Friday, February 11, 2011

Metro's Second Worst Decision Ever?


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.

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.
Other items:
Board debates bag inspections (WaPo)
Metro to study interoperability of light rail and streetcar projects (WMATA)
Funny Tom Toles cartoon

Comments (127)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
As much as I hate to say it, there are some good points here.
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
There really are a lot of good points here, and for the most part, I'm convinced. I would be happy to take the buses on weekends if:
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.
As Metro track worker, I can say that everything written here it right on. Many times we are forced to allow the revenue side of the house overrule the operations side. I can remember several projects that should have been done in one go that had to be broken into 3 or four shifts. Any engineer will tell you that's not really a good idea.

Good luck out there.
Ever and Anon's avatar

Ever and Anon · 737 weeks ago

The points in that letter are hard to refute. Cancel late night service until the system is backup to safe levels. Besides, why should the citeis be enjoying extra services beyond the system's capacity when NONE of them want to provide funding to keep it so?
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
DCMarkie's avatar

DCMarkie · 737 weeks ago

What was metro's logic for only creating a two track system? Cheaper upfront, worry about the problems later? Even without the promise of a 24 hour system, having 3 tracks just seem like common sense. A train breaks down, go around it without blocking oncoming trains. It also opens up the possibility of express service, which seem like an even better idea if we're designing the system for commuters.

Any ideas?
6 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
Something tells me that if WMATA were a competently run organization that actually reviewed performance and could fire bad employees, they would figure out a way to get it done. Hire the guy who runs Singapore's metro and give him dictatorial powers. Things would get noticeably better in six months.
The points are blunt, but probably correct. Maybe metro should close even earlier, say 10:00 p.m. Most commuters have made it home well before that.

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.
2 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
Great post. One minor point:

"...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...
What Metro was concieved as is irrelevant. It is what it is, and that's a subway system.

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.
5 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
We MUST invest in a third and fourth track (where possible) immediately.

It creates jobs. It will pay off in the long run. And it will improve our commute.
7 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
You said "You haven't seen what I've seen in those tunnels. Believe me. It's scary"
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.
To DCMarkie- Short answer $$. I would like to drink champagne every day, but my budget calls for beer. It's like the beltway- it would be nice to have an extra lane during rush hours, but no $$. __What I find funny about all this whining and belly-aching by you fellow Metro riders is that up until 3 or 4 yrs ago, Metro didn't keep extended hours unless the merchants put up the cash. Then being flush with cash they opted for extended hours, __Sure the bars like the extended hours it helps them with their $$, but ask them if they want to front the cost to keep the extended hours and you will hear crickets chirping. __Everyone likes free, if they are not paying for it.__Its like the Metro Bus system, its a joke. Anytime there is talk of cutting service, listen to the whiners cry. So it continues to bleed $$. That part of Metro brings in $0.33 from fares for every $1.00 in cost. Metro Rail carries its load and subsidizes the bus system. I'm for turning the bus system over to the cities and just operating the rail system. Like I said, if you want the service, expect to pay for it.
Middle management has problems.
Sweet Bobby's avatar

Sweet Bobby · 737 weeks ago

I think there are valid points in the post, but there is an overlooked flaw in the argument: Metro runs on weekdays from 5 to midnight, and on weekends from 7 to 3. So really, due to later opening hours on weekends, they only lose one hour of potential work on those days relative to weekdays. The bottom line is that from a maintenance perspective, WMATA has failed to provide reasonable upkeep of the system, and the idea that a couple more hours each week would make a significant difference is laughable given the deterioration of service despite several weekend closings and repeated fare hikes.
3 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
Two points:

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.
This message brought to you by DC Taxi Union #2154
Metro opens at 5AM on weekdays and closes at Midnight
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.
2 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
Remy should run the Metro!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkjfh5klUzM
Personally, I'd be more than willing to pay double to ride the train from DC to Virginia during these late night hours. Even with a price increase, metro would still be a bargain compared to getting a cab.
JacksonsGirl's avatar

JacksonsGirl · 736 weeks ago

I agree with this post. My only issue with them closing earlier is will they decide midnight is to late down the line and close at 10...and so on and so on. I don't own a car, and I'm a Chef. I work late into the night and rely on metro to get home. Not because I'm drunk, but because of work. And I know there are MANY others out there like that. So as for the 3am...I don't care. I just hope they don't decide to close earlier and earlier down the line. My other thing, and I continue to keep saying this, is that if they wish to make up some of their money they need to start charging for parking on the weekend. I know for a fact *I live out in Shady Grove* that people who drive to work on the weekdays will take the metro on the weekends...who NEVER take the metro. And they don't have to pay for their parking. I think it would help metro and its money issues if they just started charging on the weekend as well. Thats my $0.02.
14 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
LoxyBrown's avatar

LoxyBrown · 736 weeks ago

Any known studies about how many people ride Metro between midnight and 3?
JacksonsGirl's avatar

JacksonsGirl · 736 weeks ago

I agree with this post. My only issue with them closing earlier is will they decide midnight is to late down the line and close at 10...and so on and so on. I don't own a car, and I'm a Chef. I work late into the night and rely on metro to get home. Not because I'm drunk, but because of work. And I know there are MANY others out there like that. So as for the 3am...I don't care. I just hope they don't decide to close earlier and earlier down the line. My other thing, and I continue to keep saying this, is that if they wish to make up some of their money they need to start charging for parking on the weekend. I know for a fact *I live out in Shady Grove* that people who drive to work on the weekdays will take the metro on the weekends...who NEVER take the metro. And they don't have to pay for their parking. I think it would help metro and its money issues if they just started charging on the weekend as well. Thats my $0.02.
4 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
The system may have been intended for commuters but it has morphed into a connection for the DC Metropolitan area's inhabitants and a way for tourists and residents - many of whom do not own cars - to get around the city with ease when they are not at or going to work. Ending the late night service will adversely affect businesses (yes, especially bars) that have sprung up around the Metro stations. I appreciate the complaints of the commuters coming into the city for work only, but they are not Metro's only customers. I have never seen a train running between 1:00am and 2:30am that was not at least half full.
4 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
So did we not have bars and drinking prior to 1999? I think not. Some how the city did function with midnight closures...
2 replies · active 736 weeks ago
The original poster doesn't mention the fact that, not only did Metro closed earlier on weekends, it also opened late.u
hrh king friday 13's avatar

hrh king friday 13 · 736 weeks ago

*Slow clap*

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.
The suburbs can just go to hell.
4 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
I voted "shrug" partly because I don't use Metro after 12:30 a.m. on the weekend (I go for the DD route) and partly because I really don't think the work crews are run well enough that an extra three hours would do any good. I think Metro would save money by shutting down early for operational costs and still get the same next-to-nothing amount of work done (i.e. not increase their maintenance costs either). Not that I'm saying they would do this purposefully to save money, but I think it would all become a wash in the end - early shut down and no progress made. SS, DD.
3 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
"You haven't seen what I've seen in those tunnels. Believe me. It's scary,"

CHUDS?
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
I think this is a smart and valid article. Thank you Unsuck for posting this.

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.
How about this for a compromise:

-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.
3 replies · active less than 1 minute ago
Considering the piles of "puke" operators have to step over,
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?
the change wasn't made for politicians, it was was made b/c people in DC actually work past midnight.
Just another point: isn't most of the peeing inside Metro cars done during the extended hours?
Why not close some of the stations that primarily serve office areas after, say, 9pm? That would free up some operating costs too. Stations like Federal Triangle, Smithsonian, and Federal Center SW don't really have much of a nearby commercial or residential footprint. This would cut some costs.

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.
Arghhhhhhhh you people don't get the point. It is not about closing a station but about ripping rail off the concrete. No train can get across your closed station.
city girl's avatar

city girl · 736 weeks ago

Many employees who work at night would suffer but on the whole I agree with the writer. Staying open to accommodate weekend socializing at the expense of the whole system does not seem like a fair trade. As the exact red liner rider the writer described (suffering weekend closures for "improved reliability" with a lousy-to-the-max commute every day) I can support the earlier closures.
GlenmontGirl's avatar

GlenmontGirl · 736 weeks ago

I'm tempted to agree with a lot of "R"'s points. Disclaimer, though: I don't drink, and I almost never find myself out late and reliant on Metro to get me where I need to go, so I am coming at this from the perspective of someone who wouldn't be inconvenienced by the decision to close Metro early.

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.
I agree completely with the writer of the original post. The original plan was very narrowly focused and did not allow for easy expansion or growth. It was conceived and planned for a specific time and place in Washington's growth. The planners had ZERO imagination or foresight. So now we're stuck. I keep hoping that bus service is expanded and improved. I only ride Metro Rail when I absolutely must. Otherwise, I'm running to the bus stop. More often than not I get to where I must in the same or better time than if I took the train and I'm a lot happier. Kudos to the original post.
What gets me the most about the Dulles extension is that it's catering to a suburban life that eventually we're going to have to end. Strengthen what we already have, and if you choose to live in Herndon, deal with the roads.
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
Callie is correct. Rail service is not flexible in terms of future planning. You don't know the future. Buses, on the other hand, can be changed like that.

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.
I've used Metro a fair share on Friday and Saturday nights, and though I totally understand the writer's points, there are a lot of people - and businesses - who have grown to depend on Metro for late-night transportation. These people are typically a much different group of people than those who use Metro to commute to and from work. By the way, for those who don't know, peak fares are charged between 12a and 3a. I suggest that Metro consider reducing hours on a seasonal basis. From mid-March to the last weekend of October, keep the hours as they are now. From the end of October to mid-March (when tourist traffic is low, there are a lot fewer major events, the weather is lousy, etc.), operate on the following schedule:
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.
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
WantToTakeTheBus's avatar

WantToTakeTheBus · 736 weeks ago

If they improved the bus infrastructure, improved NextBus and worked on where to route buses on weekends, I truly think more people in the core and fringe cities (Silver Spring, Arlington, Alexandria, Bethesda) would ride them. The buses don't have to be nicer, but they do have to come more often in hot spots and be reliable. I would think that might be a cheaper fix than some of the Metro ideas.
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.
Metro shuts down at the same time every day and starts up at the same time every day. This is a maintenance worker's dream - I am a dispatcher for a freight railroad - if my track workers, signal maintainers, welders could be guaranteed 4 solid hours every day, 5 days a week, they could rebuild my entire railroad in a year - why can't Metro's workers do the same thing?

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?

Post a new comment

Comments by

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Site Meter