DCist: Morning Roundup: Meter for Meter Edition

boondoggle

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:00:55 -0500

BTW, LNS jokes are sooooo 2006. Their relevancy, even as fodder for satire, disappeared long ago. I moved here in 2007; can I get a waiver? And can we make a list of groups relevant for ridicule? And what about the 'Tuesday night takedown' sign I made for tonight's Caps game (w/ adult themed graphics)?

MikeB

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:58:16 -0500

Who in their right mind mentioned the word "elevated" anyway? It's just the reporter covering his bases since it doesn't look like he quotes any one. Probably just saw the initial presentation, which I don't think mentions either above ground or underground rail. But the Examiner's story on this on Saturday specifically mentions the need to build a new tunnel under the Potomac.

rllayman

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:50:16 -0500

don't have time to read through all the comments but the original separated blue line proposal was always underground. Who in their right mind mentioned the word "elevated" anyway?

the_heckle

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:55:18 -0500

registering sucks: With the impending McCain presidentiary, LNS is all kinds of NOW.

monkeyrotica

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:31:14 -0500

With a name like "registeringsucks" you've definitely got my vote. Unfortunately, I am not registered to vote. THAT'S how the CIA and the Bilderbergers track you. In fact, the only identification I keep with me is my Captain 20 Club Card and the my diocese which is tattooed to the back of my neck.

Hillman

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:22:51 -0500

What is Graham's idea bad? Because that $300,000 should be used for actual enforcement of basic standards in cabs. That'd pay for an actual program that would check out how cabs actually operate - an undercover operator or two that would take cabs in DC regularly, so they can witness first hand the number of cabs that won't take you anywhere but downtown (in violation of DC law), the number of cabs that will tell you their AC is broken (again, against the law), etc., etc. DC cabs suck in part because we let them. But instead Graham suggests using that money to further subsidize the cab industry. Why? Because he sees it not as a vital part of our transit system, but rather as a make-work program. And it's his total lack of oversight on this issue (he is the Councilmember that supposedly oversees the taxi industry) that has allowed us to have the crap we have now. And it's that whole mindset that gave us what we have now. We require almost nothing from our cabbies. They don't have to learn English. They don't have to have even a basic knowledge of the streets in DC. They can have crappy 20 year old cars that wouldn't be allowed in other cities. And now they don't even have to pay for their own meters? You get what you allow.

registeringsucks

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:12:18 -0500

How about people just move out of the sticks. Live where you work or vice versa. BTW, LNS jokes are sooooo 2006. Their relevancy, even as fodder for satire, disappeared long ago. Also, I would like to announce my candidacy for ward 1 council member.

IMGoph

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:39:41 -0500

drew: seriously, if you want to borrow that book, i have a copy... and monkey is both, those descriptions aren't mutually exclusive...

tcl022077

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:30:55 -0500

Drew- There's no question that Monkey's an evil genius. But in this case he's just repeating information that you missed in the original post. See the "Side Note" at the end of the Georgetown Metro paragraph in the post.

Politburo

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:18:38 -0500

"Also, is WMATA studying connecting the two Farragut stations?" It's on their wish list, along with connecting Gallery Pl and Metro Center.

Reid

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:17:40 -0500

Braver: Getting a station in Georgetown is not the point of this effort, it is merely a byproduct. The point of the plan is to build a new backbone through the city to relieve the pressure on the Orange and Blue lines, which cannot handle the volume that is projected. That it also would enable a Georgetown station is secondary to the objective of easing pressure on the existing lines. And I think it's pretty clear that the Silver Line to Dulles was putting the cart before the horse. Metro expansion to Dulles and beyond would be seriously hampered if it continued to rely on the Rosslyn tunnel. It was idiotic to plan the Silver Line without considering its effect on the central system.

drew in adams morgan

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:10:11 -0500

Monkey, are you a treasure trove of useless knowledge? or just a run-of-the-mill evil genius.

MikeB

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:09:20 -0500

Braver - Yes, the pedestrian tunnels are in the presentation. I don't remember if they've committed to building them or not. There was something in the news a while back. And I'm not sure why you see Georgetown and Tysons/Dulles as mutually exclusive. Sure it's a stretch to think they'll get the money for both, unless the next administration is more subway friendly. But technically they already have a plan for Tysons/Dulles, so why not think ahead to see how to relieve some of the congestion on the Orange line, which according to their projections will be the first one to exceed capacity. Unfortunately, the presentation, at least based on the link inloganO posted, is lacking in details.

braver

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:57:52 -0500

There's already the blue buses between Rosslyn and Dupont Circle, stopping in Georgetown...they used to be cheaper than taking the Metro but now I think they're the same price. Maybe instead of a whole new subway line we could just expand those? I'm so pissed they'd even consider a Georgetown plan instead of actually making a plan to get Metro to Tysons/Dulles. What a waste. Also, is WMATA studying connecting the two Farragut stations? I'd love it if there were a pedestrian tunnel so you could get off at one and walk over and transfer to the other for free. It would probably take some of the pressure off Metro Center, too.

blittle

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:47:12 -0500

Excuse me Drew, but I also take the time to think about what's new at J.Crew and if that Molly with her huge butt think she can wear those white capri's the same time I do. I'm going to cut a bitch.

WHAZZUP

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:47:04 -0500

That metro configuration is EXACTLY the one I proposed a few years ago. Metro, feel free to contact me for more details on how you can do this. You just better run it up Wisconsin Ave until Tenleytown!

monkeyrotica

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:42:56 -0500

Georgetown had the option of having a station (at least according to urban legend) and they turned it down for fear of having too many people descend upon the neighborhood. drew - Guess what you're getting for Hannukah?

Reid

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:38:54 -0500

Bawler: What I'm recommending would be a streetcar/light rail with its own lane down I-66, Key Bridge, and K St. They'd have to come pretty frequently though, since light rail cars can't hold as many people as an 8 car subway. But essentially, if planned right (e.g. timed red lights) it would face no more back up problems than a normal subway.

DCster

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:33:33 -0500

I don't see this particular Jim Graham idea as being that bad unless it further prolongs the transition to meters, though if anything it would seem to speed it up by identifying a funding source.

bawler

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:29:42 -0500

The problem with a street car is that it does not solve the back-up problem from all the suburban riders - plus we all know what happens when something happens on the blue-orange lines during rush hour. Back-up city. A second entry and line would relieve that pressure. So would other things. That is why Metro is studying it. They're not building anything yet.

drew in adams morgan

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:29:27 -0500

I'm sorry, but the Georgetown Metro idea would be a nightmare to build. Georgetown had the option of having a station (at least according to urban legend) and they turned it down for fear of having too many people descend upon the neighborhood. "you give the LNS crew a new exit strategy for their Tuesday night takedowns and imagine what that does to the demand for baby Lacoste shirts." Are you kidding? They don't ride Metro. They don't know what it is. Their minds can only comprehend what's available at Polo Ralph Lauren and not on anything so trivial.

monkeyrotica

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:23:46 -0500

Speaking of the Whitehurst Freeway, why is it still even around? I thought all the waterfront condo crowd were pushing for its demise, what with it ruining their million-dollar view and everything. And whatever happened with the Roosevelt Island redevelopment, or the whole Kennedy Center waterfront development initiative? Seems like there's a whole slew of uncoordinated efforts between Foggy Bottom and Rosslyn that are going in all sorts of directions, none of them towards completion. All the more reason why we need to accelerate the K Street Skilift Gondola project with all due haste. If it's good enough for Baltimore...

hillrat

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:23:16 -0500

are people generally having a difficult time getting in and out Georgetown? For real tho'! Isn't that place at maximum density as it is?

Hillman

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:19:56 -0500

"The Examiner also reports that Ward 1 Council member Jim Graham, who has opposed time and distance meters in favor of zone meters, has asked the Taxicab Commission to consider using $280,000 in out-of-state taxi driver fees to subsidize the cost of meter installation for drivers." Will someone please run against this guy and remove him from office?

McGillicuddy

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:14:29 -0500

are people generally having a difficult time getting in and out Georgetown? the last time I was there it was full of people who either walked, took the bus, drove their car, or rolled out of bed next to their eurotrash, bugeyed sunglass-wearing, Locoste-slut. what they should really build is a new line from my front door to Galaxy Hut.

DC Guy

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:11:55 -0500

It is all about re-implementing the Street Car. As someone else noted, run it from elswhere, through Rosslyn, into Georgetown and connect it across the Red Line (both spurs). Run another line from Nat's Park up GA to Silver Spring. Run another from the Mall, up CT or 18th, out CT to Kensington. Look at the old maps and re-implement what the highway and auto lobby eliminated in the Post WWII era.

sirchek

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:11:46 -0500

Bring back the streetcars! Toronto does it, so can we.

Hillman

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:11:10 -0500

Isn't it obvious? Simply bless the Rosslyn station, then sit back and pray for teleportation from Rosslyn to where you need to go.

inloganO

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:09:56 -0500

Look at page 15 of this presentation being made to the BOD on Thursday. Actual presentation to the board. You can see the line would cross into Georgetown and run east on M Street through the West End and then turn southeast a bit to travel down Mass Ave past the convention center and to Union Station. This was from the big study they did back in 2002, but of course no one ever came up with an idea on how to fund it.

MikeB

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:03:51 -0500

As much as I agree they need to do something about the Rosslyn-Georgetown crossing, I just don't see how they get it done. An elevated track would be fought tooth and nail in Georgetown (and even if it wasn't would require the buyout of some rich homeowners), while a tunnel would cost serious money and we've seen how much FTA likes heavy rail even when a good chunk of the project is paid for (see Dulles extension). Maybe they're hoping the Davis bill gets passed and the next administration is more friendly to subway projects.

boondoggle

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:03:42 -0500

A Georgetown metro stop creates unforeseen externalities that demand further study; you give the LNS crew a new exit strategy for their Tuesday night takedowns and imagine what that does to the demand for baby Lacoste shirts.

Reid

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:02:45 -0500

If they want to avoid tunneling, they could consider putting in light rail down the center of I-66 from West Falls Church to Rosslyn (I know there's not the same median on I-66 on that stretch as there is west of Falls Church, but there may be space). That way you could have an express route from West Falls Church to Rosslyn. Then from Rosslyn you could send the Light Rail across the Key Bridge (ideally on a ROW, I know that takes a lane away from commuters, but a light rail with a ROW can move more people than a lane of single occupancy cars). From the Key Bridge it could go down to K st. on the ramp they're likely going to build in conjunction with the demolition of the Whitehurst. Then, ideally it would travel down K St. along the much delayed K St. "busway" ROW. That way Virginians who live beyond Falls Church could be siphoned off the Orange Line and ride a relatively express route to downtown. It's not an ideal option, but it'd be significantly cheaper than building a new tunnel and station.

Ian

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:01:04 -0500

Ignorant question: Is there space under the Whitehurst freeway for an elevated track? Putting a Metro station west of Wisconsin under the Whitehurst could make some sense, since that space is currently underutilized and crippled by 24-hour shade.

monkeyrotica

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:57:22 -0500

Typical Metro thinking; they never met a problem a subway couldn't fix. So they're trying to connect one station to another on an elevated track? Isn't this what STREETCARS are supposed to be all about? They used to run all the time up and down M Street and Pennsylvania Avenue and across to Rosslyn. Hell, they used to run all the way out the Glen Echo. Now if you'll excuse me, my monowheel is doubleparked in front of a sushi/pizza/martini concept bar and lounge.

the_heckle

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:53:19 -0500

Speak for yourself Monkey. This is DC. Why maintain a structure when you can spend ten times as much to knock it down and start over? Still, wouldn't it be nice if they spent these funds on adding a third track on at least one of the lines?

monkeyrotica

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:46:43 -0500

Metro needs to work on fixing and maintaining existing tracks and cars before they start talking about expanding service. You don't build a $50k addition on your house when you've got a leaking roof you've been ignoring for years. If Metro wants to spend billions on increasing capacity, do it at the core, not out in the hinterlands. Adding more rail lines downtown makes sense, both in expanding public transit in dense areas and relieving pressure at chokepoint stations like Rosslyn. Now, if only they had the money....

IMGoph

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:44:39 -0500

the article on metro says: It's not known if the new line would be a tunnel or an aerial structure (insert your own comment here about Dulles Rail, or about a Georgetown resident throwing a fit that an elevated track might run past their home). so i wouldn't get too excited about any elevated track. the author just floated that out there, but if anything serious happens, it would have to be tunneled, no doubt. you couldn't elevate from the rosslyn station to get up over the river without going almost vertical. that station is too deep, so any new crossing would have to be in a tunnel. of course, this map should be required reading for discussion of metro expansion in the city...