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

[whittle]

Re: Congestion tolling

(If this person could be traveling in a Tesla Model 3 instead of taking a diesel powered commuter train, I wouldn't even be terribly unhappy about the single occupancy vehicle use.)

Why? Any type of train will still be an order of magnitude more energy efficient than a single occupancy vehicle.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

If the electric car is charged from solar panels, it will be zero emissions, which a diesel train won't be.

(Of course, if we're discussing filling a seat on a reverse peak commuter train which would otherwise go empty, the incremental fuel used by having a person filling a seat is tiny.)

 

[FK4]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

There may be cases where helping the most economically disadvantaged populations may be a bigger priority than maximizing ridership.

Yes, helping the most economically disadvantaged is a worthy goal. Show me a study that actually shows that this is the best way to spend money, vs other expenditures that actually benefit either this geographical population or an equivalent number of disadvantaged people in the state, and I'll agree that this is a worthy project. Simply crying out that SE MA has a lot of poor and unemployed people, AND has no mass transit, does not mean that building mass transit to SE MA is the way to help that region best.

Again I think you're missing the point. I already said I wouldn't spend billions on this project (the Stoughton line). How the fuk hard is it to run a train down an existing in use track? Build bare bones stations and let the ridership grow from there.

Actually, as someone else already stated, that's where the biggest expense comes in. So no, that in of itself adds nothing to the argument to build this thing.

I'd also say your first paragraph smacks of elitism. Boston has available jobs be it in biotech, finance, medical, academia, hospitality/tourism even (no, not just desk clerks and room cleaners) that may not be 6 figure incomes, but offer far more opportunity than what SE Mass has currently.

Actually, no, you're wrong: you are the one who is talking about the region being economically disadvantaged, and Boston having a shortage of workers, and I responded by referring to frequent recent news articles that the biggest unfilled positions in the Boston area are in food services, which don't pay particularly well. Please be careful about levying accusations simply because someone disagrees with your standpoint.

You have maybe half a million people in that area (Taunton-FR-NB and neighboring communities) with zero mass transit.

I knew several people who commuted from Taunton to downtown to work at my former employer (a finance co) for example. It benefits the city if those jobs can be filled by people who can live off of the salary they provide. That is accomplished with a transit connection. Obviously its up to the denizens of this area to utilize this new connection. No argument there. But if you can make that happen at a fraction of the cost of the ridiculous swamp crossing option, why wouldn't you?

It's a tiresome argument that the mere presence of a population base and a nearby city is sufficient to make a massive transit project worthwhile; this is exactly how wasteful projects get justified and built. First, "bare bones" is not a great option because if you're going to get people to ride the train, you've gotta run it on a decent schedule. It also has to affordable enough to make people feel it's worth it. AND, this trip is not gonna be all that quick. That's a big problem... You can talk about your population base all you want, but the population is spread out all over and you're gonna need to have people drive to the train station (that's time, and parking $), then sit on the train (time and $), and then you hope that the job is near SS or else there's gonna be even more commuting and more $. So for many people, you're looking at a very long commute and expense that they might not think is worthwhile.

Again, the numbers I have seen always show an egregiously high cost/new rider for any version of this project. Has that ever happened in this state before? Yes, but that's not a reason to argue to keep doing it. Show me that this is the best possible use of XX billions of dollars to help Southeastern Mass and I'll support it. But I seriously doubt it is, and either way, the real drivers of the project are the local pols and pork barrel, not true transit equity.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Given that Taunton politicians seem to have been the ones who were most displeased when it was first leaked that MassDOT wanted to study the option of going through Middleboro Junction instead of Easton, I suspect that part of the potential argument for this project may be getting Taunton residents to Boston, for which the length of the commute is not as unreasonable as Fall River / New Bedford.

 

[Arlington]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Let's say there are 500k people in the FRNB area. $2b rail line is $2k per person, and probably $6k per working person. Maybe 1 in 20 are ripe to work in the FiDi. Suddenly you are looking at $120k per working person...and are better off finding them and giving them a Tesla for 80k and asking them to autopilot their electric car for their commute than that we build a train for them.

Getting rail Mboro to Taunton, and getting it to run every 20 mins during rush hour to be met by HOV lanes & bus that fan out is probably a way better system.

In fact, we should probably be doing more to encourage the development of lab and production space in Greater Taunton --naturally-sprawly jobs critical to the metro area and also better suited to a greater % of the FRNB workforce.

The people who wanted downtown Boston jobs have already been forced to move inside 495. It isn't like there are a whole bunch of financial analysts sitting at home in NB whose careers have been cut off by traffic, is it?

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Isn't the base price of a Tesla Model 3 more like $35k? (Though this doesn't include the cost of solar panels or making sure we have adequate road capacity, and it remains to be seen whether the least expensive versions of the Model 3 will be available early on; I'd been assuming that they'd want to focus on the versions with more options early on to get a better margin, but Elon's tweets about all wheel drive not being available initially indicate that they're also focused on simplifying initial production by focusing on the less complicated versions of the car. And maybe we want the autopilot carpool scenario where four people share that $35k car and the solar panels it uses and the road space it takes up. If spreading that $35k out over 10 years and four people ends up being $1k/person/year, it ends up costing about what a LinkPass does.)

 

[FK4]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Taunton is closer and well within the Greater Boston range. Would make much more sense on paper to just extend a line there... not sure about how much it would cost, though.

 

[whittle]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

If the electric car is charged from solar panels, it will be zero emissions,

It would take away from energy that could be put back into the grid and thus result in an increase in carbon emissions relative to no car being plugged in.

 

[Rover]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Let's say there are 500k people in the FRNB area. $2b rail line is $2k per person, and probably $6k per working person. Maybe 1 in 20 are ripe to work in the FiDi. Suddenly you are looking at $120k per working person...and are better off finding them and giving them a Tesla for 80k and asking them to autopilot their electric car for their commute than that we build a train for them.

Getting rail Mboro to Taunton, and getting it to run every 20 mins during rush hour to be met by HOV lanes & bus that fan out is probably a way better system.

In fact, we should probably be doing more to encourage the development of lab and production space in Greater Taunton --naturally-sprawly jobs critical to the metro area and also better suited to a greater % of the FRNB workforce.

The people who wanted downtown Boston jobs have already been forced to move inside 495. It isn't like there are a whole bunch of financial analysts sitting at home in NB whose careers have been cut off by traffic, is it?

Your 2bn figure is a straw man argument. That's the old figure for the Stoughton option and too much money which I've already mentioned. However, lets run with your #'s. You're trying to say 2bn for 25,000 people having access to the Boston jobs market leads to 120K per job. Problem is you're equating a one time cost (extending the rail) with giving these people access to commuter rail for what - 10, 20 30 years or more? That cuts down the average start up cost per commuter quite a bit, no? Also, again while I'd like to see more detail I wouldn't support the project at a 2bn cost as that's absurd what the work that needs to be done. (btw1/20th of 500K is 25,000 -dividing that into 2bn leaves 80K, not 120K per job unless you skipped a step)

The second point that's odd is that everybody is going to work in finance downtown. Medical jobs, academia, research, you name it. Yes it'll be a long commute but for a good job opportunity people may choose to make it (I know I did). From downtown you can hop the Red line to Kendall, the Orange Line to Back Bay, you name it. It would be nice if businesses weren't all cramming into the core of the city and spreading out to places like Taunton, Lawrence, Pittsfield, and the like. They're not, which is a countrywide problem a bit outside of this discussion.

Finally, I can live with extending to Taunton and running busses if that gets this thing kicked off. The notion some people have of HOV lanes and all that makes me think they've never done that commute, as its a two lane highway. You can't block off one lane and cram everybody into the other one. However, a bus service with a transfer from each downtown, as in buying a commuter rail pass gets you on the bus as well, might be workable. For NB, its all 140 even missing 24 IIRC to get to Cotley Junction. Fall River's a little more difficult since they got rid of 79 along the waterfront but in the cases of both cities their north ends aren't that far away relatively speaking from the proposed Taunton station provided its near mall and 24/140 intersection.

 

[Rover]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

It's a tiresome argument that the mere presence of a population base and a nearby city is sufficient to make a massive transit project worthwhile; this is exactly how wasteful projects get justified and built. First, "bare bones" is not a great option because if you're going to get people to ride the train, you've gotta run it on a decent schedule. It also has to affordable enough to make people feel it's worth it. AND, this trip is not gonna be all that quick. That's a big problem... You can talk about your population base all you want, but the population is spread out all over and you're gonna need to have people drive to the train station (that's time, and parking $), then sit on the train (time and $), and then you hope that the job is near SS or else there's gonna be even more commuting and more $. So for many people, you're looking at a very long commute and expense that they might not think is worthwhile.

Again, the numbers I have seen always show an egregiously high cost/new rider for any version of this project. Has that ever happened in this state before? Yes, but that's not a reason to argue to keep doing it. Show me that this is the best possible use of XX billions of dollars to help Southeastern Mass and I'll support it. But I seriously doubt it is, and either way, the real drivers of the project are the local pols and pork barrel, not true transit equity.

I suspect you've never actually done that commute on a regular basis, but if you have please enlighten us. But you as well are using the same strawman argument. No reasonable person wants to spend 2bn dollars on this effort. I think that's stuck in people's mind as the initial cost of running the line through the swamp up to Stoughton. If I had a buck for every time someone's used that figure to justify not doing the Middleborough route I'd be about 100 short of financing the thing myself. The blah blah blah we're getting is that it'll cost a lot less to run this way than the old option. I personally would like to see the cost of 1) running to Taunton including Middleborough station relocation, then 2) cost of running to NB, and 3) cost of running to FR. In all cases exempting money that's already been spent.

Next, you aren't running the train down there just for the hell of it. Study after study is showing Boston is reaching full employment and needs to expand its pool of workers. You can do that with better transit options. If Boston was Detroit, or even Hartford where jobs are scarce then no you wouldn't spend money to get people to a place where they couldn't work. That's not Boston's reality and we need to stop thinking small. For the record if Southeast Mass did have a train connection and say Worcester didn't I'd be making the same argument.

 

[dwash59]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Isn't the base price of a Tesla Model 3 more like $35k?

Historically, Tesla has not met their announced price targets. The Model S came in $15,000 above the announced prices. And the price has gone up by $10,000 since then. So, the Model S is currently $25,000 above Tesla's originally announced price of "roughly half of $89,000".

No one should have faith in Tesla's claim of a $35,000 price until they are actually selling vehicles for that amount.

 

[FK4]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

^Whether I've done the commute or not alters nothing because that would be anecdotal evidence. I want to see data - show me a study that actually takes into account the commuting time and frequency of the projected finished product, and that shows that enough people will ride it to make it worthwhile, AND that it's money better spent than other projects: then, sure, I'm all for it. But that's not how we do things and politics trumps everything else. You say no reasonable person wants to spend 2 billion on this, but that's exactly what the local pols would do if they had their way.

 

[Rover]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

^Whether I've done the commute or not alters nothing because that would be anecdotal evidence. I want to see data - show me a study that actually takes into account the commuting time and frequency of the projected finished product, and that shows that enough people will ride it to make it worthwhile, AND that it's money better spent than other projects: then, sure, I'm all for it. But that's not how we do things and politics trumps everything else. You say no reasonable person wants to spend 2 billion on this, but that's exactly what the local pols would do if they had their way.

I think having some experience with the commute helps. However, as I said I too would like to see more study/details and to be clear I'm not in favor of building at all cost. But, I keep coming back to it from a layman's perspective and not a contractor or transportation junkie. How much can it actually cost to run the same train that stops in Middleborough now over to Taunton, including track improvements, a new station at cotley junction, and a new station up the tracks in Middleborough? If that cost is truly $2bn then okay, that's absurd. Then how much to each city from there? Again, if that's also $2bn it might be more prudent to just go to Taunton and call it a day. I'd have to dig it up but I heard talk of just the spur to NB costing less than 1bn. If they can bring it in for under that amount I think its worthwhile.

 

[Lrfox]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

^Whether I've done the commute or not alters nothing because that would be anecdotal evidence. I want to see data - show me a study that actually takes into account the commuting time and frequency of the projected finished product, and that shows that enough people will ride it to make it worthwhile, AND that it's money better spent than other projects: then, sure, I'm all for it. But that's not how we do things and politics trumps everything else. You say no reasonable person wants to spend 2 billion on this, but that's exactly what the local pols would do if they had their way.

Eh, I disagree. Yes, it's anecdotal evidence, but given the number of variables that go into this type of connection, data-driven estimates aren't particularly reliable either. There's a lot that's not accounted for and can't be accounted for with data. While data is important (and ultimately the most concrete piece of evidence for making a decision- even if it's imperfect), there are a lot of educated people in this region who currently don't seek out opportunities in Boston (or they do and they move closer) because of the commute. If there was a way to make it reasonable, they'd do it.

"Reasonable" is the operative word. And that's what I think my biggest takeaway is from the people who don't/haven't done the commute. For someone living in Boston, a 75 minute train ride is an absolute no-go. For someone in the Southeast where the commute is 90 minutes on a good day, the 75 minute commute is beyond reasonable (actually attractive). Having done it for three years, I view it through a different lens. I also feel pretty confident in saying that there's a big portion of the population down here that would go for it.

 

[FK4]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Eh, I disagree. Yes, it's anecdotal evidence, but given the number of variables that go into this type of connection, data-driven estimates aren't particularly reliable either. There's a lot that's not accounted for and can't be accounted for with data. While data is important (and ultimately the most concrete piece of evidence for making a decision- even if it's imperfect), there are a lot of educated people in this region who currently don't seek out opportunities in Boston (or they do and they move closer) because of the commute. If there was a way to make it reasonable, they'd do it.

"Reasonable" is the operative word. And that's what I think my biggest takeaway is from the people who don't/haven't done the commute. For someone living in Boston, a 75 minute train ride is an absolute no-go. For someone in the Southeast where the commute is 90 minutes on a good day, the 75 minute commute is beyond reasonable (actually attractive). Having done it for three years, I view it through a different lens. I also feel pretty confident in saying that there's a big portion of the population down here that would go for it.

Well, evidence may be imperfect but it's better than nothing, and definitely better than anecdotal, sorry. Moreover, it's not the train ride itself (and I recall seeing longer projections than 75 minutes, but let's call it that) - it's the time driving to the commuter rail station, parking, paying for parking, then getting from the terminus to work. For a helluva lot of people that will make it 90 minutes. Now, 75 minutes might be more relaxed, sitting on a train. But simply trumpeting the train time alone is not the trip time for the riders. That's something to factor in as well.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

[crawls out of sewer for one post]

Service levels:

• The M'boro Alternative is a best-case 95-100 min. trip. Emphasis: best-case, because last traffic modeling done of the M'boro Alternative was 15+ years ago and peak station dwells at the biggest ridership growers (Brockton, Bridgewater, etc.) aren't the same as before. Reduce projected ridership from the (already-reduced) FEIR projections accordingly for the +25 min. longer trip time.

• They haven't specified how many trains can run down each SCR branch on this routing. Was 10 round trips per branch via Stoughton, possibly less here (that they aren't saying one way or other: probably less). Prepare to reduce projected FEIR boardings further on all branch stops if the state un-buries the lede on achievable frequencies.

• Taunton Depot station has to relocate south of Cotley Jct. to a more remote site straddling the Berkley town line. The Mozzone Blvd. site was one of the only FEIR stops that achieved real 1:1 parking space utilization, due to ease of access to the 24/140 interchange. Far less available capacity, inferior road access at the new site; reduce ridership projections accordingly due to lesser P&R and GATRA bus patronage. New site has wetlands issues Mozzone doesn't, NIMBY issues with residential abutters on Berkley side of the town line. Significant possibility it can't be built at all. Sen. Pacheco of Taunton has already threatened to sue over the barely-there Taunton coverage.

• Middleboro Station, the #2 highest-ridership Old Colony station and 25th on the system, has to be abandoned at its current location. Task Force gave some blah blah about doing a reverse move there, but that adds 10+ more minutes to the schedule so forget it. State proposes relocated stop north of Pilgrim Jct., but hasn't contacted the town about where. All the lush TOD that's driven ridership increases at current stop gets isolated, and relocated stop would be much smaller w/ less P&R capacity from 495. Reduce M'boro Blue Book boardings anywhere from 50-100%.

• 5 branches now have to be fed off one Old Colony main. Even if double-tracked through Dorchester & Quincy, that's too many trains to run at peak without disruptions to existing frequencies. Speed limit's probably going to drop a lot inside-128 from higher-density signaling and need to thread the schedule needle around single-filing behind trains making JFK, Quincy, or Braintree stops. Prepare for repeat of Stoughton Alt. where intermediates get skipped at rush to make impossibly thin margins for train meets/overtakes (Quincy, Montello, Campello, etc.). Prepare for Greenbush & Plymouth to have schedules re-spaced with awkwardly long gaps and clumps in frequencies during peak-most rush (i.e. super-long gaps w/ sardine-packed trains, followed by super-short gaps with near-empty trains). Reduce Blue Book boardings across the entire South Shore from worsened variability of frequencies on whole branch schedules, or outright loss of frequencies at individual stops.

• Balance the ledger of ridership losses on existing South Shore service with gains from adjusted-down FEIR boardings on the South Coast stops, with loss of Middleboro Station and the +25 min. SCR travel times being the biggest buzzkills. Best-case ends up SCR gains cancel out South Shore losses. Worst-case if train frequencies get harmed is a net loss of ridership across the board because gains can't overpower losses. Ask yourself how we even got to a place where ^this^ is the value proposition the whole project hinges on.

• THEY...KNEW...THIS...COULD...HARM...RIDERSHIP...when the M'boro Alternative was first eliminated from consideration 15 years ago. There is no universe where transit loss to existing service areas are credible grounds for proceeding on expansion, no matter how much 'relatively' cheaper we're talking. South Shore pols >> South Coast in political heft, so zero-sum wagers of political capital are going to meet an ugly end in this matchup. South Coasters should ask their Legislature caucus if that's really the hill they want to die on.

Cost issues:

• $1.1B to double-track the Old Colony in Dorchester & Quincy, plus upgrade the Middleboro Secondary. On top of the base costs of building the branches. Still a $2B project.

• You may say..."Well, that's an improvement over $3B!" No, it's not. The $1B in difference is entirely tied up in the Army Corps' insistence that a single-track concrete trestle be built through the swamp in lieu of using the existing double-track embankment. And that said single-track must be done with wires, NOT for environmental reasons but because the single-track so destroys the schedule that papering over a 2 min. electric vs. diesel improvement from wires is the literal only way to make the necessary train meets on-paper.

• This is wholly fraudulent reasoning easily defeatable through a formal challenge, because the Corps allowed exactly this type of swamp embankment through vastly more sensitive Scituate swampland not 10 years ago when diesels to Greenbush were restored at their blessing. Where it was built at-cost and bloat-free (Greenbush's $$$ problems were all well north).

• The state's unwillingness to challenge leaves >$1B in purely naked bloat and brokenness saddling the Stoughton alignment. In the real world where GLX-level cost scrutiny is applied to all stakeholders, a legally beaten-back Stoughton Alt. shorn of the Corps' BS assumptions costs equal-or-less than M'boro.

• Equal-or-less cost before weighing the revenue case of what a not-broken Stoughton Alt. can aggregately deliver vs. an M'boro Alt. that slashes back ridership projections everywhere on the branches, lays waste to South Shore service levels, and nukes TOD/P&R Middleboro off the map. This is only empirically "cheaper" and anecdotally "better" in arbitrary funhouse-mirror bizzarro world where shitting all over South Shore voters is seen as 'good' use of political capital, and where the Army Corps is some sort of Vatican walled city whose conclusions have never ever been successfully challenged on any other project.

To the posters who keep making the same overly emotional arguments about this, and pitting Boston vs. Fall River & New Bedford into some sort of self-esteem contest. . .

• I'd ask why you haven't bothered to read any of the previous dozen pages in this 35-page thread detailing blow-by-blow everything that is factually broken about this project and the way it's being conducted.
• I'd ask why you haven't bothered to read any of the factual evidence on the previous pages of this thread that it WON'T deliver usable transit service or...by-proxy...usable access to employment.
• I'd ask why you haven't bothered to read any of the factual evidence on the previous pages of this thread that it may acutely HARM other commuters' existing transit service and acutely worsen the SE Expressway carpocalypse.
• I'd ask why some of the same posters are so wholly on-point about frequencies mattering the world when it's a different transit thread...but take such pains to repeat 'intangibles' anecdotes that don't have anything to do with service frequencies in this particular SCR thread.

I don't ask because I know the exact reason: tribalism FTW! And so every time the thread flips to a new page it's like the previous thirty-something pages fall into a memory hole and it's an all-clear vacuum to start arguing the same old talking points, push the same agendas, impose the same old rooting-for-laundry reframing of the project around who's city is more deserving than whom.

There's nothing more to say. Don't expect anyone to feel motivated to re-explain blow-by-blow for the 37th time why any and every permutation of this project and its political kabuki dance are defective-by-design. All that brutal info is there within 5 clicks' reach on this thread's history. And the folks most self-invested in re-arguing themselves blue each time there's a thread bump fully well know that.


[/back to blissful lurking sanity]

 

[Lrfox]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Well, evidence may be imperfect but it's better than nothing, and definitely better than anecdotal, sorry. Moreover, it's not the train ride itself (and I recall seeing longer projections than 75 minutes, but let's call it that) - it's the time driving to the commuter rail station, parking, paying for parking, then getting from the terminus to work. For a helluva lot of people that will make it 90 minutes. Now, 75 minutes might be more relaxed, sitting on a train. But simply trumpeting the train time alone is not the trip time for the riders. That's something to factor in as well.

95-100 minutes is still an improvement over the status quo. Dattco between Boston/New Bedford is more expensive than the train, and is scheduled for 100-110 minutes during rush hour trips (and ridership is still strong). That's allowing for "normal" conditions- many times it's much worse (I use Dattco about once a week, as well as Middleboro/Lakeville rail). MBTA CR for all of its flaws, is still more reliable, consistent and comfortable than commuter buses (inc. Dattco, Peter Pan to Fall River and Bloom to Taunton) which sometimes simply don't show up and don't announce that they're not showing up.

As far as the "it's not just the train ride itself" piece, how is that any different from the way it is now? I mean, the "paying for parking" bit is a bit ridiculous to include, no? You have a couple of payment options. 1) you can put cash in the box if you feel inclined (I doubt the new lots will even have this option), 2) you can pay from your phone while you're sitting on the train, or 3) you can live the life of luxury, do absolutely nothing at the station, and pay the $0.50 surcharge to have the bill delivered to your home on a monthly basis. None of those things are time consuming.

The bolded is nothing new. It's currently a factor because, no matter what, you're connecting at both ends. But with SCR- in addition to shaving some time off the trip- you no longer have to drive 30+ minutes to Middleborough/Lakeville, or stand outside in a park and ride and hope a bus shows up.

That's the only thing I'm going to debate in this thread. For all of the complaints about how awful the trip time is (and it really is- we should want/expect better), it's still a significant improvement over an existing "system" (Dattco/Peter Pan/Bloom) that has pretty good ridership already.

 

[Rover]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Has anybody ever been in a meeting with the guy who has good knowledge but he just goes on...and on....and on....and on...until by the time he makes a salient point everyone is the room has fallen asleep or is thinking about what to have for lunch?

F-Line, we all appreciate the technical knowledge, but have you ever heard the expression cut to the quick already?

But, for the sake of the audience, I'm going to try to pick out a few relevant things here...

1) Service levels. Certainly for the Taunton extension if the Middleborough train gets you to SS in a little under an hour, why would an extra 10 miles take and extra 42 minutes? Also in terms of frequencies and needing extra trains, aren't we merely running the train that stops in Middleborough one more stop further down the line?

Next, where does it say they're definitely relocating from Cotley Junction under this new plan to a remote spot on the Berkeley line? First I've heard of this and if true makes no sense, but again is that your speculation or part of an official plan somewhere?

Finally for this section, why in God's name would people stop using the Middleborough station, a 50% drop in your opinion, if it got moved up a quarter mile? That makes no sense, and again is this purely your speculation? Sure sounds like it. All of your fear mongering about lower ridership, which doesn't compute if we're running the same train that stops in Middleborough for one extra stop initially, doesn't seem to have any basis anywhere outside of your head although kudos for burying that fact in some flowery language.

Cost issues: Your plan to re-ignite the Stoughton alternative revolves around one critical component, which I'll call F-Line's Magic Wand. If you could wave that and get rid of local opposition, armed with environmental rulings in its pocket, to get rid of the mitigation through Bigfoot's home in the swamp and cut a billion dollars off the project, sign me up! But, one has to wonder why you haven't deployed your magical powers at an earlier date... In the meantime, lets deal with reality as we know it.

Once again, if you're running the same train that now stops in Middleborough another stop, why do we need to start double tracking the line? ITS THE SAME TRAIN. Does it currently levitate to get to South Station?

Previous 35 page bleatings being ignored: As we've already covered, some of you are really, really long winded and have a bias against the project that can't be overcome by any logic. Also, a lot of the previous whining was over the ridiculously expensive Stoughton alternative, and I'm not sure any of the advocates of the Middleborough alternative were in favor of that plan given the cost. Beyond that, the old plans poo-poohing Middleborough extension seemed in many ways to fit the behest of the Devalue Patrick administration, who although I'm a pretty liberal guy myself I would not trust any more than a vampire giving me a bj.

I'll conclude with this thought. Often times opponents would like to stereotype activists with a one size fits all label. Lets say tribalism exists. BUT, lets say there's a 3rd possibility to blow your mind. Maybe people are looking for a cost effective alternative that's a win-win for everyone. Underserved region gets access to better paying jobs so that they need not relocate closer to the city, AND Boston which is currently reaching peak employment gets a fresh influx of workers thereby mitigating cost increases.

Reminds me of if you are opposed to a casino, its automatically assumed you want to tell people what to do, instead of a 3rd option which is you don't care if people blow their paychecks at these things, but they often turn out to be a bad deal as local pols too easily give away the store over time whenever the casino renegs on its initial promises. People have a variety of reasons for wanting a South Coast rail extension. I'm cautiously optimistic that our voices are starting to be heard beyond the pandering of the previous governor.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

That's the only thing I'm going to debate in this thread. For all of the complaints about how awful the trip time is (and it really is- we should want/expect better), it's still a significant improvement over an existing "system" (Dattco/Peter Pan/Bloom) that has pretty good ridership already.

And that's why it's pointless to respond: I/me/mine. Not even an attempt to explain away why shitting all over the South Shore's transit frequencies and access is an acceptable answer. Just like the brokenness of the Stoughton Alternative's kneecapping of frequencies to Stoughton, Canton, Westwood, and Hyde Park is a " ¯_(ツ)_/¯: I'm owed this."

It's a complete waste of time to rehash this when facts just disappear down the wormhole every time. We get it...you got yours, who cares about anyone else being screwed because of it.

 

[Lrfox]

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

And that's why it's pointless to respond: I/me/mine. Not even an attempt to explain away why shitting all over the South Shore's transit frequencies and access is an acceptable answer. Just like the brokenness of the Stoughton Alternative's kneecapping of frequencies to Stoughton, Canton, Westwood, and Hyde Park is a " ¯_(ツ)_/¯: I'm owed this."

It's a complete waste of time to rehash this when facts just disappear down the wormhole every time. We get it...you got yours, who cares about anyone else being screwed because of it.

Not at all the case- don't lump me into that category. I simply have no argument to other points mentioned. You know infinitely more than I do regarding the actual logistics of making a project of this magnitude happen. I don't have anything to dispute what you've argued time and again on this thread. As far as I'm concerned, you're right. If you're not, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

I also think you (and others) who have posted about the price are spot on. It's beyond unacceptable. I have no counterpoint, nor do I think it's OK because "I got mine." As much as I want a rail connection to the South Coast (but particularly Taunton which is unfortunate to have to be part of this), the cost is prohibitive. There are also other projects that are more beneficial to the Commonwealth (i.e. Red/Blue Connector, Blue Line to Lynn, NSRL, etc.) and I don't agree with "kneecapping" other communities for the sake of a $3 billion rail connection to FR/NB.

The facts haven't disappeared. The only thing I vehemently disagree with is the notion that the trip time would be a prohibitive factor to potential riders. It wouldn't. even at 95-100 minutes it's an improvement over the existing bus service which is has solid ridership. CR is also more reliable (and a more pleasant experience) than the existing bus service- both of which are appealing factors to new riders. That certainly doesn't change anything about the points made above. However, it's one of the few arguments that gets rehashed here that really doesn't hold any weight with people who have much experience commuting from that region.

If you want to convince one of the "I've got mine" folks that South Coast Rail is a failure, drop the "but it's a 95-100 minute trip!" pitch because that doesn't sound nearly as bad to them as it does to you.