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 03-11-2015, 03:06 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,231 posts, read 3,475,434 times
Reputation: 2850

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
You are incorrect if you think they are separated. In the top 10 total, all of the various transit agencies for each metro (well, as best I could) were lumped together. Why? Because the various transit authorties in a single metro (ideally) are linked.
I am just curious since you didn't provide the breakdowns. Were you estimating the riderships for agencies not listed on the report? Was it apples to apples, e. g. Capital Corridor is run by Amtrak did you include various Northeast Amtrak lines for their metros? What about agencies not listed on Apta? As far as I know their Port Authority of NY and NJ numbers only include the PATH train, etc...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2015, 06:06 PM
 
9,413 posts, read 4,311,734 times
Reputation: 4380
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
The three NYC-area commuter rail agencies are the three busiest in the U.S. The least busy of the three agencies has more than six times the ridership of Caltrain. Collectively they have over twenty times the ridership of Caltrain.

In fact, a single NYC-area line (the Metro North New Haven line) has about four times the ridership of Caltrain.
None of this is shocking because of how much bigger NYC is than the Bay Area and also because Caltrain is only a single line running north south along the peninsula between SJ and SF. The total mileage for that one line is 77 miles, but the vast majority of the usage is between SF and SJ (somewhere around 40-50 miles of track), and only a few trains a day go past San Jose to Gilroy in the south. Considering all of this, it's pretty impressive the amount of numbers that Caltrain puts up on a daily basis (I ride it daily and finding a seat is pretty impossible these days on bullet/rush hour trains...thank you tech boom).

It's certainly not NYC-levels, but its numbers seem a lot lower than other cities mainly because it's not a hugely sprawled system with many lines. And understanding "commuter rail" usage in the Bay Area outside of the peninsula can be a bit tricky. In other areas of the Bay, BART kind of does the job that Caltrain does along the peninsula...this makes things a little whacky when trying to decouple commuter rail from heavy rail ridership numbers (i.e. in some areas of the Bay Area, such as Walnut Creek, people are certainly using BART as "commuter rail", but for places like Oakland or within the city limits of SF, BART becomes more of a subway system where people hop on/off for a few stops at a time)...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2015, 06:12 PM
 
Location: ITP - City of Atlanta Proper
7,794 posts, read 11,727,152 times
Reputation: 5394
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
War please calculate at the census tract level
Hahaha! Now that can only be out done by the Starbucks Density Map.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2015, 09:14 PM
 
Location: The Left Toast
1,086 posts, read 1,343,460 times
Reputation: 744
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
It does, but I may have missed Fairfax.




They are sorta right, but you and kidphilly are correct: Outside of NYC, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, and New Jersey it's not really worth mentioning commuter rail statistics since it's so lopsided.

For those who are curious, here are the full rankings:


1. NYC (LIRR, Metro-North, New Jersey Transit Corp*) - 934,700
2. Chicago (Metra and South Shore Line)- 302,300
3. Philadelphia (SEPTA) - 134,600
4. Boston - 130,600
5. Bay Area (Caltrain, CCJP) - 61200
6. DC-Baltimore - 53,100
7. Los Angeles - 41,200
8. Salt Lake City - 16,800
9. Miami - 14,000
10. Seattle - 13,700

*NJT didn't provide their daily numbers, but they have about the same monthly volume as Metro-North, so this is a estimate. This traffic is also split between NYC and Philadelphia as well as points in between, but as you mentioned earlier it is probably 95% of this traffic is going to NYC.

After this there are a little over a dozen commuter rail lines in various cities around the country, but they only amount to a few thousand (and several around 1000) passengers a day. Clearly for the Bay Area, this isn't something that really makes a huge difference. There is just one tiny problem though.

Another point to consider when ranking commuter rail networks is that there are three systems in this country (the Bay's BART, DC's METRO, and Atlanta's MARTA) that were all designed to be hybrid commuter rail and central city subway systems. Technically speaking, you could also rank the ridership for those three systems in the commuter rail rankings AND the heavy rail subway rankings. With that frame of thought DC would move to second on the list, the Bay would go third, Chicago would fall to fourth, and Atlanta be fifth.

This isn't just an postulation either. While it is hard case to make for Atlanta (while it was designed to be a hybrid, it only reaches the inner ring suburbs and was reconfigured to primarily serve the central city) and a little tough for DC (Metro has great coverage in both the city and suburbs), BART is primarily used to ferry people directly in to San Francisco from around the Bay while MUNI the primary mass transit in San Francisco for every day use.

Personally though, I wouldn't count BART primarily as a commuter rail system. Between San Fran and Oakland it's more subway and that's probably where most of the traffic comes from.


Wait a sec....NJT can only be counted for New York? How about it's big city neighbor to the south? Oh yeah , were there any numbers for PATH up there or PATCO down there?
Just curious..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2015, 12:51 PM
 
Location: The City
21,945 posts, read 30,803,938 times
Reputation: 7489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenses & Lights. View Post
Wait a sec....NJT can only be counted for New York? How about it's big city neighbor to the south? Oh yeah , were there any numbers for PATH up there or PATCO down there?
Just curious..
well most of NJT is serving NYC but ye there probably i another 60-80K serving the Philly metro all forms combined

I think the point earlier is that most additional entities dont materially change things. In Philly adding PATCO, NJT buses, LRT, AC Line, DART in DE, the reading PA PT etc can be in the total but dont materially change much - and most metros have similar smaller PT offerings
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2015, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Berkeley, S.F. Bay Area
374 posts, read 349,653 times
Reputation: 289
Those are weak numbers for BART. BART needs more expansion within the urban core, it's already at capacity serving suburban areas, but its high costs would be justified with twice the ridership with developed urban lines.

It's ridiculous that in a city like San Francisco, it's faster for travelers to go from the far side of North Berkeley to Powell St. in San Francisco via BART (all the way up a coast, then under the bay), than it is for someone from 44th. ave to get to Powell St. on Muni, despite being in the same city of only 49 sq. miles. Only in San Francisco, could someone say: "Yeah, well if you're concerned about quick commute times to downtown on transit you ought to live in the East Bay and not the City."

Last edited by GalacticDragonfly; 03-12-2015 at 01:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2015, 01:33 PM
 
Location: ITP - City of Atlanta Proper
7,794 posts, read 11,727,152 times
Reputation: 5394
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalacticDragonfly View Post
Those are weak numbers for BART. BART needs more expansion within the urban core, it's already at capacity serving suburban areas, but its high costs would be justified with twice the ridership with developed urban lines.

It's ridiculous that in a city like San Francisco, it's faster for travelers to go from the far side of North Berkeley to Powell St. in San Francisco via BART (all the way up a coast, then under the bay), than it is for someone from 44th. ave to get to Powell St. on Muni, despite being in the same city of only 49 sq. miles. Only in San Francisco, could someone say: "Yeah, well if you're concerned about quick commute times to downtown on transit you ought to live in the East Bay and not the City."
What do you think the challenges are with MUNI? Old tech or competition with car and foot traffic for speed? I'm not leading anywhere since I don't know, but I have heard people complain about the speed and efficiency of MUNI before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2015, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Berkeley, S.F. Bay Area
374 posts, read 349,653 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
What do you think the challenges are with MUNI? Old tech or competition with car and foot traffic for speed? I'm not leading anywhere since I don't know, but I have heard people complain about the speed and efficiency of MUNI before.
In regards to Muni Metro, it's a matter of infrastructure. Frankly, Muni is proof that maintaining America's streetcar systems from the pre WWII era isn't all it's cracked up to be. The problem with the trains is that they have no "right of way", maintain slow speed limits, and have stops at nearly every block. It's a glorified bus on rails.

Muni Metro is preferable to the bus, especially when it's underground. But even then, the Market Street subway is only one tunnel so the trains get bottlenecked whenever something goes wrong. SF kept Muni Metro because the certain streetcar lines used old school historic tunnels (Sunset Tunnel/Twin Peaks tunnel), so they didn't want to waste such monuments by converting the lines to buses. And that's great.

But it's 2015, not 1945.

Muni Metro cannot be San Francisco's only form of rail transportation in the Western neighborhoods, and yet it is. It's slow, it's constantly stopping because of a car, or too many trains rushing into the street-to-tunnel segment. And it's astounding considering BART is the fastest subway in the country, performing speeds up to 80 MPH, and going an average of 40 MPH, yet if you don't live in the Mission neighborhoods, or the East Bay, or a small segement of the pennisula, you're stuck with a bus, or a slightly faster 1920's streetcar system that merely has updated trains but maintains the same routes and lack of right-of-ways.

I like the mix of both. But streetcars should be for segments with specific stops needed for small amounts of people. It should be supported by a less frequently stopping high-speed subway like BART. Say Muni stops at every other block, but at least BART covers one or two stations in the primarily dense areas of the neighborhood, like the Mission. In the Mission, almost everyone I know takes BART over the J-Church. And they love it. BART even beats out the freeway it follows in San Francisco. Meanwhile, Muni loses on most fronts.

I just don't understand why we persist on having the most advanced, high speed subway system in America literally in the same tunnel as one of the slowest light rail systems in the country

Last edited by GalacticDragonfly; 03-12-2015 at 04:59 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2015, 04:51 PM
rah
 
Location: Oakland
3,315 posts, read 7,887,567 times
Reputation: 2492
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
Except I wasn't suggesting that APTA combined the numbers. I was speaking of another report the poster had saw that showed higher MUNI ridership, so I was suggesting that MUNI combines the numbers. It is important to keep in mind that the numbers in the APTA report or self reported.

Actually, we can put away this "debate" and talk specifics. I did a little digging, and while I wasn't able to find data specific to 2014 I did find it for 2013. According to this article (http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancis...nt?oid=2729689), MUNI had a total ridership in 2013 of 701,000.

Taking that knowledge, let's look at the daily numbers for MUNI that were actually reported:

MUNI Streetcars: 128,500
MUNI Gas Buses: 300,900

On the APTA report, while they daily trolley bus numbers arent broken out specifically, they do have the monthly volume listed. That number is 64081400 for 2014, so dividing that by 240 (weekdays only), that gets us to ~267,000, or 696,405 total for all of MUNI.
The total of around 700,000 daily riders on MUNI is right, but those numbers still look wrong. You have to compare to previous data to see what I'm talking about:

2013 Q3:
daily light rail riders: 214,200
daily trolley bus riders: 210,200
2013 Q4:
daily light rail riders: 214,600
daily trolley bus riders: 193,100
2014 Q1:
daily light rail riders: 214,300
daily trolley bus riders: 192,900
2014 Q2:
daily light rail riders: 223,200
daily trolley bus riders: 195,100


But then once you get to quarter 3 and 4 for 2014, the numbers suddenly get all weird, with the trolley bus totals not being available for Q4 (and the total when added up looks too high), and with the light rail apparently vastly underestimated:

2014 Q3:
daily light rail riders: 145,500
daily trolley bus riders: 195,100
2014 Q4:
daily light rail riders: 128,000
daily trolley bus riders: n/a (apparently 267,000 when added up)

I'm pretty sure the quarter 4 trolley bus numbers are including around 70,000 riders that should have actually been included in the light rail rider numbers. So about 200,000 riders for each rather than 270,000 for trolley buses and 130,000 for light rail. I'm pretty sure someone just messed up the numbers somewhere, whether it be Muni, or the APTA. I could be wrong, but the sudden drop/rise in light rail and trolley bus numbers in the stats just doesn't seem to make sense otherwise. And I also say this a someone who rides Muni daily, including light rail. It seems more crowded than ever, not like there's been a drop of 100,000 riders.

Last edited by rah; 03-12-2015 at 05:04 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2015, 11:02 PM
 
Location: Aurora, Colorado
5,373 posts, read 7,659,745 times
Reputation: 4324
Quote:
Originally Posted by steel03 View Post
^Don't forget computer rail from Target Field to Hastings, the Midtown corridor project (probably a combination of aBRT on Lake St and streetcar/LRT hybrid on the Midtown Greenway), the Orange Line BRT on I-35W, and the Nicollet Ave starter streetcar line. Also the Gold Line BRT through the east metro looks like it may actually be happening. Wouldn't be surprised to see Chicago Ave and Hennepin Ave streetcar lines too once Nicollet starts up.




The interesting thing about this is that the Green Line opened halfway through the year and (as far as I am aware) ridership has been increasing each month, so Minneapolis is likely to see another gigantic leap this year. It will definitely pass Salt Lake City and may even pass Denver.
It's possible, but I don't think it will surpass Denver that quickly. A much anticipated/needed line is opening next year and should boast the numbers past 100k (I believe) if all goes well. Another line is also opening. SLC is will probably be past, however.

EDIT: Actually it'll be counted as a commuter rail rather than light rail, so maybe MSP could come close or surpass.

Last edited by Mezter; 03-12-2015 at 11:21 PM..
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