Good point. I knew I was missing something. Still frustrating.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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?