Through the past – darkly
A note from Zwei….
This post is for the real transit enthusiast, who understands the nuances of transit history. Ed T., who is mentioned in the post is Ed Tennyson, who just turned 90, is one of the USA’s foremost transit experts.
The following has been making the rounds in the “transit blogs” and is well worth a read.
“Remember that during the depression the government was funding roadbuilding all over this country. so even the worst riding buses were smooth on these brand new “concrete ribbons” as they were advertised and the people building them wanted to drive on them so as soon as they could scrape together the downpayment on that fliver they were off of transit. many found out they couldn’t afford that car but by then the trolley they had abandoned before was gone.
In transit there is a threshold volumne and connectivity that when a system falls below this the whole system essentially collapses except for the captive riders. this was in recent years proven with accessible transit, ridership was very low until about 75% of the system became accessible then ridership practically exploded. this is the same thing with almost all transit in general, Portlands, San Franrciscos, San Diego, Dallas and other new systems of rail have reached that threshold of connectivity and coverage that suddenly ridership explodes, the N
Judah in San Francisco was a heavy but not overloaded line for many years but suddenly in recent years with the additions to the system at the Bay end the ridership is more than even the longest trains and fleet size and tunnel carpacity can handle and they need bus supplements.This worked the same way in reverse when systems were falling apart and the only economic choice the private operator had was to write the worst rail line off for short term survival it reached the level where the system essentially imploded.
Remember that GM and other members of NCL also provided scholarships and often controlled the sylabus in colleges that taught the transit planners and executives of the 50’s 60s and 70s I know because I was one of them and felt like a fish swimming upstream against the tide, Ed T was one of the last old school and I was just the odd guy out that they tolerated. I can pull out my old textbooks, there is maybe a chapter on monorails, PRT and subways. but a year or so ago I looked and could not find a single mention of anything resembling light rail. and this was after the building of the first light rail line (officially in Franfurt a Main, Germany) I had lived in Frankfurt so I had watched and ridden the U lines as they were designated and had photos of them and when brought up in classes they were brushed off as the “dying gasp of those unwilling to face the future”
When I first got involved in accessible transit I was a firm believer in paratransit, but had an open mind, and then I ran a paratransit system and tried as hard as I could and could not make it work, that I started believing in mainstream accessibility.
The basic formulas that Ed T and the old timers knew from the seat of their pants and thru experiences of an open minded educated and experienced transit professional could recognize in the 30,40,50,60s was as accurate then as it is today.
We must learn from the past but use it to build for the future. fortunately the students comming out of even my old alma mater and other transportation engineering and planning programs are learning this but we had to make a lot of mistakes and overcome many years of wrongful teaching by those who were lead by the people only concerned about their own wallets and pie in the sky vision (which was common until about 1963 or so) and then 20 years to come to our senses and actually move forward. Sen M in San Diego was one of these visionaries from the past and linked up with a trained engineer from the past (Ed T) and was willing to fight for what they knew would work until the generation that learned from them matured enough to take over.
enough. crawling off my soapbox”
Hello Steve, greetings from Calgary,What prenectage of the folks traveling on the Bloor-Danforth line transfer to go south into the core vs using it as a cross-town route?Steve: The question is much more complex than what you have posed. With the expansion of population and jobs outside of the core, there is a very heavy counterpeak flow, for example, northbound on the Yonge line from Bloor Station in the AM peak, and a similar, but less strongly peaked southbound to east-west flow in the PM peak. Also, some trips taken on BD do not pass through St. George or Bloor-Yonge.More people transfer from westbound to southbound at Yonge Station than at St. George as this is the shorter route for the majority of trips. Eastbound to southbound riders tend to change at St. George.I don’t have hard data on this question, an doubt even the TTC does as they have not done a detailed OD survey of subway passengers since the late 1960s. However, what is quite clear is that the peak direction on the Yonge line (and the University line to a lesser extend) south of Bloor sees the capacity of the trains fully used and overtaxed if there is the slightest upset to service (which can usually be counted on). The northbound AM peak service on Yonge is crowded (there are usually standees on some cars at least to Eglinton), but not packed. Finally, there is transfer traffic onto the BD line in the AM peak, but moreso westbound than eastbound.Adding any new element(s) to the network will have a complex effect on the routes people choose to take, and some new riding will be induced on both the new elements and on existing ones where a latent demand can now be comfortably handled.From the point of view of a relief line, there would be two major effects. An eastern line, especially if it goes all the way up to Eglinton and Don Mills, will not only intercept trips that now travel west on BD to south on Yonge/University, but also some trips that now travel west to the Yonge line from the Don Mills corridor. A western line, presuming that it followed the Weston subdivision, would meet the BD line much further west than the proposed eastern branch, and so the travel shifts would be different.