Live data from Hacker News

Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

practical.engineering

291–300 of 352 posts

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#291
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is why San Francisco, Boston and NYC have the cheapest rents in the US.

No, it is why 60% of Americans live in single family detached homes, not including the additional 10% who live in manufactured homes or single family attached. Not factoring in latent demand, or those who are in high-density living for reasons beyond their control, e.g. assisted living, college dorms, military, that should be excluded from the calculations. San Francisco 2024 growth rate is minus 2.4 percent. NYC 202…

I would think any one of NIMBY incumbents, rent control, and (CA-specific, obv) Prop 13/19 would individually do a lot more to artificially pump up rent prices than rent setting software.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything's bigger in Texas, including egos. Crucially, Texans are highly aware of "everything is bigger in Texas" trope and take pride in it. My favorite example is that everyone knows that Texas State Capitol is taller than United States Capitol (92.24m vs 88m)... But nobody will ever tell you that Texas State Capitol is only 6th tallest state capitol. Source: lived in Austin for 2 years. https://en.wikipedia.or…

Texan here. My experience has been quite different. I lived in Austin for 7 years and I had no idea about this fact. Whenever the whole "everything is bigger in Texas" comes up, everyone smiles and rolls their eyes. I now live in Houston and its the same. People here think its kind of a joke. Though Texans definitely do take pride in Texas. I just don't think they take themselves as seriously as your comment suggests…

Authentic Texan-ness is manifested by the slogan that used to be painted on the side of Goode Company BBQ:

“You might give some serious thought to thanking your lucky stars you’re in Texas.”

And Kinky Friedman.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#293

"the worst symbol of our car-obsessed culture" Nothing against the article, which covers an interesting topic. But this refrain gets tiresome, the railing against our "car obsession." We have a big-ass country. We like to move about it. Many of us don't want or need to live on top of each other. That is all.

You might be tired of it, but it doesn't come from a place of 'wanting to bash car culture' but rather from a pragmatic look at the real outcomes from the current US transportation philosophy.

I don't know if you've noticed but there are some actual real problems that the US is running into.

Building stuff is cheap relative to having to maintain it over its lifetime and then eventually replacing it. The more you build the more it costs to maintain it all.

That means that from purely an economical perspective there is an optimum where you provide the most transportation for the least amount of money. The US method of building more and more is slowly driving up the cost side of the equation and delivering less and less benefits. That's not hippy-liberal bullshit, but that is just a fact.

Just imagine that instead of adding extra lanes, they would build a good train connection between your cities. You could still drive as much as you want but there would be a lot less people on the road.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>having to pilot a huge deadly vehicle everywhere is vastly more stressful than just walking to handle my groceries. That's a nice luxury to have. I take it you're fortunate enough to live in a very temperate area with palatable weather year-round, rather than somewhere that gets 110° F in the summer, or ice storms in the winter? Not everyone can afford to live on the beautiful, comfortable, and exorbitantly expensiv…

> I take it you're fortunate enough to live in a very temperate area with palatable weather year-round, rather than somewhere that gets 110° F in the summer, or ice storms in the winter? Okay, we don't get the 110°F in the summer here (only up to the 90's), but we do get the ice storms in the winter. I still walk to get my groceries if I can, even if it's actively snowing. I just wish they'd plow the sidewalks here,…

Every place I've ever lived has required property owners to clear and salt their sidewalks within 24 hours of the snow stopping, and any place that actually gets regular, measurable snowfall (northeast, northern midwest) is pretty good about citing those that don't.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#295
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texas is a giant strip mall with football stadiums and megachurches sprinkled throughout.

Texas is a lot more than that, certainly.

Texas can be a lot more than that. There's a lot of culture here, particularly in South Texas. But there's also contention. There's a disdain for that part of Texas. And the washed out, strip mall side of Texas wants very badly to make it seem like they're all there is. The boredom, the normality, the white picket fence, is a plague. It spreads and sucks the color out of everything, like The Wizard of Oz but in reverse.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#296
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Maybe for late 90's, but major metro areas like ATX, DFW, Houston, and SA have grown much more progressive in the last quarter century. Also, statistically speaking, you're less likely to be shot in a Texas LGBTQ-friendly venue than a Colorado LGBTQ-friendly venue.

> major metro areas like ATX, DFW, Houston, and SA have grown much more progressive in the last quarter century

While true, and while these places being by far the most population dense, they don't actually have any influence over the laws. Funny how that works. And those laws do matter.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#297
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm not sure what you think the alternative is. We could start by making people who choose rural or suburban life pay the costs of such a life rather than foisting them on everyone else. Roads should either be toll roads or entirely paid for by gas taxes and vehicle registration costs. Gas taxes should have to include the cost of removing the pollutants from the environment.

Setting aside the shocking myopia of this comment (it turns out most of your food that magically appears in grocery stores comes from those useless rural yokels that use these roads) A major driver of the interstate highway project was military in consideration because of the importance of logistics in being able to move troops around the country.

Well now that you tell me the military industrial complex is behind it, I'm all for it!

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preface: I don't like this architecture. I think things need to change. I'm just describing what is . These are people coming from several dozen square miles and dispersing into several dozen square miles, flowing through these chokepoints. They're commuting 40, 50, or more miles. You'd need these people to change several bus lines and several train lines. Those busses would be snaking through messy suburbs for them…

I was replaying specifically to the 'all people go to the same place'. Just as you have highway interchanges, you have railway interchanges (that are much cheaper). Railways can go into multiple directions and intersect with other modes of transports. I do understand the problem in the way the infrastructure is build in the area and that it isn't easy to just change and go to trains, that's not what I was suggesting.…

Its incredible how you could read all of that and yet not have any takeaways to adjust your preconceived notions of the reality of life in this area.

> infrastructure has been under-invested in for 100+ years.

This isn't some subway built in 1920 that has barely even had a new train in the past 50 years. The Orange Line opened in 2010. The Red Line in 1996. Some of the stations opened in like 2014. The rolling stock is mostly stuff purchased post-2008. And with the Silver Line, those are all totally new stations on a totally new path with totally new rolling stock. Clearly, you don't know what you're talking about if you're thinking this is stuff that hasn't been invested in for nearly 100 years. But hey, you watched some YouTube videos, so you know exactly what the realities are like living in DFW and know precisely what would solve it.

> more modern and electric

The train in my example is pretty new and electric. Once again, you clearly don't know what you're talking about here.

> an electric train that leaves every 15min is apparently impossible.

The Orange Line and Red Line at its peak is like 7.5ish min intervals. Once again, you clearly don't know what you're talking about here.

> If the buses had their own lanes (not like Texas doesn't have enough lanes) the avg speed of the bus could likely be improved quite a lot.

What, we're going to have 100mph busses going on surface streets or something? Dedicated bus lanes make sense in areas where there's lots of traffic and gridlock, they can do a lot of good there. The bus in the example isn't in one of those places. That road isn't normally very crowded. Forcing the light cycles for the bus would probably save a minute or two, but once again the overall trip is losing by well over a half hour. The overall trip time is worse because you're going to stop that train several times along its path, that bus is going to stop and pick up people. Whereas the car, even if it goes a bit slower because of traffic, is still keeping its average speed at like 50ish mph.

> The whole area seems like its pretty dense with a lot of people

That's the thing. It really isn't. Some people have a several minute drive jus to leave their neighborhood, just to get to the first place where a bus stop would even remotely make any sense to be. Some parts are decently dense, and those are the places where people can and do reasonably take transit as their primary way of travel. But it is definitely not the norm. But hey, once again, you're someone that's watched a few YouTube videos and poked around on Google maps, you definitely know more than the person who's actually lived in it for over a decade.

> It should NEVER take 30 min to swap from one train to another.

Sure. But those trains are going to be largely empty even with the 30 minute service interval. Running them every 5 minutes is burning billions of dollars and lots of energy rolling empty trains. And in the end, look at the math. Shave 15 minutes off the trip. Shave 30 minutes off the trip. The highway path still beats out on time.

> This is just about infrastructure choices

Its far more about city design overall than just "infrastructure". You could replace all the highways overnight in DFW with trains that run every 30 seconds. It'll just increase the overall transit times for all these commuters. Do the math. Look at actual average speeds for whatever design you might propose. It is a fundamental issue with how the cities are laid out and designed from the very foundations. Those average commuters would end up changing trains several times on their commutes. That train is going to have to roll through a bunch of stations and stops in order to actually be useful to the riders. Because its not "mostly people in this area going mostly to that area", its people from an absolutely massive area going to an absolutely massive area.

> Even just with buses on existing roads. As long as you make some room for them and give them the appropriate priority and so on. A lot could be done for not that much money, if people actually wanted.

The thing is, once again, the density and overall design of where I'd want to go. There's a bus stop right outside my house. The routes from there make a decent bit of sense, they go along through a few shopping areas and to the nice downtown Plano area and that bus station there. But I don't often shop at those shopping areas. I go to slightly different ones. So now there would need to either be yet another bus line that goes to each of those different shopping areas, or so much bus service the next bus is just a couple of minutes behind. Otherwise, each of those changes really adds up in time, and suddenly I'm spending 2-3x as much time taking the bus than just driving.

And I'm lucky, I live literally on the edge of my neighborhood. Someone deeper in the neighborhood, it is a 15 minute walk to the main road where the bus is. With the weather right now having a heat index of like 110F. That walk alone is longer than what their drive would be to that store. So then what, we have busses snaking through all the small curvy neighborhood roads? Gee, that'll really make the overall travel time higher. This is why I just completely ignored the travel time for that person to Parker Road Station, you include that and for a lot of people it really blows the travel time up.

And to think, I'm in kind of a small and compact neighborhood for DFW. There's a lot out there with much bigger lots and more separated from the main roads.

So you see how its not just a matter of "well, if only we had more modern electrc trains, and more busses, maybe dedicated bus lanes." It is the fact that person is weighing a 15 minute walk in 110F heat versus leaving their house in an air-conditioned car and getting to their destination in the same amount of time as before they even got on the bus. That bus wait could be 0 minutes, that bus could go practically right where they wanted to go, the bus isn't really stuck in traffic for their route, but because of the layout of their neighborhood and the sprawling nature of all the places they might want to go taking the bus just didn't make sense.

Its far more than just "invest in the infrastructure!" It is changing the mindset. Its building new forms of housing, shopping, and working. And yes, actually building the trains and buying the busses. But we could quadruple the bus fleet of DART and change the train service interval to 10 seconds tomorrow and we'd still have roughly the same ridership. In the end though, I do vote for that more modern city design. I do vote to expand DART. I do vote for bike lanes and better traffic calming. And I do ride transit when it makes sense. I just wish it made more sense more often.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, the service level on that train is pretty bad especially for peak. Hopefully they'll be convinced to run it more. But change that wait, do the math, and compare it to the drive time again. Ok, we shaved a 15 minute average wait to 2 minutes or so. 13 minutes saved, awesome. We're still comparing a well over an hour public transit trip to a 30 minute drive on the tollways. In the end you'll need to convince p…

The question is whether that needs to be the case. By combining train and car you can usually end up faster and cheaper if done well as trains won't be stuck in traffic and commuter trains can reliably run at 120-160km/h. See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41309489 for examples and details on how to solve this long-term.

Once again it kind of comes back to the density. Without the density, you'll end up with a lot of stations to try and make the line useful to people. With lots of stations, you're not realistically going 120-160km/h average speeds.

These DART LRV trains do >100km/h peak speeds. But in the end if you halved the stations you'd really crush the ridership because there's just not enough stuff or people at any particular station.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#300
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is why 60% of Americans live in single family detached homes, not including the additional 10% who live in manufactured homes or single family attached. Not factoring in latent demand, or those who are in high-density living for reasons beyond their control, e.g. assisted living, college dorms, military, that should be excluded from the calculations. San Francisco 2024 growth rate is minus 2.4 percent. NYC 202…

I would think any one of NIMBY incumbents, rent control, and (CA-specific, obv) Prop 13/19 would individually do a lot more to artificially pump up rent prices than rent setting software.

Prop 13 drives down prices the same way mortgage interest drive down sales prices. low tax on homes purchased 30 years ago means higher taxes on new purchases.

New home buyers usually care about their monthly payment. high mortgage rates mean they can afford lower sales prices. High tax rates mean they can afford lower sales prices.

Post reply on HN