I second the frustration about the senators wanting to "take over" WMATA. Do they even know what that means? Do they even have a clue how much economic activity is directly or indirectly a result of WMATA services? Do they even understand the systematic difficulties that got WMATA is the challenging place that it's now in?

Or, are they like everyone else and just take it for granted?

by Cavan on Feb 24, 2010 9:20 am  

@David: Your comment on the first link is pretty childish and, I thought, was beneath you.

by Fritz on Feb 24, 2010 10:05 am  

A Federal takeover of Metro wouldn't be a bad thing. This is after all the capital city, we deserve better than to be left to the whims of local jurisdictions that are often vying with each other rather than acting as a whole for the greater good.

David, I thought I heard you express a similar sentiment some posts back? Something about the local jurisdictions not competing against each other in regards to locating new companies and resources to this area. That we'd all be better off if we looked at this area more comprehensively rather each from our own 'rice bowls'. Well, this falls into that same category. As long as you have separate jurisdictions vying with each other competing with each other for tax dollars (including how they get spent), you won't have that comprehensive planning you say you want. We need a larger over-arching authority to handle cross-border systems such as the Metro system ... And what better larger over-arching authority than the Federal government whose capital seat this area is supposed to be?

by Lance on Feb 24, 2010 10:21 am  

@Cavan, I think today's Tom Toles Cartoon sums it up well.

by Matt Glazewski on Feb 24, 2010 10:27 am  

and just for clarification (before the question gets asked), WMATA is not a larger over-arching organization. It's an organization of individuals with no real authority or funding of their own. Each of the representatives to WMATA governing board is totally dependent on his/her home jurisdiction ... and similarly his/her interests lie back in his/her jurisdictions and not 'system wide'. Hence why you end up with millions of dollars spent 'adding names to metro station signs' instead of paying for needed safety equipment and, more importantly, safety planning.

by Lance on Feb 24, 2010 10:31 am  

I've always thought it'd be nice if Alexandria/Metro could make the transfer from the King Street Metro to Union Station easier. The tracks are literally right next to one another. But you have to go down to street level, go to King Street, walk under two Metro tracks and three CSX tracks, go up a flight of stairs and into the station. It takes about 7 or 8 minutes. Maybe the only solution would be another Metro entrance and a walkway over or under all of the tracks. Or maybe not.

But maybe I'm just lazy.

by Tim on Feb 24, 2010 10:35 am  

On the first story: the Post also is saying that the police are looking for a silver toyota camry with a damaged front bumper(http://voices.washingtonpost.com/getthere/2010/02/hit_and_run_in_tysons.html) (just in case anyone sees one). And they're calling it an "accident" which, in this particular case (as with Asa Fukuhara's), makes no sense (however one defines "accident") since there's no evidence about the driver's intent one way or the other.

by Eileen on Feb 24, 2010 10:48 am  

I work in Tyson's corner and you will often see guys walking in the tiny shoulder of Route 7 by the beltway ramps. It's very dangerous and very common. Much of the sidewalks here are piled with snow plowed off the street. The few times I have taken the bus here, it's been made more clear just how little regard is given to people who aren't able or don't want to drive absolutely everywhere. It's pretty sickening.

by fixtysons on Feb 24, 2010 11:06 am  

To try and draw some parallel between the results of some jackass who hit a pedestrian and was not man enough to face up to the responsibility, and Congress performing oversight on money they use to fund Metro is just bizarre.

I'm with Fritz.

by Lou on Feb 24, 2010 11:42 am  

Re: PGC Planning Board-Thanks for the heads up. I just contacted my rep.

by Bianchi on Feb 24, 2010 11:44 am  

I agree about the bizareness. There's a lack of seriousness embedded in the comment.

HOWEVER, having said that, when I first read it, I skimmed over it quickly and mistakenly interpreted it as a statement of fact, and thought , GOOD! The feds are taking that over too!

There's just too much killing going on, it's so unnecessary and preventable. I say do whatever it takes to get on the right course.

by Jazzy on Feb 24, 2010 11:52 am  

Lance and Jazzy, I question whether senators taking over the Metro would be an improvement. They don't ever ride the system. I doubt they have much experience operating a transit sytem. I question whether they will fund it any better than our existing patchwork funding once the newspaper headlines fade away.

I'm very concerned that this "take over the Metro" talk is just political grandstanding. I fear that should they take it over, it will go into a death spiral becuase its funding will get cut with each passing budget cycle because it's not a sexy issue to any senator not from Maryland or Virginia. I don't even know how sexy it is for Virginia senators since the rest of the state is openly hostile to Northern Virginia.

I'm also concerned that a federal takover would take the system away from its intended purpose of serving the people who live here. The Congress will see it as something to grandstand against when they go up for reelection in some far-flung place. We'll be paying for something we have no control over. That is a worse situation that what we've got now.

by Cavan on Feb 24, 2010 12:17 pm  

I interpreted the comment on the first article as a comment on the relative safety of Metro v. Route 7 (or, more broadly, public transit v. travel by car) and the fact that politicians often seem spurred by the latest tragedy to make grand pronouncements. I wasn't offended by it.

by Eileen on Feb 24, 2010 12:27 pm  

Your comments deserve more deliberation than I can give them right now. Still, initially I'd just say that your comments are true of any jurisidiction's agency the feds have taken over, and there have been MANY. Many that have been improved because they had been in crisis, as I think Metro now is.

I think your comments also reflect an extreme that is not necessarily true - and does not really reflect how senators' behavior plays out in such circumstances.

by Jazzy on Feb 24, 2010 12:27 pm  

@Cavan, Your concerns are definitely valid. And the Metro problem is just one of many that occur when you have a capital city not being treated like a capital city. Maybe it's our federalism that is at the root of this problem (and hence maybe not surmountable), but look at other capital cities throughout the world and its clear that they get 1st rate treatment from their politicians. To the chagrin of the folks out in the provinces, they usually get better amenities and services than the other cities of these countries. Actually, if you look at our amenities such as the National Mall, the Smithsonian, the National Gallery, our circles with their statues and fountains, the National Arboreteum, our wide streets, the parkways and Rock Creek National Park, etc. etc. ... there definitely was a period there when we were being treated like a capital city. I can't help but wonder if that treatment stopped at about the time we gained homerule. I'm not saying that homerule was the cause of our losing this 'special' treatment ... More likely it was a change in politics in some way where having a great national capital as a point of pride became less important to us as a nation.

by Lance on Feb 24, 2010 12:49 pm  

Tim: a direct tunnel between the King St Metro station and Alexandria's Union Station has been proposed, but would be too expensive to include in this $4.3 million project.

by Froggie on Feb 24, 2010 1:52 pm  

I would be very concerned about a federal takeover of Metro until such time as I'm convinced they would see Metro as a seven-days-a-week, nineteen-or-so-hours-a-day transportation system, and not solely as a way for federal employees to commute from the suburbs to the city in the morning, and back again in the evening.

by cminus on Feb 24, 2010 2:24 pm  

@ King St: Many improvements can be made out there. The easiest would be to remove 80% of the barely used parking area and use that for buses and cabs. The space now vacated by the buses and cabs, close to the station can be made into a very wide walk-way/plaza.

The tunnel under Duke is very poorly designed. It is nice and wide for the most part, except the entrance station-side. Which kinda defies the point of having a wide tunnel.

It would also be worth looking at the possibility of closing Diagonal St for all motorized traffic, except buses and cabs.

It is incomprehensible that the VRE and Metro stations are separated and not unified. No amount of money can make up for the frustration that (potential) transfer passengers have to deal with on a daily basis.

If you look from a slightly larger point of view, this whole King St station areas has no proper design. Basically you have three modes of transportation (train, metro and bus) that require and spit out pedestrians tucked between a number of major road intersections. None of the intersections is even remotely designed for the convenience of pedestrians.

I will predict here that putting up fences "to protect pedestrians against themselves" will lead to more dangerous situations, because pedestrians will ignore the fences.

by Jasper on Feb 24, 2010 2:55 pm  

Its called an umbrella: those huge platform canopies (in blue) are way unnecessary, maybe you could put in some small bus shelters, but don't waste your money on putting a roof over a sidewalk.

by arm on Feb 24, 2010 4:52 pm