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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me guess OP. You are a millennial who doesn’t have a car and you live in one of the gentrified neighborhood in north east that is convenient walking or biking distance to the Arboretum. Am I right?

Bonus points for admitting that you are a fairly recent arrival to the district of Columbia and this is your first home that you’ve purchased

To add, just as you’re tired of cars in your new pandemic walking routine, people like me, who’ve been going there for years,
are so bummed that throngs of millennials have “discovered “ the once-quiet place. We’re dismayed that you clog it up consistently with off-leash rescue dogs and shouty loud preschoolers and babies climbing in the trees which is clearly inappropriate.

We have to coexist now and so do you

OMG, so much THIS!!! To both PP’s.

Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the year this argument is pointless because there are simply not that many people at the park. If you walk, you don't deal with many cars and they mostly go slow. And most of the people who drive are simply doing it to reach the more far flung areas of the park and are respectful of low speed limits and look out for pedestrians and bikes.

It's just that in the spring, you get lots of people who visit the park infrequently (including tourists) showing up to see the most crowded part of the park and not observing any of the unspoken rules of the arboretum, like minimizing driving. If you go there a lot, you know that you can park at the visitors center and walk to almost everywhere you want to go on accessible trails. The only real exception are the Asian gardens which are a bit of a hike if you have mobility issues, children, or limited time, so many people will drive over there if that's the focus of your visit.

But no one drives, parks to look an "an azalea" then drives to look at a dogwood, etc., as a PP mentioned. That kind of behavior, and accompanying entitlement, only happens during azaleas and to a lesser extent on summer weekends. For those of us who have been visiting the Arboretum for years, especially if you live in NE where it is more accessible than the mall or waterfront areas, this really isn't an issue most of the time. Like everything in DC, you just have to learn to work around the tourists and crowds in the high season. It's one of the costs of living in this lovely city with so many free amenities.

It seems to be working out fine for most of us, present OP excluded.

It's not working out fine for me. I've been in the area 20 years, and I've never been to the Arboretum, because the transit/walking/biking access is lousy.

Have you been banned by Uber?
Honest question.

PP you're responding to. I've never taken Uber. I don't like the business model, I don't like what Uber has done to the streets (more cruising traffic, more drivers staring at their devices, more dangerous U turns), my phone is probably too old to even have the app on it, and for the Arboretum specifically, I'm not interested in a bus-to-Metro-to-bus-to-hirecar trip.

Also, "Why don't you take Uber?" is not an adequate response when the problem is lack of public transit access to a public facility.

But not liking the options is not the same thing as not having options.

I am confused. Uber is not public transit. Responding "take Uber!" to people who say they don't go to the Arboretum due to lousy public transit is like responding "eat cake!" to people who say their supermarket has a lousy selection of fruits and vegetables.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:90% of the year this argument is pointless because there are simply not that many people at the park. If you walk, you don't deal with many cars and they mostly go slow. And most of the people who drive are simply doing it to reach the more far flung areas of the park and are respectful of low speed limits and look out for pedestrians and bikes.

It's just that in the spring, you get lots of people who visit the park infrequently (including tourists) showing up to see the most crowded part of the park and not observing any of the unspoken rules of the arboretum, like minimizing driving. If you go there a lot, you know that you can park at the visitors center and walk to almost everywhere you want to go on accessible trails. The only real exception are the Asian gardens which are a bit of a hike if you have mobility issues, children, or limited time, so many people will drive over there if that's the focus of your visit.

But no one drives, parks to look an "an azalea" then drives to look at a dogwood, etc., as a PP mentioned. That kind of behavior, and accompanying entitlement, only happens during azaleas and to a lesser extent on summer weekends. For those of us who have been visiting the Arboretum for years, especially if you live in NE where it is more accessible than the mall or waterfront areas, this really isn't an issue most of the time. Like everything in DC, you just have to learn to work around the tourists and crowds in the high season. It's one of the costs of living in this lovely city with so many free amenities.

It seems to be working out fine for most of us, present OP excluded.

It's not working out fine for me. I've been in the area 20 years, and I've never been to the Arboretum, because the transit/walking/biking access is lousy.

Have you been banned by Uber?
Honest question.

PP you're responding to. I've never taken Uber. I don't like the business model, I don't like what Uber has done to the streets (more cruising traffic, more drivers staring at their devices, more dangerous U turns), my phone is probably too old to even have the app on it, and for the Arboretum specifically, I'm not interested in a bus-to-Metro-to-bus-to-hirecar trip.

Also, "Why don't you take Uber?" is not an adequate response when the problem is lack of public transit access to a public facility.

But not liking the options is not the same thing as not having options.

I am confused. Uber is not public transit. Responding "take Uber!" to people who say they don't go to the Arboretum due to lousy public transit is like responding "eat cake!" to people who say their supermarket has a lousy selection of fruits and vegetables.

I am also confused, because the bus is public transit, and you can take one to the arboretum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a mile one way from the visitor center parking lot to the Asian Collection, so you're at 2 miles round trip with a hill before you even step foot into the paths. There are plenty of people who cannot walk that, and it's not because they are lazy AF.

it’s half that distance from the NY Avenue lot, and you could leave open the lots on the eastern end too, just restrict driving to between the lots. A trolley would make the rest accessible. Also I question how much value there is seeing everything from a car anyway - seems better to park and have thoughtfully designed accessible paths for walkers, wheelchairs, etc.

You’re still talking about a mile round trip with a hill before you even enter the collection. And no, you aren’t seeing much of anything from the road at the arboretum, walking or driving. You need to actually go in the collections. It’s not unusual for us to park by the Asian collections or dogwoods and have those be our entire visit. By the time little kids have gone the whole way down the lawn to the fountain at the end of the dogwoods, walked through the camellias and explored the hill down to the river and come back up, they are done. Another trip would be the azalea hill, capital columns, and Fern Valley. Before kids I would routinely park at the r street entrance and jog a 3 mile loop, but that isn’t practical for all users. Once things open up after covid the arboretum will turn back into a sleepy place outside of azalea season.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am also confused, because the bus is public transit, and you can take one to the arboretum.

"By Metrorail

The closest Metrorail subway stop is Stadium Armory Station on the Blue and Orange lines. Transfer to Metrobus B-2; disembark the bus on Bladensburg Road and walk 2 blocks to R Street. Make a right on R Street and continue 2 blocks to the Arboretum gates."

[Anonymous]

Cars, driving on roads, designed for that purpose.

The nerve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cars, driving on roads, designed for that purpose.

The nerve.

Actually, people (visitors) driving cars on roads. Also, OP didn't ask, why do people drive in the National Arboretum? But rather, why does the National Arboretum allow visitors to drive on the roads in it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a mile one way from the visitor center parking lot to the Asian Collection, so you're at 2 miles round trip with a hill before you even step foot into the paths. There are plenty of people who cannot walk that, and it's not because they are lazy AF.

it’s half that distance from the NY Avenue lot, and you could leave open the lots on the eastern end too, just restrict driving to between the lots. A trolley would make the rest accessible. Also I question how much value there is seeing everything from a car anyway - seems better to park and have thoughtfully designed accessible paths for walkers, wheelchairs, etc.

You’re still talking about a mile round trip with a hill before you even enter the collection. And no, you aren’t seeing much of anything from the road at the arboretum, walking or driving. You need to actually go in the collections. It’s not unusual for us to park by the Asian collections or dogwoods and have those be our entire visit. By the time little kids have gone the whole way down the lawn to the fountain at the end of the dogwoods, walked through the camellias and explored the hill down to the river and come back up, they are done. Another trip would be the azalea hill, capital columns, and Fern Valley. Before kids I would routinely park at the r street entrance and jog a 3 mile loop, but that isn’t practical for all users. Once things open up after covid the arboretum will turn back into a sleepy place outside of azalea season.

but I still don’t think that entitles you to demand that the whole design be car centric with cars everywhere. The car traffic should be strictly limited to 2-3 lots. just like any other park. Prospect Park in Brooklyn is much much bigger and people still manage to enjoy it without driving all over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a mile one way from the visitor center parking lot to the Asian Collection, so you're at 2 miles round trip with a hill before you even step foot into the paths. There are plenty of people who cannot walk that, and it's not because they are lazy AF.

it’s half that distance from the NY Avenue lot, and you could leave open the lots on the eastern end too, just restrict driving to between the lots. A trolley would make the rest accessible. Also I question how much value there is seeing everything from a car anyway - seems better to park and have thoughtfully designed accessible paths for walkers, wheelchairs, etc.

You’re still talking about a mile round trip with a hill before you even enter the collection. And no, you aren’t seeing much of anything from the road at the arboretum, walking or driving. You need to actually go in the collections. It’s not unusual for us to park by the Asian collections or dogwoods and have those be our entire visit. By the time little kids have gone the whole way down the lawn to the fountain at the end of the dogwoods, walked through the camellias and explored the hill down to the river and come back up, they are done. Another trip would be the azalea hill, capital columns, and Fern Valley. Before kids I would routinely park at the r street entrance and jog a 3 mile loop, but that isn’t practical for all users. Once things open up after covid the arboretum will turn back into a sleepy place outside of azalea season.

but I still don’t think that entitles you to demand that the whole design be car centric with cars everywhere. The car traffic should be strictly limited to 2-3 lots. just like any other park. Prospect Park in Brooklyn is much much bigger and people still manage to enjoy it without driving all over it.

That’s nice. The arboretum has roads. By your own admission the impact of cars was “not a lot” but you think you should change everything. If you’re walking on the road you aren’t even really seeing anything.

[Anonymous]

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.

Better idea: Maybe a day a month when the selfish and able-bodied can be allowed to have the streets that were deliberately designed for car traffic all to themselves?

So OP had a lovely walk, and thinks that the elderly, the handicapped, and anyone who can’t manage walking considerable distances should be relegated to one day a month. Wow.

Third generation Washingtonian who remembers what it was like to live in a segregated community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a mile one way from the visitor center parking lot to the Asian Collection, so you're at 2 miles round trip with a hill before you even step foot into the paths. There are plenty of people who cannot walk that, and it's not because they are lazy AF.

it’s half that distance from the NY Avenue lot, and you could leave open the lots on the eastern end too, just restrict driving to between the lots. A trolley would make the rest accessible. Also I question how much value there is seeing everything from a car anyway - seems better to park and have thoughtfully designed accessible paths for walkers, wheelchairs, etc.

You’re still talking about a mile round trip with a hill before you even enter the collection. And no, you aren’t seeing much of anything from the road at the arboretum, walking or driving. You need to actually go in the collections. It’s not unusual for us to park by the Asian collections or dogwoods and have those be our entire visit. By the time little kids have gone the whole way down the lawn to the fountain at the end of the dogwoods, walked through the camellias and explored the hill down to the river and come back up, they are done. Another trip would be the azalea hill, capital columns, and Fern Valley. Before kids I would routinely park at the r street entrance and jog a 3 mile loop, but that isn’t practical for all users. Once things open up after covid the arboretum will turn back into a sleepy place outside of azalea season.

but I still don’t think that entitles you to demand that the whole design be car centric with cars everywhere. The car traffic should be strictly limited to 2-3 lots. just like any other park. Prospect Park in Brooklyn is much much bigger and people still manage to enjoy it without driving all over it.

Okay, but it's already in existence, roads and all, and has been practically since the automobile was invented. Who tf are you to show up and demand all of the existing roads be abandoned so you can have the worlds larges bike lane?

[Anonymous]

but I still don’t think that entitles you to demand that the whole design be car centric with cars everywhere. The car traffic should be strictly limited to 2-3 lots. just like any other park. Prospect Park in Brooklyn is much much bigger and people still manage to enjoy it without driving all over it.

Well since that is how it was designed, we are entitled to use the facility as it was designed. Who the hell are YOU to demand it be redesigned and not be accessed as it was intended?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a mile one way from the visitor center parking lot to the Asian Collection, so you're at 2 miles round trip with a hill before you even step foot into the paths. There are plenty of people who cannot walk that, and it's not because they are lazy AF.

it’s half that distance from the NY Avenue lot, and you could leave open the lots on the eastern end too, just restrict driving to between the lots. A trolley would make the rest accessible. Also I question how much value there is seeing everything from a car anyway - seems better to park and have thoughtfully designed accessible paths for walkers, wheelchairs, etc.

Have you actually been to the Arboretum? Real question.

No one views the arboretum from their car. None of the features are readily accessible by car. And no one views the Asian Collection by car in particular! It is on a steep hill and you climb down a path with lots of steps toward the Anacostia. A major reason people (including me) usually drive there is that once you are there, there is tons of walking involved. Walking from the NY Ave lot is feasible but will easily eat up a lot of your visit time walking along access roads with no sidewalk.

There are 3-4 areas in the park where people usually park: Visitors Center, Capitol Columns, Asian Collection, NY Ave. in my experience, cyclist most often use NY Ave because it’s not that close to anything and is kind of ugly, but it’s a great place to load and unload bikes. Most people park at the Visitors Center because from there you can walk most places in the park, plus it is useful to park near restrooms. The Asian Collection is rarely busy because people don’t know about it — I’ve never seen the lot full, even during high season. It’s not uncommon for me to just drive straight there if I’m visiting during a busy time with my kid, because we can happily spend 60-90 minutes over there and then get in the car and leave while avoiding the crowds. She is way too young to walk there from either NY Ave or the Visitors Center, walk around, and then walk back. I am certain the same is true for many older people as well.

I do think it’s silly when people park at the Capitol Columns because they are walkable from the Visitors Center which has a much larger lot and is more central. But tourists often do it. Shrug. It really does not account for much traffic except during the high season. I’d be fine with them getting rid of that lot, but I actually think they use it when people rent it out for events.

“No one”? I’ve actually viewed the arboretum by car with two elderly relatives. For one of them, it was one of her last outings. She was born in DC at a time when she was legally not allowed in many places that are now common tourist attractions, and she wanted to enjoy some of the beautiful parts of the city while she still could. Those of you blithely going on about what “everyone “ could do well to look beyond your own experiences— which are hardly universal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

but I still don’t think that entitles you to demand that the whole design be car centric with cars everywhere. The car traffic should be strictly limited to 2-3 lots. just like any other park. Prospect Park in Brooklyn is much much bigger and people still manage to enjoy it without driving all over it.

Well since that is how it was designed, we are entitled to use the facility as it was designed. Who the hell are YOU to demand it be redesigned and not be accessed as it was intended?

People get to advocate for changes in the design and use of public facilities - just as you get to advocate against changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a mile one way from the visitor center parking lot to the Asian Collection, so you're at 2 miles round trip with a hill before you even step foot into the paths. There are plenty of people who cannot walk that, and it's not because they are lazy AF.

it’s half that distance from the NY Avenue lot, and you could leave open the lots on the eastern end too, just restrict driving to between the lots. A trolley would make the rest accessible. Also I question how much value there is seeing everything from a car anyway - seems better to park and have thoughtfully designed accessible paths for walkers, wheelchairs, etc.

Have you actually been to the Arboretum? Real question.

No one views the arboretum from their car. None of the features are readily accessible by car. And no one views the Asian Collection by car in particular! It is on a steep hill and you climb down a path with lots of steps toward the Anacostia. A major reason people (including me) usually drive there is that once you are there, there is tons of walking involved. Walking from the NY Ave lot is feasible but will easily eat up a lot of your visit time walking along access roads with no sidewalk.

There are 3-4 areas in the park where people usually park: Visitors Center, Capitol Columns, Asian Collection, NY Ave. in my experience, cyclist most often use NY Ave because it’s not that close to anything and is kind of ugly, but it’s a great place to load and unload bikes. Most people park at the Visitors Center because from there you can walk most places in the park, plus it is useful to park near restrooms. The Asian Collection is rarely busy because people don’t know about it — I’ve never seen the lot full, even during high season. It’s not uncommon for me to just drive straight there if I’m visiting during a busy time with my kid, because we can happily spend 60-90 minutes over there and then get in the car and leave while avoiding the crowds. She is way too young to walk there from either NY Ave or the Visitors Center, walk around, and then walk back. I am certain the same is true for many older people as well.

I do think it’s silly when people park at the Capitol Columns because they are walkable from the Visitors Center which has a much larger lot and is more central. But tourists often do it. Shrug. It really does not account for much traffic except during the high season. I’d be fine with them getting rid of that lot, but I actually think they use it when people rent it out for events.

“No one”? I’ve actually viewed the arboretum by car with two elderly relatives. For one of them, it was one of her last outings. She was born in DC at a time when she was legally not allowed in many places that are now common tourist attractions, and she wanted to enjoy some of the beautiful parts of the city while she still could. Those of you blithely going on about what “everyone “ could do well to look beyond your own experiences— which are hardly universal.

It would still be accessible if cars were limited. It would actually be more accessible because you could use the paved roads for wheelchairs and other mobility impairments. It’s all about balance. Nobody demands we pave the beach so the disabled can access the whole thing.

the fact is, it’s a poorly thought out design that should be reconsidered. the primary purpose for cars to enter the arboretum is to park, and this could be done in a much less disruptive way.