Who has a better transportation system?

[Woonsocketier]

Voted for NYC. Transit system is the best in the country hands down, and for a metro area of 20 million people the roads aren't all that shabby. Frankly, I find NYC a ton easier to navigate than Washington, DC. Word is that DC was planned in order to stop large congregations of people rioting and things of that sort. They succeeded in that but they also succeeded in detouring half the surface roads and creating monster traffic jams on New York Avenue.

[vincent59]

I voted for the New York system; however, I admit that I have never used either Miami or LA public transit. I would say that there are a few more worthy candidates as far as the cities go. Philadelphia, Boston and Chicago all have systems where you do not need a car to get around. While not a US city, Montreal has an excellent subway system. I live in Philadelphia and can get anywhere in the city with public transit. (Of course, that may end Monday if they go on strike).

[jctim]

I know this poll is old but I wonder why Chicago wasn't even included in the Poll and Miami was? Chicago is the third largest city in the US and has the 2nd largest transit system in the entire US!

[MR-2]

I know this poll is old but I wonder why Chicago wasn't even included in the Poll and Miami was? Chicago is the third largest city in the US and has the 2nd largest transit system in the entire US!

This cannot be emphasized enough. Chicago needs to be on the poll. Boston too.

[teshadoh]

Miami? I did have a vacation there without a car, stayed mostly in Miami Beach. The bus system around South Beach was good - but outside I did nothing but complain. It's hard to say this with a straight face - but Atlanta's transit system is better than Miami's.

There is a single group that stands far above all other cities:

Washington

Philadelphia

New York City

Boston

Chicago

San Francisco

[surroundsound7]

The question was who has a better TRANSPORTATION system, not the better mass transit system. With that in mind the best transportation system must have the following qualities: Go from anywhere, to anywhere, at anytime, with comfort, ease of use, safty, speed, and affordability. With out a doubt, the car is by far the best form of transportion ever devised. Its so damn good, its become by far the most popular, so much so, its become mundane, and people are prone to think its garbage. HOWEVER, owning and operating a car is a pain in the ass, therefore, the best form of transportation is the TAXI... you don't even have to park, maintain, or drive the damn thing... its pure service. And by far the best city for taking short cheap taxis everywhere is NEW YORK CITY (well, manhattan anyways). The second best to taking a taxi everywhere is then to own your own car. LA therefore does rather well, but congestion is a problem. Parking however is easy. Most older easy coast cities the mass transit isn't good enough to give up the car, but parking is a beotch, and congestion is bad. NYC's mix of easy use of the taxi with an enormous mass transit system and high enough density that walking is reasonable gives that city by far the best transport mix. Chicago is a good with decent subway and bus options, almost walkable, but also easy to drive in, and distances not so far that a taxi is unreasonable (not sure how easy it is to park).

[lammius]

New York, hands down. The transit system is everywhere and runs 24 hours. Taxis are all over Manhattan and popular portions of the outer boroughs ('cept Staten Isl). Driving in is a beotch, so why even try? Go with transit and you'll have a happy trip!

DC has a good Metro, but it's not nearly as extensive as NYCT. It's clean, but all the stations look the same, with the concrete tubes (btw, McDonalds called and they want their floor tiles back). DC also has some of the worst traffic I've ever witnessed. Yuck.

In LA car is king. The traffic was bad, but I expected worse. Transit is far behind out there, but there seem to be many efforts afoot to expand services.

Miami, never been.

Boston's T is great, but not too extensive. I haven't used their commuter rail

Philly is great for having a variety of train types, and has a fairly large coverage. But their service is notoriously slow!

San Fran was easy to get around w/out a car. Market Street is awesome! BART Subway, MUNI subway, buses, F-line trolleys, cars, taxis, bikes, pedestrians, and a big ferry terminal at the end. How many more modes can possibly operate on one street corridor?

Chicago, never been.

[zane900]

I voted NYC because I live there myself and know alot, alot about their transit system. Most bus lines there come about once every miute, they have if not the, one of the largest subway systems in the world and anyone who has been there will agree with me I'm sure.

The downpoint to NYC's transit system is the fact that since so many people use it (like 5 million people daily) it is very dirty. On subways there have been asults during the night but, other then that- I think it's the best...

[Southernyank]

I vote for DC simply because it is more compact than New York and nearly meets the same transportation needs in terms of walkability and metro.

[Jerseyman4]

NYC metro area by a landslide over the other cities for highway, rail and airline transportation.

[nowyano]

having ridden on 3 of these 4 systems (NYC, MIA, DC) I can say that NYC is untouchable, Bostons MBTA is actually a wider running system than DC though not as reliable, Miami's system is not even close to DC, Philly, Boston, NYC or even ATLs. Having a few friends who live in LA (one who actually moved there from Brooklyn, another who moved there from DC) I can say at least to them LA's subway is a joke.

[damus]

having ridden on 3 of these 4 systems (NYC, MIA, DC) I can say that NYC is untouchable, Bostons MBTA is actually a wider running system than DC though not as reliable, Miami's system is not even close to DC, Philly, Boston, NYC or even ATLs. Having a few friends who live in LA (one who actually moved there from Brooklyn, another who moved there from DC) I can say at least to them LA's subway is a joke.

Been to Miami but never used its system. Never been to LA. Between DC and NYC I'd say NYC wins hands down. I have checked out the transit systsms, or lack thereof, in cities like LA and Miami on the internet. Where are Boston and Chicago in the poll?

[damus]

Word is that DC was planned in order to stop large congregations of people rioting and things of that sort. They succeeded in that but they also succeeded in detouring half the surface roads and creating monster traffic jams on New York Avenue.

If they were trying to stop large congregations of people from rioting, why do they have the national mall right in front of the white house and capitol building?

[tamias6]

I voted for NYC. 9/11 and the two great blackouts that occured in its history showed how much the city is supported by its mass transit system. Without it NYC would quickly grind to a halt.

[runawayjim]

i've been on the DC metro and have spent a lot of time in NYC and used 2 of their commuter rail systems (metro north to new haven and LIRR). new york is by far the best. you're never more than a couple blocks from a subway stop in manhattan and the buses generally get you everywhere else, even in the boroughs. the commuter rails run late into the night (i think the last trains are like 1am).

the DC metro was cleaner and has nice little signs that tell you when the train is coming, but other than that, it's not as extensive.

[lebronstheman]

i've been on the DC metro and have spent a lot of time in NYC and used 2 of their commuter rail systems (metro north to new haven and LIRR). new york is by far the best. you're never more than a couple blocks from a subway stop in manhattan and the buses generally get you everywhere else, even in the boroughs. the commuter rails run late into the night (i think the last trains are like 1am).

the DC metro was cleaner and has nice little signs that tell you when the train is coming, but other than that, it's not as extensive.

NYC, by a mile, for all the reason's you've listed. The DC METRO is a very good system -- top 5 in America, definitely. It wins on cleanliness/upkeep, speed and TOD development. But it's as much a suburban/commuter railroad as a rapid transit -- too many missed important DC neighborhoods (Georgetown, Adams Morgan, Gold Coast, etc), and too many neighborhoods skirted (Capitol Hill, Old Town Alexandria) -- too much gap between stations (for example, look at the ridculous gap btw Dupont Circle and Woodley Park-Zoo way on the north side of Rock Creek Park; a whole dense neighborhood is skipped.

If I were building the METRO from scratch, it would be much shorter on more basic routes (up 16th, out East Capitol, up Penna Ave/M Street, etc.). Most lines would penetrate or reach the Beltway, but go no further. Instead, I'd electrify all the other commuter rail lines (aside from the already electrified MARC-Penn/Amtrak

line and beef up service on those to deal with deep suburban commuting. In addition, I would branch a 4-track commuter tunnel off from Union Station to serve the old & new downtown areas ending somewhere in Georgetown. This is a more traditional approach, like Boston has had (which is why I love The "T") and Toronto took.