May 11, 2007
Metro Brightens Foggy Bottom
Metro stations have always been dimly lit, adding to the general cathedral-like atmosphere upon which the transit system has built much of its reputation. But that may soon change.
As part of a pilot program, Metro recently installed new lighting on the underside of the mezzanine level in the Foggy Bottom Metro station, flooding part of the platform with a bright white light. I noticed this last week as I arrived in the morning, and the effect was, well, jarring. As we pulled into the Metro station and the front of the train proceeded under the mezzanine level, it suddenly seemed like someone had poked a hole in the station's ceiling and let natural light shine in. Commuters emerging from the train seemed disoriented, the white light clashing with the station's otherwise muted tones.
We called Metro for comment, but didn't get much from them beyond it being a test of some sort. The station manager at Foggy Bottom didn't even know about the changes, admitting, "I'm out of the loop on this one."
Unlike Metro's plan to install colored LED lights along the platform edge in its stations, this isn't a very good idea. While some Metro stations are a little too dark for their own good, banks of what seem to be flourescent lights might be too dramatic a change. We like Metro's cathedral-like qualities, and bright white lights are sure to wreck that.
|
These lights might be jarring, but it's definitely true that some of the Metro stations and escalator wells are just too damn dark. There's no need for the ambient lighting to be roughly equivalent to "dusk" at all times, the way it is in some parts of Metro Center, and it's silly that some of the escalators only have mediocre lighting at the level of one's feet. Maybe this isn't the best solution to the situation, but I'm glad to see they're trying to do something about it.
Some of these stations (hello, Metro Center!) are TOO DAMN DARK. If I'm waiting for a train, I'd like to actually be able to read something without standing two millimeters away from a light source. In no other transit system I've ever been in do they have stations this dark. I guess it's just another of the countless ways in which DC is just bizarre.
Don't like it. I liked the trademark gentle subdued classic Metro lighting. The lighting design was an integral part of Metro station design. This screws it up. Garish, like putting neon lighting on the Lincoln Memorial. Bright lighting does not complement the pallor and harried look of most bleary-eyed Metro riders, still half-asleep on their way to work, or exhausted on their way home.
I bet this is due to protests from old people who complained it was too dark. Old people screw up everything.
I think this is better than a dark station, and am surprised that people feel otherwise.
First thing in the morning, it would be nicer to be on a bright platform instead of a dreary one that makes you want to fall back asleep.
Why is everyone always dogging on Metro? (not to mention Old People, spookiness - jeez)
It is one of the cleanest public trains I have ever been on and they handle an ever-increasing ridership with limited dedicated funding pretty well - and Catoe seems to be stepping up.
They are trying to improve lighting, have station managers be more available to riders, manage fare increase equitably, improve safety and accessibility...come on people, quit your bitchin'!
aj, discussing Metro is not the same as dogging on it. We all have a vested interest in what works and what doesn't, so there's nothing wrong with discussing those issues.
Boo! I have always loved the cool and dim quiet that Metro stations can be after a day at work.
Flourescent lighting always makes me look pasty.
Fluorescent lighting, on the other hand...
They started a pilot program like this several months ago at the Pentagon City station. They put banks of bright fluorescent lights on top of the pylons that indicate train direction on the mezzanine and the station manager's booth. It helped brighten up what was always notoriously a dim station, and I'm all for increasing lighting at Metro Center and the underside of Gallery Place, but they just need to keep it indirect. Metro's built on the indirect lighting principle-if they make things glaring and jarring they're headed in the wrong direction. Good thought Catoe, just implement it right...
I'm pretty sure these are grow lights.
Part of the idea behind dim lighting, I believe, was the crowd-calming psychological aspect. The low-light, cavernous, cathedral spaces encourage masses to be quieter and more orderly. Also, according to Great Society Subway, Dr. Schrag's excellent history of Metro, the interior station architecture is meant to reflect the "character of Washington" as a city of monuments and grand avenues.
I absolutely love the stations as they are and find the lighting garish. I guess it works better in New York...
Actually, some sort of brighter lighting is totally needed throughout Metro. Many of my leagally blind friends and coworkers take MetroAccess or Star to get to work because the Metro during rush hours is too dark/crowded and disorienting. They have told me they would use Metro more often and on their own without a friend in tow if it was just better lit. If those taking MetroAccess because the Metro isn't well lit would use the rail option more frequently once the lighting was adjusted, that would lower some costs for Metro one area at least. And I'm not talking about glaring florescents, either. Just my two cents.
How telling is it that the station manager, who is supposed to know everything that's going on in his or her area of responsibility says "I'm out of the loop on this"? Somebody installed a whole new set of lights and this asshat doesn't know anything about it? Do I hear something ticking over in the corner?
I hate the new lighting in Foggy Bottom. Don't these people have any asthetic sense?!?! One of the cool things about Metro is that the original station designs were unique in a world of cookie-cutter transit systems. The clean lines, clear site lines and cethedral-like coffered ceilings make the system stand out as relatively pleasing to the eye, albeit in a funky seventies-2001 space odyssey sort of way. Subsequent additions and changes to the system over the years have degraded this asthetic and the new lighting is yet another one of these changes.
I'd also like to add that I dislike the new door chimes. The old two-tone chime was better!
Hurray to Metro for brightening up the stations. One of my pet peeves about Metro has always been that the stations are too dark. It's ridiculous that passengers can't read comfortably while waiting for the train to arrive (and I'm not an old person!). It's more important that vision-impaired passengers be able to use Metro safely, and for other passengers to be able to read on the platforms, than to preserve Metro's gloomy Gothic aesthetic.
More than an aesthetic concern, I think they installed them for safety reasons. Having brighter lights might deter crime or harrassment. Unfortunately, it seems as though station managers are oblivious to anything happening in their stations anyway.
More lighting = good
Harsh lighting like they have in FB = bad
Middle ground? WTF is middle ground?
Oh yeah, it'd be a bit more illumination within metro stations, but not enough to blind me when I'm done yelling at tourists to stop standing on the left on the escalator down to the FB platform.
The easy solution to make the stations brighter would be to replace the fluorescent tubes with brigher ones, and clean or remove the metal grates that cover them. Why this is so hard for Metro to grasp, I do not understand.
amen demonfafa. The stations are so fricking dark as it is now that just turning the lights up a bit would both help visibility and keep the vampires who like it dim from bitching too much. I haven't finished the Schrag book but I look forward to more info about the aesthetics of the Metro.
When I visited DC and rode the metro as a kid in the 80's, I was struck by how white, light and spacious the stations were, compared to Boston, where I grew up. Now that I live here, I realize that in the 20+ years since then, the clean white bright cement waffle walls have been covered over with soot. Cleaning the soot would definitely brighten up the stations, without any additional lighting. Probably not feasible, though.
When they brightened the lights at Pentagon, it certainly woke me up a little. It's nice to see some light in the Metro on the way to work.
I agree that direct lighting should be avoided like the plague - it would absolutely destroy the atmosphere of Metro.
But it could be a little brighter.
Lower mezzanines, while not so cavernous, still have more than enough room for the occasional proper, hanging indirect metal halide fixture below a white portion of the ceiling. Alternately, they've been experimenting with sulfur lamps in some stations - an oversized, dim diffusor on a sulfur lamp could work. See the ones at Air and Space, which superficially resemble 60 foot long flourescent tubes, and create a decent semblance of daylight.
JKG - what soot has polluted the tunnels of electric trains? If so, a bit of cleaning would work wonders.
Kelly-
I was going to start a drive for more street lights in my neighborhood a few years ago based on the "safety" rationale, and so started reading literature in order to make my pitch. Everything I found showed either absolutely no correlation, or a negative correlation between increased lighting and crime. It seems that not only does extra lighting deter crime, but criminals like to have light to work in as well. While people feel safer on well-lit streets (or metro stations), there's nothing to justify that feeling.
Some of the Metro stations are too dark, but this is the wrong way to do it. Just put brighter bulbs in the overhead fixtures that already exist- mmkay fellas?
Each day thousands of people read small and blurry print newspapers while waiting for the train. How can it be too dark?
The thing I'd like to see metro do is make the lighting at the entrance/exit of each station function as a suitable transition to the outside.
Brody:
I'd be interested in hearing more on the light/crime research you did. I'd always assumed more light meant less crime.
So, you censor your posts here do you, Martin? I am OUTRAGED!