Does DART plan to... (Houston, Dallas: neighborhoods, costs, trains)

[CMDallas]

Does DART plan to have a HEAVY RAIL system anytime soon?
I mean, we have a metro...is you want to call it that. It's kind of more of a trolly IMO.
It doesn't even go underground. I know they're planing on making in go underground in the downtown areas soon, but do any of you know if they also plan on upgrading the LIGHT RAIL system to a heavy rail system?
I know the need for it isn't there NOW, but urbanization could bring us there.

I know there is ONE underground station, which actually isn't too shabby in North Dallas.
Comments? Answers?

by the way, only 11 cities have a heavy rail system.
Those are:
New York (of course)
Boston (Partially heavy rail)
Washington DC
Chicago
Baltimore (only one vertical line)
San Francisco (which actually has both a light rail and an actual subway)
Los Angeles (Which is half heavy rail, half light rail)
Philadelphia
Miami (one lines)
Atlanta
Cleveland (which is only one line of actual subway)

I know it might be expensive to upgrade, but you'd think it'd be possible to do something like Los Angeles, Baltimore, or Boston and upgrade the lines that are more well traveled (leaving the less traveled ones as light rail)
We're up to over 57,000 daily ridership (in 2010), and with the expansion, it'll only go up.
That actually beats out Baltimore, Cleveland, Philadelphia's PATCO (but we're still FARRRR off from beating SEPTA) and almost Miami.

You're argument might be that the nee isn't there. But I think people would use the trasnportation system if it became more available. Atlanta's MARTA... JUST THE TRAINS (not integrated with any light rail system) earn a daily ridership of over 240,000.
Los Angeles' heavy rails (not counting the light rails) earns a ridership of over 130,000. Boston's three heavy rail lines earn a ridership of almost half a million (once again, not counting the light rails they use) Baltimore's and Miami's single subway line essentially match entire system, and they still use light rail (Miami doesn't actually).

Ok, so I'm not going to compare Dallas to Boston. Boston is much denser as a whole. But I CAN compare Dallas to Atlanta, Miami, and Los Angeles. Atlanta has 4 lines (47 miles of track)...and beats us out 4 times.
You see the picture?
I don't think it's the people that are the problem in Dallas. I think it's the lack of accessibility. If we were to develop a real subway, I think our ridership would go up significantly.

Someone please tell me we have plans to develop a heavy rail. It'd be good for the city, and make the whole place more tourist friendly.

[DarkWolf]

Dallas can't support Heavy Rail , and it barely Supports Light Rail. Make your core super Dense and surrounding areas dense, then we can talk about Heavy Rail. Boston has 3 Heavy Rail lines and 1 Light Railway , Baltimore has 1 Metro Heavy Rail line , Los Angeles has 2 Heavy Rail lines , and 5 Light Railways. Atlanta's Core is Dense thus it could have Heavy rail... Heavy Rail does not cause a boom in Urbanization , Heavy Rail is reversed for Dense Urban corridors....hench the Subway to the Sea in LA under Wilshire boulevard or 2nd Avenue subway. The Urban need has to be there for the subway to get built or near there as in the case of the DC Metro silver line. Dallas is still on LRT mode and seems to be going backwards instead of forward. This is not the case in Houston. There starter line could support a heavy railway since it runs along a dense corridor / semi dense. Heavy Rail is also 4x more expensive then LRT , so if the ridership isn't there or won't be for a decade or too its a waste to build it.

Do these things then we could talk about Heavy Rail in Dallas...

1. Boost Ridership up to the level of what it should be for a system of your size which is around 260,000

2. Make your Core Super Dense , and surround areas Dense like Calgary did...

3. build up around your outer stations , there should be more housing and less parking around your stations in the suburban DART part.

4. There should be no parking into Downtown Dallas or limited Parking , this will make your city more Urban and boost Transit ridership.

[cmacemm]

too expensive, dart can't even afford to build light rail lines it needs. and by the way, part of it does run underground

[eepstein]

No, DART will remain a light rail operation. They have been expanding it for many years and have rather aggressive plans for the future. Take a look at the website and see where they are going now. From what my contacts in the transportation industry have told me, DART (the light rail part) is still somewhat underutilized for a metro the size of DFW.

Originally Posted by CMDallas

Does DART plan to have a HEAVY RAIL system anytime soon?
I mean, we have a metro...is you want to call it that. It's kind of more of a trolly IMO.
It doesn't even go underground. I know they're planing on making in go underground in the downtown areas soon, but do any of you know if they also plan on upgrading the LIGHT RAIL system to a heavy rail system?
I know the need for it isn't there NOW, but urbanization could bring us there.

I know there is ONE underground station, which actually isn't too shabby in North Dallas.
Comments? Answers?

by the way, only 11 cities have a heavy rail system.
Those are:
New York (of course)
Boston (Partially heavy rail)
Washington DC
Chicago
Baltimore (only one vertical line)
San Francisco (which actually has both a light rail and an actual subway)
Los Angeles (Which is half heavy rail, half light rail)
Philadelphia
Miami (one lines)
Atlanta
Cleveland (which is only one line of actual subway)

I know it might be expensive to upgrade, but you'd think it'd be possible to do something like Los Angeles, Baltimore, or Boston and upgrade the lines that are more well traveled (leaving the less traveled ones as light rail)
We're up to over 57,000 daily ridership (in 2010), and with the expansion, it'll only go up.
That actually beats out Baltimore, Cleveland, Philadelphia's PATCO (but we're still FARRRR off from beating SEPTA) and almost Miami.

You're argument might be that the nee isn't there. But I think people would use the trasnportation system if it became more available. Atlanta's MARTA... JUST THE TRAINS (not integrated with any light rail system) earn a daily ridership of over 240,000.
Los Angeles' heavy rails (not counting the light rails) earns a ridership of over 130,000. Boston's three heavy rail lines earn a ridership of almost half a million (once again, not counting the light rails they use) Baltimore's and Miami's single subway line essentially match entire system, and they still use light rail (Miami doesn't actually).

Ok, so I'm not going to compare Dallas to Boston. Boston is much denser as a whole. But I CAN compare Dallas to Atlanta, Miami, and Los Angeles. Atlanta has 4 lines (47 miles of track)...and beats us out 4 times.
You see the picture?
I don't think it's the people that are the problem in Dallas. I think it's the lack of accessibility. If we were to develop a real subway, I think our ridership would go up significantly.

Someone please tell me we have plans to develop a heavy rail. It'd be good for the city, and make the whole place more tourist friendly.

[rantanamo]

part of it does go underground. Part of the system is heavy. Do you really understand the difference and why one is important and one isn't and how they operate? Do you know that what Dallas runs is not light rail but what is called SLRV? Probably not based on the questions.

[DarkWolf]

Originally Posted by rantanamo

part of it does go underground. Part of the system is heavy. Do you really understand the difference and why one is important and one isn't and how they operate? Do you know that what Dallas runs is not light rail but what is called SLRV? Probably not based on the questions.

Dallas does not have any Heavy rail lines , just because it runs underground doesn't mean its Heavy Rail. Heavy Rail is built differently then Light Rail. DART is like our RiverLine , but underused unlikely our RiverLine.

[cmacemm]

Originally Posted by rantanamo

part of it does go underground. Part of the system is heavy. Do you really understand the difference and why one is important and one isn't and how they operate? Do you know that what Dallas runs is not light rail but what is called SLRV? Probably not based on the questions.

What are you even talking about?

[lh_newbie]

SLRV refers to the type of trains on the light rail tracks.

To my knowledge, DART does not have any plans to do heavy rail. The costs are substantially higher - and we don't have the ridership to require heavy rail. I personally don't see the need for heavy rail for the next 20 years in our region. Heavy rail would simply drive up costs while doing nothing about increasing ridership. Why would someone even care about heavy rail if the ridership isn't there to support it anyhow?

Brian

[dfwcre8tive]

DART's rail system is the best solution for the area. There's not enough density to require a fully grade-separated heavy rail system, but the light rail still runs in its own double-tracked corridor (not in the street). There's plenty of capacity on the lines to add more frequent service or longer trains if demand warrants in the future. The planned downtown rail tunnel will also help speed service. What Dallas needs next (and is under planning) is a modern streetcar system connecting neighborhoods and pockets of activity to these regional lines. DART's current lines primarily serves commuters, bringing them from the suburbs to downtown.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

Do these things then we could talk about Heavy Rail in Dallas...

1. Boost Ridership up to the level of what it should be for a system of your size which is around 260,000

2. Make your Core Super Dense , and surround areas Dense like Calgary did...

3. build up around your outer stations , there should be more housing and less parking around your stations in the suburban DART part.

4. There should be no parking into Downtown Dallas or limited Parking , this will make your city more Urban and boost Transit ridership.

Calgary got dense because its a city ordinance that you cant build tall buildings outside the core. Thats not the Texas way. Texas is a pro-business, do what you want as long as its good for business kind of place.