Backers Revive Push for Light Rail

Supporters of a transit link between Montgomery and Prince George's counties are renewing efforts to persuade state lawmakers to fund a light-rail system that they say would bring environmentally friendly traffic relief.

The proposed Purple Line would connect the Maryland ends of Metro's Red, Green and Orange lines, with major stops at Bethesda, Silver Spring, College Park and New Carrollton. The line would allow Metro riders to travel from one Maryland suburb to another without having to ride through the heart of Washington.

The Maryland Transit Administration has studied the idea over the past 10 years, but the state has not taken steps toward funding its design and construction. An updated environmental review was scheduled to be completed this summer. However, acting state Transportation Secretary John D. Porcari said that timing is "optimistic."

The project's biggest hurdle appears to be a financial one.

About 60 Purple Line supporters, including 19 state and local lawmakers from Montgomery and Prince George's, held a rally last week in Annapolis to urge the General Assembly to find money for the line.

"We want to remind [state lawmakers] that in the elections a lot of legislators pledged to build the Purple Line," said Harry Sanders, co-founder of Action Committee for Transit. "Now we need the money."

But the project, like all state programs, will have to compete for dollars at a time when the state faces a financial crunch.

Other priorities, Porcari said, are more transit for Baltimore and the Corridor Cities Transitway project, which would add light rail or rapid bus service along Interstate 270 between the Shady Grove Metro station and the area just south of Clarksburg.

However, he said, finding money to design and build them will be difficult.

"We have a very limited ability to fund larger projects," Porcari said. "We have a very ambitious transportation program, and we know, given the current revenues, that we can't fund it."

Porcari said that the state is continuing to study rapid bus transit as a Purple Line alternative "for the time being." Rapid bus service, which became part of the Purple Line study under former governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R), has been used in some cities where buses run on a dedicated road, similar to a train on rubber tires.

Ehrlich's transportation officials promoted rapid bus transit as a far cheaper option with the flexibility to change routes according to growth patterns. However, Porcari said he believes it would be difficult to persuade companies to invest in development around transit if the stops and routes were subject to change.

Such assessments, suggesting that the administration of Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) might be leaning toward light rail, have encouraged Purple Line advocates. They've also celebrated his administration's decision to return the commonly known "Purple Line" name to the project.

The Ehrlich administration had dubbed it the "Bi-County Transitway" when it expanded the transit study to include areas east of Silver Spring, including the University of Maryland and New Carrollton. Some Purple Line advocates said they believe the name change was intended to confuse the public.

"I'm much more optimistic than I was a year ago," said Del. Anne Healey (D-Prince George's). "We're now talking about the Purple Line as the Purple Line again. I know it's going to be tough because the fiscal situation is tough, but I think we're in a better position than we've been in for a long, long time."

Del. William A. Bronrott (D-Montgomery), a member of the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee, said the public's appetite for a Purple Line illustrates the need for a new source of revenue, such as a half-cent sales tax increase dedicated to transit projects. Bronrott said he believes people are willing to pay it.

"The public desperately wants to get out of the second or third worst gridlock in the country," Bronrott said. "I think people realize the Purple Line is part of that solution."

Supporters say the line would not only take cars off badly clogged roads but would be cleaner for the environment, promoting "smart growth" by linking densely populated communities. In particular, supporters say, it would help low-income workers who spend hours on multiple buses to get from Langley Park and Silver Spring to jobs in Bethesda.

Opponents say a light rail along the most studied route between Bethesda and Silver Spring would destroy the Georgetown Branch of the Capital Crescent Trail, a popular wooded walking and bike path in an otherwise urban area. It also would run near back yards of long-established neighborhoods, including East Bethesda and Chevy Chase, opponents said.

John Warnock of the Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Coalition, said his group would support an underground transit system between Bethesda and Silver Spring. Running the line along the trail, he said, would require cutting down an estimated 6,000 trees.

"We have nothing against transit," Warnock said. "But we don't want them to chop down all the trees and destroy the neighborhoods."

The project's biggest opposition, however, might arise from its price tag. The transit line is estimated to cost between $360 million and $1.6 billion, depending on whether it would entail a bus system or light rail and how much tunneling would be required.

Hans Riemer, president of Action Committee for Transit, said his group is already looking ahead to next year's legislative session.

"The sense is they're not going to be pushing through a major funding package this session," Riemer said. "We're focusing on next year."