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.
Like previously mentioned, I think LA has a good shot at being the 2nd or 3rd best transit system in the country by the end of the 2030s. Currently, there are 107 miles worth of rail lines either already operating, which is really good for a single-generation buildout, with another 27 miles of rail set to open in under the next 6 years by 2028, and another 60 miles of rail under active EIR and funded for completion throughout the 2030s. This brings LA's rail network to almost 200 miles by the end of the 2030s, making it unrivaled to any other American urban rail system except New York's by system length. While most of this rail expansion is likely to be light rail, LA does light rail quite differently from most other American cities, emphasizing extensive grade separation on the A, E, L and K lines, and 100% grade separation on the C Line, crossing gates at most at-grade intersections allowing for signal pre-emption, individual ROW for trains with no shared ROW with cars at any point in the system, and high-floor LRVS more akin to traditional metro rolling stock. Recent design changes also emphasize heavy-built light rail stations, especially by equipping surface light rail stations on the K Line with fare gates, which is rare or almost unheard of in most other cities.
I mean I don't live in LA but I highly doubt it would be 40% of users don't pay.....that a bit high.
I assure you a solid chunk, if not the majority of people, don't pay. Most light rail stations don't have fare gates, the ones that do can easily be jumped. Same for most subway stations, and both don't have security that cares enough to monitor fare payment. Many bus drivers are generally lenient enough to let you on if you don't look homeless, since they don't want to be late. Hell, even I don't pay most of the time unless there's a cop nearby.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,552,695 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by xqcdblh456
Like previously mentioned, I think LA has a good shot at being the 2nd or 3rd best transit system in the country by the end of the 2030s. Currently, there are 107 miles worth of rail lines either already operating, which is really good for a single-generation buildout, with another 27 miles of rail set to open in under the next 6 years by 2028, and another 60 miles of rail under active EIR and funded for completion throughout the 2030s. This brings LA's rail network to almost 200 miles by the end of the 2030s, making it unrivaled to any other American urban rail system except New York's by system length. While most of this rail expansion is likely to be light rail, LA does light rail quite differently from most other American cities, emphasizing extensive grade separation on the A, E, L and K lines, and 100% grade separation on the C Line, crossing gates at most at-grade intersections allowing for signal pre-emption, individual ROW for trains with no shared ROW with cars at any point in the system, and high-floor LRVS more akin to traditional metro rolling stock. Recent design changes also emphasize heavy-built light rail stations, especially by equipping surface light rail stations on the K Line with fare gates, which is rare or almost unheard of in most other cities.
It has to match others in ridership and efficiency to ever become a top 3 system, and again most of that track mileage is light rail. Systems like Metro in DC and Chicago L train, still both move more people, and on heavy rail. And for the Metro system in DC you have expansions happening much like LA and it's already far far ahead of LA in ridership. There's also a semi circular suburban light rail line being added around DC currently. LA appears to be adding a much more "comprehensive" system than it has ever had before, which should allow it to surpass a number of places with their ridership totals, but saying it's going to make it all the way to 2nd this decade or ever is assuming that it's the only system expanding or improving, which is not the case.
Like previously mentioned, I think LA has a good shot at being the 2nd or 3rd best transit system in the country by the end of the 2030s. Currently, there are 107 miles worth of rail lines either already operating, which is really good for a single-generation buildout, with another 27 miles of rail set to open in under the next 6 years by 2028, and another 60 miles of rail under active EIR and funded for completion throughout the 2030s. This brings LA's rail network to almost 200 miles by the end of the 2030s, making it unrivaled to any other American urban rail system except New York's by system length. While most of this rail expansion is likely to be light rail, LA does light rail quite differently from most other American cities, emphasizing extensive grade separation on the A, E, L and K lines, and 100% grade separation on the C Line, crossing gates at most at-grade intersections allowing for signal pre-emption, individual ROW for trains with no shared ROW with cars at any point in the system, and high-floor LRVS more akin to traditional metro rolling stock. Recent design changes also emphasize heavy-built light rail stations, especially by equipping surface light rail stations on the K Line with fare gates, which is rare or almost unheard of in most other cities.
Are you talking about the subway or all of the trains? Just getting confused what the 200 mile number refers to exactly.
It has to match others in ridership and efficiency to ever become a top 3 system, and again most of that track mileage is light rail. Systems like Metro in DC and Chicago L train, still both move more people, and on heavy rail. And for the Metro system in DC you have expansions happening much like LA and it's already far far ahead of LA in ridership. There's also a semi circular suburban light rail line being added around DC currently. LA appears to be adding a much more "comprehensive" system than it has ever had before, which should allow it to surpass a number of places with their ridership totals, but saying it's going to make it all the way to 2nd this decade or ever is assuming that it's the only system expanding or improving, which is not the case.
Right, there are projects underway in all of the big six cities to improve transit. LA does have among US cities one of the largest slates of under construction and planned projects for this decade, but it's also starting from a lower base in regards to rail ridership, frequency and coverage than the big six in the US (NYC, Chicago, DC, Boston, Philadelphia, and SF metropolitan areas). I think an interesting topic might be total metropolitan area rail ridership in 2030 which is a little over seven years away. Given the pace of large infrastructure approval, funding, and construction in the US, this means that the pathways for ridership improvements in the US to be done by 2030 will be new rail that's already under construction or at the very least already approved and at least significantly partially funded, as well as making better use of existing infrastructure whether it's grade crossing eliminations, electrification, additional frequency especially in off-peak times, and population or job growth as well as bus network reworking along current and likely to be in existence by 2030 stations.
Maybe with the confines of a topic being the urban areas of respective cities (2020 census based urban areas are to be released soon) and any system which has a large majority (let's say at least 2/3rds) within that urban area. I do think that LA within those limits has a good chance of being up to number four since several of the projects underway are within very population and job dense parts that should have had convenient rail transit quite a while ago.
I think NYC will obviously still be at the top in that instance and is effectively in a tier of its own among US metropolitan areas. The biggest wildcards with the largest reasonably possible gains by 2030 are LA with its large slate with an up to number four slot from its current number seven slot, Philadelphia due to factors already mentioned in relation to Regional Rail and Chicago due to Metra Electric and reasonably easy way to get through-running done for Metra lines as well as underutilized express rapid transit infrastructure through a large chunk of the densely populated north side.
Chicago being already either second or third means it only has one potential position to get up to (number 2 in contention with DC) and what it has in the pipeline is an existing pathway to some through-running of Metra and a bevy of potential Metra improvements, South Shore Line extension, the modernization and separation of Blue/Red and Brown lines, and a new Green Line station. It's also in a weird place where there's a lot of existing rapid transit infrastructure in places that are currently much less dense than they used to be which could potentially see some shift.
DC has the Silver Line extension about to wrap up, some commuter rail improvements, and the Purple Line circumferential light rail line so has a solid chance of getting to/staying at number 2.
Philadelphia I think has a small, but possible shot at all the way up to number two from what I argue is a current number 5 slot.
Boston has relatively little underway that has a decent chance of completion by 2030 that can add much ridership as what it has is the rest of the GLX and rather far flung extensions of the MBTA commuter rail that may not add all that much in ridership and a chance of some parts of MBTA commuter rail running much more frequently (South Station capacity already packed in peak times and there's virtually zero chance of the North South Rail Link being completed by 2030, but off-peak has the capacity of adding higher frequency but this would be somewhat expensive for most lines given that almost none of it is currently electrified).
SF has a decent shot at jumping past Boston, and possibly Philadelphia if Regional Rail improvements don't go very far, as Caltrain electrification by itself is likely to be pretty big news especially in conjunction with state-wide TOD around transit mandates and the Central Subway will be helpful along with minor incremental improvements to other parts of the rail network though mostly still run on commuter rail principles, and a relatively technically easy pathway of improving BART simply by making off-peak transit service less crappy.
I think LA is the only one capable of moving into the top six by the end of this decade, and it'll be an interesting jockeying for position for the six positions of #2-#7. I think there are a slate of cities after that, not in order, of Seattle, Portland, San Diego, Denver, Twin Cities, DFW, Atlanta, and Miami duking it out. Baltimore could have been in this next tier, but Maryland governor Larry Hogan's administration vigorously squashed what was a rare opportunity of federal, state and municipal alignment.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 10-19-2022 at 09:30 AM..
It has to match others in ridership and efficiency to ever become a top 3 system, and again most of that track mileage is light rail. Systems like Metro in DC and Chicago L train, still both move more people, and on heavy rail. And for the Metro system in DC you have expansions happening much like LA and it's already far far ahead of LA in ridership. There's also a semi circular suburban light rail line being added around DC currently. LA appears to be adding a much more "comprehensive" system than it has ever had before, which should allow it to surpass a number of places with their ridership totals, but saying it's going to make it all the way to 2nd this decade or ever is assuming that it's the only system expanding or improving, which is not the case.
LA is expanding and adding more rail to core areas. That will generate more riders per mile than suburban extensions. I don’t know if it will catch or pass DC and Chicago in ridership but it should be in the ballpark. It very well could pass them because the D line and Sepulveda line extensions are projected to have very high ridership per mile. I think over 15,000 per mile.
But the bottom fell out of LA ridership even before the pandemic. DC to some extent as well. Now with wfh, who knows? I think that LA will be in the same tier as Chicago and DC but regardless of ridership I wouldn’t say that it will be better than DC given that DC has such a huge advantage in heavy rail rapid transit.
As the SEPTA maps show how extensive the Phiily rail system is. Stretching from Cecil County Md. to just south of Princeton N.J. and from Harrisburg Pa. to Atlantic City N.J... Soon you will be able to ride public transportation from NOVA to N.Y.C., with SEPTA being the linchpin .https://www5.septa.org/travel/maps/
As the SEPTA maps show how extensive the Phiily rail system is. Stretching from Cecil County Md. to just south of Princeton N.J. and from Harrisburg Pa. to Atlantic City N.J... Soon you will be able to ride public transportation from NOVA to N.Y.C., with SEPTA being the linchpin .https://www5.septa.org/travel/maps/
As the SEPTA maps show how extensive the Phiily rail system is. Stretching from Cecil County Md. to just south of Princeton N.J. and from Harrisburg Pa. to Atlantic City N.J... Soon you will be able to ride public transportation from NOVA to N.Y.C., with SEPTA being the linchpin .https://www5.septa.org/travel/maps/
Yep, and there are also non-SEPTA rail mass transit due to the metropolitan area being split with southern New Jersey. There's a good wikpedia portal here with NJT Atlantic City line commuter rail, NJT River Line light rail and DRPA's PATCO Speedline rapid transit line. MARC's Penn Line just barely touches the Philadelphia metropolitan area and is meant as a feeder to DC/Baltimore, so I don't think it should be considered really part of the Philadelphia metropolitan area transit.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,552,695 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Right, there are projects underway in all of the big six cities to improve transit. LA does have among US cities one of the largest slates of under construction and planned projects for this decade, but it's also starting from a lower base in regards to rail ridership, frequency and coverage than the big six in the US (NYC, Chicago, DC, Boston, Philadelphia, and SF metropolitan areas). I think an interesting topic might be total metropolitan area rail ridership in 2030 which is a little over seven years away. Given the pace of large infrastructure approval, funding, and construction in the US, this means that the pathways for ridership improvements in the US to be done by 2030 will be new rail that's already under construction or at the very least already approved and at least significantly partially funded, as well as making better use of existing infrastructure whether it's grade crossing eliminations, electrification, additional frequency especially in off-peak times, and population or job growth as well as bus network reworking along current and likely to be in existence by 2030 stations.
Maybe with the confines of a topic being the urban areas of respective cities (2020 census based urban areas are to be released soon) and any system which has a large majority (let's say at least 2/3rds) within that urban area. I do think that LA within those limits has a good chance of being up to number four since several of the projects underway are within very population and job dense parts that should have had convenient rail transit quite a while ago.
I think NYC will obviously still be at the top in that instance and is effectively in a tier of its own among US metropolitan areas. The biggest wildcards with the largest reasonably possible gains by 2030 are LA with its large slate with an up to number four slot from its current number seven slot, Philadelphia due to factors already mentioned in relation to Regional Rail and Chicago due to Metra Electric and reasonably easy way to get through-running done for Metra lines as well as underutilized express rapid transit infrastructure through a large chunk of the densely populated north side.
Chicago being already either second or third means it only has one potential position to get up to (number 2 in contention with DC) and what it has in the pipeline is an existing pathway to some through-running of Metra and a bevy of potential Metra improvements, South Shore Line extension, the modernization and separation of Blue/Red and Brown lines, and a new Green Line station. It's also in a weird place where there's a lot of existing rapid transit infrastructure in places that are currently much less dense than they used to be which could potentially see some shift.
DC has the Silver Line extension about to wrap up, some commuter rail improvements, and the Purple Line circumferential light rail line so has a solid chance of getting to/staying at number 2.
Philadelphia I think has a small, but possible shot at all the way up to number two from what I argue is a current number 5 slot.
Boston has relatively little underway that has a decent chance of completion by 2030 that can add much ridership as what it has is the rest of the GLX and rather far flung extensions of the MBTA commuter rail that may not add all that much in ridership and a chance of some parts of MBTA commuter rail running much more frequently (South Station capacity already packed in peak times and there's virtually zero chance of the North South Rail Link being completed by 2030, but off-peak has the capacity of adding higher frequency but this would be somewhat expensive for most lines given that almost none of it is currently electrified).
SF has a decent shot at jumping past Boston, and possibly Philadelphia if Regional Rail improvements don't go very far, as Caltrain electrification by itself is likely to be pretty big news especially in conjunction with state-wide TOD around transit mandates and the Central Subway will be helpful along with minor incremental improvements to other parts of the rail network though mostly still run on commuter rail principles, and a relatively technically easy pathway of improving BART simply by making off-peak transit service less crappy.
I think LA is the only one capable of moving into the top six by the end of this decade, and it'll be an interesting jockeying for position for the six positions of #2-#7. I think there are a slate of cities after that, not in order, of Seattle, Portland, San Diego, Denver, Twin Cities, DFW, Atlanta, and Miami duking it out. Baltimore could have been in this next tier, but Maryland governor Larry Hogan's administration vigorously squashed what was a rare opportunity of federal, state and municipal alignment.
I think this is a great summary, and would like to see everywhere raise the bar in what rail options are available in their respective cities. I think going forward through much of this century the majority of rail expansions that are not commuter rail, but local transit systems we'll mostly see light rail as the option, or at least until construction and supply costs change.
My own personal wish was that the infrastructure bill actually added another $1 trillion to it for the actual "hard infrastructure", since that is such a tangible thing, and then later for some of the other additions.
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.
