DaninDC

Columbia Heights station is about four blocks east of Adams-Morgan. There is a crossing of 16th Street in there. The blocks in between, however, are a bit dicey, and anyone familiar with Hispanic machismo shouldn't let his female friends walk in that area at night. There have been a few gang scuffles as well. There is a station at Connecticut Avenue and Calvert Street (Woodley Park, on the Red Line) that is also about a 10-minute (much safer) walk from A-M. I've also walked to Adams-Morgan from the U Street and Dupont Circle stations. And then there's the 90 series buses that run the gauntlet on 18th Street.... Extending the Yellow Line is going to make it much more convenient to get to Target when it opens in Columbia Heights!

The legislation described below has since passed the D.C. Council. Mayor Anthony Williams is expected to sign it into law before leaving office. D.C. Moves to Become Pioneer In Forcing 'Green' Construction By Nikita Stewart Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, November 16, 2006; Page A01 The District is poised to become the first major city in the country to require that private developers build environmentally friendly projects that incorporate energy-saving measures. By 2012, most large construction in the city -- commercial and city-funded residential -- would have to meet the standards, if the D.C. Council gives final approval to a new bill next month. For more, click the link www.washingtonpost.com

That's not entirely correct. Green roofs can be much heavier than "standard" roofs. Soil and plants weigh a heck of a lot more than metal roof deck and an elastomeric membrane. On top of that, design snow load for a roof is typically only 30 psf. If your green roof weighs more than that, the roof structure is not likely able to support it, and would need to be altered or reinforced at great expense. Typically speaking, the capital costs of a green roof are higher than for a standard roof; the real cost savings is realized in the operations of the building.

Gildone, I completely agree with you. I would never fly back home to Cleveland if there were actually decent rail service. One train a day and a 12-hour trip time don't make it worthwhile to visit for a weekend--especially if a plane ticket costs the same as a train ticket.

Metro to Extend Yellow Line, Expand Service to Shady Grove By Lena H. Sun Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, April 21, 2006; Page B01 Metro officials agreed yesterday to experiment with extending the Yellow Line through revitalizing neighborhoods in the District to Fort Totten, and with increasing service on the Red Line from Grosvenor to Shady Grove in suburban Maryland. The 18-month pilot program would begin in January and would affect service on the two lines during weekday off-peak hours and on weekends. The Yellow Line would serve what are now exclusively Green Line stations in the U Street, Columbia Heights and Petworth neighborhoods, where new shops and condominiums and renovated rowhouses are increasing the demand for subway service. Groundbreaking is set for next month for a Target store that will be the anchor of a large urban shopping center in Columbia Heights. If the transit agency decides to make the changes permanent, it will be the biggest rail service increase since Metro added the Morgan Boulevard and Largo Town Center stations, extending the Blue Line, in December 2004. The Yellow Line runs from Huntington to the Washington Convention Center at Mount Vernon Square, where Metro riders wanting to continue must transfer to the Green Line. Under the proposal, Yellow Line trains would keep going north on the Green Line tracks to Fort Totten, the last station in the District on the Green Line. "This is a very important expansion of our service to the mid-city stations," said Metro board member Jim Graham, also a D.C. Council member who represents Ward 1 and has lobbied vigorously for the proposal. Graham noted that mid-city neighborhoods would now have a direct line to Reagan National Airport. The proposal to increase Red Line service came after suburban members of the Metro board last month nixed a plan to extend service only on the Yellow Line. On the Red Line, some trains reverse direction at the Grosvenor-Strathmore and Silver Spring stations to accommodate the majority of riders who get off at or before those stops. Commuters wanting to continue north must wait for trains that go to the ends of the lines. Under the pilot plan adopted yesterday, the board chose to test ending "turnbacks" only on the Grosvenor side of the Red Line. Ridership is expected to grow faster there because of development at the White Flint, Twinbrook, Rockville and Shady Grove stations, said Robert J. Smith, who represents Maryland on the Metro board. Service on the affected parts of the two subway lines will operate every six minutes instead of every 12 minutes during off-peak hours weekdays. On weekends, when trains operate every 15 minutes, service will increase to every 7 1/2 to 10 minutes. The additional off-peak service on the Yellow Line will cost $5.75 million and be paid for by the District; Maryland will pay the $2.5 million for added service on the Red Line. Officials will weigh several factors, including ridership, to determine whether to make the changes permanent. An initial estimate for the service is $3 million a year, but that does not include projected revenue from additional riders. In other action, the board approved spending $50 million over the next six years to rehabilitate 206 escalators, all of them inside stations. The system has 588 escalators. On a typical day, 41 are out of service, officials said, forcing thousands of riders to climb into and out of stations. Outside escalators allow rain, snow and debris to pour into the electrical systems and cause problems. Nonfunctioning escalators trigger more complaints from Metro customers than almost any other problem. In 2000, Metro began a 10-year comprehensive maintenance and rehabilitation plan for all of its escalators. To date, 181 have been overhauled; the process costs $240,000 per escalator, takes three to four months and involves stripping the unit down to bare steel. Contractors are responsible for maintaining 287 escalators, with Metro personnel responsible for the remainder. But in four years, Metro intends to phase out the contractors and rely solely on in-house personnel for escalator and elevator maintenance, though a 2002 task force convened by Metro found that private contractors were doing a better job of keeping the equipment running. A Washington Post analysis last summer of two years of maintenance records found that, on average, escalators serviced by Metro mechanics broke down more often and took longer to repair than those serviced by private firms. Metro officials and union executives have said they are confident in-house mechanics will improve as they gain experience. In other action, the board, as expected, formally approved the creation of an independent inspector general post, part of an effort by transit officials to improve accountability and restore public trust. The inspector general will report directly to the board, will have subpoena power and a staff of 27 and will "enjoy the greatest possible independence." The position is to be filled by October, board Chairman Gladys W. Mack said.

Yet you Buckeye fans wonder why the Michigan folks think you're assholes.

I'm not disagreeing, necessarily. And while KJP's figures are correct, they are misleading--there are no dining or sleeper cars on the NEC trains, which consist a large portion of the revenues Amtrak collects on long-distance trains. The truth is, long-distance trains are primarily for leisure travel, while the NEC trains are at least 50% business travel. It's a whole different ball of wax, so direct comparisons are difficult, at best. This goes back to another issue--WHY Midwestern states don't have as many trains. As we all know too well, states like Ohio and Michigan have systematically discouraged travel by rail by overinvesting in highway infrastructure, destroying passenger rail facilities, subsidizing suburban sprawl, and dismantling local transit systems that allow one to get around once he/she alights an intercity train. Chicago is the one exception. If there are to be more passenger trains in the Midwest, the local infrastructure needs to be in place to build dense urban cores that would support train travel, akin to the cities and towns in the Northeast. To date, Ohio has shown no willingness to do that.

TRANSPORTATION Car Sharing Picks Up Speed -- and Groceries By Eric M. Weiss Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, November 30, 2006; Page B06 Too much traffic and too little parking have already made Washington area drivers among the most enthusiastic adopters of car sharing -- and the two leading car-share companies are betting millions that many more area drivers are willing to give up their car keys. Yesterday, one of the two major car-sharing companies that operate in the Washington region, Zipcar, announced a $25 million investment that will allow it to possibly double the 350 vehicles it already puts on area streets. In June, Zipcar's rival, District-based Flexcar, announced a major investment by a company started by AOL co-founder Steve Case.

BuckeyeB, I understand your point of view, but I don't think it's that simple. To be frank, without the NEC, the East Coast shuts down. That's a LOT of lost economic activity. Second, the NEC trains generate an operating profit. While the federal government spends money to maintain Amtrak's trackage in the Northeast, it has to spend money to subsidize operations in the rest of the country. Is that fair to people in the Northeast? We could just as easily say, "subsidize your own train operations", just as you want the Northeast states to pay for their own track infrastructure. Third, the agreement for the federal government to own the NEC dates back to the formation of Amtrak. And finally, railroad trackage is covered under the "Interstate Commerce Clause" of the Constitution. It's Congress' responsibility--not the states'. I am against any one of the Northeastern states assuming control of the NEC trackage. Anyone who has ridden through Connecticut would agree.

Hey, nobody said anything about people USING the libraries....

Well, sure, but it's a whole 12-block walk from home! All kidding aside, the LOC isn't generally open in the evenings, leaving Saturday as the only time to visit. While that doesn't sound so bad, you can't check anything out unless you're a Member (of Congress).

I can't wait to go to Cleveland Public Library over my December vacation. I need to do some geneaolgical research on the Polack's who came over here on the boat. In reality, I'm just looking forward to using a good library again. You have no idea how good your libraries are until you live in a city where they're absolutely crummy.

The trackage between New Haven and the New York state line is owned by the State of Connecticut. They've been a little lax on maintenance over the years--it's a painfully slow ride compared to the rest of the route. For this reason alone, Bush's brilliant plan to turn passenger rail over to the states is shown to be a rotten idea. I can't imagine being a Metro North commuter on the New Haven line.

In the spirit of honestly, only the Acela trains operate at 150mph between Boston and New Haven (which is pretty sweet, I must say) and 135mph between NY and DC. The Regional trains top out around 125 mph, if I'm not mistaken. I think any successful rail plan is going to branch off existing successful rail services. For example, the recent improvements to the Harrisburg-Philadelphia section. There are other plans underway, as I'm sure the railfans are aware. Connecticut is looking to improvement on the line from New Haven to Springfield, Mass. The Downeaster from Maine to Boston keeps drawing more riders. Richmond, VA, is looking to expand track capacity at its historic downtown station to accept more trains (including a future high speed line in the Southeast). What I think would be most successful is taking the Harrisburg-Philadelphia route, and making incremental improvements to Pittsburgh. Take the Albany-NYC Empire route, and improve the line to Buffalo. By inching along, you would eventually establish a web of high speed trains along the East Coast, that are connected to a hub in Chicago as well as the South. From St. Louis eastward (and Texas) there is no reason why regular high speed passenger rail service won't be successful, save for a lack of sufficient investment.

In the one part of our nation where 110mph trains currently run, and on dedicated passenger right-of-way, the train is a very popular mode of transportation. Between DC and New York, Amtrak carries more people than all the airlines COMBINED. There is a precedent--we just need to incrementally expound upon it.

But to take the incremental approach, you have to actually make increments of progress!

I'm well aware of this. I've seen a few freight trains here-and-there on the NEC, especially in New Jersey. I think the dedicated passenger service right-of-way is very important, though. Because of the high priority given to passenger trains in the NEC, the trip between any two points on the line is very predictable time-wise--a key element to consider if we're ever going to rebuild a passenger service on par with our peers in Europe and Japan. While right-of-way acquisition is no doubt expensive, would you rather pay to acquire land for a pair of railroad tracks, or for a six-lane Interstate? The question is hypothetical--I think I know your answer This a particularly aggravating topic, perhaps because we're on the cusp of change, or so I'd like to think. I would have loved to been able to hop on a train to come back to Ohio for Thanksgiving last week. Driving is an absolute nightmare, and flying for the holidays is almost as bad. Because of the once-daily frequency, though, and ridiculous trip time (12 hrs), the train is currently not a very realistic option. Grrrr....

Rob, I'm with ya. It's no coincidence that Amtrak's best-performing corridor is almost exclusively (electrified) passenger rail. Would it cost a hell of a lot of money to do this? Absolutely, but the investment would be worthwhile--certainly a lot cheaper than highway expansion, with less negative impact on the land. If nations in Europe--which are a LOT less financially well-endowed than the mighty US of A--can do it, so can we. We as a nation just have to get some balls to admit that maybe the so-called "American Dream" of nothing but highways is a crock.

If width is the issue, then locomotive-hauled trains are pretty much DOA. I guess I'm a little confused, though, because when you mentioned dual-powered trains, I instantly thought of the equipment on the LIRR, which looks a lot like a subway train, and even uses a third rail for power over a lot of its trackage. I haven't looked at the relative dimensions, but even still, I believe the LIRR equipment (or something similar) would be FRA certified to operate on freight trackage. How high are the overhead cateneries on the Red Line above top of rail elevation? As you're aware, many commuter railroads in the electrified Northeast Corridor operate with double-decker passenger cars just fine, although I'm not sure if the catenary has a greater clearance than the Red Line.

Isn't it true, though, that by FRA regulations, a commuter train would not be able to switch onto the RTA Red Line tracks? It doesn't seem to be an issue of diesel vs. dual-power as it is an issue of incompatibility (safety-wise) with the local rail transit system.

A-fricking-men!

Wow. Get a sense of humor. Knocking OSU (as is my responsibility as a UM alumnus) does not equate with trashing my birthplace. Thanks for stepping up as Stereotypical Overly Sensitive Midwesterner, though!

This "poll" question is flawed. Ohio State is not playing the entire State of Michigan. Do they not teach the English language in Columbus?

Well, I guess my city is in the economic shitter, then, because we don't have any buildings over 13 stories tall. Back in 1977, Detroit opened the Renaissance Center. The building consisted of five towers, including the then-world's tallest hotel with 1400 rooms. Cost was $350 million (in 1977 dollars). Henry Ford II, who headed the project, hoped that construction of such a complex would demonstrate to the world that Detroit was ripe for new investment. The Ren Cen was a colossal failure, and lost money every year. The little street life Detroit had was sucked into the enormous vacuum of the isolated, internally-oriented complex. General Motors purchased the building around 1999 for its new world headquarters, at a then-cost of $75 million.

Read as: "You're either with us or against us."