[miketoronto]

Canadian transit systems carry millions of people each day. Over one million in Toronto, over a million in Montreal, over 700,000 in Vancouver, etc.
These stats sound impressive, untill you look at the actual % of people transit carries to work each day in our metropolitan areas. Then the stats look pretty bad.
Transit basically does not matter the most Metropolitan residents in our cities, when you look at how few people use it.

Stats from the census. Your views on this. Keep in mind these are work trips. For non-work trips transit loses out even more.
Should Canada set targets to increase transit use? Quebec has done this with a plan to increase transit modal share by 8%.


Percentages of commuters who take transit. Metropolitan area use.

Toronto- 22
Montreal - 21
Ottawa - 19
Vancouver - 17
Calgary - 16

Just for reference here are the US numbers.

For US metropolitan areas (2000)

New York - 25
Chicago - 11
Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Washington - 9
Los Angeles - 5
Miami, Minneapolis - 4
Atlanta, Houston, San Diego 3
Dallas, Detroit, Phoenix - 2

[Cambridgite]

Nothing really surprises me here. A typical Miketoronto thread...

[quobobo]

I don't see what Canada can do about it - it's more a municipal issue than anything. Get municipalities to stop subsidizing cars (minimum parking requirements, free or lower-than-market-priced public parking) and I imagine those numbers would change significantly.

[mersar]

The good news though that they brought up with these numbers is that the younger the age group, the higher the transit use though.

[Rathgrith]

You know miketoronto, some peolpe actually walk to work- like me in Ottawa.

You should have included that factor before going down a slippery slope argument.

[miketoronto]

The transit, walking, biking population makes up a small % of commutes. Something like over 70% still use a car to commute to work.

The younger population thing is just because young people don't have access to a car for the most part.

I think a goal has to be set, like 30% of trips will be by transit. Like I said, Quebec is doing this now. We will have to see if it works out. Their goal is not 30%. But they are atleast trying.

[IntotheWest]

I'm not sure what the numbers work out to for other cities when factoring in other "sustainable transportation" methods than the auto, but Calgary is at 24.4%...which I think is fairly good. And, I believe that Calgary use of public transit rose 3% between 96-2006, apparently, the highest in the country.

And from the other numbers, I don't think Canada's largest cities have "dismal" numbers at all.

EDIT: I should say, I'm quite sure Van's and TOs overall would be higher than this.

[SFUVancouver]

It's beginning to feel like Groundhog Day...


In addition to Quebec British Columbia has also set transit mode share goals. It is for a 22% transit mode share in Metro Vancouver by 2020 (source (http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/Transit_Plan/Provincial_Transit_Plan_LR.pdf) -pg5)

Between 2001 and 2006 the number of people who drove to work in Metro Vancouver dropped by 5% to 67.3%, from 72.3% in 2001. Source (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ef76285a-2e4c-4d37-a82a-5799f8d978a3&k=145) This is in addition to declining commute distances, time, and fuel consumption.

The number of people who take transit has statistically increased by 5% to 16.5%, up from the 11.5% that was recorded in 2001, which itself is a rather miraculous figure because the census was taken during a transit bus strike!. Source (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ef76285a-2e4c-4d37-a82a-5799f8d978a3&k=145)

In 2001, due to the transit strike, only 95,711,414 revenue passengers were recorded (down from 129,121,913 in 2000, for illustrative purposes.) In 2006 165,073,200 revenue passengers were recorded and in 2007 this number rose to 172,071,000 revenue passengers. (2000, 2001 & 2006 stats Source (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ef76285a-2e4c-4d37-a82a-5799f8d978a3&k=145)) (2007 stat source (http://www.translink.bc.ca/files/pdf/2007StatutoryAnnualReport.pdf) -pg2)

For those who work in the city of Vancouver, 42.9% used sustainable transportation, up from 35.7 per cent in 2001. This includes walking, bicycling, and transit. Source (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ef76285a-2e4c-4d37-a82a-5799f8d978a3&k=145)

The major surrounding cities also tracked increases in transit mode share in 2006 over 2001.
-Surrey (12.2%, up from 9.5%) <- Three bus rapid transit lines in the works, 7km SkyTrain extension by 2020, major bus service improvements coming soon. Surrey is currently served by 1/4th the number of buses as the City of Vancouver despite having a roughly comparable population and greater residential density if you exclude the metro core of the City of Vancouver.
-Burnaby (22.7%, up from 16.3%) <- Burnaby has already surpassed the Province's 2020 transit mode share goal thanks to two SkyTrain lines.
-Richmond (13.1%, up from 9.0%) <- SkyTrain coming in 2009, major increase in the city's off-street bicycle network.
Source (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=ef76285a-2e4c-4d37-a82a-5799f8d978a3&k=145)

[MonkeyRonin]

I think a goal has to be set, like 30% of trips will be by transit.

Walking/biking > transit. The goal should be to reduce auto usage, but we should be encouraging walking above all else by creating proper mixed-use communities. For long commutes, transit is ideal, but we want as few long distance trips as possible.


The younger population thing is just because young people don't have access to a car for the most part.

A big part of it is also cultural and indicative of the changing attitudes towards things like the environment and cities. A good article about commuting patterns of Torontonians of different age groups: http://www.thestar.com/Canada/Census/article/409108

[miketoronto]

SFUVancouver, the Vancouver core stats are impressive. However we have to look at our cities on a metropolitan wide basis. If we just looked at core cities, then Toronto would be doing great, because the new city of Toronto has 35% transit use for work trips. But we have to look at the entire metro areas, because it is our outter suburbs that are dragging our cities down big.

MonkeyRonin I agree all non-auto modes should be promoted.

[SFUVancouver]

Mike, Metro Vancouver does not equal Vancouver Core.

Metro Vancouver is the entire Vancouver CMA, all 2,877 square kilometres of area and 2.2 million people.

The Metro Core/Vancouver Core is downtown Vancouver and the Central Broadway precinct and neither Stats Canada or Translink breaks down stats to the Metro Core level.

Nothing I have cited is exclusive to the Metro Core/Downtown Vancouver, for if I had I would have certainly have wrote 60% sustainable transportation for the downtown core way back in 2004! and put it in bold and giant sized it.

(source: City of Vancouver Transportation Plan Update Brochure - A Decade of Progress 1994 - 2004, published June 22, 2006.)

[Coldrsx]

i think climate plays an important role as well......id take the bus more if winter wasnt so bad.

vancouver has a very large advantage in this area.

[Rusty van Reddick]

i think climate plays an important role as well......id take the bus more if winter wasnt so bad.

vancouver has a very large advantage in this area.

Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa have pleasant winters? Please.

I love the 2% Dallas stat- another one to cram down the throat of those morons who insist that Calgary is "just like Dallas."

[Bucolic Urbanity]

Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa have pleasant winters? Please.

I love the 2% Dallas stat- another one to cram down the throat of those morons who insist that Calgary is "just like Dallas."

Climate is a very subjective thing. Some people consider the winter climate of the 3 cities to be pleasant. With Ottawa and Montreal you have a pretty good chance of enjoying activities like skating, skiing, snowshooeing, bumper hitching etc, throughout the winter w/o excessive cold snaps, blowtorch winter thaws that ruin these activities, high winds, flooding etc.

Why do you need to refer to people who compare Dallas to Calgary as 'morons'. They are both in the middle (relatively) of their countries, growing rapidly, HQ of oil companies, and located in provinces/states that have a sense of independence from the centralized government. Or am I missing something here?

[Kwik-E-Mart]

Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa have pleasant winters? Please.

I love the 2% Dallas stat- another one to cram down the throat of those morons who insist that Calgary is "just like Dallas."

Also, what about Swedish cities? They have harsh winters too. However people still take transit in great numbers.

[IntotheWest]

Yeah, the climate argument isn't great...as the numbers show, all those American cities are in better climates - or as good as (in terms of temperature anyway) - Vancouver, and it obviously doesn't work in those cities.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Why do you need to refer to people who compare Dallas to Calgary as 'morons'. They are both in the middle (relatively) of their countries, growing rapidly, HQ of oil companies, and located in provinces/states that have a sense of independence from the centralized government. Or am I missing something here?

Yes, you're missing everything. Look at religiosity, relative "liberalism," transit use, sprawl, downtown vitality. I'd love to see support for same-sex marriage in Dallas versus in Calgary. Calgary is one of the most secular cities in North America (among major cities in Canada, only Vancouver is less religious). Where does Dallas rate?

If Dallas is like Calgary, then I guess Ottawa is like Washington DC.

[waterloowarrior]

The City of Ottawa's goal in their OP/Transportation master plan is a 30% modal share for transit....

[Deez]

^Note that's only AM peak hour trips (not 24-hr work trips). Ottawa's currently sitting at about 22%.

[KrisYYC]

I drive to work everyday.

[LordMandeep]

Over one million in Toronto,


you mean closer to 2 million with 1.6 million people a day!!!

Rather surprised Montreal and Toronto are not that far from NY and double Chicago...


also you cannot use Transit use in the Core. Of course we know it is high!!


I would say if every GO train line was as frequent as the Lakeshore line and if the subways went further into the Suburbs and there more subways inside the city. The transit figure would easily be 35%...

[Stephen Ave]

I don't think the numbers are that bad. In the grand scheme of things we are probably in the middle somewhere. Consider how big and wide open Canada is, we should be comparing to countries with similar standard of livings and similar in size. That leaves Australia and the US. And I'm sure we're using tranist more than both of them.

[LordMandeep]

Sydney to my knowledge just has a super duper version of the GO train and ferries.

No Subway, and forget about 1-2 min frequent bus routes!!!

[miketoronto]

Australia actually has pretty low transit use. Syndey is not that bad, but their use is blow Toronto levels.

Canada is at the top followed by Australia, and then the U.S. in transit use.

[LordMandeep]

when I was in Sydney the Regional Rail system was excellent however the inner city Transit is terribile... It is that you have to hop on a train to go a distance of a few subway stops.

now if we had the GO train like their Regional Rail service, that would be nice.

[miketoronto]

you mean closer to 2 million with 1.6 million people a day!!!

Rather surprised Montreal and Toronto are not that far from NY and double Chicago...


I do not find it surprising at all that we are not that far from NY and double Chicago.

People look at subway maps in American cities and think the transit is so extensive and good. But what people forget is that transit is almost non-exististant once you leave the central city.
Even in NYC, most suburbs have very poor bus service.
In Chicago the majority of suburbs have no bus service after 7PM.
In Philly, most suburbanites can not even walk to a bus stop.

Contrast that to Canadian Metro areas where almost all residents in a metro area have access to transit service seven days a week. And you can see why our ridership is higher.

[vid]

Yes, you're missing everything. Look at religiosity, relative "liberalism," transit use, sprawl, downtown vitality. I'd love to see support for same-sex marriage in Dallas versus in Calgary. Calgary is one of the most secular cities in North America (among major cities in Canada, only Vancouver is less religious). Where does Dallas rate?

Dallas is liberalizing actually. Obviously they're a few steps away from Calgary. Maybe more like Calgary in the 1980s or so.

Anyway, I'm going to apologize to yourself for making you bring up a Calgary is not like Dallas circlejerk. Glad I could chime in.

I live downtown and a bus only goes by my place every 30 minutes. If it went by every 15 or 10 minutes more people would use it. Thunder Bay's transit usage is only 3 per cent for work commuters.

North Bay has a bus route that goes up Highway 11 to, essentially, nowhere. It probably has less people living along it than our Route 5, which basically serves trees. And yet, like I said, transit frequency on my busy downtown street is only 30 minutes. :( More than 20,000 cars use this street daily! If only we had more buses..

[MolsonExport]

I carpool for the 6 months of bad weather, and walk/rollerblade/carpool the other 6 months. My commute (including dropping off my son at daycare) takes all of 20-25 minutes. Most transit is designed to funnel individuals to/from the central city, but with many (if not most) jobs outside the central city, transit use will continue to be restricted.

When I lived in Montreal, I always took transit. Downtown Montreal and the inner suburbs have superb transit, and driving was a hinderance.

[MolsonExport]

Canadian transit systems carry millions of people each day. Over one million in Toronto, over a million in Montreal, over 700,000 in Vancouver, etc.
These stats sound impressive, untill you look at the actual % of people transit carries to work each day in our metropolitan areas. Then the stats look pretty bad.
Transit basically does not matter the most Metropolitan residents in our cities, when you look at how few people use it.

Stats from the census. Your views on this. Keep in mind these are work trips. For non-work trips transit loses out even more.
Should Canada set targets to increase transit use? Quebec has done this with a plan to increase transit modal share by 8%.


Percentages of commuters who take transit. Metropolitan area use.

Toronto- 22
Montreal - 21
Ottawa - 19
Vancouver - 17
Calgary - 16

Just for reference here are the US numbers.

For US metropolitan areas (2000)

New York - 25
Chicago - 11
Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Washington - 9
Los Angeles - 5
Miami, Minneapolis - 4
Atlanta, Houston, San Diego 3
Dallas, Detroit, Phoenix - 2

Sorry Mike, but these stats make Canada look very, very good in relation to the USA. Perhaps the title of your thread should be changed, accordingly. It is interesting how in so many of your threads, you shoot yourself in the foot.

[big W]

Percentages of commuters who take transit. Metropolitan area use.

Toronto- 22
Montreal - 21
Ottawa - 19
Vancouver - 17
Calgary - 16

Just for reference here are the US numbers.

For US metropolitan areas (2000)

New York - 25
Chicago - 11
Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Washington - 9
Los Angeles - 5
Miami, Minneapolis - 4
Atlanta, Houston, San Diego 3
Dallas, Detroit, Phoenix - 2

What are you getting at. Lets compare Toronto with similar sized metro's in the US and Toronto blows them out of the water. Compare Montreal with similar sized metros, same thing. Vancouver same thing. Ottawa, Calgary and Edmonton (though the stats are not there) same thing. In fact I would like to know how many Canadian CMA's would be in the top 10 if you included US and Canadian stats? My guess is 7 or 8.

[miketoronto]

The US stats are just to show how we rank with our neighbour. But in the grand scheme of things, even the Canadian numbers are very low, compared to Europe.

16, 20% is not that high at all.

I guess transit systems themselves are to blame for the dismal use also.
We were talking about cars, transit, etc at dinner, and the same issue always comes up. People would use transit if it actually did not take so much longer then driving.

[Cambridgite]

But in the grand scheme of things, even the Canadian numbers are very low, compared to Europe.

Maybe because we're not Europe.

[sync]

I drive to work everyday.

you son of a bitch!

;)

[Acajack]

It has everything to do with planning and urban form. Much of the urban/suburban build-up in this country (and most everything built since the 50s) cannot be effectively serviced by transit service that is competitive with the automobile. Either these areas are going to have to be densified, or the best that we’ll be able to do is concentrate future employment in transit-serviceable areas and have the suburbanites drive a short distance to park and ride lots next to stations.

[Doady]

What are you getting at. Lets compare Toronto with similar sized metro's in the US and Toronto blows them out of the water. Compare Montreal with similar sized metros, same thing. Vancouver same thing. Ottawa, Calgary and Edmonton (though the stats are not there) same thing. In fact I would like to know how many Canadian CMA's would be in the top 10 if you included US and Canadian stats? My guess is 7 or 8.

Yup, 8 Canadian metropolitan areas in the top 10

2001/2000
1. New York 24.9%
2. Toronto 22.4
3. Montreal 21.7
4. Ottawa-Gatineau 18.5
5. Winnipeg 14.2
6. Calgary 13.1
7. Chicago 11.5
8. Vancouver 11.5
9. Halifax 9.9
10. Quebec 9.8

However in 2006, Vancouver and Halifax surpassed Chicago, which could drop off the list altogether in 2010/2011.

[SFUVancouver]

^ And Vancouver was in the midst of a transit strike when the 2001 census was taken and we still eeked out 11.5% without any buses on the road.

Fundamentally I agree with MikeToronto. Canada is doing well compared to the US but that is like comparing oneself athletically to a couch potato. We can and will do better.

For me the most important element of this discussion is trajectory.

What is the trajectory for our cities and what will it take to make ourselves radically more sustainable? We know we will need to massively reduce the GHG emissions and energy consumption of our buildings and transportation systems.

I cannot speak to what other cities are doing, but in the City of Vancouver we are proceeding full speed with a city-wide green building strategy that will require all new buildings to meet at least LEED Silver and likely LEED GOLD before 2010. By that same year we will have built two new rapid transit lines in a decade and two more are in the pipeline for completion by 2020.

Let's turn the discussion around. How about this for a question:

What is your city doing to improve sustainable transportation, decrease car use, massively improve the environmental performance of buildings, and heal social wounds?

What is the end game?

[jlousa]

MY city is upgrading their existing 25yr old stadium instead of knocking it down and building a new one. :tup: Thus keeping thousands of tons of material from landfills.

[Ayreonaut]

The US stats are just to show how we rank with our neighbour. But in the grand scheme of things, even the Canadian numbers are very low, compared to Europe.


So in an attempt to illustrate how bad Canada's transit use is compared to European cities, you showed American stats.

Call me insane but I probably would've used, oh I dunno, European stats.

[vid]

Let's turn the discussion around. How about this for a question:

What is your city doing to improve sustainable transportation, decrease car use, massively improve the environmental performance of buildings, and heal social wounds?

What is the end game?

Bus routes to nowhere and increased fares! :banana:

[someone123]

Yeah, the climate argument isn't great...as the numbers show, all those American cities are in better climates - or as good as (in terms of temperature anyway) - Vancouver, and it obviously doesn't work in those cities.

Climate works against many US cities in the summer. Waiting around at a bus stop in Phoenix, Houston, Atlanta, etc. in July is probably not that pleasant. Arguably it's much worse than having to deal with cold weather in a city like Montreal.

[vid]

Probably more so than waiting for one in the winter here.

It's a dry heat.

[AndrewJ3D]

Australia actually has pretty low transit use. Syndey is not that bad, but their use is blow Toronto levels.

Canada is at the top followed by Australia, and then the U.S. in transit use.

So we're good then? What was hte point of this thread?

[wild wild west]

These numbers aren't bad at all, particularly when compared to US cities. I have a hard time believing we have insufficient transit use when I sometimes have to wait for 2 or 3 C-trains to go by before being able to fit on the train during rush hour, and I'm sure the situation is similar in the other large cities. I also wonder if that includes numbers for private transit companies like Cardinal Coach Lines' commuter buses into Calgary, which are always full. Then there's the fact that transit use in Canada is increasing. The glass is always half empty as far as Miketoronto is concerned.

[vid]

Even in small cities it is well used on some lines. North Bay has as many daily transit riders as Thunder Bay and it's little more than half our size, and the bus route I live on is standing room only (if that) between 8am and 8pm. But its frequency is too low. TBTransit doesn't have very much foresight, it's too top heavy.

[LordMandeep]

Transit use exists but it is not being harnessed.

Like do you think people would be using commuter trains going downtown at 1:45pm from Brampton???

No, but there is a Train that leaves and its not that full but there are about 300-600 peopled (a train can fit 2000-2500) on the train before it gets to Union...

Now if the service was all day 30 min frequencies imagine how much use there would be on these routes and commuter trains are a form of transit even car lovers will use....

[vid]

You need to work on your grammar. :\

Increased frequency would make transit more convenient and increase ridership but its costly. People use transit for more than just getting to and from work though. I'm sure many people in Toronto's suburbs go into the city itself to do stuff when they're not working.

[Deez]

What is your city doing to improve sustainable transportation, decrease car use, massively improve the environmental performance of buildings, and heal social wounds?

What is the end game?

https://ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/beyond_2020/tmp/transit_options/150_alternative_4_en-1.jpg

All of my fingers and toes are crossed.

[LordMandeep]

Increased frequency would make transit more convenient and increase ridership but its costly. People use transit for more than just getting to and from work though. I'm sure many people in Toronto's suburbs go into the city itself to do stuff when they're not working.


Suburbanites don't take the bus, because the bus comes every 20-30 mins...
Streetcars only work in a urban environment and making subways into the suburbs would cost way to much and really it would be a waste.

The best option is to have smaller trains that are way more frequent, something like the C-train. The GO train system needs to stop being a rush hour service with 12 massive car trains . It needs to be a service that runs all day...Sure 12 car trains add more capacity but I think people really want the trains to be more frequent.

I would one day like to be able to go on the commuter rail train and not worry about the schedule. That is the only reason I like the TTC...Sure its dirty and the people are rude but is frequent!!

[miketoronto]

Thank you SFUVancouver. That is what I was trying to get at. Canada does not do that bad, but we should be setting our goals even higher.

wild wild west. The C-Trains may be full. But at the end of the day, while the ridership is impressive, it still is only like 16 or so % of the population using it.

I just think we should be setting higher goals.

I always say, look at your family and people you know. How much does transit play in their lives? Probably very very little even in the most big transit cities like Toronto and Montreal.

[MonkeyRonin]

I always say, look at your family and people you know.

No! Thats exactly what NOT to do but you always do anyway! Your friends + family are not representative of the population at large and probably not even a smaller demographic segment.

If I were to use this logic of looking at my family and extrapolating those trends to fit millions of people, 75% of Torontonians would commute by transit, and 25% by bicycle. Actually, scratch that, 75% of the global population takes the subway to work. :rolleyes:

[wild wild west]

Thank you SFUVancouver. That is what I was trying to get at. Canada does not do that bad, but we should be setting our goals even higher.

wild wild west. The C-Trains may be full. But at the end of the day, while the ridership is impressive, it still is only like 16 or so % of the population using it.

I just think we should be setting higher goals.

I always say, look at your family and people you know. How much does transit play in their lives? Probably very very little even in the most big transit cities like Toronto and Montreal.

Considering the level of service, transit ridership in just about every major Canadian city is quite impressive. If we had the kind of extensive transit systems the major cities of Europe or Japan have, I fully believe we would have amazing ridership numbers. But considering how the reality in most major Canadian cities is a long and uncomfortable rush-hour commute, I'm surprised we manage to coax as many riders as we do.

[Aylmer]

wild wild west. The C-Trains may be full. But at the end of the day, while the ridership is impressive, it still is only like 16 or so % of the population using it.

If a transit system only sends one train every rush hour, the train will be full
(until they get so fed up that they abbandon transit).

:)

[Halifax Hillbilly]

Canadian transit systems carry millions of people each day. Over one million in Toronto, over a million in Montreal, over 700,000 in Vancouver, etc.
These stats sound impressive, untill you look at the actual % of people transit carries to work each day in our metropolitan areas. Then the stats look pretty bad.
Transit basically does not matter the most Metropolitan residents in our cities, when you look at how few people use it.
Metropolitan area use.


I'd be shocked to hear too many people in big Canadian cities say transit doesn't matter. How can systems that carry 1 out of every 5 people to work not matter? That's still a big chunk of people and without transit these cities transportation systems would break down. Look at the panic and fear in most cities when there's a transit strike. God even here in Halifax, where only 12% of people take the bus, a possible transit strike was front page news for weeks.

What is your point with these threads Mike? We've spent 50 years creating an unbalanced transportation system that encourages people to drive their cars. No one should be shocked by these numbers; our transportation investments, land use policies, parking policies etc. have been designed to allow car use.

It's taken 50 years to get Canadian cities to this point. I don't think we're going to continue along this path. The massive highway projects of the sixties and seventies are a thing of the past, smart growth ideas are making their way into numerous cities planning documents, and transit investment and ridership is growing strongly again. BC just announced 12 billion dollars for transit, Ontario brought in the Places to Grow Act and is trying to fund projects like Transit City, Quebec has multi-billion dollar plans to invest in transit, C-Train expansions in Calgary, etc. etc. If the feds ever get into the act on transit we'll be doing fine.

The thing is you simply can't scream about how dismal our transit numbers are and than expect them to be fixed quickly after we've spent fifty years building an auto-centric transportation system. We get it Mike, way more people should use transit, we should change our land use policies, we should encourage centralized employment, etc. The promising thing is that I think the people who run our cities are starting to get it as well.

[The Chemist]

If a transit system only sends one train every rush hour, the train will be full
(until they get so fed up that they abbandon transit).

:)

Wait... are you claiming that the C-Train runs very infrequently during rush hour? :koko:

[Aylmer]

Well with the amount of people on every train, yes.

:)

[KrisYYC]

Well with the amount of people on every train, yes.

:)


You realize they run every 5 minutes right?

[Aylmer]

Well mabe you should aim for every two.
I felt so squished when I rode it on a Saturday Morning IN JULY.

:)

[KrisYYC]

Well mabe you should aim for every two.
I felt so squished when I rode it on a Saturday Morning IN JULY.

:)

They are trying to go with 3 minute headways. But the downtown corridor is pretty much at capacity.

See, unlike Alymer, Calgary is growing. It's hard to keep up with it.

[Aylmer]

Aylmer is probably growing faster than Calgary in that by 2010 we should double our population in 2000.

That's more than 13% every 6 years.

:)

[Nicko999]

Aylmer is probably growing faster than Calgary in that by 2010 we should double our population in 2000.

That's more than 13% every 6 years.

:)

How can you double your population in 10 years with 13% every 6 years???:haha:

[Aylmer]

13% is Calgary's growth.

:)

[KrisYYC]

Aylmer is probably growing faster than Calgary in that by 2010 we should double our population in 2000.

That's more than 13% every 6 years.

:)

Double your population? :haha: :haha: Maybe Vid can give you a math lesson.

So Alymer is growing fast yet you don't have an LRT system yet? Your city should really try harder.

[Aylmer]

I know...

Ideas move veeeeeeerrrrrrrrry slowly around here...

:(:)

[vid]

I'm not giving him a lesson in anything, he's a lost cause.

[Aylmer]

THE FOLLOWING IS UTTER NONSENSE.






I'll give you a lesson:

a2 x a4/b3 = 27b/17

What is the value of "a" knowing that nor a, nor b has the same value or 0.

Isolate a:

a2/2 x a4/b3/4 = 27b/17/2/4

a*a3/b3 = 108b/34 x 3

a*a*b/b = 324/34b

a*a = 162/17b

a = ~12.72/~4.12b

a = ~3.09b


B is inisolatable so I finish there.

:)

[O-Town Hockey]

:previous:
Man, you are on crack!

[Nicko999]

THE FOLLOWING IS UTTER NONSENSE.






I'll give you a lesson:

a2 x a4/b3 = 27b/17

What is the value of "a" knowing that nor a, nor b has the same value or 0.

Isolate a:

a2/2 x a4/b3/4 = 27b/17/2/4

a*a3/b3 = 108b/34 x 3

a*a*b/b = 324/34b

a*a = 162/17b

a = ~12.72/~4.12b

a = ~3.09b


B is inisolatable so I finish there.

:)

:haha: Nice job.

[SHOFEAR]

THE FOLLOWING IS UTTER NONSENSE.









and this is different than 90% of your posts how?

[Aylmer]

Because this one is UTTER!

Moo.

:)

[MolsonExport]

check this out (covers only RTS)

I decided to calculate ridership per route mile of North American rapid transit systems. My source for the numbers was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_Rapid_Transit_Systems_by_ridership

Some of the numbers are several years out of date, but most of them are fairly recent.

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g240/jwill_01/rprm.jpg

[Mid1]

Interestingly enough my problem with transit in Canada is that we really don't have any national program for transit funding. The federal government basically funds what is politically favourable and doesn't care about everything else. I would like to see them take some leadership and perhaps set some type of large fund or funding formula to help pay for transit infrastructure much more evenly across the country in the future.

[LordMandeep]

NY does not have 600 km of subways!!!

[RTA]

^ Are you being facetious?

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Subway):

It is one of the most extensive public transportation systems in the world, with 468 reported passenger stations,[4] (or 422 if stations connected by transfers are counted as one),[5][6] 229 miles (369 km) of routes[7] translating into 656 miles (1056 km) of revenue track, and a total of 842 miles (1355 km) including non-revenue trackage.[8]

References:
4 MTA NYC Transit - Info
5 ^ Jeremy Olshan, New York Post, Lone Riders of the Rockaways, August 21, 2006
6 ^ Annie Karni, New York Sun, Surges in Ridership at Stations Reflect Neighborhood Dynamism, January 22, 2007
7 ^ Urbanrail.net: New York City, [2]
8 ^ A Guide for Evaluating the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Proposed Capital Program for 2000 Through 2004, [[3]]

[HomeInMyShoes]

Canada's poor transit ridership rates are a function of quality of service (frequency, speed to destination, wait comfort.) Quality of service is directly related to urban density. Most centers in Canada don't have the urban density required to make transit attractive or useful in an even remotely close to profitable way. If Canada wants to make transit an attractive option then governments at all levels need to make changes. Changes to how we plan urban forms, changes to how we fund transit, changes to how we plan transit routes, changes to how we treat transit riders.

[jeremy_haak]

^ Are you being facetious?

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Subway):

It is one of the most extensive public transportation systems in the world, with 468 reported passenger stations,[4] (or 422 if stations connected by transfers are counted as one),[5][6] 229 miles (369 km) of routes[7] translating into 656 miles (1056 km) of revenue track, and a total of 842 miles (1355 km) including non-revenue trackage.[8]

References:
4 MTA NYC Transit - Info
5 ^ Jeremy Olshan, New York Post, Lone Riders of the Rockaways, August 21, 2006
6 ^ Annie Karni, New York Sun, Surges in Ridership at Stations Reflect Neighborhood Dynamism, January 22, 2007
7 ^ Urbanrail.net: New York City, [2]
8 ^ A Guide for Evaluating the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Proposed Capital Program for 2000 Through 2004, [[3]]

They are inconsistent in which numbers they are using then. Toronto's revenue track would be approximately twice what they list, as would most other cities.

Edit: No wonder, it's just some random statistics computed by some wikipedian. Children, this is why you should never use wikipedia as a source.

[LordMandeep]

http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/subway_ridership07_08.pdf

according to this the ridership on the Subway is around 1,246,020 people.

[RTA]

Edit: No wonder, it's just some random statistics computed by some wikipedian. Children, this is why you should never use wikipedia as a source.

Track miles 660
Source: MTA of NY (http://www.mta.info/mta/network.htm)

Pretty close I'd say.

[RTA]

Toronto's revenue track would be approximately twice what they list, as would most other cities.

Explain?

38 miles = ~61km
This source (http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/toronto/) says the length is about 64.9 km. Again, pretty close.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_subway_and_RT) (setting aside your disdain for it for the moment) says 68.3km. A bit higher but also close. Certainly not double.

[jeremy_haak]

Explain?

38 miles = ~61km
This source (http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/toronto/) says the length is about 64.9 km. Again, pretty close.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_subway_and_RT) (setting aside your disdain for it for the moment) says 68.3km. A bit higher but also close. Certainly not double.

656 miles is the length of mainline tracks in the NY subway system as per the reference on the wikipedia page. 38 miles is the length of routes in the Toronto subway system. In order to be comparable, the Toronto figure would have to be doubled to show the length of mainline tracks in their subway.

Incidentally, the wikipedia page has been updated and shows more plausible figures for New York, probably correcting the use of track miles in the figure for route miles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_Rapid_Transit_Systems_by_ridership

[Wooster]

Rank System Metropolitan area served Area population Ridership per capita

1 New York City Subway New York City 18,818,536 .342
2 C-Train Calgary 1,160,936 .234
3 Mexico City Metro Mexico City 19,231,829 .229
4 Toronto subway and RT* Toronto 5,555,912 .218
5 Montreal Metro Montreal 3,635,571 .209
6 Metrorail (Washington, D.C.) Washington 5,300,000 .176
7 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (or "T")* Boston 4,455,217 .104
8 Vancouver Skytrain Vancouver 2,249,725 .091
9 Chicago 'L' Chicago 9,505,747 .064
10 SEPTA* Philadelphia 5,823,233 .054
11 BART San Francisco 7,228,948 .052
12 MARTA Atlanta 5,138,233 .051
13 Monterrey Metro Monterrey 3,664,334 .037
14 Baltimore Metro Subway* Baltimore 2,658,405 .020
15 PATH New York City 18,818,536 .013
16 Tren Urbano San Juan 2,509,007 .013
17 RTA Rapid Transit* Cleveland 2,250,871 .013
18 Metrorail Miami 5,463,857 .011
19 Metro Rail* Los Angeles 12,950,129 .010
20 PATCO Speedline Philadelphia 5,823,233 .006
21 Detroit People Mover Detroit 4,468,966 .001
22 Staten Island Railway New York City 18,818,536 .00075

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_Rapid_Transit_Systems_by_ridership

[RTA]

656 miles is the length of mainline tracks in the NY subway system as per the reference on the wikipedia page. 38 miles is the length of routes in the Toronto subway system. In order to be comparable, the Toronto figure would have to be doubled to show the length of mainline tracks in their subway.

Oookay, I think I get what you're saying now.

[1ajs]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2346/2474198302_df63aec02a_o.jpg

[jeremy_haak]

Rank System Metropolitan area served Area population Ridership per capita

1 New York City Subway New York City 18,818,536 .342
2 C-Train Calgary 1,160,936 .234
3 Mexico City Metro Mexico City 19,231,829 .229
4 Toronto subway and RT* Toronto 5,555,912 .218
5 Montreal Metro Montreal 3,635,571 .209
6 Metrorail (Washington, D.C.) Washington 5,300,000 .176
7 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (or "T")* Boston 4,455,217 .104
8 Vancouver Skytrain Vancouver 2,249,725 .091
9 Chicago 'L' Chicago 9,505,747 .064
10 SEPTA* Philadelphia 5,823,233 .054
11 BART San Francisco 7,228,948 .052
12 MARTA Atlanta 5,138,233 .051
13 Monterrey Metro Monterrey 3,664,334 .037
14 Baltimore Metro Subway* Baltimore 2,658,405 .020
15 PATH New York City 18,818,536 .013
16 Tren Urbano San Juan 2,509,007 .013
17 RTA Rapid Transit* Cleveland 2,250,871 .013
18 Metrorail Miami 5,463,857 .011
19 Metro Rail* Los Angeles 12,950,129 .010
20 PATCO Speedline Philadelphia 5,823,233 .006
21 Detroit People Mover Detroit 4,468,966 .001
22 Staten Island Railway New York City 18,818,536 .00075

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_Rapid_Transit_Systems_by_ridership

I'm not going to argue the accuracy of these numbers, but what's the point of this statistic? :shrug:

[Mikemike]

It would be a useful stat (rapid rail ridership per capita) if it were compiled on a city by city (or metro by metro) basis, but on a per system basis it means nothing. The 3 NYC stats should be added together, same with the 2 Philly #s. It reflects a combination of a metro areas willingness to use mass transit with how much of the metro is served. I'm not sure why edmonton ( and other rapid LRT cities are excluded when calgary is on there, but Edmonton is in the same range as Atlanta, Philly and San Francisco.

[1ajs]

I'm not going to argue the accuracy of these numbers, but what's the point of this statistic? :shrug:

mexico city sure looks impresive till you see how many people live there

[Wooster]

I'm not going to argue the accuracy of these numbers, but what's the point of this statistic? :shrug:

I think they attempt to compare metro numbers and the primary rapid transit network that serves that population. I'm not sure why they split up the NYC systems. It is interesting to see what relative proportion of people in a metro area use the rapid transit network. Canadian cities perform well, and it is pretty remarkable that a city like Calgary, which has barely over a million people gets over 270 000 daily trips on its LRT - a relatively huge proportion of ridership compared to its tiny population. Per Capita ridership is amongst the best.

Another pretty eye popping stat is the C-Train's ridership growth in the past 5 years - with a huge jump in the last year as capacity has increased:

2003: 181 200
2004: 197 000
2005: 205 300
2006: 219 000
2007: 273 200

[Reesonov]

^ Adding 100,000 daily trips in 5 years is truly unbelievable. I wonder what sort of impact the WLRT will have on ridership? Another 100,000? 150,000? It seems the only ceiling now is capacity.

[Bassic Lab]

^ Adding 100,000 daily trips in 5 years is truly unbelievable. I wonder what sort of impact the WLRT will have on ridership? Another 100,000? 150,000? It seems the only ceiling now is capacity.

I'd say some where more in the 50,000 to 75,000 range. I can't see the West line surpassing any of the three existing lines, especially initially, and there really aren't any destinations along the route. Where as the NW has the University and SAIT/ACAD that increase ridership from other quadrants, and the south has, um Chinook, the West really doesn't have much. I imagine it will primarily serve downtown commuters who live in the west end, which is essentially the demographic most likely to drive downtown any way. That said, I imagine within a couple of years of its completion we could easily be seeing somewhere over 350,000 daily riders, which is in and of itself fantastic for the city. Throw in the SE Line and additional capacity from four car trains and the 8th ave subway and we're talking a huge increase in the next ten or so years.

[mersar]

The south line doesn't really have a destination, but rather the source of huge portion of the ridership.

Yep. Adding both the WLRT and SELRT and there is the potential to more than double usage from its current numbers.

[jeffwhit]

^^ Not to mention the 8th ave subway will allow for a dramatic increase in frequency for the 201 and 202 lines as well, We could see ridership closer to half a million or more once that along with the WLRT and SELRT.

With regards to the Philly numbers, it doesn't seem as if they've included SEPTA's communter lines, just the Subway and Trolly.