The Great American Streetcar Scandal

[wholbr]

Hi everybody

Oh, owning a car definitely does have plenty of advantages here in the US. Everthing is so spread out as compared to other countries.
A friend of mine recently returned from a semester of studying abroad in Italy. Whenever she said that she drove everywhere, her new Italian friends believed that all Americans exaggerate the distances between places. She had to explain that it would take nearly two hours to walk to work from her home, as opposed to a ten minute drive. When they found out she was from San Diego, they assumed she often spent her weekends in Texas or Oregon, as they thought they were close to southern California. She had to nearly pound into their skulls the fact that it would literally take the WHOLE weekend just to drive out to either place.

Seeing as most European countries are small enough where you could drive for a few hours in any direction and end up in another nation, I can see how their knowledge on US geography can be a bit... warped.
My friend told me how in Florence, where she stayed, everything was within walking distance. So with that, I can also see how tram systems in Europe seemed to die out on their own as opposed to the Streetcar Conspiracy here in the US.

Hauntedclipp, with the greatest of respect, I find your above posting very offensive to European nations and Italian people in particular. I cannot understand why you would feel that Europeans have any less grasp of the geographical nature of this planet than any other ethnic race in the world. You seem to have based your assumptions on “tales” related to you from “a friend” with regard to his/her contact with a few Italian attendees to a seminar.

So, let’s look at a few of the so-called facts you have stated. First of all, the size of many major European cities relates very closely in terms of population to the major cities of the United States. As an example London has a population of 8 million which is the same population size as New York.

Along with the above European (especially British people) very often commute long distances to their workplace which is very much on a par with American people. Until retirement last October I regularly commuted at least twice per week from North Somerset to London a distance of 130 miles before the start of my days work. I did that with many other regular rail commuters on the 06:40 Taunton to London Paddington HST. Trains from Bristol to London run once every 15 minutes with all of them packed with passengers throughout the day as it is from all major British cities into London. Therefore to state that Europeans do not understand the nature of commuting is very far from the truth.

Other North Somerset residents commute by car to Bristol which can take them up to one and a half hours to travel the 15 or 20 miles on Britain’s congested roads. The foregoing is the reason why the railways have become once again a major player in commuter transport.

Hauntedclip, in your final paragraph you seem to equate the size of Florence as being typical of the size of all major European cities which is again far from the truth. If you placed yourself in the centre of Berlin, Paris, London or even the provincial cities of Birmingham or Manchester, you would find that you will not travel very far across those conurbations in your above quoted “10 minute drive”. Therefore the corresponding size of cities or towns in America or Europe had little to do with why the trams or streetcars were phased out.

Statistics also show that European people do travel outside their own countries extensively with large numbers visiting the United States (as I have done on several occasions). Therefore I believe that Europeans have a good knowledge of the geographical size of America which they easily equate to the size of their own countries.

I have no wish to create a flame war with this posting as this thread has been excellent up to this point. However, I do have to say that if there was any results tests at the end of the seminar attended by “your friend” and the associates he or her met on the course they must have undoubtedly failed those tests based on the “unintelligent claptrap” that was talked outside the seminar time.

Again all said with the greatest of respect.

Bill

 

[AJ_Fox]

The railways are still around, they're just underground or between the lanes of the freeways. And they don't get stuck in traffic like buses.

Cheers

AJ

 

[hauntedclipp]

Hi everybody


Hauntedclipp, with the greatest of respect, I find your above posting very offensive to European nations and Italian people in particular. I cannot understand why you would feel that Europeans have any less grasp of the geographical nature of this planet than any other ethnic race in the world. You seem to have based your assumptions on “tales” related to you from “a friend” with regard to his/her contact with a few Italian attendees to a seminar.

So, let’s look at a few of the so-called facts you have stated. First of all, the size of many major European cities relates very closely in terms of population to the major cities of the United States. As an example London has a population of 8 million which is the same population size as New York.

Along with the above European (especially British people) very often commute long distances to their workplace which is very much on a par with American people. Until retirement last October I regularly commuted at least twice per week from North Somerset to London a distance of 130 miles before the start of my days work. I did that with many other regular rail commuters on the 06:40 Taunton to London Paddington HST. Trains from Bristol to London run once every 15 minutes with all of them packed with passengers throughout the day as it is from all major British cities into London. Therefore to state that Europeans do not understand the nature of commuting is very far from the truth.

Other North Somerset residents commute by car to Bristol which can take them up to one and a half hours to travel the 15 or 20 miles on Britain’s congested roads. The foregoing is the reason why the railways have become once again a major player in commuter transport.

Hauntedclip, in your final paragraph you seem to equate the size of Florence as being typical of the size of all major European cities which is again far from the truth. If you placed yourself in the centre of Berlin, Paris, London or even the provincial cities of Birmingham or Manchester, you would find that you will not travel very far across those conurbations in your above quoted “10 minute drive”. Therefore the corresponding size of cities or towns in America or Europe had little to do with why the trams or streetcars were phased out.

Statistics also show that European people do travel outside their own countries extensively with large numbers visiting the United States (as I have done on several occasions). Therefore I believe that Europeans have a good knowledge of the geographical size of America which they easily equate to the size of their own countries.

I have no wish to create a flame war with this posting as this thread has been excellent up to this point. However, I do have to say that if there was any results tests at the end of the seminar attended by “your friend” and the associates he or her met on the course they must have undoubtedly failed those tests based on the “unintelligent claptrap” that was talked outside the seminar time.

Again all said with the greatest of respect.

Bill

I meant no offense, nor did I mean to come off as overly-generalizing. But the only "facts" I stated were facts were the time it took to drive from San Diego, CA to Texas or Oregon. And I never mentioned anywhere that I felt all Europeans or Italians thought that same way or that Europeans don't understand commuting. But I should have been more specific by mentioning that the Italian people who had a poor grasp on US geography were just a few students in the same university program as her, and was referring back to those same students in my second paragraph. Everything in the first paragraph was simply a reiteration of what was told to me. And when I spoke of her ten minute drives to work, I was referring to the suburbs in which we live just north of San Diego proper. There, things are spread out within the hilly region, with the roads curving, climbing, and dipping as opposed to the typically straight and level grid-pattern streets of downtown San Diego. That was an oversight on my behalf, and I apologize for any confusion my vagueness may have caused.

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.

I meant no offense, nor did I mean to come off as overly-generalizing. But the only "facts" I stated were facts were the time it took to drive from San Diego, CA to Texas or Oregon. And I never mentioned anywhere that I felt all Europeans or Italians thought that same way or that Europeans don't understand commuting. But I should have been more specific by mentioning that the Italian people who had a poor grasp on US geography were just a few students in the same university program as her, and was referring back to those same students in my second paragraph. Everything in the first paragraph was simply a reiteration of what was told to me. And when I spoke of her ten minute drives to work, I was referring to the suburbs in which we live just north of San Diego proper. There, things are spread out within the hilly region, with the roads curving, climbing, and dipping as opposed to the typically straight and level grid-pattern streets of downtown San Diego. That was an oversight on my behalf, and I apologize for any confusion my vagueness may have caused.

Thank you hauntedclipp or Brett as you would rather be called, I am sure the clarification and qualification of your earlier posting will be genuinely well received by all European forum members especially me. When speaking of Europe these days it is better to think of the European Union as one country with state borders similar to the United States.

However, there is much argument throughout Europe (especially here in Britain) as to how far that process should go. I would certainly get myself into a very deep water if I made the above statement on other forums that I visit, especially the football forums with the World Cup going on at the moment………..LOL

Anyway, many thanks Brett I have always respected your postings on this forum and will do so into the future.

Bill

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.

The railways are still around, they're just underground or between the lanes of the freeways. And they don't get stuck in traffic like buses.

Cheers
AJ

I would 100% agree with you AJ with regard to railways surviving and still being around. Certainly here in Britain and throughout most of the European Union their usage by commuters is increasing by double-digit figures every year.

With regard to buses getting stuck in traffic, almost all cities and towns here in Britain have introduced what is known as “bus lanes” which are road traffic lanes or sometimes even whole streets restricted to no other traffic but buses and sometimes taxis. The foregoing means that buses do not get held up by other traffic and therefore can be a considerably quicker means of transport around town and city centres than using a personal car.

The above system is especially efficient for rail commuters travelling into large towns and cities as the train is much quicker than a car on any journey, then at the passenger rail terminus you just hop on a bus which quickly gets you to your ultimate destination via the bus lanes. As I stated in an earlier posting at main terminal stations such as Bristol, Manchester etc buses are now every two or three minutes in schedule on all routes from the station.

I would be interested to know if American or Australian cities have introduced similar systems bringing about similar benefits for commuters.

Bill

 

[Blutorse4792]

The Chicago Transit Authority actually built a fleet of rapid transit cars out of recycled streetcar parts.

 

[hauntedclipp]

The closest thing we have to bus lanes are carpool lanes on many of our highways. Though, I do believe the idea of bus lanes in cities has been kicked around a bit. Except they'd be nothing more than a normal lane on a multiple-lane road with the words "BUSES ONLY" painted every couple dozen of feet.

Blutorse, what happened to those rapid transit cars? What sort of services did they use them on pre- and post-conspiracy?

 

[johnwhelan]

The closest thing we have to bus lanes are carpool lanes on many of our highways. Though, I do believe the idea of bus lanes in cities has been kicked around a bit. Except they'd be nothing more than a normal lane on a multiple-lane road with the words "BUSES ONLY" painted every couple dozen of feet.

Blutorse, what happened to those rapid transit cars? What sort of services did they use them on pre- and post-conspiracy?

Further north in Ottawa we have bus only lanes, and a transitway which is a sort of bus only system of separate roads many of which are on old railway lines out of grade. Trouble is downtown can't cope with the number of buses so we're getting alight rail system to replace some of the transitway.

Cheerio John

 

[Blutorse4792]

The Chicago Rapid Transit company had been trying to modernize its ancient, wooden "L" fleet for years. When the CTA took over in 1947, they also took over the Chicago Surface Lines streetcar system. A few years earlier, the CSL had purchased hundreds of new PCC streetcars.

The designs for the new "L" cars - the 6000 series, utilized PCC technology, and in fact, shared a great deal of hardware with the streetcars. So, the CTA decided that the streetcar fleet would better serve the city if they were taken apart and recycled into these "L" cars. This also saved the agency a great deal of money.

The last streetcars in Chicago ran in 1958, while the 6000 Series "L" cars ran from 1950 to 1992 before they were retired. There was also the 1-50 Series, which were the same design, but ran as single cars instead of married pairs. The cars that were assigned to the Evanston and Skokie lines (now the Purple and Yellow Lines) had trolley poles and catenary to run on the overhead wire when it was still up.

 

[JCitron]

Over here in Boston, we have the Silver line buses which operate on their own routes and even have a designated bus lane in some places. They operate as part of the new BRT, or Bus Rapid Transit system put in place in Boston after the new tunnel was completed to Logan International Airport. The Silver line uses some hybrid buses which operate on CNG above ground, but when they enter into a designated tunnel, a former trolley tunnel in downtown Boston, they operate via an overhead catenary. The service has been expanded to South Boston and parts of Dorchester which were once served by the Boston EL.

When the EL was removed, and the Orange line was moved to a former New Haven railroad grade during the 1980s, this disenfranchised the residents in the poorer districts which rely heavily on the rapid transit. The promise was initially to replace that with real trolley cars connected to the Green line system, but that never happened. Instead they were given regular buses and now the Silver line. People are not happy with the new buses since their rapid transit is far less than rapid in fact they operate even slower when underground than they do as buses above ground.

John

 

[cascaderailroad]

http://www.historynyc.com/proddetail.asp?prod=mta-01

 

[TheParot67]

Tucson is now rebuilding our streetcars,plus uses bus lanes in downtown mostly.
We tore out our streetcars in the early fifties, mostly because they didn't really go anywhere they just linked the train station to the nearby university.
The current system being built is still kind of a joke, it does a five block loop through downtown uses an underpass to go under the Union Pacific tracks then to the University again, It does directly link with our bus system at least.

 

[cascaderailroad]

S Korea needs a massive public transportation system, with so many cars cruising the many blocks, for hours on end, in search of few parking spaces, the parking lot attendants have resorted to raising colored balloons so drivers can see far away when a spot opens up (BP invented this idea to cut oil use, and there is a helium shortage).

 

[AJ_Fox]

@wholbr

Yes there are bus connections from the trains here. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. Here we have Amtrak California and the BART trains. There are connections to other train systems like ACE and Caltrain in addition to the streetcars and cable cars.

Cheers

AJ

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
Sorry for dropping out of this thread of late, but after retiring last October I have been suddenly requested to go back and carry out my old job following one of the senior case handlers becoming a serious casualty in a road traffic accident. I felt I could not refuse to help those who had given me so much assistants throughout many of my working years. So, apologies for going missing.

Anyway, after stating that i would be interested in knowing if cities and towns in countries other than the Great Britain had introduced bus lanes, I would wish to say thanks to all those that have posted in regard to the matter. It is also good to see that the system has been introduced in the United States and I would hope that the same good results are obtained their as they have been in the UK.

In regard to the above, several forum members advised that the bus lanes are only traffic lanes which have been taken out of use for private cars and restricted to sole use of buses. That same system also operates extensively here in the UK. In most major towns and cities where a road has more than one lane operating (example 2 lanes in both directions) then one lane is taken out on both sides of the carriageway to create a bus lane in both directions.

Of course when the foregoing is introduced there are always huge protests from those who wish to use their cars to commute. However, after several occasions of sitting in their car in the then extended traffic jams and watching the buses Flash past on the inside bus lane it is always inevitable that many of those motorists will decide to use the then much quicker public transport meaning the bus.

The above stated, rail enthusiasts should not be disheartened by the use of the bus for it has advantages for the railways as well. It has been found that once commuters start using public transport for any part of their journey they always then start looking to use public transport for the entirety of their commute. Therefore, commuters in rural and extended urban areas a pattern has developed in the UK of driving your car to your local railway station, boarding a train that will take you into the centre of the town or city you wish to travel to, where you then hop on a bus that will take you the short distance to your final destination.

The above system of commuting has contributed greatly to the British rail network achieving double-digit percentage increases in passenger numbers over the past few years. In 2013 over one and a half billion passenger journeys were taken on the rail network. Many of those rail journeys culminated in bus travel to their ultimate destination.

Having said all the above, I travelled up by rail from North Somerset to Manchester yesterday evening and on leaving the station it was a tram (streetcar) that took me from the Manchester station to my hotel by the convenience of the Manchester metrolink, and very pleasant it was to, LOL

Bill
Posted from the 18.05 Manchester Piccadilly to Bristol Temple Meads Cross Country HST sevice.

 

[PortlandBill]

Bus lanes are fine if there is a bus going where you need to go when you need to go otherwise you are stuck in your car for longer staring at empty bus lanes. Before I retired I lived in town and worked 7 miles outside town no buses there or back. It could take anything from 15 mins to an hour to work in the morning most of the time staring at the empty bus lane. I am glad I am out of it.

 

[JCitron]

In and around Boston, mostly on the south shore, there used to be "zipper lanes" where a concrete barrier would be pushed out to separate a lane for carpooling and buses. Many times the carpool lane would be standing still while the rest of the traffic was moving along quickly. The reason being most people, had to be two occupants or more, would race down the zipper lane and then get jammed up where it merged into the normal traffic. So much for a speedy commute!

Steve,

Your commute sounds like my old one as well. I live 35 miles from my old work place. On a good day, during the summer months when everyone is away, I could make it in there in about 30-35 minutes. If there was a tiny, smidge of a drop, of rain, a flake of snow, or some other issue, forget about it. The trip would take upwards of 90 minutes or longer. By the time I got into the office, I was already exhausted before the day began. Now that I'm retired, I enjoy listening to all the commotion on my police scanner, a device that sadly you can't have in the UK, but so much fun to listen to.

Bill,

The transit study maybe true, but sadly in my area the local transit company bustituted the trolleys and trains with buses. Where there was once a nice network of frequent trolleys (trams), we now have infrequent buses. As I've said, Boston is a bit better, but what is left is a pale reminder of what used to be.

John

 

[bl4882]

Haven't commented on this as yet; most of what's been written was posted while my computer was in a coma. Just got it back about a week ago.

I was born and raised in the SF Bay Area, mostly on 45th street near Market in Oakland. We used to ride the Key System, and the whole East Bay was carpeted with trolley and interurban tracks. Same for San Francisco. Back in the mid '50s you could take an interurban, ferry, or bus run by private companies who competed for customers with outstanding service. The buses were rationally used to feed the trans-bay lines to and from SF. Used to ride almost anywhere as a kid for a dime. But the Key System went bust and when the government took over it pretty much went into the dumper, tracks were paved over, buses took over, and the Bay bridge was gridlocked.

The whole Key System was ripped up in a big hurry and almost all evidence of it was gone before the '60s came into existence. Then BART was proposed in 1960 and built, over almost a half a decade, at a staggering cost. Not only was Key already there, but it had the distinct advantage of going from where people were to where they wanted to go. The whole thing could have been used with a little upgrading and moving the bay crossing from the bridge to a tube. The cost would have been minimal compared to what the new system, with it's isolated or hidden crime magnet stations cost the taxpayers. Remember, back then a billion dollars was real money! :hehe: Not that BART is bad. I rode it for years in the '80s from Fremont (which was as far as it went) to my office near Civic Center in SF, but the whole thing could have been done less expensively and more efficiently if we had not begun by despising what we already had.

Well, that's my two cents.

Bernie

 

[Blutorse4792]

It's very interesting that you posted this, I was just about to come here and ask...

Why did they start planning BART when the Key System was in its death throes?

Wouldn't it have made more sense to take over the existing infrastructure?

Was it simply a matter of the street-running?

 

[bl4882]

Well Blutorse, you ask some very good questions. Unfortunately I don't think there are any satisfactory answers. On the one hand, there were excellent reasons to want trains off of the Bay Bridge. When there were three railroads using the tracks on the lower deck that was one thing, but Southern Pacific pulled out long before and Sacramento Northern did the same in the '50s (going by memory here). One railroad was taking up 25% of the carrying capacity of the bridge. The lower deck supported only trains and trucks. All passenger vehicles were on the upper deck, and the ride to or from San Francisco was extremely hazardous. Seemed like a week did not go by without some horrible head on collision. The planners, if there were any, probably thought that making the upper and lower decks one way the extra capacity would fix the traffic problem, but as 1960 approached things changed. In the '50s a wife generally used the family chariot to give hubby a ride to a bus or train to get to work. By 1960s wealth had increased to the point where two car families were common and his and her cars were often the norm. Suddenly, more cars. Also, things like joint powers boards were thought of as creatures for the like of New York City. I don't think there was anything like a central, coordinated planning commission until the problem had arrived and most of the really smart decisions were no longer feasible. It's like in the movies where Tokyo is never ready to deal with Godzilla until he actually arrives.

BTW of absolutely nothing, I saw a tremendous track plan of a Key System layout, basement sized, in Model Railroader, I believe, back in the '60s. Always thought it would be a great system, with the Sacramento Northern and Espee, of course, to model. Great for Trainz, I think. C'mon guys, would only take a couple of lifetimes to model. Somebody do it. :hehe:

Bernie