tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post7875264443472724666..comments2024-03-27T09:13:58.922-07:00Comments on The Amateur Planner: When Boston Almost Lost Commuter RailArihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06058285362842737187noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post-63117775740936274322016-06-08T11:45:57.377-07:002016-06-08T11:45:57.377-07:00ooh! And 1983 ridership data!ooh! And 1983 ridership data!Arihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06058285362842737187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post-75292182338345178472016-06-06T12:57:32.277-07:002016-06-06T12:57:32.277-07:00There was a history of the commuter rail system wr...There was a history of the commuter rail system written in 1985 - http://www.amazon.com/Bostons-commuter-rail-first-Bulletin/dp/B0006EIE9EJim D.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post-437957221793458252016-06-01T12:13:33.404-07:002016-06-01T12:13:33.404-07:00Those networks were minimal (a single line in Detr...Those networks were minimal (a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEMTA_Commuter_Rail" rel="nofollow">single line</a> in Detroit, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_commuter_rail" rel="nofollow">Cleveland</a> had one or two trains per day on a couple of lines, and Pittsburg only had a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PATrain" rel="nofollow">couple of peak-hour trips on its lines</a>. Boston, on the other hand, went from a full-fledged commuter rail network in the 1950s, to mostly skeleton service in the 1970s, and back to a full-fledged network by the 1990s. It very easily could have followed the Cleveland-Pittsburgh-Detroit model as it had withered almost that far. Good points, I'll edit this in.Arihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06058285362842737187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post-81572480124572989952016-06-01T06:50:16.253-07:002016-06-01T06:50:16.253-07:00This is a VERY interesting article - thank you so ...This is a VERY interesting article - thank you so much for taking the time to research this - it is quite informative!<br /><br />One minor quibble - you mention that:<br /><br />Boston came very close to losing its commuter rail system in its entirety, something which occurred in no other city (the closest was the abandonment of the non-electrified portions of the SEPTA system in the early-1980s; while Boston's ridership began to rise in the 1980s, SEPTA and Metra saw ridership decline in the early '80s). <br /><br />I could be wrong about this, but I don't think this is true. In the United States, I believe Detroit, Cleveland and Pittsburgh all lost their entire "commuter rail" services (what relatively few services they had, in any event).<br /><br />But again - many thanks for an interesting post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post-47588245862123011892016-05-31T09:29:59.094-07:002016-05-31T09:29:59.094-07:00What's interesting is that after the Blue Line...What's interesting is that after the Blue Line extension (which used an abandoned rail line) and the Highland Branch conversion, Boston never fully converted any freight lines to mass transit, but left some freight (and, as it turns out, passenger) capacity. The <a href="http://transitmap.net/post/28991236970/boston-1945-plan" rel="nofollow">1945 plan</a> envisioned more—Orange Line to Reading and Dedham, Green Line to Woburn, Needham and Riverside via both the Highland Branch and two of the four tracks of the B&A main line, and Arlington from Harvard via the Bemis Branch (by Fresh Pond). Some of this was built; much was not.<br /><br />Where any freight was present, Commuter Rail was left (explaining the flyover in Medford, for example, and the Old Colony). There was a lot more freight in the 1940s and even the 1970s, so there were fewer full-line conversions possible. Plans in the 1970s looked in to full conversion of all Commuter Rail to transit lines, although today that would likely be impossible given the strain on the core transit network. <br /><br />As for other cities. Some bits and pieces of NYC's subway system use old rail lines (Rockaway, Dyre Ave) as do some portions of Hudson-Bergen. Some DC Metro lines parallel existing rail corridors, as does some of MARTA and a bit of BART, and some newer light rail systems. But really, that's about it. Boston has probably the largest percent of rail-transit conversion in the country.<br /><br />And, yes, there's a history of Commuter Rail in Boston to be written. Maybe in time for the 200th anniversary of Commuter Rail on the Worcester Line (not just in Boston, but <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_and_Albany_Railroad#History" rel="nofollow">pretty much anywhere</a>) in 2034.Arihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06058285362842737187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293100068373105830.post-62590744611408229812016-05-30T20:42:17.030-07:002016-05-30T20:42:17.030-07:00I wish I knew more about the history of commuter r...I wish I knew more about the history of commuter rail in Boston, and in the US in general. It's worth noting that this was also a time period when the MBTA's strategy seemed to be to replace commuter rail lines with very-suburban extensions of the T in the same right-of-ways. (The Old Colony branch of the Red Line, the Medford Orange Line, the D-Riverside branch of the Green Line, and the planned extension of the Red Line along what is now the Minuteman Commuter Bikeway.) I wonder how much that was a Boston-specific phenomenon and how much it was national?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com