Should Funds from Dulles Toll Road be Used to Widen a Road in Loudoun?

[anonymous703]

Originally Posted by Caladium

As you point out, for transit to be a preferred option, it has to be cheaper or faster than a car. This is why I don't think most people in Loudoun will be using the train. A train is really only handy if it's within walking distance of both your home and your job.

Well, if people are able to avoid the Greenway tolls, then I think transit will be cheaper. Greenway Tolls+Dulles Toll Road Tolls + Parking isn't cheap.

And I do think you're a bit off on your last statement -- I would say a train is convenient if you don't have to go out of your way to get to it, and it's within walking distance of your destination. I mean, leaving near the Reston Town Center, the train is handy getting into the city -- sure I have to drive 15 minutes to EFC, but it's on my way. If I had to drive 15 minutes out of my way, I wouldn't do it.

The western end of the Orange line is popular, and it's full of people who drive to it.

[dkf747]

Originally Posted by anonymous703

As was said earlier in this thread, for transit to be a preferred option, it has to be cheaper or faster than a car. Generally, limited bus schedules do neither, and therefore rich suburban people avoid it.

Like I said, schedules can be changed, buses added, dedicated lanes built, IF people would ride them. I don't believe in the "build it and they will ride" theory when it comes to buses.

[guyincognito]

Originally Posted by Denton56

When do you think that the subway will change things? We heard that when the orange line went to Falls Church, it would make a HUGE difference. Then we heard once it got to Vienna, it would make a HUGE difference. Traffic would be SO much better. Do you think the subway has helped to reduce traffic? Heck no. If you build it, they will come. Everyone thinks that the subway will get all those OTHER people off of THEIR roads. LOL The reality is that subways encourage MORE building, MORE growth, MORE people, and that means MORE traffic. Yet people like you continue to say that the subway will somehow make things better. Other than increasing the tax base, just how does this make things "better"? Would you care to define what that ''better" may be and when it will happen?

I don't follow. Are you saying that if Metro had never been built that traffic would be better on 66 near Falls Church?

I think the reality is that people are coming to this area because of the good job market. If traffic ranked anywhere in their priorities they either moved close to work or didn't move here at all. Building additional highway lanes or rail lines allows people to spread out, but mass transit provides a much more controlled form of growth than highways, and is much more efficient at moving a lot of people.

[pcity]

Originally Posted by Denton56

The reality is that subways encourage MORE building, MORE growth, MORE people, and that means MORE traffic. Yet people like you continue to say that the subway will somehow make things better. Other than increasing the tax base, just how does this make things "better"?

More building/growth/people are coming with or without the Silver Line (it's not a subway BTW).

There are two options: Transit + growth near transit OR no transit + spread-out growth. Spread-out growth (i.e. sprawl) tends to make traffic worse in a hurry,and it makes traffic worse everywhere. Transit-oriented growth doesn't cure all traffic but does confine it to certain areas and alleviates roads leading into those transit centers.

No growth isn't an option.

[anonymous703]

Originally Posted by dkf747

Like I said, schedules can be changed, buses added, dedicated lanes built, IF people would ride them. I don't believe in the "build it and they will ride" theory when it comes to buses.

Would you believe in a "build it right and they will ride" theory? I named two bus lines that are generally successful because they actually go where people want to go. Incidentally, both of them have a quasi-dedicated right of way.

Would metro rail be so successful if it only ran two cars per train and it left every half hour?

ETA: I lived in LA for three years, and never once road the rail OR buses there. Neither is popular with the locals.

[dkf747]

Originally Posted by anonymous703

Would you believe in a "build it right and they will ride" theory?

Perhaps. I have seen it work in Europe. However, I still see people say,
a bus??? ewww! No way!"

[car54]

Originally Posted by Denton56

Please, feel free to submit more taxes to Fairfax County. Oh, wait, you don't own property so you aren't paying county taxes! Easy for you to advocate raising taxes.

Such an oft repeated crock! Unless one lives on a park bench, everybody pays real estate taxes.

I have rented houses for many years and my tenants pay the taxes and insurance on the houses they live in, period.

I assure you that apartment owners also include the real estate taxes in the rent.

[Yankeesfan]

Originally Posted by ScranBarre

The anti-Silver Line whiners either have to give me just ONE good reason as to why they oppose mass transit coming to the area, or they can just shut up in my eyes as typical NIMBYs ... If we're going to be opposing the Silver Line, then what, pray tell, is supposed to take its place so we don't officially become the next L.A. in terms of congestion? :dubious

But you drive alone to work rather than using mass transit by taking the bus or organizing a carpool even though you could so how are you any different? By moving here and driving solo you yourself are adding to the congestion.