Correcting the Record on Our Stance Re: East-West Rail Service to Pittsfield

Correcting the Record on Our Stance Re: East-West Rail Service to Pittsfield

BOSTON, June 15, 2020 -

TransitMatters wishes to correct the record regarding what one article called, a difference of opinion on service to Pittsfield. The article quoted a study and policy statement that we have not yet released out of context. We strongly believe train service to Pittsfield is critical to this project. We join elected officials, public transit advocates, and residents in calling for a fair and accurate study process. And we call for MassDOT to work on both higher-speed service and an initial service that could begin in 18 months or less. 

However, there are two main issues: the timeline of service and cost. MassDOT and the MBTA could run service to Springfield field for close to $0 in capital costs and less than $5M in annual operating costs in a matter of months.  Adding service to Pittsfield would cost about $46M in capital costs and maybe add $1-2M to the operating cost. There's a need for train storage in Pittsfield and our plan for service within a year relies on MBTA equipment (using this equipment to provide service to Pittsfield would be very difficult; morning trips would be extremely early just as evening trips would be extremely late and it would be impossible to provide mid-day service with MBTA equipment). This will take an additional few years, but we're still talking about service to Pittsfield much faster than any billion-dollar MassDOT alternative. 

MassDOT has not studied any of this. They are doing the exact opposite. The first three alternatives propose spending north of $1B for travel times that essentially match or exceed the current Amtrak travel times. Let's be clear. No city west of Worcester will ever see a train if MassDOT continues on this current path. That is our focus. 

TransitMatters is working on a document to show that a travel time of 90 mins (to Springfield) or less could be achieved with $900M or less in 9 years (with many trains continuing to Pittsfield). While not as fast as the $25B high-speed alternative 6, it is competitive with the Pike and achievable within a decade. The MassDOT high-speed rail plan is infeasible. High-speed trains can't climb the grades present on the Pike ROW. The other advantage of implementing our phase 1 incremental higher-speed rail plan first is that it guarantees towns like Palmer and Pittsfield get service, as most 185-220mph high-speed lines either skip towns of that size or provide limited service; secondly, the state can continue to cut travel times after this 90 min time is achieved. This can be done by fixing bottlenecks, bridging valleys, and limited tunneling. 

We are collaborating with rail advocates from Western Mass and take their feedback seriously. This is not an issue of Springfield vs. Pittsfield, it is a battle between a reasonable plan for service and MassDOT’s unspecific plans and wildly inaccurate cost estimates.

For media inquiries, please contact media@transitmatters.org

Press Release: Regional Rail Proof of Concept

TRANSITMATTERS RELEASES NEW “PROOF OF CONCEPT” REPORT TO ADVANCE REGIONAL RAIL VISION WITH PRACTICAL NEXT STEPS AND $3 BILLION SAVINGS

BOSTON, MA (September 12, 2019) – Today, TransitMatters hosted a launch event for its new report “Regional Rail Proof of Concept: How Modern Operating Practice Adds Capacity to the Current Commuter Rail Network”. The report is a follow up to last year’s Regional Rail report which laid out the vision for a fast, frequent, electrified intercity rail network. That report showed that through embracing world best practice Metro Boston could have a transformative rail network. The new report focuses on how relatively modest changes in both operations and track layout at South Station can have significant benefits to train capacity in the short-term.  

The new report questions the wisdom of the long-planned South Station Expansion (SSX) project as a wasteful $2-3 billion project with little transportation value. The report also calls into question the MBTA’s reliance on bi-level coaches with inefficient passenger flow. The report instead calls for operational changes first: regular “clockface scheduling”, quicker train turn times, and dedicated tracks, all of which also add to the passenger experience and increase capacity at terminal stations. The report also advocates for relatively modest changes to the track layout of the approach to South Station; these changes would allow for faster speeds in the station (up to 50% time savings in some cases) and allow for flexibility by allowing trains to reach all platforms. 

“We believe that Regional Rail has the potential to solve many of the Commonwealth’s biggest challenges- congestion, inequality, Gateway Cities reaching their full potential, housing availability, and climate change. We have to make smart decisions about what projects not to do and start taking steps towards achieving the service improvements necessary to respond to our economy and to rider needs”, said Jarred Johnson, COO of TransitMatters. “Today, we found an extra $3 billion for the Commonwealth to spend on making commuter service across Eastern Massachusetts better. 

The new TransitMatters report, which was authored by a dedicated team of volunteers, is the first in a series of follow-up reports that will focus on each Commuter Rail line, as well as topics like electrification. Today’s report will be available online at regionalrail.net. You can also watch a live stream of the event on the @TransitMatters Twitter account. The TransitMatters team also announced an upcoming press event focused on the second part of the report, “How to Provide Frequent, All-day Service on the Worcester Line”. This event will be hosted in conjunction with the Worcester Regional Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday, Sept 17 at 2 PM at the Worcester Regional Chamber. 

###

Media Statement: NSRL Feasibility Reassessment

The MBTA’s cost estimate for the North South Rail Link (NSRL), released yesterday, is the most recent in a series of estimates for this project.  Those estimates, from under $4 billion to over $20 billion, run the gamut of construction methods, infrastructure choices, and cost assumptions. These huge disparities underscore that cost estimates for major infrastructure projects have to be assessed based on their underlying assumptions.  TransitMatters believes that there are many reasons yesterday’s cost estimates are as large as they are, not least the assumptions and selective comparisons employed by the MBTA’s consultant. 

In our report on Regional Rail (excluding the NSRL) we estimated the cost range of systemwide electrification, high platforms to enable level boarding, and strategic capacity improvements at bottlenecks to be about $2 to 3 billion. We stand by that estimate and do not believe the electrification and rolling stock costs estimated in yesterday’s MBTA presentation are consistent with the most relevant and appropriate comparative examples of which we are aware.  

We read yesterday’s presentation to the Fiscal Management and Control Board as an affirmation of our view that South Station expansion (SSX) should not move forward – it is, by any measure, too little bang for way too much buck.  The MBTA’s consultant now estimates SSX will cost $4.7 billion, money that simply does not need to be spent in order to improve the functionality of existing tracks at South Station. There are other, much lower cost approaches to improving operations at South Station as we indicated in our Regional Rail report, and we will offer more a more detailed roadmap to doing that in a follow-up report we expect to release in the early fall.

With regard to NSRL itself, we stated in our report, and repeat here: “cost estimates for NSRL, undertaken by MassDOT consultants and independent third parties, significantly vary in range. These variances often are attributable to consultants not comparing like-to-like or using different methodologies. The reality is that actual costs can vary greatly depending on the quality and complexity of project designs, labor costs, and many other factors. Massachusetts has learned valuable lessons in cost containment through its recent Green Line Extension experience, and we would expect the same rigorous approach to providing maximum value for reasonable cost to apply here as well.”

TransitMatters continues to believe that the only route forward for the MBTA is to advance a transition to Regional Rail, an electrified intercity rail system with frequent service during the day. The Regional Rail model is critical. While not critical to implementing a Regional Rail system, the NSRL would be a highly useful enhancement providing the flexibility and connectivity to which many riders and potential riders would be drawn. We hope and expect that a candid and open-minded conversation on both of these initiatives will continue.

Without a commitment to a new Business Model for intercity rail, our region will continue to experience crippling traffic congestion and people will be deprived of the kind of access to jobs and opportunity that is necessary for a thriving economy and decent quality of life.  We look forward to collaborating with the MBTA and all stakeholders as we make Regional Rail a reality.