Posts about Light Rail
Transit
Ride The Tide of light rail, Virginia Beach
Just 6 months after opening, Virginia's first light rail transit system, located in Norfolk, is already exceeding ridership expectations. Now it's time for the Commonwealth's largest city, Virginia Beach, to hop aboard and extend the light rail all the way to the Atlantic oceanfront.
Photo by VaDOT on Flickr.
Dubbed "The Tide," South Hampton Roads' light rail system made its debut in Norfolk on August 19, 2011. The initial $338 million segment, operated by the regional transit agency, Hampton Roads Transit (HRT), is 7.4-miles, has 11 stops, and is currently located only within Norfolk's city limits.
The system connects Norfolk State University, the downtown central business district, Harbor Park (minor league baseball stadium), and the region's premier medical center complex, including Eastern Virginia Medical School, Sentara Norfolk General Hospital, and the Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters.
I had the opportunity to experience the Tide's inaugural weekend while visiting my parents in my hometown of Virginia Beach. We were among the over 75,000 people who boarded the trains during the first three days, when HRT was running a free promotion to introduce the community to the new light rail system.
Initial weekday ridership during the first year was projected to be only 2,900. However, the 6-month data shows that those early projections have been blown away. About 4,642 people ride The Tide during an average weekday. An even higher number Virginia Beach wary of light rail, but preserving its options
Originally, HRT had planned for The Tide to extend from downtown Norfolk all the way to the Virginia Beach oceanfront, along an abandoned Norfolk-Southern rail right-of-way. However, the transit agency needed the consent of both cities to move forward, and Beach residents voted down the proposal in 1999. Therefore, Norfolk proceeded on its own.
In recent years, however, the resort city has signaled that it may be warming up to the idea of light rail. For example, Virginia Beach's 2009 Comprehensive Plan adopted a new urban growth strategy that is designed to direct the majority of the city's future growth to 8 defined "strategic growth areas" (SGAs). Six of these SGAs are located along the city's portion of the abandoned Norfolk-Southern right-of-way currently used by The Tide in Norfolk. The comprehensive plan even gives a positive mention to light rail as an "alternative transportation" option.
In 2010, Virginia Beach contributed the $15 million in matching funds necessary to purchase the 10.6 mile stretch of Norfolk-Southern right-of-way which runs from the city's Newtown Road border with Norfolk to Birdneck Road in Virginia Beach Tide promises a "tsunami" of smart growth possibilities for region
For The Tide to become the truly regional transit system it was intended to be, it must extend to the Virginia Beach oceanfront. The resort city's portion of the abandoned Norfolk-Southern railway corridor has already been identified in the Hampton Roads Regional Transit Vision Plan as a priority rapid transit extension corridor.
HRT has begun a federally required transit extension study / alternatives analysis to determine what mode of rapid transit, if any, is appropriate for the corridor. The four alternatives being considered are (1) doing nothing; (2) enhancing local bus service; (3) building a bus rapid transit (BRT) line; and (4) extending The Tide's light rail line.
According to the study, an extension of The Tide light rail system to the Virginia Beach oceanfront would bring approximately 1.1 million square feet of residential and commercial development within a quarter-mile of the corridor, or 90,000 SF per corridor mile The study anticipates that the Beach extension of The Tide would have 8 stations, all of which lie within the city's 2009 Comprehensive Plan-designated strategic growth areas.
After being inspired by my inaugural Tide ride in Norfolk, and prior to looking at any planning documents, I decided to create my own map of potential Virginia Beach light rail stations. Based solely on my knowledge of the area from growing up there, I was able to identify all 8 of the stations that HRT recommended in its study, plus a ninth one (at North Plaza Trail). Here's my map:
In April 2011, HRT suspended the Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study until it could get 9-12 months of actual ridership data from The Tide's initial Norfolk segment. Having now obtained 6 of those 9-12 months of data, HRT should have no problem concluding that regional ridership will support the extension of light rail to the Beach.
Particularly in light of Amtrak's recent announcement that its popular Northeast Regional trains will directly service Norfolk's Harbor Park by the end of 2012, it makes even more sense to extend The Tide to Virginia Beach. That way, tourists and business travelers from as far north as Boston could seamlessly travel to most of the region's prime destinations without ever having to rent a car.
To paraphrase (in a shamelessly corny way) an early 1980s Blondie hit, The Tide is High
Potential Virginia Beach Tide stations. Image from Google Maps.
Transit
Transitways can run on top of grass
Transitways don't have to be ugly. They don't even have to be paved. There are many examples around the world of grass-track transitways for light rail or BRT, and a lot of local interest in using them here.
Maryland is actively considering grass tracks for the Purple Line, and the idea could theoretically be applied to the Corridor Cities and Crystal City transitways as well.
Since some of the opposition to transit in King Farm is apparently based on the absolutely incorrect misconception that all transitways must consist of massive concrete barriers, here are examples of grass transitways from around the world.
 New Orleans, LA. Photo by tinydr. |  Fort Collins, CO. Photo by the author. |
 Kenosha, WI. Photo by kschmidt626. |  Concept for Purple Line by Maryland MTA. |
 Porto, Portugal. Photo by gradiate. |  Paris, France. Photo collilnchurcher2003. |
 Strasbourg, France. Photo by GEO.Hellas. |  Barcelona, Spain. Photo by Daniel Sparing. |
Even BRT can be accommodated in a grass transitway, as Eugene, Oregon's Emerald Express illustrates:
 Photo by the author. |  Photo by rob_wrenn on Flickr. |
Cross-posted at BeyondDC.
Transit
ACT creates Montgomery County transit vision
Last July, Montgomery County's Action Committee for Transit worked with Greater Greater Washington to produce a transit vision for the I-270 corridor. Rather than spending billions of dollars on widening I-270 as the State of Maryland proposes, ACT argued that it would be better and more affordable to invest in a vigorous integrated transit network.
That was all well and good, but why stop with the I-270 corridor? There's more to Montgomery County than Gaithersburg.
That in mind, ACT asked me to produce for them the following map, which expands their original 270 vision to encompass the entirety of Montgomery County.
ACT vision for Montgomery County. Click to enlarge.
The proposal includes:
- Extension of the Metrorail Red Line from Shady Grove north along I-370 and I-270 to MD Route 118, where it would end at Germantown Town Center. There would be one intermediate station at Quince Orchard Road, where the line crosses the CSX rail tracks.
- MARC improvements resulting in more frequent, all-day, bi-directional service to Frederick.
- A new spur of the MARC Martinsburg branch to reach Hagerstown.
- The completed Corridor Cities Transitway as light rail, with slight modifications to the route at Crown Farm and Kentlands, and a one-station extension to Clarksburg Town Center.
- The completed Purple Line, using the adopted Locally Preferred Alternative alignment.
- A new light rail line beginning at Silver Spring Metro and extending north along US-29 to Burtonsville.
- A new streetcar line beginning at White Flint Mall and running north along MD Route 355 through Rockville and Gaithersburg, ending at an expanded multi-modal Metropolitan Grove station.
- (Not shown on the map) Various bus priority and/or BRT improvements throughout the county, such as on Veirs Mill Road.
For more about their vision for Montgomery County, visit ACTfortransit.org.
Cross-posted at BeyondDC.
Transit
Montgomery Council agrees on 270 widening, debates BRT versus light rail
At this morning's session, the Montgomery County Council expressed a consensus for a scaled-back I-270 widening, and debated whether to build bus rapid transit or light rail on the Corridor Cities Transitway.
Image from I-270 Multimodal Study.
Council President Phil Andrews (Rockville/ Politically, this was probably the most restrictive option that could pass the Council, and all members who spoke expressed support for this idea. However, it's much less clear when, if ever, Maryland will have money to build this project, since they aren't likely to raise gas taxes and mortgaged many years of future revenue on the ICC. SHA representative Russell Anderson told the Council that they will break the project into as much as 30-40 phases, potentially starting with pieces such as replacing bridges in the City of Frederick. Anderson could not say when a functional reversible-lane segment might actually open.
Councilmembers did not press SHA on tolls, which would need to be fairly high to keep the new lanes moving, especially if carpools can operate for free. Instead, they seemed content with having some free lanes alongside new tolled lanes, apparently predicting that drivers and future elected officials would be okay with high tolls if they only applied to some lanes.
Money also played into the much fiercer debate over Bus Rapid Transit versus light rail for the Corridor Cities Transitway. Other Councilmembers argued that the intangible differences between light rail matter. Councilmember Mike Knapp (upcounty) pointed to the studies showing light rail stimulates more development and brings in more riders than BRT compared to the predictions from models. "We may get sexy new buses, that might work, or it might not," he said. "We know people will ride rail."
Andrews responded by showing pictures of BRT and rail vehicles, which are almost identical, and argued that, "If we provide a vehicle that is fast and comfortable, people will not care if it's bus or light rail." Councilmember Marc Elrich (at-large) noted that the US has no real examples of good BRT to point to, with most "BRT" being simply buses with a queue jumper lane or signal priority.
Local opponents of the development at Gaithersburg West have been pushing for BRT instead of light rail, since making the light rail investment "cost effective" will force the County to plan for a higher level of development than they might otherwise choose. But Councilmember George Leventhal (at-large) noted that few people actually argued that they wanted to ride a bus. He said, "I am not hearing from people who say, 'I love to ride the bus, please give us a bus, we are going to ride the bus." For that matter, recommending the light rail might make the project less likely to happen, reducing development more than light rail.
Leventhal seemed to be leaning toward light rail, saying that he predicted a great outcry from area residents if the County Council takes their promised transit line and decides to make it "a bus" while keeping light rail for the Purple Line. As many noted, the two projects differ substantially as buses would not have enough capacity for projected Purple Line riders while the CCT expects far lower ridership, but the optics matter to elected officials, especially ones like Leventhal who weigh political factors most heavily.
Councilmembers Duchy Trachtenberg (at-large), Nancy Floreen (at-large), and Nancy Navarro (east county) spoke in favor of light rail as well, arguing in various ways that light rail is superior and that the county should make the real investment if it can. On the other hand, Councilmember Roger Berliner noted statements by Planning Board Chairman Royce Hanson saying that BRT was superior at Gaithersburg West even absent the cost difference, because it can work even before all segments get built and provides more route flexibility as development progresses.
After touring the area and considering the arguments, it seems that while light rail is better, the flexibility of buses wins out. This area is far from linear, as we can see from the contortions required to serve the various planned developments. Debating between a single BRT busway and a single LRT line is probably not the right question. Instead, would a network of buses on dedicated lanes that go beyond just a single line better connect people to the planned jobs?
From the discussion, it looks like Andrews, Berliner, and Elrich favor BRT, while Floreen, Knapp, Navarro, and Trachtenberg favor light rail. Ervin either did not talk, wasn't there, or I just missed her comments. If Leventhal chooses rail, the Council will likely recommend that next week, though as Leventhal noted, it may not really matter what the Council says if Maryland state officials don't think they can get light rail through the FTA. The Council will vote on the CCT and I-270 widening next week.
Politics
ACT produces District 4 scorecard
Voters in Montgomery County's District 4 will choose Democratic and Republican nominees for County Council on Tuesday. On the Democratic side, Nancy Navarro and Ben Kramer are considered the front-runners, and are also the candidates most in favor of transit and transit-oriented growth in Montgomery County. Navarro pulls slightly ahead of Kramer on our issues. All Republicans oppose the Purple Line, but Andrew Padula favors transit in the County more than his opponents.
Ben Kramer and Nancy Navarro. Photos from the candidates' sites.
This morning, the Action Committee for Transit released their scorecard based on questionnaires and candidates' public statements. It rates candidates on five major issues:
- Purple Line: Do they support the light rail link from New Carrollton to Bethesda?
- Rail on Route 29: Would they study light rail in the median of Route 29 up to Burtonsville?
- Metro communities: Do they believe in focusing development around Metro stations in designs that favor walkers and bikers instead of just cars?
- Green growth: Would they insist that new "transit-oriented development", like that in Germantown and Gaithersburg West, actually include the transit link?
- ICC: Do they feel that building the Intercounty Connector was a mistake, especially given Maryland's dire fiscal situation?
Navarro is the only candidate to get a perfect score, supporting the transit-oriented viewpoint on five of five issues. Kramer supports the Purple Line, Route 29 light rail, and Metro-centered development, but also supports the ICC and, in ACT's judgment, would move forward with large projects far from transit even if the promised transit never materialized. All other Democratic candidates support the Purple Line and Route 29 light rail, but ACT dubs all unknown or against the transit-centered viewpoint on development. Cary Lamari, the homeowner's association candidate, also opposes the ICC, but supports widening many local roads while opposing most any development.
Transportation is a frequent hot-button issue in District 4, especially around the ICC. Despite his ICC support, Kramer doesn't share the SHA's enthusiasm for ramps and bypasses everywhere. He opposed a plan to grade-separate Georgia Avenue and Norbeck Road into a "Los Angeles-looking freeway intersection", which Cary Lamari supported. Kramer also fought (though supported at first) a another Georgia-Norbeck bypass plan SHA was once promoting to temporarily handle ICC traffic while the freeway temporarily ends at Georgia.
The most significant differences between Navarro and Kramer involve wider political issues beyond transportation. Navarro is more of a classic progressive, while Kramer is a fiscal conservative. The County Council is currently divided into two four-member factions, primarily around budget issues and union relations, though both include members formerly considered "pro-union" or "pro-business". One Council faction, comprising Valerie Ervin, Nancy Floreen, Mike Knapp and George Leventhal, has endorsed Navarro, along with Congresswoman Donna Edwards and Delegate Anna Sol Gutierrez, while County Executive Ike Leggett and Councilmember Duchy Trachtenberg have endorsed Kramer.
As Maryland Politics Watch pointed out, these factions don't correspond clearly with development issues, whether growth policy, the ICC, or whom to elect to the Planning Board. Ervin and Trachtenberg have been the Council's strongest advocates for transit and transit-oriented issues in the past, and we've worked with Floreen and Leventhal on several issues.
Just Up the Pike's Dan Reed is voting for Navarro, primarily based on her background and her desire for change. Kramer sees no "demand or need for directional change," which Dan consideres "really scary." It's little surprise, therefore, that the editorially conservative Washington Post endorsed Kramer, primarily because he's anti-union, like the Post, and supports the ICC, for which the Post has relentlessly cheered, calling all ICC opponents "anti-growth zealots".
All of the Republicans support studying Route 29 light rail but oppose the Purple Line. Padula comes out ahead of his opponent Robin Ficker on whether to allow "fake" transit-oriented development. Green Party candidate George Gluck agrees with ACT on all issues, though they're unsure of his position on Metro-focused communities.
For much more on the race, read Maryland Politics Watch. What other information should transit- and smart growth-oriented District 4 voters weigh in their decisions?
Transit
Prince George's transportation plan, part 2: transit alignments old and new
Part 1 looked at road, pedestrian and bicycle improvements in Prince George's Preliminary Countywide Master Plan of Transportation. The plan also evaluates the county's many railways, identifying numerous proposals for expansion.
The County fully endorses plans to increase MARC service on the Camden and Penn lines, which would bring additional tracks to segments of the routes, mitigating the delays that come from sharing the tracks with Amtrak and CSX. The Purple Line is also a priority. The plan lays out future plans to extend the could-be circumferential light rail line to National Harbor via Largo, Westphalia, and Suitland.
This alignment (light purple in the map above) is rather indirect. It runs outside the Beltway to Westphalia, serving a greenfield development, while missing potential infill sites in District Heights and Forestville. Worse yet, it turns inward, bypassing Andrews AFB, a BRAC site unserved by rail that will gain thousands of new jobs over the next decade. Planners should put more track inside the Beltway, such as by the alternate Purple Line alignment in darker purple on the map above. Nonetheless, it is promising to see this segment in some form in the County's plan. If the Purple Line ever runs all the way around the city, Prince George's County will have by far the largest segment, and this plan testifies to the County's interest in seeing such a project come to fruition.
The plan also shows an alignment from New Carrollton to Bowie (blue in the map above). I can't determine if this is supposed to be MARC or Metro. The county lists a Green Line extension to Fort Meade and possibly BWI as a priority (green), and the study shown has the line running along Route 1, which would be much better for future TOD than other proposals that follow I-95. A Green Line extension would also bring better transit to another BRAC site, the isolated, high-density job center of Fort Meade just over the county line. Adequate service to the NSA and the main base could potentially take thousands of automobiles off the road as it strengthens transit links with the Baltimore region.
There are also some entirely new transit lines (brown on the map). There's the proposed light rail from the Green Line's southern terminus at Branch Avenue down MD-5 toward Brandywine and ultimately Waldorf. This route has been tossed around for a few years now, but no formal plans exist, as right now it sits behind the Purple Line, Corridor Cities Transitway, and Baltimore Red Line on Maryland's transit priorities. There's also an extension of a streetcar coming out of DC along Rhode Island Avenue up to East Riverdale on the Purple Line, which would further exploit the potential for TOD along Route 1 and the Port Towns.
A fixed guideway running along I-295 to National Harbor and over the Wilson Bridge appears disconnected from another terminating on the Purple Line extension in Oxon Hill less than a mile away. The study doesn't specify mode, but this ought to use a compatible mode with the Purple Line, allowing it to eventually run all the way around DC. Light rail from DC along South Capitol Street would be better than I-295, and could connect to the Indian Head line with a detour to National Harbor.
I also question the merit of running rail transportation south past National Harbor. This area consists of very sparsely populated suburban sprawl with little chance of transit oriented development. That line would be redundant to the Branch Avenue line, and would wastefully serve exurbs when more beneficial projects could be studied to connect areas inside the Beltway such as Forest Heights, which is completely by-passed by this rail alignment.
Finally, there's one glaring omission in the plan: bus facilities. WMATA is advocating for increased transit capacity through priority bus corridors. Montgomery County Councilmember Marc Elrich responded by identifying 10 corridors in his county that could receive such upgrades. Meanwhile, no Prince George's leaders have discussed any of WMATA's proposed corridors in their county, and there's no mention of them in this plan.
Also missing is the transit center proposed at Takoma-Langley Crossroads, the region's busiest transit node without a Metro station. The proposed bus facility would serve the 11 bus lines that service the intersection while complementing a planned Purple Line station.
The County proposes many transit lines that will enhance mobility in the County. As with roads, though, they seem to treat transit as a set of individual facilities, rather than as an overall network. They should move forward with many of these links. They should also think harder about how to help people move around by transit, by connecting transit lines and focusing new alignments on existing, densely populated communities and potential infill sites inside the Beltway.
@ggwash
- Successful speed cameras require fair speed limits
- Amid scandal, don't lose sight of Gray's policy achievements
- Bethesda gets new but terrible bike racks
- Montgomery plans 160-mile, "gold standard" BRT system
- DC's parks are 5th best in the nation, says "Park Score"
- DC's divide need not be black and white
- Live chat with Matt Yglesias
Greater Washington
District of Columbia
