BSL Ridge Spur + PATCO - Possible?

Wingnut--in response to your query, I find PhilaGeoHistory most helpful. Looking around that block, it appears to have been smaller, denser building stock, in all likelihood typical of modern Chinatown or Old City. Keep in mind that the 1942 WPA map (e.g.) is showing property lines, and for more major properties, what's there--and also remember that the typical property dimensions for residential and industrial do vary quite a bit.

Ch1nish--PATCO is most assuredly not a light rail line. (The River Line is a light rail line.) Rather, it is built to heavy rail frequency and operations standards. PATCO operations also happen to be more frequent (more trains run per line) than SEPTA's, and around-the-clock to boot, so forgive me for being extremely skeptical of your claim that SEPTA has better operations because it is bigger and better "capitolized". (I take it you mean capitalized?) While there are problems within DRPA (like it being a patronage machine), PATCO is certainly one of the, if not the, best-run rail operations in the Philadelphia metropolitan area. I strongly suspect whoever's in charge of PATCO operations there really ought to be in charge of operations over at SEPTA.

Now then, let me plug again my idea for a cheap, easy-to-implement, and expandable alternative to the Ridge Spur as it exists today. The City Branch Cut running along the former Noble St. from Pennsylvania Avenue to Broad Street is reasonably close to the major destinations of that part of Center City, is close to the neighborhood of Spring Garden, and passes through the Community College of Philadelphia. Heading up the Pennsylvania Avenue tunnel, the right-of-way in which is largely disused, the line passes by the large apartment and condo structures facing this street and between the Art Museum and Perelman annex. Breaking back into daylight along the former B&O Philadelphia Branch to Fairmount Jct., it passes by Fairmount (the neighborhood) and Lemon Hill in Fairmount Park, as well as the frequent trolley line the 15 at Girard Avenue. Since this ROW is already mostly acquired, reserved, or disused, the only real major cost necessary to connect it to the Ridge Spur is the cost of tunneling from Ridge along Noble out to Broad, only about 3.5 blocks, preferably with a station offering a connection to the 23. Otherwise, opening some poorly-placed walls, curving around a poorly-placed support column or two, slapping down some tracks and (at first wood) platforms, and utilizing the equipment already in use on the Ridge Spur is all that's really necessary.

Tunnel costs are mucking with my cost guesstimate, but I'd say between $25 and $50 million is all that's really necessary for a "light" heavy rail line from 8th/Market to Girard following this route--most of it spent on that short tunnel. Remember that is a tiny fraction of the costs of, say, the Second Avenue Subway, or SunRail, both of which have price tags in the billions of dollars.

I have never ridden the Spur, but to my knowledge it connects Fairmount, Chinatown, Spring Garden, and 8th & Market. I believe it is on an independent track from the rest of the line. What if you were to do the following: Turn the Spur into single car operation and put concrete blocks at the end of the platform for two cars. Then, like Septa did with the NHSL and the Former MFL Cars, install a farebox at the door of the single car and have the driver collect the fare. Also remove the turnstiles & Sales Clerks, except at Fairmount where a free interchange could be made. It would be like a Subway Surface Line that never goes aboveground. The only reason why SST works is because its in a safe(er) part of the city, but install cameras on the platforms in very visible places and signage that they are being monitored by police. Also, hire a single security guard to monitor those cameras and have access to the station intercoms, like in the Seattle Bus Tunnel. Then, you bring operating costs down while maintaining a valuable resource for the community.

askclifford wrote:I have never ridden the Spur, but to my knowledge it connects Fairmount, Chinatown, Spring Garden, and 8th & Market. I believe it is on an independent track from the rest of the line. What if you were to do the following: Turn the Spur into single car operation and put concrete blocks at the end of the platform for two cars. Then, like Septa did with the NHSL and the Former MFL Cars, install a farebox at the door of the single car and have the driver collect the fare. Also remove the turnstiles & Sales Clerks, except at Fairmount where a free interchange could be made. It would be like a Subway Surface Line that never goes aboveground. The only reason why SST works is because its in a safe(er) part of the city, but install cameras on the platforms in very visible places and signage that they are being monitored by police. Also, hire a single security guard to monitor those cameras and have access to the station intercoms, like in the Seattle Bus Tunnel. Then, you bring operating costs down while maintaining a valuable resource for the community.

...Except it isn't. North of Fairmount, Spur trains share the middle tracks with express trains. There is a major junction between Girard and Fairmount stations where they merge.

The basic problem with Spur service is that it's a duplicate service anyway. There's no need to run two express services from Fern Rock to Center City. Spring Garden station was closed because it was too close to Spring Garden on the BSL mainline and was hence only very lightly ridden. There is no station the Spur currently serves that isn't in the service range of the BSL mainline + Market-Frankford Line (free transfer at City Hall). If Spur service as it is today were shut down altogether tomorrow, it wouldn't be much missed. And why should it? It only offers increased convenience to a small subset of people.

Which is why I put forward my plan. By stretching along major ridership generators--urban neighborhoods, employment nodes, a college (and a high school)--and the prestige of a major urban cultural center--I think my route would get increased ridership. Right now I'd be targeting ~1000 riders/station/day with the most cost-effective implementation (which would be 9 stations--Girard, Lemon Hill, Art Museum, Rodin Museum, Franklin Town Square, Broad, Callowhill, Chinatown, and 8th/Market)--I'd be looking to have an initial ridership on that route of 9,000, noting that with the biases in a lot of ridership forecasting that would translate to a real number closer to 20,000 daily riders in about five years' time.

ETA: Chinatown station right now suffers from being on a block nearly filled by parking lots, next to a poorly-designed hospital and police headquarters. The closest major ridership generators are the condos across the street, and Chinatown itself nearly a block off. The best hope that station has is urban development of that mammoth parking lot, and urban redevelopment of the podiatry school (since IIRC Temple is planning on shifting its functions to the Med School campus).

askclifford wrote:I have never ridden the Spur, but to my knowledge it connects Fairmount, Chinatown, Spring Garden, and 8th & Market. I believe it is on an independent track from the rest of the line. What if you were to do the following: Turn the Spur into single car operation and put concrete blocks at the end of the platform for two cars. Then, like Septa did with the NHSL and the Former MFL Cars, install a farebox at the door of the single car and have the driver collect the fare. Also remove the turnstiles & Sales Clerks, except at Fairmount where a free interchange could be made. It would be like a Subway Surface Line that never goes aboveground. The only reason why SST works is because its in a safe(er) part of the city, but install cameras on the platforms in very visible places and signage that they are being monitored by police. Also, hire a single security guard to monitor those cameras and have access to the station intercoms, like in the Seattle Bus Tunnel. Then, you bring operating costs down while maintaining a valuable resource for the community.

The ex-Market Frankford & ex-CTA cars as used on the NHSL/Rt 100 were always operated with a 2 person crew. It would be extremely difficult to set up the Broad St. cars for onboard fare collection unless a conductor was used due to the lack of independent door controls to allow only one pair of doors to be used.

hammersklavier wrote: Which is why I put forward my plan. By stretching along major ridership generators--urban neighborhoods, employment nodes, a college (and a high school)--and the prestige of a major urban cultural center--I think my route would get increased ridership. Right now I'd be targeting ~1000 riders/station/day with the most cost-effective implementation (which would be 9 stations--Girard, Lemon Hill, Art Museum, Rodin Museum, Franklin Town Square, Broad, Callowhill, Chinatown, and 8th/Market)--I'd be looking to have an initial ridership on that route of 9,000, noting that with the biases in a lot of ridership forecasting that would translate to a real number closer to 20,000 daily riders in about five years' time.

ETA: Chinatown station right now suffers from being on a block nearly filled by parking lots, next to a poorly-designed hospital and police headquarters. The closest major ridership generators are the condos across the street, and Chinatown itself nearly a block off. The best hope that station has is urban development of that mammoth parking lot, and urban redevelopment of the podiatry school (since IIRC Temple is planning on shifting its functions to the Med School campus).

I like your plan for the Ridge Spur. Separating it from the BSL and running it on the abandoned right-of-ways you mentioned would make more efficient use of the Spur. I think i should continue further north, possibly to East Falls and Manayunk via the existing R6 route.

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:

hammersklavier wrote: Which is why I put forward my plan. By stretching along major ridership generators--urban neighborhoods, employment nodes, a college (and a high school)--and the prestige of a major urban cultural center--I think my route would get increased ridership. Right now I'd be targeting ~1000 riders/station/day with the most cost-effective implementation (which would be 9 stations--Girard, Lemon Hill, Art Museum, Rodin Museum, Franklin Town Square, Broad, Callowhill, Chinatown, and 8th/Market)--I'd be looking to have an initial ridership on that route of 9,000, noting that with the biases in a lot of ridership forecasting that would translate to a real number closer to 20,000 daily riders in about five years' time.

ETA: Chinatown station right now suffers from being on a block nearly filled by parking lots, next to a poorly-designed hospital and police headquarters. The closest major ridership generators are the condos across the street, and Chinatown itself nearly a block off. The best hope that station has is urban development of that mammoth parking lot, and urban redevelopment of the podiatry school (since IIRC Temple is planning on shifting its functions to the Med School campus).

I like your plan for the Ridge Spur. Separating it from the BSL and running it on the abandoned right-of-ways you mentioned would make more efficient use of the Spur. I think i should continue further north, possibly to East Falls and Manayunk via the existing R6 route.

Agreed. I've thought about similar routing as well; and as a younger resident of Fairmount, the ability to take the subway to Manayunk or Fairmount Park would be much appreciated. I've always thought that the PRR Ivy Ridge side could be re-activated and extended along the RDG Norristown line to cover the end of the line. Use the newly-opened time slots on the RDG side for trains to Quakertown .

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:

hammersklavier wrote: Which is why I put forward my plan. By stretching along major ridership generators--urban neighborhoods, employment nodes, a college (and a high school)--and the prestige of a major urban cultural center--I think my route would get increased ridership. Right now I'd be targeting ~1000 riders/station/day with the most cost-effective implementation (which would be 9 stations--Girard, Lemon Hill, Art Museum, Rodin Museum, Franklin Town Square, Broad, Callowhill, Chinatown, and 8th/Market)--I'd be looking to have an initial ridership on that route of 9,000, noting that with the biases in a lot of ridership forecasting that would translate to a real number closer to 20,000 daily riders in about five years' time.

ETA: Chinatown station right now suffers from being on a block nearly filled by parking lots, next to a poorly-designed hospital and police headquarters. The closest major ridership generators are the condos across the street, and Chinatown itself nearly a block off. The best hope that station has is urban development of that mammoth parking lot, and urban redevelopment of the podiatry school (since IIRC Temple is planning on shifting its functions to the Med School campus).

I like your plan for the Ridge Spur. Separating it from the BSL and running it on the abandoned right-of-ways you mentioned would make more efficient use of the Spur. I think i should continue further north, possibly to East Falls and Manayunk via the existing R6 route.

It is a good plan...except when it comes to the bill. In Philadelphia, we have so much political crap, that you would have to wait a century for that to happen. My plan would save the spur, and still provide convenient service to the current areas served. It also does not eliminate the possibility of future expansion. Regarding the doors, You could disconnect all but one door on each of the front sides, or rewire the controls to be independent. It could also be configured to allow single person operation. In addition, cut service back to Fairmont. I'm all for expanding the spur, lets just make it manageable and safe first. Septa has major infrastructure, sanitation, security, issues among outdated stations. Septa is serious when they talk about CLOSING the spur, not expanding a piece of infrastructure that isn't generating a penny of profit. My plan would eliminate gate clerks (A huge expense), replacing them with fare collection on board and marked and clear surveillance cameras. It would also reduce the platform and station concourses to a manageable size.

Matthew Mitchell wrote:1--SEPTA is a state-chartered authority, not a branch of city or suburban government

2--the Locust Street tunnel is owned by the City of Philadelphia, as is the Broad Street Subway. PATCO pays rent to the city.

3--ch1nish appears to be another sock puppet. I have put in a report to the moderators.

No, I'm not a puppet. SEPTA isn't a word in the dictionary so it should be capitalized. You people should get that down before pissing about the system which by the way, is the best. SEPTA is awesome and I've never had issues. I'm from Cali and they have nowhere near anything like this. SEPTA gets me where I need to go and they take care of their equipment and it runs well. On top of that, they run every mode. I think that's awesome.

Grumpy old men.

ch1nish wrote:

Matthew Mitchell wrote:1--SEPTA is a state-chartered authority, not a branch of city or suburban government

2--the Locust Street tunnel is owned by the City of Philadelphia, as is the Broad Street Subway. PATCO pays rent to the city.

3--ch1nish appears to be another sock puppet. I have put in a report to the moderators.

No, I'm not a puppet. SEPTA isn't a word in the dictionary so it should be capitalized. You people should get that down before pissing about the system which by the way, is the best. SEPTA is awesome and I've never had issues. I'm from Cali and they have nowhere near anything like this. SEPTA gets me where I need to go and they take care of their equipment and it runs well. On top of that, they run every mode. I think that's awesome.

Grumpy old men.

Site Admin Note: Okay, everyone breathe. This is a well-moderated forum, and I seldom post in SEPTA as I know nothing about the system. I only post this as I this post came up in the queue for approval as ch1nish is newly moderated.

First, ch1nish, I and each forum's moderators will handle any grammatical issues. Some post from smart-phones, and in this day and age of texting, don't always take the time to capitalize what's appropriate. I'd prefer it more if people posted properly, but I'll leave that to each forum's moderators. I don't consider posting SEPTA in lower case to be a grievous error or mortal sin.

Especially considering that the correction is coming from a new member (you), and you misspelled capital as capitol.

Relax, be less confrontational. We appreciate your passion for all things Philadelphia, especially the transit systems. That doesn't mean you have to denigrate NY, or Boston, or DC.

Others: let's not go off half-cocked claiming the internet trolls are back. If you think there's an issue, by all means, as indicated in this post, use the report function. It's not necessary to announce it, and further inflame the situation. I appreciate you all "tending to the garden", though, but let's all let the moderator's do their jobs.

Thanks,

Jeff

Askclifford--I continue to have a few problems with your idea.

(1) Fairmount Station is not laid out in such a way as to make transfers from the southbound mainline platform to the Ridge Spur platform possible. The stair down to the Spur platform is accessible only from the northbound platform. Only a massive (and expensive) retrofit of a relatively little-used station can ameliorate this.
(2) In the case of the Ridge Spur, forcing a transfer will most certainly further depress ridership. While Fairmount's northbound transfer is feasible, the southbound is not, and further, cross-platform transfers are available at Girard, North Philadelphia, Erie, and Olney. I know this because I did it just yesterday. And again, while there is a (cross-platform) southbound transfer available between mainline and Spur trains at (Olney, Erie, North Philadelphia, and) Girard, none is available at Fairmount. This is because Fairmount's Spur platform does not lie under the mainline platforms, but rather under Ridge.
(3) Spur trains already originate in Fern Rock, along with mainline local and express trains. I cannot stress this enough. There is lots of unused capacity along the four-track mainline right now, and the one-seat ride to 8th/Market the Spur train offers from Fern Rock is one of the current setup's few major redeeming features. Eliminating this is tantamount to killing the line; if you want to muck with the Spur (and ridership stats suggest it needs to be mucked with) it's better to find a new ROW to feed service from 8th/Market and Chinatown into; the best ROW for that is in my opinion the former City Branch and unused sections of the ex-B&O Philadelphia Branch between the Fairmount* Tunnel and Junction (just north of Girard). There are no active industries anymore along this line and (from CSX's perspective) quad-tracking this stretch** when the mainlines directly to the south (Fairmount Tunnel, Schuylkill Banks) and north (Wayne Jct. cut, NYSL) can only handle double-tracking would be pointless.

The best way to expand Spur ridership without heavy capital investment in new infrastructure would be development of the currently-barren 8th & Race lot.

I agree that SEPTA's lack of long-term vision (their mentality always seems to be maintain and curtail when maintenance becomes impracticable) is a fundamental issue, but that's one of the other reasons I promote this idea. Mass transit in Philadelphia needs expansion, not just incremental maintenance and occasional contraction; the costs of this route consist of three elements: (1) acquisition of City Branch easement, (2) a tunnel between City Branch, with a portal at, or in the vicinity of, Broad, and an at-grade junction with the current Ridge Spur, approximately three to four blocks (between roughly 11th and the Broad Street portal), and (3) preparation for and installation along this easement of railroad equipment (roadbed renewal, tracks, ties, third rail, station platforms). The tunnel can be built largely as a cut-and-cover project--the least-expensive kind of tunnel available--and it may even be possible to grade the line to run above the Broad Street Line mainline tunnel and below the low section of 13th***. The majority of the expenses come from the tunnel; installation costs should be $10 million ($1 million for trackwork installation, $9 million for platforms w/ required ADA access), acquisition costs $10 million, and tunneling costs the balance ($50 million if kept low; if a lower alignment is needed to clear under the BSL main, the costs for this shouldn't be more than $75-100 million), and a cost cushion of approximately 10% of projections; the total project expenditure should thus be between approximately $77 million and approximately $133 million; this upward-revised estimate is due to (a) a slightly more sophisticated cost analysis and (b) a slight revision upward of tunneling costs, which are (again) the dominant costs of this project. There are no equipment costs since the line will repurpose extant Spur equipment, and electrification costs can be shifted over to BSL electrification maintenance, as the network would remain physically interconnected**** and I do not believe the current substations are at or near capacity.

In any case, in today's mass transit world, $133 million is a very low-cost project: Norfolk's Tide light rail line cost about $350 million, which averaged out to $50 million a mile, or a projected $25 grand a passenger. This is unusually low by American standards, and is par for the course in Europe. My plan--built to heavy-rail standards, would be $77-$133 million for just about three miles, with an initial daily ridership goal of 10,000 (or just over 1,000/station), which would be $25.6 million to $44.3 million/mile, or a estimated $7,700 to $13,300/rider--so long as the costs are kept down, very reasonable indeed. Lower, in fact, than the Tide's projected costs.
_________
*Someone correct me if the name is wrong.
**Actually, I think this ROW was originally built out to six tracks, back when the City Branch Cut was a major industrial spur.
***Approximately 20 feet below Broad at Noble. However, Broad is elevated above the former City Branch and 13th sunk below it, so the ideal grade profile for this attempt would be about 20 feet along 500 feet, which, at 4%, should be about the same as, if not less steep than, the MFL/Subway Surface grades from 30th to the bottom of the Schuylkill and thence back up to 22nd Street--steep, but feasible for light metro equipment. When that tunnel was built, the Schuylkill was considered a navigable waterway to Fairmount Dam and kept dredged to a depth of at least 20 feet; the MFL tunnel appears to have 20 ft. clearance, and as such the tunnel from 22nd to the bottom of the Schuylkill drops (I'm guessing) 40 ft. from 22nd to the Schuylkill's east bulkhead line, a distance of 1000 feet; similarly, it has to clear under the Northeast Corridor as it rises from the bottom of the Schuylkill, the concourse at that station is (roughly) at floodplain level and the platform 20 ft under, meaning that from the Schuylkill's bulkhead line to 30th St., a distance of 500 ft., a 20-ft rise occurs, the exact same grade as I'm proposing between 13th and Broad along Noble. Another possibility may be the closure of 13th under Noble, which allows for a more gradual grade, coupled with the installment of bike ramps to Noble; and a third, more expensive, clearing under the BSL main and returning to City Branch grade at 16th (20 ft/1000 ft=2%). This final option, however, is fairly clearly overengineering until such time as line use would warrant it; the middle option may not have much, if any, cost savings over the first after litigation and the installation of compensatory infrastructure (i.e. bike ramps up to Noble and back down, a cost of most likely $10 million), and as the MFL example shows, the first is clearly feasible.
*****An at-grade double-track junction would be all that's called for where the new line splits from the existing Spur. The line from this junction to Fairmount Jct. would still be used for non-revenue moves (maintenance runs, trash train, and the like). Because of this, the new line would remain integrated into the BSL system.

rbreslow wrote:But it would have to be below ground so people don't step on the third rail. It would also make no sense to convert a Regional Rail line that has rider ship and is being restored very nicely in to a rapid transit line. If the line is making money then to Septa no changes need to be made.

It does not have to be below ground (or above ground for that matter). It would need 2 requirements:

Grade separation (which both the R7 Chestnut Hill East and R8 Chestnut Hill West already are)

Raised platforms

There were plans on converting the R7 into a rapid transit line and connecting to the B.S.S. and realigning the R8 to connect to the former Reading trunk (along with a few other plans that never came to fruition).

hammersklavier, there is a stair from Fairmount Broad St station down to a passage under the Broad St tracks to the Broad St northbound and Ridge Ave Fairmount station platforms, it's just walled up at both ends. So it's not correct to say it's impossible to make transfers. It's just not convenient. It's a long walk, since at that point the Ridge Ave spur's platform is a bit south of the Broad St Fairmount northbound platform, which in turn is a bit south of the Broad St line's Fairmount southbound platform, so the passage goes diagonally across the rather wide subway.

ch1nish wrote:No, I'm not a puppet. SEPTA isn't a word in the dictionary so it should be capitalized.

Actually it is in the dictionary. It's plural for septum (tissue in the body that separates).

Patrick Boylan wrote:hammersklavier, there is a stair from Fairmount Broad St station down to a passage under the Broad St tracks to the Broad St northbound and Ridge Ave Fairmount station platforms, it's just walled up at both ends. So it's not correct to say it's impossible to make transfers. It's just not convenient. It's a long walk, since at that point the Ridge Ave spur's platform is a bit south of the Broad St Fairmount northbound platform, which in turn is a bit south of the Broad St line's Fairmount southbound platform, so the passage goes diagonally across the rather wide subway.

Um, I already pointed that out. What I said is that the transfer is possible from the Spur platform (center island) to the NB platform; there is no possible transfer, however, from the mainline SB platform, which is on the west side of Broad. If you disagree with this assessment, you are more than free to visit the station and case it out, and then post how you can get from the Spur platform to the mainline SB platform at Fairmount without needing to cross Broad at grade and expend an extra token.

Sorry, I only noticed that you pointed out that it's impossible to make transfers, and I interpreted that to mean you don't know about the southbound Broad St to Ridge Ave pedestrian tunnel.

Since I missed it I would appreciate it if you'd tell where you pointed out that there is a stair from Fairmount Broad St station down to a passage under the Broad St tracks to the Broad St northbound and Ridge Ave Fairmount station platforms. As I mentioned it's walled up at both ends, so one might not be able to notice it today, but I can remember it was open in the 1970's, and one could see the mismatched paint and brick on the barrier walls for several years after it was closed. Subsequent repaintings, dust and grime may have made the barriers walls more closely match the rest of the station, so there might not be much evidence now.
In order to restore that passage I think all they need do is to break down the walls, which I don't see as impossible.
I'm not advocating that they do so, I'm just trying to remind folks that such a walled up access exists.

I admit that I haven't visited the station in more than 10 years, so it's possible, but I think very unlikely, that at some time authorities broke through those walls and filled up the stair and passage under the tracks, then rebuilt the walls.