DART Plots Love Field Stop

[texman]

I know this isnt likley, but heres my idea. Take out the Inwood station idea, Elevate the line over mockingbird and have a ststion right above it. Then connect a skybridge.
Amatuer paint:

[texman]

it is too late to submit another design. That's why DART submitted both designs at the same time. They realized that they wouldn't get a second bite at the apple, so to speak.

Well why not!? They wont let us have our damn tunnel, so they better let us do what we want. In a reseasonable price range of course. ;)

[Mballar]

Just for consideration... did you realize that even without the tunnel, DART plans to run the line 40 feet below Mockingbird Lane?

That's not my understanding at all. I think that the design along Denton Drive (absent the terminal option) is clearly illustrating an at-grade line from Mockingbird Lane to the Brookhollow Station.

[Mballar]

I know this isnt likley, but heres my idea. Take out the Inwood station idea, Elevate the line over mockingbird and have a ststion right above it. Then connect a skybridge.
Amatuer paint:


I like the effort that you put into trying to make this thing work. However, any type of skybridge that close to the runway is going to cause some serious problems with the FAA, AND I have to think that constructing a free-standing skybridge that long would be an expensive proposition in-and-of-itself.

[RobertB]

That's not my understanding at all. I think that the design along Denton Drive (absent the terminal option) is clearly illustrating an at-grade line from Mockingbird Lane to the Brookhollow Station.
They may have a new plan in place, but this drawing shows existing ground level at 470 (looks like feet above sea level), and the "top of rail" at 430. Here's a highlighted version. I wouldn't have caught it myself, except that I've obsessively/compulsively pored over these drawings (as well as those for the much simpler SE line).

[tamtagon]

I like the effort that you put into trying to make this thing work. However, any type of skybridge that close to the runway is going to cause some serious problems with the FAA, AND I have to think that constructing a free-standing skybridge that long would be an expensive proposition in-and-of-itself.

I'm going to disagree with you R. Mbala, and mostly agree with texman, but I'm going with the potential of the Inwood Station to also function as an entry into the airport.

Assuming this becomes the reality:

"Once the tunnel plan is formally rejected, DART is likely to revert to its second option for Love Field service. A main light-rail line to northwest Dallas, Irving and Carrollton would run beside the airport, and a $70 million rail spur and shuttle train would drop off airport passengers at the nearest main line station."

DART, Dallas and Texas have already pledged a the additional $100 million needed for a tunnel. Rather than build a light rail spur into the airport exiting the main line just north of the Inwood station, the Inwood Station is transformed into much more than a DART station. Build into the DART station, a full service passenger checkin facility connected by tram to the terminal and gates. Get off DART at Inwood, walk to the checkin counter, take a tram to your gate. Most passenger drop-off/pick-up is moved from the terminal to the Inwood station. The tram from Inwood Station would only need a small amount of additional land along the mainline.

Texas builds the remote airport check-in facility into the Inwood Station, DART and Dallas build the secure tram from Inwood to the gate.

[RobertB]

DART, Dallas and Texas have already pledged a the additional $100 million needed for a tunnel. Rather than build a light rail spur into the airport exiting the main line just north of the Inwood station, the Inwood Station is transformed into much more than a DART station. Build into the DART station, a full service passenger checkin facility connected by tram to the terminal and gates. Get off DART at Inwood, walk to the checkin counter, take a tram to your gate. Most passenger drop-off/pick-up is moved from the terminal to the Inwood station. The tram from Inwood Station would only need a small amount of additional land along the mainline.

Texas builds the remote airport check-in facility into the Inwood Station, DART and Dallas build the secure tram from Inwood to the gate.
One problem with this alternative will be the fact that Inwood Station has already had to be redesigned to minimize impact to Rusk Middle School, which is caty-corner from the station location shown in the picture below (from DART's design as of June 2003 (http://www.dart.org/nweis/nwcorridoreis5c.htm)). According to DART:

The Inwood Station was relocated from north of Inwood to south of Inwood, west of Denton Drive. This relocation avoids five business displacements, lessens potential impacts to Rusk Middle School and reduces project cost. This relocation was proposed in part due to comments from affected property owners during the DEIS comment period.
Inwood Station is already very tightly packed due to these concerns, and adding a tram stop to it would pretty much wipe out what little parking is there. Plus, remember that this is an elevated station -- your tram station would also need to be elevated, unless you want folks to lug their bags down the escalator.

On the other hand, the surface spur is going to run into a lot of trouble from residents and business owners. You'll end up wiping out one and possibly two gas stations right at the airport entrance -- a lucrative spot if ever was one. And you're probably going to end up with another tooth-grinding sharp turn that will create a noise condition that may require additional mitigation (read: cost). The tunnel was clearly the best alternative, if its cost hadn't been so high... due in no small part to the area's waterlogged geology.

[Mballar]

I'm going to disagree with you R. Mbala, and mostly agree with texman, but I'm going with the potential of the Inwood Station to also function as an entry into the airport.

Assuming this becomes the reality:

"Once the tunnel plan is formally rejected, DART is likely to revert to its second option for Love Field service. A main light-rail line to northwest Dallas, Irving and Carrollton would run beside the airport, and a $70 million rail spur and shuttle train would drop off airport passengers at the nearest main line station."

DART, Dallas and Texas have already pledged a the additional $100 million needed for a tunnel. Rather than build a light rail spur into the airport exiting the main line just north of the Inwood station, the Inwood Station is transformed into much more than a DART station. Build into the DART station, a full service passenger checkin facility connected by tram to the terminal and gates. Get off DART at Inwood, walk to the checkin counter, take a tram to your gate. Most passenger drop-off/pick-up is moved from the terminal to the Inwood station. The tram from Inwood Station would only need a small amount of additional land along the mainline.

Texas builds the remote airport check-in facility into the Inwood Station, DART and Dallas build the secure tram from Inwood to the gate.

Ahh. . . . So much to say. . .I'll try to be brief.

1. Again, I appreciate the effort and your creative license with this issue. However, what you propose requires way too much supposition. It supposes that DART even wants to transform the Inwood Station into something "much more than a DART Station" in the first place. It further supposes that even if DART wanted to "transform" the station to allow passenger drop-off/pick-up, that Love Field Airport Officials would want passenger drop off/pick up at that remote location. It further supposes that even if DART wanted the transformation and Love Field officials wanted the off-site check-in, that the feds would allow such a thing to happen for security reasons post 9/11. I could go on, but you get the idea.

2. Why would Texas and Dallas apply pledged funds to any type of tunnel now that they know the federal funding is gone? My guess is that Dallas is going to take its share of that money and apply it to more immediate city needs.

3. DART doesn't just change its plans at the end of the process, considering the history of the agency. There are numerous meetings where approval of plans/designs occurs. The agency has to maintain its accountability. The plan that has been submitted for funding to the feds is probably the final design, considering all of the approvals/enviornmental impact studies, etc. have been concluded. I could be wrong though.

4. You also stated that you disagree with my comment regarding the syybridge (i.e. expensive & problematic due to proximity/crossing landing strip). However, your post did not address the skybridge at all. Do you or don't you think it's a good idea?

[jammin]

Love Field light rail plan rejected

03:36 PM CST on Tuesday, November 23, 2004


By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News



The Federal Transit Administration confirmed today that it has formally rejected DART's plans for a $160 million light-rail tunnel under Love Field Airport.

The city of Dallas and Dallas Area Rapid Transit had hoped to build a single rail line that connects the central business district, Love Field and Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.

DART officials said they would review their options to determine how best to get rail passengers to Love Field.

"It was a good idea, we just couldn't make the cost-effectiveness numbers work out," said Gary Thomas, DART president and executive director.

DART board members were expected to take up a resolution today affirming their commitment to serve Love Field, although they are unclear about how to do it.

[texman]

Hopefully, they'll go with the rail spur option. For this to work they have to have a rail connection. The whole "shuttle train" idea though is stupid. Maybe they could re-route a line making Love Field the end of the line. A bus isnt going to attract riders.

[texman]

Also, what was this TXDOT money going too? Just speeding up the lines construction progress?

[tamtagon]

Ahh. . . . So much to say. . .I'll try to be brief.

1. Again, I appreciate the effort and your creative license with this issue. However, what you propose requires way too much supposition. It supposes that DART even wants to transform the Inwood Station into something "much more than a DART Station" in the first place. It further supposes that even if DART wanted to "transform" the station to allow passenger drop-off/pick-up, that Love Field Airport Officials would want passenger drop off/pick up at that remote location. It further supposes that even if DART wanted the transformation and Love Field officials wanted the off-site check-in, that the feds would allow such a thing to happen for security reasons post 9/11. I could go on, but you get the idea.

2. Why would Texas and Dallas apply pledged funds to any type of tunnel now that they know the federal funding is gone? My guess is that Dallas is going to take its share of that money and apply it to more immediate city needs.

3. DART doesn't just change its plans at the end of the process, considering the history of the agency. There are numerous meetings where approval of plans/designs occurs. The agency has to maintain its accountability. The plan that has been submitted for funding to the feds is probably the final design, considering all of the approvals/enviornmental impact studies, etc. have been concluded. I could be wrong though.

4. You also stated that you disagree with my comment regarding the syybridge (i.e. expensive & problematic due to proximity/crossing landing strip). However, your post did not address the skybridge at all. Do you or don't you think it's a good idea?

At this point, all I really have with this issue is creative license (a recurring theme for me). Any effort is more than amply rewarded on a personal level just to be participating in the discussion - probably the same for everyone in the discussion.

Without a DART stop at Love Field and, frankly, thinking a little more about the whole deal, I cannot really come up with any reason why an FAA approved skybridge would even be needed. The spur will do everything that's needed - take people from the airport to the train station.

1. Since DART and Love Field officials are committed to customer service, the remote check-in would benefit departing flyers by eliminating two luggage handling situations: getting on the spur, getting off the spur. If a DART 'skycap' station design meets FAA security requirements, both transit authorities would probably go for it. The time passengers and luggage travel along the spur would even allow for more thorough security checks - more supposition: luggage would be screened on the way to the terminal - that might call for too fancy a luggage carrier...?

2. Texas and Dallas will commit the funds to the best option. It is entirely possible that the implementation cost of a remote skycap station would be millions less than a tunnel, AND there would be one less stop for DART passengers not going to the airport.

3. We all may be in for a series of delays if the transportation bill doesnt get signed by the president. $700 million is far from a done deal, and it's likely that if billions must be cut in D.C., DART will be included - I'm bracing for another disappointment. Optomistically, I'm not ruling out round two for the Love Field tunnel - we may have chance to revise the proposal, this time with the state chipping in the amount necessary to meet the FTA cost-effective threshold. Nevertheless, if funding for the alignment w/spur is approved, DART or Dallas or Texas would be allowed to pay for any upgrades.

4. I'm no engineer, but I would think there would be plenty of room for a skybridge to run parallel to the runway from Brookhollow although, I guess the most direct route would be east toward Bachman Lake, then south. I didnt consider the congenstion near the Inwood station.

So, actually, the spur isnt going to be all that bad, mostly the extra time and effort to get on/off a train with luggage - actually a good thing for DART riders not going to the airport.

[texman]

So, actually, the spur isnt going to be all that bad, mostly the extra time and effort to get on/off a train with luggage - actually a good thing for DART riders not going to the airport.

I wish with this spur option thing, the "shuttle trains" don't just go to inwood to connect. I say create a new line, say from Pearl to Love Field Station. They don't even need a color either. They can just say "Love Field" in the destination sign. Then we can let SWA put there logo all over these trains so they can pay for the costs and they can be called "Love Trains" Good Idea?

[freewaytincan]

I wish with this spur option thing, the "shuttle trains" don't just go to inwood to connect. I say create a new line, say from Pearl to Love Field Station. They don't even need a color either. They can just say "Love Field" in the destination sign. Then we can let SWA put there logo all over these trains so they can pay for the costs and they can be called "Love Trains" Good Idea?

Or a tunnel with boats. The Tunnel Of Love.

[texman]

Now that I think about it the transit mall is crowded as it is, so instead of sending my idea to Pearl why not to Union Station?

[drumguy8800]

I wish with this spur option thing, the "shuttle trains" don't just go to inwood to connect. I say create a new line, say from Pearl to Love Field Station. They don't even need a color either. They can just say "Love Field" in the destination sign. Then we can let SWA put there logo all over these trains so they can pay for the costs and they can be called "Love Trains" Good Idea?

It'd be impractical as the "Love Trains" would be few and far between. The current thing.. with just a rail spur - is a pretty cool idea. If they did build a rail spur, they could probably make it connect to the Terminal by just building an underpass underneath one of the runways.. right?

[texman]

It'd be impractical as the "Love Trains" would be few and far between. The current thing.. with just a rail spur - is a pretty cool idea. If they did build a rail spur, they could probably make it connect to the Terminal by just building an underpass underneath one of the runways.. right?

Hows it impractical? Makes sense to me and I think I'll email my idea to DART even though theres probably no chance of "Love Trains." Posted a picture of the spur thing from DART's exapansion studies for you Drummy.

[freewaytincan]

How about a seperate system, like a people mover? We've all thought it a great idea at Park Lane.

[tamtagon]

Just wondering, if restrictions from the Wright Amendment had been lifting, would this tunnel have more of a chance? Traffic could double at Love Field w/o the restrictions, and that could bring hundreds more DART customers per day.

[RobertB]

It'd be impractical as the "Love Trains" would be few and far between. The current thing.. with just a rail spur - is a pretty cool idea. If they did build a rail spur, they could probably make it connect to the Terminal by just building an underpass underneath one of the runways.. right?
"Underpass under a runway" = "tunnel"

DART originally proposed a shallow-bore tunnel under the runways, but their engineers found that the soil is singularly unsuitable for the plan. The airport is built on Trinity River sediments, and the water table is so close to the surface that you have problems with subsidence. It doesn't take much subsidence to turn a major runway into an abandoned runway. That's why after the Dr. Sauer & Co. report (Appendix F (http://www.dart.org/nweis/nwfeistoc.htm)), DART had to switch to a deep-bore project, just to get out of the waterlogged rock layers.

[Mballar]

Just wondering, if restrictions from the Wright Amendment had been lifting, would this tunnel have more of a chance? Traffic could double at Love Field w/o the restrictions, and that could bring hundreds more DART customers per day.


I was thinking the same thing.

[Mballar]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/112404dnmetdart.86d8c464.html

DART plans for Love Field tunnel hit brick wall
Federal agency says no, criticizes request for $160 million

08:45 PM CST on Tuesday, November 23, 2004


By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News



The Federal Transit Administration on Tuesday formally rejected DART's plans to build a $160 million light-rail tunnel and station under Love Field Airport.

Federal officials said the decision, which was expected, came down exclusively to cost and dashes the region's hopes of having a single-rail line connect directly to North Texas' two major airports and downtown Dallas.

"It was a good idea. We just couldn't make the cost-effectiveness numbers work out," said Gary Thomas, president and executive director of Dallas Area Rapid Transit.

Transit agency officials spent Tuesday afternoon crafting a resolution, reinforcing a desire to somehow serve Love Field. And although they still must determine what type of transit service to provide, the agency was reminded that it also faces a challenging task in obtaining the $700 million it is seeking to build lines from Pleasant Grove to Farmers Branch.

DART sought an unprecedented preliminary federal review of the Love Field tunnel to determine whether including the airport would jeopardize the agency's chances of obtaining the $700 million from Washington, D.C. Without the full amount, DART's rail construction schedule could be delayed months or years.

In its letter to DART, the FTA not only rejected the airport plan, but it also used strong wording concerning the agency's funding request. Federal officials said that DART's request for $700 million was an "unprecedented amount" and that the project's cost-effectiveness, even without the Love Field tunnel, "is of concern."

With the tunnel, the cost effectiveness reached $25.61 per passenger, slightly above the $25 cutoff point. Without the tunnel, the cost effectiveness is $21.59 per passenger.

"We have pretty strong admonishments here to get our costs down," said DART board Vice President Mark Enoch of Rowlett.

But one local congressional leader said she remained optimistic about DART's funding request.

"I feel pretty good about them getting their request fulfilled in spite of how tight money is in Washington," said U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas. "But we haven't approved anything yet, either."

With the preferred option no longer available, city and transit agency officials must determine how best to serve the estimated 1,200 passengers a day who would get on or off trains at the airport.

DART has several options. One would be a $70 million, ground-level rail spur between the airport and the closest station on the main rail line. Another option that the city of Dallas previously supported would operate direct train service from several downtown stations that ends at Love Field.

Whatever the final decision, rail service to Love Field must be done well, said Pat White, co-chairwoman of the Love Field Citizens Action Committee, a group of concerned residents that monitors expansion and other issues at Love Field. Ms. White is also a member of the Dallas Love Field Master Plan Advisory Committee.

"We feel strongly there should be rail service," Ms. White said.

Debate about Love Field service will not delay the northwest and southeast rail line construction, DART officials said Tuesday. Some form of transit service should be available to Love Field passengers when the northwest line opens in late 2010. However, DART planners were reluctant to commit to having a rail spur open by late 2010.

The Regional Transportation Council, which funnels some state and federal funding for many local projects, had pledged $60 million for the Love Field tunnel. However, the money might not be carried over if DART builds a downtown-to-Love Field direct line, said Michael Morris, director of transportation for North Central Texas Council of Governments.

Such an option would create long waits for passengers transferring to the airport from northern suburbs. A short rail shuttle line from the airport to the nearest main line station would work better, Mr. Morris said.

E-mail thartzel@dallasnews.com

[RobertB]

The Regional Transportation Council, which funnels some state and federal funding for many local projects, had pledged $60 million for the Love Field tunnel. However, the money might not be carried over if DART builds a downtown-to-Love Field direct line, said Michael Morris, director of transportation for North Central Texas Council of Governments.

Such an option would create long waits for passengers transferring to the airport from northern suburbs. A short rail shuttle line from the airport to the nearest main line station would work better, Mr. Morris said.
Has *anyone* seen any sort of "downtown-to-Love direct line" proposal? I know I haven't seen anything remotely like that(*). I don't think DART has ever proposed anything but a "short rail shuttle line to the nearest main line station." I think the reporter must have thrown the question out there, and Mr. Morris had to answer it.

(*) Of course, I've seen several such proposals on this board, but I'm not counting us among the official DART/NCTCOG planners. Yet. :rolleyes:

[texman]

Has *anyone* seen any sort of "downtown-to-Love direct line" proposal? I know I haven't seen anything remotely like that(*). I don't think DART has ever proposed anything but a "short rail shuttle line to the nearest main line station." I think the reporter must have thrown the question out there, and Mr. Morris had to answer it.

(*) Of course, I've seen several such proposals on this board, but I'm not counting us among the official DART/NCTCOG planners. Yet. :rolleyes:

Well if you read up a bit you can see my idea for the "love trains"...This whole thing has me demoralized. the FTA isnt even promising us funds for the NW, SE extensions and I'm having some serious doubts. Also, I don't know if the donors will let the funds they wanted a tunnel to get built with will go for the rail spur idea.

[texman]

Ok heres my idea finalized (I feel like robertb lol). Though I'll probably get alot of "blah blah that wont work," but oh well.
Trains would run from the Love Field Station on the "spur option" to Dallas Union Station. I wouldnt run them through downtown because of the congestion problems and if you want to transfer over to Orange/Purple you do it at Inwood and for Red/Blue/TRE you transfer at Union. (A lot of you have said on here Union Station needs to be a hub of Intermodal transit so here it is)
Trains would come every 15 min and the line wouldn't have a color to designate it. The destination sign would probably just say Love Field. The trains would be funded by Southwest Airlines to pay for operating costs and blah blah, Therfore they can put their logo all over the airport trains gaining the name "Love Trains." I know some European airlines do this like Virgin and Lufthansa. Here a map of the line (In black).

[RobertB]

Here's DART's press release:

http://www.dart.org/news.asp?ID=616

<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=1><font color=#000000 size=2>Media Relations Contact:</font><br><font size=2><b>Morgan Lyons<br>Claudia Garibay</b></font><br><p><b>November 24, 2004</b><p><P><B><FONT color=#000000 size=4>DART Northwest/Southeast Corridor Expansion moves forward without Love Field tunnel</b></font>
<p>DART's Northwest/Southeast rail expansion will move forward without a proposed rail tunnel serving the Love Field Airport terminal, agency officials said Tuesday.

The announcement follows a determination by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) that the alignment, with the inclusion of the one-mile, $160 million tunnel, would not be recommended for federal funding. The addition of the tunnel produced a low cost-effectiveness rating for the overall project, FTA Deputy Administrator Robert Jamison wrote in a letter to DART officials.

Despite the FTA's evaluation of the tunnel option, the 20.9-mile base alignment of the 35-mile light rail expansion moves forward with a &quot;recommended&quot; rating it received from the FTA in February. The base alignment will link Pleasant Grove, South Dallas, Fair Park, Deep Ellum, downtown Dallas, Dallas Medical/Market Center and Farmers Branch. Regionally funded extensions will serve Carrollton, North Irving and DFW International Airport.

Based on the FTA determination Tuesday, DART President/Executive Director Gary Thomas said planners will study other options to serve Love Field. &quot;We appreciate the hard work of our staff and our partners at the City of Dallas, Dallas County, the North Central Texas Council of Governments, and the FTA to thoroughly explore the benefits of a Love Field tunnel. Despite the FTA decision, the overall expansion project enjoys broad support, it remains on track and that's important to the entire region.&quot;

To illustrate local congressional support for the Northwest/Southeast light rail expansion, Congress included $8.5 million in the FY 2005 omnibus appropriations bill. The funding will be used to advance design and real estate activities as DART pursues a $700 million Full Funding Grant Agreement request for the light rail expansion.<B><P align=center>-- 30 --<hr size=1 color=#000000></P></B>

[texman]

Thank God!

[aufdermckinneymann]

I would like to see it done as well, not only for the exchange; but Dallas plans something, and then a few months/years the plan will be cancelled. If they decide on something, STICK TO IT!!!

[texman]

I would like to see it done as well, not only for the exchange; but Dallas plans something, and then a few months/years the plan will be cancelled. If they decide on something, STICK TO IT!!!

Well, this isnt just some highrise office tower being planned, so trust me, this wont be cancelled.

[Orlando]

Where can I find more info on the Knox/Henderson station? In what year is this supposed to happen? 2050?

[drumguy8800]

You won't find much official. The station (supposedly) was hollowed out, but never built because of resident concerns. I'd expect this to be the first station opened after the current orange-purple expansion.

[Foucault]

...so we're looking at probably around 2080...

[Columbus Civil]

Is the Love Field tunnel officially dead?

[texman]

Not officially, but yes, I believe so.

[Columbus Civil]

bummer

[texman]

Yeah i know, But hopefully they can go with the spur option and run trains from Union to Love.

[Columbus Civil]

I guess that's the next best option. I'm still holding out hope that one of our resident billionaires will pony up the dough for the tunnel.

Can you imagine arriving in the Love terminal via the Mark Cuban Tunnel? Hot!

[saxman66]

Any new options for light rail to Love Field? Shuttle bus? Underground sidewalks? Its silly not to have a stop at all or any connections to Love. I'td be nice to come from the NW area and catch a plane from there.

[texman]

Read this entire thread and you'll see all of our ideas.

[tamtagon]

Here's DART's press release:

DART's Northwest/Southeast rail expansion will move forward without a proposed rail tunnel serving the Love Field Airport terminal, agency officials said Tuesday.

The announcement follows a determination by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) that the alignment, with the inclusion of the one-mile, $160 million tunnel, would not be recommended for federal funding.

$160 million for a mile long tunnel from Love Field would attain cost effective ridership numbers within a LRT line between Love Field between and the Port of Houston's South County agile port. Routed though the Oak Lawn neighborhoods of Cedar Springs and Turtle Creek, through the downtown neighborhoods of Uptown (MidMac), Arts District, and Convention Center, and through TBD Oak Cliff downtown and South locations, frequent destinations among visitors and residents are joined. West Collin County developments Legacy and Frisco (area) are target contributory destinations beyond Love Field increasing the possibility of a stand alone DART LRT route.

[Mballar]

^Huh?????

[tamtagon]

^Huh?????

sorry - instead of a feeder or spur of the Northwest Line, I think the Love Field DART station should anchor a new LTR route, roughly: Wilmer - SOC - Downtown Oak Cliff - Convention Center - Farmers Market - Arts District - Uptown - Oak Lawn - Love Field - North Dallas - Galleria - Plano - Frisco.

[RobertB]

sorry - instead of a feeder or spur of the Northwest Line, I think the Love Field DART station should anchor a new LTR route, roughly: Wilmer - SOC - Downtown Oak Cliff - Convention Center - Farmers Market - Arts District - Uptown - Oak Lawn - Love Field - North Dallas - Galleria - Plano - Frisco.
The only problem is that most of that route would be underground, which makes the $160 for the one mile under Love look like lemonade stand revenues by comparison.

[psukhu]

I just wanted to confirm- the tunnel is going to be built or not?

[RobertB]

I just wanted to confirm- the tunnel is going to be built or not?
Not. See message 176 (http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showpost.php?p=43542&postcount=176).

[texman]

But there's still a spur option! http://www.dart.org/nweis/nwcorridoreis5d.htm

[Columbus Civil]

They should call it a maverick instead of a spur.

[tamtagon]

The NW Line Tunnel and Spur options need to get out of the way of the far superior plan to build a direct line from Love Field to the CBD. During the funding talk prior to receiving FTA recommendation, outside agencies pledged the extra millions needed for a Love Field Tunnel:



The Regional Transportation Council, which funnels some state and federal funding for many local projects, had pledged $60 million for the Love Field tunnel. However, the money might not be carried over if DART builds a downtown-to-Love Field direct line, said Michael Morris, director of transportation for North Central Texas Council of Governments. at the nearest main line station."

AND

The Texas Metropolitan Mobility Plan Project Acceleration

DALLAS ($4.7 billion)

Construct a light rail transit connection to Dallas Love Field airport. The use of these funds allows this project to be accelerated by 7 years.

The recommended spur alternative is going to cost DART $70 million:



"Once the tunnel plan is formally rejected, DART is likely to revert to its second option for Love Field service. A main light-rail line to northwest Dallas, Irving and Carrollton would run beside the airport, and a $70 million rail spur and shuttle train would drop off airport passengers

So, considering the way intown Dallas neighborhoods have embraced TOD, the best return on rail investment comes with a line through the most rapidly urbanizing, neighborhoods most favorablly disposed to TOD, and the route which connects primary destination of residents, business travelers and regional tourist.

Stations:
Love Field Grand Lobby, Cedar Springs @ Oak Lawn, Pearl @ McKinney, Ackard @ Main, Convention Center @ City Hall.

Now, that's about six miles and if you add the $70 million from the DART Spur, the $60 million from the Regional Trans. Council, and the undisclosed amount from The Texas Metropolitan Mobility Plan Project Acceleration, there should be more than enough money to get the direct connection between the CBD and Love Field, without futher delaying Carrollton, Irving, or Farmers Branch Stations.

[Columbus Civil]

The NW Line Tunnel and Spur options need to get out of the way of the far superior plan to build a direct line from Love Field to the CBD.

No kidding. Not building the tunnel will be a mistake that, once built, will never get fixed.

[RobertB]

So, considering the way intown Dallas neighborhoods have embraced TOD, the best return on rail investment comes with a line through the most rapidly urbanizing, neighborhoods most favorablly disposed to TOD, and the route which connects primary destination of residents, business travelers and regional tourist.

Stations:
Love Field Grand Lobby, Cedar Springs @ Oak Lawn, Pearl @ McKinney, Ackard @ Main, Convention Center @ City Hall.

Now, that's about six miles and if you add the $70 million from the DART Spur, the $60 million from the Regional Trans. Council, and the undisclosed amount from The Texas Metropolitan Mobility Plan Project Acceleration, there should be more than enough money to get the direct connection between the CBD and Love Field, without futher delaying Carrollton, Irving, or Farmers Branch Stations.
Are you talking about a six-mile subway route with six stations? The rough estimates we've come up with in previous subway discussions are about $50 million per mile, and $50 million more per station.

The Love Field tunnel by itself is two miles and a station -- about $150 million by those prices, which matches something I read a while back but can't find right now. The $70 million plus the $60 million fall $20 million short -- and don't forget, that first $70 million isn't real money at this point. It's how much the spur would cost *if* it were built, and the current NW-2 plans don't include it.

But for your Love Field - Oak Lawn - Uptown - Downtown subway line, you're talking about $300 million for the tunnel, plus $300 million for the stations... a total of $600 million! You can only get cash like that if you're building a highway. [/me ducks]

Looking on the bright side, though:

* DART is building in phases, and the NW-1 phase ends at Inwood Station. There's still time for the Tunnel Fairy to make an appearance -- and if the Wright Amendment is lifted, you could see Herb Kelleher & co wearing the wings.

* Even if the NW-2 phase is built, the current plans on the DART.org site show that they're going to tunnel under the rails and roads at Mockingbird Lane. This means that the starting point for a tunnel to Love will already be in place -- but our grandkids would probably be the first riders.

* If the funding gnomes really get in a groove after NW-2 is built, then you could attach the Oak Lawn/Uptown line to the line south of Brookhollow Station, at the original subway portal. Then, you'd have the Orange Line on the surface from Carrollton to Downtown, and the Purple Line coming from DFW to subway under Love and Oak Lawn to Downtown. If the $600 million were to suddenly land on the roof of DART's Akard St. headquarters, I think that might be the best plan of all. Darn it, now I've got to draw a map. :)