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.
Walk access to transit is preferable for several reasons. If somebody can walk to transit, they may be able to not have a car, or only have, say, one car for two adults. Walk access is better environmentally, most of the pollution cars generate is when they first start up. It also means that transit stations don't have to have these big moats of parking around them, and use up a bunch of land.
Ridership is a good metric, but service is even better. How much transit service did the transit agency make available? So here is annual transit vehicle miles per capita for the big urbanized areas (from the APTA fact book). It includes all systems serving the area. Each bus or train car counts as one vehicle.
Urbanized Area Vehicle Miles Per Capita
1. New York 51.9
2. San Francisco-Oakland 45.2 (does not include San Jose)
3. Washington 41.9
4. Honolulu 39.2
5. Seattle 38.8
6. Salt Lake City 35.9
7. Denver 28.7
8. Chicago 27.9
9. Portland 27.4
10 Boston 25.9
11. Minneapolis-St. Paul 23.6
12. Pittsburgh 22.8
12. San Antonio 22.8
14, Philadelphia 21.7
15. Los Angeles 21.5
16. Charlotte 21.1
17. Austin 20.9
18. Atlanta 20.8
(all UZAs with over 500,000 population and 20 vehicle miles per capita included)
Mostly, not a real surprising list. Salt Lake City, Denver, and Charlotte have all been developing/expanding light rail. I suspect that Philadelphia's relatively poor showing has to do with weak service levels in the suburbs. Atlanta is known for having a weak bus network connecting to its heavy rail, probably accounting for its relatively weak showing.
You could say that the top 10 cities on this list are the top 10 transit cities.
Yeah...no. That list isn't very good aside from NYC at 1 to say those are the top 10 transit cities.
Location: NYC based - Used to Live in Philly - Transplant from Miami
2,307 posts, read 2,766,054 times
Reputation: 2610
Based on my experience living in 3 cities:
Even though I consider Miami my hometown, it has one of the crappiest METRORAIL system. It is only one line (sans the MetroMover), and it does not extend to certain areas alot of people need to go. (Miami Beach? for example). And in times, they don;t take you right into the destination area. Like if you want to go to Coconut Grove, you still have to walk extensively / wait for the bus at the train station. (I heard they extended to the airport now, which is good though!)
Philadelphia has great transit system. I barely use my car nowadays. Although in last several months, there has been talk that SEPTA might cut several lines due to lack of funds. (I hope not!). I think I am almost ready to sell my car now!
Atlanta has an OK MARTA system. It takes you to places, but it is not as extensive as SEPTA. It took me to destinations I needed to go back then in college, namely Lenox Square/Phipps PLaza area, Midtown and Perimeter Mall.
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.
