U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-29-2018, 07:52 PM
 
4,622 posts, read 2,986,189 times
Reputation: 5522

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert_SW_77 View Post
Denver's RTD rail has done well in its buildout of its rail system. Its biggest flaw that is it's very park and ride with very little intra-urban rail within the city of Denver. It's fine if you want to commute in from DTC, Douglas County burbs, or Lakewood if you happen work in downtown or want to catch a ball game. But busy corridors like Colfax, Broadway, and Colorado Blvd and many neighborhoods within the city of Denver could really use some rail service and would likely increase ridership on the existing lines to the suburbs.
That's because, for the most part, RTD decided to use old railroad ROW or place lines along the interstates/freeways around the Denver metroplex. Doing it that way saved them both time and money in their build out, but you're right it also caused the lines to away from the denser parts of the metro, so people have to do the park and ride thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-29-2018, 07:55 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
4,241 posts, read 2,049,071 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
All the new systems other than Seattle have that issue where outside the core they are grade separated low(er) frequency lines and then in the core itís all a trunk line thatís mixed with traffic. Thatís how Portland, Dallas and Denver built their system. As opposed to say Boston, SF, Cleveland which have street running trolly lines that become Exclusive ROW in trunk lines through the downtown core.


The big problem with all the new systems is the places that itís hardest to get ROW is where you need it the most. So they have the Busiest part of the system also being the most bogged down by traffic and such which unbalanced the system.
Dallas will join Seattle in having a full-blown light metro when it completes its planned downtown subway tunnel.

BTW, I think we need to get our terminology clear. A grade-separated line may run at surface level, but it has no at-grade crossings of its tracks. It's this type of operation that I call "light metro." Seattle now qualifies fully (though it also has a couple of modern streetcar lines that are about to be joined). The "D" (Riverside) branch of Boston's Green Line does as well, though the other three branches do not. Cleveland's Shaker Heights Rapid Transit doesn't either, as it does have grade crossings even though it runs in a reserved median.

MUNI Metro in San Francisco and Pittsburgh's and Philadelphia's trolley subways don't meet the light metro standard either, as once out of the subway tunnel, they run in mixed traffic (Pittsburgh less than the others).

Buffalo's would if it didn't run at-grade downtown. It's unusual in that it runs in a subway outside downtown.

So neither DART or RTD have grade crossings outside downtown?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2018, 08:06 PM
 
677 posts, read 281,577 times
Reputation: 530
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post
Dallas will join Seattle in having a full-blown light metro when it completes its planned downtown subway tunnel.

BTW, I think we need to get our terminology clear. A grade-separated line may run at surface level, but it has no at-grade crossings of its tracks. It's this type of operation that I call "light metro." Seattle now qualifies fully (though it also has a couple of modern streetcar lines that are about to be joined). The "D" (Riverside) branch of Boston's Green Line does as well, though the other three branches do not. Cleveland's Shaker Heights Rapid Transit doesn't either, as it does have grade crossings even though it runs in a reserved median.

MUNI Metro in San Francisco and Pittsburgh's and Philadelphia's trolley subways don't meet the light metro standard either, as once out of the subway tunnel, they run in mixed traffic (Pittsburgh less than the others).

Buffalo's would if it didn't run at-grade downtown. It's unusual in that it runs in a subway outside downtown.

So neither DART or RTD have grade crossings outside downtown?
But at-grade, even if there are no crossings, is still slower and less reliable, especially in denser areas, because it usually cannot travel faster than the speed limit and cars can block the tracks. That is, unless theyíre using old rail ROW or some other ROW completely separated from city streets. This can happen in more suburban or industrial areas but is very difficult to pull off in denser, more urban areas. This is why grade separation is so much more critical in those core areas while not quite as important in the outer areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2018, 08:09 PM
 
4,622 posts, read 2,986,189 times
Reputation: 5522
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post
So neither DART or RTD have grade crossings outside downtown?
RTD has grade crossings, the W Line that goes out to the Jefferson County Government Center, easily has a dozen or more. The A Line coming from the airport to the downtown has a bunch as well. But what makes their system better than say, the Phoenix Metro, is that the RTD has its own ROW that basically acts like a railroad, where they have the "right of way" and don't have to slow down/stop at the at-grade crossings, where as the PHX Metro has to stop at red lights because it's basically sharing the road ROW.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2018, 08:50 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
4,241 posts, read 2,049,071 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_Adultman View Post
But at-grade, even if there are no crossings, is still slower and less reliable, especially in denser areas, because it usually cannot travel faster than the speed limit and cars can block the tracks. That is, unless they’re using old rail ROW or some other ROW completely separated from city streets. This can happen in more suburban or industrial areas but is very difficult to pull off in denser, more urban areas. This is why grade separation is so much more critical in those core areas while not quite as important in the outer areas.
The LA Blue Line - that city's first current rail transit line - has grade crossings but operates in a PROW that used to be a Pacific Electric Railway line to Long Beach.

The absence of grade crossings plus a private ROW as opposed to a reserved median wouldn't impose a top operating speed penalty, but the same thing in a median shouldn't either, since there are no points where cross traffic might get in the way. Grade crossings with gates and crossing signals on the cross street, as on the LA Blue Line, don't impose much of a speed penalty since the gates come down in enough time for cars to clear the ROW, or should.

Unprotected grade crossings do impose a speed penalty for the reasons you state.

BTW, you do know there is one heavy rail rapid transit line that operates at grade with crossings on its outer end, right? It does, however, operate in a PROW.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2018, 11:30 PM
 
1,168 posts, read 356,491 times
Reputation: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post
The LA Blue Line - that city's first current rail transit line - has grade crossings but operates in a PROW that used to be a Pacific Electric Railway line to Long Beach.

The absence of grade crossings plus a private ROW as opposed to a reserved median wouldn't impose a top operating speed penalty, but the same thing in a median shouldn't either, since there are no points where cross traffic might get in the way. Grade crossings with gates and crossing signals on the cross street, as on the LA Blue Line, don't impose much of a speed penalty since the gates come down in enough time for cars to clear the ROW, or should.

Unprotected grade crossings do impose a speed penalty for the reasons you state.

BTW, you do know there is one heavy rail rapid transit line that operates at grade with crossings on its outer end, right? It does, however, operate in a PROW.
It is, however, worthy to note that the LA's newest line, the Expo line, features a large segment in which the trains actually have to stop for traffic signals, along with cars, on the main road! (That's why the Expo line features an average speed of 17.5 mph).

Dallas doesn't have the same problem, outside of Downtown. Like others have pointed out, they are resolving this issue by building a transit tunnel through Downtown.

Dallas also has far more potential than the Bay Area for rapid transit. They're building the cotton line from DFW directly to Plano via Carrolton--HUGE potential. DART also has a lot of transit-oriented devlopment--Las Colinas, for one, and Mockingbird Station, where you're right across the street from SMU.

Yes, the Bay Area may be more dense than Dallas, but the mountainous terrain is really holding rail construction back. Dallas' flat terrain will make rail much cheaper and able to cover more places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2018, 01:31 AM
 
677 posts, read 281,577 times
Reputation: 530
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJester View Post
It is, however, worthy to note that the LA's newest line, the Expo line, features a large segment in which the trains actually have to stop for traffic signals, along with cars, on the main road! (That's why the Expo line features an average speed of 17.5 mph).

Dallas doesn't have the same problem, outside of Downtown. Like others have pointed out, they are resolving this issue by building a transit tunnel through Downtown.

Dallas also has far more potential than the Bay Area for rapid transit. They're building the cotton line from DFW directly to Plano via Carrolton--HUGE potential. DART also has a lot of transit-oriented devlopment--Las Colinas, for one, and Mockingbird Station, where you're right across the street from SMU.

Yes, the Bay Area may be more dense than Dallas, but the mountainous terrain is really holding rail construction back. Dallas' flat terrain will make rail much cheaper and able to cover more places.
Iím curious, have you ridden rail transit in all three places?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2018, 09:15 AM
Status: "Hasta Luego New Mexico, I'm sure going to miss you!" (set 4 days ago)
 
Location: New Mexico --> Northern Vermont in March
9,194 posts, read 17,784,913 times
Reputation: 11582
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjseliga View Post
That's because, for the most part, RTD decided to use old railroad ROW or place lines along the interstates/freeways around the Denver metroplex. Doing it that way saved them both time and money in their build out, but you're right it also caused the lines to away from the denser parts of the metro, so people have to do the park and ride thing.
Oh I understand why the RTD Fastracks project built the system the way they did. Yes, the ROW's were cheaper and hitting all those suburbs meant easier to secure funding when put to a regional vote. But it's not hitting the dense nodes, like you said and it perplexes me why they built the R line through Aurora like they did. It is mostly running parallel to I-225, it starts and ends from one transfer point to another with no direct service to Denver, the only real busy stopping point is the Anshutz medical campus and it's not really hitting any residential areas or neighborhoods in Aurora. So the ridership numbers on that line are pretty dismal, half of what RTD has projected (https://kdvr.com/2018/09/25/rtd-redu...hrough-aurora/). That particular line was pretty poorly planned, not sure how you can fix that.


Since Denver has been, is, and will be growing like a weed as it's seen tremendous investment with lots of urban infill development in the city itself, it would be nice to see Denver build a good heavy rail intra-urban subway line. I think a logical route would be Colfax/Colorado corridors starting at the I-25/Colorado station going up Colorado Blvd (probably the most congested corridor in the city), heading up into the Cherry Creek and City Park areas, and then shift over onto East Colfax towards downtown and terminating at Union Station where all the other lines meet, or perhaps extended into Highlands and beyond. That would hit a lot of missing links and would likely increase ridership on most of the other lines providing better connections for commuters. How they secure funding for this on a regional vote..... ugghhh, pie in the sky I know. Such is the status quo for many American cities and metros.

Last edited by Desert_SW_77; 09-30-2018 at 09:33 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2018, 11:46 AM
 
2,137 posts, read 2,684,310 times
Reputation: 1787
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post
Dallas will join Seattle in having a full-blown light metro when it completes its planned downtown subway tunnel.

BTW, I think we need to get our terminology clear. A grade-separated line may run at surface level, but it has no at-grade crossings of its tracks. It's this type of operation that I call "light metro." Seattle now qualifies fully (though it also has a couple of modern streetcar lines that are about to be joined). The "D" (Riverside) branch of Boston's Green Line does as well, though the other three branches do not. Cleveland's Shaker Heights Rapid Transit doesn't either, as it does have grade crossings even though it runs in a reserved median.

MUNI Metro in San Francisco and Pittsburgh's and Philadelphia's trolley subways don't meet the light metro standard either, as once out of the subway tunnel, they run in mixed traffic (Pittsburgh less than the others).

Buffalo's would if it didn't run at-grade downtown. It's unusual in that it runs in a subway outside downtown.

So neither DART or RTD have grade crossings outside downtown?
But, of course, the first 6 miles of the Shaker Heights line from downtown to Shaker Square is, indeed, fully grade separated to the extent its centeral downtown station (partial terminal) is, essentially, a subway and 2.5 miles of the line from downtown share ROW and tracks with the heavy-rail Red Line, which is unique among American transit syatems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2018, 12:22 PM
 
2,137 posts, read 2,684,310 times
Reputation: 1787
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post
Dallas will join Seattle in having a full-blown light metro when it completes its planned downtown subway tunnel.

BTW, I think we need to get our terminology clear. A grade-separated line may run at surface level, but it has no at-grade crossings of its tracks. It's this type of operation that I call "light metro." Seattle now qualifies fully (though it also has a couple of modern streetcar lines that are about to be joined). The "D" (Riverside) branch of Boston's Green Line does as well, though the other three branches do not. Cleveland's Shaker Heights Rapid Transit doesn't either, as it does have grade crossings even though it runs in a reserved median.

MUNI Metro in San Francisco and Pittsburgh's and Philadelphia's trolley subways don't meet the light metro standard either, as once out of the subway tunnel, they run in mixed traffic (Pittsburgh less than the others).

Buffalo's would if it didn't run at-grade downtown. It's unusual in that it runs in a subway outside downtown.

So neither DART or RTD have grade crossings outside downtown?
But, of course, the first 6 miles of the Shaker Heights line from downtown to Shaker Square is, indeed, fully grade separated to the extent its centeral downtown is, essentially, a subway and 2.5 miles of the line from downtown share ROW and tracks with the heavy-rail Red Line, which is unique among American transit syatems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top