Longfellow
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2023
- Messages
- 193
- Reaction score
- 473
Okay I called the congressman's office and they told me the "full report" will not be published until the Fall.
Booooooo!Okay I called the congressman's office and they told me the "full report" will not be published until the Fall.
Ive sometimes wondered the same thing. If nsrl is going to cost 10 billion, what if we give the chinese 5 billion to do it? If the options are the chinese build the tunnel or we get no tunnel Id be ok with the chinese building it.
I think I found the same slides as you. Not much here besides an alignment endorsement but I am not super familiar with eg. if the "advocates" long settled on the artery alignment.
I know the deep underground stations are a cost driver but 2.9 miles of TBM, come on! at this point hire a european country to do it and pay them 2x of whatever it costs them to do it. Just get it done.
View attachment 51644
Absolutely infuriating that they seem to be pursuing a backwards "build the Link first, then get Regional Rail" tact instead of latching onto the TransitMatters momentum. Moulton really seems to intensely believe that stub-end terminals are the be-all/end-all of sucky "19th century" ops instead of the whole bunch of other things that have been factually proven.
I think I found the same slides as you. Not much here besides an alignment endorsement but I am not super familiar with eg. if the "advocates" long settled on the artery alignment.
I know the deep underground stations are a cost driver but 2.9 miles of TBM, come on! at this point hire a european country to do it and pay them 2x of whatever it costs them to do it. Just get it done.
View attachment 51644
And this is why I question the pols' true commitment. The public isn't going to get behind NSRL in a big way unless they have some means of perceiving what high-frequency service and truly useful 2-seat tripmaking really is. It's too-abstract a concept right now (doubly so when the rapid transit division's supposed-to-be useful frequencies are imploding), and they'd be right to be skeptical that digging an $8B tunnel only to run the same infrequent ops constitutes some sort of boondoggle. For example, the way SEPTA slashed its system to the bone before opening its run-thru tunnel, then kept things at the same reduced service for 40 years provides easy-grasp national cautionary tale for this skepticism. So the only way NSRL is ever practically going to get to the starting line is by reworking ops first. Stub-end terminals are no constraint to densifying Regional Rail. You might have to expand some (maybe not all, and definitely not larded-up with the vast majority of the real-estate kingmaking and headhouse monument-building costs) of South Station to the chagrin of the zero-sum game advocacy contingent who are pitting SSX diametrically against NSRL...but most of the work is just optimizing the terminal district interlockings, electrification and EMU's, level boarding, and fare zone + transfer equity. Then simply run the trains every :30 to 495 and :15 to 128 on every line. The rest of the advocacy comes naturally, because the ease of commuting and transfer utility will be FAN-FUCKING-TASTIC all around until you hit the brick wall of that gap through Downtown. Then people will really, truly notice the need for run-thru. It doesn't have to take an eon to get to that stage, either. Partial Regional Rail-ification of the system this decade will thoroughly whet people's appetites for more.The NSRL has a big ribbon cutting. Reworking ops doesn’t.
Hell yeah, and even without a LVT it's still possible to use land value to help with this. I did my thesis on using land value discrepancy to identify potential redevelopment sites around the commuter rail, and it was pretty easy to find enough parcels to cover the cost of RER electrification. NSRL fully funded is possible if we fully tap into the big sites like Beacon Park, and that's also leaving out the real sicko moves like "Beverly's Rantoul Street" ification of many commuter rail stops.Henry George has an idea
Usually referred to as Central Station -- not really a central hub, but a connection to get the Blue Line connected to the Urban Rail network. It is deep and expensive to build, and often talked about as optional. But it does get all the rapid transit lines connected to the Urban Rail network if implemented.I’m late to this and not at all a rail expert, but I noticed in some of the diagrams it shows a Union Station as a central hub after NSRL completion but I don’t see that on the alignment map posted above. Is this really feasible or necessary? I imagine that’s the deepest part of the bore, so would require a ton of extra room for access. Where would this be, right on the greenway?
I think a good compromise to get a useful walkshed around the "union station" would be to build "north station under" near the haymarket/GC area. That would be close enough to the blue line for transfers and certain northside lines can continue to terminate at the surface stub-end station.Usually referred to as Central Station -- not really a central hub, but a connection to get the Blue Line connected to the Urban Rail network. It is deep and expensive to build, and often talked about as optional. But it does get all the rapid transit lines connected to the Urban Rail network if implemented.
The grades will be 2.5% max, which is lower than the Commuter Rail's current steepest grades: Mystic River Bridge on the Eastern Route (3%), Neponset River Bridge on the Old Colony main (3%), and the currently out-of-service Wellington duck-under on the Reading Line (almost 3%). So there's no restriction on push-pull sets; indeed Amtrak will be running its Charger dual-modes and Airo sets through there for future Portland and/or Concord Northeast Regionals, as well as a South Station/Southampton Yard-terminating Downeaster. But as an unventilated tunnel it obviously can't take straight diesels because of the fumes. The T did evaluate Alts. that equipped the whole system with dual-modes so it could retain push-pull ops, but the performance through the tunnel would be sucky at best and the locos would basically be the most expensive on the planet. EMU's are definitely the way to go on price and performance, as they have somewhat more zip and can recover better from the numerous speed penalties on the underground grades, curves, and junctions.It's important to remember that the NSRL itself requires electrification, because diesel trains won't be able to handle the required grades. So before the NSRL can open, at least the lines that are slated to run through will have to be electrified.
That's exactly what they're doing. North Station on the CA/T alignment will have egresses to both the North Station Green/Orange superstation and Haymarket. No direct Blue Line transfer, but it serves the walkshed.I think a good compromise to get a useful walkshed around the "union station" would be to build "north station under" near the haymarket/GC area. That would be close enough to the blue line for transfers and certain northside lines can continue to terminate at the surface stub-end station.
That's exactly what they're doing. North Station on the CA/T alignment will have egresses to both the North Station Green/Orange superstation and Haymarket. No direct Blue Line transfer, but it serves the walkshed.
Surface NS and SS remain the Downtown termination stations. NSRL is for thru-running to a surface terminus further out.So this will be a big station, but this looks markedly not like the palatial underground stations like Penn. I assume the idea is that trains will truly not be terminating at NS/SS under and will always run through? As far as that goes I'm glad they are more forward thinking than NYC in this aspect.
They can't be big stations being bored so far underground. It'll probably be a little claustrophobic. And the egresses and transfer interfaces with rapid transit will take some time...very long escalators and walkways, but that's the geometry they're dealing with.So this will be a big station, but this looks markedly not like the palatial underground stations like Penn. I assume the idea is that trains will truly not be terminating at NS/SS under and will always run through? As far as that goes I'm glad they are more forward thinking than NYC in this aspect.