Charlie_mta
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2006
- Messages
- 4,323
- Reaction score
- 5,938
Re: North-South Rail Link
I concur. These political discussions will never be resolved.
I concur. These political discussions will never be resolved.
Regional Rail (RUR) & North-South Rail Link (NSRL)
- Thread starter quadratdackel
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
Re: North-South Rail Link
In which we at TransitMatters blow up the MassDOT Arup NSRL Study:
https://commonwealthmagazine.org/opinion/states-rail-link-study-full-of-flaws/
This has been a long time in the making and we appreciate your patience. We were originally waiting for the final report to drop but then MassDOT sat on it and still hasn't released the final (we still only have the "draft"). We also had the opportunity to sit down with the team and discuss the NSRL study, which proved valuable in correcting inaccuracies from the June FMCB presentation like using manual doors in the NSRL (thankfully that is not the plan, despite what was said at that meeting). In this piece we point out factual inaccuracies, estimating mistakes & cost inflation as well as highlight the fact that the report dramatically understates the benefits of the link.
In which we at TransitMatters blow up the MassDOT Arup NSRL Study:
https://commonwealthmagazine.org/opinion/states-rail-link-study-full-of-flaws/
This has been a long time in the making and we appreciate your patience. We were originally waiting for the final report to drop but then MassDOT sat on it and still hasn't released the final (we still only have the "draft"). We also had the opportunity to sit down with the team and discuss the NSRL study, which proved valuable in correcting inaccuracies from the June FMCB presentation like using manual doors in the NSRL (thankfully that is not the plan, despite what was said at that meeting). In this piece we point out factual inaccuracies, estimating mistakes & cost inflation as well as highlight the fact that the report dramatically understates the benefits of the link.
Re: North-South Rail Link
Right on DD - - - keep fighting the good fight. Truth and human progress may lose a few rounds, but always win out in the end. TransitMatters is helping to make it sooner rather than later.
Right on DD - - - keep fighting the good fight. Truth and human progress may lose a few rounds, but always win out in the end. TransitMatters is helping to make it sooner rather than later.
Re: North-South Rail Link
A Public hearing has been scheduled on the DOT's "feasibility study" for Monday, November 19, 12 pm at the State Transportation Building (10 Park Plaza)
Wish it wasn't during work hours...
A Public hearing has been scheduled on the DOT's "feasibility study" for Monday, November 19, 12 pm at the State Transportation Building (10 Park Plaza)
Wish it wasn't during work hours...
DominusNovus
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,065
- Reaction score
- 170
Re: North-South Rail Link
This is not directly related, but TransitMatters might find this useful:
I was just joking with my wife that its a shame that the NSRL hasn't been built, because she's at the Bruins game tonight (I had to work) and we live in Quincy. She could just take the Commuter Rail in a nice spacious comfy train straight from the TD Garden to Quincy Center.
And then I realized that that is an amazing marketing pitch: we have two major sports venues, TD Garden and Fenway that are directly on the Commuter Rail lines (yes TD Garden is literally directly on it, while Fenway is just right next to it), but are only accessible to part of the population - TD is convenient for North Shore, Fenway is convenient for Metro West and somewhat for South Shore. This is also true of Gillette, but thats pretty far out in the suburbs, whereas Fenway and TD are right in the city itself.
With how sports-crazed our city is, these are the people you guys should be pitching to. Pitch a one-seat trip from their hometown (or near enough) to their sports venue of choice, on the Commuter Rail, so much more spacious, comfortable, and relaxing than the Green, Red, or Orange lines. Not to mention that it gives these people time to sober up after the game. And obviously avoid the atrocious traffic that comes with any such event releasing 30-60 thousand people into the system all at once (much worse for Gillette in this case, where you almost have to drive there).
Honestly, just handing out fliers outside the venues as they get out would be a good way to raise the profile of the project and get people interested. Get a grass roots movement going, get average voters supporting this idea. I think it's a much more emotionally resonant pitch than just 'save x minutes off your commute.'
This is not directly related, but TransitMatters might find this useful:
I was just joking with my wife that its a shame that the NSRL hasn't been built, because she's at the Bruins game tonight (I had to work) and we live in Quincy. She could just take the Commuter Rail in a nice spacious comfy train straight from the TD Garden to Quincy Center.
And then I realized that that is an amazing marketing pitch: we have two major sports venues, TD Garden and Fenway that are directly on the Commuter Rail lines (yes TD Garden is literally directly on it, while Fenway is just right next to it), but are only accessible to part of the population - TD is convenient for North Shore, Fenway is convenient for Metro West and somewhat for South Shore. This is also true of Gillette, but thats pretty far out in the suburbs, whereas Fenway and TD are right in the city itself.
With how sports-crazed our city is, these are the people you guys should be pitching to. Pitch a one-seat trip from their hometown (or near enough) to their sports venue of choice, on the Commuter Rail, so much more spacious, comfortable, and relaxing than the Green, Red, or Orange lines. Not to mention that it gives these people time to sober up after the game. And obviously avoid the atrocious traffic that comes with any such event releasing 30-60 thousand people into the system all at once (much worse for Gillette in this case, where you almost have to drive there).
Honestly, just handing out fliers outside the venues as they get out would be a good way to raise the profile of the project and get people interested. Get a grass roots movement going, get average voters supporting this idea. I think it's a much more emotionally resonant pitch than just 'save x minutes off your commute.'
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,547
- Reaction score
- 3,146
Shepard
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,518
- Reaction score
- 66
Re: North-South Rail Link
It's a good pitch, and even more broadly I think the "branding" of NSRL aims too narrowly. The words North-South-Rail-Link simply evoke the poor NYC Amtrak passengers trying to get to Maine, who now need to lug their bags into an uber from South to North stations.
...Now, obviously, even a small number of neurons firing should get someone to go from that idea to the idea of greater regional mobility on the CR. But, people don't like to think about things (this is why brands exist for marketing purposes in the first place).
...Furthermore, as we know, it's more than just regional mobility on the CR. It opens up capacity and even future extensions on the T. Arguably, given the capacity it unlocks, it grafts the newly-connected and capacity-unlocked CR as a complementary rapid transit system overlayed on top of the T itself.
I like the term SuperRail. Forget about the tunnel link itself - you don't sell a car by talking about the welding on the axles. Take flyers to Salem showing time to Back Bay, or time to Longwood, currently vs. with SuperRail. Do the same at sporting events, a Semass proposed. Do it in the dozens of similar situations where SuperRail would supercharge transit connectivity to everyone's benefit.
Selling the tunnel will only unleash the PTSD of the Big Dig. Selling the transit benefits is what's really going to move the needle. NSRL, as a term/word/acronym, only does the former rather than the latter.
It's a good pitch, and even more broadly I think the "branding" of NSRL aims too narrowly. The words North-South-Rail-Link simply evoke the poor NYC Amtrak passengers trying to get to Maine, who now need to lug their bags into an uber from South to North stations.
...Now, obviously, even a small number of neurons firing should get someone to go from that idea to the idea of greater regional mobility on the CR. But, people don't like to think about things (this is why brands exist for marketing purposes in the first place).
...Furthermore, as we know, it's more than just regional mobility on the CR. It opens up capacity and even future extensions on the T. Arguably, given the capacity it unlocks, it grafts the newly-connected and capacity-unlocked CR as a complementary rapid transit system overlayed on top of the T itself.
I like the term SuperRail. Forget about the tunnel link itself - you don't sell a car by talking about the welding on the axles. Take flyers to Salem showing time to Back Bay, or time to Longwood, currently vs. with SuperRail. Do the same at sporting events, a Semass proposed. Do it in the dozens of similar situations where SuperRail would supercharge transit connectivity to everyone's benefit.
Selling the tunnel will only unleash the PTSD of the Big Dig. Selling the transit benefits is what's really going to move the needle. NSRL, as a term/word/acronym, only does the former rather than the latter.
fattony
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,099
- Reaction score
- 480
Re: North-South Rail Link
"Rail Unification" or "Rail Union" or something along those lines.
To me, the word union evokes the image of something fragmented that could be greater than the sum of its parts, which is exactly what NSRL is all about. Actually "greater than the sum of its parts" should be tag line and slogan for the whole effort.
"Rail Unification" or "Rail Union" or something along those lines.
To me, the word union evokes the image of something fragmented that could be greater than the sum of its parts, which is exactly what NSRL is all about. Actually "greater than the sum of its parts" should be tag line and slogan for the whole effort.
bigpicture7
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2016
- Messages
- 3,738
- Reaction score
- 8,570
Re: North-South Rail Link
What a great discussion (thanks DominusNovus for seeding this). I agree with all of these sentiments expressed so far.
Such a branding effort (thinking back again to the sports crowds scenario) should emphasize BOTH departures frequency as well as increased connectivity. (I know this is something the RegionalRail guys emphasize well...but just pulling it into this discussion here)...many Celtics/Bruins/Sox people are aware of the "commuter rail" option but hate the "miss the boat" aspect of it: e.g., there's ONE ideal train that you have to get to after the game, and if you miss it, you're SOL. With the regional rail concept, there'd be another train some short time later on game nights, so missing a particular departure is not a huge deal. We need to rebrand the entire concept...this is NOT just "take the commuter rail to the game" anymore.
What a great discussion (thanks DominusNovus for seeding this). I agree with all of these sentiments expressed so far.
Such a branding effort (thinking back again to the sports crowds scenario) should emphasize BOTH departures frequency as well as increased connectivity. (I know this is something the RegionalRail guys emphasize well...but just pulling it into this discussion here)...many Celtics/Bruins/Sox people are aware of the "commuter rail" option but hate the "miss the boat" aspect of it: e.g., there's ONE ideal train that you have to get to after the game, and if you miss it, you're SOL. With the regional rail concept, there'd be another train some short time later on game nights, so missing a particular departure is not a huge deal. We need to rebrand the entire concept...this is NOT just "take the commuter rail to the game" anymore.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
Re: North-South Rail Link
Yeah, you guys are getting at our Regional Rail concepts in this NSRL discussion. This is something we've been trying to get the NSRL folks to consider. To them, the link is just a tunnel on its own without any further rethinking of the commuter rail operational model. You have to have Regional Rail concepts in place BEFORE you build the NSRL. The NSRL is useless without Regional Rail.
Yeah, you guys are getting at our Regional Rail concepts in this NSRL discussion. This is something we've been trying to get the NSRL folks to consider. To them, the link is just a tunnel on its own without any further rethinking of the commuter rail operational model. You have to have Regional Rail concepts in place BEFORE you build the NSRL. The NSRL is useless without Regional Rail.
Re: North-South Rail Link
Sorry, for replying to this three weeks after, but I agree their cost estimate is shit. For one, they appeared to double count and use a bunch of outlier costs.
The NSRL report refers to the Alaska Way Tunnel Costs of $989 per mile as one of their comparable costs (table E7 in the report). Its on the higher side of comparable project costs. The numbers appears to be referring to the estimate for the SR99 proposed bored tunnel and system cost from that projects 2010’s estimate. The cost was $1,960M for roughly 2 miles of a 51ft bore diameter, which gives you a cost of $980M/mile for 51 ft bore diameter. The SR99 tunnel cost was for the entire system, and not just the tunnel portion. It includes, construction, management, design, launch pits, roadways, vents, tear down of the old viaduct risks, inflation, etc.) It does not appear evident that NSRL report backed out all those costs when creating their cost per tunnel mile regressions. The NSRL report double counts by a lot, because then they have separate line items in the WBS for the launch pit, stations, disposal, design, engineering, stations, management etc. On top of that they compound risk contingencies, further double counting.
Source - SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Updated Cost and Tolling Summary Report January 15, 2010 Exhibit 8 – 2010 SR 99 Bored Tunnel Cost Estimate - 2010 Cost Estimate (millions)*
Construction (including construction management) $1,224
Right of way $152
Preliminary and final design $169
Risk and escalation $415
Total $1,960
I wish the GAO could do a evaluation on their report. It would not be pretty.
Sorry, for replying to this three weeks after, but I agree their cost estimate is shit. For one, they appeared to double count and use a bunch of outlier costs.
The NSRL report refers to the Alaska Way Tunnel Costs of $989 per mile as one of their comparable costs (table E7 in the report). Its on the higher side of comparable project costs. The numbers appears to be referring to the estimate for the SR99 proposed bored tunnel and system cost from that projects 2010’s estimate. The cost was $1,960M for roughly 2 miles of a 51ft bore diameter, which gives you a cost of $980M/mile for 51 ft bore diameter. The SR99 tunnel cost was for the entire system, and not just the tunnel portion. It includes, construction, management, design, launch pits, roadways, vents, tear down of the old viaduct risks, inflation, etc.) It does not appear evident that NSRL report backed out all those costs when creating their cost per tunnel mile regressions. The NSRL report double counts by a lot, because then they have separate line items in the WBS for the launch pit, stations, disposal, design, engineering, stations, management etc. On top of that they compound risk contingencies, further double counting.
Source - SR 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Updated Cost and Tolling Summary Report January 15, 2010 Exhibit 8 – 2010 SR 99 Bored Tunnel Cost Estimate - 2010 Cost Estimate (millions)*
Construction (including construction management) $1,224
Right of way $152
Preliminary and final design $169
Risk and escalation $415
Total $1,960
I wish the GAO could do a evaluation on their report. It would not be pretty.
DominusNovus
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,065
- Reaction score
- 170
Re: North-South Rail Link
Thanks!
Absolutely. For Gillette, I think the traffic argument is better, since you *have* to drive or be driven there. Yes, there’s a commuter rail station at Patriot Place already, but my gut is that its sorely underutilized (I have no numbers to back that up). If it connected to the North Shore, that would change.
That said, Patriot Place does have one key problem: its so far out that its nkt an easy trip to much of the system - Worcester and the South Shore branches all would need to go into the city and back out. So, for there, the pitch is pretty much only appealing to North Shore fans. A similar situation applies to Fenway: you’d have to go in to BBY or SS to go south of the city, but at least there, you’re already in the city, so its not as bad for the passengers.
I’m sure it would be a pain for the dispatchers in both cases, though. I expect it would be easier to reverse EMUs than the current locomotives, at least.
Thanks!
Absolutely. For Gillette, I think the traffic argument is better, since you *have* to drive or be driven there. Yes, there’s a commuter rail station at Patriot Place already, but my gut is that its sorely underutilized (I have no numbers to back that up). If it connected to the North Shore, that would change.
That said, Patriot Place does have one key problem: its so far out that its nkt an easy trip to much of the system - Worcester and the South Shore branches all would need to go into the city and back out. So, for there, the pitch is pretty much only appealing to North Shore fans. A similar situation applies to Fenway: you’d have to go in to BBY or SS to go south of the city, but at least there, you’re already in the city, so its not as bad for the passengers.
I’m sure it would be a pain for the dispatchers in both cases, though. I expect it would be easier to reverse EMUs than the current locomotives, at least.
BostonUrbEx
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 4,340
- Reaction score
- 127
Re: North-South Rail Link
Nah, a Worcester Patriots train already did a test run a year or two ago. It went Worcester to Framingham on the B&A and Framingham to Foxboro on the Framingham Secondary. The speeds were too low at the time for it to be worth it, but Mass Coastal is almost done with their contract to upgrade the line so maybe it will get a second look.
Nah, a Worcester Patriots train already did a test run a year or two ago. It went Worcester to Framingham on the B&A and Framingham to Foxboro on the Framingham Secondary. The speeds were too low at the time for it to be worth it, but Mass Coastal is almost done with their contract to upgrade the line so maybe it will get a second look.
DominusNovus
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,065
- Reaction score
- 170
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,185
- Reaction score
- 8,948
Re: North-South Rail Link
You might find a blurb from MetroWest Daily on Google, but it wasn't well-publicized. A consortium of rich business owners with season tix asked for a serious look, the T told them it would be too dog-slow to attract ridership, and some Legislaturecritters who were pals with the biz owners then started nagging the T to do some sort of study. They scheduled the one-off test train (no special dignitaries...just a crew doing a live simulation) as a courtesy to appease the pols.
The biz owners were shown the travel times the test train logged and immediately abandoned their plan because it was so slow as to be totally non-viable. That was the end.
-------------------------
While the Framingham Secondary has had its physical plant thoroughly upgraded over the last year, the speeds haven't increased anywhere near enough to bring a WOR-FXB train into the realm of feasibility. It's now Class 2/30 MPH passenger. However, the Framingham-Walpole section is still fairly curvy with lots of grade crossings, and one prospective Worcester special event train is not nearly enough to get the track class uprated one more notch. Travel times on the Worcester Line skip-stop + the turn south from Framingham probably have a ceiling of no better than 80 minutes if another round of closeout-level track upgrades gets greenlit. As is, it's likely to still be worse than 90 minutes because what they did do on that segment was mostly catered to uprating freight loading capacity and improving the once-horrible ride quality with thorough resurfacing. They weren't targeting raw speed, just freight revenue and general reliability.
That's just not going to be competitive with the 65 minutes it currently takes to go SS-FXB and PVD-FXB. Especially when the Boston trains still have lots of potential time to shed if full-time Foxboro commuter rail bumps the 5 miles from Walpole-Foxboro to a Class 3/60 MPH passenger track class with another funding shot's worth of tie replacement. The Providence game train can likewise shed in excess of 5 minutes just from having non- barf-bag ride quality and more crossing gates on its 5 miles out of Mansfield Jct. I-495 is right at Worcester's doorstep, with degrees-better difference in traffic levels that MetroWest has to fight through to get to Gillette compared to Boston and Providence. There will likely never be enough patronage for a game-day train when transit times have an infrastructural ceiling a solid 30 minutes worse than anyone else's game train...and highway travel times are a solid 30 minutes better than anyone who has to fight with I-95 instead.
Short of another consortium of business leaders wanting to float all funding for a boutique run at subsidized heavy losses, there probably will never--in any era--be a MetroWest game train. Times won't ever be competitive unless you find an excuse to upgrade Framingham-Walpole to Class 3/60 MPH and bleed enough extra time to knock under 75 minutes. And there's no viable excuse for doing that here. The only Class 3-rated freight-only lines in the region are biggies like P&W's twin Providence and Groton mains, or NECR from New London to Vermont. This one isn't nearly big enough, carrying only a modest daily slate of short-run Eastern MA CSX locals. With no other passenger coattails (Framingham Jct. points the wrong way for any Boston routings), this is its maintenance ceiling for the traffic it carries.
You might find a blurb from MetroWest Daily on Google, but it wasn't well-publicized. A consortium of rich business owners with season tix asked for a serious look, the T told them it would be too dog-slow to attract ridership, and some Legislaturecritters who were pals with the biz owners then started nagging the T to do some sort of study. They scheduled the one-off test train (no special dignitaries...just a crew doing a live simulation) as a courtesy to appease the pols.
The biz owners were shown the travel times the test train logged and immediately abandoned their plan because it was so slow as to be totally non-viable. That was the end.
-------------------------
While the Framingham Secondary has had its physical plant thoroughly upgraded over the last year, the speeds haven't increased anywhere near enough to bring a WOR-FXB train into the realm of feasibility. It's now Class 2/30 MPH passenger. However, the Framingham-Walpole section is still fairly curvy with lots of grade crossings, and one prospective Worcester special event train is not nearly enough to get the track class uprated one more notch. Travel times on the Worcester Line skip-stop + the turn south from Framingham probably have a ceiling of no better than 80 minutes if another round of closeout-level track upgrades gets greenlit. As is, it's likely to still be worse than 90 minutes because what they did do on that segment was mostly catered to uprating freight loading capacity and improving the once-horrible ride quality with thorough resurfacing. They weren't targeting raw speed, just freight revenue and general reliability.
That's just not going to be competitive with the 65 minutes it currently takes to go SS-FXB and PVD-FXB. Especially when the Boston trains still have lots of potential time to shed if full-time Foxboro commuter rail bumps the 5 miles from Walpole-Foxboro to a Class 3/60 MPH passenger track class with another funding shot's worth of tie replacement. The Providence game train can likewise shed in excess of 5 minutes just from having non- barf-bag ride quality and more crossing gates on its 5 miles out of Mansfield Jct. I-495 is right at Worcester's doorstep, with degrees-better difference in traffic levels that MetroWest has to fight through to get to Gillette compared to Boston and Providence. There will likely never be enough patronage for a game-day train when transit times have an infrastructural ceiling a solid 30 minutes worse than anyone else's game train...and highway travel times are a solid 30 minutes better than anyone who has to fight with I-95 instead.
Short of another consortium of business leaders wanting to float all funding for a boutique run at subsidized heavy losses, there probably will never--in any era--be a MetroWest game train. Times won't ever be competitive unless you find an excuse to upgrade Framingham-Walpole to Class 3/60 MPH and bleed enough extra time to knock under 75 minutes. And there's no viable excuse for doing that here. The only Class 3-rated freight-only lines in the region are biggies like P&W's twin Providence and Groton mains, or NECR from New London to Vermont. This one isn't nearly big enough, carrying only a modest daily slate of short-run Eastern MA CSX locals. With no other passenger coattails (Framingham Jct. points the wrong way for any Boston routings), this is its maintenance ceiling for the traffic it carries.
DominusNovus
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,065
- Reaction score
- 170
Re: North-South Rail Link
Good info, F-Line. Not very pleasing, but good. It still leaves us with a good pitch for Fenway and TD Garden, though.
Good info, F-Line. Not very pleasing, but good. It still leaves us with a good pitch for Fenway and TD Garden, though.
Last edited:
Digital_Islandboy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 400
- Reaction score
- 60
Re: North-South Rail Link
If all 11-12 commuter rail lines are going to be passing through Boston this Rail Link is going to need a lot more than 2 tracks. It might need like 5-6 tracks like Back Bay in order to handle all those train routes.
If all 11-12 commuter rail lines are going to be passing through Boston this Rail Link is going to need a lot more than 2 tracks. It might need like 5-6 tracks like Back Bay in order to handle all those train routes.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,547
- Reaction score
- 3,146
Re: North-South Rail Link
I believe the plan is not for every train to pass through, just some. Many will still stop at the existing surface stations. But enough trains, clearly delineated, will pass through to give commuters options to get to stations on the other side of downtown directly. Many cities in Europe make this kind of selective through routing work.
Maximum capacity of the route under the Big Dig is 4 tracks.
I believe the plan is not for every train to pass through, just some. Many will still stop at the existing surface stations. But enough trains, clearly delineated, will pass through to give commuters options to get to stations on the other side of downtown directly. Many cities in Europe make this kind of selective through routing work.
Maximum capacity of the route under the Big Dig is 4 tracks.