UMD Ignores Burden of Proof on the Purple Line
November 13th, 2007 | by David Daddio | Published in Purple Line, Transportation | 11 Comments
There is something about human nature that makes every person want to put their pen to a map and draw their own alignments for transportation infrastructure. Go to any Purple Line Focus Group meeting and you’ll understand this phenomena. Everyone is encouraged to participate in this process, but regular citizens rarely if ever dramatically change alignments. Unlike regular citizens, leaders of agencies/major stakeholder groups can have a big influence – one that can be greatly disproportionate to their actual understanding of basic transportation principals… Such is the situation with UMD and the Purple Line.
Without a more thorough explanation of why MTA’s preferred alignment is a bad idea (read our counterargument), there seems to be little reason to seriously consider parting with it (in purple above). If the university wants to continue to go against a multi-year, multi-million dollar planning process, then the burden of proof is on them to prove the benefits of the Stadium Drive alignment (in orange above). Instead of providing a reasonable rationale, University Administrators continue to go around campus sewing the seeds of misinformation into every imaginable facet of the university bureaucracy. What’s worse is that they are resorting to scare tactics (such as suggesting the project will require a 5 foot fence on either side) to support their alignment. The only organizations with the will to fight them are the GSG, the Diamondback, and RTCP.
There are essentially 4 arguments administrators use to support their position (safety, aesthetics, the Univesity Master Plan, and the supposed “nearness” of Stadium Drive to Campus Drive), none of which are supported by the real facts…
Safety:
If light rail is so unsafe, why does it succeed in other heavily pedestrian environments in some of the densest metropolitan cities around the country and world (including on other college campuses)? When Campus Drive is closed to private automobiles, that would amount to a 78 percent reduction of vehicles on the roadway. The Purple Line would replace many buses, so the actual reduction in vehicle/pedestrian conflicts would be even more pronounced. Light Rail is no more inherently dangerous than buses. At 10-12 MPH through campus, Light Rail operators could easily stop the train for pedestrians. University administrators have yet to rationally explain how the Purple Line scenario proposed by MTA would be worse than the status quo.
Aesthetics:
The MTA is proposing a series of avoidance and mitigation measures to ensure the Purple Line respects the core of campus. These measures include minimizing the appearance of catenary wires by affixing them to light posts and an estimated $2 million in streetscape improvements (new sidewalks, signalized crosswalks, street treatments, landscaping, and maybe even a parallel bikeway). The MTA proposes no fences like the ones described over and over again by University Administrators. Instead, the MTA plans a series of low barriers designed to discourage non-crosswalk street crossing. Some raise concern over noise and the effect of vibrations on research facilities. Modern Light Rail is extremely quiet. Indeed, many systems are so quiet that bells and flashing lights are installed at crosswalks to warn pedestrians of approaching trains.
The Campus Master Plan:
The Master plan clearly states that Campus Drive should become a dedicated transitway. The document is searchable. Look for instances where the words “Metro”, “Campus Drive”, and “Purple Line” occur. We challenge anyone to find one sentence in this document that categorically supports the Stadium Drive alignment.
The “nearness” issues:
If Stadium Drive is so convenient why don’t all Shuttle-UM buses run on it?
The University’s focus should be on working with MTA to maximize metro access to campus just as the University Master Plan suggests. They need to use their expertise on the campus community to find ways to maximize the potential benefits of the Purple Line on Campus Drive. Instead they continue to obstruct the process and propose alignments that are plainly inferior.
If they continue to insist on the superiority of the Stadium Drive alignment, we urge that they actually support their position by facts. Their strategy so far is to ignore the most basic principles of academic inquiry and prey upon the university community’s ignorance over the project. They are doing it with cheap scare tactics and a focused (although perhaps more reckless than intentional) campaign of misinformation.
November 13th, 2007 at 1:03 pm (#)
“At 10-12 MPH through campus, Light Rail operators could easily stop the train for pedestrians.”
That six to ten minutes (including stops) to cross campus might not seem like much for a local passenger, but if you are passing UMD for an inter-county daily commute, this slowdown will get old quick.
“Modern Light Rail is extremely quiet.”
Can you put that in db’s?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 13th, 2007 at 2:20 pm (#)
In the interest of the basic principles of academic inquiry. Wouldn’t that 20 minute daily commute through campus add up to 100 minutes per week, 5200 minutes per year, 86.67 hours per year, over TWO WORK WEEKS, per year because of this slow stretch of rail? And that would only be a fraction of the commute.
It has to be faster.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 13th, 2007 at 5:22 pm (#)
The MTA estimates the effect of delays on ridership and these calculations effect federal funding levels. That’s part of the $30 million study they are conducting. If you have some advice for them I suggest you call them.
As for noise levels, several measuring stations are set up throughout the corridor and the results of a noise study will be in the DEIS which comes out early next year. Feel free to call MTA to have them put a noise meter in your backyard if this is a concern of yours.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 13th, 2007 at 6:13 pm (#)
David,
Do you honestly think commuters will want to use a system that is so slow? I doubt it, you are not looking at the big picture. Your attitude reminds me of “Hey kids, let put on a show” (Andy Hardy, Brady Bunch).
Dr. Mote displays so much more class and gravitas then you currently do. You can continue to take cheap pot shots at his credibilty, but you are the one who looks silly.
Although this is a UM website, this is not only a UM project. You are small-time. Apparently whatever degree you graduated with had a curriculum that did not include Logic.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 13th, 2007 at 6:36 pm (#)
I’ve spoken with MTA and I understand the process. Dr. Mote speaks to MTA through his administrators and he has a fundamental misunderstanding of the NEPA process. He continues to spread information that is blatantly incorrect – 5 foot fences, vibrations, damage to the ‘M’ circle, master plan misinterpretations, etc.
I haven’t seen the side by side study that MTA is conducting now(between Campus and Stadium Dr), but I’m going to guess that adding .5 miles to the route (as the Stadium Drive alignment does) will take just as long if not longer than Campus Drive. So we lose ridership because it will take longer and we lose ridership because the stop will be further from where people need to go.
I am looking at the big picture. The Federal Transporation admin takes the ridership studies from project across the country to determine which few (of several) will get congressional funding. If they decide that they will get more riders per dollar from another project then so be it.
Dr. Mote looks especially silly if you compare his op-ed to ours.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 13th, 2007 at 10:51 pm (#)
Light rail and noise: from
http://www.lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_lrt03.htm
“9. LRT is quiet. Light rail vehicles produce less noise than diesel or other fuel-burning buses and much less noise than the equivalent volume of automobile traffic. Smooth, welded rails and vibration absorbing fasteners eliminate much of the noise we associate with rail travel.”
So Dr. Mote valiantly follows in the footsteps of President Elkin who chased the green line away by girding his troops to defeat the evil transit line. Nice to know that the I-95 Connector blasting into campus from University blvd doesn’t have any problems related to noise or aesthetics or safety or degradation of the precious pedestrian environment (which, if he hasn’t noticed, is pretty degraded on Campus Drive). I know, just put all of this new cars he wants to zip down off the highway in a collection of nice new parking garages, and make sure they are lined with bricks because at UM our parking garages must be neo Georgian to maintain the historic campus ambiance.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 14th, 2007 at 1:03 am (#)
I heard the figure of 10 db once for Light Rail. In Denver they had to install bells to make them loud enough for pedestrians to hear.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 14th, 2007 at 9:41 am (#)
“install bells to make them loud enough for pedestrians to hear.”
Pretty sure I said this in the post…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 15th, 2007 at 12:34 pm (#)
I just get depressed thinking about how bad past and current university presidents are at transportation.
Today I stepped off the train onto the College Park metro platform at 10:42 AM … after missing the UM Shuttle and having to get on the Metro C4 bus I finally got to class .. late .. at 11:09 AM in Tydings.
27 Minutes from the metro to class?!?! That is HORRIBLE. There are people who have shorter DOOR-TO-DOOR commutes than that. That is my TRAIN-to-class commute!
I hope we get the Purple Line right, but that was seriously depressing. It makes me think that horrible, short-sighted decision in the 70s will prevent College Park from ever becoming a truly urban, accessible location….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
November 16th, 2007 at 2:22 pm (#)
How loud does it seem in this video?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
May 16th, 2010 at 11:13 am (#)
I would like to chime in as someone with a somewhat conflicted opinion. I would love to get the Purple line on campus and get more cars off campus. I, however, worry about the placement of the purple line and wonder whether running it along the southern border of campus might be better. This would exclude both Campus and Stadium drive, for this reason:
Vibration
All the physics, materials science engineering, nano-fab, etc labs are clustered near the Stadium/Regents intersection quadrant of campus. What happens to our experiments when the light rail shakes the basement?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0