WMATA does it again

[Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson]

Image DCP01646.JPG clearly shows the future southbound trackway.
The northbound trackway will be where the B&O spur use to be. The
column to the left of the future southbound trackway will support
the future Metropolitan Branch Trail.

Which will end where? Better not say M Street.

The trail will pass over M Street so I am assuming behind the old
Woodies warehouse. You can see the future ramps from the elevated
trail down to the south side of M Street.

<MrBurns> Excellent. </MrBurns>

Loading Image...
I have no idea if they are going to build another ramp further
south down to the north side of L Street across the street from the
Greyhound bus terminal.

They could use the old Pierce Street right of way / Met Branch
terminal spur behind the Woodies Warehouse, no? A right of way
that was originally going to be used for the M Street subway...
hmmm, do you suppose there might be some use to that northbound
side tail track once they're finished after all, no? ;-)

--BER

[Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson]

At any rate, life lesson: You can't have everything. The kinds of
modifications I'm talking would be a PITA both for WMATA and for
passengers, but I think they're pretty much imposed by the limitations of
the older farecard system.

Tim, I think it's quite obvious that the modifications you've come
up with, for enabling free free-area transfers in underground shopping
galleries under 17th street in DC, while they are great problems to solve
in the abstract, are totally unnecessary.

The idea of making this a free-area transfer with faregates at each end
renders the whole concept useless, except as a way to squeeze money out
of the surrounding area by diverting shoppers underground. Even that is
unnecessary, since WMATA doesn't seem to understand the concept of a
paid-area shopping mezzannine.

This is not a situation like New York where free-area ped tunnels are
needed because crowd control is an issue on the surface sidewalks
between stations. Nor Montreal for its weather (the land between the
two stations is occupied by Farragut Square which is quite pleasant,
even in the summertime).

It is about making the two Farragut stations a single transfer station
for riders going from one end of the Red Line to one end of the Orange
line, nothing more.

Making it a free area with numerous unnecessary stair exits, shops or
no shops, works against this even for electronic card users. It is
nothing more than an obstacle invented to use as a bludgeon against
Farecard users, akin to the new Metrobus machines which discriminate
against Farecard users. Social engineering at its worst. In fact, I'm
not sure a free-area tunnel would allow free transfers for -anyone-
trying to get from Rosslyn to Bethesda, or Rockville to Farragut West.

--Brian

[Tim Kynerd]

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 19:10:24 -0500, Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson

Post by Brian Robinson OR Carol Goter Robinson OR Bill Robinson

At any rate, life lesson: You can't have everything. The kinds of
modifications I'm talking would be a PITA both for WMATA and for
passengers, but I think they're pretty much imposed by the limitations of
the older farecard system.

Tim, I think it's quite obvious that the modifications you've come
up with, for enabling free free-area transfers in underground shopping
galleries under 17th street in DC, while they are great problems to solve
in the abstract, are totally unnecessary.
The idea of making this a free-area transfer with faregates at each end
renders the whole concept useless, except as a way to squeeze money out
of the surrounding area by diverting shoppers underground. Even that is
unnecessary, since WMATA doesn't seem to understand the concept of a
paid-area shopping mezzannine.
This is not a situation like New York where free-area ped tunnels are
needed because crowd control is an issue on the surface sidewalks
between stations. Nor Montreal for its weather (the land between the
two stations is occupied by Farragut Square which is quite pleasant,
even in the summertime).
It is about making the two Farragut stations a single transfer station
for riders going from one end of the Red Line to one end of the Orange
line, nothing more.
Making it a free area with numerous unnecessary stair exits, shops or
no shops, works against this even for electronic card users. It is
nothing more than an obstacle invented to use as a bludgeon against
Farecard users, akin to the new Metrobus machines which discriminate
against Farecard users. Social engineering at its worst. In fact, I'm
not sure a free-area tunnel would allow free transfers for -anyone-
trying to get from Rosslyn to Bethesda, or Rockville to Farragut West.

Hi Brian,

I'm not sure I follow your argument, but I'll try. :-)

When you refer to a "free area," I gather that you mean "outside the
fare-paid areas." That confuses me a little because "free area" makes me
think of a "free transfer," which of course is one that takes place INSIDE
the fare-paid areas. But anyway.

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're objecting to having the
transfer tunnel outside the paid area. I fully agree with you, although I
can't say that I know the station configurations well enough to know
whether a free transfer (inside the paid area) is feasible or not.

However, my flights of fancy in this thread were simply to point out that
the existing older fare system wouldn't necessarily preclude a free
transfer between the Farraguts that involved going outside the paid area.
It ought to even be possible to dispense with my special machines and
simply reprogram the faregates so that, say, they return a zero-balance
card with "0.00" printed on it and the card coded to permit entrance at
the other station within, say, 20 minutes.

In fact, now that I think of it, this could even be done without needing
to construct anything. The transfer could be done on the street, where, as
you point out, the weather is reasonable for a good portion of the year
(although I'd disagree with you about both summer -- pant, pant -- and
winter -- brrr).

[Keith F. Lynch]

Post by Tim Kynerd
In fact, now that I think of it, this could even be done without
needing to construct anything. The transfer could be done on the
street, ...

Exactly. The *only* point in a pedestrian walkway between Farragut
North and Farragut West (or between Metro Center and Gallery Place
where a walkway would make even more sense) is so that one doesn't
have to pay twice. Having such a walkway outside the faregates
defeats the whole purpose.

[John R Cambron]

Post by Tim Kynerd
Hi Brian,
I'm not sure I follow your argument, but I'll try. :-)
When you refer to a "free area," I gather that you mean "outside the
fare-paid areas." That confuses me a little because "free area" makes me
think of a "free transfer," which of course is one that takes place INSIDE
the fare-paid areas. But anyway.
If I'm understanding you correctly, you're objecting to having the
transfer tunnel outside the paid area. I fully agree with you, although I
can't say that I know the station configurations well enough to know
whether a free transfer (inside the paid area) is feasible or not.

Tim,

The two Farragut stations were built with provisions to allow the
construction of a paid area tunnel between the stations. I if you
have read my posts on WMATA over the years you may have read my
descriptions of the locations of the knockouts that were built in
to each of the the station.

What WMATA wants to do is expand beyond the simple directly
connecting tunnel and add additional surface entrances that would
allow entrance access to either station rendering the free
transfer impossible without adding an additional segregated
paid area passageway.

Here is the drawing I ripped from a WMATA document that shows
what is proposed;

Loading Image...

Here is the WMATA document that the drawing was ripped from;

http://www.wmata.com/about/MET_NEWS/pressroom/CIP.pdf

If you look closely at the drawing in the first link above you
can see the layout of the fare gates on the mezzanines as they
exist today (in black). Were WMATA to build paid area tunnel
between the stations utilizing the existing knockouts and not
adding additional surface entrances to the tunnel no modification
to the fare gate layout would be needed. To top it off access to
either station platform would be possible from any of the five
existing surface entrances without making any changes to the fare
collecting system.

[Tim Kynerd]

Post by John R Cambron

Post by Tim Kynerd
Hi Brian,
I'm not sure I follow your argument, but I'll try. :-)
When you refer to a "free area," I gather that you mean "outside the
fare-paid areas." That confuses me a little because "free area" makes me
think of a "free transfer," which of course is one that takes place INSIDE
the fare-paid areas. But anyway.
If I'm understanding you correctly, you're objecting to having the
transfer tunnel outside the paid area. I fully agree with you, although I
can't say that I know the station configurations well enough to know
whether a free transfer (inside the paid area) is feasible or not.

Tim,
The two Farragut stations were built with provisions to allow the
construction of a paid area tunnel between the stations. I if you
have read my posts on WMATA over the years you may have read my
descriptions of the locations of the knockouts that were built in
to each of the the station.
What WMATA wants to do is expand beyond the simple directly
connecting tunnel and add additional surface entrances that would
allow entrance access to either station rendering the free
transfer impossible without adding an additional segregated
paid area passageway.
Here is the drawing I ripped from a WMATA document that shows
what is proposed;
http://www.chesapeake.net/~cambronj/wmata/A02-C03_connector.jpg
Here is the WMATA document that the drawing was ripped from;
http://www.wmata.com/about/MET_NEWS/pressroom/CIP.pdf
If you look closely at the drawing in the first link above you
can see the layout of the fare gates on the mezzanines as they
exist today (in black). Were WMATA to build paid area tunnel
between the stations utilizing the existing knockouts and not
adding additional surface entrances to the tunnel no modification
to the fare gate layout would be needed. To top it off access to
either station platform would be possible from any of the five
existing surface entrances without making any changes to the fare
collecting system.

Which of course is the way it OUGHT to be done. But I assume WMATA just
wants to capture some additional revenue in the process by having retail
in the tunnel, and they aren't enthusiastic about the potential of retail
in a paid-area connection. I support WMATA trying to develop new sources
of revenue that will reduce their need for (always scarce) subsidy, but
I think sacrificing passenger convenience for that end is going way too
far.