Changes approved at Metro board meeting this morning, via GGW (http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=7173)
The one member to vote against this was Chris Zimmerman, who wanted the replacement of the 13's with the 16F/7E to be discussed more with the public. The Greenbelt realignment might also breed some controversy too.
Also revealed: The target to open up the Silver Spring Transit Center is to be "by the end of FY2011". I'll say now that that date is one year too soon unless they work hard through the winter to get even something rudimentary up for transit's sake.
I thought the greenbelt routes would be split into new T lines, it's showing them as G lines.
Also, I do like the idea of having the X9 going to Capitol Heights rather than just Minnesota Ave.
I really don't think the 13 changes need more public input. As it is, this is a long overdue change.
Interesting and cool. Back in the day (the 1960's and 1970's) the original X9 was a rush hour only express that travelled rapidly on East Capitol Street and had a destination sign of "Seat Pleasant" which was what Capitol Heights was called before it was named Capitol Heights.
I wonder if the 16F and 7E proposed changes would entail reverse flow service since there are people that take the 13 to get to the State Dept and other government buildings on the western end of Constitution. But then again, there is the X1 and P1.
Just me but I think they should've extended the 9A into DC but further into DC like to Farragut Square or Union Station. It's a short route now and add some passengers would usually take metrorail.
The 7E will serve the Potomac Park area. The map on the board presentation shows it going up 23rd from the Lincoln Memorial Circle, R on Constitution, and then to Federal Triangle. Personally, I'd rather see it continue up 23rd to Virginia Avenue, then turn right on Virginia, and then left on Constitution to get into that area bit better.
Quote from: WES on September 17, 2010, 09:27:30 AM
Just me but I think they should've extended the 9A into DC but further into DC like to Farragut Square or Union Station. It's a short route now and add some passengers would usually take metrorail.
WES, totally agree with you here, especially since the 9A parallels the Metro so much, it is a great alternative if there are disruptions and also can reduce the number of people transfering to the train at Pentagon. I'd probably advocate for the 9A using a route similar to the 11Y within DC?
IMHO, the 13 was basically was a route that wasted 2 buses. If you have routes crossing the Potomac, coming from VA into DC, even MD you're going to have patronage. Not everyone is going to pay the higher metrorail fare, it will relieve overcrowding some lines already have and offer up the chance to gain new riders.
With that said, a question that I've always wanted to ask. Was metro planned poorly from the get go (rail and bus)?
Quote from: WES on September 17, 2010, 02:42:43 PM
IMHO, the 13 was basically was a route that wasted 2 buses. If you have routes crossing the Potomac, coming from VA into DC, even MD you're going to have patronage. Not everyone is going to pay the higher metrorail fare, it will relieve overcrowding some lines already have and offer up the chance to gain new riders.
With that said, a question that I've always wanted to ask. Was metro planned poorly from the get go (rail and bus)?
Agreed. It did seem like whenever I saw those 13s, they appeared to be underutilized. Also, I agree that many people would choose use the bus over Metrorail in some of these situations to avoid the higher fare.
Quote from: WES on September 17, 2010, 02:42:43 PM
With that said, a question that I've always wanted to ask. Was metro planned poorly from the get go (rail and bus)?
In terms that Metro wanted to shift as many trips to rail as possible? YES!! That and Virginia commuters get hosed with only the 38B having anything besides peak service.
I agree with Wes... I live of the 9A route and ridership is very low.
I don't know about y'all, but a couple of days ago I rode the R12 from end to end (Deanwood to New Carrollton), and, as it looks like on the map, it's a very long route. These changes accommodating the current R12 from the Beltway Plaza area to New Carrollton into bits and pieces of new and different routes seems like a great idea if you ask me, especially since there will be more coverage in said areas with these changes.
Quote from: orionvii2680 on September 18, 2010, 08:00:51 PM
I agree with Wes... I live of the 9A route and ridership is very low.
What if they extended it north to Farragut Square or McPherson Square?
They are basically almost restoring the original R12 line. Before the extensions, it ran from Deanwood to Greenbelt. I think it terminated at either Beltway Plaza or Greenbelt Center, can't remember. For a time it ran from Addison Road to Greenbelt, replacing part of the old P14 line, before the V14 took that segment over. But buses coming from that long of a haul often would run late, especially going to New Carrollton from Deanwood. I know this from the many times coming from Baltimore and none coming for a while because they got caught up somewhere.
It would make sense to extened the 9A that far up. Right now it's only a 30 minute route from Huntington to Pentagon. Extending it another 20 minutes isn't going to hurt and like I said it might take some of the people who now take metrorail, to save a few dollars and take the bus. I can't say that the 11Y is always packed but it seems to get good patronage from K Street to southern Fairfax and the 16Y isn't doing all that bad either.
Quote from: WES on October 03, 2010, 03:32:17 PM
They are basically almost restoring the original R12 line. Before the extensions, it ran from Deanwood to Greenbelt. I think it terminated at either Beltway Plaza or Greenbelt Center, can't remember. For a time it ran from Addison Road to Greenbelt, replacing part of the old P14 line, before the V14 took that segment over. But buses coming from that long of a haul often would run late, especially going to New Carrollton from Deanwood. I know this from the many times coming from Baltimore and none coming for a while because they got caught up somewhere.
Case in point: The 16 and 64 (Baltimore). Those lines seem to always run late no matter what day. You get late on one part of the run, your entire run is late.
Quote from: WES on October 03, 2010, 03:36:11 PM
It would make sense to extened the 9A that far up. Right now it's only a 30 minute route from Huntington to Pentagon. Extending it another 20 minutes isn't going to hurt and like I said it might take some of the people who now take metrorail, to save a few dollars and take the bus.
Plus it's good for those who just wanna go to VA no matter what time of day without having to go through Georgetown...ugh...
you know what this makes me think of? instead of "orange line with a view", this would pretty much make it the "yellow line with a view" assuming it will go up to L'Enfant Plaza or Archives or further north.
The thing I'm wondering is: are any of the newer buses going to be in the Express Scheme for the X9? If not, Bladensburg could possibly need additional Express buses from other divisions for that route. But then that will mess things up for the other division.
They should just repaint some of the C40lfs into the Express scheme, if none of the newer buses are going to be in that scheme. I'm pretty sure the current 18 Express buses at the yard isn't enough for both those routes.
Quote from: OrionFlyer on October 05, 2010, 11:21:11 AM
The thing I'm wondering is: are any of the newer buses going to be in the Express Scheme for the X9? If not, Bladensburg could possibly need additional Express buses from other divisions for that route. But then that will mess things up for the other division.
They should just repaint some of the C40lfs into the Express scheme, if none of the newer buses are going to be in that scheme. I'm pretty sure the current 18 Express buses at the yard isn't enough for both those routes.
Most of the C40LFs are in the local scheme and it really wouldn't be feasible to re-repaint a bus. There are still quite a few of the C40LFRs that haven't been repainted outside of 2817 and 2823. Those might be good candidates.
The X9 might start as a rush hour only route like the 79 and X9 and granted if there is funding available, it could go all day.
WMATA bus branding is ridiculous. Better to just keep using the older schemes and not having buses assigned to specific services.
The X9 is a rush hour only operation to start IIRC.
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 05, 2010, 05:46:30 PM
WMATA bus branding is ridiculous. Better to just keep using the older schemes and not having buses assigned to specific services.
The X9 is a rush hour only operation to start IIRC.
I was thinking the same. I hope they don't continue this as it just doesn't work for the way WMATA operates.
Quote from: WayneNYC on October 05, 2010, 06:24:54 PM
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 05, 2010, 05:46:30 PM
WMATA bus branding is ridiculous. Better to just keep using the older schemes and not having buses assigned to specific services.
The X9 is a rush hour only operation to start IIRC.
I was thinking the same. I hope they don't continue this as it just doesn't work for the way WMATA operates.
I mean, marketing and curb appeal. I doubt they'll stop with the branding.
See...for the most part the whole branding thing is working. On the Limited Stop and Express routes, most of the time you'll see express-branded buses (37, 39, S9, 79, J4, B30) but whenever needed, there's plenty of local-branded and non-branded buses available. In that case, a bus is a bus, and if it can transport dozens of passengers, then it works just as fine. Same with vice versa (express buses on local routes), but I do see why this isn't working out, just because more times than usual, we're seeing all sorts of buses all over the place (like a MetroExtra bus on the 86, a local bus on the 79, express bus on the K2, etc etc...). The only way how this is affecting the budget is switching the signs to the green ones that 2815-2817 and 2665 have.
Quote from: NewFlyer9736BCT on October 06, 2010, 12:38:45 AM
See...for the most part the whole branding thing is working. On the Limited Stop and Express routes, most of the time you'll see express-branded buses (37, 39, S9, 79, J4, B30) but whenever needed, there's plenty of local-branded and non-branded buses available. In that case, a bus is a bus, and if it can transport dozens of passengers, then it works just as fine. Same with vice versa (express buses on local routes), but I do see why this isn't working out, just because more times than usual, we're seeing all sorts of buses all over the place (like a MetroExtra bus on the 86, a local bus on the 79, express bus on the K2, etc etc...). The only way how this is affecting the budget is switching the signs to the green ones that 2815-2817 and 2665 have.
The fact that express buses appear on local routes with a certain amount of regularity, especially on weekends, would indicate to me the branding isn't working as well as you make it out to be.
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 06, 2010, 05:21:44 AM
Quote from: NewFlyer9736BCT on October 06, 2010, 12:38:45 AM
See...for the most part the whole branding thing is working. On the Limited Stop and Express routes, most of the time you'll see express-branded buses (37, 39, S9, 79, J4, B30) but whenever needed, there's plenty of local-branded and non-branded buses available. In that case, a bus is a bus, and if it can transport dozens of passengers, then it works just as fine. Same with vice versa (express buses on local routes), but I do see why this isn't working out, just because more times than usual, we're seeing all sorts of buses all over the place (like a MetroExtra bus on the 86, a local bus on the 79, express bus on the K2, etc etc...). The only way how this is affecting the budget is switching the signs to the green ones that 2815-2817 and 2665 have.
The fact that express buses appear on local routes with a certain amount of regularity, especially on weekends, would indicate to me the branding isn't working as well as you make it out to be.
It's the whole scheduling and assignments. Like theres a J2 that does a Z express in the evening and always gets an express bus. I think since now alot of runs are crazy interlined, yea some branded buses end up elsewhere but I don't think most people care as long as its the bus they want (granted they even READ the sign properly). Once the scheduling system improves, things might change to exclusive express and exclusive local. But then, that all depends on the starter and how the runs are set up.
Quote from: 79MetroExtraMD on October 06, 2010, 07:42:44 AM
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 06, 2010, 05:21:44 AM
Quote from: NewFlyer9736BCT on October 06, 2010, 12:38:45 AM
See...for the most part the whole branding thing is working. On the Limited Stop and Express routes, most of the time you'll see express-branded buses (37, 39, S9, 79, J4, B30) but whenever needed, there's plenty of local-branded and non-branded buses available. In that case, a bus is a bus, and if it can transport dozens of passengers, then it works just as fine. Same with vice versa (express buses on local routes), but I do see why this isn't working out, just because more times than usual, we're seeing all sorts of buses all over the place (like a MetroExtra bus on the 86, a local bus on the 79, express bus on the K2, etc etc...). The only way how this is affecting the budget is switching the signs to the green ones that 2815-2817 and 2665 have.
The fact that express buses appear on local routes with a certain amount of regularity, especially on weekends, would indicate to me the branding isn't working as well as you make it out to be.
It's the whole scheduling and assignments. Like theres a J2 that does a Z express in the evening and always gets an express bus. I think since now alot of runs are crazy interlined, yea some branded buses end up elsewhere but I don't think most people care as long as its the bus they want (granted they even READ the sign properly). Once the scheduling system improves, things might change to exclusive express and exclusive local. But then, that all depends on the starter and how the runs are set up.
So either they need to stop interlining, or they need to stop branding. You can't have it both ways. I'd rather they interline for maximum efficiency than paint buses a certain way to indicate what service they supposedly are running. It is silly to tell people to expect a bus of a certain color (even if WMATA has never said this explicitly, this is what branding entails) on certain routes and then for that system to not be followed, whether it be by having a local bus on the 79, a third or fourth or whatever number scheme bus it is on the 79, or an express bus on the N6 on the weekend.
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 06, 2010, 09:56:36 AM
Quote from: 79MetroExtraMD on October 06, 2010, 07:42:44 AM
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 06, 2010, 05:21:44 AM
Quote from: NewFlyer9736BCT on October 06, 2010, 12:38:45 AM
See...for the most part the whole branding thing is working. On the Limited Stop and Express routes, most of the time you'll see express-branded buses (37, 39, S9, 79, J4, B30) but whenever needed, there's plenty of local-branded and non-branded buses available. In that case, a bus is a bus, and if it can transport dozens of passengers, then it works just as fine. Same with vice versa (express buses on local routes), but I do see why this isn't working out, just because more times than usual, we're seeing all sorts of buses all over the place (like a MetroExtra bus on the 86, a local bus on the 79, express bus on the K2, etc etc...). The only way how this is affecting the budget is switching the signs to the green ones that 2815-2817 and 2665 have.
The fact that express buses appear on local routes with a certain amount of regularity, especially on weekends, would indicate to me the branding isn't working as well as you make it out to be.
It's the whole scheduling and assignments. Like theres a J2 that does a Z express in the evening and always gets an express bus. I think since now alot of runs are crazy interlined, yea some branded buses end up elsewhere but I don't think most people care as long as its the bus they want (granted they even READ the sign properly). Once the scheduling system improves, things might change to exclusive express and exclusive local. But then, that all depends on the starter and how the runs are set up.
So either they need to stop interlining, or they need to stop branding. You can't have it both ways. I'd rather they interline for maximum efficiency than paint buses a certain way to indicate what service they supposedly are running. It is silly to tell people to expect a bus of a certain color (even if WMATA has never said this explicitly, this is what branding entails) on certain routes and then for that system to not be followed, whether it be by having a local bus on the 79, a third or fourth or whatever number scheme bus it is on the 79, or an express bus on the N6 on the weekend.
I totally agree.
Guys: Do you see what's happening here. Oren is saying that bus branding doesn't work for WMATA, and I agree. Then Ken is giving an explanation of why local branded buses are showing up on express routes and vice-versa. This is why my position is that bus branding is not good for WMATA. It doesn't make sense (and can confuse people) to have buses dedicated to a particular service and then have them regularly doing other services.
Bus branding can certainly work in other places. A good candidate would be in NYC, now that they use OTR coaches for express service. Local buses still occasionally show up on express routes at MTAB, but it's pretty much unheard of nowadays on NYCTA routes.
IMO, WMATA should discontinue the express-local branding and simply use the the PR signs to indicate whether it's a local, express or limited-stop.
Branding really doesn't matter. You're not going to let a bus pass because it's painted blue and says express. No one is saying you're wrong or anything, it's just that no one really cares about it being branded. We gotta deal with it one way or another.
Quote from: LandoverDivision on October 06, 2010, 07:09:15 PM
Branding really doesn't matter. You're not going to let a bus pass because it's painted blue and says express. No one is saying you're wrong or anything, it's just that no one really cares about it being branded. We gotta deal with it one way or another.
OK, So... If branding doesn't matter and no one cares about it, then why bother doing it? Sure, no one will pass up a bus just because it is branded. I think you're missing the point as it's not about whether riders will care about branding or not. Sure, some of the bus fans here don't care. However, I'd bet that if you present this situation to any level-headed person, they'd likely also question why bues are being branded.
Y'know, it's probably not too late to simply remove the "Local" and "Express" words from the buses. Then, the red and blue bases could just be variants of the scheme, and they can use the destination signs to show whether it's a local or express like other systems do.
Here's what I see as the big picture: I think we are in a bad place in time *right now* as far as branding is concerned. Now I've seen and heard some of Catoe's bus plans and if he had his way, there would be a LOT of express work and you could probably hold down express-only vehicle blocks...but we just aren't there *yet*. New York can do it because there's so much express service that you could do an 18-hour block and still do nothing but expresses, and if things went like the 79, that would be possible in DC too.
The issue here is timing -- buses were being painted on purchase or at rehab into express schemes, save for a few exceptions of what looked like experiments or buses after body work -- basically, buses were being painted into an express scheme instead of a local scheme when the opportunity existed to (re)paint them anyway.
So...the real question is, do we stop branding and have one less tool to distinguish our services down the road when it actually matters (causing confusion then), or do we keep branding, confuse people now, and keep our eyes on the prize of express service on every major corridor in the region that needs it?
Note: Catoe started before the recession.
Not defending anything, just offering some perspective.
Tristan,
Good points. Perhaps the "Local" and "Express" lettering could've been decals and applied at such a time when WMATA would've been doing widespread launching of new express services.
I agree with with the other Brandon. If we were to remove it just simply remove the words that's all. But again, we gotta deal with it one way or another theres nothing any of us can really do about it. What's done is done.
Tristan, thanks for the points you made in your post.
Does anyone remember the original timeline for the rollout of these services?
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 08, 2010, 04:27:51 AM
Tristan, thanks for the points you made in your post.
Does anyone remember the original timeline for the rollout of these services?
I think Dec is supposed to be when the X9 starts. Next year, a few other lines are supposed to be under evaluation. I have to get the original corridor priority docket to see.
Quote from: 79MetroExtraMD on October 08, 2010, 07:49:49 AM
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on October 08, 2010, 04:27:51 AM
Tristan, thanks for the points you made in your post.
Does anyone remember the original timeline for the rollout of these services?
I think Dec is supposed to be when the X9 starts. Next year, a few other lines are supposed to be under evaluation. I have to get the original corridor priority docket to see.
I know that, but that wasn't the question being asked....