[canucklehead2]

Hi I was wondering if people had the built or unbuilt rapid transit plan maps of their own city. I'm really curious to know the rejected plans from 1933 Detroit, and the old/unbuilt Vancouver, Seattle and Los Angeles plans. If you have any others feel free to share...

I'm trying to dig up the old Calgary and Edmonton ones as well. Actually I have the Edmonton ones on my photobucket account, but I can't find old CALTS plan myself...

[Beltliner]

I'm trying to dig up the old Calgary and Edmonton ones as well. Actually I have the Edmonton ones on my photobucket account, but I can't find old CALTS plan myself...

Good luck finding soft copies of CALTS-1967 anywhere. There are hard copies at City of Calgary Archives and the Calgary Public Library, but you'll go old and grey long before you Goggle your way to an even semi-coherent soft copy of the plan. As I recall, the plan at that time was for a metro from Anderson Road through downtown and up Centre Street to Thorncliffe, but this system would pretty much have been a sop to those opposing the two-mile grid of expressways that was the backbone of the CALTS-1967 plan.

[canucklehead2]

Some members did post old Calgary RT plans in the past, but I can't find them now...

Here are some of the one's I'd love to find more info about...
Phoenix-1989 plan for an elevated and automated ALRT network called ValTrans

Seattle-1968 plan for an automated RT network
Los Angeles- 60's era Alweg monorail plan
Buffalo-master plan for the really short Buffalo LRT
Detroit-1933 Rapid Transit plan

I'm also curious to know if the Baltimore LRT was built as an alternative to subway expansion or if that was also the case in Cleveland and Los Angeles as well...

[VivaLFuego]

From the amazing chicago-l.org, is this city-wide subway plan from 1939:
http://www.chicago-l.org/plans/images/1939subways.jpg
Existing lines at the time are dotted.
For all practical purposes, the only stage of subways that was completed was Stage One. The lines extending to the Northwest and Southwest were eventually built (serving each airport) but not as subways.
Of course, some of the dotted lines were torn down and not replaced....sigh....

[BuildCTPlace]

Rochester, NY
http://www.railroad.net/articles/railfanning/rochestersubway/media/rsb_proposed_map.gif

Odessa, Ukraine
http://osamuabe.ld.infoseek.co.jp/subway/mappage/constmap/odessa.jpg

Riga, Latvia
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3348/rigametro29kl.gif

[Cirrus]

I'm also curious to know if the Baltimore LRT was built as an alternative to subway expansion or if that was also the case in Cleveland and Los Angeles as well...
It was.

You can find info on the original 1968 Baltimore Metro plan HERE (http://www.roadstothefuture.com/BRRTS.html).

HERE (http://www.baltimorerailplan.com/linked_files/brreportfinal.pdf) is Baltimore's *current* rail expansion plan.

[zaphod]

baltimore's plan is suspiciously reminiscene of DC's

anyways if Baltimore could ever pull that off it would be amazing

[BTinSF]

Here is the BART that was to be but isn't:

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Early-BART-Map--1961--metro-maps-55247_362_500.jpg
Source: http://www.fanpop.com/spots/metro-maps/images/55247

Here is the BART that is:

http://www.bart.gov/images/map500.gif
Source: http://www.bart.gov/stations/map/systemmap.asp

And here is Muni Metro (LRV) as it is:

http://transit.511.org/providers/maps/SF_712200722845.gif
Source: http://www.sfmta.com/cms/mmaps/metromaps.htm

[jmecklenborg]

Cincinnati has the largest unfinished rapid transit line in the country:
http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/subway-c7.jpg

One of three surviving stations in the two mile subway:
http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/zsubway-r7.jpg

Photo from 1956 prior to expressway construction that destroyed all five surface miles:
http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/subway-bandytour9.jpg

A link to my website:
http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/subway.html

[Abner]

From the amazing chicago-l.org, is this city-wide subway plan from 1939:
http://www.chicago-l.org/plans/images/1939subways.jpg
Existing lines at the time are dotted.
For all practical purposes, the only stage of subways that was completed was Stage One. The lines extending to the Northwest and Southwest were eventually built (serving each airport) but not as subways.
Of course, some of the dotted lines were torn down and not replaced....sigh....

It would have been heaven on earth to have that alignment along Ashland/Paulina from the Brown Line down to 79th. Actually, it would be pretty nice just to have the stretch between Milwaukee and Lake that was torn down (for reasons unknown to me).

[canucklehead2]

Thanks everyone. Does anyone have maps of some of the more recently proposed systems like Anchorage, Honolulu, Des Moines, New Orleans, etc?

[BuildCTPlace]

Honolulu
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/dailypix/2003/Nov/02/localnews8.jpg

[BuildCTPlace]

Thanks everyone. Does anyone have maps of some of the more recently proposed systems like Anchorage, Honolulu, Des Moines, New Orleans, etc?

Des Moines? Is that a joke?

[BuildCTPlace]

Here's one of St Petersburg, Russia metro, outlining the expansion plans in that city. As you can see, there will be a station under the Gulf of Finland, probably the first such station in the world located under such a large body of water. However, because of the depth of the station and the slope of the escalators, the entrance to the station will be on dry land, right on the seaside embankment.
http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/b/3/5/930/5930878_1193123614_Karte_Metro_St_Petersburg.png

[MolsonExport]

Montreal had some earlier, alternative subway extensions (source: Wikipedia):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8f/Plan1976.jpg/800px-Plan1976.jpg

Current existing Montreal Metro (subway):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/Mtl-metro-map.svg/500px-Mtl-metro-map.svg.png

Future projects (Wikipedia)
As of 2007, other formal and informal extension proposals are currently being considered, although none of which are currently in the works.

Montreal city:
-Propositions made by the city of Montreal all directly relates to its territory. Therefore, Line 5 could be extended 6.2 km eastward beyond Saint-Michel up to Anjou, committing to the line's original design.
-Line 2 could also be extended northwest from Côte-Vertu station, up to Bois-Franc commuter rail station in Saint-Laurent. The extension would include two stations: Poirier and Bois-Franc (an intermodal station with the Deux-Montagnes commuter line).

Agence Métropolitaine de Transport (AMT):
-The AMT has considered an extension of Line 4 with four new stations beyond Longueuil–Université-de-Sherbrooke, under the city of Longueuil to College Édouard-Montpetit.
-Another extension of this line, but from the other terminal, Berri-UQAM, which would head towards downtown Montreal, was briefly studied but then shelved.
-In 2006, the AMT has studied the possibility and cost of an extension from Lionel-Groulx to Brossard city on the south shore of Montreal as an alternative to the proposed light rail project in the Champlain bridge corridor.

Laval city:
-On July 22, 2007, the mayor of Laval, Gilles Vaillancourt, with the ridership success of the current Laval extension, announced his wish to loop the Orange line from Montmorency to Cote-Vertu stations with the addition of six new stations (three in Laval and another three in Montreal). He proposed that Transports Quebec, the provincial transport department, set aside $100 million annually to fund the project, which is expected to cost upwards of $1.5 billion.[3]

West Island cities papers:
-Montreal's West Island papers have discussed in 2006 and 2007 plans to extend Line 5 from Snowdon into the Notre-Dame-de-Grâce area of Montreal, as depicted in its original design. A further extension to Dorval was discussed to improve the connection between downtown Montreal and Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport.

Lasalle district papers:
-Lasalle district papers have discussed in 2007 extending line 1 west of Angrignon station.

[canucklehead2]

No I'm not joking about Des Moines. Many smaller American cities are now proposing LRT systems, and Iowa's largest city is just one of them... I'm curious to know if system maps are available for them...


I know that Anchorage, Spokane, Boise and Des Moines were among those seeking LRT lines... Pretty much any city over 500 000 could get a system, after all that is how large Edmonton was when we got ours back in 1978...

[volguus zildrohar]

Philadelphia's original planned rail system would have left the city with a rapid transit structure not too unlike Chicago's, a city crisscrossed with elevated lines.

This map depicts the routes of the original 1912 A. Merritt Taylor plan for the city:

(A few liberties were taken by the maps creator)

http://www.pbase.com/image/90670889/original.jpg

And this is a city plan from 1926, shortly before the Broad Street Subway opened:

http://www.pbase.com/phillytrax/image/90670674.jpg

And the current Philadelphia subway system:

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/phil/philadelphia-map.gif

[borgo100]

.

[Doady]

^ Streetcars are not "rapid transit."

[borgo100]

.

[canucklehead2]

Do we have any members from Seattle that know about the 1968 Forward Thrust RT plan for the city? That is the one I'm most curious about... Here is the only info I could find, but I'm still seeking planning maps and official documents...

"The Forward Thrust package in 1968 would have given the area a system of amazing scope. It would have been completed in 1985 and fully paid off in 2008. It would have been heavy rail, largely in subways, with two prongs north, two prongs south, and two prongs on the Eastside. Unlike Portland's system, which is largely on the street, this system would have been separated from traffic and much faster. It probably would have done a fair amount toward shaping dense neighborhoods and concentrating urban growth. All this at one quarter the local cost of a completed (much smaller and slower) Sound Transit system."

[canucklehead2]

It would have been a 47-mile system, according to another site...

[Vashon118]

This is from an article (06/18/1989) in the Pacific insert in the Seattle Times. The article was about freeways that were never built, but the map includes the rail system that was proposed in 1968.

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/7886/1968lightrailmaprm5.jpg

[canucklehead2]

Thanks for that. The map certainly helps put things into perspective. It's a real shame that the 1968 plan wasn't built!

[seaskyfan]

^ Well it's also good we never built all those freeways.

[MayorOfChicago]

Des Moines? Is that a joke?

Actually Des Moines is finishing up with the 5th and final study for a light rail route in the city. I don't think it's going to pass though.

The state just finished a full beltway around the city a few years ago, and this year they completed a $482,000,000 project to widen and modernize the main freeway that runs through downtown, and the rest of the city.

There is a lot of talk in Iowa this month though about passanger rail.

Illinois today released a study giving a green light to begin design of passanger rail service from Chicago the the Quad Cities on Iowa's border. The state of Iowa is initiating a study on bringing passanger rail from Chicago to Davenport, then to Iowa City, Des Moines, and Omaha.

CHICAGO – Amtrak has completed a report requested by the Illinois Department of Transportation (Ill. DOT) that evaluates possible passenger train routes between Illinois Quad Cities (Moline-Rock Island) and Chicago. This "Feasibility Report on Proposed Amtrak Service, Quad Cities-Chicago" is also in response to a January 2007 town meeting in Rock Island, hosted by U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who was joined by Amtrak and Ill. DOT representatives, labor officials and leaders from Illinois and Iowa.

In the report, the approximate cost of upgrading the railroad infrastructure to accommodate passenger train speeds is $14-to-23 million, over the shortest, fastest and least costly of the potential routes. Not included in this figure are any capital expenses for railcars and locomotives, nor the local costs of providing stations.

Annual ridership on the route is estimated to be nearly 111,000 if improvements are made allowing maximum speeds of 79 mph, based upon two daily round-trips.

The annual state operating cost for the possible routes is in the $6-million range. Quad Cities-Chicago travel times of about 3 1/2 hours are possible and would be competitive with automobile driving, dependant on the choice of routes, agreements with host railroads and required infrastructure improvements. Excerpts from the report and a map are attached. An executive summary of the report is now/will be available this week on the Ill. DOT and Amtrak websites.

"Amtrak and the State of Illinois have seen tremendous growth in passenger rail ridership since Gov. Rod Blagojevich and the Legislature increased funding for state supported routes in 2006," said IDOT Secretary Milton R. Sees. "These gains indicate there is a significant and growing demand for passenger rail service across the state. At a time when everyone is becoming more conscious of the need to conserve fuel, passenger rail moves people efficiently, helps reduce traffic and is good for our environment."

"Last year, we held a meeting that showed us that the Quad Cities are committed to bringing Amtrak back to the area," said Sen. Durbin. "Today, we have a feasibility study that shows us that adding rail service between the Quad Cities and Chicago will give businesses and tourists a time competitive and convenient alternative to driving. Amtrak already provides quick, cost-effective, and reliable public ground transportation to 30 communities in the state — it's time to add the Quad Cities to that list."

"The first passenger rail train pulled into the Quad Cities more than 150 years ago," said Congressman Phil Hare (D-Rock Island). "It's time for it to return to this area. In addition to providing an affordable method of transportation between the Quad Cities and Chicago, our region could be an important gateway to Iowa City, Des Moines and Omaha as we continue to invest in transportation infrastructure."


There are also studys underway to extend rail from Chicago to Dubuque, Iowa in the northeast portion of the state.

Last year Iowa City started the "Hawkeye Express" rail service from a suburb of Iowa City to the home football games during the fall. It's not a commuter service, and is mostly just to keep cars off the roads around the stadium, but one of the big reasons they pushed this was to get rail transport back into people's minds - especially with the prospect of having new lines running east/west across Iowa, and the Cedar Rapids/Iowa City light railway.

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f385/Candrson/me%202/1-8.jpg

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f385/Candrson/me%202/2-8.jpg

There have already had test runs with trains on a light rail system in production between Iowa City - Cedar Rapids. The line would run from downtown Iowa City, to North Liberty, the airport, and then downtown Cedar Rapids. The cost of this upgrade is actually pretty cheap, and people are very optomistic.

[canucklehead2]

Any maps of those systems MayorOfChicago?

[MayorOfChicago]

None I could find, it's still fairly preliminary, except for the light rail from Cedar Rapids to Iowa City. The file with that map wouldn't let me post the image on here though...

[kitchener-lrt]

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f385/Candrson/me%202/2-8.jpg


What's up with the strange hand rails? Why not just have a solid 2nd floor?:haha:

[MolsonExport]

^err, so the people on the bottom can stand when they board and disembark the train. Otherwise there would not be enough headroom.

Most of the double-deckers that I have been on (Italy, Australia, Canada, USA, Korea) were of the same sort.

[phillyscooter]

What's up with the strange hand rails? Why not just have a solid 2nd floor?:haha:

I thought the design was actually so the conductor collecting tickets could do it from downstairs...that has been the way on the old caltrain gallery cars since they were the old southern pacific trains waaaaay back in the day!

[onishenko]

Any other pics of the Honolulu line? That appears to be a newspaper clipping of one portion.

[SnyderBock]

Here's one for Denver in the early 1970's (compliments of ColVol).

This system would have had two phases. Phase One would have costs between $500 million and $733 million (in 1970's dollars) to build. It would have been a first generation light rail line, with an ~2.5 mile segment of it in downtown being subway. Phase Two would have cost an additional $1 billion dollars (in 1970's dollars) to build.

It was a grossly expensive proposal for Denver which was viewed in Washington as a mid-sized "cow town" back then. When Denver turned down it's winning bid for the 1977 winter Olympics, the feds threw this proposal in the trash and gave them $33 million to improve/expand their bus system - which didn't help Denver's air quality (like the feds wanted them to do) or help one of the countries worst traffic cities reduce congestion.

No....not THAT rail transit plan. But we've been down a similar path before. Last week when I was going through the Google news archives I came across these stories.

Back in the 1970's Denver voters approved a massive, and somewhat futuristic, rail transit plan. The plan included "Personal Rapid Transit" vehicles and a subway section. After years of planning, it was canceled by federal officials who felt that it wasn't necessary.

You can click the images below for the full .pdf versions.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u65/covol/transit72.jpg (http://home.comcast.net/~denverssp/72transit.pdf)http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u65/covol/transit76b.jpg (http://home.comcast.net/~denverssp/76btransit.pdf)

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u65/covol/transit73b.jpg (http://home.comcast.net/~denverssp/73transit.pdf)http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u65/covol/transit76a.jpg (http://home.comcast.net/~denverssp/76atransit.pdf)

[destroybananas]

^ Well it's also good we never built all those freeways.


I think it's a shame we didn't, the infrustructure wouldn't be so jerriatric like it is right now.

[seaskyfan]

I think it's a shame we didn't, the infrustructure wouldn't be so jerriatric like it is right now.

If we had built all those freeways we'd have a lot more geriatric infrastructure that we do now (since they would all be 30+ years old by now).

Those proposed freeways (and don't forget the bridge to Kitsap) would have compounded our sprawl problem and made urban core density a lot less likely. Plus they would have trashed many of the close in neighborhoods making them a lot less attractive to the folks who have fixed them up over the past 20 years.

[ardecila]

What's up with the strange hand rails? Why not just have a solid 2nd floor?:haha:

They are this way because Iowa bought the cars used from Metra here in Chicago. On Metra trains (all except Metra Electric) the conductor walks down the center aisle to punch/sell tickets. The open ceiling allows him to do both levels at the same time.

The bilevel cars allow platforms to be much shorter in length, reducing the costs of station construction.

[SFUVancouver]

The Ministry of Transportation will be unveiling the long-awaited and rumoured transit mega project TOMORROW for the Lower Mainland and BC.

http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/6170/32763825mt1.jpg

Sunday's News Hour report on today's announcement:
ZzAdzC_BTAw



The following is from today's Vancouver Sun:

Major transit announcement
Transportation project to be unveiled today, involving many cities and billions of dollars

Jonathan Fowlie and Frances Bula
Vancouver Sun

Monday, January 14, 2008

A major announcement involving transportation improvements throughout B.C. will be made today.
CREDIT: Ian lindsay/Vancouver Sun

BRITISH COLUMBIA - A Lower Mainland transit and transportation plan, billed as one of the biggest capital projects in B.C. history, is expected to be unveiled today by Premier Gordon Campbell.

On Sunday, Dale Steeves, a spokesman for Campbell, said the project will involve many cities - including municipalities both inside and outside the Lower Mainland - and will involve multiple billions of dollars in spending commitments.

"It will be one of the biggest, if not the biggest, capital projects in the history of the province," Steeves told The Vancouver Sun on Sunday evening.

The plan involves funding and a final route plan for the Evergreen SkyTrain Line to the northeast suburbs, rapid transit to the Fraser Valley, and the Millennium Line extension in Vancouver to the University of B.C., according to Global BC.

It comes about one month before the provincial budget and is an opportunity to showcase billions in new spending without the distractions associated with budget day.

In December, Finance Minister Carole Taylor predicted B.C. will have a surplus of $2.1 billion for the 2007-08 fiscal year. Taylor has remained quiet on what will be in her Feb. 19 budget, but last week spoke about the possibility of a provincial carbon tax.

In that discussion, Taylor said all of the carbon tax proposals she has been reviewing include a promise of revenue neutrality. She added this neutrality can either come from lowering other taxes, or by spending the money on projects aimed at reducing emissions.

"[One] possibility is you take those dollars in and you put them back out into technology that helps with climate change - for instance buses," she said.

Lower Mainland mayors have been invited to today's provincial announcement. But all say the provincial government has been exceptionally tight-lipped about what might be in it, which is frustrating for many mayors who have been waiting anxiously for months for announcements on critically needed transit projects in their regions.

"We're in the dark and when you're in the dark, it's pretty tough to guess what's coming down the pike," said Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts.

Watts, along with three other Fraser Valley mayors, made a special pitch last fall to Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon for help in boosting transit service for the booming valley suburbs.

"We need to see some of that improvement straight away. We absolutely need improved bus service now," she said.

Watts said that, although transit funding is much needed, it's difficult to see decisions dropped on the region out of the blue without any input from the affected municipalities. Watts is also the chair of the new Council of Mayors in the recently reorganized TransLink.

The south of Fraser mayors want to see a new rapid-bus system, with one segment of it leading the way for a future expansion of SkyTrain.

Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini expressed a similar mix of hope and frustration. Trasolini has been waiting for more than a year to hear from the provincial government that it will provide the last $400 million needed to build the Evergreen Line, the light-rail extension to the existing Millennium line that is supposed to run east from Lougheed Centre in Coquitlam to the northeast suburbs.

He has no idea what is coming.

"I just got an e-mail from [the Transportation Ministry] saying to be there. I would have hoped to have a heads up."

Evergreen is "the obvious project," he said, but he doesn't want to get his hopes up because he's been promised the money for so long.

In Vancouver, Mayor Sam Sullivan has also been invited to the announcement. His communications manager, David Hurford, said the mayor is looking forward to the announcement "with anticipation" but he wouldn't speculate on what Vancouver might hope to get.

jfowlie@png.canwest.com

fbula@png.canwest.com

[CanadianCentaur]

Some old LRT plans from Edmonton - from the as early as circa 1964, when
the city of Edmonton had only about 350,000 at that time.
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/9559/1964macdonaldmaptanxb7.gif

1972 plan..
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1764/lrtmapyh1.jpg

This is construction timeline they originally envisioned way back in the early 1970s. Of course they never got any farther than just north of
the river and the University of Alberta. The U of A extension wasn't even completed until 1992. And that was the last time they did any LRT
extension prior to the current SLRT extension south of the U of A. What a shame for one of the first North American metros under 500,000 to
open an LRT system. Even as recently as during the mid-1990s, I was told that any further LRT extension past the U of A would not occur
until around 2020 and anymore new LRT lines not until after 2025 or even not ever.
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/5839/lrtconstructionip1.jpg

Scaled-down plan from the 1970s.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/3780/1970setslrtconceptbw1.jpg

This is from 2004. The BRT plan is already dead as this month, since the new general manager of the ETS has said it's best to concentrate entirely
on LRT, not BRT.
http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/8112/ultimatelrtam3.gif

Proposed NLRT (North LRT) path in detail. This is probably what will go up next once SLRT is finished around the end of 2009.
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3059/nlrtfu8gz0.jpg

[newboldphilly]

baltimore's plan is suspiciously reminiscene of DC's

anyways if Baltimore could ever pull that off it would be amazing

That's the brilliance of the Baltimore plan. It looks like an amazing, world-class system. And, when it gets finished it will be. But building it isn't the big deal that people make it out to be.

The plan only adds one new line to the system. The red line. It isn't even a particularly long route. The plan increases frequency on a commuter rail route to make it more like transit service and adds extensions or spurs to the existing metro and light rail routes.

[jodelli]

Hi I was wondering if people had the built or unbuilt rapid transit plan maps of their own city. I'm really curious to know the rejected plans from 1933 Detroit, and the old/unbuilt Vancouver, Seattle and Los Angeles plans. If you have any others feel free to share...

I'm trying to dig up the old Calgary and Edmonton ones as well. Actually I have the Edmonton ones on my photobucket account, but I can't find old CALTS plan myself...

Here are links to a transport study from 1945 in Detroit. They planned heavily on expressways but also included rail transit along the medians of both the northwest and crosstown highways (approx what are now the Jefferies and Ford freeways).

Guessing it would have looked like the CTA Red Line along the Dan Ryan in Chicago.

http://www.detroitrising.com/1945plan2.htm
http://www.detroitrising.com/1945plan3.htm

jodelli

[canucklehead2]

Just think of how busier Detroit could be right now if they had in fact built Rapid Transit to the downtown core. If not, the city would have yet another sexy/scary set of modern urban ruins for people to explore...