Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Caltrain already runs between SF and SJ so there is no need for BART to extend down the Peninsula to SJ.
Santa Rosa is way too far to justify a BART line anyways, would have been a big waste of money.
Sorry, but I disagree b/c BART should cover & control the entire SF Bay Area.
Amtrak ought to take the Cal-Train line into the City aka SF Transbay Terminal upon its completion.
FYI,
There is a combination of people to live/work in cities & live/work out of the city limits due to living costs. This is not only in SF, but many major US cities (NYC, Chicago, DC, Boston, Philly, etc.) to build & populate other towns from 1 to 2 hrs distance from the City Centers. As people drive into the city for work or recreation from their distance commuting towns by vehicle. A metro rail line must be constructed to relieve the vehicle traffic on the highways.
Examples:
Boston = Springfield, MA; Portsmouth, NH, Concord, NH; Portland, ME; Newport, RI; etc.
Philly = Allentown, PA; Reading, PA; Lancaster, PA; Burlington, NJ; Atlantic City, NJ; Dover, DE; etc.
Chicago = DeKalb, IL; Kankakee, IL; Gary, IN; Southbend, IN; etc.
I am not bashing SF, but I do bash other US cities ought to have efficient mass transit rail systems.
Since I have not lived in the SF Bay Area for over 12 yrs now to change tremendously.
Like any major US cities ought to have improvements & innovations on its infrastructures.
Plus you excluded PATCO (another subway line in Philly into Jersey more like Bart actually) which brings HR/Subway to about 380K.
But also the regional rail coverage is much more extensive. BART is a more modern hybrid (part subway part RR) and a lot of riders are commuters like commuter rail, its form is a little of both. Add Philly RR and LRT (Muni, Caltrain, Septa NJT etc. (you cant forget NJT which also services Philadelphia and the Jersey burbs etc.) and ridership is much more even or so. Buses probably put Philly over
for me it comes down to coverage and utility. SF has a good system to funnel people in for work if you live along a BART line; Philly has a better system within the city based on my experience.
This is true, Philly has much better overall coverage. But for such fantastic coverage, and size, and centrality, the fact that its commuter rail system is electrified, it's still lacking in ridership. Part of the reason could be headways, or an antiquated fare system. I don't know, but you would think it would blow past the Bay Area in ridership.
MUNI + BART + Caltrains + ferries alone blow past Philly + PATCO and any other system you want to throw in there. Add in SamTrans, GGT, and ACT, all three of which feed SF, and you have about 1.4 million riders to pull from in a city that's 35% the land area and half the population. Add in all Bay Area transit (down to SJ for instance) and you have well over 1.6 million transit riders in a population area about the same size as metro Philly.
As sucky as Bay Area transit is, as crowded as it is, despite the fact that it's never on time, old trains/cars, lots of crazies and homeless, fare readers that often don't work, trolley buses responsible for 200K riders a day that frequently break down or get stopped up in Chinatown, or take 1-1.5 hours to traverse the peninsula in traffic, light rail that's ineffective and doesn't serve most of the city, only 1 serious commuter rail line, you have more riders than in Philly, plain and simple.
This is true, Philly has much better overall coverage. But for such fantastic coverage, and size, and centrality, the fact that its commuter rail system is electrified, it's still lacking in ridership. Part of the reason could be headways, or an antiquated fare system. I don't know, but you would think it would blow past the Bay Area in ridership.
MUNI + BART + Caltrains + ferries alone blow past Philly + PATCO and any other system you want to throw in there. Add in SamTrans, GGT, and ACT, all three of which feed SF, and you have about 1.4 million riders to pull from in a city that's 35% the land area and half the population. Add in all Bay Area transit (down to SJ for instance) and you have well over 1.6 million transit riders in a population area about the same size as metro Philly.
As sucky as Bay Area transit is, as crowded as it is, despite the fact that it's never on time, old trains/cars, lots of crazies and homeless, fare readers that often don't work, trolley buses responsible for 200K riders a day that frequently break down or get stopped up in Chinatown, or take 1-1.5 hours to traverse the peninsula in traffic, light rail that's ineffective and doesn't serve most of the city, only 1 serious commuter rail line, you have more riders than in Philly, plain and simple.
Philly needs to do something.
Since you wanted to combine all of the SF Bay Area Counties into one total ridership.
The Philly Metro Area: SEPTA, NJ Transit, PATCO, & DART (Delaware Area Rapid Transit) covers all of the Tri-States (PA, NJ, & DE) total riderships.
The issue I'm having is that people want to keep on trying to add Ferry service. Ferry service is not a commuter rail line. It is not a train, does not run on tracks. Geesh. Just because a system is electrified does not mean it is supposed to a tier amount of passengers that doesn't make any sense. METRA has all diesel lines and their ridership is high ?. I Will say this though I do think the frequency on SEPTA Commuter Rail needs to be increased by a whole lot. Once the new railcars come in maybe that can happen, and whenever they can get around AMTRAK'S Schedule that would be lovely and hire more people to operate.
Ferry service obviously counts as transit, so, yeah, it should be included. But it isn't rail, of course, so shouldn't be included if just looking at rail transit.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,135,974 times
Reputation: 2919
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRINCE-DARKNESS
Sorry, but I disagree b/c BART should cover & control the entire SF Bay Area.
Amtrak ought to take the Cal-Train line into the City aka SF Transbay Terminal upon its completion.
FYI,
There is a combination of people to live/work in cities & live/work out of the city limits due to living costs. This is not only in SF, but many major US cities (NYC, Chicago, DC, Boston, Philly, etc.) to build & populate other towns from 1 to 2 hrs distance from the City Centers. As people drive into the city for work or recreation from their distance commuting towns by vehicle. A metro rail line must be constructed to relieve the vehicle traffic on the highways.
Examples:
Boston = Springfield, MA; Portsmouth, NH, Concord, NH; Portland, ME; Newport, RI; etc.
Philly = Allentown, PA; Reading, PA; Lancaster, PA; Burlington, NJ; Atlantic City, NJ; Dover, DE; etc.
Chicago = DeKalb, IL; Kankakee, IL; Gary, IN; Southbend, IN; etc.
I am not bashing SF, but I do bash other US cities ought to have efficient mass transit rail systems.
Since I have not lived in the SF Bay Area for over 12 yrs now to change tremendously.
Like any major US cities ought to have improvements & innovations on its infrastructures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRINCE-DARKNESS
Since you wanted to combine all of the SF Bay Area Counties into one total ridership.
The Philly Metro Area: SEPTA, NJ Transit, PATCO, & DART (Delaware Area Rapid Transit) covers all of the Tri-States (PA, NJ, & DE) total riderships.
This ought to calculate the total ridership of the Philly Metro Area is greater than the SF Bay Area.
Yes I agree Philly's mass transit system should be overhauled into modernization.
I'm Team Philly and I'm on your side, but in your first post, Atlantic City (NJT, AC line) and Lancaster (Amtrak, Keystone Service) are the only cities you have listed that actually have rail service directly into Philadelphia (though Burlington is on the River Line, and you can easily connect to either PATCO or NJT to get to Phila). Neither Allentown ( notably), Reading (notably) or Dover (no big shock) have rail access into Philadelphia (Wilmington/Newark do however).
Also DART First State, at around 12 million passengers annually, really only serves the state of Delaware. It's essentially all inter-county and intra-county bus service. The only part of DART that crosses state lines is the subsidized (by DelDot) SEPTA line to Philly (around 2.75 million annual passengers). So it's debatable to me to actually include all of DART in Philly's numbers, apart from the SEPTA line. If we're just puffing our chest out and adding adjacent counties for numbers, sure, but functionally, only a small portion of DART directly services Philadelphia. Delaware, while independent, contributes a lot to the Philadelphia metro (Delaware Valley), but I think this is a scenario (ridership numbers) where we really don't
And including all of NJ Transit's numbers would be insane, since the vast majority of that system services North Jersey/NYC. But if you're overall point is sarcasm and to slam what you see as disingenuous boosting by Bay boosters through purposeful inflation, than never mind my contentions
Sorry, but I disagree b/c BART should cover & control the entire SF Bay Area.
Amtrak ought to take the Cal-Train line into the City aka SF Transbay Terminal upon its completion.
FYI,
There is a combination of people to live/work in cities & live/work out of the city limits due to living costs. This is not only in SF, but many major US cities (NYC, Chicago, DC, Boston, Philly, etc.) to build & populate other towns from 1 to 2 hrs distance from the City Centers. As people drive into the city for work or recreation from their distance commuting towns by vehicle. A metro rail line must be constructed to relieve the vehicle traffic on the highways.
Examples:
Boston = Springfield, MA; Portsmouth, NH, Concord, NH; Portland, ME; Newport, RI; etc.
Philly = Allentown, PA; Reading, PA; Lancaster, PA; Burlington, NJ; Atlantic City, NJ; Dover, DE; etc.
Chicago = DeKalb, IL; Kankakee, IL; Gary, IN; Southbend, IN; etc.
I am not bashing SF, but I do bash other US cities ought to have efficient mass transit rail systems.
Since I have not lived in the SF Bay Area for over 12 yrs now to change tremendously.
Like any major US cities ought to have improvements & innovations on its infrastructures.
You Realize Springfield is 91 miles from Boston right?
Portland is 112 miles from Boston, that is in no way a commutable distance.
There is no traffic on I-95 in Kittery going to Boston there is no demand for that trip.
There is no traffic on the Mass Pike between 84 and 291. There is no demand of Springfielders to go to Boston, they live their own lives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
