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.
Are there any plans for a subway through Philly down Front/8th and/or 25th like you said? That's the most major gap in service I can see. I'm moving to Philly in summer and living in Pennsport. Sucks that I can only take buses and no subways get there, but hopefully the buses run pretty smoothly through that neighborhood. It's just that buses never are as reliable as subways. I would be great to invest in a few years in a property along a proposed subway line if it turns into a permanent move
If an additional line was built heading north/south through that part of the city though, something east/west along Washington would have to be built to better get through the city on rail as opposed to bus.
No, no plans whatsoever to build those subway additions.
forgot about patco, never ridden it. always felt like regional rail to me since no transfer and cost.
Patco is actually more similar to Metro or Bart as a hybrid of subway and regional rail IMHO
the fare systems will work together after the NLP implementation by summer I believe
also the Philly regional rail lines run underground in the core sort of like a subway of sorts. There are also what are called subway surface lines that are LRT and run into some neighboring burbs. The physical boundaries of Philly contain the main lines but the MFL is probably as long if not longer than a couple of the Metro lines
Montreal is easily the best of the bunch here. I'd still give DC the number 2 slot and Boston the number 3. Philadelphia comes in last. I'm excluding Toronto because I really am not qualified to comment on it. When I think of "good" transit, I don't care so much for ridership numbers, length of lines, variety of lines, etc. I want to know which city is easiest to be mobile around the urban core and the metro area as a whole. Which city is easiest for living without a car?
In my opinon that's Montreal. All of these cities are dense and walkable. All have good transit systems. I think Montreal's covers the metro area better, is more comfortable (rubber wheel on the subway!), and as reliable (if not more so) than any of the others.
I know DC's Metro has had its problems in the past few years, but I still think it's excellent. It covers the urban core well and is great for sparking TOD and reaching out into the suburbs. I hate the scaled fares on rapid transit (there should be an urban core zone with flat fares, just my opinion), but overall Metro and transit in DC is pretty good.
MBTA in Boston loses points for some reliability issues and lack of late night service, but it still covers the core very well (maybe better than any of the others) and the metro area very well. Commuter rail is too expensive and the schedule isn't perfect, but it's extensive and comfortable. Rapid transit in the core is very good, even with the occasional hiccup. I like that Boston's transit network includes a system of water taxis and ferries which makes it pretty diverse (I dream of a ferry commute from Salem or Hingham). If this thread were best city to live without a car, I think Boston and Montreal might be my number one picks. Boston's density and compact core makes it, in my opinion, the easiest of the pack to navigate without a personal vehicle. It's built environment makes up for some of the flaws in the transit system. Still, on this list (excluding Toronto), I'd rank it 3rd.
Philadelphia is last, but not bad by any stretch. As a visitor, I've found it to be one of the more difficult systems to navigate. While the regional rail network is excellent (probably the best or second best of the bunch), the urban rapid transit network is probably the weakest of the bunch. It's still an easy city to navigate on foot and without a car, but I think it lacks in terms of rapid transit in the core.
Montreal is easily the best of the bunch here. I'd still give DC the number 2 slot and Boston the number 3. Philadelphia comes in last. I'm excluding Toronto because I really am not qualified to comment on it. When I think of "good" transit, I don't care so much for ridership numbers, length of lines, variety of lines, etc. I want to know which city is easiest to be mobile around the urban core and the metro area as a whole. Which city is easiest for living without a car?
In my opinon that's Montreal. All of these cities are dense and walkable. All have good transit systems. I think Montreal's covers the metro area better, is more comfortable (rubber wheel on the subway!), and as reliable (if not more so) than any of the others.
I know DC's Metro has had its problems in the past few years, but I still think it's excellent. It covers the urban core well and is great for sparking TOD and reaching out into the suburbs. I hate the scaled fares on rapid transit (there should be an urban core zone with flat fares, just my opinion), but overall Metro and transit in DC is pretty good.
MBTA in Boston loses points for some reliability issues and lack of late night service, but it still covers the core very well (maybe better than any of the others) and the metro area very well. Commuter rail is too expensive and the schedule isn't perfect, but it's extensive and comfortable. Rapid transit in the core is very good, even with the occasional hiccup. I like that Boston's transit network includes a system of water taxis and ferries which makes it pretty diverse (I dream of a ferry commute from Salem or Hingham). If this thread were best city to live without a car, I think Boston and Montreal might be my number one picks. Boston's density and compact core makes it, in my opinion, the easiest of the pack to navigate without a personal vehicle. It's built environment makes up for some of the flaws in the transit system. Still, on this list (excluding Toronto), I'd rank it 3rd.
Philadelphia is last, but not bad by any stretch. As a visitor, I've found it to be one of the more difficult systems to navigate. While the regional rail network is excellent (probably the best or second best of the bunch), the urban rapid transit network is probably the weakest of the bunch. It's still an easy city to navigate on foot and without a car, but I think it lacks in terms of rapid transit in the core.
What are your thoughts of the North-South rail link, electrification and the idea of making a RER/S-Bahn for Boston? It's always struck me as one of the best transit deals for any US city (basically seems like getting a DC metro or BART at a price point where much of the cost has already been sunk in), but I don't live in Boston and follow things closely enough.
They should have done this a while back. I remember this was proposed a few years ago, nothing happened, because people thought it would be too "inconvenient" to shut down entire lines, and now look how worse things have gotten. I welcome a planned temporary shut down of specific lines one at a time, if it benefits for the longevity and safety of the system. Good for Metro and I wish the New GM well. It seems like finally someone gets it, the previous two GM's would do or say anything just to save face. At least the new GM has the cahunas to shut things down if it's deemed necessary. DC's Metro is very underfunded someone has to stand up for what is right for the riders/ public. The one day safety shut down last week was a GOOD thing for Metro, the chief safety executive of Metro just resigned last week. New leadership is what Metro needed, and it's out in full force now. I'd like to see where this new GM leads us over the next 7-8 years and revisit the topic.
I don't know if you can do just one line at a time since many lines share track. They probably have to do all at once. It sucks but it needs to be done. And while they are working on that, work on those escalators too.
Question. If this is the Blue Line they're proposing to shut down, this wouldn't be as horrid everyone makes it out to seem, would it? Looking at the system map now. From the Franconia to the Pentagon stations, the Yellow line runs with the Blue. Then from Rosslyn to Stadium Armory, it follows the same path as the Orange and Silver. From Stadium Armory to Largo Town Center, it continues to follow the Silver Line.
Is there a reason why the DC Metro is so repetitive like this? It seems like a vast majority of stations are quite overlapping with with at least one other line. I guess in a situation of a 6 month shut down, it's not such a bad thing, though right? Looking at the map, it seems like the Red Line shutting down would be more catastrophic, no?
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.
