New Start Projects

So what do we do? What we have has been shrinking and deteriorating since the 60's really. And year by year we lose routes, service and capacity. There is no good transporation here at all. Public or private.

IF you live in the city, you have to own a car because SEPTA doesen't get you there. If you live in a old neighborhood, owning a car is a pain because the streets weren't designed for every house to have a car, let alone 2 or 3. If you take SEPTA, it takes you twice as long to make the trip. Kind of defeats the purpose of living in the city.

If you live in the 'burbs, you have the train, but it only goes to one place, Center City. It runs once an hour. If you have many places to go, the train does you no good. So the alternative is to sit in traffic somewhere.

It's gotta get better than this......doesen't it?

Philadelphia transit-wise DOESN'T DO ANYTHING.Big people mover or not,NOTHING NEVER HAPPENS.

How very true and how very sad.Still no 15 trolley,no 23 and was suppose to bring the trolley back on the 56 but all of the wire is down and the tracks paved over,been talking about the Blvd subway for years,the SVM and CCM and the Rte 100 extension,no R6 to Bala since '86 and nothing done!By the time they get anything done,I'll be too old to ride on it.

Let me just say that the concept of the CCM has a very real impact for some of us who actually live and work in the western and northern suburbs. A P&W (route 100 on the map) stop mere blocks from my front door afforded the utmost convenience when I worked in the city. Now I'm working in the Plymouth Mtg. Metroplex, a large big box mall. The various stores there employ hundreds of people from towns like Phoenixville, Collegeville, and Norristown, as well as from all over Philadelphia. One of my employees rides three differerent buses for two hours each way from her home in Southwest Philly. I end up driving 40 minutes during rush hour, because I don't feel like making the transfer from the route 100 to the 95 bus, which will only get stuck in the same traffic I'm trying to avoid. Why is this relevant? Because the proposed routing for the CCM runs [i]literally[/i] behind the Metroplex. I can hear freight trains rumbling by once or twice a week. After connecting to the PRR Reading line, it goes across the river, then crosses the existion P&W route. From there, it doesn't just go near King of Prussia, it goes through, just a few dozen yards south of US 202. The Malls, which draw people from the entire region, are immediately north of the road. Put a walkway over the highway from the already raised railbed, and it seems pretty convenient.

The thing you have to remember in the Philadelphia metro area is that the presence of two major railroads in direct competition usually meant there were two parallel trunks in most areas. Were is the operative word here, in that the conrail merger often resulted in a consolidation to the more tenable of the competing lines, more often PRR properties do to there less frequent grade crossings. Thus there were 2 Reading Lines(either side of the R6), which cross one another several times between Philly and Reading. 2 Trenton Cutoffs, whose right of ways still parallel one another just south of the PA Turnpike. Right of ways that are often still present in some form, seen in aerial photos from just a few years ago, cut across the region. Go to terraserver-usa.com, and see the scars of development all along this route in aerial photos just a few years old. I'd like to know that if my next job were in an office park in Fort Washington or Oaks, that I would have transit options as robust as I might have working in Center City. I don't care what type of rail it is, as long as the option is there.

tinmad dog wrote:Why is this relevant? Because the proposed routing for the CCM runs literally behind the Metroplex.

And the station site is not at the Metroplex, but where the Cutoff crosses Butler Pike near Plymouth Road.

2 Trenton Cutoffs, whose right of ways still parallel one another just south of the PA Turnpike.

That's not a second Cutoff, that's the Plymouth Branch, which runs from the R6 near you to Oreland. It is not a viable passenger route--there's little or no concentrated development anywhere near it most of the way, and there's no realistic prospect for same.

The Cross-County Metro looks quite natural to a railfan (or to a SEPTA planner looking for a legacy), or to a Montgomery County policitian whose district is the Cutoff runs through the eastern part of the county, but to the people who have real transportation needs in mind, it's a joke. When a regional conference asked business and planning leaders to rank projects they felt deserved investment, Cross-County ranked last or next to last out of 17 possible projects.

The project that should have the top priority of the list is the Roosevelt Blvd Subway. This is the only project that is almost entirely located along high density areas, and would continously transport large volumes of people at any given time. No other new start can boast that right now. I think the city should approach this as it did the rest of the subways, build it themselves, and make SEPTA operate it.

From a efficiency standpoint, the SVM is on the bottom of the list. SVM goes through very light density areas. SVM also will most likely only transport large volumes of people during peak times only. The Blvd would most likely always be a high volume line, just look at the Blvd today.

The Roosevelt Blvd subway is, I think, a project that has not gotten the attention it deserves. There is a Roosevelt Boulevard Study site. This project doesn't even show up in SEPTA's current Capital Budget. I think the reason it has not gotten much attention is that SEPTA, area lawmakers, and local newspapers concentrated on the SVM, with SEPTA especially putting all their eggs in one basket with the MetroRail concept. The SVM project also included parts of the CCM and Route 100 King of Prussia Extension, and some alternatives included the 52nd Street Connector and City Branch, though not in the MetroRail alternative. Some would say the SVM was a "grab bag" of projects which appealed to a lot of different factions.

From a efficiency standpoint, the SVM is on the bottom of the list. SVM goes through very light density areas.

I think the FTA agrees with you on that one. They said they doubted the ridership projections in the SVM studies for the MetroRail alternative.

I think the city should approach this as it did the rest of the subways, build it themselves, and make SEPTA operate it.

The City's bond rating from the S&P is BBB, barely above investment grade. Raising the $3.6 billion required might be difficult today. Going it alone would probably mean forgoing state help, and federal funding would probably be 50%-60%. It would be great if the City could do this without the help (or hinderance) of the suburbs and the state, but the current political reality is that the City needs to cooperate in order to get things done.

I suppose that is why its not getting built, since the primary beneficiaries are people who live in the city. Most suburbanites are using the R7 and R3. So unless you're going somewhere in between that the regional rails don't go to, the Blvd subway has no appeal to suburbanites. Again, its a shame because it would have the highest ridership.

Lucius Kwok wrote:The Roosevelt Blvd subway is, I think, a project that has not gotten the attention it deserves. There is a Roosevelt Boulevard Study site. This project doesn't even show up in SEPTA's current Capital Budget.

Correct. There's also been a remarkable lack of leadership from the city government--the project has in part been a production of the Streets Department (not to be confused with the Street Department, in which contracts are handed out to political allies).

I think the reason it has not gotten much attention is that SEPTA, area lawmakers, and local newspapers concentrated on the SVM, with SEPTA especially putting all their eggs in one basket with the MetroRail concept.

Though I think the multi-billion price tag may have more to do with the fact that the project is not moving. What's going on is that the planners are hoping that billions in highway money would be showered on the Boulevard, funding both the road and the rail parts of the project.

The SVM project also included parts of the CCM and Route 100 King of Prussia Extension, and some alternatives included the 52nd Street Connector and City Branch, though not in the MetroRail alternative. Some would say the SVM was a "grab bag" of projects which appealed to a lot of different factions.

Well, in its original conception at SEPTA HQ, it was such a grab-bag, as it spliced together the City Branch, Cynwyd-Manayunk, service into King of Prussia, and service to Reading and points enroute). However, the more rational alternatives are pretty straightforward, and should not be tarred with the "grab bag" brush, though the City is still trying to graft an in-city light rail line onto the project.

From a efficiency standpoint, the SVM is on the bottom of the list. SVM goes through very light density areas.

I think the FTA agrees with you on that one. They said they doubted the ridership projections in the SVM studies for the MetroRail alternative.

That's not because the line serves light density areas (portions of it are in the sticks, but others are quite high density, or have the potential for it, like the Phoenix Steel redevelopment site in Phoenixville), it's because SEPTA (despite warnings) used an urban subway model for ridership projections rather than a commuter rail model, among other reasons.

I think the city should approach this as it did the rest of the subways, build it themselves, and make SEPTA operate it.

The City's bond rating from the S&P is BBB, barely above investment grade. Raising the $3.6 billion required might be difficult today. Going it alone would probably mean forgoing state help, and federal funding would probably be 50%-60%. It would be great if the City could do this without the help (or hinderance) of the suburbs and the state, but the current political reality is that the City needs to cooperate in order to get things done.

The City doesn't even want to pay to study the SVM--they don't want to do anything unless it's with other people's money.

Though I think the multi-billion price tag may have more to do with the fact that the project is not moving. What's going on is that the planners are hoping that billions in highway money would be showered on the Boulevard, funding both the road and the rail parts of the project.

I'm not aware of the road part of the project. What are they planning to do with the roads?

Well, in its original conception at SEPTA HQ, it was such a grab-bag, as it spliced together the City Branch, Cynwyd-Manayunk, service into King of Prussia, and service to Reading and points enroute). However, the more rational alternatives are pretty straightforward, and should not be tarred with the "grab bag" brush, though the City is still trying to graft an in-city light rail line onto the project.

OK, they did drop the City Branch in the MetroRail project, but then the City of Philadelphia was not happy with it. Still, the MetroRail plan would have included three other projects:

1. Cynwyd-Ivy Ridge Restoration: This would finally put to use the renovation of the Manayunk bridge/viaduct over the Schuylkill River and reuse the upper Ivy Ridge station which was opened in 1980 and then closed in 1986.

2. Route 100 Extension to King of Prussia: The MetroRail branch would have made the Route 100 extension unnecessay, since the MetroRail route allowed a one-seat ride from Center City to KofP.

3. Cross County Metro: While this would have remained a separate project, the MetroRail technology would have also been used on the CCM.

When the MetroRail plan failed, these three projects went into limbo. I guess with government-funded projects, you expect things to go very slowly. When they decide what to do, will these projects be dropped from the SVM?

As for the City Branch, there is a study mentioned in SEPTA's Capital Budget called the "52nd Street Rail Connector — Feasibility Study," started June 2004. Somebody should start a web site with a collection of all these studies.

[quote="Matthew Mitchell"][quote="tinmad dog"]2 Trenton Cutoffs, whose right of ways still parallel one another just south of the PA Turnpike. [/quote]
That's not a second Cutoff, that's the Plymouth Branch, which runs from the R6 near you to Oreland. It is not a viable passenger route--there's little or no concentrated development anywhere near it most of the way, and there's no realistic prospect for same.[/quote]

First, sorry if I screwed up the quoting thing, kinda new to this board. Forgot to check the map I was talking about to see it only went to Oreland. Look at too many rail maps and it makes your head spin. I don't however thing that the CCM is as farcical as many would see it. I think it ranks in importance only as a component of a fully restored (as opposed to expanded) transit system in the suburban counties. On its own it bears little import, unlike the SVM, P&W expansion and Roosevelt blvd. rapid transit. The septa network at present does not need a link at the outer edge of the regional rail system. The key point is that the track exists because, when built, it served the regions needs. In the intervening decades, the area gradually declined, and is experiencing a massive resurgence. Again they need the passenger service they once enjoyed despite a lack of developement in the area.

Lucius Kwok wrote:

What's going on is that the planners are hoping that billions in highway money would be showered on the Boulevard, funding both the road and the rail parts of the project.

I'm not aware of the road part of the project. What are they planning to do with the roads?

I'm not familiar with the nuts and bolts of it, but I think it would depress portions of the highway, and grade separate some of the intersections.

OK, they did drop the City Branch in the MetroRail project, but then the City of Philadelphia was not happy with it.

Hence the new study in the current capital budget.

Still, the MetroRail plan would have included three other projects:

1. Cynwyd-Ivy Ridge Restoration: [snip]

2. Route 100 Extension to King of Prussia: The MetroRail branch would have made the Route 100 extension unnecessay, since the MetroRail route allowed a one-seat ride from Center City to KofP.

3. Cross County Metro: While this would have remained a separate project, the MetroRail technology would have also been used on the CCM.

When the MetroRail plan failed, these three projects went into limbo. I guess with government-funded projects, you expect things to go very slowly. When they decide what to do, will these projects be dropped from the SVM?

The P&W branch did not go into limbo--there was further study done on that project to get it up to the same stage as Schuylkill Valley, in case the new Locally Preferred Alternative included it.

When they decide what to do, a lot of different things could happen, starting with the project getting a new sponsor to replace SEPTA (considering SEPTA's low credibility at the FTA and elsewhere, it's an enticing idea). What's gotta happen now is a new grant application has to be filed with the FTA, and it has to address the deficiencies FTA called out in the New Starts Report (financial plan, ridership estimates) as well as any deficiencies FTA found but did not mention in the report.

There also has to be a new determination of a Locally Preferred Alternative, which I think requires a public hearing, or at least a meeting. That's where the SEPTA Board or some other sponsoring agency formally kills the MetroRail plan because it's unaffordable and technically flawed, and replaces it with a more sensible alternative.

If they choose one of the non-electrified options, they have to determine how it will reach Center City: either with a forced transfer (probably at Norristown), running straight diesel to 30th St. only, dual-mode of some sort (perhaps a mixed diesel/AC MU consist), switching locomotives en-route or hauling an extra locomotive around, or laying third rail in the tunnel. Most of those will require some technical analysis and cost projection.

Regardless of the alternative chosen, the financial plan has to be rewritten, and the source of local funds identified. And regardless of the alternative chosen, it's almost certainly too late now to file a grant application for FY 2006, so we've now lost at least two more years because of SEPTA's MetroRail folly.

Matthew Mitchell wrote:I'm not familiar with the nuts and bolts of it, but I think it would depress portions of the highway, and grade separate some of the intersections.

That was one of the alternatives, but it was rejected. That alternative called for making the Blvd's "express lanes" into a 4-lane (2 each way) limited-access highway with the train running in the median. It was not picked because it was deemed too destructive to the flow of people in the neighborhoods around it, too expensive, and offering poorer station locations (always in the median of a major highway surrounded by a major road, rather than having access points where people need them -- near the corners, and/or in transit-oriented "town squares" like the one planned at the Blvd & Cottman under the locally preferred alternative).

whew, that was a long parenthetical statement...

Lucius Kwok wrote:The MetroRail branch would have made the Route 100 extension unnecessary, since the MetroRail route allowed a one-seat ride from Center City to KofP.

Have any studies been done to determine where the KofP ridership originates? My anecdotal observations have been that a lot of reverse commuters are going from West Philly, etc. to work at the malls in addition to those who follow the more traditional bedroom-to-CC-office pattern. With or without the 100 extension, those passengers would have a 2-seat ride regardless, just in different directions.

Metrorail would also take a somewhat circuitous route via Norristown that could make it less attractive. In particular some proposals have shown the Norristown-KofP service as a tripper or shuttle, which would be even more inconvenient.

Given that the 100 extension is much more feasible(*) than Metrorail and has a much higher ROI, it would seem that if anything is built, that's where to start.

(*) The extension is only 4 miles, not 62. Admittedly they're a somewhat difficult 4 miles but it's still attainable w/o breaking the bank. There's a known ridership cohort on the 123/124/125 buses, not a blue-sky estimate, and usage would almost certainly increase once faster and more reliable rail service was available. Also the costs for the third substation and extra N-5 cars have already been incurred ... although at the current rate of non-progress the N-5s are gonna be wearing out before one ever pulls into the Plaza.