North-South Rail Link Discussion

There's a parallel between the NSRL and the Red-Blue Connector in one way - they would both serve to reduce crowding where the subway system is most constrained: the downtown core. The closer you are to the Park/DTX/State/GC square you are, the more crowded it gets. Allowing more transit riders to have a way around this helps overall system capacity in huge ways. Helping a Blue Line commuter get to Cambridge without going thru GC and Park? Helps. Helping a commuter from Wakefield get to Ruggles and the LMA without packing on to the Orange Line? Helps.

I don't doubt for a minute that plenty of regional rail commuters would happily wait 5-15 minutes for a cross-platform or same-platform connection to get somewhere on the other side of the city, such as the Wakefield to LMA example above, were it possible. That seems well within reason to avoid having to pack onto the Orange Line for that trip, and would probably be time competitive by the time you make the walk from railroad station to Orange Line, wait for a train, and then deal with the slower travel time through the city.

I'd argue that more connections and more routing options would be more valuable than express tracks on the MBTA subway system. We're not a huge city like NYC or Chicago, we're not (in most cases) traveling huge distances. If the (pre-pandemic) crowding levels can be reduced, it will help improve travel times. If we're going to build new subway tunnels, we'd be better off coming up with other routes which expand the destinations served by rapid transit and take pressure of the existing lines.

What if the NSRL came to the surface, at the edge of the harbor? Could it be promoted as a way to connect rails north and south through the city while protecting it from the rising seas? Venice has a causeway and nobody seems to mind. Developers have no problem walling the harbor off from us; let's give them something to look at besides the Airport.

NSRL 4 main tracks ? No way any tunnel system that will require 2 separate bores to meet present safety standards. Two 2 track bores for 4 tracks would be just too big . Just think of all the buried impediments . I saw enough of the big dig to just shake my head.

The tunnel walls for I-93 extend quite some ways below the actual roadway, specifically to make a space for the NSRL. The dirt between the walls needs to be removed, but as far as utilities go the area has already been clean-roomed - if, indeed, there was anything that far down to begin with.

Do any of the NSRL proposals include proposed service patterns? That is, do any of them say which lines, if any, would run through? It seems like lines that would allow a more or less straight trip (Plymouth to Fitchburg, Middleboro to Lowell, Newburyport to Providence, etc) and a line along the coast, which wouldn't be in a straight line but would link places that are slow and unpleasant to drive between (Middleborough to Newburyport, Plymouth to Rockport) would be the most likely ones to be competitive with driving and help attract passengers in the off-peak directions.

There was one map published in the 90s, but I don't know whether it was the official proposal:


The majority of NSRL ridership is not going to be suburb to suburb - there aren't many jobs near the suburban stations, and few people are going to commute from the opposite side of Boston. The majority is going to be from suburb to city (Northside to South Station, Back Bay, Ruggles, Lansdowne, etc; Southside to North Station, Porter, etc) - especially inside 128, where NSRL plus increased frequency provides nearly-subway-quality service.

I think there's a lot of arterial traffic that doesn't make sense to travel through the city by car, but might by train. The 128 belt does have a lot of business on it. I sure wouldn't want to commute to Dedham from the North Shore, for example, or to Woburn from Quincy, but with a one seat train ride I'd be much less deterred.

Adding to the Edg's map - some of the early documentation has maps
This one is from 1994 https://archive.org/details/nsrl-tech-r ... 6/mode/1up

At the time they had several proposal of what lines might run through.
https://archive.org/details/nsrl-tech-r ... 1/mode/1up
https://archive.org/details/nsrl-tech-r ... 2/mode/1up

All the information from the most recent study a couple years ago is on the MassDOT website. Chapter 4 talks about service patterns, both with a 2-bore and 4-bore option.

https://www.mass.gov/lists/north-south- ... -documents

It will be hard to pair suburb-to-suburb trips. Last mile connections are a challenge and have been a challenge in the pre-COVID push for "reverse commute" options. That last mile connection exists in the city and a lot of locations are walkable. Plus parking is typically less of an issue in the suburbs as most employers have room at their office buildings for a sizable parking lot with free parking. To get people on the train the cost/benefit in terms of both time and money has to be in that favor. If they're even close to equal people will tend to favor their car because it offers more flexibility.

The real benefit as others have said is unloading the downtown subway core. If you live North and go to the LMA, you're transferring to Green or Orange. Instead you could stay on or transfer to another commuter rail train and get off at Ruggles. I know plenty of people who work near South Station or Back Bay who get off at North, and would gladly stay on the train for an extra stop or two.

Just heard about the proposed central station . That IMO is a very good proposal. Now that really can possibly reduce the overloaded local transit.

Trinnau wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 4:22 pm Plus parking is typically less of an issue in the suburbs as most employers have room at their office buildings for a sizable parking lot with free parking. To get people on the train the cost/benefit in terms of both time and money has to be in that favor. If they're even close to equal people will tend to favor their car because it offers more flexibility.

Not necessarily true. Reverse services like the 351, Mishawum station, and the 128 area shuttle services from Waltham and Alewife all being significantly utilized serve to prove people are commuting TO there and aren't hellbent on driving. When Biogen launched their own shuttle service there was an article about it in which people commented that they prefer the extra time to rest, read, or get some work done, and there was something to be said for not being able to take on that one extra task the boss dropped on your desk 4 minutes before quitting time because, "sorry I've got a bus to catch." If you're going to do this thing, you're going to have to take into account people commuting to non-urban business districts if you want to maximize utilization in addition to North Shore to Ruggles type trips.

The whole idea of a Central Station, while admirable, is what will kill any N-S proposal. Yeah, if we could turn back time and start from scratch, that would make perfect sense (and North and South stations would never be built,) but the vast majority of the $$$ in such a proposal could be cut if just a simple way to get rail from here to there was proposed.

I would love a Central Station, but I would love a N-S connector more

Back when the Waltham CitiBus ran, there were a surprising number of people who commuted from the North Shore to Waltham, via the Newburyport/Rockport and Fitchburg lines with a transfer at North Station. For the train I took daily from N. Station to Waltham, a couple dozen people made the transfer. If the inbound train was delayed, the conductor would hold the outbound train for a couple minutes as well.

artman wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:33 am The whole idea of a Central Station, while admirable, is what will kill any N-S proposal. Yeah, if we could turn back time and start from scratch, that would make perfect sense (and North and South stations would never be built,) but the vast majority of the $$$ in such a proposal could be cut if just a simple way to get rail from here to there was proposed.

I would love a Central Station, but I would love a N-S connector more

You're right about the money, but the real problem is the increase in dwell time and the general confusion between what is an intercity service and what is a subway service.