The Washington, DC region is great >> and it can be greater.


Breakfast links: Know the rails

Photo by infosnackhq on Flickr.
A good ridership reduction: WMATA is saving millions by encouraging riders eligible for MetroAccess to ride the bus or Metro, such as by having escorts teach disabled riders how to use the system. The agency also limited eligibility more in recent years. (Examiner)

Roads vs. rails: To relieve congestion on I-66 outside the Beltway, Fairfax Supervisor Pat Herrity wants I-66 express lanes while Reps. Jim Moran and Gerry Connolly want Metro extended to Centreville. (Examiner)

Can you hear me now? How about 2015?: The deadline for full cell phone coverage in the Metro got extended to September of this year, through WMATA says it won't be up until the end of 2015. (Patch)

I can park where I want: Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert lost it over $25 NPS parking ticket and tried to intimidate an NPS police officer. Though Congressmen can park in any available curb space while on official business, his visit seemed recreational. (Politico)

Alerts on Maps: The Google Maps app on smart phones will now show Metro service alerts in its transit directions. They've also started rolling out real-time departure information in New York and Salt Lake City. (Post)

Transit greatly helps congestion: Transit reduces auto traffic even more than usually thought, because it takes drivers off the most crowded roads, say economists based on the change in congestion during a Los Angeles transit strike. (NYT, Ben Ross)

Inspectors didn't inspect: The contractor responsible for inspecting the concrete at the Silver Spring Transit Center failed to do their job, say independent engineers. They didn't measure concrete thickness and didn't raise alarms when cracks emerged. (Post)

And...: Higher speed limits come to the ICC this weekend, saving drivers a whopping 90 seconds. (Post) ... 10% of Mt. Pleasant homes have solar panels. (Grist) ... WMATA will run late service Thursday night for the NCAA Sweet 16. (NBC)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.
Steven Yates grew up in Indiana before moving to DC in 2002 to attend college at American University. He currently lives in Southwest DC.  


Add a comment »

While I'm somehow sure the speed limits on the ICC have something to do with urban quality of life, it sure seems more like culture war snark.

Really, we should be pushing Germany: World class highways and world class trains. But walking and chewing gum at the same time is hard....

In terms of Metro Access, that is a great initative. But I often wonder if would be cheaper to use cabs for some of the MetroAccess "customers". Given each MetroAccess ride costs something like $25....

by charlie on Mar 28, 2013 8:55 am • linkreport

This is interesting because I've never thought of transit actualy relieving congestion, merely allowing a higher level of transportation activity with the same amount of congestion.

My mental model was always that drivers will fill the roads that are available to capacity (i.e., congestion gets so bad that taking the train or bus is about the same commute time, adjusted for convenicence and comfort factors), and if you want more transportation activity, you're going to need to provide alternatives or restrictions on use.

by Michael Perkins on Mar 28, 2013 9:21 am • linkreport

"saving drivers a whopping 90 seconds"

Increasing speed limits has little to do with saving drivers time.

by jh on Mar 28, 2013 9:23 am • linkreport

Louis Gohmert should be careful. If, like most TX Congressmen, he wants DC to be more like TX, the next time he threatens an NPS officer could see Rep Gohmert some time inside a cell.

by SJE on Mar 28, 2013 9:26 am • linkreport

Michael - I think both models are correct.

There is friction in "the system". You see this in gas prices versus the "fleet" of vehicles in the US. Gas prices can change quite quickly over the course of days/weeks but people invest in a car that they will own for (often) many years so they can not quickly adapt to the changing gas prices.

Over the shorter run (months/a few years?) due to leases, mortgages, kids in school, etc. people can not going to move houses but they can/will take advantage of the new transportation. Over the longer run, leases expire, kids graduate and selling/buying homes becomes a tenable option. So, with less congestion, some people will make the decision to move somewhere less transit accessible and will contribute to returning the congestion to it's original (or worse) state.

I just think there hasn't been enough time for people to fully adapt to the new LA transit yet.

by Friction on Mar 28, 2013 9:38 am • linkreport

Re; "Transit greatly helps congestion:"

The operative term being "reduces congestion", not "eliminates congestion".

In simple terms, transit doesn't make roads unnecessary, as some would have us believe.

Re: I-66, both the express lanes and extension of Metro should happen. In that case, the answer is "all of the above", but given this region's history, we'll spend millions of dollars and lose a decade "studying alternatives" and pretending the Metro extension will meet everyone's needs and not adding capacity to 66 will magically eliminate any future congestion.

by ceefer66 on Mar 28, 2013 9:38 am • linkreport

"the real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism." - George Will

by Thayer-D on Mar 28, 2013 9:41 am • linkreport

@Michael: I've had the same general impression. Which is interesting since the NC Governor is hinging his support for a planned LRT line in Durham on it "alleviating congestion":

Regarding I-66, I'm of the opinion tht it needs BOTH express lanes and expanded transit on a dedicated right-of-way. I've sketched out an Orange Line extension out to Fair Lakes, but Nother possibility is an LRT line that feeds directly up to Tysons Corner.

by Froggie on Mar 28, 2013 9:43 am • linkreport

Sorry...that should be *another. Stupid iPad "keyboard".

by Froggie on Mar 28, 2013 9:45 am • linkreport

Louis Gohmert should be careful. If, like most TX Congressmen, he wants DC to be more like TX, the next time he threatens an NPS officer could see Rep Gohmert some time inside a cell. 6 feet under w/ a bullet through his head

by thump on Mar 28, 2013 9:48 am • linkreport

transit doesn't make roads unnecessary, as some would have us believe.

Who is this "some" that you constantly refer to? Have you ever heard anyone on this blog say that all roads are unnecessary?

by thump on Mar 28, 2013 9:50 am • linkreport

Jim Moran and Gerry Connolly want Metro extended to Centreville.

Good start. But why not extend it to Centreville, Manassas, Gainesville and Warrenton in one swoop? Why such little plans?

Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert lost it over $25 NPS parking ticket

Ah, a republican with an entitlement problem. So refreshing.

Higher speed limits come to the ICC this weekend, saving drivers a whopping 90 seconds.

And a lot of frustration.

10% of Mt. Pleasant homes have solar panels.

Fantastic! Onto the next 90%.

by Jasper on Mar 28, 2013 10:02 am • linkreport

Instead of extending Metro more and further reducing the quality of service for everyone else, how about Virginia gets serious about expanding VRE? It's hugely popular and a far better choice for far out places like Centreville.

by MetroDerp on Mar 28, 2013 10:07 am • linkreport

Isn't it an issue of right-of-way? I-66 is an existing ROW that is easier to work with then creating new ROW. However, I'm not sure where the VRE goes and does not go right now.
Regardless, having more train service along the I-66 corridor is a great idea.

by dc denizen on Mar 28, 2013 10:17 am • linkreport


I agree with expanding VRE, but I'm not sure how you would work places like Centerville into that picture. New track splitting off of the Manassas Line? It's own track that eventually runs adjacent to the Orange line? It's own track that takes a different route?

by jh on Mar 28, 2013 10:23 am • linkreport

I can't get behind the idea of further extending the orange line, particularly in the cenetr of I-66. Such an extension would only intensify the existing conflict Metro already suffers from, by trying to be both a traditonal city subway system and a suburban commuter rail. As many have pointed out previously, Metro is already at or rapidly approaching capacity in the core.

And I think most of us are in agreement that building transit down interstate medians is not smart planning. It may be cheap, but it doesn't allow for the creation of TOD. It seems a waste of valuable resources to continue the build transit in the middle of highways model.

What is needed is a commitment to real commuter rail lines--in Maryland and Virginia--that will bring people into the city without placing undue burdens on the already oversteached metro system. This is part of the need for a larger, region-wide commitment to developing new transportation options and intergrating them as part of one fully fuctional network. To me, an Orange line extensions is just a band aid, not a real solution.

by Birdie on Mar 28, 2013 10:33 am • linkreport

jh: "saving drivers a whopping 90 seconds"
Increasing speed limits has little to do with saving drivers time.

Spot-on. I used to think of myself as a pretty diehard urbanist but am increasingly finding myself put off by the negativity so many are using these days. While this is admittedly a small case, in general I've been getting the feeling that what used to be a proactive & optimistic movement has become more reactive & incendiary :/

by Bossi on Mar 28, 2013 10:34 am • linkreport

I wholeheartedly agree that a regional train network should be created, however, it's still a ROW issue, isn't it? All the regional train networks were torn up and turned to bike trails in the 50s, so some of these can be reclaimed, like they want to do with the Purple Line. However, in other places you'd have to build new ROW which is probably politically not feasible. I don't think running it alongside or the median of I-66 is that bad, though. They do it outside of Paris. It doesn't have to be Metro either. It can be a separate commuter rail system branching off somewhere in NoVA where the two systems meet. Sort of like the way the Marc and Metro lines run parallel in MoCo then break off.

by dc denizen on Mar 28, 2013 10:45 am • linkreport


Good idea. To expand on it, extend Metro from Vienna out to its new terminus at Stringfellow Road along the reserved ROW (plus, VDOT already owns a park & ride there).

Build a VRE branch line from west of the Burke Centre station, along the Fairfax County Parkway ROW (ROW is already available and planned for transit) up north to Route 66. Then have the VRE branch join the Route 66 ROW and head west out to Centreville, Manassas and beyond.

At Stringfellow, VRE riders from west of Stringfellow can either transfer onto the Orange line to access all the VA stations, or can stay on VRE and continue into Alexandria/Crystal City/Union Station.

Commuter rail makes so much more sense in the outer suburbs.

by flimflam on Mar 28, 2013 10:48 am • linkreport

In re I-66, I think extending the Orange Line to Route 50 makes a lot of sense. Much better spot for a terminal station than Vienna would ever be, plus you've got a lot of commercial and government campuses that could be transit friendly and transfer potential for connections to better bus lines or BRT on Route 50.

But I see little reason to extend to Centreville with heavy rail. That's just unnecessary unless things change in Centreville. Dedicated busway on I-66 is the way to go there.

by James M on Mar 28, 2013 10:49 am • linkreport

@MetroDerp, I also agree that expanding VRE to a 7 day a week service should be considered, but there are major capacity, speed, operating cost, route issues and NS & CSX may not be interested. For Centreville, a new & expensive VRE branch line from the NS line would do little good for anyone wanting to travel from Centreville to the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor or to Tysons via a connection at East Falls Church. Extending the Orange Line out I-66 beyond Vienna is a logical future expansion, but the overloaded Blue/Orange/Silver line starting at Rosslyn has to be addressed first.

As for I-66 express lanes, lets see how well - or badly - the I-495 express lanes do. My bet is that they will be a financial failure with toll revenue coming in well below projections even after several years.

by AlanF on Mar 28, 2013 10:51 am • linkreport


In principle, you're 100% correct. The Metro hybrid subway/commuter rail system becomes more difficult to balance the more extended it gets.
In reality, I think you run into two major problems:
1) Metro has a very strong and well known brand compared to VRE, making it more appealing to politicians, developers and residents and
2) DC has few existing rail corridors to run commuter service on. Boston, New York and Philadelphia were all able to leverage their historic rail lines. VRE to Centreville would require a new rail line on a new right of way, which is a non-starter.

by Distantantennas on Mar 28, 2013 10:56 am • linkreport

The lack of existing rail corridors with which to run commuter rail is why commuter-rail-expansion-as-an-alternative-to-Metro will not fully work. Sure, it will work in some areas...expanding VRE will help those in Manassas (and points west) or along I-95 South get to Alexandria, Crystal City, and DC. But it doesn't do anything for those trying to get to/from places such as Fair Oaks, Tysons, or the Mt Vernon side of Fort Belvoir.

Another thing to keep in mind: the I-66 Draft EIS included origin-destination studies at 3 points along the corridor: the west end at US 15, in the midddle between VA 28 and Fairfax County Pkwy, and the east end at the Beltway. Some of the O-D study numbers actually work against both VRE improvements and an Orange Line extension. The key number here is the drivers who are on I-66 by Centerville....almost half of them exit by Fair Oaks. Only 11% of I-66 traffic east of Centerville is continuing on I-66 east of the Beltway.

Another notable figure: of those who are on I-66 at the Beltway, 40% of them are coming to/from the north (towards Tysons and the American Legion Bridge), and over half of them enter/exit 66 at either Nutley, 123, or Fair Oaks. This suggests that some sort of transit between Fair Oaks/Fairfax and Tysons Corner might be worth pursuing.

by Froggie on Mar 28, 2013 11:26 am • linkreport

I think extending the Orange Line makes sense but it has to be done AFTER seperating the blue line with a new Bridge or tunnel. Either that or reroute the Silver line so it goes south to Pentagon and then up to L'Enfantwhich could also make a lot of sense.

by Alan B. on Mar 28, 2013 11:27 am • linkreport

I-66 needs:
- The Metro to be extended to Fairfax Corner/Fair Oaks Mall. (Special Tax District to allow increased density and the cost of building the station)
- Two Toll Express Lanes added from Monument Dr. to I-495. (Rail line should be laid in conjunction with this project)
- HOV2 restrictions eliminated west of Monument Dr. (Bus on Shoulder)
- VRE service should be hourly during non peak hours. (Build second platform at Baclick, Rolling Road, Burke Centre and Manassas Park stations)
- An effort should be made to straighten the curves on the Manassas Line VRE tracks to increase trip times.

by mcs on Mar 28, 2013 11:37 am • linkreport

I should add that I don't know if would make sense to extend the Orange Line all the way to Centreville. An extension out I-66 to Rt. 50 / Fairfax Mall or to Fairfax County Parkway might be more justifiable Orange Line end points. An terminal station at Fairfax Cty Parkway / Fair Lakes would provide a catchment for car traffic from further west on I-66 and the Parkway. A terminal station at Rt. 28 would not be at all close to Centreville.

The DC Metro system is a commuter/regional-transit system hybrid. As noted, the DC area does not have a lot of legacy commuter rail lines like Philly, NYC, Boston have that were built back when the ROW could be cheaply acquired. Commuter rail lines here are confined to using CSX and NS freight corridors or the NEC. Hence the DC Metro system, which does provide a big advantage as an integrated single system. Whre light rail lines can be added to provide connections across the gaps.

by AlanF on Mar 28, 2013 11:40 am • linkreport


Hence, VRE along the Fairfax County Parkway ROW, which has already been reserved for transit. A few posts up I suggested VRE branch off from Burke, travel north along the Pkwy up to Route 66, connect to the Orange Line (extended to Stringfellow Rd) and then head out west along the Route 66 ROW. I should've mentioned that VRE (or some form of LRT or BRT) could also continue up the Pkwy through Fair Lakes / Route 50 on up to Reston, connecting into the new Silver Line.

Thus, several major jobs centers in Fairfax could be connected via transit (orange line, silver line, and commuter line). These include Tysons, Merrifield, Reston, Fair Lakes and Springfield. The only other major job center in Fairfax left out is the Route 28 corridor.

by flimflam on Mar 28, 2013 11:47 am • linkreport

@flimflam: VRE requires what is effectively freight-rail-style construction, which believe it or not is a heavier type of construction than Metrorail was/is. I don't think you could put that up the Fairfax County Pkwy median without fully reconstructing the roadway and expanding the right-of-way out, especially now that VDOT used the median for additional lanes between 29 and 50.

by Froggie on Mar 28, 2013 11:51 am • linkreport

I remember talking to a VDOT guy at one of the public meetings about I-66 years ago. He said there are really significant environmental concerns (uncertainty, expense) with building a metro station in Centreville along I-66. It's essentially marshland (cub run/bull run stream valley) that's very complicated to build on.

I've lived in Centreville for many years. It's highly undesireable and completely impractical to cross the street there because Routes 29, 28, and 66 divvy up the area into walled sectors accessible only by driving out onto the main road for one light and hanging a left or a U-turn to go get some coffee or dessert after dinner. So I think any rail station is pointless because most people would have to drive to the station's mega parking deck. Might as well drive to existing facilities (if improved) in Manassas or Fairfax.

On the other hand, Centreville already has a high number of choice bus riders - commuters who could drive to work but choose to take the commuter bus. If significant numbers are already choosing to take the bus, and the bus depots (as they are now) are a bit more distributed across the different sectors of Centreville (than a single rail station would be), it makes sense to me that giving buses their own lane or any other means to arrive at Metro or D.C. faster than SOV traffic would be the way to go.

by James M on Mar 28, 2013 11:55 am • linkreport

VRE requires what is effectively freight-rail-style construction, which believe it or not is a heavier type of construction than Metrorail was/is.

In an ideal world, there's no reason this has to be true. I would love to see commuter rail in our nation evolve to be more like the French RER or German S-Bahn systems - rapid transit that makes use of mainline rail lines with transit vehicles.

It would require a sea-change in the US regulatory environment, but there's no technical reason it can't be done. Such a change would not only improve the performance of our existing passenger rail infrastructure, but would open up a whole host of new opportunities for transit in urban areas.

Such a plan would make it possible to branch a passenger-only line off of a freight rail line, while the freight line could serve the dual purpose.

by Alex B. on Mar 28, 2013 12:00 pm • linkreport

Now that I am driving out to Reston again from Alexandria for work I get to experience I-66 reverse-commute style. While extending the on ramp from Ballston all the way to the next exit 2 miles down the road is a step in the right direction, it just shifts the backups 2 miles down the road. Extending the extra lane to the Dulles Toll Road split would alleviate virtually all of this poorly designed congestion. Doing it inbound from the Toll Road merge to Fairfax Drive/Ballston is also a no brainer, and I generally dislike throwing money into highways.

by NikolasM on Mar 28, 2013 12:02 pm • linkreport

Extending the Orange line and/or adding express lanes sounds great until you consider the opportunity cost. Are there alternative infrastructure improvements that could be made that would result in greater economic growth and better land use?

I'd say relieving bottlenecks and adding new transit/road service inside the beltway makes more sense than building infrastructure that facilitates more development at the Outer Beltway.

What the market is demanding these days is more square footage in "Walk-Up" locations but there is insufficient infrastructure to allow for greater densities at many of NOVA's Walk-Ups. To maximize the economic impact of infrastructure improvements, they should allow for upzoning at existing Walk-Ups or at a minimum, create new Walk-Ups.

This is not some kind of argument for transit-only investments in infrastructure. In NOVA, upzoning Walk-Ups or creating new ones requires, transit, road, and pedestrian improvements like what we've seen (or will see) at Merrifield and Tysons.

by Falls Church on Mar 28, 2013 12:03 pm • linkreport

I would be interesting if while they were building a Metro Rail extension on the Orange Line they connected Fairfax Corner and Fair Oaks Mall across I-66 with something similar to what was completed on High Steet in Columbus. This could help cover some of the cost related to building the Metrorail Station.

by mcs on Mar 28, 2013 12:34 pm • linkreport

All this talk about extending rail service of any sort past Vienna is pointless without trainloads of money somehow appearing in the budget. Just look at what drivers on the Dulles Toll Road will be paying (projected $17 each way by 2030) to finance the Silver Line.
Where will the money for new rail come from? Don't count on the new transportation bill, anything there for transit will go to reduce the pain of the Silver Line.

by AintNoMoney on Mar 28, 2013 3:53 pm • linkreport

Just look at what drivers on the Dulles Toll Road will be paying (projected $17 each way by 2030) to finance the Silver Line.

This is actually a great comparison.

If US infrastructure projects could control their costs a bit better and get down to rates similar to their European peers (also built in highly regulated and unionized societies), then tolling the whole of I-66 would be a great way to a) manage demand, and b) finance new capacity for the corridor, preferably through transit of some type.

by Alex B. on Mar 28, 2013 3:57 pm • linkreport

tolling the exisding free lanes on I66 is as much a fantasy as persuading the Commonwealth and the counties to build rail everywhere, including a blue line extension on FFX county parkway.

Most likely we will get HOT lanes on I66, with some facilities to make it more usable by buses, and they will call that BRT. Unlike an Orange line extension, that will also provide a one seat ride to Tysons (all in HOT lanes). Won't do as much for TOD as rail would (FairOaks at least, has the potential) but seems to me the County will be nervous about diluting the appeal of Tysons with yet more TOD sites.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Mar 28, 2013 4:06 pm • linkreport

tolling the exisding free lanes on I66 is as much a fantasy as persuading the Commonwealth and the counties to build rail everywhere, including a blue line extension on FFX county parkway.

It's also against the law.

However, it does have one thing going for it: all the other fantasies spend money. This one generates money.

by Alex B. on Mar 28, 2013 4:12 pm • linkreport

BTW, didn't mean to sound like such a curmudgeon regarding lack of money for transit... there is a lack of money for everything in transportation right now, except the governor's and legislature's pet projects ("public-private partnerships").
Also, $17 now appears to be the wrong toll for 2030... I double-checked and found a 2012 projection from MWAA that called for "only" $10.75 each way in 2030, hitting $16.75 each way in 2043 and continuing to rise from there. So, mea culpa.
Good luck getting the state and federal governments to approve those kinds of tolls on I-66.

by AintNoMoney on Mar 28, 2013 4:14 pm • linkreport

I double-checked and found a 2012 projection from MWAA that called for "only" $10.75 each way in 2030...

Which isn't all that much. That's 17 years from now.

17 years ago, if you adjust for inflation, what is now 10.75 would be 7.20.

Good luck getting the state and federal governments to approve those kinds of tolls on I-66.

Something's got to give. If not tolls, then what? We can always raise the gas tax substantially to get it back to the purchasing power it had back when the interstates were built, but that seems to be a non-starter, too.

Sooner or later, someone will realize that you can't simultaneously propose new projects while also eliminating every means for funding them.

by Alex B. on Mar 28, 2013 4:31 pm • linkreport

@AintNoMoney, do those 2012 toll projections include $300 million from VA for Silver Line Phase 2 and the reduction in bond payments if MWAA succeeds in getting low interest TIFIA loans? Probably not. Once the construction bids are in, contracts are awarded, and the status of the TIFIA application is known, MWAA should update the future toll projections. The future toll rate projections will likely drop quite a lot from the worse case scenario numbers once the updated debt costs are in.

As for paying for expansion, WMATA is receiving close to $1 billion a year in capital funding from the federal gov, DC, MD, VA, and the local governments for the 6 year Metro Forward program. If that funding level is maintained after the 6 year program, it will provide a foundation to work from for system improvements, more new rolling stock, and getting started on expansion such as the Blue Line re-route. if the capacity issues in the core are addressed, an Orange Line extension of 2-3 stations in the I-66 median will not be that difficult to pay for.

by AlanF on Mar 28, 2013 5:24 pm • linkreport

@AlanF: I seem to have sidetracked this into a toll discussion - the 2012 projection is not changed by an additional $300 million from Virginia - that buys down tolls for a few years, but does not affect the tolls for the following years. TIFIA is not considered.

At any rate, the point was that extension of rail of any sort beyond Vienna would be massively expensive if constructed the way we currently build rail. The problem is how to reduce the cost and/or raise the money.
From what I've heard about Metro's capital needs, even ten years of capital funding at $1 billion a year is not enough to pay for needed repair and replacements over that time, let alone fund expansion of the system.

by AintNoMoney on Mar 28, 2013 5:48 pm • linkreport

Before all these metro extensions, I'd like to see the metro we have at least be brought up to par. Last Thursday I got into the Federal Triangle stop around 9:40 at night due to a late function for my wife's work. Wait time on the board said 17 minutes. When train came, you couldn't tell the difference between then and rush hour there were so many people on it. That's what happens when they're 17 minutes apart. 9:40 isn't even that late, especially for federal government types who have AWS on Friday. We're supposed to be a world class city, shouldn't we have more frequent service than that.

We have one of the most expensive to ride heavy rail rapid transit systems in the country, and what do we get for our money? Turnstyles that don't work, farecard machines that only take one combination or another of payment, broken or barely audible intercom systems on the trains, broken escalators, broken elevators, etc., etc. Extensions and what not are great, but I would like to see this other stuff dealt with too.

by Nickyp on Mar 28, 2013 8:50 pm • linkreport


"Who is this "some" that you constantly refer to? Have you ever heard anyone on this blog say that all roads are unnecessary?"

Well, I have seen the Outer BeltwayOuter Bypass repeatedly referred to in GGW as "the zombie highway" that "just won't die".

The immediate response from the Coalition for Smart Growth for every major road is a statement in opposition - often quoted here in GGW - very recently regarding the Loudon-Prince William Parkway.

But no one here EVER says "all roads are unnecessary". Just the Outer Bypass, AND the ICC (when it was being debated), AND the new route 460 in Virginia, AND widening I-66 inside the Beltway, AND the HOT lanes on the Virginia Beltway, AND the HOT lanes on I-395 in Arlington, AND practically every other DC metro area highway project ever discussed here.

But no. No one on this blog ever says "all roads are unnecessary".

Thanks for clearing it up.

by ceefer66 on Mar 29, 2013 5:28 pm • linkreport

If any Metrorail is extended past the current points than every other train needs to end closer in such as at West Falls Church for trains bound for Centreville or Fairoaks or the outer stations should only be served during rush hour

by kk` on Mar 31, 2013 10:22 pm • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

You can use some HTML, like <blockquote>quoting another comment</blockquote>, <i>italics</i>, and <a href="http://url_here">hyperlinks</a>. More here.

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.


Support Us