Report a Comment

@tmt

thats for phase 1 so I'm not sure how its relevant to the current discussion, which is of phase 2. Secondly, FTA does not provide a source, so its not possible to analyze the assumptions implicit in it - whether with regard to TDM, urban layout, parking, etc. Thirdly, as the document is from 2010, its not new.

As for traffic relief on DTR, you will note the context here was a discussion of funding - DTR vs airport users. In both cases the redevelopment of Tysons is a given. If you do not take the redevelopment of Tysons as given, that raises other questions - but its hard for me to see how that indicates that airport users should pay for it.

Again, the case made by the robocallers is that Loudoun County residents WILL benefit from the existence of the silver line, but will get few incremental benefits from the two stations in Loudoun. Ergo they should not build the stations, but should free ride (so to speak) on the investment made by fairfax. If you of another way to ensure that LC contributes to a project that WILL benefit LC, I would be pleased to know what it is.

However if you wish to renew, for the thousandth time, your discussion of Tysons developers and Gerry Connolly, and the high end development estimates (which IIRC you are happy will not happen thanks to Ms Bulova's changes to Mr Connollys plan), you are of course free to do so. If we could tax those, we could easily pay for the additional transit lines that will likely be needed (notably dedicated transit lanes on Gallows Rd and some kind of improved transit through falls church 7 towards Baileys), and that will improve life in the county.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Jun 4, 2012 5:30 pm • link • report

Does this comment violate Greater Greater Washington's comment policy? If so, you can report it using this form and an editor will take a look.

What is the major reason you believe the comment violates the policy?
Comment is spam.
Comment attacks other individuals personally.
Comment criticizes the level of knowledge of another commenter or contributor.
Comment discourages others from posting their ideas.
Commenter is impersonating someone else.
Comment uses profanity or abusive language.
Comment advocates violent acts or harm to another.
Comment was posted in multiple areas of the site.
Comment is arguing about the comment policy.
Other:

Your name:
Your email:

Administrator page • spam