I’ve posted a series on why I think BRT on Jones Bridge Road is not the right choice for the Purple Line, with one of the main reasons being the BRT will not have the capacity to carry the heavy demand forecast for the Purple Line Corridor in 2030, and will be even more inadequate for the greater demand beyond 2030. See the demand forecast at BRT on JBR, part one.

If we do build BRT on JBR instead of the light rail, and if you are able to get on an overcrowded BRT vehicle in 2030, you will find the ‘Rapid’ part of BRT has disappeared. You will be stuck in slow traffic on a fancy bus. This will be especially true if the BRT is built by Governor Ehrlich with his focus on cheap.

In December 2008 Delegate Al Carr (district 18) gave a glowing description of the new Healthline BRT in Cleveland. His review was a guest blog at JUTP: Riding North America’s newest transit system. Delegate Carr wrote “I came away convinced that BRT is a practical, efficient and cost effective transit option. Giving buses priority at traffic signals seems to be a key factor in achieving its full potential for fast trip times.” Delegate Carr is one of the fiercest opponents of the Purple Line light rail, lobbying strongly for BRT on Jones Bridge Road instead.

But now, nearly two years since the Healthline BRT opened its doors in Cleveland, we have this report from the Cleveland Plain Dealer: Healthline buses moving slower than expected…. From the article:
“RTA’s HealthLine — a bus/rapid transit touted as a faster, more efficient way to travel Euclid Avenue — is moving at about the same slow pace as the bus it replaced.
Cleveland is still adjusting traffic lights on Euclid Avenue from Public Square to the Stokes/Windermere rapid station in East Cleveland to shorten the bus trips, nearly two years after the $200 million Euclid Corridor project was completed.”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer article cites difficulties in adjusting pedestrian signals and cross street traffic signals to give the BRT the signal priority it needs for fast service. Traffic engineers are optimistic they can eventually get the problem under control. But the Healthline BRT experience highlights a critical point – you must give signal priority to BRT, or else it will be just a fancy bus stuck in traffic.

The issue of giving BRT signal priority on Jones Bridge Road pits one part of Delegate Carr’s constituency against another. Depending upon whether or not BRT receives the signal priority at Wisconsin Avenue, Connecticut Avenue and Jones Mill Road that it needs for fast service:
1) his constituents driving north-south on Wisconsin Ave./Connecticut Ave./Jones Mill Road will find their drive takes much longer because the dozens of BRT vehicles crossing these highways each hour have signal priority, or
2) his constituents riding BRT east-west on Jones Bridge Road will be wondering why they are stuck in traffic on fancy buses when a fast light-rail option is possible.

View Larger Map

The MTA has issued a signal priority study that concludes that signal priority for BRT at these three major highways will likely not be acceptable, since the time delays caused to north/south travelers by signal priority will exceed the time benefit to the BRT riders. Without this important signal priority, the BRT on JBR experience will be like Cleveland’s Healthline BRT – moving slower than expected.

July 15, 2010

The Montgomery County Council T&E Committee took up the proposed Purple Line Functional Master Plan on July 15. In general, the Committee followed the guidance given by the analysis in the staff packet. I’ll touch on some of the high points here, and add some information that arose from the Committee discussion with the MTA project staff that was not in the staff packet.

The Committee agreed with the recommendation to not have a single-track section in Chevy Chase. There was a long discussion on this issue and the decision was difficult for Committee members, but in the end the Committee agreed that even a short single-track section would harm the operational capabilities of the system too much. I have posted earlier at Off track on one track why a single-track section would have little, if any, benefit to the Trail.

The Committee agreed to Master Plan language that MTA should use wireless technology as much as is practical to minimize the interference of overhead wires with restoring the tree canopy after construction. MTA agreed some promising technologies are being studied, and this might be feasible for short sections in a few more years.

The Committee endorsed the plan to hold the trail on the north side of the tracks through the Chevy Chase and East Bethesda neighborhoods. As for the discussion of single-track, this was a difficult decision for the Council Members. But in the end they agreed with the MTA finding that this would allow for a trail with better vertical separation. I have posted earlier at Flipping the trail south on why the trail is better on the north side overall.

The Committee did welcome news that MTA and the Town of Chevy Chase were having continuing discussions on how to make the at-grade crossing at Lynn Drive safe, and also were having discussions on possibly building a local neighborhood trail along the south side of the transitway between the Lynn Drive path and Elm Street Park.

The Committee agreed to strengthen language on the trail width – to make the 12’ width the standard wherever possible, instead of having a 10’ width be the standard with 12’ only listed as desirable. Councilmember Leventhal shared that the County is negotiating with the Columbia Country Club for an agreement that would have the Club drop its opposition to the Purple Line in exchange for shifting the Purple Line alignment shift a few feet north at the Club, to minimize the impact on the greens on the south side. A 10′ trail width through the Club may be a part of that agreement. My own view is that if 2′ is a deal breaker, surely there is another place to find 2′, say by reducing the width of the planted buffer between trail and rail. We need all of the trail width we can get!

July 16 update: Councilmember Leventhal has received clarification from Mike Madden of MTA that the trail width is NOT a sticking point in negotiations with the Club, and the Trail can be a consistent 12′ width through this area.

Committee discussions with MTA showed that the newest plans have two alignment shifts for the future Trail from that shown in previous plans:
1) The trail will shift from the north side of the tracks to the south side of the tracks at Rock Creek, instead of just west of Jones Mill Road. MTA did not present any sketches showing how the trail would shift sides, but I’m guessing that the Trail would cross from north to south underneath the Purple Line transit bridge span right at Rock Creek. A sketch of the older plan is at Access to a real park and shows the trail bridge could clear beneath the transit bridge at Rock Creek. In my opinion, this can be an improvement over the older plan if designed right – it eliminates the need for an up and over crossing west of Jones Mill Road for less elevation change on the CCT, while still giving good access to the Rock Creek Trail.
2) The Trail will cross over CSX west of the Rosemary Hills Elementary School, instead of just east of the Talbot Avenue Bridge.. This change is believed necessary to avoid increasing the height of the retaining wall that is close behind the school now. This change requires taking several feet from the yards of five homes along Talbot Ave. between Michigan Ave. and Lanier Drive, and making Talbot Ave. one-way on this block. I consider this as roughly an even trade-off for the Trail if done right – it eliminates at-grade crossings of Michigan Ave. and Lanier Drive, but creates an at-grade crossing at the east end of the Talbot Ave. Bridge.

The Committee supported new access points for the Trail. The most significant new access might be by building a new access trail along a stream valley that leads into Coquelin Run, from Jones Bridge to Jones Mill Road. Depending upon the length of the access trail, new access can be: 1) just from Jones Bridge Road at Manor Drive; 2) or also from the east end of Chevy Chase Lake Drive; 3) or also from Jones Mill Road near East-West Highway. As the staff packet notes, this is a new idea and it is much too early to know if this will have acceptable environmental and neighborhood impacts. I hope this access trail can be built – it would give good access from many homes in this area.

MTA now estimates the cost of rebuilding/completing the CCT alongside the Purple Line at $65M for a 10’ wide trail. Much of that cost is in the cost of structures such as retaining walls to keep the trail higher than the rail, and the cost of lowering the railbed in the Bethesda Tunnel to make room for the trail to be overhead. Cost for a 12’ wide trail will be higher. By prior agreement between the County and MTA the cost to build the Trail is to come from sources other than transit funding, so as not to burden the Purple Line proposal with the cost of the trail when the Purple Line competes at FTA against other projects. But as Council members pointed out to MTA staff, this does not mean that all of the cost of the Trail must come from County funding. Other state funding sources such as Transportation Enhancement funds can be used. The County also intends to negotiate with MTA on how the cost sharing is determined where trail and transit share structures and grading. The County will also press MTA for full credit for the County contribution of the right-of-way when the final cost share between County and State is negotiated.

I believe the MTA may be taking a too restrictive view of Trail use in calculating cost sharing. In many places the Trail will be a major pathway for transit users to reach the Purple Line stations from the neighborhoods, and where significant numbers of trail users are really transit users the cost of the trail should be proportionately assigned as a necessary part of the transit system. Scarce County funds for trails should not be used to build the Purple Line’s pedestrian access system – that part of the cost is a legitimate transit budget item. MTA may be viewing the trail as a separate system, instead of seeing it as an integral and necessary part of the Purple Line system.

Overall I think the T&E Committee reached thoughtful, even courageous, decisions. The Master Plan now goes to the full Council at a July 20 work session. After the Council has approved the plan, it returns to the M-NCPPC for final confirmation. Most of the ‘heavy lifting’ is done now, I doubt that any major changes will come on the path to final confirmation.

The new Lyttonsville neighborhood sign marks an entrance to a small but historically significant community. Lyttonsville was founded in 1853 when Samuel Lytton, a freed slave, received a parcel of land from a white landowner. It was a predominantly African-American community for most of its history, but in recent years the cost of homes in this neighborhood has risen and the community has become very racially diverse. See the Gazette article For new Lyttonsville residents, an enlightening look at the past.

Lyttonsville, and its adjacent neighborhoods, can provide welcome diversity along the Trail. The MTA analysis of neighborhood characteristics in the future Purple Line service area, using year 2000 census data, found that the Lyttonsville/Rosemary Hills/Rock Creek Forest neighborhoods were 42% white, 31% black, 7% asian and 19% “other”. By contrast, the Chevy Chase neighborhood was 92% white, 3% black, 3% asian and 2% “other”. See trailequity.pdf for more information on other neighborhoods along the future CCT, and the racial profile for all of Montgomery County.

It was very annoying to watch the Purple Line Master Plan public hearings at the Planning Board, and very recently at the County Council, and to see a small group of well orchestrated Purple Line opponents from Chevy Chase neighborhoods dominate the testimony with their message that they will refuse to make any accommodation to build the Purple Line and finish the trail. Lyttonsville and the other neighborhoods east of Rock Creek need the Purple Line for better transit. They also need the Trail to be completed to give them safe off-road trail access to each other, to Rock Creek Park and to downtown Silver Spring. If the trail is completed to downtown Silver Spring, the number of people with easy access to the trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring will be doubled, the trail will be directly connected to many more important destinations, and the trail users may start looking a little more like the rest of Montgomery County.

The plans for the Purple Line transit and trail incorporate all of the best design practices to protect the integrity and safety of the future Capital Crescent Trail, see MTA’s Fast Facts about the Purple Line and CCT. I hope our County Council will hold fast in their awareness that this is not just about Chevy Chase, and continue to strongly support the Purple Line transit and trail.

The Gazette reports at Planning Board unanimously approves Lake Frank trail that local residents argued passionately against building a paved trail adjacent to their neighborhood. From the article:

At the Planning Board meeting, 29 residents addressed the issue.

Those who were opposed to having the trail cited concerns and issues such as pedestrian safety on a bike trail, the detrimental effects of asphalt on the area, fears of increased crime and affecting the natural livelihood of the lake.

“From my understanding, Lake Frank has always been the undisturbed, natural lake and Lake Needwood was the commercial lake where you have the golf course nearby with families having picnics and people fishing and boating,” said Stanley Lorek of Lake Terrace Avenue.

On the other side, supporters of the connector trail said other communities besides the Manor Lake Civic Association should be entitled to enjoy and have equal access to the lake.

“Just because they live closer to the lake does not give them the right to dictate what goes onto park property,” said Janet Buyer of Sunflower Court in the Flower Valley community.

Concerns for pedestrian safety, opposition to asphalt, fears of increased crime, concerns about losing the “natural” setting – we’ve heard this all before from residents opposed to proposed trails adjacent to other neighborhoods, including the Capital Crescent Trail. The pedestrian safety issue was recently raised by Meir Wolf of the Town of Chevy Chase at another Planning Board Hearing, see A bicycling Raceway?.

The Planning Board didn’t fall for these NIMBY arguments against the Lake Frank Trail. Again from the Gazette article:

In his last appearance as Planning Board chairman, Royce Hanson said he acknowledged the neighbors’ concerns in preserving the nature and character of the lake, but that ultimately, the need to expand and build a countywide trail system would provide benefits for a larger representation of people.

“We have a responsibility to be sensitive to the concerns of the community,” Hanson said, “but we also have a responsibility to make it feasible for the public to have access and traverse the area, and allow everyone to enjoy Lake Frank and have different kinds of experiences.”

Hanson also pointed out there had been public objections made to past trail projects such as the Matthew Henson Trail and Capital Crescent Trail, but those trails now have the support of the surrounding communities.

The issue of completing the Capital Crescent Trail into Silver Spring with the Purple Line is different from the decisions to build the Matthew Henson Trail and the Lake Frank Trail connector because completing the Capital Crescent Trail is intertwined with the Purple Line transit. But nonetheless one part remains the same – the way the local neighborhoods tend to act as though the Interim Trail belongs to them, and their opposition to any change in the trail that will open it up to use by other neighborhoods and other user groups.

We are still waiting for the Capital Crescent Trail in Silver Spring.

Last year the runners literally ran away from the trail they were claiming to “save”. The race has been changed this year, so the runners will actually use part of the Interim CCT. The race course has been moved to start at Elm Street Park, will be on local streets in the Town of Chevy Chase for a while, then will take runners down a short section of the Interim CCT to Connecticut Avenue and back.

The race has been shortened from last year, to be only 5K. If the race is to showcase a trail the runners wish to “save”, why not have a full 10K race and stay on the Interim CCT for its length, or at least to Rock Creek Park, to showcase it properly? Because any race on the trail that begins in the Town of Chevy Chase has a huge problem: Connecticut Avenue.

View Larger Map
Interim CCT where it crosses Connecticut Avenue

Race organizers cannot stage a competitive race across six lane Connecticut Avenue without shutting it down, and that is a bigger deal than they can take on. But a race from Elm Street Park to Connecticut Avenue and back will only be a 4K race, and who does 4K races? So, race organizers have little choice but to make up some extra distance by having runners go in a circle on the streets of Chevy Chase to beef the race up to a whopping 5K.

If the Purple Line is built, the trail will be finished into downtown Silver Spring, will be paved, will be wider than it is now in many places, and will be given bridges and underpasses for grade separated crossings of all major highways, including Connecticut Avenue. See MTA Fast Facts for more on the plan to finish the trail.

The runners are running in circles to help the Town of Chevy Chase preserve the trail in its unfinished form – best suited for the Town as its own local walking trail. They are running against their own best interests.

Today the Montgomery County Council took a formal vote to give final approval to the FY 11 Operating Budget and FY11-16 CIP budget, see Press Release. The final approved CIP budget includes $12.1M to design Phase 1 and 2 of the MetBranch Trail, and to construct the Phase 1 section from the Silver Spring transit center to Georgia Ave., including a new trail bridge over Georgia Avenue.

The schedule in the CIP program description for the project shows three parts:
FY11-12: Complete final design
FY13-14: Negotiate agreements with property owners and acquire needed right-of-way
FY15-16: Build

Thank You! especially to District 5 Councilmember Valerie Ervin, and T&E Committee Members Roger Berliner, George Leventhal, and Nancy Floreen for inserting this funding into the CIP budget to “correct” for County Executive Leggett’s earlier omission.

May 20 Update:

The County Council tentatively approved the Operating Budget and CIP budget this afternoon. While there are many cuts in the Operating Budget, the CIP budget survived largely intact. The CIP budget relies on different funding sources than does the Operating Budget, such as long term bonds, so it is much slower to respond to a downturn in tax revenue.

The good news for advocates of the Metropolitan Branch Trail is that funding for design and construction of the Phase 1 appears to have survived the reconciliation process.

March 2, 2010:

Late Tuesday afternoon all three Montgomery County Council T&E Committee Members (Floreen, Leventhal and Berliner) voted to accept the recommendations of the Council Staff on the proposed CIP budget for the bikeways projects, including funding the design of the entire County MetBranch Trail section starting in the coming fiscal year, and land acquisition and construction of ‘phase 1′ including the bridge over Georgia Ave. The decision came late in the day so that Councilmember Valerie Ervin could attend the discussion. The staff recommendation is described more fully here.

This is a big step forward for the MetBranch Trail. But the project still has to survive the “reconciliation” process between now and the final vote of the nine member Council in late May. That reconciliation process must pare down the budget recommendations from all of the Council committees until the total budget is within the allowable limit. Some worthy projects will be cut. Our advocacy to the Council must continue so this much improved MetBranch funding and schedule can survive this process.

There will be a “Meet the Met” party on the trail on National Trails Day, Saturday June 5. Check out the details at the Rails-to-Trails Meet the Met webpage. RSVP at their webpage to join me on the community ride to the party, leaving the historic Silver Spring railroad station at 10:10 a.m.

The Maryland Transit Administration has just released a brochure that describes their commitment to the CCT in the Purple Line project, see Capital Crescent Trail Fast Facts (a pdf file). The brochure presents little that has not been shown in Purple Line documents and at public meetings, but it is good to see all the key trail design features presented together in one document dedicated to the Trail.

The MTA also has just released a batch of illustrative drawings of the CCT at the Town of Chevy Chase.

The drawings apparently were prepared in response to a request from the Town of Chevy Chase. The Town has been pushing hard to convince decision makers that the trail should be on the south side of the Purple Line at their border. The MTA asserts that the trail should be on the north side for several reasons – a principal reason being that the terrain makes it easier to keep the trail higher than the transit in this area, which is important to a better trail experience when a trail is near rail.

I’ve gone over the issue of north side vs. south side extensively at “Flipping the CCT south”, showing why the CCT should be on the north side of transit in this area as MTA plans. The M-NCPPC planning staff and the Planning Board have recently reviewed this issue extensively and reached the same conclusion, see M-NCPPC staff: ‘north side is best’. But the Town of Chevy Chase refuses to let this issue go, and has asked for drawings showing representative profiles along their town border.

Overall, the illustrative landscaping drawings bolster the MTA position that the trail will be better on the north side. The links to the set of pdf files follow.

TCCplanview1
TCCplanview2
TCCsection314+50
TCCsection317+40
TCCsection320+40
TCCsection323+80
TCCsection327+50
TCCsection330+90
TCCsection332+40

The MTA drawings illustrate the profile with the trail on the north side. It can be seen why the terrain will make it difficult to keep the trail higher than the transit tracks if the trail is on the south side. The trail will be more naturally connected on the same level to the neighboring properties on the north side. If on the south side, the trail must be held high above adjacent properties by a retaining wall to keep a good elevation relative to the transit tracks. It is also shown by the drawings that the majority of residences in the Town are separated from the Purple Line by very deep back yards, so assertions that flipping the trail to the south side will make a big difference in the noise and vibration impacts on the Town’s residences are grossly overstated. For the several properties near East-West Highway that do not have deep back yards and that would be very near the Purple Line, the Riviera House multi-residence building is close on the opposite side so that switching sides to favor these several homes must be balanced against the negative impact on the much larger number of residents in the Riviera House.

I know the squeaky wheel will get the grease, but the Town has had more than it’s share of attention from the MTA. The section of the CCT between downtown Bethesda and Silver Spring to be completed with the Purple Line is about 4 and 1/2 miles long. The section that borders the Town is less than 1/2 mile long. The Town is not the only neighborhood stakeholder impacted by design decisions like ‘north vs. south side’. For example, the residences represented by the East Bethesda Citizen’s Association are equally impacted. That Association represents as many homes as does the Town of Chevy Chase, and opposes switching the trail to the south side. My own Woodside Civic Association would like to have more attention be paid to design decisions for completing the trail through our neighborhood into downtown Silver Spring. Trail users not from the adjacent neighborhoods are stakeholders too, and the number of trail users represented by organizations like CCCT and WABA dwarfs the 1200 residences the Town represents. The Town has every right to speak up for the narrow interests of its residents – that is its job. But it is time for MTA to move on, to devote more of its limited planning resources to the trail east of the Town, and to begin to meet with the other stakeholders.

The Washcycle blog finds Silver Spring is now closer to downtown D.C. by bike, at Silver Spring is three minutes closer.

Jim Sebastion, D.C. DOT, has issued this announcement of an official ribbon cutting ceremony on Monday, May 3:

Please join us for a ribbon-cutting to open a big chunk of the Metropolitan Branch Trail!

When: Monday, May 3, at 10:45am

Where: 4th and S Streets, NE, about 5 blocks up the trail from the New York Avenue Metro Station.

This has been a long time coming, and many of you have helped us get here. Hope to see you there.

Check out the website www.metbranchtrail.com for information about the trail.

On National Trails Day Saturday, June 5 there will be bike rides to a “Grand Opening” celebration on the MetBranch Trail. Trail fans will be converging on the new section of the MetBranch Trail in the area of the Rhode Island Avenue Metro Station. WABA and Rails-to-Trails will be sponsoring rides to the event. I will be leading one of these rides from Silver Spring – leaving from the historic Silver Spring Train Station at 10:10 a.m. and following the Interim MetBranch route through Takoma Park. Save the date and watch this blog for more information as June 5 draws near.