Why isn't there a Metro Stop at Taylor's Run?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Free or cheap parking in downtown DC. Pray do tell where that would be? A spot can easily cost $300/month, but people pay that because it is far more convenient than other options.

Seriously, dude. If you want to drive into DC and pay $15 a day to park because it's more convenient for you, then you should do that. Obey the speed limits, stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, don't right-hook bicyclists and scooter riders, and you ought to be fine.

$15 a day is cheap parking, though. My round trip into DC and back on the commuter train costs $12. Lots of people have transit commutes that cost more.

Please pay attention. As has been clear in this discussion, I don't drive all the way to DC because there is a viable parking option in Bethesda that you seem hell bent on taking away. You plainly hate cars and drivers based on your completely non-sequitor PSA about basic driver safety.

I don't hate cars. I mostly get around by driving. All I'm saying is that downtown Bethesda should not be a park-and-ride. It can be a thriving urban place, or it can be a park-and-ride, but it can't be both. I understand that the park-and-ride is convenient for you, personally, but I think that the people in the county in general are better off with a thriving urban place.

So if I and people like me take a bus into Bethesda and then get on metro, Bethesda will be a thriving urban place, but if we drive in and park to get on metro, it becomes a park-and-ride? That makes no sense at all.

In fact, people driving into Bethesad directly helps it be a thriving urban area. At least a couple of days a week, I (and I am sure others) stay in Bethesda for dinner, supporting restaurants which of course are a key component to a thriving urban place. We'll also sometimes go shopping or see a show or movie, further increasing the vibrancy of the area.

Without available parking, much of this economic activity would be lost because, without parking, I and many others would drive to DC - not take a bus to Bethesda as you would prefer because that would significantly increase commute time. That would very much harm the urban vibrancy of Bethesda.

Finally, we've been talking about commuting, but if parking were cut as you wished, it would further damage the vibrancy of the area because it would make it much more difficult for people to get into the area and support the businesses needed for a thriving area. That's why the Bethesda Urban Partnership has made sure to have adequate parking in recent developments. But of course you know better than the actual businesses that help make Bethesda a thriving urban area.

They recognize that the families eating or shopping, the ladies who lunch, and lots of other folks who support the local economy, would not in fact bus, bike, or walk in to town if parking were unavailable, difficult or expensive. They would simply go elsewhere and losing those customers would mean losing businesses, harming the urban vibrancy you seek.

Your desire that people would simply bus, walk or bike doesn't make it reality and many people can't or wouldn't use those options. So the choice is actually parking availability OR a thriving urban scene, not the other way around.

The space taken up by parking garages absolutely kills the streetscape. At least at Bethesda Row, the parking garage is in the middle of the block. But most of the garages are just dead streetscape and dangerous to pedestrians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Your desire that people would simply bus, walk or bike doesn't make it reality and many people can't or wouldn't use those options. So the choice is actually parking availability OR a thriving urban scene, not the other way around.

Lots and lots of people already bus, walk, and bike. It's not a desire, it's the reality.

Some certainly do. But if Bethesda businesses had to rely on people who bus, bike, or walk, most would close taking the urban vibrancy of the area we both want with it.

Please name two vibrant urban areas in the world that rely on people driving there in cars and parking.

Almost every vibrant urban area relies on cars and parking to a reasonable degree. Some rely on it more (e.g., LA or Dallas) others rely on it less (e.g., NY), but all would lose many of their workers and people in for entertainment if driving were not an option.

"Urban" is not limited to places with incredibly high density, such as Tokyo and HK, and a place like Bethesda will never remotely approach those levels or level so of a place like NY or Chicago - and that's ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Free or cheap parking in downtown DC. Pray do tell where that would be? A spot can easily cost $300/month, but people pay that because it is far more convenient than other options.

Seriously, dude. If you want to drive into DC and pay $15 a day to park because it's more convenient for you, then you should do that. Obey the speed limits, stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, don't right-hook bicyclists and scooter riders, and you ought to be fine.

$15 a day is cheap parking, though. My round trip into DC and back on the commuter train costs $12. Lots of people have transit commutes that cost more.

Please pay attention. As has been clear in this discussion, I don't drive all the way to DC because there is a viable parking option in Bethesda that you seem hell bent on taking away. You plainly hate cars and drivers based on your completely non-sequitor PSA about basic driver safety.

I don't hate cars. I mostly get around by driving. All I'm saying is that downtown Bethesda should not be a park-and-ride. It can be a thriving urban place, or it can be a park-and-ride, but it can't be both. I understand that the park-and-ride is convenient for you, personally, but I think that the people in the county in general are better off with a thriving urban place.

So if I and people like me take a bus into Bethesda and then get on metro, Bethesda will be a thriving urban place, but if we drive in and park to get on metro, it becomes a park-and-ride? That makes no sense at all.

In fact, people driving into Bethesad directly helps it be a thriving urban area. At least a couple of days a week, I (and I am sure others) stay in Bethesda for dinner, supporting restaurants which of course are a key component to a thriving urban place. We'll also sometimes go shopping or see a show or movie, further increasing the vibrancy of the area.

Without available parking, much of this economic activity would be lost because, without parking, I and many others would drive to DC - not take a bus to Bethesda as you would prefer because that would significantly increase commute time. That would very much harm the urban vibrancy of Bethesda.

Finally, we've been talking about commuting, but if parking were cut as you wished, it would further damage the vibrancy of the area because it would make it much more difficult for people to get into the area and support the businesses needed for a thriving area. That's why the Bethesda Urban Partnership has made sure to have adequate parking in recent developments. But of course you know better than the actual businesses that help make Bethesda a thriving urban area.

They recognize that the families eating or shopping, the ladies who lunch, and lots of other folks who support the local economy, would not in fact bus, bike, or walk in to town if parking were unavailable, difficult or expensive. They would simply go elsewhere and losing those customers would mean losing businesses, harming the urban vibrancy you seek.

Your desire that people would simply bus, walk or bike doesn't make it reality and many people can't or wouldn't use those options. So the choice is actually parking availability OR a thriving urban scene, not the other way around.

The space taken up by parking garages absolutely kills the streetscape. At least at Bethesda Row, the parking garage is in the middle of the block. But most of the garages are just dead streetscape and dangerous to pedestrians.

More and more garages in urban areas are put underground and that makes complete sense and is very different than saying parking shouldn't be available. But I disagree that garages are dangerous for pedestrians per se. Drivers, pedestrians and bikers all have a responsibility to act safely and in accordance with the law, something people in all three groups sometimes fall short of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Your desire that people would simply bus, walk or bike doesn't make it reality and many people can't or wouldn't use those options. So the choice is actually parking availability OR a thriving urban scene, not the other way around.

Lots and lots of people already bus, walk, and bike. It's not a desire, it's the reality.

Some certainly do. But if Bethesda businesses had to rely on people who bus, bike, or walk, most would close taking the urban vibrancy of the area we both want with it.

Please name two vibrant urban areas in the world that rely on people driving there in cars and parking.

Almost every vibrant urban area relies on cars and parking to a reasonable degree. Some rely on it more (e.g., LA or Dallas) others rely on it less (e.g., NY), but all would lose many of their workers and people in for entertainment if driving were not an option.

"Urban" is not limited to places with incredibly high density, such as Tokyo and HK, and a place like Bethesda will never remotely approach those levels or level so of a place like NY or Chicago - and that's ok.

If you're referring to LA, Dallas, Bethesda, New York, then the analog is the DC metropolitan area, not Bethesda.

Think of some great places that you really enjoy walking around in, in the US or anywhere else in the world. Are those places full of big roads, cars, and parking lots/garages?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

More and more garages in urban areas are put underground and that makes complete sense and is very different than saying parking shouldn't be available. But I disagree that garages are dangerous for pedestrians per se. Drivers, pedestrians and bikers all have a responsibility to act safely and in accordance with the law, something people in all three groups sometimes fall short of.

Underground garages are very expensive, and still involve people driving cars to and fro - unless they're empty underground garages.

Also, in Montgomery County, lots of the cases of drivers hitting pedestrians happen in parking lots and garages. And driveway entrances are dangerous for pedestrians too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An infill station at Dunn Loring makes more sense than this.

Sums up this thread completely

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My own experiences show how limited the effect of increased frequency would have on ridership. Even if buses came every 5 minutes (which is wildly unrealistic) I still wouldn't use them that often. It would still increase my commute time 10-20 minutes each way, even when I didn't have to pick up kids and/or take them to activities - neither of which could really be done via bus since they don't go there. (Maybe I could theoretically piece together 2 to 3 buses each way to make it work, but the added time and hassle would be tremendous.)

As for the costs of roads, the 2 miles of roads I drive will still need to be there regardless and the added wear and tear is pretty minimal.

I'd love better transit and bike trails (biking would be an option for me occasionally) but your utopian vision that buses and bikes are going to become the main means of transportation if we just provide enough funding doesn't work in the real world.

?

It's not an utopian vision. It's an actual reality in lots of places.

Agree. Plus PP frames the issue narrowly around her needs/behavior. What she doesn't take into account is that increased bus frequency means that other people can rely on the bus to metro, allowing for a wider pool of people to consider jobs that encompass this commute. Higher frequency also helps with the car v. public transportation cost/benefit. When bus routes increase frequency they usually also extend hours or go to the later hours, allowing workers in non-office settings to rely on them more.

I framed it around my experience because a PP (who conveniently likes cutting off where she quotes) claimed my circumstances showed how added buses would make a huge difference. I pointed out how she was wrong as to the effect it would have on me.

Of course my experience isn't universal; I never claimed it was. But let's not pretend my circumstances are terribly unique either. Lots of folks where I live have two adult working, kids, and the means to pay for parking if it is substantially faster and easier.

More buses would certainly lead to some increase in ridership, but I don't believe it would be a drastic change, at least in my area or other similar areas. The tremendous costs would be much harder to justify if ridership did not, in fact, increase dramatically.

Could you be so kind as to say, in general terms, where you live? The OP was (apparently) talking about the City of Alexandria, and I don't think there is any large part of the City where a reasonable increase in bus service would not result in a meaningful increase in ridership. I do not wish to debate conditions in say, Chantilly, which I do not know at all well. Bus service is not something that can really be debated in the abstract - its impacted not only by income and family size, but by population density. proximity of destinations, and a range of other very local factors.

Sure. I mentioned it early, but with quotes getting cut off it got lost. I am in Bethesda, a couple of miles from downtown and a couple of miles from the dc border.

Oh. I really don't know bus service in the lower density parts of Bethesda at all well. I will try not to engage with you about Bethesda. Can you try not to make statements about the situation in Alexandria? Maybe adding bus service won't work in your neighborhood, but I think its a very feasible approach in the City of Alexandria. Again, bus service, transit, parking, etc are all very local issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Free or cheap parking in downtown DC. Pray do tell where that would be? A spot can easily cost $300/month, but people pay that because it is far more convenient than other options.

Seriously, dude. If you want to drive into DC and pay $15 a day to park because it's more convenient for you, then you should do that. Obey the speed limits, stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, don't right-hook bicyclists and scooter riders, and you ought to be fine.

$15 a day is cheap parking, though. My round trip into DC and back on the commuter train costs $12. Lots of people have transit commutes that cost more.

Please pay attention. As has been clear in this discussion, I don't drive all the way to DC because there is a viable parking option in Bethesda that you seem hell bent on taking away. You plainly hate cars and drivers based on your completely non-sequitor PSA about basic driver safety.

I don't hate cars. I mostly get around by driving. All I'm saying is that downtown Bethesda should not be a park-and-ride. It can be a thriving urban place, or it can be a park-and-ride, but it can't be both. I understand that the park-and-ride is convenient for you, personally, but I think that the people in the county in general are better off with a thriving urban place.

So if I and people like me take a bus into Bethesda and then get on metro, Bethesda will be a thriving urban place, but if we drive in and park to get on metro, it becomes a park-and-ride? That makes no sense at all.

In fact, people driving into Bethesad directly helps it be a thriving urban area. At least a couple of days a week, I (and I am sure others) stay in Bethesda for dinner, supporting restaurants which of course are a key component to a thriving urban place. We'll also sometimes go shopping or see a show or movie, further increasing the vibrancy of the area.

Without available parking, much of this economic activity would be lost because, without parking, I and many others would drive to DC - not take a bus to Bethesda as you would prefer because that would significantly increase commute time. That would very much harm the urban vibrancy of Bethesda.

Finally, we've been talking about commuting, but if parking were cut as you wished, it would further damage the vibrancy of the area because it would make it much more difficult for people to get into the area and support the businesses needed for a thriving area. That's why the Bethesda Urban Partnership has made sure to have adequate parking in recent developments. But of course you know better than the actual businesses that help make Bethesda a thriving urban area.

They recognize that the families eating or shopping, the ladies who lunch, and lots of other folks who support the local economy, would not in fact bus, bike, or walk in to town if parking were unavailable, difficult or expensive. They would simply go elsewhere and losing those customers would mean losing businesses, harming the urban vibrancy you seek.

Your desire that people would simply bus, walk or bike doesn't make it reality and many people can't or wouldn't use those options. So the choice is actually parking availability OR a thriving urban scene, not the other way around.

The space taken up by parking garages absolutely kills the streetscape. At least at Bethesda Row, the parking garage is in the middle of the block. But most of the garages are just dead streetscape and dangerous to pedestrians.

A couple of important points about parking in Bethesda.

1) Montgomery County loses a lot of money on their parking garages. The revenue never covers the costs and the garages have to be closed for maintenance every decade or so because cars cause a lot of wear and tear and that costs additional money.

2) There is a huge opportunity cost in dedicating commercial land in an expensive area to above ground parking. Instead of spending 30-40 million to build a commercial parking garage that the county never re-covers the money on they could sell one of these lots for 10-20 million and a developer could, at their expense, put up a commercial or residential building that instead would create housing or commercial space that would generate tens of millions annually in property and potentially income taxes.

I'm not sure how PP is using a Montgomery County garage as a park and ride as I thought they were all shorter term parking?

As for sidewalks at the street level Bethesda really is dominated by cars - the sidewalks (relative to DC and Arlington) are very narrow and the streets and intersections are just massive with high volumes of cars, lots of queuing and very long waits for pedestrians to cross.

I had to take DS to basketball practice at Bethesda ES last week and we walked from the metro and it was not a pleasant experience at all. The intersection right by the school took like 4 minutes to get across while we stood on a narrow sidewalk inhaling car exhaust.

I read somewhere that by 2025 downtown Bethesda is going to have about 50,000 people living within walking distance. With the Purple Line coming and all of the bus feed that will necessitate to the Bethesda Metro between transit and the people who live within walking distance there is no reason for Bethesda to continue to subsidize parking.

But try telling that to all of the limousine liberals who profess concern about global warming while crying for the county to continue to subsidize their driving everywhere.

If you live in Montgomery County and want to drive for lousy food you can go Rio and enjoy some faux urbanism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Free or cheap parking in downtown DC. Pray do tell where that would be? A spot can easily cost $300/month, but people pay that because it is far more convenient than other options.

Seriously, dude. If you want to drive into DC and pay $15 a day to park because it's more convenient for you, then you should do that. Obey the speed limits, stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, don't right-hook bicyclists and scooter riders, and you ought to be fine.

$15 a day is cheap parking, though. My round trip into DC and back on the commuter train costs $12. Lots of people have transit commutes that cost more.

Please pay attention. As has been clear in this discussion, I don't drive all the way to DC because there is a viable parking option in Bethesda that you seem hell bent on taking away. You plainly hate cars and drivers based on your completely non-sequitor PSA about basic driver safety.

I don't hate cars. I mostly get around by driving. All I'm saying is that downtown Bethesda should not be a park-and-ride. It can be a thriving urban place, or it can be a park-and-ride, but it can't be both. I understand that the park-and-ride is convenient for you, personally, but I think that the people in the county in general are better off with a thriving urban place.

So if I and people like me take a bus into Bethesda and then get on metro, Bethesda will be a thriving urban place, but if we drive in and park to get on metro, it becomes a park-and-ride? That makes no sense at all.

In fact, people driving into Bethesad directly helps it be a thriving urban area. At least a couple of days a week, I (and I am sure others) stay in Bethesda for dinner, supporting restaurants which of course are a key component to a thriving urban place. We'll also sometimes go shopping or see a show or movie, further increasing the vibrancy of the area.

Without available parking, much of this economic activity would be lost because, without parking, I and many others would drive to DC - not take a bus to Bethesda as you would prefer because that would significantly increase commute time. That would very much harm the urban vibrancy of Bethesda.

Finally, we've been talking about commuting, but if parking were cut as you wished, it would further damage the vibrancy of the area because it would make it much more difficult for people to get into the area and support the businesses needed for a thriving area. That's why the Bethesda Urban Partnership has made sure to have adequate parking in recent developments. But of course you know better than the actual businesses that help make Bethesda a thriving urban area.

They recognize that the families eating or shopping, the ladies who lunch, and lots of other folks who support the local economy, would not in fact bus, bike, or walk in to town if parking were unavailable, difficult or expensive. They would simply go elsewhere and losing those customers would mean losing businesses, harming the urban vibrancy you seek.

Your desire that people would simply bus, walk or bike doesn't make it reality and many people can't or wouldn't use those options. So the choice is actually parking availability OR a thriving urban scene, not the other way around.

The space taken up by parking garages absolutely kills the streetscape. At least at Bethesda Row, the parking garage is in the middle of the block. But most of the garages are just dead streetscape and dangerous to pedestrians.

A couple of important points about parking in Bethesda.

1) Montgomery County loses a lot of money on their parking garages. The revenue never covers the costs and the garages have to be closed for maintenance every decade or so because cars cause a lot of wear and tear and that costs additional money.

2) There is a huge opportunity cost in dedicating commercial land in an expensive area to above ground parking. Instead of spending 30-40 million to build a commercial parking garage that the county never re-covers the money on they could sell one of these lots for 10-20 million and a developer could, at their expense, put up a commercial or residential building that instead would create housing or commercial space that would generate tens of millions annually in property and potentially income taxes.

I'm not sure how PP is using a Montgomery County garage as a park and ride as I thought they were all shorter term parking?

As for sidewalks at the street level Bethesda really is dominated by cars - the sidewalks (relative to DC and Arlington) are very narrow and the streets and intersections are just massive with high volumes of cars, lots of queuing and very long waits for pedestrians to cross.

I had to take DS to basketball practice at Bethesda ES last week and we walked from the metro and it was not a pleasant experience at all. The intersection right by the school took like 4 minutes to get across while we stood on a narrow sidewalk inhaling car exhaust.

I read somewhere that by 2025 downtown Bethesda is going to have about 50,000 people living within walking distance. With the Purple Line coming and all of the bus feed that will necessitate to the Bethesda Metro between transit and the people who live within walking distance there is no reason for Bethesda to continue to subsidize parking.

But try telling that to all of the limousine liberals who profess concern about global warming while crying for the county to continue to subsidize their driving everywhere.

If you live in Montgomery County and want to drive for lousy food you can go Rio and enjoy some faux urbanism.

1. There is now a thread in Metro DC politics on parking in Bethesda. Please take this discussion there. I created it here but the mod in his wisdom moved it there. Please leave this for Alexandria, which has more extensive bus service than Bethesda, among other differences. That other thread could use some policy specifics - if selling one of the municipal garages is a live policy proposal, that would be good to discuss there
2. FYI, I live in Alexandria, I am a liberal (no limo, we have a sedan and I bike commute) who cares a lot about climate change, and I support "urbanist" policies in the City of Alexandria. I am also fine with "faux urbanism" (just you wait to see what Potomac Yard is gonna look like when its done)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An infill station at Dunn Loring makes more

Uhhh

[Anonymous]

Why would a metro stop be needed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would a metro stop be needed?

It makes about as much sense as reviving a dead thread to ask this question, doesn’t it?

[Anonymous]

I'd be up for a new metro stop