atlantis wrote: I don't think we should write off the Greenbush line just yet. I think improvements must be made such as better transit connections at stations.
In my opinion, it seems in this country, especially this state, commuter rail is often set up as an extension of driving. For example, at Greenbush station, I'm not aware of any connecting bus to Scituate. I don't think thaer'es even a local taxi service. (although someone can correct me on this)
Such transit connections could make the service more viable, IMHO.
Hingham and Scituate are entirely creations of the auto.
Ron Newman wrote:Hingham and Scituate are entirely creations of the auto.
No, both existed centuries before there were any automobiles around. They were settled during the same decade as Boston. The Old Ship Church in Hingham is one of the oldest in the whole USA.
livesteamer wrote:Ron Newman wrote:Hingham and Scituate are entirely creations of the auto.
No, both existed centuries before there were any automobiles around. They were settled during the same decade as Boston. The Old Ship Church in Hingham is one of the oldest in the whole USA.
While it is drifting off topic, I will absolutely agree that Scituate did not grow up around the automobile.
Arlington: Hingham and Scituate are entirely creations of the auto.
Ron Newman: No, both existed centuries before there were any automobiles around. They were settled during the same decade as Boston. The Old Ship Church in Hingham is one of the oldest in the whole USA.Livesteamer: I will absolutely agree that Scituate did not grow up around the automobile. I grew up in Scituate having moved there in 1957. Scituate was a sleepy little seacoast town (with a year round population of something less than 7500) and the Greenbush line was a critical link to Boston. The building of the Southeast Express sealed the fate of the Old Colony and created all the auomobile dependant suburbs we now know.
Teamdriver wrote:This line serves quite the affluent area.I dont think parking fees or train fares mean too much here. i just dont get why these people would rather drive up rte 3a or rte 3 in all that traffic than be in a nice train car.What could cause this insanity?
“This has done nothing from an environmental standpoint,’’ said state Senator Robert L. Hedlund, a Hingham Republican first elected in 1990 in part over his opposition to the project. “It has simply drawn sorely needed capital funds away from other projects that made better environmental sense, never mind transportation-planning sense.’’
Hedlund is now calling for the Legislature to convene a hearing to examine Greenbush’s progress and consider the lessons it holds for South Coast Rail, the Patrick administration’s proposed $1.4 billion to $2 billion commuter rail extension to Fall River and New Bedford via Taunton
Arlington wrote:The situation is really much much worse that just under-performing its ridership estimates by nearly 1/2 (doing 2,133 per day instead of 4,200). It is 74% BELOW its estimate for new transit riders. because nearly half of riders were taken not from cars, but were cannibalized from the commuter boat!
The reality is that for $534m was "supposed" to entice 3,600 new transit riders, and it only enticed 950 which is just 26% of forecast. Even had the line cost its original $200m its hard to justify it based on this ridership
I've reconstructed the projected and actual based on the Boston Globe article (which is found here and is a "must read"
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/10/31/after_3_years_greenbush_ridership_below_projections/)
Projected 3 to 5 Year Ridership:
4,200 daily
of which....
3,550 new transit users
450 cannibalized from commuter boat (forecast was for 1 boat rider taken for each 8 taken from the road)
200 cannibalized from other transit (this is unstated, but I'm guestimating from actual cannibalization)
Actual Ridership at 3 years
2,133 daily (and falling...but more like "at its likely max" if not for the recession)
of which...
950 new transit users (44.5%)
995 cannibalized from the commuter boat (46.6%)
190 cannibalized from other transit (8.9%)
$534,000,000 spent per each of 950 new transit rider is $562,000 per new rider BEFORE operating subsidy. You'd probably have gotten way better environmental benefit by giving away 200 new Priuses (for free) every year for the next 50 years (which could be funded with more like $300m, and would require no operating subsidy). Or given away 950 condos along the Mattapan High Speed line. Building this line was financial insanity.
chefsef wrote:So, I say, give it more time and make the service better (cheaper, more frequent, bar car) and ridership will increase.
Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
Users browsing this forum: sonicdoommario and 8 guests