The 10 Best Cities for Public Transportation

[MrFSS]

In 2009, passengers across the country took 10.2 billion trips on public transportation systems in the United States, and its usage continues to grow. Since 1995, public transit ridership has grown at a faster rate than either population or highway usage. By using data on ridership, safety, and government spending, U.S. News has compiled a list of the 10 best cities in the country for public transportation.

FULL STORY

1.) Portland

2.) Salt Lake City

3.) New York

4.) Boston

5.) Minneapolis/Saint Paul

6.) San Francisco

7.) Los Angeles

8.) Honolulu

9.) Austin (tie)

9.) Denver (tie)

 

[Bob Dylan]

Im Shocked! Shocked! to find Austin on the list! Id rate St. Louis and Washington way above Austin and add San Diego also! But in Texas the Dallas/Ft. Worth Metroplex, (DART and TRE) are head and shoulders above Austin! Only thing I can fiugure is that the Billions of dollars that CapMetro wasted on the Red Line (aka known as the DeadLine here! :giggle: )is what made us rate so high! :help: BTW- Wonder if Eric agrees about Honolulu? I know their City busses are pretty cheap way to get around the Island!

 

[amtkstn]

Chicago did not even make the list.

 

[GG-1]

And Honolulu did make the list, I am shocked, Honolulu's transit system is a shame barely any progress since forever. :angry:

 

[WhoozOn1st]

It's all in the methodology, and I think it was Will Rogers who said somehting about lies, damn lies, and statistics. Interesting, though, that 7 of the 10 cities are in the west, which runs kinda contrary to the concept of the northeast as a singular bastion of urban transit (enthusiastically nurtured by - who else - northeasterners).

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Damn ridiculous.

New York is clearly number one.

Then Chicago

Then DC

Then Boston

Then Philly

Then LA

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Any "best of" list that includes Austin Texas' anemic public transportation options is immediately suspect in my view. Either that or the US has even worse public transport than I originally understood.

 

[Oldsmoboi]

If you were to include the rest of the civilized world, not a single one of those cities would have made the list.

 

[George Harris]

I too am surprised that Washington DC does not make the list.

 

[John Bredin]

If you were to include the rest of the civilized world, not a single one of those cities would have made the list.

Not even New York City?!

I'm willing to concede that no other U.S. transit system, even ones like Chicago that should have handily made the 10 best in the US list, is truly world-class. But the NYC subway stands with the biggest in Europe and Asia on ridership and length or extensiveness.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I'm willing to concede that no other U.S. transit system, even ones like Chicago that should have handily made the 10 best in the US list, is truly world-class. But the NYC subway stands with the biggest in Europe and Asia on ridership and length or extensiveness.

First thing that comes to mind when looking at the "Wealthson" link is wondering where exactly that "New York Metro" picture comes from. Second thing is how did they account for metro areas that have more than one public transportation network? Third, I'd be more interested with the percentage of the population using public transport than the raw ridership numbers. The skyscrapercity link is just one huge thread that goes on and on and on. Few of the posters seemed willing to explain where they got their data from or how recent it was when posted so it's hard to know how seriously to take it. That's not to say it's all bad, but it's not exactly the be-all-end-all link that would cement New York's position anywhere near the top. Having seen some of the best systems the world has to offer and the rate at which they're being improved and modernized while New York's network stagnates I wouldn't be surprised if NYC has indeed slipped from the top ten.

 

[John Bredin]

First thing that comes to mind when looking at the "Wealthson" link is wondering where exactly that "New York Metro" picture comes from.

Egads, you're right. I didn't even notice that picture. :blush: It's clearly a DC Metro train, so my guess would be that whoever was assigned to illustrate the article googled "New York Metro" or the like. However, because most online sources that refer to the NYC subway wouldn't call it the "metro", the search probably brought up a picture of a DC Metro train at New York Avenue station. :giggle:

 

[AlanB]

Having seen some of the best systems the world has to offer and the rate at which they're being improved and modernized while New York's network stagnates I wouldn't be surprised if NYC has indeed slipped from the top ten.

No disrespect intended Daxomni, but what are you smoking? :unsure:

The average age of a NYC subway car is 17.40 years old vs 19.0 for the entire US. From 1999 to date 3,534 new subway cars have been purchased and more are still on order, with a few more new orders pending. The NYC subway only owns 4,538 subway cars, which means 2/3rds of the fleet is less than 12 years old. We're currently building an extension to the #7 line, as well as the first segment of the long delayed 2nd Avenue Subway. We're building the new downtown transit connection that will link almost every subway and the Path trains at the new World Trade Center all together; one will be able to transfer between all lines without going outside and almost walk from the Hudson River to the East River underground. We just built the new South Ferry station on the #1 line and closed the old one, along with a few hundred feet of new track on a new alignment to the new station. We've recently opened up 3 new passenger connections between lines that didn't exist 5 years ago. And many subway stations have been rebuilt with many more slated for major overhauls.

In fact, I just took a ride on the A line from Far Rockaway today with Misty, visiting from St. Louis. All the stations along the line from and including Far Rockaway to 67th are currently being rebuilt. The train even skips every other stop in one direction so that they can close the platform entirely. The trains running to Far Rock skip the stations that the inbounds miss and skip the stations that the inbounds stop at.

The average age of the bus fleet in NYC is 7.69 vs 7.3 at the national level. We just started a new BRT line in Manhattan, where one pays before boarding the bus.

The LIRR is busy building the East Side Access project that will not only bring trains into Grand Central on the east side of Manhattan, but allow a huge increase in the number of people moved into Manhattan by the LIRR. The project will also fix a big problem at Harold Interlocking (next to Sunnyside yard) that requires Amtrak trains to cross in front of LIRR trains when going to/from the Hell Gate line to Boston. This conflict will be eliminated when things are finished. They just computerized the major interlocking plant in Jamaica, rebuilt the main waiting room at NYP, installed concrete ties on many lines, put in several new high speed interlockings east of Jamaica, and built a new yard & shop near Sunnyside. The average age of the cars in their fleet is 8.01 years old as compared to a national average of 18.3 years old.

Metro North has been engaged in a year’s long project to redo all the electrification on the New Haven line, as well as rebuilding most of the bridges. I'm not sure if they're also laying all new rail or not, perhaps Dutch knows. They extended the Harlem line a few years back by several miles to the north. They're rebuilding the main shops at Croton Harmon. Rebuilt the Park Avenue viaduct maybe 10 to 15 years ago. Put in new concrete ties on much of their track. They built a new yard & shop at Highbridge, near Yankee Stadium. And I know that they're also busy rebuilding stations. The average age of their rail cars is 18.28 years and that number will start going lower as the new M8 rail cars for the New Haven line start arriving and the 50+ year old M2 cars currently in use are retired.

New York's transit system may have its problems and issues, but it's not as bad as many riders think it is. The problem is that they don't ride other systems and have no clue how bad it really can be. And NY is certainly not resting on its laurels!

 

[Green Maned Lion]

It's all in the methodology, and I think it was Will Rogers who said somehting about lies, damn lies, and statistics. Interesting, though, that 7 of the 10 cities are in the west, which runs kinda contrary to the concept of the northeast as a singular bastion of urban transit (enthusiastically nurtured by - who else - northeasterners).

Samuel Clemens, AKA Mark Twain.

If you were to include the rest of the civilized world, not a single one of those cities would have made the list.

****. New York City's public transit system is right the heck up there. With 24hour service at a minimum of 30 minute headways, with sufficient density that just about anybody living within the city borders can use it, it is not only the best in the United States by a considerable amount, it is not in the top ten list only because it could probably qualify in the top 5.

Most of those other decent systems can't call themselves decent because they fail to operate 24 hours a day. New York's does. I don't care how clean they are, how new the cars are, or how many television monitors they have. Four things matter on transit systems: Speed, frequency, breadth of operating hours, and system density. New York isn't just better than almost any system in the world in those area; it blows them out of the water.

 

[Ispolkom]

I too am surprised that Washington DC does not make the list.

And the Twin Cities does, and beats out San Francisco? I'd love to see their bogus methodology.

 

[bretton88]

I love how they used DC's 59mph max speed (which is false, they need to check their facts, it's 79mph) as a strike against DC while promoting San Fran.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

It's all in the methodology, and I think it was Will Rogers who said somehting about lies, damn lies, and statistics. Interesting, though, that 7 of the 10 cities are in the west, which runs kinda contrary to the concept of the northeast as a singular bastion of urban transit (enthusiastically nurtured by - who else - northeasterners).

Samuel Clemens, AKA Mark Twain.

If you were to include the rest of the civilized world, not a single one of those cities would have made the list.

****. New York City's public transit system is right the heck up there. With 24hour service at a minimum of 30 minute headways, with sufficient density that just about anybody living within the city borders can use it, it is not only the best in the United States by a considerable amount, it is not in the top ten list only because it could probably qualify in the top 5.

Most of those other decent systems can't call themselves decent because they fail to operate 24 hours a day. New York's does. I don't care how clean they are, how new the cars are, or how many television monitors they have. Four things matter on transit systems: Speed, frequency, breadth of operating hours, and system density. New York isn't just better than almost any system in the world in those area; it blows them out of the water.

Chicago runs red and blue lines 24/7. And I think their buses run 24/7 too. Well, not all, but some.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Having seen some of the best systems the world has to offer and the rate at which they're being improved and modernized while New York's network stagnates I wouldn't be surprised if NYC has indeed slipped from the top ten.

No disrespect intended Daxomni, but what are you smoking?

NYC may very well still be in the top ten, I am not in a position to decide either way, but as I said I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it indeed fell off that list at some point. New York is the ultimate metro system that the US has ever accomplished, but after having seen metros like those that exist in Tokyo or London and reading about all the improvements happening in other countries it's not hard to imagine that New York may be approaching the day when it eventually falls to number eleven. I'm a huge railfan myself and yet even I was compelled to head to the taxi stand or private shuttle when arriving at LGA or JFK. It simply boggles the mind that in all those decades they still hadn't figured out how to easily and efficiently connect two major airports to their main rail network in a way that air travelers would find useful. Maybe they have something better up and running now but when I visited there wasn't much to work with. As for the age of the cars, I'm far more curious about the age of the basic design that squeaks, rattles, and bumps you around like that. Or simply shuts down altogether when the going gets tough. I can hold my book still and set my clock to the performance of other world class systems. NYC? Not so much. I'm glad the new WTC station will finally reopen a full decade after the last one was hauled away. Maybe some of the improvements you mentioned will be substantial enough to have a larger impact than I currently realize, but there's just nothing particularly impressive about how the New York subway currently operates in my view. Instead of a new, smooth, and modern system worthy of the self-described "capitol of the world" it's old, jarring, and dank. All night trains are nice and not often duplicated, but I wouldn't want my mom or aunt to use them alone and it seemed like half the stations closed down for the night anyway.

New York's transit system may have its problems and issues, but it's not as bad as many riders think it is. The problem is that they don't ride other systems and have no clue how bad it really can be. And NY is certainly not resting on its laurels!

I don't deny there are far worse metros out there, but there are also several systems that are far better in my view. Not just because some random web link said so, but because they blew me away when I rode them in person.

 

[AlanB]

I'm a huge railfan myself and yet even I was compelled to head to the taxi stand or private shuttle when arriving at LGA or JFK. It simply boggles the mind that in all those decades they still hadn't figured out how to easily and efficiently connect two major airports to their main rail network in a way that air travelers would find useful. Maybe they have something better up and running now but when I visited there wasn't much to work with.

Alas nothing has been done at LGA, the NIMBY's killed a monorail plan many years ago that would have served that airport. JFK however now has the Airtrain that connects the airport both with the LIRR, E, & J trains in Jamaica, as well as the A train's Howard Beach stop on the Far Rockaway line.

I for one however remain upset with the airport charging a whopping $5 bucks one way to link to the Airtrain from the subway or LIRR.

As for the age of the cars, I'm far more curious about the age of the basic design that squeaks, rattles, and bumps you around like that. Or simply shuts down altogether when the going gets tough. I can hold my book still and set my clock to the performance of other world class systems. NYC? Not so much.

The newer cars ride much smoother than the older ones, and at least IMHO when compared to other US & Canadian subways (never been overseas), they are quieter. Boston's T and BART are particularly loud in my opinion.

And the mean distance between failures with the new cars has gone through the roof as compared to the old ones.

1982 7,145 miles

2009 153,201 miles

I'm glad the new WTC station will finally reopen a full decade after the last one was hauled away. Maybe some of the improvements you mentioned will be substantial enough to have a larger impact than I currently realize, but there's just nothing particularly impressive about how the New York subway currently operates in my view. Instead of a new, smooth, and modern system worthy of the self-described "capitol of the world" it's old, jarring, and dank.

There is currently a WTC station for PATH operating and it has been for some time. They built more of a temp station, since they couldn't build the real station without the buildings above being in place.

And again, as stations are rebuilt they get newer and much brighter lighting. Same with the new cars, you can tell immediately the newer cars from the older ones, as they're much brigher inside. Far more inviting than they used to be. The automated announcements are also nice, as you no longer have to deal with mumbles and/or heavy accents.

Yes, you can still find stations that haven't been redone, they can't do them all at the same time, and it does take some effort to renovate 100+ year old stations.

All night trains are nice and not often duplicated, but I wouldn't want my mom or aunt to use them alone and it seemed like half the stations closed down for the night anyway.

There is only one station in the entire system that closes very late at night, that's the 135th Street stop on the #3 train, which gets bus service from the nearest stop on the still running #2 train. All other stations remain open 24/7, although certain entrances may close, but there is always at least one open.

 

[George Harris]

I love how they used DC's 59mph max speed (which is false, they need to check their facts, it's 79mph) as a strike against DC while promoting San Fran.

The facts are these:

The design maximum speed from the beginning is 75 mph.

As a method of saving energy, wear and tear, and improving reliability at a negligible cost in run time policy for quite a few years has been to limit train speed to 59 mph. If you look into the driver's cab this is what you will see on the display. The higher speed would only come into play between the more widely spaced stations. Within the central part of the city, station spacing is such that train speed almost never exceeds 40 mph regardless of the defined speed limit.

 

[Spokker]

Haha Portland!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKS6AMFZHSo

Hahaha!

They should have built bus lanes instead of streetcars of all things.

 

[MikefromCrete]

Haha Portland!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKS6AMFZHSo

Hahaha!

They should have built bus lanes instead of streetcars of all things.

Nice anti-transit propaganda.

 

[PRR 60]

There should be two listings for ranking public transit in US cities: One list for New York and the second for all the other cities. New York is the only US city that is "world class" for transit. You can get from anywhere to anywhere at anytime in New York. Try that in Salt Lake City or Portland.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

New York's transit system may have its problems and issues, but it's not as bad as many riders think it is. The problem is that they don't ride other systems and have no clue how bad it really can be.

&

The newer cars ride much smoother than the older ones, and at least IMHO when compared to other US & Canadian subways (never been overseas), they are quieter.

I think you should give some of the better European and Asian systems a try, especially Tokyo. The NYC subway may not be resting on their laruels, but they're not exactly leading the way to the future either. At least that's the view I came back with. That's not to say it's a terrible system, just that it could learn something from the efficiency, quality, and cleanliness of other systems.

 

[jis]

New York's transit system may have its problems and issues, but it's not as bad as many riders think it is. The problem is that they don't ride other systems and have no clue how bad it really can be.

&

The newer cars ride much smoother than the older ones, and at least IMHO when compared to other US & Canadian subways (never been overseas), they are quieter.

I think you should give some of the better European and Asian systems a try, especially Tokyo. The NYC subway may not be resting on their laruels, but they're not exactly leading the way to the future either. At least that's the view I came back with. That's not to say it's a terrible system, just that it could learn something from the efficiency, quality, and cleanliness of other systems.

That I can agree with.

The other problem with New York is that things in outer boroughs aren't exactly as good as it is in Manhattan, and Staten Island is outright miserable in many ways.

And once you get into suburbs, suburb to suburb transit is outright difficult. This is a huge strike against New York when compared to many large city transit systems in the rest of the world.

Of course the multiple fiefdoms and sub-fiefdoms of ostensibly public agencies that are supposed to work for us, but are unable to work with each other with a focus on customer convenience is a problem that appears to be relatively unique to New York among the large transit systems in large metro areas of the world.

Notwithstanding all that the portions of the New York Metro area where transit works, it works reasonably well, though it still is clunkier than the better maintained systems in many other cities of the world.