What is the LPA?

A Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) is the selected physical design concept and scope for a major corridor transit investment. For the Red Line in Baltimore, the decision on the LPA identifies the transit mode (bus or light rail), and the location and description of the alignment. The LPA will also generally describe the proposed location of stations, the operating plans for the transit service (hours of operation, how often vehicles run, etc.), and any design options to be further evaluated during the next phases, Preliminary Engineering and Final Design.

Download the LPA Corridor Map

Download the full LPA Report

What is the Locally Preferred Alternative?

The Locally Preferred Alternative, or LPA, is the specific definition of the Red Line that MTA is proposing to construct. Since 2002, when study of the Red Line began, MTA considered many alternative alignments and rapid transit modes, including heavy rail and bus rapid transit. Based on public input and technical evaluation, MTA selected a 14.5-mile light rail project with 20 stations and two tunnels.

Why are you updating the LPA now?

Since the LPA was announced, MTA has continued to refine the forecast of project benefits and cost estimates in preparation for a request to the Federal Transit Administration to enter a process that will eventually lead to federal funding for the project. This additional work showed that we could support enhancements that would make the Red Line more reliable and less costly in the long run. All of these enhancements had been considered previously but were removed from the LPA last year to meet federal requirements for cost effectiveness.

What are the specific changes?

Changes include the following:

If the cost has increased why has the cost effectiveness improved?

The project cost effectiveness has decreased which is a good thing (our goal is to have the most benefit for the least cost). This is a result of increased ridership which means increased user benefits. The increase in user benefits more than offsets the increase in cost.

Why did the ridership forecast increase?

Since August 2009, the travel demand model used to estimate ridership has been improved. Average daily ridership is now 59,000. The primary reasons for the increase in ridership are as follows:

1. The model used Round 7A, the most recent and updated set of land use and demographic forecasts adopted by Baltimore Regional Transportation Board. Round 7A includes, among other enhancements, far more residential development in the downtown area.
2. The model used MTA's 2007 rider survey. The Phase I model used 1996 survey data which was the best available at the time. The 2007 survey showed significantly higher level of transit dependency and off-peak trip making than the prior model.
3. Ensured distribution of trips for home-based work travel is reflective of the patterns observed in the Journey-to Work data from the U.S. Census. The improvements made in representing this key market translated into a much improved and more sensitive model.

What is the justification for adding a second tube to the Cooks Lane tunnel?

The Cooks Lane tunnel is a one-mile segment of the Red Line. This is the only portion of the 14.5 mile project that was proposed as single track in August 2009, which was done to help achieve the medium cost effectiveness rating. Single tracking would have supported the headways needed for 2030 ridership, but is not ideal because it would result in service disruptions if the track is blocked and it would be more costly to construct the second tube in the future. This was of particular concern to citizens and elected officials, including, in particular, the District 41 delegation and the Red Line Citizens Advisory Council.

The cost effectiveness is below the FTA threshold for a medium rating, so why aren't you adding more tunnels or looking at different modes?

Since the process of working with FTA is just starting, MTA believes it is prudent to provide some opportunity for costs to increase as a result of federal comments. Additional tunneling such as Boston Street and Edmondson Avenue would far outweigh additional benefits as they are measured in the federal process. More costly modes, like heavy rail, which requires far more structures for grade separation or corridors that are less attractive for either ridership and/or economic development and revitalization opportunities, would have the same impact. This would result in a low cost effectiveness rating which would be detrimental to our efforts to win the competition for funding. Additionally, the MTA has completed the Alternatives Analysis phase of the FTA New Starts process and has begun the application process for requesting entry into the Preliminary Engineering phase. Studying additional modes would extend the project schedule, causing us to miss the opportunity to secure federal funding, and as a result, delay likely project benefits for the region.

How much would it cost to add more tunnels?

Extending the tunnel under Boston Street from Hudson Street to Conkling Street would cost $180 million. Extending the tunnel under Edmondson Avenue from Winans Way to Calverton Road would cost $420 million.

When will the FTA approve the LPA?

Our current schedule calls for FTA to approve the LPA by late summer 2010.

Will the costs and benefits change again?

Yes, because the cost estimates are based on very limited engineering work, as engineering continues over the next several years the cost could change, either up or down. The benefits could also change as result of updates to the regional forecast of population and jobs by the Baltimore Metropolitan Council.

What is the effect of FTA policy changes that reduce the significance of cost effectiveness?

Prior to a recent federal policy change, a transit project was required to achieve a medium cost effectiveness rating and a medium overall project rating to advance through the approval process. While the recent policy change will remove the medium cost effectiveness threshold as an absolute requirement, the Red Line will still be competing nationally, and a lower cost effectiveness number will help in that competition. The current range for a project to achieve a medium rating is $16.00 to $24.99. The updated Red Line has a rating of $22.77.