Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail (South Coast Rail)

[buju b]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Busses, especially public transit busses, are not typically a very enjoyable ride. Having ridden a lot of trains (commuter and amtrak) and more busses than I would have liked, I cannot fathom how one can make the argument that these two forms of conveyance are equivocal.

As if the comfort issue isn't enough, consider this: Many people (especially commuters) take trains to get off of the roads and the congestion and frustration on them. Riding busses puts you right back on the roads and, as stated by several others in previous posts, exposes you to all the delays that commonly occur on the roads (due to volume, construction, accidents, inclement weather, etc.).

I cannot state better the points in favor of rail to New Bedford and Fall River than they have already been articulated.

I will add is that if there was train service to these areas, I would be likely (almost guaranteed, in fact) to take itdown to either/both for a day trip or two to check them out. I have never driven to either place (much less ridden a bus of any kind) to do so and can't imagine a scenario where I would drive or ride a bus to these places.

While I do not possess any emprical data to support the notion that others probably feel similarly (I'd guess that the people who live in NB and FR also would take more trips into Boston--for work and, particularly, for leisure if rail was an option), I'd invite anyone that has access to any such info to share it.

 

[Lrfox]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

^I'd be surprised if many people felt differently. I can't however vouch for them as I'll be the first to admit, my family and friends still live in that area, I grew up there, and I have a big bias on this project. That does not mean I'm beyond reason and will listen to any argument against it (I can fully understand why the cost issue is prohibitive to people not living where this will affect them and can't argue against that); but I know the area well and I know that this project means to everyone on the South Coast and I know what it can do for the area.

 

[Ron Newman]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I've taken the Dattco (formerly American Eagle) commuter bus to New Bedford for Summerfest. It's reasonably comfortable and runs on schedule, but weekend service is not very frequent. Since it is not an MBTA service, a lot of Boston people who might use it for a tourist excursion don't even know that it exists. And it stops running much too early in the evening -- last bus back from New Bedford leaves at 7 pm.

 

[jass]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Busses, especially public transit busses, are not typically a very enjoyable ride.

Unfortunately the MBTA doesnt believe in coach buses. Why are regular city buses being used on express routes? Highways should see greyhound style buses operated by the MBTA, like NYC does.

 

[Ron Newman]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

The Dattco bus is 'Greyhound-style', as are most or all of the other inter-city and commuter buses that use the South Station bus terminal.

That said, I'd still rather have a train.

 

[buju b]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

^Agreed. A train pummels a bus, anyday.

 

[Lrfox]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Results of a new ridership study still point towards a Stoughton route.

Ridership study touts Stoughton rail option


By Joe Cohen
Standard-Times staff writer
February 18, 2009 6:00 AM

NEW BEDFORD ? A ridership study for the South Coast Rail Project ? including commuter trains and rapid bus service between this city, Fall River and Boston ? indicates the best option to maximize mass transit ridership is the Stoughton rail alternative using electric-powered rail cars.

Kristina Egan, South Coast Rail Project manager, said a yearlong study indicated the Stoughton electric option would attract the most daily ridership ? 6,300 people making 12,600 one-way trips ? from Southeastern Massachusetts to Boston.

Using electric trains ? which can accelerate more quickly than diesel-powered trains ? would provide a trip time of 76 minutes from New Bedford to Boston. A diesel train would take 85 minutes. The study used modeling to project ridership to 2030.

Egan said the rail project wants to maximize the number of riders, not just to make commuter rail convenient but also to reduce emissions and greenhouse gases. That would be done by taking cars off highways.

The Stoughton alternative had been selected in a past study as the optimal route for commuter rail service from SouthCoast. The Stoughton alternative is not without obstacles, however, including its potential environmental impacts crossing through a swamp and other wetland areas. "We are investigating the environmental consequences" of all the routes, Egan said.

The ridership study is being added to information provided to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Massachusetts environmental officials. The Corps and state are studying environmental impacts of five rail alternatives and a rapid bus option, and they ultimately will select the likely final route.

Despite progress under the administration of Gov. Deval Patrick, there are skeptics aplenty regarding whether this time the rail project is more likely to be built than when proposed by previous governors. A commuter rail connection between New Bedford, Fall River and Boston has been studied and debated for decades with little real action.

Egan and others argue this time really is different, given the commitment of Patrick and the current attention to economic, environmental and energy concerns. Among the hurdles still to be overcome is an estimated price tag of at least $1.4 billion for a rail option.

Egan said Tuesday that just in the past several weeks, U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., has sought to provide potential funding for the South Coast Rail Project in federal legislation related to the stimulus package. President Barack Obama also has indicated he is interested in infrastructure projects such as rail along with projects that save energy and protect the environment, Egan said.

The $787 billion stimulus bill signed Tuesday includes nearly $50 billion for roads, bridges, transit and rail, including $8 billion for high-speed rail, according to the Washington Post.

"I am more enthused than ever," Egan said. "There are multiple funding options" being discussed.

She added that federal transportation- and climate change-related legislation also could prove beneficial for the rail project.

The ridership study found "more people will use (commuter rail) than predicted in past studies, and it confirmed it is more needed than in past studies and will take thousands of cars off the road and will do that for decades to come," Egan said.

Patrick has set January 2010 to get a financing plan in place for the rail line. If the project moves forward, service could be in place by 2016.

The ridership study found:

* Stoughton electric would take 76 minutes and carry 6,300 round-trip passengers daily, of which 2,950 would be new riders. It would save 241,900 automobile travel miles a day.
* Stoughton diesel would take 85 minutes, transporting 5,600 round-trip passengers daily, with 2,500 new riders. It would save 195,000 vehicle miles.
* Attleboro electric would take 75 minutes, carry 6,000 round-trip passengers daily, with 2,850 new riders, saving 278,000 vehicle miles.
* Attleboro diesel would take 84 minutes, with 5,300 round-trip passengers daily, and 2,350 new riders, saving 178,600 vehicle miles.
* Middleboro full-build option would take 90 minutes, with 3,900 round-trip passengers daily and 1,950 new riders. It would save 163,800 vehicle miles.
* Middleboro simple-build option would take 90 minutes, with 1,700 round-trip passengers daily and 700 new riders, saving 64,400 vehicle miles.
* Rapid-bus option would take 68 minutes, carry 3,400 round-trip passengers daily, with 1,750 new riders, saving 157,500 vehicle miles.

The rapid-bus option, in addition to being the fastest, has the advantage of being significantly less expensive than rail, including substantial highway work that would have to be done.

Egan noted that the Attleboro rail alternative performed well on ridership numbers but would be very expensive to build at an estimated cost of $2 billion. She said it would also take a long time to make operational.

Contact Joe Cohen at jcohen@s-t.com

Link: http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090218/NEWS/902180342

 

[atlrvr]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

$1.4B for 12,600 passengers? Pass.

 

[mass88]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I am obviously missing something here. I can't understand how a project such as this will cost in the upwards of $1.5 Billion dollars.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

The $787 billion stimulus bill signed Tuesday includes nearly $50 billion for roads, bridges, transit and rail, including $8 billion for high-speed rail, according to the Washington Post.

$0 of this will go towards this project. Journalism FAIL.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I am obviously missing something here. I can't understand how a project such as this will cost in the upwards of $1.5 Billion dollars.

Steel prices? Also if they are going to electrify the entire line that is going to add a pretty penny. Plus they will need to buy new cars and probably have to expand South Station a bit to fit the new cars. I can see how the price could get up there.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

$1.4B for 12,600 passengers? Pass.

If that is the only way you look at it then, yes, it seems like a waste. But $1.4 billion isn't just to get 12,000 people to Boston, it is an investment in the entire South Shore. If you look at it as how much development can a $1.4 billion rail line potentially bring in then I think it makes a lot more sense.

 

[czsz]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

$0 of this will go towards this project. Journalism FAIL.

I think it was just to add context, not to imply it would be funded by the stimulus. The line right above indicates that Kerry had tried to have it included in the package, and the line below states that "multiple funding options are being discussed".

Re: investment, it would help to know what effect the opening of other lines has had. There are serious concerns about the Plymouth Line having accelerated South Shore sprawl, for example. I wonder if the plan should contemplate fewer stops and more "express" service to encourage growth in nodes like Fall River and New Bedford themselves.

 

[Lrfox]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

^I agree that an express service would be the way to go. The plan now has places like Assonet (my hometown) which really doesn't need a stop given its proximity to other cities that will have stops. Furthermore, having stops in only the larger communities will focus growth in those cities that need it. It will also decrease the length of the trip which will encourage more riders.

I also consider it a statewide investment with heavy emphasis on the South Shore. Much of the money goes to improving existing infrastructure on operating routes, and a huge chunk goes to adding platforms and renovations at South Station. All these things will of course benefit the communities around Fall River and New Bedford, but they'll also benefit anyone who already uses these facilities.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Re: investment, it would help to know what effect the opening of other lines has had. There are serious concerns about the Plymouth Line having accelerated South Shore sprawl, for example.

I never put that together but I think you are totally right. I have family on the South Shore near Plymouth and every time I see them the place looks so different.

The problem is that there isn't a whole lot zoning can do. Most of these communities think density=bad, though they completely miss the point that sprawl is 100x worse. The only thing that will truly cut down on sprawl is long term increases in gas prices.

The paradox about transit into suburbs like this is that planners miss a really basic fact: some people really like living in the suburbs. Build rail lines into them will encourage development but as long as gas is cheap it will be auto-dependent. You can zone areas around the stations to be walkable but then there will be the surrounding areas that won't be zoned, or zoned low density, and end up becoming sprawl.

So how to prevent that? Well, don't build stations! But that sortta defeats the whole point now doesn't it? You could always increase the gas tax which would also help pay for road improvements to new stations. But no matter what you do people are going to live how they want. One man's townhouse is another man's prison and one man's suburban dream is another man's isolated hell.

 

[buju b]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Van, I can appreciate the logic that a substantial tax on gasoline that makes the purchase of it so expensive that it becomes cost-prohibitive for most to live far afield from where they work could very well contribute to the strangulation suburban sprawl.

The problem (well, one of the problems) with a high gasoline tax is that it will negatively impact a lot more than just people who happen to have a long commute. For example, any business that has to move people or things would be unamused in direct proportion to the degree they had to move said people or things.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

The problem (well, one of the problems) with a high gasoline tax is that it will negatively impact a lot more than just people who happen to have a long commute. For example, any business that has to move people or things would be unamused in direct proportion to the degree they had to move said people or things.

Most businesses that move people and things (in large quantity) use diesel, not gasoline. A tax on just gas would not affect these businesses.

Another reason for increased tax would be to offset any reduction in consumption caused by more fuel efficient cars. Gasoline will still be used, IMO, for a long time since it will take a generation to switch over (assuming the new technology was implemented today, which is not the case). In fact a higher gas tax would be beneficial in this regard since it would encourage more fuel efficient vehicles.

ANYWAY.... any community along the rail line will seriously need to prepare for development, and since they will have a good 8 years until it could go online, they really have no excuse.

 

[jass]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Most businesses that move people and things (in large quantity) use diesel, not gasoline. A tax on just gas would not affect these businesses.

And diesel is taced higher than gasoline, even though it allows for more fuel efficient cars...

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I think I should restructure my argument about gas tax:

Gas taxes have been kept low as part of the governments pro-housing development. More cars for more houses = jobs and growing economy.... until a year ago that is. This economic crisis is exactly the time when we need to look at what we've been doing, development wise, and start changing. If we don't do it smart it is going to hurt a lot more people in the long run.

 

[buju b]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I think the much larger part of the current economic situation we are in is a result of absurd lending practices for mortgages than the government keeping a low tax on gasoline.

Yes, keeping gas taxes (and, consequently, the price at the pump for the consumer) low will serve to promote (if only by not impeding) all that you describe.

But the real catalyst for the run up on housing values/prices, development, etc. was that loan programs designed for a very narrow spectrum of potential lenders (i.e. those whose income comes at irregular intervals in irregular amounts--people who get large bonuses or who work on commissions, etc.) were made available to W-2 employees who had a relatively constant income stream . . . and making this worse was that a lot of these programs allowed borrowers to state that they had a much more favorable economic profile than they in fact did.

In other words, a lot of should-be renters became buyers and sooner or later, the other shoe would drop and they would become renters again . . . and it has.