Are More Subways Needed?

[londoner]

I took this photo at 7pm, last Friday night, on our way down to the Phillies game. Wow--what a joke. This subway is borderline useless. The subway line i proposed upthread, though pie in the sky, will at least have 24 hour ridership demand--commuters, tourists, residents trying to get across town, out-to-dinners, etc.

How can a 4-track subway in the 5th largest city in America, on a Friday night, be empty? For fear of sounding like Bleeper, it's almost a sad waste of resources keeping it open--when you'd rather spend operating costs opening/building a subway line that serves the current city--not the city from 1908.

[eldondre]

I took this photo at 7pm, last Friday night, on our way down to the Phillies game. Wow--what a joke. This subway is borderline useless. The subway line i proposed upthread, though pie in the sky, will at least have 24 hour ridership demand--commuters, tourists, residents trying to get across town, out-to-dinners, etc.

How can a 4-track subway in the 5th largest city in America, on a Friday night, be empty? For fear of sounding like Bleeper, it's almost a sad waste of resources keeping it open--when you'd rather spend operating costs opening/building a subway line that serves the current city--not the city from 1908.

aside from the fact that a picture of one car on one day does not prove that we should dismantle the subway. I assume you are unfamiliar with the city in 1908 and the city's plans as it related to subways. the plan from those days, particularly the 1913 transit plan, wasn't to build a four track subway from olney to snyder. the plan was actually four tracks from erie to snyder with branches to west philly via passyunk ave, league island (now the navy yard), the northeast/bustleton via the boulevard, germantown, and glenside via west oak lane. those would have all been two track branch lines (primarily built as elevateds just as in nyc) feeding a four track main. on top of that, there was to have been a parkway line running to 29th st, then to henry ave. the problem isn't that the city has changed in the last 100 years but that they built shockingly little of that. the broad st subway was never intended to be a subway line in and of itself. in fact, when it was first built, it was only four tracks to city hall from erie, then to walnut. then they extended it to olney, then they extended the subway to pattison. nothing has been done since that time. meanwhile, septa struggles with slow, overcrowded buses between germantown and broad st. they penalize riders for transferring to the subway (by charging them more).

[raider.adam]

I took this photo at 7pm, last Friday night, on our way down to the Phillies game. Wow--what a joke. This subway is borderline useless. The subway line i proposed upthread, though pie in the sky, will at least have 24 hour ridership demand--commuters, tourists, residents trying to get across town, out-to-dinners, etc.

How can a 4-track subway in the 5th largest city in America, on a Friday night, be empty? For fear of sounding like Bleeper, it's almost a sad waste of resources keeping it open--when you'd rather spend operating costs opening/building a subway line that serves the current city--not the city from 1908.

Nothing stops SEPTA from doing a bus route with a special designation and sign to run over the path you talk about.

[londoner]

aside from the fact that a picture of one car on one day does not prove that we should dismantle the subway.

Just for fun, here's the reverse shot looking into the adjacent car--it was eerie how empty it was:

assume you are unfamiliar with the city in 1908 and the city's plans as it related to subways. the plan from those days, particularly the 1913 transit plan, wasn't to build a four track subway from olney to snyder. the plan was actually four tracks from erie to snyder with branches to west philly via passyunk ave, league island (now the navy yard), the northeast/bustleton via the boulevard, germantown, and glenside via west oak lane. those would have all been two track branch lines (primarily built as elevateds just as in nyc) feeding a four track main. on top of that, there was to have been a parkway line running to 29th st, then to henry ave. the problem isn't that the city has changed in the last 100 years but that they built shockingly little of that. the broad st subway was never intended to be a subway line in and of itself. in fact, when it was first built, it was only four tracks to city hall from erie, then to walnut. then they extended it to olney, then they extended the subway to pattison. nothing has been done since that time. meanwhile, septa struggles with slow, overcrowded buses between germantown and broad st. they penalize riders for transferring to the subway (by charging them more).

I'm somewhat familiar with the plan. But just for argument sake, why was the BSL the first line built of this proposal? Presumably, at the time, it was determined to be the most essential and important route, regardless of planned offshoots--and therefore prioritized as such. Broad Street at the turn of the century was where wealthy people had mansions, almost all of the city business was conducted, home of entertainment, etc. A snapshot of PHiladelphia in 1910 perhaps justifies prioritizing a subway along this route. A snapshot of PHiladelphia today does not reflect this reality--at all. The BSL is a fossil of a different bygone era.

[raider.adam]

Just for fun, here's the reverse shot looking into the adjacent car--it was eerie how empty it was:
I'm somewhat familiar with the plan. But just for argument sake, why was the BSL the first line built of this proposal? Presumably, at the time, it was determined to be the most essential and important route, regardless of planned offshoots--and therefore prioritized as such. Broad Street at the turn of the century was where wealthy people had mansions, almost all of the city business was conducted, home of entertainment, etc. A snapshot of PHiladelphia in 1910 perhaps justifies prioritizing a subway along this route. A snapshot of PHiladelphia today does not reflect this reality--at all. The BSL is a fossil of a different bygone era.

The solution isn't to shutter the BSL. The solution is for the City to leverage it. Make the station intersections TOD (real ones, not the fake stuff they currently have). Loosen zoning and density rules for several blocks around the BSL. Same goes for the El as well.

Leverage it. They have Temple as one major attraction. Center City stops and the Stadiums as two more. What the BSL needs is more infill and destinations along it.

I mean, christ, the biggest case in point is one of the most frequent topics on this board: the Divine Lorraine. Imagine how useful that Fairmount subway stop would be with it developed and the vacant land behind it built 8 stories tall too, or a hybrid office park or something.

The problem isn't the BSL. The problem isn't that Philadelphians have moved to other parts of Philadelphia. The problem is that Philadelphians have moved out of Philadelphia. So use the BSL to get people to migrate back in along the rapid transit infrastructure.

[eldondre]

Just for fun, here's the reverse shot looking into the adjacent car--it was eerie how empty it was:




I'm somewhat familiar with the plan. But just for argument sake, why was the BSL the first line built of this proposal? Presumably, at the time, it was determined to be the most essential and important route, regardless of planned offshoots--and therefore prioritized as such. Broad Street at the turn of the century was where wealthy people had mansions, almost all of the city business was conducted, home of entertainment, etc. A snapshot of PHiladelphia in 1910 perhaps justifies prioritizing a subway along this route. A snapshot of PHiladelphia today does not reflect this reality--at all. The BSL is a fossil of a different bygone era.

in addition to Adams well reasoned rebuttal, the broad st portion HAD to.come first. You don't build branch lines before the trunk. I do.t think you appreciate that it was supposed to be part of a system not a line to itself. Sure broad st has seen better days but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that even then it was about moving people not serving rich people's mansions. The idea that we should stuff the 115k riders a day into buses and shut down the system is preposterous.

[luchobucho]

My built out version of Philly has always been intense corridors of jobs, wealth and activity along market and broad streets with particularly dense clusters in 4 or 5 square block rings around stations. The cities zoning mostly reflects this already, but not at the magnitude that it should be at and parking is still foisted upon multi units I believe.

For example, 40th and walnut should be a bangin' corner with 12 stores offices
On each corner (it should also be clean).

Broad and south/lombard and Ellsworth federal should be built out/up not with surface lots.

Girard, Fairmount, Snyder (suburban Walgreens? C'mon), etc.

The solution isn't to shutter the BSL. The solution is for the City to leverage it. Make the station intersections TOD (real ones, not the fake stuff they currently have). Loosen zoning and density rules for several blocks around the BSL. Same goes for the El as well.

Leverage it. They have Temple as one major attraction. Center City stops and the Stadiums as two more. What the BSL needs is more infill and destinations along it.

I mean, christ, the biggest case in point is one of the most frequent topics on this board: the Divine Lorraine. Imagine how useful that Fairmount subway stop would be with it developed and the vacant land behind it built 8 stories tall too, or a hybrid office park or something.

The problem isn't the BSL. The problem is that Philadelphians have moved to other parts of Philadelphia. The problem is that Philadelphians have moved out of Philadelphia. So use the BSL to get people to migrate back in along the rapid transit infrastructure.

[eldondre]

My built out version of Philly has always been intense corridors of jobs, wealth and activity along market and broad streets with particularly dense clusters in 4 or 5 square block rings around stations. The cities zoning mostly reflects this already, but not at the magnitude that it should be at and parking is still foisted upon multi units I believe.

For example, 40th and walnut should be a bangin' corner with 12 stores offices
On each corner (it should also be clean).

Broad and south/lombard and Ellsworth federal should be built out/up not with surface lots.

Girard, Fairmount, Snyder (suburban Walgreens? C'mon), etc.

sounds like there's already big plans for 40th just off market. Broad and sg. Is being redeveloped as is broad and south. I never used to take the subway for anything other than to CC or games but now we use tasker morris and Snyder fairly often to go to passyunk. The weak headways Saturday nights and Sundays keep me from Using it more often. I'd love to see a target near broad and girard to.anchor the shopping district. Perhaps where Wm Penn is located.

[Jtom]

I have a lot harder time hearing the announcements on the subway. Sometimes, there are no announcements at all on the subway. The el is pretty good in that way. The stops from Frankford to City Hall are loud enough and clear enough. Every now and then, the announcements are a station off, but that's rare.

[MarketStEl]

How can a 4-track subway in the 5th largest city in America, on a Friday night, be empty? For fear of sounding like Bleeper, it's almost a sad waste of resources keeping it open--when you'd rather spend operating costs opening/building a subway line that serves the current city--not the city from 1908.

Others have already responded to this, but as usual, I'll bat cleanup and throw in two cents more.

A multiplicity of factors, some already mentioned, have left the Broad Street Subway underutilized - even at peak hours (consider that the stations can accommodate six-car trains of "BMT Standard" dimensions (same as those on the BSS), but SEPTA only runs five-car trains). Not only were none of the proposed branch lines built, but the downtown loop subway that would have probably attracted more traffic to the line because it would have sent the trains along rather than just across Center City's main axis of development (which is served by the busier Market-Frankford Line, about which more below) was also scrubbed. (PATCO runs through what would have been the loop's east and south legs.) And soon after work began on the first phase of the city's expanded rapid transit network in 1915, a cash crunch (sound familiar?) led the city to halt work on the Broad Street half of the program and pour what remained into building the Frankford Elevated. (The Frankford Elevated took seven years to complete - two more than it took the Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company to build the Market Street subway-elevated. That painfully slow construction schedule is what led for calls for the city to assume responsibility for building new rapid transit lines after 1908. BTW, the Market Street tunnel is the only privately financed subway tunnel in the United States; the city just granted the company a franchise to build it.)

In addition, the configuration of bus routes in North and South Philadelphia west of Broad Street also do not take advantage of the subway. A number of routes, including the 17, 32, 33, and 48, provide one-seat rides into the city center from outlying neighborhoods where they might be better routed to feed Broad Street Line stations. (Actually, the 17 can't be rerouted like this, for it runs along a north-south pair of streets.)

Market-Frankford Line trains are as full at the hour londoner shot his photo as Broad Street Line trains are empty. Again, that's because the line runs along the city's main axis of development and also serves as a trunk line for feeder service from both the western suburbs and Northeast Philadelphia. This underscores the point about the importance of feeders made previously.

As for TOD, how many of you have either gotten off the subway at or ridden the 23 bus through the intersection of Broad Street, Erie and Germantown avenues? Even in its somewhat deteriorated present state, you can see that it was a major commercial district - there is even a high-rise office building standing vacant at the junction much as the Divine Lorraine molders at Broad, Ridge and Fairmount. (Note that at both of these intersections, major streets on the city grid intersect diagonal roads that connected what were once separate outlying communities to the 18th-century core city, which did not extend west of 8th Street.) There does remain a lot of unrealized potential around a number of Broad Street Line stations.

Chronological nit: Work resumed on the Broad Street Subway, minus the loop, in 1925 after being suspended in 1915, and the line opened for service on Sept. 1, 1928, from Olney to City Hall. Walnut-Locust opened two years later, Lombard-South (and the Ridge Spur, which substituted for the loop by providing service to 8th and Market) two years after that, and the South Broad Street extension to Snyder - built as the eastern side of what could be expanded to a four-track tunnel - opened on Sept. 19, 1938. The extension to Pattison Avenue (now AT&T station) opened along with Veterans Stadium in 1971.

[OffenseTaken]

Leverage it. They have Temple as one major attraction. Center City stops and the Stadiums as two more. What the BSL needs is more infill and destinations along it.

I mean, christ, the biggest case in point is one of the most frequent topics on this board: the Divine Lorraine. Imagine how useful that Fairmount subway stop would be with it developed and the vacant land behind it built 8 stories tall too, or a hybrid office park or something.

The problem isn't the BSL. The problem isn't that Philadelphians have moved to other parts of Philadelphia. The problem is that Philadelphians have moved out of Philadelphia. So use the BSL to get people to migrate back in along the rapid transit infrastructure.

Jesus. A thousand times THIS. Why are we even having these abstract discussions about enormous showcase projects that get the imaginary carte blanche?

Right now, the answer to the question posed at the beginning of this thread is: no. No more subways are needed for Philadelphia as it is today. No subway line in this city is ever going to be better-positioned for ridership than the MFL, and even that isn't exactly filled to the brim with riders.

We all have our SEPTA wish lists. The problem with these wish lists isn't that the hypothetical subway lines are fantasy; the problem is that we design them for a city that is itself fantasy. Subways are built for places where lots of people need to be in one small area at one time, for the purpose of making and spending lots of money. Does this sound like Philadelphia to you? Be honest with yourself. Does that sound like a city where somebody acquires an enormous empty lot in the middle of the "financial district," and opts to build apartments because nobody wants to put an office there?

Instead of wasting our time talking about things that aren't getting built for a city that isn't there, we should be talking about how to create the conditions that would make that city possible. I know corruption, taxes, and local elections aren't as amusing to our inner child as underground trains are, but so what. Look at this city. Where do you want to see it in 20 years? We don't have time for farting around.

[eldondre]

Jesus. A thousand times THIS. Why are we even having these abstract discussions about enormous showcase projects that get the imaginary carte blanche?

Right now, the answer to the question posed at the beginning of this thread is: no. No more subways are needed for Philadelphia as it is today. No subway line in this city is ever going to be better-positioned for ridership than the MFL, and even that isn't exactly filled to the brim with riders.

We all have our SEPTA wish lists. The problem with these wish lists isn't that the hypothetical subway lines are fantasy; the problem is that we design them for a city that is itself fantasy. Subways are built for places where lots of people need to be in one small area at one time, for the purpose of making and spending lots of money. Does this sound like Philadelphia to you? Be honest with yourself. Does that sound like a city where somebody acquires an enormous empty lot in the middle of the "financial district," and opts to build apartments because nobody wants to put an office there?

Instead of wasting our time talking about things that aren't getting built for a city that isn't there, we should be talking about how to create the conditions that would make that city possible. I know corruption, taxes, and local elections aren't as amusing to our inner child as underground trains are, but so what. Look at this city. Where do you want to see it in 20 years? We don't have time for farting around.

actually, the el does pretty good business at rush hour, it's off peak where it drops off dramatically...I think, in part, because the areas around the stations are, well, seedy at best. I've made an argument in the past that there should be extra service between girard and 40th st on the el, 15 minutes headways are atrocious.
even the bsl I sometimes don't use simply because of the 12 minute headways. that said, if they had built the northeast elevated the bsl would have more riders than the el, end of story. there are bus routes in Philadelphia that are often sro and many have more riders than most light rail projects happening around the country. Philadelphians need to stop being so down on themselves, there are people in the city, they need to get around, and the current system isn't big enough. you need to balance that with weak office demand, lack of money, and crime that are all deterrents. the answer, then, is modest improvements to the transit system in addition redeveloping the areas around the stations.
I walk more than the average fellow, the distance between templetown redevelopment and core revitalization is, perhaps, three blocks. we've come to a point where these places are going to start running together, spring garden and nl, francisville and templetown. despite all the challenges, it's estimated that Philadelphia added more people than boston last year. between 1990 and 2000 the core area added 4k people, between 2000-2010 it added 17k people. there's a disconnected job center at the southern terminus (navy yard), there are lots of people just off the bsl (lower NE, germantown, wol).

[Brian616]

We all have our SEPTA wish lists. The problem with these wish lists isn't that the hypothetical subway lines are fantasy; the problem is that we design them for a city that is itself fantasy. Subways are built for places where lots of people need to be in one small area at one time, for the purpose of making and spending lots of money. Does this sound like Philadelphia to you?

Actually, that sounds a lot like UCity to me, which already has 30th St, UCity station, and El stop, and the trolley tunnel. I assume you meant bankers, but doctors and professors also make spend a lot of money.

Sandy, did Spur BSL trains ever use the Locust St Subway, or was it only PATCO? Others have said this before me, but I'd love to see PATCO stop at 8th and Market, and give the rest of the tunnel back to SEPTA. I'd bet that would boost ridership, and it would be more feasible to use those stations as normal subway stops (intra-city transit), instead of pseudo-commuter trains. It would also make completing the loop juuust a little less pie-in-the-sky, as at least all of it would be one agency.

[MarketStEl]

My ears are burning. Someone must have called my name.

OffenseTaken, I know one of the big reasons there's no subway serving the central and upper Northeast, and it has nothing to do with whether there would be people out there to ride it - there would be - and everything to do with bigotry. The reasons that the opposition to the Northeast Spur has melted are twofold: one, the bigots have largely been replaced by the United Nations - this part of the city is quite diverse now - and two, the folks who remain don't much care for having to transfer to get to anyplace outside the Northeast from it on public transit. (There is just about no other part of the city where this is true.) Just about every study that's been done has concluded that the Northeast subway IS needed. Moving up here has raised my consciousness on this subject, and I live in an area that's only a 20-minute walk from Frankford Terminal. (Most residents prefer the 10-minute bus ride to Arrott Terminal.) The problem is paying for it now.

eldondre, patronage on the MFL doesn't "drop off dramatically" off-peak. There's a sizable "shoulder" period in the early and mid-evening, and I've NEVER been on an MFL train with as few riders as the BSL train londoner photographed at 7 pm on a Friday - not even the last eastbound train of the night at 12:30 a.m. I've been on 7 p.m. trains that are almost as packed as peak-hour trains on a few occasions as well, and Saturday midday trains on the line ARE as packed as weekday peak-hour trains. The MFL carries some 230,000 passengers every day.

Brian616: Ridge Spur trains operated through the Locust Street Subway from the day the tunnel opened in 1952 until 1968, when service ended in preparation for conversion of the tunnel for PATCO trains. At that time, the current Ridge Spur terminus in the mezzanine of the Market Street station opened.

[raider.adam]

For the record, last night at 6:42 before the Phillies game the BSL was standing room only.

[eldondre]

I rode the train at 630..sro again at 1130 pm and it still had more ppl than that. Just to play devils advocate .. why does the bsl run more often than the El late at night?

[BarryG]

I rode the train at 630..sro again at 1130 pm and it still had more ppl than that. Just to play devils advocate .. why does the bsl run more often than the El late at night?

This doesnt really answer the question, but because the El is a bit longer and has more stations.

[OffenseTaken]

actually, the el does pretty good business at rush hour, it's off peak where it drops off dramatically...I think, in part, because the areas around the stations are, well, seedy at best. I've made an argument in the past that there should be extra service between girard and 40th st on the el, 15 minutes headways are atrocious.
even the bsl I sometimes don't use simply because of the 12 minute headways. that said, if they had built the northeast elevated the bsl would have more riders than the el, end of story. there are bus routes in Philadelphia that are often sro and many have more riders than most light rail projects happening around the country. Philadelphians need to stop being so down on themselves, there are people in the city, they need to get around, and the current system isn't big enough. you need to balance that with weak office demand, lack of money, and crime that are all deterrents. the answer, then, is modest improvements to the transit system in addition redeveloping the areas around the stations.

You seem to think I'm just heaping scorn on Philadelphia or something. That's not true at all. I've lived in other cities enough that I wasn't surprised by the news of SEPTA's big recognition last month: I think it's not only the least dysfunctional public institution in this city, but one of the least dysfunctional transit systems anywhere. And I have to stand on the 17 almost all the time, but I'm not complaining; I'm glad it's such a well-travelled route.

What you're saying about "modest improvements" is thoroughly unobjectionable, but I'm responding to the main topic of this thread, which is a discussion of improvements that are anything but modest. And to that, I'm saying that we should be putting the force of our imagination behind solvable problems.

I walk more than the average fellow, the distance between templetown redevelopment and core revitalization is, perhaps, three blocks. we've come to a point where these places are going to start running together, spring garden and nl, francisville and templetown. despite all the challenges, it's estimated that Philadelphia added more people than boston last year. between 1990 and 2000 the core area added 4k people, between 2000-2010 it added 17k people. there's a disconnected job center at the southern terminus (navy yard), there are lots of people just off the bsl (lower NE, germantown, wol).

The city's system of taxation punishes residents less than it does businesses. So we can be happy that many people are settling here, but in tandem we have to acknowledge that businesses still avoid the city like a plague.

This is why a huge component of the city's resurgence has been as a kind of bedroom community to the suburbs. I forget the exact figure, but the number of those new CC residents who work outside the city is awfully high; to them, add all the wage-workers in West and North Philly who have longer outward commutes and much lower pay. When I was job-hunting as a new resident, the employment listings in Montco seemed to outnumber the ones in Philadelphia by a ratio of several to one (not including jobs in restaurants and bars, of course).

I'm plagiarizing myself from another thread, but it's worth asking again: what would New York look like if everybody had to schlep out to White Plains or Long Island every day? There probably wouldn't be 1.6 million people living in Manhattan, for one thing. There would be vacant lots on Fifth Avenue, robberies in broad daylight on dead streets, an abandoned Rockefeller Center would be rehabbed into cheap condos for a niche market of adventurous empty nesters, etc. etc. You see where I'm going.

Most importantly, there wouldn't be enough demand to run twenty-one subway lines—certainly not the economic wherewithal to run them 24 hours a day. This is Philadelphia's problem, and this is why talk of anything more than "modest" improvements under current circumstances is foolishness.

OffenseTaken, I know one of the big reasons there's no subway serving the central and upper Northeast, and it has nothing to do with whether there would be people out there to ride it - there would be - and everything to do with bigotry. The reasons that the opposition to the Northeast Spur has melted are twofold: one, the bigots have largely been replaced by the United Nations - this part of the city is quite diverse now - and two, the folks who remain don't much care for having to transfer to get to anyplace outside the Northeast from it on public transit. (There is just about no other part of the city where this is true.) Just about every study that's been done has concluded that the Northeast subway IS needed. Moving up here has raised my consciousness on this subject, and I live in an area that's only a 20-minute walk from Frankford Terminal. (Most residents prefer the 10-minute bus ride to Arrott Terminal.) The problem is paying for it now.

Maybe I should revise my definitive answer to the thread's question from "no" to "not enough to justify the cost." In other words, new subways are much more wanted than they are needed.

If $3.5bn suddenly fell out of the sky, a NE route or spur would be one of the two or three most advantageous ways to spend that money, as Adam pointed out upthread. Personally, I would rather see the money on more than just a huge favor to people in one section of town, but that's outside my ken. It's all immaterial, of course.

[eldondre]

Hard to object to that. Well said.

[Jtom]

My ears are burning. Someone must have called my name.

OffenseTaken, I know one of the big reasons there's no subway serving the central and upper Northeast, and it has nothing to do with whether there would be people out there to ride it - there would be - and everything to do with bigotry. The reasons that the opposition to the Northeast Spur has melted are twofold: one, the bigots have largely been replaced by the United Nations - this part of the city is quite diverse now - and two, the folks who remain don't much care for having to transfer to get to anyplace outside the Northeast from it on public transit. (There is just about no other part of the city where this is true.) Just about every study that's been done has concluded that the Northeast subway IS needed. Moving up here has raised my consciousness on this subject, and I live in an area that's only a 20-minute walk from Frankford Terminal. (Most residents prefer the 10-minute bus ride to Arrott Terminal.) The problem is paying for it now.

eldondre, patronage on the MFL doesn't "drop off dramatically" off-peak. There's a sizable "shoulder" period in the early and mid-evening, and I've NEVER been on an MFL train with as few riders as the BSL train londoner photographed at 7 pm on a Friday - not even the last eastbound train of the night at 12:30 a.m. I've been on 7 p.m. trains that are almost as packed as peak-hour trains on a few occasions as well, and Saturday midday trains on the line ARE as packed as weekday peak-hour trains. The MFL carries some 230,000 passengers every day.

Brian616: Ridge Spur trains operated through the Locust Street Subway from the day the tunnel opened in 1952 until 1968, when service ended in preparation for conversion of the tunnel for PATCO trains. At that time, the current Ridge Spur terminus in the mezzanine of the Market Street station opened.

Bigotry isn't the only reason some Northeast residents used to (and still do) oppose a subway in the Northeast. Generally, the areas around the stations become big drug and crime hotspots. Of course, the neighborhood isn't really any worse because of the station but the bad elements are just concentrated in one specific location. It wouldn't bring ghetto thugs up from North Philly like some people (the bigots) in the NE think.

I'm all for building the spur. I'm tired of taking the bus down to Frankford Ave in order to get downtown. C'mon SEPTA, get it done.