945 lines
50 KiB
Plaintext
945 lines
50 KiB
Plaintext
The Delaware Valley Rail Passenger
|
||
|
||
December 1994
|
||
Vol. XII, No. 12
|
||
|
||
ISSN 1073-6859
|
||
|
||
Published by the Delaware Valley Association of Railroad Passengers in the
|
||
interest of continued, improved, and expanded rail service for the present
|
||
and
|
||
potential railroad and rail transit passengers of southeastern Pennsylvania,
|
||
southern New Jersey, and nearby areas.
|
||
|
||
|
||
For more information about DVARP and good rail service, please contact us:
|
||
P.O. Box 7505, Philadelphia, PA 19101 215-222-3373
|
||
|
||
NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS
|
||
<dvarp@libertynet.org>
|
||
|
||
The electronic edition is produced as a public service to the network
|
||
community. It is archived on the CUNYVM Listserver in the RAILNEWS
|
||
directory. An index of back issues is available by sending INDEX RAILNEWS to
|
||
LISTSERV@CUNYVM. Thanks to Geert K. Marien (GKMQC@CUNYVM) for maintaining
|
||
this archive! If you have comments or questions, contact us, not Geert!
|
||
The DVRP is also archived on these FTP servers
|
||
ftp://wuarchive.wustl.edu/graphics/trains/text or graphics/trains/incoming
|
||
ftp://hipp.etsu.edu/pub/railroad/dvarp (Thanks to Bob Weir)
|
||
|
||
Coming soon: recent issues will be available on WWW
|
||
see home page opening soon--http:///libertynet.org/~dvarp/dvarp.html
|
||
|
||
Volumes X (1992) and XI (1993) are on floppy disk for $4.00 each from DVARP.
|
||
|
||
We hope you consider joining DVARP; your financial support makes possible
|
||
this newsletter and our many other activities on behalf of rail and transit
|
||
passengers. Annual dues for 1995 are $16.00. see the coupon at ##R.
|
||
|
||
Contents copyright (C) 1994 DVARP, except photos (C) 1994 credited
|
||
photographers
|
||
|
||
Acting Editor: Don Nigro Online Liason: Matthew Mitchell
|
||
For other DVARP officers and committee chairs, find ##Q
|
||
|
||
Opinions expressed in The Delaware Valley Rail Passenger are not necessarily
|
||
those of DVARP or its members. We welcome your comments: call 215-222-3373
|
||
|
||
|
||
contents:
|
||
use the search function of your word processor to find articles
|
||
##A First Customer Enhancement Programs Initiated
|
||
##B Is Light Rail Sometimes The Right Choice?
|
||
##C Editor's Note: Schuylkill Valley Metro
|
||
##D North Philadelphia Progress
|
||
##E Railworks Wins Civil Engineering Award
|
||
##F Suggestion For Letters To Legislators On Harrisburg Line
|
||
##G Montgomery County Station Improvements
|
||
##H News from Delaware
|
||
##I Let's Have More Product Differentiation at SEPTA
|
||
##J Metra: a Role Model for RRD
|
||
##K NJT To Study Commuter Rail To Mt. Holly
|
||
##L Route 23 Celebration
|
||
##M Letters To The Editor
|
||
##N Ooops
|
||
##O Upcoming DVARP Meetings:
|
||
OCTOBER GENERAL MEETING CANCELED
|
||
##P Dues Increase Coming
|
||
##Q Cross County Bus
|
||
##R DVARP Phone & Voice-mail Directory
|
||
##S DVARP Membership Coupon
|
||
|
||
|
||
##A First Customer Enhancement Programs Initiated
|
||
by Chuck Bode
|
||
SEPTA's employee empowerment project, the Customer Service Enhancement
|
||
Committee, continues to make good progress. DVARP, the Citizen Advisory
|
||
Committee, and SEPTA all developed information and projects. SEPTA has
|
||
already initiated work on the first projects. Best news is that the scope
|
||
of passenger involvement is increasing.
|
||
SEPTA now has three service measurement programs and one employee
|
||
measurement program in operation to obtain information. The visible program
|
||
is the rider report card, which passengers have received the past several
|
||
years. SEPTA has also selected a group of employees to report in a
|
||
structured manner on their trips as passengers. Most recently, an outside
|
||
firm has been hired to ride and report. This firm does this in several
|
||
cities thus allowing SEPTA to be compared to other systems as well as to its
|
||
own goals. Once a year, the employees are surveyed to get their input.
|
||
The enhancement committee has come face to face with the daily issues:
|
||
Do the rules for both operations and for passengers help or hinder? How
|
||
should the rules be enforced--should all the passengers be delayed to deal
|
||
with one offending passenger? Should different rules/standards apply to
|
||
different parts of SEPTA? The committee has recognized that one rigid
|
||
solution is not best. Many ideas are being explored to determine what will
|
||
work best in the various types of service.
|
||
Eating has been discussed at length. Many passengers are on board for
|
||
long periods of time and want to use the time productively, which includes
|
||
eating. Some passengers are neat, other passengers are slobs. Because of
|
||
the slobs, many SEPTA vehicles resemble rolling garbage dumps discouraging
|
||
potential riders. Slobs cost money. Extra effort is required to clean and
|
||
exterminate dirty vehicles. This is a place where passengers can help.
|
||
Put some "peer pressure" on the slobs. Or, carry their garbage off
|
||
yourself. Fair warning, with SEPTA fares expected to increase, the extra
|
||
costs of garbage removal are likely to result in a ban on eating on RRD
|
||
unless the mess stops.
|
||
The Subway Elevated Division project is most immediate because
|
||
passengers will directly rate the daily progress. No consultants, no
|
||
middle management; direct passenger input. This is the significant
|
||
difference from all the other initial projects. 50 passenger volunteers
|
||
are to fill out a rating form for each trip. The goal is a diversity of
|
||
passengers using different stations and riding at all times of the day. A
|
||
half-day training session is planned for October, after which rating should
|
||
begin.
|
||
RRD is trying an altogether different approach, changing the
|
||
organization of management. The West Trenton line is expected to have its
|
||
own management, staff, and maybe even dedicated cars by September. The
|
||
concept under test is whether a dedicated team covering everything from
|
||
track and signals through train operation to management can cost-effectively
|
||
improve service and ridership.
|
||
Light Rail is beginning with the top priorities from the summer 1993
|
||
rider report card. 14.8% of the passengers indicated station security and
|
||
14.1% station cleanliness. Suburban Division is working on Route 100.
|
||
Surface Division also began with the rider report card. Their project
|
||
began in May with schedule adherence, loop & terminal operation (passengers
|
||
are permitted to wait on the bus), and performance checks. Additional
|
||
items are being added in June.
|
||
Finance is trying to get sales office personnel to interact with
|
||
customers. Have you noticed the model bus and other new items on sale? The
|
||
main purpose is to have something for the staff to communicate about instead
|
||
of grumpily ignoring the customers. The difficulty is that it is so hard
|
||
for the staff to hear and speak through the thick windows that they
|
||
eventually become frustrated and stop trying.
|
||
With the new programs, passengers need to continue to participate in
|
||
two of SEPTA's ongoing efforts--rider report card and SEPTA on Site. From
|
||
our participation in this project we have learned that SEPTA is trying hard
|
||
to figure out what the passengers really want. Employees at SEPTA on Site
|
||
make a report on what the passengers told them. Much work is done to
|
||
extract what the passenger wants from the report cards. We need to realize
|
||
that change takes time, and we should not be discouraged because
|
||
suggestions are not instantly implemented. The only conclusion that can be
|
||
reached from no participation is that all is well.
|
||
We need to hear from our members. Do you notice changes? Are the
|
||
initiatives working? What suggestions do you have? This is the new SEPTA.
|
||
SEPTA has not only empowered the employees, it has empowered the
|
||
passengers. Is there any other transit system that puts passengers
|
||
projects directly into the process with internal projects? We need to
|
||
constructively use this opportunity.
|
||
The next time the bus is late don't gripe at the driver, instead smile
|
||
and say good morning. Good service requires good passengers.
|
||
|
||
|
||
##B Is Light Rail Sometimes The Right Choice?
|
||
by John A. Dawson
|
||
From time to time proposals have surfaced calling for the conversion of
|
||
a regional rail line to light rail. DVARP has always opposed such
|
||
suggestions, believing this course of action to represent a downgrading.
|
||
But is this a wise course? I think not.
|
||
There are nearby examples of 'transitized' rail lines that we can look
|
||
at. One of the most successful rail lines in the Delaware Valley is PATCO's
|
||
Lindenwold Line. Using former rail right-of-way, this one line carries over
|
||
40,000 weekday trips, which is more than one-half of the trips carried by
|
||
SEPTA on all 13 Regional Rail lines put together; with automated fare
|
||
collection and one-person train operation, its cost recovery is superior to
|
||
either SEPTA or NJ TRANSIT. For many years, fares actually covered
|
||
operating expenses.
|
||
A second example is provided by Washington's Metrorail. With 80 miles
|
||
now in operation, it has lines extending far into the suburbs, territory
|
||
that in earlier years would have been served by a traditional railroad
|
||
operation. Weekday ridership exceeds 900,000, a number that is 38% greater
|
||
than SEPTA's total ridership, railroad plus transit. More people now cross
|
||
the Potomac at Washington by Metrorail than by car. Weekend ridership is
|
||
good, and obviously attracting riders across all income strata. In
|
||
contrast, ride SEPTA on a weekend and one receives the definite impression
|
||
that most of the riders are there because they have no choice. Although
|
||
these are both examples of heavy rail transit, they show that transit can
|
||
provide quality service to suburban corridors and attract riders out of
|
||
their cars.
|
||
On the other hand, regional rail service does offer a number of
|
||
advantages. It can probably provide a more comfortable faster ride over
|
||
longer distances. It can operate in mixed traffic with intercity passenger
|
||
and freight trains, and new service can be initiated on existing rail lines
|
||
with minimal capital investment. However, the rationalization (downsizing)
|
||
of the rail network has increased the difficulty of using freight lines, and
|
||
Conrail, in particular, has indicated that it wants as little to do with
|
||
passenger trains as possible. Even if one can reach an agreement to share
|
||
track, service is not likely to be frequent, and in many cases may be
|
||
limited to weekday rush hours. In addition, operating costs are high for
|
||
traditional rail service. Light rail offers the potential to offer more
|
||
service at lower cost, and because it does not require the ridership density
|
||
that subway/elevated lines do, it can be extended further into the suburbs.
|
||
Modern equipment can operate at 70 mph on a grade-separated right-of-way,
|
||
and can be configured to provide comfortable seating.
|
||
One long-range project now under consideration by SEPTA and Montgomery
|
||
County is that of the Schuylkill Valley Metro, which essentially combines
|
||
both ends of the R6 and replaces it with a light rail line. As proposed,
|
||
the line would use the existing R6 line from Norristown to Ivy Ridge, and
|
||
then shift to the now unused ex-PRR line to cross the river to Bala Cynwyd,
|
||
and proceed to Wynnfield Avenue on the existing R6 Cynwyd line. From there
|
||
it would use an old Fairmount Park trolley right-of-way to Girard Avenue,
|
||
then turn east, using the Route 15 trolley tracks to recross the Schuylkill
|
||
River. There it drops down to the CSX right-of-way, where it would run on
|
||
its own dedicated track.
|
||
After clearing the Pennsylvania Avenue tunnel by the Art Museum, the
|
||
route would turn east on the abandoned ex-Reading City Branch. Access to
|
||
Center City and the west side office complex would be via paired tracks on
|
||
11th and 12th Streets, last used by Route 23, and new track laid in the
|
||
Chestnut Street Transitway. The line would terminate at 18th and Chestnut.
|
||
This route offers a number of interesting possibilities. It offers
|
||
good distribution along Chestnut Street and direct service to the Convention
|
||
Center, Art Museum, Zoo, and Mann Music Center. It also provides a much
|
||
improved service at transit fares to Bala Cynwyd residents, as well as an
|
||
attractive service to Manayunk. And it resolves the issue of what to do
|
||
with the inefficient and costly R6 Cynwyd service.
|
||
However, operation of the full route to Norristown also creates some
|
||
problems. It makes it difficult to extend rail service out the Schuylkill
|
||
Valley to Pottstown and Reading. Although in theory, light rail could be
|
||
run to those points, this would make for some rather long trolley rides.
|
||
Conflicts with Conrail freight movements at Norristown would have to be
|
||
resolved, and provision made for access to shippers at Conshohocken, Spring
|
||
Mill, and Miquon. It would leave riders in Wissahickon, East Falls, and
|
||
Allegheny without service, and it should be noted that both Mayor Rendell
|
||
and Senator Specter maintain residences in East Falls. While good speeds
|
||
could be maintained on most of the route, street running through Center City
|
||
is likely to be slow.
|
||
Instead of converting the entire line, why not just convert the Ivy
|
||
Ridge portion? It would work well as a stand-alone operation, and it would
|
||
leave the R6 Norristown service undisturbed. The distances are relatively
|
||
short, and it would improve transit access to important visitor attractions,
|
||
as well as to Bala Cynwyd and Manayunk.
|
||
Maybe there are better choices, but light rail should receive
|
||
consideration. We should avoid imposing one modal solution on all
|
||
transportation problems. We need to examine the unique circumstances in each
|
||
case, and then make our choice. Light rail transit should not be ruled out
|
||
before we even start the process.
|
||
|
||
##C Editor's Note: Schuylkill Valley Metro
|
||
|
||
DVARP's most recent statement regarding conversion of a regional rail line
|
||
to light rail occurred on July 3, 1994 within our comments on the Delaware
|
||
Valley Regional Planning Commission Draft May 1994 Transportation
|
||
Improvement Program FY 1995-1998. In reference to project #8622
|
||
Schuylkill Valley Metro:
|
||
Philadelphia To Oaks Area Extension & Conversion
|
||
of SEPTA R6 Line To Light Rail - Study
|
||
we noted the following:
|
||
This study should be broadened to include an examination of ways to
|
||
improve the cost recovery on the SEPTA R6 line rather than seeing conversion
|
||
as the only option. The average speed on this line is very slow. Many more
|
||
riders could be drawn to this line if the time travel was more competitive
|
||
with the Schuylkill Expressway. This could be accomplished through:
|
||
improve grade crossings;
|
||
replace old jointed rail with new welded rail;
|
||
superelevate the curves;
|
||
raise speed on many sections of the line from 40 mph to 65 mph;
|
||
improve interlockings and signals to permit further travel-time reduction.
|
||
Currently, SEPTA runs the slowest commuter railroad in the country.
|
||
Its average speed is about 23 mph. The nations average is about 32 mph.
|
||
SEPTA's dismally low average speed is the largest factor why the regional
|
||
rail lines have such poor ridership and therefore, a low cost recovery.
|
||
Furthermore, a rerouting of the R6 trains should be considered. The R6
|
||
Cynwyd route to Ivy Ridge is shorter and faster than the routing via East
|
||
Falls. The Norristown Line tracks could be reoriented to line with the
|
||
Cynwyd route between Shawmont and Ivy Ridge. The stations between Manayunk
|
||
and Allegheny on the present Norristown Line could be served through the
|
||
diversion of currently non-revenue trains.
|
||
|
||
##D North Philadelphia Progress
|
||
|
||
Change is expected at North Philadelphia Station. Amtrak has removed
|
||
most of the high level platform. SEPTA was recently presented with a
|
||
request to construct a 142 foot wide deck over the R8 line there as part of
|
||
commercial development of the site. This appears to be part of the project
|
||
begun several years ago to improve the station.--CB
|
||
|
||
##E Railworks Wins Civil Engineering Award
|
||
by Bill Mulloy
|
||
The SEPTA Railworks(R) project received the 1994 Award of Merit in the
|
||
Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement Competition. This national award
|
||
is sponsored by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
|
||
Railworks(r) was in competition with other large public works projects
|
||
located across the country. The major criteria for the award included:
|
||
completing the project on time and within budget, meeting quality standards,
|
||
maintaining minimal impact to the environment, and maintaining minimal
|
||
disruption to the public. Railworks(R) met all of these criteria and has
|
||
been called "a model for urban construction" by Gordon Linton, head of the
|
||
Federal Transit Administration.
|
||
The award was officially presented on September 9, 1994, at a ceremony
|
||
held in the Pennsylvania Convention Center Grand Hall (Historic Reading
|
||
Train Shed). Speakers included representatives of SEPTA, the Federal
|
||
Transit Administration, the City of Philadelphia, and ASCE. The common
|
||
theme expressed was that a project of this type should be publicized to
|
||
emphasize the importance of restoring our infrastructure and the essential
|
||
role it plays in our region.
|
||
|
||
##F Suggestion For Letters To Legislators On Harrisburg Line
|
||
Although Amtrak owns the line between Philadelphia and Harrisburg, for
|
||
the past several years it has been a reluctant operator of the Keystone
|
||
trains between the two cities. As the line ranks low on Amtrak's scale of
|
||
priorities and as capital funds are scarce, Amtrak has been unable to
|
||
maintain the railroad to satisfactory standards, and there are signs that
|
||
the line is deteriorating.
|
||
Currently track 2 is out of service between Overbrook and Bryn Mawr,
|
||
and the tower at Bryn Mawr is no longer functioning. The signaling system,
|
||
while for the most part still serviceable, is outdated, inefficient, and
|
||
badly in need of modernization. A study conducted two years ago for PennDOT
|
||
identified about $20 million worth of investment (ties, catenary,
|
||
substations, etc.) that should be made within the next five years just to
|
||
maintain the railroad to its existing design standards. The rolling stock
|
||
currently used by Amtrak is the oldest on its roster and not appropriate for
|
||
the type of service operated. New or refurbished cars could enhance the
|
||
service and help build ridership.
|
||
On the operational side consolidation of the Keystone Service and the
|
||
SEPTA R5 service west of Paoli could eliminate costly duplication of service
|
||
and increase the options available to riders. Implementation of a combined
|
||
schedule convenient for travel between Philadelphia, Chester County,
|
||
Lancaster, and Harrisburg could increase ridership, and thus reduce traffic
|
||
congestion and air pollution.
|
||
DVARP urges you to support funds in the State budget to continue and
|
||
improve service on this line. Federal money is available under the
|
||
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program, as well as from other
|
||
sections of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and
|
||
the Clean Air Act for capital investments. We also urge you to support
|
||
legislative and policy changes that would permit transferring control of the
|
||
line and service to an appropriate State agency. Our volunteers are
|
||
available to meet with you if that would be helpful.--JD
|
||
|
||
##G Montgomery County Station Improvements
|
||
Montgomery County has contributed $1.25 million, half the cost, to
|
||
rehabilitate Merion, Wynnewood, Philmont, DeKalb Street, Oreland, and Elkins
|
||
Park Stations. Work, which varies at each station, typically includes
|
||
waiting room, ticket office, plumbing, bathroom, exterior repairs, station
|
||
and parking lot lights, platforms and sidewalks, and parking lot paving.
|
||
Work is underway at Philmont. Merion and DeKalb are to be repaired in 1994.
|
||
Elkins Park, Oreland, and Wynnewood follow in 1995.
|
||
(From SEPTA Community Update. CB)
|
||
|
||
##H News from Delaware
|
||
by Chuck Bode
|
||
DelDOT recently inaugurated two new Monday to Friday bus routes, U bus
|
||
and 896 Link, serving the areas along highways 40, 896, and 7. Both routes
|
||
operate approximately 6 am to 6:30 pm. 896 Link operates half- hourly from
|
||
S. College and Main in Newark to Peoples Plaza, with 7 trips extended to
|
||
Middletown. U Bus also connects S. College and Main in Newark with Peoples
|
||
Plaza every 30 minutes, but travels a "u" shaped path through White Clay
|
||
Corporate Center, MBNA, Christiana Hospital, Christiana Mall, Governors
|
||
Square Shopping Center, and Fox Run Shopping Center. Connections can be
|
||
made to DART and Blue Diamond Lines at several locations along the routes.
|
||
DVARP members are urged to help make these routes successful by patronizing
|
||
them.
|
||
|
||
##I Let's Have More Product Differentiation at SEPTA
|
||
by John R. Pawson
|
||
So deeply embedded in our economic culture is product differentiation
|
||
that we hardly give it a thought. The variety of restaurants typifies this
|
||
practice among the service industries. We have fast-food restaurants which
|
||
give minimal service at low cost. We have fine restaurants with elaborate
|
||
menus, fine food, much customer attention, and relaxed ambiance for those
|
||
who wish to spend more money in return for a different kind of dining
|
||
experience.
|
||
Even in the world of spectator sports, new stadiums include
|
||
accommodations ranging from bleacher-type seats to the plushest, costliest
|
||
boxes high above the playing field for those who think it worth the extra
|
||
money. Don't let the word out, but the construction of these stadiums is
|
||
publicly subsidized.
|
||
Little attention is called to this fact either: SEPTA's transportation
|
||
service, too, is built around the principle of product differentiation.
|
||
Different services run parallel; one of the city's most-traveled bus routes
|
||
runs directly above the Broad Street Subway. Ten of the 13 outer terminals
|
||
of SEPTA's commuter rail system may also be reached from center city by
|
||
transit as well. Each type of service--transit and commuter train--serves
|
||
various niches. Evidently, the customers want it this way, just as they do
|
||
with restaurants and spectator sports.
|
||
Let's carefully analyze public transportation. Loosely, some call it
|
||
"transit" (two syllables may be handier than six), but careful speakers and
|
||
writers use the words "public transportation" as the generic term. SEPTA and
|
||
most of its multi-modal counterparts are designated as "transportation
|
||
authorities", not as "transit authorities". The following shows the diverse
|
||
qualities of SEPTA's services:
|
||
|
||
Public Transportation
|
||
|
||
Transit Commuter Transpiration
|
||
(the basic product) (higher quality and price)
|
||
|
||
[NOTE: The following table didn't convert well to ASCII. Please
|
||
follow the numbers--MDM]
|
||
|
||
1--Urban Transit
|
||
2--Suburban Transit
|
||
3--Commuter Rail/Commuter Bus
|
||
|
||
Travel Context
|
||
1--Within high density urban areas, which usually extend 5 or more miles
|
||
from center city.
|
||
2--Radiating from outlying terminals of urban transit, and intra- suburban.
|
||
3--Longer distance, primarily between suburban residences and center city
|
||
jobs, also reverse commutes and intra-suburban.
|
||
|
||
Operating Modes
|
||
1--Subway-elevated (rapid transit or heavy rail), bus, street car or light
|
||
rail transit, trackless trolley.
|
||
2--Suburban transit bus, light rail transit.
|
||
3--Commuter rail, commuter bus (the later mode is rare in this region).
|
||
|
||
Attributes in Peak Service
|
||
1--Least space per customer, many stand, frequent service, many transfer
|
||
points, high degree of integration between operating modes, equally spaced
|
||
stops, "flat" fare structure.
|
||
2--More space, few stand, better quality seating, less frequent service,
|
||
higher average speed, equally spaced but fewer stops, zoned fares.
|
||
3--Most space, seats for all, service 2 to 4 times per hour at each outlying
|
||
station, few stops in the transit zone, highest average speed, downtown
|
||
schedule times suit workplace starting and quitting times, multi-zoned
|
||
fares.
|
||
|
||
Market Relationship to the Automobile
|
||
1--Many customers have no car available. Others may find trip less onerous
|
||
than driving.
|
||
2--Center-City-bound customers find joint urban-suburban transit trip less
|
||
onerous than driving. Most intra-suburban customers have no car available.
|
||
Most customers have car available for the trip.
|
||
3--Service must compare well to driving. Intra-suburban and reverse-
|
||
commuters may not have a car available.
|
||
|
||
SEPTA Operating Division
|
||
1--City Transit Division.
|
||
2--Suburban Transit Division, comprised of Red Arrow (or Victory) and
|
||
Frontier Districts. [NOTE: Victory bus and rail are separate
|
||
districts--MDM]
|
||
3--Railroad (or Regional Rail) Division (RRD).
|
||
|
||
Start-Up Year [under SEPTA]
|
||
1--1968.
|
||
2--1970.
|
||
3--1983.
|
||
|
||
Operating Costs Recovery
|
||
1--55%.
|
||
2--Victory = 44%, Frontier = 33%.
|
||
3--37%
|
||
|
||
(Overall, SEPTA = 50%)
|
||
|
||
The 13-year wait before taking over Conrail's commuter railroad
|
||
engendered in some of the non-RRD SEPTA staff a distinct slant toward
|
||
transit and away from commuter rail service. "We can't afford to run a
|
||
railroad, too" was a sentiment that was and occasionally still is heard.
|
||
More recently, one staffer lamented in a letter that commuters seem to
|
||
think they have a "god given right to a seat". A well known transit
|
||
consultant told a SEPTA public hearing that RRD should give up its seats-
|
||
for-all policy. A city official wrote that "the ultimate solution may be to
|
||
scrap traditional railroad equipment and operating practices in favor of
|
||
lower cost, higher speed, more frequent rail transit operation on all but
|
||
the Wilmington, Paoli, and Trenton lines."
|
||
With such attitudes evident to us (even though they come from a
|
||
minority of persons in the industry here), it's likely that Board members
|
||
and area political leaders perceive them, too. The fact that dedicated
|
||
operating subsidy still is denied SEPTA indicates relatively low confidence
|
||
in the authority's ability to spend wisely.
|
||
Regardless of how the authority as a whole is perceived, the fact that
|
||
a top-management minority in some fashion wants to eliminate commuter rail
|
||
service implies the existence of major problems there. Regrettably, the
|
||
basic economic parameters for RRD are the lowest or among the lowest of the
|
||
13 U.S. commuter railroads.
|
||
Although improved from a one-time 32% level, today only 37% of RRD's
|
||
operating costs are recovered through fares. Most commuter-rail systems
|
||
recover 45 to 55%. At a 55% recovery, City Transit Division greatly excels
|
||
that 37% figure. The performance of SEPTA's suburban transit districts
|
||
brackets the RRD figure, but that fact largely is ignored. Nearly all of
|
||
the economics-based criticism of RRD arises in Philadelphia and over this
|
||
37%-55% disparity.
|
||
RRD also is low or lowest in the common operating parameters, a
|
||
situation which doubtless greatly contributes to the low cost recovery.
|
||
These parameters include average train speed, average passenger trip length,
|
||
average train load, and the on-time performance average ("reliability").
|
||
All of these low ratings permit nay-sayers to justify curtailing RRD service
|
||
or converting it to or replacing it with transit.
|
||
We must emphasize that their negative case can be made only in this
|
||
region. It's not the commuter rail mode that is faulty; but over the
|
||
decades, it's how suboptimally its capital and operating funds have been
|
||
spent here.
|
||
The need is to improve both the quality and cost- effectiveness of RRD
|
||
service as the customer and taxpayer perceive them. Spend capital money
|
||
strategically. Increase train speed to attract more car-driving commuters.
|
||
Extend service attractively and economically to accommodate the currently-
|
||
unserved longer-distance commuters. Increase the average train load.
|
||
Improve on-time performance. Eliminate the "Toonerville trolley" practices
|
||
which annoy RRD customers. Altogether, there should be more product
|
||
differentiation between RRD and the transit divisions, not less as some
|
||
would have it.
|
||
In future issues, we'll go into specifics of how past suboptimizations
|
||
can be rectified, how a more business-like RRD can satisfy customers and
|
||
taxpayers, and how the RRD-CTD cost-recovery disparity can be narrowed to
|
||
halt the carping of the railroad.
|
||
|
||
|
||
##J Metra: a Role Model for RRD
|
||
by John R. Pawson
|
||
Some who never have experienced the rush-hour conditions of New York
|
||
City's public transportation might propose that region's three commuter rail
|
||
systems as worthy models for the major improvement of SEPTA's Railroad
|
||
Division and its services. However, the facts show otherwise. The number
|
||
of passengers carried there is enormous; not so here. Only there will
|
||
commuters stand aboard commuter trains. Manhattan's insular location makes
|
||
driving to work all the more difficult. As a result, the transportation
|
||
industry regards New York City as a special case; its practices often are
|
||
inappropriate for use elsewhere.
|
||
So we are led to the Chicago region, where the Metra commuter rail
|
||
system serves six counties in the "railroad capital of the world". This
|
||
single-mode agency sends 13 routes into its service region from four
|
||
downtown terminals. Metra claims to provide (self-operated or through
|
||
contracts with operating railroad companies) "the nation's finest commuter
|
||
rail service". There seem to be no successful challengers to that self-
|
||
proclaimed title.
|
||
In northeastern Illinois, public transportation became a governmental
|
||
duty later than here. A Regional Transportation Authority was set up there
|
||
in 1973 to run or to contract out all rapid transit, bus, and commuter rail
|
||
services under one central management, as SEPTA does now.
|
||
Ten years later (and two years after the old Chicago political machine
|
||
collapsed), RTA was converted into an "umbrella" organization. The urban
|
||
transit (CTA), suburban transit (PACE), and the commuter rail functions
|
||
(Metra) were given to three agencies, each with its own board of directors.
|
||
Metra's directors are appointed on a population basis. Six come from
|
||
the various counties, one from the city of Chicago, but none from state
|
||
level. Each of the three agencies is free to pursue the needs of its own
|
||
marketplace niches--the ultimate in public transportation product
|
||
differentiation.
|
||
A detailed comparison of RRD and Metra is informative. Naturally, the
|
||
greater population of the Metra-served region (line 5, below) justifies a
|
||
larger-scale commuter rail service than here. Important factors and
|
||
parameters of RRD and Metra (drawn from various sources) are included. Bear
|
||
in mind that the median scale factor (the Metra figure divided by the RRD
|
||
figure) is 1.66.
|
||
Comparison of RRD and Metra
|
||
|
||
|
||
SEPTA RRD Metra
|
||
Scale
|
||
Factor
|
||
|
||
Political, Demographic, and Service Factors
|
||
|
||
1. Type of transportation company
|
||
multi-modal single mode
|
||
|
||
|
||
2. Major funding method
|
||
[annual] appropriations sales-tax surcharge in service area
|
||
[from government--MDM]
|
||
|
||
3. Service area
|
||
2184 sq. mi. 3721 sq. mi.
|
||
1.70
|
||
|
||
4. Total route mileage
|
||
282 miles 424 miles
|
||
1.50
|
||
|
||
5. Service area population
|
||
3.7 million 7.26 million
|
||
1.99
|
||
|
||
6. Annual passenger-miles carried
|
||
375 million 1415 million
|
||
3.77
|
||
|
||
7. Annual per-capita passenger miles
|
||
96 miles 195 miles
|
||
2.03
|
||
|
||
8.Number of stations served
|
||
158 230
|
||
1.46
|
||
|
||
9. Number of trains run:
|
||
a. weekday (all day)
|
||
360 598
|
||
1.66
|
||
b. weekday (outbound, 5-5:59 pm)
|
||
41 69
|
||
1.68
|
||
c. Saturday
|
||
248 269
|
||
1.08
|
||
d. Sunday
|
||
173 135
|
||
0.78
|
||
|
||
10. Minimum peak-period headway [at terminal--MDM]
|
||
3 minutes 5 min. out, 4mins. in
|
||
|
||
|
||
Efficiency and Financial Parameters
|
||
|
||
11. Average train speed
|
||
24 mph 32 mph
|
||
1.33
|
||
|
||
12. Average train load (pas. mi.. per train mile)
|
||
76 247
|
||
3.25
|
||
|
||
13. Average passenger trip length
|
||
14 miles 21 miles
|
||
1.50
|
||
|
||
14. Average on-time performance (5 min. tolerance)
|
||
92% 97%
|
||
|
||
|
||
15. Operating cost recovery
|
||
37% 55% + 5% of capital costs
|
||
|
||
|
||
Comments:
|
||
1. The single-mode organization allows for specialization. Transit
|
||
management attitudes and methods which are unsuited to the market for
|
||
commuter rail service cannot intrude, as sometimes appears to be the case at
|
||
SEPTA. Management has full control of all resources, while at SEPTA, the
|
||
RRD management has to take the services it gets from SEPTA's central staff.
|
||
|
||
2. Metra's funding is nearly "automatic". Although its funding
|
||
does vary with the state of the local economy and the volume of sales, the
|
||
management is insulated from political interference with capital and
|
||
operating policies. "Holding Metra hostage" for patronage jobs, a favored
|
||
project or contractor, etc. appears much less likely than is the case here.
|
||
Metra's leaders emphasize that they are not a provider of "social
|
||
services". By most regards, they run Metra more like a business than most
|
||
public transportation agencies do. Nevertheless, its fares (particularly
|
||
over longer distances) tend to be lower than RRD's.
|
||
|
||
3-5. Metra runs less route mileage in comparison to its larger area and
|
||
population. This would be a factor for better economics. Also, it needs to
|
||
support the costs of electrification on only 12% of its route mileage, not
|
||
100%. However, Metra will increase its non-electrified route mileage soon
|
||
when it opens a completely new radial corridor service. (earlier plans to
|
||
open a cross-country route have been shelved.) RRD has the economically
|
||
easier task of extending existing trains on existing lines instead of having
|
||
to add new trains on a new route.
|
||
|
||
6-7. Likely because of a more commercial attitude, Metra is able to
|
||
generate passenger miles much greater than its increased population (even if
|
||
slightly more widely scattered) would suggest is appropriate.
|
||
|
||
8. Metra maintains fewer stations, relatively speaking. There
|
||
are, however, some areas where stations are located only a half-mile apart
|
||
but are well-used by the neighborhoods which they serve.
|
||
|
||
9. Both carriers' weekday service levels (both as a whole and in
|
||
peak periods) agree with the median scale factor of 1.66. However during
|
||
the off-peak periods, Metra's lines (especially the non-electrified ones)
|
||
tend to be scheduled more according to passenger demand than at constant
|
||
"policy" headways like transit. Even so, Metra (unlike SEPTA provides
|
||
outbound service from Chicago after midnight for shift workers and "night
|
||
owls".
|
||
On weekends (when a few Metra lines don't operate), the commercial
|
||
basis shows emphatically as service is limited tightly to demand. On
|
||
Saturdays, both railroads run about the same absolute number of trains. On
|
||
Sundays, when demand for service is at a minim, Metra runs an average of
|
||
just 14 trains per line in service.
|
||
|
||
10. Metra's practice of more conservatively spacing its peak-
|
||
period trains apparently helps to assure its faster (10) and more reliable
|
||
(13) service. By so operating, small random lateness have much less effect
|
||
on the progress of following trains. (Why RRD trains must run so closely is
|
||
gist of another article for these pages.)
|
||
|
||
11-14. Metra's improved efficiency parameters combine in effect to
|
||
produce lower costs and more attractive service. One unseen factor in these
|
||
two directions is Metra's use of the spacious gallery car, which quite
|
||
adequately seats over 150 passengers. In SEPTA's Silverliners and
|
||
Bombardier cars, because of the cramped three-place bench, only about 100 of
|
||
some 125 total places per cars actually are salable. Needing fewer cars for
|
||
a given traffic reduces cost significantly. (This issue also will be
|
||
covered in the future.)
|
||
|
||
15. The "bottom line": As a result of market size, single-mode
|
||
operation, a relatively stable corporate climate over the years, a
|
||
commercial attitude, an efficient and market-understanding management,
|
||
political support and restraint, effective operations, and suitable rolling
|
||
stock, Metra is able to cover the majority of its operating costs and a
|
||
little of its capital costs through its reasonable fares.
|
||
Except for the size of the market, all of these elements of Metra's
|
||
success could be adopted by SEPTA. The challenge would be to put all of
|
||
them into action in this region.
|
||
|
||
|
||
##K NJT To Study Commuter Rail To Mt. Holly
|
||
by Donald Nigro
|
||
With encouragement from DVARP and NJ-ARP, New Jersey Transit will study
|
||
commuter (regional) rail to Mount Holly, Burlington County as part of its
|
||
Burlington/ Gloucester Initiative. Previously, commuter rail was being
|
||
examined only between Philadelphia, Pennsauken and Maple Shade (see
|
||
September 1993 issue). This mode with this terminus point will now be
|
||
studied just as modified PATCO and light rail are being considered. As
|
||
pointed out to NJ Transit, it did not make sense, on the one hand, to
|
||
present commuter rail as one of the three options for a Maple Shade terminus
|
||
(minimum length) and then, on the other hand, not to study it as an option
|
||
for Mount Holly service (full length). Longer haul service is a forte of
|
||
commuter rail. To ignore a full length option for this mode was to ignore
|
||
the industry's high passenger acceptance for longer hauls.
|
||
The following are some of the reasons presented to NJ Transit for full
|
||
consideration of commuter rail:
|
||
|
||
- The national average commuter rail line length is 22 miles. Many
|
||
lines are shorter. Some are as long as 90 miles (Port Jervis, NY to
|
||
Hoboken, NJ). A Mt. Holly route is approximately 22 miles. To consider
|
||
commuter rail to Mt. Holly is a natural. To cut it short at Maple Shade is
|
||
unnatural and imprudent, not allowing the examination of this mode's full
|
||
potential for this alignment.
|
||
- Only commuter rail, because of its routing, offers a station at River
|
||
Road, Pennsauken near the Delair Bridge. Such a station location would draw
|
||
many riders from the densely populated river communities such as Palmyra,
|
||
Cinnaminson, Riverton, Delran, Riverside and Delanco. If not for this
|
||
station location, many of these potential passengers will not use rail to
|
||
commute. They would not be attracted to a Mt. Laurel or Maple Shade station
|
||
(of any mode type) because their commute from home to station would take
|
||
them significantly out of the direction of their final destination.
|
||
- Commuter rail, like the other modes, would offers intrastate
|
||
connections between communities such as Maple Shade, Moorestown and Mt.
|
||
Holly. For the small percentage of riders that would like to travel to
|
||
Camden, either NJ Transit's #409 or #419 could be restructured so that one
|
||
of them offers express feeder bus service between the proposed station at
|
||
River Road, Pennsauken and downtown Camden. Such a service could go
|
||
possibly to Camden's waterfront.
|
||
- Commuter rail also would offer intrastate service through platform
|
||
connections in Pennsauken with the Atlantic City Line.
|
||
- Commuter rail offers a one-seat (no transfer) ride to Center City
|
||
Philadelphia. This is important because Center City is a highly marketable
|
||
area for public transportation if it is served properly. Because of its 40
|
||
story sky scrapers, Center City offers an employment density eleven times
|
||
greater than any area within the region on either side of the Delaware
|
||
River, 115, 559 jobs per square mile. There are literally hundreds of
|
||
thousands of jobs within walking distance of stations within Center City,
|
||
Philadelphia. Center City also offers a wide variety of cultural and
|
||
entertainment experiences.
|
||
- Suburban Station is central to the business district of Center City
|
||
while the PATCO stations on Locust Street are south of it.
|
||
- Market East Station, Suburban Station, and 30th Street Station are
|
||
lively transportation hubs which offer many more amenities (shops,
|
||
restaurants) than the PATCO Stations on Locust Street. Suburban Station
|
||
also offers a sprawling underground concourse which is ideal to use to get
|
||
to and from the station during inclement weather.
|
||
- Commuter rail would offer great connections at 30th Street Station for
|
||
Amtrak and SEPTA trains. Philadelphia International Airport is 12 or 15
|
||
minutes away (15 minutes scheduled, 12 minutes actual). The Airport train
|
||
runs every half hour in each direction from 6:00 am to midnight.
|
||
- Commuter rail is the least expensive of the alternatives to construct.
|
||
Looking at it another way, commuter rail could be built farther into
|
||
Burlington County than other modes for the same cost.
|
||
- Commuter rail may eventually be the only politically viable option to
|
||
go through Moorestown due to its somewhat less frequent service and its
|
||
ability to go through the entire town on a single track.
|
||
- During peak hour, commuter rail would offer headways of 20 minutes
|
||
from Mt. Holly. Modified PATCO would offer headways of 20 minutes from Mt.
|
||
Holly and 10 minutes from Mt. Laurel. With Modified PATCO, Moorestown also
|
||
would have headways of 10 minutes. Where headways of 10 minutes may be
|
||
unacceptable to Moorestown, 20 minute headways at rush hour may be tolerable
|
||
by the community and certainly feasible for a single track through
|
||
Moorestown.
|
||
- Commuter rail trains are only six inches wider than a modified PATCO
|
||
vehicle; 10 feet, 6 inches compared to 10 feet. All modes during the peak
|
||
would require multiple car consists. All modes during some off peak hours
|
||
would run single car consists.
|
||
- The technical feasibility of the merging of a no transfer, three
|
||
branch PATCO/modified PATCO system is in question and under review by New
|
||
Jersey Transit.
|
||
- Commuter rail would have the greatest likelihood of being extended to
|
||
Route 206, Pemberton, Fort Dix and beyond. Longer haul service is a forte
|
||
of commuter rail. The longest light rail line in the country is 22 miles.
|
||
The main destinations are in the middle of this line, with a one-seat ride
|
||
to those destinations.
|
||
- Commuter rail seats are at least 20.5 inches wide. Light rail seats,
|
||
because of the narrowness of the vehicle, are 17.5 inches.
|
||
- Commuter rail offers the smoothest ride.
|
||
- Commuter rail is FRA compatible with freight service 24 hours a day.
|
||
Unlike with modified PATCO and light rail, freight service would not have to
|
||
be relegated to the hours between midnight and 6:00 am. Freight service is
|
||
increasing on the existing right-of-way. The local freight operates
|
||
Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Last fall one- or two-car trains were not
|
||
uncommon. In recent months, it has been running upward of 20 cars. Local
|
||
communities react strongly when the industrial parks of Hainesport and
|
||
Moorestown are serviced even occasionally after 7:00 pm., let alone
|
||
consistently after midnight.
|
||
|
||
Although DVARP and NJ-ARP have strongly encouraged the consideration of
|
||
commuter (regional) rail, neither organization at this time has endorsed a
|
||
particular mode as the preferred alternative. More study data is yet to
|
||
come before an informed judgement can be made.
|
||
|
||
##L Route 23 Celebration
|
||
One hundred years ago, August 12, 1894, electric cars replaced horse
|
||
cars between Chelten Ave and Pelhem Depot (today called Germantown Depot).
|
||
The first operation on Route 23 occurred October 1, 1859 when the horse
|
||
cars were tested. Passenger service from 7th & Diamond to the depot began
|
||
8 days later. The line was extended to 8th & Dauphin in 1872. Electric
|
||
streetcar operation began August 5, 1894 between 8th & Dauphin and Chelten
|
||
Ave. and was extended a second time on February 3, 1895 from Pelham Depot
|
||
to Germantown & Rex. Many extensions and changes later the line became
|
||
Route 23.
|
||
On August 13, 1994, the Philadelphia Trolley Coalition (PTC), the
|
||
Philadelphia Street Railway Historical Society (PSRHS), SEPTA, and DVARP
|
||
held a birthday party for the Route 23 electric trolley. Shortly after
|
||
11am, the crowd of about 100 persons was welcomed to the ceremony by
|
||
SEPTA's Ed Springer. Joe Mannix of BVTA and NRHS, spoke on the significance
|
||
of the event. Chuck Bode, DVARP, urged the crowd to contact their elected
|
||
officials for funding so SEPTA can repair the wire, track, and substations,
|
||
and buy new streetcars. Joel Spivak, PTC, unveiled a plaque (funded by
|
||
individual contributions of PTC, PSRHS, and DVARP members) placed on the
|
||
Depot commemorating the event.
|
||
LRV 9111 took the crowd on a short ride, followed by an inspection of
|
||
Germantown Depot and 3 generations of streetcars (2 Peter Witts, several
|
||
PCCs and LRV 9111). 9111 made several revenue service trips on Route 23
|
||
between Chestnut Hill and Ontario Street. SEPTA's Training Dept. concluded
|
||
the full day by showing trolley videos, including a National City Lines
|
||
promotional movie alleging the great improvements made when PTC's
|
||
streetcars were replaced by buses and when PTC moved its offices from
|
||
expensive Center City to less costly Wyoming Avenue.
|
||
This event again demonstrated the value of SEPTA working with the
|
||
community. Articles favorable to public transportation appeared in several
|
||
papers both before and after the event, nearby residents received a good
|
||
impression of SEPTA, and passengers got another chance to try LRVs. --CB
|
||
|
||
##M Letters To The Editor
|
||
This section includes excerpts from several letters in the interests
|
||
of furthering discussion and presenting alternate viewpoints.
|
||
From Michael Prosch 6/24/94
|
||
[suggestions for empowerment] "...announce all the stops beforehand
|
||
(that is, before the train actually stops)."
|
||
"...My use of SEPTA involves R6, R5 (PRR part), route 100 and route
|
||
125. (Not all for the same trip!) I use the latter two rarely for the
|
||
primary reason that the 125 bus takes such a circular and time-consuming
|
||
route from Valley Forge to Gulph Mills. Usually, I could drive to Villanova
|
||
and back in the time the bus/route 100 trip takes."
|
||
From Art Munson 6/17/94
|
||
"I hope that any future changes or 'improvements' will keep the
|
||
passengers' ride foremost. After all, that is the final product."
|
||
"After all the money spent in recent years on STD, we still have 3
|
||
incompatible rail systems radiating out of 69th Street Terminal, each needs
|
||
its own special emergency cars, rather than a common pool."
|
||
"The renewed vehicles and tracks assure yet more decades of
|
||
incompatibility."
|
||
"...and after all the money spent at 69th Street Terminal, there is
|
||
no improvement with respect to the great loss of time during transfers."
|
||
"I also notice that the new cars on the 100 race with great power to
|
||
the next station, only to lose time standing still for the rather clumsy
|
||
fare collection process.
|
||
|
||
##N Ooops
|
||
DVARP volunteers apologize for the blank page 15 in the September
|
||
Delaware Valley Rail Passenger. It was intended to have text, but somewhere
|
||
between the PC and the printing press the page became blank. Newsletter
|
||
production 100 miles from the printing plant prevents face- to-face
|
||
communication, so the problem was not discovered until the newsletter was
|
||
being mailed.--CB
|
||
[NOTE--This problem did not affect the electronic edition--MDM]
|
||
|
||
##O Upcoming DVARP Meetings:
|
||
|
||
OCTOBER GENERAL MEETING CANCELED
|
||
Due to a lack of business,
|
||
the DVARP meeting scheduled for
|
||
Saturday, October 15,
|
||
at the Lansdowne Public Library
|
||
has been canceled.
|
||
|
||
Commuter Rail Committee:
|
||
Call DVARP voice-mail, 215-222-3373, message box 2 for meeting schedule
|
||
|
||
Light Rail Committee:
|
||
October 29, 1:00 pm., the coffee bar at Borders book store in Chestnut Hill
|
||
November 26, 1:00 pm., same location
|
||
|
||
South Jersey Committee:
|
||
Call DVARP voice-mail, 215-222-3373, message box 7 for meeting schedule
|
||
|
||
Transit Committee:
|
||
No meeting scheduled this month
|
||
|
||
##P Dues Increase Coming
|
||
After much thought, the members at the September meeting approved an
|
||
increase in dues effective January 1, 1995. After several years of level
|
||
dues, this increase is necessary because of postal rate increases. The
|
||
regular dues will be $16.00 beginning in 1995. The higher level categories
|
||
were not increased because they cover their expenses. Introductory ($10)
|
||
and Special ($7.50) were not increased because of their specific purpose
|
||
and because only a few members are in these categories. Members can save
|
||
themselves $1.00 by sending their 1995 dues before the end of the year.--CB
|
||
|
||
##Q Cross County Bus
|
||
A map has surfaced of a possible bus route linking Cottman Ave in
|
||
Northeast Philadelphia with Jenkintown, Glenside, Fort Washington Office
|
||
Center, Ambler, Montgomery Mall, and several RRD stations, medical
|
||
facilities, and malls. Word seems to be that local elected officials are
|
||
not supportive of this latest attempt to start a route across boundaries.
|
||
Supporters might make more progress by increasing the cost to $100 million
|
||
and calling it the Cross-County-MetroBus. Until then passengers have to
|
||
use several bus and train lines--with multiple fares and a detour through
|
||
Center City Philadelphia--to get from one point along the proposed route to
|
||
another--or buy a car.--CB
|
||
|
||
##R DVARP Phone & Voice-mail Directory
|
||
DVARP main number (voice mail line) 215-222-3373
|
||
9 Chuck Bode, President 215-222-3373
|
||
6 Robert H. Machler, VP-Administration 215-222-3373
|
||
5 Sharon Shneyer, VP-Public Relations 215-386-2644
|
||
3 Matthew Mitchell, Newsletter Editor 215-885-7448
|
||
<mmitchell@asrr.arsusda.gov>
|
||
4 Betsey Clark, Volunteer Coordinator 215-222-3373
|
||
8 Mark Sanders, Treasurer 215-222-3373
|
||
2 John Pawson, Commuter RR Comm. 215-659-7736
|
||
(6 to 9 pm please)
|
||
3 Transit Committee 215-222-3373
|
||
7 Don Nigro, South Jersey Committee 609-869-0020
|
||
Dan Radack, Bicycle Coordinator 215-232-6303
|
||
|
||
Computer e-mail (internet) dvarp@libertynet.org
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
##T DVARP Membership Coupon
|
||
|
||
Yes, I want to support improved passenger train service in our region!
|
||
|
||
Here are my DVARP membership dues for 1994!
|
||
|
||
Name
|
||
|
||
Address
|
||
|
||
City, State, Zip
|
||
|
||
Please choose a membership category below, enclose check and mail to:
|
||
|
||
DVARP, PO Box 7505, Philadelphia, PA 19101
|
||
|
||
( ) Regular: $15.00 ( ) Family: $20.00 ( ) Supporting: $25.00
|
||
|
||
( ) Sustaining: $50.00 ( ) Patron: $75.00 ( ) Benefactor: $100.00
|
||
|
||
( ) Introductory<72>new members only: $10.00
|
||
( ) under 21 or over 65: $7.50
|
||
|
||
|
||
--END--
|