Railroad Forums 

  • Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

  • Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.
It is currently Sun Apr 28, 2024 11:26 am

Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: sery2831, CRail

 Reply

Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615749  by charlesriverbranch
 
A MA state rep has filed a bill that would separate commuter rail operations fro the MBTA: https://www.masstransitmag.com/manageme ... operations

Oddly, he wants to exempt the Fairmount Line. Would Keolis then have different contracts with separate state agencies? Separate pools of rolling stock? Separate maintenance facilities? If his goal is not to have MBTA answer to the Federal Railroad Administration, then the Fairmount Line needs to go with the rest of the commuter rail system, it seems to me.

I wonder if Representative Straus is even aware that MBTA commuter rail is run by Keolis.

The one advantage of putting commuter rail under separate state agency is that it might then evolve into statewide regional rail system without, say, Springfield, having to join the MBTA. But would stripping the T of responsibility for commuter rail really help address the T's deficiencies?

My trip into town yesterday involved both commuter rail, in recently built (or refurbished) equipment running on well maintained track, arriving more or less on time; and the Red Line, in cars that might have been 50 years old, at times running not much faster than a brisk walk. The contrast was stark.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615830  by eolesen
 
It might make it easier to secure funding if the perception is that it serves the collar counties vs. Boston. There was a plan once to convert the Fairmount over to DMUs, so perhaps Keolis and the rolling stock isn't a long term issue?

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615833  by RandallW
 
Assuming this bill becomes law, unless there is some law specific to Massachusetts that prevents it, MBTA could fund operations on the Fairmount line by contracting with MassDOT (or entering into some other sort of funding agreement) to operate it such that MBTA no longer needs to deal FRA oversight for some of its operations.

Right now, MBTA is subject to the jurisdiction of three federal agencies, FRA (commuter rail), USCG (ferries), and FTA (everything else). This bill and a companion bill would mostly spin out the operations subject to FRA and USCG jurisdiction. While keeping the Fairmount line in MBTA keeps an MBTA operation under FRA jurisdiction, it also means that the only MBTA rail operation entirely within the city limits of Boston does not become a MassDOT operation.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615885  by CRail
 
The idea there is probably to turn Readville into the "Indigo Line's" maintenance facility since it will be replaced by Widett Circle. The biggest issue I have with that is what the railroad system gives up by converting the Dorchester Branch. First of all, the rail line is not contained within the city of Boston as it only artificially ends at Readville. It serves as an alternate route to Boston for both the Franklin and Foxboro Branch as well as the NEC. If some major thing shuts down Back Bay for a time, you're going to want that line connected to the national network. I also wonder where they intend to send the transit trains once they get to South Bay. You can't get to South Station by any isolated corridor. As far as the Dorchester Branch goes, it should be electrified with short EMU trains running frequent service with Foxboro trains adding service during rush hours.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615901  by charlesriverbranch
 
CRail wrote: ↑Mon Feb 13, 2023 12:34 am The idea there is probably to turn Readville into the "Indigo Line's" maintenance facility since it will be replaced by Widett Circle. The biggest issue I have with that is what the railroad system gives up by converting the Dorchester Branch. First of all, the rail line is not contained within the city of Boston as it only artificially ends at Readville. It serves as an alternate route to Boston for both the Franklin and Foxboro Branch as well as the NEC. If some major thing shuts down Back Bay for a time, you're going to want that line connected to the national network. I also wonder where they intend to send the transit trains once they get to South Bay. You can't get to South Station by any isolated corridor. As far as the Dorchester Branch goes, it should be electrified with short EMU trains running frequent service with Foxboro trains adding service during rush hours.
Indigo Line? I didn't realize they were proposing to convert the Fairmount line to rapid transit. I'm surprised they haven't suggested paving it over and making it a busway, since that seems to be all the rage these days.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615903  by Red Wing
 
RandallW wrote: ↑Mon Feb 13, 2023 6:15 am
Red Wing wrote: ↑Sun Feb 12, 2023 9:10 pm So how does MassDOT access Readville if MBTA has the Fairmont?
Readville has two platforms on the NEC (currently unused), one platform on the Franklin line connection to the NEC, and one platform on the Fairmount line.
The platforms aren't the issue CRail answered the question with the hopeful Widdett Circle work. And he's right eventually everything going to Franklin and Foxboro are going to have to go via Fairmont to open up slots on the NEC.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1615922  by wicked
 
The best way to open up SW Corridor slots long term is an Orange Line extension to West Roxbury or a 128 park and ride. Not a ton of slots, but gives you a fair bit of flexibility.

I don't think this is possible... but if the Fairmount ROW could support a middle track for commuter rail only, with some passing sidings, rapid transit conversion would be an option. Not saying it would be ideal, but possible.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1616049  by lordsigma12345
 
RandallW wrote: ↑Sun Feb 12, 2023 10:00 am Right now, MBTA is subject to the jurisdiction of three federal agencies, FRA (commuter rail), USCG (ferries), and FTA (everything else). This bill and a companion bill would mostly spin out the operations subject to FRA and USCG jurisdiction. While keeping the Fairmount line in MBTA keeps an MBTA operation under FRA jurisdiction, it also means that the only MBTA rail operation entirely within the city limits of Boston does not become a MassDOT operation.
I'm kind of surprised to hear about this and I'm not sure it's a great idea. While commuter rail is indeed passenger rail subject to FRA oversight from a safety and operational standpoint, commuter rail that's part of mass transit systems is also subject to FTA oversight as much of the federal funding for such comes from the FTA so commuter rail is kind of blurred between both agencies. Commuter rail systems that receive FTA funding have to follow FTA oversight and service standards. Basically FRA tells them how to run the trains, but FTA is who they go to for the money. FRA service grants are for intercity rail and Amtrak only. It seems to me that it makes more sense to have commuter rail closely tied to the state's transit programs to ensure they are still competitive for funding. If they hand it over to the people at MassDOT who deal with intercity rail (who only deal with Amtrak and FRA) they'll have to then deal with the FTA as well. Right now only one organization has to deal with grant writing to the FTA.

This is precisely the reason why the MBTA has nothing to do with the east west passenger rail out to Springfield. MassDOT wants to keep MBTA focused on FTA grant writing and its people (ultimately whatever intercity rail authority they come up with) focused on FRA grant writing and dealing with Amtrak. The grant writing is a key thing to which right now its MassDOT For the FRA and MBTA for the FTA.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1616051  by Red Wing
 
Maybe it all should go the way of New Jersey or Connecticut. Abolish all the transit authorities and put everything under a statewide authority. With a rail division which may very well make it easier for more trips to Hyannis and Pittsfield, bus division, ferry division and a heavy/light rail division.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1616098  by Arborwayfan
 
The bill is backwards. Commuter rail should be MORE integrated with rapid transit and buses, not less. Fare structure and payment methods should be coordinated. Schedules, choice of stops, etc., should be coordinated. There should be one big transit system with several types of vehicle.

Re: Bill filed to remove commuter rail operations from MBTA

 #1616407  by BandA
 
This bill is a major, serious bill, unlike the recent electrification bill. I'm sure the legislators and the bureaucracy are working together on this.

The bill addresses two things which are happening at the same time - responding to the safety issues, and separating out modes of travel into different groups. It really gives teeth to the chief safety officer. Is this because the previous chief safety officers were ignored or didn't do their jobs?

Some definition of the terms Commuter Rail, Passenger Rail, Heavy Rail and Light Rail. Apparently Commuter Rail means all steel rail service other than Red/Orange/Green/Blue that starts or ends in Boston. Passenger Rail is all steel rail service in other areas such as the Berkshires or through Springfield or Worcester that isn't going to Boston.

Exclusivity. Sorry Boston Surface Railroad, your already unlikely plans are now illegal. If Brightline was in Massachusetts, it would be illegal. Private railroads are not allowed to provide Passenger Rail or Commuter Rail, only the government can. Cape Flyer will no longer be nominally a CCRTA service, but will be directly under MassDOT or whatever. Amtrak will have to get permission from Massachusetts to continue Acela, Northeast Regional, Downeaster, Vermonter or Springfield Shuttle service. CTrail will have to get MassDOT permission to continue their Hartford Line service to Springfield. New Hampshire Commuter Rail will not be allowed unless it is run by MassDOT. Of course Amtrak will just ignore this as Federal law trumps state law. CTrail will either ignore this law or will be granted permission.

Commuter Rail will no longer be linked to whether you are in the MBTA District. Sorry Bourne, you have wasted your money.
 Reply
 Return to “Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)”
 - All times are UTC-05:00 -