First world cities that make Dublin's public transport look good

Chivito550 · 17-02-2017 2:32pm #1

Reading up on Columbus, Ohio in the USA. Population over 2 million, yet they have no form of rail at all. No Metro, no commuter train, no intercity, no trams.

What other cities make our third world public transport look ok in comparison?

Ferrari3600 · 17-02-2017 2:44pm

Auckland. Not only a 'first world'' city but like Dublin, a national capital and one that regularly makes it into those 'most livable cities in the world' lists.

A charming city in a lot of ways but they have made a mess of their public transport.

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Aucklands-public-transport-system-so-bad-and-expensive

L1011 · 17-02-2017 3:14pm

Leeds. Airport up a hill up residential streets. Tram system dropped after £40m spent. Pathetic "ftr" bendybuses decorated to look like trams running on ordinary roads claiming to be a BRT.

I would argue it makes Cork's public transport system look good let alone Dublin!

Sam Russell · 17-02-2017 5:28pm

L1011 wrote: »

Leeds. Airport up a hill up residential streets. Tram system dropped after £40m spent. Pathetic "ftr" bendybuses decorated to look like trams running on ordinary roads claiming to be a BRT.

I would argue it makes Cork's public transport system look good let alone Dublin!

I think they had the tram system up for sale. We should have bought it, lock stock and barrel. We could then bring the rolling stock to Dublin.

ClovenHoof · 17-02-2017 7:31pm

There are not many. Even many of the car dependent US cities are moving towards trams and metros. Dublin really is awful considering it is a European capital.

Zebra3 · 17-02-2017 10:56pm

A while since I was in them but Dallas and Phoenix.

Awful places too.

brick tamland · 17-02-2017 10:59pm

LA.

Drive or taxi/Uber or you're fecked.

NoCrackHaving · 17-02-2017 10:59pm

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

Auckland. Not only a 'first world'' city but like Dublin, a national capital and one that regularly makes it into those 'most livable cities in the world' lists.

A charming city in a lot of ways but they have made a mess of their public transport.

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Aucklands-public-transport-system-so-bad-and-expensive

Auckland isn't a capital city...

gordongekko · 17-02-2017 11:07pm

NoCrackHaving wrote: »

Auckland isn't a capital city...

What's the capital of the north island?

Ferrari3600 · 18-02-2017 12:42am

NoCrackHaving wrote: »

Auckland isn't a capital city...

You're correct. But it's the largest by population in NZ by a huge margin so your point is rather pedantic.

hytrogen · 18-02-2017 8:49am

Abu Dhabi, where everyone drives, you get discounts on your speeding fines if you pay early, no-one indicates as it's seen as a sign of inferiority, kind of like the quays most days and taxi drivers here.. And their "buses" someone definitely got the magic crayons out on the Hookah

markpb · 18-02-2017 10:18am

brick tamland wrote:

LA. Drive or taxi/Uber or you're fecked.

Have you been in LA recently?

jacksie66 · 18-02-2017 10:21am

This post has been deleted.

Chivito550 · 18-02-2017 10:42am

Not a first world country like we know it, but it managed to host the Olympics so it warrants mention. The public transport in Rio de Janeiro is beyond a joke. The metro is good if you live near it, but bugger all use to most. In order to connect to Line 4 you have to get off at the last stop of line 1, change platforms (long walk) and then the Line 4 begins its journey from there. Would have made more sense to have had it as an extension. In addition Line 4 only took you 2/3rds of the distance to the Olympic Park so you needed a BRT for 20 mins after that. Mental. In total there are 2 lines (1 and 2) which share a lot of the same route and now the new line 4 (there is no line 3!).

Then there's the SuperVia train which has no integrated ticketing with the metro. Unless you had the Olympic pass, you'd have to queue up in a massive line to buy another ticket. The trains themselves are misery. Absolutely cramped going out to the far flung stadium that hosted the athletics, yet lads in wifebeaters stenching of BO would still squeeze through trying to sell an assortment of sweets, crisps and soft drinks. They did store ice cold beer in their back packs so it wasn't all bad. Those trains were surprisingly infrequent given they were serving the track and field events.

The staff are utterly clueless. One guy tells you one thing, the next tells you the opposite. One lad said to me "That's Brazil for you, roll with it", or something to that extent.

Every half decent transport (metro, trains, BRT) are so disjointed that it would take spectators a good 90 minutes to get from one cluster of venues to another. I realised after a few days that by having a media pass I had access to a phenomenal media bus service which had so many routes, with frequent departures and which took you between every venue imaginable, in about one third of the time. But until I realised this, the first few days were pretty miserable getting around. Anybody who was there purely as a spectator and who wasn't accredited would have found it very different to get to multiple venues in one day.

And then there's the layout of the city. Stunning mountains and forests everywhere. A tourists' dream, but a nightmare for public transport as they block the obvious routes, and create enormous bottlenecks. For most people buses are the only option and they crawl along with the most ridiculous car traffic you will ever see.

I got a taxi one day to the bus station, and for the first 30 minutes of the journey, I'd have been quicker walking, even with a suitcase. Imagine doing that every day.

A local girl who lived out a bit further than Olympic Park, who worked in the city, said to me she gets up at 5:30 every morning for a job that starts at 9am!

Don't get me wrong, it's a great city and the Olympics were great, but in terms of public transport you'll struggle to find a worse city that has hosted it. Tokyo will be 500 years ahead.

monument · 18-02-2017 11:22am

brick tamland wrote: »

LA.

Drive or taxi/Uber or you're fecked.

You can very much so get around LA without a car: http://sunmoontechdreams.blogspot.ie/2013/11/welcome-to-grid-la-bus-system.html?m=1

Their growing metro rail system puts our planning and funding systems to shame.

Metro Rail
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Metro_Rail

Metrolink
http://www.metrolinktrains.com/routes/

n97 mini · 18-02-2017 9:14pm

brick tamland wrote: »

LA.

Drive or taxi/Uber or you're fecked.

20 million people spread over a large area. Public transport works of you plan very carefully. But on the upside uber is dirt cheap, far cheaper than a taxi here.

n97 mini · 18-02-2017 9:18pm

monument wrote: »

You can very much so get around LA without a car: http://sunmoontechdreams.blogspot.ie/2013/11/welcome-to-grid-la-bus-system.html?m=1

Their growing metro rail system puts our planning and funding systems to shame.

Metro Rail
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Metro_Rail

Metrolink
http://www.metrolinktrains.com/routes/

Lot of investment in public transport in the US in the last number of years, to the point where it's surprisingly good in a lot of cities. My favourite was Portland. Trams, streetcars and buses. $2.50 single journey or $5 for a day ticket covering all modes.

mansize · 18-02-2017 9:22pm

Sanfrancisco

ClovenHoof · 18-02-2017 10:46pm

brick tamland wrote: »

LA.

Drive or taxi/Uber or you're fecked.

LA is developing a super system in recent years.

ClovenHoof · 18-02-2017 10:47pm

mansize wrote: »

Sanfrancisco

BART? Trams....Commuter Rail?

ClovenHoof · 18-02-2017 10:48pm

n97 mini wrote: »

Lot of investment in public transport in the US in the last number of years, to the point where it's surprisingly good in a lot of cities. My favourite was Portland. Trams, streetcars and buses. $2.50 single journey or $5 for a day ticket covering all modes.

Atlanta too. Complex metro and bus network.

18-02-2017 10:54pm

I think people are comparing the centres of other cities with all of Dublin. I find the transport is pretty OK here in considering the small population over the wide area.

I have noticed Irish people have the attitude to find a way to put down everything about their country. Hello, it is not so bad, pretty good really

prinzeugen · 18-02-2017 11:02pm

L1011 wrote: »

Leeds. Airport up a hill up residential streets. Tram system dropped after £40m spent. Pathetic "ftr" bendybuses decorated to look like trams running on ordinary roads claiming to be a BRT.

I would argue it makes Cork's public transport system look good let alone Dublin!

If fairness the WYPTE has spent millions on rail over the years in the Leeds area. They paid for stations to be reopened, part funded electrification and bought new trains. I have never used the bus etc however.

monument · 19-02-2017 3:00pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I think people are comparing the centres of other cities with all of Dublin. I find the transport is pretty OK here in considering the small population over the wide area.

I have noticed Irish people have the attitude to find a way to put down everything about their country. Hello, it is not so bad, pretty good really

We don't have that small of a population over a wide area -- it's a myth that Dublin is low density.

The continuous urban area of Amsterdam is slightly lower density than that of Dublin. The continuous urban area is the area which mainly hosts tram lines and metro lines -- yet even with a lower density Amsterdam hosts far more tram routes and a metro network with four lines (soon to be five lines).

mansize · 19-02-2017 3:08pm

ClovenHoof wrote: »

BART? Trams....Commuter Rail?

Bart and trains were very limited. Bus Service awful filthy dreadful

ClovenHoof · 19-02-2017 7:20pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think people are comparing the centres of other cities with all of Dublin. I find the transport is pretty OK here in considering the small population over the a wide area

Myth.

Elemonator · 19-02-2017 7:31pm

Public transport is actually a largely alien concept in the US broadly speaking. Not many railways and few good high speed ones like the Acela Express.

Having been around the world, I can actually say Ireland is quite okay but expensive. We are comparing ourselves to countries which were empires once and have a head start on us. For a country that was largely ignored when it was part of the UK and only independent for not even 100 years, I would say we are decent and catching up.

I dare you to find substantial railways in Turkey.

Chivito550 · 19-02-2017 7:48pm

Elemonator wrote: »

Public transport is actually a largely alien concept in the US broadly speaking. Not many railways and few good high speed ones like the Acela Express.

Having been around the world, I can actually say Ireland is quite okay but expensive. We are comparing ourselves to countries which were empires once and have a head start on us. For a country that was largely ignored when it was part of the UK and only independent for not even 100 years, I would say we are decent and catching up.

I dare you to find substantial railways in Turkey.

How are we catching up? Other cities our size are constantly upgrading and expanding their metro/rail/light rail networks. This means we are falling further behind.

monument · 19-02-2017 9:13pm

Elemonator wrote: »

Public transport is actually a largely alien concept in the US broadly speaking. Not many railways and few good high speed ones like the Acela Express.

Broadly speaking, no, it's not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_light_rail_systems_by_ridership
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_rapid_transit_systems_by_ridership

Elemonator wrote: »

Having been around the world, I can actually say Ireland is quite okay but expensive. We are comparing ourselves to countries which were empires once and have a head start on us. For a country that was largely ignored when it was part of the UK and only independent for not even 100 years, I would say we are decent and catching up.

The Amsterdam Metro only started operations in 1977, the LA Metro system only started in 1990, and the Copenhagen Metro only started in 2002... we keep choosing to fund large road projects over rail again and again and again.

And rail in Ireland was hardly "largely ignored" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rail_transport_in_Ireland#/media/File:Map_Rail_Ireland_Viceregal_Commission_1906.jpg

Elemonator wrote: »

I dare you to find substantial railways in Turkey.

IS that some kind of a joke?

Istanbul's metro and tram network: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Hafif_Metro_Istanbul_Map.png

The Istanbul Metro (Turkish: İstanbul Metrosu) is a rapid transit railway network that serves the city of Istanbul, Turkey. It is operated by Metro Istanbul (the new name of Istanbul Ulaşım A.Ş.), a public enterprise, controlled by the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. The oldest section is the metro is M1 line, which opened in 1989; it now includes 73 stations in service,[1] with 71 more under construction.
The system currently consists of five lines named M1, M2, M3, M4, and the M6 Mini-Metro. More lines are under construction or planned: M5 (Üsküdar-Çekmeköy/Sancaktepe), M8 (Bostancı-Dudullu) will be on the Asian side, while M7 (Kabataş-Mahmutbey), M9 (Ataköy-İkitelli) will be on the European side.[3]
Istanbul Metro well connected with Marmaray and F1 Funicular underground systems and T1 modern tram ground system.

LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_Metro

Yüksek Hızlı Tren or YHT (English: High-Speed Train) is the high-speed rail service of the Turkish State Railways, currently operating on two lines: Ankara to Istanbul via Eskişehir and Ankara to Konya via Polatlı. YHT is the only high-speed rail service in Turkey, with trains operating at speeds of up to 250 km/h (HT65000)[3] or 300 km/h (HT80000).[2]

LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%C3%BCksek_H%C4%B1zl%C4%B1_Tren

Plus:
İzmir Metro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%B0zmir_Metro
İzmir commuter rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%B0ZBAN
etc

ClovenHoof · 19-02-2017 11:55pm

Elemonator wrote: »

Public transport is actually a largely alien concept in the US broadly speaking. Not many railways and few good high speed ones like the Acela Express.

Having been around the world, I can actually say Ireland is quite okay but expensive. We are comparing ourselves to countries which were empires once and have a head start on us. For a country that was largely ignored when it was part of the UK and only independent for not even 100 years, I would say we are decent and catching up.

I dare you to find substantial railways in Turkey.

Jesus wept....

it's like Sean Barrett and Colm McCarthy love children all arrived on this thread at once.

plodder · 20-02-2017 11:01am

mansize wrote: »

Bart and trains were very limited. Bus Service awful filthy dreadful

Never used the bus there, but the BART network is quite extensive now, and still expanding. Both major airports in the region are connected to it.

What's impressive about that region though is how the road system is able to cope with a population of over 7 million, and it gets everyone to work and home again every day, albeit with fairly bad congestion at times. What I like about the US is their pragmatism. Every measure whether public or private has to be justified. They wouldn't tolerate the under utilised bus lanes on Dublin's streets for example.

We have the worst of all worlds. A preference for public transport among planners, but unwillingness to invest in it, by politicians.

First world cities that make Dublin's public transport look good

Comments