"light rail would be a boon to Falls Church" (Arlington: employment, taxis)

[brooklynborndad]

Guest Commentary: Light Rail Would Be a Boon to City of F.C. | Falls Church News-Press Online


I wonder though. A few years ago the virginia dept of rail whatever, did a beltway corridor rail study, suggesting either a line on the beltway, or down gallows road from Tysons. Could we support that AND a rte 7 line? With ROW reserved along Gallows, as part of the Mosaic project, would LRT be more feasible than on Rte 7? Of course it sounds like city of FC is mostly interested in goosing commercial development within the city limits, so a Gallows Rd line doesnt really do much for them.

As the New Tysons develops, there are some interesting possibilities on the horizon.

[globalburgh]

What would be the major cons to the project? The opinion piece dances around the cost issue. I suspect that's the big problem.

[FindingZen]

I'm not so knowledgeable about the logistics of getting around Falls Church but it seems like reviving their "George" bus service might be a more cost-effective approach than light rail. And this is coming from someone who favors rail expansion over buses.

If anything, I would predict that the light rail would sooner provide a convenient alternative/subsidy for Tysons Corner commuters than bring more commercial business into Falls Church.

[cdmurphy]

Originally Posted by Tone509

I'm not so knowledgeable about the logistics of getting around Falls Church but it seems like reviving their "George" bus service might be a more cost-effective approach than light rail. And this is coming from someone who favors rail expansion over buses.

I agree about GEORGE. It helpfully connected the two Metro stations with each other (neither of which is actually in the city limits) by going through downtown. I don't know where they would put light rail down Route 7 - not on the stretch through the city limits, anyway.

[LocalGuy61]

Originally Posted by cdmurphy

I agree about GEORGE. It helpfully connected the two Metro stations with each other (neither of which is actually in the city limits) by going through downtown. I don't know where they would put light rail down Route 7 - not on the stretch through the city limits, anyway.

I have to respectfully disagree. GEORGE was a boondoggle. I live in Falls Church and I don't think I ever saw one of those buses with more than 2 or 3 passengers, with them being completely empty most of the time. It would be a huge waste of money to bring them back. I'm not saying that I'd be in favor of the light rail as an alternative, only that I think the bus option was tried and it proved to be a huge failure.

[slim04]

Originally Posted by LocalGuy61

I have to respectfully disagree. GEORGE was a boondoggle. I live in Falls Church and I don't think I ever saw one of those buses with more than 2 or 3 passengers, with them being completely empty most of the time. It would be a huge waste of money to bring them back. I'm not saying that I'd be in favor of the light rail as an alternative, only that I think the bus option was tried and it proved to be a huge failure.

The George was substantially supported by federal grants, probably due to the fact a lot of politicians and high level government executives live in the area.

No one used it and it bled money. It wasn't economically feasible and would require substantial subsidies by people/taxpayers who don't use it. When the grants disappeared, the George disappeared.

Lesson learned: Rich and upper class people don't like buses. Especially if they live in the suburbs.

The same story applied to the lunch line bus service through Tyson's Corner that no one ever used.

[saganista]

"Using it" is hardly the only benefit that is derived from a transit system. Those who "use it" obviously help pay for it through fares. Businesses that are made more convenient destinations for their employees and customers also benefit, and there is every reason for them to pay as well. This is the logic behind the Silver Line Special Tax Districts, and the principle applies in different flavors everywhere.

As for Falls Church, I would guess that their light-rail future rests heavily on the success of the Columbia Pike transit project and on the pace of progress at New Tysons. If the Pike Transit and Arlington Multi-Modal people can keep their wits about them, there is no reason why that experiment should not be a glowing success. If it is, demand for branch and feeder lines will be quick and signficant in coming, and a Skyline to Tysons run (right through downtown Falls Church) will be almost inevitable.

Within New Tysons itself, I would expect to see some sort of pod-based PRT (personal rapid transit) system emerge. Almost like taxis, these can quickly and efficiently provide direct, climate-controlled, Point-A to Point-B travel to individuals and small groups over relatively short distances in relatively high-density areas. But with no traffic lights, no traffic jams, no non-English-speaking drivers, and likely no or no significant fares.

[Caladium]

Originally Posted by slim04

No one used it and it bled money. It wasn't economically feasible and would require substantial subsidies by people/taxpayers who don't use it. When the grants disappeared, the George disappeared.

Good point. Although I like the idea and yes, it would be a boon in some ways, is it really that practical? Would enough people use light rail in and to Falls Church to justify the expense? I'm not sure what the answer is. Maybe it all comes down to better marketing, but then again maybe it just wouldn't attract enough customers no matter how well it was marketed. Light rail service in PW County seems like a better thing to focus on, IMO.

[South Jersey Styx]

Originally Posted by slim04

Lesson learned: Rich and upper class people don't like buses. Especially if they live in the suburbs.

Then I guess they like sitting in traffic for gawd-awful hours because the buses are so horrid.

I'll take the metro and bus anytime over a car, at least if commuting into DC (oh I forgot I am not rich though).

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by LocalGuy61

I have to respectfully disagree. GEORGE was a boondoggle. I live in Falls Church and I don't think I ever saw one of those buses with more than 2 or 3 passengers, with them being completely empty most of the time. It would be a huge waste of money to bring them back. I'm not saying that I'd be in favor of the light rail as an alternative, only that I think the bus option was tried and it proved to be a huge failure.

I never had the opportunity to ride it, but ISTR reading elsewhere that George was fairly circuitous - it went all around City of FC in an attempt to be accessible to everyone. A better designed bus service would focus on key ridership generating locations - the metro stations, the main commercial areas, and the highest density residential areas. The same would hold, as far as possible, for a street car or light rail solution.

to summarize - george vs some future light rail

A. any transit should be designed to get high ridership relative to areas served, which IIUC George was not
B. some affluent people will take LRT but not bus - partly due to a smoother, quieter ride, partly due to image - in either case, this means more riders, which means more frequent service, which attracts more frequency sensitive riders, in a virtuous cycle
C. The presence of rail, which cannot easily be changed, has been shown to do more to induce new development (which in turn leads to more ridership)
D. We are talking aboutsome point fairly far in the future (given the time it takes these things from idea to approval to implementation) - when the employment concentration at Tysons will be even larger than it is now, and Tysons will be a more attractive destination for non drivers.

That does not prove the concept will work - but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand based on the experience of George

vs PWC - thats much lower density than FC and adjacent areas, IIUC. In falls church and elsewhere on rte 7 there is the opportunity to shape development. Perhaps there is in PWC - what specific corridor are we talking about?