Silver Line Officially Receives FFGA

After years of work, Northern Virginia will be getting a new Metro Line. The Silver Line officially received a Full Funding Grant Agreement worth $900 million this morning, when Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood signed it.

Construction on the project has already begun, but this agreement means that the project will be able to move forward. Phase I is expected to open in 2013 and will add 5 stations in the Tysons Corner and Reston Areas. The line should eventually be extended to Dulles Airport, but that is part of Phase II, which will still need to go through the FTA funding process.

Phase I of the Silver Line will run from Wiehle Avenue in Reston to Tysons Corner in the median of the Dulles Access Road. In Tysons Corner, it will travel along Routes 7 and 123, with four stops in Virginia's largest job center. It will return to the Dulles Access Road median and continue to I-66. It will join the Orange Line between East Falls Church and West Falls Church and will run with the Orange (and later the Blue) Line from East Falls Church to Stadium-Armory station in the District of Columbia.

For a look back on the ups and downs of the Silver Line see some of my previous posts:

• Are All Transit Investments Created Equal?
• Over/Under?
• Dulles Rail DeRailed?
• FTA Approval
• Getting Closer

Understanding the Blue Line Reroute

Metro's growth in ridership has never been pain free, but overcrowding on the Orange Line is reaching absurd levels. WMATA has already lengthened many trains to 8 cars, which is the length of the platforms. A shortage of rollingstock and power substation issues are preventing more trains from being lengthened, but even so, the day is coming when nothing can be done but add trains.

This unfortunately, can only happen at the expense of the Blue Line.

Metro trains can operate 90 seconds apart, but require 135 seconds of separation at locations where switches must be realigned between trains. In this case, the bottleneck is the "Rosslyn Portal," the area of tunnel just west of Rosslyn Station, where the Blue and Orange Lines diverge.

Planners at WMATA have gotten a little extra capacity out of the system by running two consecutive Orange Line trains followed by one Blue Line train. This way, the switches don't need to be realigned as much--and that saves 45 seconds. This is possible because for every 2 Blue trains, WMATA runs 3 Orange trains. Still, the throughput is limited.

Since pictures are worth more than words, I'll just demonstrate by referring to the diagram below. *If you don't understand something, leave a comment, and I'll try to address it.*

Based on the 135 second headway, WMATA can run 5 trains through a given segment of track every 12 minutes. Each the diagrams below represents a 12 minute interval during rush hour. Each of the lines on the diagram represents a train in each direction. Therefore, a trackway with two lines (like between Navy Yard and Anacostia) represents a headway of 6 minutes--12/2.

The first diagram represents WMATA's current service pattern during rush hours.

*In the first version of my maps, I erroneously showed the Yellow Line going all the way to Fort Totten. During rush periods, the Yellow Line terminates at Mount Vernon Square. The corrected map is below.


The chief limitation for the Orange Line, as you can see here is the 4 minute headway on the Vienna-Rosslyn segment. Adding one train would reduce headways to 3 minutes and would add a capacity of 1000-1400 passengers for every 12 minute period. Any additional capacity is sorely needed, but the segment of track between Rosslyn and Stadium Armory is essentially at capacity.

Hence the so-called "Blue Line Split." Under this proposal, approximately every other Blue Line train leaving Franconia-Springfield would follow the Yellow Line across the Potomac, and up to Greenbelt. While this would shave about 8 minutes off of a trip between Franconia and L'Enfant, it would decrease the frequency of trains running directly to Rosslyn, Farragut, and Metro Center from Franconia. According to Metro reports, however, trips from the Alexandria/southern Fairfax stations to Farragut and Metro Center have been decreasing (by about 4%) while trips to the east side of Downtown (L'Enfant, Gallery Place) have been increasing (by 11%).

Here's what WMATA is proposing:

*In the first version of my maps, I erroneously showed the Yellow Line going all the way to Fort Totten. During rush periods, the Yellow Line terminates at Mount Vernon Square. The corrected map is below.


Under this scenario, all stations maintain their current headways or increase them except for Arlington Cemetery. To offset the Blue Line trains to Greenbelt on the east side of the system, the new Orange Line train that will be running in place of the Blue Line train will also run to Largo.

While the Blue Line via Rosslyn is certainly less patronized, there could still be potential for overcrowding. This could be alleviated by making sure that all Blues via Rosslyn are 8 cars (which hold about 400 more passengers than a 6-car train).

Still, some are understandably upset. But there is a greater good to think about. All they need to do is get to the Metro station 6 minutes earlier, and they'll get to work 6 minutes earlier. There is no trip time impact to Blue Line trains operating via Rosslyn. Of course, that's assuming that normal operations are underway. Since the Blue Line Split will increase efficiency and reliability at the Rosslyn Portal, riders via Rosslyn on both Blue and Orange Lines will experience fewer delays, and therefore an increased trip time on average (not considering wait times).

To analyze the travel time cost to riders, I created an additional schematic (I've spent several hours this week working on this post--that's what having a cold is good for). The schematic on the left side of the diagram shows the current travel times. Assuming someone wanted to leave Franconia-Springfield at 7:30, they would take train "A." Were they to miss that train, the next one (B) would leave 6 minutes later at 7:36. Since trains take the same routing, B would arrive at each destination 6 minutes after A. Passengers wishing to travel to L'Enfant would save 5 minutes by transferring to the Yellow Line at King Street or Pentagon.

On the right side of the diagram, I've shown projected travel times (based on current station-station travel times) with the Blue Line Split. Since approximately every other Blue train at rush hour would follow the Yellow Line, I've assumed that train A would be the re-routed train. It has the same departure time from Franconia as train A does under the current travel time scenario.

Passengers traveling to L'Enfant now save 9 minutes over the one-seat ride, and 5 minutes over the transfer-to-Yellow ride. Passengers traveling to Farragut West and Metro Center would still get to work quicker by waiting 6 additional minutes at Franconia for train B, but they would only be saving 3 minutes over train A. But their trip is not actually longer, just their wait. Since trains (even Metro trains) run on schedules--and remember, this rerouting will help on-time performance--the riders in question can just show up at Franconia (in the AM) or Farragut (in the PM) 6 minutes earlier or later and get to work in the same time.

The only people inconvenienced by this plan are people traveling to Arlington Cemetery during rush hours. Most of them are tourists, and can use their additional 6 minutes of waiting to puzzle over the Metro map or stand at the top of an escalator.

Therefore, I judge the direct cost to Franconia->Farragut riders as 6 minutes each way. Some will not like this. They are already complaining to Dr. Gridlock and Metro, but the time savings for everyone else in the system is quite appreciable.


Some have also contended that this scenario will cause confusion. Staff at WMATA have proposed dubbing the reroute, which would only occur during rush hours, the Brown Line. David over at Greater Greater Washington disagrees. He thinks dubbing it the Yellow Line makes the most sense, and I agree. For simplicity's sake, on the diagram showing the re-route, I have colored it light blue.

This proposal becomes even more essential (and probably assured) once the Silver Line to Dulles comes on line. With trains from Tysons and Loudoun County sharing tracks with the Orange Line between East Falls Church and Stadium-Armory, service will need to be reduced at WFC, Dunn Loring, and Vienna (see below).

These cuts would be less if the Blue Line had a separated subway along M Street, as WMATA is now proposing. Funding for this massive project has not been identified, but in my opinion is more likely under an Obama Presidency.

I also think that the Silver Line will eventually need it's own tunnel downtown. After all, as popular as the Orange Line is currently, the Silver Line will serve much more popular destinations. There's not much at Vienna, while the four stations in Tysons will be in the largest job center in the entire state of Virginia. Additionally, Silver trains will run much further into the suburbs than Orange Line trains--so they might be more popular with commuters. At the same time, I don't see the popularity of Vienna's parking garages dropping off.

*In the first version of my maps, I erroneously showed the Yellow Line going all the way to Fort Totten. During rush periods, the Yellow Line terminates at Mount Vernon Square. The corrected map is below.


Anyone have any thoughts? Questions?

Digging Down (for Transit) Means Building Up

This post is the sixth in a series of posts I am writing about lessons planners could learn from Canada. My recent trip showed me North American cities that have done a better job of managing their urban fabric than is typical south of the 49th Parallel.

The Washington region has done a decent job of building up where it has dug down for subway construction. And so has Toronto. Because of the height restrictions in DC, it's not always as obvious that we've included density with transit; however the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor and transit nodes in Alexandria, Bethesda, and Silver Spring are easier to see.

Transit Oriented Development in Alexandria

Mid-rises in Silver Spring,
Metro/MARC in foreground

Rosslyn's transit node from across the river

Toronto is especially adept at matching density with transit nodes. They also offer a good vantage point for the geography-savvy to note this good planning. From the top of the CN Tower, one can see for many miles, and its obvious where subway stations are, even from 1464.9 feet above the city.

Can you find the subway stations?
Hint: Look for taller buildings
Looking northwest from the CN Tower

Looking north from the CN Tower,
TOD stretches toward the horizon

Success in transit goes hand in hand with success with urban development. I was in another city which has learned that lesson recently. Charlotte, North Carolina opened its brand new light rail system in November of last year, and has almost reached its 2025 ridership targets in less than 10 months. I think that a large portion of the credit for the high ridership can be given to the planners in Charlotte who, long before the rail line was a sure thing had already implemented transit-supportive, smart growth policies.

The Lynx LRT at Carson

These policies are essential to the success of transit. At the moment, Fairfax County is struggling with those issues in preparation for the Silver Line to Dulles. As I've noted here before, the largest impediment to creating walkable, livable urban centers at Tysons is the auto-oriented nature of the development and transportation systems.

One Cross Tie Closer

I just wanted to draw your attention to an article in today's Post. According to the paper, the FTA has authorized the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to begin construction on the Dulles Metrorail Project (Phase I).

Some work is already being done in the Tysons Corner area. This work is utility relocation and was not technically part of the Metro project, although it is necessary before Metro construction can commence. The work authorized by FTA is not a formal go-ahead. They could still say no to the $900 million in federal funding, but allowing construction to start is very promising of final approval.

Phase one of the Dulles Metrorail Project will create a new Metro line, the Silver Line running along with Orange Line trains from Stadium-Armory to East Falls Church. It will also construct new track from East Falls Church to Whiele Avenue along the Dulles Toll Road. In Tysons Corner, the line will detour through the business district.

For other posts on the Silver Line, click here.

Silver Line Update

This morning's wonderful news about the Tysons Corner Metro extension is still good news, but we're not out of the woods yet.

FTA is committing $158.7 million to the project and is advancing it to the final design phase. The project is not yet a sure thing, but having jumped this hurdle, it is one step closer to reality.

Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters reminded Governor Kaine in a letter dated today that the two main issues facing the project are WMATA's ability to keep the system in a state of good repair and the ability of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (which is building the line) to keep the project on schedule and on budget.

At the same time, Senator Coburn of Oklahoma, is blocking a bill which would greatly improve Metro's chances of keeping the system in good repair. The bill would provide $1.5 billion in federal assistance for capital costs over the next decade, and would be matched by Maryland, Virginia, and the District.

Mr. Coburn doesn't think even one penny should go to Metro. He says to use federal tax dollars to keep Metro running is to "steal opportunity from our children." I remind him that every gallon of gasoline that Washingtonians don't use because we have the Metro is one more gallon of gasoline available for the children of Oklahoma--and they don't have a subway to take.

The senator feels that Metro riders (who already pay one of the highest percentages of the cost of the system in the nation) should be the ones who shoulder the burden--all of the burden. Of course, we might not even need to have this discussion if the federal government hadn't made rail travel less feasible in this country through a systematic use of policies encouraging suburbanization. Perhaps Mr. Coburn would support drivers paying the full cost of the Interstate Highway System, but I doubt it.

Anyway, we owe a big thanks to the leadership of Virginia for moving this project forward.

Silver Line Approved!

Despite earlier doubts, good sense has prevailed at the Federal Transit Administration. It seems they will likely dedicate $900 million in funding to the $2.5 billion Metro extension to Tysons Corner.

The first phase of this project, dubbed the Silver Line, will include 5 stations, four in Tysons Corner and one just east of Reston at Whiele Avenue and the Dulles Airport Access Road.

It will share track with the Orange Line from Stadium-Armory to East Falls Church, allowing riders to travel directly from downtown to the largest job center in Northern Virginia (map).

The second phase of the project will eventually extend the project through Reston to Dulles Airport and beyond.

Congratulations Metropolitan Washington!

Dulles De-Railed?

Will this....

...ever get here?

After Friday's Washington Post headline, that's a question many Washingtonians are asking themselves. The Federal Transit Administration's decision to not grant an expected $900 million to the Silver Line has caused quite a stir here in the seat of government.

Since the 1960s, before even the current Metro system was open to passengers, regional leaders have been calling for a rail connection to the area's largest airport. Of the three Airports in the Washington area, the premier gateway, Dulles, is the only one without train service to Downtown (and BWI also has service to Baltimore). The Silver Line would include 23 new miles of heavy rail, with trains operating from Ryan Road (Rt 772) in Loudoun County to Stadium-Armory station along the Orange and Blue Lines in Washington. Along the way, it would serve one of the region's largest job centers while connecting international visitors to downtown on a one-seat ride.

Many people I spoke with on Friday responded with surprise and outrage that a project being planned for four decades was suddenly in such a precarious position. According to the Post, it wasn't just everyday Metro riders that were upset either, Friday's lead article described Virginia Senator Warner as "livid."

So why all the hubbub? According to columnist Marc Fisher, the decision by the FTA to put federal funding at risk for Phase I of the Metro extension to Dulles Airport is not completely out of the blue. Still, the feds and Virginia have already allocated $104 million to the project, and utility relocation for the project has already started in Fairfax County.

It seems that there has been some contradiction regarding conversations between FTA and Virginia leaders. The Post is reporting that Virginia's cost estimates don't match the FTA's and that only a few days before the bell tolled for the Silver Line, FTA sent a report to Congress rating the Dulles Metro line as meeting criteria for funding. The Post articles indicate that Virginia's leaders feel like FTA has been leading them on with regards to the project's hopes. Many of the concerns raised last Thursday have already been addressed, including the slashing of costs late last year to meet FTA cost guidelines. If FTA is so concerned with the project, they should have sent up smoke signals earlier.

Due to this pressure, US Secretary of Transportation, Mary Peters, has agreed to grant a "cooling off period" before making a final decision. It seems very unlikely, however, that the FTA is going to change their mind and that leaves Northern Virginia's citizens and leaders in a quandary.

As reported before (here and here) on Track Twenty-Nine, the Silver Line was about far more than getting people from home to work (an estimated 60,000 commuters daily), it was to be about redefining Northern Virginia in a way which would change the very foundation of the home to work trip. Of course, it would take more than a Metro line to transform Tysons into Bethesda, but it isn't too far-fetched to imagine a transformation on the scale of Silver Spring's in gridlocked Fairfax County.

Without the $900 million in federal dollars, the $2.5 billion project will probably not move forward, at least not without major changes. Already talk is surfacing of ways to make up the gap. Governor Kaine has already expressed his disinterest in further raising tolls on the Dulles Toll Road to pay for the project. Some have suggested a private takeover of the project, but public-private partnerships still face much criticism, at least outside of the White House.

Regardless of the fate of the Silver Line, however, this situation is indicative of a larger problem facing America's urban areas. Transportation dollars are stretched thinner and thinner each additional year that passes, and the costs associated with the aging infrastructure from the Interstate Highway era are piling up. In an age where cheap oil seems to be in retreat, it does not seem prudent to continue to spend $40 on roads for every $1 on transit, yet that is where our national transportation policy is aimed.

Furthermore, the implications of the Dulles Metro rejection should be looked at in a broader context. For some time now, many cities have shied away from even considering heavy rail because FTA is unlikely to fund it. A few cities that already have systems are considering extensions, but what doubt the Dulles decision will cast is yet to be seen. For more information on this, check out the Overhead Wire's articles here and here.

In his State of the Union speech Monday night, Mr. Bush encouraged Congress to pass a stimulus package in the face of this recession. The Dulles Metro project is the same kind of stimulus for Northern Virginia because it challenges some of the forces that put us into this economic situation. Alternative forms of transportation would allow Americans to cut back on fuel spending, and therefore put money back in wallets across the nation.

It's ironic how spendthrift this administration is when it comes to improving our urban areas, education programs, and the health care system, especially in the face of Mr. Bush's own pet project, Iraq. Everyday, America spends an estimated $720 million on the Iraq War--almost enough to cover FTA's bill for Dulles. According to CommonDreams.org, one day's worth of War dollars would buy 6,500 homes, or give health care to 423,529 children, or even convert 1.27 million homes to run on renewable energy--talk about a stimulus package!

It's time that Metro opened its doors at Dulles and it's time that America's transportation policies started to lean in a more sustainable direction. America can't afford to miss the train when it comes to the greening of our cities. It's time for the Bush Administration to get on board with Dulles Rail.

Agree? Let the people in charge know at http://www.dullescorridorrail.com/.

It's Not Over 'Til It's Under--Or is It?

It seems that both sense and nonsense are flowing out of the Tysons Corner area at the moment. Last week, the Post reported that the group, Tysonstunnel.org had sued the US Department of Transportation over the selection of an elevated alignment for the Silver Line as it passes through the congested office district. They feel that proper consideration was not given to constructing a set of subway tunnels to host the sleek Metro trains.

Now, it seems that some of those who backed the tunnel are throwing their support behind the locally preferred alternative. Apparently, they feel that having a Metro station above ground is better than not having a Metro station period. This group is calling itself Tysons Tomorrow, and hopes to throw community support behind getting federal funding for the project.

As I opined last week, the auto-oriented nature of the Tysons area is a severe impediment to creating the transit-oriented mix of uses envisioned by the land owners there. Furthermore, I questioned the wisdom of placing transit in a freeway median. In Tysons' case, however, there seems to be little alternative to using the freeway corridor. At least planners have taken the step of placing the four Tysons stations away from the Dulles Toll Road and Capital Beltway. Of course, I feel that a Metro line to Tysons is a vitally needed link. There are an estimated 70,000 jobs in the area, and the first phase is the stepping off point for rail service to Dulles Airport.

Tunnel proponents argue that an elevated rail line will hamper efforts to convert Tysons into a pedestrian friendly node. They contend that subway stations are more likely to attract transit-intensive uses, and point out the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor as evidence. Of course, one could just as easily use Alexandria's King Street Station, or the Metro/MARC facility in Silver Spring as elevated stations which have also attracted the types of growth that planners are hoping for in Tysons. As I mentioned last week, the presence of major freeways will do far more to harm Tyson's TOD chances than will a few concrete pylons.

It is unclear whether the lawsuit has standing, but what it represents is the attempt to scuttle the Silver Line. Of course tunnel supporters would claim that they only intend to bury the line, and that may well be what happens. The delays which would be caused by switching to a Tysons tunnel would likely kill the project outright. On the bright side, it might only delay the project by 10 years or so, since Washington would have to get back at the end of the line. With construction costs rising and more and more cities competing for fewer and fewer transit dollars, the Silver Line must get started immediately if it has any hope for completion.

Let's hope that Tysons Tomorrow can bury the "under not over" argument before the argument buries the Metro. After all, Tysons will have absolutely no hope of converting their neighborhood into an urban node without the proposed transit. The locally preferred alternative has been selected, even if it isn't supported by 100% of the populace. It's time to get behind the Silver Line proposal--before Tysons misses the train.

Are All Transit Investments Created Equal?

Like all policy decisions, transit investments are made based on an underlying set of values and objectives. The way those objectives are interpreted and addressed can mean vast differences between alternative solutions to perceived problems. Therefore, in order to assess the quality of a transit proposal, we must first assess the foundation upon which transit decisions are made.

As the population of America's cities continues to increase along with congestion and oil prices, an ever greater number of commuters and cities are choosing to make investments in transit. Cities like Washington face a dilemma about where to make transit investments and what kind of investments they should be. Should the primary purpose of rail planning continue to be an emphasis on suburb to central city commuting, primarily in the form of large park and ride facilities on radial rail lines? Or should precious federal dollars be spent on transit projects in an effort to rejuvenate older urban areas?

Recently, much emphasis has been placed on congestion relief as the primary goal of transit. Unfortunately, this goal is one which cannot be achieved. No matter how much additional transportation infrastructure is constructed--or even what mode--congestion will never be eliminated. This failure, however, is nothing to fret about. Congestion is merely an economic phenomenon that occurs when demand exceeds supply. It is neither practical nor feasible to construct enough highway lanes to handle rush-hour demand. In the face of this realization, planners are doing what they have been doing for many years; using freeway medians as a means of penetrating the urban core, attracting riders from their cars, and providing an alternative to sitting in traffic.

This strategy has certainly been successful in some regards. In Washington, where Interstate 66 is host to severe HOV restrictions and permanent width restrictions, the median-running Orange Line has proven extremely popular with commuters. Even so, it seems a bit dubious to site a transit line on “highway’s turf” as Paul Farmer, head of the American Planning Association, so aptly puts it. In November’s edition of Planning, Mr. Farmer outlines some of the problems with using freeways as a means of penetrating the urban core.

Freeways are not typically characterized by dense multi-use nodes. Northern Virginia’s Orange Line is no exception. Interstate 66’s stops are mostly places for commuters to park, rather than live, work, and play. This is in stark contrast to the dense urban neighborhoods which have sprung up around stops in Bethesda, Rosslyn, and Ballston. The transit oriented development at these nodes is not coincidental. Neither is the lack of transit oriented development where the car is king.

Of course, the tradeoff is that transit takes cars off the road—and leaves room for others. For every commuter that parks at Vienna, there is room for one more to fill a space in the traffic jam. The concept is called “induced demand,” and it illustrates one more fallacy of placing trains in freeway rights of way. The idea that transit or road building can reduce congestion is a myth. Only demand-side techniques can permanently reduce congestion. Demand-side techniques include congestion pricing, lane management, and transit oriented development.

Citizens in growing Tysons Corner are trying to harness for themselves transit’s power to reshape the urban—or in this case, suburban-fabric. The Washington Post reported today that activists there have filed a lawsuit against the federal government for foiling the Silver Line’s chances to be constructed underground. Whether subways are more likely to inspire transit oriented development than elevated ones is not clear, however, Tysons chances are greatly improved with transit than without. Of course, some areas are more likely than others to develop the dense nodes that the people of Tysons envision. If anything damages Tysons’ chances to become the Bethesda of Fairfax County, it will likely have more to do with the presence of two major freeways than elevated stations.

Another problem with freeway-running transit lines is that they enable further sprawl to accrue on the periphery of our metropolitan areas. Instead of incentivizing the redevelopment of the central city, auto-oriented transit just allows some commuters to bypass congestion and still lvie in the sprawling hinterlands. While suburban development is not necessarily bad, one must wonder if choosing an auto-oriented locale is the best place for a transit investment. A better strategy for transit would be to invest in communities where household car ownership is low and places which are ripe for redevelopment. Of course, parking and riding will continue to serve as a major source of transit users, but transit lines should still be routed away from freeways for maximum success.

In the Washington area, an example of good transit routing is the Red Line. The suburban terminus of the line is at Shady Grove. The Shady Grove station is close enough to Interstate 270 to allow convenient access for commuters from the suburbs. The line, however, is far enough from the freeway that dense, multi-use nodes can germinate along the line as it runs under Rockville Pike, Wisconsin Avenue, and Connecticut Avenue. These nodes create demand for transit by being centered around it and by providing a mix of uses. The Bethesda Station, for instance, has many jobs drawing Metro riders from the suburbs and from the city proper. It also has housing, which contributes commuters to the subway not only during rush hour, but also during off-peak times, due to the convenience of transit in this node.

If the car is harmful to the urban fabric, then the freeway is toxic. Transit investments can be and have been used to improve cities, but freeways make that extremely difficult. At least in Tysons, the proposed Silver Line has been routed away from the Dulles Toll Road and through the center of the burgeoning business district. Still, one can only hope that those in charge of transportation decisions begin to realize the impact that “congestion mitigation” is having on our cities.

Not all transit investments are created equal. If our policies have any hope for success, they’ll need to follow the advice of Paul Farmer and keep transit in areas where it has a better chance of working. In the face of the looming energy and environmental crisis, we must decide whether transit will serve as an enabler for auto-centric, suburban lifestyles or as an incentive for pedestrian and community friendly traditional neighborhood development. The decision is far from clear-cut, but more consideration must be given to the environs with which we choose to surround transit—these surroundings will either enhance or blunt the ability of transit to reshape our metropolitan regions. There is no better time to reassess the underlying assumptions of our transportation policies than now.