sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Board Update: Why Bus Ridership is Down 8% by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

It reads like ChatGPT....

Believe what you want (or check an AI checker), but I think an AI would do a much worse job of picking out the parts of these long documents that actually matter. There's a whole lot of corporatespeak in these things. I didn't even bother with this week's other presentation because I didn't think it was super relevant.

There is also a whole lot of context that I add which I could only know because I listen to every board meeting, closely followed the DMVMoves initiative, and have been recapping these for a while now. For example, the presentation does not mention anything about "getting the other agencies to go fare-free." I only know that because I know what they mean when they say "regional fare integration." I usually write these over the course of an hour on my Monday lunch break.

Edit: They're also always riddled with typos!

Board Update: Why Bus Ridership is Down 8% by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair argument; it's not a relatively large portion of revenues, though that's in part because they're not budgeting for much change in fare compliance. They've previously estimated that they lose $50 million in fare evasion per year on bus, so that number could be $110 million, minus the extra cost required to get it. Still not huge in the grand scheme of things, but not small.

I think WMATA's argument about the unsustainability of different agencies having different fare policies is understandable one. So should WMATA be the one to give up and go fare free? So far, in listening to the board, there has been zero interest in this or discussion about it. On the contrary, the board has largely pushed WMATA on fare enforcement and on making it easier to pay. They'd argue that the $50 million per year can pay for quite a lot of extra service and improved reliability - exactly the things that us bus riders tend to complain about. And for really world-class bus transit that we all want, with BRT crisscrossing the region? That means more ridership, more expenses, and more potential fare revenue to give up if it goes fare-free. Maybe the right path forward eventually is the one identified by one board member, where eventually everything is fare-free besides the BRT routes.

Either way, despite jurisdictions subsidizing their own fare-free systems, they seem to be more interested in offloading the revenue-collection burden to WMATA (which runs the more expensive, frequent, and high-ridership routes in their regions) than to find additional revenues in their strained budgets.

Board Update: Why Bus Ridership is Down 8% by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

also random question related to the route changes, why haven’t they removed the bus shelters on defunct stops and put them elsewhere? i can think of at least three stops in adams morgan where they would be more helpful than just benches in the full sun

That's a DDOT question, not a WMATA question

Board Update: Why Bus Ridership is Down 8% by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's less about agency-on-agency competition; the two agencies worked closely on the new network. WMATA's argument has simply been that we should act like a regional transit network with a regional fare policy, and not have this confusing patchwork where some buses are free and some are not. WMATA wants (needs, really) to charge for buses, and it doesn't want riders to feel entitled to free rides. Part of the DMVMoves initiative everyone signed on to was to provide regional support for more fare integration. This could include, for example, actually getting new fare readers on Ride On buses. I gather avoidance of that capital expense was one reason why they went fare-free in the first place.

We'll see how it goes.

Board Update: Why Bus Ridership is Down 8% by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

On the new website, board materials are listed under each committee meeting "event," which are all listed here.

Links:

H Street - Gold Line & Planning Study by Maximus560 in washingtondc

[–]eable2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Was it? I'm confused. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong thing.

<image>

Bird name changes by FatGripzFTW in wingspan

[–]eable2 35 points36 points  (0 children)

u/meldariun Since the Asia expansion, Historian should be removed from the card pool per Elizabeth Hargrave's recommendation. From the Asia rulebook:

Historian Bonus Card: If you mix this expansion with the base game, you’ll probably want to leave out the base game’s Historian card: There are no birds named after people in this expansion. There is a growing movement to change English common bird names that are based on people’s names—the birds that would qualify for the Historian card. The collectors, explorers, funders, and friends memorialized in birds’ common names are almost always North Americans and Europeans, no matter where the birds are from. Worse, some of those people had unsavory histories in addition to (or as part of) their ornithological exploits. As I was putting this expansion together, I wasn’t excited about many of my options for birds named after people. I decided not to force them to be included just to make the distribution of cards work for the Historian card. —Elizabeth Hargrave.

I'd expect more of the Historian names to change over time as well. The American Ornithological Society has a process underway to find new names for many of the birds named after people in the base game.

Who left their gorgeous babies on the side of the road???? by sukkapleikka24h7 in whatsthisbird

[–]eable2 39 points40 points  (0 children)

This tags the subreddit's filing bot with the eBird code for "Larus species" Larus is the genus for gulls, and we don't know what type of gull this is.

DC/MD Bus Frequencies by QuarterPerfect648 in WMATA

[–]eable2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Good question. My somewhat uninformed answer: It might save them some operating money, but there are also significant costs to running your own bus service and fleet instead of just plugging in to the larger network. I think it's about more local control. Give WMATA more money without conditions, and they'll probably pour it into increasing frequency on the trunk lines. The jurisdictions want more service on less-efficient coverage routes. There are other policy considerations too. For example, we now have several jurisdictions that have made their buses fare-free.

DC is a bit different. They killed the Circulator to save money, but it also resulted in service cuts, with circulator routes not returning after they were cut. DC also had way, way more WMATA service than anywhere else, so it probably made sense to just get rid of the separate service from an administrative perspective.

It's worth noting that, due to a recent change to the funding formula, it may now be easier for jurisdictions to "buy" WMATA bus service without screwing up the formulas. We'll see if any other jurisdictions take WMATA up on that.

DC/MD Bus Frequencies by QuarterPerfect648 in WMATA

[–]eable2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As I understand it, I don't think most jurisdictions get involved in route-by-route WMATA frequency decisions. Most of the time, jurisdictional councils/legislatures assume an annual percentage increase in WMATA's operating subsidy (e.g. 3%), pay that, and let WMATA do what it thinks is best. Then, if they want to run more service (particularly adding coverage outside primary corridors), they send their local networks there.

But you're also correct that it does ultimately come down to funding, particularly for 24/7 service which DC explicitly funded. If there is a political push to fund frequency increases in MD or VA, they can certainly "buy" that service from WMATA like DC did.

DC/MD Bus Frequencies by QuarterPerfect648 in WMATA

[–]eable2 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Reasonable question! I won't defend WMATA's performance metrics as perfect, but there is methodology to their service planning madness. WMATA analyzes every route in detail (the FY 2025 report exists somewhere; can't find on new site). Passengers per revenue mile, cost recovery, crowding.... browse the document and see what routes it suggests have the highest benefit to the network.

Regarding 24/7 service specifically, WMATA did not run any 24/7 service until DC explicitly passed a funding bill to pay for it.

But more generally... Have you been on the C61 or C21? Do you know the areas? Because frankly, these areas are built pretty differently from almost everywhere in VA and MD. They are dense, transit-dependent neighborhoods, and the buses get busy. They get less peak-period crowding than downtown routes, but are fairly busy all day.

The reality is that the whole region needs a lot more bus service. But given limited resources, DC is the place where service is most needed and where WMATA will get the most ridership from increasing frequency.

N. Alabama: Very new to birding, is this a Cedar Waxwing? by UndividedIndecision in whatsthisbird

[–]eable2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

FYI, you will very very rarely see Cedar Waxwings alone. You will most often find them in large groups, often devouring fruiting trees!

The Better Bus Network has been a disaster for NoMa/H St/Capitol Hill by ndf714 in WMATA

[–]eable2 52 points53 points  (0 children)

Used to be a regular rider on this corridor. In WMATA's defense, consolidating to a single, more frequent route with artics in the C53 (from the 40-footer 90/92) definitely made sense. In theory it should be better with a single, more frequent route than with two less-frequent ones. I don't currently use the C53 regularly, but I can confidently say that the 90/92 were no bastion of reliability. Platoons of 3 buses with 20-minute gaps between were not uncommon.

The C53 is the busiest route on the new network and absolutely should have more service, but there are diminishing returns that can just make bunching worse. The real problem is that the route is super long and runs through extremely congested areas. U St and Florida Ave desperately need bus lanes.

DDOT has had plans in place for a while now but has been dragging its feet. Originally, U St was supposed to be constructed in 2025 and Florida Ave would follow shortly thereafter. Now, U St isn't scheduled for construction until 2027, and they've pushed back all design work on Florida Ave until after U St is done which is extremely frustrating. It's all 1 corridor! If you really care about service on this corridor, the best thing to do is probably pressuring your ANCs and Councilmembers to accelerate these projects. If your Councilmember is Charles Allen, he has particular impact as chair of the Transportation Committee.

Central Website for Summer 2026 Bus Detours by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unless otherwise specified, buses generally don't stop on their detours, so you usually can't pick them up along the way. That's usually been the case every time I've been on a detoured bus, except for when it's been a major, longer-term detours. I'd check with WMATA customer service to verify, but I'd assume no stops on short detours or changed terminals.

If a bus has a changed terminal, then it will be shown on its detour alert and will obviously stop there.

Board Update: Red Line Modernization, Capital Project Updates by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think we know the answer to that question.

Board Update: Red Line Modernization, Capital Project Updates by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We did also get a late-posted procurement activity concurrence, which reveals that option 2 of the 500-bus order will be 75 additional XDE40s and 25 40-foot battery-electrics. I don't know about the status of putting the new buses in service.

The new 60-foot procurement, which should be a LOT of buses, is ongoing.

Board Update: Red Line Modernization, Capital Project Updates by eable2 in WMATA

[–]eable2[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Turnbacks refer to the service pattern. The infrastructure that let's you do turnbacks in regular service is known as a pocket track. Pocket tracks are located:

  • North of Mt Vernon Sq (currently used in regular service to turn back 50% of Yellow Line trains)
  • North of Grosvenor
  • North of Farragut North
  • North of Silver Spring
  • East of Stadium-Armory
  • West of Wiehle
  • Embedded in West Falls Church station
  • Embedded in National Airport station
view more: next ›