Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-03-2014, 03:39 AM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
1,386 posts, read 1,486,007 times
Reputation: 2430

Advertisements

You guys are killing me. First of all, RTD hasn't existed for going on 20 years. Second of all, people who haven't tried using public transit in LA shouldn't comment on it. It's actually rather good and is on track to blow SF out of the water as it opens new rail line after new rail line while SF does little more than pick its nose. LA certainly has a reputation for sprawl, but one can cross 7 miles of LA shockingly easy on an MTA bus in comparison to the pain and agony one would experience on Muni.

The only reason why SF has done so well in these rankings, as far as I can tell, is because geographic coverage is heavily weighted. Of course SF will come out on top in this case... It has bus stops every block, so people have to do little more than fall out of their front door and land on a bus stop. But as anyone in the public transit industry knows, close stop spacing actually deteriorates service quality by slowing it down (average speeds) and making it less reliable (too much variability in travel time associated with randomness of stop use).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-03-2014, 02:37 PM
 
3,570 posts, read 2,510,879 times
Reputation: 2290
Quote:
Originally Posted by davdaven View Post
You guys are killing me. First of all, RTD hasn't existed for going on 20 years. Second of all, people who haven't tried using public transit in LA shouldn't comment on it. It's actually rather good and is on track to blow SF out of the water as it opens new rail line after new rail line while SF does little more than pick its nose. LA certainly has a reputation for sprawl, but one can cross 7 miles of LA shockingly easy on an MTA bus in comparison to the pain and agony one would experience on Muni.

The only reason why SF has done so well in these rankings, as far as I can tell, is because geographic coverage is heavily weighted. Of course SF will come out on top in this case... It has bus stops every block, so people have to do little more than fall out of their front door and land on a bus stop. But as anyone in the public transit industry knows, close stop spacing actually deteriorates service quality by slowing it down (average speeds) and making it less reliable (too much variability in travel time associated with randomness of stop use).
I think you are correct about why SF does well in these rankings, and I think it also benefits because the rankings look at city limits transit. SF has a small footprint and Muni does the job in our borders pretty well, for all of its many shortcomings. In the City, it just doesn't take very long to travel between any two locations. When you look at the city limits of Chicago, Boston, and NYC, included are lots of relatively sprawled neighborhoods with even poorer access to transit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2014, 03:16 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,977 posts, read 32,531,418 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi View Post
I also agree that SF has the second best public transportation system in the US. I think most people who complain about it have never traveled around our country lol.
You really think it's better than Chicago and DC? Never been to Boston but they seem to have better rail transit too.

Problem with this ranking is it weights light rail the same as heavy rail. Light Rail is A LOT slower than heavy rail, especially in the case of SF. Also not sure why Ferries and Cable Cars are weighted so much either as they both are pretty slow forms of transportation. Not sure any other city even has anything that qualifies as a cable car unless funicular's count, in that case I think the only other city would be Pittsburgh. They should throw in average bus speed into the methodology and see what that does to SF's score lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2014, 04:47 PM
 
Location: SW King County, WA
6,409 posts, read 8,251,572 times
Reputation: 6588
Can't comment on buses, but Boston's T is a million times better than Muni. Not even debatable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 10:55 AM
 
Location: East Bay, San Francisco Bay Area
23,396 posts, read 23,819,817 times
Reputation: 23818
LA really has no public transportation. Actually, it does, but LA is so spread out that public transportation is really inefficient and ineffective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmzizzle View Post
Wow did someone really compare public transport in sf vs la? Lol.. Kinda like comparing a pro basketball player vs a middle school one and saying the pro is better
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Dana Point
1,224 posts, read 1,819,200 times
Reputation: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by davdaven View Post
But as anyone in the public transit industry knows, close stop spacing actually deteriorates service quality by slowing it down (average speeds) and making it less reliable (too much variability in travel time associated with randomness of stop use).
As someone who used MUNI for 6 years, this is definitely the case in S.F. For work I'd use MUNI, for getting anywhere else, I hopped on my bike or just made a 2 mile walk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Dana Point
1,224 posts, read 1,819,200 times
Reputation: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccm123 View Post
LA really has no public transportation. Actually, it does, but LA is so spread out that public transportation is really inefficient and ineffective.
This statement is simply untrue and not accurate.

Los Angeles public transportation was recently ranked #3 in the nation for investment, ridership, and safety (behind Denver and New York).
10 Best Cities for Public Transportation - US News

... and this was before the Expo Line opened to West LA, and the 24 Owl Service was reorganized. In fact I can't think of a large area of L.A that isn't touched by public transportation through rail or bus now days, and this was all literally accomplished in the past 25 years, and it's going to get much, much better. LA is literally investing billions into MetroRail to create more stations. Now let me know how much SF public transit has changed in the past 25 years.



This isn't 1987 when MetroLink didn't exist, and the Blue Line wasn't even around. Yes it's not perfect (neither is it perfect in the Bay), but to say it "really doesn't" exist or that it's ineffective is simply not reflective of the current system.

Last edited by ExeterMedia; 03-02-2014 at 11:48 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Eureka CA
9,519 posts, read 14,699,255 times
Reputation: 15067
When I was deciding on grad school I was aware that SF State was easy to get to by bus and an article came out saying that you could get within a block of anyplace in The City by bus. Is that statement still true? (I thought the Muni was great, btw)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 11:46 AM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,588 posts, read 27,322,733 times
Reputation: 9048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
That's nothing! The voters in Seattle voted down light rail initiatives for 30 years before a couple of short legs were finally approved, but it doesn't begin to address demand. And if there's anyplace that really needs it, it's Seattle, with its long string-bean type of layout. It takes forever to get from the south end to the north part of town. That makes it difficult for university students looking for affordable rents (which are mainly in the south, while the U is in the north end), or even people who have to commute downtown from south or north.
^This. Seattle needs some serious work on this area. I have used public transportation most of my life minus those periods when I did own a car. As far as bus systems go, I rank from best to worse of the four I've used like this:

Muni - San Francisco

AC Transit - East Bay

King County Transit - Seattle

Metropolitan Transit System - San Diego


Compared to at least these three areas, San Francisco is way ahead!

San Diego's is truly abysmal! I use it every day here to go to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2014, 12:12 PM
 
Location: SW King County, WA
6,409 posts, read 8,251,572 times
Reputation: 6588
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExeterMedia View Post
This statement is simply untrue and not accurate.

Los Angeles public transportation was recently ranked #3 in the nation for investment, ridership, and safety (behind Denver and New York).
10 Best Cities for Public Transportation - US News

... and this was before the Expo Line opened to West LA, and the 24 Owl Service was reorganized. In fact I can't think of a large area of L.A that isn't touched by public transportation through rail or bus now days, and this was all literally accomplished in the past 25 years, and it's going to get much, much better. LA is literally investing billions into MetroRail to create more stations. Now let me know how much SF public transit has changed in the past 25 years.



This isn't 1987 when MetroLink didn't exist, and the Blue Line wasn't even around. Yes it's not perfect (neither is it perfect in the Bay), but to say it "really doesn't" exist or that it's ineffective is simply not reflective of the current system.
Ok, but only poor people use transit in LA. When middle class professionals (like in NYC, SF, DC, Chicago, Boston) willingly CHOOSE transit over sitting in bumper to bumper traffic, then let's talk. Until then, riding transit is social suicide in LA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:00 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top