Making Tracks Through Cyberspace
Village Crosstown Trolley Coalition
Making Tracks through the Village.Greenwich Village, New York City
Become a Member
Contact VCTC
The 8th St. Corridor
GV Transit
Newsletter
Questionnaire
Board of Directors
Volunteers Wanted
Calendar of Events
Transit Links
MAKING TRACKS - Vol. 1, No. 3 - July 1995
Entire contents of MAKING TRACKS is copyright © 1995 by Village Crosstown Trolley Coalition,
but may be reproduced either in whole or in part with a clear acknowledgment of the source.
Please report any errors to us at VCTC. Thanks.
Inside this Issue
Village Light Rail: Not Just a Nostalgia Trip
Trolley Topics
Not Just a Nostalgia Trip
By William K. Guild
For some people, the term "light rail" conjures up images of the Toonerville Trolley, or of the decrepit and cash-starved streetcar systems of New York and other American cities just before they were swept aside for "modern" buses and cars. Yet visitors to cities which have preserved and upgraded earlier streetcar systems, or have built new systems, will recognize that these not-so-fond recollections bear little resemblance to modern light rail transit (LRT).
It is ironic that this country, which developed the electric streetcar in the 1880s and the remarkably advanced PCC (Presidents' Conference Committee) car in the 1930s, virtually abandoned LRT technology for fifty years. Streetcars survived in only a few U.S. cities, mainly where rail tunnels precluded bus con-versions. Meanwhile the Brooklyn-born PCC spawned a light rail industry in Europe which has led to modern urban rail-based transit around the world, even on our own auto-centric West Coast and in other American cities.
Many economic, social and political factors led to the virtual extinction of streetcars in the United States and to the abdication of technological leadership in this field. While VCTC welcomes the establishment of LRV (light rail vehicle) manufacturing facilities in this country, and the efforts of American firms to regain light rail expertise, our purpose is to describe the features of LRVs and systems now available and to show how they might benefit the business and residential communities served by the 8th Street transit corridor.
Available in a wide variety of styles and configurations, the modern LRV is a far cry from its remote ancestors, which once plied the 8th Street corridor and numerous other Manhattan streets. It is a great advance even over the 50-year-old PCC cars still running in Newark, New Jersey. State-of-the-art low floor LRVs, operating successfully for several years in Europe, are now on order for Portland, Oregon, and Boston, Massachusetts. Curb-height platforms provide virtually level access to these cars, easing the boarding process for all passengers--not just the elderly, the handicapped and parents with baby strollers--and reducing "dwell time" at stations.
Articulated cars (see illustration on bottom of next page) often exceed 90 feet in length and can accommodate as many as 200 passengers. Some LRVs are designed to run in "multiple unit" trains of two or more cars. Portland, which has been operating peak period two-car trains since its MAX system opened in 1986, may use its new low-floor cars in tandem with conventional LRVs.
Modern LRT systems generally use exclusive right-of-way, at least in congested areas, keeping transit riders on schedule even when motor vehicle traffic is gridlocked. VCTC's plan calls for substantially exclusive LRV operation over most of the route, improving crosstown transit reliability while providing safer, more pleasant and pollution-free spaces for pedestrians along Christopher Street, 8th Street and St. Marks Place.
Light rail is more attractive to riders than buses. A modern LRV is almost always more comfortable, faster and more reliable than a bus, but even when objective differences are insignificant, ridership tends to increase when LRVs replace buses and decrease when buses replace LRVs. This tendency has been observed from Atlantic City to San Francisco, baffling "planners" who cannot understand the public's irrational preference for rail-based transit. Julian Wolinsky has reported the same phenomenon in France ("Paris Trams an 'Unqualified Success,'" Passenger Train Journal, Nov. 1994). The St. Denis-Bobigny light rail line, opened in 1992 to link high-density inner suburbs to the Paris Metro, now averages 55,000 weekday riders, double the number carried by previous bus services. 30% of these riders had not used any mass transit prior to the advent of light rail.
At the opposite end of the style spectrum from the sleek new Parisian LRVs, Memphis has equipped its new Main Street line (see "The Crosstown Trolley: A Boon to Village Business" in MAKING TRACKS, April 1995) with rebuilt Portuguese and Australian cars dating from the 1920s and '30s. These "heritage" cars, each in its own distinctive livery, are adequate for the relatively light usage of the two mile segment now in operation and appeal to the Convention Center visitors and tourists who make up much of the current ridership.
In New Orleans, original 1922-23 trolleys still run on the old St. Charles Avenue and new Riverfront lines, but modern LRVs may be needed for the heavy passenger loads anticipated when the Canal Street line is restored. Ex-Melbourne cars are also used on Seattleþs Waterfront heritage line, a tourist attraction used increasingly by regular commuters connecting with Puget Sound ferries.
Portland, the first North American city to order state-of-the-art low floor LRVs, also has "vintage" cars supplementing its nine-year-old standard LRV fleet. Used mainly on weekends and holidays, these early 20th Century look-alikes are actually brand new, but are very popular with tourists and for family outings.
Also designed for tourists are the "ersatz" trolleys used for sight-seeing in many cities, actually rubber-tired motor buses with bodies and interiors made to resemble old-time trolley cars. Such vehicles also run on several local bus routes in the historic district of Charleston, SC. Closer to home, the NYU "trolley" shuttles students and faculty around the Washington Square campus and to University facilities further afield. These ubiquitous vehicles demonstrate that, when the real thing is not available, the public prefers make-believe trolley cars to diesel buses.
VCTC proposes a modern, state-of-the-art LRT system, not a nostalgia trip, for the 8th Street corridor. While some tourists might enjoy the look and feel of old-time streetcars, modern equipment can provide better service as well as greater capacity.
Even with infrequent service through heavy and unpredictable traffic, the M-8 crosstown bus performs a vital rush hour transit service. Patronage remains significant during off-peak hours and on weekends, as well. NYC Transit survey data suggest that many regular M-8 riders, taking advantage of free "add-a-ride" transfers, change to a north-south bus line rather than to one of the many subways intersecting the route, for lower Manhattan or midtown trips.
Crosstown bus ridership is low considering the thousands of potential riders in densely developed areas close to the route, especially in "double fare" zones far from the subways. Many residents are forced to maintain cars in order to reach jobs, stores and other destinations beyond walking distance. Others choose not to travel at all. Unreliable surface transit and double fares have led to the paving over of playgrounds and other open spaces for parking lots in public housing.
While current M-8 passenger loadings might not justify the higher capacity of a modern LRT line, there is good reason to expect a ridership increase. In Paris, a switch to light rail doubled ridership between a working class neighborhood and the Metro, bringing a significant increase in overall transit use in the area. Ridership on LRT systems opened during the past year in St. Louis and Denver has far exceeded expectations, requiring substantial increases in planned LRV fleets. A similar demand can be expected on 8th Street, especially if an integrated fare structure is established.
In addition to area residents seeking to reach other parts of the City, the Village crosstown corridor is home to scores of retail and other business establishments whose proprietors, employees and customers all would find LRT an attractive improvement. Many more tourists and other visitors would be attracted to the area by the light rail system itself, regardless of the type of equipment used. VCTC believes ridership levels would require modern, high-capacity, low-floor LRVs rather than "heritage" cars, at least in normal service. On weekends, when more tourists use the system, some service might be provided by Portland-style "vintage" cars or even restored cars from area trolley museums.
With larger and more comfortable vehicles, more frequent and reliable schedules, free subway transfers and the subjective preference of most potential riders for light rail, a much higher level of ridership can be anticipated for the proposed Village Crosstown Trolley. State-of- the-art LRVs, possibly supplemented by "vintage" cars or museum pieces, will contribute to the success of the Village Crosstown Trolley project.
An auto-free 8th St. is already producing positive results. Put into effect by the NYPD's 6th Precinct to cut down on rowdy car drivers with boom boxes, 8th St. is closed at the discretion of the Commander on duty Friday and Saturday nights during the summer. Open only to buses and emergency vehicles from 11pm to 4am, 8th St. is transformed into a pleasant walking space from 6th Avenue to Broadway. Letters to police have been running overwhelmingly in favor of the closure. Thousands of residents and visitors use 8th St.each day to reach nearby subway stations. For more information call the 6th Pct. Community Affairs Office at 212-741-4826.
Mayor Guiliani hopped on board the 42nd St. trolley when he gave the go-ahead for City officials to apply for a $300,000 Federal grant to assist in preparation of final franchise contract documents for the project. Private vendors would build and operate the trolley on 42nd St., river to river, recovering their costs from fare box revenues. Vendors are expected to make formal proposals by the end of the year. City Councilman Andrew Eristoff has assured the City's Dept. of Transportation that the Council will soon appoint members to the citizen's advisory committee called for in its franchise authorization. A major rebuilding of 42nd St. will take place concurrently with installation of the trolley, including replacement of old water and sewer lines.
Trolleys may come back to Second Ave. if the MTA study on Manhattan East Side Alternatives (MESA) finds this the most cost-effective option to reduce congestion on the Lexington Ave. subway. This study is exploring four trolley options, along with more than a dozen other subway and bus alternatives. The Village Crosstown Trolley would be an important feeder to the 2nd Avenue trolley, which it would cross at St. Marks Place. Call Keith Martin at NYC Transit 718-694-5164 to get on the MESA mailing list.
NY Today
TimeOut New York
CitySearch New York
