New York City ranked as having the worst traffic in North America (credit, taxi cab)

[pbergen]

i just saw an article in the ny times that caught my attention.

the report, which was released very recently, ranks new york city as having the worst traffic in north america.

now, i usually view these "best/worst" lists with a grain of salt, as the rankings seem to fluctuate yearly and are based on any number of factors, including editorial biases. but i wanted to bring this article to the forum's attention because it would seem to subvert some of the most commonly held notions about which cities have the worst traffic. so many CD posters love to rip on the sprawling sunbelt cities when it comes to traffic and lack of mass transit alternatives, but at least one study suggests that some of the cities with the best mass transit in north america also have some of the worst traffic.

in case anyone is wondering, i'm not trying to defend decentralized land-use patterns, nor am i trying to discredit the efficiency of compact, walkable city centers with excellent mass transit. i just wanted to show that in spite of what some people on this site want to believe, heavy automobile congestion is caused by a lot of factors, not the least of which is simply having a massive amount of people in a finite amount of space.

incidentally, i have felt for years that the nyc metro has the absolute worst traffic in the nation, hands down, based on extensive firsthand experience driving throughout the city and region. so this report comes as no shock to me.

here's a quick snippet from the article:

Worst Rush Hours in the United States
1. New York City
2. Washington
3. San Francisco
4. Seattle
5. Los Angeles
6. Philadelphia
7. Chicago
8. Dallas-Ft.Worth
9. Atlanta
10. Houston

Freeways with the Slowest Typical Rush Hour
1. New York City – Brooklyn Battery Tunnel (northbound)
2. New York City – George Washington Bridge (eastbound)
3. Montreal – Autoroute 15 – (eastbound)
4. Philadelphia – U.S. 202 (southbound)
5. Montreal – Route 138 (westbound)
6. New York City – George Washington Bridge (westbound)
7. Los Angeles – 1-10 (eastbound)
8. Boston – U.S. 1 (northbound)
9. Dallas – Texas State Highway Spur 366 (eastbound)
10. Toronto – Don Valley Parkway (northbound)

[MiamiRob]

Well having grown up in metro NYC only fools own cars trying to navigate the traffic in New York City. My family never owned a car until we moved to Florida! You either walk, catch a bus or ride the trains and that didn't mean you were "poor" either!
As for your list on the "worst rush hours" the top canidates have very urban & dense cities yet when you get to the bottom of the list you have Atlanta, Houston & Dallas/Ft.Worth which are cities well known for their huge and sprawling expressways yet manage to be catergorized as having the worst traffic.

[18Montclair]

I wouldnt rank SF above LA at all.

Im from the Bay Area and have lived in Los Angeles off and on and LA is far worse. Its not even close. The 405 is downright wicked as well as the 10, the 5, the 101 and so on. All horrendous.

I don't know what their criteria is but in my experience having been to all of the cities ranked in this ranking, LA is by several levels worse than everywhere except NY, and I would actually put LA above NY too.

[chitown85]

This study is flawed because it only takes into account the city, not the metro. Chicago city traffic is much better than suburban traffic.

[sk8t]

Lets see what all the ATL bashers say about this list since it's so low and not even mentioned in the other. I know they will find any reason to put it on this list.

[Chicago South Sider]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I don't know what their criteria is but in my experience having been to all of the cities ranked in this ranking, LA is by several levels worse than everywhere except NY, and I would actually put LA above NY too.

I have to agree with you here. LA traffic is, by far, the worst I've ever seen and that includes New York City.

[fleures87]

NYC has terrible traffic with all the public transportation available:buses, trains and taxi cabs. Plus, with so many people from NJ, Conn., other states and tourists within a very compact, forever growing population makes it difficult to keep things flowing.

[Ben Around]

"at least one study suggests that some of the cities with the best mass transit in north america also have some of the worst traffic." < That's a canard conservatives like to use to support the "autos only" policies they espouse for American cities. It's not a surprise that NYC would have the "worst traffic". It IS the largest city, after all. If you are a habitual driver, you'd be miserable there. But if you are open to alternative transportation, you are in luck. The city has the best transit, commuter rail, taxi system and is most walkable of any city in America. Compare that to cities like LA, Houston, Dallas, etc.

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by chitown85

This study is flawed because it only takes into account the city, not the metro. Chicago city traffic is much better than suburban traffic.

Excellent point. Many don't realize that city driving on local streets is much easier than driving in and between burbs.

[Gantz]

To be fair, traffic on a 4 lane road such as the Brooklyn tunnel is kind of different to traffic on a 10 lane superhighway.