Crazy Transit Pitches

[omaja]

We totally agree that rail through Newton to Needham is a good idea. My argument is simply that demand does not justify the costs to neighborhood aesthetics and cohesion that a surface HRT line would require. This is important, IMO, because the idea of Green Line to Needham isn't as much of a Crazy Transit Pitch as one might think - it's been proposed seriously in both towns and might well happen when Needham St. is developed (will happen soon) and when the T can gets its financial house in order (probably never). My guess is that the CR line will be truncated to Needham Junction at this point, which will provide faster Downtown access to those in Needham who want it, without any need for an Orange Line conversion.

Aren't neighborhood aesthetics and cohesion sacrificed already? The major differences between heavy and light rail would be station presence and trainsets, not too noticeable considering the area is already bisected by a rail right of way.

By the way, the Riverbank Subway is a great idea, and I hope it happens someday. It should be extended under one of the streetcar reservations, though. Those branches have the proper density all the way to termini at the historic limits of Boston's inner transit network.

The B and C may traverse denser corridors, but the B would be incredibly expensive to bury or elevate considering the hills along Comm Ave, and the C is just too short for heavy rail to really make much of a difference. Not to mention, the D is already the second-busiest branch of the Green Line. Like I said, a ~3.5 mile extension to Needham won't be the dealbreaker for whether or not the D is converted to heavy rail. That will be determined by the current D mainline route to Riverside. Riverside, Woodland, Newton Center and Newton Highlands already see decent traffic numbers that would only increase with a reduced trip time into the city.

I suppose, like Riverside suggested, Needham-Newton Highlands could always exist as a shuttle light rail route.

The platform is long enough (they unload deuces back-to-back sometimes), but people would have to get off at the tips of the station behind the faregates and by the inspector's booth. On the rear inbound side there's open access behind the stairs to the abandoned tunnel as an emergency exit. In a blind spot for any station staff, so that's almost daring people to go exploring.

The solution...security cam the place end-to-end...put an alarmed emergency exit door on the behind-stairs passageway. Not hard. If quads are under serious consideration that's probably exactly what they'll do. You wouldn't be talking more than 5-10 grand in cost.


Technically they could even make the outbound side (not sure about inbound) ADA-accessible by sticking an elevator behind the stairs, relocating that electrical box, and fencing off the walkway behind the faregates from the tracks. But...you know...effort.

Would 4-car trains be necessary if they converted the B and D to all 3-car operations and did rush hour 3-car train support on the E to Brigham? I guess logically the B and D may need some 4-car trains as rush hour/special event support.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Would 4-car trains be necessary if they converted the B and D to all 3-car operations and did rush hour 3-car train support on the E to Brigham? I guess logically the B and D may need some 4-car trains as rush hour/special event support.

They pretty much already are at crush loads. Easiest thing for them to do in the future is 4's on the D/GLX, 3's on the B and C, 2's on the E, 3's backing up the E to Brigham. Space out the headways just a smidge, and let the per-train capacity increase de-clog the dwell times at platforms and eliminate the excess bunching (that means open all the @#$% doors!!!).

Boylston is no constraint in the security cam era. And if any D platforms are too short it's the non-ADA ones they need to stop slacking off on and upgrade already.

 

[omaja]

Three-car trains still seem pretty rare - last I saw was they were up to 32 trips per day, but that was awhile ago so things may have changed.

 

[Equilibria]

Aren't neighborhood aesthetics and cohesion sacrificed already? The major differences between heavy and light rail would be station presence and trainsets, not too noticeable considering the area is already bisected by a rail right of way.

There's a massive difference. LRT at 20-30MPH does not, I believe, have to be completely fenced, and can certainly be crossed at grade as current tracks are. Even without a third rail, the conversion for 55MPH service absolutely would require total exclusion of the route (even with your viaducts, that still 5 or 6 intersections that would have to be grade separated). That means that, rather than backing up to a multi-use trail with a single track Light Rail service, new developments on Needham Street would back up to this:

http://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/images/Skokie/ROW@SearlePkwy-cta3449.jpg

Instead of this:

http://www.onlineweb.com/rail/photos/usa/norfolk_light_rail_2010/corporate04.jpg

As for the rest of the line, again, where is your proof that there is or ever can be the demand in NEWTON for Heavy Rail's supply? We've established that the need exists in Boston, and I can believe it exists in Brookline, but both of those areas can be served by a tunnel that better serves more important areas of Brookline (of the 3 GL branches, I'd say the D sees the least central stations, even if Brookline Village is technically the center). It doesn't matter how long or difficult it is to build, since these pitches are supposed to be crazy, but crazy shouldn't mean running subway stock wherever it seems easy to put it.

I'd actually be interested to see statistics that I know the T doesn't release: of the people riding the "3rd busiest line", how far are they going? Like the B through BU, the D serves high schools in Newton and Brookline and carries a fair amount of student traffic, particularly in the latter. This is important because the demand for seats can be at GLR levels between any 2 station pairs on a long line even if demand as a whole is comparatively high.

 

[omaja]

I guess we're assuming two completely different things for that corridor: I was thinking that since the D Line is already fully grade-separated and fenced, a branch to Needham would be given the same treatment - regardless of whether it is light or heavy rail. I don't see the fencing and grade separation as a major issue along the current Riverside-Fenway overground route. Like the current D, the right of way through Needham is already woven into the fabric of development in the area. That's why I don't think comparing what the corridor would look like to Chicago's Yellow Line is fair. The Yellow Line is flanked by massive power lines running along its length that require a significantly larger right of way and absolutely must be surrounded by large fences.

As for demand, there's certainly a lot of intrasuburban traffic handled by the D's outlying stations, but anecdotally, the trains always carried healthy loads traveling out past Reservoir/Chestnut Hill when I lived over in that area. If we consider that a typical Green Line 2-car train has a capacity in the neighborhood of ~500-600 people (with twice the operational overhead with the second car operator), and a Blue Line 6-car train might handle ~1,200 people, it isn't much of a stretch to think that the D, which already sees jam-packed 3-car trains as well, will need to expand further. You don't need a jam-packed train all the way to Needham to make it work; I'm sure the D isn't packed all the way to Riverside, but the demand obviously exists otherwise they'd figure out a way to short turn trains at Reservoir instead of wasting the trip time with every train.

It seems like the only thing really needed to upgrade the current D to heavy rail is redoing the stations and perhaps power substations. F-Line, maybe you have some insight? Not entirely sure what the difference in operational needs would be between, say, running 3-car light rail trains versus all Blue Line rolling stock.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I guess we're assuming two completely different things for that corridor: I was thinking that since the D Line is already fully grade-separated and fenced, a branch to Needham would be given the same treatment - regardless of whether it is light or heavy rail. I don't see the fencing and grade separation as a major issue along the current Riverside-Fenway overground route. Like the current D, the right of way through Needham is already woven into the fabric of development in the area. That's why I don't think comparing what the corridor would look like to Chicago's Yellow Line is fair. The Yellow Line is flanked by massive power lines running along its length that require a significantly larger right of way and absolutely must be surrounded by large fences.

As for demand, there's certainly a lot of intrasuburban traffic handled by the D's outlying stations, but anecdotally, the trains always carried healthy loads traveling out past Reservoir/Chestnut Hill when I lived over in that area. If we consider that a typical Green Line 2-car train has a capacity in the neighborhood of ~500-600 people (with twice the operational overhead with the second car operator), and a Blue Line 6-car train might handle ~1,200 people, it isn't much of a stretch to think that the D, which already sees jam-packed 3-car trains as well, will need to expand further. You don't need a jam-packed train all the way to Needham to make it work; I'm sure the D isn't packed all the way to Riverside, but the demand obviously exists otherwise they'd figure out a way to short turn trains at Reservoir instead of wasting the trip time with every train.

It seems like the only thing really needed to upgrade the current D to heavy rail is redoing the stations and perhaps power substations. F-Line, maybe you have some insight? Not entirely sure what the difference in operational needs would be between, say, running 3-car light rail trains versus all Blue Line rolling stock.

Blue and Green use the exact same overhead, so it's more a power load thing. And the spot where the roof dips low in the C/D portal tunnel, but that's not a hard one to fix.

The D is not fenced in. There are a couple ped grade crossings out in Newton by the golf course. And every single platform has grade crossings to the opposite platform, which means all 12 intermediate stations have to get total rebuilds with cross-platform overpasses, elevators, etc. With some sort of mitigation for Longwood being used as a major ped crossing in/out of the Emerald Necklace. Nothing bloats a project like station costs. Even if the T could learn to stop gorging itself on station overbuilds it's still not cheap to totally remake platform infrastructure with grade separation. So it's missing a lot of the point to say, "Well, the train can physically run on the track so we're good right?"


And it wouldn't be safe to relax the rules about grade crossings. Heavy rail cars aren't designed to be nimble around pedestrians. The electrical guts are underneath and exposed. They're high off the track and don't have the "cow catcher" effect of a trolley bumper to deflect a Darwin Award contender away...it plows them under the vehicle. And they don't have the stopping distance of a trolley. That's why from Day 1 every heavy rail line in Boston has had auto-stop enforcement (mechanical trip arms or electromagnetic ATO) instead of line-of-sight like the Green Line.

 

[czsz]

Interesting debate I touched off re: Needham. As a former resident, I have to say I'm surprised what hasn't been considered:

- Converting commuter rail to OL will mean extra stops for Needhamites past Forest Hills. Commuters won't want to stop at Roxbury Crossing, etc. OL trains will also be less comfortable. I'm not sure ridership would warrant the service, and there's about 0 potential for densification in Needham itself, so the extra capacity and frequency won't matter much. Looks like a good idea on paper, but doesn't make sense.

- I'm more and more sold on the GL extension from Newton, but many Needhamites will not want to lose the one-seat CR ride from Needham Heights or Center downtown and either have to transfer from a two-stop GL ride or else ride the GL all the way downown. So there's a huge question about what to do with the corridor between Needham Heights and Needham Junction - I'm not sure you could accommodate both GL and commuter trains.

Here's a potentially reasonable transit pitch: branch the Needham CR line to Dover and Medfield. Would there be any ridership to justify?

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Interesting debate I touched off re: Needham. As a former resident, I have to say I'm surprised what hasn't been considered:

- Converting commuter rail to OL will mean extra stops for Needhamites past Forest Hills. Commuters won't want to stop at Roxbury Crossing, etc. OL trains will also be less comfortable. I'm not sure ridership would warrant the service, and there's about 0 potential for densification in Needham itself, so the extra capacity and frequency won't matter much. Looks like a good idea on paper, but doesn't make sense.

- I'm more and more sold on the GL extension from Newton, but many Needhamites will not want to lose the one-seat CR ride from Needham Heights or Center downtown and either have to transfer from a two-stop GL ride or else ride the GL all the way downown. So there's a huge question about what to do with the corridor between Needham Heights and Needham Junction - I'm not sure you could accommodate both GL and commuter trains.

Here's a potentially reasonable transit pitch: branch the Needham CR line to Dover and Medfield. Would there be any ridership to justify?

No-go. The T just signed the death warrant for that line 4 weeks ago when it granted its $1/99-year trail lease. Commuter rail to Millis with stops at Dover and Medfield projected out to +4000 riders per day on commuter rail and +2700 new transit riders not taking any mode. And many considered that lowballed by a lot because it assumed it would be stealing, not adding ridership to the existing stops. But Dover NIMBY's are something else. They were trying with vigor to kill off the commuter rail through their town while commuter rail was still running through their town 45 years ago. They're practically dancing in the streets that nothing will ever run through their town again.

And, really, that option was the only compelling argument against not extending the Orange Line because in addition to Millis it would've opened up an alternate route to Framingham via Medfield. Now that that's off the table there is no potential for anything commuter rail beyond the current weird 'tweener of a line that clogs up the NEC and can never get meaningful headways as long as it's clogging the NEC. "Fairmounting" it is not an option because of that, sooo...

Git 'r dun.

 

[Riverside]

Interesting debate I touched off re: Needham. As a former resident, I have to say I'm surprised what hasn't been considered:

- Converting commuter rail to OL will mean extra stops for Needhamites past Forest Hills. Commuters won't want to stop at Roxbury Crossing, etc. OL trains will also be less comfortable. I'm not sure ridership would warrant the service, and there's about 0 potential for densification in Needham itself, so the extra capacity and frequency won't matter much. Looks like a good idea on paper, but doesn't make sense.

I agree. It might have made more sense 30 or 40 years ago, when development patterns were different, but Orange Line to Needham now doesn't make sense, from a transit perspective nor from a political perspective.

- I'm more and more sold on the GL extension from Newton, but many Needhamites will not want to lose the one-seat CR ride from Needham Heights or Center downtown and either have to transfer from a two-stop GL ride or else ride the GL all the way downown. So there's a huge question about what to do with the corridor between Needham Heights and Needham Junction - I'm not sure you could accommodate both GL and commuter trains.

For what it's worth, in my plan, even if we get one-seat Green Line Needham-Downtown service, I would still try to keep Commuter Rail service to Needham Junction, if only to hold service in place for an eventual extension to Dover/Medfield/Millis. (Though this could get hard if/when the Orange Line is extended to West Roxbury.) On the other hand, of course...

Here's a potentially reasonable transit pitch: branch the Needham CR line to Dover and Medfield. Would there be any ridership to justify?

My impression of this project was that, no, there would not be the needed ridership. The 2004 PMT, on the other hand, disagrees with me, saying,

It would be one of the more successful commuter rail expansion projects in attracting riders, but capital costs would be at the upper end of the mid-range among extensions examined. Therefore it would have a medium rating in terms of capital and operating costs per new transit rider. Some of the new ridership would be attracted by increased frequency and faster travel times at existing Needham Line stations, and the same improvements could be made with- out a Millis extension. Emissions of CO, CO2, and VOC would be reduced, but those of NOx would increase. The overall impact on air quality would be medium. This project would not serve any envi- ronmental justice target communities.

It says there the "Daily Ridership Increase on Mode [Commuter Rail]" would be 4000, while the "Net Increase in Daily Transit Ridership" would be 2700.

To compare, they give figures of 3400 and 500 respectively for GL to Needham, 3100 and 2200 for CR to Nashua, and 1500 and 900 for CR to TF Green.

EDIT: Ach and F-Line beat me to the punch. Though, F-Line, to be fair, this is the Crazy Transit Pitches thread, so I'd say that political challenges such as those you named could be occasionally disregarded.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

EDIT: Ach and F-Line beat me to the punch. Though, F-Line, to be fair, this is the Crazy Transit Pitches thread, so I'd say that political challenges such as those you named could be occasionally disregarded.

With fire.

"It's not in your backyard if you have no backyard, Doverites! [*evil genius laugh*]"

 

[Riverside]

Lol. Well-played sir, well-played.

 

[czsz]

Speaking of commuter rail between Framingham and Medfield, anyone know the status of this?

http://www.wickedlocal.com/medfield...ter-rail-for-Medfield-metrowest#axzz23m5ps1rr

 

[Equilibria]

Speaking of commuter rail between Framingham and Medfield, anyone know the status of this?

http://www.wickedlocal.com/medfield...ter-rail-for-Medfield-metrowest#axzz23m5ps1rr

Well, the Foxborough Casino (at least the Kraft one) is dead. That probably takes that off the table unless the whole thing can be justified by Patriot Place and the stadium alone...

Re Needham: I guess it would be up to the folks there to decide which transit priority matters more to them. If people in Needham Highlands value a 1-seat ride to Downtown more highly than a Highland Ave. transit corridor and trolley rides to Needham Center and the High School, then I guess you don't truncate the CR at all and end the GL extension at Needham Highlands. If not, extend the Light Rail farther.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Speaking of commuter rail between Framingham and Medfield, anyone know the status of this?

http://www.wickedlocal.com/medfield...ter-rail-for-Medfield-metrowest#axzz23m5ps1rr

It's not an official T or MPO study, and is bankrolled mainly by private interests...so I wouldn't put much stock in it. Worcester-Foxboro? Yes, that's an en fuego commuter market right there.

As for Boston-Foxboro commuter rail, I wouldn't write that one off just because the casino plan is dead. The studies all pre-date the casino law, and Foxboro is pushing it hard. Even proposing couple times daily trial service on minimally-upgraded 40 MPH unsignaled track as a short-term foot in the door. As an IOU from the CSX sale the state is obligated (but not on any set deadline) to upgrade the route from Framingham to the South Coast/Cape freight interchange to handle 286,000 lb. rail cars. Which means the Framingham Secondary will get spiffed up (as it should...it's used several times a day and bumps up a notch in importance with CSX pulling out west). It makes a lot of sense to bootstrap passenger considerations onto that if the track is getting replaced and the bridges upgraded. Not only for Foxboro ridership, but doubling-up the Franklin headways would really uncap demand in Norwood and Dedham Corporate Ctr. where service levels are currently inadequate to make those key stops. And it would supply a number of extra Fairmount schedule slots with the thru-routing.

The demand is definitely there...Norwood Central has the 2nd highest boardings of any non-NEC southside stop after Kingston, and swings it on a pretty anemic schedule. Upping the service levels on that line otherwise would be an expensive proposition because Franklin layover is tiny and the only other available space is in Bellingham almost 2 miles past Forge Park (which means...you pretty much have to do the Milford extension to run more trains at all to the existing stops). Foxboro flushes the inner half full, at cheaper and higher ridership than a Bellingham stop. Plus the freight considerations. Plus a key safety valve for NEC service disruptions with the ability to thru-route to Boston from Mansfield and Walpole and tow Amtrak with a borrowed T diesel from Providence layover.

$63M for the minimum build. $84M for the maximum build with layover yard and full-supporting schedule. Foxboro already has a full ADA mini-high (no full highs...it's a freight clearance route), with public-private partnership potential out the wazoo with Bob Kraft TOD and (if he's feeling generous) some station amenities. Only 1 grade crossing between Walpole and Foxboro; only 1 Franklin Line grade crossing between Boston and Walpole. 60 MPH track proposed from Walpole-east...40 MPH from Mansfield-west where the only passenger user would be the Providence-Foxboro game trains and NEC emergencies. I think other than Lowell-Nashua this is the only unfunded CR extension that ought to go full-speed ahead even with the T in budget hell. State's got to act sometime before decade's out on the freight IOU's, and it would pay back the $84M capital cost easily with the ridership explosion at Dedham Corporate, Norwood Central, and Walpole.


As for Framingham Secondary between Walpole and Framingham...not a lot of obvious potential for the next 20 years. It'll get 40 MPH track with the freight IOU, remain unsignaled unlike the lower half, probably be a useful equipment shuttle if the Worcester Line gets some robust Framingham short-turn reinforcements, host more freight if Southie port starts kicking in substantial freight traffic, and will be a nice future consideration to brainstorm on. CSX is definitely looking for a sell-high opportunity to dish what's left of its east-of-Worcester track off to the state, so I'm sure the T is going to be owning the thing within 3-5 years. The system interconnections make it one of the highest-upside acquisition targets they don't currently own.

 

[underground]

I've taken the Pat's Train down to Foxboro for games a couple of times. It's a LONG ride (and the cops take your booze!!!). They dump you out in the woods behind one of the parking lots which is kinda funny. Post game it's 1000x quicker than driving though.

I don't know about Framingham to Walpole though. It's a quick drive from Sherborn to Natick and Medfield to Walpole. Although, maybe residents decide they should at least get some personal use out of the line since they're already dealing with the freight coming though.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

$63M for the minimum build. $84M for the maximum build with layover yard and full-supporting schedule. Foxboro already has a full ADA mini-high (no full highs...it's a freight clearance route), with public-private partnership potential out the wazoo with Bob Kraft TOD and (if he's feeling generous) some station amenities.

How much more to drop in a freight track and full-high those platforms anyway? If it's only going to be another $8~$15M, it's probably worth doing.

 

[Riverside]

I mean, I'm not sure how great an idea it is, but my personal rule is that, if it expands our rail/transit infrastructure in a permanent way, without "closing doors" later on (ie. Silver Line Phase III or even GLX the way it is now), I can get on board. Since this project would upgrade existing freight infrastructure into passenger-capable infrastructure, it counts.

That said, I don't think the state (or any state agency, or agency contracted by a state agency) should be primarily responsible for this. As F-Line pointed out, this study is done by private interests, and as such, were it to happen, I think it should be paid for by private interests. (*cough* Kraft *cough*)

And I agree that Worcester (and points west)-Foxboro is not an insanely active commuter rail market. On the other hand, there is real potential for a park and ride at Patriot Place. Worcester could go for this to attract commuters to their city, maybe envisioning it as the beginnings of another commuter rail network centered on their city, especially once PVD-WOR rail gets going.

Tangentially related, it's sorta crazy to realize that 5 major malls in the Greater Providence area can be connected almost entirely by existing ROWs:
-Start at Foxboro station (Patriot Place). Go north on the Framingham Secondary.
-You'll intersect the North Attleborough Branch of the NY&NHRR near Industrial Road and Production Road. (Coordinates: 42.122546, -71.263768) Plop some new turn tracks here. This is the only non-historical track additions you would have to make. All other tracks on this route existed at some point in history.
-Go south on the NA Branch. If you're following along on Google Earth, the ROW can be a bit hard to see sometimes, but if you look closely, it's there, and not extremely encroached upon.
-Just after the NA Branch crosses 495, you go right alongside the Wrentham Outlets.
-Keep going south, through Plainville and North Attleborough. North Attleborough actually has a bit of a functioning downtown (more to shop there than in Attleboro, imho), so you could arguably plop a stop down at Richards Avenue and call it a commercial destination. But I digress.
-The ROW is most severely encroached upon in NA, just south of Roosevelt Avenue. A housing development has gone in there. On the other hand, the houses aren't on the actual ROW, only the driveway. So you could finesse it, given enough money and political will.
-Keep going south through NA. Unfortunately, this ROW misses the Emerald Square Mall. You could plop a station down at the 295 intersection, and run a shuttle circuit down to the mall and Target, Wal-Mart, etc, but it's not as elegant.
-Meet up the P&W in Valley Falls, and then the NEC in Pawtucket. Follow the NEC down through Providence (including the stop right next to Providence Place). Heck, you could even throw a stop in at the Providence Plaza Shopping Center at Charles Street, there are some big stores there.
-After PVD, you can two things:
-You can tear up the Washington Secondary bike path, and run the trains down that to a new station serving the Warwick Mall, the Rhode Island Mall and 295. Unfortunately, because of the river there, I'd assume you couldn't really build another lot for a Park-n-Ride. But you could try acquiring some of the malls' parking.
-Or, you can continue on the NEC until the Pontiac Branch splits off and take that down to the malls, approaching from the other side. I like this better, because you don't have to destroy the bike path.

And voilà. 5 (or 6) shopping centers with walkable would-be stations connected almost entirely by existing ROW. Plop down local stations in Wrentham, Plainville, North Attleborough, Valley Falls, Pawtucket, Providence, and Cranston, run trains every hour or two, and you might get people to take their cars less.

I'm not really proposing this seriously; soooooooo many hurdles to overcome, political, logistical, etc. And I'm certainly not proposing that RIDOT or MassDOT try to do this. But if a private concern (*cough* again, Kraft *cough*) thought that this would be worth their while, and was willing to spend the money needed to make it politically and logistically viable, I could think of worse ideas. And it is sorta cool to realize that all of those major shopping centers are connected.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

I mean, I'm not sure how great an idea it is, but my personal rule is that, if it expands our rail/transit infrastructure in a permanent way, without "closing doors" later on (ie. Silver Line Phase III or even GLX the way it is now), I can get on board. Since this project would upgrade existing freight infrastructure into passenger-capable infrastructure, it counts.

That said, I don't think the state (or any state agency, or agency contracted by a state agency) should be primarily responsible for this. As F-Line pointed out, this study is done by private interests, and as such, were it to happen, I think it should be paid for by private interests. (*cough* Kraft *cough*)

And I agree that Worcester (and points west)-Foxboro is not an insanely active commuter rail market. On the other hand, there is real potential for a park and ride at Patriot Place. Worcester could go for this to attract commuters to their city, maybe envisioning it as the beginnings of another commuter rail network centered on their city, especially once PVD-WOR rail gets going.

Worcester's not becoming the center of any kind of market, and they shouldn't be.

The 'New Commuter Rail Market' - such as there is one - should be centered around Springfield. SPG-WOR-BOS/PVD, SPG-HFD-NHV/NLC, SPG-ALB. Centering it around Worcester loses you Albany, Hartford, New Haven, New London, and picks you up... nothing in exchange.

 

[Riverside]

Worcester's not becoming the center of any kind of market, and they shouldn't be.

The 'New Commuter Rail Market' - such as there is one - should be centered around Springfield. SPG-WOR-BOS/PVD, SPG-HFD-NHV/NLC, SPG-ALB. Centering it around Worcester loses you Albany, Hartford, New Haven, New London, and picks you up... nothing in exchange.

The power of politicians to do remarkably stupid things never ceases to amaze me. I agree that a Worcester-centered CR network would not be a good idea (well, not until Springfield, Providence and NH all have one each, at least), but I wouldn't put it past some leaders from pushing it to gain votes and popularity.

But still, as I said, "Worcester (and points west)"; a refurbished Mansfield-Foxboro-Framingham-Worcester passenger line could be linked into a Springfield network without much problem. (Hell, you could even run it further out than Mansfield. But let's not go there...) Probably wouldn't be worth much for a while, but if Springfield became more easily accessible by commuter rail (particularly if the B&A became electrified and could run faster service), eventually people might start moving to communities where the train ran. Build it, they will come. (Hopefully.)

But the whole thing is certainly not a winning proposition for the foreseeable future.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

The power of politicians to do remarkably stupid things never ceases to amaze me. I agree that a Worcester-centered CR network would not be a good idea (well, not until Springfield, Providence and NH all have one each, at least), but I wouldn't put it past some leaders from pushing it to gain votes and popularity.

But still, as I said, "Worcester (and points west)"; a refurbished Mansfield-Foxboro-Framingham-Worcester passenger line could be linked into a Springfield network without much problem. (Hell, you could even run it further out than Mansfield. But let's not go there...) Probably wouldn't be worth much for a while, but if Springfield became more easily accessible by commuter rail (particularly if the B&A became electrified and could run faster service), eventually people might start moving to communities where the train ran. Build it, they will come. (Hopefully.)

But the whole thing is certainly not a winning proposition for the foreseeable future.

B&A is going electric eventually - it's a matter of when, not if. Far too important a corridor not to go electric. Double-tracks, at minimum, on the entire line again - probably triple-tracking anywhere we can get it if not full 4-tracks. Possibly something is going to be done about Palmer Junction as well, to eliminate the need to reverse direction on a trip Springfield - Amherst. That's less important, though.

I disagree with you on one point - while most of the 'Springfield Network' isn't yet a winning proposition (and maybe not for a while), NHV-HFD-SPG is clearly winning enough of a proposition for Amtrak to have a non-insignificant presence of service on that corridor. The MBTA could definitely move into that market and recoup the costs of doing so pretty easily, if only they had yards over there.