February 7, 2007
Morning Roundup: Nice Day For A White Wednesday
Good morning, D.C. That wasn't too bad, was it? We got our projected inch of snow (more or less), but for the most part civilization continues. You can find a list of closings and delays here — the most notable is probably the two hour delay announced by District schools. But the snow isn't the only problem they're facing: yesterday more than three dozen D.C. schools experienced heat problems, and this morning three are closed outright because of furnace difficulties. Students at the affected schools will be bused to other facilities for the day.
Barry Suggests Suspending Gun Ban, Banning Smoking In Cars: Marion Barry is making headlines for more than just his failure to abide by his tax settlement's terms. NBC4 reports that the councilman wants to suspend D.C.'s handgun ban for 90 days. But his rationale leaves us scratching our heads: Barry says he's opposed to any citizen having a gun, but that those who already do ought to register them. But who would register a gun if it might become illegal again in three months? Other council members expressed skepticism — the bill's fate will ultimately be up to the council judiciary committee. But that's not the only new legislation that Barry's proposing: WTTG reports that he's also introduced a measure that would ban smoking in cars carrying minors within the city. UPDATE: DCist Martin is, as usual, on top of things, and tells me that although FOX5 didn't bother to note it, the proposed ban would only apply to cars carrying minors.
Tysons Tunnel Just Won't Die: It seems like the fight over the Tysons Metro tunnel has been going on forever. Tunnel advocates were initially defeated by the federal government's cost-effectiveness requirements — the tunnel's pricetag looked like it would put federal funds in jeopardy, making the project a no-go. Then the elevated track started to look more expensive and the tunnel less so. But it was too late to change and still meet the federal deadline... Except that it turns out that it wasn't, as the Post reports. Federal officials say that the state has until spring '08, which tunnel boosters say is just enough time to switch plans — if Governor Kaine decides to do so.
Briefly Noted: Transportation bill passes Va. house... Gaithersburg girl found safe & sound... City expedites purchase of street cameras... Astronaut charged with attempted murder...
This Day In DCist: One year ago we pondered appropriate apparel at Chi-Cha Lounge and, coincidentally enough, pondered what Marion Barry's punishment for tax evasion ought to be. Two years ago we were angry about the persistent presence of chemical trains in the city.
Image posted to DCist Photos by Flickr user a nameless yeast
|
The Examiner reports that tunnel backers have also submitted a fixed-price offer to build the tunnel for $200m less than the most recent elevated option cost estimates, and that they will pay for any additional cost overruns. They also claim they can build the tunnel 12 months faster, with no delays for commuter traffic in Tysons.
That's private enterprise for you! Faster and cheaper!
"a fixed-price offer to build the tunnel for $200m less"
HA!
Just because a contract is Fixed Price, doesn’t mean that the contract will not have change orders out the yazoo. Most contractors underbid large construction contracts knowing that specs and drawings will change and will make their profit off the change orders. Once the contract is awarded and performance has begun, the Contractor basically has a sole source contract to perform the work and doesn’t have the competitive pressure to keep cost down. The enviable fact in large construction contracts is that conditions assumed, at the time of drafting, are never what are encountered. Just take a look at the “Big Dig”.
Oh and that “will pay any cost overruns part”, mean if every goes perfectly to spec we will pay if we underbid, however that’s out the door when an unexpected condition arises. That’s the theory behind Fixed Price contracts; everything is set in stone, until something unexpected happens.
So if guns are illegal in DC, Barry wants some kind of amnesty so that criminals can then register their guns? Makes sense to me. Then again, I'm in favor of said criminals getting mandatory firearms training. Seeing as most of the gun violence in DC is dealers shooting other dealers, I'd rather they hit their target instead of bystanders.
And speaking of weather, what is up with Channel 9's tall redheaded weather...well...I hesitate to call her a "lady." I mean, she was born a man, right? I'm cool with that; she's even pretty hot by tranny standards. But she's got the biggest man hands I've ever seen on broadcast tv. And her jaw! My god, I keep expecting her to detach it and swallow a sheep or something.
Monkeyrotica: Barry's on top of that concern. That's why he's proposing to ban smoking in cars- so that drive-by shooters won't get smoke in their eyes during attempted hits.
Nobody in DC should be forced to inhale someone else's second-hand smoke. Not even hitmen. Some of these guys can't even afford basic healthcare coverage, yet they're forced to ride shotgun in some smoker's Escalade, inhaling second-hand Pina Colada White Owl blunt fumes. You'd think their union would be in the vanguard of lobbying for a smoke-free environment for their dues-paying members.
RJ - That's EXACTLY what I was going to say. You beat me to it.
RJ, Kate - if you're worried about runaway costs:
1. Even if the tunnel costs rise, the Tysons developers have pledged to pick up all costs in excess of the estimated cost of the current above-ground option. So at worst, the tunnel gets built for the SAME cost (to taxpayers) as the elevated rail. Yet even then we avoid years of traffic delays from construction, we get a more attractive and pedestrian-friendly Tysons, and we get the long-term maintenance and operations savings from tunnels vs. above-ground tracks and stations.
2. Dragados has a very good reputation for tunneling around the world, in terms of both speed and cost.
3. Bechtel's last major project was the Big Dig.
Who do you want tearing up your town?
"But who would register a gun if it might become illegal again in three months?"
I don't know. Maybe there's a certain junky, who's had a couple late night drug deals go bad, but who only expects to be out on the streets for another three months or so before his parole gets revoked. But enough about CM Barry. Other people might benefit from this too. I just can't think of any.
"and we get the long-term maintenance and operations savings from tunnels vs. above-ground tracks and stations."
Because when the Red Line isn't flooding out or catching fire, it's a maintenance dream.
Please to provide proof that tunnels=cost savings over ground tracks.
The handgun "amnesty" would have to depend on how the legislation itself was actually worded. As it is, any handgun legally registered before the current ban went into effect is still legally registered, so long as the registrant complies with things like keeping their address up to date (DC Code 6-2312(4)). There are several liquor stores in the District that have completely legal .357s stuffed under the counter. Based on my reading of the handgun ban, if there was a 3 month amnesty any gun registered in that period would then be legal to possess after the amnesty period was up.
The trick here is that possession of a handgun isn't illegal- what's illegal is possession of an unregistered handgun. If you could register a handgun, then its possession would still be legal after the registration period was closed, so long as there wasn't an automatic revocation provision. Presumably, registration would still be subject to all of the requirements of the DC Code, which, as I've complained about before, is nearly impossible to comply with. I shudder to think what the process would be like if suddenly there were 5,000 people trying to register handguns within a 3 month period. It would take a week of sitting at the office in order to get it done.
Oh, and I'm nearly positive that photo was taken on my street- 18th looking north toward Newton.
Not to sound totally cynical, but I'll believe that when I see it.
And yeah, I don't imagine much maintenance cost savings by putting the tunnel underground. I think the real impotus here is that an underground tunnel means better condo development opportunities. But I could be totally wrong.
BrodyV - Could a plucky MD/VA entrepreneur conceivably register a few dozen cheapo used handguns with the District then, after the 90-day amnesty, sell them at a ridiculous profit?
And if they make the registration system as simple as filing DC taxes online, 5,000 people shouldn't be a problem.
monkeyrotica-
Not by my reading of the statute (admitting that I haven't seen how the Barry proposal modifies it). Section 6-2341 deals with sales of handguns, and is completely independent of 6-2312 that deals with their registration. It would be a trivial matter to allow registration, but yet not allow someone to get a dealers license. You'd have to be a licensed dealer in order to sell the "cheapo used handguns," and I'd imagine that a registration amnesty wouldn't include a dealer license amnesty.
It looks like the law prohibits sale/transfer of a handgun by an individual except as to a licensed dealer- i.e., you can't sell the gun directly to your next door neighbor. Even if that isn't the case (which would seem to be an impermissible restriction on property rights) then the person who bought the gun would still have to register it themselves- the gun could be transferred, but not the registration certificate.
"I think the real impotus here is that an underground tunnel means better condo development opportunities. But I could be totally wrong."
Dingdingdingding! Hot dog, we have a wiener.
Because condo folk LOVE having trains running past their potted begonias. Just ask the condo folk in Georgetown who are trying to get rid of the Whitehurst Freeway. Does wonders for the resale value, not having Friday night traffic in your backyard.
Is it so awful to want better condo development opportunities? It's easy to take a cheap shot at developers, but isn't part of the goal of expanding Metro to make Tyson's an "urban center" which would presumably include condos?
"which would seem to be an impermissible restriction on property rights"
Why is that? There are all sorts of restrictions on property rights. There's nothing that protects property rights per se (aside from the toothless and ignored Amendment IX).. they just have to be deprived through "due process".
The government has the authority to regulate commerce. Selling a gun to your neighbor is still commerce.
It should be common sense that the climatic stresses on elevated rail, such as extremes of heat and cold, precipitation, the sun, etc., would require much more maintenance than subterranean rail, with its fairly constant temperature and humidity levels.
-Borbaran
Sure, Tysons should include condos, but at what cost? And who gets to pay the bill? I haven't seen any data that convinces me that tunnels are more cost effective than elevated track. The only reasons I can see tunnels being advocated are so that the NIMBYs don't have to deal with the noise, developers can continue to peddle quiet condos as the market continues to cool off, and urban planning esthetes don't want to have to look at fugly public transportation spoiling their pretty vision of infill nirvana.
Jeebus, every time I roll through Tysons or Crystal City or Rosslyn, I get the creepy feeling that I've woken up in the City of Domes and I look down at my palms and see my lifeclock blinking red and I look up and I'm waiting in line to get my ass blown up at Carousel. And when I turn around, there's Richard Jordan and Michael York trying to "retire" me. And Peter Ustinov and his cats aren't even there to read me T.S. Eliot poems. If that's the lifestyle the Tysons tunnel advocates want, they're welcome to pay for it themselves. But leave me out of it. At least until the blotter acid wears off.
Sure, Tysons should include condos, but at what cost? And who gets to pay the bill? I haven't seen any data that convinces me that tunnels are more cost effective than elevated track. The only reasons I can see tunnels being advocated are so that the NIMBYs don't have to deal with the noise, developers can continue to peddle quiet condos as the market continues to cool off, and urban planning esthetes don't want to have to look at fugly public transportation spoiling their pretty vision of infill nirvana.
Jeebus, every time I roll through Tysons or Crystal City or Rosslyn, I get the creepy feeling that I've woken up in the City of Domes and I look down at my palms and see my lifeclock blinking red and I look up and I'm waiting in line to get my ass blown up at Carousel. And when I turn around, there's Richard Jordan and Michael York trying to "retire" me. And Peter Ustinov and his cats aren't even there to read me T.S. Eliot poems. If that's the lifestyle the Tysons tunnel advocates want, they're welcome to pay for it themselves. But leave me out of it. At least until the blotter acid wears off.
Politiburo-
Mea culpa. I'll confess to sloppy drafting. The reason it might be impermissible is because the statute isn't all that clear as to whether you can privately sell a gun, and in any event, monkeyrotica's question was a hypothetical one. In this instance, absent at least a rational basis for prohibiting private sale, the restriction would be an impermissible one. It would all depend on how an as yet unseen bit of legislation altered the existing statutory scheme. As it is, there's currently a provision in the law for how to deal with estates that include firearms (although arguably it's problematic since it confers ownership, but not the ability to register, automatically making an heir a criminal the moment the person with proper registration dies). This particular provision dealing with sale of a firearm would be problematic because you can't sell a legally owned gun to anyone except a licensed dealer, only there aren't any licensed dealers, so the net result is that you can't sell it at all. Which might or might not amount to a taking. In some sense it would depend on the makeup of a deciding court as to how far they interpret the 2nd amendment to determine the level of scrutiny appropriate for such a review. But all that discussion is just boring ConLaw. A thorough answer would include reference to the Federalist Papers, vertical federalism, and the definition of "militia." I'm not all that willing to go into that when there's a much easier statutory interpretation answer that's just as suitable.
In any event, the answer the the original question is still the same- you couldn't take advantage of the amnesty to register 10,000 guns, then sell them at a tidy profit after the registration period elapsed because the new owner would still be required to register the gun over again, this time without the benefit of the registration amnesty. The article might be transferable, but the registration wouldn't. Which avoids the whole restriction/taking analysis because you don't have a property right in a handgun registration any more than you have a property right in your marriage.
"It should be common sense that the climatic stresses on elevated rail, such as extremes of heat and cold, precipitation, the sun, etc., would require much more maintenance than subterranean rail, with its fairly constant temperature and humidity levels."
OK. I call "caca" on this. The Red Line between Dupont and Bethesda requires maintenance repairs from the moment Metro shuts down until it reopens in the morning. Constant water seepage, condensation damage, mineral buildup, all this has to be patched on a DAILY basis. There is NO long term solution for this because of limitations on the original design. The biggest hassle Jim Graham got from the Metro board to keep the stations open after 1am was that it was going to cut into track and tunnel preventive maintenance. Just because it's underground doesn't mean it's going to be less maintenance than open track.
And I find it highly suspect that when I Google "C. Borbaran Pennes-Long" I get nothing but penis enlargement ads.
Politiburo-
Mea culpa. I'll confess to sloppy drafting. The reason it might be impermissible is because the statute isn't all that clear as to whether you can privately sell a gun, and in any event, monkeyrotica's question was a hypothetical one. In this instance, absent at least a rational basis for prohibiting private sale, the restriction would be an impermissible one. It would all depend on how an as yet unseen bit of legislation altered the existing statutory scheme. As it is, there's currently a provision in the law for how to deal with estates that include firearms (although arguably it's problematic since it confers ownership, but not the ability to register, automatically making an heir a criminal the moment the person with proper registration dies). This particular provision dealing with sale of a firearm would be problematic because you can't sell a legally owned gun to anyone except a licensed dealer, only there aren't any licensed dealers, so the net result is that you can't sell it at all. Which might or might not amount to a taking. In some sense it would depend on the makeup of a deciding court as to how far they interpret the 2nd amendment to determine the level of scrutiny appropriate for such a review. But all that discussion is just boring ConLaw. A thorough answer would include reference to the Federalist Papers, vertical federalism, and the definition of "militia." I'm not all that willing to go into that when there's a much easier statutory interpretation answer that's just as suitable.
In any event, the answer the the original question is still the same- you couldn't take advantage of the amnesty to register 10,000 guns, then sell them at a tidy profit after the registration period elapsed because the new owner would still be required to register the gun over again, this time without the benefit of the registration amnesty. The article might be transferable, but the registration wouldn't. Which avoids the whole restriction/taking analysis because you don't have a property right in a handgun registration any more than you have a property right in your marriage.
Oh, and my Mom was in Logan's Run. You can see her elbow in the final scene.
Um, three dozen schools with heating problems? When I first moved here from a very hot southwestern state and learned that schools would close when it got too hot, I thought kids in DC were just big pussies. Then I learned that some schools DON'T HAVE AIR CONDITIONING - which is illegal back home.
I understand that the periods of weather extremes in DC are rather short - i.e. snow just starting in February - but COME ON. It's pathetic that you would have THIRTY-SIX schools without working heat in the middle of winter, while the school board continues to waste millions of dollars every year.
Monkey - I'm not arguing for or against the tunnel, but if you think that having elevated track guarantees you anything with respect to cost overruns I'd recommend you lay off the "blotter acid".
Seriously dude, how old are you? That sounds like something my Dad would say.
The Red Line tunnel beneath Rock Creek was designed 40 years ago, and we are unlikely to encounter similar geology in Tysons Corner. While maintenance costs are certainly higher in the case of the former, the Tysons tunnel would probably be a lot closer to the surface, and it wouldn't have dozens of underground streams to contend with.
Funny, when I Google "C. Borbaran Pennes-Long," I get no results. I shudder to think about what results I might get, should I bother to google "monkey erotica"!
ME - From what I understand, the reason the Red Line has problems in some areas is because they didn't seal between the exterior of the tunnel and the bedrock. This was discovered to be a design flaw many, many, many, years ago and this method is no longer used. I would say there is a long-term solution, but it isn't practical. From a USGS report (google wmata red line leaking, 9th result):
There's also something about the geology north of Dupont that contributes to the leaking. I'm not sure if this same geology exists in Tyson's.In short, I don't think the Red Line leaking is a very persuasive argument against tunnels. Since WMATA does have newer above-grade and below-grade tracks, they should have some idea of what the maintenance costs might be for Tyson's and how it would differ if the tracks were above or below grade.
Cost overruns are the coin of the realm when it comes to municipal construction. That's not the issue. My problem is with the developer/NIMBY fantasy that a Tysons Big Dig somehow alleviates the inevitable maintenance problems associated with cramming people and equipment into a leaking hole in the ground.
The only arguments I'm hearing against above-ground track are esthetic ones. Its up to the tunnel enthusiasts to prove their option is more cost-effective, construction AND maintenance wise. Because it's like the old engineer joke: you can have it cheap, done right, or fast. Pick any two.
ME - I'm largely in agreement with you, but another argument I heard in favor of the tunnel is the decreased impact on traffic when compared to above ground construction. If Metro can avoid adding to the traffic nightmare in Tyson's during this extension, that alone might be a compelling reason to go underground IMHO.
Fine. Go ahead and build your precious, leakproof pneumatic tubes. But when the Advanced Supersonic Aluminum Nazi Hell Creatures From The Hollow Earth start stumbling from car to car asking you buy candy bars to help fund their basketball team's new uniforms, don't say I didn't warn you.
And you're all welcome to come up to my place and check out my designer blotter art and collection of rare scrimshawed colonial american cock rings.
One at a time.
Bow chicka chicka bow.
With the new tunneling technology that is fast and allows for almost all day construction, a study showed that the project could be cheaper.
From a maintenance standpoint, the general consensus from engineers is that below ground is better. This is an industry wide consensus. If it can be done cheaper, than it's a no brainer for underground.
The red line is obviously having some issues that appear to be isolated for the most part. We'll all see what happens by spring '08, hopefully that decision will be the final one.
I am not sure how tunneling will not significantly affect traffic. You just don’t tunnel under a street or some community without severely disrupting the traffic of that street or community. Construction does not stay underground. Not sure how they dig around here, but I was around when the LA’s Redline was going under Sunset, it was several years of glorious detours, lane closures and large gapping pits in the middle of the road; it was an utter nightmare.
I am not sure how tunneling will not significantly affect traffic. You just don’t tunnel under a street or some community without severely disrupting the traffic of that street or community. Construction does not stay underground. Not sure how they dig around here, but I was around when the LA’s Redline was going under Sunset, it was several years of glorious detours, lane closures and large gapping pits; it was an utter nightmare.
That's true, but Rt. 7 will is in the process of widening, w/ that, and the towers going up and metro all going up simultaneously, the disruption will be less. You'll have dump trucks in and out, sure, but that's better than having columns and tracks being transported. Also, you can tunnel during a larger percentage of the day. If it's cheaper and faster, it's a no brainer, assuming the maintenance and construction costs and quality are pretty much the same. And that's an assumption that probably in real life, would favor below ground also. We'll just have to see what the studies prove.
I have faith that the overruns will be supported by the businesses. If you just don't trust them, than I don't know what to say. One of the head scratchers is the system that the feds use in order to determine funding. It almost seems at this point that they're doing it their way simply for spite.
I'll be honest with you, I don't know how that would work either; but the American Society of Civil Engineers thinks it's workable. Check it out:
www.asce.org/pressroom/news/display_press.cfm?uid=2769
The only arguments I'm hearing against above-ground track are esthetic ones. Its up to the tunnel enthusiasts to prove their option is more cost-effective, construction AND maintenance wise.
They have. That's what the $3,5m engineering study is for. The contractors and landowners are BEGGING for the chance to put their money where their mouths are through competitive bidding.
Construction does not stay underground.
That's true with "cut-and-cover" methods used in LA, where you dig down to build the tunnel, section by section, and then cover it back up. With a tunnel-boring machine, by contrast, you start at the one end and drill your way thru. You only break surface to build the stations or ventilation/maintenance access.
Areas along the Greenline, like Georgia Ave., were very disrupted up until just a few years ago, when the line was finished. So yes, tunneling does disrupt above ground as well. How much or how little disruption there is depends on the tunneling technique. A "cut and cover" approach is most disruptive (sounds like that's what they used in Los Angeles). Tunnel boring machines (like they used for the English Channel tunnel) would probably be the least, as they usually just require an entry and exit ground pit. I'm assuming they're thinking TBM for Tysons, but it's been a while since I've seen the exact method mentioned.
And after some quick google/wikipedia/washingtonpost magic -- the original tunnel proposal would use "conventional" methods, while proponents had tried to get the state to re-evaluate based on using a tunnel boring machine.
There's a winery in Napa that used a boring machine to drill a champagne cellar in the side of a hill. They had to import the thing from West Virginia, where it had been used to dig tunnels for coal mines. Seems to have done a pretty good job, but kinda small. The pics I've seen that were shot during Metro's initial construction in the 1970s had tunnels that were several stories high. Seems like that would indicate the need for a REALLY big boring machine. And it's one thing to dig a deep Wheaton-type tunnel deep underground, but what about one closer to the surface. Don't they need to re-route water/sewer/gas/electrical/optical data lines?
And if they can pull this off on time, on budget, using the best technology, I say more power to them. But tunnel advocates have yet to address the issue of how to deal with the large morlock population in Tysons. The Booz-Allen/SAIC compound is one of the largest hubs of morlock activity this side of Trenton.