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 don't think that Boston was mentioned, or given a grade at all. Being one of the "Anointed Six" (NYC, Chicago, Boston, Philly, SF and WashDC), and since I live here and use it, I would give the "T" a solid "B". However, now riders are being threatened with the elimination of several Green line stops, no commuter line service after 7 on weekdays, and no weekend commuter rail service at all , UNLESS state funds are appropriated for its support. If the T implements these measures, it would be catastrophic for this area. Ultimately, I don't think it will come to this, but we have been warned.
One final note--Boston's service is very comprehensive, with commuter lines going to the NH border, Worcester, and Providence RI, but the subway closes at 1:00 AM, which causes barflies some problems on a Sat night....
lmao, i think every big city in FL has horrible Public transportation systems. (Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa, Miami). Orlando's might get a little better if they build this "sun rail" that they are planing.
Well, compared with France, Germany and the United Kingdom, you might be right about that, but I think that most North Americans' view of public transportation is changing. It's only a matter of time. In fact, currently, many North Americans are demanding more public transit. If we don't demand it, we won't get it. Let's continue to hope that we move to improve public transit all over the country and not just in large cities.
^ I strongly disagree with the above. If people want to improve public transit in North America they are certainly not showing it with their lifestyle choices. Until land-uses change due to people demanding apartments or townhomes near employment districts, any public transit investment is doomed to failure.
You may think the above is a ridiculous statement, but the fact is transit will only be successful if there is a high density of people along a corridor with a common destination in mind. A school bus is an effective form of transit because it picks up children with the school being the common destination. If instead the kids were going to see their aunt and uncle located anywhere in town, a school bus would obviously not be effective. The latter is similar to the situation in most American cities which is why transit doesn't work.
There is no desire because the cultural ideal is low-density single family homes in a subdivision away from the CBD. It's almost the exact opposite of the elements needed for transit to be successful.
You may say a chance is already happening, but I say baloney!
I would actually support cuts in transit funding for many cities which do not have decent transit - put it out of its misery if you will - if the funds were directed towards the few cities which have decent transit: NYC, DC, Chicago, Boston, Philly, etc...
There is nothing worse than a ****ty transit system which loses tons of money and are always empty. Because politicians will point to it as evidence that transit doesn't work and the places where transit is successful gets the shaft. Today's case in point is the NY-NJ tunnel which will double capacity into Manhattan. It's costly but it's necessary since the system is already at capacity, and the only other alternative would be an extensive upgrade of the existing street network which would be more costly. Yet, because transit has such a bad rap in this country due to so many Americans having nothing but terrible experiences with the poor excuses with pass as transit in their community, there are a lot of people thinking it's a waste of money.
Last edited by CollegeGuy9; 06-10-2009 at 06:41 PM..
It's tricky because a half-assed transit system can't convince people of its necessity, but few cities are willing to go whole hog and build a comprehensive system from the ground up (unless that city is in China).
I think a lot of cities with new mass transit systems aren't doing things too badly in that they're planting their first lines in corridors dense enough (and with "popular" enough destinations like the CBD) to support a fledgling system while trying to encourage development along those lines. I don't think there are too many current mass transit lines that are white elephants--but of course, the existing smaller lines will become exponentially more useful once they get better coverage.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 06-10-2009 at 06:42 PM..
Well, compared with France, Germany and the United Kingdom, you might be right about that, but I think that most North Americans' view of public transportation is changing. It's only a matter of time. In fact, currently, many North Americans are demanding more public transit. If we don't demand it, we won't get it. Let's continue to hope that we move to improve public transit all over the country and not just in large cities.
I think most Americans in urban cities or even metropolitan areas wanted it. They just wanted to hear an argument on what's in it for them such as crime, can it take them where they want to go, and can it be efficient and effective. Public transit especially in the form of rail is much more superior in high or even medium dense areas than relying on a car. Unfortunately, the only way they can hear it and implement that is by politicians. This is what the South is fighting now. This is what New York residents fought at the end of the 19th century.
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.