U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-07-2014, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Denver
13,976 posts, read 18,724,658 times
Reputation: 8386

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeTarheel View Post
Are you really putting Atlanta on that list? I'm not sure if you realize it, but we do have a 48-mile heavy rail system with 4 lines that transports 227,000 riders per day along with a bus system that has 200,000 riders per day...and a streetcar that is just ready to open the first of several planned lines. Atlanta is ranked pretty high among U.S. rail systems.
And US rail systems are sub-par compared to other countries. Atlanta has a rail system that just sucks less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-07-2014, 09:00 PM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,783 posts, read 15,357,772 times
Reputation: 2833
There are tons, take your pic. Over 4 million would be more interesting. Phoenix, Houston, Dallas, take your pick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2014, 09:05 PM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
6,569 posts, read 11,634,890 times
Reputation: 3989
Probably Las Vegas really only has that monorail which only serves tourists. The interesting thing is Las Vegas ALSO has one of the lowest freeway lane miles per capita in the country so its a lack of highways too but traffic there never seems to be too bad at least not during my visits and I've visited a lot of the area beyond the Strip.

I don't know if Salt Lake City's metro area has a population over 1 million. Baltimore has mass transit and wants to expand it but the problem is hardly anyone takes the Metro or Light Rail because of crime issues and most of the region is car centered
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 12:12 AM
 
Location: SoCal
460 posts, read 696,736 times
Reputation: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by WanderingImport View Post
I never said it was "rapidly" improving. I said it was improving. Period.

For a city the size of gigantic Los Angeles, it should have a transit system MUCH better than what it is. I'm holding to that.
You can hold to whatever you want, but the fact of the matter is that Los Angeles does not belong on any list that relates to this thread topic. Your opinion just doesn't jive with the current realities of LA's public transit systems (Expo Line Extension, Gold Line Extension, Purple Line Extension, Measure R, 30/10 Initiative, etc.)

There are objective data (i.e. miles of track, number of lines, ridership, etc.) out there for you to utilize and compare and contrast.

List of United States rapid transit systems by ridership - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of United States light rail systems by ridership - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of United States commuter rail systems by ridership - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of United States local bus agencies by ridership - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Benefits of Public Transportation--Statistics

Just because it 'should' be much better doesn't mean it's not good now. Could it be better? Yes. Seems like you're penalizing LA on what should be instead of what is. Right now LA is already a top ten city when it comes to mass transit, and it will only get better (rapidly).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 12:52 AM
 
Location: Prince George's County, Maryland
6,212 posts, read 7,042,765 times
Reputation: 2581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian View Post
Yeah, just the fact that Miami's airport is connected by rapid rail to downtown (and soon to be connected to commuter rail as well) - which is an amenity not many US cities have -- disqualifies Miami from consideration for this thread.

If they build a rail link between Downtown and South Beach (which I understand is currently under consideration) it would take Miami to another level.
They are? It's about time!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 06:27 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,750 posts, read 39,675,031 times
Reputation: 14671
The thershold is metros over 1 million. There are lots of them that haven't been discussed but should be more than say, Atlanta, Los Angeles or Miami.

List of Metropolitan Statistical Areas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How about Oklahoma City? Indianapolis? Raleigh, NC [not sure]? Birmingham, Alabama? Jacksonville, Florida? All of these are all low density and rather decentralized, and the south in general tends to have lower public transit usage than other parts of the country. Oklahoma City has about half the bus service of a usual "newer" American metro (note rail is excluded, except many cities in the graph either no rail or very little):



State Transit Systems Offer Sparse Service, But Ridership Is Growing | Oklahoma Watch

From the link, annual ridership is 8 million riders / year. Nassau County, NY has 29 million annual riders for its county bus system with a similar population. Salt Lake City, a slightly smaller metropiltan area, has 44 million riders bus and rail (not a fair comparison with Nassau County as Nassau has the LIRR). Las Vegas has 60 million riders / year, with a BRT system, though a population of 2 million rather than Oklahama City's 1.3 million. There is no reason why Las Vegas belongs on this discussion. From what I've read, its coverage is good but the speed can be very slow. At the higher end, Honolulu's bus system has 74 million bus riders / year, with only about 800,000 people in the region.

Indianopolis is worse from a per capita point of view: 10 million annual riders with a metro population of 1.9 million. Some old centralized cities (such as Buffalo) might have low transit ridership overall but good service in the central parts where transit is the most useful, so those cities shouldn't be among the worst. In any case, metro-wide, Buffalo has about half the transit ridership of Salt Lake City with the same population, but far better than Oklahoma City and Indianapolis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 06:39 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,750 posts, read 39,675,031 times
Reputation: 14671
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
There are tons, take your pic. Over 4 million would be more interesting. Phoenix, Houston, Dallas, take your pick.
Why? Usually those have been discussed a lot more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 06:47 AM
 
5,368 posts, read 4,874,534 times
Reputation: 3302
Tampa!! Largest metro in the developed world without any type of rapid transit system!!

Houston and Dallas do have rail lines. Small ones, but they do exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 06:56 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,750 posts, read 39,675,031 times
Reputation: 14671
Why would you use rail lines only to judge a transit system? Rail lines often don't cover much of the city, and take a minority of the trips.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2014, 07:00 AM
 
Location: Atlanta and St Simons Island, GA
20,945 posts, read 32,935,593 times
Reputation: 12603
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Why would you use rail lines only to judge a transit system? Rail lines often don't cover much of the city, and take a minority of the trips.
True. Seattle for years has had an efficient and dependable transit system without having heavy rail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top