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.
The amount the system's ridership has increased in two years (without significant additions) is pretty impressive, speaks to the effort the city and Metro has put in with advertising, publicity, etc. Still a long way to go to catch up with the rest of the pack, though in the next 10 years there are going to be some significant additions (Purple Line extension, Expo Phase II, Crenshaw Line) that can help boost the ridership closer to where it should be.
Another thing to note is that bus ridership is also up.
The amount the system's ridership has increased in two years (without significant additions) is pretty impressive, speaks to the effort the city and Metro has put in with advertising, publicity, etc. Still a long way to go to catch up with the rest of the pack, though in the next 10 years there are going to be some significant additions (Purple Line extension, Expo Phase II, Crenshaw Line) that can help boost the ridership closer to where it should be.
Another thing to note is that bus ridership is also up.
Those are some big increases for a single year. Do you know if there was also an y-o-y increase of jobs in downtown LA?
Also, do they have stats on the expo line in terms of month to month? I wonder what the ridership patterns for that have been.
Pretty steady increases, it took a huge jump when the Culver City station opened. I would imagine it will get close to Blue Line numbers once it connects with Santa Monica, there is a huge ridership base looking to go both from SM to DTLA and from DTLA to SM.
Not sure about the downtown, but I would assume that yes there was increase, though not sure of how much.
Well, I kind of expect that of Vancouver. I kind of lower my expectations when it comes to transit in LA so I can be happier.
True, but contrary to stereotypes the Vancouver metro isn't really any denser than Los Angeles. And the core regions of Los Angeles are denser than Vancouver's. City is probably far more centralized, though. Feels the opposite of Boston in city style, though.
If Canadian cities count for this thread Toronto and Montreal are probably ahead of Chicago and DC.
True, but contrary to stereotypes the Vancouver metro isn't really any denser than Los Angeles. And the core regions of Los Angeles are denser than Vancouver's. City is probably far more centralized, though. Feels the opposite of Boston in city style, though.
If Canadian cities count for this thread Toronto and Montreal are probably ahead of Chicago and DC.
Yes, LA is really dense in its core areas. Vancouver has a lot more transit-oriented development as far as I can tell though. If we're talking about people living and working within a half mile of a transit stop, I wouldn't be surprised if Vancouver beats LA in density in that regard. To be fair to LA though, it does have a very extensive and fairly good bus system though buses (even rapid transit buses ones) are generally not sexy enough for people to count them.
Montreal and Toronto definitely have higher riderships for rapid transit, though DC is edging in there and Chicago has way more stops. Chicago's a particularly interesting case since it has such an extensive system, yet it doesn't seem to make full utility of it which is likely due to the heavy depopulation it went through while transitioning from an industrial economy.
Yes, LA is really dense in its core areas. Vancouver has a lot more transit-oriented development as far as I can tell though. If we're talking about people living and working within a half mile of a transit stop, I wouldn't be surprised if Vancouver beats LA in density in that regard. To be fair to LA though, it does have a very extensive and fairly good bus system though buses (even rapid transit buses ones) are generally not sexy enough for people to count them.
I'd assume LA has far more people within half mile of a transit stop if only because it has 6x the population. Vancouver also has an extensive bus system, I got a daily weekday ridership of 728,000 per weekday. Would be #4 in America only surpassed by the three largest American metros:
Divided the number in the article by the amount of increase from the Olympics to get the normal ridership.
Quote:
Montreal and Toronto definitely have higher riderships for rapid transit, though DC is edging in there and Chicago has way more stops. Chicago's a particularly interesting case since it has such an extensive system, yet it doesn't seem to make full utility of it which is likely due to the heavy depopulation it went through while transitioning from an industrial economy.
Yea, Chicago underperforms for its size. Though its larger size might be a drag; it includes areas that are relatively less conducive for transit ridership than some other metros. But then again, the DC metro goes to some low density suburban areas. The Blue line in Chicago seemed well used. Its park and ride stops and highway median section was a bit alien to me (most familiar with the NYC subway). But the Boston Orange line through Charlestown is rather pedestrian hostile, probably more so. Doubt any other major city's metro has something like that right near the city center.
Other than Chicago, Philadelphia has the only other rapid transit system in a city that has suffered heavy depopulation.
I'd assume LA has far more people within half mile of a transit stop if only because it has 6x the population. Vancouver also has an extensive bus system, I got a daily weekday ridership of 728,000 per weekday. Would be #4 in America only surpassed by the three largest American metros:
Divided the number in the article by the amount of increase from the Olympics to get the normal ridership.
Yea, Chicago underperforms for its size. Though its larger size might be a drag; it includes areas that are relatively less conducive for transit ridership than some other metros. But then again, the DC metro goes to some low density suburban areas. The Blue line in Chicago seemed well used. Its park and ride stops and highway median section was a bit alien to me (most familiar with the NYC subway). But the Boston Orange line through Charlestown is rather pedestrian hostile, probably more so. Doubt any other major city's metro has something like that right near the city center.
Other than Chicago, Philadelphia has the only other rapid transit system in a city that has suffered heavy depopulation.
Maybe LA has more within distance of stops--does LA have more stops? Maybe if it was adjusted for that then Vancouver would be on top. LA does have a pretty good number of stops (for light rail especially) where there's pretty low density development around it.
Chicago could do a lot better. If it ever redevelops/improves a lot of its south side neighborhoods along its rail lines then at least it could have infrastructure already in place. I wonder if Chicago has ever tried developing a secondary core within its city boundaries along those transit lines.
Maybe LA has more within distance of stops--does LA have more stops? Maybe if it was adjusted for that then Vancouver would be on top. LA does have a pretty good number of stops (for light rail especially) where there's pretty low density development around it.
Chicago could do a lot better. If it ever redevelops/improves a lot of its south side neighborhoods along its rail lines then at least it could have infrastructure already in place. I wonder if Chicago has ever tried developing a secondary core within its city boundaries along those transit lines.
Metro Rail has 80 stops in the LA area (plus around 20 BRT stops) and it looks like Skytrain has 47 stops.
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.
