HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2018, 9:05 PM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,701
Transit/Walk/Bike Mode Shares of US/UK/Canada, Metropolitan Areas, 2011

I already posted these stats in the "How America Killed Transit" thread, but I have corrected and expanded them, and also added data for the UK. Maybe now you will wonder how Britain killed transit (hint: Margaret Thatcher).
















United States:
Code:
Metro Area    Population %Transit %Active
New York      19,015,900    32.38    7.04
Los Angeles   12,944,801     6.55    3.79
Chicago        9,504,753    12.20    3.91
Dallas         6,526,548     1.51    1.32
Houston        6,086,536     2.42    1.68
Philadelphia   5,992,414     9.66    4.45
Washington     5,703,948    15.51    3.96
Miami          5,670,125     3.99    2.29
Atlanta        5,268,860     3.26    1.85
Boston         4,552,402    12.19    6.41
San Francisco  4,391,037    15.58    6.55
Riverside      4,304,994     1.67    1.87
Detroit        4,285,832     1.69    1.59
Phoenix        4,263,236     2.30    2.83
Seattle        3,500,026     8.57    4.86
Minneapolis    3,318,486     4.91    3.00
San Diego      3,140,069     3.23    3.70
Tampa          2,824,724     1.31    2.37
St. Louis      2,817,355     2.48    2.08
Baltimore      2,729,110     6.38    2.97
Pittsburgh     2,359,746     5.76    3.77
Portland       2,262,605     6.77    6.01
San Antonio    2,194,927     2.24    2.26
Sacramento     2,176,235     2.90    4.24
Orlando        2,171,360     2.62    1.86
Cincinnati     2,138,038     2.13    2.28
Cleveland      2,068,283     3.32    2.52
Kansas City    2,052,676     1.26    1.46
Las Vegas      1,969,975     4.02    2.12
San Jose       1,865,450     3.54    4.26
Columbus       1,858,464     1.83    2.65
Charlotte      1,795,472     2.46    1.73
Austin         1,783,519     2.66    3.21
Indianapolis   1,778,568     1.22    2.07
Virginia Beach 1,677,984     1.91    3.08
Nashville      1,617,142     1.47    1.69
Providence     1,600,224     2.89    3.32
Milwaukee      1,562,216     4.15    3.44
Jacksonville   1,358,593     1.62    1.65
Memphis        1,325,605     1.61    1.35
Louisville     1,294,849     1.97    2.04
Oklahoma City  1,278,053     0.51    2.15
Richmond       1,270,541     1.72    1.85
Hartford       1,213,255     3.89    3.24
New Orleans    1,191,089     2.81    4.00
Raleigh        1,163,515     1.17    1.69
Salt Lake City 1,145,905     3.76    2.75
Buffalo        1,134,039     3.77    3.35
Birmingham     1,132,264     0.70    1.29
Rochester      1,055,278     1.92    3.80
Honolulu         964,607     7.87    6.51
Tulsa            946,962     0.49    1.52
Fresno           942,904     1.12    2.91
Bridgeport       925,899     9.17    2.49
Albuquerque      899,149     1.72    3.47
Omaha            877,110     0.95    2.11
Albany           871,478     3.28    3.83
New Haven        861,113     4.06    4.45
Bakersfield      851,710     1.28    2.28
Grand Rapids     779,604     1.67    1.90
Columbia         777,116     0.69    4.08
Greensboro       730,966     1.17    1.84
Little Rock      709,901     0.57    1.37
Knoxville        704,500     0.45    1.18
Akron            701,456     1.39    2.01
Stockton         696,214     1.60    2.25
Springfield      693,204     2.89    3.96
Syracuse         662,553     2.33    4.36
Boise            627,281     0.41    2.81
Des Moines       580,255     1.00    1.67
Scranton         563,223     1.41    3.71
Ogden            555,437     2.50    1.98
Provo            541,710     1.39    5.58
Lancaster        523,594     1.51    4.23
Durham           512,979     4.18    3.77
Santa Rosa       488,116     1.92    5.11
Winston-Salem    482,025     1.12    1.56
Spokane          473,761     3.06    3.54
Lansing          465,138     2.77    6.81
Asheville        429,017     0.47    2.53
Fort Wayne       418,148     0.60    1.27
Canton           405,693     0.89    1.77
Manchester       401,696     0.73    1.80
Salem            394,865     1.00    5.47
Anchorage        387,516     2.01    3.89
Peoria           380,961     1.13    2.30
Trenton          367,063     8.49    5.16
Savannah         355,576     2.09    2.39
Rockford         348,360     0.50    1.37
Ann Arbor        347,962     6.85    8.62
Boulder          299,378     6.68    9.69
Duluth           279,761     2.08    4.97
Atlantic City    274,338     9.16    4.09
Olympia          256,591     1.59    2.11
Topeka           234,380     0.37    2.50
Sioux Falls      232,433     0.96    3.11
Champaign        232,050     7.74   10.59
Fargo            212,171     0.59    5.86
Charlottesville  202,406     3.13    8.14
Saginaw          199,088     0.44    2.46
Racine           195,388     2.27    2.48
Athens           193,317     3.12    6.25
St. Cloud        190,014     1.14    3.66
Eau Claire       161,151     0.79    4.60
Pueblo           160,545     0.74    2.80
Billings         160,097     1.53    4.30
Iowa City        154,893     6.18    9.71
Bangor           153,786     0.64    5.48
Jefferson City   152,370     0.48    1.75
Santa Fe         145,648     1.21    4.51
Jackson          116,995     0.31    1.10
Ithaca           101,723     5.40   17.49
United Kingdom:
Code:
Metro Area   Population %Transit %Active
London       14,717,231    36.29   12.83
Birmingham    3,720,360    14.26   11.30
Manchester    2,734,806    14.70   13.38
Leeds         2,467,376    14.49   13.09
Liverpool     2,467,305    13.23   12.35
Glasgow       1,966,943    20.23    9.77
Newcastle     1,934,095    15.20   12.65
Portsmouth    1,670,399     8.42   16.62
Nottingham    1,632,238    11.38   14.19
Sheffield     1,546,412    13.32   12.36
Cardiff       1,390,247     9.60   12.49
Bristol       1,069,583     9.45   20.45
Leicester       929,952     8.77   15.21
Edinburgh       834,648    24.46   16.61
Brighton        785,000    17.51   19.65
Middlesbrough   662,791     8.76   13.54
Hull            590,585     8.61   17.61
Bournemouth     511,027     7.75   16.07
Stoke           469,985     6.89   11.45
Blackburn       404,734     7.71   14.13
Norwich         381,170     7.75   18.93
Swansea         378,835     6.36   11.50
Preston         356,414     8.88   13.04
Blackpool       325,571     7.57   15.88
Cambridge       272,622    10.41   30.03
Dundee          263,246    12.19   14.98
Ipswich         257,682     8.16   19.08
York            198,051    10.45   31.53
Peterborough    183,631    10.51   15.64
Hastings        180,842    11.17   16.05
Colchester      173,074    14.50   17.44
Bedford         157,479     9.66   15.27
Kettering       154,730     5.85   13.06
Canterbury      151,145    11.14   19.80
Lancaster       139,375     8.66   20.30
Thanet          134,186    11.04   15.85
Canada:
Code:
Metro Area   Population %Transit %Active
Toronto       5,584,064    23.28    5.72
Montreal      3,934,078    22.24    7.09
Vancouver     2,313,328    19.71    8.08
Ottawa        1,236,324    20.10    8.55
Calgary       1,214,839    15.87    6.04
Edmonton      1,159,869    11.32    5.16
Quebec          767,310    11.34    7.46
Winnipeg        730,018    13.41    7.14
Hamilton        721,053     9.27    5.28
Kitchener       496,383     5.43    5.46
London          474,786     6.89    5.39
St. Catharines  392,184     2.94    6.00
Halifax         390,328    12.47    8.52
Oshawa          356,177     8.45    3.63
Victoria        344,177    11.08   15.89
Windsor         315,460     3.02    4.80
Saskatoon       262,215     4.45    7.09
Regina          211,519     4.77    5.90
Sherbrooke      202,261     4.19    7.38
St. John's      196,954     2.98    5.66
Barrie          184,325     4.59    4.42
Kelowna         176,435     3.43    7.52
Abbotsford      166,685     2.54    3.41
Kingston        159,561     5.06   10.69
Sudbury         158,260     4.52    6.03
Trois-Rivières  146,930     2.27    6.10
Guelph          141,097     6.24    6.63
Moncton         139,287     3.25    6.73
Saint John      129,057     4.72    5.30
Thunder Bay     121,596     3.58    6.27
Peterborough    118,975     3.48    8.63
Lethbridge      102,785     2.78    5.30
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2018, 9:50 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is offline
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,383
Really interesting compilation - kudos! It's fascinating to see the similarities and contrasts.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2018, 11:00 PM
accord1999 accord1999 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doady View Post
Maybe now you will wonder how Britain killed transit (hint: Margaret Thatcher).
No, growing individual wealth and the car did. Public transit had been declining since the early 50s, long before Thatcher's period as PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 12:37 AM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
No, growing individual wealth and the car did. Public transit had been declining since the early 50s, long before Thatcher's period as PM.
The decline in UK bus ridership started in 1980 because of recession, and it just continued. After bus privatization in 1986, UK bus ridership outside of London declined 40%, from around 4.5 billion trips to 2.7 billion today. 10% decline in the last 10 years alone.

You can't use wealth and cars as excuse. It's not like USA and Canada are third world countries. And places like Washington, Vancouver and Calgary are not exactly car-free either; they grew largely in the post-war era. There is no good reason for them to have better transit ridership than much older and denser UK urban areas like Birmingham and Manchester. That's just the result of bad government policy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 1:39 AM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
I looked up 2017 ACS numbers for the Seattle MSA:

2010 (from OP): 8.57% transit, 4.86% active

2017 (census 2017 ACS): 10.1% transit, 4.6% walk+bike

I'm disappointed in the walk+bike. However it looks like a lot of cities had significant drops in bike share...was the methodology changed?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 1:45 AM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Portland/Vancouver/Hillsboro:

2010: 6.77 and 6.01

2017: 6.3 and 5.6

San Francisco / Oakland / Hayward:

2010: 15.58 and 6.55

2017: 17.4 and 6.8
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 2:33 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
I actually thought the UK would have higher transit share.

UK has relatively low auto ownership, lower incomes, sky high gas and relatively little auto-centric sprawl, though the largest UK cities (excepting London) are roughly in-line with the largest older U.S cities (excepting NYC). And London is roughly in-line with NYC.

Where's Oxford? I see Cambridge listed but much bigger Oxford isn't. Maybe it's part of "London"?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 6:19 AM
accord1999 accord1999 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doady View Post
The decline in UK bus ridership started in 1980 because of recession, and it just continued. After bus privatization in 1986, UK bus ridership outside of London declined 40%, from around 4.5 billion trips to 2.7 billion today. 10% decline in the last 10 years alone.
From British Government statistics here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...table-tsgb0101 Table TSGB0101

Bus ridership (in terms of billion passenger-km) had already declined from 92 B-km in 1952 to 52 B-km by 1980. The recent decline might be cannibalization by rail.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I actually thought the UK would have higher transit share.
Even though European countries are held up as public transit/walking/biking-centric, the reality is that cars are still the dominant form of passenger transport, even with density, smaller areas, higher fuel prices, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 7:01 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 16,806
I am always amazed at what an outlier Victoria is for walking and cycling in North America.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 11:24 AM
The Chemist's Avatar
The Chemist The Chemist is offline
恭喜发财!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 中国上海/Shanghai
Posts: 8,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
I am always amazed at what an outlier Victoria is for walking and cycling in North America.
Well, having one of the most moderate climates in North America, as well as a pretty compact city layout, both certainly help in that regard. I know if I lived there that's how I'd be getting around.
__________________
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature." - Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 2:12 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
Even though European countries are held up as public transit/walking/biking-centric, the reality is that cars are still the dominant form of passenger transport, even with density, smaller areas, higher fuel prices, etc.
I'm aware; I'm European-born, and lived there half my life. All my European relatives own cars (though most are in rural areas).

The UK transit numbers appear somewhat lower than those on the Continent. UK is a bit more homeowner oriented and somewhat lower density and has cultural preference for terraced or detached homes compared to apartments. I wonder if this plays a role.

I'm still a bit surprised that Birmingham or Manchester have about the same transit share as Chicago or SF. I don't think Valencia or Munich or Zurich would have comparative share.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 2:31 PM
Minato Ku's Avatar
Minato Ku Minato Ku is offline
Tokyo and Paris fan
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 4,168
Just to give a perspective on a non-english speaking country.

Note that French census doesn't make the difference between a bicycle and a motorbike.
The majority of "two wheeler" commute is done by motorbike.
Strasbourg and Grenoble are among the few exception where it's not the case.

Just like in the United States and UK, there is a big gap between Paris and the rest of the country.

France:
Code:
Metro Area   Population %Transit %Walk %Two-wheeler
Paris        12,532,901    42.4    6.9         4.8
Lyon          2,291,763    19.9    7.2         3.9
Marseille     1,752,398    15.9    7.5         4.8
Toulouse      1,330,954    13.1    4.6         5.6
Bordeaux      1,215,769    12.8    4.4         6.4
Lille         1,184,708	   17.2    6.5         3.5
Nice          1,005,891    13.2    8.6         7.6
Nantes          949,316    14.1    4.6         5.5
Strasbourg      780,515    16.1    6.1         8.1
Rennes          719 840    12.6    5.3         4.2
Grenoble        690,050    15.5    6.9         7.0
Rouen           663,743    12.4    6.5         2.6
Toulon          622,895     8.0    7.1         6.6
Montpellier     599,365    13.2    6.4         6.4
Douai - Lens    539,715     6.4    5.0         3.5	
Avignon         527,731     3.7    5.6         3.7	
Saint-Étienne   517,585     9.9    7.3         1.5
Tours           492,722     9.9    5.8         4.8
Clermont-Ferrand479,096	    8.4    7.4         2.7
Nancy           435,336    12.7    8.4         2.7
Orléans         433,337    10.9    5.7         3.8
Caen            418,148     7.4    5.4         3.2
Angers          413,325     8.6    6.0         5.1
Metz            389,612    10.6    6.6         1.9
Dijon           384,824	   14.3    7.4         4.1
Béthune         370,326     4.7    4.4         2.7
Valenciennes    369,849     7.1    6.1         3.0
Le Mans         347,348    10.1    5.3         4.2
Reims           322,264    10.7    8.3         2.9
Perpignan       320,785     4.1    6.1         3.8
Brest           318,829     8.8    5.6         3.0
Geneve (Fr part)314,972     9.5    5.4         5.7
Pointe-à-Pitre  313,432     5.7    5.0         1.7
Bayonne         297,375	    3.9    4.0         3.6
Amiens          295,892	    9.6    8.0         3.4
Le Havre        290,684	   11.1    7.4         3.3
Mulhouse        285,449    10.8    5.5         3.0
Limoges         283,823	    5.8    6.5         1.9
Nimes           266,593	    6.9    7.2         4.5
Poitiers        260,626     6.3    5.2         2.9
Dunkerque       257,652	    6.2    5.9         3.7
Besançon        250,563     9.6    8.0         3.1
Pau             243,122     4.9    4.5         4.0
Annecy          234,085	    6.2    6.9         4.5
Chambéry        223,280     8.6    8.0         4.4
Saint-Nazaire   219,698	    5.2    3.7         3.9
Lorient         217,901     5.3    5.0         3.9
La Rochelle     214,109	    5.5    5.1         6.2
Saint-Denis     202,993     9.6    8.9         4.2

I decided to stop at 200,000 inhabitants because there are so many metropolitan areas between 200,000 and 100,000 inhabitants in France.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 3:12 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Interesting. So French transit share doesn't appear to be much higher than that of the UK, especially in the smaller metros. And I'm amazed that Marseille, a super-dense Mediterranean city, has the same transit share as Calgary!

I would have guessed that France's higher densities and greater preference for apartment living would result in higher transit share.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2018, 10:06 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
<stereotype>
Doesn't only a tiny fraction of the French population make commute trips? And of those, I think they commute on average two days a week? Maybe we should look at mode share for trips to the boulangerie instead.
</stereotype>
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2018, 12:10 AM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,701
Thanks for the French numbers, Minato Ku. I'm not even going to try to find numbers for non-English-speaking countries. At first I could only find US numbers with regular bikes and motorbikes combined. It took some effort to find stats that separate them.

I wonder if a metropolitan area dominates a whole country so much as London and Paris do, the others can get forgotten and neglected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I actually thought the UK would have higher transit share.

UK has relatively low auto ownership, lower incomes, sky high gas and relatively little auto-centric sprawl, though the largest UK cities (excepting London) are roughly in-line with the largest older U.S cities (excepting NYC). And London is roughly in-line with NYC.

Where's Oxford? I see Cambridge listed but much bigger Oxford isn't. Maybe it's part of "London"?
Maybe sometimes urban sprawl is bad enough to discourage walking and cycling, but not bad enough to discourage transit. So the higher transit use in some US and Canadian cities could be a symptom of sprawl. But that wouldn't explain the higher transit use in Edinburgh and many other places throughout Europe.

UK doesn't have formal definition for metropolitan area so I had to manually choose the municipalities to be included, based on what is the "functional urban area", and I didn't know what to include for Oxford. I omitted many other small metropolitan areas in UK and US simply because there are so many of them. Reading is included in the London numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
From British Government statistics here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...table-tsgb0101 Table TSGB0101

Bus ridership (in terms of billion passenger-km) had already declined from 92 B-km in 1952 to 52 B-km by 1980. The recent decline might be cannibalization by rail.
Declining bus ridership before 1980 could be explained by lack of government funding as well. To say increasing wealth and cars automatically results in declining transit use wouldn't explain the numbers for US and Canada.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2018, 2:41 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 11,527
Euro numbers are much lower than I expected. I knew auto reliance was really still very high despite stereotypes, but I didn't know that Canada has better transit numbers than most midsized french cities.

Makes me want to see Dutch and German numbers. The Netherlands has both an extremely efficient freeway and regional rail system, but I've found city transit far from perfect (though obviously better than anything you would find in 95% of the US), and of course their famous cycling culture. Employment and density can be pretty spread out though, and there isn't a single dominant mega city like Paris or London.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2018, 4:09 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
Makes me want to see Dutch and German numbers.
The Dutch have a mediocre rail system for Western European standards, and sky-high bike share, so I would imagine their transit share is pretty low.

Germany, though, I'm betting has higher transit share than UK or France. Germany has excellent rail, everywhere. It's like the Japan of Europe. Let me see if I can find German stats.

But I bet Eastern Europe and Spain have higher transit share still, because incomes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2018, 5:14 PM
accord1999 accord1999 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,028
Modal split between cars and transit for the members of the EU-28:

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statis...cs#Modal_split
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2018, 8:15 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 5,991
not sure if passenger-km is the right metric though... presumably car commutes tend to be longer than subway commutes.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2018, 11:00 PM
Minato Ku's Avatar
Minato Ku Minato Ku is offline
Tokyo and Paris fan
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 4,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Interesting. So French transit share doesn't appear to be much higher than that of the UK, especially in the smaller metros. And I'm amazed that Marseille, a super-dense Mediterranean city, has the same transit share as Calgary!
Actually I'm surprised by the result of Marseille, I expected this number to be lower.
Despite being known as a city with inadequate transit, it's still among the highest in France as far as transit.
While Marseille has a dense inner city, it's also quite suburban. The inner city tends to be quite poor with high unemployment, the upper and middle class live in more suburban areas.
Grenoble is often presented as the exemple to follow but as far as transit, it doesn't fare better than Marseille.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I would have guessed that France's higher densities and greater preference for apartment living would result in higher transit share.
France doesn't have higher density overall, it does have some dense inner city area like in Paris, Lyon or Marseille but it's also a country with many suburbs and exburbs.

The majority of dwellings in France aren't apartments.
While the inner cities tend to have a rather good transit, the service in the suburbs is weak and most of the jobs are in suburban areas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:27 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.