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.
Efficiency, behind New York? Indeed. Accessibility? Indeed. Cleanliness? Muni Metro seems cleaner , and more aesthetically pleasing than the Metro. And once BART's new fleet comes in two years, I'm sure in terms of interior (and even exterior design) it'll be the most attractive subway in the country, with terrible inner-city coverage.
Impressive! Welcome news regarding the new BART fleet; it's badly needed.
Efficiency, behind New York? Indeed. Accessibility? Indeed. Cleanliness? Muni Metro seems cleaner , and more aesthetically pleasing than the Metro. And once BART's new fleet comes in two years, I'm sure in terms of interior (and even exterior design) it'll be the most attractive subway in the country, with terrible inner-city coverage.
New METRO railcars were set to debut sometime this January. They're very sleek, clean and modern
The METRO also plans to take out the carpet inside all METRO trains as well.
I'm just loling at that video. Here in Atlanta, MARTA's system is actually pretty clean. Other than the occasional drink spill that someone does not want to clean up, I don't find it messy or dirty. If MARTA actually had better crosstown coverage, it would be a heavily underrated system.
Okay I don't want to get into the petty bickerings of DC vs SF. From personal experience in both cities, I do agree that DC does have more comprehensive coverage in rapid transit, along with better connections to passenger rail to other NE hubs (NE Regional, Acela Express). I know this thread is limited to U.S. and Canada, but perhaps we could all raise our standards a little and start measuring our public transit with other similarly sized international cities in other OECD nations? Munich, Madrid, Berlin anyone?
Munich, Madrid, and Berlin are stellar for their metro size. DC is about mid-pack for a metro of its size while SF is towards the end, but a step up compared to most other US metros aside from the usual mentions (DC, Philly, Boston).
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalacticDragonfly
Efficiency, behind New York? Indeed. Accessibility? Indeed. Cleanliness? Muni Metro seems cleaner , and more aesthetically pleasing than the Metro. And once BART's new fleet comes in two years, I'm sure in terms of interior (and even exterior design) it'll be the most attractive subway in the country, with terrible inner-city coverage.
This new fleet looks cool. Are there any plans to try to make BART run something besides the one trunk through SF?
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,550,614 times
Reputation: 5785
DC's system is mid pack for a metro of its size?? Metro has the 2nd most track mileage only trailing NYC in the US, and 3rd most stations only behind NY and Chicago, with a much smaller population than both places.
This new fleet looks cool. Are there any plans to try to make BART run something besides the one trunk through SF?
There are conceptual plans for a second transbay tube and new BART lines going through SOMA and down Geary blvd., all the way through the Richmond district and to the beach (if I remember right, one of the possible alignments of a second transbay tube includes going through Mission Bay and Alameda as well). They're also thinking about a line going down 19th avenue through the sunset district, stretching between Geary blvd and Daly City, as well as a new line in the east bay going through Berkeley and Oakland. This would change BART into a true metro system with proper coverage within SF and Oakland/Berkeley, and the second transbay tube would allow for 24 hour service. But it would be insanely expensive of course, and there are NIMBYs everywhere, so it'll be decades before it happens...if it ever does happen.
DC's system is mid pack for a metro of its size?? Metro has the 2nd most track mileage only trailing NYC in the US, and 3rd most stations only behind NY and Chicago, with a much smaller population than both places.
And of course 2nd in ridership as mentioned.
He means relative to other cities in the developed world. The system in Munich, for example (a smaller city) is fantastic.
And Chicago, not DC, has the second most track miles in the U.S.
Keep in mind that DC doesn't really have a true subway system; it's more of a subway/commuter rail hybrid. It isn't really fair to compare DC Metro straight-up with a traditional subway system.
He means relative to other cities in the developed world. The system in Munich, for example (a smaller city) is fantastic.
And Chicago, not DC, has the second most track miles in the U.S.
Keep in mind that DC doesn't really have a true subway system; it's more of a subway/commuter rail hybrid. It isn't really fair to compare DC Metro straight-up with a traditional subway system.
DC Metro is all rapid transit. So how is it a commute rail hybrid? MARC Train is commuter rail though.
He means relative to other cities in the developed world. The system in Munich, for example (a smaller city) is fantastic.
And Chicago, not DC, has the second most track miles in the U.S.
Keep in mind that DC doesn't really have a true subway system; it's more of a subway/commuter rail hybrid. It isn't really fair to compare DC Metro straight-up with a traditional subway system.
You have no idea what you're talking about but I'll just leave it at that.
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.