Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Caltrain already does a pretty good job and actually is faster between San Jose and SF than BART would be, at least the "Baby Bullet" express trains. Caltrain could be just as good as BART with electrification and more grade separation.
BART in its current form would not be able to service cities that far from the city center as your examples, it would be incredibly expensive and the cost could not be justified.
Wow finally Cal-Train has the express line from SF to SJ vice versa. How long is the ride? I remembered when I used to live in the SFBA during late 1990s & early 2000s. When I rode Cal-Train a few times to get there within 90 minutes due to its many stops along the San Mateo Co. Peninsula to be breathtaking. Also, when I gone to watch the NHL Sharks. LOL!
The reason why BART won't construct a rail line from SF to SJ b/c of all the CA State funds to build a high speed rail line from NorCal to SoCal. Which it sounds like a fantastic idea, but the costs & overruns will be tremendous for the taxpayers & travelers not to ride it rather they prefer to fly on Southwest Airlines within 1 hr. CA should have concentrate to fund local city mass transit systems: SFBA, LA, & SD.
sav858 texted about how the whole SF Bay Area utilizes its multiple mass transit systems like BART, Cal-Train, MUNI, AC Transit, SamTrans, VTA, Golden Gate Transit than Philly's City Limit aka SEPTA only. Yet, sav858 forgot to text that the Philly Metro Area covers the Tri-States (PA, South NJ, & DE) more than SF Bay Area to have higher ridership. Yes I agree BART has higher ridership than SEPTA per capita. Sadly sav858 texted very shallow about how "Philly needs to get its act together" to be exaggerated.
The only agencies I mentioned were BART and Caltrain. Also I never mentioned a word about Philly or Septa and have no idea what the hell you're talking about, and clearly neither do you.
Wow finally Cal-Train has the express line from SF to SJ vice versa. How long is the ride? I remembered when I used to live in the SFBA during late 1990s & early 2000s. When I rode Cal-Train a few times to get there within 90 minutes due to its many stops along the San Mateo Co. Peninsula to be breathtaking. Also, when I gone to watch the NHL Sharks. LOL!
The reason why BART won't construct a rail line from SF to SJ b/c of all the CA State funds to build a high speed rail line from NorCal to SoCal. Which it sounds like a fantastic idea, but the costs & overruns will be tremendous for the taxpayers & travelers not to ride it rather they prefer to fly on Southwest Airlines within 1 hr. CA should have concentrate to fund local city mass transit systems: SFBA, LA, & SD.
It takes an hour from Diridon Station in San Jose to the Caltrain Depot in SF on the Baby Bullet.
The only agencies I mentioned were BART and Caltrain. Also I never mentioned a word about Philly or Septa and have no idea what the hell you're talking about, and clearly neither do you.
Also the high speed rail project is the main reason that Caltrain will soon be upgraded and electrified.
No, the reason why BART won't construct a rail line from SF to SJ is because one already exists, CALTRAIN. There is no need for it.
The reason why BART won't construct a rail line from SF to SJ b/c of all the CA State funds to build a high speed rail line from NorCal to SoCal. Which it sounds like a fantastic idea, but the costs & overruns will be tremendous for the taxpayers & travelers not to ride it rather they prefer to fly on Southwest Airlines within 1 hr. CA should concentrate to fund local city mass transit systems: SFBA, LA, & SD.
I stand corrected on your West Coast analysis not to observe the entire picture.
Last edited by PRINCE-DARKNESS; 12-15-2015 at 07:49 PM..
This is true, Philly has much better overall coverage. But for such fantastic coverage, and size, and centrality, the fact that its commuter rail system is electrified, it's still lacking in ridership. Part of the reason could be headways, or an antiquated fare system. I don't know, but you would think it would blow past the Bay Area in ridership.
MUNI + BART + Caltrains + ferries alone blow past Philly + PATCO and any other system you want to throw in there. Add in SamTrans, GGT, and ACT, all three of which feed SF, and you have about 1.4 million riders to pull from in a city that's 35% the land area and half the population. Add in all Bay Area transit (down to SJ for instance) and you have well over 1.6 million transit riders in a population area about the same size as metro Philly.
As sucky as Bay Area transit is, as crowded as it is, despite the fact that it's never on time, old trains/cars, lots of crazies and homeless, fare readers that often don't work, trolley buses responsible for 200K riders a day that frequently break down or get stopped up in Chinatown, or take 1-1.5 hours to traverse the peninsula in traffic, light rail that's ineffective and doesn't serve most of the city, only 1 serious commuter rail line, you have more riders than in Philly, plain and simple.
Philly needs to do something.
Please read above by what you texted between the SFBA vs Philly City Limit.
it seems like springfeild would be closer to new york than it is boston ? do you mean worcester (i assume there is commuter rail there but not sure) ?
Yes, I texted Springfield, MA ought to have a MBTA regional rail line b/c the way things are heading for major US city limits to create a high cost of living; therefore, people will commute & live further away from the city centers to annex other towns: 1 or 2 hrs away. All of the US metro cities might want to plan ahead into building mass regional rail lines, or else our highways & infrastructures will be a chaotic nightmare.
Worcester has commuter rail (and Amtrak) connections to Boston already.
Springfield is slated for a commuter rail connection to New York via Hartford and Springfield. I don't believe there's any discussion about connecting Boston to Springfield via commuter rail (there's Amtrak service but it's not adequate for commuter service) as it's really too far (90 miles) to be a commuter hub for Boston.
A Newport RI connection is planned as essentially a phase 2 of the South Coast (Fall River-New Bedford) commuter rial service project which is moving forward at a snail's pace and has a bloated price tag. Somehow it's dodged the axe and is still progressing. RI won't discuss it until service to Fall River is in place. Once that happens, RI is eager to extend the rail connection down to Newport. You're still looking at 15-20 years off and that's optimistic. Without upgrading the entire route to accommodate high speeds (100+), a commute via commuter rail from Newport to Boston would be awful.
Portsmouth and Concord (though Manchester and Nashua stand to gain the most from a Concord connection) are ideal candidates for commuter rail to Boston. The problem is that the NH government and populous is extremely reluctant to fund that type of project. The only reason they have the existing stop in Durham, NH is because Maine had to pay for the rail through that small sliver of NH in order to have Amtrak Downeaster service to Boston. I'd love to see Downtown Portsmouth as the terminus for a commuter rail line. I just don't see it happening with the political environment in NH.
Portland, Maine is too far to be a viable commute to Boston without bullet train service. It's over 112 miles from Portland to Boston. Current service is more than 2.5 hours each way- assuming it's on-time which it rarely is. You really need a train that runs 150 mph or more for the majority of the trip to make it viable and you need to run these trains frequently enough to make the schedule work for commuters. I don't see it ever happening. Portland is far enough to always be relatively independent. I do think we should improve the connection for business and leisure travelers, but it's not and never will be a commuter hub to Boston.
The transit improvements to Boston that would be most useful now (disregarding the limiting factor- funding) are the following:
1) South Station expansion. This is critical for a multitude of reasons. The station is beyond capacity. Improving capacity immediately allows for better headways and increased service on all South Station originating/terminating commuter rail and Amtrak trips. It will vastly improve service.
2) Track Improvments and upgrades to the commuter rail network and rapid transit network. updating tracks, double tracking routes where needed and uniform electrification will allow for much faster trips on many commuter rail lines. Combined with added capacity at South Station will allow for more faster trips, better headways and more efficient schedules. Commuter rail in Boston is great if your schedule happens to cooperate. If not, it's useless. More frequent, faster trips would go a long way to increasing ridership and reducing vehicular congestion. Obviously track upgrades to existing rapid networks (Red/Orange/Blue lines) need to take place to improve service quality and reduce breakdowns.
3) Blue line extended to Lynn on one end and about 1/2 mile to Charles/MGH on the other end. This does two things. First, It turns Lynn into the Quincy of the North Shore and connects a large, dense population hub (Lynn currently has 90k people) to downtown Boston. Lynn then becomes a viable commuter option like Quincy has. Second, it makes a single connection (to the Red Line at MGH) that vastly improves mobility around the core of the metro area. It connects the North Shore to Cambridge, Cambridge to the airport (more efficiently than the silver line) and reduces multiple transfers for many, many commuters (inc. myself). It means Kendall Square, Central Square and Harvard are accessible from East Boston, Revere, and Lynn (assuming it's extended both ways). It's the last piece of the rapid transit puzzle missing from central Boston.
4) Green Line to Medford. Even with some of the budget issues, this looks to be the closest of the above to reality. This connects large and densely populated parts of Cambridge, Somerville and Medford to the urban core.
5) North/South rail link. from a passenger standpoint, a relatively inexpensive light rail or street car (think: SF's F-Line) along the Rose Kennedy Greenway would solve the connection problem between North and South Stations (and give tourists arriving at each easy access to Faneuil Hall and the waterfront). The North/South Rail link, is important for more than that though. It allows Amtrak's Northeast corridor to run directly North to Portland and beyond (maybe even Quebec City in the future). More importantly, it allows for quick and easy equipment transfers on the commuter rail network (which is harder than you'd ever imagine currently).
6) Commuter rail extensions to Portsmouth, Manchester, Fall River, New Bedford and Cape Cod. These communities on the edge of and just outside of the metro area are disconnected outside of highway access and contribute a good deal of traffic to the congestion on Boston area highways. Adequate commuter rail service would go a long way toward relieving some of that in addition to helping stimulate growth in the stagnant economies of Fall River, New Bedford, Taunton (part of the Fall River/New Bedford connection), Manchester and Nashua (part of the Manch. connection).
These all sound great. I read that much of the push for getting the North/South rail link for through running operations is to eliminate the need for a South Station expansion which would be necessary if train cars were left idling in the station waiting for turnaround as they do now. Other cities around the world have had great success with turning their end-of-route terminal stations into stations along a through running service lines (see especially some of the Paris train stations, the current ongoing conversion of London stations, and various S-Bahn systems of German/Germanic cities) and has allowed for conversion of commuter rail lines into what are basically express subway stations with more stops within the core.
If the North/South rail link is prioritized and a couple of lines that go into North station and South station are electrified and combined, then you can essentially have additional rapid transit lines in the city while also eliminating the need for a South station expansion as any train that is now just passing through South Station wouldn't need to take a terminal stub track to turn around and head back. It seems like with the improvements you listed, minus the south station expansion and with the additional rapid transit like services allowed by having a north/south commuter rail link, Boston could have a remarkably great system with fairly minor additions.
Yes, I texted Springfield, MA ought to have a MBTA regional rail line b/c the way things are heading for major US city limits to create a high cost of living; therefore, people will commute & live further away from the city centers to annex other towns: 1 or 2 hrs away. All of the US metro cities might want to plan ahead into building mass regional rail lines, or else our highways & infrastructures will be a chaotic nightmare.
i think regional rail is philly.. the mbta calls theirs commuter rail.
also springfeild is based in massachusetts but as explained before it mite make more sense for new york to create a commuter rail station there.
Yes, I texted Springfield, MA ought to have a MBTA regional rail line b/c the way things are heading for major US city limits to create a high cost of living; therefore, people will commute & live further away from the city centers to annex other towns: 1 or 2 hrs away. All of the US metro cities might want to plan ahead into building mass regional rail lines, or else our highways & infrastructures will be a chaotic nightmare.
There are far, far, far, more urban centers closer to Boston than Springfield that could use improved rail service. Places like Manchester, Nashua, Taunton, Woonsocket, Pawtucket, Fall River, New Bedford, Portsmouth, etc. are all without commuter rail service and should all be connected given their proximity to central Boston long before Springfield. Other cities like Worcester, Lowell, Haverhill, Lawrence, Fitchburg, Brockton, Lynn, Salem, Gloucester, etc. should all get significantly upgraded service before we begin to consider discussing Springfield commuter rail. There are plenty of improvements to be made to underutilized urban centers closer to Boston that would improve cost of living in the Boston area much better than a Springfield commuter line would.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
