Brian Robinson
Friends of Old Takoma
wrob@erols.com

Defining A Compromise Route: An Open Letter
Towards a Solution to the Purple Line Dilemma

The following open letter to MWCOG and the County Council is in reference to the "Purple Line" proposal for a "compromise route" that uses the Inner Alignment as well as portions of the so-called "outer alignment" in a network connected seamlessly to the existing Metrorail system.

A map of this proposal, and the contents of this letter, is extremely helpful to understanding it, and may be viewed at:

http://earthops.net/purple-line/purple.html

The concept of a "Y"-shaped route, with provisions for an extended future network, is not unique to my website. Nor is it new to the attention of officials -- it is in fact the primary feasible alternative to the presently-flawed "Inner Line" proposal. The existence, and eminent political feasibility of this alternative, is the primary reason that the thoughtful among us are so fraught with trepidation at the false choice now being presented.

Description of "Y" Route Proposal

Local transit advocates who have visited my site before I updated it, may remember that the previous incarnations of my site mostly involved attempts to connect the two legs of the Red Line without using the Georgetown Branch --OR-- the largely fictitious "Outer Beltway alignment" -- and to do so with the mode of choice in the Washington area, Metrorail, preferably using the existing Red Line cars that presently terminate in Silver Spring and Grosvenor.

My opinion is different now. If I, a one-time opponent of the Bethesda-Silver Spring rail proposal, can be induced to defend a compromise, then I think it is a compromise worth considering -- one which I have no doubt you are already considering. I urge you to support the aptly-yclept, "Y" Route.

I am now convinced that, if as necessity dictates, it's taken in isolation as the only transit corridor the State will acknowledge as an alternative to the mostly imaginary Wheaton alignment -- then the Georgetown Branch's true and essential utility lies precisely in its capacity to accommodate heavy rail.

Let's consider the facts:

The County Council has been repeatedly advised that there is merely one alternative to the Georgetown Branch alignment, and that it involves going underground -- deep underground.

If we assume for a moment that "outer line" advocates don't really care about transit oriented development, that they're just creating a "straw man" with which to prevent rail of any kind through downcounty--then we are certainly under no obligation to accept this proposal as the ONLY alternative to light rail on the Georgetown Branch!

However, IF we can safely assume that "outer line" advocates have made a credible attempt to craft a feasible alternative to the Georgetown Branch -- then certainly they must believe that going underground where required is a feasible, even desirable alternative to our planners' current preferred strategy: of building only surface rail, and choosing our route accordingly!

Which is it? Are trolley advocates nickle-and-diming transit to death, in hopes that they can take credit for something, anything, in the short term, at the expense of the long? Or are outer line advocates hijacking the route-selection process in an attempt to get nothing built at all, lest it go through their areas? Either way, we end up with the same startling conclusion: The "Bethesda Silver Spring Trolley" is not the only Purple Line proposal that is viable and cost effective. It's not even the only feasible arrangement of existing options!

My "Purple Line" website is an attempt to depict other possible arrangements of the *existing* options that remain on the table -- by leave of the County Council and the State of MD. The more options we take off the table in an attempt to resolve false choices before the preliminary engineering stage, the less lee-way we will have to take a given SET of alignments, and turn it into a future mass-transit network.

The original objective of my "Purple Line" web page has always been to advocate for a compromise alignment that incorporates the best features of the Inner and Outer Line, with emphasis on three key points that the State of Maryland has not adressed:

The essential pointlessness of an alignment through Wheaton.

In short, it tells us nothing about the relative viability of the Georgetown Branch for light or heavy rail, and its peculiarly convex alignment, oriented as it is to the existing hub-and-spoke arrangement focused on the region's core, militates against connecting the Georgetown Branch or ANY future inner-beltway rail link with employment destinations in White Oak.

The existence of such a proposal as the Wheaton one, which for some reason is called "the" Outer Line, is not an argument for or against the utility of the Georgetown Branch for rail of any sort. It's not even the argument Inner Line opponents care about. Let's adress the concerns that future neighbors AND users of the line DO have, not create literally tangential "solutions".

As in, "I don't live right in downtown Silver Spring, and I don't work in Wheaton. How do I get to my job on the other side of the Beltway from where I live?"

and "Do we really have to raze one forest in Chevy Chase for a surface rail line in order to save another forest from highway development? Or are we pinching pennies on the rail line so we can afford to do BOTH?"

If we can afford to CONTEMPLATE a subway of any sort via Wheaton, where circumstances do not dictate such a solution, then we can certainly afford to do right by our down-county residents by placing the Georgetown Branch alignment in Subway.

The fact that we can GET AWAY WITH putting any sort of rail on the surface of that alignment -- when only 15 feet of it is level and unforested -- should be dismissed immediately as unsound planning and irresponsible to the public trust.

The fact that the alignment is already in public hands, undeveloped and immediately accessible to cut-and-cover construction -- these things tell us that, as in the case of Davis Square on Boston's Red Line subway, no suburban land is MORE suited to sub-surface Metrorail than an existing rail trail.

The objective of suburb-to-suburb transportation ought to be the same as that from suburb-to-city: to get people from their homes to their destinations over the shortest, fastest, and most destination-packed route possible. If one looks at a map of the entire DC area, similar to the one used here,

it is readily obvious that the best approximation of such a route is not a semicircle, but a CHORD cutting along the traditional path of the Northwest Corridor, from Laurel to Tysons Corner.

Such an alignment could be used in the future to connect BWI and Dulles with intermediate points -- the emphasis being on the latter points.

After all, not only are the greatest concentration of intermediate points to be found on a straight line imbetween these two airports, but also, that line, if it used the Georgetown Branch, would also traverse the shortest distance between ALL of the points of interest we are talking about: Bethesda, Tysons Corner, Silver Spring, White Oak, Westfarm technology park, the I-95 corridor, and Laurel.

But ALL of that is moot if we do not place the Georgetown Branch segment underground, so that it may be used in a high-capacity fashion. Absent that, the value of the Georgetown Branch as the shortest distance between two points is obviated by the character of light rail as the slowest door-to-door transportation mode, and the environmental devastation inherent in any surface rail on that segment.

In order to use the Georgetown Branch for such an alignment, we must recognize THREE crucial limitations on the use of the Georgetown Branch for ANY practical purpose of moving large numbers of people -- be they from White Oak, Rock Spring, College Park, or wherever.

In order for an Inner alignment to serve Langley Park, Bethesda, AND any of the numerous employment and commuter destinations above the Beltway, the use of a "Y"-shaped alignment is crucial.

That is why my Purple Line website proposal is dubbed the "Y Route". Modifications thereof -- including a former proposal for an alignment connecting the two eastern legs of this proposal to Grosvenor -- might be accordingly dubbed "Y1","Y2", or similar.

I feel that there are a lot of as-yet unrealized benefits to using the Georgetown Branch alignment through Bethesda, IF we use the right technology. However, the resulting rail line must serve both inner-suburban residents in Langley Park, and employment and commuter destinations on the other side of the Beltway, not least the new FDA campus at White Oak, and a Springfield-style transit terminal on the rapidly developing I-95 corridor north of Beltsville -- so that the rail line can have some immediate benefit to those who do not live in downtown Silver Spring. Absent that, it will never attract enough initial ridership to be extended to such worthy destinations as College Park and Tysons Corner.

Given the lack of obstructions, railroad-grade curves and sparsity of intermediate destinations between Bethesda and Silver Spring, it is incumbent on us not to waste this resource by introducing incompatible infrastructure and ridership-killing "mode changes."

If a COMPLETED Purple Line network is ever to become attractive and worth extending to outlying destinations 20 track-miles hence, its central segment MUST be rapid rail that is compatible with existing Metrorail tracks and platforms at Bethesda and Silver Spring -- even if the trainsets are built for trundling at-grade through the outlying destinations.

Again, absent that, it will never attract enough initial ridership to be extended to such worthy destinations as College Park and Tysons Corner.

Given the immense environmental devastation inherent in ANY sort of surface rail on the Georgetown Branch, light or rapid, whatever is built there must be built as a STACKED SUBSURFACE CUT-COVER TUNNEL.

In much the same manner as the Green Line underneath Park Road in the District, but at substantially less cost -- since there are so few drainage and site preparation issues attendant in hollowing out an earthen berm.

The fact that this technology would obviate any possible objections to running rapid heavy rail on the resulting tracks is a mere side benefit. The environmental site requirements will mandate going underground through Chevy Chase regardless. We should plan accordingly.

Every bit as much as they will mandate going underground through Takoma Park and East Silver Spring, by the way. Hard-line trolley fans will inform you that it would be a betrayal of Langley Park and Silver Spring residents to "appease" advocates for the Capital Crescent Trail. What the trolley proponents are not mentioning is the fact that us Takoma Park and East Silver Spring residents are ALREADY insisting that the line be placed underground in our areas!

Nor has anybody mentioned the fact that State and County planners have accordingly chosen to -omit- Langley Park from the initial segment! Apparently, downcounty residents, myself included, feel that a rail tunnel through our area would be economically viable at the present time -- and our appointed planners DO NOT. Given this fact, do not Takoma/Langley and Chevy Chase residents in fact share a common interest in Metrorail -- the least destructive solution for the Inner Purple Line?

Assume that we really, truly desire to get rail transit out to folks in Langley Park. Why hesitate? The fact that a tunnel is needed under Sligo Creek should not be a deterrent. After all, the Georgetown Branch segment -- not the Rock Creek crossing but certainly most of the rest -- will need to be put below grade also. Silver Spring is not the logical destination point of the first phase -- Langley Park is. This is a segment that can support either heavy or light rail -- or both, when you consider the future extension of light rail along University Boulevard.

Yet again, absent such cooperation and insistence on a worthwhile level of investment, it will be deemed a controversial failure that will not be extended east of Silver Spring, -much less- to such worthy destinations as College Park and Tysons Corner.

Our Planners have said as much, to me and to anyone else who cares to listen. For them, the fact that subways are too expensive a solution is part & parcel of their belief that Langley Park will not get rail in our lifetimes anyway.

That's why they think we can save any money at all single-tracking the line to start-out with -- by the time it gets extended anywhere useful (say, East Silver Spring!) they say it'll be a sunken cost! Too bad they don't really seem to mind this terrible outcome for transit in the Washington region.

Sincerely,
Brian Robinson
Friends of Old Takoma
wrob@erols.com

http://earthops.net/purple-line

The writer is a member of the Purple Line Network. The opinions expressed herein are those of Brian Robinson and are not intended to be representative of the Purple Line Network as a whole, which includes transit advocates of every description .