Tuesday, December 1, 2009

What Should Waterfront-SEU Metro be Renamed?

With construction set to start on the new Waterfront-SEU Metro station plaza before the end of the year, perhaps it’s a good time to bring up the subject (as readers have done in the past) of the name of the Metro station itself. Southeastern University shuttered its doors back in September, so its future is in doubt. Perhaps WMATA should consider dropping SEU from the station name and add the name of a major historic institution in the area like Fort McNair? Waterfront-Fort McNair would give a good description of the neighborhood the Metro station covers. Fort Lesley J. McNair has been at Buzzard Point since 1794 and is the third oldest military installation in the nation (according to Wikipedia), so I doubt it will be going anywhere soon, unless a future BRAC Act closes the fort. Another alternative could be to rename the station Waterfront-Buzzard Point. Using Buzzard Point in the Metro station name would give attention to a neglected neighborhood that will be undergoing dramatic changes over the next couple of decades. Instead of replacing SEU with another local destination, WMATA could simplify the name by renaming the station Waterfront or Southwest Waterfront. In most cases, the way a station name change happens is the local government (in this case the DC Government) makes a request to WMATA to change the name of a station and will also pay for any expenses related to the name change. We'll see if the DC Government will opt to have the name changed, but at any event, what would you rename the Metro station? Vote in December’s poll on the upper left corner of the sidebar and feel free to leave a comment after this post.

19 comments:

Jim said...

Keep it simple, and stick with the original name as it was envisioned when Metro was designed: Waterfront.

Anonymous said...

'Waterfront' - Please nothing more! All these long metro names have to go.

wd

IMGoph said...

i like the idea of including buzzard point. just "waterfront" could be anywhere. that could be in virginia, up in georgetown, etc.

BeyondDC said...

I agree with both sentiments. Simple names are good, but "waterfront" could be anywhere (especially as more and more waterfronts become popular places).

I'd drop *both* "Waterfront" and "SEU" and rename the station completely. The simple "Buzzard Point" sounds good to me.

Anonymous said...

Buzzard Point? Huh? This place serves the Waterfront neighborhood. I live there. It's at the new Waterfront Station and will serve the huge Waterfront redevelopment. It barely serves Buzzard Point... you might as well take Navy Yards for that.

wd

Anonymous said...

I think "Southwest Waterfront" best describes the area that metro stop serves. I live in Buzzard Point, but use the closer Navy Yard metro at Half Street, so even though I'd like to see Buzzard Point get some more love, I don't think adding it to that metro name is the best idea.

Anonymous said...

Southwest Waterfront

Anonymous said...

I vote for Southwest Waterfront. It's simple, and accurately describes the neighborhood. It also seems to just sound better. No offense to Buzzard Point, but the word "buzzard" never seemed that appealing to me...I keep imagining vultures circling dead fish or something.

Anonymous said...

Hasn't anyone noticed that the metro pylons in the station already have removed "SEU" from their name? Also notice that train operators have also stopped saying "SEU" at the end of their station announcements.

I think "Waterfront" is the way to go - "Southwest Waterfront" if anything else. Why NOT make THIS the place people want to go if they want to see the water? I'm all for it.

Anonymous said...

I agree. Just "Waterfront". If people can't figure out which waterfront area that refers to, they'd better start learning how to look at the Metro system map!

Thanks to the petulance of Georgetown residents of 30+ years ago, we don't have a "Georgetown" station (so there's no conflict with a "Georgetown Waterfront"). There is therefore only ONE waterfront subway stop in the whole system.

Keep it simple. I also am REALLY tired of the "feel good" efforts of city government to make metro stations names more inclusive of their surroundings though endless hyphenation. The London Underground doesn't do this. The Tube stations have ONE NAME, regardless of what's in the neighborhood. Why the heck don't we use similar logic? Jeez!

DavidSW

HRH King Friday XIII, Ret. said...

Either "Southwest Waterfront" or "Waterfront-Ft. McNair."

The latter becuase I've noticed while ordering stuff online that my 20024 zip code sometimes won't associate with Washington DC but instead says "Ft. McNair." Thinking there must be some longstanding logisical/city planning reason for this. Plus its kind of cool, I dont know why.

Alternative, I'd suggest "Waterfront-Crappy Safeway With Long Lines.

IMGoph said...

davidsw: if you're referring to georgetown not having a station because NIMBYs fought it or something like that, you're wrong. please don't spread that urban legend—read "the great society subway" by zachary m. schrag.

the reason there is no georgetown station is because of geology, not "petulance."

Anonymous said...

I like the name "Southwest Waterfront". I too think all of the hyphenated names are ridiculous, but this would be adding a descriptive modifier, not essentially a second name. I cringed when SEU was added to the name thinking that it was a rather poor excuse for something to be added. My second choice would be the original name "Waterfront," but I do think that the adding "Southwest" helps remove some confusion. Buzzard Point is just too far away as others have said.

Anonymous said...

@IMGoph. I'm not completely wrong. The Post indicates that the NIMBY opposition I mentioned did exist, but didn't affect the outcome:

"Sunday, June 11, 2006
Chalk up one more urban legend. For years Washingtonians have been telling the story of how snooty Georgetown dealt itself out of a subway stop because it didn't want its streets crawling with riffraff from poorer sections of the city.

The opposition was there all right, explains Zachary M. Schrag in The Great Society Subway: A History of the Washington Metro (Johns Hopkins Univ., $30), but it was irrelevant, "for a Georgetown station was never seriously considered."

DavidSW

IMGoph said...

davidsw: yes, the opposition did exist, but you said it was "thanks to the petulance of georgetown residents of 30+ years ago, we don't have a "georgetown" station."

thus, what you said was incorrect.

Anonymous said...

Your original reply can be taken as 'no opposition existed - it was strictly geology'. I added the comment about the opposition because it did exist. My linkage of the opposition to the outcome is what is my error.

DavidSW

Anonymous said...

Well maybe we should call it Not-Georgetown-Waterfront for all the NIMBYs.

Anonymous said...

SW Waterfront.

Just like Federal Center SW or Capitol South - name and directional location. So simple it hurts.

Anonymous said...

It seems most folks like "Waterfront", along with the SW directional label as a possible addition.

So should it be

"Southwest Waterfront", or

"Waterfront Southwest"?

What do you all think?

DavidSW
(or should I be SWDavid)? :)