*Dallas - Fort Worth: The New Mecca of the South! (Houston: camp, public transportation)

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by Dallas native

The rail lines couldn't be placed just anywhere by the time DART rail was started in the 1990's. It was too late to connect every hot spot in Dallas by rail. As it stands, each of the lines goes through Downtown (very useful) and individual lines hit useful destinations such as: Uptown & CityPlace, the Telecom Corridor in Richardson, points north and east for Richardson, Plano & Garland commuters, the Dallas Zoo, Deep Ellum, Fair Park, the Market Center, UTSW/Parkland Hospital, points NW for the Carrollton commuters, etc....

It sure does goes through those places, but how do riders go to the stations? Do most riders walk/bike or transfer from a bus or do they park&ride? Currently, DART is a commuter system, except Downtown where it's an urban system. Commuter systems by nature don't carry the same ridership as urban systems.

[Dallas native]

Originally Posted by dv1033

Houston is exactly on the same level as Dallas when it comes to crappy public transit yo. No need to trying to dispute that.

Originally Posted by dv1033

Why are you singling out rail? Good public transit consists of multiple modes of transit working together, which DFW doesn't have. (neither does Houston).

You are just another poster who thinks the mere presence of rail makes it good. If the OPPORTUNITY to ride rail is far greater on DART then why is ridership so low? Ridership/mile is a direct reflection of the effectiveness of the system. No doubt ridership will increase, but the projections for ridership and the layout of the rail won't push DART's ridership to the levels of the top tier rail cities, in my opinion.

You're the one who made the blanket statement that public transit was equally crappy in both cities. You were wrong about that as it pertains to light rail, so I was pointing that out. You realize that I'm sure, so now you're trying to change your argument to save face.

The AVAILABILITY of light rail and RIDERSHIP are 2 different things. Dallas has much more opportunity for someone who wants to ride light rail to do so than Houston. I'm not dissing Houston, just stating an obvious fact. Get over it. Getting people in a large, spread-out sunbelt metro to park their cards and ride rail in greater numbers is the challenge. Continued population growth, increased density around stations and a change in mentality of potential riders will increase ridership over time. But 55 stations are already there for those who want or need to ride rail in the Dallas metro.

As for top tier rail cities, neither Dallas nor Houston will ever be in the same league as NYC, Chicago or Boston in that respect. DART rail is basically commuter oriented due to the fact that the Dallas metro, like the Houston metro, is far too spread out to ever make it feasible to have a station every 10 blocks as it is in NYC.

[Dallas native]

Originally Posted by dv1033

It sure does goes through those places, but how do riders go to the stations? Do most riders walk/bike or transfer from a bus or do they park&ride? Currently, DART is a commuter system, except Downtown where it's an urban system. Commuter systems by nature don't carry the same ridership as urban systems.

DUH! We finally agree on something.

[cmacemm]

Originally Posted by dv1033

Isn't that the point of transit, serving those with the greatest need?

Furthermore, why would you assume METRO rail is full of riders without cars because it isn't the case.

I'm on right there with you on that. Redline gets great ridership (my trains are often packed tighter than trains I've riden on in NYC and Chicago). The article you posted really will not have much relevance because as I stated before, the Greenline was just opened and I've seen signifacant increases in ridership daily in the month that it has been open. Another flaw with our system is the ability to expand. The current stations on the redline and blue line (minus downtown) cannot handle the length of 3 car trains on the greenline and those are the busiest lines.

And I think it is really stupid to depend on TOD to fill in the gaps like you said. There are plenty of areas that are dense enough (which if covered would increase ridership) that are completely left out. DART definitely took the cheaper way out by using existing ROW but weren't there other ROW they could have accquired? Katy Trail goes completely through uptown and knox...

and I still get so mad knowing that we missed out on the Knox/Henderson subway station...

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by Dallas native

You're the one who made the blanket statement that public transit was equally crappy in both cities. You were wrong about that as it pertains to light rail, so I was pointing that out. You realize that I'm sure, so now you're trying to change your argument to save face.

Not really... I stand by statement that both cities have crappy public transit systems. And I'm not wrong about how it pertains to light rail. DART rail may not be crappy, but it certainly isn't effective for the length and cost to build. Perhaps, if changes are made, like those mentioned in the articles, DART rail can be made more effective.

The AVAILABILITY of light rail and RIDERSHIP are 2 different things. Dallas has much more opportunity for someone who wants to ride light rail to do so than Houston. I'm not dissing Houston, just stating an obvious fact. Get over it. Getting people in a large, spread-out sunbelt metro to park their cards and ride rail in greater numbers is the challenge. Continued population growth, increased density around stations and a change in mentality of potential riders will increase ridership over time. But 55 stations are already there for those who want or need to ride rail in the Dallas metro.

I'm not following you. If the availability and opportunity to ride rail is high then shouldn't ridership reflect it? It seems you didn't read any of those articles.

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by cmacemm

I'm on right there with you on that. Redline gets great ridership (my trains are often packed tighter than trains I've riden on in NYC and Chicago). The article you posted really will not have much relevance because as I stated before, the Greenline was just opened and I've seen signifacant increases in ridership daily in the month that it has been open.

The article was about the the green line opening and the overall system. Did you miss the part about the green line's projection of 30,000 more riders? Not to mention, that the opening of new line usually generates more riders for a few months then drops once the novelty wears off.

And I think it is really stupid to depend on TOD to fill in the gaps like you said. There are plenty of areas that are dense enough (which if covered would increase ridership) that are completely left out. DART definitely took the cheaper way out by using existing ROW but weren't there other ROW they could have accquired? Katy Trail goes completely through uptown and knox...

Politics and cost certainly play a part. DART did go "cheap" by running the rail through abandoned freight corridors. But it isn't all DART's fault, local politics play a large part.

[Lakewooder]

If they had tried to use other right of way or had to buy some, I don't think DART would have ever made it past the voters - a lot of neighbors didn't like that idea back then.

[Dallas native]

Originally Posted by dv1033

Not really... I stand by statement that both cities have crappy public transit systems. And I'm not wrong about how it pertains to light rail. DART rail may not be crappy, but it certainly isn't effective for the length and cost to build. Perhaps, if changes are made, like those mentioned in the articles, DART rail can be made more effective.

I'm not following you. If the availability and opportunity to ride rail is high then shouldn't ridership reflect it? It seems you didn't read any of those articles.

So Dallas has a crappy public transportation system exept for DART rail, which may not be crappy? Which is it, crappy or not crappy? Once again, ridership will increase with time for a variety of reasons such as development around certain stations, population growth, increasing gas prices and an evolution in the mentality of potential riders.

[Dallas native]

Originally Posted by Lakewooder

If they had tried to use other right of way or had to buy some, I don't think DART would have ever made it past the voters - a lot of neighbors didn't like that idea back then.

Exactly. I can't imagine how DART rail could have ever been built along the path of the Katy Trail. Highland Park would have put a stop to that. I'd rather have the Katy Trail anyway. It's easy for people to look back and complain about what isn't right and how things should have been. Getting the job done is the hard part. Looking at the big picture, I think DART set up a very viable commuter system given the obstacles. Growth around many stations & increased ridership will follow.

[mm4]

Originally Posted by Scarface713

Just like Houston is far ahead in bus, HOV/Park and Ride, and freeways.

Pathetic.