Metro
 

The problem is metro has gotten too damn popular for its designed size. Ridership has gone beyond what the design makes sense for. A couple of downtown hubs work if traffic isn't that large, but it's gotten too big for it.

They need 8-car trains during rush hour, but don't have the money. THey need to run the orange line through a different tunnel under the river and not through metro center. But that all costs major $$ that they don't have.

BTW, how is it that the 8-car trains can't be handled by the stations? THey all seem to be exactly 8 cars long. If someone fucked up that big-time--making the stations 71/2 cars long--they do deserve to be shot.

Bridges & Tunnels
 

Who is this metro loathing, concerned for the environmental poster with the smarts to not live in BF Maryland? Except fot the Alexandria part, you are like my total match! Unless its Old Town in which case there are no exceptions. And you know the true spelling of my "name". Vegas for the Fourth darling?

Metro
 

How about these asshole metro drivers who keep the doors open for like thirty seconds or a minute at every stop? Or the ones who keep talking and talk ign like they are all microphone happy? Shut up and drive, bitch. Has anyone ever had the guy who likes to point out that Rosslyn is the first stop in the Commonwealth of Virginia? Totally unnecessary.

Metro
 

Don't they all do that???

Same thing with Pentagon on the Yellow line.

Metro
 

Yeah, it's like it's some sort of state law or something--now entering Virginia-please stop engaging in sodomy.

But the train drivers that watch you out the window as they shut the door in your face are even worse.

Anyway, what they're saying is all immaterial to me now--i've entered my own little musical world on the metro and don't have to listen to all the shit.

Metro
 

Except for, of course, the Singin' Korean.

Metro
 

I think my ipod will win even that battle.

Bridges & Tunnels
 

actually i think that was my point. and i do know a bit about urban planning, which is undoubtably a way more interesting topic than law. of course, as some of the problems with metro show, even urban planning professionals can't get everything right. part of the problem is that transit systems reflect the ideals of the time when they were conceived and for a comprehensive heavy rail system like metro, because of the time and cost of construction, it may well be oboslete by the time of completition.

metro was conceived during the 1950s and 1960s using the assumptions of the time - namely of suburban to city center commuting. the original system was not completed until about 2000 when the green line was finally completed. by that point, the edge city style of development has met that there are now many people who commute suburb to suburb rather than around. of course, the highway system which was also a product of 1950s or earlier planning (not only in washington but throughout the u.s.) is also woefully inadequate for modern needs. throughout the washington area there are abandoned and long gone rail lines that if they still existed could be the basis of a light rail system at a relatively low price (one which could essentially paralell the proposed metro line to dulles airport, another could have gone from rockville, maryland through bethesda to georgetown) because the track and right of way would have already been there. these rail lines are gone forever - they were destroyed in the 1950s and 1960s in an increditably short sighted move.

los angeles is of course the best and most classic example of the planning assumptions of yesterday turning into the urban nightmare of tomorrow. they have spend billions of dollars to not come close to recreating the street car system that they had in 1950 which was abandoned in favor of roads that today are just as obsolete as the street car seemed in 1955.

but there are tons of cities between washington and la who suffer from obsolete urban planning and today are trying to undo the damage that the decision to base almost everything on highways in the 1950s has caused. in fact, even in the cities that have public transit systems, they were mainly products of the 1960s where they were centered on getting people from the suburbs to downtown and do not reflect the modern trend towards decentralization of business offices. in fact, i think the main problem is that urban planning professionals spend the last 50 years trying to complete the plans created in the 1950s rather than coming up with new plans. i think the original interstate highway system just got completed a few years ago as well.

ms. naughty diplomat

Bridges & Tunnels
 

Yep, the W&OD would make for a fine commuter rail line.

Are they technically "gone forever"? I thought the rails to trails thing was technically an easement from the RRs to the RtT group,because otherwise the neighbors would get their land back. That said, it might well be politically impossible to reopen those rail lines, even if legally the right exists.

Metro
 

As I pointed out to my wife last night, I do believe that sodomy is now legal. What a great country this is. :eek:

Bridges & Tunnels
 

Paigow fishing for e-dates for a major holiday? I'm shocked.

Metro
 

I figured the announcements were so you would know when to ditch your concealed weapon.

DC Representatives?
 

So, Tom Davis has introduced a bill (or proposed) to add two representatives to the House. Article. One would be assigned to DC. Now, come again? What in the constitution allows DC to send a representative (full, voting, as opposed to the Norton dealio) to the House? Could we give Canada a representative if we wanted?

Bridges & Tunnels
 

my impression of the "rail bank" provisions of the rails to trails act is that it was primarily put there to make the rails to trails act constitutional. and in any case, it does not include all of the rail lines that closed and were removed before the rails for trails act was passed. which unfortunately includes a lot of the old interurban/commuter lines which today would be the most useful rail lines which were closed between the 1940s and the 1960s. i think that the w&od may be within this group of pre-rails to trails abandonments - so it may not even be within the rails to trails act.

Fenwick might close its dc office
 

Recently Fenwick has been exploring the possibility of closing its DC office. It states however that the rest of the firm is doing well.

"Fenwick & West is looking at closing its 17-year-old Washington, D.C., outpost as the firm struggles to maneuver the continuing downturn in corporate work.

Just days after the firm announced a salary freeze for most of its 250 staff members, Mountain View-based Fenwick is mulling whether to pull the plug on its capital outpost. "

Subscription required article from law.com http://www.law.com/jsp/pubarticleCA....=1056139931252


Our thoughts are with the 14 attorneys in the DC Fenwick office as well as the staff that works there. Don't hesitate to post here for help or to PM one of the Admins if you would like us to post something on your behalf.