Posts in category transit

BRT creep and RTV's success

The Task Force's report emphasizes the most important requirement for success: separated, dedicated transit lanes throughout the system.

Buses would ideally have dedicated lanes in both directions, but this only appears feasible for part of the system. Most of the RTV lines will have a dedicated lane going in the direction of rush hour traffic (south or west in the morning, north or east in the evening). Vehicles running in the opposite direction will have to operate mixed with other traffic.

It is unclear whether such buses running in mixed traffic will receive any signal priority or other preference.

Earlier plans had called reconfiguring the medians of many arterial roads for RTV. While the final report still calls for this on some routes, space and right-of-way issues make it difficult elsewhere. On most other routes, a lane in the off-peak direction will likely be taken away from cars and allocated exclusively to RTV.

For instance, on a 6-lane road with 3 lanes each way, one lane will be devoted to RTV and 3 to cars, all running with rush hour traffic. The remaining 2 lanes would run counter to the rush hour traffic.

While these compromises are not ideal, they are far superior to the existing situation where buses are completely mixed with cars.

Another danger is that other parts of the RTV system could be degraded in order to save money or get the system operational more quickly. Montgomery County already has a pretty good bus system. If the extra features of RTV are diluted too much, then the entire effort will simply duplicate what already exists, and will be a waste. For the system to perform as promised, it cannot be watered down.

Transit advocates should keep apprised of all aspects of RTV planning as it develops, to make sure it retains the benefits of a true BRT system as much as possible.

Although large parts of the business, government, planning, environmental, and transit communities have come together around the RTV idea, Montgomery County does not have a great record with putting transit first. If citizens are promised a "gold standard" system that is comparable to light rail and something less is delivered, it will make future transit projects less likely.

Managing parking and traffic

Another factor that might impact RTV services is its effect on traffic and parking. While RTV is intended to reduce traffic, its success might draw more cars from outside the county, since relatively empty roads often fill up with drivers hoping to take advantage of uncongested lanes. Could a successful RTV system actually induce some traffic in a kind of rebound effect?

One way to avoid this is to limit the number of parking spaces near transit stations. Although the Task Force's report did not address this issue, Dale Tibbitts, Chief of Staff for Marc Elrich (the County Council member who pioneered the RTV system), has clarified that a separate public parking committee will address this issue.

Elrich hopes to lower the amount of parking required for office buildings on transit lines. This will boost ridership on the RTV, save office owners on the costs of providing parking, and reduce the need to use valuable land for parking garages.

Route planning

The choice of routes will also affect RTV's success. The report proposes maximum protection for Montgomery's agricultural reserve, and includes strong east-west links that were absent in earlier versions of the proposal.

These east-west links would encourage balanced growth, allow for stronger infill development in east county, and possibly spur links to Prince George's County. However, some might be more useful than others.

Instituting an RTV line along the wide and underutilized Intercounty Connector (ICC) would be easy, but it would go through relatively low-density areas and would be one of the least useful connections in the network. It probably makes sense for this line to be included in the plan, but does it belong in Phase 1, as proposed?

By contrast, the Randolph Road and Viers Mill east-west connections would immediately see tremendous usage, so it is very appropriate to include those lines in Phase 1. The University Boulevard route would also be more useful than the ICC, although it is scheduled for Phase 2.

It might also make sense to combine the University Boulevard and Veirs Mill lines into a single route, since they form a single cohesive corridor from Langley Park to Rockville.

Meanwhile, The Wisconsin South and Georgia South routes should also be prioritized and potentially extended into the District.

On the other hand, the Midcounty Highway extension section does not make sense; it would require a new highway in a part of the county already dense with roads. With I-270, Great Seneca Highway, Frederick Road, Clopper Road, and Snouffer School Road already providing a grid of north-south connections between Gaithersburg and Germantown, Midcounty Highway should not be a priority.

Affordability

While core urban areas are best served by streetcars and light rail, the realities of funding mean we cannot afford to build rail everywhere, especially in more suburban areas. The latest cost estimates for the light rail Purple Line are $120 million per mile, compared to $54 million per mile for the BRT Corridor Cities Transitway, and $10-$20 million per mile for the proposed RTV network.

With Maryland still paying for the ICC and unable to pass a new gas tax, the RTV may be the only viable option.

Effects on Montgomery County and the region

Although BRT is less ideal than a rail system, the RTV network does have the potential to transform Montgomery County and the DC region. It will bring unprecedented transit access to all of the major mixed-use areas of the county. For the first time it will become easier to travel around many parts of Montgomery via transit than via car. That would be a profound change.

But as impressive as the RTV concept may be, there's more to do. The system should be integrated with the entire region, especially Prince George's County. The same things that make RTV a practical choice for Montgomery are also true for all the suburban areas around the Beltway, and even for some corridors in DC. With many local jurisdictions considering BRT or streetcar networks, it would be a shame for them all to end up with different branding and fare structures.

The first phases of the RTV system are projected to start in 2016, with the entire system built within a 9-year time frame. That's extremely rapid. The report emphasizes the need to get the whole system working together quickly, since a major benefit of a network like this is that the lines all complement one another.

If built as proposed, with dedicated busways, in a short timespan, the RTV idea can be a real winner for Montgomery County. If it's expanded to neighboring jurisdictions it can also be a real winner for the region. But if that's to happen, the pratfalls of BRT creep and putting automobile capacity first must be avoided. Montgomery can do it, but it won't be easy.

The Red Line requires the most cars. At peak, it uses 288 cars in 41 trains. The Orange Line is in second place, with 204 cars on 30 trains. And in third place is the Green Line, whose 140 cars make up 20 trains.

The Blue Line falls fourth, with 138 cars making up 23 trains. The shortest line, the Yellow, requires 60 cars in just 10 trains.

In addition to the 124 trains assigned to a line, Metro positions 5 "gap trains" around the system that can be used to fill in when a train is taken out of service. These 5 trains require 30 cars.

Train length

During rush hours, the Red, Orange, and Green Lines operate with some 8-car trains, with the rest 6-cars long. The Blue and Yellow Lines use all 6-car trains.

Of the Red Line's 41 trains used during rush hours, 21 (51%) are 8-car sets. On the Orange Line, 12 of the 30 trains (40%) are 8-cars long. The Green Line uses 10 8-car trains out of 20 total trains (50%).

Systemwide, Metro operates 43 8-car trains and 86 6-car trains during peak hours. That means that one-third of trains run with full-length consists.

Off-peak

Metro doesn't need as many trains or as many cars during off-peak periods.

The Red Line requires 21 trains and 126 cars. There are 12 trains and 72 cars on the Blue Line. While the Orange needs 66 cars in 11 trains. For the Green, it's 10 trains and 60 cars, and on the Yellow, it's 8 trains and 48 cars.

Rush Plus

On June 18, Metro will start new rail service patterns. In addition to the 5 colored lines, 2 new services will be starting. One will run between Vienna and Largo Town Center (to be colored orange). The other will run between Franconia-Springfield and Greenbelt (colored yellow).

The Franconia to Greenbelt service will not require any additional trains, since 3 trains per hour that currently run as Blue Line trains are being shifted to the Yellow Line bridge. But the new Vienna-Largo service will require Metro to add several trains during peak hours.

While WMATA did not respond to requests for how many new trains it will require for Rush Plus, the 58 minute Vienna-Largo run time and 20 minute headway could be done with 6 trains.

Metro also did not provide data about how many cars this will require. If all 6 of the new trains are 6-car trains, it will add 36 cars to Metro's peak vehicle requirement. If all 6 of the new trains are 8-car trains, it will mean adding 48 cars during rush hours.

That would increase the size of the peak vehicle requirement to between 896 and 908 cars.

Fleet size

Metro has 1,104 cars that are in its active fleet. But the agency can't schedule all of those cars on any given day.

Metro aims to have a spare ratio of 20%, to account for trains that are out of service for repair or preventative maintenance. In the 1980s, as system expansion outpaced new rolling stock acquisition, Metro allowed its spare ratio to drop and that led to a corresponding drop in reliability.

What this means is that if the system has a peak vehicle requirement of 896 cars, it needs to have an additional 179 cars (20% of 896) set aside as spares. If the system has a peak vehicle requirement of 908 cars, it needs to have an additional 182 cars as spares—a total of 1,090 cars. Metro's fleet today is 1,104 cars, so as long as no major repair issue forces them to take a lot of cars out of service for a long period, they should have enough.

Madam Chairman and members of the Council,

Appointing DDOT Director Terry Bellamy to the WMATA Board of Directors represents a very significant opportunity. There are many such opportunities, such as to work with you to push WMATA to correct its stifling and longstanding stance of secrecy toward riders and simply to make sure needed repairs are on track, but specifically having the DDOT director on the board is a chance to bring DDOT and WMATA closer and foster greater coordination between these agencies.

Each controls an enormous share of the transpor­tation infrastructure that our residents depend on every day, yet the two agencies often do not work in harmony as much as needed to move transportation forward.

By far the greatest opportunity to improve transportation for District residents lies in our bus service. DC spends over $190 million per year in public operating dollars on our bus service. That is about 3½ times the amount we spend on Metrorail, and is more than double DDOT's operating budget.

Bus delays from traffic swell this cost and cause pain to our residents. For example, I recently received this email from a reader who will soon be moving to the Wisconsin Avenue area:

My wife took a bus going from Federal Triangle over to Wisconsin Ave for an appointment but also near our future new home. She became stuck in traffic on I St and is now cursing the bus. What is the outlook for the H & I bus lanes?

With the volume of buses that use that route, it really should be a priority. Anything that can be done to help speed up the process? My wife was spoiled by few stop Metrorail commutes and the bus is a big adjustment for her.

This type of question is far from unusual. Residents rich and poor, black and white, in outer low-density areas and inner high-density ones all struggle with bus delay if they aren't fortunate enough to have both home and work close to a Metrorail station.

There is an enormous amount DC could be doing to reduce the costs of bus travel while improving speed and reliability for our bus riders:

• Allow appropriate turning movements for buses to help them get through congestion
  
• Create queue hopper lanes that help buses bypass traffic waiting at signals
  
• Enforce illegal parking that prevents buses from making turns or bus stops
  
• Locate bus stops in ways that allow buses and customers to use them more efficiently
  
• Create bus lanes where practical
  
• Implement traffic signal priority
  
• Improve the accessibility of bus stops so that fewer riders are dependent upon, or beholden to, costly and unreliable MetroAccess service
  
• Remove on-street parking where the benefits outweigh the costs.

There are dozens of recommendations in WMATA line studies and service evaluations that have not yet been implemented. Sometimes, these just do not come up in internal DDOT discussions. At other times, WMATA and DDOT's transit staff point to the recommendations, but the engineers and traffic operations folks balk at implementing the studies.

Fortunately, there is a simple solution. These divisions work for Director Bellamy. He can bring these issues from WMATA and ensure that DDOT prioritizes implementing them.

Here are a few examples:

• WMATA was implementing bus priority on the 70s lines at the same time DDOT was planning the 7th Street streetscape. However, there was no coordination on signal technology needs.
  
• The 90s line study proposed bus enhancements along U street, but DDOT paid no attention to these recommendations while they simultaneously designed streetscape enhancements on U Street. Meanwhile, efficiency recommendations for 8th Street go almost completely unnoticed.
  
• A study about the potential for bus lanes on H and I Streets downtown was supposed to be complete in March, but still remains months from completion, with no clear path to implementation thereafter. Short segments H and I are where many of DC's most heavily used bus lines bogged down in commuter traffic wasting hours and ruining bus reliability.

WMATA isn't the only source of bus operating efficiency needs. The DC Circulator routes, for which DC bears 100% of the operating subsidy, is an ideal place for DDOT to prioritize operational enhancements.

I have spoken over several years with officials at both WMATA and DDOT. I repeatedly hear from WMATA that they are not finding the support at DDOT to implement their recommendations, and hear from folks at DDOT that they don't feel WMATA is ready to support DDOT or understands the constraints DDOT must labor under.

I am sure both groups of people are right. It is often difficult for two agencies to coordinate closely, especially when the agencies answer to different masters. I am sure many people at DDOT find it simply less work to tackle projects that don't require calling the Jackson Graham building, and those at WMATA have less trouble simply solving problems they can handle without going to New Jersey Avenue.

But this is necessary. Bus service is our best chance to save money and improve mobility for the residents of the District. We're not going to build any new Metrorail lines in the near future, and while streetcars will bring meaningful economic development, they will not be a speedy ride across town. But our bus service can and should be a desirable mode of travel for all.

There is no big megaproject to undertake that will fundamentally revamp bus service. Improving this mode of travel requires making many small and medium-sized fixes over many years that build up in the aggregate. The same applied to bicycle lanes, and tireless staff worked for years to gradually build up more and more lanes. DDOT needs to start now to put in one bus improvement at a time, then another, and another.

Right now, that is not yet happening, which costs DC millions of dollars and makes bus riders suffer, often at the expense of commuters from Maryland and Virginia who we often end up prioritizing despite clear policies at DDOT, and statements from this council, to the contrary.

The time is now. Montgomery County yesterday released their proposal for building 160 miles of a new bus Rapid Transit System, mostly on dedicated lanes. The Council, with your support Madam Chairman, just created a special fund for bus enhancements beginning in FY13, which could raise several million dollars per year if DDOT moves swiftly to implement performance parking in the downtown area.

With Director Bellamy on the WMATA Board, I am hopeful that this state of affairs can change. We will have a single person who can instruct his staff in DDOT meetings to advance bus improvements, and then head over to WMATA and push the staff there to uphold their end of whatever is necessary.

I hope you will ask Director Bellamy questions such as these:

• Do you agree that bus efficiency must get much higher priority from the department?
  
• Will your participation at WMATA represent a turning point to get long-awaited, significant progress going on these bus projects?

If the answers to both are yes, then Director Bellamy's presence on the WMATA Board will not just mean yet another voice contributing to already crowded debates, but a very positive step toward getting these two agencies working together to exploit our greatest untapped mobility opportunities.

Montgomery County is growing, and residents need to be able to travel around without worsening traffic. But there isn't room to keep widening arterial roads, and that's not a sustainable approach in any event.

Outside the dense Silver Spring-Bethesda area and along the existing Red Line corridors, there isn't the density or the density isn't linear enough to make rail worthwhile. Maryland needs to build the Purple Line, but the future of transportation elsewhere likely lies in high-quality bus transit.

What is a "world class" system?

The report calls for this to be a "world class" system. They've set out a clear principle in the report that the service must run in dedicated lanes, and even call it "the most important principle":

To the maximum extent possible, having physically separated, dedicated RTV lanes THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM, so the system's RTVs would not become commingled into mixed general traffic.

The question will be, where does the space for these lanes come from? The report also says, "This preference for, and weight given to, RTV use within the maximum potentially available right-of-way should not be interpreted as being hostile to the on-going requirement for effective automobile use ... The Task Force does not advocate for the elimination of a large percentage of current automobile lane use."

But what about a small percentage? Will Montgomery dedicate some car lanes for buses even in some places? That remains to be seen, and could be a critical factor in whether the countywide RTV system succeeds. The Montgomery DOT has been reluctant to change even a single car lane thus far.

The report also calls for "unique branding" to further emphasize that this system is "world class" and not just a bus, and sets out a number of other distinguishing factors as absolute "must haves":

• RTVs must be sleek and stylish.
• RTVs must have multiple wide doors on both sides of the RTVs.
• RTVs equipped with WiFi capabilities and electronic real-time messaging.
• Stations must be of a consistent and distinctive style.
• Stations must be safe, wide, and weather-protected.
• Stations must have level platform boarding with handicap accessibility.
• Stations must be equipped with real time data and with user-friendly maps.
• Stations must provide off-vehicle fare collection.
• Peak-peak period frequency of 3-5 minute headways.
• Off-peak period frequency of 5-7 minute headways
• Lanes with intersection improvements and coordination with other modes of transportation.
• Multi-modal integration (pedestrians, bicycles, Zipcars®, taxi service, Ride-On and Metrobus, shuttle buses and neighborhood circulators).

Other factors, like stations set slightly away from the road, late-night service, and photo enforcement are also recommended but less critical.

Do we call it a bus? Does it matter?

These elements come directly from ITDP's report on BRT where they try to define a LEED-like rating system to classify BRT systems as "gold," "silver," etc. That's because the term "BRT" has often gotten watered down in jurisdictions that skimped on one or more elements in what Dan Malouff calls "BRT creep."

It's gotten so bad that this report actually disavows the terms "BRT" and "bus" as well. "We are not building a bus system, we're building a transformational transit system," said task force member David Hauck at today's press event. The report states,

These systems are frequently referred to as bus rapid transit ("BRT") systems. However, the Task Force has deliberately elected to refer to it as an RTV [Rapid Transit Vehicle] system because the nature, appearance and performance of the system will be qualitatively different from what is typical of BRT systems in the United States or abroad, which do not offer transformative qualities to be considered transportation solutions of choice.

This is a little ironic because the term "BRT" originally was supposed to distinguish these high-quality systems, similar to light rail only without the tracks, from regular bus service. Whatever they call it, Montgomery County will have to make a strong commitment to avoid its own BRT creep, or RTV creep.

BRT system could set standard for other cities

If the county can build it, the system could be both transformative and groundbreaking. No US metropolitan area has such a large system; others are generally a small number of lines in smaller cities. If it succeeds, other metropolitan areas that mix lower and higher densities might be able to start meaningfully expanding transit.

Montgomery is also a wealthy enough county to be able to afford to build the system and create a model for others. The report acknowledges that little federal money is possible, given both cuts in support to transit, the failure to raise the gas tax, and higher priorities for state money like the Purple and Baltimore Red Lines and Corridor Cities Transitway.

The report suggests a fairly modest increase in property tax, focused around areas near the lines. Supporters have built a strong coalition with businesses, neighborhood activists, and transit advocates.

They all agree that, coupled with the light rail Purple Line, this could be Montgomery County's future. There will be many challenges and disagreements to make it a reality, but there's really no other option.

Ultimately, Gray's mayoralty will leave a lasting effect on the budget and city services, and residents, whether they voted for and endorsed Adrian Fenty (as I did) or Gray, should care a great deal about what the capable people in the administration, unconnected to the campaign or any campaign finance, are doing.

We've also yet to find out whether the mayor himself was part of any illegal activity or knew about it. Based on what we know thus far, it appears that Gray made some very poor choices about whom to trust early on. Since then, he's replaced most of these poor hires with better staff, who are better at sharing the administration's positive accomplishments, such as:

One City One Hire

The administration's program to help unemployed residents find jobs has now suc­cee­ded in getting employers to hire 3,000 unemployed District residents in the past year.

There are numerous obstacles to getting people into jobs, but employers' lack of trust in DC's jobless has been among the most intractable. One City One Hire officials work to restore this trust by personally vetting resumes of unemployed DC residents and asking employers to consider a couple of handpicked resumes for each opening.

Some feel that this is what the Department of Employment Services (DOES) was supposed to be doing all along. This is technically true. It's also true that DC Public Schools are supposed to be properly educating our children. We shouldn't withhold credit where credit is due when DCPS or DOES fulfills its mission.

Sector-specific economic development

Under previous administrations, the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development was concerned almost exclusively with real estate deals. Although targeted real estate deals are important, only Mayor Gray has really invested in developing other sectors that are strategically important to the city.

The Mayor's broader focus has produced new positions critical to the city's economy, even if the officers filling those positions often operate behind the scenes. For example, newly hired DMPED officials regularly meet with leaders of the technology, government contractor, and health care communities to align identify ways DC can support these strategically important sectors.

A newly reconstituted Workforce Investment Council, whose executive director Alison Gerber was recruited from the Aspen Institute, has made it clear that workforce development dollars must be targeted to high demand sectors. As a result, for the first time, workforce development in DC is no longer scattershot, with the Gray Administration targeting key sectors.

DOES has cut off funding to several training providers whose training wasn't aligned with these sectors. A new Workforce Intermediary will ensure that the needs of hospitality and construction employers are addressed by training providers.

Continued capital investments without raiding city's reserves

DC residents were aware of the many capital improvements made under former Mayor Fenty, but fewer were aware that Fenty drew down the "rainy day" fund of $700 million to pay for some of these improvements.

Mayor Gray has continued the pace of capital improvements, with renovations of Takoma Education Campus and Woodson, Cardozo and Anacostia High Schools. While maintaining the pace of the previous Administration, Mayor Gray has managed to replenish our reserve fund, bringing it up to $1.1 billion.

Sustainability plan

If you haven't seen the objectives Mayor Gray set for 2032 in his Sustainable DC plan, then you should take a look. These objectives should provide the basis for numerous DC government initiatives over the next two decades covering issues as diverse as our food supply and obesity, along with transportation, tree canopy, and waste.

For some these strategic plans and objectives may seem mere feel-good talk, but these objectives matter. Historically, DC government has looked to such comprehensive plans and small area plans in designing legislation and framing countless policy debates in subsequent years.

Cameras and parking

Study after study proves that traffic cameras save lives. Mayor Gray significantly expanded traffic cameras in this year's budget, a politically courageous move that will continue DC's trend of lower and lower traffic fatalities.

While the DC Council created visionary pilots in performance parking, the previous administration never made it much of a priority to adjust meter rates to manage curbside space effectively. The Gray administration has expanded performance parking and made it clear this is a priority.

Continued momentum in education reform, streetcars and bike lanes

Some predicted that education reform, the streetcar and bike lanes would stop under Mayor Gray. Let's be clear: that hasn't happened. Mayor Gray has increased the investment in streetcars, pledging $100 million in capital funds starting last year.

The pace of bike lane construction slowed a bit at first, but DDOT is now putting in bike lanes on many streets throughout the city, and is on track to build the L Street track this summer and M street soon after. He even vociferously defended Capital Bikeshare over Twitter to skeptical New York reporters.

Finally, Mayor Gray has continued the process of education reform, despite the fears of many DC residents. Teachers are still being evaluated and sometimes fired based on performance, not on seniority.

The Gray administration's education reforms have included important initiatives which haven't received the same attention and publicity accorded the teacher firings. The administration has already made strides toward improving our special education system and opened multiple Early Stages centers aimed at early identification of kids with special needs. These investments have reduced by 20% the number of children bused, at DC's expense, to non-public special education, saving significant money.

I'm not nominating Mayor Gray for sainthood, but residents need to reexamine the fairly widespread belief that the administration is not getting anything done. While Adrian Fenty was very good at getting press attention for his actions, this administration is acting more quietly.

We should condemn any illegal behavior from the campaign, but we must also give the mayor and his staff credit for the ways the administration is making DC greater for the long term.

Bottigheimer and former real estate head Steven Goldin advanced many significant projects for transit-oriented development on WMATA property, including at U Street and an agreement with GSA to develop around many suburban Metro stations, especially in Prince George's.

While there have been many frustrating developments from the operations side, the work we've seen from planning has been almost universally terrific. Of course, many top-notch planners remain in the group, so we can expect much good work yet to come.

In a memo, CEO Richard Sarles announced the change. Also, Chief of Staff Shiva Pant is retiring, and current customer service head Barbara Richardson will take over. She will oversee a number of functions at WMATA including planning, while parking and real estate development will be under CFO Carol Kissal. Lyn Bowersox, head of PR, will take over Richardson's job as Assistant General Manager for Customer Service, Communications and Marketing.

Bottigheimer will continue to advise WMATA on the transit plan and real estate issues through the fall as well.

Jeremy Faust, who runs the DC Council's Committee on the Environment, Public Works and Transportation for Councilmember Mary Cheh, is leaving to move to Cincinnati. Jeremy became an expert on transportation policy very quickly once his boss took over the committee, and before that did great work on streamlining the government when running the Committee on Government Operations and the Environment.

Fortunately, Cheh recently also hired Will Handsfield, who as a Capital City Fellow helped roll out Capital Bikeshare, among many other things. Cheh will continue to get very good advice on transportation policy.

Finally, Aaron Overman is leaving DDOT's transit group and will start working for Cambridge Systematics, where he will manage planning projects in the Washington region and around the United States. Overman helped push for better bus service and for a successful streetcar program at DDOT, and sadly losing him will force DDOT to find another person of high caliber to help keep its transit operations moving forward smoothly.

WMATA planned the single tracking between Eastern Market and Cheverly to accommodate a range of repairs and reconstruction in that segment. Half-hour headways may have been necessary to ensure worker safety and maximize efficiency, so that the work could be completed prior to Monday's rush hour. That's all perfectly justifiable.

But there was absolutely no reason for riders along the entire length of the Orange Line to be left with such terrible service. Metro's track schematic clearly shows there are crossover tracks between Federal Center SW and Capitol South stations. Trains coming and going west from Federal Center SW could have used that crossover track to turn around, ensuring regular weekend headways through downtown Washington and in Virginia.

We know trains can turn around using the crossover tracks since they do it every day at Mount Vernon Square and Grosvenor, so why couldn't they have done so last weekend at Federal Center SW? This simple solution would have prevented thousands of Metro customers from being greatly inconvenienced.

It's possible that Metro had repairs under way elsewhere along the Orange Line, but the press release didn't communicate that. In any event, there are crossover tracks every few stations all throughout the system. Trains could have turned around at McPherson Square, Foggy Bottom, or Clarendon, and at least riders west of the turnaround wouldn't have been faced with 30-minute waits.

Sometimes officials forget that keeping the rail system in proper order is a means to an end, not an end in and of itself. If the system isn't serving customers then it's not working. The next time Metro has to perform single tracking, they should use one of the system's many turnarounds to ensure short headways along the rest of the line.

Cross-posted at BeyondDC.