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.
One thing I really like about Seattle, They built the most important lines in the best alignments. Less rail mileage than Denver, Dallas, Etc but it’s building the best system
Took the Seattle light rail for the first time because of the snow last week and it was quite pleasant. Seems functionally no different than a heavy rail system. Some of my own pics below:
One of the nicer subways I've taken in the country.
One reason is that LA is building multiple lines with as high or higher ridership and for another "ridership" isn't necessarily the best statistic to look at to see the impact for an extension. To see the impact it's better to look at "boardings per mile" along the extension. Even better you have to consider how many of those are new riders versus existing riders that are staying on the train for a longer distance. There's a difference, maybe subtle, in building a new line that attracts new riders versus building a new line that gives existing riders a better trip.
As an example the Regional Connector in LA is expected to have 90,000 riders per day, but some number of those riders will be replacing their previous longer walk, bus ride, or transfer to the B/D with staying on the new line. I don't know what the boardings per mile are for the Regional Connector, but it will be a lot and maybe comparable to the Boston green line.
thanx, i see from the l.a. metro website there is 1.4 billion spread across a half dozen projects.
the m.b.t.a. raised 2.8 billion for mainly glx (about half a billion for new red line/orange line cars and switches) so naturally i assumed boston was bigger but i guess east coast costs/labor are just more plus general mismanagement in taxachusetts.
thanx, i see from the l.a. metro website there is 1.4 billion spread across a half dozen projects.
the m.b.t.a. raised 2.8 billion for mainly glx (about half a billion for new red line/orange line cars and switches) so naturally i assumed boston was bigger but i guess east coast costs/labor are just more plus general mismanagement in taxachusetts.
I think that you made a math error. The current LA Metro transit projects total nearly $18 billion and there are several more starting this decade that aren't included but are funded.
Edit to add that this is just Metro and doesn't include the LAUS run through tracks and modernization, nor the metrolink upgrades.
As we dive into the 2020s, public transportation (specifically rail) is becoming an increasingly popular issue in American cities. So many cities in America have rail, mostly inadequate, but its there.
But as we head off into the 2020s which cities are most likely to greatly improve/expand their systems? Or if a city does not have a good subway/light rail/commuter rail system; which city is most likely to create a new one? Who will chang the most looking back 10, 15 years from now?
My guess is cities that are experiencing high COVID growth coupled with crippling traffic will see the most rail projects. I would cast my vote to Atlanta, DC, Dallas and LA.
But what do you think?
It's only a popular issue in cities that already have existing systems.
I also dispute the notion that rail is "mostly inadequate" in the American metro areas that do have it.
What people usually mean when the criticize a rail system here is "its not exactly like the NYC subway."
Speaking of NYC and high COVID growth with crippling traffic-they have a longer one way commute time than L.A. or Atlanta.
Since L.A. is always presented as the poster boy for crippling traffic and NYC has longer commute times, shouldn't they be frantically expanding their mass transit system? What are they doing about this gridlock?
San Diego has a huge mass transit system for a metro of its size (65 miles of light rail, BRT, two commuter lines, two major Amtrak stations in city limits), and you will mostly only hear complaints about how inadequate or "nonexistent" it is.
As for the often dragged out cliche of "well, in Europe or Asia...", I dispute that also. Across the country-Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Sacramento, Atlanta, Dallas-all more than adequate systems that compete with peer cities around the world.
The answer to the question though, is clearly Los Angeles with no one else even close.
While the other cities are bogged down in perpetual proposals, meetings, 2040 long-range impact studies, etc., Los Angeles is all action in this category.
Take a drive through central L.A. and you'll see the massive dig sites with the Metro logo splashed across the fencing-every one of them part of multi-billion dollar projects.
It's only a popular issue in cities that already have existing systems.
I also dispute the notion that rail is "mostly inadequate" in the American metro areas that do have it.
What people usually mean when the criticize a rail system here is "its not exactly like the NYC subway."
Speaking of NYC and high COVID growth with crippling traffic-they have a longer one way commute time than L.A. or Atlanta.
Since L.A. is always presented as the poster boy for crippling traffic and NYC has longer commute times, shouldn't they be frantically expanding their mass transit system? What are they doing about this gridlock?
San Diego has a huge mass transit system for a metro of its size (65 miles of light rail, BRT, two commuter lines, two major Amtrak stations in city limits), and you will mostly only hear complaints about how inadequate or "nonexistent" it is.
As for the often dragged out cliche of "well, in Europe or Asia...", I dispute that also. Across the country-Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Sacramento, Atlanta, Dallas-all more than adequate systems that compete with peer cities around the world.
The answer to the question though, is clearly Los Angeles with no one else even close.
While the other cities are bogged down in perpetual proposals, meetings, 2040 long-range impact studies, etc., Los Angeles is all action in this category.
Take a drive through central L.A. and you'll see the massive dig sites with the Metro logo splashed across the fencing-every one of them part of multi-billion dollar projects.
Talk vs. action.
Transit commutes are almost always slower can car commutes. Atlanta commutes are ~25 minutes faster than Londoners (28 vs 52 minutes) I don’t anyone would argue MARTA is better than the underground. Americans have very low commute times globally despite generally far distances because of the predominance of cars are freeways
People who Transit commute often suffer in cities with poor transit there just typically isn’t enough of them to effect the median commute time.
It's only a popular issue in cities that already have existing systems.
I also dispute the notion that rail is "mostly inadequate" in the American metro areas that do have it.
What people usually mean when the criticize a rail system here is "its not exactly like the NYC subway."
Speaking of NYC and high COVID growth with crippling traffic-they have a longer one way commute time than L.A. or Atlanta.
Since L.A. is always presented as the poster boy for crippling traffic and NYC has longer commute times, shouldn't they be frantically expanding their mass transit system? What are they doing about this gridlock?
San Diego has a huge mass transit system for a metro of its size (65 miles of light rail, BRT, two commuter lines, two major Amtrak stations in city limits), and you will mostly only hear complaints about how inadequate or "nonexistent" it is.
As for the often dragged out cliche of "well, in Europe or Asia...", I dispute that also. Across the country-Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Sacramento, Atlanta, Dallas-all more than adequate systems that compete with peer cities around the world.
The answer to the question though, is clearly Los Angeles with no one else even close.
While the other cities are bogged down in perpetual proposals, meetings, 2040 long-range impact studies, etc., Los Angeles is all action in this category.
Take a drive through central L.A. and you'll see the massive dig sites with the Metro logo splashed across the fencing-every one of them part of multi-billion dollar projects.
Talk vs. action.
This is so incorrect. Even the NYC subway isn't near the best in the world, depending on how you rank them. Metro Vienna is smaller than San Diego yet has 5 U-Bahn lines and 10 S-Bahn lines. The Chicago L doesn't even run 24/7 when I was there, which is embarrassing. Many of our commuter train systems like Metra only run trains for commuters, if you need to get to the city at noon or whenever, your out of luck. Also embarrassing for major cities like Chicago. Seville is a bit bigger than New Orleans yet has a light metro line with 3 more along the way. Our public transit infrastructure is much worse than many other developed nations.
This is so incorrect. Even the NYC subway isn't near the best in the world, depending on how you rank them. Metro Vienna is smaller than San Diego yet has 5 U-Bahn lines and 10 S-Bahn lines. The Chicago L doesn't even run 24/7 when I was there, which is embarrassing. Many of our commuter train systems like Metra only run trains for commuters, if you need to get to the city at noon or whenever, your out of luck. Also embarrassing for major cities like Chicago. Seville is a bit bigger than New Orleans yet has a light metro line with 3 more along the way. Our public transit infrastructure is much worse than many other developed nations.
I’m almost 100% sure the Red Line, Blue Line and Brown line run 24/7.
But it’s also not normal for the subways to run 24/7. Paris, Seoul, Madrid etc do not
While non radial lines are sort of overrated (even most of the busiest bus lines are downtown terminal is most cities) transfer station more that 1 station out from what’s considered the middle of the city would be helpful in most cases. Something like a Little Italy/Chinatown service rather than Lakeview to Logan Square service not Something only NYC (and soon LA and DC) have. Unless you could like Kenmore or JFK/UMass where transfers between branches a couple miles from the city center are possible.
Also Downtown terminal lines like PATCO or the MBTA Blue line are kind of a waste. Where only marginal (1ish mile Extensions) could make a massive difference
It's only a popular issue in cities that already have existing systems.
I also dispute the notion that rail is "mostly inadequate" in the American metro areas that do have it.
What people usually mean when the criticize a rail system here is "its not exactly like the NYC subway."
Speaking of NYC and high COVID growth with crippling traffic-they have a longer one way commute time than L.A. or Atlanta.
Since L.A. is always presented as the poster boy for crippling traffic and NYC has longer commute times, shouldn't they be frantically expanding their mass transit system? What are they doing about this gridlock?
San Diego has a huge mass transit system for a metro of its size (65 miles of light rail, BRT, two commuter lines, two major Amtrak stations in city limits), and you will mostly only hear complaints about how inadequate or "nonexistent" it is.
As for the often dragged out cliche of "well, in Europe or Asia...", I dispute that also. Across the country-Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Sacramento, Atlanta, Dallas-all more than adequate systems that compete with peer cities around the world.
The answer to the question though, is clearly Los Angeles with no one else even close.
While the other cities are bogged down in perpetual proposals, meetings, 2040 long-range impact studies, etc., Los Angeles is all action in this category.
Take a drive through central L.A. and you'll see the massive dig sites with the Metro logo splashed across the fencing-every one of them part of multi-billion dollar projects.
Talk vs. action.
Vehemently disagree. But a unique American centric take to this topic. And as always, i do appreciate your thought.
This is so incorrect. Even the NYC subway isn't near the best in the world, depending on how you rank them. Metro Vienna is smaller than San Diego yet has 5 U-Bahn lines and 10 S-Bahn lines. The Chicago L doesn't even run 24/7 when I was there, which is embarrassing. Many of our commuter train systems like Metra only run trains for commuters, if you need to get to the city at noon or whenever, your out of luck. Also embarrassing for major cities like Chicago. Seville is a bit bigger than New Orleans yet has a light metro line with 3 more along the way. Our public transit infrastructure is much worse than many other developed nations.
Great take. But Chicagos Red, Blue Lines are 24/7. Very much so. But other than that, great post
This is so incorrect. Even the NYC subway isn't near the best in the world, depending on how you rank them. Metro Vienna is smaller than San Diego yet has 5 U-Bahn lines and 10 S-Bahn lines. The Chicago L doesn't even run 24/7 when I was there, which is embarrassing. Many of our commuter train systems like Metra only run trains for commuters, if you need to get to the city at noon or whenever, your out of luck. Also embarrassing for major cities like Chicago. Seville is a bit bigger than New Orleans yet has a light metro line with 3 more along the way. Our public transit infrastructure is much worse than many other developed nations.
Tokyo, Paris, and London (except weekends) also don’t run 24/7 and they aren’t embarrassed.
24/7 is very overrated and mostly unnecessary. Buses can run pretty fast at 3am and shared rides are preferred by most partiers out late.
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.
