Light Rail Preferred for Purple Line

[WayneNYC]

That hated bus thing is definitely alive and well in the DC area.  Even as a transit fan it's hard for me to get used to commuting via bus.  I can do it for fun and/or some errands, but for me the commute (IMO) is not at all attractive.  For my own selfish reasons as long as I live in Gaithersburg, work at GU, I'll continue to drive.  If I worked downtown or nearby, I'd commute on MARC.  When I lived in Silver spring I commuted on mass transit most of the time.  Now that I live in G'burg my car is a much more attractive option to me getting to/from work.  This is why I say for my own selfish reasons.  I know using mass transit is the right thing to do.  Now a mass transit commute for me would be: board a Ride-On bus from the Lakeforest transit center (I prefer 55 or 61) to Shady Grove.  Red Line to DuPont Circle and then Georgetown shuttle bus or WMATA's G2 to the campus.  The few times I did this the trip door to door took about 1 hour & 35 min.  The couple of times I rode the J9, I was turned off by the heavy traffic in Bethesda only to have to still board a Red Line train and another bus to campus.

When I talk to others, some say they're very much interested in using mass transit just for the savings alone, but for many of them it would take them forever.  One lady in my department described what her mass transit commute involves.  She lives in Laurel.  She would leave home a bit after 5:00 AM, rode the 87 to Greenbelt, Green Line to West Hyattsville and ten minute walk to drop off child, back to West Hyattsville Station and to DuPont Circle by Green and Red Line and Shuttle to campus.  She described her return trip as being quite stressful because she the last 87 and 89 left Greenbelt a few minutes after 7:00 PM.  If she missed the bus, she had to take a taxi.  She went on to remind me that that doesn't include if she nees to make any other stops like for groceries etc.  Then she has to prepare dinner, get her and the child fed and so on.

To me this lady's commute sounded like a nightmare.  I totally understand her decision to buy a car and incur the expense of driving to/from work.  That said, I'm sure others are in these type of positions too and therefore, make the decision to drive to/from work.

Perry makes a good point about going with BRT over LRT.  I like the idea of LRT, but the time and cost of building (and maintaining it) that infrastructure would be a huge concern.

My situation is quite simple.  If Metrorail served the Georgetown area, I'd be a daily rider for sure.  I'm very much in favor of commuting via mass transit.  It's the only way I commuted growing and and in my adult life until I moved to the DC area.

[WES]

Some may remember but I believe at one time, the Shirley Highway Express lanes, was supposed to be bus only lanes, but due to complaints(from auto drivers), those lanes were changed into HOV lanes.  Even is a busway was conceptualized, car owners would raise hell and demand that any proposed busway would be turned into an either HOVway or a roadway that would support cars.  Though I would rather have a BRT system over a LRT system, an LRT system would be the better fit for this area and these people.

My only concern about any LRT system, and I have not read the details about the proposed system, was will this system crossed by streets or will bridges be built so there will be no railroad crossings would interrupt street traffic, because that would raise hell also.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

The Maryland Transit Administration came to my neighborhood tonight to do an information session on the Purple Line.  The MTA rep's presentation was very much in favor of LRT, but Pat Baptiste was also there to offer the advantages of BRT, and cited flexibility for further expansion as an advantage to BRT.  BRAC is not likely to have a significant effect on any decision, the number of additional people at Navy Medical doesn't really change things significantly.  The current plan is to have the CCT run above the Bethesda Station through the Air Rights Tunnel, there is apparently enough room to do this.  The light rail tracks would be in a "grass ROW", similar to what is done on many trams in Europe (you can find examples of this in the photos on my website in the Turin, Paris, and Barcelona sections, among others). 

The discussion that followed was quite heated with people on both sides of the issue.  However, one of the reasons I am against the Purple Line as LRT (and in general) is because it will not attract significant new transit ridership and no studies have been done on how much additional traffic will be generated by the economic development the Purple Line is likely to cause.  The MTA also has not done a tree count along the bike trail and its ideas on how many trees and how much other vegetation will exist along the ROW if the line is built seem to be far fetched as best.  Others pointed out that the draft EIS was pretty sloppy and designed to be pro rail, and argued that the state was trying to push light rail through regardless of the consequences.  It made for interesting listening, I didn't participate in the discussion at all however. 

To answer some of the questions I see in this thread, LRT would be fully grade separated west of Silver Spring but would be all or mostly street running east of Silver Spring.  BRT varies depending upon how high an investment they make.  BRT cannot get priority signalling at a number of intersections along the route, both east and west of Silver Spring, but it can at others. 

[WMAveteran]

Thanks for the excellent report on the hearing.  That's how I thought it would develop - a lot of people with defined positions on either LRT or BRT arguing the relative merits of "their" plan and no one (except you) really came to listen and be educated.  So, I decided to go to my health club and workout (lol).  I agree with you that the merits of the BRT plan are inescapable but as a transit fan I just want to see improvement in the east-west transportation network while I am still alive to ride it, so I will support any form of transportation that can be funded.  It would be nice to see an analysis on which form of transportation is "greener" - BRT (with CNG) or LRT.

[WayneNYC]

I'm sure there were some heated people there.  Probably not much different from some of our HOA meetings.  So many people just want everything to make their lives easier over what's best for the areas as a whole.  I also hope to see Purple line (and Silver and so on) up and running in the not too distant future.  A couple of weeks ago I decided to drive through my old stomping grounds in Silver Spring and noticed that many houses on Wayne Ave with signs regarding the Purple line.  When I looked last Summer, most seemed to have signs against LRT on Wayne Ave (No train on Wayne) and now I saw a few with signs in favor of the Purple line.

It'll be interesting to see what happens.  I     

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Well, they called it a "forum" with Mike Madden, the project team director, giving a powerpoint followed by a panel discussion.  It wasn't an official public hearing, but it was part of the MTA's general community outreach effort to the affected communities and stakeholders. 

The MTA rep said that BRT would be fueled by hydrodiesel.  There was also a debate as to whether or not BRT was more environmentally friendly than LRT, an argument I don't entirely understand since BRT uses gas of some sort, whereas LRT would be electric.  Pat Baptiste said that the coal burned to generate the electricity in West Virginia would be more harmful to everyone than using hydodiesel.

[LandoverDivision]

I love buses, but we have a lot of buses we don't need more. I would prefere light rail over the bus because it would be good to have some light rail in P.G and Montgomery County.

[WMAveteran]

Well, they called it a "forum" with Mike Madden, the project team director, giving a powerpoint followed by a panel discussion.  It wasn't an official public hearing, but it was part of the MTA's general community outreach effort to the affected communities and stakeholders. 

The MTA rep said that BRT would be fueled by hydrodiesel.  There was also a debate as to whether or not BRT was more environmentally friendly than LRT, an argument I don't entirely understand since BRT uses gas of some sort, whereas LRT would be electric.  Pat Baptiste said that the coal burned to generate the electricity in West Virginia would be more harmful to everyone than using hydodiesel.

Thank you for the clarification.  At least they were having the "green" discussion although it sounds like they had their facts confused.

The USA is one of the four nations on earth with the largest reserves of natural gas while it has relatively little oil.  Clearly CNG would be a better choice for BRT vehicles because they would use  neither electricity produced by coal nor oil for propulsion.   I just read a report on what kind of fuel is used to make electricity for PEPCO: about 50% of the electricity is produced by coal and the rest is produced by nuclear, hydroelectric sources, biomass, methane, wind, etc.  To correct Pat Baptiste, West Virginia is known for a large wind turbine farm near Cheat Mountain, I believe.  Montgomery County Government has contracted to buy a percentage of its electricity from this turbine farm.  The coal burning plants are right here in Maryland (Dickerson, Chalk Point, etc.) and so is the nuclear power plant (Calvert Cliffs).  There is also a large LNG facility on the Chesapeake. 

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Well, they called it a "forum" with Mike Madden, the project team director, giving a powerpoint followed by a panel discussion.  It wasn't an official public hearing, but it was part of the MTA's general community outreach effort to the affected communities and stakeholders. 

The MTA rep said that BRT would be fueled by hydrodiesel.  There was also a debate as to whether or not BRT was more environmentally friendly than LRT, an argument I don't entirely understand since BRT uses gas of some sort, whereas LRT would be electric.  Pat Baptiste said that the coal burned to generate the electricity in West Virginia would be more harmful to everyone than using hydodiesel.

Thank you for the clarification.  At least they were having the "green" discussion although it sounds like they had their facts confused.

The USA is one of the four nations on earth with the largest reserves of natural gas while it has relatively little oil.  Clearly CNG would be a better choice for BRT vehicles because they would use  neither electricity produced by coal nor oil for propulsion.   I just read a report on what kind of fuel is used to make electricity for PEPCO: about 50% of the electricity is produced by coal and the rest is produced by nuclear, hydroelectric sources, biomass, methane, wind, etc.  To correct Pat Baptiste, West Virginia is known for a large wind turbine farm near Cheat Mountain, I believe.  Montgomery County Government has contracted to buy a percentage of its electricity from this turbine farm.  The coal burning plants are right here in Maryland (Dickerson, Chalk Point, etc.) and so is the nuclear power plant (Calvert Cliffs).  There is also a large LNG facility on the Chesapeake. 

OK, thanks for the info.  The MTA guy said the thing about hydrofuels.  I honestly don't know what they are, and imagine CNG being more realistic. 

I can't see how the Purple Line is going to use a significant amount of electricity such that the environment where the power is being produced is going to be adversely affected, so I thought that part of the discussion was somewhat silly.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

From washingtonpost.com:

Montgomery Council Backs Light Rail for Purple Line
By Katherine Shaver
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 27, 2009; 2:08 PM

The Montgomery County Council today approved a light rail system for the planned east-west transit link between Montgomery and Prince George's counties, a milestone in the more than 20-year debate over how to move people more efficiently between the two suburbs and spur redevelopment of their older neighborhoods.
With the Prince George's council, Prince George's Executive Jack Johnson (D) and Montgomery Executive Isiah Leggett (D) already in favor of the Purple Line project, today's unanimous recommendation to Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) was the last political hurdle for the planned 16-mile link. O'Malley also has voiced support for the line, which would connect Bethesda and New Carrollton inside the Capital Beltway.
"The county is united on this, and we look forward to the Purple Line being built as soon as possible," said Council President Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg-Rockville).
But the project's backers now face their biggest challenge: securing construction money. So many urban areas across the United States are considering transit projects that competition for federal funding will be fierce.
With today's vote, Montgomery and Prince George's counties join a growing number of communities across the country looking to transit as a way to focus population growth, limit sprawl and rejuvenate their older, inner-ring suburbs. Some transportation experts believe the Purple Line could do for Maryland's inner suburbs what Metro did for the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor in Northern Virginia.
A Purple Line light rail system would be among a first wave of transit projects designed to lure redevelopment to areas already too built up and crowded with traffic to accommodate more roads, some urban planners say. Without a fast and reliable way to move people on transit, they say, developers will be reluctant to build new housing, office space, restaurants and shops in areas beginning to show their post-War War II age.
"It represents a case study for how suburban areas are going to remake themselves for the 21st century," said Robert Puentes, a transportation specialist and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, which recently hosted a panel discussion of the Purple Line as an example of "remaking the suburbs in a carbon-constrained world."
"It's not just the old notion of moving people from point A to point B," Puentes said, "but about remaking those places."
The Purple Line would become one of a growing number of systems planned, in part, to move people from one suburb to another, bypassing downtown job centers that subways were initially designed to serve. Maryland transit officials say a Purple Line would give workers who live in more affordable but job-starved Prince George's county and eastern Montgomery county a faster and much more direct transit connection to Bethesda, Rockville, Gaithersburg and other fast-growing suburban job centers in western Montgomery. State planners say the line also is critical to linking Maryland's Metro, Amtrak and MARC stations.
When O'Malley submits a Purple Line plan to the Federal Transit Administration this spring, the state will enter a years-long bid to secure as much as half the funding for the project, which is estimated to cost $1.2-billion in 2007 dollars.
Transit advocates say they are optimistic that President Obama's plans to spur the economy by investing in infrastructure will mean more money for transit projects. But the demand for transit construction money will likely continue to far outpace supply, advocates say.
The local debate over the Purple Line has centered on its route--mainly whether it would run along a popular wooded walking and biking trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring and how it would thread through some Silver Spring neighborhoods. Recently, discussions also have turned to whether it should be light rail or a considerably less expensive rapid-bus system, with light rail winning out because it would carry more people and is considered more likely to attract development around stations.
Maryland transit officials say 80 percent of people who testified at public hearings this fall favored the Purple Line. The most vocal opposition has come from those who say they favor better east-west transit but not at the expense of the Georgetown Branch Trail, an unpaved extension of the Capital Crescent Trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring.
Some trail advocates, including Columbia Country Club, whose golf course straddles the trail, say the plan would require cutting down thousands of mature trees, destroying the tranquil feel of a rare swath of wooded green space in an urban area.
Other opponents, particularly the Town of Chevy Chase, say it would be more cost-effective to run rapid buses farther to the north, along Jones Bridge Road. They say that would spare the trail while better serving an expanding Bethesda National Naval Medical Center under the military's base realignment plans.
The council voted 5-3 to ask Maryland transit planners to study in more detail the possibility of using a single track along parts of the trail, which would limit the number of trees that would need to be cut down. Council Member Don Praisner, who was recently diagnosed with colon cancer, was absent from the meeting.
Michael Madden, manager of the state's Purple Line study, said his team would look at that possibility but said single-tracked systems are generally unreliable and difficult to maintain because they require shutting down entire segments of a line to repair a track.
Because the right-of-way for a Purple Line is particularly narrow between downtown Bethesda and the Columbia Country Club, he said, nearly every tree would need to be cut down. However, he said, trees could be spared in areas of the trail with greater right-of-way, such as through the country club's golf course and east towards Silver Spring.
Some residents east of downtown Silver Spring also have called for a tunnel beneath the area, saying above-ground trains would be dangerous for cars and pedestrians, would bisect neighborhoods and would run too close to homes.
That follows trends across the country, where voters in 16 states last year approved 70 percent of ballot measures aimed at raising money for transit, according to the American Public Transportation Association. Even voters who don't see themselves using trains or buses want the kind of vibrant, walkable communities that development focused around stations often create, said Art Guzzetti, the American Public Transportation Association's vice president for policy.
"When you ask people 'Do you want more transit?' the answer is going to be yes," Guzzetti said. "They see the benefit of it and see what kind of community they want in the future."
A Purple Line would be the first major east-west transit link to directly connect spokes of the Metro system, a trip that now must be made by car or a series of buses. As jobs have moved from cities to fast-growing suburbs over the past 20 years, planners say, the Washington area joins Los Angeles, Chicago and other areas seeking ways to better move commuters who need to get from their suburban homes to their suburban jobs -- all while space to build new roads has diminished.
"Our urban areas are expanding and encroaching on our suburbs," said Sarah Catz, director of the Center for Urban Infrastructure at the University of California at Irvine. Without room for new roads, Catz said, "What do you do? You have to start investing in transit."
Guzzetti and urban planners say new transit systems such as a Purple Line will serve demographic trends. Those include a rise in one- and two-person households, which will increase demand for the kind of high-density housing that can be built around transit stops. Guzzetti said planners also see a generational shift in younger people wanting to live in urban areas where they can walk or take transit.
"I'm not saying the American love affair with the automobile is totally over, but the newer generation of people don't seem to need it in the same way as the previous generation did," Guzzetti said. "Young people are attracted to cities and don't necessarily want to jump in a car."

[WMAveteran]

Thank you for the news.  We should all live so long to see the Purple Line actually built!