Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Home | News | Site Map
Frequently asked about links:

Active Topics Around the Forums

Current SEPTA's Bus & Light Rail Assignments by Depot (includes Norristown High Speed Line)
Push Pull Assignments
Vehicle Overhaul Status Page
We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Interesting DVRPC I-76 Bus Study; Changes possible on XWay routes?
Topic Started: Jul 28 2009, 09:15 PM (960 Views)
ctrabs74
Member Avatar
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
DVRPC recently completed a study to improve the transit services that currently use I-76 between Center City, Wissahickon/City Line Ave, Roxborough, and King of Prussia (including the 9, 27, 44, 62, 123, 124, and 125 - the former 121 bus was also part of the study, however it was merged with the 44 as the study was proceeding). Some interesting proposals would take most of these services off of I-76 and re-route them to Overbrook station (R5 Paoli-Thorndale), Wissahickon, Ivy Ridge and Norristown stations (R6 Norristown), and Gulph Mills (Rt 100).

Full study can be read at:

Alternatives to Buses on I-76 - DVRPC (April 2009)

Nothing is set in stone, and, like most such studies by DVRPC, it's really nothing more than a wish list...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tritransit Area
Member Avatar
Transit Enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Interesting study. It will certainly inconvenience a lot of people, especially those who take the 124/125 to Wissahicken Transfer Center. I mean, there IS a reason why people take the expressway routes.

I would have liked to see that ALL Roxborough/Manyunk area routes go to the reconstructed Wissahicken Station/Transportation Center as was suggested in the study. There's "no point" in having a disjointed system where area routes just serve one or two stations up the line. I'd rather have a mega transpo. center than a disjointed system.

In regards to the 123, this is just a step backwards! After all, remember the whole "Rt 100 to 124/125" fiasco that passengers used to have to endure? However, with their proposed routing to Gulph Mills, they could certainly extend the route to Conshohocken, providing access to the R6, and just hit 476 from there. If the intent is to save a bus or two or 3, getting them away from "closed door operations", terminating in Conshy would be best.

Of course, this would hurt the 95's ridership, just as the 200Y could potentially hurt the 99's (of course, those buses are packed during the rush anyway). Don't forget, 200Y, that DeKalb Pike gets majorly backed up as well.

Also, are they considering reducing the fare zones with lower costs? Because they are raising the fare for quite a few people.

Anyway, it's an interesting study, and I'd be curious to see what, if anything, is implemented.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ctrabs74
Member Avatar
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I could see some of these changes, except for the 44. There's going to be a lot of complaints from people to use the 44 to get to City Line Av from Center City.

If SEPTA tries to eliminate the 35 as part of this plan, you know that's going to be a big issue. If that Ridge Av/Ivy Ridge feeder line were incorporated into the 35, that might work (this study focuses on the I-76 routes as opposed to other routes).

I don't really have a problem with the other city proposals as far as the routings go. If that also ends up meaning 30 minute headways on the R6 Norristown, then it could have some beneficial effects on the Norristown-based Frontier routes.

The "200Y" proposal should be operated as an extension of the 92 bus, since this proposed route duplicates the 92 between KofP and PA 252/Chesterbrook Blvd. Also, these buses could be slotted into the existing 99 short-turn NTC-KofP trips, so that could reduce costs on the 99 as well.

Overall, the idea to take buses off 76 could work if it's executed properly. You know that there will be a lot of screaming from people who don't understand that it works better to take buses off the crowded Expressway and onto the more efficient rail feeder concept.

With that said, I find it highly doubtful that any action could take place for at least a year or two. Then again, with SEPTA, anything is possible...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tritransit Area
Member Avatar
Transit Enthusiast
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I just about agree with all of your points, especially the one about potentially having 30 minute regular headways on the R6. In the RR.net forum, where there is a heated debate about the "rebranding" of the Regional Rail lines, someone brought up a nice idea of having the R1 interline with the R6 regularly to not only provide 30 minute headways on both lines, but to give one seat access to the airport for those along the I-76 corridor.

I must also add that it would give Norristown and other area residents easy access to airport area jobs, without having to resort to the 108 or transfering to the R1. Of course, a zone 3 should suffice for the entire journey, since a passenger can ride the entire R1 with just a transpass.

In regards to having the 200Y simply be an extension of the 92, I agree but disagree. The problem would be that the 92 may end up being just too long, and I think there are a lot of bottlenecks along the line. Honestly, that route could go through a serious overhaul to speed up time and reliability. Dare I say that we could even think about returning to hourly off-peak headways, which I think is certainly warranted.

Is there a reason why the 92 must still go all the way down Parkway Plaza? Is there even any ridership down there? I would much rather have extended DART rt 2 trips come up to the West Chester Transportation Center.

Also, in regards to the 35, I'm wondering if the "Ridge Ave-Ivy Ridge Circulator" is in fact an extended 35. In fact, in my opinion, it would not be a bad idea to give the 35 a peak hour Regional Rail connection anyway.

Finally, I agree that nothing is likely going to happen very soon. At least, not until the Act 44 funding is secured.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ctrabs74
Member Avatar
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tritransit Area
Jul 30 2009, 09:38 AM
In regards to having the 200Y simply be an extension of the 92, I agree but disagree. The problem would be that the 92 may end up being just too long, and I think there are a lot of bottlenecks along the line. Honestly, that route could go through a serious overhaul to speed up time and reliability. Dare I say that we could even think about returning to hourly off-peak headways, which I think is certainly warranted.

Is there a reason why the 92 must still go all the way down Parkway Plaza? Is there even any ridership down there? I would much rather have extended DART rt 2 trips come up to the West Chester Transportation Center.
The first thing SEPTA could do with the 92 would be to cut the route back to WCU instead of going down to Parkway Shopping Center; I am not aware of any ridership past the campus - maybe one or two riders per day at most and that's it. Also, looking at the routing of "200Y", it would operate via the Dannehower Bridge and US 202 instead of via Bridgeport, so that should make it a faster connection to the mall. It makes no sense to have this route duplicating the 92, hence the idea to merge the two routes (which should, in theory, increase the cost recovery for the 92). I don't see a lot of complaining about the length of the 113 between 69 St and Tri-State Mall - peak hour travel times on the 113 are approximately 90-100 minutes. Extending the 92 to Norristown may add about 10-15 minutes at most.

Also, I don't see DART extending all the way to West Chester; maybe the 2 could be extended to Concordville Town Center or Chadds Ford, but not all the way to West Chester.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Van2006ko
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I can't see DART expanding their service into the state of Pennsylvania in general. It would be a awesome move though...

I think this report has a extreme rail bias and assumes that people are willing to spend the extra few bucks to avoid the expressway. I just would like to know did they do any research into how many people actually go to King of Prussia to shop versus how many go there because their jobs are out that way.

I have a huge contention against the route 44 proposal. Albeit, the route 44 serves its own purpose and should not be tempt with. They would be better off to just sale the "Route 121" and have it go from Gladwyne to Cynwyd Station and have the R6 to act as a feeder line into the city of Philadelphia.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
redarrow5591
Member Avatar
Light Rail and Railroad Historian
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Brandon and Kyle is right, that report is heavily rail biased and the proposals will severely hurt both Manayunk and Roxborough residents and businesses, but the King Of Prussia Mall with a completely unnecessary transfer.

Although part of the Expressway Lines trouble do lie at the Dispatchers and Supervision.

We all know that the Schuylkill can go from clean-as-a-whistle to a parking lot in ten minutes flat, and we all know that the control center do get PennDOT camera feeds and driver reports as they come in, but they refuse to allow, or even inform the operators to at least get off and keep moving; I myself would be grateful knowing that I might just be 3-4 minutes late running local instead of over an hour sitting in traffic.

What really burns me about that report is that the 123 (which is one of the best KOP lines there) will be no more. The 123 provides a strong alternative to the extremely unreliable P&W/124-125 transfer at Gulph Mills and the long P&W/99 transfer at either King Manor or NTC with a straight one-seat ride to 69th Street; in some cases its even faster than the 124 from the mall to Wissahickon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nabi60SFW9620
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I76 is always jam packed in Philadelphia. Especially in the center city. Which is why I take Amtrak when making day trips to Philly instead of drive.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Van2006ko
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Nolan is referring to the section a tad outside of the city. North of City ave is usually where things get extremely bad. South of City Ave, it's usually manageable, but i have nightmare rides before in those sections on the 44.

Don't know what Amtrak has to do with I-76 though....?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
philabob1
Member Avatar
Foamer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Some thoughts on the Northwest route ideas.

I rode the 27 daily for 18 years and often wondered why it couldn't be turned at Wissahickon and riders transferred to R6. Other than the divisional issues and no transfers, etc, it made a lot of sense to have two competing modes complementing each other.

For the past 2 1/2 years I've been a daily R6 user (since I recall the times before the 'R' designations, I'll call it the Norristown train!). The line is packed these days. There's no room for the feeder route transfer riders. SEPTA would need to add peak-hour trains as well as go to at least 30-minute headways in the off-peak. (And, in my experience, Saturday and Sunday draw crowds as well.) Case in point - I took the 7:45 out of Market East on Tuesday evening and it was standing room only - at 7:45 PM.

There is no excess capacity on the railroad side (no cars, etc to do this). There are no 'windows' on the Center City trunk for additional trains in the height of the peak unless some trains are cross-lined, but then the car issue is still there. Even when the S V's show up, the additional capacity may not be there as the push-pulls might get put up for sale, etc.

Back to the bus routes. 35 survives every attempt to kill it that SEPTA has come up with, even though many trips could be served by a Mini Cooper. (Having said that, I have been part of a standing load on the route at least twice in my life.) I have suggested expansion to SEPTA, particularly to capture Andorra riders (the new development off Spring Lane as well as the areas close to Houston Playground east of Ridge Ave). Andorra will fight any new line even though the 62 runs has at least half their loads by the time they get to Ridge & Cathedral inbound.

Not sure why the proposed circulators are so close together - the Henry line appears to use the 27 Dupont/Leverington route east of Ridge and Leverington west of Ridge, while the Ridge line looks like it's on Fountain St, about 3 blocks north of Leverington. Parker Ave, with all its new homes, might be a more sensible route, but then again all those new residents would probably fight it.

Any of you operators out there think that turn in the Wissahickon station parking lot is going to be easy? Looks very tight to me. Also, the left from Ridge into the station driveway will be tough for buses - cars have a tough time, not only dealing with traffic coming up the hill but the grade of the driveway itself, which kind of turns level with an offset. I've seen low-riding vehicles bottom out on it. The turn out of the driveway going up the hill is a bit challenging also. The 'throat' of the driveway is a bit narrow, and I've seen it happen a few times - someone who drives into the lot to drop someone off stops there and all traffic flow in and out comes to a stop.

Someone once told me that SEPTA should run R6's alternately to Ivy Ridge to benefit City residents (and don't kid yourself that Ivy Ridge station is all city folks - it's free to park there, and this entices riders from Miquon and Spring Mill where it's a buck to park) and there is a crossover just south of Ivy Ridge which could help make this work. The capacity issue comes into play again, but it might be a viable idea, especially if all those feeder buses are being considered.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Operations · Next Topic »
Add Reply