4 ms·

> Without the density, you'll end up with a lot of stations to try and make the line useful to people. With lots of stations, you're not realistically going 120

> Without the density, you'll end up with a lot of stations to try and make the line useful to people. With lots of stations, you're not realistically going 120-160km/h average speeds. > But in the end if you halved the stations you'd really crush the ridership because there's just not enough stuff or people at any particular station. Of course there's enough people left. First you build train stations near destinations. That's business parks, universities, airports, downtown areas, malls. Then you build train stations with lots of spacing into the suburbs so you can still hit peak speeds between them. Typical station spacing depends on train speeds, but you can estimate with: 50km/h at 500m spacing, 90km/h for 2km spacing, 120km/h at 5km spacing, 160km/h at 10km spacing. So you'll want to have 5km-10km spacing between the stations. That's not close enough for walking. But you can set up free parking at the station for anyone with a train ticket. At the same time you'll set up congestion charging for the destinations with stations. Now the fastest and cheapest way to travel to these dense areas is to drive to the nearest station, park your car, and take the train. For the rest of the city the car remains the fastest option. Nonetheless, at 2-5km average distance to the nearest station cycling becomes more viable, which primarily benefits teenagers and students. Later on you can improve upon this by: · creating bus and tram lines with cross-connections between the larger train stations to serve as distributor lines and connect more people · changing the minimum setbacks for properties near the bus and tram lines to allow semi-detached and terraced housing. This makes cheaper housing available, increases density, makes transit more viable and still keeps the suburban lifestyle · changing the zoning near the station to develop 5-over-1s, with 1 level of businesses, 5 levels of apartments and an underground parking garage. This would allow creating something resembling the "main streets" of foregone eras. Overall you can make these changes over the span of a generation. This is how cities grew during the industrialization in the first place (including in the US) and how european cities have recovered from the post-war car-centric urban design which had destroyed more cities than the war.

vel0city 2y ago
Once again you're telling me how it should be instead of looking at the realities of what is. Take a look at the route for the Red/Orange lines on DART. Tell me which stations get the axe to make that spacing. Do we kill Downtown Plano or Cityline? Do we kill the stop with the easy bus transfer to the Richardson library and city hall? Do we kill the station next to the massive apartment complexes and the concert hall and office park at Galatyn? Or all the mixed use at Spring Valley? Do people lose access to the hospital and medical facilities near Forest Ln? No more shopping at all the stuff at the Shops at Park Lane and NorthPark mall? Do SMU students lose access to the network by taking away Lovers Ln? Forget all the mixed use at Mockingbird? Tell me, who gets the axe? And you really think we're going to keep ridership up if we eliminate the stop at the hospital or eliminate half the apartment complexes on the path? The only easy stops I see to eliminate are the ones downtown where it's acting like a streetcar. There were plans for a "D2" project to move these lines underground and change the number of stops. And all of this is also still assuming there is the bus connections to take you East/West, because there's still so much you miss at each stop on just the train alignment a few miles either direction.

vel0city 2y ago

Once again you're telling me how it should be instead of looking at the realities of what is. Take a look at the route for the Red/Orange lines on DART. Tell me which stations get the axe to make that spacing. Do we kill Downtown Plano or Cityline? Do we kill the stop with the easy bus transfer to the Richardson library and city hall? Do we kill the station next to the massive apartment complexes and the concert hall and office park at Galatyn? Or all the mixed use at Spring Valley? Do people lose access to the hospital and medical facilities near Forest Ln? No more shopping at all the stuff at the Shops at Park Lane and NorthPark mall? Do SMU students lose access to the network by taking away Lovers Ln? Forget all the mixed use at Mockingbird? Tell me, who gets the axe? And you really think we're going to keep ridership up if we eliminate the stop at the hospital or eliminate half the apartment complexes on the path? The only easy stops I see to eliminate are the ones downtown where it's acting like a streetcar. There were plans for a "D2" project to move these lines underground and change the number of stops. And all of this is also still assuming there is the bus connections to take you East/West, because there's still so much you miss at each stop on just the train alignment a few miles either direction.