Arguments for "Metroization" of passenger rail services in New York City; Boston; Chicago ... and London issues a new report

I have used the example of Transport for London's creation of the London Overground system through the takeover of various in-city passenger rail lines but used the approach of the subway system in terms of (more) frequent service, branding, and fare integration, resulting in increases in usage of up to 700% as well as in-migration and real estate development in the communities getting the improved and branded Overground service as a way to rethink the provision of MARC service in DC and Maryland ("One big idea: Getting MARC and Metrorail to integrate fares, stations, and marketing systems, using London Overground as an example," 2015).

And in terms of long term thinking about railroad passenger service in suburban and exurban Virginia ("A new backbone for the regional transit system: merging the MARC Penn and VRE Fredericksburg Lines," 2017).

Also see "Branding's not all you need for transit," 2018.

But it's been discussed in blogs and other venues for years for New York City ("Regional Rail for New York City - Part I," "Regional Rail for New York City - Part II," and "New York Regional Rail: A Coda," Transport Politic), Chicago ("Idea to convert Metra Electric to rapid-transit line draws mayor's interest," Chicago Tribune), and Boston (Transit Matters).

This bridge over Mare Street for the London Overground Hackney Central Station has a public art lighting project done by Martin Richman ("Martin Richman: Lighting up East London and beyond," East London Lines).


Transport for London is arguing for a new round of this ("Sadiq Khan pushes for tube-style services on London's railways," Guardian) to extend the London Overground concept further, especially into the South of Greater London, especially where the Thameslink/Southern Railway rail services have been so terrible ("Train service in Greater Manchester needs to be reorganized?," 2018).

As part of this play, they've produced a great report, which likely would be useful as background material to support various similar efforts in the US.

-- Strategic Case for Metroisation in south and south east London, Transport for London

====
Note advocates in the UK argue, correctly when compared to best-in-class European rail services, that rail services pale in terms of amount of service, and often in terms of high cost.

But having a brief experience with these services in London and Liverpool, all I can say is that "bad rail services in the UK" are probably a minimum of 10x better than rail services in the US.

Granted the UK is much smaller than the US, but you can get to most major cities and within city metropolitan areas by train in a reasonably convenient if imperfect manner. You can't in the US.