Save The Trail Petition

Letters to Editors

Letters sent to the Gazette which were not published:
September 2009

Dear Editor:

I was perplexed by the letter that questioned the motives of the town of Chevy Chase in its opposition to the MTA's "green" plan to destroy one of the prettiest green spaces in the country. I am a resident of East Bethesda and I oppose the destruction of our beautiful Capital Crescent Trail in the name of "green" light rail. Anyone who has spent any time on that trail should have an interest in preserving it.

I am a big supporter of light rail, and if the proposed plan would actually help solve our transit problems, I would support it; however the plan as it is sacrifices a trail used by thousands every week for commuting and recreation--without really putting a dent in the number of cars that will be clogging our roads. I am very grateful to the Town of Chevy Chase for having the vision and courage to fight for the gorgeous canopy of trees that shade my young children on our walks to downtown. People from all over the country marvel at this intelligent green space. Let's not foul it up just because we can.

With the BRAC adding 2,500 more jobs to Bethesda, we need a serious plan and the Purple Line with light rail doesn't come close. The best plan--which everyone could support-- would include an underground metro line linking the two ends of the red line. People say that metro rail is too expensive. If that's the case, we should focus on finding the money for the right solution instead of spending a lot of money we don't have for a disaster.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Dunbar
Bethesda

********************************************

Good Morning,

I wanted to personally follow up on the article regarding Chevy Chase and the Capital Crescent Trail. I honestly believe that your journalist lost sight of the issues. The goal is to “preserve the trail” not only for Chevy Chase but for all others. It is very short sighted to go out and calculate the distance of the North Border of the city of Chevy Chase to see if the trial is really within the city border or just outside. The Capital Crescent Trail is a shared asset to all the communities in the area and it should be preserved. The goal once again is to preserve for all of us, including your reporter, with a unique place such as the trail
Regards
Sp

**********************************************

My two children will be attending North Chevy Chase Elementary school,  and I have no concerns about "Bus Rapid Transit"  there, while I do about the destruction of the trail and traffic congestion that the light rail will bring due to increased development and density that will be allowed on Connecticut Avenue and downtown Bethesda. 

With the coming of  BRAC, there will be  2,500 new hospital employees, as well as patients and visitors coming to Bethesda Naval Hospital every day.  Automobile traffic on Jones Bridge Road will be a nightmare unless we have Bus Rapid Transit.   Buses would run on clean fuel,  go no faster than the speed limit, and take cars off of Jones Bridge Road.

Ann Bittman
Chevy Chase

******************************************

Reference the recent letters to the Gazette attacking the motives of the officials of the Town of Chevy Chase who oppose the use of the
Crescent Trail route for the Purple Line, it should be noted that the data or methodology used in the estimates of ridership have been witheld from the public.  Why?

The whole project is based on prospective ridership.   

It is inconceivale that either (1) the public officials approving the project were denied access to the data, or (2)  if they received the data, it has been witheld from the public. 

In public projects, no information is proprietary.

Joseph Kenary
Chevy Chase, MD

Washington Post, February 22, 2007

Bus Trumps Purple Line

I don't wonder that the "chief obstacle to Purple Line may be its cost," as an article in the Montgomery Extra put it recently ["Backers Revive Push for Light Rail," Feb. 8]. That is as it should be.

After all, no one has demonstrated that a light rail would attract more users than the current (and usually efficient) bus lines. Case in point: I rode the 34 Ride On from the Medical Center Metro stop to the Wheaton Metro last week at 8:30 a.m., and it took all of 15 minutes to get from one end of the Red Line to the other. So I'm not convinced that a light rail is necessary.

In light of the changes sure to come when the Walter Reed Army Medical Center moves to Bethesda, doesn't it make more economic sense to improve bus service, since bus lines offer more flexibility and more convenient stops than the proposed Purple Line?

True, developers may favor the light rail, as acting state Transportation Secretary John D. Porcari suggested. But who is supposed to benefit from this project?

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette, Feb. 7, 2007

Impact Beyond Golf Course

Sen. Brian Frosh?s remarks in Annapolis about the Columbia Country Club?s opposition to the Purple Line ignores the tens of thousands of residents who oppose this ill-conceived, not-cost-effective, non-traffic relieving light rail ? 8,000 of whom signed petitions opposing a surface transitway on the Capital Crescent Trail.

Frosh?s attempt to perpetuate the myth that opposition is just about the country club and not about the Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Silver Spring Crescent Trail user communities that will be degraded, the thousands of trees that will be destroyed, and the Capital Crescent Trail that will be ruined, is outrageous. He should know better.

Isaac Hantman
Bethesda

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette. Feb. 7, 2007

Impact Beyond Golf Course

I am concerned about Sen. Brian Frosh’s comment that a light rail through our neighborhood would only affect golfers who could easily afford to let the trains ‘‘play through” (‘‘Purple Line supporters push light rail,” Jan. 31 article).

I have never played golf and am not a member of any county club. I know, however, that a light rail through my neighborhood would degrade the quality of life for many more than country club members, and would threaten the safety of our children and others who use the trail.

While I don’t live directly on the trail, our children play there and I am concerned about accidents should a train run through what is our No. 1 play space. My husband and I commute to the Metro via the trail; we hike, bike and set up lemonade stands on the trail. In short, it is an important part of our lives and is one of the reasons we choose to live here.

I believe there are transportation alternatives better than light rail that won’t degrade the trail or our quality of life.

Amy Kostant
Chevy Chase

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette. Feb. 7, 2007

Impact Beyond Golf Course

If the Purple Line is built along the Capital Crescent Trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring, then the next logical step is to continue the light rail along the Capital Crescent Trail to River Road⁄Massachusetts Avenue⁄Westbard. After all, the goal of light rail proponents is to continue the light rail to Tyson’s Corner, and where else can it go but down the trail?

Will state Sen. Brian Frosh support a light rail to Westbard? Or are the trees and trail more precious in his neighborhood than in ours?

Cynthia Brumfield

Bethesda

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette, February 7, 2007

Impact Beyond Golf Course

The Jan. 31 article on the rally for support of the Purple Line neglected to include that the proposed routes will also negatively impact East Silver Spring and Chevy Chase neighborhoods.

The proposed routes will take an acre of Sligo Creek Park, cross in back of East Silver Spring Elementary School, take more than 200 mature trees, and destroy houses along Thayer Avenue, and bring noise into the surrounding neighborhoods as well as the Capital Crescent Trail.

Light rail routes in other cities go through busy urban areas, not near parks, schools and neighborhoods. It also does not make sense that a route through Colesville Road and University Boulevard was not studied or considered.

On the other hand, the planned Corridor Cities Transitway light rail from Shady Grove Road to Germantown has none of these problems, is cost-effective, will relieve more traffic congestion, reduce more air pollution, reduce more effects of global warming, provide more ridership over longer distances, run at high speeds along Interstate 270, not take land from current homes, is not controversial, has no organized opposition and should have a much higher priority.

Elliot Levine, Silver Spring

The writer is with Silver Spring⁄Thayer Opposed to the Plan, which opposes a Purple Line route that would run along Silver Spring and Thayer avenues.

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette, January 31, 2007

Delegate Jane Lawton Supports Underground Purple Line

The letter from Kathy Jentz (‘‘Why oppose Purple Line,” Jan. 10) suggests that my support of Clean Cars legislation is somehow inconsistent with my stance on the Purple Line, but I believe both positions are environmentally sound.
Over the past 20 years, I have worked with other local activists to establish and improve the Capitol Crescent Trail, including the Georgetown Branch to Silver Spring. Thousands of residents use this trail daily.
The proposal for a surface-level light rail along the trail would greatly diminish its beauty and use by clearing thousands of trees and putting hikers and bikers within a few feet of trains running on double tracks every few minutes. For this reason, last year more than 10,000 trail users petitioned elected officials for an underground connection or an alternative route, less destructive of trees and open space.

A preliminary study by the Maryland Transportation Administration reported that the light rail Purple Line would not significantly reduce traffic or benefit air quality. In fact, the higher density development that would be permitted around the Connecticut Avenue rail station would increase the number of cars on that major north-south artery.

I support the Purple Line as a Metro link, tunneled through residential neighborhoods, which will increase ridership, expand Metro’s ability to run alternate routes in emergencies, and protect the Capital Crescent Trail.

With Maryland’s increasing budget deficit, the first step to support Metro and other transportation projects is to establish a dedicated source of funds for mass transit. I will work for passage of that legislation, and I will work for a Purple Line that is consistent with preservation of the trail and sensitive to the communities through which it passes.

Jane E. Lawton, Chevy Chase
The writer, a Democrat, represents District 18 in the House of Delegates.

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette, January 31, 2007

Opponents cite reasons to oppose Purple Line

Kathy Jentz asks why people concerned with air pollution do not automatically support the Purple Line (??Why oppose Purple Line?? Jan. 10 letter).

Perhaps it?s because the Purple Line will not take people out of cars; it will take people off the bus. So far I have not seen any studies suggesting that the Purple Line as proposed will cut down on Beltway traffic. If reducing air pollution is the issue, then the Outer Purple Line plan to link the Greenbelt, White Oak, North Bethesda and Rock Springs employment areas makes more sense.

Grace Palladino
Bethesda

Return to Table of Contents

Gazette, January 31, 2007

Opponents cite reasons to oppose Purple Line

Why oppose the Purple Line? It’s not the concept of a Purple Line that so many oppose, but a light rail on the Capital Crescent Trail.

Walter Reed Army Hospital and clinics will soon be relocated at Bethesda Naval Hospital, and thousands of new employees, visitors and outpatients will be coming daily.

The Purple Line loop — a Metro rail line from Silver Spring to Bethesda Medical Center, proposed by former County Executive Doug Duncan, makes more sense. It would provide a seamless, faster Metro connection and attract more riders than light rail. And it would enhance Metro, allowing for several configurations between Shady Grove and Glenmont, and improve Metro’s ability to evacuate in emergencies and Metro’s potential for expansion.

Pam Browning
Chevy Chase
(The writer is an organizer for the Petition Drive to Save the Trail.)

Return to Table of Contents

Post, Jan 2, 2007

Be Careful What You Wish For

Regarding Roger K. Lewis's Dec. 23 Real Estate column, "My 2007 Wish List: An Intercounty Connector, a Purple Line . . .":

Perhaps Mr. Lewis failed to notice that in the primary contests in Montgomery County, the candidate for county executive who made the vote a referendum on the Purple Line lost by a wide margin. The voters are not as foolish as some might wish.

The Purple Line, as envisioned by its advocates, would cut wide swaths of destruction through residential areas of Bethesda, Chevy Chase and Silver Spring. It would also result in the destruction of the Georgetown Branch of the Capital Crescent Trail. The certainty of this calamity is why we who oppose the Purple Line have argued for years that its original and strongest transit justification -- linking the two arms of the Red Line -- would be far better served by a deep tunnel that would permit regular Metro trains to make the connection.

Mr. Lewis hopes that tunneling will be used to spare Virginia a comparable disaster when Metro is extended to Tysons Corner and beyond. But he seems to see no drawback to using light rail for a Purple Line, which is designed to help create a "new Friendship Heights" at Chevy Chase Lake and which figures in plans for development in College Park.

The most likely consequence of a light-rail Purple Line would be an increase in traffic congestion affecting, among other things, Washington's emergency evacuation route, Connecticut Avenue.

JOHN A. WARNOCK
Chevy Chase

The writer is on the board of the Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Coalition, which has fought to preserve the Georgetown Branch of the Capital Crescent Trail.

Return to Table of Contents