The Future is in the Past

Orphan Road has photos of a 1920 plan for a Seattle Subway System. It looks awfully familiar.

Second Avenue Sagas discusses the 1960 New York Subway Expansion that never happened.

Switchback laments the loss of the Arborway Branch of the Green Line in Boston. The State has a legal obligation to run it as a rail line again, but they just paved over the tracks, hoping the thought will just go away. I would say that Boston is second to AC Transit in rail hate. Not an easy feat when everyone else is trying to put rail lines back.

A post on the Political Environment Blog discusses the loss of a rail fight in Milwaukee back in 1997. Then Governor Tommy Thompson loved the idea, but apparently its demise was due to right-wing radio. It seems like some things never change. The city still can't quite beat back the scourge of winger radio and in a city that's set up well for transit (weighted density 5,830) with approaching $5 gas, things are starting to look up a little when the main paper is pushing both sides a bit harder.

Had Tommy stood up to the local conservative talk radio hosts who still use "light rail" as an all-purpose anti-urban code phrase, workers and students commuting from Waukesha could be riding the rails with some of that $4-gallon gas money in their pockets.

We can learn much from the past, so we don't make similar mistakes going forward.

A Sad Trend in Boston

All around the country cities are trying to add light rail lines, yet some cities have the infrastructure and are failing to see the value. The Arborway is no different. In one of the first posts on this blog I discussed why buses sucked compared to reinstating the streetcar when tracks already existed. Seems like we lost the battle, but not the war. Switchback has more.

The Last PCCs of Mattapan

We know all about the PCC collections that reside in San Francisco and Philly but how about the last holdouts of a bygone era in Boston. The Ashmont-Mattapan Line is the last bastion of operating PCCs that never stopped. And hopefully it will continue past the repairs its undergoing at the moment. The following is a great article about the line from the Weekly Dig. (Links Added for emphasis)

The Mattapan Line is the only continuously operating system of PCCs left in the country, although Mattapan-Ashmont trolleys have been off-line for over a year. The T began jettisoning PCCs in the name of progress in the 1950s and 1960s; today, stretches of their track have been razed to make way for an enormous construction project at Ashmont, a gentrification-happy makeover that includes a new T station and a 116-unit condo development, the Carruth, abutting the Red Line tracks.

While Ashmont is being rebuilt, the trolleys have been moldering at the Mattapan carhouse, which finds itself besieged by more construction at the Mattapan station. In their place, the T has been running a temporary "trolley shuttle" (an MBTA bus). Neighbors have become disgruntled; some worry that the "temporary shutdown" might become permanent. After all, the Arborway Line in Jamaica Plain met its fate that way.

It's an interesting article, check it out.

So Tell Us Why Bus is Better...

The folks at Better Transit Without Trolleys want us to believe a few things below...mainly the 5 points that will be refuted below...

Faster Travel- "Buses Can Provide Faster Service Than Trolleys" is what they say. However we know that diesel engines whether hybrid or not are inferior in terms of acceleration when it comes to moving large loads of people. And with stops short before getting back on the main rail line this will allow greater time savings than a bus. Also, buses going into downtown have to contend with traffic and snow while an LRV will enter the subway system for enhanced people movement. This can even be improved with an rail lane during peak hours and pre-empted signaling. The rails will also be a snow clearing priority...experience from the Silver Line shows that snow is stored in the dedicated lanes after a storm. See picture.

They also complain about cars double parking. Tickets and information can easily take care of that issue. Also the idea of a huge LRV hitting or even just waiting with many angry passengers behind your car is a great deterrent.

Less Waiting- By claiming 17,000 (It's actually more like 14,000 now) passengers they believe that the traffic density does not warrant rail service at increased headways. But the fact is that if bus service continues there will be a continued decline in ridership. If the traffic density of 28,000 from 1988 is to be brought back, this line will need greater vehicle capacity. A band aid simply won't work and neither will limited bus capacity.

More Service - What does more service mean? They mean more frequent service and claim streetcars cost more than buses. Well according to the NTAD this is not true and actually rail is significantly less than buses in terms of expense per rider. This is a ridiculous claim that has been shot down over and over again. They also say that capital costs are less. Well thats not true either given that rail vehicles have a 30 year time frame while buses last 12. That means in order to have the buses you need to buy two for every LRV but then 12 years later you need to buy 2 more meaning you have to have 4 buses for every LRV in cost!!!! And each of those two buses per LRV has a driver meaning even greater operating costs.

Accessibility- They say...can't do it with trolleys...no...we don't know the facts...and we aren't changing our minds. Basically they say it will cost more to apply ADA to streetcars than buses. However streetcars can be low floor and wheelchair accessible also. If it needs to go into the subway and has a certain platform height then neighborhood platforms can be built. They are not that expensive and can easily be created on the bulbouts. Their claim is expense but it should be called an investment. Building and continuing rail operations is an investment, while buses should be seen as a non-returning expense.

Safer Streets for All- this was discussed in the previous post with the bike safety.

What the above excuses tells me is that merchants don't see the direct benefits of rail to them. More riders and greater service means a better situation for them however for some reason they believe buses are the answer. If buses were the answer then all of the rail lines in Boston would have been replaced with buses by now. The proof is in the pudding and the pudding (eg ridership) has dropped by 50% since 1988. They should get it back with rail.

Buses are Better? No They Aren't

So the good folks of Boston are having a debate. Should they restore streetcars on the Arborway Green Line or Replace them with Rapid Bus. Distinction....BRT has its own lanes, Rapid Bus does not. Ridership on the line is in decline from 28,000 in 1988 to 14,400 in 2005. This is really all i need to know to make a decision but lets look at what the bus lovers (actually just afraid of change) are saying.

(Note: Buses are the workhorses of most transit systems but high ridership trunk lines should be more cost effective to extend the reach of bus service in a region. Light Rail serves this need by having lower operating costs per passenger by A. attracting new passengers and B. efficiently bringing them to thier destination)

Tracks Make Pavement Hard to Maintain - Well so do buses. Actually, recent issues have arisen from the Orange Line and its pavement cracking. While this might be an issue with the contractors, it also tells the story of pavement and buses. The weight of a bus is just too much. If they are so worried about the pavement from rail...they should be really worried about the pavement from buses.

Bicycle Hazards - Yes riding over the tracks can be an issue. But Portland has signs and warnings for cyclists. I don't think that a few folks ignoring the warnings and taking the spill every year would be enough to warrant the line not run rail.

Traffic Flow - Here they say that traffic flow for cars will be impeded by the streetcars. Well isn't it already impeded by buses every day? I don't get this logic... why are people so worried about traffic flow? We shouldn't design the world for cars, we should design the world for pedestrians which means that a little traffic calming never hurt anyone. If you need to speed that bad go to Talladega.

Restricted Curbside Access - Well this is a no brainer. In Portland they have bulbouts. And if it takes up 7 parking spaces, so what...see above world for cars link. Heck there is probably an answer including creating several bulbouts for each of the door ends keeping space in the center for cars and deliveries. It's not an insurmountable engineering task and its still not enough to warrant bus only service.

Then they give a plethora of reasons why they feel bus is better... which i will answer tomorrow.