WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 5: Making a better transit network | Connecting heavy rail + light rail + railroad -- a concept for New York City

This last entry in the series was prompted by a recent Substack post (below)

-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2a | The Original Approved Metrorail System (1968-1970)"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2b | Lessons learned: Proposed expansions and the Metrorail system we don't have"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 3 | Stations"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 4 | Buses"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 5: Making a better transit network | Connecting heavy rail + light rail + railroad -- a concept for New York City"

Benjamin Schneider, in his "The Urban Condition" Substack, has a two part series on how the original proposal for a TriboroRX by the Regional Plan Association in 1996--now separated into two projects, one a Metro North rail project called Penn Station Access, adding four stations in the Bronx and a connection of the Harlem Line to Grand Central Station, and the Interborough Express (IBX) for Queens and Brooklyn--could still come to a kind of fruition, through making better connections between the various modes.

In "Unlocking the full potential of the IBX" he makes the point that network connection planning doesn't happen very well, because planning tends to be mode specific (in silos).

These two projects, the IBX and Penn Station Access, were once envisioned by the RPA as a single line within a grand regional rail system. Now, they are on totally separate tracks, literally and figuratively. Though these two services come within about a mile of one another, passengers will not be able to transfer between them. This outcome is a reflection of the region’s siloed approach to transit network planning, and its limited ambitions with each individual transit project it pursues.

In the first piece in this series, I did make the point about creating a regional transport association and using transit infrastructure projects as a way to drive improvements across the transit network.

And in the stations piece, I discuss planning and implementing for access before a station/line is opened, not afterwards, to put transit's best foot or visage forward, from the start, rather than sometime far after the opening.

Past entries on the Purple Line, Silver Line, and Blue Line make similar kinds of points, not just about access but driving necessary improvements forward, leveraging the power of new infrastructure, etc.

-- "Codifying the complementary transit network improvements and planning initiatives recommended in the Purple Line writings," (2022) 
-- Setting the stage for the Purple Line light rail line to be an overwhelming success: Part 1 | simultaneously introduce improvements to other elements of the transit network (2017)
-- Part 2 |   the program (macro changes) (2017)
-- Part 3 |   influences (2017)
-- Part 4 |   Making over New Carrollton as a transit-centric urban center and Prince George's County's "New Downtown" (2017, originally 2014)
-- PL #5: Creating a Silver Spring "Sustainable Mobility District"
-- Part 6 |  Creating a transportation development authority in Montgomery and Prince George's County to effectuate placemaking, retail development, and housing programs in association with the Purple Line (2017)
-- Part 7 | Using the Purple Line to rebrand Montgomery and Prince George's Counties as Design Forward (2017)
-- Revisiting the Purple Line article series after one year: Part 1 | a couple of baby steps (2018)
-- Revisiting the Purple Line (series) and a more complete program of complementary improvements to the transit network (2019)

-- "Using the Silver Line as the priming event, what would a transit network improvement program look like for NoVA?," (2017)

-- "A "Transformational Projects Action Plan" for the Metrorail Blue Line," (2020)

Schneider offers a number of recommendations for connection.

As I wrote in part one of this piece, the IBX will have a transformative impact on mobility in Brooklyn and Queens from the day that it opens, largely because of transfers to express subways that will quickly get riders to popular destinations like Midtown, Downtown Brooklyn, and the JFK Airtrain at Jamaica.

With a few complimentary transit projects, the mobility benefits of the IBX could be extended to the Bronx and beyond, as envisioned by the RPA thirty years ago. With a handful of more ambitious initiatives, the benefits of the IBX could reach even further, to Long Island and New Jersey; as well as to air travelers landing at LaGuardia and intercity train passengers on the Northeast Corridor.

This piece lists those projects in order of difficulty and expense. Most of the following ideas are speculative and have not been formally proposed by a government agency. However, they follow transit planning best practices as reflected in white papers from advocacy groups like the RPA.

The central premise of these conceptual projects is to better integrate the IBX and the rest of the New York City subway system with what is now called the “commuter rail” system. These projects seek to make the most of existing infrastructure as much as possible, rather than building expensive new lines. And they embody the notion that travel to and from the downtown core is no longer the central, overriding purpose of transit planning.

More connections, more access, faster trips.

His list:

• Add high-frequency ferry service between Brooklyn Army Terminal, Staten Island and New Jersey
• Make the LIRR Atlantic Avenue Branch a super-express subway line
• Extend the G Subway, which serves Queens and Brooklyn exclusively, on the north and south to connect to the IBX
• Build an IBX-LIRR infill transfer station near 51st Ave. in Queens
• Extend the IBX one mile to connect with Metro North’s Penn Station Access project, providing a link to the Bronx, Westchester and Connecticut
• Extend the IBX to LaGuardia Airport
• Upgrade the IBX-Metro North transfer station into an intermodal Northeast Corridor rail-air hub
• Build the Harbor Tunnel for passengers and freight

I've written a piece like this about Baltimore ("More remonstration about the molasses of change: Transit planning, Baltimore County, Maryland and Towson," "Transit agenda for Greater Baltimore"), merging the VRE and MARC "commuter railroads" into a 24/7 passenger rail system like the S-Bahn ("One big idea: Getting MARC and Metrorail to integrate fares, stations, and marketing systems, using London Overground as an example," "A new backbone for the regional transit system: merging the MARC Penn and VRE Fredericksburg Lines,"  and leveraging the once proposed, since cancelled Maglev system ("DC, Transformational Projects Action Planning, and the Baltimore-Washington Maglev project ).

The second entry in this series:

-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2a | The Original Approved Metrorail System (1968-1970)"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2b | Lessons learned: Proposed expansions and the Metrorail system we don't have"

provides a framework for the heavy rail part.  Some of the recommendations in the Purple Line series do for Maryland-side commuter rail:

• Integrate MARC and VRE fare payment into the SmarTrip/ CharmCard fare media system (note that with their regular tickets, MARC and VRE provide reciprocity, and include free rides on Baltimore local transit)
• Introduce bi-directional passenger rail service between DC and Frederick on the MARC Brunswick Line
• Consider charging DC-Montgomery County trips on a bi-directional Brunswick Line using the Metrorail/Purple Line tolling/fare schedule. That would treat mileage from railroad trips in the context of a complete (linked) trip on railroad+subway+light rail as a single fare
• The White Flint Sector Plan calls for an infill MARC station. Plans to build that station should be accelerated as part of this proposal.
• Build an infill train station in DC on the Penn Line, serving the New York Avenue corridor
• Set the opening of the Purple Line as the deadline for the integration of the MARC Penn Line and VRE Fredericksburg Line into one combined railroad passenger service
• + the Baltimore area recommendations in "Transit agenda for Greater Baltimore"
• + the Eastern Shore ("Letter to the editor in the Washington Post about passenger railroad service to the Eastern Shore")

Dan Malouff's proposed passenger rail system.  He didn't include Southern Maryland because at the time they were planning a light rail line to Charles County.  It also doesn't have a line from Baltimore to Frederick, nor the Penn Line to Delaware.

I don't have a handle on what to recommend on the Virginia side.  

Many years ago, at the BeyondDC blog, Dan Malouff provided a couple of schematics of how an integrated passenger rail system could provide service deeper into Virginia, connections to Pennsylvania, and an extension of the Penn Line to Delaware.

His framework provides a pretty good agenda for Virginia.  It complements various rail passenger expansion efforts throughout Virginia by the State, through its Amtrak Virginia program, support of VRE and exploration of other rail service options, and acquisition of right of way from CSX ("Virginia to build Long Bridge and acquire CSX right of way to expand passenger train service," Washington Post). 

Chicago, Inglewood, Minneapolis and commercial corridor redevelopment | Stadiums, arenas, and downtown transit malls

I was reading an article about Minneapolis' transit (bus) mall, Nicollet Mall ("Nicollet Mall tries to look beyond retail in latest attempt at reinvention," Minneapolis Star-Tribune), and I was struck by this paragraph:

The Downtown Council is creating a “Nicollet Mall prospectus” for prospective investors. It will include an inventory of vacancies, points of contact, any relevant incentives or financing tools and outline civic leaders’ priorities and ideas for the mall.

I made such a suggestion, that commercial district revitalization programs needed all this information at their fingertips for each property in their district, when I was doing consulting in Pittsburgh in 2008!  

This image makes Nicollet Mall look prety fun.

And considering all the articles over the past ten years about Nicolett Mall (e.g., "Revamping Nicollet Mall as a 24-hour district is one idea for downtown Minneapolis," "Frey’s plan to take buses off Minneapolis’ Nicollet Mall next year meets resistance") it should have already occurred to them.

(WRT the bus proposal idea.  It's true.  A bus mall is not a congenial places.  Buses are loud.  And that was my experience with Nicolett Mall quite some time ago.)

Similarly, when I first got involved in Main Street commercial district revitalization c. 2002 at some point I came across an article by Neal Peirce, "Main Street Niches in a Mass Sales World," making the point that revitalization is a process that takes a couple decades, and never really ends.

I wrote about that at the onset of covid, "From more space to socially distance to a systematic program for pedestrian districts (Park City (Utah) Main Street Car Free on Sundays)," making the point that commercial districts should have been planning for multi-modal access long before the distancing requirements arising from covid best practice.  Also see "A point about pedestrianizing streets: Boulder; Alexandria, Virginia, Cleveland Park, DC."

Lots of empty space around SoFi Stadium.

The LA Times has an article about Inglewood's Market Street commercial district, "Inglewood’s downtown still struggles. Can it spark to life before World Cup, Super Bowl?," and how it languishes despite its proximity to SoFi Stadium and Intuit Dome, home to the LA Clippers basketball team.  From the article:

The sports and entertainment corridor along Prairie Avenue has become a major economic driver for the city of Inglewood, with SoFi Stadium grossing over $175 million in revenue and bringing in 1 million visitors in 2023 alone, according to Billboard.

And yet, on most nights, Inglewood’s downtown is subdued and inactive. While a few longstanding businesses have managed to attract regular customers on the otherwise empty street, many others have closed due to rent hikes and eminent domain to make way for planned transit centers.

SoFi had the Super Bowl in 2022 and the Washington Post had an article, "A home Super Bowl is good for the Rams. But is SoFi Stadium good for Inglewood?," about how the rest of the city didn't seem to be experiencing improvement in the face of the stadium.

My criticism is that you shouldn't be allowed to build such facilities without adjacent access to high frequency rail transit.  Inglewood now is planning various surface transit improvements including a couple of bus hubs on Market Street ("Project Overview -- Inglewood Transit Connector").  Ultimately they were supposed to get a People Mover mode to connect to the LA Metro--at least ten years after the stadium opened.  But that doesn't seem to be happening (" A $2.4B Rail Project For The 2028 L.A. Olympics Has Been Suspended—Here’s What’s Happening Instead," Secret LA).

My thought was um, why don't cities develop mitigation/improvement plans in association with stadiums and arenas before they open, including funding from the team owner as a condition of the contract?

Not having such plans is why I've developed "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities" as a way for a community to try to get the best possible outcomes from sports facilities deals.

From the Axios article, "Renderings: New project looks to transform United Center, West Side."

I don't know if Chicago is getting funding from the owner of the Bulls basketball team, but in association with the construction of a new arena there, they are preparing an improvement plan for the adjacent district ("Chicago seeks to make the West Side's Madison Street shine again," Chicago Sun-Times).  From the article:

... the thoroughfare is the focus of a city study aimed at helping bring new retail, housing and other activity to three miles of Madison Street, stretching from the shadow of the United Center to the heart of K-Town.

“Madison [is] probably the most visible and historically significant commercial corridor on the West Side,” Chicago Department of Planning Supervising Planner Brian Hacker said of the Madison Street Corridor Study. “We’re looking at the levers that we can pull as a city planning department — zoning, regulatory, environmental ... to facilitate development.”

Madison Street could see a rebirth, according to plans being developed by the city and and West Side community groups.Pat Nabong/Sun-Times 

It’s not a bad time to rethink Madison Street, particularly within the study’s boundaries that include the Near West Side, East Garfield Park and West Garfield Park.

East of the study area, construction will soon begin on the 1901 Project, a $7 billion effort by the Reinsdorf and Wirtz families to turn those barren parking lots around the United Center, 1901 W. Madison St., into a new neighborhood and entertainment district.

(Of course, the question is why didn't the basketball team owners do such a project to begin with, instead of making barren an area already distressed.)

Bye DC Streetcar | Too small to reshape DC policy, Big enough to spur $1 billion in economic development

Flickr photo by Ted Eytan.

Yesterday, DC shut down its streetcar ("D.C.’s Streetcar is making its final stop, leaving a mixed legacy," ).  My joke is that DC and Seattle started planning for streetcars in 2003.  Seattle got its first segment in 2007.  DC in 2016.

The streetcar never got a chance to succeed.  Dan Malouff at Greater Greater Washington has written some good pieces about it ("Eight big-picture lessons from the DC Streetcar," "How DC’s mayor and council chair thwarted every effort to better the streetcar," "To the death of a dream: RIP DC Streetcar"). 

He makes three key points.  (1) Settling for a start with a "minimum viable segment" is a mistake and (2) success of the streetcar was dependent on it being but one segment of a larger network (3) but that was actively stymied by elected officials, in particular Mayor Bowser and Council Chair Mendelson.

Minimum viable segment means you start it, and hope to expand it incrementally, by building on the expected success of the first segment.  But that never happened.  The minimum was too minimal to have much effect on getting other areas of the city to want streetcar service.  

Imagining a streetcar on Georgia Avenue.  This is in Petworth.

(Even though the economic development benefits ought to have convinced many areas of the city it would be a great lever for improvement.)

And people committed to opposition don't ever stop opposing (even if not helped by the city's top elected officials).  It makes for an almost insurmountable hill.

OTOH, the minimum viable segment was enough for DC's development community to offer to the city an unsolicited proposal to manage, create, build out, and operate a streetcar network for the whole city, not just the itty bitty part it was currently serving.

DC's elected officials don't see transit as a core competitive advantage. DC's elected officials mostly come from car-oriented areas of the city ("DC as a suburban agenda dominated city").  The current generation is not known for visionary thinking.  

Despite the massive success of the city's revitalization centered around the creation of Metrorail and intensification of development in its wake ("Today WMATA Metrorail's 50th anniversary from the start of service | Part 1: many lessons can be found, if you look")--ironically the 50th anniversary of the start of the system was last week--the current generation of elected officials don't accept that without Metrorail the city would be s***.  Even Councilmembers who have served on the WMATA board.

Streetcar westbound on the 500 block of H Street NE.  Photo by Dan Malouff

Resident opposition.  And I have never understood resident opposition to the streetcar or light rail projects proposed for DC, Maryland, and Virginia.  DC was served by streetcars until 1962.  In fact, the H Street Line, Rte. 20, was one, although it was abandoned in 1949.

Media opposition.  While this Washington Post editorial is recent, "A streetcar no one desired," it's not a whole lot different from op-eds from 10 years ago ("Mayor Bowser should shut down streetcar operation, concede it was a bad idea").  

Although Washington City Paper disagreed ("H Street NE May Not Need the Streetcar. Benning Road Does").  WRT the City Paper's point, it was economic development misfeasance to not continue the streetcar to Benning Road Metrorail station, serving the Minnesota Avenue corridor.

This ad we created for H Street NE shows we understood the value of transportation access as one of the neighborhood's competitive advantages relative to the rest of the city.  This is at the corridor's "100%" intersection, 8th Street and H Street.

They act as if the metropolitan area has zero experience with successful fixed rail transit.  Sure Metrorail is the best--as advocates in Toronto used to say, "Subways are for everyone," but light rail and streetcar have their place within a robust transit network.

The fact is the city has 42 Metrorail stations.  At the core it has 31 stations, and for the most part, the commercial districts and neighborhoods served by every one of those stations have experienced massive economic improvement.

WRT the streetcar, it's not just that the city didn't do a good job planning network expansion.  Attempts to do so got bogged down in neighborhood opposition.  Which were seized on by elected officials to use appropriated money for other things.

At Whole Foods.  Photo by Dan Malouff.

Lesson One:  In economic development terms the Streetcar was a big winner for H Street NE.  I wrote about the cancellation last May ("DC makes yet another bad decision about streetcars: will replace the one line with a so called "fancy" bus | The Vision Thing") and last fall in "Streetcars: transit, economic development levers, source for discontent in local politics | Milwaukee HOP streetcar."  

My point all along is despite the planning and operational failures, which Dan does a better job explicating than I did, it's been a wild success from an economic development standpoint.

More than $1 billion of new development has been sparked, mostly outside of the catchment area of Union Station, which gets its ED oomph from Metrorail ("DC and streetcars #4: from the standpoint of stoking real estate development, the line is incredibly successful and it isn't even in service yet, and now that development is extending eastward past 15th Street," "Update/revision of H Street transit oriented real estate development table").

And in an area not directly served by Metrorail, H Street, because of the streetcar, has more intense development than any other area of the city similarly not immediately connected to Metrorail.

Revitalization didn't come about solely because of the Main Street commercial district revitalization program.  In 2002, a group of stakeholders got the corridor officially sanctioned as a Main Street improvement area.  The approach links historic preservation and business development and marketing, based on a model developed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.  It's now called Main Street America.

It brought attention to the district when it had been ignored, but can't take credit for the large number of new buildings on the corridor.  That's on real estate developers, and the streetcar as a "priming action."

H Street Land Use and Transportation Plans and Programs.  The designation and funding and technical assistance associated with it were complemented by the creation of an area plan for the corridor in 2004 (Revival: The H Street NE Strategic Development Plan), and a streetscape improvement plan (Great Streets Framework Plan: H Street NE – Benning Road).  Interestingly enough, a new plan is being developed ("H Street NE Land Use and Market Study Underway," H&K).

Other city investments in facade improvements, business development, etc. contributed to the improvement.

Sure, I'd like to take credit for it, given I was a key organizer of the Main Street program there ("The community development approach and the revitalization of DC's H Street corridor: congruent or oppositional approaches?").  

The 2004 economic development plan didn't foresee the streetcar, it aimed to leverage the economic energy of Union Station, so how the corridor developed, and how they anticipated it would develop became very different from what happened.

More than anything this change, especially further east from Union Station, was because of the streetcar.  Although having a land use plan when DC was at an inflection point--post Marion Barry--when urban areas not just DC were attracting new residents and new businesses, was key.  Big real estate consulting firms mapped all the opportunities on the corridor and started marketing them.  This intensified with the commitment to the streetcar. 

The whole district gained thousands of new units of housing, not just by Union Station, with new ground floor space with high ceilings better suited for modern retail.  Whoever would have anticipated that a Whole Foods Market would have opened on H Street?  And that's just one example of significant change that never could have been anticipated when were organizing to be designated a Main Street district.  

Originally the building on the left had been an ugly small modular single story library.  It was redeveloped as affordable housing.  I wish it were taller with more units, but I guess they built what they could fund. They did a great job with the facade in terms of historic architectural design and building materials.                                                                                                                                        I do wish they had kept the library function as a public use on the ground floor, as a way to maintain the presence of civic assets in the corridor.  Photo by Dan Malouff.                                                                       
Although more so the retail and restaurants developed were not chains, but with great identity and branding systems ("Independent retail businesses can succeed and thrive"), not so much chains, although Giant Supermarket came first ("360 Apartment building + Giant Supermarket vs. a BP gas station, which would you choose?").  And now even Aldi wants to be in on the urban action.

Separately the rehabilitation of the Atlas Theater into the Atlas Performing Arts Center helped to anchor the eastern end, still with a lot of smaller historic buildings, as a night life district ("Joe Englert, DC nightlife impresario, dies | Lessons about nightlife-based revitalization," and "H Street NE nightlife district, failing").

DC's streetcar is another example, even if done so wrongly, that return on investment for economic revitalization may be best from significant improvements to transit infrastructure.

Counter examples: Kansas City, Milwaukee, and Tucson.  And despite complaints about the streetcar Kansas City ("12 transformative projects drive growth along the KC Streetcar in 2025 and beyond," Kansas City Star) and Milwaukee (cites above), the streetcar there is again, sparking significant economic development.

And Tucson ("Smaller than Jax, but I have rail: Lessons from Tucson’s Sun Link system," Jacksonville Today).  From the article:

According to research published in the Harvard Law & Policy Review, half of Tucson’s population and housing growth between 2014 and 2021 occurred along the streetcar corridor. Real estate investment surged by $2.5 billion, and annual city tax revenues jumped 30%, adding $13 million each year.

Rendering, a new Commanders football stadium as the anchor of a mixed use entertainment and housing district.

What about transit service to and within the RFK campus?  It's also short sighted to drop streetcar service when it can be leveraged to provide additional service to the new campus being developed around the Washington Commanders football stadium and all its touted ancillary development.   

A streetcar loop could serve the interior of the campus, with cars leaving from the Stadium-Armory Station as well.

SF Muni light rail/streetcar service at Oracle Park, home to the San Francisco Giants baseball team.

DC is so full of missed opportunities.

Lesson two: a streetcar is intra-district transit not inter-city transit.  These days most pundits are criticizing "Obama era streetcar projects" as not having much effect ("Out of Favor," Governing).  

Part of the issue is whether or not the places served were the right ones, whether or not the streetcar is an isolated mode or integrated more broadly into the area's transit networks, inadequate frequencies, slow speeds, the focus on "minimum viable segment," and being street running.  From the JT article:

The success of Sun Link wasn’t about density; it was about connecting the right destinations with reliable, visible infrastructure that people trust. If Jacksonville wants to move forward, it must learn from cities like Tucson, not fear them. Innovation doesn’t mean chasing gimmicks, it means investing smartly in what works.

At the streetcar line scale, street running versus dedicated lane was the biggest criticism of the streetcar ("Sign In Subscribe Live TV Markets Economics Industries Tech Politics Businessweek Opinion Video More US Edition CityLab Transportation Hey, Streetcar Critics: Stop Making 'Perfect' the Enemy of 'Good'," Bloomberg).  

Or that they are more about economic development than transit ("Why Streetcars Aren’t About Transit: The Economic Development Argument for Trams," NextCity).  While the criticisms are reasonable, they miss the point about what kind of transit a streetcar is supposed to be.   

A streetcar should be transit + economic development.

My response to that article was "DC and streetcars #2: STREETCARS ARE ABOUT TRANSIT, just in a different way from how most people are accustomed to thinking about it."   

But I realized people were judging it wrongly.  A streetcar line is about "intra-district" transit ("Making the case for intra-city (vs. inter-city) transit planning").

Sure it gets people between districts along the line, but it also provides multiple stops within a neighborhood and its commercial district.  But people are judging it as if it is supposed to be a metropolitan area service, where people travel relatively long distances, and speed matters at lot more.  

Riders wait for the Cincinnati Bell Connector on the opening day of the streetcar following opening ceremonies at Washington Park. The 3.6 mile long route goes through downtown and Over-The-Rhine has been 10 years in the making. The Enquirer/ Liz Dufour

Although like as implemented in Cincinnati, streetcars in dedicated middle lanes would be optimal.  But if not could be addressed by aggressive traffic enforcement ("While progress has been made, Sun Link blockages still an issue," Arizona Daily Star).

For me, getting from the Metrorail station home, or to and from the grocery store, etc., would be a huge gain.

Lesson Three: Effects on the transit network/you need a streetcar network.  Plenty of streetcar stubs don't do much for the transit system overall.  There are many more examples than mentioned here, like Tampa.  But ones that are lines like Little Rock or multiple lines like San Francisco and Toronto, less so Philadelphia, have a great deal of success.

Adding fixed rail transit in the form of streetcar to a community without it can be transformational in reaching new audiences, and serving as a rolling marketing campaign.  For example, the KC Streetcar generates 30% of the area's total transit trips.  Yes, they are low generally, but from a marginal increase standpoint, not insignificant.

And DC did have plans for expansion (DC Streetcar System Plan: H St/ Benning Rd and Future Segments and Extensions).

The streetcar network that wasn't.

Lesson Four: Opportunity to reposition a community's economic development and transit messages.  I don't think it's communicated enough or right.  Cities other than DC recognize the economic development value of streetcars.  I think like I have written about light rail ("Using the Purple Line to rebrand Montgomery and Prince George's Counties as Design Forward") it's an opportunity to position a transit system and the business district and community more broadly as "design forward."

Portland streetcar as a mobile public art installation.  Art by Bobby Fouther.

Although in places that are very much car centric, it just might not matter so much.  People are committed to the car and can't see viable alternatives. 

Lesson Five: Expansion takes way too long.  DC never expanded.  Other streetcar projects have like in Portland, Seattle, and Kansas City.  This gets back to the minimum viable segment point.  It takes so much community and organizational capital to get a transit infrastructure project launched, that it's hard to keep raising the same level of organizational, community and financial support for expansion.  

So I say, plan for extensions while constructing the initial segment, and move forward to design and engineering as soon as possible.  Kansas City's first extension opened nine years after the initial launch ("KC Streetcar Now Open at UMKC," UMKC).  

Cincinnati's considering it now, nine years later ("Streetcar expansion study? Most key Cincinnati City Council candidates open to it," Cincinnati Business Courier).  If they get the go ahead, it could be another ten years before it happens.  As these quotes from the article confirm, Cincinnati's had the same problems other places have had, with skepticism and opposition, as well as difficulties getting funding, etc.

The Cincinnati Connector streetcar has set new highs for ridership in every year since 2021, but the city, which opened the project in 2016, has never developed a plan to expand and extend the route, should funding ever become available. At the same time, two of the region's Midwestern competitors, Kansas City and Milwaukee, have expanded their streetcar lines.

... Streetcar supporters have never given up on expanding the project even though the political will at City Hall has been nonexistent. A previous council made the streetcar fare-free in 2021, which boosted ridership that has kept growing.

... “It’s an economic development tool,” Cramerding said. “We need to look at transit as an economic development tool to grow the city, not just move low-income people from point A to point B.”

Former Councilman Steve Goodin, who is Charter Committee endorsed, said the city does not have the money to study an extension and is against it. “It’s an amusement park ride, not transit,” Goodin said.

... Former Councilwoman Laketa Cole, who is Charter Committee-endorsed, described the current project as a failure. “They should have had the train go from Uptown to downtown,” Cole said. “To have it go around a circle, you set it up for failure.”

The project originally was supposed to extend to the University of Cincinnati, but then-Gov. John Kasich, a suburban Columbus Republican, killed state funding for that phase of the project. Then-Mayor Mark Mallory and City Manager Milton Dohoney declined to let the project die, securing more federal funding to complete its current iteration.

Conclusion: Comparing and contrasting systems.  Research by a professor at the University of Kansas compared two successful systems, Kansas City and Tucson, to two less successful systems, Atlanta and Cincinnati and ("Place-Making or Place-Taking? The Relationship between Goal Tension and System Performance of U.S. Modern-Era Streetcar Systems," Journal of Planning Education and Research). 

Interviewees were asked what influenced decisions that shaped the streetcar systems in their respective city. Mendez found that systems that prioritized economic development in decision making tended to perform poorly. The most successful systems were in cities that emphasized system performance and placed streetcar systems in areas where people lived, worked and wanted to go for entertainment, recreational and personal reasons.

“In cities that prioritized economic development, decisions reflected that focus,” Mendez said. “For example, if you look at corridors where poor performing systems were placed, you will find twice the number of vacant parcels and properties. Such placement can maximize the economic development impact of the streetcar, but it limits its ability to serve the immediate needs of the public.”

He makes a good point.  But I look at this a bit more nuanced, and should have earlier in my writings as well.  An economic development focus is fine, so long as the district or the city is in a strong real estate market.  H Street--close to Downtown and Union Station, in a city regaining population, is an example of this.  Aiming to spur development in a weak market is difficult, as the example of the Miami heavy rail Metrorail shows. 

I think Atlanta is somehow different.  It's not a weak market overall.  It may be because there while there is a lot of new development, much is in the suburbs ("A wrinkle on corporate headquarters: leaving the city as buildings age") or in what may as well be a suburb, the Buckhead District. This is seen in how the Braves baseball team moved to Cobb County, while every other baseball stadium redevelopment project has been city focused.  

Clearly, Atlanta had other issues.  Atlanta also has the separate Beltline project, although I wonder if transit will ever be added to it--it is experiencing growth because of the reposition, civic investments in trails, etc.  

If it had been linked to the Beltline, and at least of the portion of the Beltline got transit service, comparable to Maryland's forthcoming suburban Purple Line, which as built will be less than 20% of the initial concept) then it would be different ("Atlanta’s Beltline rail debate: To build or not to build?," ACPC).

DC as the supra outlier.  Being the only city in the era of modern streetcars shutting it down, DC is the foremost outlier.  Despite the clear economic success.  I'd argue DC's weak leadership by elected officials doomed the streetcar, even though overall the city until the new Trump Administration, had been experiencing a great deal of growth, construction of new properties, infill development, and population growth.

As discussed in the parallel series on Metrorail's 50th anniversary, it also suffers from many of the same problems ("Today WMATA Metrorail's 50th anniversary from the start of service | Part 1: many lessons can be found, if you look"). 

========

A shout out to Joe Fengler.  Joe Fengler was the chair of Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6A, which covers a good chunk of the commercial district's geography.  

It occurred to him that it would be wasteful to tear up H Street for streetscape improvements, only to tear it up again for streetcar tracks.

He created a lobbying and advocacy campaign to install the tracks at the same time, instead of separately.  

He also thought--at the time Anacostia was being considered for the first line--having tracks in the ground would increase the likelihood the project would move forward on H Street first.

He got other ANCs along the corridor to agree, and the city decided to do what he suggested.  Some people, like in Dan Malouff's assessment, said this created problems down the line, when what would have been the best option was already constrained by the track layout.

Nonetheless, Joe was a visionary and he doesn't get much credit for it.

To bad he didn't get on City Council.  He would have been a great advocate for streetcars both for transportation and economic development.

The city let all his hard work go to waste 

Vis a vis the WAMU article, "As the DC Streetcar shuts down, leaders wrestle with H Street’s transit future."  

“We need to have a bold vision,” said Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen, who represents much of H Street and chairs the council’s transportation committee. “One that is more than just a segment, but one that actually is a connection that really connects neighborhoods, connects the city and works as part of an entire transit network…It’s got to be a bigger vision than just one segment or else we’re just repeating the mistakes of the streetcar.”

Now they're concerned?  They've had decades.

South Shore Line Interurban extension in Indiana

SSL en route in Michigan City on local surface streets.

This is notable because the South Shore Line, powered by electricity, is the only still functioning interurban train line in revenue service in the entire United States..  

As a mode, interurban was between heavy rail and train, with dedicated and mixed tracks and reasonably frequent cities operating within and between cities.  They carried passengers and local freight (not unlike todays package delivery services).

It was said transferring from one system to another you could get from Chicago to New England on interurbans.  Or from San Diego to Portland or Seattle.

Unlike heavy rail or railroad freight and passenger services, interurban lines could be street running within cities, like streetcars, and today's South Shore Line is distinguished in some places by still running on the street network in various communities along the line.  

Once owned by Samuel Insull, who owned many electricity generation and streetcar companies, like the CTA and London Underground, which he also controlled at one time, they were known for their poster marketing of sites on the line ("Moonlight in Duneland: Marketing the South Shore Line in the 1920s").

The DC area had such a system operating between Washington, Baltimore and Annapolis.

Today the South Shore Line operates between Downtown Chicago and South Bend, Indiana's Airport (originally the line went to downtown). Some trains go all the way from South Bend, while others start at either Michigan City or Gary. Like other similar services, for a time it had access to the Elevated track system of the Chicago Transit Authority.

These days it mostly serves Indiana, with 20 stations, and has a minute number of riders, less than 7,000 per day. But a goodly number of trains--26/27 go to or are from Chicago.

Starting today, the new "Monon Corridor" adds four stations with a terminus in Dyer, Indiana ("All Aboard! South Shore Line announces opening of new Monon Corridor expansion service," WSBT-TV).

But wow, what can they do to increase ridership? 

Certainly, an Indiana based Chicago Bears football team could generate some weekend ridership but only a few times per year.  

The South Bend Station no longer is in the center city, but on the outskirts.  While inconvenient, the location is probably not a deal breaker in terms of willingness to ride transit.  

What changes in marketing or otherwise would make a significant difference in ridership?

A homogeneous mobility system: cars and for medium and long distance trips, airplanes, doesn't work in crisis

Travelers waiting at a TSA checkpoint at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport on Friday. Elijah Nouvelage/Bloomberg News

Trains.  An AP writer took the train from Atlanta to DC to avoid the chaos at Hartsfield Airport due to the federal shutdown of pay for TSA agents ("Midnight train from Georgia: A view of America from the tracks as airports struggle in the shutdown").  Most places don't have that option.

Planes.  The crush at Hartsfield is being played out similarly at airports across the country ("Why the TSA Lines in Atlanta Are Longer Than Other Airports," Wall Street Journal).

Plus there is the issue of the Iran War raising jet fuel prices ("As oil prices rise, airfares are surging and some airlines might not survive," Los Angeles Times) making fares higher, although trains face higher diesel fuel prices (and would do better if more lines were electrified).  From the article:

United Airlines Chief Executive Scott Kirby said this week that his company could face an $11-billion loss if oil prices remain at their current levels. Meanwhile, United’s airfare could increase by 20%, he said.

With thin profit margins and oil prices hovering around $100 per barrel, airlines have no choice but to pass the increased costs onto consumers.

It would make more sense to develop the passenger railroad system on medium distance trips focused on shifting trips from plane to train, such as DC to Philadelphia, or NYC or NYC to Boston, Dallas to Houston, etc., but the airlines advocate heavily against such a policy change.

Proposed High Speed Rail Network.

Many European countries have developed high speed rail networks in part to divert airplane trips to trains.  

Brightline Florida is a rail line from Miami to Orlando, targeting tourists.  According to the Mark Brown Substack "Car Free America," "Brightline Passenger Rail Is Booming While America Still Has No Real Alternative to $4 Gas and $400 Domestic Flights."

Automobiles.  The Iran War is why gas prices are up over 50% in the US.  A car-dependent economy has no real alternative but to keep driving.  Some cities have decent transit systems, and may experience a rise in ridership.  

Most metropolitan areas don't have the right form to make transit work very well, regardless of the cost of gasoline.

In response to the oil shocks of the 1970s, countries like Denmark and the Netherlands reshaped their mobility and land use policies to favor walking, biking, transit, and compact development, to reduce their dependence on automobility and fuels (gas or diesel) produced elsewhere.  Unlike the US, they didn't say biking and walking is good to do, and then didn't change policies much to make this policy in practice, they changed all kinds of laws, imposed high gasoline taxes, etc.

Mark Kauzlarich, Bloomberg.

The US did impose efficiency requirements on the car industry and some environmental efficiency measures to reduce energy use and under Carter reduced speed limits on Interstates to 55mph and created right turn on red rules (saving cars from having to idle).

But mostly, the US doubled down on gasoline-dependence, investing in the military around maintaining access to oil, and by creating the Strategic Reserve--the idea was to buy gas when it was cheap, and put it on the market in dire circumstances.

Ethanol.  The US also adopted ethanol requirements.  But they are a waste.  In the US, ethanol is made from freshly grown corn, using agricultural resources.  In Brazil, instead the feedstock is used cane sugar stalks, so they are reusing waste to make fuel, rather than expending more resources than what are gained back in energy density.  Ethanol doesn't save gas really, but it does help provide demand in agricultural states like Iowa, making them strong defenders of the process.

Ford and other automakers have spent years building up a supply chain to support their rollout of EVs. Scott Olson/Getty Images

Electric vehicles.  They are still cars, and an automobile-centric land use and transportation paradigm is a poor use of land and resources.  

But electric vehicles are an environmental strategy and tactic  Having an electric car insulates drivers from hiccups in the oil-gasoline supply chain that result in severe price increases ("What to Know About Electric Cars When Gas Prices Are Surging," New York Times).

Hill Family Bicycle Group with the US Capitol in the background

Bike, walk (and transit).  In the MinnPost ("Skip Starbucks to save gas? There are better strategies") Bill Lindeke suggests walking, biking or using transit as alternatives to high gas prices.  He writes from Minneapolis-St. Paul which has a decent light rail and bus system.  Most cities don't.

Heterogeneous mobility paradigm.  The difference between the US and Germany is that both manufacture cars, but of the two, only the US produces oil ("The Petro States of America," Bloomberg).  

That could be the reason that Germany has a much more heterogeneous mobility policy. 

It loves its cars--known for autobahns without speed limits--but recognizes cities are best served by transit, and most major cities have multiple modes well serving their communities.  

The German Transport Association model created in Hamburg is a model that US metropolitan areas should adopt ("The answer is: Create a single multi-state/regional multi-modal transit planning, management, and operations authority association," 2017, "Verkehrsverbund: The evolution and spread of fully integrated regional public transport in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland," International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 2018) .

Barcode public art project.  A40 Autobahn/Freeway, Ruhrgebeit-Essen, Germany

For the past few years, for sustainability and climate change reasons, it's sponsored a national transit pass ("The Deutschland-Ticket for just 63 euros per month," DB).

Germany also promotes walking and biking (the Federal Bike Plan in its various iterations always turns out to be good).  

Seattle East Side light rail expansion

Opened Saturday.  From the Seattle Times article "Seattle light rail crosses Lake Washington this weekend. What to know"

Sound Transit’s pioneering seven-mile segment, along with stations on Mercer Island and in Seattle’s Judkins Park neighborhood took 18 years from voter approval to completion, will fuse Eastside and Seattle routes into a 58-mile network, with tentacles stretching to Lynnwood, Redmond and Federal Way for a $3 standard fare.

... first-day ridership could surpass the 137,000 boardings when Taylor Swift performed here in 2023, though probably not the 225,000 who flooded the stations Feb. 11, the day of the Seahawks Super Bowl victory parade.

Each addition to the system leads to significant rises in ridership (e.g., way better than DC Metrorail's Silver Line).  Current ridership is about 108,000 per day and will increase with the connection to Seattle from the East Side--in 2024 a partial Line 2 had been running, with a later extension in 2025, but not crossing Lake Washington.

Seen from Mount Baker Beach, sprays of water from a fireboat greet a light rail train as it crosses Lake Washington on the first day of cross-lake service Saturday, March 28, 2026. 

(Bettina Hansen / The Seattle Times)

It will also bring about big changes to many bus routes ("How Seattle light rail crossing Lake Washington will change bus service")--King County has one of the biggest bus systems in the US.  But also for Community Transit in Snohomish County, where a terminal station will operate.

This is something I've long recommended for DC, to National Airport:

Unrelated to this weekend’s opening, Sound Transit is beginning a night bus pilot line that will run every half-hour between downtown Seattle and the airport. The overnight service on Route 570 will begin about 15 minutes after train service ends.

Seen from Mount Baker Beach, sprays of water from a fireboat greet a light rail train as it crosses Lake Washington on the first day of cross-lake service Saturday, March 28, 2026. (Bettina Hansen / The Seattle Times)

WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2b | Lessons learned: Proposed expansions and the Metrorail system we don't have

This is part of a series:

-- "Reprint with editing: Today WMATA Metrorail's 50th anniversary from the start of service | Part 1: many lessons can be found, if you look"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2a | The Original Approved Metrorail System (1968-1970)"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 2b | Lessons learned: Proposed expansions and the Metrorail system we don't have"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 3 | Stations"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service, Part 4 | Buses"
-- "WMATA's 50th anniversary from the start of service | Part 5: Making a better transit network | Connecting heavy rail + light rail + railroad -- a concept for New York City 

Each discusses what I think of as the lessons that should be learned from Metrorail, as a transit service and as an economic development augur.

Recently I acquired a copy of the February 1976 issue of "Metro Notes", a tabloid published by WMATA throughout the construction process.  The Approved Plan Map shows the current system, with 11 potential extensions.  Three were constructed:  (1) two Blue Line, stations from Addison Road to Largo; (2) from Rockville to Shady Grove on the Red Line; and (3) the Silver Line.  All were covered on the Approved Plan Map (1968-1970).  

Two infill stations were later added, NoMA on the Red Line ("Having Turned a Corner, Washington’s NoMa Is Coming Alive," New York Times) and Potomac Yards on the Blue/Yellow Line ("Metro's New Potomac Yard-VT Station Is Open. Here's What to Know," NBC).  

Because of the number of images, the map alone is a separate entry.  Note that I am sure to have missed some officially sanctioned proposals of some sort or another.

Where we are today:

Today's Metrorail system

6 lines, 130 miles of track, 98 stations.  No current planning for extensions or intensifications. Daily ridership was about 750,000 before covid.  The system exceeded one million riders for the Obama Inauguration, and had a number of peak days greater than 750,000.  

Today's ridership is about 2/3rds of peak.

The Purple Line Light Rail Link (opening 2028)

The Purple Line is a light rail link between Bethesda and New Carrollton Metrorail Stations in Montgomery and Prince George's County Maryland, and will also connect to the Green Line in College Park/  It will also connect to all three MARC commuter rail lines, at Silver Spring (Brunswick Line), College Park (Camden Line) and New Carrollton (Penn Line).

There will be 17 new stations in addition to the existing transfer stations.

The line was conceptualized in 1987, when Maryland bought rail right of way "abandoned" by CSX because it was no longer needed to serve the since shuttered electricity generation plant in Georgetown. 

The Purple Line is being constructed by Maryland.  

Like how the Silver Line was constructed by the State of Virginia and then given to Metrorail, Maryland intended to transfer the Light Rail line to WMATA too--which is different technology from the heavy rail system--but WMATA said no.  

It is still expected that service schedules, fares and mapping will be integrated with WMATA, at least this was intended according to a letter from John Porcari, then State Transportation Secretary, to Chevy Chase, Maryland c. 2015.

While the Purple Line was conceptualized as a fully circumferential line connecting all the legs of the Metrorail system (see below), only the section between Bethesda and New Carrollton is under construction.  No planning for extensions is underway.

The Metrorail system we don't have

If you don't plan for extensions or intensifications, you don't get them.  In the first entry, under transit infrastructure lessons, point 1:

While the early system was expensive and seemed extensive, it missed areas that would have been good to have been included, and WMATA didn't continue to work for expansion beyond the original system program.  

WMATA kept saying, not until we finish the original Approved Plan.  This meant that original concepts of extensions mostly did not come about. (I pointed this out to the first Dr. Gridlock columnist for the Washington Post, c. 1990.)

As the Purple Line light rail program proves, it takes decades to build rail.  If you do it in fits and starts it takes a lifetime.

To further explore this point, at the outset of construction of the system, there was an Adopted Approved Plan for the system, eventually slightly modified to have 103 miles of track with 83 stations, and separately, a set of recommended extensions.  Of the 11 proposed extensions, only three were completed. 

THE MAP: 

The expansive Metrorail system planned at the outset

Washington Regional Rapid Rail Transit System Map

Adopted March 1968. Revised February 1969 and June 1970

The map of the system, printed in that issue, and just before the system started operation, shows a number of "authorized" or planned "further" extensions.  These were the authorized extensions, listed clockwise from the map:

• Green Line, north from Greenbelt to Laurel, ≅8 miles
• Orange Line east leg, from New Carrollton to Bowie, ≅9 miles
• Blue Line from Addison Road to Largo (two stations)
• Green Line, south from Branch Avenue to Brandywine, ≅12 miles
• Yellow Line south leg, from Huntington to Fairfield -- unknown.  I don't know where this is.  Commonly Fairfield in Fairfax County is thought to be west of Vienna Metrorail Station in the Fair Oaks area, not the Rte. 1 Corridor
• Blue Line west leg from Franconia-Springfield to Burke, ≅8 miles
• Columbia Pike Line from the Pentagon to Lincolnia 
• Orange Line west leg, from Vienna to Centreville, ≅10 miles
• What is now called the Silver Line, which was constructed in two segments, serving Fairfax and Loudoun Counties with 11 stations and 23.5 miles of track 
• Red Line one station extension  from Rockville to Shady Grove
• Red Line west leg, from Shady Grove to Germantown, ≅9 miles

If you ever wondered why Southern Towers in Alexandria is so tall, it's not just because of proximity to freeways, but also because they expected the Columbia Pike Metrorail Line to be constructed.

Remember, at the time of the initial planning, passenger railroad services were on the decline, so Metrorail is a mixture of a heavy rail subway in the core and a "commuter railroad" outside the core.

Since then, researchers have found that stations in the core of a region have the best ridership.

  

A good example of this for WMATA is the Silver Line, it extends 23.5 miles further out into the suburbs, with 11 stations, but only has a daily ridership of about 36,000, while the Red Line, which is more focused on the core, but still suburban, had at least 136,000 daily riders.  Data source.

Interestingly, the very first plan for a Silver Line c. 1971, forecasted around 30,000 riders, so you could say the Silver Line is meeting expectations.  But the other lines have double or more the ridership.  Without Dulles Airport as a primary and important destination, the line is less justifiable.

Most of the proposed extensions are exurban, but could be justifiable, IF AND ONLY IF, comparable to Arlington, those jurisdictions developed land use intensification plans in association with the expansion.  (Although this could be further criticized as sprawl.)

The c. 1991? WMATA Metrorail "21st Century" Map

I know nothing about the origin, but this was displayed in the office of then DC Councilmember Jack Evans, who served on the WMATA Board of Directors for many years.  Since it includes a circumferential Purple Line, which was first proposed in 1987, it was produced some time after 1987.

It shows:

• A one station extension to Gaithersburg on the west leg of the Red Line (not to Germantown)
• An extension to Olney from Glenmont on the east leg of the Red Line
• A Wheaton-Georgetown-Manassas Line serving Columbia Pike, with 12 stations, including one for Kennedy Center
• What became the Silver Line but  showing only three stations, but as far out as Leesburg, which is 17 miles further from Dulles Airport, and 11 miles from the current end of line Ashburn Station
• A heavy rail Purple Line, a circle line connecting the legs.  This line doesn't show many stations between the legs.  It does show Montgomery Mall, Tysons Corner, a connection at "Ravenswood" to the Wheaton-Manassas Line, National Harbor, and Andrews Air Force Base
• the Green Line south extension to Brandywine
• an Orange Line extension to Annapolis
• the Potomac Yards infill station in Alexandria
• and the Green Line being extended from Greenbelt to Baltimore, a distance of about 29 miles

Most of the proposed extensions are exurban, but could be justifiable, IF AND ONLY IF, comparable to Arlington, those jurisdictions developed land use intensification plans in association with the expansion.  (Although this could be further criticized as sprawl.)  Penn Line MARC railroad service to Baltimore means a Green Line extension there isn't warranted, as it's an unnecessary duplication.

Regional Transit System Plan, 1999

The graphic is referenced in this document.  The extensions were supposed to be operational by 2025.  

It shows:

•  An extension to Centreville; 
• a loop for Tysons Corner; 
• an outer circumferential route (the Purple Line, but heavy rail), from the Orange Line south of Tysons to Greenbelt; 
• an inner circumferential route, from Bethesda to New Carrollton; 
• a line from Wesley Heights/Georgetown to Fort Lincoln; 
• from Columbia Heights? to Minnesota Avenue; 
• a separated Yellow Line to Silver Spring; 
• A line from Bailey's Crossroad-Columbia Pike to the Pentagon to Charles County, in part being a southern outer circumferential route (Purple Line, but heavy rail)
• a Blue or Yellow Line extension to Fort Belvoir/Lorton.

It also includes the already approved extension to Largo then under construction, the previously referenced infill station at Potomac Yard, but for the first time, the infill New York Avenue Station (now called NoMA), between Union Station and Rhode Island Station, which began construction a couple years later.

Assignation of responsibility for expansion planning to the jurisdictions, not WMATA, 2000 

Silver Line, c. 2000

There have been many different planning iterations for a Silver Line, dating from the time of the initial Approved Plan(s) in 1968-1970.  In 2000, decisive planning was put into place by the State of Virginia, primarily to provide a Metrorail connection to Dulles Airport.   The final plan was approved in 2004.

This Washington Post graphic is from 2007.  The first phase opened in 2014 and the second in 2022.

Separated Blue Line, c. 2000-2001

(Or a Separated Silver Line)

The original proposal for a separated Blue Line dates to 2001 ("If DC had visionary elected officials and planners it could use the new WMATA "BOS" study to push through the development of a separated Silver Line in DC (and Northern Virginia)").  The main purposes were twofold: (1) to provide a separate platform at Rosslyn, taking pressure off the Blue and Orange Lines; and (2) to provide a parallel line to the Downtown stations as a "relief line," presuming that as the system approached 1,000,000 daily riders, existing stations would be at overcapacity.  

Two secondary purposes were providing service to Georgetown and to provide an additional connection to Union Station, to support plans for expansion of the station and an expected doubling or more of railroad passenger train ridership.

WMATA dropped this plan, in response to a regional economic downturn.  It's the foundation of my concept for a more ambitious Separated Silver Line.

With post-covid decline of Downtown DC as a regional employment center, there is less need for a "relief line" for the Downtown stations.  But Georgetown "needs" a station, and to accommodate planned future growth for Union Station ("Union Station in Washington Has a Grand Development Plan," New York Times), another Metrorail connection would be advantageous.

For awhile, only the Arlington County Master Transportation Plan kept the Separated Blue Line concept alive in their planning documents.

Except for the section east, starting at Minnesota Avenue to New Carrollton, the line would no longer interline in Virginia and most of DC, which is an advantage for reliability.

Separated Silver Line.  My concept riffs on the separated concept, based in part by comments on a post at GGW.  Instead of separating the Silver Line at Rosslyn, it drops down from East Falls Church, sending it southward to Seven Corners and east along Arlington Boulevard, to Rosslyn and then across the river to Georgetown and then east of the existing subway lines, to Union Station, and from there to H Street as in the original plan and then connecting to the Blue Line again at Stadium-Armory.  

At the very least it would be better to connect to the Orange Line at Minnesota Avenue, adding one or two stations on the RFK Campus and Benning Road.  This would serve the forthcoming RFK campus, not just for the stadium, but also for redevelopment of the parking lots.  Perhaps a leg could go up up Bladensburg Road into Prince George's County.  It would also provide a Metrorail connection to New York Avenue.  

Regional Transit System Plan, 2010

From the document:

Assuming at least 10 years to construct major core capacity projects, we must identify a preferred expansion strategy and begin to preferred expansion strategy and begin to secure funding in the next 5 years

Regional Transit System Plan, 2013

This planing document fed into the next.  But it called for a lot more extensions, like the 1999 Plan.  I'm taking some liberties with this list.  Few of the examined opportunities made it into the Momentum Plan (next).  For rail it states:

(1) Purple Line in Maryland's portion of the Constrained Long Range Plan.  

And for WMATA by 2025:

(2) Metro Center/Gallery Place Pedestrian Walkway (planning for this dates to 2002)

(3) Farragut North/Farragut West Pedestrian Walkway

(4) Second Rosslyn Station and Blue or Silver Line separation options

(5) Possible separation of the Yellow and Green Lines

(6) A potential Brown line loop from Friendship Heights on the west to Cherry Hill in Montgomery County on the east.

(7) The Beltway Line, circumferential, more northerly than the Purple Line

(8) End of Line Extensions: (a) Green Line to BWI; (b) Orange or Blue Line to Bowie; (c) Blue Line to Potomac Mills; (d) Orange Line to Centreville or even further to Gainesville; (e) Red Line to Metropolitan Grove/Gaithersburg; (f) Green Line to National Harbor; (g) Yellow Line to Lorton; (h) Silver Line further to Leesburg.

And more infill stations: (1) Montgomery College on the west Red Line; (2) Kansas Avenue on the east Red Line; (3) Oklahoma Avenue on Blue/Orange (this station was planned in the original system but successfully opposed by residents); (4) St. Elizabeths Campus on the Green Line; (5) Eisenhower Avenue/Valley on the Blue/Yellow Lines.

Plus more interline connections.  Exploration of a Purple Line extension on New Hampshire Avenue to White Oak, and from New Carrollton to Alexandria.  And exploration of light rail in Upper Montgomery County (Corridor Cities).

Momentum: The Next Generation of Metro

Strategic Plan: 2013-2025 (published in 2013)

This plan is well done.  WRT Metrorail it suggests:

(1) possible extensions to Centreville (Orange Line in Virginia), to Bowie (Blue Line in Maryland) and to Potomac Mills (Blue Line in Virginia).

(2) a possible separated Blue line either more north between Rosslyn and H Street NE along M Street, or between Rosslyn and H Street via Constitution Avenue.

(3) A new platform station, separating the Orange and Blue Lines, for the Blue Line at Rosslyn

(4) Walkways between stations to foster foot-based transfers to stations in close proximity.  For example, this was proposed for Metro Center and Gallery Plan in a plan dating to 2002.  Later a walkway was suggested between Farragut West and Farragut North, to facilitate transfers without having to go to Metro Center.

(5) extension of the Purple Line south and west from New Carrollton to Virginia

There are also discussions about BRT, commuter rail, and streetcars, in keeping with various plans at the time, pursued by other transit agencies.

Connect Greater Washington - Transit Project/Strategy Summary, 2016

My mind is too full to give this document adequate justice: part one; part two.  

(1) Another Circumferential Line connecting the ends and the suburbs, further north than the current Purple Line alignment, and then takes up the concept as is from New Carrollton.   While I picked it up from an Internet posting in 2008 it's in this 2016 document.  

It doesn't show a transfer connection to a Columbia Pike line, and it has more stations, 18, between the legs of 8 Metrorail lines, which are transfer stations on the map.  Whereas the "1991" map only shows 5 interstitial stations.  This map also shows the Purple Line connecting to the west leg of the Red Line at White Flint (now North Bethesda), not the Bethesda station, which is the eastern origin point of the line under construction.  It's not clear if the map shows a connection to Dulles Airport.

(2) And so many other possibilities:

• Making the Silver Line a Virginia only service, with a new station at Rosslyn (not recommended)
• WRT the Beltway line, sticking with Maryland's Purple Line light rail, but also with Virginia, extending from Bethesda to Tysons, and Tysons to Merrifield and more expansion in Maryland on the south
• Yellow Line separation once it crosses the Potomac, adding a station on the National Mall, not connecting to L'Enfant Plaza, having a transfer station at Union Station, and continuing up North Capital and Georgia Avenue to Silver Spring
• Separated Blue Line from Rosslyn to Union Station, maybe on H Street NE or a Separated Silver Line to Union Station, and then interlining on the Orange/Blue.  (It anticipated streetcar service would be provided on H Street, therefore it didn't suggest duplication with Metrorail.)
• Metro Center-Gallery Place and Farragut North-Farragut West underground pedestrian connections
• Blue Line extension to Potomac Mills
• It doesn't recommend extension to Bowie from Largo based on density and employment figures.  Below I argue that such an extension, even further to Annapolis, should be considered on economic and equity grounds, but as discussed it needs a commitment to development along that route.
• The infill stations not previously approved are not recommended.  However, the Oklahoma Avenue station could now be justified as a result of the Washington Commanders team returning to the RFK campus, with planned ancillary development.  A St. Elizabeths station could be justified by the since relocation of the Department of Homeland Security to that site.

Extensions to Potomac Mills/Quantico

(Fairfax and Prince William Counties)

In keeping with the WMATA policy of jurisdictions being responsible for expansion planning, Fairfax County's Countywide Transit Network Study (2016) calls for extending the Blue Line to Potomac Mills in Prince William County.  

In 2021, the Virginia State Department of Rail and Public Transportation did a study (Springfield to Quantico Enhanced Public Transportation Feasibility Study) recommending extension of either the Blue or Yellow Lines to Quantico (Marine Base, CIA Training Center) and the end, also serving Fort Belvoir and Potomac Mills ("Here’s how Metro would change Prince William County development, if a Quantico extension ever happens," Washington Business Journal).

The State study said it was possible, but would take a decade or two to come about.  I prefer the Yellow Line alternative which serves the Rte. 1 Corridor, and doesn't require a big horseshoe bend to reach Fort Belvoir.

The BLOOP/Blue Line Loop, 2023

I always thought this was dumb, so I never really wrote about it.  I don't think I gave it enough credit, but I still didn't think it provided enough value.

-- Blue/Orange/Silver Capacity & Reliability Study

-- Alternatives

The preferred alternative would have provided an inner ring subway service providing a new platform at Rosslyn, some new inner city stations in DC, and a connection to National Harbor in Prince George's County.  It added 8 stations in addition to transfer stations at Rosslyn, Mount Vernon Square, Union Station, and Navy Yard--useful to provide more capacity for service to the Nationals baseball stadium.

Although it called for service to Georgetown and 8 total new stations in DC, I didn't think that turning the line south from Union Station, rather than extending east from Union Station a la the original Separated Blue Line plan provided, enough value to DC.  But it's arguable.   

OTOH a connection to Georgetown and an additional connection to Union Station are of high value.  And I could be biased because I lived in the H Street NE neighborhood for many years.  I still remember my shock reading the original Post article ("Crowds could derail success," 2001, and this article which preceded it, "Coming to a Curve: Region's Subway System Begins to Show Its Age, Limits"), when we were organizing the commercial district revitalization improvement program for the neighborhood, which has had great success.

But now, serendipitously from a transit service standpoint (not for taxpayers) the forthcoming football stadium at the RFK campus would also have been served by stations on the north side of the campus, not just from the RFK-Stadium/Armory station on the south.  

National Harbor is a blot of development with a casino, in Prince George's County, along the Potomac River across from Alexandria.  It's primarily accessed by car.

Although to be fair to WMATA, the BLOOP was satisficed, not optimized, but designed to get approval from all three jurisdictions: (1) Virginia for the new Rosslyn platform; (2) DC for connections to Georgetown, additional stations east of the current system, and a new connection to Union Station; and (3) National Harbor for Maryland ("Backwardness of transportation and land use planning: National Harbor, Prince George's County, Maryland | Why isn't high capacity transit access required from the outset?").

Light Metro

Nothing on the books, but current WMATA President Randy Clarke said in this "Ask me anything" session on Youtube, that if WMATA is to expand rail services, it'd most likely be light metro, like the expanding REM system in Montreal.  

A Reseau express metropolitan (REM) train on a test run in downtown Montreal.  

Photo: Canadian Press/Christinne Muschi.

Light Metro is light rail on a dedicated track, with automation.  In Montreal it's both above ground, and below--as they took over a tunnel that had been used by regional rail. Then again, DC itself has failed with streetcars ("DC makes yet another bad decision about streetcars: will replace the one line with a so called "fancy" bus | The Vision Thing").   

Note that while REM gets a lot of attention these days, it's not a panacea ("Montreal's new, for-profit light-rail system: national model or cautionary tale?," Canadian Press) especially because the province agreed to pay the vendor 75 cents per kilometer per passenger for 99 years--that's $7.50  Canadian ($5.25 US) for a 6 mile trip.  That seems wholly unsustainable.

Other reasonable concepts for extension

Looking at the big map, I'd say you could also consider this extension but it's never been a part of any official planning.  

• instead of rerouting the Yellow Line to Silver Spring, I'd send it out New Hampshire Avenue into Montgomery County perhaps further along Colesville Road -- this combines a couple of different ideas in various plans
• Adding a Yellow Line station in the vicinity of Jefferson Memorial on the National Mall is enough value to separate the Yellow Line as listed in planning documents referenced above.

Conclusion.  If you don't plan for extensions or infill stations (system intensification) you don't get them.  If you propose dumb ones you don't get them either.  If you propose and plan for good additions to the transit infrastructure, with a jurisdiction in support, you'll get them.

But because it always costs much more to wait, it's better to move forward more quickly.  Costs balloon up to 5x or more if you don't.

WRT the various iterations of official plans of some sort (plus some of my own) this is what I would have prioritized, recognizing that my bias is on intensification of adding stations in the core, which is likely to result in the greatest amount of new ridership.

• A Wheaton-Georgetown-Manassas Line serving Columbia Pike, with 12 stations, including Georgetown and Kennedy Center

This would provide 7 new stations in DC, and would support intensification in the Columbia Pike corridor.  Southern Tower apartments would finally get their Metrorail connection.

(We won't talk about the failed Columbia Pike Streetcar project, "Arlington officials halt efforts on streetcars for Columbia Pike, Crystal City." Washington Post.)

• Separated Blue (or Silver) Line

This would provide new platforms/connections at Rosslyn and Union Station, service to Georgetown and to the H Street NE corridor, which given the forthcoming stadium for the Washington Commanders at the RFK campus, adds transit capacity to a future high in demand destination.

My Separated Silver Line concept does this, but also adds stations along Arlington Boulevard in Arlington, which is also an intensification move.  Same with a potential leg north on Bladensburg Road potentially into Prince George's County.

• Various line extensions

Shady Grove to Germantown, Orange Line to Fair Oaks, etc., make sense to me.  Counties should be looking out for their interests, and at least doing scoping to determine if such extensions make sense. 

Like what Fairfax County did with its transportation plan, calling for a Blue Line extension.  As the "not recommended" language in the 2016 plan makes clear, these areas need more population and employment density to justify the extension.

But, if you don't plan for them, they certainly won't happen.

• Orange Line to Annapolis:  Also an economic development equity move

It's far, 28 miles from New Carrollton.  

But it's an important regional destination, especially being the State Capital, given limited bus service and no railroad service,  adding connections to Bowie on route, setting up the conditions for intensification, etc.  (Hell if we're really dreaming then you could do a Metrorail line from Annapolis to Baltimore, or alternatively a new Baltimore Subway Line to Annapolis, 30 miles.)

I went to a conference in Annapolis in 2005 and people were opposing a new development there because of how much motor vehicle traffic it would generate.  I was thinking, "this is so much different from DC, because you can build this close to a Metrorail station and generate so much less automobile traffic."

It could also be prioritized on economic development equity grounds ("D.C.-area leaders consider prioritizing equity in transportation and land use planning," Washington Post).  Like most regions, the economic center of the Washington region continues to shift West ("A Region Divided: The State of Growth in Greater Washington, D.C." Brookings).  This would provide the ability to intensify and refocus development on the East side of the metropolitan area.

Prince George's would have to finally prioritize transit oriented development to make this work for them.

-- "Better late than never? DC Metrorail Blue Line Corridor Coalition advocates for TOD, 45 years after line opens" (2025)

--"Prince George's County's newly announced transit oriented development program for the Blue Line," 2022
-- "Backwardness of transportation and land use planning: National Harbor, Prince George's County, Maryland | Why isn't high capacity transit access required from the outset?," 2022
-- Branding for Downtown Largo, Maryland National Park and Planning Commission
-- "Major Blue Line projects aim to transform Prince George’s County. Residents hope it’s for the better," WAMU/NPR
-- Ten Principles for Developing Successful Town Centers, Urban Land Institute, 2007

-- "The future of mixed use development/urbanization: Part 3, Prince George's County, where's the there?," 2011
-- "A recommended new planning direction for Prince George's County," 2011
-- "Another lesson that Prince George's County has a three to five year window to reposition based on visionary transportation planning," 2011
-- "Frustration #3: the talk about transit oriented development and Prince George's County," 2013
-- "Prince George's County still doesn't get "transit oriented development" and walkable communities: Greenbelt edition," 2012

-- "Making over New Carrollton as a transit-centric urban center and Prince George's County's "New Downtown" (2017, originally 2014)

Also it would connect to the Purple Line, and if the Purple Line were extended from New Carrollton to Alexandria, it would be even better.

Would it be cool if Metrorail were extended to Annapolis, and Baltimore Subway to Annapolis, ideally as part of a greater plan ("Transit planning in Baltimore").

• Purple Line.  

A circumferential line would not have generated the kind of ridership necessary to justify the cost of heavy rail, unless like how the Moscow subway is prioritized by the national government, it was funded regardless of strict economics.  However sections in Virginia probably would have generated decent ridership as the line would reach underserved areas.  The Purple Line light rail is a good alternative.

I do think planning for further phases, especially in Prince George's County, and from Bethesda to Tysons should be initiated.  Definitely from New Carrollton to Alexandria.  PG County should make the latter one of its top economic development priorities. 

• Yellow Line from Fort Totten up New Hampshire Avenue into Montgomery County and then on Colesville Road

This is my concept, never has been studied formally.  It's a way to serve an intensifying corridor and major employment centers like White Oak, and would connect to the Purple Line light rail at Takoma/Langley Crossroads. 

(A blogger at Greater Greater Washington suggested an alternative going up Georgia Avenue to Silver Spring.  To me, it would make more sense if it were extended beyond that station.  "Imagine a Separate Yellow Line."  And I'm not sure you can get the intensification benefits, without going to an Arlington Planned Unit Development underlying property upzone.)

• BLOOP

I never gave it a chance.  Basically it's an inner circumferential line.  It would be in DC's favor, adding service to unserved areas like Georgetown, connecting Rosslyn to DC, adding new transfer stations at Union Station and Navy Yard (Washington Nationals Stadium) and stations in both the NW and SE quadrants.  Plus it provides subway service to some locations in PG County, including National Harbor.

• Extension to Quantico by either the Blue or Yellow Lines

Not my ballgame.  It's super polycentric and exurban.  But it will reach some major employment centers and could provide some interesting opportunities for in-line transit service if more stations are added in certain places, comparable to intra-Arlington County ridership between Rosslyn and Virginia Square Stations.  Nonethess for Fairfax and Prince William Counties, it could be a top economic development and transportation planning priority ("Reimagining Potomac Mills: County’s draft comprehensive plan envisions big things for Prince William’s busiest mall," Prince William Times).