Great concept (and great video) about the Anacostia Transit Center!

Note though that the wires and stanchions currently being proposed by DDOT were decidedly absent from the video. Re-run that video and picture in place wires (including the kite-like array of some dozen or so cross-thatching wires that are required anytime the streetcar isn't moving in an absolutely straight line) and the big hulking overhanging stanchions required every 100 feet of so to carry this hulk of wires ... We don't get quite the same sleek, modern vision of the concept under those circumstances, do we?

by Lance on May 23, 2010 9:48 am • link • report

Saw that Birthday flash mob clip on CNN. Awesome.

by Mike on May 23, 2010 10:30 am • link • report

The supports and wires for Portland (OR) Streetcar are barely noticeable, which always surprises us when we're there. Not to say that they're invisible -- here's a photo of Portland Streetcar rounding a curve -- not the tangle of wires of yore.

by dcseain on May 23, 2010 12:45 pm • link • report

why does the Anacostia Transit Center have to look like it was prefabbed on Planet Krypton? why not build a beautiful station instead? we used to have a few. i know us transit 'advocates' don't actually believe that people deserve to look at, much less travel through, anything dignified, much less something beautiful, but maybe we can reconsider just this one time?

as for overhead wires, i live in SF, and couldn't remember the other day if Mission Street -- the main North/South corridor through SF -- had overhead wires or not. i thought i remembered the bus ride quality being slightly less horrific than a regular bus ride, so that made me think it probably operated with overhead wires, but i still wasn't sure. so i looked at Google Street View and could barely see the overhead wires. verdict in: overhead wires are present in both directions. they're just really hard to notice.

by Peter Smith on May 23, 2010 4:03 pm • link • report

DDOT is quite good at doing the virtual designing.

It's taking it from the virtual world to the actual world where they've been having some issues.

Maybe what's powering the streetcars of futuristic Anacostia isn't overhead wires; maybe it's powered on hope.

by Fritz on May 23, 2010 6:39 pm • link • report

Re: old terminals. Some of the survivors are grand on the outside, not so much on the inside (and probably never were): Baltimore's claustrophobic Penn Station is a good example. Ditto Newark's Penn Station and Broad Street. The Michigan Central terminal has been a white elephant throughout its life and the office tower above it was never fully rented. The location was too far from the main part of downtown. The lakefront stations in Chicago were a barrier to realizing Burnham's vision for the downtown area. Chicago still has four remaining stations which vary from the traditional (Union Station), the repurposed (Dearborn), and the scalped (the one near Illinois Center).

by Rich on May 23, 2010 9:35 pm • link • report

Why not sacrifice some paved road for some extra, dedicated curb space for bikes? Kinda Ballston-ish, but not completely.

by C. R. on May 24, 2010 3:06 am • link • report

Some fun videos there David, thanks!

by Matt Glazewski on May 24, 2010 7:51 am • link • report

Re bus video: Am I the only one who thought that having some guy play a trumpet (badly) on a moving bus is a bad idea? Did you see the operator's face? He wasn't looking at the road. It's nice to show transit operators some appreciation, but maybe not when the bus is moving.

by michael on May 24, 2010 10:14 am • link • report

@Peter Smith
That post about demolished terminals is REALLY depressing. Makes you realize why riding the train has gotten a bad reputation...thank goodness we still have Union Station downtown. It's a beauty.

To put it in context, though, I think this has less to do with maligning transit and much more to do with this country's obsession with "new" things. It's always about making something trendy and "better" than it was before, only to find that it becomes outdated or fashionably obsolete within 50 years.

I'm definitely not a Yankee's fan, but consider the fact that Babe Ruth's stadium, the one where Lou Gherig gave his speech and where so many of history's greats flourished, is going to be torn down. TORN DOWN! What a way to thumb your nose at history! All because the stadium supposedly doesn't meet the needs of today. The history of baseball is something truly American and it doesn't belong to just NYC - much of that will be lost with that wrecking ball.

We have a short history on this continent, but seems like most people don't have an interest in preserving what few things we do have...

by SDJ on May 24, 2010 10:15 am • link • report

@SDJ

Babe Ruth's stadium was already torn down in the mid 70s.

by Alex B. on May 24, 2010 10:20 am • link • report

@Alex B.
Actually, no. "The house that Ruth built" was the 1923 stadium, and it was renovated in the 70s, but not actually torn down until this year.

by SDJ on May 24, 2010 10:52 am • link • report

@SDJ,

You can call it a renovation all you want, but the post-renovation Yankee Stadium was never the same thing.

Just my humble opinion.

by Alex B. on May 24, 2010 11:00 am • link • report

I liked the bus video, and having lived for a short while in Copenhagen, it captures the goofy charms of its people (and I even remembered the first two verses of the birthday song!) but it seems pretty obvious the thing was staged by the bus company.

by spookiness on May 24, 2010 11:43 pm • link • report