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

jklo said:
If bus service is that unprofitable... even at $31/RT... yikes. SCR is going to be such a money pit.
Click to expand...

I’m optimistic that the train is just such a nicer mode of transport than the bus even with longer travel time that it will attract riders who’d never consider the bus. I’d also imagine the CR would be used well for weekend and holiday leisure combined with UMass Dartmouth student trips.
 
Koopzilla24 said:
I’m optimistic that the train is just such a nicer mode of transport than the bus even with longer travel time that it will attract riders who’d never consider the bus. I’d also imagine the CR would be used well for weekend and holiday leisure combined with UMass Dartmouth student trips.
Click to expand...

I don't think that your optimism is unfounded. Having lived and commuted from the South Coast for a long time, the bus wasn't something anyone other than regular commuters really thought about as an option for getting to/from Boston. On the other hand, the Commuter Rail is commonly used by people heading to games, the Aquarium, concerts, the airport, etc. The stations are very visible, train-specific, and in prominent locations as opposed to park & rides and downtown bus stations that most locals avoid. The novelty factor of riding on a train combined with avoiding traffic on the the highway is also a big part of the appeal. Cost might also be factor. Peter Pan, Dattco (when it was running) , and Bloom can cost $30 or more round trip whereas the Commuter Rail is $24.50 on weekdays and $10 on weekends with a weekend pass. Kids under 11 are free on MBTA trains but they're full-fare on the buses. Even with the stupid long ride times, it's still a better (and faster) option than the bus on most days.
 
Last edited:
Lrfox said:
I don't think that your optimism is unfounded. Having lived and commuted from the South Coast for a long time, the bus wasn't something anyone other than regular commuters really thought about as an option for getting to/from Boston. On the other hand, the Commuter Rail is commonly used by people heading to games, the Aquarium, concerts, the airport, etc. The stations are very visible, train-specific, and in prominent locations as opposed to park & rides and downtown bus stations that most locals avoid. The novelty factor of riding on a train combined with avoiding traffic on the the highway is also a big part of the appeal. Cost might also be factor. Peter Pan, Dattco (when it was running) , and Bloom can cost $30 or more round trip whereas the Commuter Rail is $24.50 on weekdays and $10 on weekends with a weekend pass. Kids under 11 are free on MBTA trains but they're full-fare on the buses. Even with the stupid long ride times, it's still a better (and faster) option than the bus on most days.
Click to expand...

I’m also just realizing this would connect UMass Dartmouth and UMass Boston via rail at the cheaper inter zone fare
 
Nothing new in this article, but...
commonwealthmagazine.org

Is scrapping of bus service bad sign for South Coast rail?

THE SOUTH COAST'S only bus link to Boston is shutting down next month because ridership is so low, which is raising questions about the viability of
commonwealthmagazine.org commonwealthmagazine.org
I saw they mentioned 3 morning peak trains and 3 evening peak trains to both terminals. Is that actually feasible? I was under the impression that you can't get that kind of frequencies on the single-track Old Colony mainline.
 
Teban54 said:
Nothing new in this article, but...
commonwealthmagazine.org

Is scrapping of bus service bad sign for South Coast rail?

THE SOUTH COAST'S only bus link to Boston is shutting down next month because ridership is so low, which is raising questions about the viability of
commonwealthmagazine.org commonwealthmagazine.org
I saw they mentioned 3 morning peak trains and 3 evening peak trains to both terminals. Is that actually feasible? I was under the impression that you can't get that kind of frequencies on the single-track Old Colony mainline.
Click to expand...
I don't think that there will be any additional trains, it's just that that some Middleborough trains will travel through.
 
Tallguy said:
I don't think that there will be any additional trains, it's just that that some Middleborough trains will travel through.
Click to expand...
That’s my understanding as well, although, if memory serves, there has not been an updated proposed FR/NB schedule since they shifted the Old Colony Lines to clockfacing. So, we’ll see how they handle it.

But yeah, this was one of the downsides of the Middleborough alt: the constraints of OCR capacity.
 
According to MassDOT:

8C2747E0-6816-416F-A210-F5286CF9F0D9.jpeg
 
Tallguy said:
I don't think that there will be any additional trains, it's just that that some Middleborough trains will travel through.
Click to expand...

I looked into the schedules and came up with a theoretical schedule for the FR/NB but I don’t know exactly how long a train takes to clear the single track from Southampton-Braintree and estimated only a 3-5min window for the passing track beginning 3min before or after JFK. This is based on the times of the current Middleboro/Lakeville schedule and could only figure in 22 round trips not the 26 MassDOT says. I could also be misinterpreting what they mean for service. I’ll need to move my spreadsheet to my other computer before I can post my scheduling for critique by those more knowledgeable on the subject.
 
@Koopzilla24 — I have no proof of this, but I believe that service plan you linked to hasn’t been updated since the OCR schedule change.

A little while back, I did some analysis to try to determine how the T came up with that “3 round trips per branch” number. I think I posted my conclusions upthread somewhere, but if memory serves, literally all they did was take the Middleborough/Lakeville departure and arrival times and keep those constant while adding on SCR stops before/after. Presumably, they did this so that the scheduling and dispatching north of Middleborough/Lakeville (ie the current system) could remain unmodified, thus simplifying the rest of the analysis. (This is also how they get the “3-3.5 hour off-peak frequencies” figure: that was the frequency between every other off-peak Middleborough train at the time.)

The problem as I see it — and part of why I am skeptical — is that applying that same logic to the current schedule (ie don’t modify anything north of MIDD) gives you something like 2 round trips rather than 3. So if they still want 3, they’ll need to redo the Middleborough schedule, which will also mean redoing the Kingston and Greenbush schedules (for dispatching); it may also require tweaking other schedules — it depends how much equipment gets shared between the OCR and the rest of the system.

So, like I said, I’m skeptical.

To your original question whether 6 peak trains is feasible — I believe this was based on the OCR schedules at the time, which I think did see 6 Middleborough trains arriving in Boston before 9am. But I think (though I’m not positive) this was only possible because some peak direction trips did a layover rather than turning back immediately — ie subsequent inbound trains didn’t need to wait while earlier inbound trains came back south through the single track.
 
millerm277 said:
It's where the line goes + the closest they can easily get it to downtown. SCR isn't creating a new right of way.

That said, there are plans to road diet/redesign MA-18 in the area as well, that's just out of scope of this and years off. https://www.southcoasttoday.com/sto...it-traffic-lights-changes-planned/6280795001/
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's the existing right of way. Something a bit closer to downtown and better connected to the city around it would have been ideal, but that's not doable without being substantially more disruptive. The location really isn't that awful. It's still walkable to downtown, and the city/state have plans to continue to improve connectivity over the years.
 
king_vibe said:
1) Do this at the Northern Avenue Bridge
2) Why did they put a train station in the middle of a traffic island
Click to expand...
Hot takes....
First, yes and yes.
Second, we would need two of those bridges (295ft) to span Fort Point Channel (605ft)... which would look cool.

I'd like usage stats for the existing ped bridge first. As pretty as it is, I'd bet the new one will get the same amount of use as the one it's replacing. Rail or no rail, it's going from an established car centric neighborhood to a featureless parking lot over a loud-ass highway. This is a stupid waste of resources. If there has to be a quick state payoff, spend the cash on extending the rail to downtown!
If they want to connect the Career Center (the only other thing there) to the people it serves... well, move the Career Center to the people!
This whole project is full of half wishes and slush. If could have been so much better. Nobody is walking to that station.
Somebody already said to put the rail downtown. It just seems like a no-brainer. Connects to the ferries, the museum, local businesses, a walkable neighborhood, etc... Just do it!
 
BeyondRevenue said:
I'd like usage stats for the existing ped bridge first. As pretty as it is, I'd bet the new one will get the same amount of use as the one it's replacing. Rail or no rail, it's going from an established car centric neighborhood to a featureless parking lot over a loud-ass highway. This is a stupid waste of resources. If there has to be a quick state payoff, spend the cash on extending the rail to downtown!
If they want to connect the Career Center (the only other thing there) to the people it serves... well, move the Career Center to the people!
This whole project is full of half wishes and slush. If could have been so much better. Nobody is walking to that station.
Somebody already said to put the rail downtown. It just seems like a no-brainer. Connects to the ferries, the museum, local businesses, a walkable neighborhood, etc... Just do it!
Click to expand...

I'd like to see the usage stats too. But I would be surprised if the new one didn't perform better almost right off the bat. The existing bridge is a pretty forlorn experience. Even if it served a practical purpose (like connecting a walkable urban neighborhood to a transit station), I think people might be reluctant to use it. That "established car centric neighborhood" is already fairly dense and walkable. The new bridge will be a drastically improved experience, and even if only a handful of people in the neighborhood use the train, I doubt they're driving to the station (it's a bit circuitous to drive there) instead of walking. The new one is also a few blocks closer to downtown. If the city invests in improving the bike/pedestrian experience along Acushnet Avenue, it would also be a great connection to the ferries and waterfront businesses.

For all of the city's issues, that pocket of New Bedford (between downtown and Clasky Common Park) is actually fairly in-demand due to it's relatively sizeable and well-kept historic housing stock. It's reasonably affordable and within walking distance to downtown (and the station). I actually know two different couples who have purchased homes there in the past 3 years and walkability to the commuter rail station was on the list of reasons the neighborhood was appealing. And while inventory is limited everywhere, historic single family homes in that neighborhood don't turn up for sale too often. And when they do, they go fast. SCR isn't going to turn the city into the next boom town, but it's already had an impact on that particular neighborhood. I don't see that stopping any time soon.

I also would love to have had a station closer to downtown, but I'm just not sure how that gets done without drastically disrupting existing businesses along the waterfront and requiring major infrastructure reconfiguration. As it is, Whale's Tooth isn't that far (still walkable), so I don't know that that level of upheaval required to get it closer would be worth it. And no matter what opinions are on the station location, the nearby neighborhoods, etc., the defining factor of SCR's impact is going to be the ride time. The ~90 minute Phase 1 trip just isn't going to move the needle drastically.
 
Last edited:
BeyondRevenue said:
Hot takes....
First, yes and yes.
Second, we would need two of those bridges (295ft) to span Fort Point Channel (605ft)... which would look cool.

I'd like usage stats for the existing ped bridge first. As pretty as it is, I'd bet the new one will get the same amount of use as the one it's replacing. Rail or no rail, it's going from an established car centric neighborhood to a featureless parking lot over a loud-ass highway. This is a stupid waste of resources. If there has to be a quick state payoff, spend the cash on extending the rail to downtown!
If they want to connect the Career Center (the only other thing there) to the people it serves... well, move the Career Center to the people!
This whole project is full of half wishes and slush. If could have been so much better. Nobody is walking to that station.
Somebody already said to put the rail downtown. It just seems like a no-brainer. Connects to the ferries, the museum, local businesses, a walkable neighborhood, etc... Just do it!
Click to expand...

My hope is that the pedestrian access to Downtown is at least better than it is in Lowell for the Gallagher Terminal. In Lowell, the station isn't far from Downtown, but it's a very awkward pedestrian route. You have to cross an arterial road, negotiate an overpass, cross a canal until Downtown is somewhat accessible. It's not an intuitive or pleasant experience at all. The overpass is currently being converted to at-grade intersections, which will be better for sure, but it still involves crossing a lot of intersections and I'm not sure it will qualify as a pedestrian friendly experience. In Lowell, the pedestrian access would have been much more straight-forward if the station had been built just 0.4 miles north beyond the canal and overpass. I'm not familiar enough with New Bedford to really comment on their station location, and I'm sure extending the rail line closer to Downtown would have been significantly more expensive/disruptive, but I just hope it's not a repeat of Lowell, where people will come away thinking 'This would have been much easier if it was just a little bit closer...'
 
Smuttynose said:
My hope is that the pedestrian access to Downtown is at least better than it is in Lowell for the Gallagher Terminal......but I just hope it's not a repeat of Lowell, where people will come away thinking 'This would have been much easier if it was just a little bit closer...'
Click to expand...

~3/4 mile (including the bridge) or so to really get to Downtown, but should be just a mellow walk over the bridge and the sidewalks. The Purchase/Hillman intersection could probably use pedestrian improvements but that's the only spot that looks questionable to my perspective. Some possibility for general streetscape improvements, but in terms of being unintuitive or feeling dangerous/unfriendly to walk, I don't think it's that. "Cross bridge, follow this street to the downtown area"
 
Smuttynose said:
But I just hope it's not a repeat of Lowell, where people will come away thinking 'This would have been much easier if it was just a little bit closer...'
Click to expand...

I think it would be easier if it was just a little closer, but I do think the walk in New Bedford is a good deal more straightforward than Lowell. The 90 minute ride is going to be the most off-putting aspect of the trip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top