12 ms·

For a Better Economy, Add Commuter Rail?

165 points by misnamed 10y ago

coredog64 10y ago
If anyone is interested, I believe this [0] is the train station in question on Google Maps. I can't find the mentioned nearby mills though. [0] https://goo.gl/maps/8UFfq737jgF2 https://goo.gl/maps/8UFfq737jgF2
- niftich 10y ago
  Here's some street view of the mills mentioned. Each building the initial viewport is looking at is part of the mill complex, but ones behind the camera are usually not. You can back out of streetview to see where it is on the map. [1] https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8821836,-71.3947742,3a,75y,237.68h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl6x4y52O9PzgGoh7Cx4JEQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8821836,-71.3947742,3a,75y,2... [2] https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8794315,-71.3946096,3a,75y,304.16h,80.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSaa7VPaweOcc2rPr4fytug!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8794315,-71.3946096,3a,75y,3... [3] https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8832275,-71.3979953,3a,75y,139.46h,89.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCwidS0-IBpA-E1GrkWb_2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8832275,-71.3979953,3a,75y,1... Also, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conant_Thread-Coats_%26_Clark_Mill_Complex_District https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conant_Thread-Coats_%26_Clark_...
niftich 10y ago
The point in this particular case is that Rhode Island has become a bedroom community for Boston, so improving transportation links between the two can make RI even more attractive to discretionary residents (who come here because they want to, not because they can't find anything better -- which is a byword for higher-income residents), who can stimulate both residential and commercial growth by their presence. It's a reasonable suggestion. Another alternative is that RI could promote business growth to lure away some MA or CT talent. But whether they want to be a swankier, higher-income commuter suburb or a commercial-heavy exurb they really should do something.
- jseliger 10y ago
  The point in this particular case is that Rhode Island has become a bedroom community for Boston Yeah. Some friends moved from Cambridge to Providence, and in Providence they're a five-minute walk from the train station. They can be at South Station in 45 – 50 minutes. They live in a nice, newly-constructed two-bedroom apartment that's a little more than half the cost of their previous, cramped Cambridge apartment.
  - jghn 10y ago
    It's convenient but there's still a tradeoff. Even once you get to South Station, unless you work right there you then have to have your secondary commute inside the city. I work in Kendall Sq so for me it'd tack on at least another 15 minutes. In contrast it normally takes me 15-25 minutes total for my commute as is. That's a big time savings. I also have a lot more flexibility, for instance not needing to worry about catching the last train at night if I'm out with my friends or something like that. For me, I'd rather pay more money for the proximity and flexibility but I agree that YMMV and that for others it makes a ton of sense to go to Providence. And really, I'd much rather go to Providence than a standard suburb because at least I get some of the benefits of urban life there.
    - acomjean 10y ago
      This is so true. Boston transit leaves a lot to be desired. Even once you get there on commuter rail. There are 2 commuter rail stations and they're not connected. They are trying to connect though even with the advocacy of two former govenors, but the current government is resisting (http://www.northsouthraillink.org/ http://www.northsouthraillink.org/). I live in Cambridge MA and commute to Boston (3.5 miles by bike). The fastest I can get to longwood Boston is about 25 minutes on a bike. Bus is 45 minutes. Coworkers that have spaces can get from just outside 128 to Boston in slightly over an hour. The few places with decent access to the city the prices are going through the roof.
      - jghn 10y ago
Animats 10y ago
They already have the tracks and the trains; they just need a station. This is the easy case. This isn't about building a new line. With jobs moving back to inner cities, the radial structure of commuter rail works again.
BuckRogers 10y ago
A better idea yet, force employers to allow all employees who can, to work from home. It's bad for the environment, wasteful of resources and additional stress (illness/cancer) for commuters. Shifts the burden from the planet and people to the company as they learn to manage employees remotely. Which is where the balance should be set at.
- WalterBright 10y ago
  > force employers This is usually where good intentions go awry. A more efficacious approach is to find ways to make it worthwhile for employers to do so.
  - BuckRogers 10y ago
    Employers don't need any more efficacious reasons than balancing the health of the planet/people and profits. The world doesn't have to kiss the ring of employers, and few employees have individual bargaining power as I do. I work from home. People were murdered fighting for an 8-hour workday. Look up Pinkerton. Something that by and large is still not respected to this day, we need stronger labor laws all around. A law has to be passed to force it, because profits will always come before people otherwise. This is the history of the labor movement. It's just reality of how things work. Another efficacious reason is as Nick Hanauer has argued, it's in the best interests of business to compromise on these matters, before the pitchforks come out. As I was once told "every business gets the union they deserve". If you treat people right, you won't have people saying the things I do, changing the political environment. And the final reason, it's just the right thing to do. Not much money will be made once the planet is destroyed or talented employees die early deaths. In the shortsighted search for profits, all of these reasons are ignored, which is why we have labor laws and desperately need more.
    - WalterBright 10y ago
      "The worst crime against working people is a company which fails to operate at a profit." -- Samuel Gompers
Noos 10y ago
It would probably descend into corruption. Rhode Island's governance is horrible, and I doubt publics works projects will solve that.
guard-of-terra 10y ago
It's 100,000 people[1], how come they don't have a station for a rail that literally passes through? Of course they need to fix it right away. [1] By European standards that could as well be a railway hub.
- keithpeter 10y ago
  UK: Sutton Coldfield has a population just under 100K and has a manned station [1]. Pretty middle class area, no abandoned mills or anything, embedded in a larger conurbation up in the millions, fairly high density. On the Redditch to Lichfield line via Birmingham. Smethwick: working class area with an immediate population of around 25k you get an unmanned station [2] with trains each half an hour in both directions (Walsall to Wolverhampton via Birmingham). Both lines used for commuter traffic, and both stations built a long time ago (Lichfield line was actually early 20th Century). I suspect the economics all come down to use levels and density. What they call 'ridership'. In a lot of neighbourhoods in the West Midlands that are further away from the radial railway lines you are looking at a bus ride then train and a bus ride the other side - as I gather from the OA the present situation is in the settlements mentioned. [1] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870a5a8c7157eb5:0x9c0432a30a727d14!2m5!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i100!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/Sutton%2BColdfield%2BStation%2BUK/@52.5648576,-1.8246764,3a,75y,315.43h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sIrcArVgECQGyzTeukcfyhQ*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x0:0x9c0432a30a727d14!5sSutton+Coldfield+Station+UK+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2sIrcArVgECQGyzTeukcfyhQ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj93YOLp7_OAhWYOsAKHQMMCjEQpx8IiQEwDQ https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870a5a8c7157... [2] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870bd5d2f177b5b:0xb0a5c999f72118f3!2m5!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i100!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/Rolfe%2BStreet%2BStation%2BUK/@52.4964898,-1.970528,3a,75y,174.16h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211so19lMnLpPuqMTu_mEAZh2A*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x0:0xb0a5c999f72118f3!5sRolfe+Street+Station+UK+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2so19lMnLpPuqMTu_mEAZh2A&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiL5PP3p7_OAhWILMAKHaLmCkQQpx8IeDAK https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870bd5d2f177...
rchowe 10y ago
There are a few issues with getting these train stations built though: A. The state of Rhode Island currently reimburses the MBTA for all operating expenses south of the RI/MA state line, and they just funded a commuter rail extension south of Providence to attract intra-RI commuters to take transit to Providence instead of driving. However, even providing incentives such as free parking, ridership at these stations has pretty drastically missed expectations [1], and the trains are scheduled to take the same time as the bus takes in rush hour traffic. The commuting situation/parking isn't bad enough in RI like Boston or New York to make the train obviously beneficial time/money wise, when you lose schedule flexibility of when you can go to/leave work. B. The site of the proposed train station only has two passenger tracks and is located in a high speed (125 MPH or 150 MPH) zone. Starting service to the station is not as simple as just refinishing it and having trains stop there: Amtrak (which owns the tracks) would probably insist that the state of Rhode Island quad-track through the station so that its trains can pass a stopped commuter train. C. It's difficult to get transit projects funded near state borders, because of the mindset of "we paid for it and they all go work in the other state!". Providence is a pretty fast-growing city, so it's possible that in 5 to 10 years the traffic situation makes a much more compelling case for people to make use of transit, but additional commuter rail service there is a kind of hard sell. [1] http://wpri.com/2015/05/18/south-county-rail-ridership-far-short-of-expectations-may15/ http://wpri.com/2015/05/18/south-county-rail-ridership-far-s...
- ams6110 10y ago
  You would only need to add a third track, since traffic will be predominatntly inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening. That's how Chicago does it. Express trains on the center track, locals on the outer. That said, even adding a third track is a substantial investment.
  - rchowe 10y ago
    Yeah, I guessed on that one. They may be able to use the third freight track that already passes through the station for that. The reason I said four is because there actually are just as many southbound commuter trains as northbound commuter trains at rush hour [1], since most of the trains stay overnight in Boston. The Amtrak trains are mostly southbound in the morning and northbound in the evening though. It depends on what Amtrak's mathematicians decide, including whether electrifying the track is worth it. [1] http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/Documents/Schedules_and_Maps/Commuter_Rail/providence.pdf?led=5/23/2016%208:09:11%20AM http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/Documents/Schedules_and_Ma...
honkhonkpants 10y ago
What a blessing of a problem to have a double-track high speed rail system passing through an underutilized station. For comparison to the Bay Area, the distance from Providence to Boston is about the same as the distance from Berkeley to San Jose. That route is also served by Amtrak, but on a neglected single-track, wooden-tie, local-stop service that's scheduled to take 1h33m, but almost always takes longer. Amtrak from Providence to Boston only takes 40 minutes and is generally reliable. Regional transportation in the northeast is so far beyond what we have in the Bay Area.
- om42 10y ago
  I was talking to a friend about this. Why does California not have a better public transportation system build? Especially in the Bay Area? I know cities like LA were designed for cars but I've gotten used to public transportation in the Northeast (DC/Philly/NYC/Boston) and its surprising how much west coast cities lack in that department.
  - honkhonkpants 10y ago
    California until quite recently was a giant real estate scam. The entire place was settled with the intent to exploit it and then dump it on the next more gullible person. Only in the last few decades has planning for long-term sustainability been widely practiced.
    - dredmorbius 10y ago
      Citation requested.
    - michaelvoz 10y ago
      Source? Seems like drivel.
      - madgar 10y ago
        Yeah, not sure who can swallow that "planning for long-term sustainability [has] been widely practiced" for "the last few decades."
graycat 10y ago
Will it pay for itself or need subsidies? Usually in the US, passenger rail needs significant subsidies. A bit tough to think that subsidies are a good path to "a better economy".
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  How do you feel about roads? Most of them are 100% subsidized, capital and operations alike.
  - niftich 10y ago
    In an effort to avoid politics as much as I can, roads tend to escape scrutiny about government subsidies because they are a baseline, bring-your-own-vehicle requirement, which doesn't smell nearly as 'subsidized' to people who then have to provide their own cars to use them. In the 'equity' vs 'equality' debate, roads are 'equality': everyone is given the same road to succeed, but of course not everyone has a vehicle to make use of it properly. But this debate pops up in areas when tolls, euphemistic "usage fees", or increases in fuel taxes are proposed to pay for new roads.
    - honkhonkpants 10y ago
      Yes, but the road itself always loses 100% of the money, except for toll roads. It is considered to be an external benefit to the economy that people can move around, even if they have to bring their own vehicles. Therefore it is true in the case of roads that we collectively believe subsidies lead to a better economy. It is not nonsense to extend that belief to railroads.
      - niftich 10y ago
        Perhaps it can be generalized as 'people tend to support only things that are directly and immediately beneficial to their current life circumstances, and demonstrably non-detrimental to their real or perceived future lifestyle prospects'.
      - 10y ago
planetmcd 10y ago
Yea, it is great for Rhode Island business to make it easy for talented people to commute to another city in another state to help their businesses grow. I bet they are thrilled their taxes fund that.
- epa 10y ago
  The alternative view is that without rail it would be harder for those individuals to bring their high pay checks back to Rhode Island to spend their money in the local economy.
  - planetmcd 10y ago
    That would be true if people moved there because of the stop. I'm not sure Pawtucket is a big draw for either families or singles. I am sure that if there is parking, people who already live in RI will use it to commute to Boston to create real wealth for Boston companies while hoping for marginal trickle-down wealth for RI.
- jacalata 10y ago
  That's the problem state income taxes are supposed to solve, isn't it?
  - wtbob 10y ago
    > That's the problem state income taxes are supposed to solve, isn't it? Silly me, I thought state taxes were meant to finance the operation of the state, not punish people for making unpopular choice.
    - jacalata 10y ago
      WTF? Yes, collecting income taxes from people who live in your state is how you finance the operation of the state, and is why Rhode Island will still benefit from spending public money that makes it easier for their residents to work in another state at higher incomes. I don't know why you're talking about punishing anyone, or what unpopular choice you think is involved.
jbpetersen 10y ago
One thing I tripped over here is just what is a phototube in this context? https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2016/08/Screen_Shot_2016_08_09_at_1.41.29_PM/1500b1c9e.png https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2016/08/S... "Phototubes protrude from an abandoned building at the Conant Thread-Coats & Clark Mill Complex, in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)" My own knowledge, Google, and Wikipedia have all failed me here. My best guess is it's old slang for pneumatic transport tubes, but I can't say I've ever seen anything quite like what's shown in the picture.
- R_haterade 10y ago
  Vacuum transport tubes. I seem to remember them being called photo tubes at the bank branch we went to when I was a child. That was a small part of a childhood I'm still recalling odd fragments of here and there. Thanks for prompting the recall.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    Those things are still in use, believe it or not. There's a big box retailer where my parents live that has a tube to every register. When the registers have too much money the checker puts the excess into a cylinder that whooshes to the central office.
    - R_haterade 10y ago
      I think they were in use in hospitals for a while as well for sending notes around, pre-email.
      - nickzoic 10y ago
        Also pathology samples, although I believe there's now some interest in robots doing similar things.
nickbauman 10y ago
This should help a lot. When I worked in the rail automation biz (for a 100B multinational) the internal heuristic for people transport worldwide was two heavy commuter rail lines were the equivalent of a 24-lane highway all parameters being equal (which they never are: there were tons of planning formulae brought to bear when making projections).
- gaul 10y ago
  Wikipedia suggests 3x more passengers per track/lane at 40% of the land use based on Eurostar and the Highway Capacity Manual: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail#Automobiles_and_buses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail#Automobiles_an... Tokaido Shinkansen carries twice as many passengers so this agrees with your post end assuming that two rail lines each have two tracks each. Note that this is the most extreme example, most railways do not carry this capacity.
wtbob 10y ago
I love rail as a user, but the cost is … a bit insane. > In July, the feds awarded $13.1 million, just shy of the $14.5 million the state was seeking … The grant application estimates it would serve 519 riders daily, within the range of other Boston-area commuter rail stations. But most riders would be drawn from busy stations nearby, resulting in a net gain of just 89 new passengers. Surely we could just give $73,600 to each of the 89 people to pay for cab fare, and save the other half of the money?
- madgar 10y ago
  I suspect your calculation ignores that grant money isn't a yearly stipend, so after the $73,600/person runs out those people are back where they started.
jswrenn 10y ago
Speaking as a Providence resident: Pawtucket begins where the comfortable-walking-distance-to-the-Providence-station ends. Pawtucket and Central Falls are languishing. Providence, generally speaking, is more affordable than Boston to live in (which drives a lot of commuter traffic to Boston), but the presence of Brown is steadily driving rents up in the suburb closest to the Providence station. Pawtucket and Central Falls should be the affordable residential suburbs of Providence, but they're not (or, at least, not so much as they should be). Commuter rail to these towns would help revitalize them and ease some of Providence's present growing pains. The thrust of commuter rail into southern Rhode Island has failed because it has not responded to the needs of residents. In Wickford, where I grew up, very few residents take advantage of the weekday commuter lines running from the new Wickford Junction Station, since very few residents there commute to Boston. There are, however, plenty of retired folk who would love to take a weekend trip to Boston via train, but are stymied by the station being closed on weekends. If weekday commuter rail is to ever succeed in southern Rhode Island, it will not be in the short term.
- chmaynard 10y ago
  > Very few residents take advantage of the weekday commuter lines running from the new Wickford Junction Station. I wanted to take MBTA commuter rail to Boston on a Wednesday afternoon to see the Red Sox play the Giants at Fenway Park. There were no trains leaving Wickford between 1:25 and 5:30 pm, so I had to park at Wickford Junction, take a bus to Providence, and walk three blocks to the Amtrak station to catch a train. What good is a beautiful station if there is a 4-hour gap between trains on a weekday?
  - api_or_ipa 10y ago
    > What good is a beautiful station if there is a 4-hour gap between trains on a weekday? Transit begets transit. The shame in urban planning is the reactionary cycle that engages the public process of investing in efficient and multi-mode transit. In the Bay Area, I'm continually frustrated by the lack of Caltrain service. A light rail system with the local Caltrain service density and a headway of <15m could provide the backbone of a huge number of bike commuters. In my experience, Caltrain > driving for most commutes in the SF <=> SJ corridor and having adequate last mile solutions. The challenge now is to transform the chore & appointment traffic into public transit friendly opportunities.
andys627 10y ago
Lots of very intelligent critical analysis applied to these are related issues - if only some of that was applied to roads and encouraging driving. Roads are showered with money with no thought of consequences. This is not in the slightest hyperbolic. Transit projects have to claw tooth and nail for scraps.
Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
$40m for one new station and associated signalling? That's not much less than the cost of reopening the entire 19-mile, 8-station Ebbw Vale line in Wales [1], even though British railway projects are notoriously expensive [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbw_Valley_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbw_Valley_Railway [2] http://www.transportblog.com/archives/000492.html http://www.transportblog.com/archives/000492.html

165 points by misnamed 10y ago

If anyone is interested, I believe this [0] is the train station in question on Google Maps. I can't find the mentioned nearby mills though. [0] https://goo.gl/maps/8UFfq737jgF2 https://goo.gl/maps/8UFfq737jgF2

niftich 10y ago
Here's some street view of the mills mentioned. Each building the initial viewport is looking at is part of the mill complex, but ones behind the camera are usually not. You can back out of streetview to see where it is on the map. [1] https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8821836,-71.3947742,3a,75y,237.68h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl6x4y52O9PzgGoh7Cx4JEQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8821836,-71.3947742,3a,75y,2... [2] https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8794315,-71.3946096,3a,75y,304.16h,80.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSaa7VPaweOcc2rPr4fytug!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8794315,-71.3946096,3a,75y,3... [3] https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8832275,-71.3979953,3a,75y,139.46h,89.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCwidS0-IBpA-E1GrkWb_2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8832275,-71.3979953,3a,75y,1... Also, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conant_Thread-Coats_%26_Clark_Mill_Complex_District https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conant_Thread-Coats_%26_Clark_...

niftich 10y ago

The point in this particular case is that Rhode Island has become a bedroom community for Boston, so improving transportation links between the two can make RI even more attractive to discretionary residents (who come here because they want to, not because they can't find anything better -- which is a byword for higher-income residents), who can stimulate both residential and commercial growth by their presence. It's a reasonable suggestion. Another alternative is that RI could promote business growth to lure away some MA or CT talent. But whether they want to be a swankier, higher-income commuter suburb or a commercial-heavy exurb they really should do something.

jseliger 10y ago
The point in this particular case is that Rhode Island has become a bedroom community for Boston Yeah. Some friends moved from Cambridge to Providence, and in Providence they're a five-minute walk from the train station. They can be at South Station in 45 – 50 minutes. They live in a nice, newly-constructed two-bedroom apartment that's a little more than half the cost of their previous, cramped Cambridge apartment.
- jghn 10y ago
  It's convenient but there's still a tradeoff. Even once you get to South Station, unless you work right there you then have to have your secondary commute inside the city. I work in Kendall Sq so for me it'd tack on at least another 15 minutes. In contrast it normally takes me 15-25 minutes total for my commute as is. That's a big time savings. I also have a lot more flexibility, for instance not needing to worry about catching the last train at night if I'm out with my friends or something like that. For me, I'd rather pay more money for the proximity and flexibility but I agree that YMMV and that for others it makes a ton of sense to go to Providence. And really, I'd much rather go to Providence than a standard suburb because at least I get some of the benefits of urban life there.
  - acomjean 10y ago
    This is so true. Boston transit leaves a lot to be desired. Even once you get there on commuter rail. There are 2 commuter rail stations and they're not connected. They are trying to connect though even with the advocacy of two former govenors, but the current government is resisting (http://www.northsouthraillink.org/ http://www.northsouthraillink.org/). I live in Cambridge MA and commute to Boston (3.5 miles by bike). The fastest I can get to longwood Boston is about 25 minutes on a bike. Bus is 45 minutes. Coworkers that have spaces can get from just outside 128 to Boston in slightly over an hour. The few places with decent access to the city the prices are going through the roof.
    - jghn 10y ago

Animats 10y ago

They already have the tracks and the trains; they just need a station. This is the easy case. This isn't about building a new line. With jobs moving back to inner cities, the radial structure of commuter rail works again.

BuckRogers 10y ago

A better idea yet, force employers to allow all employees who can, to work from home. It's bad for the environment, wasteful of resources and additional stress (illness/cancer) for commuters. Shifts the burden from the planet and people to the company as they learn to manage employees remotely. Which is where the balance should be set at.

WalterBright 10y ago
> force employers This is usually where good intentions go awry. A more efficacious approach is to find ways to make it worthwhile for employers to do so.
- BuckRogers 10y ago
  Employers don't need any more efficacious reasons than balancing the health of the planet/people and profits. The world doesn't have to kiss the ring of employers, and few employees have individual bargaining power as I do. I work from home. People were murdered fighting for an 8-hour workday. Look up Pinkerton. Something that by and large is still not respected to this day, we need stronger labor laws all around. A law has to be passed to force it, because profits will always come before people otherwise. This is the history of the labor movement. It's just reality of how things work. Another efficacious reason is as Nick Hanauer has argued, it's in the best interests of business to compromise on these matters, before the pitchforks come out. As I was once told "every business gets the union they deserve". If you treat people right, you won't have people saying the things I do, changing the political environment. And the final reason, it's just the right thing to do. Not much money will be made once the planet is destroyed or talented employees die early deaths. In the shortsighted search for profits, all of these reasons are ignored, which is why we have labor laws and desperately need more.
  - WalterBright 10y ago
    "The worst crime against working people is a company which fails to operate at a profit." -- Samuel Gompers

Noos 10y ago

It would probably descend into corruption. Rhode Island's governance is horrible, and I doubt publics works projects will solve that.

guard-of-terra 10y ago

It's 100,000 people[1], how come they don't have a station for a rail that literally passes through? Of course they need to fix it right away. [1] By European standards that could as well be a railway hub.

keithpeter 10y ago
UK: Sutton Coldfield has a population just under 100K and has a manned station [1]. Pretty middle class area, no abandoned mills or anything, embedded in a larger conurbation up in the millions, fairly high density. On the Redditch to Lichfield line via Birmingham. Smethwick: working class area with an immediate population of around 25k you get an unmanned station [2] with trains each half an hour in both directions (Walsall to Wolverhampton via Birmingham). Both lines used for commuter traffic, and both stations built a long time ago (Lichfield line was actually early 20th Century). I suspect the economics all come down to use levels and density. What they call 'ridership'. In a lot of neighbourhoods in the West Midlands that are further away from the radial railway lines you are looking at a bus ride then train and a bus ride the other side - as I gather from the OA the present situation is in the settlements mentioned. [1] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870a5a8c7157eb5:0x9c0432a30a727d14!2m5!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i100!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/Sutton%2BColdfield%2BStation%2BUK/@52.5648576,-1.8246764,3a,75y,315.43h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sIrcArVgECQGyzTeukcfyhQ*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x0:0x9c0432a30a727d14!5sSutton+Coldfield+Station+UK+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2sIrcArVgECQGyzTeukcfyhQ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj93YOLp7_OAhWYOsAKHQMMCjEQpx8IiQEwDQ https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870a5a8c7157... [2] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870bd5d2f177b5b:0xb0a5c999f72118f3!2m5!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i100!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/Rolfe%2BStreet%2BStation%2BUK/@52.4964898,-1.970528,3a,75y,174.16h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211so19lMnLpPuqMTu_mEAZh2A*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x0:0xb0a5c999f72118f3!5sRolfe+Street+Station+UK+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2so19lMnLpPuqMTu_mEAZh2A&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiL5PP3p7_OAhWILMAKHaLmCkQQpx8IeDAK https://www.google.co.uk/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x4870bd5d2f177...

rchowe 10y ago

There are a few issues with getting these train stations built though: A. The state of Rhode Island currently reimburses the MBTA for all operating expenses south of the RI/MA state line, and they just funded a commuter rail extension south of Providence to attract intra-RI commuters to take transit to Providence instead of driving. However, even providing incentives such as free parking, ridership at these stations has pretty drastically missed expectations [1], and the trains are scheduled to take the same time as the bus takes in rush hour traffic. The commuting situation/parking isn't bad enough in RI like Boston or New York to make the train obviously beneficial time/money wise, when you lose schedule flexibility of when you can go to/leave work. B. The site of the proposed train station only has two passenger tracks and is located in a high speed (125 MPH or 150 MPH) zone. Starting service to the station is not as simple as just refinishing it and having trains stop there: Amtrak (which owns the tracks) would probably insist that the state of Rhode Island quad-track through the station so that its trains can pass a stopped commuter train. C. It's difficult to get transit projects funded near state borders, because of the mindset of "we paid for it and they all go work in the other state!". Providence is a pretty fast-growing city, so it's possible that in 5 to 10 years the traffic situation makes a much more compelling case for people to make use of transit, but additional commuter rail service there is a kind of hard sell. [1] http://wpri.com/2015/05/18/south-county-rail-ridership-far-short-of-expectations-may15/ http://wpri.com/2015/05/18/south-county-rail-ridership-far-s...

ams6110 10y ago
You would only need to add a third track, since traffic will be predominatntly inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening. That's how Chicago does it. Express trains on the center track, locals on the outer. That said, even adding a third track is a substantial investment.
- rchowe 10y ago
  Yeah, I guessed on that one. They may be able to use the third freight track that already passes through the station for that. The reason I said four is because there actually are just as many southbound commuter trains as northbound commuter trains at rush hour [1], since most of the trains stay overnight in Boston. The Amtrak trains are mostly southbound in the morning and northbound in the evening though. It depends on what Amtrak's mathematicians decide, including whether electrifying the track is worth it. [1] http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/Documents/Schedules_and_Maps/Commuter_Rail/providence.pdf?led=5/23/2016%208:09:11%20AM http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/Documents/Schedules_and_Ma...

honkhonkpants 10y ago

What a blessing of a problem to have a double-track high speed rail system passing through an underutilized station. For comparison to the Bay Area, the distance from Providence to Boston is about the same as the distance from Berkeley to San Jose. That route is also served by Amtrak, but on a neglected single-track, wooden-tie, local-stop service that's scheduled to take 1h33m, but almost always takes longer. Amtrak from Providence to Boston only takes 40 minutes and is generally reliable. Regional transportation in the northeast is so far beyond what we have in the Bay Area.

om42 10y ago
I was talking to a friend about this. Why does California not have a better public transportation system build? Especially in the Bay Area? I know cities like LA were designed for cars but I've gotten used to public transportation in the Northeast (DC/Philly/NYC/Boston) and its surprising how much west coast cities lack in that department.
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  California until quite recently was a giant real estate scam. The entire place was settled with the intent to exploit it and then dump it on the next more gullible person. Only in the last few decades has planning for long-term sustainability been widely practiced.
  - dredmorbius 10y ago
    Citation requested.
  - michaelvoz 10y ago
    Source? Seems like drivel.
    - madgar 10y ago
      Yeah, not sure who can swallow that "planning for long-term sustainability [has] been widely practiced" for "the last few decades."

graycat 10y ago

Will it pay for itself or need subsidies? Usually in the US, passenger rail needs significant subsidies. A bit tough to think that subsidies are a good path to "a better economy".

honkhonkpants 10y ago
How do you feel about roads? Most of them are 100% subsidized, capital and operations alike.
- niftich 10y ago
  In an effort to avoid politics as much as I can, roads tend to escape scrutiny about government subsidies because they are a baseline, bring-your-own-vehicle requirement, which doesn't smell nearly as 'subsidized' to people who then have to provide their own cars to use them. In the 'equity' vs 'equality' debate, roads are 'equality': everyone is given the same road to succeed, but of course not everyone has a vehicle to make use of it properly. But this debate pops up in areas when tolls, euphemistic "usage fees", or increases in fuel taxes are proposed to pay for new roads.
  - honkhonkpants 10y ago
    Yes, but the road itself always loses 100% of the money, except for toll roads. It is considered to be an external benefit to the economy that people can move around, even if they have to bring their own vehicles. Therefore it is true in the case of roads that we collectively believe subsidies lead to a better economy. It is not nonsense to extend that belief to railroads.
    - niftich 10y ago
      Perhaps it can be generalized as 'people tend to support only things that are directly and immediately beneficial to their current life circumstances, and demonstrably non-detrimental to their real or perceived future lifestyle prospects'.
    - 10y ago

planetmcd 10y ago

Yea, it is great for Rhode Island business to make it easy for talented people to commute to another city in another state to help their businesses grow. I bet they are thrilled their taxes fund that.

epa 10y ago
The alternative view is that without rail it would be harder for those individuals to bring their high pay checks back to Rhode Island to spend their money in the local economy.
- planetmcd 10y ago
  That would be true if people moved there because of the stop. I'm not sure Pawtucket is a big draw for either families or singles. I am sure that if there is parking, people who already live in RI will use it to commute to Boston to create real wealth for Boston companies while hoping for marginal trickle-down wealth for RI.
jacalata 10y ago
That's the problem state income taxes are supposed to solve, isn't it?
- wtbob 10y ago
  > That's the problem state income taxes are supposed to solve, isn't it? Silly me, I thought state taxes were meant to finance the operation of the state, not punish people for making unpopular choice.
  - jacalata 10y ago
    WTF? Yes, collecting income taxes from people who live in your state is how you finance the operation of the state, and is why Rhode Island will still benefit from spending public money that makes it easier for their residents to work in another state at higher incomes. I don't know why you're talking about punishing anyone, or what unpopular choice you think is involved.

jbpetersen 10y ago

One thing I tripped over here is just what is a phototube in this context? https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2016/08/Screen_Shot_2016_08_09_at_1.41.29_PM/1500b1c9e.png https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2016/08/S... "Phototubes protrude from an abandoned building at the Conant Thread-Coats & Clark Mill Complex, in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)" My own knowledge, Google, and Wikipedia have all failed me here. My best guess is it's old slang for pneumatic transport tubes, but I can't say I've ever seen anything quite like what's shown in the picture.

R_haterade 10y ago
Vacuum transport tubes. I seem to remember them being called photo tubes at the bank branch we went to when I was a child. That was a small part of a childhood I'm still recalling odd fragments of here and there. Thanks for prompting the recall.
- gozur88 10y ago
  Those things are still in use, believe it or not. There's a big box retailer where my parents live that has a tube to every register. When the registers have too much money the checker puts the excess into a cylinder that whooshes to the central office.
  - R_haterade 10y ago
    I think they were in use in hospitals for a while as well for sending notes around, pre-email.
    - nickzoic 10y ago
      Also pathology samples, although I believe there's now some interest in robots doing similar things.

nickbauman 10y ago

This should help a lot. When I worked in the rail automation biz (for a 100B multinational) the internal heuristic for people transport worldwide was two heavy commuter rail lines were the equivalent of a 24-lane highway all parameters being equal (which they never are: there were tons of planning formulae brought to bear when making projections).

gaul 10y ago
Wikipedia suggests 3x more passengers per track/lane at 40% of the land use based on Eurostar and the Highway Capacity Manual: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail#Automobiles_and_buses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail#Automobiles_an... Tokaido Shinkansen carries twice as many passengers so this agrees with your post end assuming that two rail lines each have two tracks each. Note that this is the most extreme example, most railways do not carry this capacity.

wtbob 10y ago

I love rail as a user, but the cost is … a bit insane. > In July, the feds awarded $13.1 million, just shy of the $14.5 million the state was seeking … The grant application estimates it would serve 519 riders daily, within the range of other Boston-area commuter rail stations. But most riders would be drawn from busy stations nearby, resulting in a net gain of just 89 new passengers. Surely we could just give $73,600 to each of the 89 people to pay for cab fare, and save the other half of the money?

madgar 10y ago
I suspect your calculation ignores that grant money isn't a yearly stipend, so after the $73,600/person runs out those people are back where they started.

jswrenn 10y ago

Speaking as a Providence resident: Pawtucket begins where the comfortable-walking-distance-to-the-Providence-station ends. Pawtucket and Central Falls are languishing. Providence, generally speaking, is more affordable than Boston to live in (which drives a lot of commuter traffic to Boston), but the presence of Brown is steadily driving rents up in the suburb closest to the Providence station. Pawtucket and Central Falls should be the affordable residential suburbs of Providence, but they're not (or, at least, not so much as they should be). Commuter rail to these towns would help revitalize them and ease some of Providence's present growing pains. The thrust of commuter rail into southern Rhode Island has failed because it has not responded to the needs of residents. In Wickford, where I grew up, very few residents take advantage of the weekday commuter lines running from the new Wickford Junction Station, since very few residents there commute to Boston. There are, however, plenty of retired folk who would love to take a weekend trip to Boston via train, but are stymied by the station being closed on weekends. If weekday commuter rail is to ever succeed in southern Rhode Island, it will not be in the short term.

chmaynard 10y ago
> Very few residents take advantage of the weekday commuter lines running from the new Wickford Junction Station. I wanted to take MBTA commuter rail to Boston on a Wednesday afternoon to see the Red Sox play the Giants at Fenway Park. There were no trains leaving Wickford between 1:25 and 5:30 pm, so I had to park at Wickford Junction, take a bus to Providence, and walk three blocks to the Amtrak station to catch a train. What good is a beautiful station if there is a 4-hour gap between trains on a weekday?
- api_or_ipa 10y ago
  > What good is a beautiful station if there is a 4-hour gap between trains on a weekday? Transit begets transit. The shame in urban planning is the reactionary cycle that engages the public process of investing in efficient and multi-mode transit. In the Bay Area, I'm continually frustrated by the lack of Caltrain service. A light rail system with the local Caltrain service density and a headway of <15m could provide the backbone of a huge number of bike commuters. In my experience, Caltrain > driving for most commutes in the SF <=> SJ corridor and having adequate last mile solutions. The challenge now is to transform the chore & appointment traffic into public transit friendly opportunities.

andys627 10y ago

Lots of very intelligent critical analysis applied to these are related issues - if only some of that was applied to roads and encouraging driving. Roads are showered with money with no thought of consequences. This is not in the slightest hyperbolic. Transit projects have to claw tooth and nail for scraps.

Doctor_Fegg 10y ago

$40m for one new station and associated signalling? That's not much less than the cost of reopening the entire 19-mile, 8-station Ebbw Vale line in Wales [1], even though British railway projects are notoriously expensive [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbw_Valley_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbw_Valley_Railway [2] http://www.transportblog.com/archives/000492.html http://www.transportblog.com/archives/000492.html