Subways -- underground or above-ground

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
Re high bus ridership, that's a deficiency of the metrorail system plan, IMO. You have mentioned the Ga. Avenue corridor that gets spotty service by metrorail, but I would also mention the nearby 16th Street corridor, Wisconsin Avenue/Georgetown, and parts of NE. Instead of thinking about the niftiest way by bus to half-ass service to these areas, the plan should be updated and new lines built.

The original plan was a tremendous expense, and probably wouldnt have been funded if this wasnt the capital. And there isnt close to the money for all the lines you want. The local jurisdictions dont have it. The FTA isnt going to prioritize DC radically over every place else in the USA. And theres far from the money to do that everywhere.

And I dont get the bus hatred. Buses are an economical, energy efficient, and flexible method of transit. They can provide a useful transit system with less capital in a smaller metro area, and they can be an important supplement in a large metro area.

Oh, and having a NYC type system, with lines and stations close together, even if we had the density for it (which we dont) would mean, well a more NYC type system - forget your carpets.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Wezil
A quick search shows Montreal and Glasgow as two cities with entirely underground subways.

Underground systems do avoid being shut down by blizzards, which is why NY moved theirs to underground.

(That scene on the above-ground subway in Spiderman II had to be shot in Chicago, but no appropriate site could be found in NY.)

[DanS]

If the locals didn't have the money, the extension to Dulles would not be built (and the question is begged why the locals are kowtowing to Uncle Sam when he's only providing 1/4 the money). Look, this is a tremendously wealthy metro area. It's no use acting poor, just so that you can skimp on service.

[Thue]

Subways -- underground or above-ground -DanS

Since nobody else has given the obvious answer: subways are below ground, otherwise they wouldn't be subways....

Now about whether new new commuter train line should be above or below ground, I have no position.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
If the locals didn't have the money, the extension to Dulles would not be built (and the question is begged why the locals are kowtowing to Uncle Sam when he's only providing 1/4 the money). Look, this is a tremendously wealthy metro area. It's no use acting poor, just so that you can skimp on service.

I didnt say they have no money. But Virginia is struggling to finance transport projects, its one of the biggest issues in the commonwealth, as you ought to know. Ditto Maryland. And its not like the District is ponying up a lot of money. Their was contribution offered by the airports authority, and by land owners, IIUC, cause Dulles is a unique case. In particular its widely expected that there in a fairly short time no new development will be possible in the corridor otherwise, and thats a huge potential loss. Hardly in the same boat on Georgia Avenue. And as it is, they are listening to the FTA, cause there isnt any more money.

Now if you think the Commonwealth is going to contribute tens of billions of dollars to have a subway line every half mile apart in the northern part of DC, well youre not following Virginia politics very closely.

Youre also ignoring the very considerable operating costs of a new line.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


Underground systems do avoid being shut down by blizzards, which is why NY moved theirs to underground.

? NY built a competing system underground beginning in 1904 - at the very same time the built new aboveground lines in the outer boroughs. They took the old lines down, cause of the street life impact (the 3rd avenue el marked the division beteen good manhattan and slum) and cause being VERY old, they couldnt accommodate the latest subway cars, and they couldnt reach high speeds.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


Underground systems do avoid being shut down by blizzards,

wont apply in the Tysons case. The Dulles rail line will be above ground in the highway median from East Falls Church (where it ties to the existing orange line) to Tysons, then underground (maybe) through Tysons, then back above ground (again in the highway median) to the airport and beyond into Loudon.


I look forward, to the day, years from now, after the line is built, to joining Dan S on a snow day to ride back and forth between Tysons East and Tysons West (if we can figure out a way to get TO Tysons in the snow - well Dan probably has an SUV or something )

[DanS]

Virginia is struggling with the political choice. The money will follow. I don't think you would contend that the $1 billion the feds are providing is the last nickel in Virginia. Please note that I'm not saying that money grows on trees.

Regarding new intracity lines, there are reasons why DC should pursue them no matter the suburban contribution. Although the subway originally was contemplated as a commuter subway, some areas of the city are now enjoying huge new investments and much higher densities because of what was included in the original plan.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
Virginia is struggling with the political choice. The money will follow. I don't think you would contend that the $1 billion the feds are providing is the last nickel in Virginia. Please note that I'm not saying that money grows on trees.

Regarding new intracity lines, there are reasons why DC should pursue them no matter the suburban contribution. Although the subway originally was contemplated as a commuter subway, some areas of the city are now enjoying huge new investments and much higher densities because of what was included in the original plan.

yeah, and the city just MIGHT manage some light rail lines on the periphery of the CBD, in areas where theres lots of new investment, and good luck to them on that. But major new heavy rail lines up the Georgia Avenue and related corridors, well Im not holding my breath for DC to finance that.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
I don't think you would contend that the $1 billion the feds are providing is the last nickel in Virginia.

Surely not. We could cut back on school funding. Or social services. Or on highways. Or increase taxes. Im sure you can imagine how popular all those choices are.

Oh, and Northern Virginia has some PRESSING rail (heavy or light, though in these instances I dont htink light will work) needs to attend to, before we begin to think about dealing with a rail line on every block in DC. Like extending the blue line to Fort Belvoir, which is going to be a traffic nightmare as BRAC moves into place. Its not a long line, and its not sexy, but it will be important, and it wont be cheap. Also extending the Orange line out to or at least towards Centerville. though adding enough rail cars to accommodate the Orange line passengers needs to come first.

[LordShiva]

Above ground

Cheaper to build, more fun to ride, easier to get cell phone reception, more opportunities for cool architecture, better for emergencies, etc.

[Arrian]

Heh, I remember the Glasgow underground. My basic feeling was "why did they bother?" It's got what, 8 stops?

-Arrian

[DanS]

Nothing has been written. I don't think the new line in Manhattan would have been seriously discussed 10 years ago.

As for taxes, are you proposing that Virginians are overtaxed? Your position is unclear in many respects. Setting up false choices makes your position no less unclear.

As for new lines in DC, I doubt Northern Virginia would be contributing much, so Northern Virginia's priorities will not rule the day.

[Dinner]

San Diego only has above ground medium/heavy rail. I wish we had a subway system but judging by how expensive LA's small subway network was to build I doubt we'll ever have the money.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Snotty
I missed that on my trip to DC, they should put that in the brochures. I think we have some similar sized escalators to enjoy on the deeper lines, but its not as much fun as the deep stations which rely on lifts, as they have a mother of an emergency staircase for you to climb if youre feeling brave ( russel square, im looking at you)

London has a mix of everything it seems, with predominantly underground in the core leading to overground in the surburbs. Seems like a sensible solution to me.

Hampstead is the deepest station. Great exercise potential if the lifts go ping there.