NaVa and Md. and D.C.: Region will rely on cars for foreseeable future

[cpzilliacus]

WTOP Radio story: Region will rely on cars for foreseeable future

And the inevitable rebuttal from a standard source: George Mason study of future traffic flawed, group says

[Beltway]

WTOP Radio story: Region will rely on cars for foreseeable future

And the inevitable rebuttal from a standard source: George Mason study of future traffic flawed, group says

So WMATA Metrorail isn't the "silver bullet" that will do away with the need for new freeways?

[cpzilliacus]

WTOP Radio story: Region will rely on cars for foreseeable future

And the inevitable rebuttal from a standard source: George Mason study of future traffic flawed, group says

So WMATA Metrorail isn't the "silver bullet" that will do away with the need for new freeways?

Was it ever?

[Beltway]

WTOP Radio story: Region will rely on cars for foreseeable future

And the inevitable rebuttal from a standard source: George Mason study of future traffic flawed, group says

So WMATA Metrorail isn't the "silver bullet" that will do away with the need for new freeways?

Was it ever?

Isn't that what many of the rail transit proponents claimed back in the 1960s and 1970s?

[NE2]

Probably much in the same way I-69 proponents claimed it would be a NAFTA highway, when the real reason they wanted it was pork.

[Alps]

States will do anything they can to get Federal money; no matter what the actual utility is likely to be, there is always a way to justify a project if it means $.

[Zmapper]

The Washington Metro is more intended for radial trips, while the Beltway is more for circumferential trips. There is some competition, but for the most part each mode serves different markets.

Regardless, the Washington Metro is underused compared to the Toronto Subway. It works reasonably well if you are going downtown, but the bus connections aren't there to make suburban travel that feasible.   The best way to reduce local street congestion in the suburbs would be to have bus services every 10 minutes along as many streets as possible, like what Toronto did.

[Doctor Whom]

Regardless, the Washington Metro is underused compared to the Toronto Subway. It works reasonably well if you are going downtown, but the bus connections aren't there to make suburban travel that feasible.   The best way to reduce local street congestion in the suburbs would be to have bus services every 10 minutes along as many streets as possible, like what Toronto did.

WMATA has traditionally operated Metrobus as the transportation mode of last resort, and it shows.  Way to lure people out of their cars.

[cpzilliacus]

Regardless, the Washington Metro is underused compared to the Toronto Subway. It works reasonably well if you are going downtown, but the bus connections aren't there to make suburban travel that feasible.   The best way to reduce local street congestion in the suburbs would be to have bus services every 10 minutes along as many streets as possible, like what Toronto did.

WMATA has traditionally operated Metrobus as the transportation mode of last resort, and it shows.  Way to lure people out of their cars.

Never was that more obvious than when WMATA took over the AB&W Transit Company (which served Northern Virginia roughly south of U.S. 50 (Arlington Boulevard).  AB&W was known for providing user-friendly bus service (complete with clean and air-conditioned buses), but when WMATA (and the inept managers that it kept on from the old D.C. Transit System, Inc.) took over, well, the results were predictable.

[Beltway]

Never was that more obvious than when WMATA took over the AB&W Transit Company (which served Northern Virginia roughly south of U.S. 50 (Arlington Boulevard).  AB&W was known for providing user-friendly bus service (complete with clean and air-conditioned buses), but when WMATA (and the inept managers that it kept on from the old D.C. Transit System, Inc.) took over, well, the results were predictable.

I rode AB&W buses in the late 1960s and early 1970s, just before WMATA acquired the local bus companies.  AB&W was far from perfect, and I'm not sure I saw much difference before and after.

[1995hoo]

A lot of the delusional 20-somethings overlook that the DC Metrorail is, and always has been, first and foremost a COMMUTING system, not a way to get around like it is in New York. It's never been intended to be a primary means of transportation and it cannot be such with its current design.

[Zmapper]

A lot of the delusional 20-somethings overlook that the DC Metrorail is, and always has been, first and foremost a COMMUTING system, not a way to get around like it is in New York. It's never been intended to be a primary means of transportation and it cannot be such with its current design.

Commuting is getting around. The longer station-spacing on the Metro and BART can be more beneficial than the short spacing on the NYC subway, but in order for it to work local bus service must be improved. Post-war heavy rail should be thought of as the equivalent of express trains in NYC, with local bus routes equivalent to the local stop trains.

[vdeane]

That explains why there are no stops anywhere near the Lincoln, FDR, or Jefferson memorials... that struck me as illogical.  The July heat is murder when walking the multi-mile distances to get to many of the tourist areas from the metro stops.

[1995hoo]

A lot of the delusional 20-somethings overlook that the DC Metrorail is, and always has been, first and foremost a COMMUTING system, not a way to get around like it is in New York. It's never been intended to be a primary means of transportation and it cannot be such with its current design.

Commuting is getting around. The longer station-spacing on the Metro and BART can be more beneficial than the short spacing on the NYC subway, but in order for it to work local bus service must be improved. Post-war heavy rail should be thought of as the equivalent of express trains in NYC, with local bus routes equivalent to the local stop trains.

Commuting is not getting around in a general sense. There's more to life than going to and from work.

[Alps]

The Washington Metro is more intended for radial trips, while the Beltway is more for circumferential trips. There is some competition, but for the most part each mode serves different markets.

<tangent>Boston has looked at a Gold Line that would radially connect all of its different subway lines, slightly inside the Route 128 corridor. The problem is that as convenient as that would be for people hopping from suburb to suburb, most people are not going that way. Commercial stops are all along the corridor, and any station location would require a significant walk to most office front doors even if there were a station at every office park. Also, commercial and other non-business trips would require stops in town centers, while business trips would not be well served by that at all, turning into a more expensive two-mode trip (company-provided buses? or other bus routes). Anyway, long story short, there would be very low ridership compared to radial lines so that is why you don't see cities with circumferential subways.</tangent>

[deathtopumpkins]

The Washington Metro is more intended for radial trips, while the Beltway is more for circumferential trips. There is some competition, but for the most part each mode serves different markets.

<tangent>Boston has looked at a Gold Line that would radially connect all of its different subway lines, slightly inside the Route 128 corridor. The problem is that as convenient as that would be for people hopping from suburb to suburb, most people are not going that way. Commercial stops are all along the corridor, and any station location would require a significant walk to most office front doors even if there were a station at every office park. Also, commercial and other non-business trips would require stops in town centers, while business trips would not be well served by that at all, turning into a more expensive two-mode trip (company-provided buses? or other bus routes). Anyway, long story short, there would be very low ridership compared to radial lines so that is why you don't see cities with circumferential subways.</tangent>

I beg to differ about most people not going that way due to the popularity of the MBTA's newish Crosstown routes, most of which run from Cambridge, through western Boston and Brookline, to Dorchester or South Boston. And I'm biased as I live along two radial lines and have frequent reasons to go places on other radial lines, rather than just downtown, but for me and almost everyone I know, an orbital line would be amazingly helpful. And I'm sure it would tremendously relieve busy downtown transfer stations like Park Street and Downtown Crossing, by eliminating people whose sole reason to go downtown is to switch to another line, i.e. me going from the western end of the Orange Line to somewhere in Cambridge on the Red Line, or even going between the Green Line branches. If I wanted to go from Northeastern (Green E) to visit my sister at Boston Univ. (Green B) last year, for example, I always ended up walking, which took at least 25-30 minutes on a nice day, because if I wanted to take the T I'd have to take an inbound train all the way to Arlington (5 stops), and then switch to an outbound train to Kenmore (4 stops). On the proposed orbital route, however, it would be a one-seat ride that only went maybe 4 stops. This would benefit a lot of riders too, by allowing them to transfer onto the orbital route for a stop or two from a radial route to get closer to their destination.

I can go on about this in much greater depth but am about to hit the road down to Gillette for a Revolution game so I'll have to cut it short here.

[cpzilliacus]

Never was that more obvious than when WMATA took over the AB&W Transit Company (which served Northern Virginia roughly south of U.S. 50 (Arlington Boulevard).  AB&W was known for providing user-friendly bus service (complete with clean and air-conditioned buses), but when WMATA (and the inept managers that it kept on from the old D.C. Transit System, Inc.) took over, well, the results were predictable.

I rode AB&W buses in the late 1960s and early 1970s, just before WMATA acquired the local bus companies.  AB&W was far from perfect, and I'm not sure I saw much difference before and after.

I did as well, and I disagree with you.

AB&W buses had air conditioning systems that worked (even the "Old Look" GM buses had working AC units).

After WMATA and the D.C. Transit management took over, things at the old Four Mile Run and Pendleton Street bus garages became much more like D.C. Transit (and that was not a good thing).

[Beltway]

I rode AB&W buses in the late 1960s and early 1970s, just before WMATA acquired the local bus companies.  AB&W was far from perfect, and I'm not sure I saw much difference before and after.

I did as well, and I disagree with you.

AB&W buses had air conditioning systems that worked (even the "Old Look" GM buses had working AC units).

After WMATA and the D.C. Transit management took over, things at the old Four Mile Run and Pendleton Street bus garages became much more like D.C. Transit (and that was not a good thing).

I don't recall A/C on the older AB&W buses, such as ones of this era, and they still had a number of them in 1970.

http://commonwealthcoach.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=97&Itemid=97

[cpzilliacus]

I rode AB&W buses in the late 1960s and early 1970s, just before WMATA acquired the local bus companies.  AB&W was far from perfect, and I'm not sure I saw much difference before and after.

I did as well, and I disagree with you.

AB&W buses had air conditioning systems that worked (even the "Old Look" GM buses had working AC units).

After WMATA and the D.C. Transit management took over, things at the old Four Mile Run and Pendleton Street bus garages became much more like D.C. Transit (and that was not a good thing).

I don't recall A/C on the older AB&W buses, such as ones of this era, and they still had a number of them in 1970.

http://commonwealthcoach.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=97&Itemid=97

Many of them had units retrofitted in.  Unlike D.C. Transit Old Look buses, I don't think the AB&W Old Looks had had nacelles on the rear over the back window.

[Beltway]

I don't recall A/C on the older AB&W buses, such as ones of this era, and they still had a number of them in 1970.

http://commonwealthcoach.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=97&Itemid=97

Many of them had units retrofitted in.  Unlike D.C. Transit Old Look buses, I don't think the AB&W Old Looks had had nacelles on the rear over the back window.

Apparently very few, as I rode their buses daily to and from high school for 2 years.