Originally Posted by edmontonenthusiast
Anyways I made a list by looking on Wiki at transit stats to compare rail (not just LRT, but LRT is in bold)) in some (not all) North American cities, their km of track
New York City (subway) - 7,791,700/day | 369 km
Toronto (subway) - 942,600/day | 68.3 km
Boston - 481,300/day | 61 km
San Francisco - 358,500/day | 167 km
Vancouver - 344 796/day | 68.7 km
Toronto (streetcar) - 276,000/day | 75 km |
Calgary - 266,100/day | 48.8 km
Atlanta - 247,200/day | 76.6 km
New York City (PATH subway) - 244,300/day | 22.2 km
Los Angeles - 144,900/day |
Portland - 115,400/day | 84.7 km
San Diego - 107,000/day | 82.2 km
Edmonton - 74,440/day | 20.5 km
Saint Louis - 61,573/day | 74 km
Denver - 62,900/day | 56 km
Houston - 45,000/day | 12.1 km
Phoenix - 43,509/day | 32 km
Buffalo - 23,200/day | 10.3 km
Seattle/Tacoma - 20,200 | 27.8 km
Charlotte - 20,000/day | 15.45 km
Cleveland - 18,600/day | 31 km
What's really peculiar is how high the ridership Edmonton's system is for such a dinky little system. I mean look at the ones in the same area for ridership...they have 74, 56, 82.2 km of track and Edmonton's done it in 20km. Just 40 km/20km more, which is barely anything would boost Edmonton to 148K/day on it's way to the cities with 200k a day. I had no idea our numbers were so high for such a small system compared to other places (I knew they were high, but). It's very true then when I've heard some people say Edmonton could still be a great transit marvel like Calgary, Vancouver, Portland, San Diego, etc.
Another thing that's peculiar is why is Cleveland's system so unused? I mean Buffalo isn't that far and it does the same ridership in a third of the track. I've seen that the Cleveland goes to the Airport, Tower City/Downtown, Amtrak, and what looks like a ton of neighbourhoods. It seems adding more track here won't help.
|