By adamg on Wed., 8/19/2015 - 9:48 am
The former governors say it's last time to connect the two terminals with a rail link.
Topics:
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:The former governors say it's last time to connect the two terminals with a rail link.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
A N-S link would turn all of
By anon
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 12:24pm
A N-S link would turn all of the commuter rails lines into full length tracks, Ie Plymouth to Lowell, etc. It wouldn't affect subway tracking.
Everyone who commutes in from the south and has to then get on either the green or orange lines. Everyone who commutes in from the north and then has to get on the red line to kendall. Everyone who lives north of boston but works in another suburb south of boston, who currently either has to take two commuter rails (absolutely nobody does this) or drive through the city, clogging up the highways.
Why not a public/private parntnership?
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 11:27am
Its been used in a lot of Europe.
Basically, the project is privately funded by big business and bonds. The winning consortium gets to run the system for X numbers of years to recoup the cost of financing the project.
The public gets a valuable asset.
Instead of paying thru taxes, the system is paid by fare.
Public/Private Partnerships
By issacg
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 11:50am
You don't suppose that it is a coincidence that Joe Aiello was named as the Chairman of the T's Control Board, do you? (Explore beyond that link to the rest of the site - in particular the Port of Miami Tunnel Project.)
Unless and until we can get legislative "leaders" to recognize the importance of building and maintaining infrastructure again, my feeling is that PPP's are the best we are going to do. I think that the Governor knows that (even if he hasn't said it). It is also nice that PPP's kind of bolsters he street cred with more traditional Republicans (not the crazies that we hear from so often these days).
We are never going to get public infrastructure on a large
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 11:56am
scale again. People are already taxed to the hilt. Nobody can win office running on a platform of spend. Every 4 years we elect the guy who says he is going to cut the most.
I don't pay much attention to the running of the T (since I don't use it) so i am not familiar with its management structure. But I think a PPP would be a pill more easily swallowed by the public if it becomes a pay-to-use scenario.
FredQ I wish/hope that you are right,
By issacg
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 12:54pm
but I fear you are not. If that were the case, there would be many more people in favor of the expansion of tolling or pay-per-mile charges for driving. I think that it's safe to say that there is little support for that (excepting, perhaps, from those who live west (and northeast) of town, who have always had a tenable argument regarding tolling equity).
The other issue is that many/most people don't distinguish between taxes and user fees (witness the constant requests for candidates to pledge to not raise taxes or fees). In the view of many/most, it's all going to the "government", so there is no difference. Obviously, I couldn't disagree more.
There is a big difference here IMO
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:12pm
People will not willingly pay for a service that has until now been free. So the idea of tolling I93 or I95 is a non starter.
I have the option of traversing the tunnels of Boston to the airport (Pay a fee) or driving around Everett and Chelsea for free. I will gladly pay the toll to avoid the other route.
The issue with taxes vs fees is a different argument. The whole fee thing was a ruse by republicans to hide the fact they were not really cutting taxes. They simply renamed them. You were still paying for the same service.
I think if it was proposed to the general public, that we need a north/south rail link and we can't afford to pay for it, but a private consortium was willing to fund the project in return for 35 years worth of fares, people would say yes to that. They could always have the option of disembarking at either north station or south station and finding alternative transportation. Just like the harbor tunnels and thus avoiding the fee.
"Free" vs. fee
By issacg
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:58pm
With respect to your feeling on the public saying yes in your last paragraph, I hope you are right (but I doubt very much that as a practical matter a fee would be levied only on tickets covering passage through the link tunnel).
With respect to the first paragraph, this is part of the issue. Driving on I-93 or I-95 is not now, nor has it ever been "free". Certainly, there has not been a readily appreciable out-of-pocket cost to doing so, but all of us (via the General Fund) are paying for the maintenance of those roadway.
Further, as any regular driver of the tolled roadways will tell you, they are subsidizing the drivers driving the non-tolled routes because the toll monies that they pay to maintain the turnpike and harbor crossings frees up the monies from the General Fund to be spent on I-93 and I-95, etc. It's not like the toll road drivers are getting a tax offset (the deduction for tolls paid by EZ-pass is a pittance that does not even come close), either.
So the public has to pay to
By Baker-Christie 2016
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 2:23pm
So the public has to pay to expand 128, totally redo the central artery, replace many bridges along 93, etc but if a tunnel for trains is needed it should be the private sector? Why not hand over schools to the private sector, cut taxes and people would pay for the children they want to be educated but those of us who dont have kids dont have to subsidize others? Lots of things used to be free that we pay for now (ie sewer treatment) things change, its time that drivers start paying for all their costs, instead of all the rest of us subsidizing them and then being asked to pay again if we use a subway.
There is no public appetite for infrastructure spending
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 4:47pm
This tunnel is not going to happen with the current system.
If there is another alternative that will provide the tunnel, then that system should be explored.
BTW we already have private schools.
Or the Blue line
By fibrowitch
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 12:57pm
Could get a connection to the Lynn rail line, and a link to the Red Line.
The Red-Blue Connector Should Definitely Be Built First
By Elmer
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:38pm
[img]https://elmercatdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2015/07...
[sup] Elmer's "Red Line / Blue Line Connector" (right now, it's easier to just walk)[/sup]
Elmer is today's winner!
By issacg
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:43pm
I love this!
Not quite
By Camberville
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 3:02pm
Those shoelaces should be tied together!
Adorable!
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 3:49pm
Adorable!
1. There is a North-South
By Chris77
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:06pm
1. There is a North-South link, and it's called the subway. 2. Heck, just run a shuttle along the Greenway between the two stations. 3. How many southbound Downeaster riders are headed anywhere beyond Boston? 4. How many northbound Amtrak riders arrving in Boston are headed to Portland, Maine?
There was
By cybah
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 3:20pm
Some discussion many years ago on Arch Boston about just that.
Taking all the express buses that run to the burbs and have them loop the greenway between N and S stations. That would provide a link that removes one transfer. (Montreal has something similar already)
Yes its a bus but would cost a fraction of what it would cost to build a tunnel. And yes I'm aware this wouldn't fix a direct link (rail) from each station, but would help passengers out greatly. (and then GC could be used to just move trains as it is today)
The cheapest solution
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:19pm
Would be a European style trolley running along the greenway from North Station to South Station with one stop at Faneuil Hall/ Aquarium blue line connection.
Like this one in Dublin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luas
Cheap, But Neither Practical Nor Effective
By Elmer
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:34pm
Please provide an explanation.
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:42pm
If the purpose is to get people from one station to the next it works rather well.
A trolley line isn't going link Lowell and Providence
By Neal
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:51pm
The purpose isn't to get just across the gap, it's to get people through North Station, the Downtown gap, South Station and beyond (and vice-versa).
That is true but
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:59pm
How many people need to actually do that? The vast majority of the beneficiaries of this link are people who live north or south of Boston and work in the opposing station area.
Where would a trolley go?
By issacg
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:58pm
Are we going to take vehicle travel lanes or are we going to put rails down the middle of the park? As I see it, those are the only options.
There's No Place To Safely Put An At-Grade Rail System
By Elmer
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:59pm
These trolleys run at street level
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 2:06pm
The tracks run down the existing road with lights timed for the trolleys. They share the road with other vehicles. It works really well in Europe. The distance is not that far. At most a mile and a half. A simple shuttle that runs back and forth.
http://www.simplonpc.co.uk/Tram_Dublin/AbbeySt_080...
The shuttle/trams in Rheims...
By Michael Kerpan
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 2:18pm
... were both convenient and cute:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reims_tramway
Ah, European transit.
By issacg
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 2:42pm
Yep, I agree that these seem to work in Europe (my favorite is in Zurich), but in Europe, you have to know more about driving to pass a driving test than what shape the steering wheel is.
Our own local example of shared road trolley track (Huntington Ave.) is not encouraging. Hell, we're coming up to that time of year when a car with piss yellow license plates (replete with driver saying, "what a quaint old city Boston is - look at these old trolley tracks!") drives in front of an oncoming B-line trolley in the semi-separated right of way on Comm. Ave.
Simple solution
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 4:44pm
Intersection cameras on the route. Instant $100 ticket for blocking the box. Cameras on board that record the view ahead. Again instant tickets for blocking a train. It happens in Europe too. But after a few tickets people get the message.
Why Doesn't That Work On The So-Called BRT Silver Bus Corridor?
By Elmer
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 4:59pm
because
By cybah
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 5:11pm
because it doesn't exist (yet)
A trolley could not carry the
By Baker-Christie 2016
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 1:46pm
A trolley could not carry the present number of people that need to get between north and south station, the silver bus, as inadequate and slow as it is, has been overcrowded for years and there is much more still being built (more capacity would be needed if it was adequate now). Commuter rail trains carry so many people (plus the orange and green at north and Red line at south) a full red line style train at least is needed, from north station to south station through the south boston waterfront. We cant keep doing the cheapest minimal thing that isnt even able to carry current capacity much less when it would open. The current solution, every office tower having thousands of parking spaces, is making the city unworkable. So what is Boston/the state doing? Opening up the bypass road to encourage more drivers, raising T fares, and keeping 93 and the 90 extension to the waterfront toll free.
Huh?
By FredQuimby
Wed, 08/19/2015 - 4:42pm
But the current system does?
Interesting.
They sell more than one trolley. They even hook up like regular trains.
Is a North Station-South Station link practical?
By necturus
Sun, 08/23/2015 - 9:10pm
Connecting the two stations really means connecting two new stations underneath the present ones, unless we want to run tracks down the Rose Kennedy Greenway. That means digging a couple miles of tunnels under the present rights-of-way, then tunneling under the Greenway, but on top of the highway tunnel. It might be doable, but is it worth the money? A one seat ride from Fitchburg to Middleborough shouldn't go through Boston at all, it seems to me. As for passengers bound from Portland to points south, is it really so inconvenient to catch the Orange Line to Back Bay?
I do think we need to add somewhat to the state's rail infrastructure, but question whether a North Station-South Station link is more important than, for instance, adding service between Boston and Springfield.
Pages