MODERN LIVING: Those Rush-Hour Blues

• Share

(9 of 11)

Chicago's Burlington railroad, rich from freight, modernized its passenger trains in 1948, then asked for a fare hike. Commuters were so pleased by the improvements that they even wrote letters to the Illinois Commerce Commission backing the request. Four more increases also went through smoothly. The Burlington hopes to slip into the black on commuters this year. Even if it fails, it feels that its commuter losses add up to a modest price to pay for the public's good will. Says the Burlington's president, Harry Murphy: "We've got to serve the commuters, so I believe we should give them the best service we can possibly afford." Quiet, Please. Because they have to serve the commuter—like it or not—other railroads and transit systems, along with cities, are also trying to find ways to do the job right. The Pennsylvania and Reading railroads and the city of Philadelphia are cooperating in "Operation Northwest," in which the railroads have stepped up service and lowered fares, and issue transfers for the city's transit system in return for a $320,000 grant to help cover extra costs. The plan has not cut commuter losses, but it has proved that the commuter can be won away from the auto: the Pennsy's passenger load has jumped 17%, the Reading's 29.5%.

San Francisco has formed the Bay Area Rapid Transit District to set up a regional network of 70 m.p.h. rapid-transit trains that, when completed in 1965, will get commuters from any one station to any other in less than an hour. What spurred it on was a voter outcry against the blight on the city's beauty caused by superhighways. The state legislature decided that the motorist must help pay for the new system, will nick him for $115 million in traffic tolls to construct a rapid-transit tube under San Francisco Bay.

Atlanta Transit System switched from corner-to-corner bus lines to fast, limited runs, last year netted $87,197 in profits.