Which cities' transport systems do you admire?

Aard · 13-10-2009 12:51pm #1

I was in Copenhagen last week, and what struck me most was their transport system.

Firstly, lots of people cycle - there are wide, segregated cycle lanes, with cycle traffic-lights, and ample parking spaces. There are rules for cycling that everyone adheres to, like certain arm-gestures, and no left-hand turns (you have to cross at the pedestrian crossing, then go straight).

Secondly, the S-tog - six branches that extend far into the suburbs, and converge in the city centre (three going north-west from there, three going south-west). This is the "backbone" of Copenhagen's public transport system. The trains are frequent, regular, and spacious. It's possible to bring your bike onto them too.

Finally, the zone-system. The entire Greater Copenhagen Area is divided into a grid of 95 zones. Your fare is calculated on the distance between your start zone and your end zone - so even if you have to go via the city centre, you don't have to pay for two journeys. It's the same price whether you travel by bus, S-tog, or metro. Though complicated, I think this is an elegant solution that doesn't penalise people for living far from the city centre.

So which cities' transport systems do you admire?

triple-M · 13-10-2009 12:56pm

Amsterdam for their cycle friendly facilities their brilliant tram and decent metro system which is currently being extended further,and finally most modes of transport in the netherlands use an integrated ticketing system called strippenkaarten which is convenient

hardCopy · 13-10-2009 1:31pm

I love chicago.

Integrated ticketing across bus and train.
Frequent service.
Bikes allowed on trains and buses.

jasonbourme.cs · 13-10-2009 1:39pm

this is going to sound cliche but anywhere i've been in Germany has pretty good transport , Frankfurt , Stuttgart , Munich . this was the year before last though so not sure what its like at the moment .

i like mainland Europe in general if your in any of the big cities they have public transport networks that put Irish Rail to shame in terms of performance and even more so in terms of value for money

Zebra3 · 13-10-2009 2:31pm

Aard wrote: »

I was in Copenhagen last week, and what struck me most was their transport system.

Firstly, lots of people cycle - there are wide, segregated cycle lanes, with cycle traffic-lights, and ample parking spaces. There are rules for cycling that everyone adheres to, like certain arm-gestures, and no left-hand turns (you have to cross at the pedestrian crossing, then go straight).

Secondly, the S-tog - six branches that extend far into the suburbs, and converge in the city centre (three going north-west from there, three going south-west). This is the "backbone" of Copenhagen's public transport system. The trains are frequent, regular, and spacious. It's possible to bring your bike onto them too.

Finally, the zone-system. The entire Greater Copenhagen Area is divided into a grid of 95 zones. Your fare is calculated on the distance between your start zone and your end zone - so even if you have to go via the city centre, you don't have to pay for two journeys. It's the same price whether you travel by bus, S-tog, or metro. Though complicated, I think this is an elegant solution that doesn't penalise people for living far from the city centre.

It's not just their transport system that you have to admire....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen#Finger_Plan

One criticism I do have of their transport system though is the cost. Even though Dk has a high cost of living, many locals are very bitter about the price they pay for it....

Aard · 13-10-2009 2:36pm

Yes the Finger Plan is clever.

I suppose the high cost of public transport encourages people to cycle more...

Colm R · 13-10-2009 2:38pm

Its easy to think of big cities with good systems, however it gets a bit more interesting, when we see how smaller cities work.

Edinburgh to me seems to have a simple to use and very good value for money.

Marathon Man · 13-10-2009 3:09pm

For me it has to be Karlsruhe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadtbahn_Karlsruhe

Oliver1985 · 13-10-2009 3:14pm

Was in Paris last year loved the metro so easy to get around town!!!

trad · 13-10-2009 3:20pm

A lot of European cities were devestated during the second world war and when they were evenutally rebuilt they were able to put better infrasructure in place, no complaints about knocking down historic buildings etc. So it is little wonder they had a chance to get it right.

Cuddlesworth · 13-10-2009 3:23pm

Berlin. For a city its size its amazing how easy it is to get around.

ednwireland · 13-10-2009 4:11pm

munich, singapore, Kuala lumpar, mexico city - metro systems, and nottingham where i was astudent which had amazing bike lanes (and bike activated traffic lights)

MOH · 13-10-2009 4:13pm

Amsterdam and the Hague for trams, bike facilities, integrated ticketing.

Found London fairly efficient any time I've been over, but never lived there.

Stockholm - 24 hour underground system, longest I waited was 10 minutes at 3am (usually a max of 2 mins any other time), plus reasonable prices and sensible ticket options and promotions. Even on the airport express, which wasn't cheap, they were offering 2-for-1 deals.

Found the Budapest Metro good too, especially considering it's the 2nd oldest in the world.

1huge1 · 13-10-2009 10:38pm

While it might of been at times expensive I do believe the Underground in London is one of the best modes of transport on the planet.

Sponge Bob · 13-10-2009 10:44pm

I admire Dublin .

The fact that Dublin actually considers itself a world class city and peddles itself as such with the crudfest of a telecommunications and transport infrastructure it actually has demonstrates a certain je ne sais quoi at all at all?

benj · 13-10-2009 10:48pm

Tokyo

G_R · 13-10-2009 11:05pm

I think paris is very good, when i was there i found it very easy to use and get around

Metrobest · 13-10-2009 11:09pm

MOH wrote: »

Amsterdam and the Hague for trams, bike facilities, integrated ticketing.

To be fair, there are also bad sides to public transport in Amsterdam. The trams are notoriously slow and unreliable - don´t count on making that 9am meeting. The luas puts Amsterdam to shame when it comes to trams.

The metro system is limited and not really useful for most people. Trains going to the poorer suburbs are dirty and unwelcoming.

The buses do work well, but there is currently confusion about the fares as Amsterdam is moving over to the OV chipcard (like Oyster) for all modes. A single journey costs 2.60 regardless of length. And nobody can explain why they are spending all this money when the system is already integrated and works perfectly well with the national strip cards.

That said, the bike facilities are unbeatable. But people often use the bike because it´s faster than using public transport. Which is why the trams tend to get very crowded on rainy mornings.

Zoney · 13-10-2009 11:21pm

I haven't a vast experience, but I did find Munich's transport wonderful. Haven't even used the trams or buses there yet though, just underground and S-bahn! I look forward to visiting there again - I'm not a fan of the "emigrate because Ireland is so bad" club, but I do find it a breath of fresh air to get away.

trad wrote: »

A lot of European cities were devestated during the second world war and when they were evenutally rebuilt they were able to put better infrasructure in place, no complaints about knocking down historic buildings etc. So it is little wonder they had a chance to get it right.

We did level large amounts of our own cities when they started falling apart (or became inconvenient). Also plenty of our suburbs are post-war. So sorry, but that argument doesn't cut it for me. I know it's technically outside the State, but in Belfast they levelled tracts of land (or created it) for the motorways/Westlink and yet public transport remains basic. Similarly we have a Dublin Port Tunnel at great expense and engineering effort yet apart from rail and bus, we still only have two separate single-line tram systems.

It's about will - and the will isn't there for decent public transport. Mainly because many inherently object to the idea of taxation to provide universal services, and also subscribe to individualism and would prefer to sit in traffic filling one seat in a four seat car because it gives them "independence". Even in boom times we barely provided services in many areas, nevermind a thoroughly inadequate public transport system and barely managing to deliver motorways.

patrickmooney · 13-10-2009 11:25pm

I think for connectedness, Berlin has it. Without knowing German, you can connect from u-bann, s-bann and bus etc. The bus stops are marked, announced on-board. Very effecient.

The Tokyo Subway is something else. You can't get lost. Naturally it's all intergrated with a contactless card. Getting off a train, your connection is indicated with three spellings, a colour and a number. All markers indicate how far you've to walk in metres, I couldn't fault it.

patrickmooney · 13-10-2009 11:27pm

But for price, Beijing, just back from there. No matter what distance/time, the subways are 20cent a ride with their contactless card. Buses are 4cent. Their card also works on taxis, which work out at 1euro for 15mins. All connected, all intergrated. Loved it.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater · 13-10-2009 11:42pm

New York City. I Know the MTA has it's detractors but for a city as huge as NYC to provide all it's communities with an all-in-one 24/7 transport system is great, on such a scale. No matter where you are in the 5 boroughs you're never far from a subway station or a bus route and that you can get from anywhere to anywhere else in the city for $2 represents great value. It has some stations that could do with a bit of a cleanup and it also represents a bit of a problem as regards vagrants and people begging in the subways, but overall I reckon it represents mass transit at it's best.

schween · 13-10-2009 11:51pm

There are so many places in Europe with good public transport. London, Paris and Amsterdam have been mentioned and I agree they are quite good.

I'm currently in Madrid and the metro system here is so vast and efficient and the suburban rail network is also excellent, efficient and expansive. Both networks are so well interconnected. And the metro is only €1 a journey...quite cheap.

Capt'n Midnight · 14-10-2009 12:28am

trad wrote: »

A lot of European cities were devestated during the second world war and when they were evenutally rebuilt they were able to put better infrasructure in place, no complaints about knocking down historic buildings etc. So it is little wonder they had a chance to get it right.

Actually one of the big differences is that they didn't rip up tram lines, the way we did

Dublin had a great tram network , especially between the canals. Yes it needed improving, but we had trams to Howth, Lucan, Blessington (and beyond)

1923 - Solid red lines are trams, dashed lines are buses.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dublin_1922-23_Map_Suburbs_MatureTrams_wFaresTimes_Trains_EarlyBus_Canals_pub.png

We also had the first scheduled suburban railway too.

Imagine we kept the tram lines and added to them later on..

Imagine we used the train lines in Dublin port to move the trucks out of the city.

Still you have to admire what we had

carlmango11 · 14-10-2009 1:06am

For me, it's definitely London. I think they've done the best with what they have. It really is such an amazingly well organised system. The tube is so simple to use, the bus routes are well explained, all changes with the whole transport system is updated online and in all their stations. There really is just so much organisation behind it all.

chewed · 14-10-2009 9:34am

Munich! Super U and S Bahn service.

dereko1969 · 14-10-2009 10:01am

carlmango11 wrote: »

For me, it's definitely London. I think they've done the best with what they have. It really is such an amazingly well organised system. The tube is so simple to use, the bus routes are well explained, all changes with the whole transport system is updated online and in all their stations. There really is just so much organisation behind it all.

I think London is pretty good, but if you're a wheelchair user the Tube has an awful lot of stations that aren't easy to get around which I think they should be forced to address when hosting the Paralympics.

I found Berlin great, probably helped that I was staying in Alexanderplatz which had great connectivity, but so easy to get around and good value too.

KCAccidental · 14-10-2009 10:43am

I admire Toronto's system

while woefully underfunded the TTC have managed to make the most of what is a limited system for the cities size. their clever use of bus routes (no winding routes to the city centre everything is routed to the nearest subway/streetcar line) is great and while the subway and streetcars can be crowded they are almost always on time even in the worst weather.

donvito99 · 14-10-2009 1:51pm

Berlin...Berlin...Berlin...Berlin...

MOH · 14-10-2009 3:02pm

Metrobest wrote: »

To be fair, there are also bad sides to public transport in Amsterdam. The trams are notoriously slow and unreliable - don´t count on making that 9am meeting. The luas puts Amsterdam to shame when it comes to trams.
.

Maybe they've changed in the last few years, but I lived and worked there for a year and took the tram to/from work most days, never noticed any major problems. After I while I did get fed up any time they were 2 or 3 minutes late. Found them far more reliable than buses/DARTs here.
Only time I ever used the Luas on a regular basis was to visit a relative in James' Hospital - put me right off it, always found it unreliable.

Nostradamus · 14-10-2009 10:48pm

Claremorris. Perhaps the most comprehensive and intense public transport system for an urban area of its size anywhere on the earth and with major exansion plans for the future.

I am being 100% serious. Tragically so.

Which cities' transport systems do you admire?

Comments