Defunct R3 West Chester service

Could the line be extended as a Bus Rapid Transit Line?

Such words have locked threads on this website; we do not speak of buses here . But to answer your question, no; there's not nearly enough population density to support it (the area between West Chester and Elwyn is almost rural), and there's already a bus from West Chester to 69th Street Terminal. I think we'd all like to see the train back, but, as with all things important, there's not enough money.

What was the original reasons why the diesel lines were cut in 1981? I know SEPTA was involved, but Conrail was the operator at the time until SEPTA took over the regional rails in early 1983. I heard it was funding cuts by PennDOT, because service was cut back from Reading to Pottstown, then Bethlehem to Quakertown, then eliminated entirely. And then there was the service past West Trenton to Newark which was originally Reading's Crusader and Wall Street, which was also cut end of July, 1981 but NJT/Conrail continued to provide a connecting service at West Trenton until 1983. Could there be a new dual mode DMU invented that would solve the center city tunnel problem so that trains could run direct from Reading to 30th St. and Quakertown to 30th St.? There has been talks about restoring service to Reading and Quakertown, but no action.

i'm really interested to see how NJT's new dual mode locomotives work out. if they're a success then all us transit advocates (train nerds) will have a lot more ammo in the argument for these lines.

Not really. Cost of electrification is a drop in the bucket, especially on a line like West Chester that already has infrastructure in place. Budget estimates for the palsy Wawa extension show that rail infrastructure (track, signals, wires) are the cheapest part of the project. What's gobbling up all the money is the Waldorf-Astoria that SEPTA is building at Wawa. Take the pork out and its a $20 million dollar project again.

maybe for this line, but throw in newtown, reading, pottsville, bethlehem, and my ultimate, absurd, never gonna happen dream (a loop up the bethlehem branch going west on the NS to reading and back in to philly) it would.

quick note on the Wawa project: funding for the rail infrastructure is in place but not for the station and garage. If those components could be scaled back, it would be more likely that this extension could be accomplished in the near term.

jfrey40535 wrote:quick note on the Wawa project: funding for the rail infrastructure is in place but not for the station and garage. If those components could be scaled back, it would be more likely that this extension could be accomplished in the near term.

How great is the need for a parking garage at Wawa? I can't imagine it would be particularly great, and the station's hardly in an ideal location for a park-and-ride.

You can also install a temporary wooden platform for far less cost than a concrete platform. Bonus with that setup: there would be enough left over for a platform at either Lenni or Glen Riddle--or perhaps a combination station about halfway between the two (they're too close together to open both).

hammersklavier wrote:How great is the need for a parking garage at Wawa?

Demand at Elwyn greatly exceeds available parking capacity, and the township is upset with the people parking in illegal places. There needs to be some capacity addition somewhere.

I can't imagine it would be particularly great, and the station's hardly in an ideal location for a park-and-ride.

Right off Route 1? That sounds pretty good to me.

Looking back in hindsight, it appears that the Wawa terminal site was arbitrarily chosen but comes with inherently high conststruction costs for a significantly large parking capacity. That's why this and other threads have suggested Lenni or Darlington as interim terminals for this line.

Lenni would not be a good choice for a terminal.

I'm not sure how much area is available there for parking, but there is limited access. Basically one road in & out.
Wawa has the advantage of being at least accessible directly to a major roadway, more suitable for connecting bus services, with one existing route already in service (111).

Other stations along the line further west would seem no better from an access standpoint.

Park-and-rides need to be built in the places with the greatest automotive access to the train station and only in those places; densification around the station (usually in the form of TODs) is preferable elsewhere.

On the R3, this means where the line crosses the Blue Route. Unfortunately, that happens to be halfway between Swarthmore and Wallingford. Swarthmore is in the middle of the college; colleges generate increased transit demand so moving the station is a BAD IDEA. But moving Wallingford closer to the Blue Route for a park-and-ride is--likewise--a BAD IDEA (it would put the two stations too close together). IMO the best we can do in this situation is a park-and-ride at Morton Station; Morton is easily accessible (Blue Route-Rt. 1-PA 420) and a park-and-ride can be built on a lot between the station and the BJ's.

Wawa is, in my opinion, just too far from the point of maximal automotive access to the train station. A park-and-ride there would actually work more to increase sprawl than ameliorate it. Densification around Wawa would be a better long-term strategy.

Well if you want to talk about Park-and-rides, I can think of two places west of Wawa that would be perfect--one at Westtown, where route 926 crosses over, and at Snyder Avenue/Bolmar street further up. The latter would require the building of a new station on what is now a driving range, but it would have the benefit of direct access to Route 202 via Matlack Street, and would probably take a lot of traffic off of that busy section of road. Heck, you could even put one near the Auto Park, that would give you access to the Westtown Road exit of 202.

Of course, if you wanted to build on SEPTA property, you could build a small lot on what was Oakbourne station, but it would be prohibited by its size.

hammersklavier wrote:Park-and-rides need to be built in the places with the greatest automotive access to the train station and only in those places; densification around the station (usually in the form of TODs) is preferable elsewhere.

I've probably seen the answer on railroad.net before (blush) but ... what's a TOD?

motor
(who caught the [eventual] R3 from Wallingford into Suburban Sta. on a June day in 1982 to see the tall ships at Penns Landing)

The thinking regarding Wawa as far as I know, is that because demand at Elwyn exceeded the available parking before and since the lot was expanded, Wawa would be the logical location.

My completely unverified opinion is that the ridership at Elwyn is riders from Chester county down Rt 1, those from the areas on the South side of West Chester, along with the local area.
Riders from the north side of West Chester that I know personally, are going to Exton/Malvern/Paoli.

Wawa has advantages. Available real estate for parking and a storage yard.
Relocating the storage yard should also allow for expansion of parking at Media, another area where demand exceeds availability.

Talk all you want about Transit Oriented Development, old habits die hard.
People will bitch about gas prices, but the bottom line is until it becomes completely unaffordable, transit is about convience for those that have a choice.

For me, cost is not a factor at this point. My choice to use transit is a matter of convenience.
While I don't have to do so regularly, when I do need to go into the city, I will use transit when possible so I don't have to fight the traffic or worry about parking. In fact, parking is usually the sole driver for me.

My work schedule currently is off hours, so rush hour traffic is not a concern to me. It's all about time. If transit gets to the point where it is faster than driving, then I'll be using it.
I don't have to use transit.....make me WANT to.

motor wrote:

hammersklavier wrote:Park-and-rides need to be built in the places with the greatest automotive access to the train station and only in those places; densification around the station (usually in the form of TODs) is preferable elsewhere.

I've probably seen the answer on railroad.net before (blush) but ... what's a TOD?

motor
(who caught the [eventual] R3 from Wallingford into Suburban Sta. on a June day in 1982 to see the tall ships at Penns Landing)

TOD=Transit Oriented Development. In this case, it would mean building housing within walking distance of the train station with the attempt to dissuade people from using cars to get into the city.