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.
Metro Rail has 80 stops in the LA area (plus around 20 BRT stops) and it looks like Skytrain has 47 stops.
Their ridership is similar; 405,000 daily riders for skytrain, 380,000 daily riders for MetroRail. Vancouver is much more downtown-centric than Los Angeles has no freeways within its (small-ish) city limits. Even Los Angeles has as large and healthy a downtown as Vancouver (and it has the potential) LA's downtown would dominate the metro much less than Vancouver's because the city is so much larger.
Los Angeles' MetroRail has more miles than Skytrain, nearly double the route length.
Their ridership is similar; 405,000 daily riders for skytrain, 380,000 daily riders for MetroRail. Vancouver is much more downtown-centric than Los Angeles has no freeways within its (small-ish) city limits. Even Los Angeles has as large and healthy a downtown as Vancouver (and it has the potential) LA's downtown would dominate the metro much less than Vancouver's because the city is so much larger.
Los Angeles' MetroRail has more miles than Skytrain, nearly double the route length.
Mainly out of necessity - there is a lot of ground to cover in the LA area. Agree that even if DTLA reaches its potential it still will not have the pull that CBDs have in other cities. One thing to note about the Green Line is that it gets over 40k riders and never even gets close to the center of Los Angeles - it's debatable whether it really even enters the core of the city, sort of a peripheral line that has the added hardship of being in a freeway median (but the advantage of running through some pretty low-income neighborhoods). The Sepulveda Pass line (that would go from the SFV to Westside via 405) will be another line that gets nowhere near DTLA and still have high ridership (not sure what the projections are though).
This is sort of related to the thread - but there will be a time in the near future when you can stay in Los Angeles and get to Disneyland car-free (without using a shuttle or whatever is available now): Extra, Extra: A Streetcar Comes to Anaheim: LAist Makes sense to do something big in that area because Anaheim is also building a state of the art multi-modal transit station which will serve Metrolink, Amtrak, local buses, and eventually high-speed rail.
(also interesting is that photo with the articles is the sign for my building)
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.
The Chicago Terminal District which consist of both freight and passenger covers thousands of miles of track. It has more than enough of tracks to designate as passenger. The mass amount of tracks built in Chicago since 1834 is not something DC will accomplish in 20 years time. Before you go on about development potential Chicago already has the infrastructure in place and could designate any lane for passenger use. DC is new and would take a century to catch up to Chicago's rail track infrastructure. DC will never be the nation's rail hub for anything not in freight or passenger. Sure the Metro is 2nd in terms of ridership that is basically it but it isn't enough to make DC as a 1# rail passenger hub center in the country. It will never happen in our life time. It would have to pass NYC and I don't see that happening in the near future if ever.
Apparently, you are clueless about Chicago's rail passenger history. Once again DC will never hold the title of the nation's largest passenger rail hub. Only Chicago and New York has done this. Right now NYC is the nation's number 1 rail passenger hub. Chicago was #1 in the 1930's. DC??
Chicago's bus system is pretty downplayed on this site.Chicago bus system is the best besides NYC.
Chicago's bus system is better. Its bus ridership per capita is slightly higher, and in and around the Loop to other neighborhoods the bus seems to work well. Manhattan's buses are often horribly slow, especially routes that go through the business district. Both times I've visited Chicago I've used the buses. I visit NYC frequently, I can't remember using the buses in the last 10 years. There's also gaps in coverage: there are no local buses between Manhattan and Brooklyn, except for right after a hurricane.
Chicago's bus system is better. Its bus ridership per capita is slightly higher, and in and around the Loop to other neighborhoods the bus seems to work well. Manhattan's buses are often horribly slow, especially routes that go through the business district. Both times I've visited Chicago I've used the buses. I visit NYC frequently, I can't remember using the buses in the last 10 years. There's also gaps in coverage: there are no local buses between Manhattan and Brooklyn, except for right after a hurricane.
I can see this too.
To be honest, I would take the subway in NYC anyway.
I tried to get a bus from East Brunswick to Manhattan. It seems easier to get into the city because there was an inbound only express route but the return I would have to transfer somewhere in Perth Amboy. I didn't want to stand out in the rain that day so I decided get a cab to take the NJT train from Brunswick to Penn Station instead. Over all NYC and Chicago metro area bus service is pretty good compared to other cities I've been to. CTA has excellent circular route feeders to all of it's train stations.
Chicago's bus system is pretty downplayed on this site.Chicago bus system is the best besides NYC.
I wouldn't say it downplayed. I think people just don't brag about the bus. It's the bus......
Buses don't anchor development and most people's preference. Try to count choice riders on buses outside of Chicago. I know I don't like taking the bus. To each his own though. If that is preferred in Chicago, I have no problem with that.
I wouldn't say it downplayed. I think people just don't brag about the bus. It's the bus......
Buses don't anchor development and most people's preference. Try to count choice riders on buses outside of Chicago. I know I don't like taking the bus. To each his own though. If that is preferred in Chicago, I have no problem with that.
I agree, though it should be noted the busiest bus lines in Chicago typically run along the lakefront (many run express), where the nearest EL station is a bit of a walk for most commuters. The neighborhoods along the lakefront also tend to be the densest from a population and development standpoint, in the city.
Chicago's bus system is pretty downplayed on this site.Chicago bus system is the best besides NYC.
Is it the best? Los Angeles also has a pretty great bus system (especially because it was all the city had to rely on for a few decades) - though Chicago does have higher ridership (EDIT- actually it does not have higher ridership). One thing to consider with Los Angeles is that there are multiple agencies that operate within the county besides the more ubiquitous Metro, including Santa Monica Big Blue Bus, Culver City Transit, Long Beach Transit, LADOT DASH buses (run by the city of LA), and a bunch of smaller agencies (Burbank, Foothill, Gardena, Glendale, Norwalk, Montebello, Torrance).
Does Chicago have something like the Rapid Buses here in Los Angeles? IMO that is one thing that sets Los Angeles apart from most other cities transit agencies (though I believe NYC has something pretty similar).
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.
