Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 05-29-2010, 04:53 AM
 
2,563 posts, read 6,029,241 times
Reputation: 879

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
I think a combination of ridership, money saved, coverage, innovation, and reduction of the cities carbon footprint are the best ways to gauge a PT system's effectiveness. Unfortunately for that last criteria, all cities do a universally crappy job.
I wouldn't say they do a universally crappy job. Imagine if the places didn't have the public transit and all those miles saved were spent. But they certainly have a long way to go in planning, policy, and implementation before any of them are significantly lower.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-29-2010, 11:01 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,385 posts, read 28,380,094 times
Reputation: 5877
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
I think a combination of ridership, money saved, coverage, innovation, and reduction of the cities carbon footprint are the best ways to gauge a PT system's effectiveness. Unfortunately for that last criteria, all cities do a universally crappy job.
nyc is on ultra low sulfur

  • NYC Transit has retrofitted more than 3,200 buses with diesel particulate filters, an emissions control technology that reduces diesel particulate emissions from engines by as much as 95 percent. In addition, we have received 1,300 new buses that have diesel particulate filters.
  • NYC Transit has the largest hybrid-electric bus fleet in the world. In the summer of 2009, NYC Transit had 855 hybrid buses, and MTA Bus Company had 316, for a total of 1,171.
  • The Jackie Gleason Depot converted to 100 percent compressed natural gas (CNG) operations in 1999. The West Farms Depot opened in 2003; today, half its fleet is CNG buses. NYC Transit has 486 CNG buses; MTA Bus Company has 290, and MTA Long Island Bus has 336; that’s a total of 1, 112 CNG buses operated by MTA agencies as of summer 2009.
In 2002, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) presented the Clean Air Excellence Award to New York City Transit's Department of Buses for the purchase of hybrid electric buses, its use of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel and diesel particulate filters, and its diesel engine repowering program.

In November 2005, the California Transportation Energy Future Conference gave New York City Transit's Department of Buses its Blue Sky Merit Award for contributions to clean air and energy efficiency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 01:40 AM
 
Location: DC/Brooklyn, NY/Miami, FL
1,178 posts, read 2,940,523 times
Reputation: 391
There is now way SF and LA are above D.C.

First off. LA's system sucks!!!
Just look at the map, its in the same league as Baltimore and Miami.

Second, WMATA is bigger than BART. So far, our subway system is 106.3 miles and BART is is 104 miles. We are bigger than BART both ridership and length of tracks, and the silver line is under construction as we speak, so D.C.'s WMATA is about to be the biggest public transit system in the country after NYC. People just need to stop hating on D.C.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 01:45 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 15,935,989 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by -.- View Post
There is now way SF and LA are above D.C.

First off. LA's system sucks!!!
Just look at the map, its in the same league as Baltimore and Miami.

Second, WMATA is bigger than BART. So far, our subway system is 106.3 miles and BART is is 104 miles. We are bigger than BART both ridership and length of tracks, and the silver line is under construction as we speak, so D.C.'s WMATA is about to be the biggest public transit system in the country after NYC. People just need to stop hating on D.C.
People just need to stop hating in general. Many cities go uncredited and bashed.

But yes, there is no way LA and San Francisco should be ahead of Washington DC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 01:54 AM
 
Location: DC/Brooklyn, NY/Miami, FL
1,178 posts, read 2,940,523 times
Reputation: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmShahi View Post
People just need to stop hating in general. Many cities go uncredited and bashed.

But yes, there is no way LA and San Francisco should be ahead of Washington DC.
I mean I put is like this, LA, like a lot of sunbelt cities, are like suburbs IMO. Itas a very smalll subway system for a city of over 3 million people. It sucks nd the light rail makes it no better. Its a driving city.

SF bay areas BART on the other hand is just weird. Too many of its lines share the same track and its not as extensive as it should be.

As much passengers as WMATA handles daily, non of the lines and can extended for real, its already pushing capacity. So now we're turning back to streetcars and lights rail to help ease the flow.

Like I said, WMATa was ALOT better in the 90's before the mass influx of yuppies and hipsters came in, D.C. was a real city and had its own culture, GoGo and the streets. Before there wasn't any delays or service destructions on the rails. smh...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 01:59 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 15,935,989 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by -.- View Post
I mean I put is like this, LA, like a lot of sunbelt cities, are like suburbs IMO. Itas a very smalll subway system for a city of over 3 million people. It sucks nd the light rail makes it no better. Its a driving city.

SF bay areas BART on the other hand is just weird. Too many of its lines share the same track and its not as extensive as it should be.

As much passengers as WMATA handles daily, non of the lines and can extended for real, its already pushing capacity. So now we're turning back to streetcars and lights rail to help ease the flow.

Like I said, WMATa was ALOT better in the 90's before the mass influx of yuppies and hipsters came in, D.C. was a real city and had its own culture, GoGo and the streets. Before there wasn't any delays or service destructions on the rails. smh...
The fact that the cities in the sunbelt have a sprawl layout makes public transportation hard to begin with. Imagine all the cost and maintain for multiple lines going around the city core infinitely to other suburbs that expand beyond the eye can see from a 75 story building.
Scary thought? Yes.

The city layout for Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, etc really help the cities public transportation planning.

Yes, I agree with your post almost entirely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 02:24 AM
 
Location: DC/Brooklyn, NY/Miami, FL
1,178 posts, read 2,940,523 times
Reputation: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmShahi View Post
The fact that the cities in the sunbelt have a sprawl layout makes public transportation hard to begin with. Imagine all the cost and maintain for multiple lines going around the city core infinitely to other suburbs that expand beyond the eye can see from a 75 story building.
Scary thought? Yes.

The city layout for Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, etc really help the cities public transportation planning.

Yes, I agree with your post almost entirely.
If I had anything to do with it, Houston would have a subway system almost the size of NYC's. It's sprawl but it would do good with a big subway system. LA, Houston, Atlanta, Philly, Dallas, and Baltimore should have bigger subway system than it does now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 09:29 PM
 
593 posts, read 1,755,453 times
Reputation: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by -.- View Post
I mean I put is like this, LA, like a lot of sunbelt cities, are like suburbs IMO. Itas a very smalll subway system for a city of over 3 million people. It sucks nd the light rail makes it no better. Its a driving city.

SF bay areas BART on the other hand is just weird. Too many of its lines share the same track and its not as extensive as it should be.

As much passengers as WMATA handles daily, non of the lines and can extended for real, its already pushing capacity. So now we're turning back to streetcars and lights rail to help ease the flow.

Like I said, WMATa was ALOT better in the 90's before the mass influx of yuppies and hipsters came in, D.C. was a real city and had its own culture, GoGo and the streets. Before there wasn't any delays or service destructions on the rails. smh...
I agree 100% that DC is 2nd best, better than LA and SF for sure. Pound for pound I find it to be much better than Chicago as well.

I do like SFs options of public transit, in terms of BART, Muni Light Rail (which is being expanded), streetcar, good bus system, etc. But DC has a much more integrated, accessible and easy to use system. Considering its relatively new, it really is a model for how to design and implement an excellent public transit system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2010, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
7,731 posts, read 14,289,192 times
Reputation: 2774
Quote:
Originally Posted by -.- View Post
If I had anything to do with it, Houston would have a subway system almost the size of NYC's. It's sprawl but it would do good with a big subway system. LA, Houston, Atlanta, Philly, Dallas, and Baltimore should have bigger subway system than it does now.
I agree, but show us the money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2010, 02:33 PM
 
2,957 posts, read 6,445,726 times
Reputation: 1419
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmShahi View Post
People just need to stop hating in general. Many cities go uncredited and bashed.

But yes, there is no way LA and San Francisco should be ahead of Washington DC.
I couldn't agree more, particularly with the bold. Just comparing rail systems, DC's has way better coverage. I don't know much about LA's, but SF's is much more reliant on buses than anything else. I'm not sure, but I assume its b/c of all the hilly terrain. I don't think it would be that easy to have subway or light rail stations in a lot of SF with all the varying elevation.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top