| Page 2 of 2 < |
Before Overhauling Metrorail, Be Aware Of System's History
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
James P. Hubbard
Reston
People jammed aboard 35-year-old rail cars Monday morning won't be thinking of this, but Metro was a breakthrough. It was one of the first rail systems built after World War II to challenge car commuting, and it more than held its own, as the crowding implies.
To compete, planners thought, Metrorail had to offer more amenities than the transit systems built at the dawn of the auto age. The rail car style, with cushions and carpets, was part of that. But there were other ways the Metro planners had to deal with late-20th century transit realities.
The first, troubled cars for Metrorail and San Francisco's Bay Area Rapid Transit were built by Rohr Industries, an aerospace company looking for new markets just as the U.S. transit industry was restarting.
Zachary M. Schrag, author of "The Great Society Subway," a fascinating history of Metrorail, says that the BART cars were somewhat experimental and that the system "would not have been a good path for Metro to follow." BART's wider tracks and cars drove up costs and would have been difficult for Metro to adopt given the big portion of the Washington system that runs in tunnels.
One element of Metro's mass appeal: the center door. BART cars have two sets of doors on each side, and Metro cars were designed with three to get commuters in and out more quickly.
Planners should be aware of the system's history when they consider changing designs, Schrag says. He sees art as well as science in the subway: "One of the things that makes Metro Metro is the power given to the original designers."
He's not crazy about the transit authority's process for picking red platform lights to replace the original white lights. But as Hubbard says, capital investment is crucial.
To increase capacity, Schrag suggests, we should first go after the low-hanging fruit. That includes tunnels to link Farragut North with Farragut West and Metro Center with Gallery Place. The links would ease crowding downtown.
"But there's only so much low-hanging fruit," he says.
We should be thinking about additional river crossings, Schrag says, and fixing the "great catastrophe" in the system's original design: failure to send Metrorail to Tysons.
Dr. Gridlock appears Thursday in the Extras and Sunday in the Metro section. You can send e-mails todrgridlock@washpost.com. Include your name, home community and phone numbers. Some letters are published.
Get There:http:/
