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.
Soft opening for SF's Central Subway with limited weekend shuttle service starting this weekend. Come January 7th of next year, it's expected to be integrated into the full T Muni Metro line. https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project
It's supposed to be a big deal hitting Chinatown which the densest neighborhood in SF and among the densest of the US outside of NYC, Union Square which is a major retail center and tourist destination, SOMA next to the convention center and performing arts venue, and the current Caltrain SF terminal and projected future high-speed rail station. A missed opportunity was to continue further tunneling and extending it past Chinatown which will now require far more funding and expenses and another round of getting together the crew and machinery were this to ever be approved (a classic recurring issue with major US mass transit projects)
I heard people complain it is too deep, too far underground and too long of tunnels. Is that true? Something about it being deep because they didn’t want noise or rumblings to effect existing business/homes?
Mostly seen it from San Francisco Tweeters in a short amount of characters so I never knew if it was complainers or legit concerns that could restrain ridership potential? It looks really awesome from an outside perspective.
I heard people complain it is too deep, too far underground and too long of tunnels. Is that true? Something about it being deep because they didn’t want noise or rumblings to effect existing business/homes?
Mostly seen it from San Francisco Tweeters in a short amount of characters so I never knew if it was complainers or legit concerns that could restrain ridership potential? It looks really awesome from an outside perspective.
I've heard the same and it is a legitimate concern, but there's a question of to what extent it's an issue. I do hope they don't screw up bus services though.
One question I have is if there are smaller cities that per capita have outstandingly good transit systems which I'd expect to come with a very strong bus network. I think there are two kinds of general ways to compare transit systems. One is absolute area and population where there is good service and then one that's relative to metro population size and area. It's easier to focus on the former, but I'm wondering if there are some truly outstanding ones that get lost in the cracks for the latter simply because the metropolitan area is small or not so prominent.
One question I have is if there are smaller cities that per capita have outstandingly good transit systems which I'd expect to come with a very strong bus network. I think there are two kinds of general ways to compare transit systems. One is absolute area and population where there is good service and then one that's relative to metro population size and area. It's easier to focus on the former, but I'm wondering if there are some truly outstanding ones that get lost in the cracks for the latter simply because the metropolitan area is small or not so prominent.
A smaller metro that isn't part of a larger metro? In my experience many college towns have good bus systems. Good enough for college students and employees to live car free if they wanted. Don't know which would be the best. One where students use public transit buses as opposed to private fleets for student-only use.
A smaller metro that isn't part of a larger metro? In my experience many college towns have good bus systems. Good enough for college students and employees to live car free if they wanted. Don't know which would be the best. One where students use public transit buses as opposed to private fleets for student-only use.
Yea, that's what I figured--just don't know which one.
Maybe ones that aren't part of the urban area (supposedly getting updated soon) of another should be good. Definitely fine if a separate division within a CSA as those are gargantuan and silly. I wonder if there are any that rank pound for pound above NYC in some nontrivial way.
One question I have is if there are smaller cities that per capita have outstandingly good transit systems which I'd expect to come with a very strong bus network. I think there are two kinds of general ways to compare transit systems. One is absolute area and population where there is good service and then one that's relative to metro population size and area. It's easier to focus on the former, but I'm wondering if there are some truly outstanding ones that get lost in the cracks for the latter simply because the metropolitan area is small or not so prominent.
This opinion is based only on a one-day visit (pre-pandemic),
but I was much impressed by the bus system in Bellingham, WA:
Even though I arrived on a Sunday morning, I didn't wait long for a city bus going downtown.
Here is main (downtown) bus station: http://www.google.com/maps/@48.75028...7i16384!8i8192
As well as being the bus system hub, it has an information desk
(which was staffed on Sunday... some big city systems don't do as well --
looking at you, Seattle!)
And the fare was (and still is) only a dollar.
Bellingham is home to a university (Western Washington U.),
and the system serves the campus, but doesn't seem to be focused on it.
Nice! I'll note that by what that video I posted is doing, Bellingham just barely misses out on the top ten so it's pretty up there. I'll also note that unlike a lot of the other cities mentioned, Bellingham has Amtrak service though it's surprisingly far from the downtown area. I wonder why that's the case since the train definitely passes through the area to points further north. It would seem like this straightaway before the steep turn would make sense for a Bellingham station.
I'll also note that the urbanized area used in that dataset means SF/Oakland is split from SJ which I think is not representative of how the area actually functions. Including SJ significantly drops the per capita ridership to a score to 90.9 which is about in line with Boston and DC.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 11-21-2022 at 03:19 PM..
I just want to note that I am visiting NYC for the first time in my life, been through Jersey City before but didn’t have time to stop and really explore. Well now I do… The transit here is just next level compared to anything I’ve seen in this country. The only place that remotely comes close is Chicago. I wish we had more service like this throughout the rest of the country (namely the south).
I just want to note that I am visiting NYC for the first time in my life, been through Jersey City before but didn’t have time to stop and really explore. Well now I do… The transit here is just next level compared to anything I’ve seen in this country. The only place that remotely comes close is Chicago. I wish we had more service like this throughout the rest of the country (namely the south).
Yea, it really is next level compared to other US urban areas. Chicago's transit is great for a fairly small area, but even within that area it's very much a hub and spoke system so if you're not going along to and from a place either along a particular spoke or to the hub, then it's pretty inconvenient especially as the buses are quite slow with their many stops and dearth of signal priority and bus lanes. As a region, it has a lot of stations in regards to Metra service, but that's also very hub and spoke and non-peak frequencies are quite bad while connecting bus services out those parts are generally infrequent. It's easily within top five for the US, but that's unfortunately a low bar compared to cities in other developed countries.
The crazy thing about NYC's system is that it has this giant regional train service network that's splintered in three different systems that do not want to work with each other. For example, NJT trains actually go into Penn Station and Manhattan, but because backing up through the terminals is such an inefficient maneuver, trains sometimes actually cross through Manhattan from its western side to its eastern and then under East River into Queens in tunnels shared with LIRR and Amtrak in order to turn around in Queens. During that whole maneuver, there are no stations and no boardings allowed despite crossing through the most intensely built up CBD in the US and using up tunnel capacity under the East River. What would appear to make sense would be to have NJT trains crossbranded with LIRR services on Long Island and you use that tunnel capacity for actual ridership, but that very basic cooperation is anathema to both agencies.
Another example is when the twin towers were a giant hole in the ground, the PATH-WTC station needed to be reconstructed. PATH and IRT (the numbered subways) are for the most part compatible with each other and there was proposed the idea of extending the 6 train from its New York City Hall terminal to the new PATH-WTC station that needed to be rebuilt such that they can operate as a single line all the way to Newark and potentially beyond to the airport thereby offering NJ riders a one-seat access to much of the East Side of Manhattan (as well as people around WTC in Manhattan) and vice versa for people on the East Side of Manhattan to Northern New Jersey and potentially a one-seat ride to the Newark airport. MTA was nominally interested, but PATH the agency killed the discussion. It's now so built up that it's hard to imagine this being done.
Despite all this dysfunction and how much better the transit system could have been, the NYC urban area is still currently heads and shoulders above the others as the most useful transit system in the US. In my view, the only systems that have even a shot at being about as useful per capita within this decade as NYC's is now (emphasizing now since NYC technically has some fairly low hanging fruits), given how contentious and expensive large capital construction projects are in the US, aside from small college towns which ostensibly can mass deploy buses and get great coverage and frequency, are Honolulu and Philadelphia, and then on much lower odds, the Bay Area, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 11-21-2022 at 05:17 PM..
Nice! I'll note that by what that video I posted is doing, Bellingham just barely misses out on the top ten so it's pretty up there. I'll also note that unlike a lot of the other cities mentioned, Bellingham has Amtrak service though it's surprisingly far from the downtown area. I wonder why that's the case since the train definitely passes through the area to points further north. It would seem like this straightaway before the steep turn would make sense for a Bellingham station.
I don't know why the Amtrak station is where it is... but Greyhound is there too,
as well as the dock for the Alaska ferries. So it's multimodal.
But it seems that all three could also consolidate at that location you identified,
just a stone's throw from downtown Bham.
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.
