I mean cities in Texas are very spread out. Subways work well in dense areas, and many parts of Texas just aren’t that dense. Here’s an article about Austin, and it seems people are more interested now than ever. But I want to point to a mention about Dallas:
Basically, the only reason to go underground in the West is when the city can’t get right of way or has to avoid other infrastructure. Dallas’ DART system is the only urban rail system in the Southwest that can claim a subway station. A three and a half mile section of rail runs underneath the North Central Expressway, in order to avoid the right of way conflicts that would come with going through existing neighborhoods. With urban rail projects dating back two decades, Dallas is ahead of the curve in Texas. But Houston’s getting onboard too, according to one of the city’s recent surveys.
We have something similar in my area (also in the west), surface rail is just way cheaper and good enough. Our population is somewhat spread out, so we use streetcars/trams and adjust the lights and crossings accordingly.
The problem with grade level crossings, even if the lights are adjusted, is always rush hour traffic.
One good example of this is line 512, St Clair W of the TTC. It’s a street car on well separated tracks but with many intersections due to it crossing dense neighbourhoods in addition to dedicated left/U turn lanes for 2x1 lanes worth of cars. Despite being only 2x1 lanes, the road being on the E-W makes it a major thoroughfare. The congestion can get so bad that at certain intersections the street car can get stuck for ten minutes or more until the blockage clears.
I don’t know Toronto well, but it seems there’s a good set of expressways that go around the city, so thru roads could be cut to discourage cutting through the city itself. Replace those with walking and cycling paths and people will likely use the mass transit a lot more.
Basically, anywhere the Metro goes should have limited car traffic. That way a subway isn’t needed, walk ability is preserved, and noise downtown would be reduced, making for a much more pleasant downtown.
If cities prioritize cars, trains will be more expensive and slow, and walking will be more dangerous. If cities prioritize either trains or pedestrians, cars are inconvenienced, but trains are cheaper and nicer, and walking is safe. Unfortunately, we in NA picked cars…
I don’t know why there would be. Texas is big, so overland trains would be much more cost effective.
Tunnels are expensive, and land is comparatively cheap (and we have lots of old rail lines we can reuse).
Subways are usually meant for within city limits to relieve congestion. Not for intercity, so it’s irrelevant if Texas is big.
Unless you mean that land with rails within city limits already exists. In that case grade level crossings are a major hindrance.
I mean cities in Texas are very spread out. Subways work well in dense areas, and many parts of Texas just aren’t that dense. Here’s an article about Austin, and it seems people are more interested now than ever. But I want to point to a mention about Dallas:
We have something similar in my area (also in the west), surface rail is just way cheaper and good enough. Our population is somewhat spread out, so we use streetcars/trams and adjust the lights and crossings accordingly.
The problem with grade level crossings, even if the lights are adjusted, is always rush hour traffic.
One good example of this is line 512, St Clair W of the TTC. It’s a street car on well separated tracks but with many intersections due to it crossing dense neighbourhoods in addition to dedicated left/U turn lanes for 2x1 lanes worth of cars. Despite being only 2x1 lanes, the road being on the E-W makes it a major thoroughfare. The congestion can get so bad that at certain intersections the street car can get stuck for ten minutes or more until the blockage clears.
I don’t know Toronto well, but it seems there’s a good set of expressways that go around the city, so thru roads could be cut to discourage cutting through the city itself. Replace those with walking and cycling paths and people will likely use the mass transit a lot more.
Basically, anywhere the Metro goes should have limited car traffic. That way a subway isn’t needed, walk ability is preserved, and noise downtown would be reduced, making for a much more pleasant downtown.
If cities prioritize cars, trains will be more expensive and slow, and walking will be more dangerous. If cities prioritize either trains or pedestrians, cars are inconvenienced, but trains are cheaper and nicer, and walking is safe. Unfortunately, we in NA picked cars…