Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#41

Post by bronbron »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #39
bronbron wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I categorically reject the notion that any city which has the longest commute times in the entire country as having a good transportation system By how much? What's the variance like compared to other cities? Are we comparing NYC commute times to cities that don't have public transportation systems used en masse? If I live in Houston and drive 15 minutes to work, is it really fair to compare it to spending 30 minut…

...what? It's highly objective that New York has the worst commute times in the country. I shared one link on it. There are countless more. Here's another that has more numbers for other cities. http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst//longest... If you object to their methodology 31.5% of NYC workers have a commute time longer than 60 minutes. That's insane.

You didn't answer any of my questions.

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#42

Post by rayiner »

bane wrote: post #19

I was surprised D.C. ranks so low [1] I've been to most of the big cities in the U.S. and despite having some problems the D.C. (the city proper) system is easily the 2nd best public transport. It's no NYC, but it's not bad. By wider extension, the links into the Maryland and Virginia systems are also pretty good. Looking at the map it's not even clear to me why it's ranked below LA or SF. It provides lots of coverag…

It's not NYC, and it's not Chicago or Philly either. DC suffers for making the Metro do double duty as a subway and commuter rail. Plus, many of the suburban stops have awful walk ability (silver line)

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#43

Post by callahad »

rbobby wrote: post #7

I wish they had included Toronto. There's an ongoing debate about how to improve transit and being able to see various options compared against each other empirically would be damn useful. As a philanthropic effort an open system that would allow someone to "play" with transit designs might be a godsend for all urban planners. Add in the ability to easily adjust schedules/stops (e.g. bus every 4 minutes, or add a sto…

If you can find equivalent Canadian data sources for the US Census-based ones listed in http://www.cts.umn.edu/Publications/ResearchReports/reportde..., I'd be happy to ask Andrew about computing up a map of Toronto.

Looks like he'd primarily need replacements for U.S. Census TIGER 2010 datasets: blocks, core-based statistical areas (CBSAs) and the U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) 2011 Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES)

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#44

Post by jpatokal »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #40
techsupporter wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you've dug a subway, how do you get people to the rail lines? Park and rides? All that does is encourage suburban sprawl to drive to a rail station. There's no reason for buses to be uncomfortable and unreliable beyond popular perception. I've ridden trains in Dallas that have worse onboard conditions than bus routes in Seattle.

Seattle buses are immensely more comfortable than the subway we have in Beijing (but then dammit, I just take a taxi).

But can you imagine what it would be like if Beijing had only buses instead of subways?

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#45

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jpatokal wrote: post #44
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seattle buses are immensely more comfortable than the subway we have in Beijing (but then dammit, I just take a taxi).

But can you imagine what it would be like if Beijing had only buses instead of subways?

Yes. There are still many places the subway doesn't go. The buses are also crowded, and sometimes you have to wait in line for a couple of hours even to get on (especially to/from the suburbs). Of course, you might have to wait for 30 minutes to get on the subway during rush hour (e.g. finding enough space to fit in to an open car).

My only point here is that everything is quite relative (i.e. first world vs. third world problems).

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#46

Post by jpatokal »

techsupporter wrote: post #28
jpatokal wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, any public transport system that relies on buses as the backbone will be a "shit show". Buses are uncomfortable, slow, unreliable, get stuck in traffic, etc etc. "Bus rapid transit", dedicated lanes and so on ease the pain a bit, but at the end of day, they just can't compete with any service that has fully dedicated right of way.

Unless you've dug a subway, how do you get people to the rail lines? Park and rides? All that does is encourage suburban sprawl to drive to a rail station. There's no reason for buses to be uncomfortable and unreliable beyond popular perception. I've ridden trains in Dallas that have worse onboard conditions than bus routes in Seattle.

You do what everybody outside the US does: build housing within easy walking/cycling distance of the stations.

And it's a simple matter of right of way, not "popular perception". A train runs on its own tracks, so it can be scheduled to the second and stops only when needed. A bus shares the road with other traffic, and is thus subject to traffic jams, traffic lights, other cars driving crazily and breaking down, nutcases running across the road and so on, which means lots of unnecessary stop-and-go (compared to a train) and a chronic inability to stick to a schedule.

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#47

Post by santaclaus »

rayiner wrote: post #38
forrestthewoods wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"best public transporation" for New York City? Bah. I categorically reject the notion that any city which has the longest commute times in the entire country as having a good transportation system [1]. I had a friend who was born and raised in the New York City area. I couldn't tell you what borough specifically. He was used to that insane commute. Wake up early, ride the train(s) for 90 minutes, work, ride them for…

I question if you can spend 90 min on a train in New York. It's only like 50 min to Connecticut on the metro north. Also, my commute these days is about an hour and 20 min each way. 45 min Amtrak, 20 min walking, 15 min metro. Way preferable to a 30-40 min car commute.

Ya dude but Metro North isn't making tons of stops. East New York to the Bronx Zoo is def approaching two hours, kinda long for a weekend outing with the family. Factor in time spent waiting for a train, walking to the train, etc, and the number gets higher.

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#48

Post by bane »

rayiner wrote: post #42
bane wrote: post #19

I was surprised D.C. ranks so low [1] I've been to most of the big cities in the U.S. and despite having some problems the D.C. (the city proper) system is easily the 2nd best public transport. It's no NYC, but it's not bad. By wider extension, the links into the Maryland and Virginia systems are also pretty good. Looking at the map it's not even clear to me why it's ranked below LA or SF. It provides lots of coverag…

It's not NYC, and it's not Chicago or Philly either. DC suffers for making the Metro do double duty as a subway and commuter rail. Plus, many of the suburban stops have awful walk ability (silver line)

Yeah, you're right, outside of the city proper (and the very nearby surrounding areas like Arlington and Silver Spring) the walkability is terrible. We'll see if it improves, the model of "stick a station out in the suburbs and build huge parking garages" is not one that I like. Ideally the areas right around the stations should be high density, very walkable, mixed residential-shopping-office.

Using the subway system as a commuter rail line means that it can take something like an hour or more to make it from an endpoint station to the city.

Plus D.C. has two actual commuter rail systems (VRE for Virginia and MARC for Maryland) plus Amtrak.

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#49

Post by _linden_ »

Keep in mind that in many places, and in particular in the Bay Area, the entire notion of trying to create short commutes from work to home as an ideal is one that lots of cities still haven't wrapped their head around.

I live in Palo Alto and I've heard people tell the City Council that no one wants to take public transportation and therefore we don't need it. I've also heard people scoff at the idea that jobs and housing should be built next to each other to avoid long commutes, emissions, lost time, sprawl, etc. Anyone here who says we need more housing next to all our huge office parks gets called "entitled."

We're facing a paradigm shift wherein younger generations want to be able to have the option of taking public transportation. They want to live in lively neighborhoods where friends and spaces for hanging out are close at hand- a trip to the local coffee shop doesn't involve getting in your car and driving to a strip mall. But, people who grew up in the 50s, 60s, and 70s grew up with the notion of the car as freedom and a house in suburbia as the definition of success. To them, quality of life is all about how fast they can drive somewhere and how easily they can park there. When they think "urban" they think "ghetto."

These attitudes contribute to the NIMBYism all over the Bay Area and they're the reason why outside of SF, it's extremely hard to get around without a car. It's the reason why despite being the center of innovation on the planet, Silicon Valley still looks like a Leave It To Beaver throwback.

Re: Report ranks U.S. metros based on how many jobs residents can access by transit

#50

Post by rbobby »

callahad wrote: post #43
rbobby wrote: post #7

I wish they had included Toronto. There's an ongoing debate about how to improve transit and being able to see various options compared against each other empirically would be damn useful. As a philanthropic effort an open system that would allow someone to "play" with transit designs might be a godsend for all urban planners. Add in the ability to easily adjust schedules/stops (e.g. bus every 4 minutes, or add a sto…

If you can find equivalent Canadian data sources for the US Census-based ones listed in http://www.cts.umn.edu/Publications/ResearchReports/reportde... , I'd be happy to ask Andrew about computing up a map of Toronto. Looks like he'd primarily need replacements for U.S. Census TIGER 2010 datasets: blocks, core-based statistical areas (CBSAs) and the U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) 2011 Ori…

Here's what may be the transit schedule data: http://www.gtfs-data-exchange.com/agency/ttc/

For the specific Census data... all I can do is point to http://www.statcan.gc.ca/start-debut-eng.html, the top level of Stats Canada. I tried to find similar datasets but wasn't even close to successful. CANSIM seems to be the bit where you can download the "raw" data... but finding the right CANSIM table(s) appears to be more difficult than I expected.

Post reply on HN