History of the Broad Street Line

MelroseMatt wrote: I'm sure someone has the drawings from the '60s when they built the Adams Ave. subway station. Just start re-building it to the old prints within 180 days, make sure to take your time here, so that engineering has time to figure out what to do with the rest of the line...

Ummm, a lot has changed since the 60's. If you started construction without going through a full "recent" environmental study, you'd have a lawsuit coming your way within about 5 minutes... And the injunction would effectively kill using stimulus dollars for the project.

ChrisinAbington wrote:

MelroseMatt wrote: I'm sure someone has the drawings from the '60s when they built the Adams Ave. subway station. Just start re-building it to the old prints within 180 days, make sure to take your time here, so that engineering has time to figure out what to do with the rest of the line...

Ummm, a lot has changed since the 60's. If you started construction without going through a full "recent" environmental study, you'd have a lawsuit coming your way within about 5 minutes... And the injunction would effectively kill using stimulus dollars for the project.

Tell me your an attorney...


I'm just trying to find a loop hole here

MelroseMatt wrote: Tell me your an attorney...

I'm just trying to find a loop hole here

Nope, an accountant. I truly hate seeing good money go to waste on lawyers fees that could be used elsewhere for improvements.
As everyone else, I also hate to see large studies and expansion plans developed only to sit on a shelf and gather dust. I think if SEPTA were serious about the boulevard subway, we'd have heard a whole lot more about it. It's just not high on their priority list, for better or worse.
(I think all of us agree that's an awful lot of money - and it won't be easy or quiet for them to obtain)
ps. I'd love to see it built

ChrisinAbington wrote:

MelroseMatt wrote: Tell me your an attorney...

I'm just trying to find a loop hole here

Nope, an accountant. I truly hate seeing good money go to waste on lawyers fees that could be used elsewhere for improvements.
As everyone else, I also hate to see large studies and expansion plans developed only to sit on a shelf and gather dust. I think if SEPTA were serious about the boulevard subway, we'd have heard a whole lot more about it. It's just not high on their priority list, for better or worse.
(I think all of us agree that's an awful lot of money - and it won't be easy or quiet for them to obtain)
ps. I'd love to see it built

probably because they don't think it's going to get built. IMO, the right entity to push the project is the city...but they'd rather bult a casino trolley

If SEPTA followed through on everything BSL related there would be....

Rooselvelt Blvd Branch
Passyunk Avenue Branch
Stenton Avenue Branch
X Amount of New Cars (I don't think SEPTA has enough B-IVs for all of the branches)
Heightened Security on trains and in stations

That would make the BSL comparable (Not trying to start a SEPTA Vs NYCTA Argument) to the NYCTA Subway because it would have multiple branches.

However this is all a dream

NortheastTrainMan wrote:If SEPTA followed through on everything BSL related there would be....

Rooselvelt Blvd Branch
Passyunk Avenue Branch
Stenton Avenue Branch
X Amount of New Cars (I don't think SEPTA has enough B-IVs for all of the branches)
Heightened Security on trains and in stations

That would make the BSL comparable (Not trying to start a SEPTA Vs NYCTA Argument) to the NYCTA Subway because it would have multiple branches.

However this is all a dream

Ever come across any maps of the Passyunk and Stenton branches? I've never heard of these proposals.

there was a passyunk spur that was to divert just north of snyder (probably like the ridge spur at fairmount)...you can see they planned for it. I don't this is really necessary. I saw a proposal on another site that called for a Ridge Ave subway that ran through cc south to passyunk then west under passyunk from its start. I rather like this proposal better. ridge ave is also under served and cuts across north philly. I've nver heard of a stenton branch but there was an ogontz branch that was to leave the main at erie, run up 16h to belfield, belfield to ogontz (and eventually ogontz to glenside). a modern version of this would be extending it north (there's an existing flying junction at olney) to stenton, stenton to ogontz. there's a lot of people up there with poor transit and poor highway access, probably makes the most sense of any proposal that's never looked at (whether it be ogontz or stenton).

Quick question which has always bothered me: why don't Ridge trains (at least during the day) turn at Olney instead of continuing to Fern Rock? I used to take the subway from Girard to Fern Rock, and it always kinda bothered me that if I took a ridge train, I had to get off and wait for another train just to go one additional station.

DeltaV wrote:Quick question which has always bothered me: why don't Ridge trains (at least during the day) turn at Olney instead of continuing to Fern Rock? I used to take the subway from Girard to Fern Rock, and it always kinda bothered me that if I took a ridge train, I had to get off and wait for another train just to go one additional station.

Capacity. While there is only four two-car Spur trains on the line middays, the locals and expresses run at a much greater frequency; that also don't count the switching between the two services at the Rock. Running the Spurs to Fern Rock requires a train to sit at the platform for quite some time between trips.

why don't ridge trains run local girard to erie so PATCO riders and students can transfer to temple?

NortheastTrainMan wrote:That would make the BSL comparable (Not trying to start a SEPTA Vs NYCTA Argument) to the NYCTA Subway because it would have multiple branches.

The NYCTA, IRT specifically was built out into unpopulated farm land = Think BIG.

The Philadelphia system was build to meet existing demand = Think small.

Clearfield wrote:

NortheastTrainMan wrote:That would make the BSL comparable (Not trying to start a SEPTA Vs NYCTA Argument) to the NYCTA Subway because it would have multiple branches.

The NYCTA, IRT specifically was built out into unpopulated farm land = Think BIG.

The Philadelphia system was build to meet existing demand = Think small.

The regional rail lines were built out to farmland. Some still serve cornfields (take the R5 Doylestown some time).

Clearfield wrote:

NortheastTrainMan wrote:That would make the BSL comparable (Not trying to start a SEPTA Vs NYCTA Argument) to the NYCTA Subway because it would have multiple branches.

The NYCTA, IRT specifically was built out into unpopulated farm land = Think BIG.

The Philadelphia system was build to meet existing demand = Think small.

it's not thinking, it's acting. the Market Frankford elevated led to an explosion in development in West Philadelphia. As early as 1913, the transit plan envisioned a parkway line that ran up to 29th, then under henry ave, a line to germantown, a line under Ogontz eventually to Glenside, a line to the northeast as far as bustleton. a woodland ave elevated (tied into chestnut st), a center city delivery loop, service to the navy yard, and I believe I've even seen a Girard av (west and east from 16th st, all the way up past richmond). passyunk spur. they thought plenty big, they came up small when it came time to build.

These grand plans were made during Philadelphia's period of enormous growth in the first decade of the 20th century. Then, starting with WWI, the causes of that growth changed, construction costs went up, and automobile use multiplied. It became clear that the branches either were not needed or could not be afforded. City-government money went into other things.

delvyrails wrote:These grand plans were made during Philadelphia's period of enormous growth in the first decade of the 20th century. Then, starting with WWI, the causes of that growth changed, construction costs went up, and automobile use multiplied. It became clear that the branches either were not needed or could not be afforded. City-government money went into other things.

the main difference between here and NY, though, is that they built them. had we not dickered so long and built more of them, we'd have them today. some of these branches would still be useful today (not least of which would be the boulevard subway). Decline in Philly didn't really set in until the Depression, which the city never really recovered from)