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.
One thing I think everyone can agree upon is that DC is the poster child of how to effectively deliver TOD in the suburbs, every city in the nation should take notes.
maybe like 10% that live within walking distance if that. I agree. While the Metro is a tremdous thing it will not dramatically alter the car commuter rate to these TOD centers IMHO. Yes a change but its not like everyone will all of the sudden stop driving from Reston Parkwat and Route 7 to Tysons because there is Metro stop at Wiehle or Reston etc.
I think the 20 dollar tolls roundtrip on the Dulles Toll road will have the most effect on commuting trends.
right, but most people take 7 to avoid the greenway. people who live east of Dulles only pay like $6 round trip
And with the development happening that way, how long do you think those alternate routes will be moving. A 2 hour commute to go 20 miles will make many people think twice about driving. Tolls are going up no matter what so that's not really up for debate. It will be crazy expensive by 2030.
NYC's subway system runs more than 3 minutes a train during rush hour on certain lines.
Edit: seems like only 4/5 through Manhattan (Both lines run on the same track) run more frequently than every 3 minutes. Could be less than every 2 minutes.
There are systems, notably Moscow's, that have headways of less than 2 minutes. I believe someone mentioned in a previous topic that the headways for some systems like Boston's used to actually be significantly shorter and closer to 2 min.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
DC's metro is a bit closer to BART than say, Boston's T. DC's metro has done a better job at having more core stations and more walkable TOD development around the outer stations.
Great link, though the focus is that is how BART and DC's system are radically different despite both being newer systems with a lot of interlining. Also, even with the interlining, DC's system runs much shorter headways on individual lines than BART so although DC does go far out into the suburbs, it's still operates a good deal like heavy rail due to its high frequencies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
Chicago doesn't even have 10% of the development potential of the DC metro system. Chicago's system is in the city and the area around station's is already built up. Metro still has station's (not for much longer) that have forest around them. There isn't a system in the nation with even 50% of the housing units being built around DC's metro system currently. DC is expected to add 800,000 people in ridership over the next 20 years. That will put DC's ridership close to 2 million daily riders. Almost all of that additional ridership is going to come from new housing units around the station's. Also, DC is centralizing almost all employment along it's metro system. Chicago isn't in the same league as DC in regional urban planning and transit/job centralizing. This debate really isn't close. That's the reason Chicago's ridership is so low now to begin with. Chicago is going to have to go back to placing jobs along the El' if it wants to keep up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDAllstar
My intention was not to put down Chicago's EL'; I was just talking about the potential of both systems based on development. Chicago has a much steeper hill to climb with gentrification ridership versus grass field development ridership. Honestly though, I believe the biggest difference between the potential of both systems is where jobs are locating. The DC region really focuses jobs along metro lines even in the suburbs. This is the main reason DC's metro system has such high ridership. The reverse commuting potential for the Metro system will fuel substantial growth also. This is one of the major differences between the two systems. You have to put the jobs in the suburbs along your mass transit lines as much as possible. This is obviously an advantage the Metro stumbled upon without planning for it with the combination of suburbanization and Metro reaching way out into the suburbs.
Chicago isn't developing in the same league as DC right now which is going through a pretty large boom, but it is doing well and arguably already has a very significant head start. Metro has such huge ridership for a number of reasons, but I think mostly it's the very good frequencies they have even when trains are way out as well and a much looser hub-spoke model than Chicago (the Circle line and Mid-City Transitway both really need to happen) has which makes traveling between two non-Loop areas often a pain. One wildcard is whether Metra ever electrifies and runs more frequent services. The right-of-way is there and much of the infrastructure, but who knows when if ever that could happen.
Great link, though the focus is that is how BART and DC's system are radically different despite both being newer systems with a lot of interlining. Also, even with the interlining, DC's system runs much shorter headways on individual lines than BART so although DC does go far out into the suburbs, it's still operates a good deal like heavy rail due to its high frequencies.
BART would could have shorter headways if there was higher demand, but it doesn't. A transit agency isn't going to run more train if there isn't enough riders.
Quote:
Metro has such huge ridership for a number of reasons, but I think mostly it's the very good frequencies they have even when trains are way out as well and a much looser hub-spoke model
Again, I think the higher frequencies are a result of higher ridership not a cause.
BART would could have shorter headways if there was higher demand, but it doesn't. A transit agency isn't going to run more train if there isn't enough riders.
Again, I think the higher frequencies are a result of higher ridership not a cause.
BART actually has a pretty significant headway block due to how most lines need to use the transbay tunnel to cross the bay and then have to all interline together on two tracks serving both directions once they hit the tunnel and then into SF. They probably need to lay more trackage for significant headway changes to at least the portion traversing the Bay and into SF.
I think it's a bit cyclic because higher frequencies would induce higher ridership since it becomes much more convenient. A convenient and frequent stop would then drive up the value of the area around the station and incentive building higher density residences or commercial space. It can and does work in either direction.
BART would could have shorter headways if there was higher demand, but it doesn't. A transit agency isn't going to run more train if there isn't enough riders.
All but one of BART's lines (Richmond to Fremont) use the Transbay Tube and that really limits capacity. I don't believe WMATA currently runs more than 2 lines on the same track. They've talked about building another Transbay Tube or using technology to run trains closer together to increase capacity. There is defintely demand to run at least a few more trains on some lines imo.
Quote:
Again, I think the higher frequencies are a result of higher ridership not a cause.
It works both ways. Agencies will increase frequencies if there is an issue with overcrowding but also will do so to induce demand if they think there is potential for more ridership with higher frequencies.
The Bay Area simply faces much more difficult geographic constraints than the DC area and that is one thing that really isn't stressed in that comparison you linked. SF Bay across to Oakland is something like 6 or 7 miles, so it is very expensive to build anything across that. SF isn't the geographic center of the Bay Area either like DC is for it's metro area. I can't think of an area that has topography that is as difficult to build transportation infrastructure as the Bay Area in the US.
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.
