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.
There's no doubt that Chicago's system is larger as a whole..but you should take into account the size of the metros. Chicago is a much larger place. The fact of the matter is, even as a much smaller city, Boston has higher raw number Light Rail/Heavy Rail ridership than Chicago...which says that either:
1. The populace is more transit oriented
or
2. Rail transit is covering the right places in Boston or the wrong places in Chicago.
I would guess it is probably because driving and parking in Chicago is easier than in Boston, but that is just a guess.
These are all among the best that the US has to offer, so being the worst in this contest isn't really that bad. A ranking like this also doesn't say anything about the magnitude of quality between Philly's system and any of the other system. A vote is a vote, but it doesn't say if it's much, much worse than another option or nearly equal and just slightly edging out.
Among these options though, SF and Philadelphia are about tied for the worst among these.
Here are some reasons why Philly might have been voted towards the bottom on this.
Philly's subway lines are functional, but there are only two lines and for some reason there isn't much prize development along the Market-Frankford line to make use of what's probably the single most expensive and possibly efficient piece of transit infrastructure that Philly has. The PATCO speedline is good, but has limited range within the city and could do with a bit better integration into SEPTA's system.
Philadelphia has a very extensive commuter rail system, but the other cities save have similarly good or better services, or in the case of SF and DC, have a rapid transit system that goes way out and effectively serves as commuter rail lines in the metro (and for DC, it does so with very good train frequencies). The commuter tunnel for the system unfortunately can't really be made use of as a sort of S-Bahn service since the shared track portion is relatively short and is effectively better served both going north and west from Center City by the rapid transit lines. It was still a great investment though since it allows for the passage of many more Regional Rail lines through the city. If the frequency can go up, fare integration made better, the revival of former rail lines happen, and the area of North Philly up to and around Wayne Junction became much more attractive, then this could end up playing a much larger role.
Light rail wise, Philadelphia generally has lower riderships and coverage than the others mentioned and those which don't have light rail at all (DC, Chicago, and NYC) generally have much better heavy rail transit which is much more effective.
Buses. Everyone's got them. Some of them have BRT (or BRT-ish) and more Night Owl services. People seem to not get so excited about buses, probably because their large numbers and routes are harder to count and compare. Having a smartphone makes buses awesome. This works for everyone, everyone wins.
Light rail wise, Philadelphia generally has lower riderships and coverage than the others mentioned and those which don't have light rail at all (DC, Chicago, and NYC) generally have much better heavy rail transit which is much more effective.
NYC has a number of light rail lines, but all in the suburbs. In any case, the ridership isn't big compared to the heavy rail ridership.
Eh, that's being really generous. I'd say it hardly functions as BRT let alone LRT. It's okay in the tunnels, but the vast majority of the Silver Line is at-grade and often in mixed-traffic.
Light Rail is a a little stretch, although most light rail (I'm thinking of Boston's Green Line and SF's Metro in particular) has the same problems (dealing with traffic and lights above ground and running better in the tunnels). The South Station- Airport connection on the Silver Line is pretty effective. I've found myself using it more than the Blue Line. My biggest gripe about the Silver Line? That it can be a pretty bumpy ride.
Light Rail is a a little stretch, although most light rail (I'm thinking of Boston's Green Line and SF's Metro in particular) has the same problems (dealing with traffic and lights above ground and running better in the tunnels). The South Station- Airport connection on the Silver Line is pretty effective. I've found myself using it more than the Blue Line. My biggest gripe about the Silver Line? That it can be a pretty bumpy ride.
I've used public transit a lot in Chicago and SF, less so in NYC and DC
SF is the worst. Old slow buses (and Muni trains), way overcrowded, non-sensical routes, and schedules that often don't make sense (e.g., rush hour routes ending at 6pm in a workaholic city). There's one "subway" line and it's clogged by slow muni trains. There's also an incoherent mix of Muni, Bart, and Caltrain. SF's poor transit system is all the more inexcusable when you consider (a) how dense and small the city is; (b) the city has a clear center of gravity (around Fidi) and becomes less dense as you move away from the center; (c) the high salaries/benefits and job security of SF Muni employees (I think drivers make 80k base salaries after a few years)
SF should go underground given all the hills and the density of above-ground areas
I've used public transit a lot in Chicago and SF, less so in NYC and DC
SF is the worst. Old slow buses (and Muni trains), way overcrowded, non-sensical routes, and schedules that often don't make sense (e.g., rush hour routes ending at 6pm in a workaholic city). There's one "subway" line and it's clogged by slow muni trains. There's also an incoherent mix of Muni, Bart, and Caltrain. SF's poor transit system is all the more inexcusable when you consider (a) how dense and small the city is; (b) the city has a clear center of gravity (around Fidi) and becomes less dense as you move away from the center; (c) the high salaries/benefits and job security of SF Muni employees (I think drivers make 80k base salaries after a few years)
SF should go underground given all the hills and the density of above-ground areas
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,134,833 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relegate
I would agree but, in terms of which city is easiest to get around, I'd put San Francisco towards the top of the list, just because it's so dense, compact, and walkable. The PT isn't terrible but it's not that great - I'd put it a sliver below Philly. The other four have very good PT, though,
I agree with this. Public transit in the City of SF is pretty bad, though east of about Divisadero, I find all Muni lines i have ridden to be reliable and on-time. SF definitely needs a Geary subway. That's a no-brainer.
Outside the City, things are a bit better. BART may be a little dirty, but it runs on time and is fast, albeit expensive. The BART connection to SFO is super convenient for downtown riders. Also, CalTrain seems like a great option coming from The Peninsula and it will only get better with the TransBay terminal.
Let's not forget bus service to the East Bay and Marin, either. Golden Gate is better than AC, but both do the trick. Ferries are also a popular, but expensive option for these commuters. They have bar service on board, which doesn't sound like a bad commute to me. Some people in my office ferry in from as far away as Vallejo!
So, while I agree SF is the worst of this lot, it still isn't too bad, all things considered. It's completely doable to live car-free here. In fact, it's a lot easier. That's got to be a big measure of public transportation, right?
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.
