Im laughed when I saw this. I agree with some of the comments within the Washington Post. If Gaylor wants it, Gaylord ought to pay for it.

What a crock!

by William on Jun 4, 2008 2:40 pm • link • report

It was just a dumb ass decision to put the development there in the first place.

If they wanted it in that area of PG County or near the damn river, they could have put it in Forest Hgts or Eastover and just brought out some people out over there atleast over there you could catch a metrobus or run a shuttle from southern avenue, instead they put it in the middle of nowhere.

They built it in one of the most unaccessible areas by any type of public transportation in the area and now they want to say something about it they get exactly what they deserve for being stupid.

Atleast maybe this way the other half of the Purple Line may get built from New Carrolton to King Street with a station at the National Harbor so it all isnt a waste

by kk on Jun 4, 2008 4:57 pm • link • report

According to a story News Channel 8 ran a few weeks ago, they're not that welcoming to their cab drivers either. Hopefully this will get Gaylord to cough up the dough for some additional transit, and in the long run that will be a good thing.

Let's hope Kingdon Gould III doesn't make the same mistake at Konterra.

by David Murphy on Jun 5, 2008 12:55 am • link • report

This morning I read the following story on popbitch:

Several years ago the Sultanate of Oman spent

a great deal of money building hundreds of

bus stops across the country. They are all

beautifully built with crenellations on the

top, To date however, the country has no

public buses.

and I was going to laugh at the silly Sultan, but then I thought, we've spent a lot of money building extra lanes on the new Woodrow Wilson bridge for transit. Also beautifully built. But we don't actually have any plans to run transit across it.

by jim on Jun 5, 2008 9:54 am • link • report

I know of an international conference that decided against using that center because it was impractical to assume that everyone would rent cars. This is a problem beyond getting their employees there.

by d on Jun 5, 2008 11:01 am • link • report

Some versions of the proposed DC streetcar map have shown a line through Ward 8 continuing on to National Harbor. It would be utter madness, of course, for DC to pay for extension of streetcars far beyond DC's borders, and if things like this weren't so damn parochial, perhaps MD/PG/National Harbor could kick in money to get the line built and extended down there.

Of course, the Ward 8 streetcar has been so abysmally managed that I don't know if it will ever get built, and the topography and population distribution in Ward 8 make it difficult to figure out what should be done. Even if the absurd starter line actually starts, it would be really difficult to go from Bolling AFB to anywhere else. The logical line would be a parallel line down MLK/ South Capitol St, although the grade might be a challenge. And of course DDOT fumbled that one too: once the take-over of the CSX ROW became thorny, DDOT switched their starter line plans to that alignment, but the community leaders, who'd been to endless meetings about the line using the CSX tracks, heard about the switch in the newspaper. They weren't pleased, so DDOT backed down, but who knows what damage has been done. And it doesn't help that there is virtually no overlap between the transit dependent residents of Ward 8 and the community leadership of Ward 8.

by thm on Jun 5, 2008 11:42 am • link • report

Hmmmmmm....something about this comment just doesn't make sense:

"I know of an international conference that decided against using that center because it was impractical to assume that everyone would rent cars. This is a problem beyond getting their employees there."

SERIOUSLY???? Because access to public transportation sure doesn't seem to be a problem for MAJOR convention cities like Orlando, Las Vegas, San Diego, San Francisco, etc. Those cities DO NOT provide public transportation for convention attendees to get back and forth from the airport to the convention center/hotels, yet they DO NOT have a problem attracting conventions. It's because business travelers going to those cities don't have a problem paying for a taxi or renting a car to get to their destination. Plus, the commute is MUCH FARTHER in those cities vs. the 15-minute drive from Reagan Nat'l to Gaylord/National Harbor (meaning the taxi fare is actually CHEAPER here!). I also have a difficult time understanding this statment because nearly any convention that is a bona-fide quality convention will provide airport shuttles (motorcoach) service for their attendees to the designated "host" hotels/convention center. This happens every day around our great country, yet this is the pathetic excuse you give for why this so-called international conference wouldn't go to the Gaylord? I've got news for you. Perhaps that was a piece of business that should NOT have been looking there in the first place. I think the Super 8 would have been a better option!

Wake up people - the lack of public transportation into National Harbor really isn't that big of a deal for its convention business. If it was, then you'd see it affecting nearly every other prime convention city destination in the U.S. (which is has not). The only people the lack of public transportation inconveniences is the locals and employees who whine, whine, whine about it not being there. Boo-Hoo. Get in a car and drive there like they do in nearly every other U.S. city other than the Northeast. Yes, I do agree that public transportation is a wonderful option, but saying the lack thereof is considered a deterrent for convention business at National Harbor is pretty weak and ridiculous.

by Marie on Aug 21, 2008 2:27 pm • link • report

Marie: Maybe the conference had already decided on DC, and another transit-accessible location (like the popular Woodley Park) was superior to the Gaylord Center because they didn't have to make everyone rent cars and/or do shuttles.

Also, international travelers can't use National Airport. They have to use Dulles, which is really far and a very expensive taxi ride.

by David Alpert on Aug 21, 2008 2:39 pm • link • report

Marie, maybe it's just the nature of email but your comment seems angry in a funny way (I don't mean funny "ha-ha").

I have been to big conventions in several cities including San Diego, Orlando and DC (new convention center). Granted these were huge annual conventions, but the convention itself or the convention center, I don't know which, provided shuttle busses from all the hotels to the convention center. (I didn't need a hotel in DC). In most cases (San D. excepted) i could walk to the convention center from the hotel too. From my experience Orlando was the worst place for a convention because, well, there is no public transportation to the rest of the city. Even in San D. I was able to take public transportation to visit some sites not related to the convention. Strictly speaking public transportation isn't necessary for big conventioneers since they're supposed to be sitting in darkened ballrooms asking questions about power-point presentations or reading research posters. But it sure makes the out of town trip more pleasant. Of all the conventions I've been to Oralndo is the only one where I did not travel into and patronize the host city and the reason is the lack of public transportation there.

by Bianchi on Aug 21, 2008 2:44 pm • link • report

Well now I've been to a conference at the Gaylord Center. I did not want to drive. However on their website for "getting to" only driving directions are given including from Union Station.

I drove there and discovered that in addition to the time, fuel, added risk for injury (from driving on the Interstate) and stress i "paid" to get there i also had to pay $20 a day to park.

Once inside this car-dependent island I found a full-scale walkable neighborhood. I mean indoors like a peice of DuPont was encased and turned into an Epcot display. They used the model of an early 20th c. walkable neighborhood to add charm and aesthetic appeal. Two full-scale detached houses (gift shops), brick/cobblestone streets and sidewalks complete with intersections and trees with cast iron guards/fences, a pocket-park w/benches and row houses with street level retail.

In my convention material was this note from the Gaylord Center: "The Gaylord center is Eco-logical (TM). Gaylord was built with energy conservation in mind...(watersaving shower heads, blah blah...). Gaylord invites guests to join in the earth-saving efforts by re-using their bed-linens..."

But not by taking public transportation.

Also some out-of-town conventioneers complained to me about being stranded in the fake city and wondered how they could get to DC to visit their Nations Capitol. (They heard i had a car and wanted a ride out).

The Gaylord Center gave away some "door" prizes one of which I won. It was a $25 gift card. I asked if I could use it for parking.

by Bianchi on Feb 25, 2009 4:38 pm • link • report

Sounds like Marie is somehow affiliated with the Gaylord National Harbor...

by SG on Feb 25, 2009 4:46 pm • link • report

Since I wrote the above comment on my experience at the Gaylord Center 3 weeks ago they have changed their website. It now includes directions for taking a metrobus. They also got rid of the driving directions from Union Station - now it says "from DC".

by Bianchi on Mar 10, 2009 6:55 pm • link • report