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


MoveDC calls for more transit, dedicated lanes

In the latest draft of DDOT's MoveDC plan, the 37-mile streetcar network originally planned in 2010 becomes a 69-mile "high capacity transit" network.

The new 69-mile network would include DC's initial 22-mile streetcar system, plus 47 more miles of either streetcar or BRT.

37-mile network from 2010, and latest MoveDC 69-mile proposal.
Maps from BeyondDC, using base maps from Google.

The 47-mile network, shown in red on the map, would include 25-miles of dedicated transit lanes, regardless of whether those lines are eventually built as bus or rail. The dedicated lanes would be on 16th Street, North Capitol Street, I-295, M Street SE & SW, and I and H Streets downtown.

Curiously, the proposed streetcar line on Rhode Island Avenue from the 2010 plan isn't carried forward into MoveDC.

The new plan shows the 14th Street streetcar shifting over to 7th Street, although the details of that line are still in flux. It could still end up on 14th.

Finally, MoveDC also notes several potential extensions to Maryland and Virginia, anywhere a proposed DDOT line approaches the District boundary. Perhaps most notably, there are potential connections across Long Bridge into Arlington, down I-295 to National Harbor, and to Silver Spring.

For Metrorail, MoveDC includes WMATA's proposal for a new loop subway line through DC, connecting Rosslyn on one end and the Yellow Line bridge on the other.

Map from BeyondDC, using base map from Google.

Overall this is a progressive and ambitious proposal, although the removal of Rhode Island Avenue raises questions. It's still a draft, so you can comment via the WeMoveDC website.

Cross-posted at BeyondDC.

Dan Malouff is a transportation planner for Arlington and professor of geography at George Washington University, but blogs to express personal views. He has a degree in urban planning from the University of Colorado, and lives in NE DC. He runs BeyondDC and contributes to the Washington Post


Add a comment »

They also don't show the line that was to run north on the abandoned railroad tracks out of Blue Plains (East of the river)

by David C on Nov 22, 2013 12:44 pm • linkreport

A map of the existing/old (?) version of the 37 mile system can be found here:

by JDC Esq on Nov 22, 2013 12:47 pm • linkreport

I think I'm going to faint - Wisconsin Ave?! Someone at DDOT grew some balls. I'm also loving the Mt.P/Park/Tenley alternative to the original Woodley Park to Columbia Heights route. I feel like I could have drawn this map myself. Given the many drawbacks of crosstown routes in this city, I like that they seemed to be really aware in how to provide good options.

The whole 14th/7th st thing is interested but ultimately both areas will end up well served because there are already frequent bus/metro options in the area.

by BTA on Nov 22, 2013 1:07 pm • linkreport

Hmm RI Ave is a major car commuter corridor and stretches are more low density SFH past the metro station so maybe the numbers don't work. Seems like they should at least have express bus service though.

by BTA on Nov 22, 2013 1:25 pm • linkreport

This is a good start but it's disheartening to see Rhode Island Avenue and New York Avenue not up listed. Those ares are growing rapidly and need access to transit. Instead, the now-scaled-down streetcar plans are largely duplicating service, especially along 7th Street (though I absolutely streetcars should service upper Georgia Avenue).

by Adam Lewis on Nov 22, 2013 1:29 pm • linkreport

My guess is some residents views of the rapidly growing Rhode Island Ave are precisely why it went away.

by BTA on Nov 22, 2013 1:35 pm • linkreport


I think I'm going to faint - Wisconsin Ave?! Someone at DDOT grew some balls.

This will happen over Phil Mendelson's dead body. He will lie in front of the steamroller himself.

by Dizzy on Nov 22, 2013 1:37 pm • linkreport

This will happen over Phil Mendelson's dead body. He will lie in front of the steamroller himself.

At the risk of sounding flippant, nice knowing ya, Phil.

by BTA on Nov 22, 2013 1:44 pm • linkreport

This is fabulous! I agree on the R.I. Ave. line though, what a miss. Brentwood, Brookland, and the lovely Woodridge, to say nothing about Mt. Rainer and College Park. The whole line is very attractive and primed for development, which if I'm not mistaken happened on the back of an old trolley line.

by Thayer-D on Nov 22, 2013 1:45 pm • linkreport

I like the cross town connection at Cleveland Park/Mt. Pleasant. I would also like to see the Wisconsin Avenue connection extend from Friendship Heights to Rosslyn, and then add another cross town connection via Military and Missouri to either Takoma or Brookland.

Others have suggested this.

by Andrew on Nov 22, 2013 2:05 pm • linkreport

I don't like the loop for new metro tunnel (yes, that's more with Metro than DDOT/Move but bear with me).

It seems like you're missing an opportunity to really separate the 5 original lines.

-have the blue line go up through union station and eventually meet back up at stadium armory.
- spend the money spent on tunnelling the loop through SW and redirect to separating the yellow and green to Gallery Place or maybe the Convention Center and either truncate one of the two (yes, a transfer but you may be able to run more frequent trains that way) or see what it would take to have an option for N. Capitol.

by drumz on Nov 22, 2013 2:23 pm • linkreport

DC needs to build up its downtown. DC is in a much better position to multimodaly serve its downtown, without river crossing bridges and tunnels, helping focus the region and increase the reliability of access to downtown for the maximum total number of people, and percentage of commuters to downtown DC. This is not to discourage investment in other Metro projects, but merely point out that the biggest bang for the buck, is solving DC's economic and transit problems first.

My general opinion is that DC needs a Metro line paralleling the spokes of the Red line and looping downtown, serving downtown, especially paralleling the current Orange/Blue/Silver corridor in downtown to simplify DC citizen commuting. This would allow for a new Metro spoke serving the ancient feet dry corridor and destroyed streetcar line of Georgia Ave, directly to Silver Spring, the corridor where vast numbers of homes were built, as well as other under-served areas of DC such as Georgetown, lower Wisconsin Ave, and Upper Connecticut Ave, and east of the Capital, all not currently served by Metro, and adding as many existing apartment towers also not currently served by Metro as possible.

When Congress destroyed the 100 year old DC mass transit system, the streetcars, by 1962, in favor of cars by calling it "bustitution", and then adding the new later subway lines, the subways were built in ways to remove as many Federal Employees and people from DC to the full voting suburbs as possible, for executive branch needs of loyalty and that existing Congressmen could trade votes to benefit their state's economies and tax base, while Congressionally disenfranchised DC could not prevent removal of its Federal employees, such as influence Congress to vote for restoring full voting rights in DC.

This Federal bias against DC citizens is particularly noticeable in the design and implementation of two essential Metro corridors. The Orange/Blue Metro corridor through downtown serves Federal Offices, with almost exclusively Virgina and Maryland middle class homes and apartment buildings, and with single seat commutes. The Red line from Union Station to Bethesda Navy Medical Center may be correctly buried for mass transit, but even more likely as a national security move to unify the Supreme Court, Congress, White House, and Bethesda Navy Medical Center, with publicly acknowledged deep tunnel which runs in snow and rain and high wind, while on the east side of the city, from Union Station to Silver Spring, rejects Georgia Ave where the maximum number of DC people could have been reliably served by Metro, Congress denied the logical buried Avenue route, instead opting to put Metro on the inaccessible and low density existing Amtrak heavy rail corridor for that Red Metro line segment. Currently all DC citizens needing to commute to these Metro Orange/Blue line Federal offices must change trains at a choke point, e.g. Metro Center and L'Enfant Plaza, adding many minutes to commutes, especially because these two hubs are not zoned and built to tallest (safe) height skyscrapers, which would remove the need for line transfers for DC citizens.

These 3 Congressional negative choices to prioritize more distant full voting suburbs at the expense of the region's economy and DC economy and civil rights, done by not also building infrastructure best for DC, only building the critical links to full voting rights suburbs, is central to the current problems of Washington DC, such as the profound limitations and national ranking of UDC, and only had its 4 year public liberal arts program founded by Congress in 1966, 104 years after the Morrill Land Grant College act to found such schools was passed by Congress, but unenforceable in DC without further Congressional action specifically for DC, because the unelected US Congress is also replacement for a DC state level legislature, explaining the massive delay.

I made a dream map (actually two maps) of this new Metro line idea to summarize this proposal several years ago. (Most likely I would redraw the SW/SE segment to run under C Street SW/SE, to minimize conflict with Orange/Blue.)

by Nathaniel Pendleton on Nov 22, 2013 2:25 pm • linkreport

Does the dream map Malouff posted here ("his loop", for lack of a better name) intend to establish a single redesigned Metro Blue line service corridor to free up capacity on the current Orange Corridor, exclusively to be used by Silver line trains, from Rosslyn to Largo?

I can only assume that the new loop uses the existing Blue line Metro corridor from Franconia / Springfield to Pentagon, and Arlington to Rosslyn segment, and then use "his loop" to serve downtown DC, and reconnect to the current Blue line Metro at the Pentagon.

Does this loop plan include a new Metro bridge from L'Enfant Plaza to Pentagon to prevent a massive bottle neck?

Is there any reason to be using the direct Pentagon to Rosslyn segment via Arlington Cemetery's lower entrance? A much better future route for serving both Pentagon and Rosslyn, would be using the Rt. 50, and Rt 27 routes, serving Ft Meyer, and many nearby private homes in Arlington, and high altitude access to Arlington Cemetery and its theater spaces, as well as large parking structures to capture Virginia car commuters before they drive into downtown DC, Rosslyn, and Alexandria. This longer route would drastically increase usefulness of the Blue line to Virginians between Pentagon and Rosslyn, serving many people, Federal, and private. The new longer but more useful route, would turn sharply from the current line, on the south west side of the Pentagon.

This also creates potential create a direct short line Metro, from Pentagon, to Rosslyn, via current Arlington Cemetery stop, for direct unification of many defense and tourist traffic. The shorter route would be useful for minimizing trip times between Rosslyn and Pentagon defense offices, while retaining existing tourist flows to Arlington Cemetery.

Another option (that I am skeptical of but include any way) if the short line Metro service was established, turning the a rerouted west side of Arlington Cemetery Blue line from Pentagon City, instead of the Pentagon, would make an even shorter route for the Blue line reroute, but requires effortless and reliable transfer from Blue line trains at Pentagon City, to both Yellow line trains and the short line train. Ideally the short line would run from Crystal City to Rosslyn, via Pentagon City, Pentagon, Arlington Cemetary and Rosslyn, primarily focusing on Defense commuters and tourists to the lower entrance of the Cemetery, primarily serving Blue line transfers and VRE.

by Nathaniel Pendleton on Nov 22, 2013 3:14 pm • linkreport

Has anyone noticed but the East/Westbound route in the northern portion of DC is almost the entire bus route of the H lines ?

What we should be doing is putting bus lanes on each of the following roads for their entire portions from start to finish

Connecticut, Wisconsin, Florida, Pennsylvania, Alabama, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Nebreaska, Georgia, Constituion, Independence, Rhode Island, New Hampshire & Potomac Avenues

Benning, Bladensburg, Military & Riggs Roads

East Capitol, South Capitol, North Capitol, K Street NW, M Street NW/SE/SW, 7th Street NW, 11th Street NW & SE, 14th Street NW & 16th Street NW

For the Metrorail idea that should be last after other ideas are done with. The Metro design depicted does not help the actual people in the city but Virginia residents.

If they are building a new tunnel downtown it should be atleast P Street and if possible further north. What we need to do is connect the dots between the existing lines where they are closest together.

They should just build a circular line inside of DC that connects the lines together.

This would be an example that would serve most areas of DC and connect parts that aren't served

new Benning Heights station starting point
Benning Road station,
new Oklahoma Ave station
new Trinidad station
new Ivy City station
Noma , Rhode Island Ave or Brookland station
new VA hospital station
new Georgia & Columbia Road station
Columbia Heights station
Cleveland Park station
new McLean Gardens station
new Wesley Heights station
new North Georgetown station
new South Georgetown station
Foggy Bottom station
new Constitution Ave station
L'Enfant Plaza station
Federal Center station
Eastern Market station
Potomac Ave station
new Twining Square station
new Fairfax Village station
new Benning Heights station ending point

With that building crossovers at every other station that way you could rearrange the entire system in downtown if need be to better shuttle loads. Portions could have a separate Yellow or Blue Line on it.

by kk on Nov 22, 2013 3:25 pm • linkreport

Well there needs to be another potomac crossing that connects to downtown because the Potomac tunnels are maxed out with the number of trains that can pass through. Rush plus helps somewhat but it's definitely not good for anyone who was using the blue line to get to Rosslyn or someone working north and west of around Metro Center.

by drumz on Nov 22, 2013 3:34 pm • linkreport

I am ok with the loop because it could be an intermediate step to better service. The next step would be separating the yellow line fully from the green and blue lines and taking it north toward MD. That way you could run the fully separated blue yellow and green each at 2-3 minute headways during peak.

by BTA on Nov 22, 2013 3:37 pm • linkreport

That would leave only the orange and silver still sharing a track. Eventually they could be seperated out with an additional potomac crossing and new downtown route maybe adding some better Capital Hill area service.

by BTA on Nov 22, 2013 3:46 pm • linkreport

One minor note regarding one of the proposed off-street path through Soapstone Valley connecting Broad Branch and Linnean Avenue in Forest Hills. DC Water needs to replace the ancient storm sewers through the ravine and building a new path on top of the new sewer infrastructure makes sense ... but it would also involve some complicated environmental engineering through the narrow right-of-way, which would involve major excavation of the hillsides and ravine, plus the removal of trees. (It's a really beautiful part of Rock Creek Park if you haven't hiked it.) This will eventually put the bicycling community in conflict with environmentalists and neighborhood folks who treasure Soapstone Valley. Get ready for a fight when that comes down the pike in the next few years. This will be tricky.

by Michael_G on Nov 22, 2013 4:10 pm • linkreport

Great maps! But these maps are mode specific so just b/c high capacity transit doesn't show on certain roads on this map (RIA and NY), that doesn't mean there is nothing proposed. A cycle track is proposed for RIA (not sure I agree with it. This might be a better corridor for high speed transit). NYA, which is heavily freight, seems to me it would need to continue to prioritize freight.

by Annonymous on Nov 22, 2013 4:45 pm • linkreport

BTA: something like this? (sans Yellow/Blue separation in VA)

by Froggie on Nov 22, 2013 5:04 pm • linkreport

I was initially against the loop idea but then realized that in the future the loop could be broken and extended somewhere near Union Station like in that picture Froggie linked above.

by NikolasM on Nov 22, 2013 5:50 pm • linkreport

Regarding the Metro Blue/Yellow loop line plans, I'm a little curious about how all of those new transfers will work. I figure most riders disembarking downtown won't need to transfer to the Red Line, and the Union Station transfer will be easier because of the existing tunnel between the Red Line's north exit and H Street; but woe be to riders going to the SW Federal Center, Penn Quarter, or Chinatown! The SW/SE Green Line transfers look like they'll be about as long as the always-future Metro Center-Gallery Place transfer.

I realize long transfers are normal for the rest of the world--I slogged through my share of them when I was living in Beijing and Seoul--but these will be replacing the short, convenient transfers that we currently have. Maybe if Metro can keep the new SW/SE portion of the loop line closer to M St, we can get a couple cross-platfrom transfers a la Hong Kong? Otherwise South Arlington folks will need to walk further, and travel longer distances than they are today. (Hopefully they'll all want to go to SW Waterfront and Southern NoMa by then!)

by Steven H on Nov 22, 2013 7:06 pm • linkreport

Where did the Metro loop proposal in the top article come from? There is no relevant link to that loop proposal. Mr. Malouff, please add a relevant link to the loop proposal. Is there related official documentation (so I don't have to guess like I did) on how the Metro Blue line would use that proposed loop.

by Nathaniel Pendleton on Nov 22, 2013 8:40 pm • linkreport

Here is an older Washington Post Map about the same problem with the M Street corridor but a much smaller loop, skipping Union Station.

by Nathaniel Pendleton on Nov 22, 2013 8:46 pm • linkreport

Nathaniel, the loop is from the MoveDC link on the very first line of the post.

by BeyondDC on Nov 22, 2013 8:58 pm • linkreport

The loop makes even more sense if you think of SW as the next downtown. With the mall in between and a healthy mix of residential in both centers, the Mall would feel more central to downtown rather than feel like the bottom of downtown. Especially with the 7th street streetcar line running north and south, growth could be pushed towards the tip of DC incentivicing the whole water front and eventually promoting interesting river crossings at Buzzards Point.

by Thayer-D on Nov 23, 2013 6:04 am • linkreport

Here's an idea for the streetcar: get rid of that ridiculous spur going down 1st St SW and have it go down S. Capitol so it can go over Douglass Bridge and into Anacostia and actually connect to something.

by 7r3y3r on Nov 23, 2013 8:18 am • linkreport

Ugh, the loop. Such a wasted opportunity to really extend the lines into underserved areas like H St., Trinidad, Brightwood, 16th St. Heights, etc. And such small thinking, especially with the Height Act remaining unchanged and the downtown core not likely to grow that much more. There's a whole rest of this city in dire need of transit, too!

by MetroDerp on Nov 23, 2013 8:35 am • linkreport

@Mr. Malouff: Yeah! Found it. Thank you Mr. M. It does not download easily, but I found it fascinating.

by Nathaniel Pendleton on Nov 23, 2013 9:36 am • linkreport

Major Alignment Problems with Loop Proposal: The new Metro (Blue line?) loop proposed in the draft report from, "6_DRAFT Blended Approach.pdf" (as of 20131123), does not intersect or interconnect to existing Metro lines well, causing substantial problems for serving DC, and most existing Metro lines. Without the proposal I am suggesting here, the proposed Loop really only serves passengers on living and working the Loop and Virginia commuters on the existing Franconia / Springfield to Pentagon Blue line segment to the proposed new (Blue) Loop in DC.

I am suggesting Loop one realignment, to move one station, to simplify an absolutely essential interconnection of Metro corridors, and many subterranean walkways, each of unhelpful distance (e.g. typically 800 to 1200 feet), unless combined with very high speed moving walkways, such as from ThyssenKrupp, currently deployed at Toronto Airport. These fast walkways are reported to move at 400 feet per minute, or faster. 400 fpm is 4.5 miles per hour, standing still. Typical walking at 3 miles per hour, is 264 feet per minute, therefore fast moving walkways are 51% faster than walking. Combined is 7.5 miles per hour, or 664 feet per minute. This makes most of the interconnections via fast moving walkways, I am proposing, 1 to 2 minutes ride, considerably less than the time required to wait for the next train.

For example the proposed new (Blue) Loop crosses the existing Orange line corridor, in DC, at "Capitol South" Metro Stop, one of the most sensitive stops in the city to closure because of special events, protest, violence, terrorism, or security theater. There is no other likely proposed interconnecting station between the proposed new (Blue) Loop, and the existing Orange line Metro in DC, but there may be an interconnection in "Rosslyn" stop, depending how the new Loop is interconnected with the single most complicated and deep Metro station in the region, "Rosslyn".

Despite obvious concerns about political risk of emergency station closure at "Capitol South" stop, the crossing station at "Capitol South" is a helpful easy walking distance right angle station (much like "Gallery Place / China Town" where Red and Yellow/Green corridors cross), with a station in the shape of an L or T, at the east end of the Capitol South platform that has no exit currently, connecting to 2nd Street SE, where the proposed Loop line would run under the 2nd Street SE. Having only one (possible) Metro line interconnection between current Orange and proposed loop (Blue) in DC is profoundly bad planning.

Rosslyn is an unsatisfactory station for interconnection for DC commuters changing lines to reach DC loop stations, for many reasons, such as using two bottleneck tunnels under the river. The other problem is that interconnecting these lines below the depth of the Potomac River could be potentially very unwise, because in the event of flooding of either tunnel, would automatically flood the other tunnel from Rosslyn to Foggy Bottom, requiring all interconnecting foot traffic to ascend to above the river surface height, and descend again to the other tunnel, a considerable vertical distance, to prevent flooding destroying both tunnels. (Sharing the both Metro tunnels under the Potomac from Rosslyn, for trains of both corridors, existing Orange line and proposed new (Blue) Loop, while preventing potential for simultaneous flooding damage, requires distinct tunnels for the trains also above the height of the river. For the Orange line this requires a line fork around Courthouse Metro stop, with a distinct tunnel to descend to the proposed new Loop tunnel under the Potomac River, and similar forking from above ground Blue Line station at Arlington National Cemetery, to join the Rosslyn existing Orange line tunnels.)

I have a complex proposal in the next section that would add an interconnection between the proposed Loop and the existing Orange line stop at Farragut West, requiring a Loop route realignment to move one station, to better connect with the Red Line at Farragut North, and use pedestrian tunnels with fast moving walkways, to cover the 950 feet gap. This would help minimize the impact of a closure of the "Capitol South" stop, and help many commuters switch lines each day.

The Red line Loop crossing stations, as proposed on the draft plan, in DC, are extremely awkward, proposing a new stop between Farragut North and Dupont Circle stops at M Street NW and Connecticut Ave NW, slowing commutes for basically all Red line commuters north west of Dupont in DC and Bethesda and western side of Montgomery County, to downtown. The other crossing by the proposed Loop of the Red line is well north of Union Station's Red line Metro stop, at H Street NE and First Street NE without an easy interconnection between lines, with a roughly 800 feet gap between the current north exit at street level of the current Red Line Metro Union Station stop, and the nearest part of H Street NE. Union Station could be interconnected with a pedestrian tunnel with very fast moving walkway, such as the ThyssenKrupp Toronto Airport fast moving walkway. (see video linked above).

Realignment of the proposed Loop, to move one specific stop, south from M Street NW, east of the proposed "West End" stop, and turning south, under the Ritz Carlton Hotel (private property) to cross Connecticut Ave on L Street, at the north exit of the Red Line stop at Farragut North, essential for interconnecting Red Line and the proposed (Blue) Loop line, and then from continue the Loop east on L Street NW, returning to the proposed Thomas Circle stop by using Vermont Ave NW, and then continuing east on M Street NW as proposed by their plan. This removes the need for stopping all Red Line trains at a new stop, keeping commutes quick (or no longer than now) for all commuters to downtown from north of "Farragut North" on the Red line west branch. This would also likely better interconnect the proposed Loop line with existing Orange line stop at "Farragut West", by using a pedestrian tunnel with fast moving walkways, covering the 950 feet as quickly as possible, creating an essential interconnection.

The M Street NW and Connecticut Ave stop would have to be replaced with a 800 feet long pedestrian tunnel with fast moving walkways, from L Street NW (north exit of) "Farragut North". This would assure reliable access to the very dense commercial area north of Farragut North for those commuting there from the Loop and the east branch of the Red line, and perhaps the existing Orange line. Extending the pedestrian tunnel with fast moving walkways, from M Street NW to "Dupont Circle", would simplify access for all Red Line commuters, and any future Metro line through "Dupont Circle", of which there are at least two obvious choices, such as a Massachusetts Avenue line, and a complex line using New Hampshire Ave. The primary value of the walkway is shorter commutes for everyone, and to move large numbers of people constantly towards desirable entertainment options at "Dupont Circle" with minimal waiting, creating much more desirable choice in food, and drink, and ambiance.

The Yellow Line and proposed Loop crossing station, in DC, is not proposed in the draft report, but would be at Mt. Vernon Square stop on the Yellow line at the Convention Center. The Green Line would also be served at that crossing station as well. I would build an interconnection stop here, ideally a cross or X, like the layout of the "Metro Center" stop.

There is no L'Enfant Plaza connection, because the gap between the nearest Loop line intersection marked with a proposed station and L'Enfant Plaza stop's nearest exit is 3200 feet, or 0.6 miles, about a 12 minute walk, or 8 minute maximum ride on a fast moving walkway. This makes an untenable connection delay and distance, of dubious reliability, considerable expense, and not particularly competitive with the Metro line. This means second connection from the loop to VRE in DC, just the Union Station area interconnection with my awkward pedestrian tunnel and fast moving walkway. This similarly means no second connection to the Yellow line, other than Mt. Veronon Square. If MARC trains are extended to L'Enfant, this also means no future connection to MARC trains, or future Amtrak, trains are extended to L'Enfant Plaza, no connections from the proposed new (Blue) Loop line. The only real alternative to connect the proposed Loop and L'Enfant Plaza, by rerouting the proposed alignment, from the "Waterfront" subway area, by turning the Loop north from I Street SW onto 4th Street SW, and the turning west at E Street SW, creating a additional stop at L'Enfant at 7th Street SW and E Street SW, a block south of the south entrance of "L'Enfant Plaza" stop, with a pedestrian tunnel with fast moving walkway to the legacy "L'Enfant Plaza" Stop and further to the VRE station. The distance from E Street SW to D Street, to unify the Metro stations, is about 500 feet, while the distance to the VRE station is 1000 feet. The Loop corridor would use any possible route available from E Street SW, likely under the HUD HQ, potentially turning south on 9th Street SW to connect to the current and future Metro Bridge(s) to the Pentagon. Because of the bridge capacity is insufficient the bridge would have to be doubled, with a parallel bridge, making the route choice somewhat more difficult.

The gap between nearest proposed (Blue) Loop stops, and existing Green Line branch (only) stops of Waterfront and Navy Yard / Ballpark, is 840 feet and 900 to 1200 feet respectively. Without a L'Enfant connection, one or both of these stations would have be interconnected to connect the proposed Loop to the Green Line and one of these stations. The Ballpark is the best for peak capacity.

OTHER MISSING STATIONS?: At the intersection of New Jersey Ave NW, and New York Ave NW, is between Bloomingdale and NOMA neighborhoods. I would consider adding a stop here. Because the K Street NW/New Jersey Ave NW/H Street NW-NE streetcar line is very near by, placing the stop two blocks south of New York Ave, at K Street, would be a smart spot to add a station not on the draft proposal between "Mt. Vernon Square" and "Union Station", balancing many factors.

by Nathaniel Pendleton on Nov 23, 2013 9:40 am • linkreport

As a general concept, I think this is a great direction for the region. But the 30-year time frame ....

by kob on Nov 24, 2013 10:24 am • linkreport

Any ideas about what the breakdown/which lines are going to be Streetcar and which BRT (buses)? Is this to be construed as a default to a Bus dominated system and a curtailing of the original 37 mile streetcar proposal or is it the opposite (more streetcar services). Was wondering how the lessons of H street are impacting the plans going forward (more/less expensive than imagined and more/less complex than imagined ..etc). Also a bummer about Rhode Island.

by Todd on Nov 25, 2013 8:39 am • linkreport

Given that move DC is a long range planning exercise I would take it at face value that these are corridors identified for upgraded transit which will come in a number of different forms. The only thing that's relatively set in stone is the 22 mile streetcar system.

by BTA on Nov 25, 2013 9:04 am • linkreport

I like the new plan, overall, but ignoring the Rhode Island Avenue street car line seems like a serious missed opportunity for the city to revitalize the RIA corridor. Extending the Michigan Avenue line doesn't make nearly as much sense as a RIA line does. It is not a high density area and never will be, whereas RIA has the potential for lots of transit based development I hope that they reconsider.

by udsl2000 on Nov 25, 2013 1:13 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