Commuter Rail to New Hampshire?

[GW2500]

F Line, I've enjoyed reading your posts. I now understand half of what your talking about. The stuff I do understand seems to be great ideas. You don't have to divulge information about yourself, but do you think the MBTA thinks similar to what your write on here?

 

[Equilibria]

In the meantime, I don't see why they don't shoot for a 3/4-mile, one-station infill to 128. TV Place has ample parking land they can expand for commuter space, it would take a load off Riverside parking with all the new development going on there, help the Highland Ave. situation and parking overfill at the other Needham stations, and fill in a 128 park-and-ride gap between Riverside and Dedham Corporate. What would that cost...$2M for track and grade crossing replacement, $6M for platform, $12M for parking lots? Just do it; that whole area's getting lots of redevelopment crying for a TOD angle. And that means if/when they ever want to Green Line it to Needham Jct. they don't have to build a single station.

I've been to a public meeting about this on the Newton side... I don't think many people oppose it on either side of the river. The TOD angle is actually an interesting one, since one neighbor complaint about the Riverside project is that the T requires a constant parking count before, during, and after construction, forcing the developer to increase the size of the project to compensate for the cost of the garage. Relocating some of that Park-and-Ride to Needham is a good idea.

The problem on the Newton side is that while Upper Falls would generally love service (Eliot is not particularly convenient for many folks down there), the only way to sell the extension on the city level has been access to highly-congested Needham Street, where the extension would make only 1 inconveniently located stop (which would not be a 1-seat ride from anywhere further out than Newton Highlands). To really serve that purpose, there really should be 2 infill stations, 1 close to Winchester Rd/Center St and Avalon Bay, the other in Upper Falls.

The T has buried the project as "low priority" on every system plan I've seen, though, so there's no indication they're interested in actually pursuing the project.

 

[MonopolyBag]

Haha, kinda gone way off topic. But all interesting.

The problem with Plaistow (aside from money) was that the town wanted the layover station on the boarder near Atkinson, yet Atkinson didn't "want it in their back yard." They were worried of too much pollution.

I am surprised that the station will only be going to Plaistow.

The track is already there. It runs by the Newton Junction, East Kingston, and then up into Exeter. Wouldn't these want to be goals for getting stops at? Exeter is very populated and makes sense. Between there and Plaistow it isn't too populated, but I do not know the cost of a stop and if it is going through, is it worth making a stop?

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Haha, kinda gone way off topic. But all interesting.

The problem with Plaistow (aside from money) was that the town wanted the layover station on the boarder near Atkinson, yet Atkinson didn't "want it in their back yard." They were worried of too much pollution.

I am surprised that the station will only be going to Plaistow.

The track is already there. It runs by the Newton Junction, East Kingston, and then up into Exeter. Wouldn't these want to be goals for getting stops at? Exeter is very populated and makes sense. Between there and Plaistow it isn't too populated, but I do not know the cost of a stop and if it is going through, is it worth making a stop?

B&M used to run the Haverhill Line all the way to Dover, locals short-turning at Haverhill and expresses running to Dover. Back when the Haverhill Line was permanently assigned to the Wildcat Branch via Wilmington and didn't make any of the Reading Line stops. That service lasted until 1965, into the MBTA commuter rail era. Old service was very similar in setup to how the revived Concord commuter rail would run. Lowell Line locals would make all current stops + new ones at North Chelmsford and South Nashua 3/4-mile past the border, ending there with a new T layover yard built just south of Exit 2 on Route 3. And thru service to Concord would make all the NH local stops while expressing through MA with stops only at Lowell and Anderson/Woburn. That's why the T can pursue the extension to the border without having to join hands with the NH legislative clown show. North of border they'd only be on the hook paying for a carbon copy of Plaistow, cheap enough that the anti-rail jihadists in the legislature won't oppose.

If NH actually got moving on Concord sometime in our lifetimes and kicked in its subsidy for all trainsets and staff operating in its borders a la RIDOT for Wickford Jct. service, then Dover makes some nice low-hanging fruit for the next service they can initiate. Zero track improvements required, most of the stations pre-existing for the Downeaster, maybe 1 or 2 infill stops needed at most which they could build after service initiates. Much lower-density corridor than the Lowell-Nashua-Manchester-Concord metropolis, but fact that the cost for Dover startup would be something is 90% operating + equipment / < 10% capital investment makes it very good ROI for the ridership. I think it's an inevitable encore to Concord IF (big if) the state can get past its political cripple fight on Capitol Corridor service in our lifetimes. For scale-up purposes on the operating side Dover is kind of the intermediate step that would allow them to then add the necessary (and ultimately higher-priority) restored CR service to Portsmouth via Newburyport...the other B&M northside interstate commuter rail line that lasted into the MBTA era.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

That's interesting to read there is pressure from folks in Needham for a GL branch. I was under the impression that Needham opposition was the only reason it hadn't already been done. Didn't they push for commuter rail, thereby killing both the GL branch and the OL extension? If they are indeed interested in light rail, what happens to the rest of the ROW? That would then have to become an Orange Line extension as far as West Roxbury, wouldn't it?

I think this would result in better transit for Needham, West Roxbury, and especially Roslindale. It would also free up some capacity at South Station. It would be a huge win in so many ways to make the conversion, but I suspect it will be a few decades at least, given the way things work around here.

It was another one like Lynn, Braintree, and Medford Hillside that was proposed way back in 1945. The only time it got serious traction was when the Southwest Corridor reconstruction for I-695 was planned with the Orange Line being relocated along the highway. Since that would've shifted the NEC north of Readville to the Fairmount Line with the tracks through Forest Hills ripped out, the Needham Line would've been orphaned unless replaced by rapid transit. They were going to--right until it was cut from final design in the 80's--flip Rozzie, Bellevue, Highland, and West Rox to the OL with a new final stop terminating at either 128/Needham or Dedham Center. And then Needham Jct. and points north would've become a Green Line branch.

Needham has never stopped wanting that badly. Newton had been blah to the idea of an Upper Falls stop for years, a little because of NIMBY'ism but mostly from lack of motivation with the D line not being too far away and being perfectly content to be isolated from Needham. But the traffic in Upper Falls sucks too these days, they have to deal with the same terrible Highland Ave./Needham St. bus line Needham does, and they've gotten hip to TOD (as evidenced by Riverside). It's gotten recent revival at the community level in Needham in part because Newton has gone supportive. Mayor Setti Warren's been a big advocate for it, and stated as goal forming a working group with Needham on the issue.

2004 study prepared for City of Newton: http://www.ci.newton.ma.us/Election/NewtonHighlands/cpacrail122004.pdf. Scope of that study was Newton-centric and only called for extending as far as Needham Heights and a commuter rail transfer. It's generally assumed that if this goes on the books it's going to replace CR. It would be pointless not to, because rapid-transit headways from Needham Jct. is the whole congestion mitigation motivation for doing it. Study on just the Newton-centric half-build projected pretty robust ridership: 3400 boardings per day, 500+ all-new transit riders. And only $60M to build, which is less than the Fairmount Line improvements. Study also goes into detail on the TOD potential on the Newton side.

Needham had its own study commissioned on the full build to Needham Jct. Extra running distance replacing commuter rail only added $40M to the project cost over the shorter Needham Heights/CR transfer option Newton studied. ~$100M for the full build, savings on the existing CR portion due to lots of reusable passenger-spec rail infrastructure and Needham Heights and Needham Center being able to have their existing platforms repurposed in almost as-is condition (low-height ADA platform is height as light rail) with just need for a second track platform. Needham Jct. would then get its CR platform moved a few feet down onto the wye with a GL transfer platform on the other side and a small GL layover yard on the wye. It's assumed that commuter rail between Forest Hills and Needham Jct. would keep running either on a short Fairmount-like shuttle or be extended out to Millis by this point. Existing RR rails can be re-profiled with a rail grinder for use with light rail without needing replacement so they'd only need to add the 2nd track, overhead wire, unplugging the commuter rail signal system and swapping with light rail signals, and doing faster grade crossing protection (traffic lights or mini-gates) than regular RR gates to support the 5-10 minute headways.


The only capacity constraint that would have to be addressed on the Green Line to support an added branch is the ancient signal system. Because it's manual-block, 100% human-controlled the signal blocks are really short, slow, and stop-and-go. Replaced with a more modern Positive Train Control system (there's an initial study being funded to model how that would work) the Central Subway could have longer moving signal blocks controlled by computer and much more throughput via Kenmore. That'll be a lifesaver for the whole GL. Extra branch off the D can also be divvied up at rush hour with surface connecting tracks between Brookline Village and Huntington Ave., which is a medium-priority project simply for non-revenue moves between Riverside and lines like the E that are going to be run out of the new Innerbelt maintenance facility. That'll likely happen someday when they've got the flex time to lay down 2 blocks of track; they won't have any need for it until well after GLX and Innerbelt yard are well-established. Would permit additional service patterns on the E to up its capacity, which in combo with the new signal system would load-balance the routes quite well enough at rush hour to manage a Needham Branch on full schedule.


Again, the T is the blocker here. Their interest couldn't be any lower, despite this being cheaper and easier than ANY rapid-transit extension, all commuter rail extensions except the dinkiest ones like Foxboro, and even some bus route improvements. To be fair, the current GLX, Red-Blue, and Blue-Lynn are MUCH higher-priority and they should not be considering any more until they can find a way to get done the ones they made legally binding commitments to do.

But if the environment changes, the agency gets its finances sustainably revamped at the legislative level, and it can check off the Transit Commitments...hey, this is the lowest-hanging fruit. With much higher ROI than 8 out the top 10 commuter rail extensions. That next-gen signal system will happen. After that fatal D line accident and the non-fatal Gov't Ctr. accident the NTSB recommended they expedite the study of Positive Transit Control as a safety measure. It's not mandatory, but they've snapped to attention trying to figure out how to do it because one more bad wreck in subway signal territory (i.e. non-B/C/E) and they may get a mandate. Plus the legal liability may make that upgrade the path of least resistance on its merits.

A lot can change with a leadership change and shift in priorities. We know that's not going to happen this decade, but status quo can't be a forever situation before public frustration (like with every other broken gov't function) boils over. With that in mind, it is very smart policy by Needham and Newton to get their advocacy and studies lined up, template the Somerville GLX STEP group's organization and push for MBTA transparency, and message that "Hey guys! It's cheap and high-return!" angle on a slow-burn level. It's a multi-decade effort, but pressure and time push the most immovable boulders around. This might be a pretty interesting community effort to low-level monitor and see how the gears are turning, what best-practices they've adopted, what their angle is to try to improve on what Lynn has not been able to reel in, and how resilient they're willing to be knowing that the T is just going to shit on them for this with a withering "inevitability of hopelessness" meme. It's an effort that can pay them dividends on other smart development initiatives that have nothing to do with transit; it's worth trying on slim-to-nonexistent odds because of that ability to template the effort onto other things. I think that's why pols like Setti Warren trying to score their way up the career ladder are backing it. Easy thing to pivot off of if the community gets itself in the right planning and advocacy mindset.

 

[belmont square]

The report linked to above doesn't have any indication it was ever adopted or endorsed by the City of Newton. I guess I'm not convinced there's a huge groundswell for this in Needham either. A Green Line extension would result in the same travel time to Copley and Downtown as commuter rail currently provides. Although dense for an auto-dependent suburb, Needham's residential areas consist almost entirely of single family homes with moderately sized yards--not what you typically associate with 8 minute peak headways. Do we really need to extend rapid transit levels of service beyond the pre-auto era development frontier when there's already a 30-35 minute rail connection into the CBD?

Maybe if there are enough burrito eaters in Needham and this extension was interlined with the GLX extension to Medford that Boloco by Tufts would have stayed in business...

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

The report linked to above doesn't have any indication it was ever adopted or endorsed by the City of Newton. I guess I'm not convinced there's a huge groundswell for this in Needham either. A Green Line extension would result in the same travel time to Copley and Downtown as commuter rail currently provides. Although dense for an auto-dependent suburb, Needham's residential areas consist almost entirely of single family homes with moderately sized yards--not what you typically associate with 8 minute peak headways. Do we really need to extend rapid transit levels of service beyond the pre-auto era development frontier when there's already a 30-35 minute rail connection into the CBD?

Maybe if there are enough burrito eaters in Needham and this extension was interlined with the GLX extension to Medford that Boloco by Tufts would have stayed in business...

Was adopted by the Newton Planning Board this summer off recommendation from the Transportation Subcommittee: http://www.ci.newton.ma.us/Planning/TAC/docs/2011/4-27-11-transit-pres.pdf. Needham's Board of Selectmen endorsed it and had it adopted in the town Master Plan.


It's not travel time to Boston, it's frequency. The Needham Line is capped at how many trains they can run per day by NEC congestion out to Forest Hills. Double-tracking provides some benefits on the line itself between station stops by eliminating train meets, but they're unable to more than temporarily increase the schedules because of the projected traffic growth on Amtrak, the Providence Line, and all the shared track with Stoughton (possible Fall River/New Bedford Line) and Franklin/Foxboro. Those Needham stops want frequency, not speed.

The 3-track portion running through the SW Corridor tunnel can't be expanded. They can (quite cheaply) re-lay the empty 4th track from FH to Readville to grade-separate Franklin trains, and the third track from Readville to Canton for Stoughton trains. That's all in Amtrak's cap improvements plan for this decade. But a study a few years ago on what it would take to quad to Forest Hills had a prelim cost of something like $400M+ with severe surface disruption to SW Corridor Park during construction. Total nonstarter because of the construction scars, and it would cost more than whacking the Needham Line entirely and making it an all-Green and Orange Line joint from either end. They can't put forth a plan to up Needham frequencies on the existing line to Fairmount-level headways because in 20 years those expanded schedules would have to be rolled back. Needham is going to lose the schedule competition every time to the other NEC-running trains.

The max headway it's going to support on long-term traffic loads is something similar to the Franklin Line, which is more than fine if they reinstate service to Millis. It leaves Rozzie and West Rox in a lurch, but there aren't easy answers for those stops. Needham, being the low-hanging fruit with a Green Line spur, is a much easier answer that would do a whole lot to free up help for those inner stops. Figure if the Orange Line is a much bigger and dicier dilemma much further down the road they would be able, if they jettisoned north of Needham Jct., to run an ultra-short turn CR train to boost the in-city stop frequencies that maneuvers more nimbly inside of tight schedule slots than going out to Needham with all the grade crossings. And Millis is a whole other set of net-positive considerations because it crosses the north-south Framingham Secondary in Medfield at the halfway point between the Worcester and Franklin Lines and offers up a whole slew of possible alt-routing configurations that can load-balance the other lines.

Given that Green Line headways are pretty much win-win for City of Needham, I would want to hedge on whatever solution is going to allow more immediate help for the outer Boston neighborhoods than the constrained service growth the current line offers. If that means Green Needham, rapid short-turn CR from Forest Hills nearer-term, Orange Line much much later...great. If that means Green Needham, short-turn nearer-term, Millis and all that choose-your-adventure traffic management at Medfield longer-term...also great. But $100M to relieve the outer half of the line is a pretty small 2025-30 range investment to open space for those options.

Let's not forget, the studies also spec a 2-3 stop Route 128 or Needham Heights stub as an initial $60M build that doesn't force a decision on the commuter rail stops and serves up something a little more immediately fundable. I'm almost certain, though, that Needham would happily trade in Needham Heights and Center to get 10 minute headways and be able to hold a mock funeral for the awful Highland Ave. bus. They still get the South Station option if they take the trolley to Needham Jct. where commuter rail would short-turn. Not options really get precluded here.



Again, funding's all speculative and the T doesn't want to do anything ever. It's a non-issue for rest of this decade until push comes to shove on the agency's entire structure. Still means it's smart planning for these two towns to get themselves some full-immersion smart growth mojo in the near-term. All that property redevelopment they can accomplish in the near-term adopting this mindset is going to make those areas much more liveable and workable over the next 2 decades, enrich their tax base, and lead transit improvements by the nose a bit more to serve the redevelopment. Nothing wrong with sticking a transit rallying point in the town plans to get ball rolling on other nearer-term stuff. There's more aggregate benefit to be had from smart land use than a single transit line, so the planning mindset's got bigger coattails than whatever odds they'll ever get the Green Line. That's out of their control. What they do with the Highland Ave. corridor is in their control. If keeping the transit planning on a constant slow burn gets them moving on other smart corridor development, they already won without the T's help.

 

[Shepard]

Are you suggesting that transit be improved to Needham (and Millis) at the expense of abandoning everything from Rozzie to West Rox until an Orange Line extension occurs somewhere down the road?

I think the only logical order of things would be to:
1) Plan the OL extension to terminate at West Roxbury - unless they can somehow revive an abandoned and encroached ROW that works its way from West Rox through the Dedham mall and into Dedham Center, probably impossible. Also, I am assuming that bringing the OLX out to a Park-and-Ride by I-95 around the preservation land at Cutler Park is a non-starter too. So, in summary, OLX to West Roxbury station.

2) If indeed the GLX to Needham Junction is such low hanging fruit then plan this simultaneously to maintain - and improve- service to Needham Junction via Highland Ave and a Park and Ride at I-95/Exit 19. So, in summary, GLX to Needham Junction.

3) Abandon stuck-in-the-middle Hersey station - I'd need to look at the ridership numbers but I doubt this would be a big issue. Also abandon hopes for a CRX to Dover and Millis and beyond - I don't think these exurbanites should take any precedence over improved transit within 128 (while I acknowledge that Needham as well as West Rox and even Rozzie are relatively suburban, they are still relatively dense and walkable, especially compared with typical American suburbs or Boston's 495 exurbs.)

 

[HenryAlan]

The idea of sacrificing urban rail in order to make suburban project feasible should be a non-starter. It doesn't matter if it's low hanging fruit. How do we justify GLX to Needham when we won't even fix the debacle of Washington street El. replacement service?

 

[belmont square]

It's not travel time to Boston, it's frequency. ... Those Needham stops want frequency, not speed.

What is this statement based on? Other than the fact that every transit rider would prefer more frequency, I'm not sure Needham is a good example of a place that's suffering from lack of frequency. The only rapid transit stations with lower population density than Needham--Waban, Eliot, and Chestnut Hill--would never merit extensions by themselves if they weren't on the way to big park and ride facilities. Even stations like Oak Grove, Wollaston, Suffolk Downs have much more population within walking distance than any Needham station would. If Needham were the type of place that would be likely to develop high rise apartments along the Highland Ave/Chestnut Street corridor then maybe there'd be an argument. But even someone with only a passing familiarity with the town has to know that's not happening.

Bottom line--Needham is an affluent town where virtually everyone has access to a car. They will use transit if it is cheaper or easier than auto-travel. During peak commuting hours a $5 35-minute transit trip to downtown Boston meets this standard. For any other trip or time, it does not. While a few extra trips during rush hour via CR might be justifiable, all-day rapid transit headways on a light rail line traversing Newton and Brookline is not something Needham either needs or deserves.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Are you suggesting that transit be improved to Needham (and Millis) at the expense of abandoning everything from Rozzie to West Rox until an Orange Line extension occurs somewhere down the road?

I think the only logical order of things would be to:
1) Plan the OL extension to terminate at West Roxbury - unless they can somehow revive an abandoned and encroached ROW that works its way from West Rox through the Dedham mall and into Dedham Center, probably impossible. Also, I am assuming that bringing the OLX out to a Park-and-Ride by I-95 around the preservation land at Cutler Park is a non-starter too. So, in summary, OLX to West Roxbury station.

2) If indeed the GLX to Needham Junction is such low hanging fruit then plan this simultaneously to maintain - and improve- service to Needham Junction via Highland Ave and a Park and Ride at I-95/Exit 19. So, in summary, GLX to Needham Junction.

3) Abandon stuck-in-the-middle Hersey station - I'd need to look at the ridership numbers but I doubt this would be a big issue. Also abandon hopes for a CRX to Dover and Millis and beyond - I don't think these exurbanites should take any precedence over improved transit within 128 (while I acknowledge that Needham as well as West Rox and even Rozzie are relatively suburban, they are still relatively dense and walkable, especially compared with typical American suburbs or Boston's 495 exurbs.)

Dedham ROW is dead. The T allowed new houses to be built on top of it on Belle Ave. in the last 2 years. Why? Who knows...self-loathing? But absolutely no way to go from West Rox to Dedham Ctr. anymore. Still can from Readville, though, on the former Dedham Branch. Maybe a Fairmount branch in their future if Dedham got away from its walled enclave mentality and...like, actually joined the T bus district.

Also no way to do OL to Hyde Park and Westwood/128. Can't take any NEC tracks away; Amtrak has plans to get the 4th track south of Forest Hills relaid in 10 years to get Franklin and Stoughton trains out of their way.

West Rox or 128 from Forest Hills was projected in in the 2003 PMT was around at $320M. I'm real dubious about it being that cheap because the T never builds non-downtown stations that aren't huge on parking. But to do it at all also requires doing Green-Needham simultaneously to avoid transit loss. The T shut down the Needham Line for almost 9 years in the 70's and 80's when it was doing the SW Corridor makeover, and then to rebuild the Needham Line. They took such sweet time doing it that everyone assumed Needham was getting Arborway'd out of existence. The town got real pissy about that and threatened to sue. If they get blocked again, they will sue. So the only way to do Orange is to get Green-Needham done simultaneously, which then costs a half-billion. That's the end of that dream.

They'll have to think of this in stages. You can build from Forest Hills to Rozzie Square without impacting commuter rail because the ROW is former 3-track there to a historical freight yard that was in Rozzie. Google Maps still shows a very wide property line here on non-Satellite view next to the Arboretum. Trade the second commuter rail track in that area for double-tracking further out, then lengthen the Orange Line storage track as trade for what'll be lost continuing 2 of the tail tracks as mainline tracks. That won't cost more than $100M for track and 1 station because they wouldn't have to buy new cars or do much upgrade to the power draw to make it happen.

This then moves the bus terminal to Rozzie Square where it should be. There are 9 bus routes that duplicate the distance down Washington from FH to Rozzie, plus 2 more from other directions that terminate in Rozzie. It's almost as many routes as Dudley Sq. If there was any stop that is screaming at the top of its lungs for rapid transit, Roslindale Square is it. Think how much faster the buses to West Roxbury would be if Rozzie was the terminal. Makes it so much easier to break this extension into stages with lion's share of the ridership getting out of the way here. I wish we had a mayor who gave a shit about his constituents or transit enough to see the need for advocacy of a very achievable solution like this.

Build that. THEN do Green-Needham for another $100M to get the outer half of the line taken care of and protected from blockage. THEN tackle Orange to West Roxbury where it's a more manageable 3 miles vs. 7 mile build and < $300M.

I'm not sure Orange-128 is a great idea because there's no exit ramp here and creating a new one would isolate the stop from any city streets or bus routes. That's why Hersey's in kind of a crappy place; it's on Great Plain Ave. where there's an exit and sorta direct access from VFW Parkway. I don't think that problem is fixable. There's no precedent on the system for a transit stop totally landlocked onto an interstate with no street access, and I think the off-peak ridership would be pretty awful for the extra 2-1/2 miles of construction required. With no added benefit to hitting Hersey or Needham Jct. because the Green Line would serve those. The new Highland Ave. Green stop at 128 would suck up the lion's share of the highway ridership while serving dense residential, and Dedham Corporate Ctr. is 3 exits south for park-and-ride wasteland. There's pretty damn good coverage on that 128 quadrant if Needham gets its stop.


Manageable bites. They never do manageable bites, as evidenced by South Coast FAIL. Only untenable monoliths. This isn't so scary with 2 stages at reasonable money, then a trailing stage to finish the job. And it cleans up the decision-making enough that they with Rozzie-West Rox being the final piece they can make a straight up/down decision on what to do about potentially losing the commuter rail without letting that and every other consideration freeze them in the headlights before even considering stages 1 or 2.

One such complicating factor being that the Millis extension is HUGE ridership (4000 riders + almost 3000 all-new transit riders)...bigger than South Coast FAIL, and comparable to both Green-Needham and the smaller past-Rozzie ridership to Highland, Bellevue, and West Rox. Plus the load-balancing options at Medfield Jct. with north-south access to every southside line. I think urban transit should trump suburban every time, and if it were a clean up/down decision probably would. But they won't do anything if whither commuter rail is swirling in the whole jumbled mix about how to solve Rozzie buses, keep Needham from getting blocked, whether to stop at 128 or West Rox, etc., etc. Simplify and settle that other noise so they can make a clean call on this mode issue.

There's also the matter of what can potentially be done that might accommodate BOTH local Orange Line and suburban commuter rail. The ROW property lines are wide enough for 3-track, but the embankment grading eats up a bit of that. Much like the Lowell Line with GLX quite a bit of retaining wall work and track-shifting are needed to fit the rapid-transit tracks on the historically wider ROW. Could absolutely do it here...OL local stops only at Highland and Bellevue with single-track CR expressing through, then West Rox OL terminal and CR transfer platform where there's more historical freight yard space. Then 2-track CR out to the 'burbs and the Medfield bypass for Franklin/Foxboro, Worcester, wherever supplemental service. This used to be the Franklin mainline to CT before the Readville-Islington leg was built, also the mainline to Woonsocket, and also a line feeding loop service South Station-Needham, and back to South Station over the pre-Green Line Riverside branch. It can do it all if they regraded that more modern embankment fill into a higher-capacity cut fitting 3 tracks. But those retaining walls are so daunting to consider on a monolithic build that it would never enter the conversation. Smaller 2-1/2 mile later phase tack-on from Rozzie to W. Rox, though...yeah, they'll at least study it hard to see if the expense is worth keeping both modes. It probably won't be worth it, but they'll do due diligence in a bite-size scenario where they wouldn't on a one-shot build with already scary price tag.


This monolithic build mentality is also why we don't have DMU's running inside 128 to build ridership and get these rapid transit follow-ups moving. Fear that people might actually like it?

 

[Mayor Menino's Crohn's]

Haha, kinda gone way off topic. But all interesting.

The problem with Plaistow (aside from money) was that the town wanted the layover station on the boarder near Atkinson, yet Atkinson didn't "want it in their back yard." They were worried of too much pollution.

I am surprised that the station will only be going to Plaistow.

The track is already there. It runs by the Newton Junction, East Kingston, and then up into Exeter. Wouldn't these want to be goals for getting stops at? Exeter is very populated and makes sense. Between there and Plaistow it isn't too populated, but I do not know the cost of a stop and if it is going through, is it worth making a stop?

Any extension into NH (no matter how short) is an improvement

Exeter would make since since it's so close to UNH-Durham and would be a no brainer for the seacoast. Part of the reason that this is not a main priority for NHDOT is mainly due to the fact that (and I'm sure that someone has mentioned this) is the I-93 widening project. Someone mentioned this on the other thread, and I heard it somewhere else, but the project is running short of federal funding. So, NHDOT (and the already cash-strapped MBTA) aren't going to take any risks for the next ten years

 

[whighlander]

The idea of sacrificing urban rail in order to make suburban project feasible should be a non-starter. It doesn't matter if it's low hanging fruit. How do we justify GLX to Needham when we won't even fix the debacle of Washington street El. replacement service?

Henry, F-Line and the rest on this thread -- Guys you've got to retune -- you are still living in a dream

1) There will be less if not 0 Federal Money for the forseable future -- something about 15T$ in debt = 100% GDP

2) Contrary to the sentiments on this forum -- the innermost Hub needs to keep the outmost Hub ( i.e. the Suburbanites on / ouside RT-1280 happy -- as the Suburbabites within i-495 :

a) Control the Legilature
b) Pay most of the taxes
c) consttute most of the Hub's workforce and populace
d) constitute the majority of the land available for development
e) typically moved out of the city to escape the dependance on public transit

Thus commuter rail takes precedence over thing such as a trolley on Washington St.

3) Take advantage of joint projects with NH, RI, CT, even NY whenever possible to spread the cost and the risk of CR and intercity rail --- as NH in particular is growing much faster than MA

 

[Shepard]

Westie - I don't disagree that Commuter Rail has a very important place in the regional transit infrastructure and very important for the city's economy too. However,

commuter rail takes precedence over thing such as a trolley on Washington St.

is dead wrong. Especially with South Station expansion, and probably with North Station expansion as well, there will be a lot more capacity on CR lines. I think that rather than resurrect new ROWs that could be used for urban transit within the city, it would be far more effective to increase parking at existing stations thereby increasing the catchment area for ridership. I'm in strong favor of urban ROWs like Grand Central and Fairmount line being converted to rapid transit rather than be retained for CR.

 

[whighlander]

Westie - I don't disagree that Commuter Rail has a very important place in the regional transit infrastructure and very important for the city's economy too. However,


is dead wrong. Especially with South Station expansion, and probably with North Station expansion as well, there will be a lot more capacity on CR lines. I think that rather than resurrect new ROWs that could be used for urban transit within the city, it would be far more effective to increase parking at existing stations thereby increasing the catchment area for ridership. I'm in strong favor of urban ROWs like Grand Central and Fairmount line being converted to rapid transit rather than be retained for CR.

Shep

I don't disgree with that

My ideal scenario is;

Heavy Rapid Transit (HRT) e.g. (Red, Orange, Blue) -- all extend to RT-128;
where an Alewife-scale or perhaps Assembly Sq.-like integrated complex is located of:
Parking,
Bikes,
"Kiss & Ride" ,
Buses including special purpose shuttles to major employer centers along RT-128
Commuter Rail,
intercity rail
Zip-car -like automated rental of electric cars

Also the center of moderate height / density Transit Oriened Development (special zoning -- similar to 40B):
Residential,
Hotel,
Office,
Commercial
R&D & light Industry

Outside Rt-128 electrified commuter / intercity rail

Existing CR inside of RT-128 operated as single units off-peak to insure high frequency

Green Line -- operated as mix of 2/3 car trains on protected / grade seppareated ROW (e.g. Riverside & Medford extension) and single units on Street services subject to cross traffic 9e.g. BC, Beacon St. and Huntington past NEU)

But that would take a long-term committment of some additonal revenue in addition to fares for capital for expansion and major maintenance

 

[Shepard]

Sorry Westie, I'm going to continue to disagree. I think the expanded hub-and-spoke you're advocating is becoming increasingly obsolete. Connectivity is the key now for quality of life, business, and innovation ecosystems. If on public transportation it takes equally as long to get from the SPID to the Back Bay or Kendall to Coolidge Corner as it does from Framingham to South Station then it means that something is seriously out of whack.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=4025

I lay it out here, but if you want to see a purely urban investment that's going to cascade out on every mode right to the furthest-flung CR line, CBTC signaling on the existing (no extension) subway is the biggest single payoff the state can make. At less cost than South Coast FAIL.

That is the kind of thing that changes momentum bigtime in support of other system expansion by flushing tens of thousands of new riders onto the current lines. Right now we're in a state of big inertia, and it's chicken-or-egg on expansion to gain riders vs. gain riders to support expansion. With both kinda sorta happening but the state being woefully indecisive and making poor choices. So much of what the system can handle is dependent on signaling and dispatching (see Worcester as a current example of actual vs. potential capacity on existing track with something no-cost like wresting dispatching from CSX). Biggest bang for buck they can get is increasing throughput so the in-district ridership at the existing stops gets uncapped and those folks can actually move around downtown on the existing lines.

Problem is stuff like CBTC is invisible and "unsexy". Nobody wants to do it if there's no photo op or overbuilt glass edifice to gawk at. And Joe voter has little concept of what it does until it's actually paid for, running, and their commute is a lot better...unless somebody can articulate that as a "sexy" thing. But what would you rather get for a bil...30,000 new daily subway riders who can actually get to their destinations ontime, or 400 people boarding at a Whale's Tooth station with a waiting room the size of North Station? I know what everyone boarding at Fitchburg, Newburyport, Providence, Plaistow, Lowell, Littleton, Hingham, and Andover are gonna prefer. The easier they can get around downtown, the more they're going to pack the CR trains and thus the more CR trains they'll be getting out to the burbs. And likewise the more folks in North Chelmsford, Bourne, Milford, Fall River, Millis, and Methuen are going to crave a trip to downtown and quit playing NIMBY or gimme games.

Alas...the "unsexy".

 

[whighlander]

Sorry Westie, I'm going to continue to disagree. I think the expanded hub-and-spoke you're advocating is becoming increasingly obsolete. Connectivity is the key now for quality of life, business, and innovation ecosystems. If on public transportation it takes equally as long to get from the SPID to the Back Bay or Kendall to Coolidge Corner as it does from Framingham to South Station then it means that something is seriously out of whack.

Shep -- I'm a big beliver in connectivity

The keys are you must maximize the existing investments before you can generate support / motivation for expansion or even infills (e.g. Assembly Sq.)

Thus I agree on the prirority with F-Line and others who are advocating up-dated State of the Art RF-based technologis for location / control of the existing transit: Heavy Rail (Red, Ornge, Blue and Commuter Rail) Medium (Green Line on protected ROW / gade seperated); and Light rail / Trolleys, as well as the Bus Rapid Transit (Silver Line) and even buses in urban high density / high frequeny routes

After all of that is done and required headways are reduced allowing for increased frequency as well as credible information for the passengers + (Assembly Sq & Green Line to Medford) -- then we would begin next pahse of visible construction:

1) improve the passenger interconnectivity and experience for the Hub -- the core of the downtown Color Lines -- most importantly is Red-Blue -- one should be able to arrive on any incoming spoke and transfer to another in one step with pleasant passenger tunnels with amenities and where appropriate moving walkways, up-to-date real-time destination / time signage and mobile device aps

2) improve service to SPID and BCEC in particular -- this will depend on the relocation of the USPS functions

3) Improve / enhance capacity and accessibility (gneric not ADL) of the existing CR

4) extend CR into Intercity rail (e.g. Nashua, Manchester, etc.) as the cost per mile and even cost per rider-mile is lower and you can get some sharing with NH and RI

5) Only after all the above is completed should there be any consideration of further track expansion -- that expansion should be Blue Line to Lynn / Salem & rt-128 peabody?-- this would be the first of my '"Smart Sectors at the end of the extended Spokes" -- wih the added benefit of enhancing connctivity to two viable cores (Lynn and Salem)

6) Next would be enhanced connectivity to Worcester / Framingham -- all elecric and Silver Line type frequency

7) more spoke extensions to Rt-128 with Smart Sectors at the end of the spokes

7) only then the south Coast if still viable

 

[whighlander]

existing[/U] (no extension) subway is the biggest single payoff the state can make. At less cost than South Coast FAIL....

That is the kind of thing that changes momentum bigtime in support of other system expansion by flushing tens of thousands of new riders onto the current lines. .... Biggest bang for buck they can get is increasing throughput so the in-district ridership at the existing stops gets uncapped and those folks can actually move around downtown on the existing lines.

Problem is stuff like CBTC is invisible and "unsexy".

Alas...the "unsexy".

F-Line -- ah but there is a way to make it sexy -- if the opening of the new HUB with its bright, clean, pedestrian firendly interconnects with state of the art signage, mobile aps and vendors at the core is couple in the investment wih the improved control / location making the HUB possible

The cuttung of the ribbon for the HUB at DTX (after the Filens's Hole is filled) would be the ideal political cornerstone for a new goverrnor and mayor -- abiout 10 years from now

 

[found5dollar]

http://www.eagletribune.com/newhampshire/x907916224/Plaistow-Tempers-flare-at-commuter-rail-meeting

December 20, 2011
Plaistow: Tempers flare at commuter rail meeting

By Cara Hogan chogan@eagletribune.com

PLAISTOW — The Plaistow Area Transit Advisory Committee met for the first time in more than 10 years last night, and discussions turned into shouting matches.

Committee member Tim Moore said he wanted to answer residents' questions about the proposed Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority plan to bring a commuter rail station to Plaistow, with a layover facility on the Atkinson town line.

"I've been active in trying to get the commuter rail for Plaistow since the 1990's," he said. "(The town) had a public information session a year ago and not much has occurred since then. But next year there will be quite a lot of activity. This is the first of many meetings."

PATAC is an all-volunteer group formed in the early 1990's looking at transportation improvement projects in Atkinson, Kingston, Plaistow, Danville and Hampstead. Moore said of the original 35-plus members, there are only about four left now.

So Moore wasn't quite expecting more than 40 people to show up at the Atkinson Community Center meeting last night and ran out of handouts explaining the town's step-by-step plan to bring the commuter rail to town. But before he got into the plan, residents started to ask questions about the noise, fumes and other problems associated with the layover station.

State Rep. Jim Garrity, R-Atkinson, asked if the MBTA was looking at any other sites for the layover facility than the planned site in Atkinson near the Bryant Woods neighborhood. Moore explained there were other options, all of which would be an improvement over the current layover station in Bradford, Mass.

"If you go to the Bradford site, you couldn't have chosen a worse site for a layover station," Moore said.

"Yes you could," someone yelled from the audience. "Here." Another person yelled, "We don't want Massachusett's trash."

The meeting got out of hand a number of times, with people shouting and interrupting one another to get in a point.

Residents applauded Dave Harrigan of Atkinson, when he stood up and said he doesn't believe the residents of Bryant Woods should have to deal with the layover station from another town's commuter rail.

"If Plaistow was willing to absorb the downside — the layover station — I'd say good luck," he said. "But it's your baby and we get all the diapers. It's not right."

Many people questioned Moore's belief that the train would be an economic boon to the area, including Todd Barbera of Atkinson.

"Is the growth in housing development or economic development?" he asked. "I can't see people coming to Plaistow, walking to Walmart, buying a flatscreen and then walking back carrying it. There's no secondary bus transportation."

But Moore said train stations like the commuter rail have been proven over and over to bring growth to an area.

"In Saco, Maine, the Downeaster has led to multi-million dollar investments," he said. "The state of Maine has generated $7 billion from the train."

Pat Gaudion of Haverhill was one of the few people in the audience that supported the plan for a new station.

"We live right on the border," she said. "Have you seen the traffic all the way up Hilldale (Avenue) and onto (Route) 125? Talk about fumes. If you want progress, people are moving up here and they want to get into Boston. They'll take the train and it will cut down on traffic."

Moore said he hopes the meeting helped inform residents about the facts, so that they wouldn't feel anything had been going on in secret or without their input.

"We'll try to have monthly meetings," he said.

Moore said the next meeting of the PATAC will be on Feb. 9.

• • •

Join the discussion. To comment on stories and see what others are saying, log on to eagletribune.com.