Top, left of the attachment is the view from my office. I've worked here since 2003 and our parent company has owned the field, out front (and still does). It was said that they purchased the extra land to keep others from putting a competing building next door.
Over the past several years, our parent company encouraged three other research/marketing agencies to sell their buildings and move into ours (we had the space). Our two-and-a-half-level parking lot has become rather crowded, or so I'm told, (I'm a daily bicycle commuter).
Just last year, Dallas Area Rapid Transit put a bus stop, literally, at the end of our driveway. There are several folks who have started using that. However, no companies within our building have done anything to encourage its use. They've done nothing to promote car-pooling or any other alternative transportation. Nope. They are just tearing up the field to build another parking lot, so now I'll get to look out the window at a bunch of cars.
I'm not looking for advice or solutions--I've done all I can do. I'm just venting. Thanks for listening.

Make sure they add plenty of very secure bike parking.

This is America, the great bastion of full capitalism why is it the responsibility of the company to do anything

When I lived in Germany, Johann Wolfgang Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main (JWGYFaM for short) subsidised a local transit pass.

It was usually about €100/mo or so but if you worked there it was €20/mo or about €0.6 per day (or about 80 USA cents).

If one take a look at the simple Regionaler Schienennetzplan one can see that the regional tickets are discounted as well.

A better map of zone 5000 is attached for your perusal. A second map of the city itself is attached.

I still rode my bike everyday but did my socialist duty and bought the ticket anyway

Companies can purchase monthly passes at a discounted rate to encourage their employees to use mass transit. I would have rather seen the money spent that way than adding more concrete.

Things are not right there :.-(

Maybe you could pick up some chalk and put some hints in the area, if only for fun (venting)?

If they already own the land and are building the parking lot, it is too late. Just get used to it.

Also, that is probably a sign that your local governement has more plans for the area. It might be time to stop by your local planning board and see what they are doing.

Over here, it's all online and open to the public. There has been a recent debate about the city buying some land to STOP it from being developed.

At least over here this is tough because all of the land is essentially used up (whereas last time I was in the Dallas metroplex there were huge land reserves.)

One side is fighting for a new development seen here (quite OK actually):

https://miltonplan.org.uk/wp-content/...s_Final_LR.pdf

The other side wants to save the old buildings:

https://res.cloudinary.com/jpress/im...mage/image.jpg

One compromise would be conversion of the old building into flats which is becoming more common.

The general growth of the entire dfw is eating up all the greenery unfortunately. Alot of folks swarming in and everything if going up in price. Courtesy is slowly fading away.
i hear your vent....

People who work in office buildings won't take buses to work. There will be exceptions, but most will prefer to surround themselves with a sea ashpalt topped with parked cars.

Why? Over here, everyone loves public transport, otherwise you can't go to the pub for a few pints in the evening.

Because this country has opposed public transport for so long, it's now viewed as a last resort-- it's what's used by people who can't afford other means. That's the general sentiment. The harsh reality is that there was an infrastructure, those in charge tore it out, and are now trying to replace it, but the place is all super-developed and there's no room anymore. If my wife wanted to take the train to work, the station at this end is 7 miles from our house, and the other end is about 4 miles from her workplace. That's a lot of extra travel for a 15 mile train trip.

She did Bike-to-Work Day this year, and I rode with her. It was a nightmare. I've ridden those exact roads dozens upon dozens of times-- but never on a Friday morning at 6am. Minimal bike lanes, 3X the traffic, and everybody is in a BIG hurry. Plus, it was 26 miles, a bit too much for a daily commute.

My wife would love to not have to commute. But it's not a choice. It is what it is.

Cultural differences. It might take a PhD to sort through them. I can make some guesses, but I don't pretend to know all the answers. Some of our denser, older cities like NYC do see a lot of transit use. I love visiting cities with good transit, especially rail transit like NYC is lucky to have. Many of our newer cities though are built on sprawl and are vast oceans of parking lot punctuated by office buildings.

I take the bus to work in the most ideal conditions and it's not great. Sometimes the bus is full and I end up spending 40 minutes standing up in the isle to get to work, which doesn't help my leg that I injured. On some bus routes the bus just doesn't show up sometimes for half an hour or an hour because "so what" or something. There's one bus that claims to run according to both google maps and the online schedule but I've sat waiting for it and it never shows up. I thought taking the bus would be relaxing, but instead I have to be constantly vigilant so I don't miss my stop. Our buses have shades on the windows so you don't get hit by bright sunlight but in practice it means that not only do I not get to be outside during the day, I don't even get to see it like I would in my car.

I spend about 50% more time to get to work on the bus, on the ideal direct-to-downtown bus route. If your company isn't downtown that time skyrockets, when I was living in phoenix a 20 minute drive in my car was an hour long bus ride. Put in a transfer or two and you can bump a 30 minute drive up to a 2 hour bus experience.

I need to look at apartments but I can't because they're only open for showings during the middle of the day and I don't have a car with me at work. When I need to see the doctor similar deal. I "get" to walk through the skyway system which in minneapolis feels like you're walking on a moon-horror-movie set.

I mostly hear "oh, take the bus!" from people who aren't actually using it for their day-to-day transportation. People who do use it realize it rather sucks compared to a car and adequate parking, not that that's a great solution either but the bus is even worse.

P.S. I forgot the constant neurosis you have to be in if you're not travelling during rush hour times. You get to the bus stop, bus only runs every hour, you're 5 minutes past when it came by. Stand outside waiting for 50 minutes in the weather, hoping that it does actually show up and isn't one of those "decided not to do the stop this time" cases...

I take the bus almost every morning. I live 26 miles from my office. That's two hours by bus and train. It's one hour, fifteen minutes by car. Most afternoons, it's about the same, but sometimes I opt to ride my bike the whole way. I keep all of my bus schedules on my phone, so that I know if I will catch my bus or train. Sometimes, I have to hoof it up the road and intercept them at a later stop.

But that's an excellent example of what I'm saying at almost twice as long for the bus and train. And I feel like you might have left off the additional time:
- Walking to the stop
- Waiting for the bus
- Driving to the bus station (maybe but it is in my case)
- Walking from the stop to work (may or may not apply as it depends on how far you'd walk if you came by car)

It's 10 minutes for me to get to the bus station, parked, and standing at the stop. I gotta get there another 5-10 minutes early as a buffer, so there's 15 minutes total. I have to drive 5 minutes the wrong way towards the nearest station so that's about 10 minutes of drive time so we're up to 25 extra minutes...not all of these apply to everyone but my bus at least goes straight downtown. The last place I worked wasn't downtown so it was like 20 minutes to drive vs 01:50 on a bus. (So I drove).

A friend of mine who lives in california thought he had it all setup to take the bus right from in front of the house he rented. It's about 5 blocks between the stop and his work. He thought it was no problem on the map..didn't realize how sketchy of a neighborhood it is and how hot it gets for that walk in the summer there. Some guy got in his face and tried to start a fight with him for no reason (he's minding his own business walking to work).

I mean I take the bus downtown but I've been considering renting a space in the parking garage instead. I'm really on the fence with downtown, there's a lot of issues taking the bus. But if you don't work downtown taking the bus is often completely out of the question for anyone who values their time. It doesn't sound like the OP's job is in a downtown office.

I live in a suburb and work in a suburb on the other side of Dallas. I guess I'm the odd bird who enjoys the extra time to either nap or read on the bus.

There still are a lot of people opposed to public transportation and infrastructure. I don't think they have ever done the math. There are about 1.5 million people in my metropolitan area. About a quarter of them work downtown every day. There is no practical way to have anywhere close to the 350,000 parking spots available for all of those people. Sacramento is not that large of a city. It is even worse for much larger cities.

There is no way around it, public transportation is a necessity for any large metropolitan area. Anyone that denies that will have to come up with the parking spaces to prove their point. If they can't do that, they are denying reality.

There's also no conceivable way that 1/4 of the population-- of four counties, no less-- "works downtown." Big cities can rely on public transportation. Because they're not big geographically. I can drive west to the Pacific Ocean and never leave the city.

My wife makes a 26 mile (each way) commute 5 days a week. She never leaves "city" on that journey. We live in the Inland Empire, which is conservatively 4.3 million for the metro area.

Many people my wife works with commute 50+ miles each way, from the High Desert, Lake Elsinore, north Orange County, etc. Two plus hours a day for commute time is fairly typical.

This is commuter-ville. Very few people here live in the same town that they work in. It's like Barstow or Bakersfield in reverse (the only reason people live in those places is because they work there.)

Those are good points. I decided to trade a larger city for a smaller/denser seaside one and get the job/seaside/school/nursery all within walking distance.

The island is 9 sq mi (3mi x 3mi) with about 200k people. When I want a proper sprawling metropolis, I can be in the core of 15M ppl in over an hour ... London commuter belt (I guess that makes us a suburb).

Seems to work for me right now but the island can be crowded (20000 people / mi2 or so).

Very nice for cycling.





no reason for the hassle of a car really

It's so cute when you pretend to be unfamiliar with the land of your birth.

One of the benefits of moving abroad. My memories and understandings are pliable for the argument I want to make. You guys should try it ... or stay where you are and complain

.When I commute by bike, I have two basic options:

• cycle 14 miles to work in about 1:15-1:30, leaving on my own schedule
• ride to the train station about two miles from home, take the train to a stop about 4 miles from work, and cycle in for about one half hour.

Just prior to reading the above post (on Tuesday, 9/25), I deliberated about my options. I’m not on the timeclock but I like to get in as early as possible. That early morning time is very important to me to get a jumpstart on the day, before the business and interruptions as the others arrive around 8:00 AM.

The train shortcut forces me to leave on a schedule (leave house no later than 5:15 AM), or dawdle and do the full ride at my convenience (trying to leave by about 5 AM for the same arrival time). Since I ride for fitness, the full ride is more beneficial but at that time of the morning, a shortened ride beckons.

That morning I considered the drawbacks of the train shortcut, similar to those listed by [MENTION=131376]PaulRivers[/MENTION] (a hardy Minnesotan year-round cyclist, I believe). It’s an intermittent, interrupted journey: cycle two miles to the train station, early enough not to miss, wait for the train, ride the train, get off, walk through the station (with bathroon stop and drink of water), then cycle the four miles to work and arrive about 6:30 AM.

It just seems that it’s too disjointed with wasted time, and not much physical excercise, whereas the 14 mile ride is a smooth uninterrupted (and pleasant) route, but I usually arrive about 7-7:30 AM. As noted above even that short early AM time is important to me.

BTW, a third option with/or without the bike is get to the train station by bike(leave home by about 6:30 AM), or subway (leave about 6 AM) for the 6:50 train on a different rail line that goes directly to my workplace by about 7:15 AM at the earliest with about a 200 yard distance to work.

I once posted a graph to compare my three modalities of commuting:

My employer pays a portion of the transit pass, which is generous. I'm only six miles away, so I cycle through the seasons along mostly quiet neighbourhood streets. I'll have a bus pass for January / February for truly hazardous winter days.

The majority of my colleagues live in the distant suburbs or way out of town in the middle of nowhere. I can't imagine driving an hour to work and then an hour home each day. I'd rather have a leisurely breakfast and read or have time for errands without feeling rushed.
Being able to walk to groceries, hardware stores, library, and the LBS and just downtown amenities is fantastic. 'We' really screwed up the development of the continent's city transport networks since the 1950s. Imagine if we hadn't all torn up our tram lines and replaced them with GM buses...

How do you imagine your or your colleagues' commute would be significantly different if the trams had not been replaced by buses of any manufacture?

I imagine that cities themselves would have evolved differently than to require a car.