In 2019, DC’s metro agency WMATA set out to study ways to solve the capacity issues, called the Blue/Orange/Silver Capacity & Reliability Survey. In Virginia, the Blue, Orange, and Silver lines all meet at the Rosslyn station and share the same tracks to cross over into Washington DC via the Rosslyn tunnel, which you can see in the current WMATA map.
The tracks are at capacity, and trains along these routes experience overcrowding. With the population only expected to grow along these lines, WMATA wanted to come up with ways to address it now and for future riders. They’re not as extensive as some may like (my fantasy WMATA map includes much more coverage), but the new build options are improvements to the current system.
They came up with 6 alternatives to the current WMATA system, and graded them based on how it would impact capacity, reliability, flexibility, and sustainability and equity. The Blue Loop ( came out with the highest score, but the result of their public comment period still haven’t been released, so it’s unclear if residents agree with the findings.
Table of Contents
Alternative 1: No Build
When proposing changes to anything, there’s always the question of what happens if we don’t change anything. Alternative 1 is that scenario: it looks at what is already planned and funded and evaluates if that’ will help’s enough to handle to projected population and land use changes, and if it helps us get to the goals of the study.
This means that it evaluated this like the completion of Maryland’s Purple Line, completion of Phase 2 of the Silver Line, the new Potomac Yard station that opened in 2023, Maryland’s planned expansion of their bus system, and the currently planned optimizations and improvements for WMATA. This plan was used as a baseline to compare other alternatives.
No-Build Details
| Alternative 1 | |
| New stations | 0 |
| New weekday transit trips | 0 |
| Construction cost | 0 |
| New annual operating cost | 0 |
| New annual fare revenue | 0 |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | 0 |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | 0 |
| Customers affected by service delays | No change |
Alternative 2: Rail Optimization & Bus Service
Alternative 2, known as both the Rail Optimization and Bus Service alternative and the Lower capital Cost Alternative, does not build any new rail lines or stations. Instead, it focuses on:
- optimizing the bus service along the corridor
- better scheduling of rail lines
- building rail junctions/pocket tracks at East Falls Church and Stadium Armory to allow trains to turn around and go in the opposite direction
- new railcars that can hold more customers
- increasing capacity at busy stations so more people can wait
- better communication systems for rail status and delays
This option is a cheaper alternative to others. It doesn’t provide more coverage and focuses on improving the ways to get around within the existing infrastructure.
Low-Cost Alternative Details
| Alternative 2 | |
| New stations | 0 |
| New weekday transit trips | 16,000 |
| Construction cost | $3-5 billion |
| New annual operating cost | $75-100 million |
| New annual fare revenue | $34 million |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | +3% |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | +27% |
| Customers affected by service delays | -7% |
Alternative 3: Blue Line to Greenbelt
Alternative 3 is the first option that adds in new rail lines and stations. A new station would be built in Rosslyn, and the Blue line would be redirected to that new station.
But here’s where it get fun: once it crosses the Potomac in a new tunnel, it would get routes through Georgetown down M Street, hooking up to Union Station and going through Northeast DC to Greenbelt.
That means there would be 13 total new stations and new Blue Line service at 1 existing station:
- Rosslyn II
- Georgetown
- West End
- Farragut North II
- Downtown DC (near Thomas Circle)
- Mt Vernon Square (transfer station)
- Union Station II
- Union Market
- Ivy City
- Fort Lincoln
- Port Towns
- Hyattsville
- College Park II
- Greenbelt II
Going through downtown, it would follow a path similar to the below:
A Georgetown Metro Station?
I know that a lot of people are skeptical of a metro station ever getting built in Georgetown because of the claim that the rich residents of Georgetown don’t want the poorer neighbors to have better access to the neighborhood. But, they are actively looking for ways to connect to the metro specifically because they think that building a metro to Georgetown will take too long.
At the time the metro was planned, Georgetown residents and businesses opposed it. Others have said that the real reason it wasn’t considered was partly geology (it would have been more difficult to build) and partly because it’s not an employment center and the purpose of the metro was to transport people from the suburbs into the city’s business districts.
Personally, I think all of these factors played into it, as well as the battle over highways that led to the creation of the metro. Georgetown residents had won a legal victory fairly early on to prevent any highways going through the neighborhood. The lawyer who won was a Georgetown resident who would later also fight highways being built through other areas of the city. As a result of that movement, the funding was re-allocated to build the metro. If I was planning the metro, I would keep that battle in mind when it came to planning a path that could potentially go through Georgetown.
Blue Line to Greenbelt Details
| Alternative 3 | |
| New stations | 14 |
| New weekday transit trips | 92,000 |
| Construction cost | $25-30 billion |
| New annual operating cost | $125-150 million |
| New annual fare revenue | $79 million |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | +3% |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | +20% |
| Customers affected by service delays | -13% |
Alternative 4: Blue Line to National Harbor (Blue Loop)
Alternative 4 received the best scores out of all of the different options. It would create a Blue line loop (or “Bloop”) and add more transit options east of the river in DC and in areas that are currently undergoing development, such as the redevelopment of 395, Buzzard Point, St Elizabeth’s, and National Harbor.
From Rosslyn to Union Station, the plan remains largely the same as the Blue Line to Greenbelt plan. After Union Station, however, it would turn south, cross the Anacostia River, and cross the Potomac River on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge.
It includes the more new stations, with 13 total new stations and new Blue Line service at 3 existing stations:
- Rosslyn II
- Georgetown
- West End
- Farragut North II
- Downtown DC (near Thomas Circle)
- Mt Vernon Square (transfer station)
- Sursum Corda (near New Jersey & H NW)
- Union Station II
- Capitol South (transfer station)
- Navy Yard (transfer station)
- Buzzard Point
- St Elizabeth’s
- Bolling Air Force Base
- Forest Heights
- Oxon Hill
- National Harbor
Going through downtown, it would follow a path similar to the below:
Blue Line to National Harbor Details
| Alternative 4 | |
| New stations | 16 |
| New weekday transit trips | 180,000 |
| Construction cost | $30-35 billion |
| New annual operating cost | $175-200 million |
| New annual fare revenue | $154 million |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | +11% |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | +35% |
| Customers affected by service delays | -15% |
Alternative 5: Silver Line Express in Virginia
Alternative 5 takes the Silver Line out to Greenbelt. It includes changes to the Silver Line instead of the Blue Line, and has the highest number of new stations. It also features express service on the Silver Line between Rosslyn, Ballston II, and West Falls Church. Express lines don’t currently exist in DC’s metro system, and is something residents have long wanted.
Express service would aim to reduce the number of people using the local service along the Orange and Silver Lines through Virginia. The tunnel could also be built to accommodate express line tracks as well, while the existing tunnel at Rosslyn would remain Orange and Blue Lines.
Within the city, it follows a similar path as the Blue Line to Greenbelt (Alternative 3), but with some additions. It adds in Capitol Hill and Starburst stations and takes out the Union Market stop from Blue Line to Greenbelt, and the Sursum Corda station from Blue Line to National Harbor (Alternative 4) is added.
Under this proposal, there would be 16 total new stations and new Silver Line service at 2 existing stations:
- West Falls Church (transfer station)
- Ballston II
- Rosslyn II
- Georgetown
- West End
- Farragut North II
- Downtown DC (near Thomas Circle)
- Mt Vernon Square (transfer station)
- Sursum Corda (near New Jersey & H NW)
- Union Station II
- Capitol Hill
- Starburst (Bladensburg Road, H Street, and Benning Road NE)
- Ivy City
- Fort Lincoln
- Port Towns
- Hyattsville
- College Park II
- Greenbelt II
The additional stations come with a higher price tag, though. This is the most expensive proposed plan of the study.
Silver Line Express to Greenbelt Details
| Alternative 5 | |
| New stations | 18 |
| New weekday transit trips | 139,000 |
| Construction cost | $35-40 billion |
| New annual operating cost | $175-200 million |
| New annual fare revenue | $119 million |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | +3% |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | +27% |
| Customers affected by service delays | -32% |
Alternative 6: Silver Line to New Carrollton
The final proposal studied, Alternative 6, brings the Silver Line to New Carrollton. Like Alternative 5 (Silver Line Express), the new tunnel at Rosslyn would service Silver Line, and it would increase metro coverage in Northeast DC. It does not have as many stations in downtown DC as some of the other alternatives.
One big selling point on this plan is that it does the most to reduce the passengers impacted by delays out of any of the proposals.
Under this proposal, there would be 16 total new stations and new Silver Line service at 2 existing stations:
- Rosslyn II
- Georgetown
- West End
- Farragut North II
- Downtown DC (near Thomas Circle)
- Mt Vernon Square (transfer station)
- Union Station II
- Union Market
- Ivy City
- Fort Lincoln
- Port Towns
- Landover Hills
- New Carrollton (transfer station)
Landover Hills is still an hour and a half walk to Northwest Stadium where the Washington Commanders play in Landover, so it doesn’t provide better metro access than the current Landover station. And with DC planning on building a new stadium at the old RFK Stadium location, it becomes less pressing to get public transportation to Northwest Stadium.
Silver Line to New Carrollton Details
| Alt. 6 | |
| New stations | 13 |
| New weekday transit trips | 94,000 |
| Construction cost | $25-30 billion |
| New annual operating cost | $125-150 million |
| New annual fare revenue | $80 million |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | +3% |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | +17% |
| Customers affected by service delays | -34% |
Comparing All 6 Alternatives
The Blue/Orange/Silver Capacity & Reliability Survey has 4 goals:
- Improve capacity
- Improve reliability
- Improve flexibility
- Improve sustainability and equity
These goals are what each of the alternatives were graded on. Out of all of them, the Bloop (Alternative 4, Blue Line to National Harbor) performed the best.
Blue Line to National Harbor was rated the best at increasing capacity and sustainability and equity. Silver Line to New Carrollton was rated the best at improving reliability, and Silver Line Express in Virginia was rated the best in improving flexibility.
What does that look like in terms of ridership, costs, and revenue? Along with the goals of the project, unfortunately we do not have unlimited funds to build everything. Cost will undoubtedly be a big factor in which option we choose, and we can expect costs to exceed the estimates.
In the below table, I compare all 6 options:
| Alt. 1 | Alt. 2 | Alt. 3 | Alt. 4 | Alt. 5 | Alt. 6 | |
| New stations | 0 | 0 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 13 |
| New weekday transit trips | 0 | 16,000 | 92,000 | 180,000 | 139,000 | 94,000 |
| Construction cost | 0 | $3-5 billion | $25-30 billion | $30-35 billion | $35-40 billion | $25-30 billion |
| New annual operating cost | 0 | $75-100 million | $125-150 million | $175-200 million | $175-200 million | $125-150 million |
| New annual fare revenue | 0 | $34 million | $79 million | $154 million | $119 million | $80 million |
| Trips by transit vs. other travel options | 0 | +3% | +3% | +11% | +3% | +3% |
| Residents in equity area gaining access | 0 | +27% | +20% | +35% | +27% | +17% |
| Customers affected by service delays | No change | -7% | -13% | -15% | -32% | -34% |
Timeline
While I want all of this built yesterday, the Blue/Orange/Silver improvements are still many years away. In order for it to be completed, we still need to:
- Select preferred alternative
- Get funding to build and maintain the expansion
- Get approval from all jurisdictions on the route placement
- Acquire any land needed
- Fight any legal challenges
- Build the lines and stations
Building is estimated to take at least 20 years.
If we look at the construction of the Green Line, which was the last metro line within the city to be built, some of those steps happened concurrently, but were severely delayed. The Green Line running from Branch Avenue to Greenbelt was included in the original plans for the metro system that were approved in 1968. However, it wasn’t until 1991 that the Green Line first opened with its first stations: U Street to Anacostia.
WMATA took a phased approach, and addressed jurisdictional disagreements and lawsuits from the community as the different sections of the line were completed. I am expecting the same for this next phase.
Leave a Reply