HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     
Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2019, 5:28 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
My take away from that is what I've always believed - that there is WAY too much deference [literally] payed to keeping modes open and operating while undergoing transformational renovation/rebuilding projects. The bending over backwards for the Chamber of Commerce, community groups, advocacy groups, etc etc to the tune of adding hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars in logistic coordination of such accommodations is outrageous and nonsensical. Yes they should have just shut the whole thing down, people are adaptable, they would have adjusted and made do. More examples: pretty much any station renovation that takes 4 years and 25 million more dollars by not just asking people to make a sacrifice. Imagine how long your kitchen renovation would take if you insisted on not removing your fridge and sink and stove and just removing and replacing one cabinet at a time over a period of 18 months. Sounds ridiculous right?
Jesus Christ, YES!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2019, 2:06 AM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by LineDrive View Post
It would create long trips and a regional rail system - For instance trips from day Beverly to Foxboro on game days. Or Brockton to Lawrence for... whatever it is they do in Lawrence.
But this is my point. An NSRL would be useful only to people making a reverse commute.

Is there a large demand for reverse commutes in the Massachusetts Bay area?
__________________
I don't read. I apologize in advance.

Last edited by SFBruin; Aug 24, 2019 at 9:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2019, 4:01 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 1,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBruin View Post
But this is my point. An NSRL would be useful only to people making a reverse commute.

Is there a large demand for reverse commutes in the Massachusetts Bay area? These could be to jobs in a satellite area, visiting friends etc. Obviously Foxboro, but this alone is not enough.
This underscores how the current commuter rail system used to have high frequencies, had many stations in the city, and acted as extensions of the 'T'. If you show a map of Boston's rail system, the commuter rails fill in the gaps between 'T' lines. The same is true in many other legacy cities, where regional rail and elevated/subway lines complimented each other by filling in existing gaps. Regional rails lines were then converted to commuter lines to benefit suburban commuters working 9-5, while reducing their service in the city.

The NSRL would allow for increased frequencies along these lines and could bring them back to their original function. Reverse commuting would be an added benefit, but the main goal is to have subway-like frequencies in transit deserts without having to build new infrastructure.

Map of rail lines: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...893662845&z=12
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2019, 2:54 PM
Citylover94 Citylover94 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBruin View Post
But this is my point. An NSRL would be useful only to people making a reverse commute.

Is there a large demand for reverse commutes in the Massachusetts Bay area? These could be to jobs in a satellite area, visiting friends etc. Obviously Foxboro, but this alone is not enough.
The statement that NSRL would only be useful for reverse commutes isn't true for people making a standard downtown commute from the northern suburbs because North Station is currently poorly positioned to access Downtown and Back Bay with the NSRL they could take a train on the Lowell Line for example directly to South Station or Back Bay Station which are located in the heart of the main employment areas. Also there is some demand for reverse commutes. Worcester and Providence both have relatively large employment centers near their train stations and many of the smaller cities that are served by commuter rail such as Salem, Plymouth, Providence, Newburyport, and others are popular tourist destinations that would see a lot more tourists arriving by train if the system were more convenient to use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2019, 4:18 PM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 247
delete.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 11:52 PM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomguy34 View Post
This underscores how the current commuter rail system ... acted as extensions of the 'T'. If you show a map of Boston's rail system, the commuter rails fill in the gaps between 'T' lines.
I noticed this. The Fairmount Line looks like it goes through some of the densest neighborhoods in southern Boston, the Needham line goes as far as some above-average density suburbs on the outskirts, and even other lines make several stops within the dense core of the metro (although this I believe is normal for commuter systems).

I think that the Needham line would work better as an extension of the Green Line and the Fairmount Line would work better as a subway line, though I undestand that these ideas are expensive, so probably why things are the way they are currently.
__________________
I don't read. I apologize in advance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End

Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:07 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.