Should they move the metro station a few hundred feet? Millions of $$ hinge on this question so what do you think? (Arlington: how much, homes)

[normie]

A big controversy is brewing over the silver line. At stake is a request that the Silver Line’s Route 606 rail station be moved 300-600 feet west and that a second entry point be added to accommodate a massive development slated to go in next to the station.

There seem to be three sides:

1. Pro moving the station
Moving the station allows pedestrian access to a major development being built. This POV says that substantially more people will be able to use the metro if this development has the pedestrian access--and the point of building a metro is to have people use it. Also, people could take the metro to shop at the plaza there or to work at the office buildings. They claim it would generate as much as $75 million annually in tax revenues.

2. Against moving the station
Officials with the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, who are building the line and who also own land that accommodates the current plan, claim moving the station would cost between $20-40 million. (The expenses would be the widening of the Dulles Greenway bridge over the Broad Run, realignment of the Greenway itself and installation of a second set of turnstiles.) In addition, it would cost another $1 million a year to operate the additional entrance. I'm not sure exactly why--maybe to heat the extra pedestrian access?

3. Doesn't care, wants to move on with construction.
This group is furious that on March 16, the supervisors are scheduled to decide whether they want to launch a one-month study into the costs and benefits associated with moving the station. They say that if supervisors drag their heals, the tab on the project is going to continue going up.

So.... what do you guys think?


Two articles with opposing viewpoints, for reference:
For Metro Neighbor, Location is Everything | Loudoun Independent
Delay choosing Metro site | LoudounTimes.com

[buildinginva]

This is ridiculous. I don't think we (the taxpayers) should be shouldering the cost of moving this station just so that the developer and whoever buys in this development benefits. I am a big supporter of public transportation and heavy metro user. However, like many others I paid a premium to be close to the existing metro and inside the beltway. One could argue that the metro extension could in effect devalue my investment. I know it's a bit coldhearted, but you asked a provoking question.

[normie]

Originally Posted by buildinginva

However, like many others I paid a premium to be close to the existing metro and inside the beltway. One could argue that the metro extension could in effect devalue my investment. I know it's a bit coldhearted, but you asked a provoking question.

No problem, asking a thought-provoking question was my goal.

Since the station is still in the design phase, I tend to lean towards moving the station. You're only going to design it once, so might as well design it for maximum use, right?

Also, the big argument against the silver line has always been that relatively few people would use it. Adding the extra pedestrian access means more people will use it, so it counters the argument against having metro at all.

BUT... I hate hate HATE how long this project has taken because of endless debates that always end up in wasting all our money on more studies. I think I would go for option #3, I don't care what choice they make as long as we get moving on the project and don't have to hold everything up for another stupid study.

[cdmurphy]

Originally Posted by normie

Since the station is still in the design phase, I tend to lean towards moving the station. You're only going to design it once, so might as well design it for maximum use, right?

Not exactly. It was originally supposed to be in one place, then they moved it in 2002, and now this guy wants it moved back. So why was it moved in 2002? I haven't seen any reason given, but I'm curious.

[normie]

Originally Posted by cdmurphy

Not exactly. It was originally supposed to be in one place, then they moved it in 2002, and now this guy wants it moved back. So why was it moved in 2002? I haven't seen any reason given, but I'm curious.

LOL, good point. They do seem to be diddling around too much on this.

[ngadude]

Let the developer pay for it if they want it moved. This area gives way too many concessions to developers and doesn't make them pay enough for things. If they stand to make so much money off of it being moved several hundred feet - let the developer shoulder the cost, not the rest of us.

[bornindc]

The argument to now move the ENTIRE station 300-600 feet for this developer has got to be one of the most asinine things I've ever heard. Is there ANY person that lives or will live that far out in Loudoun that would not take the Metro when it's open (who otherwise would) simply because they have to walk an extra 450 feet? Is the development only going to be open to 10-month-olds who live by themselves and simply can't walk that far? Are you kidding me? I have lived in three different homes "near" Metro, of distances between 0.5 and 1.2 miles, and I walked to them anyway to commute.

I understand there might be some people that have difficulty with walking that distance but they will be a very low percentage of any community. The developer can pay for a nice sidewalk if they want, or if that distance is simply too insurmountable for pedestrians in their opinion they can operate a shuttle like other communities near Metro stations do.

[jayh]

Some of you have trouble seeing the forest through the trees. Your government is going to waste your money no matter what. Conduct the feasibility/economic impact study and figure out how much you stand to gain over time by making the station more accessible. If moving the station is truly what needs to be done to maximize its potential, then just do it already. If the study shows that people will, generally, still find a way to get to the other entrance(s) and take the metro, then perhaps you just leave it alone and then wait a few decades until some other generation decides to move it (again).

[cardinal2007]

Both of the stations in Loudoun Co, seemed to be planned for what was essentially the middle of nowhere at the time. On the toll road, so not quite to Ashburn, there was nothing on two sides on I think two of the stations. Basically for people to use a station it has to be close to home, but more importantly close to work, unless these people are going to be working in Arlington or Tysons, I think this completely missed the mark there, I doubt there are many people moving to Ashburn that work in DC, the commute is just very long. As to whether to move the station, if the marginal profit gotten by moving the station is enough to justify the $20M, then I guess they should move it, otherwise, not. The rest of the capital expense will occur regardless, so there is no use talking about the average cost per ride, the marginal cost per rider is what would be important here, the marginal cost and marginal revenue. It really depends on that, of course this is the gov't so I'm sure politics would trump any practical considerations.

[normie]

Originally Posted by cardinal2007

Both of the stations in Loudoun Co, seemed to be planned for what was essentially the middle of nowhere at the time. On the toll road, so not quite to Ashburn, there was nothing on two sides on I think two of the stations. Basically for people to use a station it has to be close to home, but more importantly close to work, unless these people are going to be working in Arlington or Tysons, I think this completely missed the mark there, I doubt there are many people moving to Ashburn that work in DC, the commute is just very long.

It won't be the middle of nowhere for long. The land is quickly filling in with office parks. Also residential communities, but these days the plans seem to be for more and more office parks mixed with stores/restaurants. I think people will be using the silver line eventually to commute to jobs in Ashburn or Reston.