Boston 2024

[Equilibria]

There are often performance issues with mass transit / passenger rail during high heat too.

That aside, the Boston Olympic Committee projects that it will be able to move nearly 210,000 passengers on commuter rail during a three hour period on trains originating/terminating South station, and 125,000 passengers on commuter rail to/from North Station during a three hour period.

Or, as an alternative way of reading those numbers, Boston 2024 assumes the T can move that many passengers at a peak hour rate for a short period of time - immediately before and after the Opening Ceremony and Closing Ceremony, for example. I don't think they're assuming it would happen for 15 straight days during all operating hours.

Without doing a ton of detailed research, the Downtown London to Olympic Park service saw a maximum of 131,000 daily trips and an average of 90,000 over the length of the 2012 Games. Most of the key venues were located at the Park. South Station right now sees about 45,000 daily riders on Commuter Rail. Add it up, and you get approximately 130,000 per day, and the Olympic traffic won't peak during the rush hour for whatever hardy souls choose to work Downtown all week. In any 3-hour period, I doubt you'd see more than about 50,000 passengers to process.

That's not a defense of Boston 2024's bid document numbers, but given that their CEO is a former MBTA CEO, I'll trust him if he tells me the system could handle it.

 

[Semass]

In my understanding, the what the Legislature issued last year was a "Bond Bill." The projects listed therein are approved for bond funding - the MBTA and MassDOT can issue bonds in the Commonwealth's name to finance them.

Just because a project is approved for bond financing doesn't actually mean the bonds have been taken out - it's simply a statement that once a project is designed and planned out it's okay to borrow the money. Projects such as SSX haven't actually been funded - the bonds haven't been issued and the Federal matching grants haven't been approved and doled out, but MassDOT can move forward spending staff and contractor time planning it because the Legislature has formally deemed it worthy.

Think about when the actual funding came through for GLX within the past six months. The MBTA had performed all sorts of design and engineering work and had even started rebuilding the bridges before the bulk of the money was formally awarded. Boston 2024 can't depend only on projects that have reached that stage, since that only includes projects that are either already under construction or are due to break ground in the immediate future.

The statement that Boston 2024 is making is not that "you already have the money for this," it's "you've already made the public statement that you support doing this, so you can't say it's a white elephant you built for us alone."

You are correct about the bond. The bond bill only states that it is not illegal to spend money on these projects. The real catch is the borrowing capacity to issue the bonds. This is known as bond cap. The governor proposes the bond cap allocated to massdot and then the Treasurer sells the bonds to pay for it if we can afford it. Legislators can put whatever they want into the bond bill but the capital plan is where the rubber hits the road. These projects, if all approved to be complete in the next 9 years would substantially exceed the bond cap available to MassDOT or stretch the borrowing ability of the state such that other bonds - for UMass, parks, facilities, etc. could not be issued for lack of payback capacity. If the state is stretched too thin in its borrowing, the credit rating suffers and interest rates increase. Basically, if you live in Springfield, or anywhere outside this list of projects you won't get your project funded for a long time because the MassDOT cap will be sucked dry by these projects.

Also remember that to qualify for any federal funding, projects have to be on the TIP. Some of these - like Track 61 - likely don't make it. No federal assistance means you swallow the whole nut like with the new subway cars.

If you want to see where the feds might step in, check MAPC and the MPO. If it isn't on there by now, it is hard to imagine federal assistance in time to complete the project by 2024.

 

[Equilibria]

These projects, if all approved to be complete in the next 9 years would substantially exceed the bond cap available to MassDOT or stretch the borrowing ability of the state such that other bonds - for UMass, parks, facilities, etc. could not be issued for lack of payback capacity.

Well, you have to be specific by what you mean by "these projects." Boston 2024 has not identified anything other than SSX, the CNR Red and Orange Line stock, and Track 61 as projects they expect to see done, and all 3 (though it may just be Fairmount DMUs) are in the 2014-2019 CIP (Capital Investment Plan), which includes plenty of money for Central and Western Massachusetts. They haven't proposed any pipe dream MBTA projects so far.

Also, if Baker can use this to kill SCR dead, that's 2 billion CIP dollars right there that doesn't hurt anything that will make a difference outside of Boston.

 

[Arlington]

Also, if Baker can use this to kill SCR dead, that's 2 billion CIP dollars right there that doesn't hurt anything that will make a difference outside of Boston.

Please yes. That 1/6th of the 12.7b bond is SCR that'll be used by only hundreds of people a day is crazy stupid when you see existing links, used by 10,000+ people (or 100,000 looking at systems) suffering from deferred maintenance. If anyone asks, the answer is whack SCR back to a Taunton park and ride, and use the $1b saved on reliability upgrades everywhere (you can even focus on S. Attleboro and Middleboro, if you like).

 

[Matthew]

Today there was an article about how the MBTA had been the 'fastest expanding transit system' in the country.

It neglected to mention that the vast majority of that expansion was in the horrendously inefficient commuter rail mode.

So the Commonwealth poured billions of dollars down the rabbit hole of commuter rail expansion to serve a relatively few number of riders, while the core rapid transit and bus system fell apart.

I don't mind seeing transit service extended to these far-flung exurban places but it is absolutely flabbergasting how much money it costs and how little everyone gets in return. We can't afford to dump a billion reactivating an old rail line, and we most certainly cannot afford $2.4 billion for a commuter rail shuttle that will only serve 4,500 people. We need to figure out how to do this cheaper, much cheaper.

 

[stellarfun]

equilibria,

The T commuter rail ridership numbers are based on attendance at the following venue sites:

South Station: 104,000 including Olympic Stadium (used for track and field) the BCEC, and the Pavilion

Beacon Yards: 79,000 plus 7,000 for Agganis for total of 87,000

North Station: 35,000, from TD Garden and Boston Common; plus 31,000 for Lowell for a total of 66,000
_______________________________
Foxboro, of 68,000 spectators,,17,000 to arrive/leave by commuter rail. 50,000 to arrive by shuttle bus. The T is going to need to build more tracks and platforms.

 

[Schorschico]

Sch... Achieving Minimum transport standards during a week in which the City of Boston, and much of its surroundings acquired essentially an average seasons snowfall is not in any way relevant to the Olympics in the middle of the summer

Nor is it relevant to characterize the performance of the current mix of diesel and electric vehicles in cold conditions, well below the winter average temperatures -- once again not relevant to the Olympics 2024 debate

My words were not carefully chosen. Probably was better to say that last week has brought to the foreground the problems with transportation. The reactions to that debate were not my own, I was just pointing out what I have seen. But I disagree that this debacle is not relevant. The fact that the Olympics take place during the summer doesn't mean that many people (very loud this week) will find acceptable to celebrate them while the MBTA fails left and right during the winter (and lets be honest, this week was terrible, but the service is awful every winter). The attitude "Get us a decent public transport and you can get your Olympics" is out there. Whether you like it or not, and that makes it relevant.

Conversely, despite the above -- a very large number of people were successfully able to view / participate in the Rolling Rally for the Superbowl Champion Patriots without the police, or EMS being overly stressed. Indeed without many complaints at all.

I don't know what to say about this that will not get me banned, only ask, is it serious? What about the people (like me) trying to commute the very same day and having 3 and 4 times longer commutes? We are talking about hours to get to work, in my case driving because the day before with the T it was even worse. What resources did it take to clean the route of the parade? What other areas where not attended due to that effort? How many people that normally would not be getting into Boston did it due to the parade? How much did that affect the traffic? and the T? That parade should have taken place on the weekend. Even better during a May weekend.

Good to know the police was not overly stressed. Maybe if the had tried to help with the clusterf that was happening in other areas of the city, they would have been. But hey! Go Pats!

Indeed without many complaints at all.

Sorry to repeat but are you serious?!?!?! Complains from whom? From those having fun seeing Gronk drink beers? Or those whose commute got f$%%# because somebody decided to add a parade on top of the aftermath of a horrible storm. Have you read the press this week? internet? have you talked to people? have you been inside a OL car with people turning furious in front of you?

 

[stellarfun]

Article in the NY Times.

Repurposing the London venues, and making the site a major attraction / destination.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/t...?emc=edit_tl_20150207&nl=travel&nlid=10059472

 

[Equilibria]

equilibria,

The T commuter rail ridership numbers are based on attendance at the following venue sites:

South Station: 104,000 including Olympic Stadium (used for track and field) the BCEC, and the Pavilion

Beacon Yards: 79,000 plus 7,000 for Agganis for total of 87,000

North Station: 35,000, from TD Garden and Boston Common; plus 31,000 for Lowell for a total of 66,000
_______________________________
Foxboro, of 68,000 spectators,,17,000 to arrive/leave by commuter rail. 50,000 to arrive by shuttle bus. The T is going to need to build more tracks and platforms.

Are you assuming that all of those people are arriving/leaving at once? I don't think that's realistic...

 

[stellarfun]

Are you assuming that all of those people are arriving/leaving at once? I don't think that's realistic...

Those numbers aren't mine, they are from the Boston Committee's presentation.

In the case of Gillette, when there is only one soccer match being played, e.g., the finals, all the spectators will leave and arrive at once, or nearly so. How many train consists will have to be stored at Foxboro to deliver / bring back 17,000 fans? And if you have 170 passenger cars sitting in Foxboro, what does that do to commuter rail capacity elsewhere?

The passenger load numbers are for a three hour period, assuming a smoothed load level, for Beacon Yard that's roughly 28,000 per hour over a three hour period. I think ihere's a major question whether the planned station / platforms at Beacon Yard can handle anywhere near that load, anymore than Yawkey could handle Fenway Park being emptied onto that station every hour.

 

[Equilibria]

Those numbers aren't mine, they are from the Boston Committee's presentation.

In the case of Gillette, when there is only one soccer match being played, e.g., the finals, all the spectators will leave and arrive at once, or nearly so. How many train consists will have to be stored at Foxboro to deliver / bring back 17,000 fans? And if you have 170 passenger cars sitting in Foxboro, what does that do to commuter rail capacity elsewhere?

The passenger load numbers are for a three hour period, assuming a smoothed load level, for Beacon Yard that's roughly 28,000 per hour over a three hour period. I think ihere's a major question whether the planned station / platforms at Beacon Yard can handle anywhere near that load, anymore than Yawkey could handle Fenway Park being emptied onto that station every hour.

I'm not putting all that much faith in Boston 2024's presentation documents - this is the group that classified the Red Line as "Light Rail." They'll do better work before the official bid, particularly as Davey has joined the team since then.

27,000 in a 3-hour period at Beacon Park is the equivalent to saying that 2 of those venues (Aquatics Center and Harvard Stadium, say) have events that begin and end simultaneously, which they won't, and that almost every one of those people arrives by commuter rail immediately prior to the event and leaves immediately after. No one walks back to a hotel/dorm/whatever, no one attends a different event, no one walks back to Brighton where they parked their car. I just don't think that's a realistic scenario.

You can also take advantage of redundancy in they system based on how walkable these Olympics are. Based on the location of their planned venues (not really in "Beacon Park") the Red Line at Harvard is an alternative access point, as is a second commuter rail platform at Boston Landing. If MassDOT does the right thing and builds pedestrian connections across the tracks from BU, the Green Line is an access point as well.

The trick is going to be scheduling events to avoid conflicts on the transportation system and communicating with spectators to inform them of all their options. Perhaps Boston 2024 could even direct them via instructions that come with their tickets (right side of the stadium is routed to New Balance, the other is routed to Beacon Park, etc.) It's a solvable problem.

In the case of Gillette, there really isn't any mystery about what the soccer final will be like at the end - we see it 8-10 times per year when the Patriots play. The stadium isn't getting any larger for the Olympics. The only difference will likely be that there won't be any VIP parking for spectators, so the back roads might be open to a never-ending stream of buses to make up for the fact that many spectators won't have cars. Many of those buses could be rented by the countries competing to move their fans.

 

[stellarfun]

equilibria, the Boston Olympics Committee predicates that 50,000 of those attending the soccer final will arrive by bus, 17,000 by commuter rail. Apparently they don't expect many tickets to the soccer final to be sold / available to the general public in Massachusetts, who could drive. Maybe for security reasons, they don't want people driving and parking.

The men's soccer final is held next to last day generally, the women's soccer final on the day before the men's, and the semi's in the days immediately preceding both. I think Kraft's plan is to host one men's semi and the men's final, and none of the quarters or the preliminary games.

Once the Olympics allowed professional players to be rostered, that elevated the level of competition, and the level of fan interest.
_______________________________________________
Beacon Yard includes spectators at the Agganis Center.

 

[Equilibria]

equilibria, the Boston Olympics Committee predicates that 50,000 of those attending the soccer final will arrive by bus, 17,000 by commuter rail. Apparently they don't expect many tickets to the soccer final to be sold / available to the general public in Massachusetts, who could drive. Maybe for security reasons, they don't want people driving and parking.

The men's soccer final is held next to last day generally, the women's soccer final on the day before the men's, and the semi's in the days immediately preceding both. I think Kraft's plan is to host one men's semi and the men's final, and none of the quarters or the preliminary games.

Once the Olympics allowed professional players to be rostered, that elevated the level of competition, and the level of fan interest.
_______________________________________________
Beacon Yard includes spectators at the Agganis Center.

In 2011, the last year for which I could find data, the MBTA ran 1 train from Boston to each Patriots game, with a capacity of 1,950:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma.../more_pats_fans_riding_the_rails_to_gillette/

At that rate, the soccer final would see 9 trains with a total of 108 cars. That's a lot. The good news is that the soccer final takes place at night (or alternatively on a weekend), when the T could divert equipment down there. Trains could theoretically line up on the Framingham Secondary and pull into Foxborough in sequence. I also wonder if the 50,000 arriving "by bus" actually includes a lot of people arriving on shuttle buses from remote parking, as opposed to coming all the way from the city. If you have the parking lots free, you can take advantage of the summer weather and set up a fair of sorts out there to detain people on their way out and spread the load on the commuter rail.

It would be a production, but it's possible. Frankly, it's a pretty good reason to hold as many soccer matches as possible outside of Boston - spread that headache down to FedEx Field, Lincoln Financial, and MetLife if you can. It also makes activating the Framingham Secondary for Foxborough commuter rail service (a project that tops every F-Line "low-hanging fruit list) an "Olympic Infrastructure Project."

Agganis will be served primarily by the Green Line, not by the Beacon Park CR station. I realize you're using Boston 2024's definition for these venue areas, but their definition is dumb. Their "Beacon Park" venues aren't in Beacon Park, they're on the Harvard Allston Campus, and they aren't in any way adjacent to Agganis. Treating them the same from an access perspective doesn't make much sense.

 

[Matthew]

Beacon Park station would be about a 5-8 minute walk from Agganis if the current plan gets built.

 

[Equilibria]

Beacon Park station would be about a 5-8 minute walk from Agganis if the current plan gets built.

...they will be essentially equidistant between Beacon Park, Boston Landing and Harvard assuming the completion of the "Stadium Way" road system. Just checked it in GoogleEarth.

 

[stellarfun]

The timing of Olympic events is often dictated by television. A big point supposedly in Boston's favor (compared to SFO and LAX) is its time zone proximity to Europe. Almost certainly soccer will be televised at a time when it can get a large viewing audience in Europe, which is not a game starting at midnight or 1 AM European time.
_________
The Boston Olympic Committee has the Green Line accommodating three hour peak capacity at Agganis of 36,570, and Beacon Yard, commuter rail, accommodating 37,650 three hour peak capacity. That's just for BU / Agganis venues.

I understand neither their assumptions, nor their results.

 

[JohnAKeith]

I love the new regional Olympics' tagline: "We're Spreading the Headache"

 

[The EGE]

Actual numbers means it's math time.

Load for a three-car Green Line train (two type 7s and a Type 8) is 303 per policy, and 737 at estimated crush load. So let's say 500 for a little breathing room. At 37,000 people in three hours, that's 12,300 an hour, or 24 trains per hour.

Current rush-hour service on the B is 9 trains per hour. This is nearly three times that number, and represents over half the available capacity of the Central Subway. The rest of the B would presumably be bussed, leaving 12-minute maximum headways on the other 3 lines.

At a 60-minute round trip from Packards to Park at rush, that means that a minimum of 24 three-car sets - representing over one-third of the entire current Green Line fleet - would be necessary just to maintain a series of packed cars operating nonstop to Park Street (where the transferring passengers would overwhelm the transfer capacity, incidentally).

The T currently runs a very small number of three-car sets, limited mostly by power draw rather than car availability. 24tph with three-car sets would require quadrupling the existing rush hour power draw, which requires substantial power upgrades for a one-time event.

Absolutely none of the transportation numbers add up. It's time to call Boston 2024 what it is: bullshit.

(Edit: I used 205 as the current Green Line fleet size for that assumption above. That is incorrect; there are currently 160 operable cars, with a few more to be added as Type 7 rebuilds return.)

 

[Equilibria]

The timing of Olympic events is often dictated by television. A big point supposedly in Boston's favor (compared to SFO and LAX) is its time zone proximity to Europe. Almost certainly soccer will be televised at a time when it can get a large viewing audience in Europe, which is not a game starting at midnight or 1 AM European time.
_________
The Boston Olympic Committee has the Green Line accommodating three hour peak capacity at Agganis of 36,570, and Beacon Yard, commuter rail, accommodating 37,650 three hour peak capacity. That's just for BU / Agganis venues.

I understand neither their assumptions, nor their results.

Now that I've decided not to be totally ignorant, and I have the table in question in front of me:

The quoted numbers are "capacities," not demands. That's what they think the system can accommodate. The 17,000 in Foxborough, for instance, reflects the capacity of the train system by their estimation. In that case, it also represents a demand, because they literally subtracted the number from the stadium seating capacity and assigned the difference to shuttle buses. I have no idea where that 17,000 number comes from, but its equivalent to a special event train leaving every 20 minutes for 3 hours.

For the urban venues, these numbers are effectively meaningless. Note that the Red Line "capacity" count is the same 193,680 for both Beacon Park and Midtown, meaning Harvard and South Station. Harvard actually saw 23,199 entries on a typical weekday in 2013. The entire Red Line saw 217,329, and that's over the whole day. (source: 2014 Blue Book). Using the rule found here (http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/centercity/Appendix.pdf) that 15% of daily trips occur in any peak hour, that gives us a three-hour total of 86,850 on the ENTIRE RED LINE right now. They're estimating twice that as their "capacity." I have no idea why.

The real capacity, of course, is governed by frequency and capacity of trains. Each train has 6 cars and holds about 1,500 people if they're packed in. If they actually wanted to achieve their stated capacity, that's a headway of approximately 1.5 minutes for 3 hours. That's not doable.

Sum total: There's something wrong with these numbers. Also, if they represent anything these data are capacities, not forecasted demands. Boston 2024 is not anticipating 268,000 people to be riding the train to and from Beacon Park over any 3-hour period.

 

[The EGE]

An 8-car multilevel set (the maximum run with current T equipment) can carry 8x180 = 1440 passengers. So that means running fully loaded sets every 7 minutes, for three hours. Each set can only make one trip per hour (15 minute run time each way, ten minutes at each terminal to turn, and five minutes dwell time at Back Bay for the large crowds), so that's 7 sets at minimum needed for the service.

There's no talk of power upgrades, or enhanced signalling systems, or of practical things like the need to raise the Worcester Line platform at Back Bay. They're still talking about a dinky that will never work, and pretending that shiny things will make the rusty things work better. Operating an Olympics requires a dense, high-frequency net of transit in good repair. Boston does not have that, it will not have it by 2024, and Boston 2024 has been incredibly silent about how they intend it to work.