Southcoast Rail

In short...

It's a state agency. If the three top politicians (governor, House Speaker, Senate president) aren't pushing for something, or actively pushing against something, it ain't gonna happen. You really also need the first two to be in agreement, as the governor controls so much of the agency leadership (both MBTA and MassDOT) and can set the bureaucratic agenda, and you need the House to put the money in the right places. And much like all American politics, it's far easier to prevent things from happening, much harder to actually do something constructive.

The Feds have some leverage, but usually just in terms of threatening to take away federal $$$ if some goal isn't met.

You get some outside cases involving lawsuits (this is what happened with the Big Dig transit commitments) but even then the complexities of public mega-projects provide lots of opportunities for Things To Not Happen As Expected.

Two different kinds of legal requirements here.

In 1991, the state agreed to 14 emissions reduction projects to settle a lawsuit with the Conservation Law Foundation over the Big Dig. The agreement was put into federal law, under supervision of the EPA. This was the original list:


Of the transit projects, most were actually done. Both Lynn items, both South Station items, Newburyport, Old Colony, Worcester, park and ride spaces, Blue Line platform lengthening, and South Boston Transitway were all completed. (Some were completed later than the deadline, with interim mitigation required.) Silver Line Phase 3 was never a legal requirement, merely a planned addition to the Transitway.

In March 2005, with GLX not even in planning, Somerville and the CLF filed a lawsuit against the state for breaching the 1991 agreement. They reached a settlement within 2 months - likely because the state was aware that it was in breach of contract and would not win in court. The updated settlement modified GLX to include the Union Square Branch and to have the Medford Branch go to "Medford Hillside" (versus the " Ball Square/Tufts University" in the 1991 agreement.) Additional Worcester Line service and improvements to the Fairmount Line were added; the Red-Blue Connector and Arborway Line restoration were removed. A follow-up lawsuit from the CLF resulted in an agreement to still design the Red-Blue Connector.

So yes, if the state really doesn't want to build something, as with RBX and Arborway, there are sometimes ways of getting out of it. But the state didn't simply ignore the requirements - they got sued for that - they reached a legal agreement to substitute those projects with others of equal emissions reduction value. That substitution was possible because the original settlement was specifically about additional auto emissions from the Big Dig.

-----------------------------

Now, with SCR, the electrification requirement comes from the 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report, which was done by the Army Corps of Engineers, and the 2013 FEIR. Electrification was chosen (officially) for faster travel times (based on 100mph vs 79mph top speeds) and lower emissions. Since the DEIR and FEIR were formally accepted, they do have some legal power. Phase 1 (with a supplemental DEIR) is an interim service with a different route, which is why it was able to be diesel. If the state decides it wants to do Phase 2 with diesel, it might have to challenge the DEIR/FEIR in court, or it might merely have to file supplemental environmental documents - I'm not sure there. Regardless, building SCR itself is not a legal requirement whatsoever.

Now, with SCR, the electrification requirement comes from the 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report, which was done by the Army Corps of Engineers, and the 2013 FEIR. Electrification was chosen (officially) for faster travel times (based on 100mph vs 79mph top speeds) and lower emissions. Since the DEIR and FEIR were formally accepted, they do have some legal power. Phase 1 (with a supplemental DEIR) is an interim service with a different route, which is why it was able to be diesel. If the state decides it wants to do Phase 2 with diesel, it might have to challenge the DEIR/FEIR in court, or it might merely have to file supplemental environmental documents - I'm not sure there. Regardless, building SCR itself is not a legal requirement whatsoever.

Thanks for the great explanation.
So if the state were suddenly to decide that it wants to run the Fall River/New Bedford Line with diesel locomotives (which is something I can see happening in the future for a multitude of reasons) It would have to take these two reports to court and make a case for why it is doing it, or convince the Army Corps of Engineers that running diesel would be fine for the environment. In the case that the state took them to court, what grounds would the state have to stand on to make a case if it accepted the reports in the first place? Would it just be an "actually we don't want to do this anymore because..." or would there be a more complicated reasoning to it? I ask this because I can see a potential case like this coming to fruition.
- Thanks

While I'd like to see full build come to fruition, I fully expect it to get the Arborway's lip service fade to forgotten about, which I then expect to doom SCR in the long run. I also believed the requirement was legal and am not convinced that it isn't (not all legal requirements are big dig related). Whether or not it was legal there's an obligation to do SCR before any other extension project and that seems to be holding up Cape service. I'm hearing service to Buzzards Bay will begin as soon as SCR opens. Seems there's a logjam of things MassDOT wants to do that are held up by SCR being first in line.

CRail wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:41 pm I'm hearing service to Buzzards Bay will begin as soon as SCR opens. Seems there's a logjam of things MassDOT wants to do that are held up by SCR being first in line.

See MassDOT's report on Cape service which was just released this past November. It'll start after SCR, and another $70M+ in investment and infrastructure. There's nothing on the street yet for this work and all of the local signal resources along with some regional ones (signals are the main inhibitor to Cape service, long story short, if you want to start new regular passenger service, you need to install PTC - federal requirement) are either tied up in ATC/PTC or SCR work. It's planned as a 2-seat ride with a transfer to SCR service at Middleboro.

SCR Phase II opens the way for a 1-seat ride to the Cape in addition to a better ride to Fall River/New Bedford. So it has a wider political pull than just those in the SCR service area. Political commitments to certain paths sometimes seem like legal commitments but aren't.

The state was foolish to not challenge the Army Corp's finding that they needed a giant bridge over the swamp, and I would think any path forward would include such a challenge. I think electrification was an idealized scenario at the time but it didn't meet with the reality of the T's operations and how quickly they could shift toward its use. So with a political (not legal) commitment to get SCR up and running they opted for "Phase I" via Middleboro, which really still built a large portion of the original SCR plan, from Cotley southward.

Based on the T's current position on electrification I can see it as part of the path forward, but it should be tempered by realistic expectations in terms of start of electrified service. This is where dual-mode locos could come into play, with Phase II built with electric from Stoughton to Cotley through the swamp (and the T doing Canton to Stoughton) and then diesel the rest of the way until the rest is eventually electrified. They also need to cut back the service volume from the originally planned 40 trains, as instead of an extension of Middleboro service it becomes an extension of Stoughton service - and has the same slots on the NEC as those trains do. The original service plan was in a vacuum and ignored everything else on the NEC. Middleboro and Stoughton have pretty much the same number of trains.

So in short, there is enough changed to at least file supplemental environmental paperwork, if not an entirely new EIR sequence.

Question: Is there a "one-engine-in-steam-on-the-line" exemption to the PTC requirement? That is, could one trainset shuttle back and forth from Buzzards Bay to Middleboro without PTC if the trash train and any other freight moves were restricted to late night?

Observation: It's not a bad side effect that going via Middleboro in phase I has upgraded eight or nine miles of roadbed, track, and signals between Middleboro and East Taunton that could also be used for service from the NEC to Buzzards Bay and the Cape, so it wouldn't be totally lost if phase II got built. For that matter, some day it might make sense to run trains to Buzzards Bay via Stoughton and Taunton as well as via Brockton and Bridgewater, or to run some SC trains on one line and some on the other, or to run trains from Fall River and/or New Bedford to Buzzards Bay. There's a lot of development all over the state; who knows what the transportation demands will be in ten or twenty years.

SCR Phase II opens the way for a 1-seat ride to the Cape in addition to a better ride to Fall River/New Bedford.

SCR Full Build will not open the way for a one seat ride to the Cape, that is only possible if Middleborough/Lakeville Station would be reopened for such service (which would waste the relatively new Middleborough Station currently under construction) or if a second platform were constructed on the eastern leg of the Middleborough wye, neither of which are planned to happen. What is being planned is for a 400 foot shuttle platform to be built on the southern leg of the wye for easy transfer from Middleborough trains to Cape trains, this is why I believe the new Middleborough site should have been located north of the wye, it would have worked for SCR Phase I service, terminating at Middleborough service, and one-seat Boston to Cape Cod service all while being located closer to the town center, but the South Coast Rail DSEIR report ruled this out because they wouldn't be able to squeeze as many parking spaces into it as they would with the current location.

So in short, there is enough changed to at least file supplemental environmental paperwork, if not an entirely new EIR sequence.

Thanks for the response.

I'm hearing service to Buzzards Bay will begin as soon as SCR opens.

Service to Cape Cod is planned to begin in conjunction with SCR Phase II opening in 2030

There are no plans to demolish the existing Middleboro station, and the Cape Flyer is still intended to stop there for the foreseeable future once regular service shifts to the new location. Not sure if they'll run a shuttle between stations or what, but it's not going anywhere and should be "turn-key" for future service if they want to. Not saying it's the best choice, but it's not an impediment.

Did you look at the Cape Rail study I linked a few posts back? (I updated the link to be one less click.) It is expressly built around SCR phase I service, and there are schedules at the very end of the study that are based on the SCR Phase I schedules.

Cape Rail Study, page 23 wrote:Alternative 1 focused on providing weekday commuter service to Buzzards Bay with a stop at Wareham and transfers between Cape trains and SCR trains at the new Middleborough Station (Figure 3-2)... ...Alternative 1 connected Cape service with SCR Phase 1 to provide service between Boston and Buzzards Bay with a single transfer at the new Middleborough Station. As described in Section 2.2.1, SCR trains will also stop at the new Middleborough Station. Construction of a second platform for Cape service would allow for a cross-platform transfer at Middleborough between SCR and Cape trains (Figure 2-3). Alternative 1 would time the trips to provide a coordinated transfer between the two services.

The 400' platform at Middleboro was thrown into the SCR DSEIR in 2018 to at least show it, there are no current "plans" to build it - it's not in the SCR project's work, only the 800' platform is. The Cape Rail study expressly mentions the possibility of building on the east leg instead

Cape Rail Study page 11, footnote 11 wrote:For the purposes of this study, the analysis assumed the platform location as shown in the SCR DSEIR. Prior to advancing any construction of the 400-foot platform, additional coordination and design would determine the exact location of the 400-foot platform within Middleborough Station. The SCR project advanced the track design of the station to accommodate the platform at the location shown in Figure 2-3, which would provide the shortest walking route for passengers transferring between Cape service and SCR trains. The station will also include a path at the northern edge of the parking lot that could accommodate a future connection between the 800-foot platform and a 400-foot platform to the east of the parking lot. Although the potential location to the east of the parking lot would result in a longer walk time between trains and more complex construction due to grade differences, it could allow the same platform to be used for all trains serving the Cape region (including direct trips to or from Boston).

As you noted downtown really didn't work.

Arborwayfan wrote:Question: Is there a "one-engine-in-steam-on-the-line" exemption to the PTC requirement? That is, could one trainset shuttle back and forth from Buzzards Bay to Middleboro without PTC if the trash train and any other freight moves were restricted to late night?

Not anymore, it was allowed during the initial PTC implementation. Here's the regulation:

49 CFR 236.1005(b)(6) wrote: 236.1005 Requirements for Positive Train Control systems.
(b) PTC system installation -
(6) New rail passenger service. No new intercity or commuter rail passenger service shall commence after December 31, 2020, until a PTC system certified under this subpart has been installed and made operative.

My mistake about the 400 foot platform and the shuttle, thanks for the correction.

There are no plans to demolish the existing Middleboro station, and the Cape Flyer is still intended to stop there for the foreseeable future once regular service shifts to the new location.

I was aware that neither of the Middleborough Stations were going to be demolished, and I was aware that the CapeFlyer will continue stopping at Middleborough/Lakeville, but since the CapeFlyer is only seasonal the station will still be closed most of the year.

The Cape Rail study expressly mentions the possibility of building on the east leg instead

They will probably go with that, but we will see when the time comes

Buzzards Bay is not on Cape Cod, and service to it is not related to the further plans ONTO the Cape correlating to SCR Phase 2. Service to Bourne and beyond is not what I'm talking about.

I was surprised that the cape rail study was well written, apparently by sane and sober consultants. Although I doubt they have any idea how many or few passengers will really show up. I think I mentioned that the study is pretty silent about the use of the existing Middleborough station. Not sure where passengers will transfer from SCR to the existing Cape Flyer service.

An interesting situation would be if Cape Rail shuttle service starts attracting as many or more passengers as one-seat SCR.

CRail wrote: ↑Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:17 pm Buzzards Bay is not on Cape Cod, and service to it is not related to the further plans ONTO the Cape correlating to SCR Phase 2. Service to Bourne and beyond is not what I'm talking about.

The Cape Rail Study explores both Buzzards Bay and Bourne options. So what we're talking about is exactly what you were talking about. And it by all means is related to future service across the canal under any future SCR scenario, as it begins to establish operating patterns, makes required upgrades on mainland side, etc. Buzzards Bay is a stepping stone to the Cape if they decide not to cross the canal on the first iteration of service to the "Cape Cod Region" as the Executive Summary of the report puts it.

Cape Rail Study, Executive Summary, Page 2 (emphasis mine) wrote:With limited available capacity to support expanded service on the Middleborough Main Line and at Boston South Station, Alternative 1 focused on providing weekday commuter service to and from Buzzards Bay with a stop at Wareham and transfers between Cape trains and South Coast Rail trains at the new Middleborough Station. South Coast Rail Phase 1, which will restore MBTA commuter rail service in 2023 between Boston and southeastern Massachusetts, could enable this transfer connection at the new Middleborough station.

Alternative 2 built on Alternative 1 and increased the level of service. Alternative 2 extended service south of the canal to and from the existing Bourne Station (under the Bourne Bridge), added service outside the traditional commute peak periods, and added service without a transfer to and from Boston. Providing service to Bourne would require further coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which owns and controls the Cape Cod Canal Railroad Bridge that connects Buzzards Bay to Bourne.

I attached the alternative comparison from the study as well. I recommend you have a look at the study if you haven't.

[quote=CRail post_id=1590984 time=1643861861 user_id=1975]
Buzzards Bay is not on Cape Cod, and service to it is not related to the further plans ONTO the Cape correlating to SCR Phase 2. Service to Bourne and beyond is not what I'm talking about.
[/quote]

Buzzards Bay is indeed part of The Cape..It's a village in the town of Bourne and
is part of the reason Bourne pays into the MBTA pool..I live on The Cape,and as much I'd
very appreciate being able to take the train to Boston year round,the fiscal facts are
the demographics here don't come close to justifying year round service,
though the summer population does make additional Flyer trains practical,
although commuter service to BB certainly does make sense..
\

From what I have read here it would seem best if some kind of Cape Cod service year around could be implemented. Wintertime of course maybe just DMUs or Battery MUs? Summer and some weekends regular service. But still a connection except for maybe one or more Cape Flyers?

My question is will the lift bridge be able to stand the extra wear and tear of repeated openings? Also, will that mean more bridge tenders and who pays? Even if signaling is not installed the bridge would need approach circuits so tender would know when trains approaching.

Regarding the location of Buzzards Bay, I stand corrected, I've always regarded Cape Cod as beginning at the canal.

Regarding service to it; No, what's mentioned in the study is NOT what I'm talking about, and as I said before it most certainly NOT dependent on SCR Phase 2 as has been suggested here. It is said to commence once the new Middleboro station is in service. You don't have to trust my sources, but there's nothing you can quote to disprove them as a lot goes on that doesn't make the papers.