The_Overdog wrote:https://www.dart.org/ShareRoot/about/expansion/cottonbelt/DARTCottonBeltMeeting22jul19.pdf
This doc shows that the line will run to the right/east (I think) of the existing red line with the station at CityLine to the east of the existing station. If you check it does look like they will need to purchase or be really careful with their design to avoid taking a lot of property in Plano.
art_suckz wrote:IMO the parking lots should be shopping centers with businesses paying leases to DART
Tivo_Kenevil wrote:art_suckz wrote:IMO the parking lots should be shopping centers with businesses paying leases to DART
All Dart lots should be mixed used stations. Imagine having a couple Mockingbird stations around town. That's just good for everyone including non-DART riders.
muncien wrote:A few thoughts about DART and parking...
1. I don't really get why DART is in the parking lot business.
2. If you have them, why not just charge EVERYBODY who parks there?
3. If you are a resident in the DART service area, you likely have a bus route nearby and have no real NEED to park at the parking lots anyway.
4. So, who cares if out of service area people park there, so long as they pay.
5. If you live in the service area and really don't like the bus, and you choose to pay to park, that should be okay too (not being an arse... I don't like the bus myself).
itsjrd1964 wrote:Thank you Overdog for helping answer my question. I figured the arrangement at Cityline/Bush would be pretty much like this.Screenshot_20200115-134414_Drive.jpg
12th Street looks a little different than I would imagine. Looks like they won't have a combined Silver and Red/Orange station there. Hard to tell if one of my questions (regarding how the Silver will meet/split from the Red/Orange at 12th Street) will be answered. If the split has the Silver going under, there will need to be a bit of turning-radius vicinity there, and there is a commercial business just to the west of the Red/Orange line. If the Silver goes over, it would have to be quite high to get over the Red/Orange tracks and their associated electric lines. But from the way the lines are drawn at both stations, the Silver line looks to be separate and west of the Red/Orange line. A very tight fit, which will probably only be accomplished with the Silver having a small-footprint aerial viaduct, as almost all the land north of Plano Pkwy. is taken up with commercial, factories, and a small office park; the part south of Plano Pkwy. to Bush Turnpike has apartments to the west. There's not nearly as much room there as with the placement of the apartments west of Cityline/Bush station. Those likely knew about the possibility of the Silver line before building, while the ones to the probably did not.
Screenshot_20200115-134348_Drive.jpg
At the same time DART is moving forward with the $1.2 billion Silver Line, formerly known as the Cotton Belt Line, for a transit rail connection between Plano and DFW Airport. The Silver Line faces strong opposition from North Dallas neighbors who want the portion of that project that would run behind their homes to be built in a tunnel instead of on the surface.
DART has resisted a Silver Line tunnel as it offers neighbor various other “betterments” like sound walls and low noise tracks.
exelone31 wrote:Let's all keep in mind that it is entirely possible that these complaints are coming from people who voluntarily chose (under no duress!) to live on a street called "Spanky Branch Ct".
Matt777 wrote:tamtagon wrote:I still don't understand why Collyville rejected a station.
Because in their warped minds, they equate public transportation with poor people and criminals. They're the kind of people who rent a car when to go to Manhattan, and drive it so they can go see Times Square.
Cbdallas wrote:Meanwhile the residents of urban Dallas are begging for more stations and transit options and these people don't even want the train up in their suburban neighborhoods. I still don't believe in this line and would rather have diverted this money to D2 and opening up more urban stations.
Cbdallas wrote:Meanwhile the residents of urban Dallas are begging for more stations and transit options and these people don't even want the train up in their suburban neighborhoods. I still don't believe in this line and would rather have diverted this money to D2 and opening up more urban stations.
Cbdallas wrote:Why would the Green line be a negative for Deep Ellum this seems so contrary to other urban cities where they would want transit. Not sure I understand. Even Los Angeles of all places is adding more rail and stations why would Dallas not want more instead of less transit.
quixomniac wrote:And Id also like to add that far north Dallas is basically a suburb and we shouldn't stick to this labeling of entire cities as urban and suburuban and approach everything in terms of density.
Cons:
- The tracks cross three of the major routes in/out of the neighborhood. The trains block the street a surprising percentage of the time.
- The train drivers love to push the button to lower the crossing gates long before they leave the station. This is especially dangerous when they block the fire trucks and ambulances on Malcolm X and on Hall.
- When the crossing gates malfunction they create a major mess.
- To build the rail line they replaced two grade-separated street crossings with at-grade intersections, closed off several other intersections, and added other new traffic lights.
And let's not forget the Engineering by Mob that happened with D2 - a whole lot of urban Dallasites had no problem putting on their NIMBY hats and demanding expensive changes to the routing because...they didn't want "noisy" trains passing by their houses! And rather than fronting the cash for these expensive changes, Dallas made finding additional funding for the D2 subway DART's problem. Compare that to Plano, Richardson, Addison, and Irving who have all paid in significant cash towards adjusting rail alignments and plans for the benefit of their city. Maybe that's why the Silver Line is under construction and D2 is still mired in planning purgatory?
Parker Road wrote:And let's not forget the Engineering by Mob that happened with D2 - a whole lot of urban Dallasites had no problem putting on their NIMBY hats and demanding expensive changes to the routing because...they didn't want "noisy" trains passing by their houses! And rather than fronting the cash for these expensive changes, Dallas made finding additional funding for the D2 subway DART's problem. Compare that to Plano, Richardson, Addison, and Irving who have all paid in significant cash towards adjusting rail alignments and plans for the benefit of their city. Maybe that's why the Silver Line is under construction and D2 is still mired in planning purgatory?
Maybe the Silver Line is under construction because it follows a (mostly) existing ROW through low-density areas while D2 is going to be built on an all-new alignment through the most highly built-up part of the Metroplex?
TNWE wrote:The latest Silver Line briefing has some interesting nuggets on the design of the Downtown Carrolton station and how it will interchange with both the existing Green Line, as well as potential A-Train and "Frisco Line" commuter rail extensions...
https://dart.org/about/board/boardagend ... 0mar20.pdf (starting on page 5)
The most frustrating thing is the addition of a 550(!) foot ramp to connect the Silver Line Platform to the Green Line platform. I can't imagine anyone traversing that when the plan already had stairs, elevators, and in one alternative, escalators in a climate-controlled structure!
electricron wrote:TNWE wrote:The latest Silver Line briefing has some interesting nuggets on the design of the Downtown Carrolton station and how it will interchange with both the existing Green Line, as well as potential A-Train and "Frisco Line" commuter rail extensions...
https://dart.org/about/board/boardagend ... 0mar20.pdf (starting on page 5)
The most frustrating thing is the addition of a 550(!) foot ramp to connect the Silver Line Platform to the Green Line platform. I can't imagine anyone traversing that when the plan already had stairs, elevators, and in one alternative, escalators in a climate-controlled structure!
There has to be a backup way for wheelchair or otherwise mobility challenged people to get from one level platform to another in case the elevator(s) breaks down. The idea that they will never be out of service, if only for routine maintenance, is wrong. That more than 500 foot ramp is needed for the almost 40 feet in elevation changes between levels keeping it to an acceptable grade.
Check out Mockingbird Station and note how many passengers will wait for the elevator, use the escalators, or use the stairway. You might be surprised at how many avoid the electro-mechanical solutions, getting some exercise in using the human enable solutions.
TNWE wrote:There's no ramp for the existing elevated Green Line platform though - the required ADA redundancy is provided by having two elevators (three if you count the one at the south end of the ped walkway over Belt Line). What is special about the Silver line that it needs a ramp connection in addition to stairs, elevators, and (potentially) escalators?
electricron wrote:TNWE wrote:There's no ramp for the existing elevated Green Line platform though - the required ADA redundancy is provided by having two elevators (three if you count the one at the south end of the ped walkway over Belt Line). What is special about the Silver line that it needs a ramp connection in addition to stairs, elevators, and (potentially) escalators?
The Silver Line platform is only getting one elevator, there is no second elevator in the plans for it. The backup reason I responded earlier still applies to it.
The Silver Line platform will also be placed in the midst of two freight railroad corridors, BNSF to the south and DGNO to the north. An at grade access to the platform over track with mile long freight trains may not be considered safe, so it'll be an up and over catwalk in place for it, a catwalk slopping down, or an elevator from the light rail station platform.
TNWE wrote:I took a closer look at the plans, and if DART truly intends to "wall off" Silver Line access from the south and make the only pedestrian ingress/egress via the new parking lot or elevated Green Line platform, that's even worse. All of the existing bus bays are to the south, so any Silver Line <-> Bus connections also require going up and over.
If they're going to build a ramp, it should be located in a way that serves as many use cases as possible (i.e. facilitating bus connections or pedestrian access to Belt Line Road), and not just tacked on to the side as an afterthought that adds *another* avoidable pedestrian crossing of the LRT tracks
electricron wrote:The BNSF line and the DGNO line will be switching places to avoid a railroad diamond crossing. An elevated crossing will be added to the east, with the DGNO (Silver) line going over the BNSF line.
Existing layout
North
BNSF line
DGNO (ex-Cotton Belt) line
South
New layout
North
DGNO (Silver) line
BNSF line
South
The platforms need to meet the Silver (DGNO) tracks and not the BNSF tracks. And of course, BNSF does not want Silver line passengers walking across their line. So a passenger bridge or ramp will be needed for them. The existing DART station crosses both lines, and already has vertical access to the parking lots and Beltline Road to the south. So connecting the Silver line platforms to the existing station that bridges over both railroad tracks is the cheapest solution. Otherwise, the Silver line would have to build ramps on both sides of a new bridge over the new BNSF tracks. Why?
Additionally, by using the Green Line station as the bridge, interchange transfers would be quicker between the Silver and Green lines. Otherwise, transferring Silver line passengers would have to climb up to the new bridge, climb down on the other side just to climb back up to the Green line station, or vice versa. Wouldn't you rather just climb once?
Redblock wrote:A second shipment of new rail has been received. It appears that it was unloaded at the same spot as the first shipment, between Marsh and Surveyor. This link describes other progress on the project.
https://www.dart.org/news/news.asp?ID=1524
exelone31 wrote:That Shiloh Road station rendering looks like a hidden level in GoldenEye or something. Kind of hilarious, but I suppose a kitschy theme isn't the worst thing.
I have a feeling the UTD Station is going to be heavily utilized.
TNWE wrote:exelone31 wrote:That Shiloh Road station rendering looks like a hidden level in GoldenEye or something. Kind of hilarious, but I suppose a kitschy theme isn't the worst thing.
I have a feeling the UTD Station is going to be heavily utilized.
I really hate that DART feels compelled to make each station have a unique design "theme"-what's wrong with a consistent, clean look for all the stations constructed in a given project? If anything, station "art" should be the responsibility of the city where the station is located, along with the betterments. DART's mandate is to provide public transit, not public art and decorative sound walls...
electricron wrote:TNWE wrote:exelone31 wrote:That Shiloh Road station rendering looks like a hidden level in GoldenEye or something. Kind of hilarious, but I suppose a kitschy theme isn't the worst thing.
I have a feeling the UTD Station is going to be heavily utilized.
I really hate that DART feels compelled to make each station have a unique design "theme"-what's wrong with a consistent, clean look for all the stations constructed in a given project? If anything, station "art" should be the responsibility of the city where the station is located, along with the betterments. DART's mandate is to provide public transit, not public art and decorative sound walls...
By Federal law, if DART accepts FDA, FRA, or USDOT grants, they have to set aside a certain percentage of those grants for public art. All that Federal money comes with strings attached. So it is within DART's "Legal" mandate to provide public art alongside public transit.
It has been DART's policy all along to budget $5-10 million per station for public art, and anything over that amount would be paid by the local cities.
While it is true that there is nothing wrong with identical looking stations, why do you think it is wrong to have individual looking stations? I personally like the idea that every station's users having a say on how their stations should reflect the local neighborhoods history and values.
electricron wrote:To my surprise, the law in question was changed in 2013.
Read https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/gra ... ic-transit
To keep it simple as much as possible, classic art like statues are now prohibited, but art like functional design features like lighting, roofs, building materials - bricks, pavers, stones, landscaping - are still allowed and encouraged.
The_Overdog wrote:I personally would think they would want to downplay the fact that an electric substation is across from a rail station, instead of things that people riding a train might want to go to.
The_Overdog wrote:I personally would think they would want to downplay the fact that an electric substation is across from a rail station, instead of things that people riding a train might want to go to.
TNWE wrote:Redblock wrote:A second shipment of new rail has been received. It appears that it was unloaded at the same spot as the first shipment, between Marsh and Surveyor. This link describes other progress on the project.
https://www.dart.org/news/news.asp?ID=1524
I don't recall previous DART projects having even one, much less two news releases about delivery of rail. Nothing wrong with sharing progress updates, but if they publish a release every time they receive a shipment of materials, it's gonna get as tedious as every public update meeting spending 5 minutes discussing the slide with pictures of construction equipment
Approval from FTA received on November 12, 2020 for locating the EMF at DCTA – “The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has reviewed the supplemental environmental documentation DART submitted for the Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Project (the Silver Line) on 30 October 2020. FTA determines that, in accordance with 23 CFR 771.129, the design modifications to the Silver Line would not result in any substantial impact to the quality of the human environment, and the previously approved FEIS/ROD of 9 November 2018 remains valid.”
northsouth wrote:https://www.dart.org/about/board/boardagendas/planningitem7_08dec20.pdf
Interesting info on page 31:Approval from FTA received on November 12, 2020 for locating the EMF at DCTA – “The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has reviewed the supplemental environmental documentation DART submitted for the Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Project (the Silver Line) on 30 October 2020. FTA determines that, in accordance with 23 CFR 771.129, the design modifications to the Silver Line would not result in any substantial impact to the quality of the human environment, and the previously approved FEIS/ROD of 9 November 2018 remains valid.”
This is the first I'm seeing of talk of moving the Silver Line EMF to Lewisville. It makes sense, though: the DCTA facility is much closer than the TRE one, doesn't require use of relatively busy freight trackage to reach, has more room to expand, and is already set up for a similar model of vehicle from the same manufacturer.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests