Tag: Streetcars

  • Another American streetcar, another disappointment

    Another American streetcar, another disappointment

    DC Streetcar eastbound on H Street

    In mid-November, I found myself in Washington DC, accompanying my spouse as she had multiple days of work-related meetings. While I spent part of my time visiting cities in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, I also visited several neighbourhoods in Washington itself. Among the things I wanted to see for the first time was the D.C. Streetcar, one of nearly a dozen systems built across the United States in the last two decades. I had already taken rides on modern streetcars in Atlanta, Detroit, Kansas City, Cincinnati, as well as Portland and Seattle, coming away mostly unimpressed — though Portland, Detroit, and Kansas City show some promise. Washington’s small implementation didn’t win me over either.


    I grew up in Brampton, a suburb of a city that maintained a large legacy streetcar fleet. Growing up, I thought streetcars were the greatest thing: big, smooth, quiet, gliding through some of Toronto’s most interesting neighbourhoods. I watched as the city expanded its street railway network along the waterfront and up Spadina Avenue before I had the opportunity to move to the big city.

    Living in Toronto, and reliant on the streetcars, I got to experience the highs and the lows of street railway operation: traffic congestion, bunching, diversions, bustitutions, but also the sweet late-night rides when the streetcar really felt like the king of the road. The new low-floor Flexity streetcars brought even larger vehicles, but they were subject to the same constraints as the smaller CLRVs.

    The TTC’s indifference to line management and the insistence on slow operation in the name of safety (without actually addressing problems like obsolete switches) made streetcar travel less magical with every passing year. But in Toronto, streetcars are still a workhorse, and there is still no easy way for buses to permanently substitute for the demand on routes like King Street.

    Visiting cities elsewhere in the world, like Vienna or Hiroshima, makes me realize that trams can and should work, something that Toronto has largely forgotten. Or something that American cities rediscovering the streetcar haven’t even figured out.

    Former D.C. Transit streetcar in the distinctive 1956-1962 Trans Caribbean Airlines colour scheme, at Seashore Trolley Museum in Maine

    Like all large American cities, Washington once had a robust streetcar network, with several private operators that consolidated into Capital Transit in 1933. Streetcars extended throughout the District and into Maryland suburbs, with separate companies providing service into Virginia’s sprawling suburbs until 1941.

    Within central Washington, streetcars were required by law to draw electric power from an underground conduit for aesthetic reasons, though outlying areas did not have this this obligation. Therefore, many streetcars in DC, including the modern PCC streetcars acquired in the 1930s and 1940s, had both overhead trolley poles and underbody current collectors.

    The last streetcar line in DC was abandoned in January 1962. Fourteen years later, the first section of the Washington Metro opened for service. Unlike the streetcars, the new Metro system was more of a regional service, reaching far out into the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. (Famously, the affluent and congested Georgetown area of Washington is not served by Metro, which was designed mainly as a commuter service.) Though bus service was consolidated throughout the region, there were parts of Washington left underserved by Metro and local bus. The District government began operating its own bus service, DC Connector, and began planning new streetcar services to serve traditionally underserved and rejuvenating neighbourhoods.


    Map of the proposed Phase I streetcar network. Only the thick red line was completed. 

    The first planned route would have connected Anacostia, a historic neighbourhood with a majority Black population, with the Metro and with the gentrifying Navy Yards district on the north side of the Anacostia River. At first, the new light rail would have followed a disused CSX freight spur line, but disagreements with the railroad and land title issues changed the route to a shorter, on-street alignment. After several false starts, work started in 2009 on a “demonstration line” between Anacostia Metro Station and Joint Base Anacostia–Bolling, a major military installation, with an extension to Minnesota Metro Station to follow.

    Looking east on Firth Sterling Ave SE with the tracks suddenly ending before Suitland Parkway. The abandoned CSX spur line right-of-way is on the right.

    Work was suspended indefinitely in 2010. Today, less than a mile of track remains abandoned in place.

    Looking west on Firth Sterling Ave SE toward Joint Base Anacostia–Bolling, where curb-side streetcar tracks installed in 2009-2010 are left abandoned

    An abbreviated 2.4 mile (3.9 km) H Street-Benning Road Line did open, however, in 2016, several years late. The route, which begins on the H Street overpass north of Union Station, extends east to Oklahoma Avenue, at a public park and sports complex north of the abandoned RFK Stadium. Service, which is currently fare-free, operates every 12 minutes during daytime hours. A parallel bus route, the X2 Benning Road–H Street Line, operates as frequently, but has a much longer route and is considerably faster.

    H Street, in the city’s east side, has long been a lower-income, majority Black neighbourhood, hit hard by disinvestment, civil unrest (especially after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968), crime, and depressed property values. But its proximity to the governmental, cultural, and commercial centres of the city made it an attractive corridor for redevelopment.

    A westbound streetcar shifts into the median on H Street on the way to Union Station

    Though Union Station is the western terminus of the short streetcar line, the connection to the Metro Red Line, Amtrak, MARC, and VRE trains is awkward. H Street is to the north of Union Station, crossing over the multitude of tracks leading into the station platforms on a long overpass. The streetcar stops halfway across, in the median. Passengers getting off the streetcar must walk further west on the median, then cross the eastbound lanes of H Street at a traffic signal controlling a driveway exit from the Union Station parking garage. A poorly marked sidewalk provides the connection into the parking garage (which also houses the Union Station intercity bus terminal) and down towards the main station building.

    The path from DC Streetcar, through a parking garage, towards Union Station

    Like most modern streetcar lines in the United States, the DC Streetcar runs in mixed traffic, in the outer driving lane. This allows for platform level boarding from the sidewalk at each stop, but it also leaves the streetcar susceptible to traffic delays due to congestion and from stopped cars and trucks. Though there are parking and layby spaces to the right of the streetcar track, a wide or improperly stopped vehicle can easily disrupt service. Streetcars regularly squeeze past properly parked delivery vans, as in the photo below.

    A streetcar squeezes past a stopped Amazon delivery van on H Street

    But new streetcar lines in North America are typically less about moving people than it is about sparking new urban development. On H Street, this has definitely happened. New mid-rise rental and condominium residential buildings line the western end, towards Union Station. A Whole Foods grocery store is at the base of one of those buildings, where previously, there was a parking lot and local grocery store.

    Streetcar passes a Whole Foods grocery store at the base of a mew seven-storey rental apartment building, northeast corner of H Street and 6th Street NE
    The same corner in 2008, with a neighbourhood grocery store on the northeast corner of H Street and 6th Street NE (Google Streetview)

    Still, I wonder how much the streetcar itself contributed to the gentrification of H Street. The streetscape is greatly improved, but streetcar ridership is low, despite the free fare. The close proximity to Union Station, government offices, and commercial areas, along with rezoning of vacant lots would have made a bigger impact. However, government investment on the corridor made it attractive for speculators and developers to assemble land and build.

    In the meantime, as rents skyrocket, crime remains a concern. New stores such as Whole Foods do not serve long-term residents and local businesses have been displaced. Like Whole Foods, the streetcar was designed to support the new community, while others continue to take the bus and shop at the Safeway on Benning Road.

    Looking east at H Street and 3rd Street, 2008 (Google Streetview)
    Looking east towards 3rd Street, November 2024

    If the H Street-Benning Road Streetcar was extended in both directions based on the original plans, it could prove to be a useful, albeit slow, transit service filling in one of the gaps left by the Washington Metro system. But as Washington struggles with its city budget, this is very unlikely. By the end of the year, the DC Circulator bus system will disappear for good, further orphaning the single short streetcar line operated by the District.

  • Transit museums’ transit dilemma

    The Pennsylvania Trolley Museum now features a new main entrance and exhibition hall, along with an on-street boarding area complete with vintage signage.

    While visiting Pittsburgh earlier in June, I also paid a second visit to the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum (PTM), located 45 minutes south of Downtown Pittsburgh in Washington PA. I had visited the museum a few years prior as part of a visit to the Pittsburgh area, but since then, a new section of the museum opened to the public, and there were additional cars in operation.

    While I went to PTM with a friend who planned to stick around until the evening, I planned to return to downtown Pittsburgh earlier in the afternoon. I found information on a local transit service operated by Washington County — called Freedom Transit — that ran a route to and from Pittsburgh that stopped not too far from the museum’s main entrance. That plan did not go well at all.

    It is an unfortunate irony that most North American transit museums have poor or non-existent transit access. There are historical reasons why this came to be, but some of the continent’s best transportation exhibitions are inaccessible to newer generations of transit fans, historians, and enthusiasts, many of which do not or cannot drive.

    Washington County Transportation Authority, or “Freedom Transit,” doesn’t offer much freedom
    (more…)
  • How to run a street railway: riding trams in Central Europe

    How to run a street railway: riding trams in Central Europe

    Vienna low-floor tram in the Leopoldstadt district

    Back in October, my spouse and I had the opportunity to visit several countries in Central Europe: Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, though we spent the majority of our time in and around Vienna, as that is where my spouse attended business meetings for several days; we also took time to explore the city and surrounding areas together.

    While there, I experienced how serious cities operate trams seriously. In Bratislava, I saw how a streetcar priority corridor can work in a busy downtown core. In Prague, trams made it through watermain construction zones without detours or unreliable bus shuttles. In Budapest, I rode the world’s longest trams that move more people per hour than many metro lines. In Vienna, where I spent the most time, I experienced a city where transit passengers are treated with respect, and where the trams are reliable, despite no discernable signal priority and plenty of mixed-traffic operations.

    Vienna is an amazing city to visit. It’s been described to me as “what people think Paris is.” That’s pretty much true. It’s a very walkable city with a fantastic café culture full of independent konditorei cafés (which offer sit-down service), with an assortment of rich, tasty cakes and great coffee. It has great art galleries and grand imperial palaces, but without the crushing crowds of Paris and Versailles. As the original Music City, it’s easy to find shows and performances to suit your tastes. (We attended the famous Wiener Staatsoper, where I took in my first live opera, ever, at a surprisingly reasonable price). It’s also a compact city, easy to walk, though the transport system is excellent. Vienna is also a great base for visiting other cities in Central Europe, where Salzburg, Bratislava, Budapest, and Prague are only a few hours away by (frequent and relatively speedy) train.

    We noticed several pedestrian signs showing loving couples, rather than the standard, like this one in front of the Wiener Staatsoper (Opera House)

    Vienna has one of the largest tram systems in Europe, with 30 lines over 176.9 kilometres, and a fleet of 525 cars, including modern articulated LRVs and older trams and trailers. In Vienna, trams alone carry approximately 300 million passengers a year. They run in many different environments: on-street in mixed traffic, reserved lanes, dedicated median and side-of-street rights-of-way; there is also a tram tunnel south of the city centre. Until the 1980s, Straßenbahnen (the German name for trams) were the backbone of Vienna’s transport network, with a small Stadtbahn system (now incorporated into the modern U-Bahn) and regional and suburban (S-Bahn) trains providing limited rapid transit services. Though there are now five U-Bahn lines (two of which evolved from the Stadtbahn), the tram system remains robust and very useful for getting around.

    Like all four cities mentioned in this post, Vienna operates a mix of low-floor trams built in the last 25 years, as well as older high-floor trams, many of which are accompanied by an unstaffed trailer. Vienna’s entire network — trams, buses, U-Bahn, and S-Bahn — is a proof-of-payment system. Fare inspections appeared to be infrequent; neither my spouse nor I were checked during our eight days in Vienna. Tickets and passes can be purchased from a machine (found at every U-Bahn entrance and at many tram stops) or on the WienMobil app.

    An older Type E2 high-floor tram and trailer at Gumpendorfer Straße. Behind is the old Stadtbahn viaduct, which is now part of Line U6. Note the large red “Strassenbahn Haltestelle” sign to the left, a classic Viennese icon that indicates a tram stop.

    There is also a separate interurban tram service called Badner Bahn, which extends to the historic spa town of Baden bei Wien, an hour south of Vienna’s city centre.

    Badner Bahn tram, laying over at Josefsplatz in Baden bei Wien

    The modernized interurban originates in the heart of Vienna — across the street from the Wiener Staatsoper (Opera House) — then along local tram tracks and through the tunnel before entering its own right-of-way through the southern suburbs, and onwards through small towns, farms, and vineyards before arriving in Baden. There are several spurs leading to local industries; the regular passenger service shares the tracks with local freight trains.

    View of the vineyards from Badner Bahn
    A sample of the journey aboard Badner Bahn. Arriving southbound at Guntramsdorf, heading towards Baden bei Wien.

    Bratislava, just over one hour away from Vienna by train (or by catamaran), is served by a network of metre-gauge trams, trolley buses, and diesel buses, though trams predominate in the city centre. On Obchodná, several tram lines, pedestrians, cyclists, and the occasional delivery or emergency services vehicle share a narrow, but busy shopping street. It just works.

    Obchodná, Bratislava

    Outside the congested urban core, trams are afforded reserved lanes, sometimes separated from general traffic with curbs (and even grass medians), sometimes just painted lines. Bratislava’s tram system is smaller than Toronto’s, with 211 cars and 42 kilometres of revenue track, carrying around 70 million riders a year in 2019 (Toronto’s streetcars carried 108 million that year). It is also a much smaller city, with a population of around 660,000. I only visited Bratislava for a day, but I got to ride much of the tram network; I found it an easy and convenient way to get around.

    Reserved, painted tram lanes just outside Bratislava’s city centre

    Budapest, Hungary has the largest street railway system in the world by ridership, with Route 4/6 on Budapest’s Grand Boulevard (Hungarian: Nagykörút), often cited as the world’s busiest tram line. Route 4/6 also operates 53.99 metre long Combino Plus trams, which, when introduced in 2006, were the world’s longest. The Combinos are almost twice the length of Toronto’s new Bombardier Flexity cars, which are 28 metres long. Even with the huge capacity these trams have (they require two pantographs to draw enough power to operate), they operate on Line 4/6 every few minutes, all day long, every day.

    A Combino Plus tram on Line 4 traverses Budapest’s Nagykörút (Grand Boulevard)

    Through the 1970s and 1980s, Budapest’s tram network was slowly cut back in favour of buses, trolley buses, and metro construction. By the 1990s, however, there was a street railway renaissance in Hungary’s capital because of the capacity and economy trams offered. With high frequencies, a private median, and high-capacity low-floor vehicles, Line 4/6 easily matches the capacity of a metro, at comparable speeds. Elsewhere, dedicated lanes and private rights-of-way make it clear that transit riders come first.

    Older trams running along the Danube dip under road bridges on a private right-of-way

    Though Budapest has a large metro network, most of it was not constructed until the l970s and 1980s. However, Line M1 was opened in 1896 as a shallow subway under Andrássy Avenue, the first electric underground metro in the world, and only the second subway, after London’s initial Underground line. Uniquely among urban transit routes, it it is listed as part of an UNESCO World Heritage Site.

    Budapest Line M1 stations, restored to their original appearance, look like miniature New York stations, only cleaner

    Finally, in Prague, we took several trams to take shelter from the rains that greeted us after arriving from Budapest, but also to see the city outside the crowded tourist spots. We took Line 1 from the city centre to the suburban district of Hrdlořezy, and returned via Line 9, taking a slightly different route back. Like Budapest, a metro system was planned and built in the 1970s and 1980s, but trams remained important, often providing local services parallel to deep underground metro lines.

    Old two-car tram train on Line 9, passing a newer low-floor tram on Line 1, Sokolovská, Prague. Most trams run on reserved rights-of-way.

    What interested me was seeing major watermain work along the line. Through trams slowed where work was adjacent, there were no diversions or shuttle buses. The trams ran through.

    Watermain replacement in Prague, with trams still running (taken on a rainy morning)

    Like Vienna, Bratislava, and Budapest, Prague operates a mixed fleet of older high-floor trams and modern low-floor light rail vehicles, similar to Toronto’s new fleet. But in Prague, heritage trams could often be spotted in service, especially on the west bank of the Vltava near Prague Castle.

    Heritage tram #2272 in Prague

    Lessons for Toronto

    After travelling, it can be easy to spot one’s hometown flaws and faults. But I spent a lot of time riding Vienna’s metros, trams, and buses, and mindfully experiencing the transport networks in Bratislava, Budapest, Prague, and Salzburg (which does not run trams, but has a large trolleybus network), I was left with some key takeaways on how to do transit here.

    First and foremost, transit riders were respected. Not necessarily in terms of personable customer service, but the feeling that the next tram or bus was going to arrive on time, and a reliable interval. If there was a delay, it was very well communicated.

    For instance, while waiting for a tram in Vienna, we experienced an unusually long wait. The next tram display kept showing the next two arrivals at 3 and 4 minutes. Not long after, a voice came on a loudspeaker posted above the tram stop sign announcing (in German, translated in English to us by one of my spouse’s colleagues) a delay because of a collision along the route. The blockage cleared after a few minutes, and we boarded a crowded tram. I appreciated the audio announcement, especially as it was a basic tram stop.

    The classic Vienna tram stop. Note the loudspeakers atop the blue bus stop sign (at night, buses take over, hence the Strassenbahn and Autobus stop signs).

    Next vehicle displays were common in every city we visited. They would list — in real time — the next several buses or trams, as well as if the vehicle was low-floor accessible or not with a wheelchair symbol. All buses are now fully accessible, but the information is useful for the tram lines, where there are still many older high-floor vehicles.

    Next vehicle display at a bus stop in Bratislava

    I also noted that in Vienna, and for the most part elsewhere, vinyl advertisement wraps did not cover passenger windows on trams and buses. Bratislava’s wrapped trams had some ads that used window areas, but these were kept to a minimum.

    In Vienna, advertisement wraps kept windows completely free of obstructions
    Advertisement wraps in Bratislava had minimal window coverage

    It was also clear that trams had dedicated signals on their routes, if not necessarily signal priority. But with smaller intersections and relatively short signal timings, the waits at each signalized intersection were generally minimal.

    Note the white tram signals next to the overhead traffic signal. The “A” indicates that a proceed signal will soon appear, and the operator can cancel the door release, so that no more passengers can enter or exit.

    Tram signaling in Vienna and other Central European cites also includes remotely operated electric switches. Overhead signals indicate which direction the switch is set to; operators can pass through junctions at speed. While this is how trams operate in most places around the world, in Toronto, streetcar operators are required to stop before each switch and then crawl.

    Trams pass through a track junction, along with an ambulance and a transit maintenance van. The overhead horizontal signal indicates the switch direction.

    Though many tram stops are in private rights-of-way, in-street tram stops are designed for passenger safety and accessibility. These stops, depicted by the photograph below, have the curb lane raised to the level of the low-floor trams. This increases the visibility of passengers boarding and egressing, and also simplifies ramp deployment. Operators need not exit the cab and manually deploy the accessibility ramp, a timesaver versus the TTC’s ramp deployment on major streets. In the winter, this also helps keep the slush away from the tram stops.

    The raised on-street curb lane at an on-street tram stop in Vienna.

    Though Toronto is a very different city than Vienna, Budapest, or Prague, there are some clear takeaways. Keep the tram windows free of advertisements. Improve communications. Fix the track switches and signalize them. Raise the curb lanes at streetcar stops for safety, convenience, and accessibility. Fix the King Street Transit Priority corridor with a permanent streetscape and tighter vehicle restrictions. If it can be done on a narrow commercial street in Bratislava’s historic centre, there’s no reason why it can’t be done in a world financial capital.

    These can even be done incrementally, but they need to be done if transit riders are deserving of respect and reliable surface transit.

  • Line 3: struck from the maps

    Line 3: struck from the maps

    2018 view of the Scarborough RT, looking north towards Ellesmere Station

    On Monday July 24, at 6:45 AM, a Scarborough RT car on Line 3 derailed soon after departing Ellesmere Station. Forty-five passengers were on board, and five suffered minor injuries. The Scarborough RT, which opened in March 1985, was suspended, and then permanently closed, four months ahead of its planned shutdown on November 18, 2023. For the first time in its history, Toronto’s rapid transit map has shrunk.

    (more…)
  • Middle America’s transit oddities

    Pittsburgh Regional Transit Red Line train in the Brookline neighbourhood

    In 2022, with travel restrictions eased, I had the opportunity to take several road trips throughout the Northeast and Midwestern states, from New York and Maryland to Kentucky and Michigan. Previously on this site, I wrote about my visit to Philadelphia’s Rail Park, a lesser-known, yet ambitious project to repurpose former Reading Railroad corridors in the city’s north end. I also wrote about Dayton’s trolley bus network, which, if operated to its full potential, could be a model for electrifying transit across North America.

    In this post, I write about some of the other interesting transit services in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia that I visited on my travels late last year, including a personal rapid transit prototype, the remnants of a huge legacy streetcar system transformed into a modern light rail line, bus rapid transit lines, and a new streetcar service I last visited while under construction in 2015. I even got to ride TANK.

    Cleveland

    Cleveland Red Line train on one of the many bridges spanning the Cuyahoga River and the Flats. The arched double-decked bridge beyond the Rapid train once carried a streetcar subway into Downtown Cleveland from the west.

    I visited Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Dayton in September 2022.

    Cleveland, like most American cities, once had an expansive streetcar and interurban tram network. The city streetcars lasted until the early 1950s (its PCCs were acquired by the TTC), though the separate Shaker Heights Rapid Transit, which also used PCCs, continued in service.

    The Cleveland system, made up of the heavy-rail Red Line, and the light-rail Blue and Green Lines (the former Shaker Heights services), run almost entirely on the surface, largely adjacent to railway rights-of-way. The Red Line, built between the 1930s and 1960s, was North America’s first airport rail link when that extension opened in 1968. Unfortunately, the service suffers from low ridership, so it operates in two-car trains, every 15 minutes during daytime hours.

    A Greater Cleveland RTA light rail vehicle heads eastbound from Downtown Cleveland, headed towards Shaker Heights. Terminal Tower in the centre background.

    The Red Line follows an old passenger railway alignment into Terminal Tower, the massive transportation hub, office tower, and commercial development on Public Square. The complex included a hotel, Higbee’s Department Store (made famous by its appearance in A Christmas Story) and local and intercity train platforms. With the decline of passenger rail, the trains moved to a much smaller station on the waterfront, and the Higbee’s store later became a casino.

    Both the Red Line and the former Shaker Heights light rail lines share the same tracks east of Downtown Cleveland, and both services run on overhead catenary.

    As the Red Line doesn’t follow city streets, Cleveland built a bus rapid transit line, branded “The HealthLine” on Euclid Avenue between Public Square and East Cleveland. The HealthLine is sponsored by the University Hospital and Cleveland Clinic health care corporations which it serves along with Case Western University and the art and cultural institutions clustered east of Downtown.

    HealthLine bus with left-side doors

    Though the HealthLine operates with special articulated buses with doors on both sides (to serve dedicated median stations, like that shown below), dedicated bus lanes are limited, and buses do not enjoy signal priority. However, the route is frequent and reliable, which is better than most urban bus services in the United States.

    HealthLine bus on Euclid Avenue in Downtown Cleveland

    Cincinnati

    Cincinnati Connector

    Like Cleveland, Cincinnati once had a large streetcar network, with trams also feeding into the city from communities in Northern Kentucky. Cincinnati abandoned its streetcars in the early 1950s, with the TTC acquiring its old PCC fleet.

    The last time I visited Cincinnati, in January 2015, work had started on a new urban streetcar line that would connect its waterfront, the sports stadiums, the central downtown core, and the Over-the-Rhine area, a gentrifying neighbourhood north of the city core.

    Like the modern urban streetcars in Atlanta, Detroit, Kansas City, and Portland, Cincinnati’s Connector serves a small area on a route practically geared to young urban residents and visitors. Though I came away with positive impressions of Kansas City’s streetcar (which is undergoing a lengthy extension), I felt that Cincinnati’s streetcar — like Atlanta’s and Detroit’s — was too slow, too infrequent, and too short to be of great use. At least the service was free to use.

    Junction to yet-to-be-built extension to University of Cincinnati

    One thing I did note is that, unlike Toronto’s busy — and useful — legacy streetcar network, the small Cincinnati Connector loop was built with modern tram standards. The few switches (like the one shown above) are double-point switches, with dedicated signals. This allows streetcars to pass intersections at normal speed, unlike the TTC’s insistence on stopping and then proceeding at a dead slow pace over its manual, single-point track switches.

    Switches were even installed to the proposed, but postponed, extension to University of Cincinnati (a cutback due to Republican opposition to transit projects at the State Capitol), shown in the photo above.

    As a Torontonian, where streetcars form the backbone of transit in the dense, urban downtown area, it’s frustrating to see a small, novelty streetcar line build proper track infrastructure, while our crowded trams are forced to crawl at every intersection because of indifference at the TTC and at City Hall.

    A Cincinnati Bell Connector Streetcar, followed by a SORTA bus

    One of the amusing oddities of transit in the Cincinnati area are the acronyms used by the two local agencies. Cincinnati and the surrounding Ohio municipalities are served by the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority, or SORTA. The agency wisely uses “Metro” as its public brand. Covington and other Kentucky communities are served by the Transit Authority of Northern Kentucky, or TANK. To their credit, the two agencies cooperate on fares, a $5 day pass purchased on one bus is good for all regular services on both agencies. Many TANK routes enter Downtown Cincinnati as well.

    Pittsburgh

    In late October, my spouse and I visited Pittsburgh to attend a conference. Pittsburgh has one of North America’s most fascinating cityscapes, with the downtown core situated where the Allegheny and Monongahela join to form the Ohio River, with steep hills immediately to the north and south. The steep topography is the main reason why Pittsburgh maintained two historic incline railways, where many other cities (including Hamilton) abandoned theirs.

    The Duquesne Incline, on a very bright autumn afternoon

    Pittsburgh was also a leading operator of PCC streetcars until the late 1960s, with a fleet of 666 PCCs — North America’s third-largest — at its peak. Because of Pittsburgh’s many hills, often requiring private rights-of-way or tunnels for streetcars to serve outlying areas, Pittsburgh was late to abandoning its street railway, but with highway projects in the 1950s, a public takeover in the 1960s, declining ridership, and a desire to modernize, most of the lines were abandoned and replaced by buses by 1971. Only a few South Hills lines, which used a lengthy tunnel to access Downtown Pittsburgh, remained.

    Red Line train in Beechview

    The two core southern lines were gradually upgraded to light rail standards, with a downtown tunnel replacing the on-street trackage there. Only a short section of Red Line in Beechview still operates on-street, betraying the service’s streetcar legacy. In 2012, the downtown subway was extended north under the Allegheny River to serve the North Shore, particularly the baseball and football stadiums.

    Steel Plaza Station, part of the Downtown Subway

    In the 1980s, the Port Authority of Allegheny County, the public agency tasked with operating the city’s transit system, designed and built several busways radiating out of the city centre. Like Ottawa’s Transitway before construction of the Confederation Line LRT, the Pittsburgh busways follow former or current railway rights-of-way, with grade-separated road crossings, and with on-street operation in the downtown core. The busways offer rapid transit service, though stations are quite simple, with at-grade pedestrian crossings at most locations and basic shelters.

    Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (East) Busway, Swissvale

    Pittsburgh’s problem though is that the busways and LRT managed to avoid the main university campuses and many of the city’s most vibrant neighbourhoods. Oakwood, the home of University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Mellon University, many of the city’s arts and cultural institutions and some of its densest neighbourhoods, has only local bus service. Not coincidentally, Oakwood was one of the last parts of Pittsburgh to lose its streetcars in 1967.

    South of Pittsburgh, streetcars operate on an abandoned interurban line near Washington, Pennsylvania. Unlike the Halton County Radial Railway, the Washington interurban line’s tracks were not yet removed when the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum was formed. The museum, which operates several streetcars and hosts a large collection of static displays, is well worth the visit.

    Former Pittsburgh Railway Company trolley #4398 carries autumn crowds at the museum in Washington, PA. Behind is a former Philadelphia Suburban Lines (Red Arrow) trolley.

    Morgantown, West Virginia

    Only a 90-minute drive south of Pittsburgh is the city of Morgantown, West Virginia, home of the sprawling West Virginia University. What makes the public university especially unique is the automated transit system that serves the university and connects it to Downtown Morgantown.

    The one-of-a-kind Morgantown PRT, opened in 1975, has five stations between Downtown Morgantown and the main campus to the north. What makes the line a “personal” rapid transit system is passengers, upon paying the fare or swiping their university ID card, select their destination station, and wait for a car that will take them to their desired point, skipping any stations in between. Though the technology can be described as a “gadgetbahn” it fills a unique niche, and still runs with the original rolling stock and guideways, though software and motor upgrades were required. Because of the limited road space between Morgantown and the university facilities to the north and the mountainous topology of West Virginia, traditional bus service gets caught in traffic, especially on game days.

    Walnut Street Station in Downtown Morgantown

    Each car has eight seats and allows for twelve standees, so despite the name, the service isn’t precisely “personal.” As it is operated by the university mostly for staff and students, it does not run on Sundays, holidays, or when classes are not in session. During off-peak periods, the PRT usually runs in an all-stops configuration.

    The video below shows how the PRT operates, including the bypass of Towers Station.

    Part of the nine-minute ride on the Morgantown PRT at the University of West Virginia

    I will follow up with posts covering my return to Toronto, Ohio (which is just an hour’s drive west of Pittsburgh), and some thoughts after visiting a local history museum.

  • Visiting America’s other urban railway park

    Visiting America’s other urban railway park

    An abandoned railway signal towers over Philadelphia’s Rail Park

    On a road trip early this summer, my spouse and I paid a visit to New York and Philadelphia. In New York, we walked the famous High Line, which revitalized an abandoned elevated freight railway corridor, transforming it into a popular grade-separated walking path on Manhattan’s Lower East Side.

    New York’s High Line

    While in Philadelphia, I made a point of visiting another abandoned rail viaduct — Rail Park. It’s as ambitious as New York’s famed public space, but — for now — it is much less known.

    The viaducts, cuts, and tunnels that will make up Philadelphia Rail Park trace their origin to the golden age of railroading. The Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, which connected Philadelphia with its northern and western suburbs, industrial towns to the northwest, and the lucrative anthracite coal fields of northeast Pennsylvania. For many years, the Reading Railroad, as it was known, was one of the United States’ most profitable companies. In 1893, the railway opened its Philadelphia Terminal, which became famous for the public market that was established below the station platforms. To this day, the Reading Terminal Market remains a vital city landmark. In the 1930s, most of the commuter services were electrified.

    The 1893 Reading Terminal headhouse, now the entrance to the Pennsylvania Convention Center

    By the 1970s, both the Reading and PRR were bankrupt. PRR merged with its New York-Chicago rival New York Central in 1968, before it too went into insolvency. Conrail took over many failing railways in the US Northeast and Midwest, consolidating operations, abandoning or transferring redundant track, and transferring most remaining commuter train operations (which were not assumed by Amtrak) to regional and state transit authorities.

    In the mid-1980s, the Southeast Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA), which assumed control of the regional rail services formerly operated by the PRR and the Reading undertook an ambitious project to unite the separate regional rail systems. A new four-track tunnel was constructed east from PRR’s Suburban Station, and a new station — Market East — built to replace the old Reading Terminal. For the first time, trains could run through central Philadelphia, providing improved regional rail services.

    Though the historic Reading Terminal headhouse and the famous market were preserved, the station platforms were removed to make way for a new convention centre. For years, the abandoned viaducts and tunnels leading into Reading Terminal sat unused. At least they did, until June 2018.

    Entrance to the first phase of Rail Park, at Noble and 13th Streets

    In 2018, a short, initial phase of Rail Park opened to the public. Spanning just two blocks, from Noble and 13th Streets to Callowhill and 11th Streets, it is still a remarkable public space. Like New York’s High Line, the short section of viaduct provides new viewpoints over gritty city streets, with temporary and permanent public art installations along the route.

    A map of the proposed extensions of Rail Park, with the opened first phase marked. Interactive map here.
    Looking north up 13th Street, towards the gentrifying Spring Garden neighbourhood
    “Workshop of the World” – an interpretive plaque provides information on the industries that lined the Reading Company’s route through Philadelphia
    An art map of local industries that existed immediately north of Reading Terminal, made from punched Corten steel
    Looking east to the intersection of Callowhill and 11th Streets. For now, the only fully accessible entrance to Rail Park is at Noble and 13th Streets. The viaduct from the north is visible at left; this will be part of a future phase of Rail Park.
    A stairway leading up from Callowhill Street. The metal frames at the right hold swings for the public to enjoy.

    Future park extensions will continue westward from 13th Street to a below-grade cut starting at Broad Street. It will continue west to the Benjamin Franklin Parkway and the Philadelphia Museum of Art (where the Rocky statue can be found outside), where it will enter a tunnel before emerging at Girard Avenue near Fairmount Park, the greatest of Philadelphia’s urban green spaces. Another section will connect the existing Phase I to the abandoned north-south viaduct between Vine Street and Fairmount Avenue, where the old route to Reading Terminal meets the 1980s rail diversion to Market East Station. Eventually, it will reach 3 miles (5 kilometres) in length.

    The formerly abandoned viaduct offers a view of more recently abandoned transit infrastructure: the remnant tracks of the 23-Germantown trolley route, once the longest streetcar line in North America. In the early 1990s, SEPTA was forced to abandon three of its legacy street railway lines due to budget pressures and deteriorating PCC equipment. (Newer Kawasaki-built streetcars were only deployed on the surface-subway routes in West Philadelphia and on the former Red Arrow suburban lines from 69th Street Station.) The 15-Girard Line was later rebuilt with refurbished streetcars, but the 23 and 56-Erie lines were left to rot in a state of “temporary suspension.”

    SEPTA has a wealth of transit infrastructure, which I wrote about after my first visit to Philadelphia in 2009, but it hasn’t put enough of it to good use. It has a massive, fully electric regional rail network, yet trains operate only every hour on most routes outside of peak periods. There’s a four-track subway tunnel under Broad Street that’s grossly underused, and unlike Toronto, there are even a few active trolley bus routes. And sadly, it’s allowed much of its infrastructure, like its trolley network, to remain in disuse.

    A view down from Rail Park to long-disused trolley tracks on 12th Street
  • A farewell to Toronto’s CLRV streetcars

    IMG_6892-001.JPG

    On December 29, 2019, the Toronto Transit Commission’s venerable Canadian Light Rail Vehicles disappeared from the city’s streets. To mark the occasion, six CLRVs, offering free rides, were put into service on Queen Street between 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM before a ceremonial last run to Russell Carhouse in Toronto’s east end.

    The first six CLRVs, 4000-4005, were built by SIG in Switzerland, and entered service on the 507 Long Branch route on September 30, 1979. An additional 190 streetcars were built by Hawker-Siddeley in Thunder Bay, with the last cars arriving in 1981. Those were followed by 52 articulated ALRV streetcars, which were delivered between 1987 and 1989, and retired earlier this year.

    The CLRVs were unique to Toronto, designed by and for the TTC. Other North American cities that still operated streetcars in the 1970s opted for different designs to replace their ageing PCCs, though Boston have the CLRVs a try.

    Several CLRV and ALRV streetcars will be preserved at transit museums, including the Halton County Radial Railway near Rockwood, Ontario; two CLRVs will remain on TTC property for special events.

    With the arrival of the last of the 204 Bombardier Flexity low floor streetcars this month and the retirement of the CLRVs, the entire TTC fleet is now 100% wheelchair accessible and fully air-conditioned. Gone, too, with the CLRVs are back-lit vinyl destination signs, treadle rear doors that open by stepping on the stairs, and windows that open at face level and the warnings to keep arms inside.

    Streetcar 4124 on December 29, 2019Streetcar 4124 picks up passengers at Yonge Street, December 29, 2019

    Though the accessibility and the capacity of the new Flexity streetcars represent major improvements, I will miss the old CLRVs, and not just because they’re the last transit vehicle in Toronto that are older than I am. I was fascinated by Toronto’s streetcars at an early age. As a child growing up in Brampton, I would lobby hard to ride Toronto’s subways and streetcars whenever we went downtown as a family. My parents took me on a ride on the 501 Streetcar between downtown and Parkdale (with lunch at Harry’s Charbroiled Burgers when it was across from the Gladstone Hotel) when I was seven.

    IMG_6907-001Streetcar 4178, A Streetcar Named Toronto, at Greenwood Avenue, December 29, 2019

    Once I was old enough, at age thirteen, I was making my own trips to Toronto, taking GO Transit trains from Downtown Brampton or Mississauga Transit buses from Shoppers World and Square One to the subway, buying a day pass, and then spending a day wandering the city. The high floor CLRV and ALRV streetcars with their open windows offered great views of the city rolling by.

    I continued to ride the rocket regularly when I attended university, taking advantage of breaks between classes to ride further out into the suburbs, eventually riding nearly every bus route in the city. Even after I moved to Toronto, a streetcar ride was an affordable delight (as long as I wasn’t in a rush).

    IMG_6927-001.JPGShort turn: Swiss-built CLRV 4001 turns into Wolesley Loop at Bathurst and Queen

    My favourite seats were right at the back, with the curved rear with great views on three sides, similar to the bullet lounge at the end of VIA Rail’s Canadian and Ocean trains. The single seats on the operator’s side of the streetcar were also favourites.

    Though the last of Bombardier’s 204 new Flexities have finally arrived, there is still a streetcar shortage in Toronto. The 505 Dundas and 502/503 Kingston Road routes continue to be operated with buses. Many of the new vehicles planned for Dundas and Kingston have been reallocated to King Street, where the transit priority project resulted in a significant increase in ridership. The TTC wishes to purchase 60 more streetcars to fully furnish the existing demand and support expansion on the waterfront, but funding isn’t yet available.

    Unfortunately, buses will have to fill in those gaps as the CLRVs disappear.

    IMG_6936.JPG
    Retired streetcars at Russell Carhouse await their fates

    Thanks for the memories!

  • Goin’ to Kansas City

    IMG_5800-001.JPG
    Bus and streetcar, Downtown Kansas City

    Kansas City, Missouri made news this month when its City Council voted unanimously to include a plan for free fixed-route public transit in the next city budget. Though that budget would still have to be passed in the New Year, the mayor’s support for the measure is a promising sign. Though it will cost $8 million, local politicians support the idea as it will benefit low income riders.

    It is worth noting that Kansas City Area Transit Authority’s 2016 annual ridership was just over 14 million a year, while the cost recovery rate was just 12 percent. It would be much harder to offer free transit in Toronto. The TTC’s cost recovery rate is 68%, with transit fares bringing in over $1.2 billion a year. Though a two-hour transfer and free children’s fares were recently introduced, there’s little chance that the City of Toronto would agree to funding fare-free transit. In any case, Kansas City’s experiment will be interesting to watch.

    Kansas City was a more interesting city than I expected; I am glad I made the impromptu trip. There are a few Toronto connections, including a streetcar that traveled the continent, a restored Union Station, and a 1920s shopping plaza whose concept was imitated 80 years later in Don Mills.

    I enjoyed an evening at a jazz club at the 18th and Vine Historic District and local barbecue. Besides transit, I also got around on an electric pedal assist bike that’s part of the local bike share. It’s friendly, urban city, definitely worth a visit.
    (more…)

  • A departure from TTC wayfinding improvements

    IMG_3566-001.JPG
    TTC stops have improved with the addition of route numbers, but this bus stop is deceiving 

    In the last few years, the TTC has made significant improvements in its maps, signage, and wayfinding standards. It also introduced new streetcar and subway fleets, retrofitted elevators into older stations (all but one streetcar line and a majority of subway stations are now fully accessible), and opened a new subway extension. Though overcrowding, bunching, and weekend closures continue to be aggravations, it is important to recognize where the TTC has improved.

    Specific changes to TTC wayfinding include a new simplified system map, better signage at subway stations, introducing standard signage for diversions, scheduled closures and construction notifications, and revising the classic TTC bus stop.

    However, two recent changes represent an unfortunate departure from these improvements. (more…)

  • How TIFF lost the plot

    IMG_4193-001.JPG504 King Streetcar diverting onto Spadina on Thursday, September 5

    For the sixth year in a row, King Street between University and Spadina Avenues was closed for four straight days. This closure was for the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) “Festival Street,” which took place between Thursday September 5 and Sunday September 8. In addition, King Street was closed during the afternoon rush hours the following Monday and Tuesday for “Red Carpet Events.”

    TIFF has been recognized among the world’s most important film festivals, and one where the public has the opportunity to take part (albeit at increasingly inaccessible prices for many screenings). It offers tremendous economic and cultural value to Toronto. It compliments and helps to support many other annual film festivals, such as Hot Docs and Inside Out.

    But TIFF’s clout and influence has also led to entitlement, with “Festival Street” being the most disruptive result. While King Street is closed off to traffic during the film festival, it has severe effects for the 84,000 daily riders of the 504 King Street, as well as riders on the busy 501 Queen and 510 Spadina cars.

    IMG_4191-001.JPG
    501 Queen and 504 King Streetcars stuck in traffic westbound at Queen and Spadina

    Several major TIFF screening locations are located on or near King Street West, including Roy Thomson Hall, the Princess of Wales Theatre, the TIFF Bell Lightbox, and two blocks north, the Scotiabank Cinemas. Industry parties and galas are held at nearby hotels and restaurants. It’s natural that King Street would be a hub of activity for the film festival. But it is also the third busiest transit route in Toronto, after the Yonge-University and Bloor-Danforth subways.

    The King Street Pilot, which began in late 2017, prohibits through motor vehicle traffic on King Street between Jarvis and Bathurst Streets through the downtown core, though all vehicles are permitted to use King Street for short segments. Despite spotty enforcement, the pilot project allowed the TTC to operate much more reliably through the busy corridor, with an increase of capacity and ridership. In early 2017, daily ridership on the 504 King was 72,000. By March 2018, it grew to 84,000. In April, council voted to make the pilot permanent. This will allow for streetscape improvements along the corridor and wider sidewalks, with improved physical measures to further restrict through traffic.

    A lot of political capital went into making King Street work better, so it is disappointing to see all that advocacy for a proper transit corridor go to waste while TIFF is in town. Torontonians are promised each year would be the last year streetcar service would be wrecked for TIFF, but every mid-August, we find out otherwise.  (more…)