COMPASS RAIL: Pittsfield / Springfield / Boston East-West Passenger Rail

The stops Amtrak is planning for are:
- Albany NY
- Chatham NY
- Pittsfield MA
- Chester MA
- Springfield MA
- Palmer MA
- Worcester MA
- Framingham MA
- Boston-Lansdowne MA
- Boston-Back Bay MA
- Boston-South Station MA

Westfield, MA is a stop that would make a lot of sense given the size of the community and the fact that there is a university, but the folks in the city there didnt show much interest during the study so the stop hasn't been incorporated. Though if it looks like this is going to take off I would think they would then probably so interest so maybe that stop will get added in. There may be a couple others along the way but that seems to be the biggest omission.

Springfield, Palmer, and Worcester would receive additional service to Boston via inland route trains (at least NHV-BOS perhaps maybe even eventually NYP-BOS via SPG.) The study called for 8 round trips Springfield - Boston - the proposed Albany service and existing Lake Shore would provide 3 RTs, so it would take 5 inland RTs to provide the frequencies that have been discussed - I suspect they'd start lower than that. But I would assume that things would be scheduled to maximize departure/arrival times between Springfield and Boston between all the services. I would suspect the physical investment would incorporate items that were mentioned in the study under one of the three alternatives.

Pretty much all the alternatives during the study revolved around 8 round trips - more than that has never been discussed.

Great, thanks, at first I found it strange that it would be stopping at Lansdowne since Amtrak already goes through there without stopping, and it would have the line stop 3 times in Boston alone, but I'm guessing that it was added as a stop so people from Albany and Western Massachusetts could have easy access to Fenway Park during Red Sox games. I believe that New York - Boston service via the inland route will be added later as well, whether via New Haven and Springfield or via Albany and Pittsfield. Westfield will probably be added as a stop as this project gains traction, and 8 round trips a day seems sufficient for a route like this, at least for now.

The East-West Study Final Report came out a year ago. I don't see any newer documents. If someone knows about newer source material please provide links, or this stuff about creating a new authorityhttps://www.mass.gov/lists/east-west-pa ... al-report-

Three finalists: Alternative 3, altenative 4, and hybrid of alternative 4 & 5. #3 recommend 8 round trips, the other two recommend 10 round trips. These include the 1 existing Lake Shore Ltd.

I think making three stops in Boston in such a short distance is overkill. Why not also stop at Boston Landing, that would be four stops! People can easily get from Kenmore Square to Back Bay. Are there really enough passengers to justify a Westfield stop where Springfield is only ~~24 minutes away?

There is only 1 year left in the Baker administration, and the next governor will want his or her stamp on this project.

B&A - scroll up in the link you posted to see the "Governance White Paper".

Lansdowne is actually a pretty busy destination station as it connects with the Longwood Medical Area and the last-mile shuttles provided by MASCO. There were almost 1200 inbound "offs" at Lansdowne in the 2018 CTPS counts with almost 850 of those in the rush hour. Whether New Balance likes it or not Boston Landing has not developed into the same kind destination as of yet, with only 102 inbound "offs" at that point. Of course COVID throws these numbers for a loop, but the LMA is a location where many people can't work from home.

One of the thoughts to adding Lansdowne might have to do with just keeping separation from the train ahead. An intercity train like this will be rapidly approaching whatever MBTA service is in front of it, which will be stopping at all those stations. If you're going to slow down anyway why not provide the service?

I think making three stops in Boston in such a short distance is overkill. Why not also stop at Boston Landing, that would be four stops!

This is actually something that I thought as well, except for me it was "why stop at Lansdowne and not Boston Landing", I guess I thought the fact that it was further from Back Bay than Lansdowne and had the word "Boston" in it made it a better choice, but like I said in my previous post, it's probably to get Baseball fans from Albany or Western Massachusetts to Fenway Park easily, without having to transfer to the local MBTA Rapid Transit.

Also, in my opinion Lansdowne could have been designed better as a station, the outbound platform should serve as an island platform instead of weirdly being another side platform that faces the same direction as the inbound platform. I remember once I was there on the outbound platform, along with other passengers when a Framingham/Worcester train suddenly arrived on the inbound platform, this meant that the passengers who were waiting for the train had to use the overpass to get to the inbound platform and board the train, which definitely held the train up longer than if the outbound platform was an island platform or if it had simply arrived on the outbound platform like usual.

The platform at Lansdowne isn't an island because the tracks couldn't be spread apart far enough to fit a platform that met ADA width requirements as an island. The narrow corridor with the turnpike and bridges on either end simply wouldn't allow it.

Yawkey aka Landsdowne is rather shoehorned in. The two side platforms are used because of the track curvature, as long as the high level platforms are concave they will still have narrow gaps where the doors are. If the track had been tangent they probably would have used an island. There should be a train arrival board, LED signs, and announcements listing the track number so that passengers know.

A stop at Landsdowne (full high platforms, hopefully equipment with automatic doors) will add what, 3 mins to schedule? 5? And it will save anyone who wants to go to/from Fenway Park, a club or restaurant on Landsdowne St, any business around Kenmore Sq, etc., at least fifteen or twenty minutes plus having to figure out the T. For many people, even the Longwood Medical Area (big hospitals plus 3 Harvard schools) would be quicker to walk to from Landsdowne Sta. than to ride in to Back Bay, walk across Copley Sq. to Copley Station, and ride back out the E or D line. The same might even be true for the Hynes and thereabouts. In the summer Landsdowne would be a pleasant walk to the Museum of Fine Arts.

Most people aren't choosing because of how fast the train gets from Pittsfield to South Station and back. They are choosing because of how fast and how easily they can get from the actual place where they are to the actual place they want to get to and back. If people don't take the train cause it's too slow, the too slow will be because the railroad is longer than the Pike, and curvier, not because they stop three times in three different really dense neighborhoods of a big city.

If an extra, what, 3 minutes on the schedule can give a lot of potential passengers a one-seat ride, using existing infrastructure and not causing any additional cost, I think they should do it. It's not like they are planning to stop at all three Wellesleys.

https://www.masslive.com/springfield/20 ... -says.html

State is going to be moving forward with working with Amtrak to compete for funds for Springfield - Worcester improvements as part of the Amtrak expansion funds in the IIJA. I suspect they'll hook up with Connecticut on the effort and present this as a restoration of the inland route service as including a one seat ride between Hartford and Boston and between Worcester and New Haven would improve the ridership prospects of the service - and they can rope together the work needed on the B&A east of Springfield, work needed at Springfield station, and completion of double tracking on the Hartford line north of Windsor Locks and replacement of the Warehouse Point bridge on the Hartford Line together as one effort.

Passenger trains need to be equal or faster than competing highways, including station dwell times. Interesting how they state that passenger figures are incorrect in the studies. Just run a pilot service instead of continuing to study this to death.

In addition to long-distance and "Interurban" service, they should be plan to layer on local Commuter Rail service by adding a couple of stops between Worcester and Springfield. I would recommend Oxford/Leicester RT56 "Huntoon Parkway", a little east of the historic Rochdale station, and shoehorn a station off of RT49 in Spencer/East Brookfield near or behind the automobile unloading yard.

They are also ignoring the need for local "indigo" service to Riverside, and rush-hour local service between Kendall and B&A line. A shuttle from Boston Landing to Mass Ave wouldn't even have any grade crossings or interfere with existing trains. The Framingham-Worcester line needs it's own layover area in the remains of Beacon Park and at Riverside.

Trinnau wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:05 pm The platform at Lansdowne isn't an island because the tracks couldn't be spread apart far enough to fit a platform that met ADA width requirements as an island. The narrow corridor with the turnpike and bridges on either end simply wouldn't allow it.

I always wondered why they didn't build the station east of Brookline Avenue behind the parking garage where the tracks are perfectly straight. An easier walk to Fenway Park too.

My guess would be easement considerations and probably too small of a location without taking private property but they own the location around the current station?

Basically all correct. The Green Line D branch is all former railroad, the Highland Branch, and if you draw a line between Lansdowne station and the D branch along David Ortiz Way you can tell where the old branch met up with the Worcester Line. There was a small yard there at one point. I'm pretty sure there's an awesome historical aerial photo on the platform of this. I couldn't find it after a quick search

In the 1980s/1990s, the track ran from the main line through the parking lot where they built the partial high platform for Yawkey (and where it is today). I didn't exactly follow it, but if you took the Green line "D", at Fenway there was a dirt area and a fence and what looked like a track that was or had been connected, just before you went underground. I assume this was at least one of the original tracks still in place from before 1958. There was supposedly never a passenger station where the Highland Branch branched off.

For at least a bit after the opening of T service on the Highland Branch, the Brookline Avenue Sears & Roebuck facility continued to get rail service. Dunno when it stopped. Also dunno if the closeness to Kenmore Square was the cause. of Kenmore branding.