Scribd
Upload
61 views44 pages

Project Briefing: October 2007

The document provides an overview of the Purple Line project which would create a 16-mile light rail or bus rapid transit line between Bethesda and New Carrollton, Maryland. It discusses the project background and goals of improving transit connections and supporting development. Alternatives being considered include light rail, bus rapid transit, and a no-build option. Key issues discussed include community impacts, costs, and funding requirements. Next steps include further analyzing routes and alternatives to identify a preferred option.

Uploaded by

Planning Docs
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
61 views44 pages

Project Briefing: October 2007

The document provides an overview of the Purple Line project which would create a 16-mile light rail or bus rapid transit line between Bethesda and New Carrollton, Maryland. It discusses the project background and goals of improving transit connections and supporting development. Alternatives being considered include light rail, bus rapid transit, and a no-build option. Key issues discussed include community impacts, costs, and funding requirements. Next steps include further analyzing routes and alternatives to identify a preferred option.

Uploaded by

Planning Docs
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 44

Project Briefing

October 2007
Agenda

• Project Overview
• Project Background
• Project Goals
• Service Markets
• Schedule
• Public Outreach
• Alternatives Under Evaluation
• Project Issues
• Alignment Issues
• Next Steps

2
Project Overview
• A 16-mile east-west rapid transit line extending from
Bethesda in Montgomery County to New Carrollton in
Prince George’s County.
• The Purple Line will be either light rail or bus rapid transit
and will operate largely at street level.
• A hiker biker trail is included along the Georgetown
Branch and CSX/WMATA corridor as part of the Capital
Crescent Trail.
• Twenty-one station locations are currently being planned,
with additional stations under consideration.
• Provides direct connections to Metrorail at Bethesda,
Silver Spring, College Park, and New Carrollton; linking
the two branches of the Red Line, the Green Line and the
Orange Line.
3
Project Area Map

4
Project Background
• 1986 and 1989 Montgomery County studies
Georgetown Branch right-of-way
• Montgomery County purchases Georgetown Branch
ROW in 1988
• 1990 Montgomery County includes the Georgetown
Branch ROW as a transportation corridor in Master
Plans
• 1990’s SHA initiates Capital Beltway HOV Study
• SHA/MTA reinitiates project as Purple Line/Capital
Beltway Study
• 1996 - Major Investment Study/Draft EIS completed
on Georgetown Branch
5
Project Background

• 1998 - Montgomery County and MTA select LRT and


trail as preferred alternative from Bethesda to Silver
Spring
• 2001- Governor Glendening announces State will
move forward with Purple Line from Bethesda to New
Carrollton
• 2001 - Western segment of Purple Line advanced
into the planning process
• 2002 - Project renamed the Bi-County Transitway.
Project planning / NEPA initiated for the entire 16-
mile corridor
• 2007 – Purple Line name restored to reinforce
connectivity with existing WMATA system.
6
Purple Line Goals

• Provide faster and more reliable transit service in the


corridor to serve growing east-west travel markets
• Improve access to and connectivity to Metrorail,
MARC, AMTRAK, and bus services
• Serve transit-dependent populations
• Support local, regional and state policies and
adopted Master Plans

7
Purple Line Goals

• Strengthen and revitalize communities in the corridor


• Increase potential for Transit Oriented Development at
existing and proposed stations in the corridor
• Improve access to existing activity centers including
and planned commercial, office, and residential
development in Bethesda, Silver Spring,
Takoma/Langley, University of Maryland/College Park,
and New Carrollton

8
Purple Line Connectivity with Metro

9
Service Markets

• Access to major activity centers/ Metro stations


– Primary markets
– Easier to serve with surface-running transit
– Walk-to stations, no Park and Ride facilities
– More frequent stations
• Reduced emphasis on longer haul circumferential travel
– Initial travel demand estimates show less demand for
longer distance travel
– Difficult to serve with largely surface-running service.
– Additional station locations under study for high transit
demand areas.

10
Schedule

Detailed Definition of Alternatives June 2007


Internal AA/DEIS Review Late Fall 2007
Complete AA/DEIS Report Spring 2008
DEIS Public Hearing Spring 2008
Select Locally Preferred Alt. Summer 2008
New Starts/Request to Initiate
Preliminary Engineering Summer 2008
Final Design 2011 - 2012
Construction 2012 – 2015

11
Public Outreach

• Community Focus Groups


• Meetings with community organizations and
civic groups
• Public Open Houses – December 2007
• Briefings for State elected officials
• Briefings to Prince George’s and Montgomery
County Council Transportation Committees
and Council Members

12
Public Outreach
• Project team meetings (Montgomery and Prince
George’s Counties, M-NCPPC, WMATA, SHA,
MWCOG, Takoma Park, College Park, and New
Carrollton)
• Meetings with major employers and local developers
• Newsletters
• Website: www.purplelinemd.com

13
Community Focus Groups
• Fourth round of Focus Group meetings held September –
October 2007
• Discussed specific concerns for each community
• Reviewed recommendations for alignment refinements
• Future focus group meetings held as needed

14
Modes Under Evaluation

Light Rail Transit

Bus Rapid Transit

15
Modal Alternatives Under Evaluation

• Alternative 1: No-Build
Existing transportation system and programmed transit
and roadway improvements.
• Alternative 2: TSM / Baseline
Enhanced bus service and other lower cost
improvements such as more frequent and additional
service, and signal and intersection improvements.

16
Modal Alternatives Under Evaluation
BRT ALTERNATIVES
• Alternative 3: Low Investment BRT
Mostly at-grade and shared use on existing roadways
• Alternative 4: Medium Investment BRT
Generally at-grade, though often in dedicated lanes, with
some grade-separated intersections and segments.
• Alternative 5: High Investment BRT
Largely dedicated, exclusive where possible, with grade
separation in key areas.

17
Modal Alternatives Under Evaluation

LRT ALTERNATIVES
• Alternative 6: Low Investment LRT
Mostly at-grade with minimal tunneling or aerial
structures, where steep grades require it.
• Alternative 7: Medium Investment LRT
Mostly dedicated, with some intersections and key areas
grade-separated.
• Alternative 8: High Investment LRT
Largely exclusive or dedicated, and grade-separated in
key areas.

18
Alignment Alternatives Map

19
Project Issues

• Decisions on system implementer/operator and local


funding participation are needed
– MTA
– WMATA
– Counties
• Need for storage yard and/or maintenance facility in
Prince George’s County
• Additional funding required for final design, right-of-
way, and construction
• Project phasing

20
Alignment Issues

• Chevy Chase only supports underground (tunneled)


alignment to avoid impacts to trees and communities
• Opposition by Columbia Country Club due to perceived
impacts to the golf course
• Jones Bridge Road (BRT only), an alternative to Master
Plan alignment is opposed by Montgomery County, M-
NCPPC, and surrounding community.
• Potential high costs and community impacts of alignment
options along CSX corridor; need for CSX cooperation
• Topographic challenges of East Silver Spring surface
alignments and high cost of tunnel options
• University of Maryland officials oppose at-grade
alignment along Campus Drive in favor of Stadium Drive
alignment.

21
Alignment Refinements

Refinement of alternatives to:


• Respond to community input
• Reach consensus with counties
• Reduce property and community impacts
• Respond to improved understanding of Purple Line
transit market
• Improve service performance
• Reduce costs
• Improve cost-effectiveness

22
Alignment Refinements

Eliminated Alternatives:
– Riverdale Road near New Carrollton
– Sligo Avenue (deep tunnel and surface)
– Cut-and-cover tunnel along Silver Spring/Thayer
– 16th Street to East West Hwy
– Brookville Road
– Master Plan alignment – relocate trail to north side
of transit from Pearl Street to Jones Mill Road
– “Ripley Street”

23
Alignment Refinements

New/Additional Alternatives
• Bonifant Street at-grade to Wayne Avenue
• Deep tunnel only – Thayer Avenue to Silver Spring
Avenue Alignment
• Deep tunnel alignment from River Rd to MD 410 in
Riverdale Park area.

24
Next Steps

• Ridership forecasts being developed as Travel Demand


Model is refined for corridor-level analysis
• Refine and Finalize definitions of alternatives
• Technical analyses
– Ridership and Traffic Forecasts
– Cost Estimates
– Impact Analyses
• Evaluate Alternatives

25
Next Steps

• Document to Agencies and Public for Review


• Continue public outreach
– Community focus groups for key areas this fall
– Public Open Houses in late fall
– Website – www.purplelinemd.com
– Newsletters
– Continue briefings and community meetings

26
Alignment Alternatives Map

27
Bethesda

28
Master Plan Alignment to Jones Mill Road

29
Woodmont Ave/Jones Bridge Road

30
Jones Bridge Road to Manor Road

31
Jones Mill Road to CSX

32
CSX

33
Downtown Silver Spring

34
East Silver Spring - Thayer/Piney Branch

35
East Silver Spring – Wayne Avenue

36
University Boulevard

37
Trail Analysis

• Objectives:
– Evaluate the trail location on the north versus
the south side of transitway
– Maintain the trail 3-4’ above the trackbed to
provide vertical separation, while trying to
follow existing topography of the land
– Increase the separation between the trail and
the trackbed resulting in about a 10’ wide
planting area

38
Trail Analysis
Previous Design
• Trail on south side
• Trail lower than
track
• 12’ planting area
btwn track and trail

Proposed Design
• Trail on north side
• Trail higher than
track
• 12’ planting area
btwn track and trail

39
Trail Analysis

• Advantages:
– A more naturalistic environment
– A buffer/screen between the trail and track
– Minimizes retaining wall heights resulting in
reduced construction costs
– Creates greater comfort level for trail users
– Increases safety by preventing trail users from
crossing trackbed except at designated
crossings
– Improves trail experience
40
Trail Analysis

• Disadvantages:
– Residences on the south side of the trackbed
would lose their current direct access to the
trail
– The transitway would be closer to the
residences on the south side

41
Grass Tracks - Germany

Freiburg
42
Grass Tracks - France

Le Mans

43
Silver Spring Library

44

You might also like