PHILADELPHIA | Penn's Landing Redevelopment | 703 - 175 FT | 57 - 12 FLOORS

[Nanyika]

Originally Posted by JohnIII

At some point the only way we'll know if the colonial battery exist is if we look; maybe with ground penetrating radar.

Along the edge of the Delaware River were 2 fortifications; the Atwood Battery and the Association Battery; in all of my research I've never know either battery to be on a hill as much as it was on an outcrop into the river. many believe the colonial artillery batteries are below the surface of what is now Delaware Avenue or some point slightly east; as some point it'll be curious to see if there is anything left as well as to not just post a marker but to use history to add to the future importance of development in the area. This is one article you all may like.

https://preserveoldswedes.org/2015/03/the-battery/

I don't mean to move this thread off topic but solely to answer and correct some historical statements. The George Heap drawing of 1754 clearly shows that the walls of the old fort (the Association Battery) surrounded a hill, or ridge. This was the southern flank of the high ground that Old Swedes' Church lies on today, near what is today Federal Street. It was not on an "outcrop into the river" but set back on the bank of the river. Nicholas Scull's 1762 map (google the Library of Congress map collection to view it) shows that the fort was approximately on a line with Swanson Street. Therefore, if any foundation stones from the old walls remain, they would likely be west of Delaware Avenue, not to the east. The other, smaller battery that John III mentions was on Atwood's Wharf, opposite Lombard St.

I am pleased with the fact that John III cites an article on the Preserve Old Swedes website. I am on the board of that corporation, and I have lectured and written articles that touch on this very topic, which appear on the site.

[TonyTone]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

While were at it, can we get that concrete monolith at Penn's landing to be something useful besides our own Stonehenge? Wasn't it once proposed to connect this part of Philly to Camden with a sky tram or something like that. We could have something like the Roosevelt Island tram that connects Manhattan to Roosevelt Island. Ours of course being Philly to Camden, vice versa.

https://www.nj.com/camden/2016/03/sh...m_eyed_by.html

18 Million on a concrete pillar and to not even finish it.

[JohnIII]

Originally Posted by Nanyika

I don't mean to move this thread off topic but solely to answer and correct some historical statements. The George Heap drawing of 1754 clearly shows that the walls of the old fort (the Association Battery) surrounded a hill, or ridge. This was the southern flank of the high ground that Old Swedes' Church lies on today, near what is today Federal Street. It was not on an "outcrop into the river" but set back on the bank of the river. Nicholas Scull's 1762 map (google the Library of Congress map collection to view it) shows that the fort was approximately on a line with Swanson Street. Therefore, if any foundation stones from the old walls remain, they would likely be west of Delaware Avenue, not to the east. The other, smaller battery that John III mentions was on Atwood's Wharf, opposite Lombard St.

I am pleased with the fact that John III cites an article on the Preserve Old Swedes website. I am on the board of that corporation, and I have lectured and written articles that touch on this very topic, which appear on the site.

You're on the board of the Preserve Olde Swedes corporation! Then I've probably seen you a ton of times and didn't know. The website said it was underground; it should probably be corrected then.

If we ever get a Subway on Delaware Avenue I suppose we'll find out one way or another; there's no telling what's really down there; old cannon etc. I'm pretty sure we've crossed paths before now. The George Heap drawing of 1754 seems to show both points; I see the ridge or hill its within the ramparts that just out into the river; the river seems to be right up against it. I love old maps. The Nicholas Scull's 1762 is totally different; it doesn't show the water right up against the ramparts; and you're right if we use this map; the fort doesn't stand out into the river but it also doesn't show the hill that the Heap Map does; they seem to differ.

When it comes to development on Delaware Avenue being that this is to stay on topic we have a very odd event; markets on the street suggesting one thing as with the website I showed you; and these maps which may or may not contradict. If a subway ever comes and of course this is very speculative I suppose we'll know in time what's in that area.

I would love to see that area with ground penetrating radar; such a project would show a lot of interesting things.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by JohnIII

I think the old Subway spur went to about South Street; however I think if a spur were built it should be longer; if development takes place along the waterfront you'll have new commuters in high-rises as well as current residential areas and new residents may help justify ridership and fund in time.

I still believe that a two-stop spur between South St and 2nd Street is the best solution. If we were to extend the spur along Columbus Blvd to maybe Oregon Ave or the Sports Complex, my only concern would be that we'd hit table water. You have to understand that Center City's elevation is 39 ft, meaning that if each stop were to have a mezzanine and a platform below it, it would be a lot tougher to maintain that tunnel.

There's really no subway line in NYC that runs parallel to the East or Hudson Rivers. Only lines I can think of that's the closest are the Eighth Avenue and the Second Ave lines. Just about almost every subway line in NYC doesn't really run parallel to the rivers but they do intersect them to cross over to the next borough.

The closest line that's close to Chicago's Lakefront is the Shore Line East, which is practically below grade in Chicago's Loop through the South Side to IN. Boston and DC has lines that only cross their water routes and the Bay Areas one tunnel which crosses the SF Bay (and another planned on it's way).

I've said this thousands of times, but the city would've had a much better subway system had the powers that be understood that having an expansive subway system like NYC, Chicago, and Boston was the way to go rather than relying on just two subway lines. It makes a lot of sense converting the Chestnut Hill and Norristown Lines into the subway system and expanding and creating more heavy rail lines along the NE and SW into Bensalem and Chester would've been perfect.

Originally Posted by JohnIII

The consideration os trolleys on Delaware was done before and an elevated Subway is a thought; the only problem with trolleys is that they are at the mercy of automobile traffic at the cross streets and while it is cheaper the width of Delaware Avenue is to be considered; how do pedestrians access it easily through the traffic without hazard. Washington Avenue and Delaware Avenue aren't like Baltimore Avenue in that Baltimore Avenue is not a multi-lane road and the former is. While a Subway is more expensive it does have safety issues already addressed by pedestrian crossing over the roadway or below.

Yet to stay on topic all I can think of it development of skyscrapers because that will justify any mass transit construction.

Delaware Ave is a multilane highway which serves the Port of Philadelphia as well as the numerous shopping centers that line it while Washington Ave had train tracks along it's median. It's better to just expand our current light rail (subway-surface) system in West and Southwest Philadelphia and restore the old 23 line from South Philly to Chestnut Hill.

A subway is much better for long term development than just expanding the light rail system along Delaware and Washington Ave. It still bugs me the city didn't build a more expansive subway system when the city boomed from early 20th century until 1950.

[TonyTone]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

I still believe that a two-stop spur between South St and 2nd Street is the best solution. If we were to extend the spur along Columbus Blvd to maybe Oregon Ave or the Sports Complex, my only concern would be that we'd hit table water. You have to understand that Center City's elevation is 39 ft, meaning that if each stop were to have a mezzanine and a platform below it, it would be a lot tougher to maintain that tunnel.

There's really no subway line in NYC that runs parallel to the East or Hudson Rivers. Only lines I can think of that's the closest are the Eighth Avenue and the Second Ave lines. Just about almost every subway line in NYC doesn't really run parallel to the rivers but they do intersect them to cross over to the next borough.

The closest line that's close to Chicago's Lakefront is the Shore Line East, which is practically below grade in Chicago's Loop through the South Side to IN. Boston and DC has lines that only cross their water routes and the Bay Areas one tunnel which crosses the SF Bay (and another planned on it's way).

I've said this thousands of times, but the city would've had a much better subway system had the powers that be understood that having an expansive subway system like NYC, Chicago, and Boston was the way to go rather than relying on just two subway lines. It makes a lot of sense converting the Chestnut Hill and Norristown Lines into the subway system and expanding and creating more heavy rail lines along the NE and SW into Bensalem and Chester would've been perfect.




Delaware Ave is a multilane highway which serves the Port of Philadelphia as well as the numerous shopping centers that line it while Washington Ave had train tracks along it's median. It's better to just expand our current light rail (subway-surface) system in West and Southwest Philadelphia and restore the old 23 line from South Philly to Chestnut Hill.

A subway is much better for long term development than just expanding the light rail system along Delaware and Washington Ave. It still bugs me the city didn't build a more expansive subway system when the city boomed from early 20th century until 1950.

Well we have the infrastructure for the Trolley to work besides some upgrades and laying some new tracks to connect to 15th concourse unless its already there.

If we don't have to build a subway line and save the money lets do it.

They can easily put some of the new cars they ordered on it and make it semi high speed and it would work great because

1. It has its own Right of way

2. the amount of cross traffic is deals with; The cars can't turn due to protected right turn red arrows.

3. Traffic calming can be put around the Riverfront area, Ikea & spring garden to allow for people to cross safely.

4.People can take the El and get off at spring garden then take the trolley from across the street to go to the riverfront, the shopping center and the arenas, this will save time compared to transferring to the BSL to go south Philly. & Vice Versa.

its a no brainer money maker and helps the people/city. If we get to the point of population where an El extension is granted it will be easy to implement.

[PhillyDreamsReturns]

The autonomous vehicle revolution will greatly reduce subway use to begin with and greatly alter infrastructure of cities in ways difficult for us to imagine today. I think the lack of a fully developed subway system won’t be the problem we see today come 2035. I also thought the Chiefs would win by 20, but that’s my prediction!

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Well we have the infrastructure for the Trolley to work besides some upgrades and laying some new tracks to connect to 15th concourse unless its already there.

If we don't have to build a subway line and save the money lets do it.

They can easily put some of the new cars they ordered on it and make it semi high speed and it would work great because

1. It has its own Right of way

2. the amount of cross traffic is deals with; The cars can't turn due to protected right turn red arrows.

3. Traffic calming can be put around the Riverfront area, Ikea & spring garden to allow for people to cross safely.

4.People can take the El and get off at spring garden then take the trolley from across the street to go to the riverfront, the shopping center and the arenas, this will save time compared to transferring to the BSL to go south Philly. & Vice Versa.

its a no brainer money maker and helps the people/city. If we get to the point of population where an El extension is granted it will be easy to implement.

It's wishful thing to place a trolley line along Delaware Ave. Traffic calming isn't a bad idea but the way Delaware Avenue was designed and engineered as a local highway and placing the line in the middle of the median would be a tough sell. The problem is that much of the city lives inland and a river line (subway or trolley) would be a good idea.

However, I'd rather convert existing ROWs such as the Chestnut Hill and Norristown Lines into the subway system or build new lines in NE and SW Philadelphia than waste my money on a trolley line to Ikea. The bus does it's job doing that even though it's the less sexy option.

Speaking of building new lines, just learned that the city of Montreal has designed a new subway line called the Pink Line https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_L...ontreal_Metro), giving it five total subway lines compared to Philadelphia. Montreal is 141 sq. ft. while Philadelphia is 134 sq. ft. in area. Montreal has 1.7 million people while Philadelphia has about 1.6 million people in it's population. As for density, Montreal has 10,070 ppsm while Philly has 11,796 ppsm. Both cities at one point in their histories were the largest city in their country and both cities are still important major hubs.

Yet somehow Montreal is able to design a new subway line while Philadelphia struggles to expand it's subway system. If completed, Montreal would have the best subway system in Canada, just slightly behind Toronto and if you know Canada, Toronto is no slouch. Maybe it's how Canada treats the cities mass transit systems in comparison to America but Philadelphia got off to a head start during the early 20th century while Montreal designed it's system in the 60's, so there's really no excuse why Philly couldn't have a similar of bigger system than Montreal's.

[TonyTone]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

It's wishful thing to place a trolley line along Delaware Ave. Traffic calming isn't a bad idea but the way Delaware Avenue was designed and engineered as a local highway and placing the line in the middle of the median would be a tough sell. The problem is that much of the city lives inland and a river line (subway or trolley) would be a good idea.

However, I'd rather convert existing ROWs such as the Chestnut Hill and Norristown Lines into the subway system or build new lines in NE and SW Philadelphia than waste my money on a trolley line to Ikea. The bus does it's job doing that even though it's the less sexy option.

Speaking of building new lines, just learned that the city of Montreal has designed a new subway line called the Pink Line https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_L...ontreal_Metro), giving it five total subway lines compared to Philadelphia. Montreal is 141 sq. ft. while Philadelphia is 134 sq. ft. in area. Montreal has 1.7 million people while Philadelphia has about 1.6 million people in it's population. As for density, Montreal has 10,070 ppsm while Philly has 11,796 ppsm. Both cities at one point in their histories were the largest city in their country and both cities are still important major hubs.

Yet somehow Montreal is able to design a new subway line while Philadelphia struggles to expand it's subway system. If completed, Montreal would have the best subway system in Canada, just slightly behind Toronto and if you know Canada, Toronto is no slouch. Maybe it's how Canada treats the cities mass transit systems in comparison to America but Philadelphia got off to a head start during the early 20th century while Montreal designed it's system in the 60's, so there's really no excuse why Philly couldn't have a similar of bigger system than Montreal's.

I'm sorry but Delaware Ave was a highway it was replaced by I-95 so traffic calming on Delaware Ave shouldn't even be looked at as oh no the cars, we should be saying oh yes for the people especially in a area thats supposed to be the most popular and beautiful in the city.

Cars are not a city thing they are a suburb thing, we need to stop allowing the cars to win.

when you get off the highway in NYC what does the sign say "SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MPH UNLESS OTHERWISE POSTED"

Same thing we need in Philly, if people want to speed hop on I-95 and do it, if you want to drive like a person with sense you get off the highway and take the city way with the lights, people, and life of the city.

Also aren't there many places where the light rail infrastructure is in the middle? shit Girard trolley Is in the middle.

Chestnut and Norristown are served by the high speed trolley aint it? I wouldn't stress to much about that until we can get the center city issues fixed or convert RR to full septa, we have trains all over the city they are just double the price and unwilling to work with septa its stupid and really should be taken over, we wouldn't need any new lines if RR is added to the scene.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

I'm sorry but Delaware Ave was a highway it was replaced by I-95 so traffic calming on Delaware Ave shouldn't even be looked at as oh no the cars, we should be saying oh yes for the people especially in a area thats supposed to be the most popular and beautiful in the city.

I realize that but what's the purpose of having streets, avenues, roads, and highways in the first place? Not everybody is going to use the train of the trolley, especially if your job is far away from a subway/light rail line.

I never said that the city and the state shouldn't develop land around Delaware Avenue, but the reality if that developing a light rail line along Delaware Ave is going to be harder. I'd rather develop new lines where the people are (NW, SW, NE) than focus all my energy on Delaware Ave, IMO. And once we develop all the lines, then maybe we can thing of placing a transit line on Delaware Ave in the future.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Cars are not a city thing they are a suburb thing, we need to stop allowing the cars to win.

when you get off the highway in NYC what does the sign say "SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MPH UNLESS OTHERWISE POSTED"

I don't deny that but the reality is that people are going to use cars for different reasons (going to the supermarket, picking up kids from school, going to the park, going to work, camping and hiking, going to another city, etc.). The car isn't going to go anywhere. We may even have a Jetsons-style flying car in the future, but the car is here to say, whether you like it or not.

And if you want to stop cars from winning, then maybe you need to write SEPTA and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and tell them you want more rail lines in Philadelphia and SE PA. There's been many times where I hoped that SEPTA would restore a commuter rail line, only to be let down because SEPTA wanted to "study" the line as opposed to going to work and actually restoring and renovating the line.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Same thing we need in Philly, if people want to speed hop on I-95 and do it, if you want to drive like a person with sense you get off the highway and take the city way with the lights, people, and life of the city.

Nobody's denying that and I hope that the PPD enforces speeders. I used to work as a taxi driver and I always followed the traffic laws.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Also aren't there many places where the light rail infrastructure is in the middle? shit Girard trolley Is in the middle.

Well, duh! I stated I wanted to see route 23 from South Philly to Chestnut Hill to return as a trolley. I also stated in my previous post that I'd love to see the subway-surface system expand with routes along Whitby Ave, Christian St, Lansdowne Ave, Lancaster Ave, and Parkside Ave in West and Southwest Philly.

The beef shouldn't be between us, it should be between SEPTA, the City of Philadelphia, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The fact of the matter is that the city had a long time to expand it's rapid transit system, especially when the city peaked at 2 million people in 1950. Building more subway lines would've made much more sense, but the city of Philadelphia stole a lot of money, that the task of building another subway line was never realized, which is the reason why we have only two subway lines compared to other cities.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Chestnut and Norristown are served by the high speed trolley aint it? I wouldn't stress to much about that until we can get the center city issues fixed or convert RR to full septa, we have trains all over the city they are just double the price and unwilling to work with septa its stupid and really should be taken over, we wouldn't need any new lines if RR is added to the scene.

The NHSL is a heavy rail line. I've seen a train set from Chicago that was parked prior to stopping at 69th St, so it has to be heavy rail, not light rail. If anything, Routes 101 and 102 are trolleys (light rail). And the trains that are double the price are operated by SEPTA, nobody else. The difference is that the trains that cost more are a part of SEPTA's regional rail system and even that has been mismanaged (the alphanumeric designation and operations need to come back).

Last decade, it was possible to travel from Cynwyd to Norristown on the old R6 regional rail route, as well as travel from Doylestown to Thorndale on the old R5, but because SEPTA felt the it was better to remove not just the alphanumeric and color designations, but also turn the Cynwyd line into a low frequency branch (which is why Cynwyd and Bala are struggling), and only allowed regional rail trains south and west of Center City to end at Temple U and trains north and east to end at 30th St.

In the past, having the R1, R2, R3, R5, R6, and R7 was a lot better because it would consolidate all the commuter lines that radiate around the city by allowing a line to start from one point in the metro area (Cynwyd) and terminate to another area (Norristown or even better, Reading) via the Center City Commuter Tunnel. Now, because SEPTA ended that operation and there's a lot more lines than ever (Thorndale, Elwyn, Wilmington, Doylestown, Fox Chase, etc.), it makes it harder for the Cynwyd line to stay open largely because of the short-sighted decision that go inside 1234 Market, not because we want better train service.

[Nanyika]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

The NHSL is a heavy rail line. I've seen a train set from Chicago that was parked prior to stopping at 69th St, so it has to be heavy rail, not light rail. If anything, Routes 101 and 102 are trolleys (light rail). And the trains that are double the price are operated by SEPTA, nobody else. The difference is that the trains that cost more are a part of SEPTA's regional rail system and even that has been mismanaged (the alphanumeric designation and operations need to come back).

To clarify: The Broad Street Subway, Ridge Spur, and PATCO all operate on railroad-gauge track, the same gauge as Regional Rail. In that regard, there would be no problem in running Broad Street trains on lines like Chestnut Hill West, although stations, etc., would have to be rebuilt. On the other hand, the Market-Frankford line runs on trolley-gauge track, the same as Routes 101 & 102 and all the trolley cars. Of course, if there were a change to heavier light rail vehicles (LRVs), the tracks on the street might need to be reinforced.

I operated both trolley cars and subway-surface LRVs in San Francisco for close to 30 years. In fact, I drove some of the old surplus PCC cars (like on Girard Avenue) that Philadelphia sold to SF. These cars now operate on San Francisco's Market Street, where they are real workhorses for travel, as well as being a tourist attraction.

I think similarly restoring trolley lines on E. Market Street in Philadelphia would make sense, especially if they connected directly with the subway surface lines at 13th St. Also, perhaps, the old Welcome Line on 12 St. and the 23 trolley in Germantown should be brought back. In general, however, restoring trolley lines on narrow streets makes less sense, in my opinion. On wider avenues -- including Girard -- SEPTA should consider articulated LRVs, stations featuring high-level boarding at all doors, honor-system fares (with random inspection), the ability to trigger green traffic lights, etc. Such systems can carry more passengers at a faster pace than buses.

I agree with wanderer34 and others who argue that an LRV line on Delaware Avenue should have less priority than other transit projects, even though that project was on the front burner a few years ago. The old single-track trolley line there was mainly for tourists, and at this point, I doubt that ridership would be very high for general travel. On the other hand, a subway line spur from the Market-Frankford Line that reached into South Philadelphia (i.e. perhaps down Moyamensing Avenue) would be tremendous -- but it would obviously be too expensive and ambitious for today's political climate. To see it, we would have to wait for a tremendous re-allocation of resources on the federal level, perhaps under the pressure of increased climate change.

[TonyTone]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

I realize that but what's the purpose of having streets, avenues, roads, and highways in the first place? Not everybody is going to use the train of the trolley, especially if your job is far away from a subway/light rail line.

I never said that the city and the state shouldn't develop land around Delaware Avenue, but the reality if that developing a light rail line along Delaware Ave is going to be harder. I'd rather develop new lines where the people are (NW, SW, NE) than focus all my energy on Delaware Ave, IMO. And once we develop all the lines, then maybe we can thing of placing a transit line on Delaware Ave in the future.



I don't deny that but the reality is that people are going to use cars for different reasons (going to the supermarket, picking up kids from school, going to the park, going to work, camping and hiking, going to another city, etc.). The car isn't going to go anywhere. We may even have a Jetsons-style flying car in the future, but the car is here to say, whether you like it or not.

And if you want to stop cars from winning, then maybe you need to write SEPTA and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and tell them you want more rail lines in Philadelphia and SE PA. There's been many times where I hoped that SEPTA would restore a commuter rail line, only to be let down because SEPTA wanted to "study" the line as opposed to going to work and actually restoring and renovating the line.



Nobody's denying that and I hope that the PPD enforces speeders. I used to work as a taxi driver and I always followed the traffic laws.



Well, duh! I stated I wanted to see route 23 from South Philly to Chestnut Hill to return as a trolley. I also stated in my previous post that I'd love to see the subway-surface system expand with routes along Whitby Ave, Christian St, Lansdowne Ave, Lancaster Ave, and Parkside Ave in West and Southwest Philly.

The beef shouldn't be between us, it should be between SEPTA, the City of Philadelphia, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The fact of the matter is that the city had a long time to expand it's rapid transit system, especially when the city peaked at 2 million people in 1950. Building more subway lines would've made much more sense, but the city of Philadelphia stole a lot of money, that the task of building another subway line was never realized, which is the reason why we have only two subway lines compared to other cities.





The NHSL is a heavy rail line. I've seen a train set from Chicago that was parked prior to stopping at 69th St, so it has to be heavy rail, not light rail. If anything, Routes 101 and 102 are trolleys (light rail). And the trains that are double the price are operated by SEPTA, nobody else. The difference is that the trains that cost more are a part of SEPTA's regional rail system and even that has been mismanaged (the alphanumeric designation and operations need to come back).

Last decade, it was possible to travel from Cynwyd to Norristown on the old R6 regional rail route, as well as travel from Doylestown to Thorndale on the old R5, but because SEPTA felt the it was better to remove not just the alphanumeric and color designations, but also turn the Cynwyd line into a low frequency branch (which is why Cynwyd and Bala are struggling), and only allowed regional rail trains south and west of Center City to end at Temple U and trains north and east to end at 30th St.

In the past, having the R1, R2, R3, R5, R6, and R7 was a lot better because it would consolidate all the commuter lines that radiate around the city by allowing a line to start from one point in the metro area (Cynwyd) and terminate to another area (Norristown or even better, Reading) via the Center City Commuter Tunnel. Now, because SEPTA ended that operation and there's a lot more lines than ever (Thorndale, Elwyn, Wilmington, Doylestown, Fox Chase, etc.), it makes it harder for the Cynwyd line to stay open largely because of the short-sighted decision that go inside 1234 Market, not because we want better train service.

100% I agree cars will not be pushed out in favor of transportation it those two functions just work together. My issue is that philly lets the cars be above anything else, look at the speeding Ive seen people doing 50 on broad st, 40 on Walnut, these are areas packed with civilians, bike riders, kids we need speed bumps in many areas in philly just like NYC.

You also are correct we shouldnt focus all the energy on Delaware Ave we have other areas trolleys can be brought back first. its just the fact that the infrastructure is on Delaware Ave which makes it easy to do.

I think Philly just needs to dissolve Septa and create a new agency PNJTA Pennsylvania New Jersey transportation agency or even better PNDTA Pennsylvania New Jersey Delaware transportation center.

We need to get rid of the dysfunction and just make everything work on one platform, we have Patco, regional rail which is Septa but it isn't. then septa and all its mess. we just need to allow everything to be one. Then I promise you half the issues we have right now wouldn't even be talked about.

[TonyTone]

Check out these articles of previous project ideas.

https://i1.wp.com/www.thetransportpo...6%2C1024&ssl=1

http://www.drpa.org/pdfs/55survey_altpa1.pdf

https://www.thetransportpolitic.com/...sit-alignment/

These were great proposals and should be looked at again of course when we have proper funds paging Mc garth any word on any of these ?

Also if you notice the daily trips numbers and price tag for the Delaware Ave project are included in the 2nd link. plus if we have the Delaware Ave light rail vehicle as shown in the plans it goes to the Navy yard, we don't even need a BSL extension at that point.

Also sorry about the off topicness but it does pertain to this project and etc.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Check out these articles of previous project ideas.

https://i1.wp.com/www.thetransportpo...6%2C1024&ssl=1

http://www.drpa.org/pdfs/55survey_altpa1.pdf

https://www.thetransportpolitic.com/...sit-alignment/

These were great proposals and should be looked at again of course when we have proper funds paging Mc garth any word on any of these ?

Also if you notice the daily trips numbers and price tag for the Delaware Ave project are included in the 2nd link. plus if we have the Delaware Ave light rail vehicle as shown in the plans it goes to the Navy yard, we don't even need a BSL extension at that point.

Also sorry about the off topicness but it does pertain to this project and etc.

Like all things proposed for this fair city, dead in the water.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by Nanyika

To clarify: The Broad Street Subway, Ridge Spur, and PATCO all operate on railroad-gauge track, the same gauge as Regional Rail. In that regard, there would be no problem in running Broad Street trains on lines like Chestnut Hill West, although stations, etc., would have to be rebuilt. On the other hand, the Market-Frankford line runs on trolley-gauge track, the same as Routes 101 & 102 and all the trolley cars. Of course, if there were a change to heavier light rail vehicles (LRVs), the tracks on the street might need to be reinforced.

I operated both trolley cars and subway-surface LRVs in San Francisco for close to 30 years. In fact, I drove some of the old surplus PCC cars (like on Girard Avenue) that Philadelphia sold to SF. These cars now operate on San Francisco's Market Street, where they are real workhorses for travel, as well as being a tourist attraction.

I believe the biggest obstacle facing Philadelphia and it's subway system appears to be the rolling stock used in it's subway lines. DC uses one type of rolling stock (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washin..._rolling_stock), NYC uses two types of rolling stock, one for the IRT lines and another for the BMT and IND iines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yo..._rolling_stock), Chicago has one throughout it's entire system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicag..._rolling_stock), while Boston has different rolling stocks for each of it's lines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_subway#Rolling_stock). In Canada, Toronto uses one currently and Montreal has one.

Had Philly used the same rolling stock the way Chicago and DC has one type of rolling stock, maybe Philly would've had a more extensive subway system, but in the case of Boston, each line has it's own type of rolling stock, and Boston, unlike Philly, was able to expand the Red Line in the 1970's and 1980's. The MBTA is expanding it's Green Line Northward to Somerville and Medford and there's even talk of extending the Blue Line to Lynn.

I still believe that using one type of rolling stock for Philly is the best case scenario but Philadelphia has a strange way of trading it's mass transit system unlike other cities in this country. Either way, there isn't really an excuse why Philly never expanded it's subway system the same way NYC, Chicago, SF, Boston, and DC expanded theirs.

Routes 101 and 102 would greatly benefit Delco had they been converted to grade separated heavy rail as opposed to the current light rail trolley. don't get me wrong, it does its job, but extending those lines from Sharon Hill to Chester would be a boon for Delco. It would cost a lot of money doing that, but I could see Chester booming just because of that line.

Originally Posted by Nanyika

I think similarly restoring trolley lines on E. Market Street in Philadelphia would make sense, especially if they connected directly with the subway surface lines at 13th St. Also, perhaps, the old Welcome Line on 12 St. and the 23 trolley in Germantown should be brought back. In general, however, restoring trolley lines on narrow streets makes less sense, in my opinion. On wider avenues -- including Girard -- SEPTA should consider articulated LRVs, stations featuring high-level boarding at all doors, honor-system fares (with random inspection), the ability to trigger green traffic lights, etc. Such systems can carry more passengers at a faster pace than buses.

I wouldn't waste my time placing a trolley line along Market East. It's too much traffic to deal with plus Market St serves as a major artery in the city, and if a trolley were to break down on Market, that would cause a lot of gridlock. The City Hall subway-surface line is looped for a reason. However, bringing back the 23 as a trolley line from South Philly to chestnut Hill will work and I'm still surprised why SEPTA never brought back the 23 trolley the way they revived the 15 as a PCC trolley and instead split the 23 into two routes, which is inefficient, to say the least.

Originally Posted by Nanyika

I agree with wanderer34 and others who argue that an LRV line on Delaware Avenue should have less priority than other transit projects, even though that project was on the front burner a few years ago. The old single-track trolley line there was mainly for tourists, and at this point, I doubt that ridership would be very high for general travel. On the other hand, a subway line spur from the Market-Frankford Line that reached into South Philadelphia (i.e. perhaps down Moyamensing Avenue) would be tremendous -- but it would obviously be too expensive and ambitious for today's political climate. To see it, we would have to wait for a tremendous re-allocation of resources on the federal level, perhaps under the pressure of increased climate change.

Philadelphia should've expanded it's subway system when the city was growing in the 20th century. When the city peaked with 2 million people in 1950, there was still a chance to build subway lines, but as many people left for the suburbs, the opportunity window became slim to the point of the window being shut. The best time Philly should've expanded was between 1920 and 1950.

There was a station nearby the current site of Penn's Landing called Market-Chestnut, which served as the former eastern terminal of the MFL, but the line became extended to Frankford and the rest is history, which may be the reason why I suggested a station at Penn's Landing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_St...SEPTA)#History)

Originally Posted by TonyTone

100% I agree cars will not be pushed out in favor of transportation it those two functions just work together. My issue is that philly lets the cars be above anything else, look at the speeding Ive seen people doing 50 on broad st, 40 on Walnut, these are areas packed with civilians, bike riders, kids we need speed bumps in many areas in philly just like NYC.

I used to drive a taxicab and, at the most, I believe that Broad and Walnut Sts are marked at 30 mph, so at the most, I'd do up to 40 depending on traffic, and even then, I was always careful, but 50 on Broad is very excessive. Still, I wish Philly did a much better job expanding it's subway lines because it could've gone to good use had they did.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

You also are correct we shouldnt focus all the energy on Delaware Ave we have other areas trolleys can be brought back first. its just the fact that the infrastructure is on Delaware Ave which makes it easy to do.

Germantown Ave would be perfect if SEPTA wanted to bring back the PCC trolleys. The reason for the tracks along Delaware Ave was because of the freight lines from the piers to the warehouses. They didn't call Philadelphia "the Workshop of the World" for no apparent reason.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

I think Philly just needs to dissolve Septa and create a new agency PNJTA Pennsylvania New Jersey transportation agency or even better PNDTA Pennsylvania New Jersey Delaware transportation center.

Good luck with that. It's bad enough this region is fractured, with the DRPA representing the entire region, but our seaports are ran by the Philadelphia Regional Port and the South Jersey Port. In NYC, there's the MTA, NJ Transit, and the Port Authority of NY/NJ. Each transit agency has a responsibility of providing bus and train service in it's respective locales. A PNJTA will never happen, even though I can understand what you're trying to do, but like I said, each transit agency has a responsibility to serve it's locale.

Originally Posted by TonyTone

We need to get rid of the dysfunction and just make everything work on one platform, we have Patco, regional rail which is Septa but it isn't. then septa and all its mess. we just need to allow everything to be one. Then I promise you half the issues we have right now wouldn't even be talked about.

PATCO is a separate system that is ran by DRPA. The regional rail system is operated by SEPTA by the engineers and the conductors have a different union, if that's what you're referring to. The bus and train operators here in Philadelphia have their own unions.

Personally, I wish SEPTA was divided up in three boards, the surface (bus), subway, and commuter rail boards. The commuter rail board would have one representative from each county (Philadelphia, Montgomery, Bucks, Delaware, and Chester counties and if extended to the exurbs Lehigh, Northampton, Berks, and Lancaster), and the subway and surface boards would have 2 representatives from Center City, North, South, West, NW, NE, and SW as well as 2 reps from Delaware, Montgomery, and Bucks.

However SEPTA only operates one five-member board, representing the five-county region and the four suburban counties always overrule Philadelphia in not just the regional rail, but bus and subway operations, which doesn't make any sense, since the subway lines never go to certain parts of the suburban counties.

[PHL10]

Oh man, who's been getting Wanderer hopped up on energy drinks again?

[Justin7]

Sure, the problems of multiple agencies and rolling stocks are real. In an ideal world these things would be simplified. However these issues are orders of magnitude below the real reason Philadelphia's public transit is so far behind its peers: Money, political will, and the antipathy the crazies in Harrisburg feel for the city.

[begratto]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

Speaking of building new lines, just learned that the city of Montreal has designed a new subway line called the Pink Line https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_L...ontreal_Metro), giving it five total subway lines compared to Philadelphia. Montreal is 141 sq. ft. while Philadelphia is 134 sq. ft. in area. Montreal has 1.7 million people while Philadelphia has about 1.6 million people in it's population. As for density, Montreal has 10,070 ppsm while Philly has 11,796 ppsm. Both cities at one point in their histories were the largest city in their country and both cities are still important major hubs.

Yet somehow Montreal is able to design a new subway line while Philadelphia struggles to expand it's subway system. If completed, Montreal would have the best subway system in Canada, just slightly behind Toronto and if you know Canada, Toronto is no slouch. Maybe it's how Canada treats the cities mass transit systems in comparison to America but Philadelphia got off to a head start during the early 20th century while Montreal designed it's system in the 60's, so there's really no excuse why Philly couldn't have a similar of bigger system than Montreal's.

Actually, Montreal is currently building a 67km (42mi) light metro line, the REM (Réseau Express Métropolitain - or Express Metropolitan Network).

Basically it's similar to a subway, but with shorter trains - 80 meters long. It will open in phases between 2022 and 2024. At opening time, there will be a train every 150 seconds at rush hour, every 5 minutes the rest of the day.

The pink line will not be built as it was originally proposed, but a REM phase 2 (REM de l'Est - or Eastern REM) is planned for the same areas - the eastern part of Montreal's island. This will add another 32km (20mi) to the network.

There are are serious talks about adding additional phases in Laval (north of Montreal) and in the Longueuil-Brossard axis, on the south shore of the St. Lawrence river.

[Skintreesnail]

Cool transportation conversation, should probably go into the Philly transportation thread though:
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...164129&page=78

buuut, since the damage is done...

Originally Posted by Nanyika

To clarify: The Broad Street Subway, Ridge Spur, and PATCO all operate on railroad-gauge track, the same gauge as Regional Rail. In that regard, there would be no problem in running Broad Street trains on lines like Chestnut Hill West, although stations, etc., would have to be rebuilt. On the other hand, the Market-Frankford line runs on trolley-gauge track, the same as Routes 101 & 102 and all the trolley cars. Of course, if there were a change to heavier light rail vehicles (LRVs), the tracks on the street might need to be reinforced.

I operated both trolley cars and subway-surface LRVs in San Francisco for close to 30 years. In fact, I drove some of the old surplus PCC cars (like on Girard Avenue) that Philadelphia sold to SF. These cars now operate on San Francisco's Market Street, where they are real workhorses for travel, as well as being a tourist attraction.

I think similarly restoring trolley lines on E. Market Street in Philadelphia would make sense, especially if they connected directly with the subway surface lines at 13th St. Also, perhaps, the old Welcome Line on 12 St. and the 23 trolley in Germantown should be brought back. In general, however, restoring trolley lines on narrow streets makes less sense, in my opinion. On wider avenues -- including Girard -- SEPTA should consider articulated LRVs, stations featuring high-level boarding at all doors, honor-system fares (with random inspection), the ability to trigger green traffic lights, etc. Such systems can carry more passengers at a faster pace than buses.

I agree with wanderer34 and others who argue that an LRV line on Delaware Avenue should have less priority than other transit projects, even though that project was on the front burner a few years ago. The old single-track trolley line there was mainly for tourists, and at this point, I doubt that ridership would be very high for general travel. On the other hand, a subway line spur from the Market-Frankford Line that reached into South Philadelphia (i.e. perhaps down Moyamensing Avenue) would be tremendous -- but it would obviously be too expensive and ambitious for today's political climate. To see it, we would have to wait for a tremendous re-allocation of resources on the federal level, perhaps under the pressure of increased climate change.

Very cool story about running the trolleys in SF. I did hear about them using the Philly PCC cars. I've seen a picture of a trolley "graveyard" with all the PCC trolleys after buses took over. I know busses are a little better for getting around obstacles, but still wish we had more trolley lines. Route 23 should definitely be restored at the least. They run charter trolleys from time to time up to chestnut hill I think. Trolley still makes a lot of sense for short local trips and there's just something about them, especially that PCC trolley. I'd chalk to up to growing up watching Mr. Rogers for myself, but my kid likes them too.

There's currently a trolley modernization project in the works that will introduce new articulated vehicles as well as space out stops and slightly raise the platforms for ADA-compliant access. I think that will do wonders for the system overall, but it would be cool to keep some of the PCC vehicles in the mix, maybe maintain one heritage line (23?), or just have it so every once in a while you'll get a classic trolley on any of the lines.

I do think though that light rail down Delaware ave. makes a lot of sense, particularly because there are a lot of projects in the works along the river that will introduce demand as well as overcrowding on the nearby MFL. It would be easy to merge the route into the existing Girard trolley route where there is a loop already at Laurel and Delaware ave, or further up where Delaware ave becomes Richmond and already has tracks running down it. I don't think it should be center-running though, either the outermost lane of each side should be dedicated to light rail, or something like Toronto does along the lake, which would limit interaction with traffic even more: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6396...!5m1!1e2?hl=en

I think BSL/CHW conversion was actually a proposal at some point. $$ of course, but at the very least it should be taken off the NEC and tie into the main SEPTA RR trunk, which would be a lot cheaper since it's running right next to it at the Allegheny stop on the Norristown line.

[Skintreesnail]

Originally Posted by begratto

Actually, Montreal is currently building a 67km (42mi) light metro line, the REM (Réseau Express Métropolitain - or Express Metropolitan Network).

Basically it's similar to a subway, but with shorter trains - 80 meters long. It will open in phases between 2022 and 2024. At opening time, there will be a train every 150 seconds at rush hour, every 5 minutes the rest of the day.

The pink line will not be built as it was originally proposed, but a REM phase 2 (REM de l'Est - or Eastern REM) is planned for the same areas - the eastern part of Montreal's island. This will add another 32km (20mi) to the network.

There are are serious talks about adding additional phases in Laval (north of Montreal) and in the Longueuil-Brossard axis, on the south shore of the St. Lawrence river.

nice, 120 seconds is pretty impressive I'd say. I really like how versatile light rail is; it can get close to the same efficiency and speed as heavy rail while opening up the possibility of running on the street or at semi-separated grade where needed. Canada seems to really have its act together when it comes to light rail.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by PHL10

Oh man, who's been getting Wanderer hopped up on energy drinks again?