Houston vs. Dallas (Miles: qualifications, construction, law)

[dallasboi]

Originally Posted by stoneclaw

I'm just awfully frustrated with how Houston continues to build its lightrail. For the new lines, they selected the slowest moving trains, and even for the long term plans, there's no plans for grade separation (subway or elevated), or plans for commuter rail. Houston's efficiency would really benefit from connecting the rail to the suburbs. Although most of Dallas's lightrail row are abandoned train tracks in non-dense clusters, Dallas's rail at least connects suburbs and took the initiative to make a good portion of the rail grade separated.

.......Yep.

[TexasTallest]

Originally Posted by stoneclaw

I'm just awfully frustrated with how Houston continues to build its lightrail. For the new lines, they selected the slowest moving trains, and even for the long term plans, there's no plans for grade separation (subway or elevated), or plans for commuter rail. Houston's efficiency would really benefit from connecting the rail to the suburbs. Although most of Dallas's lightrail row are abandoned train tracks in non-dense clusters, Dallas's rail at least connects suburbs and took the initiative to make a good portion of the rail grade separated.

what do you mean "the slowest moving trains"? those trains can do like 65 mph, which just so happens to be the top speed of DART trains.
and no long term plans for commuter rail? what about the 90A rail study METRO is currently in the middle of? or the ROW they set aside in the 290 project? (or of course the ROW METRO owns along Westpark for future commuter rail)
im just not convinced DART is the best example how Houston should build rail when DART has gotten such mediocre performance out of their rail system.
i hope that eventually Houston has commuter rail/"hybrid" LRT with minimal stops to the suburbs, and a couple inner city heavy or commuter express routes connecting some of the major districts like uptown and downtown. these two coupled with the "slow/stop burdened" LRT system would provide 3 different modes of rail travel to accommodate for the route/destination you are trying to go to. take the commuter rail into the city, or heavy rail across town (till youre in the vicinity of where you are trying to go), then transfer to the LRT system which takes you to your final destination. obviously running light rail (how Houston has done it at least) out to the suburbs would be extremely slow and ill advised, but i think our current/planned system is good for a more long term system. DART is having to back track and build trolley lines now (more similar to our LRT), because their LRT system served more like a commuter rail system and the ridership sucked since there was nowhere to go once you got into the city.

[blkgiraffe]

Damn, over 9000 posts.

How is this topic still going since 2007?? LOL

[stoneclaw]

Originally Posted by TexasTallest

what do you mean "the slowest moving trains"? those trains can do like 65 mph, which just so happens to be the top speed of DART trains.
and no long term plans for commuter rail? what about the 90A rail study METRO is currently in the middle of? or the ROW they set aside in the 290 project? (or of course the ROW METRO owns along Westpark for future commuter rail)
im just not convinced DART is the best example how Houston should build rail when DART has gotten such mediocre performance out of their rail system.
i hope that eventually Houston has commuter rail/"hybrid" LRT with minimal stops to the suburbs, and a couple inner city heavy or commuter express routes connecting some of the major districts like uptown and downtown. these two coupled with the "slow/stop burdened" LRT system would provide 3 different modes of rail travel to accommodate for the route/destination you are trying to go to. take the commuter rail into the city, or heavy rail across town (till youre in the vicinity of where you are trying to go), then transfer to the LRT system which takes you to your final destination. obviously running light rail (how Houston has done it at least) out to the suburbs would be extremely slow and ill advised, but i think our current/planned system is good for a more long term system. DART is having to back track and build trolley lines now (more similar to our LRT), because their LRT system served more like a commuter rail system and the ridership sucked since there was nowhere to go once you got into the city.

I understand your point, but I remember reading some years back when they were in the process of selecting trains vendors to go in the southeast line, they selected Siemens and the top speed of those trains was supposed to be around 25-35 mph. Maybe I'm wrong and they changed that in the final selection process.

[TexasTallest]

Originally Posted by stoneclaw

I understand your point, but I remember reading some years back when they were in the process of selecting trains vendors to go in the southeast line, they selected Siemens and the top speed of those trains was supposed to be around 25-35 mph. Maybe I'm wrong and they changed that in the final selection process.

Nahh, METRO trains are Siemens S70s, which have a top speed of around 65. The trains hit 40 or so around hermann park.

Oh, just noticed you said for the southeast line. Idk, I assume they got more of the same vehicles

[dallasboi]

Originally Posted by TexasTallest

what do you mean "the slowest moving trains"? those trains can do like 65 mph, which just so happens to be the top speed of DART trains.
and no long term plans for commuter rail? what about the 90A rail study METRO is currently in the middle of? or the ROW they set aside in the 290 project? (or of course the ROW METRO owns along Westpark for future commuter rail)
im just not convinced DART is the best example how Houston should build rail when DART has gotten such mediocre performance out of their rail system.
i hope that eventually Houston has commuter rail/"hybrid" LRT with minimal stops to the suburbs, and a couple inner city heavy or commuter express routes connecting some of the major districts like uptown and downtown. these two coupled with the "slow/stop burdened" LRT system would provide 3 different modes of rail travel to accommodate for the route/destination you are trying to go to. take the commuter rail into the city, or heavy rail across town (till youre in the vicinity of where you are trying to go), then transfer to the LRT system which takes you to your final destination. obviously running light rail (how Houston has done it at least) out to the suburbs would be extremely slow and ill advised, but i think our current/planned system is good for a more long term system. DART is having to back track and build trolley lines now (more similar to our LRT), because their LRT system served more like a commuter rail system and the ridership sucked since there was nowhere to go once you got into the city.

You already admitted DART light rail is Better than Metro rail....dont change it now...just eat it

[TexasTallest]

Originally Posted by dallasboi

You already admitted DART light rail is Better than Metro rail....dont change it now...just eat it

When did I admit it was " better"? It does do a better job at what it's supposed to do than Houston's. Provide mass transit to a large number of people spread across a large area.. But Houston's does a better job at moving people with what it has to work with.

[R1070]

Originally Posted by stoneclaw

I'm just awfully frustrated with how Houston continues to build its lightrail. For the new lines, they selected the slowest moving trains, and even for the long term plans, there's no plans for grade separation (subway or elevated), or plans for commuter rail. Houston's efficiency would really benefit from connecting the rail to the suburbs. Although most of Dallas's lightrail row are abandoned train tracks in non-dense clusters, Dallas's rail at least connects suburbs and took the initiative to make a good portion of the rail grade separated.

I'm truly not being facetious here. I don't understand the difference between the rail system in Houston and a streetcar line. Is the Metro a streetcar? It looks like an identical setup to the streetcar being added here in Dallas from downtown to North Oak Cliff.

[majicdonjuan]

Originally Posted by blkgiraffe

Damn, over 9000 posts.

How is this topic still going since 2007?? LOL

Pure awesomeness.

[majicdonjuan]

My frustration with the rail line has always been the obvious lack of a link to IAH as well as the lack of a link to the uptown and westside business centers.

Until these two links are built, the potential with this system won't really even come close to being realized. IAH in particular - a link to the existing lines would be a game-changer for downtown. It would invigorate business, tourism, and residential interests in one fell swoop. For current (and perhaps more importantly, prospective) downtown-based businessmen this would be a boon. Tourists and inner core residents would have a way to and from IAH that doesn't involve a rental car or taxi.

Also, this would provide a shot to growth and investment in and around downtown. At this point, it really does become possible to live a more "urban" (car-free) sort of lifestyle, so to speak. Additional housing would be built and residents would continue to move in.

Personally, I think creating a "destination" so to speak would also get the Galleria and Uptown business interests to see the rail line a bit differently. The goal to one day connect that area with IAH should be the utmost priority.

I don't see why this has not been made more of a priority. You also have the added effect of taking traffic off of 45, 59/69 and the Hardy and during rush hour that effect will be seen. People leaving for those evening overseas flights would have an option not to fight with the commuters heading north.

It's such a no-brainer.