U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-24-2009, 07:21 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
2,851 posts, read 5,595,912 times
Reputation: 1723

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
I think it's funny how the thread about the WORST transit systems in the country had page after page after page discussing Chicago, New York and DC.

The thread about the BEST system in the country keeping talking about Atlanta, Houston and Dallas.



Not implying that the latter are by any means the worst, but still kinda funny how topics evolve...
Yeah I noticed that too.

 
Old 01-25-2009, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Lakeland, Florida
6,976 posts, read 12,508,867 times
Reputation: 8742
I think Portland has a good transit system. It is extensive and being extended constantly. It is made up of light rail, buses and streetcars. I however have questioned its operations and although I do think it is an excellent system, I have to give it a failing grade. The system is funded heavily by gov't subsidies and the cost is $2.30 just for a bus ride, since the fare zones are designed to make most trips the most expensive fare. The fareless square is used extensively by crime types and the entire Light rail/streetcar system except the bus is on the honor system. The amount of people not paying for tickets on the Rail end of this system is an absolute disgrace and the paying customer ends up funding these people by the many added fare increases. Another fare increase is scheduled for this summer bringing a bus or rail ticket close to $3.00. It takes much more than extensive transit systems that run on efficient time schedules to make a system one of the best. It takes honor, integrity and fairness on both the part of the transit company and its customers.
 
Old 01-25-2009, 02:52 PM
 
1,303 posts, read 1,727,766 times
Reputation: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780 View Post
You can blame that on the city, people in these cities want rail but the city is being stupid and wasting money on all these statistics and studies. Obviously many people do since the ridership numbers for Houston's bus system is over 300k.

Id rather be on the train than the bus and since i live by a marta station i never have to worry about a bus. I think Atlanta has the best system in the South. But my thing is for Dallas and Houston to be bigger citys you would have thought they would have had heavy rail a long time ago
 
Old 01-25-2009, 03:02 PM
 
Location: Somerville, MA
8,047 posts, read 16,097,254 times
Reputation: 9397
Quote:
Originally Posted by californialove24 View Post
1.NY(Great Pub Trans)
2.Chicago(^^)
3.San Francisco(Most Walkable City)?
4.Boston
Interesting. While New York has the most extensive network in the US (and the subway runs 24/7 which is a BIG plus), I don't know if I'd say it's the BEST. There are many areas, even near the core of the city that are a HIKE from the nearest subway stop. New York is dense and covers a HUGE area so it's hard to fault the city for not having every corner covered. NYC's subway also doesn't cross the Hudson to New Jersey so a huge part of the immediate metro area is disconnected from the city from that form of transit.

NYC's regional rail system is fantastic though.

I've never ridden on BART, so I have no experience there but I hear good things. I like the "El" in Chicago, but same problem as New York. I would, however put Washington D.C. at least above Boston... the system was far reaching, thorough, up to date and all round worthy of being the transit system for a national capital.

My list would be:

1) Washington DC (just about as good as you'll find in N. America)
2) San Fran (based on what I've heard... can't really back this one up)
3) NYC (may have holes, but props for the sheer expanse of the network)
4) Chicago (see NYC)
5) Boston (Great and all-encompassing, but needs some updating and expansion)
 
Old 01-25-2009, 03:31 PM
rah
 
Location: Oakland
3,315 posts, read 8,131,091 times
Reputation: 2508
As far as ridership numbers go SF is pretty high:

-MUNI (buses, light rail, cable cars, serves SF): 686,000 riders a day in 2006
-BART (heavy rail, serves SF, the East Bay and some of the Peninsula): 374,949 riders a day in July-September 2008, the 5th highest in the US for a rapid transit system.
-CalTrain (commuter rail, runs between SF and San Jose): 36,993 riders a day in February 2008.


all stats taken from wikipedia
 
Old 01-25-2009, 04:55 PM
 
1,303 posts, read 1,727,766 times
Reputation: 191
MARTA is composed of both heavy rail transit and bus transit that operate primarily within the boundaries of Fulton and DeKalb counties. Exceptions to this service area include the Airport station and 7 miles (11 km) of rail located in Clayton County[4] and one bus route to Cobb County's Cumberland Boulevard Transfer Center.[5] For fiscal year 2006, the average weekday ridership was 451,064. Overall for the year, bus and paratransit ridership was 69,194,285, while rail ridership was 69,209,027. And to add Marta is the 5th Buisest system in the USA so it is very much used regardless if its not extensive.
 
Old 01-25-2009, 05:18 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,659 posts, read 27,108,274 times
Reputation: 9591
Quote:
Originally Posted by atlantaATL View Post
Id rather be on the train than the bus and since i live by a marta station i never have to worry about a bus. I think Atlanta has the best system in the South. But my thing is for Dallas and Houston to be bigger citys you would have thought they would have had heavy rail a long time ago
At the time that Washington, Atlanta, and Miami built theres, Dallas and Houston was also suppose to have heavy rail transit. But politicians and leadership hurt both Texas cities and had to wait more than 20-30 years before they even received rail transit. They would have had it if not from the stiff opposition from politicians and poor leaders.
 
Old 01-25-2009, 05:59 PM
 
1,303 posts, read 1,727,766 times
Reputation: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
At the time that Washington, Atlanta, and Miami built theres, Dallas and Houston was also suppose to have heavy rail transit. But politicians and leadership hurt both Texas cities and had to wait more than 20-30 years before they even received rail transit. They would have had it if not from the stiff opposition from politicians and poor leaders.

oh ok cool i understand
 
Old 06-11-2009, 10:53 AM
 
57 posts, read 148,446 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
Interesting. While New York has the most extensive network in the US (and the subway runs 24/7 which is a BIG plus), I don't know if I'd say it's the BEST. There are many areas, even near the core of the city that are a HIKE from the nearest subway stop. New York is dense and covers a HUGE area so it's hard to fault the city for not having every corner covered. NYC's subway also doesn't cross the Hudson to New Jersey so a huge part of the immediate metro area is disconnected from the city from that form of transit.

NYC's regional rail system is fantastic though.

I've never ridden on BART, so I have no experience there but I hear good things. I like the "El" in Chicago, but same problem as New York. I would, however put Washington D.C. at least above Boston... the system was far reaching, thorough, up to date and all round worthy of being the transit system for a national capital.

My list would be:

1) Washington DC (just about as good as you'll find in N. America)
2) San Fran (based on what I've heard... can't really back this one up)
3) NYC (may have holes, but props for the sheer expanse of the network)
4) Chicago (see NYC)
5) Boston (Great and all-encompassing, but needs some updating and expansion)

DC Metro, first? Honey, no!

NYC -- hands down. There are parts of DC where you have to walk a hike to Metro. AND --- and this is a big AND here --- at least when a NYC subway breaks down, they have OTHER tracks that the trains can be re-routed on and you can get to your destination. When DC Metro trains break down the whole system backs up and you sit there and wait for HOURS!!!! Ugh!!! DC Metro, first? No, absolutely not.

And this thing about "NYC subway also doesn't cross the Hudson to New Jersey so a huge part of the immediate metro area is disconnected from the city from that form of transit," gets totally discredited as a factor here, because NJ has NJ Transit and PATH trains which do the job for NJ commuters. This is the same function that MARC and VRE trains in the DC area do for commuters coming OUTSIDE of DC. In fact, NJ Transit and PATH run SEVEN DAYS a week, as does the primary system in the area, NYC subway.

DC Metro does a GREAT job in the immediate DC city limits and nearby suburbs. DC Metro is a very nice-looking, clean, pretty system (well, that has started to go downill in recent years, but still nicer-looking, cleaner and prettier than NYC system, which was built in the 19th century, might I add). I really think people get caught up in how "pretty" DC Metro is. If this was a beauty contest, yes, DC Metro #1. But since this ain't a "Miss Subway" question --- LOL --- it's a best public transportation question --- DC Metro is not #1. NYC runs 24 hrs, 7 days a week. Metro shuts down about midnight, and runs only to 2am on Fri/Sat nite. It is a VERY pretty system, though. Very pretty.

"Pretty" does not mean best to me, though . . .

Last edited by HealthInfoTech; 06-11-2009 at 11:05 AM..
 
Old 06-11-2009, 11:18 AM
 
2,859 posts, read 3,776,823 times
Reputation: 3397
Alex Libman:

As your fellow capitalist, let me enlighten you to the fact that the only form of transit in the US to turn a genuine profit w/o any government intervention is Freight Rail. Airports and Roads are ridculously subsidized.

But hey, keep believing what you want instead of actual, economic, facts...

To everyone else:

1)NY
2)DC
3)Chicago
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.


Closed Thread

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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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