Route 15 Trolley Operation

I'm glad their back but the seats, running times/performance are much to be desired. None of the operators are using the IR lamp to change the traffic lights---anyone know why? This line needs all the help it can get to speed things up. The only fast section of track I noticed is between Richmond & Cumberland -Richmond & Lehigh, and thats if there are no stops in between. I'm thoroughly dissapointed at the line's performance so far. Its only been a week, but they gotta speed this thing up.

Yesterday, Sunday, I went into the city to fan the 15. I started following an east bound car and soon realized there was another PCC II right in frnot of it. I should have known. We crawed between the Zoo and Broad St. and then stopped dead as the vehicle in front discharged a wheel chair, I guess for the subway. I timed the stop as traffic piled up behind, nine minutes. If I were a commuter on a weekeday morning and ran into this sort of thing once or twice a week I would think very seriously about alternatives. Perhaps long term, Septa might want to re-think the trolleys on the route 15 and use the cars to reinstitute the Rt 23 Chestnut Hill Line and the Center City Welcome line on weekends. There these cars would be the perfect thing.

Irish Chieftain wrote:

There's a difference? POP does not LRT make; commuter rail and buses use POP too. Plenty of "LRT lines" that have a lot of street-running.

IC, it's not clear to me what it is that I posted which would lead you to reference POP (I assume you mean Proof of Payment fare collection).

I was discussing the the quality of service and associated infrastructure. While it is quite true that some of the post 1970's LRT systems have street running, it does not constitute the majority of route mileage as is the case with RT 15.

From my perspective, the distinction to be made between streetcar level service (RT 15) and LRT is that LRT quality indicates the existence of infrastructure that removes some type of motor vehicle interference with the operation of the rail system, thus allowing the rail system to operate more freely (i.e. at greater speeds).

Reserved median, traffic signal priority and designated stations two or even three blocks apart would substantially speed the service and reduce the possible delays from motorist activity. There is very little of this on RT 15, and it is quite possible that accidents encountered by the streetcar could serve to bring the service to a halt. And there are some stupid drivers in Philadelphia, let me tell ya.

Placing resereved medians along the entire route would be impossible, but there are things that could have been done that were not. Did SEPTA even consider asking for the elimination of a few parking spaces near the corners of the intersections west of Girard College where RT 15 turns?

The whole project could have been done much better that it was. Spending money to have trolleys for the sake of having trolleys without any other substantial benefit for the passengers using the service (remember them?) isn't justifiable.

I was discussing the the quality of service and associated infrastructure

A trolley is a trolley whether it runs on the street, in a center median, or on a former FRA right-of-way. LRT and "streetcar line" will always remain synonyms.

Generally, POP systems are what delineate "old" and "new", hence the mention.

traffic signal priority

No US LRT system enjoys that to my knowledge; certainly none in the northeast.

Did SEPTA even consider asking for the elimination of a few parking spaces near the corners of the intersections west of Girard College where RT 15 turns?


The parking spots in question are not legal, but like the parking situation was on 59th street, enforcement is lacking. Sadly, the parking authority is not too big on towing illegally parked cars unless they are in Center City or in the vicinity of a big event.

One of the biggest problems on the Route 23 was illegally/double parked cars and trucks; especially deliveries. Sad again, was the lack of support from City Hall in helping SEPTA with quick removal, or at least ticketing, idiot cars and trucks.

In regards to the traffic lights, the only difference I've noticed is the trolleys run more red lights then the buses did. At night, if a light turns yellow about a half a block away - they run it.

Irish Chieftain wrote:

A trolley is a trolley whether it runs on the street, in a center median, or on a former FRA right-of-way. LRT and "streetcar line" will always remain synonyms.

I would disagree. I offer the following from Wikipedia:

Paragraph 2-

Light rail is the successor term to streetcar, trolley and tram in many locales, although the term is most consistently applied to modern or modernised tram or trolley operations employing features more usually associated with metro or subway operations, including exclusive rights-of-way, multiple unit train configuration and signal control of operations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Rail

Also see the following from the LRT Association website:

http://www.lrta.org/explain.html

So I would say that there is a distinct set of standards for what is and what is not LRT, though systems are certainly able to combine characteristics of both streetcar/tram and LRT operating environments.

I would default to the 51% rule at this point. Although RT 15 has segments built to LRT standards, the majority of the route still exits in- street mixed with traffic and loading from curbside. Thus, it is more like a streetcar operation of old than younger LRT operations.

Having said that, I would definitely classify the subway-surface lines as LRT because of the tunnel.

I go back to the question of whether it is money well spent. What does having a rail operation on RT 15 improve in terms of better service to the passenger and lower costs through more cost-effective movement of passengers? The answer, given the current circumstances, is not much.

So much more that could have been done to seperate the trolleys from street traffic was not.

Trolleys on RT 15 may spawn economic development. But (at least the last time I looked) it is the mission of SEPTA to move passengers, as opposed to supporting economic development.

Given the choice of a location to spend money for trolleys/LRT, I would have picked replacing the RT 48 articulated buses on 29th Street, using the City Subway tunnel if possible. This would have had a major impact on speed and efficiency for that service.

Bill R. wrote:... But (at least the last time I looked) it is the mission of SEPTA to move passengers, as opposed to supporting economic development.

Remember that those passengers are going somewhere, usually to work or shop. Is (relatively) good rail service one of the reasons so many companies have their offices in Center City, or was the rail service established because there are so many offices? IMO the answer is both... you can't separate the two.

JeffK,

Perhaps the way I went about making my point was not directly on target.

From my perspective, the primary motivation for the RT 15 project seems to have been the politcal agenda of getting SEPTA to spend money within the City of Philadelphia. Girard Avenue neighborhood leaders, and their desire to stimulate economic activity, seem to have been used as an alibi for a money grab. If RT 15 was not on the table, another project would have been found.

How does this fit into the SEPTA long range planning for service implementation? Does SEPTA even have a long range plan for service implementation?

If SEPTA does, it wasn't apparent to the DVARP Board when they generated their own priority list of projects, rather than modifying an existing SEPTA list.

I can't help but think about other situations on which the money might have been spent, including (but not limited to) revamping fare collection with a metrocard-like system. The problem is that type of investment isn't nearly as sexy as returning trolleys to RT 15.

JeffK

Is (relatively) good rail service...

Can RT 15 be described as a relatively good rail service? Does the trolley provide a faster running time? Is the trolley more effective at avoiding delays? Will the O&M costs associated with trolley operation vs. bus be an issue? Will the number of additional passengers carried justify any O&M cost changes?

IIRC, SEPTA spent around $80 million for trolley reinstitution. What do they have to show in terms of concrete improvement for the money? Could they not have at least committed to other improvements (reserved median east of Broad Street) as future phases?

Can RT 15 be described as a relatively good rail service?

No

Does the trolley provide a faster running time?

No

Is the trolley more effective at avoiding delays?

No

It hasn't even been 2 weeks and service is already falling apart. Thurs night at 6pm was being covered by 4 trolleys and 5 buses. At 11:30PM it was 1 trolley and 3 buses. Supposedly because of an "operator shortage" at Callowhill. Yet I bet there are no bus-stitutions going on on Route 10.

To make matters worse, buses pull out at Madison loop 5-10 minutes late to keep schedule, while the trolleys are hopelessly off schedule. In a nutshell, nothing is running on or "close to schedule". Riders are annoyed. A piece of used toilet paper has more value than the timetables SEPTA published which were scarfed up by the railfans, leaving the daily riding public with little access to hand schedules. The whole thing is a mess and SEPTA is doing little to correct it.[/quote]

Some clarifications and amplifications...

Bill R. wrote:From my perspective, the primary motivation for the RT 15 project seems to have been the politcal agenda of getting SEPTA to spend money within the City of Philadelphia. Girard Avenue neighborhood leaders, and their desire to stimulate economic activity, seem to have been used as an alibi for a money grab. If RT 15 was not on the table, another project would have been found.

It does appear that getting other people's money (i.e. Harrisburg and Washington's money) spent in Philadelphia takes greater precedence in City government than actual transportation planning and policy. Otherwise, the City wouldn't be burying transportation planning in a backwater office of the City Planning Commission or letting City Council members hold up an $82 million project over a ward heeler's parking snit.

Another case in point is the City's response to the Schuylkill Valley study. Once the light rail option was found infeasible, the City withdrew its support until SEPTA committed to studying and presumably funding the 52nd Street light rail project (the city component of the light rail SVM plan, pulled out as a separate project).

How does this fit into the SEPTA long range planning for service implementation? Does SEPTA even have a long range plan for service implementation?

If SEPTA does, it wasn't apparent to the DVARP Board when they generated their own priority list of projects, rather than modifying an existing SEPTA list.

To clarify, that prioritization paralleled an exercise DVRPC did at a summit of regional leaders (our president participated), and that priortization included non-SEPTA projects too, like PATCO extensions into Gloucester County. Thus, you couldn't really modify a SEPTA list for that exercise; however it doesn't change the fact that SEPTA does not have a long-range plan, and that lack has resulted in really incoherent project planning on SEPTA's part, and probably contributed to both the rejection of Schuylkill Valley Metro and the problems SEPTA continues to have in Harrisburg right now.

This is not a new problem--the Legislature, CAC, and DVARP were all warning SEPTA they needed to get their act together on long-range planning almost 15 years ago, and they slapped together their ill-fated "Vision of the Future" in response. That was the plan which one insider described as "drawn on a cocktail napkin" and was the first incarnation of the light rail Schuylkill Valley Metro, among other things.

I see no sign that anything is changing, given (the original subject of this discussion) the SEPTA decisions to dump the push pulls and to replace Silverliner II and III cars in kind without either a fleet management plan or a vision for what the railroad is going to look like twenty years from now.

The management shortcomings evident here are profound--we're about to spend a third of a billion dollars without any systematic review of whether we're making the right choices, let alone any such review that regional and state officials or passengers will have a say in.

Compare that to how NJ Transit or any other rail operator in the nation handles equipment purchases and long-range planning.

Maybe you can answer this for me. Given what you say and the length of time for which this has been going on, I have to ask why it seems no one has seriously tried to forcibly reform SEPTA, either by restructuring it or a PennDOT takeover, or something. I've heard from people I worked with at PennDOT what a mess that agency used to be, but now it seems to work pretty well as beaurocracies go. Why hasn't anything been done at SEPTA?

PARailWiz wrote:Given what you say and the length of time for which this has been going on, I have to ask why it seems no one has seriously tried to forcibly reform SEPTA, either by restructuring it or a PennDOT takeover, or something.

This has been at the core of a number of threads and it just doesn't seem to have an obvious answer. SEPTA has somehow managed to armor itself against outside probes. How many of us have written to everyone from local reps to county commissioners to Mr. Eddie himself, only to get a form letter (or less) in response? The attitude seems to be that as long as SEPTA can get buses out of the garage and trains out of the terminals, they're doing their job.

Maybe the powers-that-be figure SEPTA is a lost cause, kind of like how authorities in the Middle Ages dealt with people who had the plague. If the community leaders say some prayers and burn incense to ward off evil spirits it looks as if they're doing something, but in reality nothing will cure the victims, and anyone who actually touches them will die.

PARailWiz wrote:Given what you say and the length of time for which this has been going on, I have to ask why it seems no one has seriously tried to forcibly reform SEPTA, either by restructuring it or a PennDOT takeover, or something. I've heard from people I worked with at PennDOT what a mess that agency used to be, but now it seems to work pretty well as beaurocracies go. Why hasn't anything been done at SEPTA?

Low expectations. The kind endemic to Philadelphia and Pennsylvania government. As far as the elected officials go, their primary goal for SEPTA is for them to make it to June 30 (the end of the fiscal year) without shutting down, requiring a fiscal bailout, or embarrassing said elected officials in the newspaper. Goal number 2 is to get money out of Harrisburg and Washington to spend in Philadelphia. Transportation considerations are third priority at best.

As for why there hasn't been a state takeover yet, prt of the reason is that nobody wants the headaches that come with being responsible for the system.

Well regardless, SEPTA has gone out of their way to make the 15 a failure, insuring that no other rail startups will happen in this system. From what I see, the operators, riding public and residents along the 15 all hate the trolley. It sucks, its slow, the operators are poorly trained, there aren't enough qualified operators to cover the runs. Its really pathetic that we have to deal with this. I know most of you here are fans and not daily riders (save a few) but its total nonsense. Its sad that we have no recourse for this, and with winter knocking on our door, I'm sure I'll be spending alot of time in Father Denny's this winter working on my alcohol habit thanks to SEPTA.

Matt Mitchell responded-

PARailWiz wrote:
Given what you say and the length of time for which this has been going on, I have to ask why it seems no one has seriously tried to forcibly reform SEPTA, either by restructuring it or a PennDOT takeover, or something. I've heard from people I worked with at PennDOT what a mess that agency used to be, but now it seems to work pretty well as beaurocracies go. Why hasn't anything been done at SEPTA?

Low expectations. The kind endemic to Philadelphia and Pennsylvania government.

Matt hit the nail squarely on the head for one cause.

A written editorial discussing the root causes of SEPTA continuing failures basically said this: SEPTA is nobody's problem directly.

SEPTA covers four counties and the City of Philadelphia (an independent county in it's own right for those that are not aware). While there are repesentatives from each of the five counties on the SEPTA Board (mainly political hacks with little knowledge about transit issues), it is beyond the complete control of the indivual county level governments, especially given politcal infighting between urban Democrats and suburban Republicans.

Being restricted to only those counties means that it is not a direct responsibility of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in comparison with the structure of NJ Transit.

A consolidated metro government entity encompassing the five counties does not exist in the Philadelphia region.

So there isn't a single level of goverment responsible, and that leaves the door open for everyone to point the finger of blame at everyone else. All the while, nothing actually improves.

A NJ Transit style solution isn't on the table, and it's not clear to me that such a solution is practical in Pennsylvania due to the size (both population and geographic) of the Commonwealth.

I'd also have to wonder if such a solution wouldn't invite service reductions from less funding caused by anti-Phila/anti-SEPTA attitudes in the rest of Pennsylvania.