PRAISE FOR METRO,

DC STREETCARS

FROM

CANADA, EH

You think you've got it bad! Metro is in serious trouble. Endless track work will continue indefinitely, yet all the work done so far has yielded no tangible or quantifiable benefit discernable to riders. Stations will be closed again on weekends. Riders are returning to cars in droves, even as ridership rises in other cities.

Metro's solution? Charge more than it costs most people to drive for a daily round trip. That should win people over!

I still love our Metro system and its distinctive architecture. It is actually a real subway inside most of DC, which has become a lost art in transit. When did planners suddenly decide that underground subways were obsolete? They allow convenient routing through developed areas without demolitions, offer optimal station placement, travel faster than light rail, create no mess of wires and equipment on urban streets, and are protected from bad weather.

The fact is that developer-beholden politicians don't want to spend subway money, even as they want to facilitate transit-oriented-development everywhere possible. This is how you end up with BRT and light rail. And a Metro Silver Line with no parking for actual human beings who might use it.

So it's not surprising to hear negative reactions to a new subway proposed in Toronto. But you might be surprised to hear praise from Canada for the DC area's rail transit system.

A gent named Peter Witt responded to a comment section debate on a Toronto website with this advice:

"Try visiting Washington, D.C., a metro region the size of the GTA (Greater Toronto Area) where they are BUILDING FIVE STREETCAR LINES IN A CITY WHOSE SUBWAY SYSTEM KICKS THE TTC'S (Toronto Subway's) (fill in the blank). Aargh."

Sounds like things could be worse. While advocating for completion of our highway and transit system, sometimes you have to stop and marvel at our Metro system and Capital Beltway: impressive achievements that apparently could not be built today.

VETERANS AND

TRANSIT

Last month, when writing about ridership on Norfolk's Tide light rail being twice the projected number, I suggested it might have something to do with the large military population there.

While most light rail systems across the country are successful, the Tide service is the biggest success so far (assuming planners didn't lowball the projections, which is unlikely, since low numbers don't win federal money). So the large number of men and women who have served in Germany and Japan, for example, might be one explanation for the above-average performance.

The reason I think this hypothesis is valid is that these servicemembers have experienced the convenience of the more advanced transit systems found in European and Asian cities. So when they return here, while our systems (with the possible exceptions of cities like New York and Chicago) seem quaint by comparison, they are more likely to give them a chance.

Further proof of my theory was found in yesterday's Core Values column by WTOP commentator Chris Core. He printed a letter from retired Air Force Col. Chris Krisinger, who had high praise for Munich's frankly incredible transit system. Noting the seamless mobility offered by Munich's S-Bahn (think the Purple Line or MTA Light Rail) and U-Bahn (subway), he underscored the need for convenient rail service to Dulles Airport.

Alas, the sensible and world-class layout described by Col. Krisinger ("the 's-bahn' train arrives at the airport in an underground station that brings passengers right up in between the two main terminals") has already been rejected for the Dulles Metro station.

In fact, the so-called airport station was never under the Dulles terminal, and that made the cheaper compromise station the right choice. Had the argument been over an actual underground station at Dulles, I would have written letters to editors and promoted that option here. Nothing would tell visitors that America leads the world more evocatively than rising into the airport itself upon an escalator from the train platform.

Ironically, Core's original column was boosting a Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority board member's idea of a smaller, Aero Train line that would restore the original vision by taking Dulles passengers from an even more affordable station further away directly into the terminal.

Given the fiscal and practical realities of the moment, that idea is a good one, but it seems to have been discarded by the board.

The truth is that Metro to Dulles is all about the Benjamins for wealthy developers. The stations have no parking, which means a massive portion of potential ridership will be lost from the get-go. The Tysons mall station... ...is not in the mall. That says third world, not world class. And the afterthought treatment given to the station theoretically the raison d'etre for the whole Metro line? These three facts speak for themselves.

So we won't have a world-class Dulles Metro system (but the skyline view of already-impressive Tysons Corner from the elevated trestle will be fantastic at night).

But Col. Krisinger's letter does offer proof of my theory - our military population, such as those commuting to BRAC sites like Walter Reed, Fort Belvoir and the Mark Center, are more likely to use transit than the average American worker.

The question is, can our politicians "grow up" and deliver the world's best transit and highway systems for the world's best men and women in uniform?