SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

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

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby mxdata » Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:21 pm

This project is often referred to as the "Southcoast Snail".

It has been suggested that its slogan should be "Headed your way since 1991".

MX
"We Repair No Locomotive Before Its Time"
User avatar
mxdata
 
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:30 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby Teamdriver » Wed May 10, 2017 4:49 pm

Middleboro board, MassDOT officials discuss SouthCoast Rail project

By Eileen Reece, Enterprise Correspondent
MIDDLEBORO – Selectmen made their message clear when they met with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation officials this week that any plans to extend the South Coast Rail service through Middleboro needs to coincide with plans to reconstruct the Middleboro rotary.

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/2017 ... il-project
User avatar
Teamdriver
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 3:18 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Wed May 10, 2017 7:27 pm

Ouch. The first of many hostages the Old Colony folks have at their disposal to ensure this turd sandwich doesn't lay waste to their service levels. For perhaps the first time ever, I'm egging the NIMBY's on with their Operation Chaos.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7008
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby Teamdriver » Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:52 am

News Article , 4 June 2017

Middleboro South Coast Rail option inches forward


By Michael Bonner, The Standard-Times
The state’s Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs issued a certificate last week that allows for more research to be done on South Coast Rail’s Middleboro route.

“It moves it forward by saying you’ve met a minimum threshold of basic information to work on this project change,” Rep. William Straus, D-Mattapoisett, said.

While the Massachusetts Environmental Act certificate is not a giant leap toward a public transit rail system in the SouthCoast, it does nudge the project forward.

“What that document does is say here are the things that you need to put into the report so we can give you total approval,” Straus said.

A step in reverse would have been if a certificate wasn’t issued, which would mean the Baker Administration doesn’t see a Middleboro route as plausible, Straus said.

The certificate does translate to more waiting, though. Straus wasn’t certain of the timetable for the conclusion of any report.

The Middleboro route has been labeled at “Phase 1” of the South Coast Rail project and would take passengers to New Bedford through Middleboro and onto Boston in 95 to 100 minutes. Phase 2 would include a line through Stoughton, which would cut the time from New Bedford to Boston to 77 minutes.

Cost for the Stoughton route was estimated at $3.4 billion last year, while the cost for Middleboro was $1.1 billion.


http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/2017 ... es-forward
User avatar
Teamdriver
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 3:18 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby BostonUrbEx » Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:16 pm

Teamdriver wrote:Cost for the Stoughton route was estimated at $3.4 billion last year, while the cost for Middleboro was $1.1 billion.


Insane cost for a sane routing, and a crazy cost for a crazy routing.

South Coast Rail is doomed under our current leadership. John Kerry must have seen the future of South Coast Rail when he said "this tunnel will be a bargain" about the Big Dig.
User avatar
BostonUrbEx
 
Posts: 3566
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Winn to MPT 8, Boston to MPN 38, and Hat to Bank

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby BandA » Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:03 pm

What's it take to delete the electric requirement, do double tracking, and terminate in Taunton until demand is proven. This should go to the back of the line behind improvements to existing lines and extension of Middleborough to Buzzards Bay.
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby mxdata » Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:10 am

A run time of 95 to 100 minutes via Middleborough is supposed to be an improvement over the existing bus service?

MX
"We Repair No Locomotive Before Its Time"
User avatar
mxdata
 
Posts: 1677
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:30 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Fri Jun 09, 2017 6:55 am

BandA wrote:What's it take to delete the electric requirement, do double tracking, and terminate in Taunton until demand is proven. This should go to the back of the line behind improvements to existing lines and extension of Middleborough to Buzzards Bay.


Deleting the electric requirement and single-tracking constriction requires challenging the Army Corps' environmental impact findings that mandate running through the swamp on a hugely expensive single-track only concrete trestle with special drainage channeling instead of using the pre-existing DT embankment. The trestle is a wholly arbitrary mandate cherry-picked by the Corps. It's a massive cost blowout item that changes the train meets enough that even if all other mainline track north and south of the swamp were double-iron (which it pretty much is) the schedule couldn't be managed because the location of the forced-single upends all the meets. Thus, you have the crippled rush-hour schedules in the FEIR where one branch has to skip the whole of Taunton and the other branch has to skip the whole of Stoughton-Canton...but travel time ends up equal to the all-stops off-peaks because of the extended pauses at station stops for managing train meets around the single track. The electrification requirement was thus--equally arbitrarily--baked in to recoup a measly 2-5 minutes end-to-end because that was the literal only thing that made the rush meets work. The electrification requirement is a band-aid for the DT being broken by the restricted-width trestle on pegs breaking the schedule meets. A billion-dollar band-aid to a billion-dollar band-aid...which in the real world won't work because the margins for these kludged meets are still too small to prevent frequent cascading delays. This will be the system's worst week-in/week-out OTP performer by a wide margin, but unlike current gimps like Worcester artificially hobbled by poor SGR there won't be any further investments that can fix the problem here.


There is no precedent for requiring a mile-long squat concrete bridge. The de-landbanked portion of the Greenbush Line between Cohasset and Greenbush was approved under the same EPA regs as the South Coast FEIR to re-use its old DT embankment with no special accommodations other than upgrading the pre-1960 culverts to modern standards. That ROW passes through several stretches of much more environmentally sensitive tidal estuaries feeding the Scituate Bay drainage network than the Stoughton Line does in the closed drainage network of the swamp. The swamp is also far more severely constrained by the gigantic east-west I-495 embankment bottling up its water flow than any of the north-south corridors like the Stoughton ROW, MA 24, and MA 138 that run parallel to the small streams and only need to do basic minimization of their pollutant runoff to stay non-impactful (MassDOT doing a pretty nonexistent job at that with 24, FWIW). By the Corps' logic, Greenbush should've been the one mandated to have miles and miles of concrete trestles in the Scituate Bay estuaries...not Stoughton. So their conclusion...and the billion-dollar electrificaition band-aids that give the utterly broken schedule the thinnest possible veneer of truthiness...are based on a mountain of BS. The hundreds of pages of FEIR doesn't even try to explain why these are precedent-setters; it skips right to "because we said so".


The Army Corps is a political fiefdom seeking to justify its own power base, just like any other large government bureaucracy. So they play favorites on projects based on where the Congressional pork is most likely to flow, and will coach their recs accordingly based on political winds. Plenty of good projects have been turfed by them with arbitrary hurdles because they weren't feelin' it, and plenty of projects have had thorny issues glossed over when the trough is full of pork and there's political capital in jockeying for position. That's just how gov't goes. South Coast Rail has never in its history had all that strong hook for Fed funding because it's so intrastate in nature, and the local pitch for better Boston commutes translates very weakly to a Federal pitch that this has "intercity" coattails. As you'd expect for the objectively 'tweener distances involved and the more speculative economic locus on presently weak-ish satellite cities vs. Boston's voraciously growing CBD (which, by contrast, Fed funding for GLX et al. more immediately feeds). The Corps does what a political fiefdom does: follow the money. And the Federal money ain't shining on this 'tweener of a project. Since there are many, many others in this region with more lucrative Fed coattails to chase...they turfed it.

The core problem isn't the Army Corps turfing it, because they do that as political animals are wont to do. It's the lack of a challenge from the state. The justifications for the billion-dollar trestle with its billion-dollar band-aids are nonexistent in the FEIR. They're easily defeatable by precedent. The state can throw binders full of Greenbush construction permits not 12 years old at them and say "Justify this vs. that" and the Corps would have no answers. Throw dozens of other projects that got rubber-stamped for further counterpoints. Dissect the utterly broken schedule and highlight how little that does to take traffic off far worse swamp polluters 24 & 495. All because the Corps never attempted to justify it in the first place. We're not talking meeting some sort of tightly-argued legal precedent that can hold up in court. Simply mounting a challenge that asks for answers required in a supposedly "Final" Environmental Impact Statement is enough to get that FEIR reopened, because the Corps administratively didn't show the math it was supposed to show. And as political animals are wont to do, the Corps will bend to political pressure. They'll reopen the FEIR to new interpretation rather than double-down in stubbornness. The project is never going to qualify for 50% or greater Fed funding; that chance passed years ago, if it ever existed in the first place. So they have more to lose by raising a stink in petty hostility over something a Corps regime 2 Administrations removed decided than they do by quietly reopening the case. They already know the real answers since all the billion-dollar band-aids are predicated on precise knowledge of what they broke by precluding the DT embankment. The rest is simply how hard the state is willing to push for an accurate real-world assessment of the environmental impact. If they push hard enough for a real up/down assessment, chances are they'll get it winnowed down to their preferred DT embankment and $1.5B in instant savings from the band-aids upon band-aids being deleted. Simply because the mountain of BS the single-track concrete trestle + train meet kludges rest upon don't stand up to sustained scrutiny, and today's Army Corps administration has bigger fish to fry than sending its ego to die on this hill.


The elephant in the room is that the state won't challenge it. Hasn't challenged it. Has never challenged it. Any of it. The grift is still too lucrative among state and local pols to keep pushing the fiction of the 'bigness' of South Coast Rail for the people lining their own pockets over this sham advocacy to see any political capital in any passing attempt to dial back the FEIR. Too many swing voters and media outlets can still be bowled over by promises that they don't have to focus on getting anything done. The game is still sustaining itself on enough of its own hot air that they're now seeing more political capital in milking absurdities like the M'boro Alternative. And nobody perpetuating the fiction will still be in power when the jig is up and reality can no longer be deferred: that there can be no practical Middleboro Alternative, that there can be no build--period--within two orders of magnitude of this price quote, that officials willingly and knowingly passed up a full decade of opportunity to challenge the FEIR for a buildable Stoughton Alternative until the window of opportunity closed, and that the perpetuators of this scam got rich off the backs of their constituents wasting hundreds of millions in paper and hype fully knowing that the cities would get zilch in the end.

Doesn't have to be this way. There is today--and always was--a path for building SCR at a full and functional diesel schedule through double-tracked Stoughton at a "tolerably slovenly" $1.5B, if they want to press for it. But they're not pressing for anything real to get built because hype is simply too good for business for some classes of political parasites. The endgame isn't giving the public a choice...or a benefit. But it is absolutely, positively by-choice that the politics have worked out this way.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7008
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby GP40MC1118 » Sat Jun 10, 2017 8:23 am

If only the SOCO delegation and other local interested parties could see this approach.

D
GP40MC1118
 
Posts: 3267
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:06 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:22 pm

http://www.capecodtimes.com/news/201709 ... ing-closer

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation announced Monday that a new train station in Middleboro — that could possibly connect to Cape Cod in the future — is the most desirable option going forward with the first phase of South Coast Rail.

A new Middleboro station at Pilgrim Junction “provides the shortest travel time from Fall River and New Bedford, provides a one-seat ride for the majority of passengers, supports a connection for future Cape shuttle service, and allows the existing station to serve Cape Flyer service,” MassDOT wrote in a statement.

A new station was the most desirable of three options that were considered, they wrote.


Hooray! Crapping all over the most successful TOD station on the whole commuter rail by moving it up the street and reducing all of Cape Cod forever to...maybe...a connecting shuttle is the least-worst of the 3 arbitrarily horrible options we surveyed! The zombie lives another day!

Also...the Cape Cod Times needs a new headline writer pronto. [/facepalm]
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7008
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby GP40MC1118 » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:57 pm

Yep...another sad day for Soco Rail.

And another stupid name for a station - Pilgrim Jct? Not as bad as Whale's Tooth, but as confusing and dumb
as Maynard Jct instead of South Acton. God, who are these people?

D
GP40MC1118
 
Posts: 3267
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:06 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby Rockingham Racer » Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:07 pm

GP40MC1118 wrote:Yep...another sad day for Soco Rail.

And another stupid name for a station - Pilgrim Jct? Not as bad as Whale's Tooth, but as confusing and dumb
as Maynard Jct instead of South Acton. God, who are these people?

D


I'm curious. What would you call it?
User avatar
Rockingham Racer
 
Posts: 2859
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:25 pm

Re: SouthCoast Rail Discussion Thread

Postby GP40MC1118 » Thu Sep 21, 2017 7:34 am

Whale's Tooth should be New Bedford because, gee, that the name of the damn city. Not the novel.

Pilgrim Jct should be Middleboro, change Middleboro/Lakeville to Lakeville.

Try attaching names to location's real geographical name instead of some consultant's or
urban planner's fantastical notions.

D
GP40MC1118
 
Posts: 3267
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:06 pm

Previous

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: NealG and 10 guests