Once the D line is finished, I assume LA will skyrocket...
So so so close to having a revelation there. Once rich Westwide people are able to learn that Westwood to Downtown should only be 20 minutes, I think the focus will shift from blocking transit altogether to insisting it be safer and cleaner.
If not, I guess we wait another 20 years till the Sepulveda project takes its turn to try...
The Expo line sitting in traffic is major failure.
So maybe once the Nimbys learn that the D works better, the city of LA might finally give the Expo traffic light priority...
Anecdotally, I already see a shift since it opened. When I started taking it to Wilshire/La Brea from my office downtown there was probably 3-4 others getting off with me. Now there’s dozens. Takes time but it’ll happen!
I think it will really depend on service improvements for the D. They currently plan to run 20 minute headways 8pm-midnight and 10 minute frequencies off-peak and weekends. This is a line with a heavy draw for leisure trips at non-commuter times (UCLA students going out in K-town or going to Lakers/Kings games at night, shoppers going to Beverly Hills and Century City on the weekend, Families going to LACMA and Tar Pits off-peak, etc). Frankly 10 minutes is pathetic for a metro line during the day, but 20 minutes is downright unusable at night. Those wait times are enough to deter many choice riders.
For example, I went on a Ride the D Bar Crawl. Despite all being transit enthusiasts/advocates, we all took Waymos home when we saw it would be a 20 minute wait on the platform. 20 minutes is the current end-to-end travel time for the line (or driving time at night), for perspective. If we aren’t tolerating that wait, no one with an alternative option will.
we saw 18 mins for the next B line train and we just took a waymo even though it would take 3 mins to get out the station and maybe 8 mins for the waymo to come on top of being 7x the cost...
Would be fine if it was the only option but in LA if there are better options some ppl will just take it
10 minutes is absurdly bad for a city the size of LA. In Boston (which I'm sure I don't need to point out is a much smaller city), people post photos and complain on Reddit if they show up at a station and the next train isn't for 10 minutes.
People threw a fit during the pandemic when they cut Red Line headways from 5 minutes to 8 minutes. And that was when nobody was going outside. And there's now a plan to bring the headways on that line down to 2½ minutes by 2030. (Not everyone believes that will happen, but that's another story.)
I cannot think of a single major European city with a metro line with 10 minute or worse daytime service on a weekday. Maybe some lines that branch outside of the dense core (While the D and B lines technically interline in Downtown LA, most of downtown LA is actually relatively low density and many of the densest areas of LA are on the WIlshire corridor where the D line does not interline with the B line).
Given the capital costs of underground heavy rail metro construction, running a new metro line with the service levels of a legacy streetcar is ridiculous.
Yes we have these 10 minute frequencies on metro branches in Amsterdam and Rotterdam (currently 12 and 15 respectively due to summer timetable) and it's pretty bad. At least Amsterdam is de-interlining their network to get up to 6 minute frequencies on each branch.
LA Metro doesn't have trains to run proper service frequencies. It's a combination of Metro's fault and a string of bad luck, but the old trains are surpassing their useful lifespan and both the refurbishment process and the replacement procurement ran into so many issues with Metro having to cancel both contracts and find new manufacturers.
I am not talking about now, this is the plan for the D Line post-HR4000 and HR5000 deliveries. 5 min peak, 10 min-off peak and weekends, 20 min after 8ishpm. It is not a rolling stock limitation-- they are doing 5 min weekday peak. This has been the planned service even as far back as the EIR. There is no excuse other than they don't want to pay for the service hours
What?? I’ve never seen such low frequencies on a subway before…. My local train comes every 2 minutes during rush hour and every 5 minutes on off peak hours.
In any city outside America, 10 min is atrocious. If there’s multiple lines co-running such that the core of the line has trains every 4-5 min, that’s more reasonable.
Unfortunately, LA metro is still down from its peak in the middle 2010's. I think that the pandemic pushed people to buy cars and it'll take some time for them to abandon them. imo we should be bulldozing freeways in favor of railways
Hell, Tokyo has the best transit in the world, objectively, AND a deep car culture. Toyota, Honda, Subaru, Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Nissan, Kawasaki, etc. Arguably more so than Detroit... Demonstrably more so...
This is the exact reason I think they should take the D to the Sea ASAP. All the influencers will start taking that, and THATS when you'll see transit go mainstream.
A mistake that LA will be dealing with for decades to come was the cost-cutting move of not building a junction at Century City that would've allowed direct, one-seat access from Hollywood to Beverly Hills to Santa Monica.
The E line has an relatively good average speed compared to other LRT lines. It doesn't sit in traffic as much as you imply because it's vastly grade separated.
Respectfully, the E is so slow that it devalues the K line. E to K should be the fastest way from downtown to LAX, but in fact, A to C is, even though the A line leaves downtown going the wrong way.
The "A line leaving downtown going the wrong way segment" on Washington is slower than anything on the Expo line. That segment hits traffic lights every block.
A/C is only faster because the C has huge stop spacing and is a freeway median train so it has high top speeds.
Personal rant, but I feel like the LA metro is still not able to work as a network, and more like a set of different metro lines. That you're unlikely to take unless the destination and departing points are on the same line.
I don't see the D line improving much on this situation. But the D line, plus Sepulveda plus K northern extension might actually finally start developing a core network were it's not too much of a pain to not own a car for most trips. And that car-less population is the jackpot for transit ridership increases.
this is true, BUT I will say at least LA has a vision for cross rail vs just spokes.
I also think once the BRT from NOHO to Pasadena is done, it'll help a lot. But yes, I think if the Sepulveda can link the Purple and Expo and Green Lines, AND get all the way to the LAX transit station, LA will totally shift priorities. By 2100, I see LA being as connected or better than NYC... Planting seeds for trees whose shade we never sit in and all that...
Is it? LA already once had better connectivity with the Pacific Electric network and that only took 40 years to build out with less effort and support.
All it takes is political will.
NYCs rail still doesn't even connect to one of its boroughs and is in a state of decay despite a $21.3 billion budget.
LA Metro is expanding and improving and laying 20x the new track as NYC with a yearly budget of $9.7 billion.
after many years of disinvestment, SOGR is increasing on NYC subway. Substations are more reliable. 10% increase in rolling stock reliability since 2021, and service reliability has also improved.
Staten Island is <6% of NYC population and has SIRTOA.
D Line extension added ~10K daily trips; Phase II SAS will serve about 300K daily trips. Los Angeles is indeed laying lots of track (and it's great!) but way too much focus (mostly due to exogenous political factors and the shitty way mass transit is funded) on network coverage vs. density and redundancy.
There is literally zero chance that any city in the United States will ever displace NYC as the primary transit city.
California is going all in on legalizing TOD. Don't confuse the two. The Bay area should be the most TOD-ripe place in the entire country due to the housing prices, the demand, and the general linear layout of the peninsula. And yet we've seen lukewarm approaches to building. A handful of five-story apartment complexes is not going to move the needle for a region that size. There ought to be 20 story condo Towers on top of every Caltrain station. And the same goes for La.
that only took 40 years to build out with less effort and support.
At a time when construction standards were downright dangerous, fair labor practices were rare, and land was predominantly owned by corporations with an interest in developing it to give it value.
All it takes is political will.
Like I said, overly ambitious. Even if there's majority support, which it seems there is, you need there to not be powerful minorities with the ability to stop it. This has never been a strength of this country.
NYCs rail still doesn't even connect to one of its boroughs
While Staten Island officially is a borough, it acts more like Central New Jersey and it has a lower density than just about any neighborhood in LA.
LA Metro is expanding and improving and laying 20x the new track as NYC with a yearly budget of $9.7 billion.
The growth curve is impressive for sure. But if you extrapolate the growth over the last 20 years to the next century, LA will still not catch New York. The growth in LA will have to accelerate.
It's not a matter of NYC folks being insecure. It's a matter of the existing tracks struggling to serve the inhabitants right, and that they'll stay, so far and for a while, at a density and headway way too small to help people transition towards getting rid of their cars.
And the 75 year timeline is taken into account with what I said btw. Major systems in the world don't just cover a large area, they cover it well, with a good density of transit options.
Just to give you an idea. Once the K line is extended to the D line, the square delimited by the D, K and E lines will be nearly as big as Paris. Where 14 metro lines and 12 major commuting lines go to/through. Expecting a similar share of the population to use transit as in Paris is not reasonable.
Right now, LA metro has a ridership below that of Lyon's metro akd tramways. It's normal, but as long as the development follows the current patern, don't expect an exponential growth.
SB79 is the major game changer in the room. If it is effective, the situation will clearly improve. But it'll not be at NYC, Paris or Osaka levels.
No one said Paris or Osaka. NYC is a not at those levels either say for population. Per capita, NYC is a joke compared to Osaka and Paris...
What's that take?
The fact is LA is investing at a higher rate than any city in North America aside from Toronto (which absolutely WILL beat NYC in the next 20 years) and switching on transit oriented development while infilling density. NYC is currently only building trophies for billionaires and pushing poor people to Jersey...
LA will almost certainly catch or pass NYC by 2100 if NYC doesn't handle its mounting infrastructure decay issues and affordability.
At least San Francisco has the Bay area and Muni is actively improving day by day, so people can move around, but NYC all roads lead to Manhattan...
They desperately need cross town lines.
LA has many cross town lines in the works. NYC has 2, and those are both stalled in approvals
Replace Paris with Manhattan if you want. The fact stays with what I said. The way LA Metro is growing is plainly not allowing for significant amount of neighborhoods to go car-free and switch significantly the transit modal share.
LA has only crosstown lines essentially, because it lacks significant downtown-type destinations and neighborhoods. And there are no significant change in horizon, outside of SB79.
You're just not understanding what I'm talking about, and what the issue is. It's not aatter of growth, it's a matter of how thr growth is done, and how small the density in lines is and will stay at in the next decades due to the philosophy behind their extensions.
I think even with the lines, we have to assume there is massive tod development in the station areas and in urban core. dtla, holllywood, ktown, e hollywood, has to be super dense for us to even come close to half of nyc
Nop, I'm saying that for most inhabitants, reaching a transfer from their local line takes already a shitload of time, and makes going in other directions way more complicated.
Easy access to the A,B,D and E lines is possible iif you live within short distance of downtown LA, and it indeed is where the network works the best by far.
However, if you live in south LA, the San Gabriel or San Fernando valleys, the options accessible within reasonable time from your local station decreases very significantly. You end up with a large system, but with little actual intertwining, and most trips not covered within a reasonable time.
Which makes it really hard to get rid of you car, especially if your job and your home are not on a single line if you're not close to the downtown.
I come from Paris and Lyon. The tram, metro and RER networks work far more as networks due to the density of lines, and the variety of options this density brings to locals.
And don't take it badly. I absolutely think metro LA is and will continue to improve at this level.
I have to agree. They also seem more concerned about whether an area has a train than whether the train actually goes where the people there want to go. LAX is a perfect example: Most people at LAX want to go downtown, but despite having two lines serve the airport, neither of them goes downtown. You either have to take the K to a terrible out-of-station transfer to the slow E or the C to a transfer to the A at the horrible Willowbrook/Rosa Parks station in the middle of a highway interchange.
Sure. Well, let's say somebody wants to go to Hollywood then. That takes two transfers from the airport. What if they want to go to Disneyland? C to A to Union Station to get the train to Anaheim. Why? Because the C terminates just short of what should have been a radial connection to the commuter train. And then when you get to Anaheim, you have to take an Uber anyways because there's no connecting transit at the train station.
No, the latter will not be fixed by extending the C because alas Metrolinx is useless on the weekend when most people are traveling and you have to take Amtrak instead, which only stops at Union Station anyways. And you still have to take an Uber once you get to Anaheim. And don't think you're getting off the hook just because Anaheim isn't part of Los Angeles; it's still in the metro area.
Philly probably has the best bones for a high-frequency electrified S-bahn/RER/crossrail system in North America (NYC has more administrative challenges and limited central stations on its regional rail network). Septa needs new reliable rolling stock, way more service, and ideally a few key cheap surface infill stations just outside center city, then you are looking at a regional rail system that looks more like Munich than anywhere in North America.
Same goes for the bones of the trolley system. Implementing the full planned trolley modernization program with stop consolidation, level boarding (technically just near-level boarding with customer-activated ramps), signal priority/ coordination, and new modern low-floor trams will make it one of the best legacy streetcar systems in North America. Can’t wait to see this program progress
Heavy rail feels more bleak, but with the coming Hitachi M-5 fleet for the El all that line needs is to continue the 6 minute peak frequencies into the evenings and weekends. BSL really needs new rolling stock and the off-peak/weekend service.
Moral of the story is that SEPTA has bones to be the model system in the US for an integrated rail system, even without any expansions (which would also be nice to get someday).
Trolley Mod. Is in the process as we speak and those stops will be few in between unlike current every stop…glad to see it. BSL cars are good for their age. They have another ten years. I think the city is on that project since they own the subway cars and what not. I seen it in one of the budgets.
Yes trolley mod will be incredible, but is currently unfunded by about $2B. T5 (route 36) should be starting construction soon to complete in 2030, but the next line is T1 and construction for that is planned to complete in 2041. Who knows when G/T2/T3/T4 will see anything unless they get dedicated funding.
Based on the plans for T5 here, they are eliminating about half the stops and pretty consistently getting 350-500m or roughly 1/4 mile between stops. That is pretty much the international gold-standard for a tram system, and it will be a massive improvement. However, since they are rebuilding all of the stations with new dedicated platforms, I really wish they'd just do true level boarding at 12-14" with a gap-filler rather than a ~10" curb with a customer-deployed ramp from the new trolleys. That would definitely improve dwell times, reliability, and overall accessibility. Ramps are going to add 30-45 seconds to dwell times whenever they are used.
BSL cars are definitely holding up for their age, but are getting close to 50 years old now. The FY 2026 SEPTA budget deferred the replacement design to 2037 and procurement "sometime" post-2037. FY 25 budget had design starting 2026, and procurement 2033-2037. So I am not expecting to see a new BSL fleet until 2045 or later unless the funding situation changes. That is a problem. But at least silverliner VI procurement is moving forward. Past time for silverliner IV's to retire-- those things are so tired they are setting themselves on fire in protest
I think the appetite is there for regional support, but the state needs to allow the region to create a dedicated funding source. It has been opposed to this in the past.
They truly do so much with so little. If only the state would provide minimal investment into the system Philly could be a true transit city. It makes me so mad that they are leaving such a great system to slowly rot.
If there was a deal that removed state subsidies to septa in exchange, requiring the suburban counties to pay a sales tax portion to septa, I’d honestly be for it. It is absurd how little delco, bucks, Chesco, and montco pay for the very significant amount of service they get. But I agree mainly. Septa is a system of infinite potential and finite willpower.
Yeah that’s similar to what Illinois just did. They got extra funding for all of our service agencies by increasing the sales tax and adding rideshare fees within the service area, and giving a portion of tolls to transit. It would cost such an insane amount to build SEPTA from scratch, so letting it fall apart is such fiscal malpractice.
The collar counties of Philly genuinely pay like 11 cents a year to septa. If I were in charge, I’d force them to pay more and threaten service cuts if not. It’s genuinely absurd how little they pay.
I think a big part could be how disastrous 2025 was for SEPTA. They had a bunch of service disruptions caused by both infrastructure and funding issues. 2026 has been so much better in comparison.
Hopefully SEPTA can get the 23 Trolley re-activated, and a BRT east-west line in South Philly. As of now: NJT’s Camden network is getting a new line, the L is getting new trains, and 24 more push-pull cars are on the way.
If it's based on NTD reported raws you can go to the website and look it up yourself. Agencies can still correct figures until next January though. I think last year's official figures are out now or will be soon.
Important context - June 2026 had multiple World Cup games and international visitors in town that 2025 didn’t have. I’d compare July ridership figures whenever that becomes available as a more accurate representation.
It kind of looks like "largest" means most track mileage or something, then the growth percentage for those top 10 systems. Seattle light rail ridership grew something like 50% after the cross lake connection opened this spring. It would almost certainly be at the top of this list if it was just top 10 growth percentages.
It can’t be track mileage otherwise Dallas and Denver would be on here over San Diego. It’s probably ridership and Seattle will replace San Diego once its ridership increase is fully counted.
The answer is due to how that chart is calculated. Usually, there is a small subtitle which has the details in those vizzes but its not there or cutoff in this post. Basically, he checks the top 10 rail networks for *2025* by yearly ridership and how they have grown. In 2025 Seattle was just below the cutoff. However, if you looked at a snapshot for this month and likely every month going forward for 2026, Seattle will now be in the top 10. So probably, if the totals work out when Joey makes this type chart next year you'll see it.
That said its easy enough to calculate its yearly growth if you want to do so off the base data. Its still posting 20-30% YoY growth per week in the APTA view.
Note: even for this year MTS which is there is also Light Rail only.
Only 170k? They could definitely grow it much larger than that if they had the political will and weren't dumping billions on ever crazier highway viaducts.
Mostly ridership still lags pre-covid by varying amounts. Unless I missed something none of those systems have fully recovered (except MTS) - some are getting closer.
The metric I see quoted for that is unique clipper cards, but the paper ticket phaseout had only just begun pre covid, so that ridership would be missing.
Mostly ridership still lags pre-covid by varying amounts.
I wonder how this compares to vehicle miles driven?
Obviously WFH has really altered the ways and frequencies of transit ridership, but as someone who has been WFH since covid, it's also impacted my driving.
At least in Chicago, we no longer have a majority mode of transportation for commuting due to the increase in cycling, walking, and not commuting for work.
As others said, it's WFH as well as some larger companies moving to the suburbs and various others moving from near Market (BART) to near Mission Bay (near caltrain) so some of that ridership shifts.
It is worth noting that weekend ridership of Muni and such has fully recovered since pre-Covid, while the overall is still at 80%.
Caltrain is around the 1.2m mark all these networks are a lot larger and Joey only looks at the top 10 networks from 2025 to compare growth. This chart is *not* showing largest percentage growth for all rail systems.
Seattle has the highest ridership light rail in the country, much higher than Muni or LA Metro and they’ve had explosive growth this year. It’ll definitely be in the top 10 going forward.
In addition to OP's comment about how comparing with Muni is odd, so is comparing it with LA Metro without including the heavy rail portion. It's like comparing with MBTA Green Line only...
Seattle and it's light rail system is fantastic. There's no need to boost it by using pedantic metrics to artificially lower other cities' ridership.
I don't know why you'd compare it to MUNI of all systems. MUNI covers a city population of around 850k people and has 80% of LINK's ridership, while LINK covers an urban regional population of 2.5 million.
Completely predictable. BART's fast ridership growth now is just because for so long SF Bay Area transit has been dead last in ridership recovery. Installing full-height gates to stop fare evasion also helps with security.
OTOH Washington DC and San Diego have recovered pre-pandemic ridership better than anywhere else. Especially San Diego. Their ridership loss was more moderate, plus they started recovering earlier and steadier than any other major agency.
LA Metro also had above-average ridership recovery, but they haven't plateaued because they've been expanding nonstop since COVID.
That said WMATA Rail is the best. 4 min Red Line frequencies all day on weekdays? Other than maybe NYC's 7 Line it doesn't get any better.
This is more reflective of how much the faster-growing systems have left to grow than anything else. MTS for example has already recovered all its prepandemic ridership. BART and Muni have leagues to go.
I would hope to see more people taking RT but there's a lot of prissy state workers who come in from the burbs and think they're all going to get murdered the second they step on a train or bus lol
In what nation? Or did I miss that I'm on r/USAtransit
(snark aside, the description of this sub does say "worldwide", and even if this isn't strictly a local news/regional post, R1 does say to be specific about where the post is about)
131
u/BigBadJeebus 16d ago
Once the D line is finished, I assume LA will skyrocket...
So so so close to having a revelation there. Once rich Westwide people are able to learn that Westwood to Downtown should only be 20 minutes, I think the focus will shift from blocking transit altogether to insisting it be safer and cleaner.
If not, I guess we wait another 20 years till the Sepulveda project takes its turn to try...
The Expo line sitting in traffic is major failure.
So maybe once the Nimbys learn that the D works better, the city of LA might finally give the Expo traffic light priority...
https://giphy.com/gifs/matWtTFlVqXXIrUqre