The Red in the Purple Line
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
I share both the puzzlement and the frustration of Geoff J. Gonella [letters, June 24] over the purpose of the Purple line and the lack of awareness that it will derive only 20 percent of its ridership from drivers getting out of their cars. They seem to be part of a larger picture, though.
The Purple Line study project manager's acknowledgment that relief of traffic congestion is "not one of the project's primary objectives" is uncannily reminiscent of Maryland Transportation Secretary John D. Porcari's remark that the intercounty connector "is not designed or intended to relieve congestion on the Capital Beltway, I-95, or I-270."
Why, in the face of our $1.5 billion state budget deficit, do our officials insist on following through with cripplingly expensive projects like the $2.4 billion intercounty connector and the $2 billion Purple Line while our taxes increase, our budgets get cut, our schools struggle and our teachers are forced into early retirement? And why do so few seem to know that such large price tags are translating into so little efficacy in meeting our greatest transportation challenges?
DAVID NÚÑEZ
Potomac
