Texas’ Long-Awaited Bullet Train Plans to Start Construction

I went to Dallas for a concert with some friends there. It does happen.

 

I don't disagree with any of that, but it's the reality I live in. lol. If you want to change how people think, more power to you. The DFW area has one of, if not the largest, metro rail system in the nation, and they've pumped over $5-$6 billion dollars into that thing and the ridership doesn't really match expectations. If you want to magically change how cities are/have been built in the nation, then have at it. If you want to start with a clean slate, go for it. There are a lot of things that can't be wished away readily. Maybe 30-50 years down the road and with tons of funding.

 

I have no idea what you're stating.

 

"In Texas, you can travel 8-10 hours easily and still be in Texas but nowhere near a major city"

 

I'm sorry, but did I miss it by 30 minutes? lol. Ok, do the DFW area.

 

Actually by 15, but that's the largest distance between any two major cities.

 

Maybe that's the issue. I don't consider places like Abilene and Midland/Odessa "major cities". Hell, there are probably at least 6-8 suburbs around Dallas that have larger population than those towns. I know it takes around 9 hours to get to El Paso driving from DFW. Hell, Austin to El Paso is probably over 8 hours, and I'm not sure wth is between Austin and El Paso other than dirt.

 

The leg from Houston to El Paso is pretty close to the 2nd leg from El Paso to LA.

 

Yes, it would take 30-50 years. That's about how long it took us to get where we are now. lol. But you'd see incremental improvements over time. It wouldn't be a magical over night thing.

Would it takes "tons of funding"? How much money will America put into funding roads in the next 30-50 years? What if in that time we did common sense crap. Instead of building roads with the adjacent side walks at the minimal 3ft width, we build 5-6ft sidewalks everywhere and ensure all the sidewalks actually connect to one another? What if we eliminated that stupid 1 ft strip of grass between the sidewalk and road and just pave that so you can have 3-4 people walk shoulder to shoulder? What if you insist businesses put their parking lots around back instead of in the front so pedestrians don't have the gauntlet of dealing with mixing with cars? Anyway, I could go on and on.

If we all keep telling ourselves the investment is too big so why bother, then every time we have a project, nobody will ever insist we can make incremental improvements rather than always making it better for cars (which always means making it worse for pedestrians).

Even in Dallas, the ridership doesn't match expectations because it's still too car friendly. Who the hell wants to walk anywhere when you get off the train, you take your life in your hands just crossing the street?

Yea, I know what the naysayers say, this is a car centric country. Blah blah. That is BS. You already have places like the Woodlands, City Center, etc etc. that started to realize this. Build places where people walk and make it easy ...and people will show up. Those town center places are all wildly popular and they are NOT car friendly. You have parking garages around back and even the roads that go through are very slow speed roads with minimal on-street parking ...and it's popular and nobody complains. It can be done. Now only if our city planners will start to think like that instead of a few visionary land developers. It'll be slow and can get incrementally better. But we need the American public to stop telling ourselves that it can't change.

/rant

 

lol. I don't think anyone is saying "the investment is too big, so why bother". A lot of those things you mentioned are already happening. Maybe they're not happening fast enough for you, but ah well, like I said, it ain't happenin' all at once. For example, those "all-in-one" communities, that I can't stand, where shopping, work, and housing are together are being built more and more around the DFW area instead of the typical suburban subdivisions (although those are still the majority, of course). Of course, a lot of that is due to the fact developers want to bilk more money out of people - "wait, we can build vertically on the same plot of land and charge people over $600k for multiple 1000 sq. ft. apartments and condos? Sweet!" That makes them about as excited as now only having to use 50' lots to build houses on and still charging 3x as much as they did for a home just 20 years ago that were built on 60-65 foot lots. lol. But if you want "rail everywhere", "tiny homes for everyone" and "bicycles for everyone", that may be on the list far in the future - but definitely ahead of "peace on earth" and "good will towards men".

 

I hope this thing stops at Disneyland TX.

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/za06h7qoPqw

 

Yes, there are examples of this happening but, as you say, when developers are driving it then their motivation is profit and not actually for the public good. The result is a developer builds out an area and then those that live in the region can't easily get there from here.

It's why we need public officials to focus on building holistic/regional plans that focus on improving quality of life, and not improving profits or cow towing to special interests.

Until the then, we'll still have 3ft sidewalks that dead-end into a grass field 100ft after a train station or telephone poles in the middle of sidewalks or bridges/overpasses that are impossible for pedestrians/cycles to utilize cause they are built for cars. Nobody in their right mind would use public transportation if once you get off, you have to play chicken with car traffic.

Maybe developers and city planners have a similar goal, to make more densely populated walkable areas ...but they are coming from opposite ends of the spectrum so the end result is what it is. Little islands of coolness rather than regional quality of life improvements.

Anyway, it seems you and I are have similar ideas. You are just the glass half empty guy and I'm the half full guy. The reality of it is you are probably closer to reality cause I don't have much hope we'll get their in our lifetime. But I try to promote optimistic visions in hopes that someday we'll move the needle if enough people insist.

 

I agree that we probably agree more than disagree. In the end I would love all these things, but I do disagree with you on the glass half-full guy. I'm the guy that just says "quit debating about whether it's half-full or half-empty... we just have a half-glass of water to drink". lol.

 

That's exactly what a "glass half empty" guy would say.

 

We need and will get rail. We just have a lot of brittle and antiquated systems to work through--politically, economically, socially.

Nationalize the national high-speed network. Let states/regions and privates work on the stations and secondary lines that connect places like Wichita Falls, Lufkin, and Corpus. Draw a line from Abilene to Uvalde (or use the 100th Meridian nationally) and no community on the east side of that line should have more than a 30 minute drive to get on a train that can take them anywhere.

 

California's challenges and delays with their high speed rail system can serve as a strong example/warning against environmental red tape, land owner interests, and corporate infighting while laying an "optimal path."

Then you have clowns like Elon who bigly claims that he could do it better with sci-fi realistic hyperloops and hobbit tunnels only to serve as a redirect for his "greener" Tesla.

It is coming though I imagine pro-car Texas has its own exclusive snipers for taking a similar system down with delays and cost overruns.

 

hobbit tunnels. lmaoooooooooooooooooooooo

entrance for hyperloop:



I can't believe a city actually paid for it. Of course it's vegas. anything to attract idiots.

 

Mr. Biden, Tear Down This Highway https://nyti.ms/3x4ppig