Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Transportation Home  |  Discussions  |  Traffic  |  Columns  |  Q&A     |      Twitter |    Facebook   |  phone Alerts
Posted at 1:00 PM ET, 03/ 8/2011

Metro plans Blue Line split for 2012

By Robert Thomson

The transit authority staff is returning to the Metro board this week to discuss its plan to divert some Blue Line trains at rush hour, a plan the staff says it can implement in June 2012. The discussion is on the agenda for the 9 a.m. Thursday meeting of the board's Customer Service and Operations Committee at Metro headquarters.

The shift, sending some Blue Line trains over the Potomac River on what is now the Yellow Line bridge instead of through the Rosslyn tunnel, will affect the travel habits of thousands of riders. The staff recognizes the need to prepare riders who might take advantage of the new service, or who might wind up on the wrong train.

To envision the scope of the communications challenge ahead for Metro, think about every place you see a Metro system map. They all have to change to reflect the reroutings that would send a third of the peak period Blue Line trains from Franconia-Springfield over the Yellow Line bridge and onto the Green Line up to Greenbelt. Meanwhile, the transit authority would add three trains per peak hour to the Orange Line, operating from West Falls Church to Largo Town Center, the current terminus for all Blue Line trains.

And it's not just the 5,000 rail system maps that will need to be reprinted and reinstalled in stations and on rail cars. Metro also would have to change 2,600 station signs and pylons. More than 1,200 fare charts for fare vending machines and station kiosks also would have to be altered.

Train operators and station managers would need to be trained for their roles in explaining the changes to riders.

In its report to the board Thursday, the transit staff promises to develop "a communications plan that not only clearly describes the expansion and resulting changes, but also involves customers, stakeholders and employees in the change to ensure public support and quality service."

The staff and the board have been discussing the proposed split for several years. Last summer, I invited readers of our Commuter page to suggest ways of designating the services that would minimize confusion. Should the new services get new colors, or should they adhere to the current color scheme while changing the destination signs?

The new report to the board focuses on how best to communicate the changes to riders. How do you listen to Metro's messages and what's most likely to get your attention?

The report suggests that riders will be most attentive to messages about the service change that focus on what's in it for them, describe the changes clearly and in detail and contain practical information that rides can act on.

A rider reading those conclusions might ask whether Metro had to pay for the information about what transit users need. But given Metro's past problems with communication, I find it encouraging that the staff is making the riders the central focus for a carefully developed information plan.

Compare this approach with the December announcement about the bag inspections, which amounted to: We've decided to stop riders at random to see if they're terrorists. Watch for a brochure.

No, this new approach to the riding experience promises to be different. But since it's been a while since we discussed the planned split, let's briefly review the three service problems the Metro staff wants to do address with this solution:

* Metro and its riders are aware that there's a problem keeping Orange and Blue Line trains close to schedule as they squeeze through the Rosslyn tunnel.

* Connecting what will eventually be the new rail line to Dulles will add trains to the congestion at Rosslyn.

* The destinations for many Virginia riders are now on the eastern side of downtown Washington.

Metro says that while some Blue Line riders heading for Rosslyn, Foggy Bottom or Farragut West would be inconvenienced by the diversion of some rush-hour trains, the realigned service would help the rail system match the new ridership demands while clearing room in the Rosslyn tunnel.

The Thursday presentation is for the information of the board members and the public. The board has not voted on the Blue Line split.

By Robert Thomson  | March 8, 2011; 1:00 PM ET
Categories:  Blue Line, Metro, Transit  | Tags:  Dr. Gridlock, Metrorail  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Today's transportation roundup
Next: Street closures for Mardi Gras

Comments

"Train operators and station managers would need to be trained for their roles in explaining the changes to riders." -- Train operators and station managers never speak or explain anything to Metro riders, so this training really won't be necessary!

Posted by: DreamEscape | March 8, 2011 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Color signage should be done so that it conveys the most important information to the highest number of riders.

This may involve a train changing colors in the middle of its route -- something Metro has been reluctant to do until now, even when it would make things clearer for most riders.

For instance, one of the new trains from Franconia to Greenbelt should be signed Yellow until it leaves Pentagon, because the most important information is whether it will cross the Yellow Line bridge or follow the Blue Line to Rosslyn. Before arriving at L'Enfant, it should change the signage to Green, because from L'Enfant on the most important information is whether it will stop at Fort Totten or continue to Greenbelt.

Southbound, the same train should be signed Yellow until after it leaves L'Enfant, and change to Blue before arriving at Pentagon.

Similarly, I doubt all eastbound Silver Line trains will terminate at Stadium-Armory -- some will need to continue to Largo to make up for the departed Blue Line trains. They should change signage to Blue before reaching Rosslyn.

In this scenario, the only change needed to track maps would be to make the line between King Street and Franconia both yellow and blue.

Posted by: dal20402 | March 8, 2011 2:16 PM | Report abuse

It needs to be distinguished by it's own color and name of the line as it is neither yellow, green or blue.

And Dr. G - at this point why don't they simply extend the yellow line to Greenbelt as well, instead of continuing to terminate Yellow Line trains at Mt. Vernon?

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | March 8, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

From Dr. Gridlock: The problem at this point is that there's not enough money or train cars to extend Yellow Line service all the way to Greenbelt. Right now, the Yellow Line's rush hour service terminates at MV Square. The off-peak Yellow Line service terminates at Fort Totten. The reason it extends to Fort Totten at any hour is that Jim Graham pushed for it, as a way to support development in that DC corridor.

Back at that time, the question was raised about whether MD would finance a Yellow Line extension to Greenbelt, as DC was initially paying for the extension to Fort Totten. MD chose instead to finance the enhanced service on the Red Line between Grosvenor and Shady Grove, eliminating some of the turnbacks at Grosvenor.

(Since the days of those pilot programs, the transit authority has taken over the financing as a regional expense. So now, all the jurisdictions pay for the extra Red Line service and the extra Yellow Line service.)

Posted by: rtthomson1 | March 8, 2011 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Only a third? That doesn't seem like it will counteract the effects of the Silver Line, especially with additional Orange Line trains added in.

Posted by: DragonofAnger | March 8, 2011 3:54 PM | Report abuse

The Silver Line is going to cause the whole system to grind to a halt, either from too many trains in the Rosslyn tunnel or not enough revenue.

Posted by: ceebee2 | March 8, 2011 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Or they could just run eight car trains on the Orange Line as promised. No new maps needed.

Posted by: getjiggly1 | March 8, 2011 5:18 PM | Report abuse

dal20402 wrote:
"Southbound, the same train should be signed Yellow until after it leaves L'Enfant, and change to Blue before arriving at Pentagon."

I would be frustrated if I were on my way to Eisenhower Avenue or Huntington, only to be later told that the train is not in fact going to those stops.

Posted by: DOEJN | March 8, 2011 11:32 PM | Report abuse

Far simpler to use a separate color for what is essentially a new route. Signage could be updated with a paste-over label for the affected portions of the system. There will be no end to the frustrated riders who get on a "Yellow" train, sit down to read their Express paper, and wind up at the end of the Green Line.

Posted by: gac1982 | March 9, 2011 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company