Edmonton, a Place of Contrasts: Why Trolley Buses in Edmonton?
by Llew Lawrence, Director of Operations, Edmonton Transit [1982]
We spend too much time and energy debating, and too little being
concerned with customers. My
philosophy is that of a generalist and is based around public transportation customers, their needs, what it takes
to meet those needs, as well as determining what they are willing to pay to meet their needs. Couple this with a
belief that all of the social services public transportation systems are expected to provide [most of which are desirable]
should not be charged to transit operating budgets, and you may understand why I prefer to explode the myths in regard
to the role that urban public transportation is delegated in North America.
[We need to learn] to combine our skills and knowledge to gain solutions to whole systems - looking at the full range
of solutions required to meet peoples' needs. Speaking on the trolley bus reflects my strong interest in its
application to our collective responsibilities within the public transit field. I will not miss an opportunity to drive
home the point close to my heart that if public transit decisions were based solely around existing or potential
customer needs, then the trolley bus would not have lost its prominence within the transit industry.
Edmonton is a city of contrasts. In order to understand how we came to be one of the select group of North
American cities operating trolley coaches, it will help to give a bit of history. Founded in 1795 as a fur trading
post, Edmonton is senior to most U.S. and Western Canadian cities. As a city, it belongs to the Twentieth Century.
Its transit operation began in 1908 under municipal ownership, and it has continued as a city department. While the
Department's history has had its ups and downs, it avoided the sequence of crises that stifled long range thinking in
privately owned transit systems elsewhere. Edmonton's contrasts also include geography. While it appears to be a
typical prairie city in most respects, it has a deep river valley cutting through its center. This is exactly the
point where streetcars and the early motor buses would be most heavily loaded on lines linking residential areas
with the central business district across the river. The inauguration of trolley coach service in 1939 introduced a
route that tackled the big grades. By 1964, Edmonton operated 100 trolley coaches.
In the 1950's and 60's, Edmontonians were preoccupied with the automobile. However, the city was growing, and Edmonton
Transit gradually spread itself over the area with motor bus feeder lines. Although the latter 1960's was full of
crashing final curtains in the U.S. transit industry, the scene in Canada was mixed. On the one hand, there were people
who wanted to imitate decisions being made in the U.S. The "New Look" diesel was on the streets, with the front
drivers loved, a back that equipment people loved, and passenger facilities tossed in as an afterthought. It was designed
to get out on those great new freeways and go! And there were people who wanted to get some freeways for the big tail
fins and the "New Looks" to cruise. In the 1960's, that trend was represented here by our only discontinuance of a
trolley coach route [the S6-Low Level]. It was affected by a roadway project.
The development of integrated rail/bus operations in Toronto and Cleveland interested transit officials. A most important
step was taken when the right men, ideas, and technology were brought together. In annexing the Town of Jasper Place,
the City of Edmonton had implied that it would offer the sprawling, low density suburb the same level of transit service
enjoyed by city residents. The Timed Transfer Concept [evolved].
I will briefly describe what happened. An existing trolley bus route was extended to a terminal built beside the Jasper
Place Town Hall. Motor bus feeder routes were timed to meet both trolleys and each other. In peak hours,
the heaviest trips were expressed to downtown. This put each bus mode into the range in which it could perform best.
Trolleys covered the stop and go main line operation, taking advantage of their performance with heavy loads. This
also fits their need for day and night operation to lower the distributed capital cost of the electrical system,
and it fits our desire to be a good neighbour in areas where main lines cut through residential areas and hospital
grounds: Glenora is served quietly and efficiently by our trolley service. Diesel buses perform well
in express operations, where their engines can run at a fairly constant speed. Their noise levels are not a severe
problem on routes served infrequently, or where late night, Sunday, and holiday service is not offered. Feeder routes
can sometimes use smaller buses as well.
The Timed Transfer Concept has allowed us to run a fairly simple system from the customer standpoint. The
traditional North American radial system often makes the outlying express route points difficult to reach from
intermediate areas. This presents planners with a choice of adding stops to expresses, running expresses and locals
over the same route, or just writing off the people who want to reach points in that part of the city which falls
between the downtown and the suburbs. This area contains many trip generators, and in the concept employed in
Edmonton, these points are accessible via transfer at the outlying transit centres. If it is necessary for an inner
city route to wander around in order to tap an industrial area, for example, it is not necessary for the residents
of outlying areas to join its slow trip. They have the option of continuing on an express bus or LRT.
Let me picture the ideal we work toward. The passenger sets out from home, walking 400 metres or less to a feeder line.
On arrival at a transit centre, s/he is offered a choice of:
- A main line trolley bus or light rail transit train that travels directly downtown.
- An express bus or light rail transit train that travels directly downtown with few or no stops during peak hours.
- A direct bus to the University of Alberta and the University Hospital.
- A cross-town route.
- Peak hour industrial routes.
- Other feeder routes, which offer access to nearby schools, community centres, shopping and other services.
Of course, this is an idealized picture. But at any given time or
place customers will find more or less what I have
described. The argument that people "don't like transfers" has not been invalidated in Edmonton. It is
just that there are other things that they like more. That includes direct access to places of work and services,
and it includes frequent service on main lines. It is also important to note that there are transfers, and there are
transfers. We still operate many street corner connections. However, there is less resistance to transfers in the
civilized environment of a terminal facility than when the same type of connection is offered on a street corner.
The trolley coach offers a part of our complete system. Its attributes give it a solid place on main lines and in densely
populated parts of Edmonton. We see it as a forerunner of LRT in these corridors. Trolley lines will not be replaced
by LRT in areas where local stopping services are necessary. In coordination with LRT, trolley operation will enable
us to meet our 1984 goal of carrying 27 percent of our passengers with electric power.
Future of Trolley Coach Operation in Edmonton:
Many of you are aware of our decision to continue trolley operations. The eventual result of this was our order for
100 Brown Boveri trolley coaches. The feedback we are getting from operators and passengers has been good. Chopper
controlled motors provide smooth operation. Electric heat is great in the winter, and twin roof vent hatches keep
temperatures comfortable in summer. The appearance of a 'New Look' bus with trolley poles did cause some double takes
at first, but most Edmontonians do not realize how unique these vehicles are. They just want the service to function
smoothly, and with comfort. Service is why patrons are standing on those corners.
What are we offering the people on those corners? Trolley coach operation will expand. One extension will take our
Route 3 through an industrial area from the apartment district it now serves to the Jasper Place Centre. Other
extensions involve routes that spend a substantial part of their time under trolley overhead. We are working to
upgrade the overhead. Along with induction control switches, perhaps the single step most appreciated by operating
personnel and least noticed by the public was the switch to K & M elastic suspension overhead. We will also be
working to upgrade the personnel operating these vehicles as well as the service control on our system so that
disruptions are handled more easily. The best upgrading is already underway: A fleet big enough so that runs
scheduled to have trolleys can be expected to have them assigned. Operators who want to drive trolleys will sign
those runs, and experience levels will improve.
I hope this puts the trolley coach into perspective. I would like to see continued extensions where traffic warrants.
The bundle of diesel lines we now operate over the original Low Level trolley route meets the [electrification]
criteria set out in the 1973 Edmonton Transit study by Robert Clark and similar criteria developed by the San
Francisco Municipal Railway's Carl Natvig in 1979. In the mid-1980's, one out of every six buses in Edmonton Transit's
fleet will be a trolley coach. When I began work as a transit operator in the 1950's, trolleys were the majority of
our vehicles. We are not 'turning back the clock'. We are continuing a useful operation where specific needs make
it the best solution.
Oft-Heard Myths About Trolley Coaches:
Now I am going to tackle some myths that lead mixed mode systems to head toward diesels. We have our share of people
who chant these phrases whenever upgrading the trolley system is mentioned. It does not have anything to do with how
much education they have. The perpetuation of these myths results from people who do not work at trying to keep a
well-rounded picture in their minds of why it is that we run a transit system.
"The trolley coach is inflexible!"
That is probably the number one chant. It means almost anything that the speaker cares to imply, but whatever the
meaning, it is a word that sets strong men to shivering and children to wake crying in their beds.
Let us just imagine for a moment that the wires disappeared from Edmonton overnight. The next morning, buses would
still make their way along the same heavily-paved streets, stopping at the same shelters and concrete bus pads.
Everything is running along, just slower, more noisily, and with a bit of smoke. But down the street there is a
lady coming. Former service control supervisor Ken Strachan said her name was "Mrs. Magillicutty", but she
could be anyone. She lives in a quiet little cul-de-sac area that faces an uphill walk to the bus. People there have
been walking uphill since streetcar days. This morning is no exception, but something is different!
"The buses are flexible now!" she whispers and skips back down the hill to call her Alderman with the
suggestion that some, not all, of those frequent buses swing down into her neighbourhood. She is not greedy, she just
wants a few trips. And how can her Alderman disagree? Out past the end of the line, a corporation is building a new
office building. It is within walking distance of the former trolley line, but it would draw higher rental income if
the bus went right to the door. Unfortunately, only some trips can be extended to the building, because the others
have had all their layovers soaked up going down into that lady's cul-de-sac.
Within a decade, bus operators will be walking out to their diesels carrying armloads of dash cards. Route brochures
will be littered with fascinating footnotes. Special interest groups will be temporarily pleased, but operating costs
will climb as buses roll through back lanes and driveways looking for passengers. The most important aspect is what
the effects on patronage will be. The passengers from outlying areas will find the circuitous routing past the new
office building or past the lady's house unattractive. They will either quit riding, or demand direct operation of
their feeder routes to downtown. Either revenue will be lost or operating costs will go up. Flexibility has a price,
which system after system in North America has paid without realizing it.
The routes on which trolley coaches operate are main lines where the travel desire has remained constant over a long
period. This allows use of the capital investment, and in turn, the capital invested acts as a balancing factor to
offset short term desires.
While the lack of short term "flexibility" does require extra effort in operations, it also offers advantages.
There is evidence that the permanence of the trolley route is attractive to passengers. There is a very sickening
feeling given to patrons left standing at a bus stop that have been by-passed due to a route change, detour, or
worse yet, by an operator who cut off part of the route to save time.
Time and again I have heard senior men talking about the feeling of teamwork and cooperation that they experienced
with fellow operators. That included working together to share a load when traffic disrupted service, courtesies to
each other in traffic, and sharing information. Railway operations demand this relationship. Without it, customers
quickly turn away. Trolley coach operation also requires this teamwork.
There can be a tendency for some diesel bus operators to regard themselves as their own little transit system. They
can pass another bus, and they will now and then, when it is personally convenient. But too often, the passing comes
after the lead bus in a jam has collected all of the passengers. I drove buses myself, and I have seen that happen.
This is a worldwide problem, so I think that it is related to the nature of the vehicle. I am talking about a minority
of operators here, but it gradually can affect everyone. Does that style of operation best meet customer needs? It
may take care of some immediate problems, but it leads to a gnawing uncertainty about the dependability of service.
On the other hand, the trolley system introduces a clear requirement for teamwork, just as rail operation does.
The operator is literally wired into the system. He or she can drop out if necessary, but cannot operate with disregard
for others. It is no coincidence that the most highly regarded North American transit systems have rail and/or trolley
coach operations.
Instead of seeing the trolley coach as an obstacle to a self-centered form of transit operation that comes to be the
norm, it can be seen that in the process of meeting trolley system requirements, we can retain and develop a sense
of shared purpose. We cannot do that without also keeping in mind the reasons for operating trolley coaches, foremost
among them being the passenger on that corner.
Imagine that it is not August, but January. Imagine that it is 20, 30, 40 below zero on either temperature scale. You
are standing in a bus shelter, and it does not matter what time it is because it is dark most of the time in January.
Within a minute or two you hear a faint laser sound twanging over the wires and then the crunching sound of braking
tires on frozen roadway. Climb inside an Edmonton Transit bus that is big and warm and friendly and you are on your
way directly to a thousand places, smoothly and quietly.
A Hollywood director would have to shoot over and over again to achieve that effect. We are expected to do that
successfully every day, and with teamwork in the Operations section and cooperation from other sections and departments
we can do it.
Acknowledgements:
In addition to references in the text, the following colleagues provided assistance. The views, however, are those
of the author.
Marilyn Brothers, Clerk Typist;
Robert R. Clark, Supervisor of Special Services;
John Nicoll, Director of Electrical Systems;
David Pagett, Technical Supervisor - Electrical;
Robert W. Rynerson, Marketing Officer
Note that the version of this article appearing on this web site has been edited for length.