This is going to be my quarterly ridership totals thread, examining how LA is doing on its own and up against other transit agencies in the US. I'll do this as long as I feel like I want to, to be honest. Also the information on here is open to vetting, debating and clarification, it's all fine by me. So let's get started

4th Quarter Totals:(all are based on average daily rides)
Heavy Rail:
1)NYC-6,228 phenomenal!
2)DC-902.2
3)Chicago-628.8
-- Boston-? no #'s this quarter. Guess they didn't report.
4)SF-352.0
5)Phili-317.5
6)Atlanta-253.3
7)NJ-234.8
8)LA-122.6 c'mon LA, we can do better than this!

Light Rail:
--Boston-? Usually Boston is #1
1)SF-129.9
2)LA-123.4 Expect LA to immediately go to #1 once Expo and EGLEx is done.
3)SD-105.1-Very very healthy #'s for our friend to the south!
4)Portland-100.4-Also very good #'s for a city much smaller than LA and SD.

Autobus Totals:
1)NYC-2,414.4
2)LA-1,303.4-I've said it before and I'll say it again, LA has probably the best bus system in the country; if it's not yet it will be after all of the Rapids and busways are put into service. Note: I'm not even tallying all of the interagencies.
3)Chicago-979.2
4)Phili-577.1
5)DC-442.0
6)Houston-306.1-This is in a city w/ only 1 light rail line and a pop of 2 mil, you would think its bus ridership would be higher at least. But yet LA is picked on the world over as the car dependant capital of the Earth yet its bus #'s are not to be sneezed at.......LA has a bus dominant system at the time.
7)SF-283.7
8)Seattle-274.5

Commuter rail
1)NYC-634.5-2 agencies Metro North and Long Island
2)Chicago-300.1
3)Boston-141.5-At least they reported their commuter rail
4)Phili-115.4
5)LA-39.5-I don't like this #. I think it's pathetic!
6)DC-13.7-With such a robust heavy rail ridership you would think........this is embarrassing.

Agency Totals: Heavy and light rail and autobus
(Excluding commuter rail since it can traverse through different metro areas, also the ATPA counts it seperate as well)
of course,
1)New York City-8,659.8 Quite amazing for the US!! Hats off!!
2)Chicago-1608
3)LA-1549.4-This is excluding the interagency service that falls w/thin and services the same county that Metro does. And the way that people talk about LA being car-dominant you would think that only 100 people rode all the busses and trains combined in LA. *
4)DC-1344.2
--Boston-usually goes here
5)Phili-1089.3
6)SF-1001.2-I combined 2 agencies for SF because it was just necessary and fair.

All data is found here:
http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/

*LA County MTA posted a percentage gain of 6.5%. The CTA(Chicago Transit Authority)posted an agency gain of 0.54%. If these #'s were to stay the same into next year LA will have eclipsed Chicago's CTA ridership #'s by 41.2 thousand riders a day, making LA County Metro #2 in overall transit ridership in the US. Question: Would LA still be considered car dependant then? And if so, what is the magic # that pushes you over into the much ballyhooed 'Transit Town Club'?

I always thought LA had the second highest transit ridership for years now

Heavy Rail:
1)NYC-6,228 phenomenal!
2)DC-902.2
3)Chicago-628.8
-- Boston-? no #'s this quarter. Guess they didn't report.
4)SF-352.0
5)Phili-317.5
6)Atlanta-253.3
7)NJ-234.8
8)LA-122.6 c'mon LA, we can do better than this!



This is pretty damn impressive considering Los Angeles only has one (well two, if you count Purple) heavy rail line. The other cities have entire heavy rail systems.


Light Rail:
--Boston-? Usually Boston is #1
1)SF-129.9
2)LA-123.4 Expect LA to immediately go to #1 once Expo and EGLEx is done.
3)SD-105.1-Very very healthy #'s for our friend to the south!
4)Portland-100.4-Also very good #'s for a city much smaller than LA and SD.


The West Coast is Where Light Rail is At!!!! Suck it, East Coast!!!




Commuter rail
1)NYC-634.5-2 agencies Metro North and Long Island
2)Chicago-300.1
3)Boston-141.5-At least they reported their commuter rail
4)Phili-115.4
5)LA-39.5-I don't like this #. I think it's pathetic!
6)DC-13.7-With such a robust heavy rail ridership you would think........this is embarrassing.


Los Angeles is the only western city in the top 5. Keep in mind Commuter Rail has only existed here for only less than 15 years.

Question: Would LA still be considered car dependant then? And if so, what is the magic # that pushes you over into the much ballyhooed 'Transit Town Club'?

Every city in the USA, with the exception of NYC, is "car dependent." Chicago has expressways and Boston's Big Dig has nothing to do with rail, right?

Right!

Klam, re-post your message on this forum:

http://transittalk.proboards37.com/index.cgi

This just proves that L.A. is doing pretty well when it comes to public transportation and its going to be better. The false claim that L.A. has the worst PT system is played out.

Once we extend the Purple Line to Santa Monica, we will only be behind NYC, DC, Boston, and Chicago in the heavy rail category.

those numbers are in the thousands right? ....please?

Just a brief comment on the commuter rail for DC, the metro heavy rail system for that city actually reaches substantially into the suburbs, so their strong heavy rail stats carry the bulk of city commuters moreso than commuter rail.

Once we extend the Purple Line to Santa Monica, we will only be behind NYC, DC, Boston, and Chicago in the heavy rail category.
The fact is, LA has a pretty good bus system but not so great rapid transit system because of its current limitations. Their are cities w/ little or no heavy rail system that are thought to have a good transit system, Curtiba comes to mind. Their is just going to be a bias against LA no matter how many lines are built or extended, that's just reality. Peep this, Chicago's CTA heavy rail #'s are 10 times less than NYC's MTA heavy rail #'s and both systems were initially started around the same time, over 100 years ago! You never hear anyone on this forum say that Chicago transit sucks, quite the opposite Chicago is thought of as a transit town. I've seen posts where people down LA due to it's low heavy rail(only) #'s, wouldn't this go for Chicago compared to its true contemporary NYC? 10 times more heavy rail riders??? On systems that are both OVER 100 years old??
DC just celebrated its 25th system anniversary and they now have 50% MORE heavy rail ridership than Chicago.......how did this happen? So what makes a transit town? #'s? or perception?

Klam, re-post your message on this forum:

http://transittalk.proboards37.com/index.cgi

edit

yay....i contributed to those numbers when i was in Hollywood:)

Peep this, Chicago's CTA heavy rail #'s are 10 times less than NYC's MTA heavy rail #'s and both systems were initially started around the same time, over 100 years ago! You never hear anyone on this forum say that Chicago transit sucks, quite the opposite Chicago is thought of as a transit town. I've seen posts where people down LA due to it's low heavy rail(only) #'s, wouldn't this go for Chicago compared to its true contemporary NYC? 10 times more heavy rail riders??? On systems that are both OVER 100 years old??
DC just celebrated its 25th system anniversary and they now have 50% MORE heavy rail ridership than Chicago.......how did this happen? So what makes a transit town? #'s? or perception?

You really can't campare mass transit in NYC with any other city regardless of the maturity of the system. L.A. has made some giant strides in mass transit, but considering the size of the city, expansion is necassary.


Truth is, Chicago's mass transit system, although pretty well networked, it does need renovating and expansion. My question on DC's heavy rail is if it runs through any DC suburbs? Anyone know?

When I went on a tour of DC, we stayed in Maryland and took the subway in. I sure didn't seem like a big city where I was staying, but then again, I know almost nothing about the east coast.

The fact is, LA has a pretty good bus system but not so great rapid transit system because of its current limitations. Their are cities w/ little or no heavy rail system that are thought to have a good transit system, Curtiba comes to mind. Their is just going to be a bias against LA no matter how many lines are built or extended, that's just reality. Peep this, Chicago's CTA heavy rail #'s are 10 times less than NYC's MTA heavy rail #'s and both systems were initially started around the same time, over 100 years ago! You never hear anyone on this forum say that Chicago transit sucks, quite the opposite Chicago is thought of as a transit town. I've seen posts where people down LA due to it's low heavy rail(only) #'s, wouldn't this go for Chicago compared to its true contemporary NYC? 10 times more heavy rail riders??? On systems that are both OVER 100 years old??
DC just celebrated its 25th system anniversary and they now have 50% MORE heavy rail ridership than Chicago.......how did this happen? So what makes a transit town? #'s? or perception?

Chicago's heavy rail line is much smaller than NYC and covers a lot less of the city. Chicagoans also use busses at a 2:1 ratio to the EL. one of the biggest problems with the EL is that it under serves a large portion of the South and West Sides.
I was impressed with LAs numbers, I didnt realize they hide such high bus ridership. very nice! :)

I wasn't necessarily picking on Chicago but it does have a "mature" system and is known as a transit town. But where Chicago metro does shine comparitevly to any other city is in its commuter rail #'s. It is on par and then surpasses NYC's commuter rail #'s, though that metro has 2 agencies. I would like to get some insight into why its commuter rail #'s are so strong? One thing I did see when I visited last fall was that Metra extended deep within the city. How are grade seperations dealt with for those trains? Were they old abandoned freight lines previously or always passenger rail lines?

NYC-LIRR-355.3
MetroNorth-279.2
Chicago-Metra-300.1 Phenomenal #'s taking into account of Chicago's much smaller metro area.
LA-Metrolink-39.5

DC's heavy rail runs from the city to all outlying areas. Keep in mind that the subway in DC is heavy rail and not a commuter rail. Some people try to compare it to commuter rail. It just goes to all parts of the burbs, like London's Underground. We do have two commuter rail systems (MARC and VRE) that are also fairly new compared to other commuter rail services like Metra, Metro North and the LIRR.

How is Atlanta #6 in heavy rail? Isn't MARTA light rail???

And is SF Heavy Rail (#4) the whole Bay Area BART system?


And it's nice to see San Diego's Trolley system there @ #3. . .

Atlanta has a heavy rail system.
http://www.urbanrail.net/am/atla/atlanta.htm

Yes, that is a tally for all of Bart.

whooo!! go LA

1st Quarter 2007 Stats are in !

Their have been some changes in this quarter:

Heavy Rail-
NYC-6085.0 Nowhere near being toppled
DC-910.1 DC is kicking butt!
Chicago-596.3 These are not the kind of heavy rail #'s I would expect from such a mature system.
SF-349.1
Phili-312.4
Atlanta-250.2
NJ-231.8
LA-126.9 Only if we had the subway to the sea
Miami-60.3
Baltimore-44.5

Boston stats have not been reported for 2 quarters now. That city usually leads the way in LRT #'s
Light Rail-
LA-128.1 All of the LRT lines combined equal to the ridership of the Red Line and its Purple stub
SF-124.8
Portland-102.0 Very impressive for such a small city!
SD-96.7
Phili-71.9
Denver-60.4 Expect these #'s to jump after they complete their 100 mile LRT system
Dallas-58.2
Sacramento-49.8 Can't believe it beat out Houston!
Salt Lake City- 42.5 Can't believe it beat out Houston!
Houston-37.8 C'mon Houston you can do better than this!

Rail Totals:(excluding commuter rail)
NYC-6085
DC-910.1
Chicago-596.3
SF-473.9
Phili-384.3
LA-255 Moved past Atlanta for the first time
Atlanta-250.2
NJ-231.8
Portland-102
SD-96.7

Autobus:
NYC-2348
LA-1271.4(not including interagencies)Bus ridership is where LA shines!
Chicago-952.8
Phili-554.6
SF-478.3
DC-423.9
Seattle-355.1 First time Seattle shows up in the top 10 beats Houston
Houston-291.6
Miami-265.9 Finally Miami makes it into the top 10 for something
Orange County-229.6 Can you believe this?

Commuter Rail:
NYC-(3697.0) Has to be a typo on the part of the APTA. Previous 4th quarter #'s were at 355.3 for the LIRR and the previous 4th quarter year was at 343.7, leading me to believe that the agency meant to quote a number of 369.7.
Chicago-298.3 Metra Rocks!
Phili-108.5 Go Philly!
LA-40.9 W/ all of the surrounding suburbs this # sucks!
SF/San Carlos-33.6
Baltimore-29.3

Agency Totals:(Heavy, Light, Commuter, Autobus, Trolley Bus)
NYC- (w/ my adjusted #'s)9062.2 Even w/ adjusted #'s NYC is far and away a certified transit town!
Chicago-1847.4 Chi continues to hold its own but w/ very dissapointing CTA #'s.
LA-1567.3 Chi wipes LA across the floor mainly due to its rockin' Metra system and I don't see that changing anytime soon. But a very good showing for the city that everyone picks on as being car depedant.....these are impressive #'s. This does not include the interagency bus systems.
DC-1348.4 Great #'s for the DC metro!
Phili-1047.4 This town does not get enough credit. These are impressive #'s for Philly!
SF-779.9 I think the SF metro(excluding SF) is overhyped in regards to its transit usage. But stereotypes die hard{see LA}
Houston-329.4 Hopefully Houston will begin to aggressively make pro transit choices and take LA's lead.

*No stats on Boston which would have been at #4 overall
*Watch out for Denver in the near future as the city begins to build a 100+ mile LRT system.

^^Houston is. We are working hard on getting more light rail lines here. The anit-rail politicians are losing power quick, which is a plus for us. You have to remember that Houston's one little eight mile rail line has 37,800 passengers a day. Imagine how much that number will grow once the other lines are built.

Chicago-1847.4 Chi continues to hold its own but w/ very dissapointing CTA #'s..


^^
Thanks for all the research klamedia. NYC is transit king in the US on par with Asian and European cities.:bow:

I also commend the progressive attitude city and state leaders have taken in expanding rail in Los Angeles. Lots of kudos.:cheers:

and honorable mention to the DC metro system. Their rail numbers are outstanding.:cheers:

I wouldn't say the CTA's numbers are very disappointing, but there is definitely room for improvement. If we analyze the % of mass transit riders the CTA serves within the city limits where it operate including about 40 adjacent suburbs, were looking at 1,847,400 riders out of a population of about 4 million people. That's close to 50%. Not that bad. I just wish that our local politicians meaning at the State level would put mass transit funding on the front burner.

I really wish that the Circle Line project will begin!

http://www.gapersblock.com/detour/gfx/02252005_circleline3.jpg



As for Metra, they are rocking, and they do have some very dynamic expansion plans which I have no doubt will become reality. One is creating a Star Line linking the outer suburbs together from north to south, expanding services into Rockford, and also connecting Chicagoland with downtown Milwaukee. It's most northern last stop is Kenosha Wisconsin.

http://www.wibuilder.com/wb-dec-2005/images/train-graphic.jpg

http://www.metrarail.com/Press_Releases/starline-map.gif

http://www.mchenrycountyblog.com/uploaded_images/Rockford%20RR%20Map%20with%20airport-east%20to%20Elgin-748052.jpg

Glad to see that about Houston.......Dallas is doing very well, although it would be a good time for Austin to start building NOW! San Antonio should have had at least 1 line up yet.....but the city is soooo slow and backwards that it might take another 10 years.
I understand where you're coming from "George" but I'm not letting Chicago off the hook. You and I both know that those CTA #'s are bumped up dramatically by those rockin' Metra #'s that eventually transfer onto the CTA to reach their final destination. I've been doing some reading and its common knowledge that the CTA needs to do some major improvements if they want to keep it a world class system. I'm pulling for Chicago's storied "EL" I've heard about it my whole life now, it's an American treasure........
I'm also pulling for:
Oakland and SJ(these two cities need LRT or Bart extensions to reach deep into their cities)
Denver(100 mile LRT system! Austin take notes)
Seattle (Just have another vote, I'm sure it will pass this time)

I understand where you're coming from "George" but I'm not letting Chicago off the hook. You and I both know that those CTA #'s are bumped up dramatically by those rockin' Metra #'s that eventually transfer onto the CTA to reach their final destination. I've been doing some reading and its common knowledge that the CTA needs to do some major improvements if they want to keep it a world class system. I'm pulling for Chicago's storied "EL" I've heard about it my whole life now, it's an American treasure........


My name is George klamedia, no need for the quotes. :) I wouldn't let the CTA off the hook either, they do need upgrades, and service extensions into various communities. In Chicago the CTA and Metra and Pace fall under one umbrella organization known as the RTA (regional transit authority). The hope is that they three systems will continue to integrate. They should not operate independently of one and other. The only way mass transit will work (at least here) is if the entire metro is connected. Too bad that most State politicians would rather spend funds on expressway improvements rather than mass transit improvements.

In the end the El will adapt to the 21st century metropolitan area, or else it will become antiquated, and second class.

And that would be my hope as well and the El deserves it. Btw, you're the first person I've ever met with the first name Chicago.:)

Btw, you're the first person I've ever met with the first name Chicago.:)

I was named after my great great grandfather:)

Glad to see that about Houston.......Dallas is doing very well, although it would be a good time for Austin to start building NOW! San Antonio should have had at least 1 line up yet.....but the city is soooo slow and backwards that it might take another 10 years.
I understand where you're coming from "George" but I'm not letting Chicago off the hook. You and I both know that those CTA #'s are bumped up dramatically by those rockin' Metra #'s that eventually transfer onto the CTA to reach their final destination. I've been doing some reading and its common knowledge that the CTA needs to do some major improvements if they want to keep it a world class system. I'm pulling for Chicago's storied "EL" I've heard about it my whole life now, it's an American treasure........
I'm also pulling for:
Oakland and SJ(these two cities need LRT or Bart extensions to reach deep into their cities)
Denver(100 mile LRT system! Austin take notes)
Seattle (Just have another vote, I'm sure it will pass this time)

Austin has a 28-mile commuter rail line that will be complete next year.

But for such a "progressive" type city I would have expected Austin to have a comprehensive LRT plan on the table. And although I've never liked Dallas, it surprises me that they are "getting it" before Austin, 'the only reason why not to bomb Texas'. I can joke about Texas, I was born there.

Well after visiting Paris, France this past week and experiencing their metro efficient system (trains only), even the US top dog NYC system seems lacking. I have never seen a system where the frequency of service is so good that you don't even have time to sit down before the next train arrives.

My first day in Paris I kept wondering why no one seems to rush when to the platform when a train pulls into the station. Well the reason I found out was because another one is right behind it in mere seconds. It was the most impressive I've seen anywhere.

There are some problems with the system I didn't like, but when it comes to frequency, NYC can't even compare. The biggest negative is the hours of service. The Paris metro shuts down at around 12:30 am, and that sucks, and this is where NYC stand out.

The other complaints was most of their trains didn't have air condition. They did have windonws that open. Even though the temperture only reach 70 degrees one day, and slightly humid, it was kind of unbearable for me. I hate to experience their metro in the summer when the temps get much higher, and the smell of funk is even worse. :ohno:

I think the only other system I've seen offer such frenquency was Montreal, but I think they probably modeled their system after Paris. They are both French speaking cities, and both use simiar rail cars with rubber tires.

Well after visiting Paris, France this past week and experiencing their metro efficient system (trains only), even the US top dog NYC system seems lacking. I have never seen a system where the frequency of service is so good that you don't even have time to sit down before the next train arrives.

My first day in Paris I kept wondering why no one seems to rush when to the platform when a train pulls into the station. Well the reason I found out was because another one is right behind it in mere seconds. It was the most impressive I've seen anywhere.


sounds like hong kong :)

need more heavy rail in LA to serve the entire county and not just the westside.

Ive always thought of LA as one of(or the best) bus transit cities in the USA.

Thanx "Staples"! I don't know why LA never gets its props when it comes to holding down the bus thing. Busses here actually do the heavy lifting of rail...think, the #4, 720 and the 33....can you think of any other overloaded bus lines that no matter how many busses they run they are always packed.

i know i probably seem like an idiot, but i'm only a teenager.

whats the difference between heavy and light rail?

also, how did u figure those numbers out? if it is by ticket sales, LA should be much higher. u don't need to buy a ticket as no one checks it and there is no slot to scan a ticket or anything. you can just hop on and ride for free...at least that's what i did b/c there was nothing or no one to see me do that. also, my friends told me not to buy a ticket for the very reason-no one checks it. if we actually had ticket checkers or something to chekc tickets, we could make more money and be able to afford more rail. maybe they do that at Union Station or some busy station, but i started at Aviation Green Line.

^^Associate heavy rail with the Red Line and light rail with the Blue Line, Green Line, and Gold Line. Heavy rail handles more passengers and is faster than light rail and is completely grade separated.

But let's have some fun and throw a wrench in it......Light Rail aka LRT can also be completely grade seperated, can go very fast(checked the completely grade seperated Green Line and it was avg 55-60 mph once it got going).......though the real difference between Heavy Rail HRT and LRT is that Heavy Rail usually has a 3rd rail where it gets its power from which is why it cannot run in the middle of a street and is not as flexible as LRT which usually runs with cantenary power(up above).
Once again go here for almost any question you will ever have about transit in LA:
http://boards.eesite.com/board.cgi?boardset=ExpoLine

Haha, you just had the screw it up. Well let me add even more onto it. Some would say that the Green Line is heavy rail that runs on light rail vehicles.

Light rail uses light rail vehicles.
Heavy rail does not necessarily use heavy rail vehicles, if you believe that the Green Line is really heavy rail.

Well yeah, the distinction isn't too important.

Cool! Also usually LRT has street floor boarding(I believe) but our system only uses a raised platform that is akin to HRT. Basically we have LRT that acts like HRT sometimes.....leave it to LA.:nuts:

Dallas has that as well. It's LRT is built in Heavy Rail style. Usually LRT moves slower than Heavy Rail. For one, the trains are closer together and just the way the vehicles are built.

^^ woo hooo...i am adding to houston's numbers..I just took the train to herman park for an outdoor concert at the miller amphitheater...first time there...it was awesome!! and the weather is so L.A. weather right now..it's perfect!

Why no love for New Jersey?!? NJT operates the 4th busiest commuter line behind LIRR, MNRR, and Metra. I think that it even passes Metra some months. And also what's up with NJ's rail totals ONLY including PATH? Where's HBLR, the Newark City Subway, and the River Line?

Why no love for New Jersey?!?

New Jersey smells j/k :tongue4:

Why no love for New Jersey?!? NJT operates the 4th busiest commuter line behind LIRR, MNRR, and Metra. I think that it even passes Metra some months. And also what's up with NJ's rail totals ONLY including PATH? Where's HBLR, the Newark City Subway, and the River Line?

I don't see those #'s. If you could direct me to your source perhaps I could look that over but I'm only going by what the ATPA says and some agencies don't report accurately or on time it seems.

Anyway I used the same formula for every MSA that is I totalled up all of the interagencies in the MSA along w/ the given chief agency #'s then subtracted commuter rail which hops MSA's many times and divided that # against the MSA population and this is what I get so far(I know this will be controversial and I'm as always open to discussion):

LA-16% ridership against MSA pop
Chicago-18%
SF-29%

My source is APTA (http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/). I guess you could also go to New Jersey Transit's website. They put the same numbers there that they give to APTA. The NJ light rail numbers in the link below includes HBLR, River Line, and Newark City Subway.

APTA commuter rail (http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q2cr.pdf)

APTA light rail (http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q2lr.pdf)

OIC. They don't give APTA the numbers in your format and I don't think that they ever do. This is all I see, but it's not by quarter and it's a year out of date.

New Jersey Transit facts (http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/an_factsataGlance_FY.pdf)

Yeah I guess so. I got Jersey in the HRT countdown at #7 w/ 231.8thousands riders per day, ironically right between Atlanta at #6 and LA at #8. Then Jersey comes back again in rail totals both LRT and HRT at #8 w/ the same #'s overall which means any LRT was not reported. It never made it into the top 6 of commuter rail #'s nor the top 10 of bus #s. Therefore it did not make it into the top 7 of overall agency totals combined modes. But that is all from the APTA. I used the closest thing to a reliable source to mainly stay consistent and uniform. So it could be that Jersey transit could have the highest ridership in the country, they just didn't report it.

If you look at the links that I provided New Jersey does report to APTA and the statistics show that New Jersey Transit commuter rail is the 3rd or 4th largest in the country. About the same as Metra. What they don't report is the average weekday ridership stats that you are using. Those aren't really the same as overall quarterly ridership which is where you'll find APTA's New Jersey Transit stats.

BTW the reason that only the heavy rail shows up is because those are the statistics for PATH. It's not part of New Jersey Transit like the light rail, commuter rail, and most of the buses. It's technically not even a New Jersey transit system since the Port Authority is a joint agency involving the states of New York and New Jersey.

then subtracted commuter rail which hops MSA's

Is that really necessary for Chicago, though? The MSA population is the same as the metro population.

I used the same formula for all of the agency sum totals, to leave commuter rail out. Now I knew Chicago would be a sticking point if any so I did calculations including commuter for Chicago's MSA of 9,505,748 and I come up w/ a bump up to 21% of unlinked daily avg trips taken divided by the MSA pop. If I included CR for LA still using the MSA totals it would bump LA up to 16%.

^Okay, cool.