10 Best Cities for Public Transportation

Reader Comments
Back to article

The difference between a public transit agency and a private company -- in terms of value creation -- is that a private company aims to directly capture as much of the value that it creates, either through product value or brand value or whatever -- and that a public agency simply aims to create as much value as possible, hoping that the private and public entities that realize that value will recognize and appropriately support the value-creating agency.
Why public transit agencies should be criticized for not making money like private companies is beyond me, when the kinds of things they do, and the tools they have to recoup value, are so completely different.

jnb of MD 2:01PM February 09, 2011

I have heard comments always about inefficient transit is yet the same can be said of every other mode of transportation. Roads are widened to meet a level of demand that only happens a few hours of a day, five days a week. Sidewalks, bike paths, airports . . . all the same. It is an investment in a mode that serves a purpose. Roads are subsidized as well - look it up.

Roger of NM 1:51PM February 09, 2011

It's interesting that Four of the Top Ten Cities (Portland, San Francisco, Boston and Los Angeles) have or soon will have a system called Nextbus - that provides real-time information passenger arrivals information. I'm using it in Boston and it's wonderful - I get to spend more time with my baby in the morning and I don't have to pour out my coffee to rush to a bus that's late - because I know it's late. They even recently added a GPS feature for Smartphones - when I'm in a part of town I don't know I can use this feature to see where the nearest bus stop is and when the buses are arriving - it even shows me on a small Google map how to get to the stop. I understand this system is also in use in Washington, DC and in Toronto - all these agencies should get it. I think you can see the predictions at www.nextbus.com for some of these cities. Oh - even MIT has it on their shuttle buses.

TransitLover of MA 1:14PM February 09, 2011

You didn't read that right... the transit system doesn't make four times its investment... for every dollar invested *the community* sees four dollars in economic return. Transit is not now, nor will it ever be, a "money maker." But it does spur economic activity and provide mobility!

Readers Are Leaders of FL 9:27AM February 09, 2011

"The association estimates that for every one dollar invested in public transportation, four dollars are generated in economic returns. APTA also reported in January that in major urban areas, individuals on average save $9,656 annually by using public transportation instead of driving."
One wonders why they have to be so heavily subsidized if they are such money makers. People who don't ride public transportation don't realize how inefficient the systems are. Passenger loads, for ex., are usually either too heavy or too light. If you don't have good service at all times however, which means running light loads at off peak hours, then most people will buy a car in addition to riding public transportation.

Luther of LA 1:36AM February 09, 2011

I am not being IGNORANCE about Utah Transit Authority I am telling the Truth.
The Economy and the Environment and Unemployment is going in Utah.
A Good Bus System does Earn the Executives the Excessive BONUSES. More Federal Funds and the Increase Ridership on Trax and FrontRunner Earn the UTA Executives BONUSES at TAXPAYERS EXPENSE. In the Utah Legislature Performance of Utah Transit Authority 2008 tell about Bonuses the pages 38-43
Catmeow Public Transit: catmeowpublictransit.blogspot.com

Tammi Diaz of UT 11:25PM February 08, 2011

Given the criteria that they use, by all means, UTA should be ranked at the top. But whether these criteria are relevant and indicate a good quality of service is questionable. Using investment as a criteria will certainly skew this group towards cities with rail lines.
What about a region like Dallas? They just opened a $2 billion expansion that was the largest single expansion. Ridershiip has been upwards of 60k and with this extension opening, I am sure the ridership will continue to rise like it always had when a new line opens. There have been issues of safety in the past but I am sure that has improved and even if that was the dragging factor, I am sure that it still should've put Dallas in the top 10 or at the very least, the top 15.
I am very hesitant to call these systems the best transit systems in US. There are other critieria that can be used to measure quality of service besides the ones mentioned here. I think this is what happens when you take a very complex animal like public transportation and try and simplify it to three criteria and then call those the best.

Paul K McGregor of UT 11:17PM February 08, 2011

DeeToo of South Carolina (not Portland): "The article forgot to mention that the streetcars are built in Oregon too."
Actually, DeeToo, you are factually incorrect.
Not one of the in-service Portland Streetcar vehicles was built by United Streetcar - they were all built by Inekon-Skoda or Inekon after dissolution of the Skoda joint venture:
http://www.inekon.cz/en/group/inekon-trams/reference/deliveries-of-new-trams.html
The United Streetcar group has only completed ONE complete Streetcar vehicle; it is not in service on the Portland Streetcar route and no United Streetcar vehicles have been delivered to any customer.
Meanwhile, the Streetcar represents a very, very tiny part of Portland's overall transit system. Our bus system is in dire need of investment thanks to the disinvestment policies by the pro-rail General Manager who recently quit the agency after increasing calls for him to stand up and improve TriMet. We have one of the oldest, least reliable, least fuel efficient and most polluting bus fleets in the nation; a bus system that is continually being attacked in favor of high cost, very limited rail service. Bus ridership has been in decline for most of the last few years - even in the years when gasoline prices spiked, TriMet reported a bus ridership drop, as other transit agencies were reporting double-digit ridership growth (including agencies which only operated bus service, and not rail). TriMet has eliminated high capacity bus vehicles, eliminated much of the night/weekend service, has failed to invest in bus stop improvements and has abandoned many of the "improvements" claimed to have been made in the last few years.
I invite anyone who wants to claim how Portland's transit system is great to come ride a TriMet bus with me. I use the system five days a week, every week of the year, and it is hardly the best system. It might be nice if you get to ride the Streetcar and avoid paying fares...but for the vast, vast, vast majority of Portland area residents, we are served by a third-class bus system. Good luck on a rainy day that your bus isn't leaking from the roof; and on a sweltering day in that only half of TriMet buses have air conditioning. And good luck finding a seat as many buses run crush loads, and TriMet refuses to add more service or higher capacity buses to accommodate the demand.

Erik H. of OR 10:48PM February 08, 2011

Public transit is a great thing . It usually is a combination of rail, streetcar and bus. It means people don't need to own a car, the air is cleaner, traffic lighter, and if reliable - a great way to go.
You may need to move to a neighborhood closer to the other parts of the transit system. Maybe if the church did not take so much from the wallets in Utah, the public would have more to pay for decent transport. Pubic transit is a rarity in "red states", so don't plan on anything great in Utah...if anything they will cut it further.
The federal transit investments go to buses and rail and trains....new ones at encourage development of new transit coverage. Taxpayers pay a tiny fraction - a percentage of one percent - for publlic transit. Ask your Congressperson why they are unwilling to cut defense spending - HALF of your tax dollars are spent on missiles, bombs, gigantic aircraft and armored vehicles scattered all over the world, but we cannot afford a bus for you to go to work.
Did you know that for the price of one missile, a school full of hungry children could eat lunch every day for 5 years?
Ask your Congressmen or Senators why they insist on buying those things we never use, and deny you basic services. Why do HALF of your tax dollars pay for weapons and death?

DeeToo of SC 6:29PM February 08, 2011