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.
My idea was an express BRT. No stops along the ICC. Just two stations. One at Konterra and one at I-270 connecting to the Red Line. Run them every 30 minutes. Every 15 minutes during rush hour.
Yes, the ICC is not congested now. But as Konterra adds density, it would be more practical to run some sort of express bus service between the two stations.
So, taking an 18 hour operational day with 6 hours of rush hour, you would have 48 departures in each direction for 96 total. The size of the bus can vary enormously, but using a 50 seats as an example, and filled to capacity on every trip that's 4,800 rider's a day. If you had to build parking garage space for 4,800 vehicles, you're looking at around $90M. Not much free these days.......it all adds up......
MoCo recently abandoned plans to study BRT on the Georgia Ave. corridor. Too expensive for the expected ridership it would generate.
So, taking an 18 hour operational day with 6 hours of rush hour, you would have 48 departures in each direction for 96 total. The size of the bus can vary enormously, but using a 50 seats as an example, and filled to capacity on every trip that's 4,800 rider's a day. If you had to build parking garage space for 4,800 vehicles, you're looking at around $90M. Not much free these days.......it all adds up......
MoCo recently abandoned plans to study BRT on the Georgia Ave. corridor. Too expensive for the expected ridership it would generate.
I like to use this chart when comparing modes of transit.
I like to use this chart when comparing modes of transit.
I wasn't comparing BRT to any other form of transit..........
Just identifying a cost that would apply to almost any suburban transit mode, and of which your chart (surprisingly), takes no account of at all........
The chart also suggests that BRT have stops every 0.5 miles, and that average journey lengths are about 5 miles. You're proposing 18 miles with zero stops, I don't think you're on the same page......
I wasn't comparing BRT to any other form of transit..........
Just identifying a cost that would apply to almost any suburban transit mode, and of which your chart (surprisingly), takes no account of at all........
The chart also suggests that BRT have stops every 0.5 miles, and that average journey lengths are about 5 miles. You're proposing 18 miles with zero stops, I don't think you're on the same page......
It's simply a guide I shared. lol I didn't say you were comparing anything.
Before this topic goes down a rabbit hole, put simply, BRT is an option. Whether people feel it is expensive or not. Fact; it is a lower cost alternative to heavy rail and it moves more people per mile than regular buses and cars.
How we got to this discussion is that people are faulting the Konterra project as having no mass transit. I offered up some alternatives. That's all. I don't want to get into particulars when no mode of transit has been proposed yet. If the county or MTA offers up proposals, then we can talk. But for now, the project is still viable without a mass transit component. Even in the age of TOD.
Further, my question was why balk at BRT when the alternatives are, wait 15 - 25 years for heavy rail that may or may not pass directly through Konterra, and nothing at all?
I'll believe it when I see it. They've been talking about Konterra, in some form or another, for as long as I can remember. How many projected groundbreakings has the developer missed over the last generation? The current iteration still hasn't been built because it makes little sense; it looks like it's surrounding a metro station - something PG has an abundance of - yet...there's nothing. The development would make much more sense as a combination of SFH and townhomes, a la King Farm. I suspect that's what'll end up happening, after another 10-15 years of missed groundbreakings, of course.
I'll believe it when I see it. They've been talking about Konterra, in some form or another, for as long as I can remember. How many projected groundbreakings has the developer missed over the last generation? The current iteration still hasn't been built because it makes little sense; it looks like it's surrounding a metro station - something PG has an abundance of - yet...there's nothing. The development would make much more sense as a combination of SFH and townhomes, a la King Farm. I suspect that's what'll end up happening, after another 10-15 years of missed groundbreakings, of course.
Well, they are starting on mixed-use first. Which means there will be retail as well as residences in the same first phase. There won't be a situation where there will be just housing.
As a smart-growth advocate, I agree. There are 15 metro stations that could use development. But people forget this family have owned this land for a long time and it has been their plan/dream to develop that land into their vision. I get it. That's what America is all about right? Those wheels were set into motion decades ago like National Harbor and University Town Center. Both were at least 40 years in the making. One is doing well, the other got started a year before the great recession and failed.
I wouldn't be surprised if it got pushed to 2020 or further as the county continues to push development around its metro stations with incentives which should attract developers to those areas. It may not even get built for all that matter. But who knows?
One thing we do know, that in order for the first phase to be completed by 2018, they need to start moving dirt very soon.
Well, they are starting on mixed-use first. Which means there will be retail as well as residences in the same first phase. There won't be a situation where there will be just housing.
As a smart-growth advocate, I agree. There are 15 metro stations that could use development. But people forget this family have owned this land for a long time and it has been their plan/dream to develop that land into their vision. I get it. That's what America is all about right? Those wheels were set into motion decades ago like National Harbor and University Town Center. Both were at least 40 years in the making. One is doing well, the other got started a year before the great recession and failed.
I wouldn't be surprised if it got pushed to 2020 or further as the county continues to push development around its metro stations with incentives which should attract developers to those areas. It may not even get built for all that matter. But who knows?
One thing we do know, that in order for the first phase to be completed by 2018, they need to start moving dirt very soon.
We'll see how it shakes out. I'm certainly rooting for them, but that's just because it's not my money on the line. If it were, I wouldn't be that aggressive that far from a metro line.
It's simply a guide I shared. lol I didn't say you were comparing anything.
Before this topic goes down a rabbit hole, put simply, BRT is an option. Whether people feel it is expensive or not. Fact; it is a lower cost alternative to heavy rail and it moves more people per mile than regular buses and cars.
How we got to this discussion is that people are faulting the Konterra project as having no mass transit. I offered up some alternatives. That's all. I don't want to get into particulars when no mode of transit has been proposed yet. If the county or MTA offers up proposals, then we can talk. But for now, the project is still viable without a mass transit component. Even in the age of TOD.
Further, my question was why balk at BRT when the alternatives are, wait 15 - 25 years for heavy rail that may or may not pass directly through Konterra, and nothing at all?
I hear you. I don't know anyone who would dispute those claims, but that's not the point, just because it's less expensive, doesn't mean it's either affordable or cost effective.
I think few would claim that mass transit in general is not desirable, but that's a world away from saying that it's appropriate in this specific case. The overall population, and population density of the surrounding zips is I think too low to support the kind of investment required, and Konterra won't change that much.
The people complaining about the lack of mass transit don't know their A from their elbow. Westphalia isn't going to have mass transit either, and that's not stopping them. Fact is, that MWCOG has identified both as among the few new centers for development going forward.
I balk because your own chart puts the cost of the 18 mile route at $5-30M per mile, and doesn't include parking costs. That's $90-540M, plus $50-150M for parking, and some people are still debating whether the cost of the ICC was worth it, and whether it's above or below targets. It's close to target. If the ICC were full of non BRT buses, I could see merit........AFAIK there's just one bus route currently using the ICC, the 201 from Gaithersburg to BWI.
Let me see how many corporate headquarters are at national harbor. Oh that's right zero. Those are in Tysons, or Arlington, Bethesda, Silver Spring, or DC. Because National Harbor is not focused on offices, it's focused on hotels, conventions and entertainment. It utilized river front space to do so, because river front convention areas have a history of doing well when located within reasonable distance from an airport.
National Harbor is quite bit different than this, it is also basically in very close proximity to DC, and Virginia, and takes advantage of highway traffic from both.
This wants to be a business and retail center with a large office outlay like Tysons. You can pull people away for conventions across the country, or region. The people are not sticking around after all. National Harbor is not a major corporate and office center, nor a major residential center. It's mostly hotels and restaurants with a convention focus. Which in some ways is easier to pull off. In addition it is much smaller than this. The problem with this is it is an suburban corporate and office center, with no anchor tenants established. Without a major corporation or federal agency it will be hard to draw office tenants. Additionally, condos and apartments this far removed from the urban core usually do not go well even if you have transit, even Tysons is struggling with this.
Lastly...PG lacks the base demographics Fairfax had to start. I am sorry, but it is has the lowest educational attainment rate in the region. It is also not an attractive area for workers just out of college, and PGs educational system is not a draw to professional families the same way the areas with decent schools are. One or the other is the big draw these days with corporate headquarters, and transit. Your competition is Fairfax, Montgomery, DC, and Arlington, and these places kill you on every criteria that matters. Do you really think you will get Marriot, when Marriot said transit access is a top priority for it's next headquarters. In fact that is a big motivation for most major corporate headquarters these days on the east coast.
In ten to fifteen years, I imagine this will not be doing well at all. PG has one thing going for it, and one thing only, it is affordable to working class families who are priced out of DC and the other inner ring suburbs of the region. It will not be fairfax, and any delusion this will succeed is just that, a delusion. Enjoy your empty office and apartment buildings in the middle of nowhere.
Yes, projects can take a decade, sometimes a little more. It's a gradual process. But lets be honest, retail is not interested for a reason, businesses looking for office space are not interested for a reason, and those in the condo and rental market will not be interested in this for good reason. This will fail for good reason.
Let me see how many corporate headquarters are at national harbor. Oh that's right zero. Those are in Tysons, or Arlington, Bethesda, Silver Spring, or DC. Because National Harbor is not focused on offices, it's focused on hotels, conventions and entertainment. It utilized river front space to do so, because river front convention areas have a history of doing well when located within reasonable distance from an airport.
National Harbor is quite bit different than this, it is also basically in very close proximity to DC, and Virginia, and takes advantage of highway traffic from both.
Not sure what HQs have to do with a development being successful without transit. But okay. And to update you, National Harbor does have a company HQ. National Harbor lacks mass transit and is doing quite well to be less than 10 years old. People said National Harbor would fail because of a "lack of access" and mass transit even though it is right off of 495 and 295. Konterra is off of 95 and the ICC, in addition to RT.1 and people are saying the same thing. That was my point.
I wouldn't call Konterra a failure before the first shovel hits the ground. Especially based on lack of mass transit when it has been proven that other developments miles from transit are successful. Tysons didn't start out as it stands today. It took decades. The mall was around since I was in high school. All of those tech companies didn't exist before the mall was there. I'm sure people said the same thing about Tysons 50 years ago.
All I can say is wait and see. It may take 50 years.
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.
