Feb. 3
By Anthony Campisi
For PlanPhilly
Get ready to say good bye to the R8 regional rail line and say hello to the Fox Chase and Chestnut Hill West lines.
SEPTA sounds like it’s settling down on a plan to phase out the regional rail numbers in use since the Center City Commuter Connection tunnel was opened in the 1980s.
Starting July 25, lines will be named after their station terminals, Harry Garforth, SEPTA’s manager of rail planning, told a Feb. 2 meeting of the regional rail subcommittee of the Citizen’s Advisory Committee.
The colors associated with each line — the R8, for example, is orange on schedules and on system maps — will also be removed, he said.
Though Garforth went into great detail about these plans in the course of a several-hours-long meeting and responded to questions, when SEPTA spokesman Gary Fairfax was contacted the next day for more details, he said that Garforth got ahead of himself in indicating that the final decision had been made.
Fairfax said that the authority is “strongly considering” this option but that general manager Joe Casey has yet to sign off on the plan.
In his presentation, Garforth indicated that the decision had already been made.
SEPTA hopes the change will eliminate confusion for area visitors and infrequent riders, who sometimes board the wrong train because they don’t understand that each line travels to two different directions.
The authority had been discussing the change for some time. Other ideas batted around by SEPTA officials were to give each line a name, like the New Jersey Transit model, or a letter.
The change also moves SEPTA away from a European-style regional rail model that emphasizes the possibilities of through-service beyond the Center City tunnel and into outlying neighborhoods and suburbs. Schedules made after the change won’t make reference to the other side of the old lines
This, Garforth said, will allow SEPTA to route its trains more efficiently and will acknowledge the reality that more and more trains change lines or head to the depot as they pass through Center City.
The hoped-for market of through-riding commuters never materialized after the tunnel was completed, and most through-riders today travel to the Philadelphia International Airport and Trenton. An analysis of Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission survey data shows that about 100 passengers a day travel to Trenton from R7 Chestnut Hill East stations, according to senior transportation planner Greg Krykewycz.
He warned, though, that the number was based on small sample sizes.
Only 33 percent of weekday trips travel along the same line past Center City, according to an Inquirer article.
Garforth said last night that percentage would probably decrease over time, though he would like to look at new through-train destinations for off-peak trains after the lines have been separated.
So for riders traveling from Wayne to Doylestown on what is now the R5, not much should immediately change — though SEPTA won’t say on its paper schedules which trains will continue on past Center City. Over time, though, SEPTA will be able to reroute trains along different lines, potentially ending the one-seat ride between those two stations.
The change has been vociferously opposed by University of Pennsylvania engineering professor Vukan Vuchic, who helped design the current regional rail system. In an earlier interview, he said that SEPTA never made enough of an effort to promote through-service as an option for area commuters.
To mitigate the effect on riders who are interested in through-service, CAC members suggested to Garforth that SEPTA include train destinations after they leave Center City. That way, riders will be able to plan their train transfers more easily.
Other members were also concerned about the effect the changes would have on institutions — especially area colleges — that market SEPTA on the basis of the regional rail lines that serve them.
Matt Mitchell of the Delaware Valley Association of Rail Passengers, a transit advocacy group, suggested that disconnecting the lines from each other gives SEPTA the opportunity to update its train routing procedures to take into account current commuting patterns.
Unclear is what SEPTA would call lines which have two popular terminals, like the R5 Paoli/Thorndale and the R3 Media/Elwyn. Fairfax said it would be “premature” to comment because no final decision has been made.
Contact the reporter at campisi.anthony@gmail.com
Comments
Hi, folks. Let me address some of the concerns. I can't speak for SEPTA, but I can give you an idea of what we heard both this week and last summer when SEPTA was consulting with the riders, the counties, and other stakeholders about the possible changes. The reason for the change is exactly as Alison experienced: with two destinations using the same line number, infrequent riders sometimes got on the wrong train, and others felt confused. While there's a majority of people believing some kind of change is necessary, there's no one right answer about how to make that change, and no consensus on what to do. SEPTA deserves credit for finally ending the paralysis over this issue.
First and most important, a final decision to make a change in the line designators has not been made yet, and everyone understands that if there is a change, there will need to be a very strong communications program to make sure passengers get the information they need. We'll watch the process closely, and tell them that if the signage isn't ready, or there are other problems, they should wait to make the change.
Second, changing the naming system for lines does not mean we stop running trains from one side of the system to the other. Most off peak trains will still run through to another line, the exceptions being for construction needs (which is why the R3 pairing was broken in the latest timetables) and because of the imbalance of trains between the PRR and Reading sides. The pairings may change, but if that happens, it won't happen immediately.
Third, the line pairings and through running were never based on potential travel markets. In other words, the planners didn't try to figure out who rode from where to where when they decided that the R7 would be Chestnut Hill East to Trenton. Instead it was based on total ridership, to reduce peak car requirements.
Finally, there's always been change in the pairing of lines and through service from one side of the system to the other. in fact, at the time the tunnel opened, West Trenton was R1, not R3; and R8 was intended to be a temporary pairing. With so many lines on each side, no matter how you pair the lines, only a minority of through-tunnel trips can be accomplished without changing trains.
The market for travel from one branch of the system to another is quite small (less than 5% of total ridership), and what ridership there is of this type is predominantly made up of three markets: travel to Trenton, particularly from the Main Line colleges, travel to the airport, and reverse commuting. The line numbers and line pairing have relatively little impact on those markets, except for airport travel from the local stations up to Jenkintown (which I've not heard about any changes in). Thus the number of people who would be adversely affected by a change in line pairing will be small, and persons who no longer have a direct train will be balanced out by others who will. Meanwhile, everyone will benefit if the change improves the efficiency of the system and we can get more service for our dollars.
Our role in this process is to represent riders like you, so if you have comments or suggestions, please send a note to us at mail@dvarp.org, phone 215-RAILWAY, or come to our next meeting, Saturday Feb. 20 from 1:00 to 4:00 at our offices in Center City. Visit our web site for details.
Matt Mitchell
Delaware Valley Association of Rail Passengers
www.dvarp.org
I rarely want or need to go to a destination outside the city limits via SEPTA, but I fear I might be befuddled at the prospect of, say, taking SEPTA to Trenton or another relatively distant connection if the destinations are no longer broadly noted via signs or schedules or announcements at my starting point, which, for me would be in Center City. Surely such information should be widely and noticeably provided.
SEPTA should change one way or the other--make a real commitment to through trains or get rid of them.
If they do end up renaming the lines, I hope SEPTA maintains some type of color coding and a simple numbering or lettering. When a train is arriving quickly at the platform, I use the color of the sign to know if it is my train or not.
If any of the lines are extended in the future, calling them by name/number will avoiding another change in designation.
Ugh. This is a terrible idea. I recently moved from Philadelphia to Boston, and the commuter rail is much harder to understand here: there are no clues as to what line a given station is on unless you already know where it is. Without convenient, short designations and color coding, it's just an impenetrable mess. If the problem is just that there are two lines with each number, SEPTA could simply renumber half of them and be done with it.
This is a lousy decision that defeats the original purpose of the Center City tunnel when it was constructed in the late '70s and early '80s. It reinforces commuting patterns that, while maybe followed by the majority of SEPTA's patrons, represent am ever decreasing portion of all commuters in the region. This move will cut down on the numbers of commuters riding from one suburb to another, or from portions of Philadelphia to suburban destinations through Center City. I'm also approaching this selfishly; I live on the R7 Chestnut Hill East, and have been annoyed since last year that trains on the weekends do not continue on to Trenton. Previously that made visits to New York City much easier. Now evidently I won't be able to tell at all what the connections are without having multiple timetables or using "plan my trip", on SEPTA's web site, which is not always effective "Trainview" is helpful only if you use the same train every day and know it's number; I go by scheduled time at a station, and that is how trains are announced at the Center City stations. Predictability is also one of the factors that encourages transit riders, and when one experiences trains on one line that may have different destinations, and stop at different stations, it can discourage potential riders. SEPTA should be moving to more frequent trains, with the same stops on every train on the same line, having those lines run through from suburb to suburb, and building on the R# concept.
I had a series of interviews today for a follow up I'm doing on this, and the tunnel was never really meant to provide through-service. Under the s-bahn-like service that was envisioned, with 10 minute headways on all lines, one-seat rides were never really considered that important. Stay tuned — I'm in the process of doing a history of the regional rail numbering system and the ideas behind the Center City Commuter Connection.
While I'm sympathetic to the Penn engineer, passengers just want to get on the right train. I have gotten on the train going the opposite direction from the one I intended, so I'm pleased to read that this matter is being addressed. I don't think that placenames are the way to do it, however. For infrequent regional passengers and visitors alike, a number system would be easiest in giving and receiving directions. Suppose you don't speak/read the language? For most visitors, an "8" in English is more friendly and recognizable than "Elwyn." Less picturesque, but way easier to remember.
"allisonk", the "8" in English is actually an Arabic number.
The original idea for the R's was admirable but appears to be outmoded. Additionally, the concern about through-trains is bogus, because clearly ALL trains will be "through trains", just not always between the same two ends. Not every person coming from West Trenton really wants to go to Media, so if that same train will now always go to Paoli, then some passengers will be disappointed but others will benefit. If the West Trenton train occasionally goes to Paoli AND Wilmington after Center City, then even more people will be able to go to numerous different places on a "through train". As for the use of names intead of numbers, the folks riding the Long Island Railroad or New Jersey Transit seem to be able to manage quite well, and so will SEPTA riders. Worst-case scenario? Make another change in another 25 years!
Riders on NJT and the LIRR may be doing fine but that doesn't mean that system of naming lines is the best. People riding the German S-Bahn systems manage quite well too, don't they? It's too bad that Septa is not taking full advantage of what it has thanks to its Center City tunnel and electrified lines. I feel they look around at the typical commuter rail systems of North America and think "we should be like them" when they have a system that could be so much more if they marketed it properly. If you think about the subway lines you could say "how many people actually travel from the Frankford terminal to 69th street?" But that's not the point is it? I'm not saying the current pairings are ideal, but that doesn't mean pairings aren't a good idea.
Jerry, I think you're incorrect. Under the proposed system, many trains will NOT be through trains, as they will just end at a center city location. And it's a lot more important than you realize, with the suggestion to just "make another change in 25 years!" If diffculty in picking the right trains increases, and the number of trains run/stops allowed decreases, we'll see a drop in ridership, which we can't afford right now.
there's a good discussion of this going on here, as well as at the Transport Politic, a blog by Yonah Freemark. Check it out: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/02/04/philadelphia-reevaluates-regional-rail-route-structure-dismissing-through-running/