Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Delaware Valley Rail Passenger Vol 12 No 10
The Delaware Valley Rail Passenger
December 1994
Vol. XII, No. 12
ISSN 1073-6859
Published by the Delaware Valley Association of Railroad Passengers in the
interest of continued, improved, and expanded rail service for the present
and
potential railroad and rail transit passengers of southeastern Pennsylvania,
southern New Jersey, and nearby areas.
For more information about DVARP and good rail service, please contact us:
P.O. Box 7505, Philadelphia, PA 19101 215-222-3373
NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS
<dvarp@libertynet.org>
The electronic edition is produced as a public service to the network
community. It is archived on the CUNYVM Listserver in the RAILNEWS
directory. An index of back issues is available by sending INDEX RAILNEWS to
LISTSERV@CUNYVM. Thanks to Geert K. Marien (GKMQC@CUNYVM) for maintaining
this archive! If you have comments or questions, contact us, not Geert!
The DVRP is also archived on these FTP servers
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/graphics/trains/text or graphics/trains/incoming
ftp://hipp.etsu.edu/pub/railroad/dvarp (Thanks to Bob Weir)
Coming soon: recent issues will be available on WWW
see home page opening soon--http:///libertynet.org/~dvarp/dvarp.html
Volumes X (1992) and XI (1993) are on floppy disk for $4.00 each from DVARP.
We hope you consider joining DVARP; your financial support makes possible
this newsletter and our many other activities on behalf of rail and transit
passengers. Annual dues for 1995 are $16.00. see the coupon at ##R.
Contents copyright (C) 1994 DVARP, except photos (C) 1994 credited
photographers
Acting Editor: Don Nigro Online Liason: Matthew Mitchell
For other DVARP officers and committee chairs, find ##Q
Opinions expressed in The Delaware Valley Rail Passenger are not necessarily
those of DVARP or its members. We welcome your comments: call 215-222-3373
contents:
use the search function of your word processor to find articles
##A First Customer Enhancement Programs Initiated
##B Is Light Rail Sometimes The Right Choice?
##C Editor's Note: Schuylkill Valley Metro
##D North Philadelphia Progress
##E Railworks Wins Civil Engineering Award
##F Suggestion For Letters To Legislators On Harrisburg Line
##G Montgomery County Station Improvements
##H News from Delaware
##I Let's Have More Product Differentiation at SEPTA
##J Metra: a Role Model for RRD
##K NJT To Study Commuter Rail To Mt. Holly
##L Route 23 Celebration
##M Letters To The Editor
##N Ooops
##O Upcoming DVARP Meetings:
OCTOBER GENERAL MEETING CANCELED
##P Dues Increase Coming
##Q Cross County Bus
##R DVARP Phone & Voice-mail Directory
##S DVARP Membership Coupon
##A First Customer Enhancement Programs Initiated
by Chuck Bode
SEPTA's employee empowerment project, the Customer Service Enhancement
Committee, continues to make good progress. DVARP, the Citizen Advisory
Committee, and SEPTA all developed information and projects. SEPTA has
already initiated work on the first projects. Best news is that the scope
of passenger involvement is increasing.
SEPTA now has three service measurement programs and one employee
measurement program in operation to obtain information. The visible program
is the rider report card, which passengers have received the past several
years. SEPTA has also selected a group of employees to report in a
structured manner on their trips as passengers. Most recently, an outside
firm has been hired to ride and report. This firm does this in several
cities thus allowing SEPTA to be compared to other systems as well as to its
own goals. Once a year, the employees are surveyed to get their input.
The enhancement committee has come face to face with the daily issues:
Do the rules for both operations and for passengers help or hinder? How
should the rules be enforced--should all the passengers be delayed to deal
with one offending passenger? Should different rules/standards apply to
different parts of SEPTA? The committee has recognized that one rigid
solution is not best. Many ideas are being explored to determine what will
work best in the various types of service.
Eating has been discussed at length. Many passengers are on board for
long periods of time and want to use the time productively, which includes
eating. Some passengers are neat, other passengers are slobs. Because of
the slobs, many SEPTA vehicles resemble rolling garbage dumps discouraging
potential riders. Slobs cost money. Extra effort is required to clean and
exterminate dirty vehicles. This is a place where passengers can help.
Put some "peer pressure" on the slobs. Or, carry their garbage off
yourself. Fair warning, with SEPTA fares expected to increase, the extra
costs of garbage removal are likely to result in a ban on eating on RRD
unless the mess stops.
The Subway Elevated Division project is most immediate because
passengers will directly rate the daily progress. No consultants, no
middle management; direct passenger input. This is the significant
difference from all the other initial projects. 50 passenger volunteers
are to fill out a rating form for each trip. The goal is a diversity of
passengers using different stations and riding at all times of the day. A
half-day training session is planned for October, after which rating should
begin.
RRD is trying an altogether different approach, changing the
organization of management. The West Trenton line is expected to have its
own management, staff, and maybe even dedicated cars by September. The
concept under test is whether a dedicated team covering everything from
track and signals through train operation to management can cost-effectively
improve service and ridership.
Light Rail is beginning with the top priorities from the summer 1993
rider report card. 14.8% of the passengers indicated station security and
14.1% station cleanliness. Suburban Division is working on Route 100.
Surface Division also began with the rider report card. Their project
began in May with schedule adherence, loop & terminal operation (passengers
are permitted to wait on the bus), and performance checks. Additional
items are being added in June.
Finance is trying to get sales office personnel to interact with
customers. Have you noticed the model bus and other new items on sale? The
main purpose is to have something for the staff to communicate about instead
of grumpily ignoring the customers. The difficulty is that it is so hard
for the staff to hear and speak through the thick windows that they
eventually become frustrated and stop trying.
With the new programs, passengers need to continue to participate in
two of SEPTA's ongoing efforts--rider report card and SEPTA on Site. From
our participation in this project we have learned that SEPTA is trying hard
to figure out what the passengers really want. Employees at SEPTA on Site
make a report on what the passengers told them. Much work is done to
extract what the passenger wants from the report cards. We need to realize
that change takes time, and we should not be discouraged because
suggestions are not instantly implemented. The only conclusion that can be
reached from no participation is that all is well.
We need to hear from our members. Do you notice changes? Are the
initiatives working? What suggestions do you have? This is the new SEPTA.
SEPTA has not only empowered the employees, it has empowered the
passengers. Is there any other transit system that puts passengers
projects directly into the process with internal projects? We need to
constructively use this opportunity.
The next time the bus is late don't gripe at the driver, instead smile
and say good morning. Good service requires good passengers.
##B Is Light Rail Sometimes The Right Choice?
by John A. Dawson
From time to time proposals have surfaced calling for the conversion of
a regional rail line to light rail. DVARP has always opposed such
suggestions, believing this course of action to represent a downgrading.
But is this a wise course? I think not.
There are nearby examples of 'transitized' rail lines that we can look
at. One of the most successful rail lines in the Delaware Valley is PATCO's
Lindenwold Line. Using former rail right-of-way, this one line carries over
40,000 weekday trips, which is more than one-half of the trips carried by
SEPTA on all 13 Regional Rail lines put together; with automated fare
collection and one-person train operation, its cost recovery is superior to
either SEPTA or NJ TRANSIT. For many years, fares actually covered
operating expenses.
A second example is provided by Washington's Metrorail. With 80 miles
now in operation, it has lines extending far into the suburbs, territory
that in earlier years would have been served by a traditional railroad
operation. Weekday ridership exceeds 900,000, a number that is 38% greater
than SEPTA's total ridership, railroad plus transit. More people now cross
the Potomac at Washington by Metrorail than by car. Weekend ridership is
good, and obviously attracting riders across all income strata. In
contrast, ride SEPTA on a weekend and one receives the definite impression
that most of the riders are there because they have no choice. Although
these are both examples of heavy rail transit, they show that transit can
provide quality service to suburban corridors and attract riders out of
their cars.
On the other hand, regional rail service does offer a number of
advantages. It can probably provide a more comfortable faster ride over
longer distances. It can operate in mixed traffic with intercity passenger
and freight trains, and new service can be initiated on existing rail lines
with minimal capital investment. However, the rationalization (downsizing)
of the rail network has increased the difficulty of using freight lines, and
Conrail, in particular, has indicated that it wants as little to do with
passenger trains as possible. Even if one can reach an agreement to share
track, service is not likely to be frequent, and in many cases may be
limited to weekday rush hours. In addition, operating costs are high for
traditional rail service. Light rail offers the potential to offer more
service at lower cost, and because it does not require the ridership density
that subway/elevated lines do, it can be extended further into the suburbs.
Modern equipment can operate at 70 mph on a grade-separated right-of-way,
and can be configured to provide comfortable seating.
One long-range project now under consideration by SEPTA and Montgomery
County is that of the Schuylkill Valley Metro, which essentially combines
both ends of the R6 and replaces it with a light rail line. As proposed,
the line would use the existing R6 line from Norristown to Ivy Ridge, and
then shift to the now unused ex-PRR line to cross the river to Bala Cynwyd,
and proceed to Wynnfield Avenue on the existing R6 Cynwyd line. From there
it would use an old Fairmount Park trolley right-of-way to Girard Avenue,
then turn east, using the Route 15 trolley tracks to recross the Schuylkill
River. There it drops down to the CSX right-of-way, where it would run on
its own dedicated track.
After clearing the Pennsylvania Avenue tunnel by the Art Museum, the
route would turn east on the abandoned ex-Reading City Branch. Access to
Center City and the west side office complex would be via paired tracks on
11th and 12th Streets, last used by Route 23, and new track laid in the
Chestnut Street Transitway. The line would terminate at 18th and Chestnut.
This route offers a number of interesting possibilities. It offers
good distribution along Chestnut Street and direct service to the Convention
Center, Art Museum, Zoo, and Mann Music Center. It also provides a much
improved service at transit fares to Bala Cynwyd residents, as well as an
attractive service to Manayunk. And it resolves the issue of what to do
with the inefficient and costly R6 Cynwyd service.
However, operation of the full route to Norristown also creates some
problems. It makes it difficult to extend rail service out the Schuylkill
Valley to Pottstown and Reading. Although in theory, light rail could be
run to those points, this would make for some rather long trolley rides.
Conflicts with Conrail freight movements at Norristown would have to be
resolved, and provision made for access to shippers at Conshohocken, Spring
Mill, and Miquon. It would leave riders in Wissahickon, East Falls, and
Allegheny without service, and it should be noted that both Mayor Rendell
and Senator Specter maintain residences in East Falls. While good speeds
could be maintained on most of the route, street running through Center City
is likely to be slow.
Instead of converting the entire line, why not just convert the Ivy
Ridge portion? It would work well as a stand-alone operation, and it would
leave the R6 Norristown service undisturbed. The distances are relatively
short, and it would improve transit access to important visitor attractions,
as well as to Bala Cynwyd and Manayunk.
Maybe there are better choices, but light rail should receive
consideration. We should avoid imposing one modal solution on all
transportation problems. We need to examine the unique circumstances in each
case, and then make our choice. Light rail transit should not be ruled out
before we even start the process.
##C Editor's Note: Schuylkill Valley Metro
DVARP's most recent statement regarding conversion of a regional rail line
to light rail occurred on July 3, 1994 within our comments on the Delaware
Valley Regional Planning Commission Draft May 1994 Transportation
Improvement Program FY 1995-1998. In reference to project #8622
Schuylkill Valley Metro:
Philadelphia To Oaks Area Extension & Conversion
of SEPTA R6 Line To Light Rail - Study
we noted the following:
This study should be broadened to include an examination of ways to
improve the cost recovery on the SEPTA R6 line rather than seeing conversion
as the only option. The average speed on this line is very slow. Many more
riders could be drawn to this line if the time travel was more competitive
with the Schuylkill Expressway. This could be accomplished through:
improve grade crossings;
replace old jointed rail with new welded rail;
superelevate the curves;
raise speed on many sections of the line from 40 mph to 65 mph;
improve interlockings and signals to permit further travel-time reduction.
Currently, SEPTA runs the slowest commuter railroad in the country.
Its average speed is about 23 mph. The nations average is about 32 mph.
SEPTA's dismally low average speed is the largest factor why the regional
rail lines have such poor ridership and therefore, a low cost recovery.
Furthermore, a rerouting of the R6 trains should be considered. The R6
Cynwyd route to Ivy Ridge is shorter and faster than the routing via East
Falls. The Norristown Line tracks could be reoriented to line with the
Cynwyd route between Shawmont and Ivy Ridge. The stations between Manayunk
and Allegheny on the present Norristown Line could be served through the
diversion of currently non-revenue trains.
##D North Philadelphia Progress
Change is expected at North Philadelphia Station. Amtrak has removed
most of the high level platform. SEPTA was recently presented with a
request to construct a 142 foot wide deck over the R8 line there as part of
commercial development of the site. This appears to be part of the project
begun several years ago to improve the station.--CB
##E Railworks Wins Civil Engineering Award
by Bill Mulloy
The SEPTA Railworks(R) project received the 1994 Award of Merit in the
Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement Competition. This national award
is sponsored by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Railworks(r) was in competition with other large public works projects
located across the country. The major criteria for the award included:
completing the project on time and within budget, meeting quality standards,
maintaining minimal impact to the environment, and maintaining minimal
disruption to the public. Railworks(R) met all of these criteria and has
been called "a model for urban construction" by Gordon Linton, head of the
Federal Transit Administration.
The award was officially presented on September 9, 1994, at a ceremony
held in the Pennsylvania Convention Center Grand Hall (Historic Reading
Train Shed). Speakers included representatives of SEPTA, the Federal
Transit Administration, the City of Philadelphia, and ASCE. The common
theme expressed was that a project of this type should be publicized to
emphasize the importance of restoring our infrastructure and the essential
role it plays in our region.
##F Suggestion For Letters To Legislators On Harrisburg Line
Although Amtrak owns the line between Philadelphia and Harrisburg, for
the past several years it has been a reluctant operator of the Keystone
trains between the two cities. As the line ranks low on Amtrak's scale of
priorities and as capital funds are scarce, Amtrak has been unable to
maintain the railroad to satisfactory standards, and there are signs that
the line is deteriorating.
Currently track 2 is out of service between Overbrook and Bryn Mawr,
and the tower at Bryn Mawr is no longer functioning. The signaling system,
while for the most part still serviceable, is outdated, inefficient, and
badly in need of modernization. A study conducted two years ago for PennDOT
identified about $20 million worth of investment (ties, catenary,
substations, etc.) that should be made within the next five years just to
maintain the railroad to its existing design standards. The rolling stock
currently used by Amtrak is the oldest on its roster and not appropriate for
the type of service operated. New or refurbished cars could enhance the
service and help build ridership.
On the operational side consolidation of the Keystone Service and the
SEPTA R5 service west of Paoli could eliminate costly duplication of service
and increase the options available to riders. Implementation of a combined
schedule convenient for travel between Philadelphia, Chester County,
Lancaster, and Harrisburg could increase ridership, and thus reduce traffic
congestion and air pollution.
DVARP urges you to support funds in the State budget to continue and
improve service on this line. Federal money is available under the
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program, as well as from other
sections of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and
the Clean Air Act for capital investments. We also urge you to support
legislative and policy changes that would permit transferring control of the
line and service to an appropriate State agency. Our volunteers are
available to meet with you if that would be helpful.--JD
##G Montgomery County Station Improvements
Montgomery County has contributed $1.25 million, half the cost, to
rehabilitate Merion, Wynnewood, Philmont, DeKalb Street, Oreland, and Elkins
Park Stations. Work, which varies at each station, typically includes
waiting room, ticket office, plumbing, bathroom, exterior repairs, station
and parking lot lights, platforms and sidewalks, and parking lot paving.
Work is underway at Philmont. Merion and DeKalb are to be repaired in 1994.
Elkins Park, Oreland, and Wynnewood follow in 1995.
(From SEPTA Community Update. CB)
##H News from Delaware
by Chuck Bode
DelDOT recently inaugurated two new Monday to Friday bus routes, U bus
and 896 Link, serving the areas along highways 40, 896, and 7. Both routes
operate approximately 6 am to 6:30 pm. 896 Link operates half- hourly from
S. College and Main in Newark to Peoples Plaza, with 7 trips extended to
Middletown. U Bus also connects S. College and Main in Newark with Peoples
Plaza every 30 minutes, but travels a "u" shaped path through White Clay
Corporate Center, MBNA, Christiana Hospital, Christiana Mall, Governors
Square Shopping Center, and Fox Run Shopping Center. Connections can be
made to DART and Blue Diamond Lines at several locations along the routes.
DVARP members are urged to help make these routes successful by patronizing
them.
##I Let's Have More Product Differentiation at SEPTA
by John R. Pawson
So deeply embedded in our economic culture is product differentiation
that we hardly give it a thought. The variety of restaurants typifies this
practice among the service industries. We have fast-food restaurants which
give minimal service at low cost. We have fine restaurants with elaborate
menus, fine food, much customer attention, and relaxed ambiance for those
who wish to spend more money in return for a different kind of dining
experience.
Even in the world of spectator sports, new stadiums include
accommodations ranging from bleacher-type seats to the plushest, costliest
boxes high above the playing field for those who think it worth the extra
money. Don't let the word out, but the construction of these stadiums is
publicly subsidized.
Little attention is called to this fact either: SEPTA's transportation
service, too, is built around the principle of product differentiation.
Different services run parallel; one of the city's most-traveled bus routes
runs directly above the Broad Street Subway. Ten of the 13 outer terminals
of SEPTA's commuter rail system may also be reached from center city by
transit as well. Each type of service--transit and commuter train--serves
various niches. Evidently, the customers want it this way, just as they do
with restaurants and spectator sports.
Let's carefully analyze public transportation. Loosely, some call it
"transit" (two syllables may be handier than six), but careful speakers and
writers use the words "public transportation" as the generic term. SEPTA and
most of its multi-modal counterparts are designated as "transportation
authorities", not as "transit authorities". The following shows the diverse
qualities of SEPTA's services:
Public Transportation
Transit Commuter Transpiration
(the basic product) (higher quality and price)
[NOTE: The following table didn't convert well to ASCII. Please
follow the numbers--MDM]
1--Urban Transit
2--Suburban Transit
3--Commuter Rail/Commuter Bus
Travel Context
1--Within high density urban areas, which usually extend 5 or more miles
from center city.
2--Radiating from outlying terminals of urban transit, and intra- suburban.
3--Longer distance, primarily between suburban residences and center city
jobs, also reverse commutes and intra-suburban.
Operating Modes
1--Subway-elevated (rapid transit or heavy rail), bus, street car or light
rail transit, trackless trolley.
2--Suburban transit bus, light rail transit.
3--Commuter rail, commuter bus (the later mode is rare in this region).
Attributes in Peak Service
1--Least space per customer, many stand, frequent service, many transfer
points, high degree of integration between operating modes, equally spaced
stops, "flat" fare structure.
2--More space, few stand, better quality seating, less frequent service,
higher average speed, equally spaced but fewer stops, zoned fares.
3--Most space, seats for all, service 2 to 4 times per hour at each outlying
station, few stops in the transit zone, highest average speed, downtown
schedule times suit workplace starting and quitting times, multi-zoned
fares.
Market Relationship to the Automobile
1--Many customers have no car available. Others may find trip less onerous
than driving.
2--Center-City-bound customers find joint urban-suburban transit trip less
onerous than driving. Most intra-suburban customers have no car available.
Most customers have car available for the trip.
3--Service must compare well to driving. Intra-suburban and reverse-
commuters may not have a car available.
SEPTA Operating Division
1--City Transit Division.
2--Suburban Transit Division, comprised of Red Arrow (or Victory) and
Frontier Districts. [NOTE: Victory bus and rail are separate
districts--MDM]
3--Railroad (or Regional Rail) Division (RRD).
Start-Up Year [under SEPTA]
1--1968.
2--1970.
3--1983.
Operating Costs Recovery
1--55%.
2--Victory = 44%, Frontier = 33%.
3--37%
(Overall, SEPTA = 50%)
The 13-year wait before taking over Conrail's commuter railroad
engendered in some of the non-RRD SEPTA staff a distinct slant toward
transit and away from commuter rail service. "We can't afford to run a
railroad, too" was a sentiment that was and occasionally still is heard.
More recently, one staffer lamented in a letter that commuters seem to
think they have a "god given right to a seat". A well known transit
consultant told a SEPTA public hearing that RRD should give up its seats-
for-all policy. A city official wrote that "the ultimate solution may be to
scrap traditional railroad equipment and operating practices in favor of
lower cost, higher speed, more frequent rail transit operation on all but
the Wilmington, Paoli, and Trenton lines."
With such attitudes evident to us (even though they come from a
minority of persons in the industry here), it's likely that Board members
and area political leaders perceive them, too. The fact that dedicated
operating subsidy still is denied SEPTA indicates relatively low confidence
in the authority's ability to spend wisely.
Regardless of how the authority as a whole is perceived, the fact that
a top-management minority in some fashion wants to eliminate commuter rail
service implies the existence of major problems there. Regrettably, the
basic economic parameters for RRD are the lowest or among the lowest of the
13 U.S. commuter railroads.
Although improved from a one-time 32% level, today only 37% of RRD's
operating costs are recovered through fares. Most commuter-rail systems
recover 45 to 55%. At a 55% recovery, City Transit Division greatly excels
that 37% figure. The performance of SEPTA's suburban transit districts
brackets the RRD figure, but that fact largely is ignored. Nearly all of
the economics-based criticism of RRD arises in Philadelphia and over this
37%-55% disparity.
RRD also is low or lowest in the common operating parameters, a
situation which doubtless greatly contributes to the low cost recovery.
These parameters include average train speed, average passenger trip length,
average train load, and the on-time performance average ("reliability").
All of these low ratings permit nay-sayers to justify curtailing RRD service
or converting it to or replacing it with transit.
We must emphasize that their negative case can be made only in this
region. It's not the commuter rail mode that is faulty; but over the
decades, it's how suboptimally its capital and operating funds have been
spent here.
The need is to improve both the quality and cost- effectiveness of RRD
service as the customer and taxpayer perceive them. Spend capital money
strategically. Increase train speed to attract more car-driving commuters.
Extend service attractively and economically to accommodate the currently-
unserved longer-distance commuters. Increase the average train load.
Improve on-time performance. Eliminate the "Toonerville trolley" practices
which annoy RRD customers. Altogether, there should be more product
differentiation between RRD and the transit divisions, not less as some
would have it.
In future issues, we'll go into specifics of how past suboptimizations
can be rectified, how a more business-like RRD can satisfy customers and
taxpayers, and how the RRD-CTD cost-recovery disparity can be narrowed to
halt the carping of the railroad.
##J Metra: a Role Model for RRD
by John R. Pawson
Some who never have experienced the rush-hour conditions of New York
City's public transportation might propose that region's three commuter rail
systems as worthy models for the major improvement of SEPTA's Railroad
Division and its services. However, the facts show otherwise. The number
of passengers carried there is enormous; not so here. Only there will
commuters stand aboard commuter trains. Manhattan's insular location makes
driving to work all the more difficult. As a result, the transportation
industry regards New York City as a special case; its practices often are
inappropriate for use elsewhere.
So we are led to the Chicago region, where the Metra commuter rail
system serves six counties in the "railroad capital of the world". This
single-mode agency sends 13 routes into its service region from four
downtown terminals. Metra claims to provide (self-operated or through
contracts with operating railroad companies) "the nation's finest commuter
rail service". There seem to be no successful challengers to that self-
proclaimed title.
In northeastern Illinois, public transportation became a governmental
duty later than here. A Regional Transportation Authority was set up there
in 1973 to run or to contract out all rapid transit, bus, and commuter rail
services under one central management, as SEPTA does now.
Ten years later (and two years after the old Chicago political machine
collapsed), RTA was converted into an "umbrella" organization. The urban
transit (CTA), suburban transit (PACE), and the commuter rail functions
(Metra) were given to three agencies, each with its own board of directors.
Metra's directors are appointed on a population basis. Six come from
the various counties, one from the city of Chicago, but none from state
level. Each of the three agencies is free to pursue the needs of its own
marketplace niches--the ultimate in public transportation product
differentiation.
A detailed comparison of RRD and Metra is informative. Naturally, the
greater population of the Metra-served region (line 5, below) justifies a
larger-scale commuter rail service than here. Important factors and
parameters of RRD and Metra (drawn from various sources) are included. Bear
in mind that the median scale factor (the Metra figure divided by the RRD
figure) is 1.66.
Comparison of RRD and Metra
SEPTA RRD Metra
Scale
Factor
Political, Demographic, and Service Factors
1. Type of transportation company
multi-modal single mode
2. Major funding method
[annual] appropriations sales-tax surcharge in service area
[from government--MDM]
3. Service area
2184 sq. mi. 3721 sq. mi.
1.70
4. Total route mileage
282 miles 424 miles
1.50
5. Service area population
3.7 million 7.26 million
1.99
6. Annual passenger-miles carried
375 million 1415 million
3.77
7. Annual per-capita passenger miles
96 miles 195 miles
2.03
8.Number of stations served
158 230
1.46
9. Number of trains run:
a. weekday (all day)
360 598
1.66
b. weekday (outbound, 5-5:59 pm)
41 69
1.68
c. Saturday
248 269
1.08
d. Sunday
173 135
0.78
10. Minimum peak-period headway [at terminal--MDM]
3 minutes 5 min. out, 4mins. in
Efficiency and Financial Parameters
11. Average train speed
24 mph 32 mph
1.33
12. Average train load (pas. mi.. per train mile)
76 247
3.25
13. Average passenger trip length
14 miles 21 miles
1.50
14. Average on-time performance (5 min. tolerance)
92% 97%
15. Operating cost recovery
37% 55% + 5% of capital costs
Comments:
1. The single-mode organization allows for specialization. Transit
management attitudes and methods which are unsuited to the market for
commuter rail service cannot intrude, as sometimes appears to be the case at
SEPTA. Management has full control of all resources, while at SEPTA, the
RRD management has to take the services it gets from SEPTA's central staff.
2. Metra's funding is nearly "automatic". Although its funding
does vary with the state of the local economy and the volume of sales, the
management is insulated from political interference with capital and
operating policies. "Holding Metra hostage" for patronage jobs, a favored
project or contractor, etc. appears much less likely than is the case here.
Metra's leaders emphasize that they are not a provider of "social
services". By most regards, they run Metra more like a business than most
public transportation agencies do. Nevertheless, its fares (particularly
over longer distances) tend to be lower than RRD's.
3-5. Metra runs less route mileage in comparison to its larger area and
population. This would be a factor for better economics. Also, it needs to
support the costs of electrification on only 12% of its route mileage, not
100%. However, Metra will increase its non-electrified route mileage soon
when it opens a completely new radial corridor service. (earlier plans to
open a cross-country route have been shelved.) RRD has the economically
easier task of extending existing trains on existing lines instead of having
to add new trains on a new route.
6-7. Likely because of a more commercial attitude, Metra is able to
generate passenger miles much greater than its increased population (even if
slightly more widely scattered) would suggest is appropriate.
8. Metra maintains fewer stations, relatively speaking. There
are, however, some areas where stations are located only a half-mile apart
but are well-used by the neighborhoods which they serve.
9. Both carriers' weekday service levels (both as a whole and in
peak periods) agree with the median scale factor of 1.66. However during
the off-peak periods, Metra's lines (especially the non-electrified ones)
tend to be scheduled more according to passenger demand than at constant
"policy" headways like transit. Even so, Metra (unlike SEPTA provides
outbound service from Chicago after midnight for shift workers and "night
owls".
On weekends (when a few Metra lines don't operate), the commercial
basis shows emphatically as service is limited tightly to demand. On
Saturdays, both railroads run about the same absolute number of trains. On
Sundays, when demand for service is at a minim, Metra runs an average of
just 14 trains per line in service.
10. Metra's practice of more conservatively spacing its peak-
period trains apparently helps to assure its faster (10) and more reliable
(13) service. By so operating, small random lateness have much less effect
on the progress of following trains. (Why RRD trains must run so closely is
gist of another article for these pages.)
11-14. Metra's improved efficiency parameters combine in effect to
produce lower costs and more attractive service. One unseen factor in these
two directions is Metra's use of the spacious gallery car, which quite
adequately seats over 150 passengers. In SEPTA's Silverliners and
Bombardier cars, because of the cramped three-place bench, only about 100 of
some 125 total places per cars actually are salable. Needing fewer cars for
a given traffic reduces cost significantly. (This issue also will be
covered in the future.)
15. The "bottom line": As a result of market size, single-mode
operation, a relatively stable corporate climate over the years, a
commercial attitude, an efficient and market-understanding management,
political support and restraint, effective operations, and suitable rolling
stock, Metra is able to cover the majority of its operating costs and a
little of its capital costs through its reasonable fares.
Except for the size of the market, all of these elements of Metra's
success could be adopted by SEPTA. The challenge would be to put all of
them into action in this region.
##K NJT To Study Commuter Rail To Mt. Holly
by Donald Nigro
With encouragement from DVARP and NJ-ARP, New Jersey Transit will study
commuter (regional) rail to Mount Holly, Burlington County as part of its
Burlington/ Gloucester Initiative. Previously, commuter rail was being
examined only between Philadelphia, Pennsauken and Maple Shade (see
September 1993 issue). This mode with this terminus point will now be
studied just as modified PATCO and light rail are being considered. As
pointed out to NJ Transit, it did not make sense, on the one hand, to
present commuter rail as one of the three options for a Maple Shade terminus
(minimum length) and then, on the other hand, not to study it as an option
for Mount Holly service (full length). Longer haul service is a forte of
commuter rail. To ignore a full length option for this mode was to ignore
the industry's high passenger acceptance for longer hauls.
The following are some of the reasons presented to NJ Transit for full
consideration of commuter rail:
- The national average commuter rail line length is 22 miles. Many
lines are shorter. Some are as long as 90 miles (Port Jervis, NY to
Hoboken, NJ). A Mt. Holly route is approximately 22 miles. To consider
commuter rail to Mt. Holly is a natural. To cut it short at Maple Shade is
unnatural and imprudent, not allowing the examination of this mode's full
potential for this alignment.
- Only commuter rail, because of its routing, offers a station at River
Road, Pennsauken near the Delair Bridge. Such a station location would draw
many riders from the densely populated river communities such as Palmyra,
Cinnaminson, Riverton, Delran, Riverside and Delanco. If not for this
station location, many of these potential passengers will not use rail to
commute. They would not be attracted to a Mt. Laurel or Maple Shade station
(of any mode type) because their commute from home to station would take
them significantly out of the direction of their final destination.
- Commuter rail, like the other modes, would offers intrastate
connections between communities such as Maple Shade, Moorestown and Mt.
Holly. For the small percentage of riders that would like to travel to
Camden, either NJ Transit's #409 or #419 could be restructured so that one
of them offers express feeder bus service between the proposed station at
River Road, Pennsauken and downtown Camden. Such a service could go
possibly to Camden's waterfront.
- Commuter rail also would offer intrastate service through platform
connections in Pennsauken with the Atlantic City Line.
- Commuter rail offers a one-seat (no transfer) ride to Center City
Philadelphia. This is important because Center City is a highly marketable
area for public transportation if it is served properly. Because of its 40
story sky scrapers, Center City offers an employment density eleven times
greater than any area within the region on either side of the Delaware
River, 115, 559 jobs per square mile. There are literally hundreds of
thousands of jobs within walking distance of stations within Center City,
Philadelphia. Center City also offers a wide variety of cultural and
entertainment experiences.
- Suburban Station is central to the business district of Center City
while the PATCO stations on Locust Street are south of it.
- Market East Station, Suburban Station, and 30th Street Station are
lively transportation hubs which offer many more amenities (shops,
restaurants) than the PATCO Stations on Locust Street. Suburban Station
also offers a sprawling underground concourse which is ideal to use to get
to and from the station during inclement weather.
- Commuter rail would offer great connections at 30th Street Station for
Amtrak and SEPTA trains. Philadelphia International Airport is 12 or 15
minutes away (15 minutes scheduled, 12 minutes actual). The Airport train
runs every half hour in each direction from 6:00 am to midnight.
- Commuter rail is the least expensive of the alternatives to construct.
Looking at it another way, commuter rail could be built farther into
Burlington County than other modes for the same cost.
- Commuter rail may eventually be the only politically viable option to
go through Moorestown due to its somewhat less frequent service and its
ability to go through the entire town on a single track.
- During peak hour, commuter rail would offer headways of 20 minutes
from Mt. Holly. Modified PATCO would offer headways of 20 minutes from Mt.
Holly and 10 minutes from Mt. Laurel. With Modified PATCO, Moorestown also
would have headways of 10 minutes. Where headways of 10 minutes may be
unacceptable to Moorestown, 20 minute headways at rush hour may be tolerable
by the community and certainly feasible for a single track through
Moorestown.
- Commuter rail trains are only six inches wider than a modified PATCO
vehicle; 10 feet, 6 inches compared to 10 feet. All modes during the peak
would require multiple car consists. All modes during some off peak hours
would run single car consists.
- The technical feasibility of the merging of a no transfer, three
branch PATCO/modified PATCO system is in question and under review by New
Jersey Transit.
- Commuter rail would have the greatest likelihood of being extended to
Route 206, Pemberton, Fort Dix and beyond. Longer haul service is a forte
of commuter rail. The longest light rail line in the country is 22 miles.
The main destinations are in the middle of this line, with a one-seat ride
to those destinations.
- Commuter rail seats are at least 20.5 inches wide. Light rail seats,
because of the narrowness of the vehicle, are 17.5 inches.
- Commuter rail offers the smoothest ride.
- Commuter rail is FRA compatible with freight service 24 hours a day.
Unlike with modified PATCO and light rail, freight service would not have to
be relegated to the hours between midnight and 6:00 am. Freight service is
increasing on the existing right-of-way. The local freight operates
Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Last fall one- or two-car trains were not
uncommon. In recent months, it has been running upward of 20 cars. Local
communities react strongly when the industrial parks of Hainesport and
Moorestown are serviced even occasionally after 7:00 pm., let alone
consistently after midnight.
Although DVARP and NJ-ARP have strongly encouraged the consideration of
commuter (regional) rail, neither organization at this time has endorsed a
particular mode as the preferred alternative. More study data is yet to
come before an informed judgement can be made.
##L Route 23 Celebration
One hundred years ago, August 12, 1894, electric cars replaced horse
cars between Chelten Ave and Pelhem Depot (today called Germantown Depot).
The first operation on Route 23 occurred October 1, 1859 when the horse
cars were tested. Passenger service from 7th & Diamond to the depot began
8 days later. The line was extended to 8th & Dauphin in 1872. Electric
streetcar operation began August 5, 1894 between 8th & Dauphin and Chelten
Ave. and was extended a second time on February 3, 1895 from Pelham Depot
to Germantown & Rex. Many extensions and changes later the line became
Route 23.
On August 13, 1994, the Philadelphia Trolley Coalition (PTC), the
Philadelphia Street Railway Historical Society (PSRHS), SEPTA, and DVARP
held a birthday party for the Route 23 electric trolley. Shortly after
11am, the crowd of about 100 persons was welcomed to the ceremony by
SEPTA's Ed Springer. Joe Mannix of BVTA and NRHS, spoke on the significance
of the event. Chuck Bode, DVARP, urged the crowd to contact their elected
officials for funding so SEPTA can repair the wire, track, and substations,
and buy new streetcars. Joel Spivak, PTC, unveiled a plaque (funded by
individual contributions of PTC, PSRHS, and DVARP members) placed on the
Depot commemorating the event.
LRV 9111 took the crowd on a short ride, followed by an inspection of
Germantown Depot and 3 generations of streetcars (2 Peter Witts, several
PCCs and LRV 9111). 9111 made several revenue service trips on Route 23
between Chestnut Hill and Ontario Street. SEPTA's Training Dept. concluded
the full day by showing trolley videos, including a National City Lines
promotional movie alleging the great improvements made when PTC's
streetcars were replaced by buses and when PTC moved its offices from
expensive Center City to less costly Wyoming Avenue.
This event again demonstrated the value of SEPTA working with the
community. Articles favorable to public transportation appeared in several
papers both before and after the event, nearby residents received a good
impression of SEPTA, and passengers got another chance to try LRVs. --CB
##M Letters To The Editor
This section includes excerpts from several letters in the interests
of furthering discussion and presenting alternate viewpoints.
From Michael Prosch 6/24/94
[suggestions for empowerment] "...announce all the stops beforehand
(that is, before the train actually stops)."
"...My use of SEPTA involves R6, R5 (PRR part), route 100 and route
125. (Not all for the same trip!) I use the latter two rarely for the
primary reason that the 125 bus takes such a circular and time-consuming
route from Valley Forge to Gulph Mills. Usually, I could drive to Villanova
and back in the time the bus/route 100 trip takes."
From Art Munson 6/17/94
"I hope that any future changes or 'improvements' will keep the
passengers' ride foremost. After all, that is the final product."
"After all the money spent in recent years on STD, we still have 3
incompatible rail systems radiating out of 69th Street Terminal, each needs
its own special emergency cars, rather than a common pool."
"The renewed vehicles and tracks assure yet more decades of
incompatibility."
"...and after all the money spent at 69th Street Terminal, there is
no improvement with respect to the great loss of time during transfers."
"I also notice that the new cars on the 100 race with great power to
the next station, only to lose time standing still for the rather clumsy
fare collection process.
##N Ooops
DVARP volunteers apologize for the blank page 15 in the September
Delaware Valley Rail Passenger. It was intended to have text, but somewhere
between the PC and the printing press the page became blank. Newsletter
production 100 miles from the printing plant prevents face- to-face
communication, so the problem was not discovered until the newsletter was
being mailed.--CB
[NOTE--This problem did not affect the electronic edition--MDM]
##O Upcoming DVARP Meetings:
OCTOBER GENERAL MEETING CANCELED
Due to a lack of business,
the DVARP meeting scheduled for
Saturday, October 15,
at the Lansdowne Public Library
has been canceled.
Commuter Rail Committee:
Call DVARP voice-mail, 215-222-3373, message box 2 for meeting schedule
Light Rail Committee:
October 29, 1:00 pm., the coffee bar at Borders book store in Chestnut Hill
November 26, 1:00 pm., same location
South Jersey Committee:
Call DVARP voice-mail, 215-222-3373, message box 7 for meeting schedule
Transit Committee:
No meeting scheduled this month
##P Dues Increase Coming
After much thought, the members at the September meeting approved an
increase in dues effective January 1, 1995. After several years of level
dues, this increase is necessary because of postal rate increases. The
regular dues will be $16.00 beginning in 1995. The higher level categories
were not increased because they cover their expenses. Introductory ($10)
and Special ($7.50) were not increased because of their specific purpose
and because only a few members are in these categories. Members can save
themselves $1.00 by sending their 1995 dues before the end of the year.--CB
##Q Cross County Bus
A map has surfaced of a possible bus route linking Cottman Ave in
Northeast Philadelphia with Jenkintown, Glenside, Fort Washington Office
Center, Ambler, Montgomery Mall, and several RRD stations, medical
facilities, and malls. Word seems to be that local elected officials are
not supportive of this latest attempt to start a route across boundaries.
Supporters might make more progress by increasing the cost to $100 million
and calling it the Cross-County-MetroBus. Until then passengers have to
use several bus and train lines--with multiple fares and a detour through
Center City Philadelphia--to get from one point along the proposed route to
another--or buy a car.--CB
##R DVARP Phone & Voice-mail Directory
DVARP main number (voice mail line) 215-222-3373
9 Chuck Bode, President 215-222-3373
6 Robert H. Machler, VP-Administration 215-222-3373
5 Sharon Shneyer, VP-Public Relations 215-386-2644
3 Matthew Mitchell, Newsletter Editor 215-885-7448
<mmitchell@asrr.arsusda.gov>
4 Betsey Clark, Volunteer Coordinator 215-222-3373
8 Mark Sanders, Treasurer 215-222-3373
2 John Pawson, Commuter RR Comm. 215-659-7736
(6 to 9 pm please)
3 Transit Committee 215-222-3373
7 Don Nigro, South Jersey Committee 609-869-0020
Dan Radack, Bicycle Coordinator 215-232-6303
Computer e-mail (internet) dvarp@libertynet.org
##T DVARP Membership Coupon
Yes, I want to support improved passenger train service in our region!
Here are my DVARP membership dues for 1994!
Name
Address
City, State, Zip
Please choose a membership category below, enclose check and mail to:
DVARP, PO Box 7505, Philadelphia, PA 19101
( ) Regular: $15.00 ( ) Family: $20.00 ( ) Supporting: $25.00
( ) Sustaining: $50.00 ( ) Patron: $75.00 ( ) Benefactor: $100.00
( ) IntroductoryÑnew members only: $10.00
( ) under 21 or over 65: $7.50
--END--
