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.
I've ridden MetroLink before, and it seemed fine to me when I've ridden it in the past. I think it wouldn't hurt, if say a north to south line could be built to connect neighborhoods that are north or south of the main east to west MetroLink line. I.e. Old North St. Louis(like say near Crown Candy Kitchen), Soulard, Gravois Park, Carondalet, etc. Not sure of the exact route that such a new MetroLink line would use, but I wish something like that would be considered. Don't get me wrong, Saint Louis city and a lot of nearby communities, including south side neighborhoods like Soulard and etc. are served well by various bus routes, but still such a north to south MetroLink line would help on transit issues for sure.
I had heard rumors the line going into Illinois might be extended east, from Scott Air Force Base to MidAmerica Airport. When the schedule on such an extension will occur, who knows? Also, I remember MetroLink opened a new infill station called Cortex about a year or 2 ago on the Missouri side, to serve nearby places including a new IKEA store.
There is a North South MetroLink expansion that is on the drawing board with local funding.
I use MetroLink daily and it's a decent system for a city with St Louis density finances.
I think ridership would be higher if there was more of an incentive. Like bad parking in a downtown with 200k workers or atrocious traffic.
It’s actually the West Side that drops the CTA’s riders per mile. There’s no one on the Harlem Branch of the Green Line or Forest Park on the Blue Line.
Also having lower ridership/mile isn’t necessarily a bad thing. If Boston has expanded day the Blue Line to Lynn and MGH and the Orange Line to Needham heights etc Ridership/mile would go down but overall service would go up.
The fact that the GLX is projected to increase Riders/mile on the Green Line (it’s projected at ~9900 riders/mile) is a sign that there are places in metro Boston that should have rail service but don’t. Lower Roxbury, Everett and Chelsea fall into this catagory as well.
Or NYC with very high Riders/mile is building a relief line (2nd ave Subway) which is designed to lower the load.
Chicago having a fuller buildout of ~110 miles kind of should have a lower riders/mile.
Of course there is a point where the optimal ridership load is like Cleveland is very low for a heavy rail system.
How is LA's 2 subway lines ahead of Chicago's L is a mystery to me.
And as mentioned, they left out buses. Kinda relevant.
LA's subway HRT system hits most of the major employment and dense residential parts of Los Angeles like Downtown LA, Westlake, Koreatown, East Hollywood, Hollywood and North Hollywood. Here you find lots more transit dependent types.
Also the subway system are major transfer points to other light rail lines, to commuter rail lines/Amtrak, and many bus routes/BRT routes. Essentially all transit feeds into LA's subway system thus why per mile ridership is very high.
LA's Light rail system reaches far into the edges of the urban county region. It seems more like a typical urban rail system with short stops within the more urban areas but once it gets into the suburbs the spacing is greater from 1/2mile to 1 mile and as you go away it becomes between 1-2 miles. So it acts like a cross between urban rail + commuter rail in some ways since LA's commuter rail system stops like every 3-5 miles or more.
LA has the highest light rail ridership which passed Boston. Maybe it switched back. But because LA's light rail is spread to the far reaches of the county, the per mile ridership is quite weak compared to Boston or SFmuni which have much less light rail miles but overall higher ridership per mile.
LA's Light rail system reaches far into the edges of the urban county region. It seems more like a typical urban rail system with short stops within the more urban areas but once it gets into the suburbs the spacing is greater from 1/2mile to 1 mile and as you go away it becomes between 1-2 miles. So it acts like a cross between urban rail + commuter rail in some ways since LA's commuter rail system stops like every 3-5 miles or more.
LA has the highest light rail ridership which passed Boston. Maybe it switched back. But because LA's light rail is spread to the far reaches of the county, the per mile ridership is quite weak compared to Boston or SFmuni which have much less light rail miles but overall higher ridership per mile.
But the city mentioned as LA ahead ..... was Chicago not Boston as not understood in the post you reply to.
But the city mentioned as LA ahead ..... was Chicago not Boston as not understood in the post you reply to.
Thats why I had 2 separate posts. and clearly wrote subway HRT for the Chicago and in the other post Light Rail which SF and Boston. Unless Chicago is really light rail and the graph is all wrong?
Can anyone answer if Chicago is a light rail system or heavy rail? If light rail, then we can compare it to Boston's System.
Thats why I had 2 separate posts. and clearly wrote subway HRT for the Chicago and in the other post Light Rail which SF and Boston. Unless Chicago is really light rail and the graph is all wrong?
Can anyone answer if Chicago is a light rail system or heavy rail? If light rail, then we can compare it to Boston's System.
OMG its heavy rail. No tram/trolley rail. It's a system that dates back to the 1800s literally. With a WW2 era subway added in its Core and lines that extend further into neighborhoods along with its elevated portion never removed in its Core .,,... as NYC did. But NYC had a much more extensive subway portion.
Also in-median large segments of expressways in later extensions of the L (as it is called) it too pioneered.
Chicago is the only city in the US that maintained its elevated HEAVY RAIL lines in its downtown.
These elevated iron skeleton supports are what date to the 1800s. The trains are computerized with automated trains saying when doors are closing and the side that a station has doors open toward. You merely download the app. and at stations/terminals buses and trains, to tell you when the next train/bus arrives. Great in winter as you can stay in the coffee shop till the train is due.
How is LA's 2 subway lines ahead of Chicago's L is a mystery to me.
LA has a very small subway network, while Chicago has a fairly large subway network. Why is it a "mystery" why a small network might deliver somewhat higher per-mile passenger numbers?
It doesn't mean LA has a "better" system. Everyone knows Chicago has an overall better rail network.
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.
