Transit
Communication is everything on "Blue Line Realignment," a.k.a. the "Yellow and Orange Line Service Increase"
Metro plans a relatively minor service change that will significantly increase overall system capacity. The way it's framed will either help the change see widespread adoption or else derail the idea, cause enormous customer confusion, or force changes to the Metro map that cause other confusion.
Metro has often called this the "Blue Line Split" or "Blue Line Realignment." It would be better to call it the "Yellow Line Split" or, better yet, the "Yellow and Orange Line Service Increase."
Left: What the Metro map could turn into without restraint.
Right: How Metro could communicate planned changes.
What Metro actually wants to do is to add a few rush hour Yellow and Orange Line trains and remove some Blue Line trains. Riders at Van Dorn Street, Franconia-Springfield, and Benning Road through Largo won't have fewer trains; the new Yellow Line trains will go to Franconia-Springfield (and Greenbelt, actually adding service north of Mt. Vernon Square rush hours), and the new Orange Line trains will go to Largo.
Riders from Franconia and Van Dorn who go to Rosslyn, Foggy Bottom, and Farragut West, or transfer to the Orange Line, might have to wait longer for a train. However, it will give Franconia and Van Dorn riders a one-seat ride to Yellow Line stations, and provide more trains overall for everyone on the Orange Line in Virginia and the Yellow Line in DC and Maryland. Once the Silver Line opens, some of the Orange trains, including the new ones, will become Silver Line trains.
If approved, the change will go into effect next summer. Feel free to debate the merits. But Metro has decided this makes sense overall, and I agree. The bigger issue is communication.
When staff presented this to the WMATA Board on Thursday, members rightly focused on communication. They asked Jim Hughes, Director of Operations Planning and Scheduling, if Metro had a communications plan for this change? Hughes said no. The Board urged staff to develop one right away.
Peter Benjamin pointed out that a service change years ago had been scrapped simply because riders were confused. Anyone know the details? It seems hard to believe it could have been more confusing than this wacky map from 1980-1983, but maybe the sensitivity level changed.
As with the earlier change, the way Metro talks about the change will be critical. In particular, the issue is what color the trains will be. Right now, all presentations talk about "rerouting Blue Line trains." Operationally, this fits how Metro thinks about it, because the trains are leaving Franconia-Springfield, and right now trains leaving Franconia-Springfield are Blue.
Therefore, tables in the presentation to the Board list numbers of "Blue Line to Greenbelt" and "Blue/Yellow to DC through L'Enfant." Having a Blue Line train go over the bridge and up 7th Street would create massive confusion.
I'm almost certain Metro doesn't really expect to call these trains Blue Line trains, but by referring to them in that way in presentations, it confuses observers and journalists, leading to maps like this:
Image by the Washington Post.
Compared to this, a separate color seems to make a lot of sense. That's the reaction some riders gave in a focus group, and it was the reaction from Jim Graham at the Board meeting. "There are lots of colors left in the rainbow," he said, and suggested pink. And the presentations have encouraged this view by including maps showing the new service as a separate line:
Image from WMATA.
However, creating a new color would be a bad idea. I listed a large number of reasons almost two years ago. Among them is that this new color would only run rush hours, and then only three trains per hour. That would likely lead some riders to wait around for a certain line which isn't coming for hours or until the next day.
It would also make the Metro map much more complex for a service that's only different from the Yellow Line for riders at four stations, which represent only 3% of total riders. Those stations also get few tourists, and tourists are most likely to become confused while regular riders will quickly get used to any change.
Plus, as Peter Benjamin noted, it's not quite right to create a new color for one split service pattern, Yellow Line trains that go to Franconia instead of Huntington, but not for the other one, Orange Line trains that go to Largo. Should that get its own color, too? How about ... burgundy?
And some Red Line trains only go from Grosvenor to Silver Spring. Should they be another color? Couple that with the future Silver Line, and the Metro map might end up looking like this insanity:
There's a much easier way. Just call the trains Yellow Line trains. For almost all their length, they match the Yellow Line. Almost everyone riding them will see no difference. In fact, since the occasional Yellow Line train already goes to Greenbelt, showing the Yellow Line there will clarify these trains as well.
New York used to have a different color for each route, and the ensuing spaghetti map looks not that unlike the crazy rainbow map above. Their biggest innovation was to combine routes that share the same path through the central business district.
DC could easily do the same. A train on the 7th Street subway is either Green or Yellow depending on whether it goes over the Potomac or under the Anacostia. A train on the Foggy Bottom-Capitol Hill line is Orange if it goes to northern Arlington and Fairfax and Blue if it hooks around to the south. That's a straightforward scheme that has the advantage of being the way things already work.
I think the riders south of King Street and east of Stadium-Armory will have little trouble with this scheme. But if Metro thinks it'll be confusing, they could introduce route numbers or letters. That could also encompass the way half the Red Line trains don't run the full length.
Board members criticized the framing of this issue as a "reroute" or "realignment." The latter, in particular, makes it sound like the tracks are moving.
This is an improvement in service. It's going to mean more trains across the Potomac to carry more people. A few people lose out, but there's more capacity. This is a good thing. Metro should talk about this as the service improvement it is.
Since Metro has no communications plan yet, I've created one for them. Here's the flyer I'd recommend posting:
Update: Added a note that this change is planned for summer 2011.
 | David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater.   |
Comments
- Community stories show the shift to a walkable lifestyle
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional
- Some are pushing to limit sidewalk cycling
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners
- DDOT agrees to repave 15th Street cycle track
by When on Jul 12, 2010 10:37 am • link • report
this last map wins the day. simplicity is your friend in graphic design. and ESPECIALLY in wayfinding cartography.
by IMGoph on Jul 12, 2010 10:41 am • link • report
by db on Jul 12, 2010 10:46 am • link • report
However, I must admit that I cringed when I read the phrase "derail the idea" in the first paragraph of this rail story. I'm a little sensitive.
by Penny Everline on Jul 12, 2010 10:50 am • link • report
You're looking at this from a DC centric viewpoint.
The real blowback to this plan it it makes it harder for Arlington (and NW orange line riders) to to seldom used destinations such as:
1. Pentagon
2. National Airport
3. Pentagon City Mall
4. King St. Alexandria
The answer to the orange line congestion is not to cut of the blue line. It is to run more 8 car orange line trains, run them quicker, or possibly convert a few car-pairs into standing room only. Or bring some bus service to run along 66 to alleviate rush hour orange line pressure.
Granted, this is a rush hour proposal. But it based on the model of "get in and out of the city" rather than suburban point to point.
And of course, to beat a dead horse, the Silver Line will make things worse -- and make it substantially more difficult for orange line riders to get to National by rail. Thanks!
by charlie on Jul 12, 2010 10:50 am • link • report
by Matt Glazewski on Jul 12, 2010 10:50 am • link • report
It is often confusing to out of town visitors, especially, when you tell them that certain trains terminate at certain stations during rush, or that only every other (fill in the color)-line train goes to the very end of the line. Therefore, the concern that people would "wait around for a certain line which isn't coming for hours or until the next day" is a very real one. Just another reason that sticking with the current color schematic makes sense. Riders will just need to pay closer attention to what's on the side of the cars (Ft. Totten vs. Greenbelt, e.g.) and on the arrival boards.
by Emilyhaha on Jul 12, 2010 10:57 am • link • report
Framing it as Yellow Line increase is clearer.
Of course, there will be the stubborn contingent who feign confusion just to play up the controversy.
by Lou on Jul 12, 2010 10:57 am • link • report
by Cavan on Jul 12, 2010 11:01 am • link • report
i learned that, because the map shows the green line on the right at that station, and the yellow line on the left, they believed that yellow line trains ran south and green line trains ran north. when they saw a green line train heading south, they were confused.
by IMGoph on Jul 12, 2010 11:04 am • link • report
Just include a legend to show that "shaded" lines are "Rush Hour Only," and you're set. (The current legend indicates that shaded lines are for "Future" stations, which is silly, given that there aren't any on the map)
by andrew on Jul 12, 2010 11:06 am • link • report
I don't know if it's possible to have language that's clear, accurate, not overly negative, but doesn't sound like PR-speak papering over a service reduction for some riders. Blue line riders already feel like Metro ignores us in favor of Orange and Yellow.
by Byron on Jul 12, 2010 11:12 am • link • report
Thinking of it as an expanded yellow line service, no matter what trains they're using or where they are originating from is the best way to deliver the message.
And WMATA has a great chance to deliver this message publicly as a benefit or net positive for people. We can disagree about the merits, but why they'd neglect an opportunity to say "we're improving things!" is beyond me.
Listen up WMATA! This is a good messaging plan! You're improving service!
by Steve Davis on Jul 12, 2010 11:14 am • link • report
The underlying reality is that the Metro system as a whole is probably on the verge of being too complex for the simple color-based naming system.
If Metro builds more interline connectors, that will enable even more services that would require even more colors. At some point, the system will have to go down the route of most other complex systems and switch to a letter/number based system with color as a secondary indicator.
by Alex B. on Jul 12, 2010 11:19 am • link • report
by Froggie on Jul 12, 2010 11:22 am • link • report
by David Alpert on Jul 12, 2010 11:23 am • link • report
Maybe I'm making it up, but I really think that I recall seeing dashed yellow lines going to *both* Springfield and Huntington at some point before they opened, and thinking to my 10-year-old self "that's dumb, why not just call one of them the blue line".
by BeyondDC on Jul 12, 2010 11:26 am • link • report
1) The blue line is heavily used between the Pentagon and Foggy-Bottom (probably to Metro Center). I think Matt has present the numbers a few times. Come ride the blue line in rush hour if you think it can use less trains.
2) I like the multicolored map. It provides clarity without much text. Text is a killer on maps because people tend to not be able to read it. It's easier to make people remember that the pink link only rides at rush hour than to freak tourists and casual riders out with yellow and orange lines that have different endings end stations - something you don't se on the map, but o see on the train.
Especially tourists live by those end stations. I have gotten very confused both in London and New York while getting on same colored lines but needing to be on a specific branch of them.
3) You could get rid of the burgundy/brown line by extending some of the silver line trains to Largo. It would give travelers from Dulles more options.
by Jasper on Jul 12, 2010 11:34 am • link • report
by RD on Jul 12, 2010 11:35 am • link • report
It's kind of amazing how complex Metro is making their 5 line system.
by jcm on Jul 12, 2010 11:36 am • link • report
by Matt Glazewski on Jul 12, 2010 11:39 am • link • report
Byron: I've added some text to the top and an additional callout box pointing to the Blue Line in Arlington that says that service on the Pentagon-Rosslyn segment will be reduced. You're right that the communication, while it should be positive about the change, should also not seem to be sweeping that under the rug.
by David Alpert on Jul 12, 2010 11:47 am • link • report
by Carmen Turner on Jul 12, 2010 11:47 am • link • report
by David Alpert on Jul 12, 2010 11:49 am • link • report
The Yellow Line was originally supposed to run from Greenbelt to Franconia and Backlick Road. The Blue Line was supposed to run from Addison Road to Huntington.
In 1983, when the section of the C Route from National Airport to Huntington opened (along with the Yellow Line Bridge and the track from L'Enfant Plaza to Gallery Place), the Yellow Line was introduced. Because it was so short, it required fewer railcars to run the Yellow Line from Huntington to Gallery Place and the Blue Line from Addison Road to National Airport. And Metro didn't have enough railcars to spare.
In the end, the Huntington/Franconia split was kept the same. When Van Dorn Street opened in 1991, Huntington had been on the Yellow Line for 8 years. Metro decided not to change things.
The other changes included consolidating the separate Franconia and Backlick Road stations into one stop, Franconia-Springfield and the truncation of the Yellow Line to Mount Vernon Square.
by Matt Johnson on Jul 12, 2010 11:51 am • link • report
I'm not sure that concept can be maintained with this current reconfiguration.
by Lou on Jul 12, 2010 11:54 am • link • report
You're not the real Carmen Turner - Metro GM from 1983-1990, I assume.
Anyway, the reason the trains ran the way they did on the map David linked to was for two reasons:
What this meant was that trains ran two service patterns:
But the trains were called by different colors based on their direction. Despite the fact that all trains starting at New Carrollton were going to National Airport and vice versa, trains starting at New Carrollton were called Blue, so that passengers headed for National Airport would get used to the idea of boarding a Blue Line train to go there. And get used to boarding an Orange Line train to head for New Carrollton.
The alternative would have been to have the Orange Line run from National Airport to New Carrollton and then the Blue Line run from Ballston to Addison Road. But then the risk would have been that people would have gotten used to that setup and either (a) been confused when it was changed or (b) the change would have become permanent, as was the case with the Yellow/Blue flop flop on the south side.
by Matt Johnson on Jul 12, 2010 12:01 pm • link • report
I commute from the orange line in Arlington to the Pentagon, and this change can't happen soon enough for me. Sure, I will have a longer connection in the morning at Rosslyn, but this is more than made up for by the fact that under the current service on my way back home if I arrive at Rosslyn durring the afternoon rush, I wait on the crowded platform as train after train passes with no room for more passengers.
by Aguirre on Jul 12, 2010 12:05 pm • link • report
As a Ballston resident I usually take a cab to the airport, unless I have lots of time and then I take the Metro. I could take the 23A/C but that only gets me "almost there."
For residents in N. Arlington, increased bus service could lessen the impact.
by Ballston_Resident on Jul 12, 2010 12:10 pm • link • report
by xtr657 on Jul 12, 2010 12:37 pm • link • report
And the graphics at Pentagon Station are so much more interesting....
by charlie on Jul 12, 2010 12:52 pm • link • report
by Catherine on Jul 12, 2010 12:55 pm • link • report
That way, the blue line cold run from Vienna to Franconia-Springfield. The Yellow line keeps doing what it does and the Silver line continues to Largo picking up the eastern end of the rerouted blue line.
The great advantage would be that there would be no more need for the switch in the Rosslyn tunnel, because the Silver and Orange lines would all go the same way. This would lead to a real increase in capacity.
And if you want to complain about the cost of constructing that extra stuff in Rosslyn, please consider that the only other serious way of increasing capacity across the Potomac is to build a second tunnel.
IMHO, this whole realignment of the blue and yellow lines is just kicking the elephant in the room further down the road. Let's face it: Both the crossing over and under the Potomac are at max capacity. Creating 5 or 10% extra capacity is not a serious solution to the lack of capacity.
by Jasper on Jul 12, 2010 1:14 pm • link • report
by Bossi on Jul 12, 2010 1:14 pm • link • report
by JS on Jul 12, 2010 1:32 pm • link • report
The idea would be to clear out passengers from metro center, and then the other trains that come in would get a normal load of passengers and people in the rest of DC orange line stops could get on.
by charlie on Jul 12, 2010 1:59 pm • link • report
We have lines right now atleast giving another 10-40 years we could have 10 or 20.
There are 26 letters and a endless amount of numbers whereas with colors after the basic ones people call them whatever they want. We could have Green, Lime, Ember, Teal, Pine etc and they all would be called Green by people.
W could have all branches on the maps separated into 3 or 4 colours and then numbers for each line like other systems The blue and orange lines could be one colour lets say blue on the map whereas the lines would have names of a letter or number.
And what happens to the areas which would get less service going to a specific place (Blue line going to Rosslyn from Alexandria or Blue Lines going to Frac-Springfield from Largo) these people will be effected with nothing good coming out of the deal for them.
by kk on Jul 12, 2010 2:45 pm • link • report
by kk on Jul 12, 2010 2:48 pm • link • report
by Dave Murphy on Jul 12, 2010 2:58 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Jul 12, 2010 3:02 pm • link • report
Then your splitting the Blue line and what about people along the route that want to go to Springfield or Alexandria.
Why should they (users who take train from Springfield or Alexandria) get a direct route into DC while others (users east of L'Enfant Plaza) don't get a direct route into Alexandria?
Where is the fairness ? Perhaps it could be acceptable if the others got a discount for that but otherwise you are taking service from one group and giving it to another.
by kk on Jul 12, 2010 3:13 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Jul 12, 2010 3:21 pm • link • report
the blue line is packed throughout rush hour and we already deal with less trains than orange and yellow.
how is this going to help?
by Matt on Jul 12, 2010 3:24 pm • link • report
I'm sure I won't be the first to point out that express trains on Metro don't work since they can't pass other trains. So you're just bypassing stops for no good reason - you're not getting anywhere any faster. The trains afterward would be even more crowded than usual.
Also, I don't think you've been paying attention the numerous times that it has been explained here why it is not possible to run Orange line trains any quicker and why it isn't in the cards to run all 8 car trains any time soon. Also, there is already a bus line that mimics much of the Orange line in Virginia (the 38).
To all those complaining about getting from North Arlington to the airport - first of all, this proposal is only about rush hours. The rest of the day, normal Blue line operations. Secondly, the GW Parkway is about as smooth and hassle-free as a car trip could possibly be. You'll be there in no time and it's real pretty, too. Thar said, I agree if this change is put into place, there should be some look at improving existing bus service between north Arlington and the airport/crystal city area.
Overall, I'm strongly in favor of this change and I agree with most here who believe that David's map is the best. It builds on what is already firmly established in riders' minds, i.e. the color line system associated with certain destinations, and simply points out some timing tweaks. I can't imagine station or train maps actually having all seven call-out boxes - but I think you'd really only need the ones at Franconia and Greenbelt anyway.
And a "hear! hear!" to xtr657. Since construction is well underway on the Silver line, let's start showing it on the Metro maps!
by Josh S on Jul 12, 2010 3:28 pm • link • report
before, it's 10 each blue and yellow
after, it'll be 13 yellow and 7 blue.
If your destination is the orange line west, you'll have to wait an additional six minutes maximum for a train, as every third ex-blue train will now be a yellow. If your destination is the Foggy bottom to Smithsonian corridor, change at L'Enfant to Orange, silver or blue. The trains will be very frequent.
by Michael Perkins on Jul 12, 2010 3:45 pm • link • report
And I'm glad to see a GGW commentary admit driving to DCA is a great idea.
by charlie on Jul 12, 2010 4:25 pm • link • report
Your proposal would reduce the number of trains servicing the most crowded platforms during the PM rush - McPherson, Farragut, Foggy Bottom.
If anything, you'd want to run your express idea in reverse - have the trains run express from New Carrolton to Metro Center, thus ensuring they are mostly empty and able to take on as many people as possible heading outbound.
by Alex B. on Jul 12, 2010 4:33 pm • link • report
What about people who don't want to have to transfer to other trains?
Why should they suffer because WMATA wants to run trains another way.
Why not keep it the way it is and force people who ride the system in that area to deal with it instead of forcing the changes to effect areas where there is no problem.
Why not just reroute lines period and build switch tracks throughout the system and use the ones we have to create express lines.
One of the benefits of the system is that you can go anywhere along the system with only one transfer. With some of the ideas floating around some trips that are presently no transfer or one transfer could become one, two or three.
If anything should be split it should be the damn red line which has both ends crowded and would have been better as it was in the original plans.
Couldn't the switch tracks be used to create express routes take the Red Line & Blue/Orange switch before Metro Center couldn't that be used sometimes to have a few trains running between from the Red Line to Rosslyn and the same type of express routes for the other switches in the system.
by kk on Jul 12, 2010 5:07 pm • link • report
How was the red line supposed to be routed? I'm curious. I know there's that one unused connection from that lets westbound Blue/Orange trains switch from Mcpherson Square to Farragut North (to Shady Grove), but it seems rather useless, as it only goes in one direction (unless you wanted to do some acrobatics with the pocket track).
by andrew on Jul 12, 2010 5:26 pm • link • report
that was my thinking it could be ran in the morning with around 5 or 6 trains at different times in the evening or morning for people who are going from VA to Western Mont/DC.
Then the same could be done on other lines also where there are switches.
They did the Green Line commuter shortcut about 10 years ago and this basically the same thing.
by kk on Jul 12, 2010 5:39 pm • link • report
by Ace in DC on Jul 12, 2010 7:52 pm • link • report
I guess it would be even more confusing to switch the Blue and Yellow lines and have some of the trains alternate destinations, but traveling a direct route from downtown to Springfield on one line would be nice, just as you drive on only one Interstate to get there. Springfielders would also get a more direct connection to downtown during off-peak times for access to special events, especially at the Verizon Center.
by Omar on Jul 12, 2010 8:53 pm • link • report
by dcseain on Jul 12, 2010 10:20 pm • link • report
Clarification of your response to 'Carmen Turner'. On 11 28 1978 WMATA opened the D Route from Stadium-Armory to New Carronllton. The reason why trains were colored Orange to New Carronllton and Blue to National Airport is because the sign rolls had no Blue New Carronllton or Orange National Airport destinations on them. That ended a little over a year later on 12 01 1979 when Orange line opened along the K Route from Rosslyn to Ballston.
My thoughts: I say swap the Blue and Yellow terminals back to the pre 1983 plan where the Yellow terminated at Springfield-Franconia and the Blue terminated at Huntington. In order to maintain peak headways on the Blue line south of King Street and still be able to increase the Orange line and future Silver line through put at Rosslyn and not eat into the Green line slots up the mid city route, turn back selected Blue line train at Arlington Cemetery. Blue line passenger wanting a one seat ride to stations west of L'Enfant Plaza would simply wait for a Blue line train displaying a Largo destination sign, otherwise they could transfer to a Yellow line train south of Pentagon and transfer again at L'Enfant Plaza to a train heading west.
by Sand Box John on Jul 12, 2010 11:42 pm • link • report
I like @Sand Box John's idea of switching them back.
by Matt Glazewski on Jul 13, 2010 8:08 am • link • report
by Matt Glazewski on Jul 13, 2010 8:10 am • link • report
by Charles Smith on Jul 13, 2010 9:45 am • link • report
by Rosslyn rider on Jul 13, 2010 4:09 pm • link • report
Thus, there are really two discussions - one about transit service, and the other is about communication. This post focuses mostly on communication, and it's important to not conflate the two issues even though they are intertwined.
by Alex B. on Jul 13, 2010 4:13 pm • link • report
by G.B. on Jul 13, 2010 5:44 pm • link • report
If you shorten the Blue Line to end at Huntington, couldn't you use the extra cars for more Yellow Line service through downtown? The four trains per rush hour proposal seems more like an afterthought than a well-thought-out proposal to increase accessibility to downtown from the Springfield area. People I know have been complaining for years that the Blue Line has to go so far out of the way before heading downtown.
I know I'm just talking into the wind here Â… if Metro didn't want to change the Yellow Line designation for Huntington back then, they probably wouldn't want to now. I just think it's a shame that the Metro can't mimic the functionality of I-395 in getting people from one place to another quickly. It makes it harder for them to compete with vehicular traffic, especially on the weekends.
by Omar on Jul 13, 2010 7:17 pm • link • report
That functionality does not exist during rush hour, and many other hours of the day. IMHO, I-395 is not much more than an extended ramp to the Pentagon parking lots.
by Jasper on Jul 14, 2010 9:37 am • link • report
Jasper on Jul 12, 2010 11:34 am
Catherine on Jul 12, 2010 12:55 pm
Matt on Jul 12, 2010 3:24 pm
Rosslyn rider on Jul 13, 2010 4:09 pm
Blue line between Pentagon City and Foggy Bottom is a mess during rush hour. If the number of trains on the Blue line is reduced, I WILL be driving to work.
This plan is only a band-aid solution to an issue that requires major surgery and sutures. We need to invest more in our infrastructure. Build a second tunnel and a bridge between Foggy Bottom and Rosslyn and do it NOW!
by Brian on Jul 14, 2010 10:36 pm • link • report
For the people complaining about the Blue Line already being crowded, I suspect that there are a number of people who stay on the line to avoid having to transfer. And you can always take the Yellow and transfer back to Blue/Orange. Are you really going to let a 6-minute (max) delay send you back into a traffic nightmare?
by Omar on Jul 15, 2010 3:33 am • link • report
by Froggie on Jul 15, 2010 7:05 am • link • report
by Omar on Jul 18, 2010 7:46 pm • link • report
Yea, you tell them man.
by MPC on Jul 18, 2010 10:33 pm • link • report
I was one of 3 people who were able to get on at McPherson Square -- no one else could. No more could join us at F. West or F. Bottom. It was that full.
When did it empty? I kept expecting things to get better by Ballston -- nope. Still standing room and packed tightly. West Falls Church -- nope. Still standing room only. By Dunn Loring we were still standing room but could space out a bit. It was full all the way to Vienna.
The train wasn't delayed or anything, it's just that bad on the ORANGE LINE at rush hour.
Meanwhile, the train before us -- a blue line train -- no only was it not standing room only, but seats were empty at McPherson Square.
Sorry Blue Liner's, no sympathy here.
by L. Fairfax on Jul 19, 2010 6:10 pm • link • report
Anyone who did the math 10 years ago knew that the Rosslyn tunnel was at capacity and that an additional river crossing was necessary, but, in the rush through development, the planning documents quietly reduced trains going to and from Vienna/Dunn Loring to accommodate the new trains going to Tyson's/Dulles.
Between the Orange/Blue/Silver dilemma and the transferring to another MetroRail line downtown, I will definitely be checking out parking garage rates in 2012 or 2013.
by Craigie on Jul 25, 2010 11:49 am • link • report
My bigger gripe, though, is that this exact same proposal was reported on by Lena Sun in February of 2008. Even then, I don't think it was a new idea. Now they say they might get it up by summer 2011.
Why does it take 3 1/2 years to get this good idea in place?
I predict this service will not exist by June 30, 2011. I hope I'm wrong.
by Steve O on Jul 26, 2010 11:53 am • link • report
Communicating "Yellow Special trains run only during weekday rush hours" seems pretty clear.
by Steve O on Jul 26, 2010 12:04 pm • link • report
"Special" is the destination that appears on the sides of trains when the train is going to terminate at a station for which there is no destination code.
So, if there were trackwork that caused an Orange Line train to terminate at Cheverly, it would be displayed on the signs as "Special" because there's no destination code for Cheverly.
I would think that "special" would be less clear than, say, "Greenbelt", which is the actual destination of these trains, and for which there is certainly a destination code.
by Matt Johnson on Jul 26, 2010 12:07 pm • link • report
Add a Comment