RandomWalk
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 5,025
Aside from the SEPTA order and the extant T orders, what else is CRRC’s Springfield plant going to build?
Aside from the SEPTA order and the extant T orders, what else is CRRC’s Springfield plant going to build?
They eventually plan to reactivate the rail siding (on the CSX East Springfield Industrial Track), but that won't happen while the SEPTA cars are on-deadline. I would assume deliveries end up getting trucked to the loading pad at CSX West Springfield Yard right across the river, and get manifested on an Albany-bound freight from there. There's only 45 cars on the total order; it's not a significant-size contract by any stretch.Are the SEPTA cars slated to ship via road or are they going to reactivate the rail siding?
Don't know if this has been shared in here before but I stumbled across this data dashboard from MassDOT that shows transit, traffic, bike, ped, frieght, etc activity and how it compares to pre-covid, thought it might be of interest. https://mobility-massdot.hub.arcgis.com/
Bingo. If the surge tracks seasonally that's very likely it.Farmers Market on Friday, I would guess.
Bus Route | Most Recent Average Weekday Ridership: Week of 3/22/21 | % of Week of 2/24/20 | % of Peak '19-'20 Week | Was 3/22 the highest ridership week of 2021? | Notes |
8 | 1,556 | 51% | 45% | Yes | |
16 | 3,444 | 60% | 56% | Yes | Frequency adjustment 3/14/21. |
17 | 1,500 | 54% | 51% | Yes | |
22 | 4,440 | 56% | 51% | Yes | |
23 | 5,901 | 54% | 48% | Yes | |
24 | 933 | 57% | 50% | Yes | Consolidation: replaced the 27 on 3/14/21. |
28 | 6,813 | 60% | 53% | Yes | |
34 | 1,569 | 48% | 46% | - | |
34E | 1,706 | 56% | 51% | Yes | |
39 | 5,450 | 50% | 46% | Yes | Ridership increase despite frequency decrease 3/14/21. |
42 | 1,403 | 57% | 51% | Yes | |
61 | 201 | 55% | 47% | - | Frequency decrease 3/14/21. |
65 | 1,176 | 45% | 45% | Yes | |
104 | 2,822 | 69% | 58% | Yes | |
105 | 527 | 56% | 46% | - | |
109 | 2,396 | 76% | 69% | Yes | See Below |
111 | 6,290 | 66% | 56% | Yes | |
112 | 607 | 53% | 47% | - | Frequency decrease 3/14/21. |
114 | 241 | 65% | 47% | - | |
116 | 3,955 | 61% | 58% | Yes | |
117 | 3,602 | 65% | 60% | Yes | |
119 | 639 | 65% | 53% | Yes | |
120 | 1,330 | 50% | 50% | Yes | |
137 | 689 | 77% | 56% | Yes | Consolidation: replaced the 136 on 3/14/21. See below. |
192 | 53 | 67% | 53% | - | Very low ridership route. Single early-morning trip. |
435 | 394 | 66% | 54% | Yes | Route change 3/14/21. |
436 | 366 | 50% | 47% | - | |
439 | 68 | 87% | 49% | Yes | Very low ridership route. See below. |
450 | 929 | 62% | 50% | Yes | |
455 | 2,147 | 60% | 58% | Yes | |
SL3 | 3,768 | 50% | 47% | Yes | |
SL5 | 4,975 | 50% | 46% | Yes |
Solved! Good work, guys. That's definitely it. Upon closer examination, Saturdays at Haymarket have dramatically higher ridership than Sundays and the surge disappears on days when the farmers market is closed (Christmas, New Years). Here's a graph of Haymarket's daily validations dating to 1/1/20 to nerd out to. The weekly spikes are all Fridays:
View attachment 11770
A 2003 study indicated extending the Transitway tunnel under D Street ("T under D") for grade separation was feasible, with a cost around $75 million. The light has attracted criticism from riders due to the delays it causes. A 2013 study found a median delay of 1.5 minutes per round trip at the light. In early 2016, the Boston Transportation Department modified the traffic light to use a fixed cycle, rather than relying on the detection of buses (only done during part of the cycle) to give a green light for the Transitway. However, the BTD's modifications did not modify the unusually-long 100-second cycle length nor actively prioritize buses, leading to criticism from transportation planners that the solution was inadequate.
MassDOT claims the ramp was not designed for buses, though Big Dig planner Fred Salvucci has claimed it was ... A 2010 study indicated that the ramp was safe for use by the Silver Line. Transit advocates have since pushed to allow use of the ramp by Silver Line buses ("Free the ramp"), though MassDOT claims the ramp is not safe to use when highway traffic is freely flowing ... In May 2019, MassDOT agreed to a limited test of ramp use, though advocates criticized MassDOT for limiting the test to only the evening peak hour, and only when highway speeds did not exceed 30 miles per hour (48 km/h). The three-day test in August 2019 resulting in average time savings of 3–8 minutes per bus, with significantly larger time savings at the most congested times. After these results, MassDOT agreed to make modifications to the ramp entrance to eventually allow use of the ramp whenever traffic speeds are below 30 mph.
The SL3 route is subject to frequent delays due to the opening of the Chelsea Street Bridge – as many as ten times per day – for ships serving the upstream oil terminals. Each bridge opening causes a delay of up to 20 minutes, and the only alternate route involves a lengthy detour on Route 1A. Federal regulations give priority to marine traffic.
Yes, these issues are quite frustrating. This route has proven to be important but is not treated as such at all. There needs to be more solution orientation for these issues plaguing the SL3. Ridership is there and will only be increasing as the year progresses. This pandemic has shown that these riders are transit-dependent and this is a crucial link. Time to "free the ramp," "T under D," and come up with some solution for the Chelsea Street Bridge.
I'm not actually sure anyone *can* come up with a physical solution for this one. Unless you can get the Coast Guard to buy into limited opening windows, (which as yet, despite the wiki claim, I don't think has happened, and will be hard to negotiate, given the traffic precedent) I don't think you can get actually fit a fixed span bridge into this area with the clearance requirements here, hence the less than a decade old new lift bridge. Moving the terminal and its tank farm that's the source of the shipping demand is also an issue; where else could you put it, south of the bridge? Deliveries to those farms and terminals comprise 41% of New England’s Petroleum Products, 66% of Regional Home Heating Oil, 79% of Gasoline for Massachusetts, and 100% of the Jet Fuel for Logan Airport. [1]There are also major issues with the Chelsea Street Bridge (snip) ...and come up with some solution for the Chelsea Street Bridge.
I'm not actually sure anyone *can* come up with a physical solution for this one. Unless you can get the Coast Guard to buy into limited opening windows, (which as yet, despite the wiki claim, I don't think has happened, and will be hard to negotiate, given the traffic precedent) I don't think you can get actually fit a fixed span bridge into this area with the clearance requirements here, hence the less than a decade old new lift bridge. Moving the terminal and its tank farm that's the source of the shipping demand is also an issue; where else could you put it, south of the bridge? Deliveries to those farms and terminals comprise 41% of New England’s Petroleum Products, 66% of Regional Home Heating Oil, 79% of Gasoline for Massachusetts, and 100% of the Jet Fuel for Logan Airport. [1]
"T under D,"
Done right you could have it be 100% as good. Set it up to operate like a rail crossing, screw the traffic on D St.Or the free version that's 75% as good - just tweak the signal timing to favor the busway when a bus is approaching.
Somehow they plead that their bus detectors weren't always detecting their buses. I'm not saying it makes sense, but their claim to be unable to Transit Signal Priority was that they couldn't reliably detect the transit.Done right you could have it be 100% as good. Set it up to operate like a rail crossing, screw the traffic on D St.
Yeah I heard that and I'd accept that in a a mixed traffic area but since it's an exclusive busway they could use literally any basic object detection to make it happen if they really wanted. Ideally yes there is specific TSP hardware that can communicate when a bus is approaching and when it's cleared but here since it's all buses you could literally just mount an infrared beam on either side if you wanted.Somehow they plead that their bus detectors weren't always detecting their buses. I'm not saying it makes sense, but their claim to be unable to Transit Signal Priority was that they couldn't reliably detect the transit.