Fewer Stops on Commuter Rail Lines?

I've gone and figured out the 2018 ridership for each station on the Commuter Rail, which involved taking the MBTA's published figures on the difference between 2012 and 2018 ridership and plugging in the 2012 figures.

Based on these numbers, it is no surprise that Prides Crossing, Silver Hill, Hastings, Plimptonville, and Plymouth were all closed. I'm going to draw 100 passengers per day as my line in the sand for having sufficient ridership. Now I should add that stations with fewer than 100 passengers per day include River Works, which is planned to become a public stop; Newmarket and Uphams Corner, which will hopefully gain more ridership once the Fairmount Line improves; and JFK/UMASS, Ruggles, and Malden Center which are connected to the subway and don't see much traffic in and out of Boston. I should also point out that Greenwood, Waverley, Kendal Green, and Melrose/Cedar Park had fewer than 100 boardings but more than 100 alights, while Rowley and Lansdowne had fewer than 100 alights but more than 100 boardings. This leaves:

Mishawum - with 32 boardings and 39 alights, this one can go unless maybe they can put up a parking garage in the area. Otherwise Woburn/Anderson does the same job better.

West Gloucester - I was surprised that it had only 36 boardings and 42 alights just because Gloucester is a relatively big place and that station serves the part of town west of the Annisquam River, but if that's all it gets it can go too unless the MBTA can find a way to get more parking.

North Wilmington - I was a bit surprised to see this had such low ridership given its proximity to I-93, however the lot is small and with Wilmington Station two miles away plus Woburn/Anderson just five and a half miles down I-93, I can see it being redundant. It had only 57 boardings and 85 alights.

On this thread, someone made some compelling arguments to close Melrose/Cedar Park, Wedgemere, Canton Center, Hyde Park, and Norwood Depot due to their proximity (about 1/2-mile) to other stations, as well as relocating Islington and West Roxbury.

Interestingly, under Option 6 of their Rail Vision plan (although I don't know how serious I should take it), all of the stations that were closed during the pandemic were slated to be closed under that plan, plus North Wilmington, which would be replaced by a new station at I-93 and Kendal Green, which would be replaced by a new station at I-95. It also adds new stations at Riverside, West Station, Kendall/MIT, and Wonderland. I don't know where these stations would be built, and the one at I-93 would seem redundant as the tracks go under the highway near the Route 129 interchange, which is just one exit and just over two miles north of Anderson/Woburn. It also doesn't include all of the new stations proposed under South Coast Rail or Pawtucket/Central Falls.

If Rhode Island ever gets their intrastate commuter rail service running, I don't see any reason they should go all the way to Wickford Junction. Pawtucket/Central Falls, Providence, and T. F. Green Airport are sufficient for Boston-bound travel from Rhode Island.

That type of "line in the sand" is the same lazy analysis the T uses to make ludicrous, uninformed decisions which are a complete detriment to the service. Take, for instance, their sabotage of late night service, in which their blanket decision was "key routes" operate until 3:00AM. That sounds logical until an ounce of thought is put into it. So you have buses traveling through the bedroom community of Belmont to Waverly at 3AM while the Forest Hills to Roslindale Square corridor, which gets more service and ridership than some key routes, gets no service at all because it is served by a cluster of lines none of which are "key". As has been stated in this thread, other factors to consider are demographics and nearby alternatives. That is, if removal of a relatively small stop means the 80 daily passengers who use it will lose access altogether, such removal is a detriment to the service and is bad policy.

If your data says Ruggles gets fewer than 100 passengers per day, discard it and don't ever read anything from its publisher again. Ruggles can get more than 100 boardings per train during much of the rush hour.

Mishawum is one of those stations that deserves more than a half a second look at a spreadsheet to determine its use. Mishawum is a commuter destination, not an origin. It doesn't need a parking garage, it needs a last-mile shuttle service like the 128 area corporate shuttle system that serves Alewife and Waltham. Riders who use the station cannot simply divert to Anderson.

Even proximity to other stations is a terrible metric for decision making because some stations don't serve a car-centric passenger base. That the next station is just a two minute drive up the road does not make eliminating a stop an equitable decision. Stations in neighborhoods without parking are obvious cases of location necessity adding weight to raw ridership numbers. That station is much more important to the 100-200 people who use it than the 1500 people who use a park and ride that could be easily substituted by another one one more exit down the interstate.

CRail wrote:That type of "line in the sand" is the same lazy analysis the T uses to make ludicrous, uninformed decisions which are a complete detriment to the service. Take, for instance, their sabotage of late night service, in which their blanket decision was "key routes" operate until 3:00AM. That sounds logical until an ounce of thought is put into it. So you have buses traveling through the bedroom community of Belmont to Waverly at 3AM while the Forest Hills to Roslindale Square corridor, which gets more service and ridership than some key routes, gets no service at all because it is served by a cluster of lines none of which are "key". As has been stated in this thread, other factors to consider are demographics and nearby alternatives. That is, if removal of a relatively small stop means the 80 daily passengers who use it will lose access altogether, such removal is a detriment to the service and is bad policy.

Well obviously ridership isn't 100 percent of the story. That's why I didn't suggest that stations like River Works, Newmarket, and Uphams Corner should be cut; their ridership is much lower than it is because of quality of service. But there has to be a certain point where ridership is so low that serving a station can no longer be justified. When you look at what did get cut, Prides Crossing, Hastings, Silver Hill, and Plimptonville were all small stops with no amenities or parking, and upgrading them would've been costly. I do feel like Plymouth got screwed as there are places nearby that would boost ridership, but with the bottleneck between South Station and Braintree plus either choosing it over Kingston or doing a backup and reverse is why it had so few riders unfortunately. I'll tackle Mishawum later.

I forgot to mention that West Gloucester and North Wilmington do both have parking lots. I was looking at aerial photography of both those stations and there were 17 cars parked at West Gloucester and 47 cars parked at North Wilmington (though the MBTA website says it only has 20 spaces), and I'm sure that there are passengers who get a ride to these stations as well. Since cars can go to other stations, cutting service there would mean that only the very few people who walk there will lose access to the commuter rail. I did pick 100 as my line in the sand because it was a nice, round, even number, but I also felt like it was easier to justify cutting service to West Gloucester and North Wilmington as opposed to stations like Greenwood and Rowley.

CRail wrote:If your data says Ruggles gets fewer than 100 passengers per day, discard it and don't ever read anything from its publisher again. Ruggles can get more than 100 boardings per train during much of the rush hour.

Of course, and I did in fact point out that it's a transfer point to the subway, which is why the counts were so low as very few people use it to take the train to Back Bay or South Station.

CRail wrote:Mishawum is one of those stations that deserves more than a half a second look at a spreadsheet to determine its use. Mishawum is a commuter destination, not an origin. It doesn't need a parking garage, it needs a last-mile shuttle service like the 128 area corporate shuttle system that serves Alewife and Waltham. Riders who use the station cannot simply divert to Anderson.

I was aware of that, and I agree that a last-mile shuttle would be good. It's good to serve reverse commuters, but why should it just serve them if it could do both? Since it's close to the highway enough parking would allow that.

CRail wrote:Even proximity to other stations is a terrible metric for decision making because some stations don't serve a car-centric passenger base. That the next station is just a two minute drive up the road does not make eliminating a stop an equitable decision. Stations in neighborhoods without parking are obvious cases of location necessity adding weight to raw ridership numbers. That station is much more important to the 100-200 people who use it than the 1500 people who use a park and ride that could be easily substituted by another one one more exit down the interstate.

This is true to an extent, however once you get down to walking distance like the stations mentioned in the thread I posted the link to, then you have to wonder if having two stations can be justified. If a walkshed of a commuter rail station is considered to be about half a mile, then you would have some overlap like Norwood Central vs. Norwood Depot for example. None of them were like Islington vs. Dedham Corp. Ctr. where the larger station is a park-and-ride a short distance down East Street across Route 128 from the smaller station that is in a neighborhood and has very little parking so most of its passengers walk there.

Ryanontherails wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 1:33 amNow I should add that stations with fewer than 100 passengers per day include ...Ruggles, and Malden Center which are connected to the subway and don't see much traffic in and out of Boston...

Ruggles is generally the 4th busiest station on the entire MBTA commuter rail system.

Ryanontherails wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 1:33 am...Interestingly, under Option 6 of their Rail Vision plan (although I don't know how serious I should take it), all of the stations that were closed during the pandemic were slated to be closed under that plan, plus North Wilmington, which would be replaced by a new station at I-93 and Kendal Green, which would be replaced by a new station at I-95. It also adds new stations at Riverside, West Station, Kendall/MIT, and Wonderland. I don't know where these stations would be built, and the one at I-93 would seem redundant as the tracks go under the highway near the Route 129 interchange, which is just one exit and just over two miles north of Anderson/Woburn. It also doesn't include all of the new stations proposed under South Coast Rail or Pawtucket/Central Falls....

There is probably enough real estate for an I-95 station on the Fitchburg-Wachusett Line, although it is very close to Brandeis-Roberts not just Kendall Green. In their fantasy-vision quest plan, it shows a Riverside station as a through station. Since MassDOT / Ma$$ Turnpike Authority in their infinite anti-MBTA wisdom sold off developable land I assume this means building a big honking parking garage and ramps on parkland or on the MDC/DCR Leo Martin golf course. In order to do it correctly the MBTA green line Riverside Branch would need to be extended to this new Riverside station, which is what they should have done in 1958. Auburndale station being very close would be endangered, unless they already rebuilt it for millions of dollars by that time, then they would be forced to leave it open. West Station is proposed, will be on Beacon Park which is owned by Harvard now, ridiculously close to Boston Landing. If they have two stations that close then they should build a new station for Newton Corner to mitigate the traffic congestion which interferes with Express Buses and #57 Watertown-Kenmore.

As for Kendall/MIT, a rush hour shuttle between Boston Landing and Kendall could easily be implemented at (relatively) low cost today. Add stops near Mem. Drive and at Mass Ave. It would be wildly popular, especially if Charlie Card II was implemented.

BandA wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 12:03 pm [q Since MassDOT / Ma$$ Turnpike Authority in their infinite anti-MBTA wisdom sold off developable land I assume this means building a big honking parking garage and ramps on parkland or on the MDC/DCR Leo Martin golf course.

There is an ammendment to the Constitution of the Commonwealth that basicly prevents any parkland transforming into other uses:

Article XCVII.

Article XLIX of the Amendments to the Constitution is hereby annulled and the following is adopted in place thereof: - The people shall have the right to clean air and water, freedom from excessive and unnecessary noise, and the natural, scenic, historic, and esthetic qualities of their environment; and the protection of the people in their right to the conservation, development and utilization of the agricultural, mineral, forest, water, air and other natural resources is hereby declared to be a public purpose.

The general court shall have the power to enact legislation necessary or expedient to protect such rights.

In the furtherance of the foregoing powers, the general court shall have the power to provide for the taking, upon payment of just compensation therefor, or for the acquisition by purchase or otherwise, of lands and easements or such other interests therein as may be deemed necessary to accomplish these purposes.

Lands and easements taken or acquired for such purposes shall not be used for other purposes or otherwise disposed of except by laws enacted by a two thirds vote, taken by yeas and nays, of each branch of the general court.

Isn't the GJ one track for pretty much its entirety? Also I'd imagine anything going through the Mass. Ave. crossing is a non-starter.

GJ is a single track from the switch at Beacon park to just past Memorial Drive. Then, there's a long passing siding between Memorial Drive and Mass Ave. Single track again from the Mass Ave crossing all the way to the Fitchburg main.

Beacon Park to Memorial drive can possibly be double tracked, as the bridge over the Charles has a second deck for a second track. If Kendall is to be the ultimate shuttle destination, it would be fine to just run the last 1700ft of track between Mass Ave and Kendall as a single track. There is no room to add a second track between Mass Ave and the Fitchburg main end of GJ as it is heavily built up around it. When it crosses Main st, the track actually emerges from a building that was built around the ROW.

Crossings can be upgraded.

Now the real challenge is finding the equipment to operate it. Ideally 1-2 car DMUs to start would work better than a whole trainset (which may block crossings on the Kendall end due to length)

Grand Junction appears to be a double-track ROW. Where it crosses ?broadway? near Tech Square, there is a billboard in the ROW. I don't think billboards are usually allowed in Cambridge. Just re-lay the second track, or just use the single track. Why would crossing Mass Ave be a non-starter? Freight trains used to cross daily, and Amtrak & MBTA still use this track. Where to put passenger platforms? It would be tight.

The ROW is wide enough for double track the entire way. The MIT building at Main St was specifically designed to accommodate a second track if the T ever decides to restore it.

If you think you're going to block the Mass. Ave. intersection a minimum of four times every hour (assuming there's service every 30 minutes and you're crossing it) and have everyone be down with it, you're nuts.

Stagger side platforms to just before Mass Ave for each direction. Train would get a red signal while in the station. When ready to cross, use a special DTMF signal (phone touch pad) to tell the gates to close & give them the green. This could even be syncronized to traffic lights. Supposedly they use the DTMF signal in Framingham I read.

The only places that I know of that a key touchpad code is used to activate railroad crossings are in framingham for route 126 and needham for both needham heights and center crossings. Needham used to be sensor activated in which trains rolled up to the train signal to activate them, but that changed. May st has always been key activated for the outbound an only while route 135 and Webster at was for inbounds only. In terms of fewer stops, I see express service working very well for providence, Franklin, Worcester, and Fitchburg trains. They actually used to have express trains prepandemic. Not sure what the ridership levels are now and days so I can’t speak for everyone.

I wonder if they will discontinue Bradford as a passenger stop once the mega condo project finishes? There will simply be no way to exit that parking lot after deboarding.