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

  • Go via Attleboro. Either you build a new 3-mile bypass (as proposed in the 1990s), or have a reverse move at the station. Either way, you have to deal with creating NEC congestion and the Taunton grade crossings. Rather indirect route.
  • Go via Mansfield. The original ROW through downtown is redeveloped, so you'd have to build a new ROW along 140 and 495. Deals with NEC congestion (slightly less than Attleboro) and the Taunton grade crossings. Fairly direct route.
I don't remember which study it was, but as I recall, when they examined the Attleboro (and Mansfield?) alternatives, the simulator literally crashed trying to fit all of the rush hour trains. Specifically, the problem was that those alternatives prevented the reuse of the Stoughton Line's slots, and instead forced the simulator to fit in additional slots for South Coast trains in addition to the Stoughton trains. If I remember correctly, the AM rush had an OTP of, like 60% (as opposed to >90% for the Stoughton alts), and the PM rush just made the simulator crash.

I realize "the simulator crashed" probably isn't as dire as it sounds, but it cracked me up when I first read the study and it cracks me up now.
 
The 2011 DEIR said the Attleboro alternative would require adding a 4th track from Forest Hills to Back Bay. There were a lot of questionable things in that study, like electrification being used to make up for other deficiencies (rather than, you know, for superior service and environmental benefit like TM is advocating for) and the cost of the swamp trestle, but adding a 5th NEC branch definitely would be a major issue. (It's worth noting that at times that FR/NB service went via Mansfield, Canton Junction-North Easton shuttle were usually operated rather than through trains).
 
Commuter rail map at Freetown station, from the ABC6 story:

img-8646-scaled.jpg


Curiously, while the branches are labeled "Fall River Line" and "New Bedford Line" like the N/R branches are, the trunk is labeled "Middleborough Line.

Lots to nitpick about this map. Poor design choices (River Works with angled label, the clumsy turn at Middleborough), errors (SL5 not shown), things already obsolete (additional CR service at Oak Grove and Forest Hills aren't shown), weird geography (B/C/D branching, Wonderland seemingly in Winthrop), etc.
 
Interesting the way it shows the Cape Flyer as if it were an MBTA service. It kind of is, but also kind of isn't.
 
Lots to nitpick about this map. Poor design choices (River Works with angled label, the clumsy turn at Middleborough)...

I agree there are many poor design choices on the map, but the clumsy turn at Middleborough is certainly not one. That accurately depicts the crappy routing for SCR phase 1 to New Bedford and Fall River.

Interesting the way it shows the Cape Flyer as if it were an MBTA service. It kind of is, but also kind of isn't.

I'm amazed the Cape Flyer route is finally acknowledged on an MBTA commuter rail map, after 9 years in service. Long past time that happened. I just wish the train name was labeled, to help the public look up the train online.
 
Interesting that it shows Plymouth as only temporarily suspended.

As far as I'm aware, "temporarily suspended" remains the official line on Plymouth (and I believe the other CR stations closed at the same time). Of course, coming from an agency with a track record of a quarter-century of the Arborway service being "temporarily suspended", one may be forgiven for an "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude towards the return of service. Nevertheless, in official terms at least, the map would appear to be correct.
 
As far as I'm aware, "temporarily suspended" remains the official line on Plymouth (and I believe the other CR stations closed at the same time). Of course, coming from an agency with a track record of a quarter-century of the Arborway service being "temporarily suspended", one may be forgiven for an "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude towards the return of service. Nevertheless, in official terms at least, the map would appear to be correct.
Not gonna lie, Plymouth is really the only one of the 5 that I think actually should be reactivated. Plimptonville, Hastings, Silver Hill, Pride Crossing... I can totally accept none of those coming back (though they too are still on this map with the temporarily suspended asterisk)
 
As far as I'm aware, "temporarily suspended" remains the official line on Plymouth (and I believe the other CR stations closed at the same time). Of course, coming from an agency with a track record of a quarter-century of the Arborway service being "temporarily suspended", one may be forgiven for an "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude towards the return of service. Nevertheless, in official terms at least, the map would appear to be correct.

It's the only one of the "temporarily suspended" stations that the MBTA removed from their official Commuter Rail map online, so that deviation between the online map and the physical map at the station is notable.
 
Plymouth isn't a bad location for a stop, especially with the TOD; even if the obvious extension to downtown Plymouth is made, it would still be a worthy intermediate. It's the only one of the closed stations that has had actual plans for reopening, though they've been punted on. But the Plymouth/Kingston split is absolutely unworkable - if you're reopening Plymouth, you have to be willing to close Kingston and have Plymouth be the terminal for everything. The question then becomes how to handle the regional demand, since Kingston is the collector for everywhere that feeds into Route 3. In 2011, about 500 of the 1,100 spots at Kingston were used; while that's surely gone down, a garage might be needed at the current Plymouth station to replace Kingston.

Mishawum is the other weird one in the batch - it wasn't official closed like the other 5, but simply never reopened. Given Woburn's kill-it-with-fire reaction when TOD was proposed 15 years ago, I don't suspect it'll ever generate real demand. Whether it will ever be useful for reverse commutes is a toss-up.

The other 4? Can't disappear into the weeds fast enough.
 
Not gonna lie, Plymouth is really the only one of the 5 that I think actually should be reactivated. Plimptonville, Hastings, Silver Hill, Pride Crossing... I can totally accept none of those coming back (though they too are still on this map with the temporarily suspended asterisk)
It's the only one of the "temporarily suspended" stations that the MBTA removed from their official Commuter Rail map online, so that deviation between the online map and the physical map at the station is notable.

Weirdly, Plymouth has been excised from the official map unlike the other four, but all five have been excised from the fare zone map found on the same page of the MBTA site as the official map. That said, the pictured map is labeled as v.38, while the currently-live map on the website is v.37, so technically Plymouth appears to have been (re)added to the map, in addition to a number of other design changes of dubious provenance. (The Haverhill Line segment was condensed and shortened to take up less space; presumably why the Wildcat Branch lost its curves, and likely the junction at Middleborough is similarly a right angle to take up less space, but that doesn't account for Oak Grove not having a stop dot and Forest Hill's being moved to solely the Needham Line. It doesn't look like the map in the picture is a sticker; if not, it seems likely that it was designed before the decision was made to permanently add CR service to Oak Grove, and Forest Hills on the NEC lines.) [Still doesn't account for the odd treatment of the Green Line branches, but that's a complaint for a different thread.]

Mishawum is the other weird one in the batch - it wasn't official closed like the other 5, but simply never reopened. Given Woburn's kill-it-with-fire reaction when TOD was proposed 15 years ago, I don't suspect it'll ever generate real demand. Whether it will ever be useful for reverse commutes is a toss-up.

I assume the Woburn Mall's obliteration and replacement with whatever it is they're calling that mix-used (re)development next to the Market Basket isn't sufficient to move the needle on Mishawum? (One would have hoped that might have enlightened Woburn somewhat on the benefits of change, but one doubts it.)
 
I'm always surprised they continue to publish this map on metal rather than have a paper map behind plexiglass that could be easily updated. Anyway in my opinion, this map could use a really good graphic designer to give it some clarity. Several of the commuter rail apps on my phone do a MUCH better job of showing the multiple rail lines.
 
The planned footbridge at New Bedford station is a textbook example of scope creep, and in particular how poor design can spend a lot of money without actual benefit. There's a 4,200-foot gap between road crossings of Route 18 near the station, with an existing pedestrian bridge near the middle. That bridge is a classic 50s cage design, too steep to be accessible.

The conceptual station design in 2009 called for keeping the existing footbridge. In fact, there would not have been any accessible route for pedestrians to reach the station!

In 2019, with the MBTA getting better at accessibility, the redesigned station added a new footbridge. Two simple truss spans (much like bike trail bridges across the state) over Route 18, with shorter girder spans providing an almost level path to the platform (since the parking lot slopes up from Route 18 to the platform). Estimated cost was $10.5 million - not cheap, but it's almost 500 feet of bridge, half of it over an active highway.

Yesterday, the MBTA board approved a $21.3 million contract for the footbridge. What made it cost more? Well, now it's a single-span tied arch, with a plaza at the west end instead of a simple ramp. At the station end, we now have two elevators and a big set of stairs. So it's double the cost, and worse for accessibility because you have to take an elevator then make your way up the sloped parking lot - and if the elevators are broken, too bad.

At no point in this process has there been any effort to add missing curb ramps and other basic accessibility features on Purchase Street (where the footbridge connects on the west). Nor has there been any to make the existing Hillman Street bridge (the most direct route to the downtown core) accessible for pedestrians.
 
What are the overnight storage provisions for SCR? Will storage happen at Middleboro?
I see what could be a storage yard at New Bedford, but nothing in FR.
 

Back
Top