Good point. I knew I was missing something. Still frustrating.
DART new D2 subway line through downtown
3,379 Views |
48 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by double aught
Kellso said:Your just echoing the.... "its too expensive because it doesn't benefit me" mantra that I've heard for years.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:I've always thought that this line of thinking was a short sighted way of looking at public transportation.Goose said:I'm not even sure it was needed pre-covid and/or if covid had never happened. Tenants traditionally occupying CBD buildings have been migrating north for decades, and advancements in technology to enable people in the workforce to come together virtually instead of in person would have provided better value than the cost for office space in due time anyways. Mass transit in lower density populations is a pipe dream to begin with. But if the increase in work-from-home percentage is combined with the rising popularity of Uber type services, the oncoming promise of ride-share/car-share platforms like Turo or Zipcar, and the incorporation of autonomous vehicles into either or both, then the need to spend a couple billion dollars to get some personal vehicles off the surface streets and alleviate some parking requirements in a CBD on the decline is not a good value at all.MGS said:
Before they decide to spend billions of dollars on this, why don't they wait a year and see if it's still needed in the post-covid era?
Anything that gives residents a choice (rather than a car) and gets cars off the streets is a net positive in the long run.
One of the reasons a lot of people hate Houston is that their public transportation options are garbage....which means you have to drive a car everywhere you go. This factors into all the traffic congestion and horrible pollution that Houston is known for.
If I am a business owner, and most of my employees are low income.....I don't want to make it harder for them to get to work. Having to drive to work each day is ultimately a tax.
Its a gas tax, a wear and tear on your car tax, and a life-style tax.
If Dallas is going to want to compete for Global business you have a way that people can get from the Airports to your downtown without having to get in a car.
You can now do that from DFW, but its a bit harder from Love Field.
Houston has higher mass transit ridership than Dallas because it has a very effective bus network and Park & Rides. Not that it's a big difference. Both cities are practically indistinguishable from a transit standpoint. Any criticism of Houston transit is equally valid or Dallas.
You're just echoing the conventional wisdom that we should have mass transit because we need it to ~compete~ without anything to back up that subjective claim. Apparently it's on the grading rubric to be a "serious" city. Dallas had no issue competing for corporate HQs and businesses before the Orange Line was finished. Practically nobody rides to the airport now anyway.
Freeways = Good.
Public Transit = Bad
and Houston does not equal Dallas because you can't commute on a train from Sugarland or Spring to the Texas Medical Center or downtown Houston like you can in Dallas.
If you work in Central Houston and want to live in the burbs then you have to drive a car.....and this is why Houston sucks.
I have a client that works at the Dallas VA Hospital in Oak Cliff, and he lives in Plano. His commute is about 10 minutes to the Parker Road Station, and then he takes the train all the way to the front door of his employment.
That is one less car on the road Monday through Friday (multiplied by thousands)
The DART rail is not on the level of what you would see in NYC, DC, Boston..etc
But those transportation agencies have been around a lot longer. They've had a much longer time to fix issues that invariably come up with public transportation.
The DART rail is only 25 years old. Its a baby. This is why its so short sighted to think that a public transport agency is going to turn around everything over night. It doesn't happen that way at all. You have to project 25-40 years forward. Its not supposed to be perfect right away.
I promise you the cities that have great public transportation also took many years to eventually fix their issues.
A great city should not prioritize cars over being able to not drive.
1.) My mantra is that DART is not cost effective at achieving its own goals. There are better means to the end.
2.) I have not categorically endorsed freeways. I'm observing the status quo about how people actually live their lives.
3.) Transit shouldn't been seen as "good side" vs "bad side." It's just about moving people and stuff efficiently. I'm not in a camp other than just doing it efficiently however that can be done. You apparently do have some vested interest.
4.) Dallas should get no credit that you can take trips by train versus bus or tram. Who cares what vehicle is used? It doesn't matter. Houston built a more widely used transit network with less expensive vehicles and that's a bad thing? Certainly not. Park & Rides are widely available in Houston to get to the city center from the suburbs via bus.
5.) "Think long term" is the chorus when you can't produce results. Running perpetual operating losses for 25-40 is crazy and value destroying. That should prompt an eye-opening realization that "hey, maybe there's a better way" or "hey, maybe the timing isn't right and we should wait until demand exists to build this thing."
6.) When was the last time you honestly challenged your own thinking and assumptions about mass transit? How certain are you that you aren't in the groupthink? Namely - why the affinity for expensive trains over cheap buses? Have you contemplated what other transit solutions could be done with the sales tax revenue we sink into DART?
The problem with DART is that if you don't live in a corridor where it stops then it's pointless. It's more efficient for me to just drive or get a Lyft. I've literally been on it once in the 20 years I've been in Dallas and that was just to say I rode it. And I had to go out of my way that one time to ride it from east Dallas to downtown and I lived in east Dallas. I wasted 30 minutes taking the train when I could have just popped downtown with a Lyft.
YouBet said:
The problem with DART is that if you don't live in a corridor where it stops then it's pointless. It's more efficient for me to just drive or get a Lyft. I've literally been on it once in the 20 years I've been in Dallas and that was just to say I rode it. And I had to go out of my way that one time to ride it from east Dallas to downtown and I lived in east Dallas. I wasted 30 minutes taking the train when I could have just popped downtown with a Lyft.
You also would have spent more driving. Either gas+parking or the lyft fare. Or a $5 roundtrip on DART. But I have the feeling the cost is irrelevant to you. That was when I used the train the most - when I did not want to pay the high cost of parking at DFW.
And in your case the drive doesn't sound worse than the ride in traffic - especially if it was on the weekend or something since it sounds like it was just to ride it.
Most of the people posting on here don't get the benefits and the demographic that the train is for.
Mostly they are for 2 types of people and a distant third type:
a. Suburban people that drive a fairly long way to downtown (or nearby hospital districts or some workplace on a train route) every day that prefer the relaxing commute by comparison and saving on gas and parking. Those costs add up over time compared to a one off trip "just to say I rode it". Also traffic can sometimes bog down so badly that the train is quicker on those days. So it is more consistent and it is always less aggravating.
b. People that don't have other transportation options (no car) and use the train and bus system connecting at some of the transit centers.
The third less common but still somewhat prevalent type was:
c. travelers to and from airport that don't have other transport and/or want to save on parking AND airport employees who don't have transport or want to save on parking and the distance from employee lots.
On the last point - as I rode it for years to the airports - I saw tons of people using it that were just employees of the airport or airlines. More so than travelers. Most travelers were solo business types that travelled a lot for business and had only a carryon. Rarely families in fact the only families I ever saw seemed to be international travelers who are more used to travel by train.
And the 4th type I would say are:
d. weekend and evening special event travelers avoiding parking, etc like to AAC or Fair Park or downtown museums or convention center etc.
I get who it's for and why. It's just irrelevant to me who happens to live someplace where it doesn't apply and it's just one more thing to pay for that I don't use. And I can personally mitigate that by moving....which we are.
The bottom line of trains is whether or not we are going to consider it a necessary public service in an urban area regardless if it's relevant to all local citizens. Everyone has to be ok with it just being a black hole of spend that will never pay for itself and only get worse over time. And most people will jump on that bandwagon simply because it's perceived (right or wrong) as a signal that your city is evolved.
FTR, I'm not anti-train. I can fully see the benefits of them if you happen to be in a living situation where you can access one and I have in multiple cities and countries. For us, it's a complete hassle factor and pointless as former denizens of East Dallas and now North Dallas. Way easier to Lyft or Uber regardless if my total costs over time are more with ride share. Don't care. My time is worth more.
The ironic thing about DART in particular is that it benefits outlying non-Dallasites more than actual Dallasites from a travel convenience standpoint. Considering how geographically dispersed DFW is that makes sense as opposed to a dense area like Chicago or New York, but it doesn't rise to the level of a necessary expense to me because of it. Actually had some sympathy for Philip Dbag Kingston when he was on council and he argued that DART should be geared toward Dallas and not the suburbs.
The problem is most people were commuting into Dallas and then leaving for most of its history, so I get why it was set up that way. He wanted to reign it in as Dallas core finally started growing in the 5-10 years preceding COVID. Well, with COVID, core growth has been stalled again. And the vast majority of people moving to DFW (which is a huge number!) are not moving into core Dallas from what I've read. Purely anecdotal, but all of the people that we do know that lived in downtown or uptown moved out, are in the process of moving out, or are planning to move out. Apparently, Uptown itself has become way less desirable place to live based on many people that I know who lived down there.
It just feels like Dallas is building bridges to nowhere at times.
The bottom line of trains is whether or not we are going to consider it a necessary public service in an urban area regardless if it's relevant to all local citizens. Everyone has to be ok with it just being a black hole of spend that will never pay for itself and only get worse over time. And most people will jump on that bandwagon simply because it's perceived (right or wrong) as a signal that your city is evolved.
FTR, I'm not anti-train. I can fully see the benefits of them if you happen to be in a living situation where you can access one and I have in multiple cities and countries. For us, it's a complete hassle factor and pointless as former denizens of East Dallas and now North Dallas. Way easier to Lyft or Uber regardless if my total costs over time are more with ride share. Don't care. My time is worth more.
The ironic thing about DART in particular is that it benefits outlying non-Dallasites more than actual Dallasites from a travel convenience standpoint. Considering how geographically dispersed DFW is that makes sense as opposed to a dense area like Chicago or New York, but it doesn't rise to the level of a necessary expense to me because of it. Actually had some sympathy for Philip Dbag Kingston when he was on council and he argued that DART should be geared toward Dallas and not the suburbs.
The problem is most people were commuting into Dallas and then leaving for most of its history, so I get why it was set up that way. He wanted to reign it in as Dallas core finally started growing in the 5-10 years preceding COVID. Well, with COVID, core growth has been stalled again. And the vast majority of people moving to DFW (which is a huge number!) are not moving into core Dallas from what I've read. Purely anecdotal, but all of the people that we do know that lived in downtown or uptown moved out, are in the process of moving out, or are planning to move out. Apparently, Uptown itself has become way less desirable place to live based on many people that I know who lived down there.
It just feels like Dallas is building bridges to nowhere at times.
Busses get stuck in traffic. Trains do not.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:Your just echoing the.... "its too expensive because it doesn't benefit me" mantra that I've heard for years.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:I've always thought that this line of thinking was a short sighted way of looking at public transportation.Goose said:I'm not even sure it was needed pre-covid and/or if covid had never happened. Tenants traditionally occupying CBD buildings have been migrating north for decades, and advancements in technology to enable people in the workforce to come together virtually instead of in person would have provided better value than the cost for office space in due time anyways. Mass transit in lower density populations is a pipe dream to begin with. But if the increase in work-from-home percentage is combined with the rising popularity of Uber type services, the oncoming promise of ride-share/car-share platforms like Turo or Zipcar, and the incorporation of autonomous vehicles into either or both, then the need to spend a couple billion dollars to get some personal vehicles off the surface streets and alleviate some parking requirements in a CBD on the decline is not a good value at all.MGS said:
Before they decide to spend billions of dollars on this, why don't they wait a year and see if it's still needed in the post-covid era?
Anything that gives residents a choice (rather than a car) and gets cars off the streets is a net positive in the long run.
One of the reasons a lot of people hate Houston is that their public transportation options are garbage....which means you have to drive a car everywhere you go. This factors into all the traffic congestion and horrible pollution that Houston is known for.
If I am a business owner, and most of my employees are low income.....I don't want to make it harder for them to get to work. Having to drive to work each day is ultimately a tax.
Its a gas tax, a wear and tear on your car tax, and a life-style tax.
If Dallas is going to want to compete for Global business you have a way that people can get from the Airports to your downtown without having to get in a car.
You can now do that from DFW, but its a bit harder from Love Field.
Houston has higher mass transit ridership than Dallas because it has a very effective bus network and Park & Rides. Not that it's a big difference. Both cities are practically indistinguishable from a transit standpoint. Any criticism of Houston transit is equally valid or Dallas.
You're just echoing the conventional wisdom that we should have mass transit because we need it to ~compete~ without anything to back up that subjective claim. Apparently it's on the grading rubric to be a "serious" city. Dallas had no issue competing for corporate HQs and businesses before the Orange Line was finished. Practically nobody rides to the airport now anyway.
Freeways = Good.
Public Transit = Bad
and Houston does not equal Dallas because you can't commute on a train from Sugarland or Spring to the Texas Medical Center or downtown Houston like you can in Dallas.
If you work in Central Houston and want to live in the burbs then you have to drive a car.....and this is why Houston sucks.
I have a client that works at the Dallas VA Hospital in Oak Cliff, and he lives in Plano. His commute is about 10 minutes to the Parker Road Station, and then he takes the train all the way to the front door of his employment.
That is one less car on the road Monday through Friday (multiplied by thousands)
The DART rail is not on the level of what you would see in NYC, DC, Boston..etc
But those transportation agencies have been around a lot longer. They've had a much longer time to fix issues that invariably come up with public transportation.
The DART rail is only 25 years old. Its a baby. This is why its so short sighted to think that a public transport agency is going to turn around everything over night. It doesn't happen that way at all. You have to project 25-40 years forward. Its not supposed to be perfect right away.
I promise you the cities that have great public transportation also took many years to eventually fix their issues.
A great city should not prioritize cars over being able to not drive.
1.) My mantra is that DART is not cost effective at achieving its own goals. There are better means to the end.
2.) I have not categorically endorsed freeways. I'm observing the status quo about how people actually live their lives.
3.) Transit shouldn't been seen as "good side" vs "bad side." It's just about moving people and stuff efficiently. I'm not in a camp other than just doing it efficiently however that can be done. You apparently do have some vested interest.
4.) Dallas should get no credit that you can take trips by train versus bus or tram. Who cares what vehicle is used? It doesn't matter. Houston built a more widely used transit network with less expensive vehicles and that's a bad thing? Certainly not. Park & Rides are widely available in Houston to get to the city center from the suburbs via bus.
5.) "Think long term" is the chorus when you can't produce results. Running perpetual operating losses for 25-40 is crazy and value destroying. That should prompt an eye-opening realization that "hey, maybe there's a better way" or "hey, maybe the timing isn't right and we should wait until demand exists to build this thing."
6.) When was the last time you honestly challenged your own thinking and assumptions about mass transit? How certain are you that you aren't in the groupthink? Namely - why the affinity for expensive trains over cheap buses? Have you contemplated what other transit solutions could be done with the sales tax revenue we sink into DART?
In regards to point #5....I'm going to state again that cities with the best public transport networks in the world were typically not that great after 25 years.
As an example, the NYC subway is decrepit and falling apart. I recall reading some articles a few years ago where it was soon to become a massive issue there because they can't practically upkeep it due to costs and, ironically, logistics.
However, I will assume the pending multi-trillion infrastructure bill that federal taxpayers will fund will partially solve that problem for them.
However, I will assume the pending multi-trillion infrastructure bill that federal taxpayers will fund will partially solve that problem for them.
Kellso said:Busses get stuck in traffic. Trains do not.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:Your just echoing the.... "its too expensive because it doesn't benefit me" mantra that I've heard for years.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:I've always thought that this line of thinking was a short sighted way of looking at public transportation.Goose said:I'm not even sure it was needed pre-covid and/or if covid had never happened. Tenants traditionally occupying CBD buildings have been migrating north for decades, and advancements in technology to enable people in the workforce to come together virtually instead of in person would have provided better value than the cost for office space in due time anyways. Mass transit in lower density populations is a pipe dream to begin with. But if the increase in work-from-home percentage is combined with the rising popularity of Uber type services, the oncoming promise of ride-share/car-share platforms like Turo or Zipcar, and the incorporation of autonomous vehicles into either or both, then the need to spend a couple billion dollars to get some personal vehicles off the surface streets and alleviate some parking requirements in a CBD on the decline is not a good value at all.MGS said:
Before they decide to spend billions of dollars on this, why don't they wait a year and see if it's still needed in the post-covid era?
Anything that gives residents a choice (rather than a car) and gets cars off the streets is a net positive in the long run.
One of the reasons a lot of people hate Houston is that their public transportation options are garbage....which means you have to drive a car everywhere you go. This factors into all the traffic congestion and horrible pollution that Houston is known for.
If I am a business owner, and most of my employees are low income.....I don't want to make it harder for them to get to work. Having to drive to work each day is ultimately a tax.
Its a gas tax, a wear and tear on your car tax, and a life-style tax.
If Dallas is going to want to compete for Global business you have a way that people can get from the Airports to your downtown without having to get in a car.
You can now do that from DFW, but its a bit harder from Love Field.
Houston has higher mass transit ridership than Dallas because it has a very effective bus network and Park & Rides. Not that it's a big difference. Both cities are practically indistinguishable from a transit standpoint. Any criticism of Houston transit is equally valid or Dallas.
You're just echoing the conventional wisdom that we should have mass transit because we need it to ~compete~ without anything to back up that subjective claim. Apparently it's on the grading rubric to be a "serious" city. Dallas had no issue competing for corporate HQs and businesses before the Orange Line was finished. Practically nobody rides to the airport now anyway.
Freeways = Good.
Public Transit = Bad
and Houston does not equal Dallas because you can't commute on a train from Sugarland or Spring to the Texas Medical Center or downtown Houston like you can in Dallas.
If you work in Central Houston and want to live in the burbs then you have to drive a car.....and this is why Houston sucks.
I have a client that works at the Dallas VA Hospital in Oak Cliff, and he lives in Plano. His commute is about 10 minutes to the Parker Road Station, and then he takes the train all the way to the front door of his employment.
That is one less car on the road Monday through Friday (multiplied by thousands)
The DART rail is not on the level of what you would see in NYC, DC, Boston..etc
But those transportation agencies have been around a lot longer. They've had a much longer time to fix issues that invariably come up with public transportation.
The DART rail is only 25 years old. Its a baby. This is why its so short sighted to think that a public transport agency is going to turn around everything over night. It doesn't happen that way at all. You have to project 25-40 years forward. Its not supposed to be perfect right away.
I promise you the cities that have great public transportation also took many years to eventually fix their issues.
A great city should not prioritize cars over being able to not drive.
1.) My mantra is that DART is not cost effective at achieving its own goals. There are better means to the end.
2.) I have not categorically endorsed freeways. I'm observing the status quo about how people actually live their lives.
3.) Transit shouldn't been seen as "good side" vs "bad side." It's just about moving people and stuff efficiently. I'm not in a camp other than just doing it efficiently however that can be done. You apparently do have some vested interest.
4.) Dallas should get no credit that you can take trips by train versus bus or tram. Who cares what vehicle is used? It doesn't matter. Houston built a more widely used transit network with less expensive vehicles and that's a bad thing? Certainly not. Park & Rides are widely available in Houston to get to the city center from the suburbs via bus.
5.) "Think long term" is the chorus when you can't produce results. Running perpetual operating losses for 25-40 is crazy and value destroying. That should prompt an eye-opening realization that "hey, maybe there's a better way" or "hey, maybe the timing isn't right and we should wait until demand exists to build this thing."
6.) When was the last time you honestly challenged your own thinking and assumptions about mass transit? How certain are you that you aren't in the groupthink? Namely - why the affinity for expensive trains over cheap buses? Have you contemplated what other transit solutions could be done with the sales tax revenue we sink into DART?
In regards to point #5....I'm going to state again that cities with the best public transport networks in the world were typically not that great after 25 years.
Trains get stuck all the time. The biggest issues with trains is that once they do get stuck there is often no way to unstick them without serious delays. If a rider is stuck on the train there is rarely a way for any individual rider to remedy the situation for themselves. At least in a traffic jam drivers have the option and individual choice to avoid the traffic, leave later/sooner, toll roads, side roads etc. Riders on trains are bounded by the train.
As someone that lived and worked in NY/NJ for a long time I can assure you trains have their own set of downsides and frankly many residents have a love/hate relationship with MTA, NJT, LIRR, and MetroNorth.
https://www.nj.com/news/2021/01/nj-transit-trains-ranked-the-worst-in-the-nation-again.html
tysker said:Kellso said:Busses get stuck in traffic. Trains do not.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:Your just echoing the.... "its too expensive because it doesn't benefit me" mantra that I've heard for years.TriAg2010 said:Kellso said:I've always thought that this line of thinking was a short sighted way of looking at public transportation.Goose said:I'm not even sure it was needed pre-covid and/or if covid had never happened. Tenants traditionally occupying CBD buildings have been migrating north for decades, and advancements in technology to enable people in the workforce to come together virtually instead of in person would have provided better value than the cost for office space in due time anyways. Mass transit in lower density populations is a pipe dream to begin with. But if the increase in work-from-home percentage is combined with the rising popularity of Uber type services, the oncoming promise of ride-share/car-share platforms like Turo or Zipcar, and the incorporation of autonomous vehicles into either or both, then the need to spend a couple billion dollars to get some personal vehicles off the surface streets and alleviate some parking requirements in a CBD on the decline is not a good value at all.MGS said:
Before they decide to spend billions of dollars on this, why don't they wait a year and see if it's still needed in the post-covid era?
Anything that gives residents a choice (rather than a car) and gets cars off the streets is a net positive in the long run.
One of the reasons a lot of people hate Houston is that their public transportation options are garbage....which means you have to drive a car everywhere you go. This factors into all the traffic congestion and horrible pollution that Houston is known for.
If I am a business owner, and most of my employees are low income.....I don't want to make it harder for them to get to work. Having to drive to work each day is ultimately a tax.
Its a gas tax, a wear and tear on your car tax, and a life-style tax.
If Dallas is going to want to compete for Global business you have a way that people can get from the Airports to your downtown without having to get in a car.
You can now do that from DFW, but its a bit harder from Love Field.
Houston has higher mass transit ridership than Dallas because it has a very effective bus network and Park & Rides. Not that it's a big difference. Both cities are practically indistinguishable from a transit standpoint. Any criticism of Houston transit is equally valid or Dallas.
You're just echoing the conventional wisdom that we should have mass transit because we need it to ~compete~ without anything to back up that subjective claim. Apparently it's on the grading rubric to be a "serious" city. Dallas had no issue competing for corporate HQs and businesses before the Orange Line was finished. Practically nobody rides to the airport now anyway.
Freeways = Good.
Public Transit = Bad
and Houston does not equal Dallas because you can't commute on a train from Sugarland or Spring to the Texas Medical Center or downtown Houston like you can in Dallas.
If you work in Central Houston and want to live in the burbs then you have to drive a car.....and this is why Houston sucks.
I have a client that works at the Dallas VA Hospital in Oak Cliff, and he lives in Plano. His commute is about 10 minutes to the Parker Road Station, and then he takes the train all the way to the front door of his employment.
That is one less car on the road Monday through Friday (multiplied by thousands)
The DART rail is not on the level of what you would see in NYC, DC, Boston..etc
But those transportation agencies have been around a lot longer. They've had a much longer time to fix issues that invariably come up with public transportation.
The DART rail is only 25 years old. Its a baby. This is why its so short sighted to think that a public transport agency is going to turn around everything over night. It doesn't happen that way at all. You have to project 25-40 years forward. Its not supposed to be perfect right away.
I promise you the cities that have great public transportation also took many years to eventually fix their issues.
A great city should not prioritize cars over being able to not drive.
1.) My mantra is that DART is not cost effective at achieving its own goals. There are better means to the end.
2.) I have not categorically endorsed freeways. I'm observing the status quo about how people actually live their lives.
3.) Transit shouldn't been seen as "good side" vs "bad side." It's just about moving people and stuff efficiently. I'm not in a camp other than just doing it efficiently however that can be done. You apparently do have some vested interest.
4.) Dallas should get no credit that you can take trips by train versus bus or tram. Who cares what vehicle is used? It doesn't matter. Houston built a more widely used transit network with less expensive vehicles and that's a bad thing? Certainly not. Park & Rides are widely available in Houston to get to the city center from the suburbs via bus.
5.) "Think long term" is the chorus when you can't produce results. Running perpetual operating losses for 25-40 is crazy and value destroying. That should prompt an eye-opening realization that "hey, maybe there's a better way" or "hey, maybe the timing isn't right and we should wait until demand exists to build this thing."
6.) When was the last time you honestly challenged your own thinking and assumptions about mass transit? How certain are you that you aren't in the groupthink? Namely - why the affinity for expensive trains over cheap buses? Have you contemplated what other transit solutions could be done with the sales tax revenue we sink into DART?
In regards to point #5....I'm going to state again that cities with the best public transport networks in the world were typically not that great after 25 years.
Trains get stuck all the time. The biggest issues with trains is that once they do get stuck there is often no way to unstick them without serious delays. If a rider is stuck on the train there is rarely a way for any individual rider to remedy the situation for themselves. At least in a traffic jam drivers have the option and individual choice to avoid the traffic, leave later/sooner, toll roads, side roads etc. Riders on trains are bounded by the train.
As someone that lived and worked in NY/NJ for a long time I can assure you trains have their own set of downsides and frankly many residents have a love/hate relationship with MTA, NJT, LIRR, and MetroNorth.
https://www.nj.com/news/2021/01/nj-transit-trains-ranked-the-worst-in-the-nation-again.html
Not really in Dallas but maybe in other cities. I've rarely had an unplanned delay on DART trains of more than 5 minutes. Trains have the right of way at all intersections and go over/under things a lot. They usually only get stuck by some mechanical reason - which is rare really. Or the very rare occurrence of a wreck with a car because someone ignored the crossing arms.
Cars get stuck just by pure traffic volume, by wrecks, by construction, etc.
Do the pro-light-rail folks have any opinions on the potential for autonomous vehicles and ride-share programs to cut into mass transit ridership and/or financial viability?
Goose said:
Do the pro-light-rail folks have any opinions on the potential for autonomous vehicles and ride-share programs to cut into mass transit ridership and/or financial viability?
Well I don't know if you are talking to me....i mean I guess I'm pro light rail... but definitely there is a change underway and just because it was maybe the right thing to do for 20+years doesn't mean it will be going forward.
Autonomous self driven vehicles are a potential game changer - may even change the concept of private car ownership.
I think the first and biggest impacts will be in bigger urban cities with more established mass transit like subways.
The transition will be interesting and chaotic I think. It won't happen overnight.
But imagine Manhattan without any privately owned cars and no cabs either - everything is autonomous cars for hire. You've just removed 70% of the traffic or more and all of the parked cars too so much less crowded streets. Transition the garages to charging stations for the autonomous cars so they are off the street when they are off duty. Now there may still be a need for mass transit - autonomous busses perhaps or subways still for mass transit. Their subways are already more widespread than most light rail systems in smaller cities so they may have more use. The cost point for those self driving cars may be too high for the poor and lower class workers. But that's a big city and I could see them moving that way sooner rather than later.
It's easier to see that in NY - in Dallas it's hard to say whether there would still be a real need for the light rail option. With less traffic busses become much more viable and can easily go more places and quicker with less traffic. So yeah if this is a possibility in 20 years or so then yeah light rail becomes moot in cities like Dallas.
Level 5 FSD seems so far away. It's only feasible once you eliminate non sd cars nearly entirely in some areas. This is decades from being reality.
I live in Rockwall and have had jobs in Addison and downtown (before remote for the last 3-4 years) and I would do downtown again in a heartbeat if I had reason to because of the blue line. I will never take a gig in Addison again, despite my commute in both cases being about the same 35-45 minutes.
The train was great - only time I avoided it was if I knew I would be staying in the office late, cause it gets shady once the regular commuter traffic dies down.
I get the argument that it isn't useful for everyone and that is valid, but many of the other arguments just don't add up with what I experienced.
In my 3 years riding the train, I think I had 1 time where we had to bus from downtown over to another location because of a mechanical problem. I think there were maybe 2 days during that time where something caused the line to be shut down during my morning commute (due to either a wreck or something else blocking the line).
If you do live near a line and you're not somebody that just always wants to be in their car (even in rush hour traffic), then its great.
As to the question a few posts up - if autonomous cars became the norm, I'd definitely consider that over a train just due to the independence and ability to do things like run errands or go out to some place at lunch (though normally, I'd just ride with folks who drove).
The train was great - only time I avoided it was if I knew I would be staying in the office late, cause it gets shady once the regular commuter traffic dies down.
I get the argument that it isn't useful for everyone and that is valid, but many of the other arguments just don't add up with what I experienced.
In my 3 years riding the train, I think I had 1 time where we had to bus from downtown over to another location because of a mechanical problem. I think there were maybe 2 days during that time where something caused the line to be shut down during my morning commute (due to either a wreck or something else blocking the line).
If you do live near a line and you're not somebody that just always wants to be in their car (even in rush hour traffic), then its great.
As to the question a few posts up - if autonomous cars became the norm, I'd definitely consider that over a train just due to the independence and ability to do things like run errands or go out to some place at lunch (though normally, I'd just ride with folks who drove).
It seems like the autonomous car evolution should impact the non-downtown areas first simply because there are fewer variables to program. IOW, highways will become autonomous before a complex downtown with pedestrians, varying street configurations, etc.
It's obviously a hell of lot of cheaper to let the technology get there rather than invest in a bunch of infrastructure for rail if you have a reasonable confidence level in the time frame for autonomous cars. I don't think anyone does though.
Sort of reminds me of inflight entertainment evolution and if a similar path happens here. Most of the majors invested in seat-back hardware for inflight entertainment while SWA did not. By the time SWA got around to thinking about in-flight entertainment they didn't have to worry about any infrastructure other than getting a internet connection (which sucks lol) because mobile technology had caught up.
It's obviously a hell of lot of cheaper to let the technology get there rather than invest in a bunch of infrastructure for rail if you have a reasonable confidence level in the time frame for autonomous cars. I don't think anyone does though.
Sort of reminds me of inflight entertainment evolution and if a similar path happens here. Most of the majors invested in seat-back hardware for inflight entertainment while SWA did not. By the time SWA got around to thinking about in-flight entertainment they didn't have to worry about any infrastructure other than getting a internet connection (which sucks lol) because mobile technology had caught up.
I really like that in seat entertainment. Sad to see it going away.
Featured Stories
See All
35:53
9h ago
3.2k
42:45
6h ago
2.0k
The Good Ol' Days: Reminiscing on Texas A&M's magical spring of '89
by David Sandhop
8:02
7h ago
1.2k
Depth of A&M lineup impresses even slugger Braden Montgomery
by Ryan Brauninger
Dave Grohl
No panic Edgerrin and other Aggies, Madubuike was drafted #71
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
106
Chandlauch
JACKSON APPEL - Aggie Baseball - Would You be Surprised???
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
87
Big Shooter
LIVE from Olsen Field at BBP: No. 1 Texas A&M vs. No. 20 Georgia (Friday)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
78
Big Shooter
LIVE from Olsen Field at BBP: No. 1 Texas A&M vs. No. 20 Georgia (Friday)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
72
Big Shooter
LIVE from Olsen Field at BBP: No. 1 Texas A&M vs. No. 20 Georgia (Friday)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
69
1/2 Man 1/2 Amazing
No panic Edgerrin and other Aggies, Madubuike was drafted #71
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
69
agsalaska
JACKSON APPEL - Aggie Baseball - Would You be Surprised???
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
67
Big Shooter
LIVE from Olsen Field at BBP: No. 1 Texas A&M vs. No. 20 Georgia (Friday)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
65
Big Shooter
LIVE from Olsen Field at BBP: No. 1 Texas A&M vs. No. 20 Georgia (Friday)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
64
Big Shooter
LIVE from Olsen Field at BBP: No. 1 Texas A&M vs. No. 20 Georgia (Friday)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
61