2 ms·

I love LA but what? There are some plans but clearly NY and SF have better rail, to name a few.

• otterley 5y ago
  SF's is pretty bad, too. To be sure, SF's is better than LA's, but LA's is a pretty low bar. BART and CalTrain provide good coverage to the cities directly around the Bay itself, but once you get to the outer suburbs, service falls off dramatically (and none at all north of SF, in Marin and Sonoma counties). And don't get me started on the pathetic state of public transit in the city itself. Muni is disgusting, unsafe-feeling, unreliable, and slow. Even LA's metro buses are better than SF's. Chicago, OTOH, has an outstanding public transit infrastructure.
  • ricardobayes 5y ago
    I thought Caltrain was pretty good?
    • ghaff 5y ago
      The problem with commuter rails in general is that they basically support, well, commuting. Where I live (well) outside Boston, my commuter rail line is a decent option to go in for a 9-5 job or event. (Decent. At least for now they've cut back some trains and eliminated the expresses so it's over 90 minutes door to door.) But it's pretty much useless for going in for an evening event. I'd basically have to hang around for an 11:30 train and get home after 1.
    • kemiller 5y ago
      Caltrain itself is fine, though not the fastest. But the connections at the suburban end are terrible making it not as useful as it might be.