South Station Expansion Project Discussion

The Commuter Rail is the wrong straw man to set up these days to sway public opinion. The riding public and local media generally view the CR as the only "winner" of the post-pandemic, post-baker T.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/06/07/ ... ridership/

I would love to see it electrified/RER style at least inside 128, I think that would solve some problems, but I agree that the tide has turned on riding patterns. The subway needs a lot of love and attention before we fix the least-broken part of the system. There's also the matter of the looming Big Dig 2 at allston and the transportation issues it's going to cause for metrowest.

CR, I agree with some of your points, but why are you so virulently anti-TM?

"Back in my day, you young whippersnapper"
Where to start on this one?
Have you ever looked a population density maps of the metro area? Do you realize that subway frequency would result in subway ridership levels at least on Fairmount, inner Fitchburg, inner Worcester and Nbpt/Rpt?
And I guess we are all okay with making people in Mattapan, Roxbury, Chelsea and Everett commute twice as far because they aren't rich and white. Never mind the respiratory disease rates. Sorry if facts conflict with your 1950s choo-choo fantasy.

The Commonwealth is already committed to decarbonization, so eventual electrification ( unless hydrogen somehow magically gets cheaper) is a given.
And EMUs and electrification are both well proven, standard technologies.
And once a week cleaning needs(do RL trains need such frequent cleaning?) are not a reason for spending 3+ B!
And our rolling stock needs replacement desperately. EMU acquisition and maintenance will save money long term. Data from all over the word shows this.

...converting the Riverside Line to Orange Line? Whatever for? That strikes me as a waste of money.

South Station has 13 tracks. Whenever I'm there, there are always tracks occupied by trains with signs that read "out of service". Why?

I've been there when a train scheduled for this or that line is shown as "delayed" on the schedule board while several of these "out of service" trains are just sitting there. An announcement will come over the PA saying that the "delayed" train is approaching Ruggles or Back Bay or some such.
But all the train sets are essentially identical; why does any particular set have to go to, say, Franklin, instead of another? I can't help wonder if the tracks and trains couldn't be managed more efficiently. Do we really need to expand South Station at all?

It's not just the set that's delayed wherever - the crew is, also. And while there's probably some flexibility as to which set can be assigned to a given train, the crews are assigned to specific trains every rating period and can't be reassigned.

Concerning the crews: do they typically start their day at an outlying facility and work their first train into Boston (meaning that if they took a different line out, they would be stranded or the MBTA would need to taxi them to wherever they left their automobile when they started their day)?

Crews may be based at either an outlying terminal or a "city" end terminal, depending on the line. Most but not all lines have an outlying crew base. For example, all Northside lines have outer yards where crews report, except for Lowell. All crews on the Lowell Line are either BET based, or do turns to Lowell during their shift before making a run back out to their home terminal.

And the trainsets are far from all identical. With the different types of cars and different consist lengths, what looks like an identical out-of-service set may in fact need to be held for a specific departure. If you're at South Station, that set could be a long set needed for Providence or Worcester. Or it could be an Old Colony set with power doors. Or it might need to come back to Boston for locomotive servicing and fueling overnight, and can't spend the night at an outlying yard, etc.

If we were in a parallel universe where the system was electrified, some of these issues might go away (EMU or electric push-pull sets wouldn't need the motive power serviced quite as often), but not many of them.

wicked wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2023 5:19 pm CR, I agree with some of your points, but why are you so virulently anti-TM?

Tallguy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 4:01 am Sorry if facts conflict with your 1950s choo-choo fantasy.

That's why. They and like minded folks have determined that their own ideas are superior, and if you disagree with them based on familiarity with the real world, you're of an obsolete and ignorant mentality. Folks on here have disputed actual operational trends based on their interpretation of GPS tracking data, for example. This isn't a simulator, it's a sizeable transportation network that proved far more efficient and reliable before electronic data analysis. Stringing up wire everywhere is fun in railroad tycoon, but it comes with tremendous burdens in finances and resources, and with severe disruptions in real life. I continue to support electrification where it makes sense, Corridor/Stoughton, Dorchester Branch, Needham (the infrastructure can be futureproofed to support RT conversion), and maybe Franklin/Foxboro. Once that's done we can reassess other routes.

The notion that we don't need to increase SS capacity because we should just keep trains moving in perpetuity is more ridiculous today than it would have been in the 1950s before every household had 1 or more cars. Rapid transit is rapid transit, and Commuter (or Regional, doesn't matter) Rail is that. I would love a system that resembles Metro-North/LIRR but we're dealing with a reality that's more like NJT. The T didn't inherit a vastly electric railroad like Septa and Long Island did. It's fun to think big, but it's important to keep our heads down where the oxygen is.

How do you expand South Station, then? Dig a cavern under it like they did at Grand Central? We can't build over it; someone's already doing that.

charlesriverbranch wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 10:51 am How do you expand South Station, then? Dig a cavern under it like they did at Grand Central? We can't build over it; someone's already doing that.

The expansion is premised on the USPS selling their abutting holdings to the state. Tearing down the postal annex would provide space for additional tracks and platforms. That has always been the idea, but the Post Office has so far opted to not play ball. And the state has no leverage to force the issue. So the reality is that it probably can't happen. At least the folks at Transit Matters are trying to study alternatives.

There is more than one interest in relocating the post office annex. In addition to SS expansion, the city would like to restore a contiguous Dot Ave to Congress St. I don't remember where that currently stands but it's got plenty of local and state support and I'm sure the big heads at those levels could come up with a plan that the post office would be happy with, especially with all of the redevelopment happening all around it.