PDA

View Full Version : Idea: Bikeshare/Metro discounted transfers



PotomacCyclist
03-26-2016, 11:22 AM
If Capital Bikeshare is viewed as a transportation system, and a publicly-owned one at that, why not have discounted transfers between CaBi and MetroRail, and CaBi and Metrobus? Transfers to/from the other area bus systems too (ART in Arlington, Dash in Alexandria, The Bus in Prince George's, Ride On in Montgomery, Circulator in DC, Fairfax Connector, etc.).

This could encourage even more people to take Metro or CaBi. While many people live within biking distance of work, school or other destinations, many do not. (I'm using the standard of a casual or occasional cyclist. Some people here might bike-commute 10+ miles each way, but very few casual cyclists will do that, especially on the slower CaBi bikes.)

A lot of people say they would like to bike, but their commutes are too far for bikeshare/cycling in general. If they had the option to have discounted transfers between Metro and CaBi, they could ride CaBi to/from Metro stations. Some people could do this at the start of their trips and at the end of their trips. Suppose someone lives near Shady Grove and commutes to Gallery Place. That would be too far for most people to bike, especially on CaBi. But if that person lives near one of the Shady Grove bike stations, he/she could bike to the Shady Grove Metro station in the morning, then take the Red Line to downtown DC and Gallery Place. If the office or other destination is still a bit of a walk, the individual could check out another bike near Gallery Place and ride to the station closest to the eventual destination. (I'm setting aside the issue of full stations in central DC on weekday mornings for now. It's a consideration, but Motivate has already expanded the temporary bike corrals to Union Station this month. Maybe more bike corrals are on the way, in addition to the two set up last year.)

A casual CaBi user may not want to spend the extra money on a short-term membership, or on an annual CaBi membership. But there would be more incentive if the bike trips help to reduce the Metro fare. I'm not sure how this would affect overall revenue, for Metro and for Capital Bikeshare. There would be many factors: increased usage of CaBi and/or Metro, reduced Metro revenue from the discounted transfers, people changing from short-term to annual CaBi membership, possible incentives or disincentives for Metro riders to purchase one of the new monthly train/bus passes, and so on.

Both CaBi and WMATA are supported by the local governments. (The federal gov't contributes to Metro. They don't own CaBi but they do provide some of the funding through various grant programs.) All of the local governments want to improve overall traffic congestion as well as improve the health of local residents. So there is an incentive to boost CaBi and Metro usage. (Transit riders tend to walk much more than those who drive to work/school. Very few people live/work immediately on or above a Metro station or bus stop. Most users have to walk to/from the stations, plus they have to walk a fair amount if they transfer to a different Metro line.)

The necessary data may not be available to determine the effect that discounted transfers would have (on Metro and on CaBi). But someone could study the issue. It wouldn't have to be someone associated with Metro or the member jurisdictions of CaBi. There are plenty of smart and capable analysts who already study CaBi and Metro data on their own. Some post here. Some post on Greater Greater Washington. WashCycle has some of these posts too. BikeArlington, DDOT and other official organizations also crunch the numbers. Someone could come up with an educated guess. Then a pilot program could be started.

It might be difficult to narrow down the effect that the pilot program would have on revenues and usage numbers, on Metro and CaBi. There would be many other factors in play: Metro service disruptions, weather, etc. But if there isn't a noticeable negative spike in revenue, at least it could be determined that a transfer program wouldn't be disastrous for either Metro or CaBi. (Metro numbers have already been falling in recent years, because of the weekend service disruptions, the smoke incidents, the emergency shutdown and so on.) If the program doesn't have a significant negative effect on revenue, then I think it would be worth it.

Has the idea ever been considered? If not, what about considering it now?

mstone
03-26-2016, 11:50 AM
Metro really has bigger things it should be focused on. The cost of an annual cabi pass is so low that I can't believe it's a significant barrier to many regular metro riders. It also means there isn't much room for a discount. If you want more cabi riders and you think cost is the problem, just subsidize more cabi passes. One thing I'm sure of, is that metro's ridership problems have nothing to do with bikes.

PotomacCyclist
03-26-2016, 11:59 AM
This is not something that would take up any time from safety, operations or maintenance personnel whatsoever. The software people would program this into the system, if it were to be added. Those people do not work on maintenance, safety, operations or management.

The point is not just to target current Metro riders. The idea is to add one more (of many) incentives to get people out of single-occupant cars and onto other forms of transportation. If something can provide a minor incentive at relatively little cost, why not do it?

Admittedly, I don't know exactly how many people would be needed to program this discount or how much that would cost. Metro already has occasional changes to fare and transfer pricing. When that happens, they need to reprogram the electronic systems. So they already have the system in place (or they use particular contractors to handle the programming). Since you have not stated how much this would cost, I don't understand your objection. This is not a major physical overhaul of the system or a large-scale project like the Silver Line. (One recent study blamed the Silver Line expansion for much of the maintenance issues, but I think the consistent underfunding of the system over a period of decades also plays a major part. A different article noted that Metro maintenance has been underfunded almost from the very start.)

mstone
03-26-2016, 12:21 PM
The reason not to do it is that it's pointless. At best they'll get flak for a regressive giveaway to the rich people who ride the bikes and that distraction is one more they just don't need. I get that you think cabi is the answer to everything, but it simply can't provide a benefit to metro that's worth any time or money investment at all.

AFHokie
03-26-2016, 02:01 PM
Why not integrate bikeshare into the SmartTrip card network? You can already use the card with the Fairfax Connector, DASH, ART, & DC Circulator buses, & MTA, etc, so why not make it an option to pay for bikeshare use?

I don't use bikeshare because for me it's not worth the hassle of becoming a member for the handful of times per year I find myself in a situation where I'd consider it as an option over a cab, Uber, a bus or simply walking.

mstone
03-26-2016, 02:37 PM
Why not integrate bikeshare into the SmartTrip card network? You can already use the card with the Fairfax Connector, DASH, ART, & DC Circulator buses, & MTA, etc, so why not make it an option to pay for bikeshare use?

Are there enough people who would refuse to use the credit card option but would use a smartrip? Even metro has talked for a while about getting rid of cards in favor of mobile payment.

PotomacCyclist
03-26-2016, 10:11 PM
The reason not to do it is that it's pointless. At best they'll get flak for a regressive giveaway to the rich people who ride the bikes and that distraction is one more they just don't need. I get that you think cabi is the answer to everything, but it simply can't provide a benefit to metro that's worth any time or money investment at all.

Here we go with the personal attacks again. This is the CAPITAL BIKESHARE sub-forum, which is why I post about Capital Bikeshare on this sub-forum. That's the whole point. If you don't like reading about CaBi, you can always skip this sub-forum.

Where exactly did I say that CaBi is the answer to everything? On this thread? Nope. On other threads? Nope. Do I like CaBi? Yes. Do I post about it often? Sometimes, yes. Do I think it is the answer to everything, or at least the answer to all transportation issues in the DC region? Nope. But you set that false characterization up and engage in yet another personal attack on someone on the forum. It's not the first time.

The whole point of this suggestion is that it could be a low-key/low-cost way to bump up non-car commutes a bit. Nothing more, nothing less. Did I say that this idea would magically allow the region to tear up the Beltway, I-395, I-66 and all the other major roads, because more people might start using Metro and CaBi? Please.

I mentioned that I do not know the specifics of the potential cost. There would be no maintenance, operations or safety personnel who would work on this whatsoever. The programming cost could be more than I expect. That's why I post on the forum, to see if others have valid, insightful comments and suggestions, pro or con. Not automatic dismissive statements and personal attacks based on your personal biases. I know there are some tech-minded people who post on the forum. Many work for gov't agencies or private companies who might be involved in programming of this sort. While they would not be allowed to post about confidential info, they could probably post an educated guess about whether something like this would be a lot more expensive than I'm thinking it is. I would welcome such insight. Starting a thread on the BikeArlington forum doesn't immediately add millions of dollars of costs to Metro or CaBi. It could be a good idea or it could be a bad idea. Nothing you have said makes me look at the idea critically in any way.

It's a simple thread, about a possible idea. I would like to see what the pros and cons are, based on data or educated guesses based on data and other insights that people may have. Gripes about how I think "CaBi is the answer to everything," well, I can't say I find that useful at all. The only thing I've gotten out of your responses is that you want me to shut up about CaBi. Since you are not the forum dictator, I will not shut up about CaBi. I will continue to post about it when I think it's appropriate. Like it or not, Capital Bikeshare is now a major part of cycling in the DC region. You may despise it and you may try to shut down discussion about it on the forum, but the forum covers bike commuting, bike infrastructure and bike planning, among other bike-related topics. Capital Bikeshare is a significant part of all of those topics and categories.

[I suspect you will complain about me posting a "wall of text" next. If you don't want to read the post, don't. Put me on ignore if you like. I won't become despondent over it. No one forced you to read the Capital Bikeshare sub-forum and no one has forced you to read this thread or any other thread that may have Capital Bikeshare content. Good lord.]

hozn
03-27-2016, 08:54 AM
I think most of us have learned that arguing with with mstone is rather pointless. He has lots of good points but they come with a heavy dose of hyperbole, over-simplification, and general cynicism. It makes for good theater, though. :-)

So I would just save the "walls of text" responses for occasions that matter.

mstone
03-27-2016, 09:05 AM
Wall of text ignored, as desired. You're not posting about cabi, you're posting about metro. You're ignoring the optics involved on the metro side, because of your focus on cabi. I don't think you actually responded to what I wrote, but I honestly didn't parse every word in the wall. Metro can't do something like this without studies and administrative overhead which isn't free. Their smartrip system has been overtaxed and having problems for years, and there's no such thing as a "simple change". And, again, the optics of metro spending time and attention on that instead of the major problems in the system would lead to headaches that metro really doesn't need and almost certainly won't affect ridership in a measurable way. If you want to promote cabi+metro, find a way to promote it from the cabi side without burdening metro with it. AFHokie posted about changing cabi to use smartrip cards. I'm skeptical that would be revenue-positive, but at least that's something that comes out of cabi's funding rather than metro's.

Think of it as a sinking ship. You want to put on a better deck chair. It doesn't matter if it's the shiniest deck chair ever, it doesn't matter if you say that the captain doesn't need to polish it, just the steward. The people on the ship are going to be really annoyed if anyone is focused on the deck chairs while the ship is sinking. Once the ship is fixed, sure, talk about how the chairs could be better.

Raymo853
03-27-2016, 11:00 AM
Based on your first seven sentances/phrases, I think this is a great idea. I have no idea what else you state as your post is insanely too long. When advocating, always keep to three related points and no more than six sentances/phrases.

One problem, metro and bike share see each other as the enemy.

Steve O
03-27-2016, 12:18 PM
One problem, metro and bike share see each other as the enemy.

Actually, I think it's asymmetrical. I don't think CaBi sees Metro as the enemy, particularly since they are a useful tool for the "last mile" problem. OTOH, Metro has publicly stated that part of their ridership decline can be attributed to more bicycling, including Capital Bikeshare.

The general concept of integrating forms of transit is, in and of itself, a good idea. It's already done a lot--particularly between buses and rail. So I think PotomacCyclist raising this idea can make for a worthwhile discussion. Since CaBi can be a good "last mile" solution for other forms of transit, linking them somehow makes good sense.

One simpler, starter idea in this regard might be cross marketing of some kind. For instance, Metro riders could get coupons for a free ride on CaBi. To reduce the free-riders problem, they could be limited to same day and certain CaBi stations. That sort of thing. If the goal is to help people better understand the connectedness the systems can create, with the intent of increasing use of both systems, then unleash some marketing geniuses to come up with promos and other tools to work on that. Shared fare systems is just one idea of many that could be considered.

mstone
03-27-2016, 01:14 PM
OTOH, Metro has publicly stated that part of their ridership decline can be attributed to more bicycling, including Capital Bikeshare.

Well, for a long time metro has been looking for anything to blame other than their reliability and other internal problems. (For years they wouldn't acknowledge that the weekend track work was a factor for people not wanting to metro on the weekend!) If you look at the difference between peak and current ridership, and the number of people riding bikes, it's clear that the majority of people abandoning metro didn't hop on a bike. I think telework is a bigger existential threat to metro than bikes, since they're geared so heavily toward supporting traditional 9-5 commuters.


One simpler, starter idea in this regard might be cross marketing of some kind. For instance, Metro riders could get coupons for a free ride on CaBi.

Yup, that's something that wouldn't require anything at all from metro, cabi could just get a couple of people handing out passes at metro stations and buy some ads inside. I thought they'd already done some of that, but I may be thinking of some other campaign. A bigger challenge on the cabi side is how non-scalable their interface for daily users is--they're not going to impress a lot of people with a line at the kiosk. I wonder if they could do some kind of facilitated transaction with mobile terminals, where someone gets handed a one day key right there? (I assume they'd still want a credit card associated with the key to discourage bike trashing?)

peterw_diy
03-27-2016, 05:52 PM
CaBi's 2014 member survey: "Ninety-one percent of respondents said they would be somewhat interested (31%) or very inter-
ested (60%) in a Capital Bikeshare fob or SmarTrip card that they could use to access both Capital Bikeshare and public transit service."

But Metrorail serves 25x as many people as CaBi. If 90% want a single card, it seems likely that the existing CaBi members are WMATA users. How much can CaBi grow without more equipment? How much of an increase would it be for WMATA if CaBi maxed out? How many of those riders would bring additional revenue to WMATA?

I imagine CaBi has already reached out to WMATA and been rejected.

PotomacCyclist
03-28-2016, 11:23 PM
The idea I had is that no new equipment would be needed at all. If this proposal were ever instituted, it would be software-based only. The CaBi account and the SmarTrip account could be linked by the user. It would be optional. If someone is concerned about "the Government" tracking their every move, well, then don't use CaBi or Metro, or at least don't sync the two. Problem avoided.

For those who want the benefit of interconnection, they could opt in, through either the CaBi acct or on the Metro SmarTrip site. (People can already register their SmarTrip cards online. The benefit is that if you ever lose the card, you can retrieve the entire balance and transfer it to a new card, paying only the small fee for a new card. Some people store hundreds of dollars of value on their SmarTrip card, so losing it could be a big deal if it isn't registered.) If everything were set up, then the user could simply check a box on either account page and possibly verify the selection by receiving an email link and confirming that the user wants to link the two accounts.

Once that's done, the individual would use their CaBi key as before, and they would use their SmarTrip card as they do currently. The difference is that if the systems detect that the person has checked in a bike within a set distance from a Metro station, and then enters that Metro station within a set time period, then the discounted transfer would apply. They could use similar limits as the rail/bus or bus/rail transfers, with slight modification for bikeshare. Perhaps something like checking into a bike station 1/4 mile from a Metro station, then entering the Metro station within 30 minutes of docking the bike. (The exact numbers could be hashed out by others.) This isn't new and it's not revolutionary. These transfers have been part of the Metro system for years, maybe even decades. That's why I don't think it would be that novel to program the CaBi/Metro transfers, because this sort of thing has already been done before. It's not new, except for the proposed addition of Capital Bikeshare.

I don't know if Metro would have money to spend on studying the effect of this transfer system. But as I mentioned before, many private individuals have already been studying cycling and bikeshare data for years in the DC/Arlington area. This is not a new task either. It is already being done by many intelligent and motivated individuals. It's really not that hard.

Will those studies be comprehensive and authoritative? Probably not, but most studies are not authoritative and 100% conclusive. They just try to narrow down the range of possibilities and probabilities. As people are pointing out, the user base of CaBi is relatively small, compared to that of Metro, so I don't see this as having a massive negative effect on Metro. If it is true that CaBi has already had a negative effect on Metro revenues, well, that had absolutely nothing to do with any discounted transfer program.

PotomacCyclist
03-28-2016, 11:26 PM
I have also been thinking of the new proposals from the new Metro General Manager, to offer more practical and beneficial monthly passes for MetroRail riders. They only offer a slight discount over paying for rail trips individually. The benefit to Metro is that if someone buys a monthly pass, that provides a much more stable revenue stream for WMATA. If there is an outage, such as the one a couple weeks ago, that would not result in a large negative spike in revenue. The monthly passes would also encourage purchasers to take more weekend trips, even with the reduced train frequencies, because once you buy the monthly pass, there is no extra cost to taking multiple additional trips on the weekend (as long as you stay under the per-ride limit of the pass). I don't recall the specifics, but the pass works something like this: You would pay for the cost of about 18 round trips at one of two levels, something like $2.15 or $3.25. (I don't remember the exact numbers, but you get the idea.) Then that pass allows the purchaser to take unlimited trips of $2.15 or less (or $3.25 or less, or whatever the number is).

Metro is already running the relatively empty trains on the weekends. The track work has led to fewer weekend Metro trips overall. Perhaps more people would use Metro on the weekends if there was no additional per-trip cost. People (at least in DC, Arlington and other areas near Metro stations) would be more likely to go car-lite or car-free. Maybe this would increase total revenue for WMATA. I don't know if it will or not. Neither does WMATA, so that is why they are only running a pilot program for the new monthly passes.

Why is this relevant here? Because this is partly why I thought of a CaBi/Metro transfer program. If someone can tie in CaBi with Metro, and connect it to a monthly Metro pass, the overall combination could attract more people to Metro than just the monthly passes would. I don't have any solid evidence to back up this assertion, but that's why I posted this here. To see what interested parties would have to say. Even such discussion would not prove anything, so a pilot program would also be a good idea, if this idea were accepted.

I tend to think that this idea would have a slight benefit for WMATA, especially in combination with the monthly passes. (The increased transit tax benefit will also help to boost Metro revenues, I think.) I do NOT think this idea would be a gamechanger for Metro. Never said it would be. However, I think the cost to institute this would be relatively small, which would make this a worthwhile program. It's not as though I'm talking about constructing a new underground Metro line through downtown DC here. I may not know the exact cost of this idea, but certainly it is not a multi-billion dollar idea, the way that a separated Blue Line through downtown DC would be.

Compared to most other Metro-related plans and programs, this transfer idea would cost very little. So even if the benefits are only modest, that could easily make it worth pursuing. If someone can explain why it would not, I would be interested to hear the argument... AS LONG AS it has to do with facts, good-faith guesses, and opinions based on experience, studies, observations and thought experiments. Just saying "Metro sucks" or telling me to shut up about CaBi does not add anything to the discussion (and DISCUSSION is exactly the entire POINT of having this forum in the first place!).

PotomacCyclist
03-28-2016, 11:41 PM
As for Metro rejecting the plan, well, both Metro and CaBi are funded/owned by the same groups, namely the local governments. There were problems with CaBi placing bike stations on Metro property, but that could have been due to exaggerated fears about bike stations interfering with bus or pedestrian traffic flows and safety around Metro stations. (I'm not saying those fears were reasonable, just that those attitudes might have led to all the delays and obstacles.) Or some of it was due to protecting Metro turf from the intrusion of the new Capital Bikeshare program.

There would be no physical transfer or use of Metro property with the discounted transfer program. It's all software. (None of those paper transfer tickets like they used to use. Actually, some of the local bus systems still use paper transfers or tickets. I used one in Prince George's County this past winter.)

Perhaps there has been reluctance to cooperate with CaBi because of concerns about CaBi eroding Metro revenue. I'll admit that CaBi does appear to have had at least a small negative effect on Metro revenue. But a CaBi/Metro transfer program would not increase the decline of Metro revenue. It could encourage more people to use Metro, and perhaps it could encourage more people to sign up for the new monthly passes. Again, I do not think the CaBi/Metro transfer idea on its own would bring tens of millions of dollars into Metro coffers. But it doesn't have to. Until someone tells me differently, I have to assume that this idea would cost much less than most Metro programs and additions. Nothing would need to be built. No new equipment would need to be designed or purchased whatsoever. No revolutionary leaps in software programming would need to be made, because these electronic transfers have already been built into the existing system. It's already set up to detect the time gaps between leaving a Metro station or bus and entering a bus or Metro station, and then deducting the transfer discount automatically.

Likewise, the CaBi account system is already set up to detect and record fairly precise information. If you login to the CaBi site, you can see the precise times that you check out or check in a bike. You can see the bike stations used. (The distances for the trips are not accurately, because the system only measures the straight-line distance between stations, not the distance of the actual route taken.)

It would take some programming to link the CaBi system and the SmarTrip system. I'm not a programmer so I don't know how complicated this would be. But I do know that all the precise info required for this idea is already being recorded and tracked for SmarTrip and CaBi today. The systems wouldn't need to be overhauled.

I understand that whenever you try to fiddle around with a complicated network or software system, bugs arise. Maybe this idea would introduce too many bugs. But it seems that the software people should be able to work it out, since Metro is already running an electronic automated transfer discount system.

mstone
03-29-2016, 06:26 AM
DISCUSSION is exactly the entire POINT of having this forum in the first place

You're not interested in discussion. You just posted 3 (!) more walls of text that basically disregarded what anyone else on the thread said, reiterated your original idea at length and without change, and explained your requirements for "legitimate" conversation (which, for anyone else, can't be "I think this so it must be true", it has to be extensively footnoted and preferably something you want to hear). That's not a discussion, it's a pronouncement.

PotomacCyclist
03-29-2016, 07:36 AM
Then don't read. I already invited you to put me on ignore.

I did look at some of the other posts. Metro has considered moving to a new payment system, but I doubt that will happen in the foreseeable future. (Skip the rest of this post if you don't want to read more than two sentences.)

Metro has been running a pilot program for the alternate payment system. Those are the silver gates present at many/most stations. The problem is that very few people have signed up for the pilot. Another problem is that even if a lot of people signed up, overhauling the payment/entry system would be very expensive. That would be a major capital project. As others have noted, Metro probably shouldn't be focused on a major capital project at this time. THAT is why I posted about keeping the standard CaBi keys and SmarTrip cards already in use today.

PotomacCyclist
03-29-2016, 07:55 AM
Switching CaBi to SmarTrip would also be very expensive, requiring modifications or replacement of every CaBi kiosk. Unless an independent donor funds such a program, I don't see how that would happen. You can claim that I'm making pronouncements, but this is based on the financial realities of CaBi and Metro. If a new kiosk were designed to use SmarTrip cards (or smartphones/chip cards), those could be added when the current kiosks are replaced. But systemwide replacement of stations isn't going to happen for years.

http://wamu.org/news/16/02/03/metro_plans_for_modern_fare_payment_system_delayed _no_word_on_how_long

Even if the $184 million contract with Accenture had been on track, the transfer away from SmarTrip would not have completed until 2021. Now the process has been delayed because of the unsuccessful pilot. Based on the delays with most major projects, Metro and non-Metro, I would guess that even if Metro sticks to their plan, it won't be finished until the mid 2020s at best.

The article does mention that Chicago's new gate system resulted in glitches. Everyone has seen enough bugs in software overhauls to know that is a possibility. This is why I would be concerned that this could happen, even if a Metro/CaBi transfer program were added solely through software. I already mentioned this before. It's a risk, and if it's too great a risk, it would make this idea unwise.

But what is the risk? I don't know but I don't think others know either.

lordofthemark
03-29-2016, 08:08 AM
Switching CaBi to SmarTrip would also be very expensive, requiring modifications or replacement of every CaBi kiosk. Unless an independent donor funds such a program, I don't see how that would happen. You can claim that I'm making pronouncements, but this is based on the financial realities of CaBi and Metro. If a new kiosk were designed to use SmarTrip cards (or smartphones/chip cards), those could be added when the current kiosks are replaced. But systemwide replacement of stations isn't going to happen for years.

Hmm. Are there are any new parts of the CaBi system, that are relatively isolated from the rest of the CaBi system, but where CaBi as last mile to metro is very important, and where there are local organizations that might want to support this?

Why so there are.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/30217/heres-where-reston-and-tysons-cabi-stations-will-go/

I would suggest FCDOT, TyTran, and Reston Association might have an interest in doing this.

Raymo853
03-29-2016, 09:16 AM
As for Metro rejecting the plan, well, both Metro and CaBi are funded/owned by the same groups, namely the local governments.

Regardless, they still are competitors for the funding stream from these sources, not remarkably than say how Booze Allen and Dewberry are funded by the Federal Gov.

I also fear that a too close of a relationship between CaBi and DC Metro, the horrid work culture and mismanagement of Metro will infect CaBi.

cvcalhoun
03-31-2016, 02:24 AM
Of course, the way things are going with Metro, people may have to use CaBi shortly.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/2016/03/30/fba8ae0a-f688-11e5-9804-537defcc3cf6_story.html

If they close down a whole line for 6 months, they will presumably have bus service to replace it. However, two things will happen. First, the bus service will be slower and even less reliable than the trains, so people will be more inclined to give up Metro for their cars. Second, the extra car traffic, plus the extra buses, will give us massive extra gridlock. We already have among the longest commuting times of any city in the country; I don't even want to think about what they'll be like once those line closures start.

Sunyata
03-31-2016, 07:05 AM
We already have among the longest commuting times of any city in the country; I don't even want to think about what they'll be like once those line closures start.

And THIS is why I ride my bike.

mstone
03-31-2016, 08:42 AM
Of course, the way things are going with Metro, people may have to use CaBi shortly.

CaBi would need one heck of an expansion to handle a quarter million morning trips.

PotomacCyclist
03-31-2016, 10:46 PM
I'm still not reading all the responses in this thread, including from particular individuals.

Just noting that I'm fed up with the *&^!, so I'm out of here. Maybe I'll check in on road and trail conditions next winter. Meanwhile, I no longer feel comfortable knowing that posting about Capital Bikeshare OR WHATEVER is causing certain individuals to simmer in their rage, and monitor how many times I post about CaBi or cycling, and leap onto any thread I start that is related to CaBi and turn it into a ridiculous circus.

I'm not getting paid to post here and frankly, the hostility, the tracking and the outright harassment is more than a waste of my time. (I'm sure this will lead to yet another explosion of rage, but not much I can do about that at this point.) So that's it.

Some of it has been entertaining and informative but it's too bad the nonsense (and worse) takes over at times. I'm done.