What do you think of the DART? (Houston, Dallas: 2010, houses)

[DWong]

Man what's with all these numbers and such driving me nutS! A previous poster made a good point about the ride taking you somewhere. It's gotta go from a high density place to another. In DFW density is very low compared to other metros. San Diego, we too have a light rail, but it is limited bc our our physical barriers. The $ it costs to build isn't worth it and will take decades to pay for itself. Again, DFW is too spread out w/ places of work being here, there and everywhere w/ people living in too many surrounding places.

Here in CA where gas is approaching $5 a gallon we have changed to high milage cars. Here we have fully electric cars (which are nice now) and so many hybrids on the road and so few trucks/SUV now. Just look it up, Aptera and telsa vehicles have started hitting the streets and are backed up on supply.

I think y'all will most likely go w/ the high eff. cars before everyone jumps on the rail. Remember, you have to actually get to work not just close enough. Even people who live in the outer parts of LA know that the light rail will only get you so close, but you still got a ways to get to work....what are you going to do??? Leave home 3hrs ahead of time or drive all be it one hour in traffic?

[DWong]

Originally Posted by Spade

This is my opinion. I like light rail. I like what it offers. I like rail regardless. It helps densify cities and it takes much stress off the minds of the citizens. I think with as great a system that DC has, light rail would be a boon for the area. Both heavy rail and light rail can co-exist. But it is what it is. "Light" rail. Meaning, it doesn't carry a large capacity. You probably need 12-14 cars to equal as many people that are on 6 cars for the DC rail system. Where am I going with this? I believe light rail is ideal for cities like Memphis, Raleigh, Charlotte, and San Antonio. Metro areas hovering around 2 million or lower. Heck, even Phoenix would probably need more light rail instead of heavy rail than Dallas.

Dallas? NO. It is now big enough to have heavy rail operations and big enough to not only have just that form of getting around the city. Especially on the Dallas side of the MSA alone. Dallas is not the densest city in the nation by far. But it does have pockets inside loop 12. For the record, I think Houston is in the same boat with Dallas. Two metro areas that has a population of over 6 million but has no heavy rail system on par with what you see in the Northeast, Chicago, Westcoast, or even Atlanta and Miami even though those two don't see high ridership numbers. I think Houston and Dallas has the potential to be like DC or the Bay.

4 million plus live on the Dallas side and shows no signs of stopping and if they team up with Ft. Worth to form a North Texas transit agency, and heavy rail became the main operation for the agency, I have no doubts that it would be successful. I doubt tallscot would complain about the heavy rail system like he is for light rail. I think his remarks on the ridership numbers for Plano is justified. That's a very small number. But DC suburbs have rail and they have large ridership numbers as well. I know a heavy rail system for Plano would work.

North Texans want rail. It's obvious. But if it doesn't take you anywhere, than why bother. I do know about the TOD's that are being build now but people will have to wait until they are built. But heavy rail IMO would be so much better for Dallas than light rail. Light rail does it's job. To bad the US government makes it so expensive to build a single line now. The DFW area is prime for a system like San Francisco or Washington DC. Likewise, the DC area is prime for a DART system like Dallas. A light rail line to Adam's Morgan or Georgetown in DC would work wonders since they don't have direct rail transportation to those areas.

Sorry to type so much.

Good post. Hey who wouldn't want rail? but a system life Sf or DC could never work in Dallas. Like you said it does have to take you somewhere you need to be and the mindset of Texans (believe me I'm married to one) is big. Big houses w/ land. Well hate to break it to y'all, but that isn't gonna fly w/ a railing system.

Having it get you to the airport is a good idea. That will be it's most probably use, but outside of that, y'all are too far spread out w/ 3,000 people a sq mile it could never reach it's potential. And that's just Dallas, FW is far less so is the surrounding cities.

I would recommend getting use to the car... maybe going w/ a hybrid....

[DWong]

Another factor is that SF does not have malls comparable to The Dallas Galleria or Northpark, let alone second tier malls such as Irving Mall, Valley View, etc. About the best it can do is a small mall in the Stonestown area of southwest SF, practically a white-bread suburban area in its own right. If I wanted to do some people-watching, I'd go to Northpark to see more people in one place than anywhere in San Francisco outside of the Fisherman's Wharf area.

I hope you went to the one on Market St. My friends and family many being from DFW area, have said the one in SF makes our Galleria look like a preschool. By the way, SF has much more shopping in about a 1 sq mile than any part of New York, so might want to check that out. But besides the point, malls aren't anything great either. Malls are a negative in my opinion of "Americana" - culturaly dead.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by DWong

Good post. Hey who wouldn't want rail? but a system life Sf or DC could never work in Dallas. Like you said it does have to take you somewhere you need to be and the mindset of Texans (believe me I'm married to one) is big. Big houses w/ land. Well hate to break it to y'all, but that isn't gonna fly w/ a railing system.

Having it get you to the airport is a good idea. That will be it's most probably use, but outside of that, y'all are too far spread out w/ 3,000 people a sq mile it could never reach it's potential. And that's just Dallas, FW is far less so is the surrounding cities.

I would recommend getting use to the car... maybe going w/ a hybrid....

Heavy rail would be effective in a heavily populated area such as the US75 corridor, also known as North Central. The corridor has several concentrations of office buildings all along its length, as well as some TODs (transit oriented developments) such as West Village, Mock Station, Galatyn Park, downtown Plano, and several new developments planned or under construction, such as Park Lane Place and the new 500 apartment retail village next to the Spring Valley station. The LPC apartment complex next to the Lovers Lane station has much shopping, thousands of apartments, and has a residential density of about 10,000 people per square mile. The US75 corridor is a high density corridor, and services a need for access to destinations all along its route.

Actually, the North Red line is already acting as a heavy rail system in the sense of being grade-separated and running multicar trains. During rush hours it has 3 to 5 minute frequency. It even has a couple of miles of subway and several elevated miles. Building the entire DART system as light rail was a good idea on the part of DART because the system is inherently more flexible, and much cheaper.

[DWong]

Originally Posted by aceplace

Heavy rail would be effective in a heavily populated area such as the US75 corridor, also known as North Central. The corridor has several concentrations of office buildings all along its length, as well as some TODs (transit oriented developments) such as West Village, Mock Station, Galatyn Park, downtown Plano, and several new developments planned or under construction, such as Park Lane Place and the new 500 apartment retail village next to the Spring Valley station. Yhe LPC apartment complex next to the Lovers Lane station has much shopping, thousands of apartments, and has a residential density of about 10,000 people per square mile. The US75 corridor is a high density corridor, and services a need for access to destinations all along its route.

Great info, but 10,000 a sq mile isn't saying much for the rest of the city that doesn't surpasses 4,000 people sq.ft.

Actually, the North Red line is already acting as a heavy rail system in the sense of being grade-separated and running multicar trains. During rush hours it has 3 to 5 minute frequency. It even has a couple of miles of subway and several elevated miles.But building the entire DART system as light rail was a good idea on the part of DART because the system is inherently more flexible, and much cheaper.

it's really not about flexibility, but size. Where people live and people work. And last I checked, DFW is growing out in all directions, not up and in.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by DWong

I hope you went to the one on Market St. My friends and family many being from DFW area, have said the one in SF makes our Galleria look like a preschool. By the way, SF has much more shopping in about a 1 sq mile than any part of New York, so might want to check that out. But besides the point, malls aren't anything great either. Malls are a negative in my opinion of "Americana" - culturaly dead.[/b]

Sure, I've been there, and it is smaller than the Dallas Galleria and doesn't have goodies like an ice rink, high end shops, etc. The rework of the old Emporium department store may be a plus for it, however.

Yes, SF has a pretty well populated downtown shopping district, but on the minus side, that's pretty much your only option for heavy duty retail in SF, with the exception of the place you mentioned, Stonestown. SF has a few malls in the suburbs, but nothing like Dallas.

It turns out that after the downtown shops close at 8PM, downtown SF becomes a ghost town, basically nothing but panhandlers and vagrants on the streets. And the shopping district downtown is a small part of downtown SF. The financial district is always abandoned after 6PM.

You're entitled to your opinion about malls, but I see nothing wrong with them. I especially see no reason not to go there to see a movie, eat in a restaurant, buy a shirt, or just people-watch. For those who don't like being inside, they can go to places like Southlake, the West Village, Preston Center, Firewheel in Garland, or the new shopping/apartment area being built called Park Lane Place.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by DWong

it's really not about flexibility, but size. Where people live and people work. And last I checked, DFW is growing out in all directions, not up and in.

Downtown and Uptown and the area along the North Central corridor is definitely growing up and in, drastically increasing its density. Two story garden apartments are being razed and replaced by 4 or 5 floor apartment blocks that cover the entire block, extending out to the sidewalk, Uptown pretty much looks like that now, and parts of Oak Lawn, Knox-Henderson and Richardson are definitely following that pattern. The areas north of Woodall Rogers, such as Harwood Dallas, Victory and LoMac are being quickly filled with high rise residential (and office) buildings, and massive high density residential and retail developments are being built around transit stations, or in anticipation of new stations coming on line.

[DWong]

Originally Posted by aceplace

Sure, I've been there, and it is smaller than the Dallas Galleria and doesn't have goodies like an ice rink, high end shops, etc. The rework of the old Emporium department store may be a plus for it, however.

Size isn't all it's cracked up to be High end shops? Just go around the corner - they're all there. In buildings- more so like NY. Anyways, you coudn't build a bigger mall in that part of town... impossible.

Yes, SF has a pretty well populated downtown shopping district, but on the minus side, that's pretty much your only option for heavy duty retail in SF, with the exception of the place you mentioned, Stonestown. SF has a few malls in the suburbs, but nothing like Dallas.
Probably true, I've never ventured to outside of SF - but in SF shopping is the last thing you want to do when you go the that town.

It turns out that after the downtown shops close at 8PM, downtown SF becomes a ghost town, basically nothing but panhandlers and vagrants on the streets. And the shopping district downtown is a small part of downtown SF. The financial district is always abandoned after 6PM.
panhandlers and vagrants, I would concur! In SF people spend their time elsewhere, however there are bars and pubs and all the fun stuff in very close walking distance. Well, small part... being that the city is nearly as dense as NY... and only 49 sq miles large... small is relative.

You're entitled to your opinion about malls, but I see nothing wrong with them. I especially see no reason not to go there to see a movie, eat in a restaurant, buy a shirt, or just people-watch. For those who don't like being inside, they can go to places like Southlake, the West Village, Preston Center, Firewheel in Garland, or the new shopping/apartment area being built called Park Lane Place.

Outside malls in Dallas? Never been... but w/ the weather is it that great? Outdoor malls are probably only a good idea in a few parts of the country anyways. Well only a few months out of the year would it be a problem. Thanks for the post!

[ctrres]

Bus Rapid Transit is a functional failure in the few places where it's been put together, often at great cost. The suspensions on the buses are rickety almost new off the assembly line, with passengers buffeted and jolted around in their seats on pathways that consist of hastily paved concrete.

The cars can't be connected into tandems; a driver is required for each bus. Safe distances between each must maintained accordingly.

In narrow passageways, including tunnels, the buses are necessarily very slow enough for the drivers to actively navigate against the walls at every moment, taking a toll on the operator's acuity, energy and the schedule's timetable.

For a few dollars more, they could lay a rail bed, string a catenary above and greatly speed up the system, increase capacity and smooth out the ride.

Satellite cities on light rail rarely see increased development around stations--particularly through preëstablished outlying centers--until decades later. The chances of development greatly increase with the ridership of a system.

There is a greater chance of manned missions to Pluto before Dallas gets a BART- or WMATA Metrorail-style heavy rail. The Washington DC Metro was initially built out for around 11 billion dollars. That's not 11 billion in today's dollars--it's 11 billion in 1970s dollars.

It is estimated that extending the Orange line west to Dulles airport, already mostly inside just SR 267 Dulles Toll Road easements, at grade, after a short detour underneath Tyson's Corner, will cost 3 billion dollars.

Planning for BART was underway in the 1940s, when Dallas County (and adjacent counties excluding Tarrant) optimistically counted maybe 500,000 people.

A second railway is needed in downtown Dallas--it should be a tunnel. It should not be located adjacent to the existing transit mall, but should be offset by several blocks, or intersect with the existing line squarely.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by DWong

Outside malls in Dallas? Never been... but w/ the weather is it that great? Outdoor malls are probably only a good idea in a few parts of the country anyways. Well only a few months out of the year would it be a problem. Thanks for the post!

Outdoor malls are popular in Dallas and Houston, and many other magnet cities, regardless of weather.