Advocates for the Purple Line running on Campus Drive may have lost one of their largest opponents, as the bulk of the university’s new administration has backed off their predecessors’ objections to the light-rail line.
Ann Wylie — arguably one of the most vocal opponents of a Campus Drive alignment for the light-rail line in recent years — has moved from vice president for administrative affairs to serve as interim provost, a position that only oversees academic matters.
And with Associate Vice President for Facilities Management Frank Brewer taking over Wylie’s vacated position, there seems to be a new openness among officials —Brewer’s department recently released a facilities plan that vowed to make any alignment on the campus work.
In the first days of his presidency, university President Wallace Loh pledged to reach an agreement with the state on the Purple Line and said he would support any route that would expedite funding. His predecessor, Dan Mote, adamantly opposed a Campus Drive alignment for the light-rail line that would connect Bethesda to New Carrollton and asked instead that the trains be routed along or under Preinkert and Chapel drives.
“The position of the university is that we must have the Purple Line,” Loh said in an interview Friday. “It is essential; this is probably the most important decision the governor will make that will affect this university for the next 100 years. What we’ve been saying is it’s not just an issue of whether you prefer alignment X or Y — the real issue is Purple Line or no Purple Line at all.”
Wylie declined to comment for this article.
The Student Government Association and Graduate Student Government have both passed resolutions over the years supporting Maryland Transit Administration planners’ preference for a Campus Drive alignment for the rail line, which is proposed to run from Bethesda to New Carrollton, connecting Montgomery and Prince George’s counties.
Planners and activists said a Campus Drive route would put the transitway in a more central location with greater pedestrian traffic than one among the residential and academic buildings on South Campus.
But Mote said he still believes such an alignment would take away from the campus’s “pedestrian right-of-way culture,” since trains coming every three minutes would disrupt traffic flow.
“These problems largely disappear if the alternative Preinkert alignment is chosen,” he wrote in an e-mail. “The free and open pedestrian friendly culture has been an attractive feature of the campus for visitors and our citizens alike. I do hate to lose it when an attractive alternative is available.”
Brewer said he is hopeful the university’s additional flexibility toward the project will keep things moving forward.
“I am hopeful that [support for both alignments] is helpful to the MTA,” he said. “We’re just very supportive of the Purple Line in general and we want to do everything we can to help it get funding.”
MTA official Henry Kay said Loh’s support for the project may mean that the university and transit planners are closer to agreeing.
“I think we have an excellent working relationship with the administration, and I think President Loh is very understanding of what the dynamics are,” he said. “He’s been in constant conversations with us about the issue and what he’s hearing, so that to me is a very good sign that we’re close to a resolution.”
Kay noted that the MTA’s long-standing preference has been the Campus Drive alignment.
“We think [the Campus Drive alignment] is cost-effective, it can be designed and operated safely, and it’s a big enhancement to the Campus Drive quarter itself,” he said. “… We want to accommodate the university concerns and an alignment they endorse, which is not yet the case.”
Senior staff writer Alissa Gulin contributed to this report. abutaleb at umdbk dot com
