Dallas Fort Worth Urban Forum

Two injured in DART derailment in downtown Dallas

"According to a DART spokesman, a northbound Orange line train made contact with a southbound Green line train around 1:15 p.m. at St. Paul Station."

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2020/12 ... wn-dallas/

My guess is that the third truck of the northbound train (between the second and third segments) somehow caught on the switch just south of the station, thus trying to take the crossover while the rest of the train stayed on the main track. It then was pulled off the track by the rest of the moving train until it sideswiped the stationary one. Looking at it in person, there was no evidence at all of an impact on the right side of the derailed train, like if it had been pushed off by a automobile collision.

https://www.dart.org/about/board/boarda ... 2jan21.pdf
Looks like they're going to rename Baylor station to Baylor/Deep Ellum after the D2 portal is constructed. Good move since the Baylor station is closer to Deep Ellum than the current Deep Ellum station anyway.

Also, IMO the best course of action after D2 is to stop running the Orange Line up the North Central Corridor and double the frequencies of Red/Blue line trains to make up for it whenever DART has the resources to do so. Otherwise the Cityplace tunnel will still constrain the outer Red, Blue, and Orange lines. Terminate the Orange Line either at Buckner, Lawnview, or the proposed Live Oak stations from DFW and run trains every 10 minutes on each line. Otherwise, the city won't be getting the full benefit of this project.

Parker Road wrote:Also, IMO the best course of action after D2 is to stop running the Orange Line up the North Central Corridor and double the frequencies of Red/Blue line trains to make up for it whenever DART has the resources to do so. Otherwise the Cityplace tunnel will still constrain the outer Red, Blue, and Orange lines. Terminate the Orange Line either at Buckner, Lawnview, or the proposed Live Oak stations from DFW and run trains every 10 minutes on each line. Otherwise, the city won't be getting the full benefit of this project.

The Cityplace tunnel isn't any more of a constraint than any other section of track not named the Downtown Transit Mall. The capacity North of the Pearl wye is unaffected no matter what direction the trains go when they pop out the other side of Downtown.

Right now there are 12 trains per hour (tph) peak running through the North Central tunnel - 3 lines, each at 15 minute peak headways. The transit mall itself currently handles 16 tph at peak, with lots of traffic lights and 4 stations, so there's no reason why the tunnel portion couldn't handle at least that much. DART could both retain the existing Orange line service pattern, plus add 1-2 tph each for a "magenta" and "cyan" lines that run from Parker Road/Rowlett to Cedars at peak hours only. Adding trains to run the full length of the Red or Blue lines would just mean valuable rolling stock running empty over half the route.

TNWE wrote:The Cityplace tunnel isn't any more of a constraint than any other section of track not named the Downtown Transit Mall. The capacity North of the Pearl wye is unaffected no matter what direction the trains go when they pop out the other side of Downtown.

Right now there are 12 trains per hour (tph) peak running through the North Central tunnel - 3 lines, each at 15 minute peak headways. The transit mall itself currently handles 16 tph at peak, with lots of traffic lights and 4 stations, so there's no reason why the tunnel portion couldn't handle at least that much. DART could both retain the existing Orange line service pattern, plus add 1-2 tph each for a "magenta" and "cyan" lines that run from Parker Road/Rowlett to Cedars at peak hours only. Adding trains to run the full length of the Red or Blue lines would just mean valuable rolling stock running empty over half the route.

Deinterlining the Orange Line post-D2 will allow for trains every 5 minutes or better on everything from Mockingbird to 8th/Corinth rather than just to Cityplace. Service on the Southeast corridor would be more consistent too. If necessary, in the off-peak every other train on the Red line could be run from LBJ/Central to Cedars or Westmoreland like you suggest, similar to how the Orange Line operates today.

Parker Road wrote:

TNWE wrote:The Cityplace tunnel isn't any more of a constraint than any other section of track not named the Downtown Transit Mall. The capacity North of the Pearl wye is unaffected no matter what direction the trains go when they pop out the other side of Downtown.

Right now there are 12 trains per hour (tph) peak running through the North Central tunnel - 3 lines, each at 15 minute peak headways. The transit mall itself currently handles 16 tph at peak, with lots of traffic lights and 4 stations, so there's no reason why the tunnel portion couldn't handle at least that much. DART could both retain the existing Orange line service pattern, plus add 1-2 tph each for a "magenta" and "cyan" lines that run from Parker Road/Rowlett to Cedars at peak hours only. Adding trains to run the full length of the Red or Blue lines would just mean valuable rolling stock running empty over half the route.

Deinterlining the Orange Line post-D2 will allow for trains every 5 minutes or better on everything from Mockingbird to 8th/Corinth rather than just to Cityplace. Service on the Southeast corridor would be more consistent too. If necessary, in the off-peak every other train on the Red line could be run from LBJ/Central to Cedars or Westmoreland like you suggest, similar to how the Orange Line operates today.

I'm just not sure of the value of running additional red line frequencies south of Downtown. If anything, DART should relocate whatever infra that's in the way of a second track on the west side of the West End wye, so trains can run from South Dallas up through the medical district at least as far as Bachman. Interchanging between Red/Blue and Orange/Green is already annoying enough having to go to West End, and D2 would only make it worse by requiring a long-ish walk to Metro Center.

The ongoing cage match over DART's D2 route through Downtown may be in its final round. If a final agreement is not reached by March 31 (city council vote on March 24) the feds may give the prize money to other cities.

The shoving match is over how to have a depressed Highway 345 and a subway emerging between Downtown and Deep Ellum.

Here is the Channel 5 report.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/new-d ... n/2577295/

Nothing will be built lol

When did an I-345 tunnel/trench become a viable option? This is so silly. Either eliminate I-345 or rebuild it. I absolutely prefer rebuilding I-345 with a much smaller footprint, two interfaces, one with each downtown street grid.

Yeah reducing the foot print is a good compromise. But TXDot only knows how to expand

^ Have you seen how they've reduced the footprint of I-30 through the canyon in the redesign?

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Nothing will be built lol

Yup - the City has already told DART it's no longer interested in paying to run the Streetcar at any meaningful frequency, citing a shortfall in the city's General Fund that was previously the source of streetcar O&M funds. https://www.dart.org/about/board/boarda ... 9mar21.pdf

Where do they expect to find the funds to realize their D2/I-345 vision? DART and TxDOT are in the exact same financial dire straits...

I haven't followed the *dramatic saga of DART D2* as closely as many, so from my limited knowledge on the topic... This basically means it's dead in the water for now, right?

undefinedprocess wrote:I haven't followed the *dramatic saga of DART D2* as closely as many, so from my limited knowledge on the topic... This basically means it's dead in the water for now, right?

No.See patrick kennedys twitter. Basically ,he's saying engineering the subway and a trenched 345 is NOT the point of contention here. It's how the subway resurfaces to ground level and how it affects the neighborhood is the problem. It's being opposed by Deep Ellum neighborhood association. So they want to rectify that basically.

That's fair. I've been concerned about the impact of these transition tunnels as well.

Initially I was so on board with this project, but as it drags on I'm less and less in support of it. Honestly, I'd rather see more money poured into a better bus system, but seeing as how we have already built quite a bit of light rail, I wouldn't mind seeing the D2 line become a surface line instead. I say this as someone who hasn't really looked at where exactly the line would run and what impact that would have.

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

undefinedprocess wrote:I haven't followed the *dramatic saga of DART D2* as closely as many, so from my limited knowledge on the topic... This basically means it's dead in the water for now, right?

No.See patrick kennedys twitter. Basically ,he's saying engineering the subway and a trenched 345 is NOT the point of contention here. It's how the subway resurfaces to ground level and how it affects the neighborhood is the problem. It's being opposed by Deep Ellum neighborhood association. So they want to rectify that basically.

At the most basic level, engineering is never the constraint. We are capable of building all sorts of insanely complex structures- the only limitation is the cost the entity paying for it is willing to bear. Keep in mind that Mr. Kennedy's name is all over proposals to remove 345 and replace it with an at-grade boulevard, which is why he's so strongly opposed to any D2 alignment crossing the current I-345 footprint at grade- it would create a traffic conflict and destroy any argument that the boulevard could replace the lost I-345 capacity. Hence the absurd claim that it's the Deep Ellum Neighborhood association that's holding everything up, when there was already a workable plan from 2015 that cost half what the most recent D2 estimates are ($800M vs I think $1.7B).

^ The ultimate irony being that there are probably more construction cranes right now within three blocks of I-345 -- where Kennedy said no one would build -- than any similar sized area in Dallas County.

TNWE wrote:

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:

undefinedprocess wrote:I haven't followed the *dramatic saga of DART D2* as closely as many, so from my limited knowledge on the topic... This basically means it's dead in the water for now, right?

No.See patrick kennedys twitter. Basically ,he's saying engineering the subway and a trenched 345 is NOT the point of contention here. It's how the subway resurfaces to ground level and how it affects the neighborhood is the problem. It's being opposed by Deep Ellum neighborhood association. So they want to rectify that basically.

At the most basic level, engineering is never the constraint. We are capable of building all sorts of insanely complex structures- the only limitation is the cost the entity paying for it is willing to bear. Keep in mind that Mr. Kennedy's name is all over proposals to remove 345 and replace it with an at-grade boulevard, which is why he's so strongly opposed to any D2 alignment crossing the current I-345 footprint at grade- it would create a traffic conflict and destroy any argument that the boulevard could replace the lost I-345 capacity. Hence the absurd claim that it's the Deep Ellum Neighborhood association that's holding everything up, when there was already a workable plan from 2015 that cost half what the most recent D2 estimates are ($800M vs I think $1.7B).

Good point!

I think it would be a real loss if this gets messed up right at the same time the Biden infrastructure bill gets done with huge money to doll out for this type of project.

City Council vote to advance tomorrow (3/24).

https://www.dart.org/about/expansion/d2 ... ch2021.pdf

Has there been any estimated completion date given publicly?

tamtagon wrote:When did an I-345 tunnel/trench become a viable option? This is so silly. Either eliminate I-345 or rebuild it. I absolutely prefer rebuilding I-345 with a much smaller footprint, two interfaces, one with each downtown street grid.

Really, so silly. Just dumb. Boulevard the thing. It would harm absolutely no one (and be great in many ways).

Rangers100 wrote:

tamtagon wrote:When did an I-345 tunnel/trench become a viable option? This is so silly. Either eliminate I-345 or rebuild it. I absolutely prefer rebuilding I-345 with a much smaller footprint, two interfaces, one with each downtown street grid.

Really, so silly. Just dumb. Boulevard the thing. It would harm absolutely no one (and be great in many ways).

Except for all the extra thru traffic that gets dumped onto 30/35/366, since all the rosy predictions about the efficacy of an at-grade boulevard replacement assumed Trinity Parkway would be built (it won't).

Also, keep in mind that DART's capacity needs are just as linked to Post-COVID changes in commuting patterns as TxDOT's roadway capacity needs. There's simply not a universe where DART ridership jumps back to pre-pandemic levels that would justify D2 but personal car trips don't bounce back in the same way - if anything, more people are going to prefer driving over sharing a crowded train with other people, thanks to the non-stop media push to make everyone see other humans as little more than walking biohazards.

TNWE wrote:

Rangers100 wrote:

tamtagon wrote:When did an I-345 tunnel/trench become a viable option? This is so silly. Either eliminate I-345 or rebuild it. I absolutely prefer rebuilding I-345 with a much smaller footprint, two interfaces, one with each downtown street grid.

Really, so silly. Just dumb. Boulevard the thing. It would harm absolutely no one (and be great in many ways).

Except for all the extra thru traffic that gets dumped onto 30/35/366, since all the rosy predictions about the efficacy of an at-grade boulevard replacement assumed Trinity Parkway would be built (it won't).

Also, keep in mind that DART's capacity needs are just as linked to Post-COVID changes in commuting patterns as TxDOT's roadway capacity needs. There's simply not a universe where DART ridership jumps back to pre-pandemic levels that would justify D2 but personal car trips don't bounce back in the same way - if anything, more people are going to prefer driving over sharing a crowded train with other people, thanks to the non-stop media push to make everyone see other humans as little more than walking biohazards.

1) I don't know who assumed that, but that was never an assumption by many (since successful highway tearouts elsewhere haven't needed that).

2) I guess all the great cities of the world that don't let people just blast through gutted large sections of city cores are totally screwed by these Covid developments then.

Rangers100 wrote:

TNWE wrote:

Rangers100 wrote:
Really, so silly. Just dumb. Boulevard the thing. It would harm absolutely no one (and be great in many ways).

Except for all the extra thru traffic that gets dumped onto 30/35/366, since all the rosy predictions about the efficacy of an at-grade boulevard replacement assumed Trinity Parkway would be built (it won't).

Also, keep in mind that DART's capacity needs are just as linked to Post-COVID changes in commuting patterns as TxDOT's roadway capacity needs. There's simply not a universe where DART ridership jumps back to pre-pandemic levels that would justify D2 but personal car trips don't bounce back in the same way - if anything, more people are going to prefer driving over sharing a crowded train with other people, thanks to the non-stop media push to make everyone see other humans as little more than walking biohazards.

1) I don't know who assumed that, but that was never an assumption by many (since successful highway tearouts elsewhere haven't needed that).

2) I guess all the great cities of the world that don't let people just blast through gutted large sections of city cores are totally screwed by these Covid developments then.

Have you not heard the giant whooshing noise from all the people fleeing NYC/SF/Seattle for Sunbelt cities like Dallas? Once industries like Media and Tech acknowledged that their people could work from home and didn't have to come into the office, their employees took their costal paychecks to less expensive locales and used the money they saved on rent to buy a car for errands.

The entire argument for transit-first development fell apart with COVID. Good luck selling people on paying a bunch of money to live car-free in a tiny apartment that doubles as their office/classroom, surrounded by restaurants that are mostly takeout only and bars that are still mostly closed.

Rangers100 wrote:
1) I don't know who assumed that, but that was never an assumption by many (since successful highway tearouts elsewhere haven't needed that).

2) I guess all the great cities of the world that don't let people just blast through gutted large sections of city cores are totally screwed by these Covid developments then.

No one assumed anything, the Trinity Parkway underlies any reconfiguration of I345, it is a fact.
Successful highway tearouts depend on in depth traffic studies presenting all the different scenarios
and showing what would be needed to maintain expected traffic. The CITY MAP study is the one almost everyone cites., DMagazine, TxDOT, DMN, opponents and supporters of the tearout like Patrick Kennedy.

When presenting their arguments for a tearout and citing traffic numbers in the City MAP study, they like to leave out that the numbers hinge on the expected Trinity Parkway.
But the Trinity Parkway is no longer being built, so therefore, it is dishonest to cite the City MAP study any longer. A new study must be made to take this in account.
Otherwise a I345 tear out will make Deep Ellum a parking lot. Which some urbanist actually want.

All of this was discussed a long time ago on the I345 thread.
Here is the study, dont take my word for it. Read it yourself
http://dallascitymap.com/results.html#home
http://dallascitymap.com/DallasCityMAP_ ... ressed.pdf

The 1st is from a set of comparisons starting at 85, and also in the supplementary.
The large picture is from slide 52.
There you will see how often they mention the trinity parkway, include the trinity parkway in all of their maps, and mention I30 reconfigurations in parallel to Trinity Parkway.
In fact, you can download the pdf, search for Trinity parkway and see how often it is mentioned.
my computer says at least 90.

If D2 falls apart then maybe the new focus should just be for a very dense urban core focused transit system for Dallas.

If D2 does get scrapped I wonder how, if at all, it impacts all of the proposed developments around the western portion of the line: Field Street district and the North End apartments site. I feel like that amount of density was planned partially around expecting a rail station at their front doorstep as a selling point for relocations.

Of course the line could still get built at-grade, but that would presumably require going back to the drawing board and adding several more years before any tracks are laid.

Per Twitter D2 Passed. Again.
https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... tion-vote/

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Per Twitter D2 Passed. Again.
https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... tion-vote/

So they split D2 into zone A and B? Does that mean its over?
What is the point of this? It’s a just in case they change their mind about deep Ellum?

What are the deep ellum D2 opponents demand anyways?
At first, there wasn’t even going to be a “deep ellum station”
Now they got what they wanted, there will be.
The new intersection is super confusing because of it
The only losers will be Bottled Blonde. Or is this about I345 tunnel itself?

quixomniac wrote:

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:Per Twitter D2 Passed. Again.
https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... tion-vote/

So they split D2 into zone A and B? Does that mean its over?
What is the point of this? It’s a just in case they change their mind about deep Ellum?

What are the deep ellum D2 opponents demand anyways?
At first, there wasn’t even going to be a “deep ellum station”
Now they got what they wanted, there will be.
The new intersection is super confusing because of it
The only losers will be Bottled Blonde. Or is this about I345 tunnel itself?

It means DART will pursue federal funding, which sets the wheels in motion for this coming to fruition.

The biggest obstacle is fixing how line comes back to grade level in Deep Ellum.
It's split into sides west (victory side) as zone A. And east side (deep Ellum) zone b.

This is how I understand it...
I believe it's split like that because they have to provide a plan of what is being proposed to the Feds.

Because zone B opponents aren't happy with the effects of the rail, DART is essentially buying time and saying this is what Zone A will look like.. zone B we still working on it.

Something to understand is that West Dale owns some land near where the line comes back up. They're not thrilled about how the line may effect some of their properties.. I know the neighborhood isn't happy with the effects on Good Latimer.. so I think that's why it was split like that.

Hopefully engineers find a good solution.

Tivo_Kenevil wrote:.

Something to understand is that West Dale owns some land near where the line comes back up. They're not thrilled about how the line may effect some of their properties.. I know the neighborhood isn't happy with the effects on Good Latimer.. so I think that's why it was split like that.

Hopefully engineers find a good solution.

Thanks for the clarification.
West Dale bought these properties knowing ahead of time this was going to happen. IMO.
At this point, i dont see any solution they would like other than not building it at all.
Or burying both the wye intersection and the proposed deep ellum station, which they should have done to begin with. They can bury with cut and cover, and have tunnels pop up closer to baylor behind all the bars and apartments. and they would also have to leave tunnels open near I345 and live oak.

On that note, does anyone know about the tunneling method they will use on the other D2 subway stations?
It would be sad if they use cut and cover and disrupt all of Commerce, arguably the hottest pedestrian downtown area right now. They all look at least 2-3 stories deep, maybe 30-40 feet underground?

quixomniac wrote:On that note, does anyone know about the tunneling method they will use on the other D2 subway stations?
It would be sad if they use cut and cover and disrupt all of Commerce, arguably the hottest pedestrian downtown area right now. They all look at least 2-3 stories deep, maybe 30-40 feet underground?

My understanding is that Commerce station itself will be cut-and-cover, as will the other two underground stations and the tunnels from them to the portals, but the sections in between the stations will be bored.

northsouth wrote:My understanding is that Commerce station itself will be cut-and-cover, as will the other two underground stations and the tunnels from them to the portals, but the sections in between the stations will be bored.

Hmm well then that further complicates the question. Commerce Station has an entrance at Pegasus Plaza right? but the "station" itself is beneath commerce street, just after At&T plaza towards D.E.
so when you say, Commerce Station, are you talking about where hte trains load/stop?
Or the other 2/3 stories of stairs, escalators and associated entrances?

quixomniac wrote:

northsouth wrote:My understanding is that Commerce station itself will be cut-and-cover, as will the other two underground stations and the tunnels from them to the portals, but the sections in between the stations will be bored.

Hmm well then that further complicates the question. Commerce Station has an entrance at Pegasus Plaza right? but the "station" itself is beneath commerce street, just after At&T plaza towards D.E.
so when you say, Commerce Station, are you talking about where hte trains load/stop?
Or the other 2/3 stories of stairs, escalators and associated entrances?

The construction would look something like this, where they put in retaining walls and dig out the station box all the way down to track level (except once they finish digging things out, they'll deck over the hole with a temporary road surface)


They'll then build up from that level, adding the mezzanines and escalators up to ground level. The side tunnels to connect to Pegasus Plaza and other ventilation shafts will be dug out in a more conventional way, and at something closer to basement level.

TNWE wrote:The construction would look something like this, where they put in retaining walls and dig out the station box all the way down to track level (except once they finish digging things out, they'll deck over the hole with a temporary road surface)

They'll then build up from that level, adding the mezzanines and escalators up to ground level. The side tunnels to connect to Pegasus Plaza and other ventilation shafts will be dug out in a more conventional way, and at something closer to basement level.

Thanks for the visual! Should be a fun traffic mess when they start in a few years. I suppose that’s how they will get the TBMs underground before they start tunneling.
Hopefully it wont kill Commerce street

quixomniac wrote:

TNWE wrote:The construction would look something like this, where they put in retaining walls and dig out the station box all the way down to track level (except once they finish digging things out, they'll deck over the hole with a temporary road surface)

They'll then build up from that level, adding the mezzanines and escalators up to ground level. The side tunnels to connect to Pegasus Plaza and other ventilation shafts will be dug out in a more conventional way, and at something closer to basement level.

Thanks for the visual! Should be a fun traffic mess when they start in a few years. I suppose that’s how they will get the TBMs underground before they start tunneling.
Hopefully it wont kill Commerce street

There are a thousand ways to skin this particular cat, but having at least one big open cut somewhere along the route speeds the construction process along for sure. They'll still need big chunks of land at either portal, but having station boxes dug before launching the TBMs lets the crews break the work into more manageable chunks and there's less risk of accumulated error causing the bores to miss their target completely.

There's a very old BBC documentary showing how this sort of process worked in the 60s when they were building the Victoria Line: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwRRSJ_wtIg Obviously tech has improved but it's fundamentally the same process.

northsouth wrote:

quixomniac wrote:On that note, does anyone know about the tunneling method they will use on the other D2 subway stations?
It would be sad if they use cut and cover and disrupt all of Commerce, arguably the hottest pedestrian downtown area right now. They all look at least 2-3 stories deep, maybe 30-40 feet underground?

My understanding is that Commerce station itself will be cut-and-cover, as will the other two underground stations and the tunnels from them to the portals, but the sections in between the stations will be bored.

Followup, looking through the FEIS/ROD, it says that they'll be mining out Commerce Station from the Pegasus Plaza access shaft as to avoid cut-and-cover on Commerce itself.

The locals Deep Ellum critics would like to do to I-345 what was done to Good Latimer, removing the grade separation and rebuilding all of it at grade. But - - - they now see the errors of their ways complaining about how the light rail line at grade crossing Good Latimer causes congestion - - - and now want the D2 light rail line to cross under Good Latimer.

You just can not win!

If I-345 was lowered to grade as a large multilane avenue congestion getting to Deep Ellum would be worse, not better. If a light rail train every 30-20 minutes causes congestion, imagine the congestion cause by cars, vans, trucks, and motorcycles every two seconds.

The Deep Ellum community fought HARD to keep the Good-Latimer grade separation, especially the Gaston tunnel. The murals lining the tunnel were a beloved gateway to the area.

Similarly, the vast majority of current residents are strongly opposed to replacing I-345 at grade. That effort, like so many things, is coming from outsiders.

Don't blame us for this rampant stupidity.

Memories: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ericinsf/ ... otostream/

Hannibal Lecter wrote:The Deep Ellum community fought HARD to keep the Good-Latimer grade separation, especially the Gaston tunnel. The murals lining the tunnel were a beloved gateway to the area.

Similarly, the vast majority of current residents are strongly opposed to replacing I-345 at grade. That effort, like so many things, is coming from outsiders.

Don't blame us for this rampant stupidity.

Memories: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ericinsf/ ... otostream/

Exactly - Neo-urbanists are obsessed with eliminating any and all grade separation for roads because the only way their grand plans can ever work is by artificially destroying the convenience of road transport. Same goes with the decade-long campaign against the pedestrian tunnels and skywalks in Dallas - they think that by closing/severing climate-controlled walkways and forcing people to walk from Point A to Point B outside at street level on scorching hot days, it will somehow revive downtown's lackluster retail scene.

I lived and worked in Downtown Dallas for years - there were plenty of days where I was more than happy to walk down the street to grab lunch, go catch the train, etc, but if it was 100 degrees out or pouring rain, my lunch dollars were getting spent at places I could get to via the tunnels.

Hannibal Lecter wrote:The Deep Ellum community fought HARD to keep the Good-Latimer grade separation, especially the Gaston tunnel. The murals lining the tunnel were a beloved gateway to the area.

Similarly, the vast majority of current residents are strongly opposed to replacing I-345 at grade. That effort, like so many things, is coming from outsiders.

Don't blame us for this rampant stupidity.

Memories: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ericinsf/ ... otostream/

Thanks for the flickr pictures and the history lesson. Some of those old murals were way better than the vanilla shit they have today. I wish they had kept some like pieces of the Berlin Wall.

Then who was pushing for eliminating the Gaston Tunnel? Dart? Probably b/c at grade was cheaper than tunneling. Some article sources would be nice.

This further illustrates the short sightedness of doing things cheap than doing things right.
If they figured out how to keep grade separation, (going out on a branch here...)
either by incorporating the Gaston tunnel, or burying the middle rail section of Good latimer,
and keeping the cars at grade at the sides like it is today.
Or altogether just making deep ellum station cut/cover.
It would have been much easier to bring in D2 without it interfering with traffic.

I guess back then no one cared what the deep ellum community had to say...
Hopefully you guys band together and stay strong.

Some pieces were kept. For instance, the robot at Good-Latimer and Gaston is leaning against a piece:

https://goo.gl/maps/SfkYQrG5ewjzhsWK6

I understand that the concrete "1930" from the tunnel entrance was gifted to Preservation Dallas.

DART filled in the tunnel because it was cheaper than reinforcing it, which they said couldn't support the weight of the trains.

Hannibal Lecter wrote:^ The ultimate irony being that there are probably more construction cranes right now within three blocks of I-345 -- where Kennedy said no one would build -- than any similar sized area in Dallas County.

My thoughts exactly!

Couldn't support the weight of the trains? The concrete "tunnel" was a bridge built for a freight rail yard...I find that hard to believe. Nonetheless, I really want to see D2 come to fruition. The rapid growth and densification of Dallas now necessitate a subway system.

Dallas Gypsy wrote:Couldn't support the weight of the trains? The concrete "tunnel" was a bridge built for a freight rail yard...I find that hard to believe. Nonetheless, I really want to see D2 come to fruition. The rapid growth and densification of Dallas now necessitate a subway system.

To be clear, D2 isn't a "subway system" - it's a largely duplicative route through downtown that happens to be below ground instead of at-grade like almost all of the DART LRT network. They're not even building stub tunnels or terminating platforms to enable future "subway" expansions. The rolling stock and platforms aren't sized for the sort of capacity you'd see on the subway systems of Chicago, NYC, or DC.

Was recently watching a youtube video about Dutch three types of surface pavements: Highways, roads, and streets which the commenter host translated into English. Was a great video, that show all three types are needed in a healthy city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM
It is the "stroads" that we have too much of in the USA, and should reconfigure into streets, roads, or both roads and streets in a new way.

Interesting point of view I thought I should share.

electricron wrote:Was recently watching a youtube video about Dutch three types of surface pavements: Highways, roads, and streets which the commenter host translated into English. Was a great video, that show all three types are needed in a healthy city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM
It is the "stroads" that we have too much of in the USA, and should reconfigure into streets, roads, or both roads and streets in a new way.

Interesting point of view I thought I should share.

Very good video, I will use the term “stroad” from now on.
It is however a completely different matter on how to implement improvements by designating types of streets in Dallas for example.
I think a good start would be to name things correctly. No more Blvd, rd, lane, st, etc.
Only 3 types from now on to clearly differentiate between them

This would permeate into all kinds of debates we are having in Dallas
From Dart D2, to I 345 in Deep Ellum.
In lots of places, politicians like to slap on a bike line onto a road, to make a stroad.
Like new rims on an old beat up car, its not gonna fix much and only scores political pts
The result is bike lines that aren’t used, are not safe. And more traffic on stroads
Regarding Dart D2, this only stresses the need to eliminate points of conflict where all 3 types of traffic intersect such as at the y junction for the deep ellum station.

Or tearing down I345 to shove a highway down the throats of deep ellum which has arguably real streets. And then we’ll slap bike lines on it and make it a stroad.

Is D2 Queued up for any funding in this new infrastructure bill?

Cbdallas wrote:Is D2 Queued up for any funding in this new infrastructure bill?

The bipartisan infrastructure bill has $39 Billion targeted for transit.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... ture-deal/
"This is the largest Federal investment in public transit in history, and devotes a larger share of funds from surface transportation reauthorization to transit in the history of the programs. It will repair and upgrade aging infrastructure, modernize bus and rail fleets, make stations accessible to all users, and bring transit service to new communities. It will replace thousands of transit vehicles, including buses, with clean, zero emission vehicles. And, it will benefit communities of color since these households are twice as likely to take public transportation and many of these communities lack sufficient public transit options."

Sounds great doesn't it? Is it as great as many wish? Nope. Why? Because the $39 Billion is not all additional money. The Federal government last year spend $13 Billion on public transit. The bipartisan infrastructure bill is a multiyear program. It only takes three years of existing funding to reach that $39 Billion. Considering the next two years public transit budget is about the same as last years (it would be considered a cut if not), the total for public transit over three years would now be $65 Billion.
Some math follows so you can follow my thinking:
$13 Billion x 3 years = $39 Billion
$13 Billion x 2 years = $26 Billion
$39 Billion bipartisan bill (which includes this years $13 Billion) + $26 Billion (next two years $13 Billion budgets) = $65 Billion
So over the next 3 years, that would be a 66% increase in funding for public transit.
And that's assuming the $39 Billion bipartisan deal is all allocated in the next three years. The percentage increase would be less over more years.

I bet many of you thought all that $39 Billion on the bipartisan deal was all additional funding and was all going to be spent this year didn't you?

All politicans twist the truth in ways to make what they do seem bigger than what it really is, or make challenges facing the country larger than what it really is. Their public communications are always full of exaggerations.

Now, I made some assumptions earlier about the future, let everyone know that I am not a magician, I rely upon what happen in the past to project the future. The partisan infrastructure bill could add even more money to public transit programs, the next two budgets could also be just as big or even bigger budget busters.

But there will most likely be enough money in the FTA's budget to fund its share of D2, but will they allocate that money for Dallas or somewhere else instead? That question remains unanswered to date. We can hope!

Cbdallas wrote:Is D2 Queued up for any funding in this new infrastructure bill?

Secretary Pete Buttigieg rides DART train, highlighting infrastructure needs in North Texas

“This would be historic in its proportions. We’re talking about $3 billion in support for transit coming to Texas alone. And more than $25 billion coming to Texas alone,” Buttigieg told WFAA

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local ... 982e456414

Article is very skimp on details, looks like a press op. But I suppose there will lots of money for DART to apply FOR, although not specified within the bill itself.