
Do their points have any merit?
From "R.," who claims to be retired Metro:
I know I'm going to get bashed for being pro earlier closing since your poll says 57 percent disagree with me, but what the hell. I doubt you'll even print this since you'll probably have a rant against how stupid the idea of closing Metro earlier is.Other items:
At least let me start out with a bash of my own.
Metro's decision to operate trains as late as they do on the weekends was the second most misguided decision the authority has ever made. It was a cave in to politicians on the board who know nothing about rail and want nothing more than to spout platitudes to their constituents that they live in a "world-class city."
World class in some ways, maybe, but Metro? Hardly.
Metro was never conceived to be a "world class" subway, at least according to what we think world class is in 2011. It was conceived to bring workers downtown in the morning and take them home at night. Sorry to break it to you, but that's how it's built.
Yes, it can do more, some, but at its core, it's a two-track system, which is the most misguided decision the authority ever made. That will forever remain the biggest impediment to making Metro into a 24-hour subway people seem to really want. And there's literally no way around it.
A third track is not as sexy as, say, the Dulles extension, however. So the pols keep spreading the Metro thinner and thinner and no one, until now has seemed to question this.
The long operating hours have made it extremely difficult to do the kind of significant track work and maintenance required of a transit system now nearly 40 years old. Shoot, that work would be required on a relatively new system. It's common sense.
Ask any tech, and they'll tell you that it's almost impossible to take on big jobs in the short windows that Metro is not running. It was mentioned in yesterday's meeting that Metro has people it's paying for track workers doing other things in the yard because there's no access.
In an environment like this, work is constantly getting interrupted and is often partially, sometimes poorly, done. Slapdash is what I'd call most of it.
And this neglect has been going on for years. It's just plain stupid.
A past board, which pushed Metro into operating so late at night, was wrong to ever give the public hope that Metro could open doors until 3 a.m. They were dumb not to offer up buses as an alternative.
It is a smart, if temporarily unpopular move, to close Metro at midnight, and they should never let it run until 3 again.
You haven't seen what I've seen in those tunnels. Believe me. It's scary, and the schedule Metro runs now normally allows only Band Aid fixes for problems. The same screw ups happen again and again and again. (See Red Line.)
In all honesty, to really get at some of the root problems, and dig out from the maintenance hole Metro is in, it'd probably be smart to close down entire lines, or segments of lines, for extended times, but that will never happen. Maybe some extended single tracking would work, but that is fraught with danger, too.
And you Red Line riders know what I'm talking about. You suffer weekend closures for "improved reliability" only to have your commute stink nearly every day.
Would you rather have Metro be open until 3 the one night every couple of weeks you stay out that late, or would you rather have a smooth commute EVERY weekday? Besides, Metro probably loses money late at night for a service most of its customers don't even use. I never had access to those numbers.
Yeah, yeah. I know. "There'll be more drunks on the roads." Should everyone suffer crazy commutes for the sake of a relative few late night weekend drunks? Drink earlier, don't drink as much, walk, get a cab, have a designated driver. Do what you need to do, but don't cry for Metro to come to your rescue. It's your responsibility. Metro's at the end of its ability to keep operating they way you want unless you're willing to fork over billions in taxes to drill out third tunnels.
I think this "controversial" floating of an idea by the new Board is a long called for, brave first step in leveling with the riding public about what Metro is capable of, where limits need to be drawn and where to set expectations.
And to those of you who will no doubt still cry "no service cuts ever," stop and think for a moment about recent weekends and look at the maintenance schedule for this whole year.
Over the past weekends, I've taken Metro to various events and to run errands. It has been a clusterf*ck every time. I'm done with that bag.
What we have now is a hodgepodge of closures, delays, single tracking and disruptions that literally requires a spreadsheet to keep track of, and that's just the "scheduled" ones.
Unless you're blind, it's easy to see that service has already been cut, but it's the worst kind of service cuts: unpredictable, seemingly random and always infuriating. Worse yet, it's doesn't allow the things that need to be fixed to get fixed they way they should be.
Metro's a commuter system, and an old one at that, and while that may not be what you want to hear, that's what it is. Don't let a politician lead you to believe otherwise.
Board debates bag inspections (WaPo)
Metro to study interoperability of light rail and streetcar projects (WMATA)
Funny Tom Toles cartoon
GUEST · 737 weeks ago
@hurricanedc · 737 weeks ago
So if you want Metro to run properly there are some things that need to happen:
-Metro needs to fix its spending, renegotiate a contract with the union like GM did
-It needs dedicated funding from the three jurisdictions
-That funding either has to come from other programs or taxes need to be raised
-Yeah I hate high taxes as much as anyone else, but they're the price you pay if you want a publicly-run operation that works
I don't think I've ever used Metro after 12:30AM, so if stopping late night service translated into better weekday service, I'd be all for it. If drunk driving really does become an issue, then MPDC should set up sobriety checkpoints around problem areas.
@kara_h · 737 weeks ago
I would be willing to accept a bus at midnight on 2 conditions:
1) None of this 'the last train leaves here at 11:30'. Midnight or nothing and that includes the end of the line, especially since I need to transfer. Plan for the last trains to leave the end of the line so it will hit every stop by midnight and close those stations gates when they have passed (except for exiting). This also means you can reliably count on transferring at midnight too.
2) Bus bridges between metro stops. Good ones, not 'we might get you home an hour later than the train if you are lucky'.
While I live in NW DC I occasionally have to be in Huntington in the late evening. I do not want to be stranded either there or in the middle of the city on my way home and a cab that distance is not exactly cheep. The people that have late shifts have that fear constantly though.
Dani · 737 weeks ago
1) The buses stayed operating until 3, and
2) Metro would cooperate with Google. It's amazing how easy it is to use transit in other cities when I have Google Maps on me. But trip planning is so much more difficult here. That's the main reason I don't use the buses--there are too damn many of them for me to memorize them all.
No One · 737 weeks ago
Good luck out there.
Ever and Anon · 737 weeks ago
DCMarkie · 737 weeks ago
Any ideas?
hug · 737 weeks ago
Grax · 737 weeks ago
However, as for the money saved, it is more likely to be split between management and labor for a Job Well Done.
As it is, when I want to go into town from the 'burbs at night, I have to commute home, get my car, and drive it downtown anyway, because the buses in the 'burbs don't run late. Unless you happen to live walking distance from a metro station, the late night service is pretty worthless.
yatesc · 737 weeks ago
"...no one, until now has seemed to question this."
A five minute Google search reveals:
http://www.amazon.com/Great-Society-Subway-Washin...
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/3760/was...
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/3763/a-s...
Alex B. · 737 weeks ago
You don't need 4 tracks to run late night service. Chicago runs 24 hours on their Red and Blue lines - only part of the Red Line has 4 tracks. The Blue line in Chicago is all two-track and has a longer run than WMATA's Red Line, yet they manage to run it 24 hours anyway.
The PATCO line in Philly also runs 24 hours a day - and it is only a two track line.
This guy's argument is bunk.
Yes, WMATA needs to do maintenance. However, this kind of thinking (that Metro can't do X because it was designed for Y) is part of the damn problem. To paraphrase what that guy in Apollo 13 said, I don't care what anything was designed to do, I care what it can do.
F'n JD · 737 weeks ago
It creates jobs. It will pay off in the long run. And it will improve our commute.
Baffled · 737 weeks ago
What exactly are the problems? We have a right to know. And we should know the detailed work breakdown of how long it will take to fix.
Often, when I pass a construction site on the highway, I see 1 guy down in a hole, and 4 other guys standing around him. Is this the issue with Metro? Get all the guys working.
I know I'm oversimplying, and there are much more detailed construction issues, but I want to know EXACTLY WHAT cannot get done in the time metro is closed at night. I see it like: Turn off switcher: 30 minutes. Remove old switcher: 1 hour. Bring in new switcher: 1 hour. Activate new switcher: 1 hour. Test: 30 minutes.
Seems like it could get done in 4 hours.
Mike · 737 weeks ago
bet · 737 weeks ago
@freshyill · 737 weeks ago
Sweet Bobby · 737 weeks ago
James · 737 weeks ago
Closing earlier on the weekends would reduce operating costs and that would at least make a dent in Metro's budget problems.
If doing so allows more work to be done on the system that would improve the commute for people taking the Metro to and from work, then by all means they should close early. Not enough people are taking the Metro during those late hours to justify keeping the system open.
John · 737 weeks ago
John · 737 weeks ago
Metro opens at 7 AM on weekends and closes at 3 AM
Thats 2 hours a week.
I DOUBT thats going to revolutionize the system, people.
Bash away for not agreeing with the article.
GoRemy · 737 weeks ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkjfh5klUzM
Jill · 737 weeks ago
JacksonsGirl · 736 weeks ago
LoxyBrown · 736 weeks ago
JacksonsGirl · 736 weeks ago
Kel · 736 weeks ago
iolaire 71p · 736 weeks ago
Guest · 736 weeks ago
hrh king friday 13 · 736 weeks ago
You know if this is true it makes a lot of sense. Its a reality check that needs to provided more and more to the public. I still don't see any justification for how lousy metro employees behave with respect to public service, security and safety. But at least I now have a greater appreciation for how overwhelming expanding the system would be and find myself fimrly in the no 3am service, no silver line camp.
John · 736 weeks ago
CRBLMK · 736 weeks ago
Guest · 736 weeks ago
CHUDS?
@deafinthecity · 736 weeks ago
Guest · 736 weeks ago
God knows that i have my share of complaints about metro. I take it almost everyday and i complain (internally) just as frequently.
I like this article because it is objective. It made me realize that metro "needs to learn how to walk PROPERLY before it can run". In other words, try to make the basic function of day-time commuting work better before it can venture into late night service.
Guest · 736 weeks ago
-Limit the number of stations that are open late night. For example, there is no reason to keep Fed Center SW open after midnight. I am sure we can all come up with others. Close entrances to other stations, shut down unused escalators, etc.
-Charge a late night premium fare. Add $5 to each trip late night. With the caveat that all of the extra revenue goes into maintenance and only maintenance. Metro would still be cheaper than most cab rides.
-Add a small mandatory tax to all liquor license holders (bars) in the Metro-served area. Use this money to fund late night operations.
-Crunch the numbers to see if there are certain times of the year or even certain weekends when, for whatever reason, late night service usage is very low. Close early those nights to allow for the longer work periods that are necessary.
Not perfect, but a start I think.
anon · 736 weeks ago
a great idea to close the system on weekends or even early weekends
Thanks Unsuck for the post.
By the way who funds you to do theses posts?
Malek · 736 weeks ago
Rory · 736 weeks ago
@whfsdude · 736 weeks ago
1. Close a little later: I Would like to see a ridership breakdown by hours. My guess based on experience is that the highest weekend night ridership is between 12:00 and 1:00 AM. Why not look at closing the rail system at 1:30 AM?
2. Weekend morning maintenance: Conduct maintenance during low ridership times w/ bus bridges. Based on my experience ridership seems lower during Sunday mornings than late Friday nights. Maybe consider closures from 7:00 AM to 10:00 AM w/ bus bridges on Sunday mornings.
3. Bus service in the system core: Metro should offer bus service that mirrors the system's core and high ridership lines.Bus service should be offered whenever the system is closed (including weekdays). Fares for this should be equivalent to the express bus fare. I am sure ridership would be much higher than many of the under-utilized during the day. If DC really wants to be a walkable/transit city, it needs 24/7 transit.
Sam · 736 weeks ago
Also, close some of the stations that are near other stations. For example, Archives can be closed after 9pm or so. If you're out drinking in Penn Quarter, just walk the extra block to Gallery Place. Do this EVERY night, not just weekends. How much does a single station manager make per hour? Cutting 27 (assuming a 9pm close, that's 3 per weekday, 6 per weekend) hours per station per week could save a little bit of money. Even at $15/hour (which I'm sure is less than what they actually make), that's over $21,000 per station per year. Not enough to build an extension to Lorton, but certainly enough that can go toward better signage, new platform tiles, better lighting, etc.
Guest · 736 weeks ago
city girl · 736 weeks ago
GlenmontGirl · 736 weeks ago
However, something has to be done. R's points about there never being enough time for quality track maintenance seem logical, and closing Metro earlier is a much easier and more practical short-term move to address this than trying to focus on finding funding and approval for constructing a third track (though I do agree that the two-track setup is the system's Achilles' heel.) Closing during the weekday, or single-tracking for an extended period of time on a certain line, would be a nightmare. As far as the numbers go, there are far more people who rely on Metro for commutes in and out of the city than there are people who use it after midnight. From a logistical and financial standpoint, it makes much more sense to inconvenience the smaller number of riders who use the system after midnight and don't pay the "peak-of-the-peak" fares. I do acknowledge, however, that those riders probably wouldn't agree, and they have every right not to.
If they put a time limit on it, would those who are opposed be more open to the idea? Say, if Metro announced that the system would shut down at midnight from March 2011 until March 2012, at which point it would resume the late-night service? That one year could give them a lot of extra time and incentive to conduct repairs, especially if they knew they would only have a limited amount of time to work with.
Callie · 736 weeks ago
Rich · 736 weeks ago
BusFan · 736 weeks ago
Granted buses must deal with the same traffic as cars, but if there was more focus on pricing cars off the street (through hot lanes), maybe bus service could be an attractive alternative to a lot of people.
Brian · 736 weeks ago
M-F 5a-12a
Sa 8a-12a
Sun 10a-11p
Metro used to always open at 10 on Sunday mornings, so the change to 7 has had just as much of an impact on track maintenance as the late-night service. And I bet more people ride Metro on Friday/Saturday nights than the first three hours of service on Sunday mornings.
Also, Metro could eliminate late-night service for stations that are rarely used during those hours, such as Judiciary Square, Smithsonian and Federal Triangle (trains would just pass through without stopping). While that wouldn't necessarily help in terms of track maintenance, they at least wouldn't have to pay a station manager to babysit a nearly-empty station past midnight.
Oh...and Metro claims that they didn't make any service cuts this past year and opted for the fare hikes, which is what they said was the preferred option of their riders. Well, they made the gigantic fare hikes, and they're still talking about cutting service anyway. Not cool to screw your riders like that, WMATA.
WantToTakeTheBus · 736 weeks ago
My biggest obstacle with the bus is outdated schedules on the bus stops, inaccurate NextBus information and long waits between buses, especially on the weekend. I WANT to take the bus. I take it during the week. I would ditch my car a lot more on weekends if the buses were improved.
devaldragon 59p · 736 weeks ago
I guess we'll have to ask the same escalator and elevator technicians that have been performing maintenance for the past 20 years - what do you do when you're on the clock?
@matt3470 · 685 weeks ago
HOWEVER--I would only accept a cut in service hours on Metro if an equal increase in service hours was started on the Metrobus routes. Additionally, I think a fair compromise would be to create late-night only bus routes that mimmick the 5 rail lines.