This is what seems main factor behind retention of a few streetcar/trolley systems

I once read a blog entry, which I cannot find right now, stating that the key to survival of the few electric systems in the U.S is alternatives to street running, these being neutral ground in New Orleans, tunnels through hills in San Francisco and Pittsburgh, underground downtown tunnels in Boston, Newark and Philadelphia and long lengths of (surface) reserved track in Cleveland and Boston. Only two systems in the whole of the Americas, one cable operated, survived without using these alternatives.

When there were a lot more of them in North America, the majority did not use alternatives to street running or used very few. The motor car crowded those streets after it began to appear. Bus technology advanced and by the 1950s, new buses could move the same people along any of the routes that were entirely street running. Many streetcars were near the end of their useful working lives by that time and the tracks were also old and worn and those buses cost less than widespread streetcar and track replacement.

Most of the big European systems also use a lot of these alternatives to street running and it appears to be this factor that saved them from abandonment. It means that buses of any type could not move the same people along the same routes.

Most new build systems also use these alternatives to street running and these are in cities where the previous systems were primarily street running.

I remember concluding that long ago. Street running is the biggest trolley killer, it seems. Buses can easily dodge traffic, and they don't need their own tracks.

"Neutral ground"? That's presumably having its own right of way. That's what the Norristown Trolley line has; it's in the western suburbs of Philadelphia. Also the Ashmont-Mattapan Line in Boston.

Looking at new light-rail systems and extensions of old ones, they usually avoid street running for much of their routes, often using street medians and their own rights of way. Elevated trackways and tunnels are not very common.

I think "neutral ground" is strictly a New Orleans term for reserved track in the median of a roadway. Regarding Red Arrow, it may be significant that of the original four lines, the two which survived, Media and Sharon Hill, are the two which cut across the street pattern and have no practical highway substitutes. Actually, that's true of only a small part of the Sharon Hill line, but that little bit seems to have saved the whole line. Otoh, Ardmore had some r/w, but that didn't save it; it was simply paved over for buses.




a

lpetrich wrote: ↑Thu Dec 29, 2022 2:08 pm I remember concluding that long ago. Street running is the biggest trolley killer, it seems. Buses can easily dodge traffic, and they don't need their own tracks.

Buses, however, cannot use reserved track, unless that reserved track is replaced by a road, and also cannot use or at least less suitable for, tunnels often used by light rail.

Then there is the Cincinnati subway, the tunnels are there but were never used. Has anyone here thought that these, had they been completed, would have saved that system from a complete abandonment?

lpetrich wrote: ↑Thu Dec 29, 2022 2:08 pm Looking at new light-rail systems and extensions of old ones, they usually avoid street running for much of their routes, often using street medians and their own rights of way. Elevated trackways and tunnels are not very common.

And these for that matter are often in cities where the previous systems were primarily street running.

ExCon90 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 29, 2022 10:37 pm I think "neutral ground" is strictly a New Orleans term for reserved track in the median of a roadway. Regarding Red Arrow, it may be significant that of the original four lines, the two which survived, Media and Sharon Hill, are the two which cut across the street pattern and have no practical highway substitutes. Actually, that's true of only a small part of the Sharon Hill line, but that little bit seems to have saved the whole line. Otoh, Ardmore had some r/w, but that didn't save it; it was simply paved over for buses.

The 103 and 104 were both killed by the paving over of the median (yes, what New Orleans calls the neutral ground) of the eastern end of West Chester Pike on which they ran.

Myrtone wrote: ↑Sat Dec 24, 2022 5:47 pm ...stating that the key to survival of the few electric systems in the U.S is alternatives to street running, these being neutral ground in New Orleans, tunnels through hills in San Francisco and Pittsburgh, underground downtown tunnels in Boston, Newark and Philadelphia and long lengths of (surface) reserved track in Cleveland and Boston. Only two systems in the whole of the Americas, one cable operated, survived without using these alternatives.

San Francisco also built a downtown tunnel, the Muni Metro (actually the upper level of the BART Market Street Subway).

Toronto maintained downtown street running all along, with the Harbourfront line receiving a new tunnel connection into Union Station.

Philadelphia had street running in Center City as late as 1992, with the 23.

I think this is largely correct. The cities with legacy lines had infrastructure less favorable to bustitution for the lines that survived. But all of them certainly had lots of street running lines that disappeared. However, there are some noteworthy examples of systems that had significant non street running portions but were nevertheless eliminated. Los Angeles is an example of this. Many of the red line routes operated predominately on off street rights of way, some of which are still clearly visible on satellite imagery, and are even being restored to service (eg Santa Ana branch). In downtown, more urban routes, there were some viaducts and even a subway, but Los Angeles killed the system just the same.

So my take away, is that such infrastructure was necessary, but not sufficient on its own to save the old trolley lines. I wonder what else is different in places like Philadelphia and Boston?

Some sections of reserved track were replaced by roads? Did that happen in Los Angeles?

Numerous large European systems also employ these alternatives to operating on the streets, and it appears that it was this choice that prevented the systems from being abandoned. It implies that the same individuals could not be transported along the same routes by buses of any kind.

In cities where the prior systems were predominantly street running, the majority of new build systems also use these substitutes for street running.

Myrtone wrote: ↑Thu Jan 05, 2023 7:47 pm Some sections of reserved track were replaced by roads? Did that happen in Los Angeles?

The rights of way were, for a time, turned into grassy and treed medians … then the need for more traffic lanes hit, and the medians were torn out.