Living in Dallas without a car (Houston, Fort Worth: 2011, construction, price)

[ctrres]

Originally Posted by aceplace

The traffic you mention constitutes only a fraction of the daily trips people make, trips that are suburban and auto-dependent. The vast majority of metro New York's population live in low-density suburbs where a car is the usual choice of transportation.

10.5 million vehicles registered in New York State (maybe 3/4 of that is 2-axle passenger car). Halve that for NJ, CT respectively.

Maybe 10% of the cars in NY are registered out of NY state. Over 8.2 million people reside in the city proper by itself (5 boroughs only).

Once you're east of Woodmere or north of New Rochelle or west of the Palisades, you're just as in the suburbs as if in Richardson or Irving. That's the proportional scale of what you're addressing.

[aceplace]

Originally Posted by ctrres

10.5 million vehicles registered in New York State (maybe 3/4 of that is 2-axle passenger car). Halve that for NJ, CT respectively.

Maybe 10% of the cars in NY are registered out of NY state. Over 8.2 million people reside in the city proper by itself (5 boroughs only).

Once you're east of Woodmere or north of New Rochelle or west of the Palisades, you're just as in the suburbs as if in Richardson or Irving. That's the proportional scale of what you're addressing.

Thanks for your input, Ctrres. It reinforces my model of a generic metro area, containing a dense urban core surrounded by less densely populated suburban areas. Both metro New York and metro DFW fit this model, although the size of the urban core varies, and the relative share of the metro that the core occupies also varies.

City governments or borough governments have no bearing on this basic urban-suburban metro pattern. Dallas city government extends way past the urban core and far into the suburban belt, but Boston city, for example, takes up only a part of metro Boston's urban core. Thus, looking at what's inside municipal boundaries is meaningless and arbitrary, and tells us nothing. The 5 boroughs of New York city are somewhere between these two extremes.

There is another difference. Cities such as Boston and New York were designed to fit an impoverished population of immigrants that could not afford personal transportation. New cities like Dallas grew up in a far richer age, where an individual citizen could demand much more from his city.

Thus, people living in the central core of the older cities are deprived of a basic amenity that people in their suburbs (and people everywhere in new cities) enjoy... being able to get into a personal vehicle and go somewhere at will. The national consensus is that being able to drive somewhere is normal and being dependent on public transportation is abnormal and undesirable, and people in the older urban cores accept it because they have no choice.

Be that as it may, depending on public transit is desirable for some people, and minimizing auto trips is desirable for many more, especially in an era of expensive fuel. The question for this thread is... how well does Dallas's urban core (and its suburban nodes with high density) support that want... either no car at all, or minimal use of a car.

It is acknowledged that if someone needs to travel to everywhere and anywhere in either metro New York or metro Dallas, public transit is not the answer. And if you spend all your time in transit-served portions of either Dallas or New York, you'll survive just fine, albeit with some inconvenience. For example, assume you are a process server, and you have to serve a summons to the notorious racketeer, Tony Soprano. You can't just take trains and buses to get to his house in New Jersey. There probably are no bus lines inside Tony's exclusive neighborhood. Even if there were, you'd lose too much time just getting there, and time is money. Furthermore, you don't want to wait for a bus or cab after you serve Tony, you really want to get out of there as fast as you can, i.e. you need a getaway car.

[ctrres]

Originally Posted by aceplace

Cities such as Boston and New York were designed to fit an impoverished population of immigrants that could not afford personal transportation.

I would argue they were not impoverished, so much as an alternative (but highly independent) transportation model for serving such a vast number of people in such a short period of time, and hence city layout, wasn't yet invented.

To accomplish the feat of getting them around during their workday, just internally within the boundaries of the present-day boroughs (forget intraregional commuter or interstate), required the charter of two private subway corporations to expend enormous amounts of manhours digging over 2000 miles of "subway", or occasionally el., and laying track 4 lines deep, local and express, sometimes in underground levels 2 over 2. Deeply into the southern reaches of Brooklyn and Queens from Manhattan. Over 700 stops, 10 subway cars in length (unarticulated heavy 3rd rail). Amazingly, most of these constructs are literally 100 years old.

Originally Posted by aceplace

The question for this thread is... how well does Dallas's urban core (and its suburban nodes with high density) support that want... either no car at all, or minimal use of a car.

My answer is, it may be getting there, but presently not as well. Dallasites are particularly underserved by bus. But then there's the complicating factor that regional "Dallas" is really D/FW.

Originally Posted by aceplace

It is acknowledged that if someone needs to travel to everywhere and anywhere in either metro New York or metro Dallas, public transit is not the answer.

Boston's public system (NYC's is superior) is so comprehensive as to allow one to traverse by foot at most two miles to almost any jobsite inside of loop 495 (its analogue is the Bush.) The same simply cannot be said of Dallas.

If you travelled the northeast corridor--simply Amtrak to Boston and Metro North (north/northeast-bound commuter rail) through Connecticut--via train, you would better comprehend the shear magnitude of the public transportation infrastructure and how easily it accommodates the citizenry at large. That's just one quadrant of the layout.

The 3 regional commuter rail systems (NJ Transit, Metro North and LIRR) don't run singularly. Each originate from within NYC on multiple track beds and then branch off into numerous segments which serve deeply and widely into three states. Each of these trains consist of maybe 10 cars, and depart and arrive many times per day. The outlying cities they serve themselves are older, with smaller housing and land use footprints than found to the southwestern US. The stops throughout a line aren't located in semi barren industrial strips, but rather in the hearts of these older villages. In a few hours one can ride from Atlantic City into Penn in the city. Walk a few blocks to Grand Central, and then be in New Haven in the middle of Connecticut in an hour and a half. And these trains are jammed, with every seat taken. Many times a day. People in the region just don't use cars nearly as often as you think they do--they really don't have to. Unless your job requires a high degree of independent, intralocal and crosstown range (which falls under the rubric of a professional delivery model), people here have what they need, even for their work, within easy walking distance, and that includes an immense public transportation system serving a very dense urban and quasi-suburban model. Outside of Boston, Philly and NYC, that doesn't exist elsewhere in the country.

And hence people just don't drive as much, as a whole, as they would elsewhere, even in the suburbs (pretty much all of these suburbs are far more densely packed than an Arlington, or Irving, TX).

Originally Posted by aceplace

And if you spend all your time in transit-served portions of either Dallas or New York, you'll survive just fine, albeit with some inconvenience.

Far less inconveniently in Boston or NYC.

And basically the numbers again illustrate this, between the number of cars in the 3 states and their populations. Until one sees people walking on sidewalks in Richardson or Garland or Duncanville in the same numbers as in Long Beach or Red Bank at any given hour of the day, I would conclude the latter drive less as a whole.

[aceplace]

No, Ctrres, my experiences in the NYC, Philly, Boston and DC suburbs just don't match your description. And yes, I've taken suburban trains in NYC (Metro North), in Boston (T to Lowell/495), and I've driven between DC and Baltimore, spending a lot of time in Maryland suburbs in Howard county. I've been extensively on the DC heavy rail system, up to the Beltway where it peters out. I've been in the western Philly suburbs, although I didn't ride the SEPTA trains.

In my opinion, and due to what I observed, people drive where they want to go. They really have no choice, since train lines are essentially a way to get into the urban core for work, not to circulate through a suburb. Howard county in Maryland is no different from eastern Tarrant county, the Connecticut suburbs are less dense than the Dallas suburbs, the western Philly suburbs are countless houses along country roads, with a train station in a small downtown, and endless strip malls and parking lots beyond. The Boston suburbs are equally country-roadish, with no local transit service that I could see, but plenty of auto traffic on the freeways.

In the case of NYC itself, and its suburbs, it is a maze of freeways, courtesy of Mr Robert Moses, who transformed the face of the Big Apple in the 1930s.

Funny you mentioned route 495. I had an occasion to ride the suburban T service to Lowell, from the Boston North station. The line is a dozen or so stops, most of them sheds next to parking lots, a few of them in what looked like a small downtown. Lowell station was more substantial, at the end of the line, but when I got there, there was no other transit other than cabs. After a 30 minute wait, I might add. The passengers went to their cars, parked here and there, and it soon became obvious that Lowell was inaccessible without a car.

How do I compare the Boston T urban lines, or the Washington DC metro to DART? More stations in the inner city perhaps, but pretty much the things that are available in Boston via the T are available in Dallas on DART. The DART system currently has 44 stations, and the set of things within walking distance of those 44 stations is a complete urban experience. And DART will be better next year when the Green line to Fair Park opens up, or the year after that when the Green line to Carrollton opens, as will the train to Denton County, and a year after that we'll have the Orange line to Las Colinas, and a year after Las Colinas, we'll have a second line in downtown Dallas, completing a transit loop.

I don't think DART has any reason to feel inferior to any other transit system in a metro of comparable size, at least in the United States. And it is obvious to me that DART in Dallas affords a practical and complete public service in the city center, either carless, or with minimal driving. And comparing the fit and finish, value and price of the Uptown Dallas neighborhoods to comparable northeastern urban neighborhoods gives the advantage to Dallas.

[ctrres]

Originally Posted by aceplace

No, Ctrres, my experience in the NYC, Philly, Boston and DC suburbs just don't match your description. And yes, I've taken suburban trains in NYC (Metro North), in Boston (T to Lowell/495), and I've driven between DC and Baltimore, spending a lot of time in Maryland suburbs in Howard county. I've been extensively on the DC heavy rail system, up to the Beltway where it peters out. I've been in the western Philly suburbs, although I didn't ride the SEPTA trains.

In my opinion, and due to what I observed, people drive where they want to go. They really have no choice, since train lines are essentially a way to get into the urban core for work, not to circulate through a suburb. Howard county in Maryland is no different from eastern Tarrant county, the Connecticut suburbs are less dense than the Dallas suburbs, the western Philly suburbs are countless houses along country roads, with a train station in a small downtown, and endless strip malls and parking lots beyond. The Boston suburbs are equally country-roadish, with no local transit service that I could see, but plenty of auto traffic on the freeways.

In the case of NYC itself, and its suburbs, it is a maze of freeways, courtesy of Mr Robert Moses, who transformed the face of the Big Apple in the 1930s.

Funny you mentioned route 495. I had an occasion to ride the suburban T service to Lowell, from the Boston North station. The line is a dozen or so stops, most of them sheds next to parking lots, a few of them in what looked like a small downtown. Lowell station was more substantial, at the end of the line, but when I got there, there was no other transit other than cabs. After a 30 minute wait, I might add. The passengers went to their cars, parked here and there, and it soon became obvious that Lowell was inaccessible without a car.

How do I compare the Boston T urban lines, or the Washington DC metro to DART? More stations in the inner city perhaps, but pretty much the things that are available in Boston via the T are available in Dallas on DART. The DART system currently has 44 stations, and the set of things within walking distance of those 44 stations is a complete urban experience. And DART will be better next year when the Green line to Fair Park opens up, or the year after that when the Green line to Carrollton opens, as will the train to Denton County, and a year after that we'll have the Orange line to Las Colinas, and a year after Las Colinas, we'll have a second line in downtown Dallas, completing a transit loop.

I don't think DART has any reason to feel inferior to any other transit system in a metro of comparable size, at least in the United States.

Robert Moses built parkways and only a handfull of freeways the biggest of which would be considered small by Dallas standards. The 4-6 lanes BQE, West Side/Hudson, Cross-Bronx, Long Island Expressway, the Bruckner, FDR, and Major Deegan are pretty much it for a city of over 8 mil.

His parkways are the equivalent of a Harry Hines or Turtle Creek Blvd. Consider the number of miles and traffic volumes of these in relationship to the populations of each metro area.

DART rail is an heroic fast-track infill that will be increasingly necessary if/as gas prices increase. The urban model is what it is after 100 years of reliance primarily on the automobile.

I've walked everywhere I need to go in Lowell. The rail terminates maybe a half mile from the center of town at most. As for these "parking lots," they are parking for the transit station. Whether Salem or Concord or Mansfield, the concentrated cities closely surround them.

But that also brings up another situation: commuter rail.

Regarding DC: There are whole sections of greater city that almost entirely lack public transportation: the 267 corridor, Loudoun Co. (analogue Collin) and a substantial portion of Arlington (Shirlington).

I would say the only model outside of the northeast that fullfills a practical public transit alternative is the Bay Area.

[aceplace]

I think you're misrepresenting the impact of Moses and the roads he built. You should read "The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York", to get an idea of the vast number of roadways the man built, propelling the New York metro squarely into the auto age. And when I drove in from Connecticut, through the unlovely Bronx, across the Triborough Bridge, into Harlem... the freeways didn't look like Turtle Creek boulevard... maybe more like 183 through Irving.

Sorry for your opinion, but Lowell is not particularly walkable, even if the station is close to its downtown. I sure couldn't walk to my hotel on the side of the freeway, or to the church for my nephew's wedding, or the country club where they had the reception. Give it up... the Boston suburbs are not a pedestrian paradise.

Dallas is also moving on commuter rail. We already have the TRE between DT Dallas and DT Fort Worth. We'll have the line to Denton, of course, and then we'll have the line from DFW airport to southwest Fort Worth, we'll sooner or later have a line from Frisco to Irving, then to DT Dallas, we'll have one from the Collin County suburbs to the DART Parker Road station, and maybe a few more. We'll have a line from Carrollton to DFW airport, in addition to the Orange line LRRT to DFW. If the Cotton Belt line between Carrollton, Addison and Plano turns out to be commuter rail, then we have that commuter rail.

[ctrres]

Originally Posted by aceplace

I think you're misrepresenting the impact of Moses and the roads he built. You should read "The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York", to get an idea of the vast number of roadways the man built, propelling the New York metro squarely into the auto age. And when I drove in from Connecticut, through the unlovely Bronx, across the Triborough Bridge, into Harlem... the freeways didn't look like Turtle Creek boulevard... maybe more like 183 through Irving.

Sorry for your opinion, but Lowell is not particularly walkable, even if the station is close to its downtown. I sure couldn't walk to my hotel on the side of the freeway, or to the church for my nephew's wedding, or the country club where they had the reception. Give it up... the Boston suburbs are not a pedestrian paradise.

Dallas is also moving on commuter rail. We already have the TRE between DT Dallas and DT Fort Worth. We'll have the line to Denton, of course, and then we'll have the line from DFW airport to southwest Fort Worth, we'll sooner or later have a line from Frisco to Irving, then to DT Dallas, we'll have one from the Collin County suburbs to the DART Parker Road station, and maybe a few more. We'll have a line from Carrollton to DFW airport, in addition to the Orange line LRRT to DFW. If the Cotton Belt line between Carrollton, Addison and Plano turns out to be commuter rail, then we have that commuter rail.

I'm looking at it on my bookshelf.

Dallas is liveable without a car. In fact I managed occasionally to live in it without one before the rail lines were built.

Are you speaking of the Lowell Connector? That might as well be the Tom Landry. All cities have those limited-access freeways with sparse development. That microcosm wasn't the original point of the thread.

Originally Posted by aceplace

...the freeways didn't look like Turtle Creek boulevard

All right: the parkways are North Central Expressway before the widening. But the NYC freeways are best are something the size of RL Thornton.

Originally Posted by aceplace

Dallas is also moving on commuter rail. We already have the TRE between DT Dallas and DT Fort Worth. We'll have the line to Denton, of course, and then we'll have the line from DFW airport to southwest Fort Worth, we'll sooner or later have a line from Frisco to Irving, then to DT Dallas, we'll have one from the Collin County suburbs to the DART Parker Road station, and maybe a few more. We'll have a line from Carrollton to DFW airport, in addition to the Orange line LRRT to DFW. If the Cotton Belt line between Carrollton, Addison and Plano turns out to be commuter rail, then we have that commuter rail.

You know what a map of the Purple Line already looks like.

[aceplace]

I think it is clear now that metro Dallas is not dissimilar in kind from northeastern metros such as DC, Philadelphia or Boston... it is different only in degree. Dallas may have less real estate that is livable without a car, mostly for historic reasons, but within those areas, which are still substantial, using transit to live, work and play is certainly practical.

[zatires]

Originally Posted by aceplace

Dallas is also moving on commuter rail. We already have the TRE between DT Dallas and DT Fort Worth. We'll have the line to Denton, of course, and then we'll have the line from DFW airport to southwest Fort Worth, we'll sooner or later have a line from Frisco to Irving, then to DT Dallas, we'll have one from the Collin County suburbs to the DART Parker Road station, and maybe a few more. We'll have a line from Carrollton to DFW airport, in addition to the Orange line LRRT to DFW. If the Cotton Belt line between Carrollton, Addison and Plano turns out to be commuter rail, then we have that commuter rail.

Do you have any idea when the above so called projects will happen?
The DFW rail plan extends all the way to 2030. Still 22 years behind. In 22 years many cities that are already superior to DFW crappy public transport will be years ahead. DFW is trying to play catchup to the public transport. Way too late. Better than nothing, I will give it to that.

At this current situation public transport in Dallas blows, years behind cities like DC,NY,Chicago,Boston etc. And the worst of all is that Dallas is a fairly new city, they should have planned a better transport much much much earlier, instead of playing catch up. Who knows what will happen in 22 years, with their 2030 plan. What if they can not get the funding? What will they do if the economies crumble? People will end up turning the suburbia to the slums.

Instead of building new roads, they should be building new tracks, subway especially. They need a good subway line in Dallas, so it will cut some of the traffic of existing light rail. A subway system that covers Downtown to Addison would be excellent.

What will happen to the suburbia? How will McKinney, Allen commute? Those cities have no public transport systems, what about Arlington and friends? As far as public transport goes DFW blows.

Even with their 2030 plan, the city and metro still will be depending on excessive car use. And if the oil prices become much more expensive, and maybe oil shortages do happen, people will still not be able to go anywhere easily in Dallas. On the other hand other cities that has a good execution of public transport will not have many problems.

Their 2030 plan is so lame that they only add 2 new rail tracks. That is all. Nothing more, and one extension of an existing line.

The Carrolton - Downtown line is already being built, on top they will add the Dallas - Airport line, and Downtown-South Dallas extensions. And one express rail from East Plano to Addison and beyond.

That is all they can do in 22 years. Well if that is all they can accomplish, they better pray there will always be cheap and plenty of oil in DFW. Otherwise they are waiting for the shock of their lives in 22 years.

While Dallas as a metropolitan area is growing to suburbia, outskirts of the city, and people are increasingly going farther and farther away from their place of employment, not much is done about public transport system. It is the fault of all the suburbia cities that do not get involved in any public transport system. West of the metro has absolutely nothing in regards to public transport. North has absolutely nothing. For me to drive to downtown takes 25 miles. For me to go to the closes rail station takes 12 miles. Closest bus stop is 3 miles away, and the bus does not even go to Dallas. Yeah, great public transport system

In 22 years their 2030 plan will blow like the current one as well.

[grindin]

I find it hilarious that someone who has never lived in the NYC area has the audacity to try and even THINK that Dallas comes close to the 5 boroughs in terms of public transportation and liveability w/o a car. That is just false, delusional and myopic.