Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's say you get 100,000 people living around suburban Metro stations (which is not going to happen). The majority of the ridership will still be people parking and riding whether they're parking in a surface lot or a garage. The people living around stations will never be a majority of Metro ridership. At least not in the near future. The majority will continue to be middle-class people with families that drive to the station and go to their boring federal government job.
[color=black][font=Verdana]
You can't ticket a driver who swings over into a lane at the last second and still has his rear hanging out in the other lane. The bus can swing around this type of driver. The streetcar can't. And you can't tow away delivery trucks in a five to ten minute window. You can ticket them, but they do that in NYC and it makes no difference.
D.C. has already said they are going to make special zones for delivery trucks and times as well. D.C. is not NYC, the District has way more flexibilty to change things and implement new things than NYC does. Streetcars would not work in NYC because the streets are too small. D.C. does not have that problem.
And who says I was trying to "discredit transit as a whole." I think transit makes a lot of sense when parking costs $36 per day, which is why most people use it. But when parking is cheap and driving is an alternative, people tend to drive. This is even the case for NYC employees who drive into Manhattan when given free parking. Do you really think Washington, DC is anywhere near New York City-type density? You could take Bed-Stuy, Harlem and maybe two other neighborhoods and get the entire population of DC in a few square miles.
So this "DC is too dense for driving to make any sense" is some baloney. People do it all the time.
Yes, google is lying. It doesn't take close to the amount of time google provides to walk to a destination. And if google told you in D.C. 8:00 a.m. traffic it takes 37 minutes to get from Rockville to downtown D.C., it really doesn't know what it is talking about. For instance, google says taking the George Washington Memorial Parkway at 11:33 a.m. to downtown D.C. is 29 minutes. That is true and I have done it. The George Washington Memorial Parkway at 8:30 a.m. on the other hand is an absolute nightmare. Are you being serious right now?
Yes, google is lying. It doesn't take close to the amount of time google provides to walk to a destination. And if google told you in D.C. 8:00 a.m. traffic it takes 37 minutes to get from Rockville to downtown D.C., it really doesn't know what it is talking about. For instance, google says taking the George Washington Memorial Parkway at 11:33 a.m. to downtown D.C. is 29 minutes. That is true and I have done it. The George Washington Memorial Parkway at 8:30 a.m. on the other hand is an absolute nightmare. Are you being serious right now?
How can a computer program "lie?" Are you being serious right now?
Google Maps provides estimates based on traffic conditions. So the commute times for different times of the day will be different. While I agree that driving times have more variation than transit times, the driving times based on my own experiences living there tend to be accurate, at least insofar as indicating a shorter driving time than transit time. When I type in my address, the walk to the Shaw-Howard Metro is spot on. The transit time is actually a little shorter than it ought to be since there is no way the Green Line is ever getting from Shaw to Gallery Place in 3 minutes. Then the walk from Gallery Place to Metro Center is estimated at 6 minutes, which sounds about right to me. Overall, Google Maps estimates the trip from my front door to my old office building to be 19 minutes. In reality, that trip was really closer to 30 minutes.
That's why I drove on days when I was really running late. Driving that same distance in morning rush hour traffic takes about 20 minutes from the time I walk out of my door to the time I was pulling into a parking space.
Google Maps is actually far more reliable than you give it credit for. They track the location of GPS navigation users to determine travel times.
Quote:
The Department of Transportation (DOT) relies heavily on expensive traffic sensors that are embedded in highways for its traffic information. As a result of the expense, until recently only major cities had accurate real-time traffic information. In contrast, Google primarily collects traffic data from Google Maps and Google Navigation users who share location data. The users, which are growing in number due to Android’s popularity and the number of people navigating with mobile phones, provide a crowdsourced solution to displaying traffic information for rural areas and smaller roads.
How can a computer program "lie?" Are you being serious right now?
Google Maps provides estimates based on traffic conditions. So the commute times for different times of the day will be different. While I agree that driving times have more variation than transit times, the driving times based on my own experiences living there tend to be accurate, at least insofar as indicating a shorter driving time than transit time. When I type in my address, the walk to the Shaw-Howard Metro is spot on. The transit time is actually a little shorter than it ought to be since there is no way the Green Line is ever getting from Shaw to Gallery Place in 3 minutes. Then the walk from Gallery Place to Metro Center is estimated at 6 minutes, which sounds about right to me. Overall, Google Maps estimates the trip from my front door to my old office building to be 19 minutes. In reality, that trip was really closer to 30 minutes.
That's why I drove on days when I was really running late. Driving that same distance in morning rush hour traffic takes about 20 minutes from the time I walk out of my door to the time I was pulling into a parking space.
For people that don't live or work directly on a line, that would be true. But many people have one seat trips. Also, Shaw metro station is not close to many parts of Ledriot Park. That can be a 15-20 minute walk especially trying to cross Florida Ave. I can see how that walk would take a long time. But for people who actually live close to transit, it is faster to take transit. That was my only point. If I lived 20 minutes from a metro station, why would I take metro? But then again, why would I live 20 minutes from a metro station and expect it to be fast to drive all the way to metro. If you want to use metro and have it work how it is supposed to work, live near it which the same goes for anyplace. If you can't afford to live near metro, that is just life. Driving is best for low density suburbs anyway. Transit needs density to work.
I live one block from the metro station in NOMA. Since NOMA is the redline, I have a one stop trip almost anywhere anybody would want to go in downtown D.C. Depending on what line you live on makes a huge difference. Driving in a neighborhood like NOMA is never going to be faster than taking the train to downtown DC at rush hour.
But can you be honest about this? If you were sitting by the Rockville metro station in your car and someone got onto the train and both of you left at the same time headed to Gallery Place, who do you think would make it there first?
This says it takes 34 minutes with zero traffic? So at the height of rush hour, it takes 3 more minutes? Come on man, be reasonable. Google says metro is 37 minutes in comparison which does not change when rush hour starts?
For people that don't live or work directly on a line, that would be true. But many people have one seat trips.
My commute was a one-seat trip. And I don't mean to be cocky or anything, but my wife and I went to some pretty good schools and make pretty decent money (enough to buy a home in Northwest Washington). If we found it difficult to live in close proximity of a Metro line, I can't imagine what's it like for people earning far less than us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
Also, Shaw metro station is not close to many parts of Ledriot Park. That can be a 15 minute walk.
I actually used my own address, which is about a 6-7 minute walk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
But for people who actually live close to transit, it is faster to take transit. That was my only point.
But I did live close to transit. You don't think 6-7 minutes is a close walk? To get any closer to a Metro station, you'd need serious guap. They just don't hand out those condos, houses and apartments like candy. You need money. That's why most people either wind up in basement apartments or move to locations that are not very far from Metro, but are not particularly close either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
If I lived 20 minutes from a metro station, why would I take metro?
Because your alternative is paying $36 for parking downtown...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
But then again, why would I live 20 minutes from a metro station and expect it to be fast to drive all the way to metro.
They don't necessarily expect it to be fast. They expect it to cost less. $11 roundtrip fare + $5.50 for parking equals $16.50. That's savings of $20 per day minimum. It's basic math. Now if parking Downtown were $6 per day, then it would be a completely different calculation. But if DC had $6 per day parking, it's downtown would resemble Atlanta's.
But can you be honest about this? If you were sitting by the Rockville metro station in your car and someone got onto the train in both of you left at the same time headed to Gallery Place, who do you think would make it there first?
I think you're missing the point that the scenario you're outlining is totally unrealistic. That's like me and you racing from Baltimore to Arlington with me driving and you flying. But you happen to be buckled in on the runway already and then text "Go" and we both race to the finish line. With an estimated four minute flight time between the two cities, you would undoubtedly beat me. But the situation rarely ever plays out like that. Most people would choose to drive to Arlington because they have to account for transit time to the airport, etc. They're just not magically buckled into their seat with the turbine engines spinning at full power on the runway.
Similarly, the downside to transit is that you have to first get to it and then wait on a train to arrive. So Google Maps, through crowdsourcing and GPS tracking, is accounting for the average time it takes to get between two given points on a given mode of transit. It's not tracking how long it takes for a train leaving Metro Center to get to Gallery Place. Nobody lives inside of a Metro station (with the exception of the homeless perhaps) and the reality is that transit time to the station must be accounted for (as well as the time walking from the station to your destination).
Now you can beef with Google all you want, but the fact of the matter is that they are tapping into people's phones and getting the data first-hand.
My commute was a one-seat trip. And I don't mean to be cocky or anything, but my wife and I went to some pretty good schools and make pretty decent money (enough to buy a home in Northwest Washington). If we found it difficult to live in close proximity of a Metro line, I can't imagine what's it like for people earning far less than us.
I actually used my own address, which is about a 6-7 minute walk.
But I did live close to transit. You don't think 6-7 minutes is a close walk? To get any closer to a Metro station, you'd need serious guap. They just don't hand out those condos, houses and apartments like candy. You need money. That's why most people either wind up in basement apartments or move to locations that are not very far from Metro, but are not particularly close either.
Because your alternative is paying $36 for parking downtown...
They don't necessarily expect it to be fast. They expect it to cost less. $11 roundtrip fare + $5.50 for parking equals $16.50. That's savings of $20 per day minimum. It's basic math. Now if parking Downtown were $6 per day, then it would be a completely different calculation. But if DC had $6 per day parking, it's downtown would resemble Atlanta's.
I'm not disagreeing with the fact that many people save money taking the train. The whole point of this conversation is streetcars allow and promote density. Buses do not. Ask any developer and they will tell you, transit needs to be on rails in gentrifying areas. Stigma is everything and the people the developers are attracting are not low income and usually aren't minority either except in few numbers. To many people, buses are not worth paying over $2,000 in a gentrifying neighborhood for a one bedroom apartment. A streetcar will add to the amenities though. Believe me; I know what I am talking about. Developers need anchors to be able to command top dollar. It's very simple really. Either be very safe and rich or have ample transit and a upside to the neighborhood if it’s in transition.
I'm not disagreeing with the fact that many people save money taking the train. The whole point of this conversation is streetcars allow and promote density. Buses do not. Ask any developer and they will tell you, transit needs to be on rails in gentrifying areas. Stigma is everything and the people the developers are attracting are not low income and usually aren't minority either except in few numbers. To many people, buses are not worth paying over $2,000 in a gentrifying neighborhood for a one bedroom apartment. A streetcar will add to the amenities though. Believe me; I know what I am talking about. Developers need anchors to be able to command top dollar. It's very simple really. Either be very safe and rich or have ample transit and a upside to the neighborhood if it’s in transition.
Logan Circle was a run down neighborhood in the 1990s. There's no rail service (only bus). It gentrified (and has a Whole Foods!). Adams-Morgan was a Hispanic ghetto without rail service. It gentrified. Mt. Pleasant was largely low-income Hispanics. It gentrified. I don't really see the connection between the streetcar and gentrification. I do, however, see the connection between the government aggressively promoting development through tax subsidies, sweetheart deals to developers, the exercise of eminent domain, etc. The streetcar is basically pork spending. It's great for the companies building it, but it's not a necessary tool for economic development, particularly in the case of H Street, which is one of the few DC areas left with an abundant stock of semi-affordable 19th Century Victorian rowhouses. With its gorgeous housing stock and proximity to Downtown, that area was going to be developed whether a streetcar plan was on the table or not. Not developing that area would be like leaving oil rich land alone to sit there because the area around it "looks scary." Yeah right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
