MTA’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) contains a set of facts that are extremely problematic for opponents of rail on the Capital Crescent Trail. But the bigger problem for rail opponents is the evolving political dynamic on the issue.
Purple Line rail foes have suffered a string of defeats. In November, the Washington Area Bicyclist Association endorsed rail. On November 16, the Post endorsed rail. In December, County Council Member Roger Berliner, who represents Chevy Chase, restated his support for rail. On December 10, the Gazette endorsed rail. On December 22, the Montgomery County planning staff endorsed rail. On December 28, Post columnist Marc Fisher endorsed rail. On January 4, the Post called for rail again. On January 8, County Executive Ike Leggett told the Post, "It's pretty clear there's overwhelming support for light rail," while saying he was undecided. Yesterday, the Montgomery County Planning Board endorsed medium-investment light rail by a 4-1 vote. The lone bright spot for rail opponents was the withdrawal of the Environmental Defense Fund from the pro-rail coalition.
But these recent events have reinforced, not changed, the basic political alignment on the Purple Line. Here is the order of battle.
The Combatants
Purple Line Now, the primary pro-rail organization, has assembled a giant coalition of civic, environmental, business and non-profit groups and has signed up dozens of state and county politicians. Rethinking the Purple Line, an anti-rail alliance, contains a number of civic groups and municipal governments located near the Capital Crescent Trail. The Chevy Chase opponents do not have close relations with opponents in East Silver Spring, who have different concerns and are themselves divided. The Jones Bridge BRT option has spawned new opposition to that proposal along Jones Bridge Road in North Chevy Chase. The Columbia Country Club, long opposed to transit through its grounds, is rumored to be in negotiations with MTA. Rail supporters are at least as well-organized, at least as well-financed and are much more numerous than opponents – a fact that is not lost on most politicians.
Prince George’s County
The Town of Chevy Chase’s push for buses sets up a dream scenario for Prince George’s politicians. The notion that opposition to rail from one of the state’s wealthiest neighborhoods might condemn Prince George’s residents to further rides on buses provides irresistible propaganda opportunities for many politicians. Senator Paul Pinsky (D-22), who said of the town and the country club, “They seem to live in Alice in Wonderland,” provides just one example. There is zero support for BRT in Prince George’s County (and Town consultant Sam Schwartz did not study it east of Silver Spring). That lack of support will factor into the state’s political decision-making.
Montgomery County
Only Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18) and Delegate Al Carr (D-18) are known to oppose rail for the Purple Line. County Executive Ike Leggett, every County Council Member and every other state legislator in Montgomery except Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher (D-18) is a listed supporter of rail. The inability of rail opponents to break out of their home district exposes a major liability. The anti-ICC coalition was much, much larger and it still lost.
The Administration
The calculus of the administration looks fairly simple. From a policy perspective, if MDOT Secretary John Porcari believes MTA’s data, the only conceivable reason he would not recommend rail is pure cost. The numbers indicate rail superiority in almost every other area. But if he did choose BRT, the data argues for running buses directly on the trail. The on-trail bus options beat Jones Bridge BRT on travel time, speed, ridership, reduction in vehicle miles traveled, reduction in carbon dioxide and cost effectiveness. Medium-investment BRT, which runs buses on the trail, costs $14.01 per hour of user benefit compared to $18.24 for Jones Bridge.
From a political perspective, the Purple Line is a high-profile, high-cost project that could use up a significant percentage of the state's transportation budget. Any rational politician would embark on such an endeavor only if he or she was sure to receive substantial credit for it. (The unpopularity of the $2.4 billion ICC must be galling to the Governor.) If the administration chooses BRT, they would disappoint the entire Prince George’s establishment, most of the Montgomery establishment and the colossal number of groups in the pro-rail coalition. If the administration chooses rail, they would antagonize a few neighborhoods near the trail and receive praise from almost every power player in the Washington suburbs.
So what do you think the state will do?
Friday, January 16, 2009
MTA Declares War on Chevy Chase, Part Five
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Pretty much nailed it.
Adam, you left out the tens of thousands of trail supporters from your equation, not to mention the many people and communities that oppose the loss of thousands of trees and greenspace and the degradation of having trains parked waiting for maintenance in the heart of Bethesda next to Giffords Ice Cream and Landmark Theater.
More than a THOUSAND Trail supporters have written the Governor. There will never be the needed consensus to get this project funded. Adam, you left out the tens of thousands of trail supporters from your equation, not to mention the many people and communities that oppose the loss of thousands of trees and greenspace and the degradation of having trains parked waiting for maintenance in the heart of Bethesda next to Giffords Ice Cream and Landmark Theater.
More than a thousand Trail supporters have written the Governor. There will never be the needed consensus to get this project funded.
If Purple Line Now wanted transit, and not just light rail on the trail for Chevy Chase Land Company's development at Connecticut Avenue, they'd be searching for a project that is a win win, instead of one that is so devastating to communities, the Trail, and the environment.
The State still has to respond to the DEIS comments before the governor makes a final decision. Hopefully, MTA will see fit to deal with the real environmental impacts of putting light rail on the Trail versus BRT on JBR (saying all alignments have similar impacts is insulting to the public); will provide realistic pictures of what the Trail will look like with no trees, long narrow ramps climbing up and over train wires, retaining walls, and fences; and will analyze, as the law requires, environmental impacts to the Rock Creek Watershed due to transit-induced development at Chevy Chase Lake.
Light rail may be the politically popular/easy choice now. But bad decisions always come back to haunt the politicians who make them. What happens to those elected officials who say “the Trail will be different but lovely” when the one million people who use the Capital Crescent Trail each year see it denuded of acres and acres of trees and the hiker/biker trail can't fit safely on the right of way? Or when Montgomery County can’t actually find the funds to pay for the Trail at all? When taxpayers come up with $2 billion for something that does nothing to ease the nightmare congestion at NIH but instead brings additional congestion to Connecticut Avenue at Chevy Chase Lake? When the Corridor Cities project is deep-sixed because of political pandering to developers down-county?
Short-term political popularity should not be the litmus test.
You got this one right. Solid analysis of the current political environment.
This isn't a popularity contest and many of those signatures didn't know that they were signing to oppose rail. Everyone supports the trail. That's why every iteration of the rail plans have included a trail. It would appear to an outsider, myself, living in Wheaton rather than the Town of Chevy Chase that the "trail advocates" are only advocating for the trail exactly as it is now. No improvements. Nothing. It's all about building nothing. Pretend that the world isn't moving and there aren't mobility needs between Bethesda and New Carrolton. Doesn't affect you, right? Nothing could be a suitable substitute. If it never gets completed to Silver Spring, so be it.
Anyway, I'm sure that everyone reading and commenting here has already heard the same old arguments again and again so I won't go on.
Suffice to say, though, in pure cold hard political calculus, the Town of Chevy Chase does not have a favorable reputation outside its borders at the present time. Not that that's important, anyway.
Cavan touched a deep suspicion I have when he wrote: "It would appear to an outsider, myself, living in Wheaton rather than the Town of Chevy Chase that the "trail advocates" are only advocating for the trail exactly as it is now. No improvements. Nothing."
Clearly not all "trail advocates" just want to keep the trail exactly as it is. WABA and the Coalition for the Capital Crescent Trail (CCCT) will continue to advocate for the Georgetown Branch Trail that it be paved, that it be widened to 12', that the fences that pinch the trail at the Columbia Country Club be removed, and that there be a grade separated crossing (trail bridge) at the dangerous Connecticut Avenue crossing. WABA and CCCT will advocate for these regardless of what is ultimately decided for the Purple Line, whether light rail, BRT, BRT on JBR, or "no build".
But I have never seen either the Town of Chevy Chase or "Save the Trail Petition" show the slightest interest in any of these trail changes. Is Cavan right? Suppose the Town gets what it wants, BRT on JBR. Will the Town and "Save the Trail Petition" support the efforts of WABA and CCCT to convert the interim Trail into a paved, first class trail to be an integral part of the area trail system, or will they just dig in and fight to keep the narrow, gravel trail they have now?
Wayne Phyillaier
So, Silverspringtrails, are you saying that if the Town and Save the Trail petitioners would support paving the trail you and the Purple Line Now folks would back off your support for light rail on the master plan alignment?
Pat:
No, I'm asking a simple question that you apparently do not want to answer:
Do you support paving the trail??
Apparently by your response, you will not support paving the trail unless that can somehow be turned to your advantage to stop the Purple Line. CCCT and WABA, by contrast, support paving and finishing the trail regardless of the ultimate decision on the Purple Line.
Wayne Phyillaier
It would seem that one thing bikers, hikers, WABA, Save the Trail, Chevy Chase, the Master Plan the Planning Board staff, and the Planning Board agree strongly is the importance of keeping the trail link in the tunnel under Wisconsin Ave. open, though obviously there remain disagreements about what form that the trail should take in the tunnel.
Wayne, I have never heard anyone say they would not support paving the Trail. So, if you and PLNow, CCCT and WABA are willing to save the trees, move the transit and pave the trail, I'm with ya. The amount of money saved from putting transit on JBR as BRT will more then allow the completion and paving of the Trail . . . I'm reserving a room today for the treaty signing.
You get what you pay for. You have the lowest capital costs with BRT on Jones Bridge Rd. However, you have by far the worst performance, least riders, and lack of transit oriented development.
A few trees in the Town of Chevy Chase vs. miles and miles of trees to pave over land for an auto-dependent subdivision in Boyds or Damascus? Not to mention all the carbon emissions from the auto trips to and from those auto-dependent subdivisions and strip malls.
Is this really about saving a handful of trees? Because building the train/trail combo will save far more trees in aggregate than doing nothing.
I still wonder if the tree argument is not about saving trees, but more about saving the specific trees on the border of the Town of Chevy Chase. It once again is an argument to do nothing. Pretend that the world isn't still turning and that the only way to emit less CO2 is to have fewer auto trips and the only way to have fewer auto trips is to have some other way to move people. Also, the land use patterns need to be retrofitted in such a way that as many people as is possible, given our expectations for standard of living, have walking access to the transit stations. There are no examples in the United States of land use patterns changing in response to a new bus line, not even the true BRT lines in Pittsburgh and Los Angeles. However, the Town of Chevy Chase is one right next to Bethesda, one of the flagship examples of the power of rail as a tool to change land use.
But you've heard that all before, right? I apologize if I've repeated old arguments.
Post a Comment