[USMichael]

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

I didn't address Brazos Bend and Hood Counties because they are not relevant to this discussion. Just because they are closer doesn't mean they are more relevant. If a significant portion of their population was commuting to the metro then they would be in the metro. But they aren't so they aren't included. And if they aren't commuting to the metro why should they be included in a study on traffic in the metro?

All of the metros in the OP have "entire swaths of people" who don't have access to public transit from that metro. Dallas is in no way unique in that regard. Austin is no different. Neither is Houston.

That's why I am making no distinction on whether or not cities with no public transit in some metros shouldn't be included in public transit numbers. Firstly Brazos Bend is a city, Hood is a County (just to make it clear) and the reason you did not address Brazos Bend and Hood County is because it is inconvenient for you

You just put up some of the DFW ones with out your public transit, here are Austin's,

Bastrop - 74,141
Caldwell - 38,066
Hays - 157,107
Williamson - 442,679

DFW is not alone in that.

Thank you for proving my point

Firstly not all of Williamson County is devoid of Public Transit. Leander and Anderson Mill are both member cities of Capital Metro. Secondly this only further proves my point that including areas with people who have no access to pubic transit skew the numbers down. So thank you

For some reason you seem to want to use distance as the measuring stick. It is not a good one. For one the areas with little population that are distant from the metro have little population. The small populations don't have any real effect on the final numbers, and the little effect they do have is negligible since all metros have small populations around, again DFW isn't unique in that.

You are right, distance isn't everything, that is why it is appropriate to question including the counties and cities containing hundreds of thousands of people who have no access to public transit which are 30+ miles from the anchor cities should

Little Population?

Far North Dallas
McKinney - 131,117
Frisco - 116,989
Allen - 84,252
Total - 332,352

Mid-Cities
Grand Prairie - 175,369
Arlington - 365,438
Total - 540,807

If those places did have large enough population to support public transit, then they would probably have it. If they are large enough to support public transit and they don't have it, then that is very significant and is something that should be reflected in the numbers.

You think the 300,000+ people in the Far North Dallas suburbs isn't enough to support public transit? They could hypothetically join DART and get Bus service very quickly, who knows how long it would take light rail expansion given the cost and planning but it would be

You think the whooping 500,000+ in Arlington and Grand Praire aren't large enough? They are, but political reasons get in the way despite both of them being in between two big cities. The DCTA has fewer people in it's jurisdiction than

And that is just the beginning, toss in Mesquite, Rock Wall, Balch Springs, Rockwall, Flower Mound, etc

I think you might be looking at the numbers differently than it is intended. What I get the feeling that you are looking for is a study on the people living there, not on the metro. Like I get the feeling you are looking for a study on if people have the choice and options are they, or aren't they, willing to use mass transit. If that is what you are looking for the of course this study is going to reflect that poorly. This was done by pulling the numbers off the census results. It isn't some huge study don't by some Washington D.C. think tank or something like that, to show how individuals are behaving. This to me is more about how a metro area behaves.

I didn't realize numbers had to be looked at in a singular way. Then again I rarely look at numbers a single way. Such a simplistic number understates the underlying complexity of major metropolitan areas and public transit usage.

In that regard to how the metro area behaves then the metro's failure to provide transportation options is one of the most significant aspect of the discussion and should be reflected as such in the numbers. Not including them would make the entire ranking utterly pointless.

It's not the metros failure, it is the failure of individual "leaders" at the local level. Not including them would show a more accurate representation of the percentage of people who utilize public transportation. Can't use something if it's not available