Annual ridership figures != people. For stops that are primarily commuter stops you have to divide by hundreds to get the actual person figure. 10k people using any given stop for one round trip twice per day is over 7M annual rides for that one stop. It's actually less than that for 18th St; using real data, the average daily ridership for is 8.6k. Compare with a station that is actually busy, like Union Square, which gets 109k daily ridership. Figures from https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NYRIDER_0420
So yeah, those people would be inconvenienced by having to walk a few more blocks, but way, way more people would experience greater convenience by having faster commutes along those very busy lines since they wouldn't need to make such close stops.
There's a happy medium between too many stops and too few. Two stops within a quarter of a mile is way too many. You can imagine a subway system in which a north/south line stopped at literally every block; you'd probably still have more than a thousand daily riders at every stop, but that's no argument to keep every single one of those stops (or even worse, build them). The system performance would be terrible and it'd take forever to get anywhere. The same is still true when you have stops that are only four short blocks away from each other.
I know how the ridership is measured. I’m not sure what your point was. It’s also not surprising that the busiest stations have 10x as many riders as those less busy.
The four track system of the NYC Subway was its most important innovation, and it literally solved the problem your talking about. You don’t want all the stops? Walk to 14th and take the express.
Comments
Annual ridership figures != people. For stops that are primarily commuter stops you have to divide by hundreds to get the actual person figure. 10k people using any given stop for one round trip twice per day is over 7M annual rides for that one stop. It's actually less than that for 18th St; using real data, the average daily ridership for is 8.6k. Compare with a station that is actually busy, like Union Square, which gets 109k daily ridership. Figures from https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NYRIDER_0420
So yeah, those people would be inconvenienced by having to walk a few more blocks, but way, way more people would experience greater convenience by having faster commutes along those very busy lines since they wouldn't need to make such close stops.
There's a happy medium between too many stops and too few. Two stops within a quarter of a mile is way too many. You can imagine a subway system in which a north/south line stopped at literally every block; you'd probably still have more than a thousand daily riders at every stop, but that's no argument to keep every single one of those stops (or even worse, build them). The system performance would be terrible and it'd take forever to get anywhere. The same is still true when you have stops that are only four short blocks away from each other.
I know how the ridership is measured. I’m not sure what your point was. It’s also not surprising that the busiest stations have 10x as many riders as those less busy.
The four track system of the NYC Subway was its most important innovation, and it literally solved the problem your talking about. You don’t want all the stops? Walk to 14th and take the express.
Probably that it's inaccurate for you to say "the 4.5 million people who use the 28th Street stop" because that number is ridership, not people.
C’mon -- that was a rhetorical flourish.
A rhetorical flourish that conveniently made your argument appear much stronger than it actually was.
That literally is the point of rhetoric.