RETHINKING THE PURPLE LINE

________________________________________________________________

WASHINGTON POST'S DR. GRIDLOCK COLUMN
RESPONDS TO BUS-RAPID-TRANSIT PURPLE LINE OPTION
AS 'GRIDLOCK SAM' WEIGHS IN
(Aug. 14, 2008)
_______________________________________________________________

MONTGOMERY COUNTY REPORT CONFIRMS TWO TRANSIT LINES
ARE POSSIBLE FOR PRICE OF ONE LIGHT-RAIL PURPLE LINE
(July 24, 2008)
________________________________________________________________

Rethinking the Purple Line is a coalition of citizens in18 Maryland communities and community organizations dedicated to convincing state and local officials to consider Purple Line transit alternatives that are affordable, serve the most people and jobs, and preserve the Capital Crescent Trail as a natural and safe green space.


The true impact and scale of Maryland’s proposed Purple Line route was demonstrated at a Coalition-hosted regional event on May 31, 2008. Transportation authority Samuel Schwartz (center) explained the environmental destruction anticipated on this popular section of the Trail between Bethesda and Connecticut Avenue.
Photo: Marty Saggese 

What’s the Problem?

The state is pursuing only one of several Purple Line transit options to connect Bethesda in Montgomery County with New Carrollton In Prince George's County. Rethinking the Purple Line coalition supports east-west mass transit.

But the Maryland Transit Administration's (MTA) proposal to put two tracks of light rail trains between Bethesda and Silver Spring falls short for several reasons:

• It would destroy an important green link along the Georgetown Branch of the Capital Crescent Trail. This section of the Trail is now used weekly by 10,000 bikers, walkers, families, children crossing the Trail or riding their bikes to school, and many others.

• In these tough economic times, the state's proposed plan is extravagant. A recent Montgomery County report confirmed that two mass transit systems would be possible (bus rapid transit along the Purple Line plus Corridors City Transitway on I-270) for the price of the state's proposed light rail plan.
  

• MTA acknowledges that this $1.6 to $1.8 billion project will not relieve traffic congestion. It would, however, destroy the existing environment.
  

As the state prepares to present its Draft Environmental Impact Statement for light rail along this route, many officials have turned a deaf ear to citizens' concerns for the true environmental and fiscal consequences of this plan. Other alternatives would cost less, serve more people, and take more cars off the road. (See alternatives report)

The MTA is expected to select its preferred alternative by mid-September, 2008. Since this Purple Line analysis costs taxpayers more than $25 million, the state has the responsibility to reflect all alternatives fully and fairly, so the public can be fully informed.

For a reality check and to see how the proposed light rail would shape up, click here. 

What You Can Do

The state has identified the Purple Line as “a high transportation priority.” Now is the time to let your elected officials know that you care about this increasingly rare natural resource, and urge them to examine alternative routes that would serve more people, cost less and remove more cars from the road. To contact your representatives, click here.