why are cars allowed in the National Arbortetum? Why? Why? WHYYYY?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

So you want to be able to drive all over the core of the arboretum to get to more isolated spots, thereby making the more popular spots less enjoyable for others. Do I have that right?

that's no way to manage a scare resource (green space in a city).

Do you have that right? Well, not quite. I do want to be able to drive on the existing roads (there for this exact purpose) to get wherever I want to go there, as is very much allowed. I've never heard anyone complain that it is making the more popular spots "less enjoyable" except from you, OP. I also like to go to the "popular spots" as well, and I don't find those to be at all disrupted by vehicle traffic. The Capitol Columns are up on top of a hill/surrounded by a huge open field, the bonsai collection is enclosed in a walled garden, the Asian Collection is in it's own valley completely removed from the road... is it just the Azalea Collection that stresses you out so much?

I get the impression that OP just walked along the road. That's fine, I've done the loop for exercise too, but it is not the same as actually walking into the collections. The idea that someone is going to park at the NY Ave lot and push a wheelchair up the hill to see the dogwoods is kind of crazy.

Pretty sure OP would love to volunteer to push some wheelchairs up the hills, once we get rid of all the cars.

I mean, I don’t think the trails themselves are accessible to wheelchairs. People are just pretending to be concerned about accessibility (typical). My plan would increase accessibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

So you want to be able to drive all over the core of the arboretum to get to more isolated spots, thereby making the more popular spots less enjoyable for others. Do I have that right?

that's no way to manage a scare resource (green space in a city).

Do you have that right? Well, not quite. I do want to be able to drive on the existing roads (there for this exact purpose) to get wherever I want to go there, as is very much allowed. I've never heard anyone complain that it is making the more popular spots "less enjoyable" except from you, OP. I also like to go to the "popular spots" as well, and I don't find those to be at all disrupted by vehicle traffic. The Capitol Columns are up on top of a hill/surrounded by a huge open field, the bonsai collection is enclosed in a walled garden, the Asian Collection is in it's own valley completely removed from the road... is it just the Azalea Collection that stresses you out so much?

+1. I kind of think the OP just doesn’t know the arboretum well. I live nearby and take my 2 yr old all the time. The cars never bother me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

Not really a solution. I'm not the OP.

Uhhh it absolutely is a solution. If something is stressful and not enjoyable to you, simply don’t do it. Don’t expect the entire universe to revolve around what you personally find enjoyable.

that’s not how public amenities work. I could equally say “your preference to experience the arboretum by driving 500 meters in your SUV instead of walking” is you expecting the universe to revolve around you and your car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

Not really a solution. I'm not the OP.

Uhhh it absolutely is a solution. If something is stressful and not enjoyable to you, simply don’t do it. Don’t expect the entire universe to revolve around what you personally find enjoyable.

that’s not how public amenities work. I could equally say “your preference to experience the arboretum by driving 500 meters in your SUV instead of walking” is you expecting the universe to revolve around you and your car.

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

DP. It's how the public amenity currently works. It worked differently in the past, and could work differently in the future, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

DP. It's how the public amenity currently works. It worked differently in the past, and could work differently in the future, too.

Sure, but a lot of people here are saying they appreciate the way it works now. Why should we pander to your preference that it only be accessible to bikers and pedestrians who can walk long-ish distances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

DP. It's how the public amenity currently works. It worked differently in the past, and could work differently in the future, too.

Sure, but a lot of people here are saying they appreciate the way it works now. Why should we pander to your preference that it only be accessible to bikers and pedestrians who can walk long-ish distances?

I'm not the OP. Why do you describe potential changes as "pandering"? Obviously it now works for some people and doesn't work for other people. OP could equally well ask (and actually basically did) why they're pandering to you. In addition, OP is not proposing to close off the Arboretum altogether except for people who can walk or bike, and also circulator/shuttle services (which OP has not proposed, I think) would provide access to people who can't or unwilling to walk or bike within the Arboretum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

DP. It's how the public amenity currently works. It worked differently in the past, and could work differently in the future, too.

Sure, but a lot of people here are saying they appreciate the way it works now. Why should we pander to your preference that it only be accessible to bikers and pedestrians who can walk long-ish distances?

OP here. The 2020 arboretum master plan actually acknowledges that the current traffic patterns are haphazard and interfere with the pedestrian experience. so I’m not alone. I disagree with the plan in that it seems to contemplate that car touring loops is an acceptable way to design the space, but at least they are thinking about putting cars in their place and cutting down their dominance.

https://www.cfa.gov/system/files/meeting-materials/2-CFA_16-JUL-20-2-US_National_Arboretum_%28v.2-sm-pres%29.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

DP. It's how the public amenity currently works. It worked differently in the past, and could work differently in the future, too.

Sure, but a lot of people here are saying they appreciate the way it works now. Why should we pander to your preference that it only be accessible to bikers and pedestrians who can walk long-ish distances?

I'm not the OP. Why do you describe potential changes as "pandering"? Obviously it now works for some people and doesn't work for other people. OP could equally well ask (and actually basically did) why they're pandering to you. In addition, OP is not proposing to close off the Arboretum altogether except for people who can walk or bike, and also circulator/shuttle services (which OP has not proposed, I think) would provide access to people who can't or unwilling to walk or bike within the Arboretum.

OP here. I think a shuttle/trolly is the ideal solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Turns out it’s exactly how this public amenity works. If it stresses you out, stop going.

DP. It's how the public amenity currently works. It worked differently in the past, and could work differently in the future, too.

Sure, but a lot of people here are saying they appreciate the way it works now. Why should we pander to your preference that it only be accessible to bikers and pedestrians who can walk long-ish distances?

I'm not the OP. Why do you describe potential changes as "pandering"? Obviously it now works for some people and doesn't work for other people. OP could equally well ask (and actually basically did) why they're pandering to you. In addition, OP is not proposing to close off the Arboretum altogether except for people who can walk or bike, and also circulator/shuttle services (which OP has not proposed, I think) would provide access to people who can't or unwilling to walk or bike within the Arboretum.

OP here. I think a shuttle/trolly is the ideal solution.

Except that they had one and lost funding for it?

In all my visits, I hardly ever saw anyone on it (or driving through the arboretum, for that matter).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

So you want to be able to drive all over the core of the arboretum to get to more isolated spots, thereby making the more popular spots less enjoyable for others. Do I have that right?

that's no way to manage a scare resource (green space in a city).

Do you have that right? Well, not quite. I do want to be able to drive on the existing roads (there for this exact purpose) to get wherever I want to go there, as is very much allowed. I've never heard anyone complain that it is making the more popular spots "less enjoyable" except from you, OP. I also like to go to the "popular spots" as well, and I don't find those to be at all disrupted by vehicle traffic. The Capitol Columns are up on top of a hill/surrounded by a huge open field, the bonsai collection is enclosed in a walled garden, the Asian Collection is in it's own valley completely removed from the road... is it just the Azalea Collection that stresses you out so much?

I get the impression that OP just walked along the road. That's fine, I've done the loop for exercise too, but it is not the same as actually walking into the collections. The idea that someone is going to park at the NY Ave lot and push a wheelchair up the hill to see the dogwoods is kind of crazy.

Pretty sure OP would love to volunteer to push some wheelchairs up the hills, once we get rid of all the cars.

I mean, I don’t think the trails themselves are accessible to wheelchairs. People are just pretending to be concerned about accessibility (typical). My plan would increase accessibility.

People with limited mobility and/or small children can park and walk into the dogwoods or Asian collection. They cannot walk all the way from one of your suggested lots AND visit the collection. It’s a matter of distance. For the record, have you ever actually gone into the Asian Collection, dogwoods, or conifers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

So you want to be able to drive all over the core of the arboretum to get to more isolated spots, thereby making the more popular spots less enjoyable for others. Do I have that right?

that's no way to manage a scare resource (green space in a city).

Do you have that right? Well, not quite. I do want to be able to drive on the existing roads (there for this exact purpose) to get wherever I want to go there, as is very much allowed. I've never heard anyone complain that it is making the more popular spots "less enjoyable" except from you, OP. I also like to go to the "popular spots" as well, and I don't find those to be at all disrupted by vehicle traffic. The Capitol Columns are up on top of a hill/surrounded by a huge open field, the bonsai collection is enclosed in a walled garden, the Asian Collection is in it's own valley completely removed from the road... is it just the Azalea Collection that stresses you out so much?

I get the impression that OP just walked along the road. That's fine, I've done the loop for exercise too, but it is not the same as actually walking into the collections. The idea that someone is going to park at the NY Ave lot and push a wheelchair up the hill to see the dogwoods is kind of crazy.

Pretty sure OP would love to volunteer to push some wheelchairs up the hills, once we get rid of all the cars.

I mean, I don’t think the trails themselves are accessible to wheelchairs. People are just pretending to be concerned about accessibility (typical). My plan would increase accessibility.

People with limited mobility and/or small children can park and walk into the dogwoods or Asian collection. They cannot walk all the way from one of your suggested lots AND visit the collection. It’s a matter of distance. For the record, have you ever actually gone into the Asian Collection, dogwoods, or conifers?

They could keep the lots near the dogwoods and Asian collection open and limit car traffic to the northern periphery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

So you want to be able to drive all over the core of the arboretum to get to more isolated spots, thereby making the more popular spots less enjoyable for others. Do I have that right?

that's no way to manage a scare resource (green space in a city).

Do you have that right? Well, not quite. I do want to be able to drive on the existing roads (there for this exact purpose) to get wherever I want to go there, as is very much allowed. I've never heard anyone complain that it is making the more popular spots "less enjoyable" except from you, OP. I also like to go to the "popular spots" as well, and I don't find those to be at all disrupted by vehicle traffic. The Capitol Columns are up on top of a hill/surrounded by a huge open field, the bonsai collection is enclosed in a walled garden, the Asian Collection is in it's own valley completely removed from the road... is it just the Azalea Collection that stresses you out so much?

+1. I kind of think the OP just doesn’t know the arboretum well. I live nearby and take my 2 yr old all the time. The cars never bother me.

+2

I've been going there for many years, almost always by car but also bike sometimes. Outside of azaleas it's not an issue. I like your proposed perimeter route OP, but since the Arboretum is just not that crowded, it doesn't seem necessary to re-work it just yet. As a PP mentioned, after the pandemic it will go back to being almost empty most of the time. The reason we love the current setup is because you don't have to make a day of it, you happen to be nearby and and can pop in for a quick walk in a specific collection/garden without spending hours there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just had a lovely walk around the Arboretum this weekend, but it was really significantly worsened by car traffic. Not a lot, but enough that the noise and interruption on the path was meaningful. For the life of me, why do they let cars in? What's the point of that? Cars should be allowed in to park, then everyone should walk/bike. Maybe a day a month where the disabled and elderly can be allowed to drive.

YES! Add lots of bike share stations, and incentivize a bike store to set up shop near the front gate.
At the very least, a day a month car-free. The Arboretum is not relaxing at all for my family, because little kids and big cars are not very visible to each other, and neither of them are good at remembering to watch out for each other's presence when not in large numbers.

Okay, so don't come? The Arboretum IS relaxing to my family, which includes two little kids. We went a lot already, but it's been a godsend during the pandemic. In fact, the accessibility to all of it by car makes it really nice for us as parents of small kids. We aren't limited to how far a 2 year old can make it on foot, or how far we want to shove a stroller or haul a picnic for four people. We can drive to a nice, more isolated area of the park, park our car off to the side of the road and walk into a practically empty clearing well off the road where we can then let the kids loose to run around while we enjoy our lunch that we only had to carry 20 yards instead of a mile on foot. It's lovely!

So you want to be able to drive all over the core of the arboretum to get to more isolated spots, thereby making the more popular spots less enjoyable for others. Do I have that right?

that's no way to manage a scare resource (green space in a city).

Do you have that right? Well, not quite. I do want to be able to drive on the existing roads (there for this exact purpose) to get wherever I want to go there, as is very much allowed. I've never heard anyone complain that it is making the more popular spots "less enjoyable" except from you, OP. I also like to go to the "popular spots" as well, and I don't find those to be at all disrupted by vehicle traffic. The Capitol Columns are up on top of a hill/surrounded by a huge open field, the bonsai collection is enclosed in a walled garden, the Asian Collection is in it's own valley completely removed from the road... is it just the Azalea Collection that stresses you out so much?

+1. I kind of think the OP just doesn’t know the arboretum well. I live nearby and take my 2 yr old all the time. The cars never bother me.

+2

I've been going there for many years, almost always by car but also bike sometimes. Outside of azaleas it's not an issue. I like your proposed perimeter route OP, but since the Arboretum is just not that crowded, it doesn't seem necessary to re-work it just yet. As a PP mentioned, after the pandemic it will go back to being almost empty most of the time. The reason we love the current setup is because you don't have to make a day of it, you happen to be nearby and and can pop in for a quick walk in a specific collection/garden without spending hours there.

so basically you want it to remain your underutilized car touring park. ok.

[Anonymous]

It's not a park. Stop moaning about the cars. If you want a park head out to SNP.