Economic blogger for The Economist and former DCist editor Ryan Avent discusses proposed Purple Line development.

It was back during the administration of Parris Glendening that a heavy rail option (that is, Metrorail style) for the Purple Line was first ruled out. In those days, oil was just $20 per barrel and Montgomery and Prince George’s counties were home to almost 150,000 fewer people than live in those places today. The District was still losing people every year, and transit-oriented development had yet to turn Bethesda and Silver Spring into the buzzing, high-rise centers of activity they are today. Governor Glendening, though a fan of smart growth, probably saw heavy rail as a rather hard sell in such an environment.

But make no small plans, they say, and with good reason. As congestion times and fuel prices have risen over the past decade, development in Maryland’s Metro-accessible inner-suburbs has soared. The heavy-rail alternative might be looking quite attractive at the moment – enough so, at least, that it would be nice to see how the option fared alongside the others on the menu in the just released Purple Line Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Especially when you have the crack reporting team at the Washington Post leading off its piece on the matter with this:

Building the Purple Line through Montgomery and Prince George’s counties could require demolishing up to 31 private properties, including some Silver Spring apartments, and constructing sound walls to shield residents from a high-pitched “squeal” noise caused by turning train wheels, according to a six-year state study released yesterday.

Oh, for an underground Metro line.