Report a Comment

but we HAVE rail to that end point (which is normally the Pentagon) The yellow and blue lines. We do not have rail along the corridor to landmark/annandale/burke etc. Are you saying that we should have rail there, and NO highway inside the beltway? Or that we should have a highway inside the beltway, and also rail, and that with rail there would be no demand for slugging.

My impression is that most slugs are coming from points further south than the end of the Metro. VRE would be an option to DC, but it's a) not nearly as frequent as Metro, and b) doesn't go directly to the Pentagon. So no, the transit service isn't as good of a direct substitute as you imply.

If there were a Metro line directly along 95/395, just as you see along 66 in VA, I doubt you'd see nearly as much slug traffic.

I mean planning has to mean more than "if i were king". B, would have been much more feasible - but there are certainly advantages to a highway with HOV vs heavy rail with a mostly park and ride trip base (at least if there are also other corridors which ARE heavy rail instead, which is the case here)

The point about planning failure is that the advantages to the auto-centric approach (e.g. highways) completely fails at a certain point. Highways just aren't nearly as high capacity as rail rapid transit is, period. Likewise, the auto-centric land development around those highways isn't some fait accompli either.

by Alex B. on Jun 13, 2012 2:17 pm • link • report