Crazy Transit Pitches [Archive]

View Full Version : Crazy Transit Pitches

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

BostonUrbEx

11-17-2010, 08:08 PM

This is where I'll toss out some of my crazy ideas that are relatively smaller and don't really need individual threads.

I give you... the Red Line Wye:

http://www.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=102103334766256038742.0004950eb693b66e8a6d4&t=h&z=13

Continue the Blue Line connection at MGH under the Charles to a junction somewhere near Kendall. Put a junction north of Broadway, South of Maverick, and connect them. And there you have it, my Red Line Wye, also featuring a new stop for the Financial District and Downtown Waterfront located below the RKG between International Place and Rowes Wharf. Will also feature a free ferry transfer.

Oh, and the Maverick-Broadway portion will run to Ashmont only, not Braintree. And that would cover all Ashmont service. This is an attempt to keep Braintree riders from getting pissy like they do about everything.

Coming soon to a Google Map near you! The Green Line Wye! Featuring heavy rail upgrades to the central subway and a wye connection to the Blue Line in the Government Center/State Street/Park Street area.

After that one, I'm all done with wyes [I think].

BostonUrbEx

11-17-2010, 08:26 PM

Okay, here she is, the Green Line Wye:

http://www.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=42.358671,-71.058648&spn=0.009403,0.022724&t=h&z=16&msid=102103334766256038742.0004954a497bd3c9e0ca8

Except I rename her... The Blue Line Wye. The Green Line would be upgraded to handle current Blue Line rolling stock. The curve from North Station to the viaduct portal would have to be straightened out, Haymarket would be eliminated due to new alignment to account for the curve coming in from State, and that would be covered by a new Government Center station on the north side of the wye. Also, Boylston would have to be relocated, if not eliminated, due to curve.

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

11-18-2010, 06:57 PM

I gave ye olde google maps a try last night...hopefully it comes up

Lowell Commuter Rail Extension into Nashua, NH

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&vps=1&jsv=296a&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=106994421069366264839.0004954c103214ea324ba

omaja

11-20-2010, 09:37 PM

I like the ideas of connecting more lines together but I think it might be better accomplished via completely separated, dedicated lines.

Here's my crazy idea that kind of rethinks the entire way the T is organized now, based on Madrid's Metro.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=k&msa=0&msid=116072282536076087276.00049581afd422709d93d&ll=42.351947,-71.152267&spn=0.241544,0.676346&z=11

A rough sketch, but you get the idea. :)

vanshnookenraggen

11-21-2010, 12:31 AM

You guys mind if I post these on futureMBTA? Full credit of course.

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

11-21-2010, 01:08 PM

Sure...not at all...

omaja

11-21-2010, 02:35 PM

Doesn't bother me either. I will probably be tweaking it a bit though.

BostonUrbEx

11-21-2010, 03:39 PM

Sounds fine, no qualms here.

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

11-21-2010, 05:34 PM

Van...I LOVE your maps. Not just like...but LOVE!

Yet, I feel that we need to re-enter the earth's surface without heat tiles. I would love to see the 2050 map become a reaility. Maybe by then when we're under China's rule, it'll happen. But realistically, the future of the MBTA's extensions and improvments will consist of the following:

1. The Red Line will be extended out to 128/Brandeis. It'll take some time, and a lot of litigation from NIMBY's. But it'll run alongside the Commuter Rail, which will be okay with most neighbors. The worst will be that they'll just add a commuter rail stop at Alewife.

2. The Orange Line will be extended to Dedham. The Northwest End will unfortunately say the same.

3. Boylston and Hynes Stations will be rebuilt by the year 2020. While the Concrete will be reinforced in the tunnels.

4. The Blue Line will be extended to Lynn.

5. The Red/Blue line connectord to MGH will happen.

And who knows? Maybe I will be wrong. Hopefully I'll be wrong (or right, depending on where you stand). But in Mass, we need to take baby steps. We also can't be trusted with elaborate projects.

vanshnookenraggen

11-21-2010, 07:44 PM

Okay, here she is, the Green Line Wye:

This is very similar to an early proposal for the original Tremont St subway and the East Boston tunnel. The wacky original layout of Scollay and Adams Sq stations was to act as a kind of interchange for trains coming from the north, east (via the East Boston tunnel), south, and west (via Cambridge St). I think once the subway became popular there was a push towards full heavy rail which killed the idea.

Here is a map I found once, year unknown.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/153/346217350_df1dc77a2d_b.jpg

Edit: Your posts are up, thanks a lot! Great ideas.

czsz

11-21-2010, 11:01 PM

1. The Red Line will be extended out to 128/Brandeis. It'll take some time, and a lot of litigation from NIMBY's. But it'll run alongside the Commuter Rail, which will be okay with most neighbors. The worst will be that they'll just add a commuter rail stop at Alewife.

2. The Orange Line will be extended to Dedham. The Northwest End will unfortunately say the same.

3. Boylston and Hynes Stations will be rebuilt by the year 2020. While the Concrete will be reinforced in the tunnels.

4. The Blue Line will be extended to Lynn.

5. The Red/Blue line connectord to MGH will happen.

Given that maybe 5% of what's proposed actually happens, and there haven't been serious proposals floated for the first three of these, I give only the last two any remotely serious chance.

NJBostonFan

11-22-2010, 11:54 AM

Hey van,

Do u remember an idea you had for an urban ring on your website and you had a map of? I'll refresh your memory:

What the Urban Ring could be

The T seems to have a sexual fixation with the idea of BRT. Now, I don?t really have anything against BRT, it?s just, if you are gonna spend billions of dollars, try to build something that will last. I think that the Urban Ring should have two subway routes rather than one. One route will come close to the city and the other will be further out, near Harvard.

The first route is basically what the MBTA proposes but will connect to Logan rather stopping at Sullivan. It will go from Logan Airport, connect with the Blue Line at Wood Island, follow the Grand Junction RR in Chelsea and Everett, and cross the Mystic to Sullivan Sq. Then it heads south to Lechmere and Kendall. After Kendall it will follow the Grand Junction a bit further and dive under the Charles River to Kenmore Sq. It will travel under Brookline Ave to the Longwood Medical Area where it will make a sharp turn west to Huntington Ave and Ruggles. Here it will head southwest to Dudley Sq, over to Uphams Corner, the current JFK/UMass stop (which will have its name changed back to Columbia, or Expo Center) and finally out to UMass Boston.

The second line will leave from Medford Center, heading west were it will meet up and run parallel with the Orange Line to Sullivan Sq. Here it will sharply turn east and meet up with the two branches of the Green Line on Washington St and Union Sq in Somerville. It will head southeast to Inman Sq in Cambridge where it will make another sharp turn to the east and head to Harvard Sq. At Harvard it will travel under to Charles over to Allston where Harvard University is building its huge student campus. The line will head south under Franklin St, connect with a new Allston commuter rail stop where the Sports Depot is and continue under Harvard Ave, stopping at Comm. Ave and Coolidge Corner. At Coolidge Corner the line will head west and connect with the first line in the Longwood Medical Area.

The Urban Ring 600kb

That refresh your memory? I think this idea for an Urban Ring works perfectly. Maybe we can get an acclaimed architect like Norman Foster to design the stations, like he did with the Bilbao Metro.

vanshnookenraggen

11-22-2010, 12:55 PM

Hey van,

Do u remember an idea you had for an urban ring on your website and you had a map of? I'll refresh your memory:

That was my old, heavy rail, plan for the urban ring. I've since changed gears and now think that building light rail subway network which integrates with the Green Line would be a better plan. I don't know if I ever actually wrote out the specifics but it would allow for not one but up to 3 different "loops" through Boston, Roxbury, and Cambridge. When I get home and can look up what I have I'll post it. I personally thought it was a much more ingenious idea than what the T was proposing; one which could easily be built in stages and be affordable.

czsz

11-22-2010, 01:45 PM

Given the way ideas get watered down in Boston we should have begun conceiving of the Urban Ring as a high-speed maglev. Then we might have wound up with, at least, light rail!

As it is the MBTA started with heavy rail and we're going to wind up with a shuttle bus sporting a handmade sign taped to the window. And it won't run weekends or holidays.

(Maybe I'm just a little bitter because the T has been replacing half of Needham Line commuter rail service with school buses. Not even conventional T buses...school buses. At full commuter rail ticket price.)

palindrome

11-22-2010, 02:57 PM

(Maybe I'm just a little bitter because the T has been replacing half of Needham Line commuter rail service with school buses. Not even conventional T buses...school buses. At full commuter rail ticket price.)

that is honestly absurd/embarrassing. They couldn't have gone for full coach buses (especially considering they are still charging upwards of $4.50 for a ticket.

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

11-22-2010, 03:27 PM

Given that maybe 5% of what's proposed actually happens, and there haven't been serious proposals floated for the first three of these, I give only the last two any remotely serious chance.
Touche...*sigh* I guess that any progress is good progress.

NJBostonFan

11-22-2010, 03:59 PM

That was my old, heavy rail, plan for the urban ring. I've since changed gears and now think that building light rail subway network which integrates with the Green Line would be a better plan. I don't know if I ever actually wrote out the specifics but it would allow for not one but up to 3 different "loops" through Boston, Roxbury, and Cambridge. When I get home and can look up what I have I'll post it. I personally thought it was a much more ingenious idea than what the T was proposing; one which could easily be built in stages and be affordable.

Heavy rail should be good. Light rail should be on the streets. Green line Should go heavy. West Medford to Riverside via Central Subway, Huntington Avenue E Line, and then a connection to the D Line to Riverside.

czsz

11-22-2010, 05:16 PM

^ That makes me think that an okay way to facilitate the conversion of the Green Line from light to heavy rail might be to resurface the trolley lines for a few years. Traffic isn't THAT heavy on Tremont and Boylston that they couldn't suffer 30some months of lane reductions, and it's not necessarily true that the Green Line would be slower at surface than in the awful old tunnels (the Herald recently held a race between trolley and bike from Cleveland Circle to Park St...guess who won?)

Of course, ideally, we'd instead temporarily replace the Green Line with a Blue Line heavy rail extension past Bowdoin to, say, Kenmore...but that obviously seems less likely.

Speaking of crazy transit schemes...some Londoner came up with this, a Tube map redesigned with "South London bias" (currently, most of the Tube runs north of the Thames...s/he basically flipped the map upside down to the other side of the river and renamed the station):
http://bit.ly/fRda8V

czsz

11-22-2010, 05:22 PM

that is honestly absurd/embarrassing. They couldn't have gone for full coach buses (especially considering they are still charging upwards of $4.50 for a ticket.

I couldn't believe it when I and the other passengers were herded onto these things at Forest Hills. Most of these people are wearing suits and typing on Blackberries. There was a distinguished old woman with expensive luggage and a cape (cape!) who exclaimed "ooh! what an adventure!" I wonder how she'll feel after doing this for months. I'm glad I don't have to make this journey every day; they're running these buses on every journey outside rush hour until almost the end of the year.

Rush hour trips haven't been left unscathed either; trackwork has increased the time it takes to run the journey from about half an hour to an hour and a half.

I mean, I understand that there's track maintenance to do (and slippery rail this time of year) but think of the treatment that highways get: most scheduled roadwork is done in the middle of the night.

Charlie_mta

11-22-2010, 10:33 PM

(double post)

Charlie_mta

11-22-2010, 10:34 PM

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/153/346217350_df1dc77a2d_b.jpg

^^^^That layout shows the tunnel to east Boston proposed at the time to run up Hanover Street through the North End, instead of up State Street as it was actually built.

The Hanover Street route for the East Boston tunnel would have been cool. I'm wondering if the State Street route won out in order to allow room for the future (at the time) Sumner Tunnel. A Hanover Street Blue Line route would have conflicted with the Sumner Tunnel route.

vanshnookenraggen

11-22-2010, 11:01 PM

The Hanover St alignment would have given the North End a subway station but I think they went with State St because it allowed for a transfer at Atlantic Ave (Aquarium today) with the Atlantic Ave elevated. Also State St was the CBD (central business district) so that probably had the most sway.

Edit: I knew I had this somewhere.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/152/346212879_e18c4e8310_o.jpg

vanshnookenraggen

11-22-2010, 11:07 PM

Fun fact about that map: it shows a possible connection with a Cambridge St subway and Washington St subway. As originally proposed, the Red Line was to be elevated along Mass Ave to Harvard Sq. This would have allowed Red Line and Orange Line trains to use the same tunnel, the Washington St subway. Residents of Cambridge balked at the plan and a full subway was proposed. Because of this change, the Red Line was built wider than the Orange Line because it didn't have to conform to the tighter elevated train standards.

This is one more reason why every line on the T is totally different.

czsz

11-22-2010, 11:51 PM

So...

1. Cambridge had rabid NIMBYs even in the 1910s

2. Said NIMBYs actually did good (burying the Red Line and avoiding future blight, leading to the line developing separately from the Orange and probably paving the way for future expansions of both that probably would have never happened).

ant8904

11-22-2010, 11:51 PM

@CZSZ They are really doing that? I can't believe they really are. This is an embarrassment and makes me ask that why isn't anyone outraged beyond this forum.

In other news. This person have a post on UH with a link to a site/blog of his statements about the green line extension. What he argues, also another thing to be embarrass about the current state of Massachusetts and likely the US on all fronts including government funded public works.

http://www.universalhub.com/node/51324

Shepard

11-23-2010, 08:20 AM

^ a very wordy proposal that essentially boils down to extending the orange line onto the proposed GLX alignment and meanwhile extending the GL from Lechmere as a trolley down major corridors eg Cambridge St to Harvard Sq.

HenryAlan

11-23-2010, 10:08 AM

Rush hour trips haven't been left unscathed either; trackwork has increased the time it takes to run the journey from about half an hour to an hour and a half.

I mean, I understand that there's track maintenance to do (and slippery rail this time of year) but think of the treatment that highways get: most scheduled roadwork is done in the middle of the night.

That really sucks for the folks out in Needham. They should bus them to the D-Line, and leave the folks in Westie and Rozzie to take regular bus service since both neighborhoods are well served to begin with.

It's been not so bad for those of us closer to Forest Hills. Everything seems to be routinely 15 minutes late, but if you just adjust your thinking, it adheres to a shifted schedule (one that actually works better for me).

czsz

11-23-2010, 12:30 PM

As bad as the current situation is, I wouldn't wish a combo bus + D line trip on my worst enemy. That's easily over two hours into the city, and probably routinely more.

^ a very wordy proposal that essentially boils down to extending the orange line onto the proposed GLX alignment and meanwhile extending the GL from Lechmere as a trolley down major corridors eg Cambridge St to Harvard Sq.

Of course, heavy rail would be preferable, so I'm down with his Orange Line suggestion. But the Green Line down Cambridge St.? Madness. Sadly, most traffic "arteries" in Boston/Cambridge/Somerville boil down to two travel lanes, making the installation of streetcars a virtual impossibility. Look at the opposition to the restoration of service on Center St. in JP... as good as these narrow streets are for deterring travel by car, they don't do many favors for transit riders, either (or for that matter, cyclists, since there's often little space for proper bike lanes). This is one of the greater structural weaknesses of the inner Boston metro, IMO.

HenryAlan

11-23-2010, 12:57 PM

I've never been able to understand the preference for Green Line over Orange Line for Somerville service. The way it's designed is tailor made for HRT, so why bother with LRT?

czsz

11-23-2010, 01:16 PM

ant8904

11-23-2010, 02:47 PM

Yet, it is approaching a billion dollars for 4 miles of track with the tracks and ROW already there. Did it always cost this much per mile like back in early 20th century where largest subway construction was happening? What about other countries? You know, it is commonly said (relatively) that Republicans are anti-rail and anything else besides highways. However, when projects like this costs a billion dollars for 4 miles of track, I can see why they are so hesitant.

The example that guy used built a tunnel that cost so much less. If it already cost a billion, I wonder how much if it was a Orange line spur instead. I wonder where is the money going.

czsz

11-23-2010, 03:11 PM

Equilibria

11-23-2010, 06:59 PM

Cheaper. You can lay some blacktop and build a shed roof and call it an LRT station. Not so heavy rail, which needs long, raised platforms. You also have to install all kinds of safety precautions on exposed heavy rail lines, since the third rail is electrified. LRT catenary poses no such problems.

The station cost is a good point (and I think was decisive here). HRT can be modified to run on overhead wires. The Chicago "L" had that capability on some of its trains for many years, and might still have it today. The trick would be having to stop the train to change over and grab the wire.

Taking a glance at his population density map, the two highest priorities for expansion on that basis would be NW Somerville (which this extension covers) and Allston-Brighton. The latter is all caught up in the Urban Ring debacle, though.

briv

11-23-2010, 07:35 PM

A billion dollars for 4 miles ($250 million/mile) seems hugely exorbitant, especially considering the ROW is already there. Other cities like Seattle and Phoenix are implementing entire lines from scratch for a fraction of the cost per mile. There's obviously something very wrong here.

erikyow

11-23-2010, 08:24 PM

That does seem high. An LRT line down the middle of a suburban arterial here in Toronto is costing between $130-160 million per mile. Factoring currency conversion and higher labor costs, that's still about $80-130 million less per mile for a brand new line with no existing infrastructure.

So, I agree, something is definitely very wrong with that figure.

ant8904

11-23-2010, 10:11 PM

Whatever is making this cost $1b now, I don't think it's for any reason having inherently to do with rail that should make conservatives or libertarians more suspicious of that transport medium than of highways. Remember the insane cost overruns on the Big Dig, a highway project...this kind of thing can happen to any infrastructure medium.

Also, it's important to keep in mind that rail tends to serve more people per mile than any road. In other words, more taxpayers whose money will go into rail projects will be able to benefit from them. Because roads tend to deconcentrate people, they're used by fewer people proportionately (on a regular basis, that is), so there's rarely as direct a benefit to the citizen paying in.

My bigger issue is the money. I never said it is inherit to railroads, but that is why I am asking for comparisons. Did it really cost this much back 1906? What about those subways in Beijing, are they spending 500 billion dollars or something? What is costing so much anyways? How much does cement for the platforms costs exactly? If I were governor and see projects costing that much, I would have to ask myself that, not because of roads vs rail or any of that, but just plain cost. If the project is only costing $250 million and other mode cost a Billion, I would be asking about the other modes.

Now, that said, $250 million per mile still looks off. I can't really know for sure. I don't have any experience nor access to information on how much each material cost, but something is ballooning the cost. If it not, then I have to ask how did we pay for all those now century old projects anyway.

HenryAlan

11-24-2010, 09:10 AM

The station cost is a good point (and I think was decisive here). HRT can be modified to run on overhead wires. The Chicago "L" had that capability on some of its trains for many years, and might still have it today. The trick would be having to stop the train to change over and grab the wire.
But the station design is part of why I've suggested they might just as well do heavy rail. Have you looked at the designs? They are nothing like the B/C/D/E asphalt strips. They look very much like the SouthWest Corridor OL stations. I'll grant that there may not be space for six car platforms, and also it's possible that ridership projections don't support the need for Orange Line level service. Still, I bet the stations are a huge element of the cost calculation. They are very substantial.

As for Centenary and heavy rail, it's very possible, and is the configuration for the Blue Line, switching as it emerges from the tunnel just before Airport Station. The original plan for the new Orange Line was that it would also operate in this fashion for the never built section beyond Oak Grove. The reason for this choice was that the trains were going to have a few grade crossings, and third rail is not compatible with a crossing.

palindrome

11-24-2010, 09:17 AM

does the $1B include the new maintenance yard? I know they are spending $50m just for land acquisitions for that. Perhaps it also includes funds for the Type 9 that is part of this project?

CSTH

11-24-2010, 11:01 AM

Theres actually a little more to the proposal that was linked than just a orange-rather-than-green HRT/LRT option.

The proposal suggested connecting the lowell and haverhill commuter rail lines just north of the Anderson station in Woburn with a new short spur (~1 mile). That would eliminate the need to build two new tracks on the somerville corridor, parallel to the existing CR tracks, for the rapid transit service - the conversion in the existing footprint from CR rails to orange line rails and power would presumably be relatively cheap and easy.

That would theoretically allow orange line service all the way out to Anderson / 128 essentially on existing track (and, importantly, without the need for a new bridge across the mystic near route 16), with the significant cost elements being the (a) new CR ~1 mile spur connecting the lowell and haverhill lines in Woburn (b) a short connection for the orange line from community college through the vacant north point site in Cambridge to the somerville corridor (c) converting the CR rails to orange line rails and power (d) grade separation in west medford (e) building new stations and (f) rolling stock.

If you did that you could probably also eliminate the need to radically rebuild the 128 / 93 intersection in Woburn - so the cost comparison for those elements listed above would be not only 1B+ for the GLX plan but also hundreds of millions for a mammoth new eggbeater junction in Woburn.

And in return you'd get a one seat HRT ride from 128 to where the jobs are: north station, state street, park street, Back Bay, ruggles and beyond - not to mention high capacity service for somerville. Plus you'd have the potential to create rapid transit-like headways on CR trains (with a combination of express and local trains for both haverhill and lowell service, possibly supplemented by indigo-line style sprinters) between North Station and Reading or Anderson on the Haverhill ROW.

Another idea that is way too good to have any potential of happening.

Equilibria

11-24-2010, 09:06 PM

I was curious about this, so I looked it up:

Based on about 15 LRT projects over the past 20 years or so, the so-called "Urban Transport Fact Book" (http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-lrt2001.htm) calculates a $70 million per-mile average for LRT construction. They include some projects which aren't really analogous to the GLE, like Austin's DMU project, but it seems reasonable based on a couple specific numbers (the Portland Interstate and California projects particularly) to say the average falls somewhere in the $70-$100 million range per mile.

The GLE is currently budgeted at almost $250 million per mile. This seems high to me. In fact, it would make the GLE more expensive by $50 million per mile than the Seattle Sound Transit Project, which was constructed from nothing and involved complex elevated right-of-way. In fact, in a gross oversimplification one could argue that the MBTA could build Seattle's system and Austin's together for the price of the GLE.

According to Reconnecting America's fact sheet, Heavy Rail such as the Orange Line can cost anywhere from $50 million to $250 million per mile. According to their figures, the GLE is costing as much per mile as San Francisco's Central Subway. Assuming that the cost to extend the Orange Line fell in the middle of that range (which is, under the circumstances, patently ridiculous, but I'll dream big), an HRT extension for the 12 miles to Anderson would cost in the $1.2 billion range. Add to that the 1.5 mile CR link (via the most plausible route) at $15 million per mile, and we end up with somewhere around $1.25 billion.

That's higher than the GLE cost (though it serves far more people), but it is not the most appealing solution to me. Austin's system is DMU, and was just recently completed (so the number is relatively current, albeit in Texas). For each mile of GLE the MBTA is building, they could construct 5 miles of DMU service on existing track, perhaps along (and potentially replacing CR service on) the Worcester and Fairmont Lines. After all, for the total cost of the GLE, we could get 20 miles of DMU, enough to reach both Riverside and 128 Station.

Of course, to get the full effect of HRT, you need HRT, not DMU. Assuming it's 12 miles from South Station to either Riverside or 128, though, it would cost the same $1.25 billion to build each of those lines. It's steep, but if the T can justify spending 80% of that on 4 miles of light rail in just about ideal right-of-way, maybe new management could push one of those through.

belmont square

11-25-2010, 07:11 AM

That would theoretically allow orange line service all the way out to Anderson / 128 essentially on existing track

Another idea that is way too good to have any potential of happening.

The population density necessary to support rapid transit drops off quite a bit beyond West Medford. Is it really such a good idea to extend rapid transit service 7 miles (W Med to Anderson) beyond where the density can support it? In order to get there you'd need to pass through tony Winchester, which would almost certainly oppose it (in fact, dense and relatively blue collar Medford has been less than enthusiastic in their support for GLX).

You'd essentially be creating a stretch of Orange Line from Anderson to West Medford that would be about as long as the Forest Hills to Wellington stretch, on which there would be essentially empty trains throughout most of the day, and empty trains coming every 5 minutes during the peak periods in the non-peak direction.

Maybe not as good an idea as you think?

BostonUrbEx

11-25-2010, 07:32 AM

There's a ROW through downtown Wouburn on up to Anderson. It may have been the former Middlesex Canal, or at least partially. That would pick up alot more density, but you'd certainly have to tunnel under the center.

ant8904

11-25-2010, 10:45 AM

BostonUrbEx

11-28-2010, 08:21 AM

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5128/5214002235_59d54c4d08_o.png

My Proposed Sullivan Station

A complete reworking of the current station, which should fit in the current ROW, if not, the rightmost commuter rail track could be placed inside the east retaining wall. Also note that I-93 supports would likely need replacing.

Improvements including a better Orange Line expressing system, and a brand new "Silver Line" (Urban Ring, heavy rail) connection. Also, a new commuter rail stop, making this the north side's very own "Back Bay" type station.

ant8904

11-28-2010, 05:59 PM

More details please, it looks more like abstract art than a diagram.

BostonUrbEx

11-28-2010, 09:08 PM

It's just to give an idea, really, not much detail.

But there would be a connection to the roads to the north and south, ideally. The names of which slipped my mind and Google isn't loading so I can't check... I believe one is New Maffa, to the north. Also, there's that street to the west that dead ends.

omaja

12-17-2010, 07:18 PM

Just some fun with map making.
http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/7789/mbta2075unofficialprevi.png (http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/6476/mbta2075unofficial.png)
Click for full size image.

Dan

12-17-2010, 10:49 PM

Just some fun with map making.
http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/7789/mbta2075unofficialprevi.png (http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/6476/mbta2075unofficial.png)
Click for full size image.Actually, that is very well thought out. Extend the Red Line up to Burlington Mall/Lahey Clinic and you've got a deal. :)

datadyne007

12-17-2010, 11:03 PM

My urban infrastructure professor this past semester was from DC and all he did constantly was bash the MBTA for having short heavy rail systems. "They really should be a lot longer," he'd say. He really didn't like the fact that from downtown, you can go to the end of any line within 20-25 minutes because heavy rail is made to go a lot longer. I agree that it should be extended and they should start by implementing the original Red Line Extension to the Burlington Mall. It's such a pain going to Alewife and waiting for a bus.

belmont square

12-18-2010, 10:28 AM

Did the professor think they should be longer for the sake of being longer? DC's system works like a hybrid urban rail/suburban commuter rail system (which fills a need given DC's relatively poor commuter rail network). Did he criticize NYC subway lines for being too short? Although they are a lot longer than Boston's, if they were serving areas with the same density that WMATA's subway serves (or that some would advocate should be served here), the NYC subway would need to be extended by about 20 miles in every direction.

My experience is that if you're looking for an urban neighborhood well served by rapid transit, you can find a lot more of them here than in DC. If you're looking suburban rapid transit stations surrounded by acres of parking lots with very little off-peak ridership, than DC would be the better choice.

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

12-18-2010, 02:09 PM

What your professor doesn't realize is that Boston is not only full of NIMBY's, but that it is also landlocked. D.C. is a bigger city and the D.C. Metro Region has more land density, and therefore can expand.

In my opinon, the Maryland Light Rail system is sweet. I went to visit a friend from College in 2007, and we took the light rail from his house to Camden Yards for a Sox game and back. Clean. Smooth. It wasn't even magic.

Shepard

12-20-2010, 03:40 PM

Omaja ^ - great illustration.

Here's my own "2040" vision:

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/4362/mbta2040f.jpg

This isn't meant to be pie-in-the-sky, and I'll readily admit that there are few original ideas here. The overarching mission here is to maximize impact (increasing connectivity, serving underserved communities) while minimizing investment. I've proposed going about that in three ways:

1) Use existing ROWs for new or extended service, and include rapid transit service on CR tracks (DMUs for example - "Rapid Express Service" on my map.)

2) Encourage street running trolleys: NIMBYs aside, the assumption being that changes to traffic patterns, road layout and street parking can make this feasible - taking Toronto or Melbourne as examples. The Green Line extensions on my map reach underserved neighborhoods in this way.

3) Expand trolleybuses: they represent fixed investment, and seem to work well where they do currently. On my proposal this forms the basis for an extensive system that complements the subway.

There are three expensive parts of this plan that I think are worthwhile. All of these have been discussed before.

A) Beacon St or Marlboro St tunnel from Charles/MGH to Kenmore - connecting the Blue Line to an upgraded heavy rail D line.

B) Mass Ave tunnel from Central Sq to the upgraded Indigo Line (cut and cover most of the way). Note that the light-blue line on the map is actually a Red Line branch, but colored differently for readability. In this proposal, then, Indigo Line is upgraded to a Red Line branch (and yes I'm aware of the arguments in favor of keeping this CR).

C) A short Green Line extension from Boylston to South Station under Essex Street and into the current Silver Line tunnel. A note on the Green Line: by having trains continue through Boylston in three different ways (From Lechmere towards Dudley; from Kenmore to Southie; and from Kenmore to Lechmere) the volume of traffic in the central subway can be mitigated. (Upgrading the D to blue also helps, of course). I've suggested GL routings in the map (some of which don't even go into the central subway) but there may be a more optimal arrangement still.

A few notes:
- Sorry for the "weight" of the file; I didn't know how to cut this down
- Map is not to scale, of course. I do have a Google Earth file that you can import - PM me if you are interested

palindrome

12-20-2010, 06:36 PM

wow that is awesome!

i think you mean 2140 though!

HenryAlan

12-21-2010, 08:39 AM

Nice work, Shepherd and Omaja! I love looking at this kind of stuff. Now how do we get it done?

KentXie

12-21-2010, 09:01 AM

^^We wait until the population density actually meets the demand which doesn't seem likely until Boston builds up in the area where there are multiple station/line coverage. In other words, you have to wait for about a generation or two to get rid of the NIMBYs.

Dan

12-22-2010, 05:02 PM

Well, both maps have more than a few common sense projects in common:

1. Connecting the Riverside Green Line with the Blue Line (although I would prefer via Huntington Ave).

2. Putting a subway down Mass Ave.

3. Running a Green Line branch down Washington Street.

Wish we had the money.

JohnAKeith

12-24-2010, 02:52 PM

So, I just took a look at this.

Is the "Rapid Express Service" a BRT?

Why so much overlap between light blue line and red line from Central Square to Alewife?

BostonUrbEx

12-24-2010, 08:30 PM

So, I just took a look at this.

Is the "Rapid Express Service" a BRT?

Why so much overlap between light blue line and red line from Central Square to Alewife?

"Note that the light-blue line on the map is actually a Red Line branch, but colored differently for readability." :D

Shepard

12-24-2010, 09:32 PM

Thanks! And the rapid express service is DMU or EMU service along CR lines. I think I explained that too. Black lines represent an expanded trolleybus system.

manrush

02-03-2011, 02:31 PM

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

02-03-2011, 02:54 PM

How about expanding the Blue Line beyond just the Charles/MGH stop, so that it has other uses besides those of a glorified suburban rail.

Perhaps extending it further to Arlington (Green Line stop), NE Medical Centre and to Dudley Square. Essentially using the Silver "Line" alignment.

Maybe even further, to the Morton Street commuter rail stop.
Good ideas. But this is Boston. And there are some limitations.

In the future, I could MAYBE see them extending the Blue Line past Charles/MGH to Boylston and hooking that up with the Green Line. Anything beyond that is just pie in the sky.

Charlie_mta

02-03-2011, 11:30 PM

czsz

02-03-2011, 11:39 PM

Not bad, although I've never been down with the DC-like/commuter-rail function the T would take on by being extended on all routes to 128.

Why extend Indigo to Norwood Airport? General aviation folks don't need transit. Better to bring it down the ROW that leads to Westwood's 128 Station, where it could serve the new transit village and provide additional access to a convenient express Amtrak stop.

manrush

02-08-2011, 10:37 PM

How about this, then?

Make a few extensions to the Orange Line.

One extension will be from State Street to South Station, thus allowing for a direct link between North and South stations. Then branch out from South Station towards the Airport Terminal, though it may be a redundant link, when compared to the Blue Line.

Another extension could be a branch either from Back Bay or from Ruggles and could serve the areas of Roxbury that are poorly served by transit.

Mayor Menino's Crohn's

02-09-2011, 06:57 PM

DominusNovus

02-12-2011, 05:46 AM

Here's a less crazy pitch: sink the E-branch at some point after the NU or MFA stops (basically, as soon as it passes over that underground brook). As a subway, there's no reason why it can't go back down through JP and end at Forest Hills.

Now, besides the usual costs associated with cut and cover (which are, of course, very significant), what problems are there with this plan?

NJBostonFan

02-12-2011, 04:57 PM

http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr354/Charliemta/MBTA_2140.jpg?t=1296796868

Here's my plan. The Indigo Line would be converted to a surface/subway heavy rail line, begiining at Norwood Airport, to the existing Silver Line tunnel at South Station, then under Fort Point Channel and a new under harbor tunnel to Logan Airport, Chelsea and Wellington.

The Blue Line would be extended to Watham/route 128 along an old rail right-of-way, the Orange Line to the Woburn rail station off of I-93, the Green Line to Woburn Center, and the Red Line to the terminus of Route 3 in Burlington. An urban ring woud be developed as a light rail line using portions of the B Line and D Line, looped at Kenmore Square to access the Longmire area and Roxbury. On the north side it would use the Harvard Square bus tunnel, proceed up Mass Ave on the surface to Porter, then connect to the forthcoming Green Line extension at Union Square.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=
204339377609299454038.0004921445b226596978c

Love the idea and the extensions. Think we can extend the Orange Line down to Westwood/128, like it was planned in the 70s too? And if that Charles River Island proposed by Ralph Adams Cram is built one day, think we can reroute the Blue Line under the Charles after Charles/MGH to serve that island, and then back under the Charles to serve Waltham?

Digital_Islandboy

02-13-2011, 02:22 PM

Van...I LOVE your maps. Not just like...but LOVE!

1. The Red Line will be extended out to 128/Brandeis. It'll take some time, and a lot of litigation from NIMBY's. But it'll run alongside the Commuter Rail, which will be okay with most neighbors. The worst will be that they'll just add a commuter rail stop at Alewife.

If they'd recess that line into the ground (Like the orange line in Jamaica Plain) or Commuter Rail in Somerville (at Porter) I'll volunteer to help dig it FOR FREE. The air rights if office buildings are built above it would also help defray costs too. Those commuter rail trains are so noisy and they wall off Cambridge in the most inconvenient of ways. Alewife Parkway to Porter is like a 10 min walk (along the tracks). But to walk around the tracks using Danehy Park plus surface roads it becomes more like 20-30 mins. I'd have to say I'm one of your NIMBYs lol. I'd help dig it though to let it proceed.

Digital_Islandboy

02-13-2011, 02:27 PM

The population density necessary to support rapid transit drops off quite a bit beyond West Medford. Is it really such a good idea to extend rapid transit service 7 miles (W Med to Anderson) beyond where the density can support it? In order to get there you'd need to pass through tony Winchester, which would almost certainly oppose it (in fact, dense and relatively blue collar Medford has been less than enthusiastic in their support for GLX).

You'd essentially be creating a stretch of Orange Line from Anderson to West Medford that would be about as long as the Forest Hills to Wellington stretch, on which there would be essentially empty trains throughout most of the day, and empty trains coming every 5 minutes during the peak periods in the non-peak direction.

Maybe not as good an idea as you think?

But doesn't it become a chicken and an egg situation. When I spoke with some people internally at the MBTA they seem to think that should that blue line extension ever be done to Lynn it will cease to be an area with property values that are as relatively low as they are...

New subway routes slowly but surely bring more people.

I wonder how Medford will look roughly two-three decades after the green line extension is done.

Digital_Islandboy

02-13-2011, 02:44 PM

http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr354/Charliemta/MBTA_2140.jpg?t=1296796868

Here's my plan. The Indigo Line would be converted to a surface/subway heavy rail line, begiining at Norwood Airport, to the existing Silver Line tunnel at South Station, then under Fort Point Channel and a new under harbor tunnel to Logan Airport, Chelsea and Wellington.

The Blue Line would be extended to Watham/route 128 along an old rail right-of-way, the Orange Line to the Woburn rail station off of I-93, the Green Line to Woburn Center, and the Red Line to the terminus of Route 3 in Burlington. An urban ring woud be developed as a light rail line using portions of the B Line and D Line, looped at Kenmore Square to access the Longmire area and Roxbury. On the north side it would use the Harvard Square bus tunnel, proceed up Mass Ave on the surface to Porter, then connect to the forthcoming Green Line extension at Union Square.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=
204339377609299454038.0004921445b226596978c

I love the idea... A northern branch I think could be the basis for expanding into areas between Route 2 + 128. Namely
A Newton Corner, Watertown Sq., Belmont Centre, Arlington Center, Medford Square, Malden Center, to the (Blue line) would help to fill out the population numbers IMHO north of Boston. And help take quite a bit of pressure off I93 Northbound in the evenings...
I knew someone that was having car trouble for a while and used to commute from Haverhill to Newburyport but because there are no connections between those 'spokes' they had to commute the 1.25 hours to North Station and then the 1+ hour to Newburyport. (plus waiting time at North Station.)

Charlie_mta

02-16-2011, 12:15 AM

Here's the interactive link to the map. Maximize map, zoom in, change to aerial photo for exact routing of transit lines.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=204339377609299454038.0004921445b226596978c&ll=42.380865,-71.019745&spn=0.269328,0.673599&z=11

BostonUrbEx

02-17-2011, 10:33 AM

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5097/5452408242_7d2fd43523_o.png

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5173/5451797153_23cfb39ec9_o.png

My proposal for being able to pull dead trains off when they're in the downtown area. Could also store an extra set or work equipment in there (like the workers' LRV between Boylston and Arlington). The Orange Line constantly has problems and downtown has a lack of crossovers. The tunnel is already there from the old alignment, the only questions is if it's long enough to shove a train in.

vanshnookenraggen

02-17-2011, 11:18 AM

That is a great idea (I think the first one makes the most sense). The MBTA probably considered this when they closed the Washington St El so I wonder why they didn't go for it.

BostonUrbEx

02-17-2011, 11:28 AM

That is a great idea (I think the first one makes the most sense). The MBTA probably considered this when they closed the Washington St El so I wonder why they didn't go for it.

My guess is back then, they rarely had the major breakdowns as often as today with the old fleet. But even when a new fleet comes in this would be a good measure for any emergency.

manrush

02-24-2011, 09:07 PM

Question: is it at all possible to create a branch from State Street to South Station?

Or would there have to be a split in the lines just before State, with the Orange Line branch to South Station having to be either further below the ground or elevated?

Shepard

02-24-2011, 09:27 PM

manrush

02-25-2011, 11:07 PM

I think a more important South Station connection would be from the GL at Boylston, under Essex St - the original Silver Line III tunnel proposal. This would also be great for the GL as it could then be routed directly into the SL tunnel.

So essentially, the stops would be Boylston, then Chinatown and then South Station?

It would be kinda fun to then extend that line further to make a direct, if redundant, link to Logan Airport.

Essentially, the Green Line would be hitting all the three important transit terminals in the city.

czsz

02-26-2011, 12:45 AM

Overload the Green Line even further? It's probably the least ideal vehicle type for transporting people with big bags to the airport. And how would it go through the tunnels?

BostonUrbEx

02-26-2011, 07:15 AM

Not only that, but so what if the Green Line hits North Station and South Station? If it goes to South Station, they would most likely go with a PO Square extension type of plan at Boylston. That means you'd come south from North Station and have to transfer at Arlington to go to South Station. Might as well take the Orange/Green to Red.

Shepard

02-27-2011, 11:23 AM

^ Greenway trolley. See my integrated vision on the previous page.

BostonUrbEx

03-04-2011, 10:35 PM

datadyne007

03-04-2011, 11:00 PM

Any particular reason why you chose not to extend the Red Line to Lahey/Burlington Mall?

JohnAKeith

03-04-2011, 11:58 PM

Having services such as NextBus are helpful when you're at a bus stop you use all the time and you want to see when the next bus is coming. But, if you're at a bus stop you haven't used before, you have to bring up the stop on your handheld by navigating through five or six menus. A pain in the ass.

The solution is to have QR codes at every stop. With two clicks on your phone, you can bring up the exact page you need to see when the next bus is coming.

Below, the #39 bus stop at Back Bay station.

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/oo139/JohnAKeith/Random/39_1.png

JohnAKeith

03-05-2011, 12:17 AM

And another thing.

I'm spending three days a week working on a Children's Hospital web project. Took a shuttle bus today from one building to another. Took 15 minutes but to be expected. A very congested area.

So, can we have a monorail between all the hospitals and buildings? Please? And between all the museums while we're at it.

datadyne007

03-05-2011, 12:23 AM

czsz

03-05-2011, 12:47 AM

Umm...isn't Longwood pretty compact and walkable?

Re: QR codes - how many people actually use these? Every ad in the NY subway seems to have them now, but I can't imagine anyone actually sticking their phone up to one.

BostonUrbEx

03-05-2011, 07:06 AM

Any particular reason why you chose not to extend the Red Line to Lahey/Burlington Mall?

Too much dead space between Arlington and Rt 3, didn't think it was worth it.

JohnAKeith

03-05-2011, 10:44 AM

Yeah, the LMA is very dense but it's also spread out. They could build some underground pathways (some exist inside each) but walking distances are a bit long. They could add in NU, Wentworth, MassArt, and the SMFA, and the other Schools of the Fenway.

Like this: http://goo.gl/maps/hVZS

RE: QR Codes. I think ads with the codes are useless. It's no faster to bring up the page by taking a photo of it than typing in "http://fastandfurious4movie.com".

With the bus codes, you'd use it only in situations where you're somewhere you don't know the bus line schedule. Most people probably use the same bus lines every single day, so they wouldn't need it. Myself, I am often at different stops on the 43 and 39 and find it time consuming to search through the menus. I have bookmarked my fav's but don't add them, everytime.

Another practical use of the codes are on house for sale listings. Real estate agents can use a service such as toor.me to create a bar code and include it on a sign in front of the house. Perspective buyer driving around simply points and clicks. The agent likes it b/c he/she can use toor.me instead of having to create an individual site for each listing and b/c it's functional with android and iPhones.

Charlie_mta

03-12-2011, 01:33 PM

I updated my MBTA expansion plan at http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=204339377609299454038.0004921445b226596978c&ll=42.31337,-71.063347&spn=0.133286,0.3368&z=12

You have to zoom in to see the transit lines amid the blue markers representing future station locations.

Green lines are LRV; all others are electrified heavy rail.

The proposals I like the most are:

- Convert the Fairmount Line to an electrified Indigo Line, and extend it to utilize the existing Silver Line tunnel, and extend that on an elevated line to the north side of South Boston proper.

- Extend the Blue Line on both ends. On the Boston end, extend the tunnel to Park Street, convert the Green Line Central Subway to the Blue Line, and extend the Blue Line from Kenmore to Waltham on mostly elevated structure, using the abandoned Watertown freight line right-of-way from Watertown to Waltham.

- Construct an LRV line from East Boston, through Chelsea to Everett, using abandoned rail right-of-way. The Chelsea River crossing is tricky as the old railroad ROW has been built on. At that location the LRV line could utilize two of the four lanes of the new Chelsea River bridge currently being built.

- Extend the Red Line to terminate at the unused stub end of the U.S. 3 Expressway in Burlington. The interchange with 128 could easily be built up to provide access with the US 3 Expressway and 128. A large garage and station would be built at the abandoned stub end of the Expressway.

- Extend the Orange Line to end at the Anderson Transit center in Woburn. It looks like there was an old rail right of way running easterly of Anderson that could be used.

NJBostonFan

03-12-2011, 03:31 PM

You've read my mind about an extension of a Green Line Charlie_mta!! I always wanted to connect the E Branch with the D Branch, and have the E Branch rerouted entirely under Huntington Avenue and converted to heavy rail. You read my mind. I only wish I knew the skills to create my idea of a Crazy Transit Pitch!

Charlie_mta

03-12-2011, 04:43 PM

The "My Maps" feature in Google Maps is fairly easy to use. What I like about it is how you can switch to aerial orthophoto view and zoom in. This provides the info needed to route a future transit line to avoid buildings, follow old rail right of ways, etc.

NJBostonFan

03-20-2011, 11:58 AM

BostonUrbEx

03-20-2011, 08:36 PM

NJBostonFan

03-20-2011, 09:44 PM

It'd be the same as most lines in Europe and China!

F-Line to Dudley

03-21-2011, 05:51 PM

I think more cars like the Red Line 01800s for the Red and Orange (obviously OL's would be scaled down for the OL dimensions) lines would be awesome and I'd have no complaints there. I'd really like to see entirely articulated trains, though. Or at least 3-car articulations.

And what benefit would upgrading the voltage do? Even if the line is longer it's still the same voltage, isn't it?

Voltage is pretty irrelevant. No need to change what's there, wouldn't add any flexibility if they did. You just need more substations to handle a bigger load. They're thinking of doing that on the Red Line where the Ashmont branch is near capacity. The Mattapan trolley doesn't have a substation of its own and just plugs into the Red Line, so they want a little more redundancy out there.

Red Line's also mangled by the signal system. Back in the 80's it ran on the same trip-arm mechanical system that the Blue Line does, and trains were much closer-spaced than they are today. They installed the ATO system and botched the spacing of signal blocks downtown so the headways had to be longer than they used to. They made excuses for it saying that because all the platforms were extended for 6-car trains (was only 4's before) that it would offset the lower frequency. It spectacularly didn't. And this is why you're stopped on the Longfellow every single morning behind another train and crawl under 10 MPH to Park St. If they re-did the signals into closer blocks they'd be able to run just as tight as they used to before they screwed everything to hell with the current layout. It would be expensive, but it's the literal only option to get more trains and less congestion through the transfer stations.

The problem with the Orange Line is that it's running the exact same fleet it had when the Washington St. El was still running and the line had 3 fewer stations on it. It can't pack the headways as full as the track capacity currently allows because there aren't enough cars. If you go by Wellington during rush hour you'll see virtually nothing sitting in the yard because they're all out running at once. That utterly kills the line when a bunch of cars are out of service like you had this winter. I think the new car order is supposed to be almost 20 cars bigger than the current fleet. That'll make noticeable difference in train frequency right off the bat. No major modifications really needed...they just need cars and lots of them.

BostonUrbEx

03-22-2011, 06:34 PM

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5064/5551084869_505596dd03_o.png

Ignore the fact that I forgot to replace Rt 1 Saugus with a green line.

HenryAlan

03-23-2011, 09:11 AM

Are you eliminating B, C, and E lines, or are they just not pictured because they do not constitute rapid transit level service?

manrush

03-23-2011, 11:06 AM

What do you think of upgrading the 600 V DC Current to 750 V DC for the Red and Orange Lines and for future extensions, in addition to a new Urban Ring, an upgraded to heavy rail Green Line, and the Blue Line. Also, what do you think would be a good choice of rolling stock to replace the old Orange Line and Red Line Cars? Bombardier MOVIA, Siemens Metropolis? Perhaps they might choose MOVIA since most of the MBTA's heavy rail fleet was built by Bombardier or companies that were merged into Bombardier? That would be cool.
Either Bombardier or Alstom could be good. Perhaps even Siemens.

The Movia sounds good for Boston, as it suits the city's subway styles. Alternatively, one could just refurbish the 1994-era Red Line cars and limit new rolling stock purchase to the Orange Line.

I was thinking something like the Movias used in Bucharest or London.

Bucharest Metro
http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/269/4/0/407339bf5ceec4e6085a998a8fddfb20-d2zkmrz.jpg
http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/269/4/0/407339bf5ceec4e6085a998a8fddfb20-d2zkmrz.jpg

London Underground
http://www.therailwaycentre.com/NewSite%20POD%202010/POD27-10-10.jpg
http://www.therailwaycentre.com/NewSite%20POD%202010/POD27-10-10.jpg

As for the new Green Line LRVs, I hope the contract to build them goes to Kinkisharyo.

BostonUrbEx

03-23-2011, 04:30 PM

Are you eliminating B, C, and E lines, or are they just not pictured because they do not constitute rapid transit level service?

Completely forgot about light rail. But as for the E, it's combined with the D.

Also didn't add 2 urban rings to avoid having too much clutter.

NJBostonFan

03-23-2011, 05:41 PM

Completely forgot about light rail. But as for the E, it's combined with the D.

Also didn't add 2 urban rings to avoid having too much clutter.

Even though having 2 urban rings might be considered clutter, it would be beneficial to reducing congestion and pollution on highways.

BostonUrbEx

03-23-2011, 07:07 PM

Even though having 2 urban rings might be considered clutter, it would be beneficial to reducing congestion and pollution on highways.

I meant cluttering my map. I definitely think 2 rings would be a good idea (provided they're not some "BRT" crap)

NJBostonFan

03-23-2011, 10:06 PM

I meant cluttering my map. I definitely think 2 rings would be a good idea (provided they're not some "BRT" crap)

As long as it's not BRT, it works for me!

F-Line to Dudley

04-23-2011, 01:29 AM

Urban Ring Phase II the way it should be (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=210491618710954337134.0004a0749a6e88784f491&ll=42.344082,-71.063862&spn=0.106196,0.202732&t=h&z=13)

The T's half-assed Urban Ring plan never had a chance. The whole Phase II where the crosstown buses got upgraded to semi-real transit was a self-defeating half solution: drop a couple billion on subway tunnels through Longwood, yet run BRT through them. Do perfect grade separation in some parts, yet have the same bus slow to a crawl in mixed traffic on a different part of the line. And run this Frankensteinian creation end-to-end as if every rider's going to need the one-seat ride around the whole loop. And then at some indeterminate point later "fix the glitch" by redoing the grade separated parts with trains and building tens of $B's in tunnels through the rest.

Yeah...how did that work out? For one, not being able to do the Silver Line Phase III makes the southern mixed-traffic end impossible to cover in a single ride. For two, the billion-dollar Brookline tunnel crosses all 4 existing Green Line branches...an awful lot of existing infrastructure semi-duplicated by all-new infrastructure. For three, subways are hard to build in the 21st century under city streets with the spaghetti of undocumented utilities and abutting foundations...there's a reason why every single other transit proposal in the land requiring a dig (including the Big Dig itself) was burrowing under some sort of existing rail or previously cleared-out (e.g. elevated Artery) ROW. And finally, the whole half north of the Pike is already railroad...WTF are you doing wasting your time with this BRT crap???

Time to come up with a buildable plan you can actually 100% do for $3-4B without overruns. Behold, my UR Phase II Google map: a two-thirds Green Line, one-third Silver Line "compromise" that may not thrill Roxbury's and Southie's imagination...but covers the whole of the Phase II ROW, is very functional and reaches everything, and most importantly is eminently buildable with a little 20-year stick-toitive-ness where the T's diagram doodles were not. Map legend tells what all the color-coding means, and all the transfer stations are populated.

I classify it in terms of "hub" lines (ones that can pretty much go in circles one-seat and transfer you around the horn), "spoke" lines (stub branches that terminate at very major transfer stations), and a few "branches" branches that are obviously necessary but don't end at a transfer node like the spokes do. Only the ROW's and street routes are defined on the map, not the actual service patterns which can go a zillion different ways. Highlights:

GREEN LINE

North half on the Grand Junction, to the Airport, and on the Phase II stub to Harvard are built exactly on the alignment the T specced. But we do it right as light rail from Day 1. Because an interim BRT step is just facepalm-silly.
Instead of the billion-dollar Brookline tunnel, we extend the subway out from Kenmore to BU Bridge under the B reservation where it's easy to dig under an existing ROW vs. who-knows-what is lurking under Park Drive. Put a portal in that hobo colony park next to the Pike feeding the Grand Junction and Harvard, and the B spits back out on the surface by BU Student Village (and gets a WHOLE LOT faster with the subway replacing the BU school bus). Route the ring traffic to Kenmore.
Connect the D at Brookline Village with the E surface tracks at Huntington Ave. (should've been done long ago), and thru-route ring trains here from BU Bridge and Kenmore. Is the zigzag through Kenmore a little more roundabout than the billion-dollar tunnel? Yes. Do you want to get where you're going and see this thing built before your grandchildren are senior citizens? You'll happily put up with the extra 4-5 minutes on the zigzag. The T's own plan didn't even let you transfer at Kenmore.
Build that Harvard branch as specced with a new tunnel from the Stadium under the Charles, meeting up with the old abandoned Red Line tunnel in front of the JFK School. Recycle, re-use. We're such an efficient transit system.
Complete the jog from Union Sq. to Porter and Red/commuter rail. Probably should've been in the original Somerville extension plan all along, but it was pretty late in the game when they split it into two branches. Wouldn't be surprised at all if this gets built on its own in 10 years...STEP already advocates it as an add-on project.
Restore the E to Forest Hills and make Silver Line Washington streetcar like they both should've been all along. There's two critical "spokes", plus welcome re-use of that abandoned Tremont St. subway off Boylston for the Dudley ride. And you can actually make excellent time to Forest Hills from Kenmore, Harvard, Cambridge, and BU where you couldn't before.
Whither SL Phase III? Can't build it under city streets without costing $5B, but how do you tie in the South Boston Transitway to downtown? Well...we got that nifty North-South Rail Link thing that they also should've been building by now. And it's going to require building a half-mile long approach tunnel under the NEC to about Washington St. for Providence/Worcester trains to enter, which means there'll be some serious digging under the tracks. Hey, what if we joined forces and kill two birds with one stone by piggybacking an LRV tunnel next to and/or on top of the Link tunnel. That gets both built on the same footprint, brings you 1 block from the end of the Tremont tunnel now restored for Dudley, and solves the whole SL III boondoggle with a totally non-street dig. Wow, MBTA, look how intrepid and efficient you just were with that move!
Now that we've reached the Transitway, let's throw some tracks in that bumpy concrete and get more use out of the thing. You Silver Line buses can stay...the pavement's not going anywhere. But we're going to be so goddamn resource-efficient here we're gonna use the same tunnel, platforms, and wires for two whole modes. People will think the T won a Buy One Get One Free subway sweepstakes when the trolleys start rolling to the Convention Center. Oh, and you tourists coming from Logan can be as indecisive as you want on our transit system 'cause you'll have 4 consecutive dual-mode stations to hop between bus and trolley from the same platform when you're all confused about where you're going.
This is gonna get busy real fast. After we get the whole system up and running, let's get a second subway thru route to downtown going by extending the existing Huntington Ave. subway from Northeastern straight out to Brookline Village. We need to replace all that street track for these kinds of traffic levels. It'll be easy like the B subway out to Brigham Circle because it's just burying the existing reservation. And then you've got about 2000 feet of "hard" tunneling to do under Huntington the rest of the way. But notice that this is the only significant stretch of "hard" under-street tunneling we've had to do at all on the whole build. And this one won't top 9 figures unlike the scrapped SL Phase III or Brookline bore plans. Everything else we've dug under existing railbeds, and in case of the NEC tunnel we shared construction cost and labor with the equally critical N-S Link project. And if we run out of money we don't have to do this one right away...100% of the build routes can function over the existing track, just with tougher congestion.

SILVER LINE

Now that uncomfortable "compromise" part. Sorry, it's just too much money right now to build the south side of the ring. All tunneling we have to do here is the "really hard" under-street kind, and there aren't a whole lot of streets that can be fitted with trolley reservations. So we are gonna have to play King Solomon here and make this part of the ring BRT until we figure out how to make a realistic Phase III. We'll do bus lanes and signal priority and expensive-ass glass shelters on every street that'll fit 'em. It won't be that bad...you won't have schedules hosed by one bus making the whole circuit around town like the T's stupid Phase II plan. And there's SEVEN rail transfers (8 if you count South Station in the Transitway) to every line in the land not named Blue on this route. That's a pretty damn good deal on balance. And if you have to get to Cambridge you can do it in 1 transfer...I promise.
The 28X proposal...hey, that kind of works a lot better now that you've got trolleys going direct downtown to Dudley. Let's give Mattapan a spoke.
Oh, hell, make it two. You guys want to get to Forest Hills, too. Let's call this the Menino Line through Hizzoner's home Hyde Park.
Let's connect all these spokes together with a short shot from Forest Hills to Dudley. Ties the room nicely together. Like that elevated Orange Line used to.
City Point...you guys kinda got screwed over by your prior Silver Line experience. Now that there's more ring ridership coming out to the Waterfront, let's have a do-over with a stub branch that actually goes through the neighborhood this time instead of blowing past blighted industrial lots.
Something's missing in Cambridge. Let's knight the 77A trackless as its own "remote" SL spoke, and extend the wires up Mass Ave. to those new direct-to-Alewife busways the T plans to build. Ties the Cambridge nodes nicely together.
Since we've already got wires on Mass Ave. and have already got those dual-mode articulated buses from the Transitway, let's also make the full 77/79 to Arlington Heights a SL branch with a power switch on the 77 to diesel at Route 16 at the end of the wires. I know...an outlier for the whole ring concept, but it's efficient use of existing infrastructure and helps justify cost for more Airport dual-modes by being able to order in greater bulk. It's the only line in the system that can significantly add extra value to maintaining a dual-mode bus fleet for the system.

Note the map doesn't touch the B, C, D, or Somerville extension since it's an Urban Ring-centric map. I'm all for bringing back the A line to Oak Sq. or Watertown, spurring off the D to Needham Jct., taking the Union/Porter line to Watertown via the Watertown Branch RR, throwing tracks in the Ted and running battery-powered LRV's off-wire on the jog to Logan instead of SL buses, building elevated BRT+LRV loops at the Logan terminals so both the Airport spoke and Silver Line can go grade-separated to the terminals, and so on. Plus getting some of those easier-to-convert SL routes over to streetcar as fast as possible so the BRT phase is as short-lived as possible.

But whole point of this was to get the complete as-envisioned Urban Ring routing built at all with some kind of realism, fiscal responsibility, and commitment. It reinstates as rapid-transit or almost rapid-transit nearly every streetcar line in the ring zone that was still around as late as 1953. See here (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/1940_Boston_streetcar_lines.png)...the 7, 10, 29, 30A, 40, 42, 43, 79, and 82 on that map are all back in the system in some sort of close facsimile, plus the 1980's-era Arborway and El lines. I think this plan accomplishes what it sets out to do, and a whole lot more overall than the T's own unbuildable blueprints.

HenryAlan

04-27-2011, 02:40 PM

F-Line to Dudley

04-27-2011, 07:04 PM

Cool map, lots of interesting ideas. I'm curious about the decision to make Forest Hills the intersect point between Orange Line and the Ring. It seems to me something less outlying would serve the purpose more effectively. Consider, for example, extending the E line down Heath St. to connect with the OL at Jackson Square. You could then follow a few different options for connecting with Dudley such as paralleling the OL, then turning the E along Malcom X Blvd. toward Dudley Square to connect with your eponymous F.

Forest Hills wouldn't be the only one...Roxbury Crossing on the Silver "hub" line between Dudley and Kenmore would also transfer to it on a straighter line. But FH itself is one of the biggest bus hubs in the system so that's a must-hit node. You'd be isolating Rozzie, West Rox, and Hyde Park from the ring system to exclude it, and the 39 is its own house of horrors needing help. Relocated Orange Line also didn't end up aligning well enough in practice with the north-south (S. Huntington/Centre/South) orientation of the neighborhood's commuting patterns to adequately serve the old Arborway trolley's ridership. There's a reason why this was a law-mandated restoration in the official Big Dig transit commitments agreement. Backing out of that was maybe the second-most shameful thing the T has done the last 25 years beyond sticking Roxbury with an "equal or better" bus replacement for the El.

Plus you tie two of the very biggest bus hubs--FH and Harvard--together with a one-seat ride via Kenmore + Brookline Village. That's a connection that's never been doable without an hour's worth of multiple transfers. Not very much street-running track to traverse if coming via Brookline Village, either. Even less so when/if you build out the Huntington tunnel all the way.

Definitely, along with the Dudley node and Comm Ave. subway, one of the first LRT pieces of the system that should be laid. The Dudley-FH Silver Line connection is semi-superfluous since nearly everyone's going to go to one or the other via rail and not between them. But, whatever, the 42 is already a short FH-Dudley shuttle running back and forth on Washington. Might as well class it up a bit with a bump onto the official ring spider map and the requisite stop + lane upgrades along Washington.

BostonUrbEx

05-13-2011, 11:54 PM

Currently working on another radical idea...

My personal FutureMBTA map featured a 10 mile radius of rapid transit spokes and urban rings around Boston. Now I'm tacking on a 5 mile radius of transit for Salem. I find Salem the best spot for a mini-me to Boston. It's a pretty swell small city, in my opinion. Also I find the density, geography, distance, etc quite appealing for what I'm proposing.

So the Blue Line would run all the way until about 5 miles north of downtown Salem (North Beverly Station if I do recall correctly). A Red Line from Danvers, through Peabody Sq, along the Blue Line under downtown Salem, and off to Marblehead. An Orange Line from where two old ROWs meet near the Rt1/I95 junction (with the intent that at max build out, it would follow on the branch through Lynnfield and meet the Orange Line in Wakefield (as the Orange Line would run to Reading)) to Peabody Sq, and the other end the Orange Line would hook it's way around downtown and down the old ROW to the coal plant, then hook towards Pickering Wharf. And then a Green Line which would run from the Lynnfield Tunnel on Rt 1 (and again, at max build out, down Rt 1 to connect with my FutureMBTA Green Line at Rt1&Rt99) and follow the Blue Line to Beverley Junction where it swoops over to hit Prides Crossing and Beverly Farms. In all, it maintains a general 5 mile radius of Salem, meshing with Boston's 10 mile radius, in an attempt to make a very large and dense urban area.

It's alot to take in, hopefully I'll finish up the map soon so ya'll have a visual. Once that's done, I'll consider it officially capped and put a completion date of 2150 on it, LOL. Then it's on to the Merrimac Valley Transportation Authority...

manrush

05-16-2011, 06:20 PM

FINALLY! I can consider it: COMPLETE!

http://www.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=217656314107067401485.0004958fa5a10149d093b&ll=42.356007,-71.064034&spn=0.148925,0.363579&t=h&z=12

Months of laying lines and making tweaks and I consider this to be pretty much my "final" draft of the future MBTA.
I'm more than two months late in answering, but I really like your map.

Especially the Blue Line extensions through Cambridge and Waltham (perhaps the Blue Line is better served as an S-bahn-style system).

I have some questions.

What do the numbered lines pertain to? LRT? BRT?

Is the Purple Line also heavy rail/metro?

And does the density around Arlington justify a Red Line extension?

BostonUrbEx

05-16-2011, 06:40 PM

I'm more than two months late in answering, but I really like your map.

Especially the Blue Line extensions through Cambridge and Waltham (perhaps the Blue Line is better served as an S-bahn-style system).

I have some questions.

What do the numbered lines pertain to? LRT? BRT?

Is the Purple Line also heavy rail/metro?

And does the density around Arlington justify a Red Line extension?

All are heavy rail except the Yellow (Light Rail), Black (BRT), and Maroon (Mattappan High Speed Line).

However, as I have once again begun tinkering with the map, I've been considering the Orange, Green, and Blue lines being EMUs as they would be hauling all the way to Salem, I'd prefer they all be the same stock as they'd all be sharing trackage at some point, and for the sake of flexibility where ROWs must be tight but still shared with commuter rail. Essentially, I think EMUs would actually be cost saving with the ability to mix and mingle with other traffic due to the extent of my system.

I don't find it necessary for the Purple and Red lines though, although I'd like them to be of the same stock, too, and hopefully share a rail yard or two. Also, the Cyan Line would essentially just be today's Blue Line stock, but perhaps in sets of 4. I decided to tune it down so as not to compete with the "real" Blue Line but still continue service in the area.

This is not so much about present density as it is about future density or spurring future density. I think Arlington in the present day already warrants an extension, but not before a Blue Line to Lynn or anything like that of course.

The whole thing is kind of going under the knife, so expect I full follow up when I'm done! :p

F-Line to Dudley

05-17-2011, 03:33 PM

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=210491618710954337134.000494ac61372e576bef4&t=h&z=11

Here's my dream heavy-rail subway system.

-- All lines extended to 128 in each direction except for Orange Line south.

-- Orange Line to Reading north per 1945 plan, replacing Reading commuter rail (Haverhill line goes back to Lowell Line + Wildcat Branch).
-- Orange Line extended south to West Roxbury per 1945 plan, but stops there. Dedham ROW unavailable and duplicated by Dedham Branch Red Line; Needham ROW duplicated by Blue Line Needham and would preclude having Millis commuter rail due to wetlands-unexpandable ROW.
-- Orange Line express track extended Wellington--Oak Grove per 1970's plan. Manages unidirectional rush hour traffic.

-- Blue Line extended north to Lynn along Boston, Revere Beach, & Lynn ROW (per the 1945 plan), then Salem along Eastern Route, then Peabody/Danvers along freight tracks (replaces proposed Peabody/Danvers commuter rail).
-- Blue Line extended west from Charles MGH tail tracks under Storrow Dr. to Kenmore, with Storrow demolished and BL recycling Storrow auto tunnel and continuing in shallow tunnel on Storrow eastbound grading. Esplanade restored on top.
-- Blue Line extended west from Kenmore on Green Line D line, replacing light rail.
-- Blue Line branched to Needham Heights using Green Line branch proposal.
-- Blue Line branched on Airport Loop from other Charles MGH tail track along Urban Ring ROW via BET and Eastern Route. Trains from west loop, trains from north loop to manage very long length and large number of stations. Also helps throttle down service to north suburbs and Needham well after hours.

-- Red Line extended to Hanscom via Lexington/Arlington (per 1970's plan), then to Burlington Mall via power line ROW.
-- Red Line extended to Mattapan, then Readville via River St. subway and Fairmount Line, then Dedham via Dedham Branch.
-- Indigo Line a new subway line using Red Line cars, using 2 tracks of North-South Rail Link, Broadway upper-level trolley tunnel. Replaces Green Line Medford and Fairmount Line, extended along NEC to Westwood/128. Runs parallel to Red Line on 4-track from Mattapan to Readville.
-- Red Line Cabot Yard lead tracks junction with Indigo Line before it hits Broadway portal, allowing interoperable routings from JFK/Columbia Jct. to Indigo Line.
-- Red Line + Indigo Line alt routings via junctions at Readville, JFK for any combination of branch and short-turn service patterns: Woburn--Braintree, Westwood--Alewife, Dedham--Route 16, etc.
-- Combination of alt routings on south branches and turnbacks at Alewife and Route 16 manage rush hour traffic, throttle-down traffic in north suburbs after-hours.

NJBostonFan

05-17-2011, 09:08 PM

Perhaps we should consider the entire T as a version of the S-Bahn, or BART. Since it can be extended into the suburbs that are within the 128, it could count as some form of regional rail. If the North-South Rail Link is finally built and the MBTA Commuter Rail is transformed into a regional system, serving the areas in Greater Boston outside the 128 (Providence, Nashua, Worcester), would it be equivalent to the Paris RER, or more like a RegioBahn?

Shepard

05-18-2011, 10:14 AM

F-Line - I'd love to see an integrated map of your heavy rail ideal with what you've already described as your Green Line ideal... when you have time!

F-Line to Dudley

05-18-2011, 10:29 PM

I don't think that'll fly. Google Maps gets waaaay unstable in my browser when it gets overloaded with stuff.

I do have a commuter rail map I'm almost finished with.

bosma

05-18-2011, 10:55 PM

Create a branch of the Orange along the pike to at least fenway park/kenmore, station below a big parking garage above the pike that would have direct on/off ramps from the Pike and also include the much talked about U-Turn for the Pike.

Create another Stop on Red Line between Quincy Center and Quincy Adams stops.

F-Line to Dudley

05-19-2011, 09:50 PM

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&start=21&msa=0&msid=210491618710954337134.0004a4e38985d9d185657&z=8

OK...here's the great Commuter Rail system map for when it's peak oil time, no one in the bottom 75% of income can afford to commute at $5.50/gal., and the "[insert President's name here] Interstate Railway System" gets funded to keep the nation's suburban economy from collapsing to dust.

Note this thing pushed Google Maps to its limits so some stuff spilled onto a second page, with the whole first page disappearing when you click next. Very annoying. A couple minimal-usage alt route lines--the Middleboro Secondary bypass to the Cape via Taunton/Middleboro, and the Attleboro Secondary Attleboro/Taunton...both used till 1996 by the Amtrak Cape Codder--spill awkwardly onto p.2. All the placemarkers also ended up on p.2, but those are easier to follow. I didn't even bother doing the last couple out-of-district lines like the Falmouth branch on the Cape or RIDOT Providence/Woonsocket because they'd look like nonsense with the rest of the map invisible.

Big-deal stuff:

-- North-South Rail Link. Built the half-RR/half-rapid transit way I showed on my rapid transit map. Electrics or dual-mode trains can use the Link and pretty much all Amtrak trains will. All commuter rail trains terminate in Boston, with the real biggies running thru the Link (e.g. Worcester--North Station, Concord--South Station) to terminate and all the others staying where they are. It's not like there's a crying need to go from Franklin to Rockport. I cut the Old Colony Lines portal from the original design and left that "for future generations", since those lines aren't intercity with traffic levels worth spending a half-billion on and the Cape is already accessible from the Link from alt. routes. Greenbush and Plymouth will get over the decades of extra wait; they can transfer to Red Line Braintree, which has direct alt routes through the Link/Indigo Line.

-- Deleted lines replaced by rapid-transit (per my other map): Fairmount, Reading, Needham (north of Needham Jct.). Most inside-128 intermediate stops on the lines that now have rapid-transit on the same ROW are flipped over to the subway side so the intercity and CR lines are focused outside of 128 and just speed on through.

-- HSR lines: Providence, Worcester, Lowell/Concord, and Portland via the Eastern Route. Eastern Route/Newburyport Line is restored all the way back to Dover, NH (not depicted on the map) where it hooks back in to the Western Route for the rest of the Portland trip. I chose this over making the Haverhill Line/Western Route full-on HSR because the Eastern Route has long arrow-straight sections for max speeds, has only a couple serious clusters of grade crossings (Everett/Chelsea and Beverly) to eliminate vs. a constant stream of them, isn't clogged by heavy freight volume like the Pan Am mainline is, keeps the Lowell/Concord Line to Wilmington from getting overloaded with intercity traffic, and aligns better directionally with the Worcester Line for thru service (i.e. north-south Concord-Providence, west-northeast Worcester-Portsmouth). Haverhill/Western Route gets electrified and is much faster than it was, but still sub-HSR speed.

-- High-density rapid-transit like service: Worcester Line to Riverside, Fitchburg Line to 128. These are the two mainlines on the system that can't be paralleled by rapid-transit lines because there's not enough room. So I'm adding 128 short-turns at Riverside and Waltham Highlands, a bunch of infill stations (Newton Corner, Brighton, Allston, Alewife, Clematis Brook, etc.), a couple triple-track passing tracks so the CR and intercity trains can get around, adding electrification to Waltham Highlands (everything past that runs on diesel because of lower density and no intercity traffic), and really running the crap out of the inner-suburb headways to give some semblance of rapid-transit.

-- MBTA vs. out-of-district: Balancing act here as the MBTA needs to be focused on 128-to-495 (or closeby state lines) as its primary public service, but there's need for Boston regional service into NH and RI. Concord, Dover, and Portsmouth are all revived CR lines that lasted a little bit into the MBTA era mid-60's before going away (Concord briefly revived 1980-81). Sort of like how they used to run, T locals stop at the edge of the district and the interstate trains are subsidized by NH, continue on over the border with somewhat less frequent schedules, and express through all but the most important MA stops en route to Boston. Ditto RIDOT, where the Providence Line will overlap a bit in-state with their homegrown commuter rail to Westerly. Balances out the schedule-keeping and passenger loads, and expressing keeps total travel time reasonable on the longer interstate routes.

-- Cape and Newport out-of-district service: Fall River and Buzzards Bay are the practical outer extents of the MBTA district. However, RIDOT has tourist train tracks on Aquidneck Island it's expressed interest in spiffing up and restoring back onto the mainland to Fall River if South Coast Rail is built. Let RIDOT subsidize very limited (1 or 2 rush-hour runs morning/evening) commuter trains year-round, and then in summer ramp it up to a more robust in-season out-of-district schedule. Ditto the Cape, which can have its private seasonal tourist train transform into a "Cape Rail Authority". Mesh with the T at most 1-2 rush hour directs to Boston year-round, then ramp it up big in-season for a much more frequent schedule to Hyannis and Falmouth. Including transfers to RIDOT/Providence and a restored Amtrak Cape Codder from NYC.

-- Alternate/radial service: All of these trains are going to be a little difficult to schedule, so we want some rush hour backup. The Framingham Secondary and the Framingham-Leominster "Agricultural Branch" lines are a contiguous stretch of track that intersects 6 T mainlines on my map. Mix-and-match the service patterns to use this thing to the hilt and keep overloaded lines like Worcester or Franklin from having to feed extra branches they can't handle at rush.

-- Electrification. It only makes good financial sense with really heavy traffic volumes or 24/7 service. So electrify all the HSR and intercity routes: Providence, Worcester, Concord, Portsmouth, Dover. And electrify the inside-128 Fitchburg because we're compensating for no rapid-transit there. Leave the others all diesel except for maybe tacking on later short branches like Rockingham Park and Rockport that go a majority of their route miles over previously-electrified mains. Nothing else really has the frequencies to justify that huge an investment, and almost 2/3 of the system's traffic is on those electric trunk lines so a majority of your trains are electric anyway. Have a small fleet of dual-mode locomotives if there's need for a rush hour special into the N-S Link...they can power-switch to diesel when they branch off-wire.

Overview of other new extensions:

-- Small 1-2 stop extensions of Plymouth Line to Downtown Plymouth, Greenbush Line to Marshfield, Franklin/Forge Park to Milford. First two are where those lines were originally supposed to go in their recent restorations before the NIMBY's forced compromises, so we're just finishing the job. Milford's a longstanding CR proposal that just upgrades a few miles of freight track.

-- Salem, NH via Lawrence: We were so close to having service here inaugurated in 1981 that it got printed on the official T map (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/142/346211745_55c76c4fd8_o.jpg), but then they had to back out at the last minute due to budget emergency. Upgrades the freight tracks to Methuen/Route 213 then pokes across the border to Rockingham Park on 1.5 miles of abandoned ROW to the racetrack lots for a big I-93 park-and-ride.

-- Millis/West Medway: Millis was a CR line till '67 and West Medway till '64. Now badly needed for road congestion, and studied proposal had very high projected ridership. Upgrade the active freight tracks from Needham Jct. to Millis (which junction the Framingham Secondary en route), then to West Medway on the abandoned ROW. Line historically intersected the Milford Line right past Forge Park, but there's subdivisions built over the ROW so it has to stop here. Use the line to feed the Framingham Secondary for rush hour relief of other lines.

-- Woonsocket via Franklin: RIDOT did an official studied proposal of extending the Franklin Line to Woonsocket 15 years ago. Uses the active freight tracks a mile past where the Forge Park trains peel off, then 2 miles of abandoned ROW, then an eroded causeway over Harris Pond at the state line in Bellingham. RIDOT would rebuild the causeway, MA would restore the 2 miles to Bellingham, and end of the line would junction with the P&W freight main in Woonsocket. Woonsocket then becomes a mini- regional rail hub because RIDOT also wants to run Providence/Woonsocket and eventually Providence/Worcester CR through this station via the P&W.

-- Central Mass Line: Old CR line that branched off the Fitchburg in Waltham and went to South Sudbury till '71 and Hudson till '64. T officially studied restoring it to West Berlin/495 in 1993. Crosses the active Leominster/Agricultural Branch in West Berlin, so would act as a south-flank Fitchburg Line for the increasingly brutal traffic the length of the Routes 20/62 corridors. Splits from Fitchburg at 128, so would bulk up the inner-suburb service where we want near- rapid transit headways.

-- Northboro/Leominster Line: On the active Agricultural Branch freight tracks from Framingham. Studied CR proposal. Northboro leg hits Framingham State U, Route 9, Pike, 495, Route 20, I-290 for string of park-and-rides Worcester Line doesn't reach. Can be fed express at rush hour from Framingham Secondary via West Medway line. Junctions with Central Mass Line at West Berlin and can alternate schedules with it for reaching Leominster, I-190, Route 12.

------------
I swear I haven't spent a whole 40-hour work week on these 3 transit maps! I've been farting around with them a few minutes a pop since early Nov., putting it down for weeks at a time while I had real work to do. I've found that if you push Google Maps to the point where the sheer number of map elements makes it unstable that you can wring more total elements out of it by saving your work when it hits a certain buggy overload...then import all your saved work wholesale into a brand new map...delete the old map...then continue piecemeal work on the imported new map. Rinse, repeat when you hit another instability wall. That's the only way my Green Line/Urban Ring map and MBCR maps ever survived to completion (and the CR map is still crippled by that @#$% page 2 bug)...the rapid-transit one was the only one that didn't get all crashy and unworkable on the original canvas.

Shepard

05-20-2011, 10:27 AM

F-Line - once you're in "edit map' mode you can choose to export to Google Earth. If you could host that resulting file somewhere then you can post a link. Google Earth has no limit (that I've found) in terms of added points or lines, and it has much better UI overall. Just a thought, since those missing points can be frustrating.

F-Line to Dudley

05-20-2011, 10:50 AM

One thing the CR map doesn't address is per-project degree of difficulty. So here's the caveats. And obviously nobody's expecting this to get built in entirety so much as it's just the whole universe of buildable projects for a future when car commutes from 495-in get tougher to swing. All using rights of way that are either active or preserved for rail reactivation under the landbanking statute.

Expensive megaprojects
-- N-S Link: Probably heading to $6 bil by the time actually built, but utterly critical. I cut the Old Colony portal from the initial build to save significant money. No intercity service down there, so they'll get over having to wait 25 more years. Did the rapid-transit sharing because would help offset costs with much greater revenue. And cut the direct Fitchburg Line portal (not shown on map) in favor of slower roundabout loop around the yard into the main portal...cost savings, no intercity, few trains needing to run past North Station, so the slower maneuver into the Link is no big deal.

-- Eastern Route HSR: You're talking restoration of a lot of route miles in NH...not hard on the rural stretch to Portsmouth but complex on the denser Portsmouth/Dover leg. Plus a brand new Merrimack River bridge and widened Salem tunnel. Plus eliminating clusters of 7 grade crossings in Everett/Chelsea and 7 in Beverly. Plus electrification. Probably $1-2B when said and done. Too much cost to swallow until much later. Electrified Western Route--congestion, slower speed, and all--will have to suffice in the interim before the real-deal 150+ MPH route can be done.

-- Electrification: Will get ample federal assistance for the intercity trunk lines (Worcester, Concord, Haverhill/Dover). Plus Eastern Route when that's ready. State can probably swing Fitchburg Line-to-128 wires for the high-frequency service. But gotta compromise away having wires everywhere. It's not practical on non-intercity lines that don't run 24 hours a day and only have trains once an hour weekends and well off-peak. Maybe add much later on for the Rockingham Park and Rockport branches where they run more total route miles on already electric mainlines. N-S Link can only hold so much on 2 thru tracks and 4 underground platforms per station, so no need to go electric when most lines will still terminate where they do today. Note that more total trains on the T will still go electric because the trunk lines carry > 2/3 the system ridership. Maintain a small fleet of dual-mode locomotives that can send a few diesel lines into the Link as necessary, but don't go overboard with yet another new mode when diesel--20 years of increased fuel/emissions efficiency in the future--is good enough.

Problematic/dodgy extensions
-- Marshfield: There's one residential subdivision to snake around past Greenbush. Given all the NIMBY problems the current line had, a possible dealbreaker. Frankly, not that high an upside and not a big loss to scuttle.

-- Central Mass: By far the most route miles of abandoned/landbanked track to restore. 1993 restoration study had OK but not overwhelming ridership to West Berlin. Maybe better to build first to South Sudbury short-turn where Route 20 congestion is bad, then let demand crest and build the rest much later. This would be the first new line I'd cut as cost compromise.

-- Rockingham Park: The T stupidly gave Methuen permission this past month to lease a couple miles of seldom-used freight track to rip up for a gravel trail if they pass ultimate T approval of final plans and TBD funding. Idiotic because the line was active and will create an army of NIMBY's if they exercise the restoration clause in the lease. Plus the trail plan looks like barely-landscaped garbage uninviting to even to walk on. I think I-93/Route 213 relief merits bulldozing the opposition (hell, they thought this was a good idea 30 years ago!), but this is a new hurdle. NH has dreams of restoring the line all the way back to Derry/Hooksett/Manchester Airport where it's landbanked as (nicer) trail, but they're so tax-poor and chronically behind the political times on rail it's asking way too much. Poking across state line is it...if they didn't already murder it with the Methuen trail.

-- Millis/West Medway: Another trail lobby looking to take the active line from Dover to Medfield. Somewhat obnoxious group trying end-run tactics around the T with local pols to ram it through. Don't know if they'll succeed because they're under-resourced, but the guys leading the lobby are VERY aggressive. If the T lacks sufficient willpower to rebuff the noise this line could get blinked out of existence by the gravel trail and ensuing anti-restoration sentiment. Which would suck because ridership projections are higher than most almost any other extension and it intersects the Framingham Secondary at its midpoint for easy alt service to Worcester and Franklin Lines + Foxboro. I would even build Millis before South Coast Rail...that's how good it is.

-- Cape Rail: Not depicted on the map, but some idiot legislator with backroom pull rammed through a short-sighted bill a few years ago forcing abandonment of the perfectly good freight-active Falmouth Line from Otis AFB to Woods Hole for a bike path. Don't think part-time Cape service is enough reason to fight a NIMBY restoration war, so will have to do mainly the Hyannis Line with just a handful of Falmouth runs on the remaining crippled half-branch. No practical hope of going to Chatham either because that line is decades-abandoned and trailed east of Dennis. And also wouldn't go way overboard with track speed upgrades since it's light service and the lines are in decent-enough shape after Amtrak upgraded them in the late-80's for the Cape Codder.

The one I wished I could do but can't is extension of the Framingham Secondary to Taunton where it used to go, tying together alt access to every single line from Fitchburg to Middleboro on one track without fouling any mainlines. But there's a 1/3-mile, 4-block abandoned gap in Mansfield on the other side of the NEC that's built over, then 3 blocks of linear community path before the preserved ROW returns and goes active again by Mansfield Airport. Would take an either a very expensive 1/2-mile tunnel like the Greenbush Line in downtown Hingham or an awkward 1.5 mile re-route along 495 from the airport to piece it back together. Don't think that's justifiable cost for a part-time route when the existing Attleboro Secondary is a 6-mile jog down the NEC and serves the same purpose with only slightly more inconvience.

manrush

06-17-2011, 03:26 PM

Here's a small proposition for future Silver Lines.

Have SL6 link Boston College to Ashmont, via Chesnut Hill and Forest Hills.

SL7 could link Porter Square to Maverick via Sullivan Square (also with a stop along any potential Green Line station for the Medford extension).

For SL8, I would implement BostonUrbEx's idea of using the Saugus Branch and linking Malden Station to either Wonderland Station or a future Lynn Station.

I'm debating also throwing in an SL9, connecting Riverside to Alewife.

I drew some inspiration for the T-Zen BRT lines being built in Ile-de-France.

CSTH

06-29-2011, 01:17 PM

The Big Dunk

Why build a North-South Rail Link when you could build a North-West Rail Link Instead? Go under the Charles at the BU bridge, and come up again with a loop in the vacant land on either side of 93, just north of the Charles, to give access to north station.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-eI6twSabTCM/Tgtn8Xr8aDI/AAAAAAAADP0/5HTjtfRs5Y4/Big%252520Dunk.jpg

You could then:

- Bury Storrow in the same footprint
- Bury the Blue line in the same footprint, with connections to cambridge street and the D line ROW, and stations at the esplanade, Mass Ave, and Kenmore
- Run HS trains continuously from the proposed new inland route to north station and eventually maine
- Build a new 'west station' under the elevated pike and a re-built storrow just west of the BU bridge, to service the all the new action that will be going up in beacon yards and in allston in the next 50 years
- Run the green line down the grand junction to that new west station
- Continue with a "build and bury" tunnel for soldiers field road and a green line extension to H square across open land, at the existing grade, in lower allston (assuming charles view gets demolished)
- Bury the bowker.

It would demote South Station a notch, but ... who gives a shit?

I know this a huge absurd project, but is not more huge and no more absurd than the existing plans for the NS Link - you're essentially tunneling a few feet below a shallow, muddy puddle, rather than 10 stories below the surface, under a two level, 10 lane interstate and active rail and subway lines in a tidal zone in the middle of highrise downtown area. Plus you'd open a lot of new value in high growth areas (particularly allston, east cambridge, and the North Station area) and reconnect the river to back bay, rather than digging a superfluous central station under the frozen-in-amber waterfront

F-Line to Dudley

06-29-2011, 01:34 PM

Problem is the N-S Link is already provisioned for under the Big Dig. It's all clear fill with utilities already relocated. The portion under I-93 is actually the most economical part of that project, with the portals at the ends being the most expensive. And the Big Dig "swamp" needs the caveat that the highway was engineered with the bare slurry walls acting as tunnel walls. That's an engineering risk because every tunnel normally has an inner wall poured as a sealant, but they opted against that for 93 because it would reduce the footprint by 1 traffic lane. It's failing because they did a s*** job on the materials. The RR tunnel underneath wouldn't be in the same situation, because 4 tracks are much narrower than 3-4 car lanes + shoulder. The Link would get a full inner wall, and hopefully an over-designed one to make it really really water-tight.

I do think transit line under Storrow and Urban Ring Green Line on the Grand Junction are the way to go, but as part of the rapid-transit system. The N-S Link is really needed for Amtrak intercity. It's the most critical infrastructure project on the Northeast Corridor for the high-speed network after the second NYC tunnel because of the continuous shot it would provide from Virginia to Maine and also HSR to Montreal. Was never intended to be a fully in-state project and always a full-New England project.

cden4

06-30-2011, 12:33 PM

Rather than burying Storrow or burying transit under Storrow, I think it makes more sense to build a light-rail line in it's place. You could narrow Embankment Road and restore it as a surface street, terminating at Beacon St as it used to. Eliminating traffic from the waterfront would do absolutely amazing things for increasing the value and enjoyment of the parkland, as well as expanding the amount of parkland available and better knitting it to the surrounding neighborhoods. On the few days a year when there are no cars (i.e. July 4 or Hub on Wheels), it is so much quieter, cleaner, and peaceful. Creating better access to the Mass Pike as has been proposed before should be explored more, since there definitely is excess capacity in the downtown segment, and is actually where many Storrow drivers are headed to anyway (via the Allston tolls).

BostonUrbEx

07-02-2011, 11:39 PM

How can I post a Google Earth file? (.kml or .kmz)

I have made a map of a "reduced" commuter rail. The CR today has 133 stations... mine? 70 stations. And yet every line is extended expect the Greenbush (shortened), Providence (ending at TF Green), Rockport (of course), and Worcester (just didn't see Springfield being worth it without an entirely new and straighter ROW).

Eastern Route: Branch terminating at Rockport, main line ending at Portsmouth.
Main Line: Branch terminating at Haverhill, branch terminating at Nashua, main line ending at Concord (via Manchester and Lawrence).
Fitchburg: Ending at Wenchendon via Gardner.
Worcester: Same. Possible leg it south to Webster.
Franklin: Ending at Woonsocket.
Providence: Same.
South Coast: Ending at Fall River and New Bedford via Taunton via Mansfield.
Middleborough: Ending at Hyannis (perhaps seasonally only, with normal terminus of Bourne).
Plymouth: Ending at Plymouth (however, closer to downtown).
Greenbush: Ending at Cohasset Center.

So how did I still manage to slash out half of the stops despite the extensions and misc. infill? I cut out every single station that wasn't reasonably close to a significant downtown or center (primarily based on satellite views). I tried to make every station as close to a significant population/retail center as possible, with little or no parking even in mind.

Also, many stations within 128 cut; most notably the Haverhill line was hacked out. The only stations within 128 are the furthest possible major rapid transit transfers that I had in mind, and inner-ish city stations.

The goal? Using commuter rail to contract sprawl, rather than enhancing it. Combined with road diets and other such driving inconveniences, we'll still have little commuting towns and commuting cities, but for the most part they will be able to sustain themselves without falling onto cars or having massive tracts of grassy lawns. The little downtowns will see their towns contract.

I suppose it turns the commuter rail into something entirely new, more like a very localized intercity rail system which revolves on the regions dependency on Boston.

Now... how do I post these Google Earth maps....

JohnAKeith

07-03-2011, 10:18 AM

Widen the Esplanade like this?

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5146/5554343310_6a6111ec1f.jpg

From the Boston Public Library flickr photostream.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/boston_public_library/

palindrome

07-10-2011, 07:48 PM

Widen the Esplanade like this?

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5146/5554343310_6a6111ec1f.jpg

From the Boston Public Library flickr photostream.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/boston_public_library/

Always felt like this was an extremely plausible project. Bury Sturrow, add a row of buildings (use land sale, and future tax revenue to cover the expense) and widen the esplanade with the remaining new room.

BostonUrbEx

07-15-2011, 12:02 AM

http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/MA-128/img22.gif

My crazy pitch: Kill this. Kill it with fire!

EarthRockHill

07-22-2011, 10:36 AM

The only logical solution to the I-93/I-95 revised transition is an elaborate elevated flyover. I do most of my traveling by car to locales as far as the midwest and the simplest and most effective way to merge one interstate to another is a series of long sweeping multi-layered bridge ramps. The days of the cloverleaf are over.

vanshnookenraggen

07-22-2011, 10:58 AM

http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/MA-128/img22.gif

My crazy pitch: Kill this. Kill it with fire!

I don't see the problem with this. A more elegant solution would involve taking private land. What is worse? Traffic, a larger structure, or losing houses?

Ron Newman

07-22-2011, 11:03 AM

Would a standard cloverleaf take less land? I'm not sure.

BostonUrbEx

07-22-2011, 11:31 AM

EarthRockHill

07-22-2011, 12:16 PM

I don't see the problem with this. A more elegant solution would involve taking private land. What is worse? Traffic, a larger structure, or losing houses?

I really don't see a need to keep making highways more efficient. It's never ending and it just makes driving easier. Seriously, what's the use....

The interstate system was designed for far less traffic flow than it is today.
I'm not sure if anyone here recalls what it was like to get onto the Storrow drive ramp alongside Boston Garden and then merge into heavy 93 northbound traffic on the upper deck and then try and cross 4 moving lanes to get to the Tobin Bridge ramp. I came to Boston in 87 and 80% of the time I would make it to the exit.

You have to constantly upgrade the road way systems. The 93/128 exit is a nightmare, the double yield system just doesn't work. Most 'sheep' aka dumb drivers sit in the 'get off lane' 2-3 miles before the interchange causing backups.

If you don't take private land by going up and over perhaps down and below is an alternative.

The rendering is flawed in that it only eases 128 N/S to 93 transition and does nothing for the 93 North to 128 North which is where the majority of the problem lies.

statler

07-22-2011, 12:30 PM

I think BostonUrbEx point is that driving should be left a nightmare as way to encourage people to form denser communities with less dependence on cars.

EarthRockHill

07-22-2011, 12:32 PM

I don't see the problem with this. A more elegant solution would involve taking private land. What is worse? Traffic, a larger structure, or losing houses?

The whole redirection and solution to this problem can be rectified without taking any homes away just the mostly abandoned and poorly designed infrastructure in the south west corner of the clover leaf from the old Charrette HQ to the old car dealership on the other side of Washington Street, part of Cummings Park Drive, and the Nissan Dealership.....

http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh216/SteveDucatiPhotos/Boston%20Highways/93.jpg

Ron Newman

07-22-2011, 12:32 PM

EarthRockHill

07-22-2011, 01:41 PM

statler

07-22-2011, 02:06 PM

Heh...

FYI You may want to read a little bit more of the forum. Ron is pretty well known (and respected) for being outspoken about building less auto-centric communities.

BostonUrbEx

07-22-2011, 08:57 PM

omaja

07-22-2011, 10:56 PM

I don't see any reason why the road network should be upgraded at all. Certainly we should not take anyone's house just to make a suburban commuter's drive one or two seconds shorter. My preference would be to reclaim developable land by tightening the cloverleaf loops further.

(To see just how tight a cloverleaf ramp can be and still function well, check out the interchange of Riverway/Jamaicaway and Route 9 in Brookline.)

Therein lies one of the truly flawed logical mechanisms of the anti-auto crowd. It isn't just about moving suburbanites to and from their jobs downtown or whatever the case may be. The answer isn't to completely ignore one segment of transportation infrastructure to push demand toward the other (look at the reverse that happened in the 1950s and 1960s with shuttering streetcar routes in favor of buses and cars). If you decrease road funding, the entire country will come to a grinding halt. Again, it isn't about either or. It is about having both and making sure each is funded properly. We aren't funding infrastructure nearly as much as we should be and our government is very slow to realize that.

But more to the point, cloverleaf interchanges are woefully inadequate, substandard and dangerous constructions for the vast majority of freeway-to-freeway connections, including I-93/I-95. There is simply too much weaving and eliminating two of the loops eliminates that issue. Would be nice to have a full four-level stack or some variant of, however.

BostonUrbEx

07-23-2011, 12:22 AM

There is simply too much weaving

Can't weave if there's just one lane in each direction.

:)

Well... I suppose you could... but then you're just not doin' it right...

F-Line to Dudley

07-23-2011, 07:42 AM

Where's the LIKE button?!

However, I still see highways needing to be viable for local/small region distribution. So tightening the ramps isn't so good for commercial vehicles. I think every highway should have tolls, where it's a mere couple dollars for commercial vehicles, but sky high tolls for all others.

How about this. Change the rules for interstates at the national level so the states can toll any of them (not just grandfathered turnpikes). Toll all the expressways that cross state lines: I-91 Longmeadow & Bernardston, I-95 Attleboro & Salisbury, I-93 Methuen, I-295 North Attleboro, I-395 Webster, I-195 Seekonk, US 3 Tyngsboro, MA 146 Uxbridge, MA 24 Fall River. Pike already has 'em, and I-84 has de facto state-line tolls because of the Pike. These would be high-speed speed-limit tolls that don't even require a slowdown except for maybe 2 cash booths stuck in as a catch-all. You could even whack a major urban bottleneck like the Allston tolls with the revenue these would bring in. And, yes, it's only fair that the other states return the favor so maybe a gentleman's agreement (which NH will surely flout, but whatever) to only toll entering-state traffic and not to double-dip.

Of those roads 91 at the VT line and 395 at the CT line are the only two lighter-volume border crossers. 5 out of 11 of these are 2-digit interstates. US 3 and 146 should as practical matter be re-designated as full-blown interstates (I-293, I-190 respectively) because of the cities they connect. Meaning MA 24 is the lone outlier that doesn't really fit the mold and would be OK to exempt (also isn't a contiguous expressway beyond Tiverton).

Also...nearly every interstate or would-be interstate in New England was constructed in close proximity to a former passenger rail line. It would be wise for the Feds to change the interstate funding standards to be inclusive of intermodal whenever it's implementable. Meaning, if there's rail service at the border you can do somewhat higher road tolls to make commuter rail price-competitive with some calculation of ancillary driving costs.

These border crossings all have or will have high-frequency CR service with stops just across the border:

-- 95 @ RI: Providence Line, Pawtucket Central Falls. Active RIDOT studies for reopening that station.
-- 91 @ CT: Springfield Line, Enfield
-- US 3 @ NH: Lowell Line, South Nashua. One of highest-priority MBTA extensions.

These border crossings can get a needed kick in the pants to get their CR lines fast-tracked in conjunction with an interstate intermodal plan:
-- MA 24 @ RI, Fall River Line, Tiverton. RIDOT has studied Fall River line restoration to Newport and is very likely to act on it if the T builds to FR.
-- MA 146 @ RI, Providence & Worcester Line, Woonsocket. RIDOT wants Providence-Worcester service and has applied for some very longshot grant money for Providence-Woonsocket starter service. They've also studied Boston-Woonsocket via Franklin Line and are inclined to lobby for that one pretty hard once they get in-state PRV-WOON service.
-- 93 @ NH, Manchester & Lawrence Line, Rockingham Park. Stupid 1981 budget crisis...we were months away from having this one (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/142/346211745_55c76c4fd8_o.jpg). Unfortunately the rail trail kool-aid drinkers in Methuen are trying to salt the earth here before the line is even abandoned, but poking across the state line and using the Rockingham Park lots as a 93 park-and-ride is an obvious one.
-- I-95 @ NH, Eastern Route, Seabrook. NH is negotiating to buy the line from Pan Am because they filed for abandonment last week Hampton-Portsmouth, so talk of how to pivot for future CR is heating up in Rockingham County (where they are not nearly as nihilist about passenger rail as the teabaggers in Merrimack County).

These lower-volume border crossings have their own CR plans likely to take hold because of low cost of implementing and corridor development:
-- 91 @ VT, Conn River Line, Brattleboro. Vermont really wants to get some regular CR service running on the corridor at some point after the Vermonter upgrades are complete. North of Springfield metro (Chicopee-Northampton) needs it worse than Fall River/New Bedford do; a Brattleboro-Springfield CR route with extended runs to Hartford would be extremely popular.
-- 395 @ CT, Providence & Worcester (New London mainline), Thompson. CDOT's studying a New London-Worcester passenger line long-term as a sort of Shore Line East thing for the NL-WOR corridor, since the track is already fast and won't need pricey upgrades to get to full speed.

That leaves 84 @ CT and Pike @ NY (both already tolled), 195 @ RI (former PRV-FR line obliterated in Somerset with no viable Taunton River crossings), and 295 @ RI (sorta...Woonsocket & 146 interchange will have CR, so only Cumberland-N. Attleboro is shut out) as the only ones that will not have any sort of border-crossing commuter rail. 84 & Pike are too rural for CR to begin with, and 295 is close enough and oughtta get tolled just to prevent cheaters avoiding the 95 border crossing. That leaves 195 the only vexing rail omission because of the lost rail infrastructure on a commute that does merit CR.

Lotsa, lotsa synergies to exploit here to help pay for roads and transit while keeping induced traffic demand well-controlled. I would rather do something like this than keep chewing up medians for add-a-lanes. If you need >6 lanes outside of 128, the 91/291/391 convergence in downtown Springfield, or the 290/190/146 convergence in downtown Worcester...something's broken with induced demand that's better solved with smarter planning.

omaja

07-23-2011, 12:18 PM

I do like the idea of tolling more than we do in the US. Most other countries have higher auto-related taxes and/or tolls that support a much better quality of construction and maintenance. All of that is in addition to excellent public transportation (i.e. Spain, France, Germany, etc.).

In the meantime, this is what I'd like to see done with the I-93/I-95 strangler.
http://i.imgur.com/ULDLb.jpg

A collector/distributor lane system to the east for the Main St exit would feed into the interchange while separate I-93/I-95 exits would be provided for Washington St/Mishawum Rd.

BostonUrbEx

07-23-2011, 12:27 PM

In the meantime, this is what I'd like to see done with the I-93/I-95 strangler.
http://i.imgur.com/ULDLb.jpg

What is this? Houston?!

Ron Newman

07-23-2011, 01:08 PM

What about a three-level design where each freeway direction has a single exit and entrance, leading to a rotary (which is the third level)? This removes all the weaving from the freeways and moves it solely to the rotary. You might even be able to reclaim some of the land now occupied by cloverleaf ramps this way.

BostonUrbEx

07-23-2011, 02:05 PM

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04091/images/fig011.jpg

Artist's rendering of Jct. I-95/MA-128 & I-93 in 2020.

omaja

07-23-2011, 02:06 PM

What is this? Houston?!

Naw, if this were Houston, most of the surrounding area would need to be removed and another six lanes of local access roads would need to be added on either side.

There wouldn't be a massive expansion in lanes, either, like you'd see in Texas. This plan separates the 8-10 lanes into an express/local set up: 2-3 express lanes on I-95 to the east and 2-3 local and auxiliary lanes in between exits. Lane capacity would remain basically unchanged but you would see a tremendous increase in throughput capacity of the interchange. Not only are there too many exit and entrance ramps along I-95, the 1.5 mile corridor includes two horrifically inadequate cloverleaf interchanges!

It's just about using the current right-of-way in a much more efficient manner.

What about a three-level design where each freeway direction has a single exit and entrance, leading to a rotary (which is the third level)? This removes all the weaving from the freeways and moves it solely to the rotary. You might even be able to reclaim some of the land now occupied by cloverleaf ramps this way.

Rotaries have notoriously low capacities, though. Think about the mess that used to be the Sagamore rotary and magnify that by a pretty significant factor. Even if the rotary is segregated from the two freeways, the backups caused by exiting traffic having to slow through the rotary would more than make up for the eliminated weaving congestion.

BostonUrbEx

07-24-2011, 01:41 AM

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6029/5969413896_dd77de8774_b.jpg

Just a quick drawing then traced on MS Paint.

I don't see a 2 track Eastern Route and 2 track Blue Line to Salem being the best use of the 60' ROW at all, so I had to go up!

vanshnookenraggen

07-24-2011, 12:23 PM

Thing is out there the land is so cheap that it wouldn't make sense to build a costly viaduct. In Lynn proper maybe, but between Wonderland and Lynn at grade or an embankment is all you need.

Also keep in mind that building it as you've proposed you would need to rebuild the CR tracks which would at least double the cost of the project.

BostonUrbEx

07-24-2011, 01:39 PM

This was for downtown Lynn until the Swampscott/Salem border, as space is tight there. Not necessary for Wonderland to Lynn, but Lynn to Salem, yes.

Also, current tracks can be somewhat easily shifted, no? But signaling has to be reworked. It could be rolled in with a North-South rail link and Amtrak NEC extension. It would help cover costs with more money from other agencies (Amtrak).

omaja

07-29-2011, 08:27 PM

http://i.imgur.com/FKaL9.jpg

The latest rendition of my fantasy MBTA map currently in progress.

Number (Color) Termini
Line 1 (Red) Burlington - Braintree
Line 2 (Dark Blue) Lynn - Riverside
Line 3 (Green) Belmont - Boston College
Line 4 (Yellow) Franklin Park - Cleveland Circle
Line 5 (Brown) Harvard Square - Forest Hills
Line 6 (Orange) Reading - Needham Heights
Line 7 (Purple) Winchester Center - Route 128/Amtrak
Line 8 (Pink) Wonderland - Riverside
Line 9 (Black) Adams Plaza - Islington
Line 10 (Light Blue) Brandeis - Ashmont
Line 11 (Gold) Ashmont - Roslindale Village
Line 12 (Silver) Circle

F-Line to Dudley

07-31-2011, 11:32 AM

Expanding on the earlier discussion about interstates, here's my revamped highway network for Eastern New England designed to designate key corridors. . .

Ground Rules
-- Integrated planning when possible for concurrent transit. As the Feds are not really providing matching funds for interstates anymore except for a few high-priority corridors this is the only substantial way to get national investment in regional corridor development. Also a requirement to control suburban sprawl and the induced demand problem.
-- Address all major Eastern NE cities (i.e. east of I-395 and I-93/NH, south of Concord/Portsmouth latitude): Worcester, Providence, Lowell, Fall River/New Bedford metro, Manchester/Concord metro, Cape. That's where the most growth is going to be, and where integrated planning in the suburbs has its highest priority.
-- Clean up route numbering and get the US routes back on the undivided roads where they belong and the major city-linking expressways designated interstates. Other areas of the country tag every highway under the sun as a 3-digit interstate, but for whatever reason New England's extremely reticent to do the same (look how long it took 395 and the southeast quadrant of 495 to get designated). And our 2-digits save for I-91 and the Pike are all oddly discontinuous because of highway revolts (even outside of the Boston/128 moratorium...93, 84, and 89 stop well short of traversing the whole region).
-- Toll all interstates at the borders for traffic crossing into MA (only fair that other states get the same courtesy). Can probably be done on newly-designated ones since they'll be state-paid, but would be nice to get a fed exception on the existing ones. Exceptions: Mass Pike (already tolled), I-84 (already de facto tolled at Pike).
-- Save for a couple short < 5 mile missing links with high existing likelihood of happening in next 20 years, required construction is limited to upgrading existing expressways to full interstate standards. That's all we can really afford, and all that's really needed. This is an economic development plan, not an overheated 1960's road construction orgy.
-- No 8-lane add-a-lane projects outside of 128 and major arteries between multiple highways (e.g. I-93 Hooksett-Bow, I-290 downtown Worcester, etc.). Too self-defeating on sprawl and induced demand.
-- Go to milepost-based exit numbering statewide. This is now a federal law that states have to transition to it over the next 10-15 years, so might as well get on with it and have the rest of New England join milepost-based Maine in the 21st century. This will make the route renumberings a lot easier, and eliminate the utter nonsensical numbering on every road inside 128 and all those "Exit xxA" instances where an infill exit was grafted into the pre-existing numbering (see Pike/146, Pike/495).

-------------------------------------------------------

Southern NH/Northeast MA (US 3 and NH 101 corridors)

New Construction
-- Upgrade 4 mile "super-2" section of NH 101 to full 4-lane expressway from NH 27 to NH 1A in Hampton so it actually hits 1A and US 1 instead of fizzing out shortly past I-95.

Upgrades
-- Upgrade any interstate-deficient sections of US 3 in NH.
-- Upgrade deficient Lowell Connector to interstate standards.

Redesignation
-- NH 101 between NH 114 and NH 1A, including concurrent Manchester I-293 segment, becomes I-193.
-- US 3 Option #1: US 3 becomes I-293 from I-93 in Hooksett to 128 in Burlington. 3A reverts to US 3. Least disruptive for route numbering. If I had to guess, this is the most likely to get approved.
-- US 3 Option #2 (preferred): I-89 extended concurrent with I-93 for 9 miles Bow-Hooksett on existing 8-lane portion, then takes over I-293/US 3 to 128. Designate Lowell Connector I-389 (189 unavailable...CT/MA cross-border state road). Pros: Gives US 3 expressway equal weight to I-93 for dividing NH traffic, prioritizes Lowell-area development, brings I-89 into populated areas with connections to Southern NE instead of being relegated to "forgotten interstate" rural road status. Cons: NH may have reservations about concurrent 93/89 numbering; Feds want to minimize concurrent 2-digit numberings when possible.

Integrated Transit
-- NH Main rail parallels US 3 to Concord, I-89 (on abandoned segment) to White River Jct., VT. High-priority federal High Speed Rail corridor with short-term goal of MBTA to Nashua and Concord.
-- Eastern Route commuter rail restoration Newburyport-Portsmouth. Serves Hampton/193, significantly eases I-95 congestion, potential for future HSR upgrades.

-------------------------------------------------------

Worcester-Providence (Route 146 corridor)

New Construction
-- Close out ongoing MA 146 expressway upgrades. 4-mile segment from MA 122A in Millbury to Central Turnpike in Sutton currently in design.
-- Upgrade 1-mile segment from RI 99 to RI 146A in N. Smithfield to full expressway.

Upgrades
-- Upgrade any deficient RI expressway segments to full interstate standards (most of it recently rebuilt, but I-95 to RI 246 segment very old with narrow lanes/shoulders).

Redesignation
-- 146 becomes I-190 extension.
-- 146 reverts back onto RI 246 and RI/MA 146A.
-- I-290 truncated to Worcester-to-495 segment. Downtown Worcester segment between 190/290 and 290/146 becomes becomes I-190.
-- I-395 extended on former I-290 Auburn-Worcester segment to 146 as route cleanup and to unify New London-Worcester corridor.

Integrated Transit
-- RIDOT Providence-Woonsocket-Worcester commuter rail via P&W mainline, with upgrades to passenger speeds (modest, since line already well-maintained).
-- CDOT New London-Worcester commuter rail (Shore Line East-like service with lowish frequencies) via P&W mainline, with upgrades to passenger speeds (modest, since line already well-maintained). Possible Amtrak bypass.
-- MBTA Franklin Line extension to Woonsocket via former B&P RR alignment.
-- Possible future Worcester-Concord/Lowell bypass on Pan Am Worcester Branch (MBTA cut passenger trackage rights deal last year) connecting I-190, I-89 (or 293) corridors. Amtrak NYC-Downeaster or NYC-Concord directs bypassing Boston.

-------------------------------------------------------

Providence-Fall River/New Bedford (MA 24 and I-195 corridors)

Upgrades
-- Decomission MA 79 expressway, reconstruct as 4-lane waterfront boulevard. Combine 24/79 and Highland Ave./24 interchanges into one bi-directional interchange. Upside: reconnects waterfront, eliminates far underused expressway for something more useful.
-- Lower-profile ramps from MA 79 to 195/Braga Bridge along with boulevard construction. Eliminate deficient decking at interchange.
-- MA 24 add-a-lane from I-495 to MA 140, Raynham-Taunton. Construct full 140 interchange to eliminate traffic lights.
-- MA 24 add-a-lane from 79 interchange to 195, with upgraded exit ramps en route and improved 195 interchange (capacity trade for eliminating 79 expressway).
-- Upgrade deficient sections of MA 24 to Randolph to full interstate standards. Do not do the proposed add-a-lane to 8 lanes project Brockton-north; makes suburban sprawl/induced demand worse, takes too much land, and fatally clobbers 128 + Braintree split.

Redesignation
-- MA 79 discontinued on 24/79 concurrent segment, decomissioned on replacement boulevard. Re-sign as US 6/MA 138 from Taunton River crossing south to 195, take US 6 off city streets and co-sign it with 195 out to the 24 south/Brayton Ave. interchange. North of bridge out to 24, make the boulevard an unsigned state road. Upside: better traffic flow on 6/138 with re-route, leaving unsigned north to 24 discourages speeding traffic on boulevard.
-- MA 24 becomes interstate north of 195. I-595 if 195 designation stays the same (see Cape section for more details).
-- MA 24 stays same south of 195 (not worth upgrade because discontinuous with north segment of 24, discontinuous on Aquidneck Island because of 1960's highway revolt).

Integrated Transit
-- Taunton commuter rail on Stoughton Branch (Phase I).
-- Fall River/New Bedford commuter rail (Phase II).
-- Newport commuter rail via Fall River (RIDOT project), w/restored Sakonnet River RR bridge and upgraded track. Limited Boston service on Fall River Line (increased in-season), Providence-Newport (RIDOT) via Attleboro Branch with stops only in Pawtucket, Taunton, FR to keep commute competitive with highways.
-- Note: ROW from Providence-Fall River only preserved in RI, obliterated from state line at Warren/Swansea with former Slades Ferry bridge across Taunton River demolished. Wattupa Branch discontinuous to FR mainline because of 195 downtown tunnel. East Providence tunnel and drawbridge still available, but former viaduct to Providence station demolished. No possibility of direct PRV-FR-NB rail without extremely expensive new ROW construction required, mainly along the 195 median; never going to happen.

-------------------------------------------------------

Cape (MA 3, US 6, I-195 corridors)

New Construction
-- MA 25 Bourne-Sagamore connector Option #1 (preferred): South of canal routing, 3-1/2 miles across abandoned Camp Edwards land from US 6 curve at MA 130 to Bourne Bridge southside rotary. Pros: balances bridge traffic between overloaded Sagamore and underloaded Bourne, puts off need for new span for probably 1-2 more decades, zero land acquisition required because of available military property. Cons: some environmental hurdles with Cape aquifer.
-- MA 25 Bourne-Sagamore connector Option #2: North of canal routing, 2 miles from MA 25 curve onto Bourne Bridge approach to Sagamore/MA 3 interchange, using power line land state purchased decades ago for expressway. Pros: highest capacity link. Cons: severely overloads Sagamore Bridge, underloads Bourne Bridge, eventually necessitates new bridge. Don't think this one works without the new span, which probably makes it too hard to swallow.
-- New Bourne Bridge flyover at full expressway standards, same as new Sagamore flyover.
-- Expand "super-2" section of US 6 expressway from MA 134 in South Dennis to end of highway in Orleans to full 4-lane expressway. Or at least as far as MA 137 in Harwich for Chatham access if community opposition doesn't allow going to Orleans.
-- Expand "super-2" section of US 44 expressway in Middleboro to full 4-lane expressway. Build full I-495 interchange in place of rotary, with prevailing east-west traffic flow. Upside: traffic relief on MA 3 north with direct 495 belt access from Plymouth to offset increased Cape/Sagamore traffic.

Upgrades
-- Rebuild 195/495 interchange, replacing half-cloverleaf so traffic favors east-west (195) direction instead of north-south. Less reliance on 495 here because of increased MA 3 and US 44 traffic flow.
-- Upgrade any deficient sections of US 6 expressway to full interstate standards, including rebuild of substandard southside Sagamore approach.
-- Install jersey barrier on Bourne and Sagamore Bridges for grade separation, 50 MPH speed limit. Take dangerous sidewalk jut to create space for barrier, graft on new sidewalk overhangs onto sides of bridges for full pedestrian/bike access.
-- Upgrade all deficient ramps on US 3 to Braintree split to full interstate standards. Judicious 6-lane add-a-lane segments, but do not go 8 lanes from Kingston to Braintree as proposed...too expensive, too much sprawl/induced demand, too much stress on SE Expressway and Braintree split.

Redesignation
-- MA 3 becomes I-93 from Braintree to new US 6/MA 25 Sagamore connector. MA 3 concurrency with 93 in Boston decomissioned. I-93 from Braintree split to I-95 becomes I-695. Sagamore is grandfathered from interstate standards so long as it's divided with a barrier.
-- MA 3A either remains as-is or becomes extended MA 203 (eliminates rule violation of having separate in-state US 3 and MA 3).
-- MA 25, new Bourne-Sagamore connector, and US 6 expressway become east-west interstate on I-195 alignment. Bourne grandfathered from interstate standards so long as it's divided with a barrier.
-- Option #1: 2-digit I-82 (preferred): Taking over US 6 from I-295 to I-95 in RI, co-signed with I-95 in Providence between US 6 and 195 (with upgraded 6/95 interchange for better east-west flow), replacing current I-195 and MA 25, over Bourne-Sagamore connector, and replacing US 6 from connector/I-93 interchange to Orleans. Same originally proposed designation for cancelled I-84 routing from Hartford-Providence-Cape that pre-dated the 195 designation. Pros: major corridor growth from Providence to Cape, future extension west if/when CT and RI fill in their US 6 expressway gaps, I-93 complies with interstate rules and ends at a 2-digit instead of 3-digit interstate. Cons: Feds might be finicky about doling this out, esp. with concurrent 95 routing in Providence (although they have I-82 reserved for RI if it ever completes US 6 expressway to the CT border and I-395).
-- Option #2: I-195 extension. Same mileage as above excluding US 6 in RI, with more conservative 3-digit designation. Pros: easier approval, less route disruption. Cons: I-195 gets a little far-flung and stretches the definition of a 3-digit I-95 spur if it interchanges with 93 on the other end and then goes 25 miles further, rule violation on I-93 (2-digit interstates can only end at other 2-digit interstates or US highways unless physically impossible; Feds might prevent US 6 from going interstate because of this).
-- [Contingent on Option #1]: MA 24 becomes I-182 instead of I-595. Upside: If I-82 marks the PRV-FR-NB-CC corridor, then the Boston-FR link ought to reflect I-82.
-- [Contingent on Option #1]: I-495 shifts onto completed US 44 expressway, 495-to-195 segment becomes I-482 (i.e. "82 to 495"). Pros: more geographic synergy with rest of the 495 belt, higher-profile radial highway needed from Plymouth to divert traffic off 93 north, new east-west traffic patterns to Cape diminishes north-south importance of 495 Middleboro-Wareham. Cons: maybe a little too much renumbering. Could always make completed 44 an I-493 (i.e. "495 to 93").
-- RI 10 from US 6 to I-95 becomes I-282 with I-82 designation extended west to 295. Note: 10/6 interchange reconstruction ongoing now, so the whole existing US 6 expressway will be at interstate standards soon.
-- MA 6A becomes US 6 again. US 44 reverts to old alignment. US 6A in RI becomes US 6 again.
-- If RI extends I-82 west with infill of Johnston and Foster expressway gaps, US 6 "super-2" Scituate Bypass would be upgraded to full expressway. Kills the confusing dual US 6 designations in Scituate, and the dual Connecticut Turnpike designations on 395 and the (currently useless) Danielson-state line stub expressway. RIDOT put this back on its long-range wish list since it thinks it's got the environmental hurdles licked (reason the original I-84 proposal died). CT can do whatever it wants with its two US 6 expressway gaps. Maybe Bolton-Willimantic actually gets built as I-384; I wouldn't hold my breath on Willimantic-Danielson officially completing I-82 to Hartford in our lifetimes.

Integrated Transit
-- MBTA extension, Middleboro-Buzzards Bay (Phase I). Limited in-season Cape Rail service to Hyannis.
-- Reinstate Amtrak Cape Codder, with rehab of Attleboro and Middleboro branches (upgrades were planned but stalled when Cape Codder ended in '96).
-- MBTA extension, Buzzards Bay-Hyannis (Phase II). For integrated transit with completed I-82.
-- RIDOT limited service, Providence-Cape, via Attleboro and Middleboro Branches. Express through intermediate stops to keep travel times competitive with highway. Note: Also impossible to go PRV-FR-NB-Cape direct. Never was a water crossing between New Bedford and the (preserved) Fairhaven Secondary; creating one requires prohibitive new ROW construction on the expressway median and navigating around residential density. Total non-starter.
-- (Long-term) Western RI commuter rail via restored Washington Secondary (semi-parallel to Route 6). Phase II restoration of full Hartford-Willimantic-Providence route, which would permit Hartford-Cape on the I-82 corridor and "Inland Cape Codder" service. Western RI and Hartford-Willimantic are low-priority commuter rail studies for RI and CT, likely accelerated if their highway segments are a no-go. Manchester-Willimantic (15 mi.) and Moosup-Providence (20 mi.) abandoned ROW's are fully landbanked; Hartford-Manchester, Willimantic-Moosup active and undergoing major track upgrades for freight. Both states want long-term reactivation.

Equilibria

07-31-2011, 10:28 PM

F-Line to Dudley

08-01-2011, 08:22 PM

^

Very interesting read, and a solid plan. I'm not sure about the interstate designation on US-44, though. I'm not certain whether even the new 44 expressway was constructed to interstate grade, as sometimes the failure to seek a designation signals a lack of motivation to keep to the standards. In any case, the question is whether the expressway functions as a connector between interstate highways (I-495 and MA-3/I-93) or merely as a higher-capacity section of the greater US-44, in which case its current designation is fine.

I'm also not a huge fan of short 3-digit interstates, however plentiful they may be elsewhere. I-290 between Worcester and Marlborough could simply be resigned I-395 (most logical would be to sign I-190 as I-395 with perhaps the I-290 designation carrying over onto 146 to formalize its role as a fringe beltway for Boston). The same applies to the Braintree-Canton section of I-93. If anything, that might be better signed as I-193 to represent its role as a feeder to I-93.

I could talk about this endlessly. I'll stop now.

The I-93 part of 128 is on the Federal interstate rolls and has been ever since 95/695 into Boston were canceled and the route mileage reassigned to 128, so it can't be decomissioned without the state forfeiting federal maintenance aid. Besides, the state already officially decommissioned 128 on that segment (although nobody in real life has ever stopped calling it what it is), so the 93 relocation would leave it without a route number. That's a case where 3-digit interstate is the only option. If it had no exits or major interchanges on it it can be an unsigned interstate or carry the lone US 1 designation, but the 24 interchange and exits with 2 cross-state state roads (138, 28) and a third state road (37) make that a bad idea. It doesn't really matter in popular vernacular if people call it by its official x95 name...it's always going to be "128" on the radio station traffic reports. And ultimately 93 needs to have something resembling a natural alignment through the state.

The only reason MA 3 was never designated 93 in the first place is because of all the chaos about the unbuilt Boston expressways and fact that the SE Expressway changed designations (and even went without one for some time in the 60's!) practically every other year before the construction moratorium. Time to finally get the last of those moratorium-disrupted designations settled after 40 years (and eliminate the sloppy US 3/MA 3, multiple 3A's rule violations and nonsensical half-assed attempts to tie them all together through the Artery).

US 44 expressway is less than 10 years old, believe it or not. Construction started in '99 from 3, and was completed to MA 58 in Carver in 2005. Nothing existed there prior, and 44 followed what's now MA 80 and High St. in Carver. Expressway is already at 100% interstate standards because it was built under the most modern revision of the standards. The "super-2" segment west of 58 is older, opening in 1968. It's one carriageway of what was supposed to be the full expressway, which is why there's no businesses on it and it goes through the middle of nowhere (old 44 there is MA 105 and some Middleboro streets reverted back to town control). Upgrading that section to full interstate standards would only entail widening to 4 lanes, grade-separating 4 intersections (originally designed for eventual overpassing), making an exit at MA 105, and rebuilding the 495 exit to 44/28/18 into a full interchange and rotary flyover. One of the easiest and least-controversial bits of road construction to do in-state should the traffic patterns on an upgraded 3 merit it.

I would agree it's not a major enough link today, but the Bourne-Sagamore connector completely remakes the traffic patterns east-west on 195 and north-south on 3 to/from the Mid-Cape Highway's southern approach to the Sagamore. And that's going to sharply de-emphasize the 495 Raynham-Wareham segment and transfer a lot of that 495-bound traffic to 44 instead given Plymouth's importance. That's where it starts to merit the (easy) expressway completion and interstate designation (whichever one it is). I also think 482 and 495 should be co-signed from the 24 (182) interchange or have signs "495 TO 482" because that's a very significant 3 miles that'll be carrying a lot more traffic.

190/290 sort of break the rules because 290 was supposed to be a beltway to Route 2 (and 2 going to 128) before the east leg past 495 got cancelled. And CT and MA didn't even want the 395 designation...they wanted 290 extended all the way to New London, but the Feds overruled them. In a perfect world you'd keep 190 as-is, extend 395 to Worcester, and make 146 as 290 so 95, 90, 190/395, and 495 were all joined by a single interstate. But there's no way the Feds are going to go for a swap-over in Auburn from one road to another only 2 miles away when there are consecutive Pike exits affected. The confusion would be too immense...much moreso than just giving up 290 south of downtown and bringing 395 up further (which alleviates a fair amount of current confusion). Imperfect, but this is the only plausible scenario the Fed mapmakers would agree to and it's definitely good enough.

F-Line to Dudley

08-01-2011, 08:50 PM

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=210491618710954337134.0004a96762c5f42152a1 4&msa=0

BTW...here's the "beta" Google Maps of the plan. Re-categorized interstates in question are included, color-coded around "families" derived from their 2-digit interstate parents. Haven't added descriptions to anything yet, so it's just the visuals.

Really illustrates well what a huge difference having "whole" I-93 and I-89 makes, as well as the utility of the I-82 designation on all the existing roads + Bourne-Sagamore connector. I also included for reference the 4 discontinuous segments in CT and RI built for the old I-84 (3 interstate-standard expressways, 1 "super-2" carriageway intended for future doubling-up) before its cancellation to show where I-82 can go if those states bite the bullet. You can see the gaps aren't as big as you would've thought, and if RI really thinks it's now got a way to safely get the wetlands permitting that it couldn't get 30 years ago on the Johnston-Scituate gap they've really not got a lot of work to do to get as far west as 395. CT, as mentioned, I wouldn't hold my breath on. Although getting 82 to 395 is plenty worthy an accomplishment for the region and does open up an all-expressway Hartford-Cape semi-direct route via (permanently substandard) CT 2, 395, and 82. That's the main reason the Feds are holding the 82 designation for RI even if it's never used for anything more than 395-to-Providence. There's still contiguous east-west expressways from either side.

One addition: MA 213/Methuen Loop becomes I-493 ("I-93 to I-495") pending upgrades to any deficient exits/lanes/curves. With NH 101/I-193 to the north you've now pretty much got a 3-digit beltway of sorts tracing the regional borders of southeastern NH. Seems useful enough since all of 213 and all of NH 101 between 95 and 93 are already both full expressways and each road already serves some degree of the same purpose. Seems worth highlighting up a notch with redesignation.

HenryAlan

08-02-2011, 12:33 PM

The latest rendition of my fantasy MBTA map currently in progress.

Number (Color) Termini
Line 1 (Red) Burlington - Braintree
Line 2 (Dark Blue) Lynn - Riverside
Line 3 (Green) Belmont - Boston College
Line 4 (Yellow) Franklin Park - Cleveland Circle
Line 5 (Brown) Harvard Square - Forest Hills
Line 6 (Orange) Reading - Needham Heights
Line 7 (Purple) Winchester Center - Route 128/Amtrak
Line 8 (Pink) Wonderland - Riverside
Line 9 (Black) Adams Plaza - Islington
Line 10 (Light Blue) Brandeis - Ashmont
Line 11 (Gold) Ashmont - Roslindale Village
Line 12 (Silver) Circle
Awesome! Now, let's make it happen!

omaja

08-04-2011, 08:55 PM

Central Boston with the rail network it should have. Certainly would be nice...
http://i.imgur.com/bQFmn.jpg

JohnAKeith

08-05-2011, 01:02 AM

It's annoying that no buses travel west through the Back Bay. The 39 goes west on Huntington and east on Boylston, but that's the best you can do.

I wonder if there ever was a bus up Beacon St.

Ron Newman

08-05-2011, 07:20 AM

The 55 used to go down Newbury Street. I think the T moved it to Huntington because Newbury was just too congested.

Shepard

08-05-2011, 08:41 AM

Cool map, Omaja - I get everything except the gray line you have pictured, and the "E line" (yellow) extension towards Kendall...!

I would also entertain the idea of an RER-style express service from South Station to Back Bay to Hynes and then out westward - similarly from North Station to Union Sq to Porter and beyond...

Shepard

08-05-2011, 09:29 AM

Here's my ongoing proposal (last version was a few pages back) -

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/6681/mbta2040g.jpg

This differs from others in that its emphasis is multimodal, making use of DMUs or EMUs (the purple lines), ferries (blue lines) trolleys and trolleybuses (double lines) and express buses (dotted lines) to round out the system.

statler

08-05-2011, 09:51 AM

I wonder if some sort of Red/Orange connector would worth it between West Roxbury/Dedham? It may not get the ridership to sustain it, but growing up in WR I was constantly driving over to Dedham.

Shepard

08-05-2011, 10:08 AM

Statler - take a look at this abandoned ROW that splits off from the Needham line after the WR stop, and heads south to the Dedham Mall:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=West+Roxbury,+Boston,+MA&hl=en&ll=42.278341,-71.161687&spn=0.009383,0.022638&sll=37.160317,-95.712891&sspn=40.968917,92.724609&t=h&z=16

JohnAKeith

08-05-2011, 11:38 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNO6EITIBVU

omaja

08-06-2011, 10:02 AM

Cool map, Omaja - I get everything except the gray line you have pictured, and the "E line" (yellow) extension towards Kendall...!

My 'Silver Line' is basically a street-running light rail line that replaces what used to be the Orange Line Washington El. Then once it nears Boylston, it goes underground through the Common, Charles/MGH, the West End, before returning to street level after North Station.

Here's a more completed central overview (still a work in progress, though):
http://i.imgur.com/FDviE.jpg

I would also entertain the idea of an RER-style express service from South Station to Back Bay to Hynes and then out westward - similarly from North Station to Union Sq to Porter and beyond...

Was thinking the same thing. On my central overview, the stations with a red white and blue "C" logo are stops on the revamped RER/S-Bahn style commuter rail network. I'll take to tackling that monster once my T network map is done.

omaja

08-06-2011, 01:16 PM

Here's a rough sketch of what I see for the current commuter rail network, keeping in mind that the Needham and Fairmount lines have completely been taken over by rapid transit lines: http://maps.google.com/maps?msid=204905147240079736190.0004a9d98bc93b158f e35&msa=0&ll=42.455888,-70.85083&spn=1.074,2.705383&t=k&z=9

BostonUrbEx

08-06-2011, 08:51 PM

omaja

08-06-2011, 09:36 PM

Strange. Must be a board error. Try this one. (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=204905147240079736190.0004a9d98bc93b158fe3 5&msa=0&ll=42.263082,-71.210632&spn=1.124033,2.705383)

MBTAddict

08-07-2011, 09:43 AM

My crazy idea is that the MBTA, if it’s not going to be in the business of real expansion anytime soon (http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-02/yourtown/29839382_1_green-line-transportation-projects-planners/2), get into the business of updating its current system to something that actually resembles and operates like a 21st century rapid transit system. And the best place to start is the B line between Kenmore and BC.

Here’s the pitch: after Kenmore, continue the tunnel underneath Comm. Ave all the way to Packard’s Corner. The Blandford Street stop is removed, and BU East and BU Central are combined into one stop named BU East. The current BU West stop is removed, and St. Paul Street is renamed BU West. Pleasant Street and Babcock are both removed as well. Packard’s Corner is the last stop underground.

After Packard’s Corner, the B line goes above ground onto an elevated track, and runs elevated from Packard’s Corner all the way to BC, making the following stops:

1. Harvard Ave
2. Warren Street (remove Griggs and Allston Street)
3. Washington Street
4. Learnington Road (combination of Chiswick and Sutherland)
5. Chesnut Hill Ave
6. BC (removeSouth Street)

We have a B line with half as many stops (9 as opposed to 18) between Kenmore and BC that can run unimpeded by traffic (making it ready for automated train control when it finally comes to Boston circa 2150) and which no longer makes the population of Allston/Brighton die a little on the inside every time they have to ride it.

Now I know elevated transit isn’t always popular, but look at Comm. Ave after Packard’s Corner. It’s 160’ wide from sidewalk to sidewalk. There is no way the structure would need to be so tall that it would cast shadows on either side of the street. The one area where this may be a tougher sell is after Chestnut Hill Ave, where Comm. Ave narrows, but it is a very brief stretch.

omaja

08-07-2011, 12:07 PM

I like that idea a lot. That section of Comm Ave has a lot in common with some sections of Paris that have elevated sections of Metro. And the structures in Paris seemed to blend in well with everything, too.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1383/886496269_57fa95923b.jpg

Some simple prioritization signaling would do wonders, though.

Charlie_mta

08-11-2011, 11:44 PM

......And the best place to start is the B line between Kenmore and BC.

Here’s the pitch: after Kenmore, continue the tunnel underneath Comm. Ave all the way to Packard’s Corner. The Blandford Street stop is removed, and BU East and BU Central are combined into one stop named BU East. The current BU West stop is removed, and St. Paul Street is renamed BU West. Pleasant Street and Babcock are both removed as well. Packard’s Corner is the last stop underground.

After Packard’s Corner, the B line goes above ground onto an elevated track, and runs elevated from Packard’s Corner all the way to BC, making the following stops:

1. Harvard Ave
2. Warren Street (remove Griggs and Allston Street)
3. Washington Street
4. Learnington Road (combination of Chiswick and Sutherland)
5. Chesnut Hill Ave
6. BC (removeSouth Street)

We have a B line with half as many stops (9 as opposed to 18) between Kenmore and BC that can run unimpeded by traffic (making it ready for automated train control when it finally comes to Boston circa 2150) and which no longer makes the population of Allston/Brighton die a little on the inside every time they have to ride it.

I would run elevated along Comm Ave starting at the portal just west of Kenmore Square and then out to BC as you describe. A tunnel to Packard's Corner isn't necessary in my opinion. The Kenmore Square to Packard's Corner corridor is an urban environment with a wide boulevard, amenable to a modern elevated as pictured below:

http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr354/Charliemta/Elevatedrail-1.jpg

datadyne007

08-12-2011, 12:10 AM

That is a beautiful section. Where is it from?

Charlie_mta

08-12-2011, 02:06 PM

I got a version of it off the planning documents for a new line of the Skytrain system in Vancouver BC. I added a median and landcaping to fit Comm Ave in the BU area.

I think there are several wide boulevards in the Boston area that would accommodate elevated sytems such as this without casting too much shadow. Tunneling is prohibitively expensive, and elevated would be a cost effective solution to providing grade seperated rapid transit.

datadyne007

08-12-2011, 02:10 PM

Tunneling is prohibitively expensive, and elevated would be a cost effective solution to providing grade seperated rapid transit.
It's a blessing that the deep-bore tunnel from Harvard to Davis (RLX) even got built.

F-Line to Dudley

08-31-2011, 02:49 PM

Tunneling is prohibitively expensive, and elevated would be a cost effective solution to providing grade seperated rapid transit.

Qualify that a bit: tunneling is probibitively expensive under city streets. The utility line relocations alone were an ungodly chunk of the Big Dig's costs. Throw in ancient property foundations and weak landfill and/or glacial debris soil and even things like constructing the Copley elevators can wreak havoc with abutting surface structures.

Tunneling under existing rights of way is significantly less-expensive. The rail lines in this town pre-date all utility lines, so there's little mess under the surface to contend with. BERy actually hedged on this when it built the Huntington Ave. subway and built Kenmore Station, as it envisioned the Green Line getting replaced by rapid-transit with tunnel extensions under the B and E reservations. Those things are still doable at manageable pain point if they were smart and designed Urban Ring Phase II as an LRT tie-in instead of an incompatible, bloated, isolated BRT system. Same thing with redrawing Silver Line Phase III to get to South Station using the abandoned Tremont St. tunnel and digging under the NEC tracks instead of the unworkable Chinatown dig. And same for the North-South Rail Link which is either under cleared, utility-relocated Big Dig fill or under RR tracks.

Just gotta pick the spots that lend themselves to it. It was easier to swallow the daunting Red Line dig from Harvard to Davis when the Davis-Alewife dig was really fast, easy, and shallow underneath an existing freight line. It's a shame they punted on Arlington because the remainder of the subway (to spit on surface between Arl. Ctr. and Arl. Heights) had similar cost efficiency as Davis-Alewife by going underneath a RR. Thankfully the available candidates in the urban core for doing this already are corridors that have proven their transit worth. We're not tapped out of max-upside routings by a longshot.

The state just has to start thinking realism. Can't draw these fantastical plans unimplementable in real life, blow hundreds of millions in design waste, then throw in the towel and scuttle every expansion project because "Well, our well-designed plan was impossible, so every plan is impossible." No, false causation. They chose an impossible path over a feasible one, then doubled-down on stupid. That's not an indictment of the idea of transit expansion, which other cities are running circles around us doing, it's an indictment of the planners' competence and priorities. Like so many other things that have been fizzing out with urban planning under this dysfunctional leadership class.

JohnAKeith

09-16-2011, 10:52 PM

Sorry to dump this here but couldn't find an appropriate thread. It's about plans to reintroduce passenger rail to Cape Cod.

Cape Cod Online has a pay wall or some sort of limit on how many stories you can read so I'm putting it all here. Sry!

The sad part of the story is that, if and when they start up, they estimate that the trip from Boston to Hyannis will be two hours and 40 minutes long. One way.

Great, I can do my needlepoint and suck on hard candies while I enjoy the scenery.

HYANNIS — Cape Cod's rail line is on a new track.

During a meet-and-greet Tuesday aboard a historic, privately owned rail car at the Hyannis depot, Cape Rail Inc. officials introduced a new management team and laid out a new vision for the railway's future. The changes come as the company continues to expand its freight operations and the Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority investigates the possibility of weekend passenger service from Boston to the Cape as soon as next summer.

"The company has gone through some changes that were needed over the last three years since we started the freight operations," said Cape Rail president Chris Podgurski inside the elegant lounge of the New York Central-3, a rail car built for Harold S. Vanderbilt in 1928 that is chartered for trips.

Some "minor differences of philosophy" and the desire to maintain relationships with the state Department of Transportation and the company that operates a waste-to-energy facility where the rail line hauls the Cape's trash led to the changes, Podgurski said.

Podgurski replaces John Kennedy of Marstons Mills as president and chairman of the railway's board of directors and is the company's chief operating officer. Kennedy still has an ownership stake in the company but an "exit strategy" for him is in the works, Podgurski said.

Kennedy provided a prepared statement to the Times on Tuesday night. "The railroads and transportation infrastructure are vital to our region's economic success. It is my hope that the railroads will continue to play a large role in keeping this region moving forward," he said. "These railroads that I helped build, operate and grow over these last three decades have been a labor of love."

As part of the changes, John Delli Priscoli, president of Grafton and Upton Railroad, was named to Cape Rail's board of directors and as the company's new chief executive officer.

Priscoli helped relaunch passenger rail service on the Cape in 1999 before selling out his share in the venture. He then became the third owner since 1873 of Grafton and Upton, which operates a line in the MetroWest area that connects with a CSX freight line as well as a commuter line to Boston, Priscoli said.

On the Grafton and Upton line, Priscoli, who has a background in real estate development, has crafted a model for rail service that provides development assistance and transloading facilities along the railroad in a "one stop shop" for freight customers, he said.

"There is potential on the Cape for that type of scenario," Priscoli said.

Cape Rail has already been working on developing a transloading facility with the state Department of Transportation at the transfer station in South Yarmouth, Podgurski said. The new facility would allow trains to bring materials such as lumber onto the Cape that could be transferred to trucks for local deliveries, he said, adding the facility could serve as an off-loading location for large electrical transformers that can only be delivered to the Cape by rail.

In addition to the management changes, Cape Cod Central Railroad, a subsidiary of Cape Rail that operates the dinner train and other excursion trains, will begin an advertising campaign to make its existence more well known to Cape visitors, Podgurski said.

The Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority is working with the state and consultants on the possibility of providing weekend passenger rail service between Cape Cod and Boston by next summer, said Julie Quintero-Shulz, mobility manager with the transit authority.

"This is not a done deal," Quintero-Shulz said. "There's a lot of hoops to go through."

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, which would provide the train used for the service, has said the trip between Boston and Hyannis would take two hours and 40 minutes, Quintero-Shulz said.

Although the train would be an MBTA train, the service is not an MBTA project, she said.

Among the remaining hurdles for the Cape-to-Boston rail service are an analysis of the tracks, approval from the Army Corps of Engineers, which is responsible for the railroad bridge over the Cape Cod Canal, and a study of several grade crossings, Quintero-Shulz and Cape Rail chief financial officer John Pearson said.

Currently, Cape Rail is licensed to provide passenger service as fast as 30 mph and freight service at 25 mph, Pearson said. A passenger service between the Cape and New York City is part of a longer term plan, Quintero-Shulz said.

Amtrak ended the most recent service from the Cape to New York City in 1997 after 11 seasons. Since then, planners have mulled reinstating commuter or tourist rail service to the Cape.

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110914/NEWS/109140321/-1/news

vanshnookenraggen

09-17-2011, 04:01 PM

MonopolyBag

09-18-2011, 01:44 PM

I can get there faster from Salem NH than it would take on train from Boston to CC.

Would this involve stopping at each stop prior to the Cape? If so, an easy way to cut the time would be have limited trains run to the Cape, but have them not stop until they get to the Cape. SO don't stop all along the South Bay

F-Line to Dudley

09-18-2011, 04:53 PM

2 hrs and 40 min? That belongs in "Crazy Transit Pitches"

They'd have to do some major upgrades to the tracks between Boston and the Cape to make that service shorter. 2 hours is doable but almost 3 is way too long; may as well drive.

Tracks themselves aren't in bad shape because the whole line was rebuilt in 1985 for the introduction of the Amtrak Cape Codder a year later. Just getting caught up on tie replacement should bring portions of it up from Class 2 (30 MPH) to Class 3 (59 MPH) track. A little more investment could get the whole thing to Class 3 (commuter rail-grade Class 4 @ 79 MPH is something to shoot for later when there's full-blown service). Lack of a signal system also caps the speed somewhat. They started building signals while the Cape Codder was running, but the project was stopped when the CC got whacked from Amtrak's budget in '96. There actually were/are dark signal heads on portions of the line that were never turned on because the project was halted. I believe all the conduits are there, so finishing it would be pretty low-cost. But also wouldn't be a total necessity if they start small with service because you probably wouldn't see frequencies putting more than one train on the line at the same time.

Cape Rail has wanted for years to expand its dinner train service into more general-purpose transit. This is just a stepped-up wooing of the T to get them to the negotiating table, because all they're really looking for is permission to operate a transfer at Middleboro coordinated with the commuter rail schedule. In the early going they'd run everything south of there themselves until demand crested enough to merit some state involvement. They have the ability to do it because their freight arm, MassCoastal, has rapidly expanded in the last 5 years, nabbing the lucrative gov't trash haul contract on the Cape and taking over CSX's local business in Fall River and New Bedford. They've bought a bunch of new equipment and new locomotives, refurbished and expanded their yards, and have judiciously expanded staff. They've got the revenue to buy a few more passenger coaches for themselves and run more Cape Cod Central RR trains.

What's blocking them is that they only serve Buzzards Bay station and all of the old Cape Codder stations on the Cape. They don't yet have any links to the MBTA because they'd need permission to operate to Middleboro station. And that's why they're putting on the charm offensive to the MBTA, who disappointingly have shown no interest to date. This really is a no-brainer, no different than negotiating with a private bus carrier as a commuter rail feeder service. Throw in a few bucks of state subsidy, control the dispatching to Middleboro so the train schedules can coordinate...and then watch the Friday and weekend ticket receipts on the Middleboro line spike sharply with a 1-transfer ride to the Cape. 30 MPH is not bad if you're only going from Middleboro, and if the service shows its potential THEN you start chucking in a few bucks to get the speeds upped. At least to Buzzards Bay. Plus all the stations are already ADA compliant because Amtrak installed handicapped ramps on them for the Cape Codder, and are well maintained because Cape Rail has kept them in pretty decent shape the last 15 years.

Really don't see a downside to at least talking to them about it. It is quite likely the T is going to have no choice but to share track with them in a few years. MassCoastal already have the Fall River/New Bedford lines and stand to greatly benefit from the track upgrades from that project. And CSX is likely to dump its low-margin Middleboro line freight locals to them in a couple of years and just run from Framingham to Middleboro yard to bulk transload with them. That is the real reason they're trying so hard to cozy up to the T. They want that expanded freight business and to position themselves as good neighbors to their track owners.

Frankly, the T should be doing this and studying a full-blown commuter rail extension to Buzzards Bay first before even trying Fall River/New Bedford. Track upgrades and signals from Middeboro to BB are only estimated to cost $50 million because of all the prior work Amtrak put in, BB station is already complete, and they'd only have to build 1 small intermediate station in Wareham near the 195/495 interchange. There wouldn't be a ton of daily riders out there, but 495 and Route 3 are definitely more Boston-oriented commuting patterns than 195/Fall River/New Bedford, which is more east-west and Providence oriented. Whole different world bang-for-buck. And they can step gingerly onto the Cape from BB, doing the Cape Rail outsourcing, starting with limited seasonal service direct from Boston, and then maybe springing for track upgrades and signals on the Cape if things look good.

Don't forget, there's decent pent-up demand for the Cape Codder to come back. Were its schedules not changed to such inconvenient hours that it effectively killed the service it never would've stopped running in the first place. A little local investment down there puts a little impetus for Amtrak to sniff around again. Cape Rail transfer service starts a little momentum build that can give way to a momentum build for T service. Whatever they can do to rope Amtrak in and tie those lines loosely into the national network is a funding source they can tap. Funding they're NOT going to get on Fall River/New Bedford. Every one of their priority commuter rail projects should have some Amtrak relevance; it's the only way they'll get built.

Priscoli's involvement is interesting. Grafton & Upton is about as small and barebones as shortlines get, but he's worked wonders getting them on the map with his investment in their tiny line. He is all about PR, PR, PR and his public visibility selling expansion of the line on the communities of Upton, Hopedale, and Milford has accomplished things that their size alone would never have been able to. With Cape Rail/MassCoastal being a larger operation with higher ceiling for growth, it'll be very interesting to see what his force of personality can do. Very, very charismatic guy who knows how to charm the locals, get in the papers, and present himself as a good neighbor to try to win over some of the NIMBY's. All about $$$ for him...make no mistake, he's bottom-line oriented. But the gee-whiz railfan packaging he presents is pretty compelling. Worth watching, because he could do some things with that outfit if he goes all-in.

HenryAlan

09-18-2011, 07:06 PM

I recently had to take the P&B from Hyannis to South Station. It would beat that train by about an hour. But it was so uncomfortable that I would gladly have traded for a train that took longer. But not an hour longer. I think the o
max acceptable duration is probably 2 hours, 10 minutes.

Charlie_mta

10-10-2011, 01:58 PM

Shepard

10-10-2011, 02:22 PM

It's astounding that a trolley like this wasn't an original part of the Greenway plan. I'd also like to see it tied into a further transit corridor on the south side, for example turning into the Piers Transitway (SL tunnel).

On the north side, I think (think) you have the surface trolley running over a parcel slated for development. In any case, why not run it up N Washington and directly over the Charlestown bridge? The elevated structure is still in place and to my estimation could perfectly suit the purpose.

BostonUrbEx

10-10-2011, 10:33 PM

An at grade bridge over the Mystic would be a disaster, IMO. As it is, even the Tobin is shut down for hours every time LNG is coming in. The height necessary to avoid a nasty situation every week is not feasible, definitely would need a tunnel, IMO.

Also, I always wondered what that curvey "breakwater"-like thing was near the dam! Now I know it was a footing for the old artery bridge. Finally, all my pondering can be put to rest, LOL!

whighlander

11-02-2011, 05:17 AM

On another thread someone noted that the new Spalding Hospital site in the Charlestown Naval Shipyard had insufficient transit access. This proposed line would provide light rail service to Charlestown, Chelsea and the Boston waterfront.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=204339377609299454038.0004ae997b152d820dfc 4&msa=0

Charlestown Navy yard does lack transit -- but the proposal is far to complicated

Suggeest a single track in the street LRV through the main axis of the yard with 3 or 4 stops and turn-arrounds at each end -- no rail connetions to any of the color lines

One end would be at North Station though possibly outside the station proper -- this line would be treated much like the Mattapan trolley extension to the Red LIne

Later if desired a tunnel could connect with Green Line at North Station

F-Line to Dudley

11-02-2011, 09:23 AM

Charlestown Navy yard does lack transit -- but the proposal is far to complicated

Suggeest a single track in the street LRV through the main axis of the yard with 3 or 4 stops and turn-arrounds at each end -- no rail connetions to any of the color lines

One end would be at North Station though possibly outside the station proper -- this line would be treated much like the Mattapan trolley extension to the Red LIne

Later if desired a tunnel could connect with Green Line at North Station

That would've worked if the Canal Street incline were still around. Current 92 and 93 buses to Sullivan used to be Green Line branches off there till '49. And the Charlestown El on the Orange Line that went to City Square via the Charlestown Bridge emerged from the very same side portal that the Green Line temporarily used during Big Dig construction. That portal's sealed but still there, and the space where the Canal St. incline used to be is now an access driveway to the I-93 ventilation building and emergency exit that will never be blocked by new development. But I can't under any circumstance see an El ever being rebuilt to the Charlestown Bridge. There's about 8 or 10 rapid-transit projects more pressing than that one, and in no way whatsoever should this ever pre-empt those.

Greenway heritage trolley connected at the portal to the Green Line...maybe, if some post-Menino regime pushes hard enough for it on economic development grounds. It's easy to unseal the portal, drop down a simple concrete incline to the surface akin to the old Canal St. turnback, and close Valenti Way to make a U-turn onto the Greenway. Would cost almost nothing to make that connection because the portal's still there sealed but slightly above the surface, and the ROW is unblocked inside the tunnel.

The Navy Yard can be helped a lot more by a highish-frequency bus shuttle, though. There's enough tourist and recreational activity to merit some sort of Greenway + Freedom Trail-paralleling transit terminating out there that's more general-purpose in nature than the purely tour buses. Maybe a short joint T/city special operation that does cater to the tourist crowd and has more frequent in-season service...but with fares interoperable with the Charlie Card system so regular bus riders can use it for general transit.

BostonObserver

11-02-2011, 12:11 PM

Would there be any value to running on Commercial St in the North End section?

F-Line to Dudley

11-02-2011, 02:13 PM

Would there be any value to running on Commercial St in the North End section?

That was exactly the route of the Atlantic Ave. El, and that overhead structure is why the road has always been 4 lanes wide. It would create a nice loop for the heritage trolley, and the Green Line connection via the Haymarket portal would be there. I don't think taking 2 of 4 lanes to create some traffic separation with the trolley is going to fly in this town, though. Certainly not until City Hall has a regime that's doubly as gung-ho about transit as Menino is passive-aggressive against it.

I think Job #1 is getting the heritage trolley laid out end-to-end on the Greenway and connected to the Green Line off Haymarket (heritage cars can be easily outfitted with a pantograph to run on the GL...historic PCC 3295 at Boylston has one). It's probably not possible to propose other routings until the trunk is laid because of Boston's pathological aversion to street-running light rail. The powers that be will have to see our version of San Fran's Market Street line demonstrate success and popularity running through the park before they start talking up things like expanding it to the North End or Navy Yard. All energy has to flow through getting streetcars on the Greenway first.

JohnAKeith

11-04-2011, 07:16 PM

Monorail, monorail, monorail.

BussesAin'tTrains

01-23-2012, 03:08 PM

Just discovered this site! For the past 6 months I've been pondering my own personal, wacky T Master Plan or sorts. A pipe dream as it were. Here's a map of my latest iteration:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004b65e16296389a37a e&msa=0&ll=42.362603,-70.95726&spn=0.273465,0.617294

3 pixel lines are Heavy Rail. 2 pixel lines are Light Rail

And here's a very cluttered write-up I've made for it. The Commuter Rail and Night Bus lines aren't included on this map.

The Red Line heavy rail maintains its core between Alewife and Bayside (formerly JFK/UMass). Main branch stops are the Park & Ride at Alewife, North Cambridge, Davis Square, Porter Square, Aggasiz, Harvard Square, Cambridge College, Central Square, Kendall/MIT, Charles/MGH, Park St, Downtown Crossing, South Station, Broadway, Andrew and Bayside. North Cambridge, Aggasiz and Cambridge College stops are new additions.

Burlington/Lexington-Dedham/Braintree: The Line is extended to the northwest from Alewife by running under the Minuteman Bike Path and Mass Ave to a Park & Ride at I-95 and then cutting to Burlington for service to the mall and the Middlesex Tpk. The stops north from Alewife are Arlington Center, Arlington Heights, Follen Heights, Lexington Center, a Park & Ride at Pine Meadows near I-95, and Burlington. The line to Braintree is maintained with stops out of Bayside at Scalia Square, Dorchester Shore, North Quincy, Wollaston, Quincy Center and Park & Rides at Quincy Adams and Braintree. These trains run locally north to Burlington in Lexington and the line is dubbed Branch 1. Trains from Burlington also run locally and branch off at Bayside to Dedham following the Ashmont RoW and the Mattapan RoW . Stops to Dedham are Savin Hill, Fields Corner, Shawmut, Ashmont, Milton Village, Central Ave, Mattapan, River St, Fairfield, Readville, East Dedham, Dedham and Riverdale. This line is designated Branch 2. Express Service runs along tandem track from Burlington to Riverdale, stopping in Pine Meadows, Lexington Center, Arlington Center, Alewife, Porter, Harvard, Kendall tunneling under the Charles to Charles/MGH, Park/Downtown, South Station, Bayside, Ashmont, Mattapan, Readville and Riverdale. This line is designated Branch 3.
Alewife-Stoughton: The Stoughton branch begins from Alewife, following Branch 3 to Bayside, then splitting off along the Branch 1 corridor to Braintree and continuing south and south west alongside commuter rail track and along a utility RoW to Braintree Highlands, Randolph and a Park & Ride at North Stoughton/Rte 24. Stops are at Stoughton/Rte 24, Randolph, Braintree Highlands, Braintree, Quincy Center, North Quincy, Bayside, South Station, Park/Downtown, Charles MGH, Kendall/MIT, Harvard, Porter and Alewife, where it terminates. This line is designated Branch 4.

The Blue Line heavy rail is extended with a northern branch and a western branch. The core of the Blue Line that serves both branches runs from Charles/MGH to Wonderland. Full service stops are at Charles/MGH, Government Center, State St, Atlantic (formerly Aquarium), Maverick, Airport, Woods Island, Orient Heights, Suffolk Downs, Beachmont, Revere Beach and a Park & Ride at Wonderland.

S Branch: This line runs from Government Center to the northeast through Lynn to Salem via the Rockport/Newburyport CR line. Stops out of Wonderland are a Park and Ride at River Works, Lynn, East Lynn, Swampscott, Salem State University, Salem Center and Salem Depot.
W Branch: This branch runs from Wonderland to Charles/MGH and then continues west. Bowdoin station is eliminated, being replaced by an expanded Government Center with a headhouse at Cambridge St. The branch continues to Waltham via Harvard Square and Watertown. It follows a new tunnel under Cambridge St to Charles/MGH, cuts under the Charles River with the Red Line express line adjacent to the Longfellow Bridge, then splits off at Kendall through all new tunnels beneath Broadway, Hampshire St, Cambridge St and Mt Auburn St with stops at Kendall, Inman, Harvard, Mount Auburn and Strawberry Hill. It then follows along and beneath an old RoW to the West with stops at East Watertown, Arsenal, Watertown Square, Bemis, The Bleachery and The Chemistry. The Line terminates at Waltham Center, meeting the Fitchburg CR line and the Green Line.

The Orange Line heavy rail is greatly expanded and broken up into four branches. The section of the old main route from Forest Hills to Wellington forms the core line of the branches plus a southward extension along the Commuter Rail line. Core stops begin at Millennium Park to West Roxbury, Highland, Bellevue, a Park & Ride at Forest Hills, Green St, Stony Brook, Jackson Square, Roxbury Crossing, Ruggles, Mass Ave/Saint Botolph, Back Bay, South Cove (formerly Tufts Med Center), Chinatown, Downtown Crossing, State St, Haymarket, North Station, Community College, Sullivan Square, Assembly Square, and a Park & Ride at Wellington.

N Branch: This branch begins at Wellington following the Orange Line core route to Back Bay Station where it leaves the core route, turning west and following the Mass Pike through Back Bay, Fenway, Brighton and Newton, where it turns off the commuter rail route and terminates at a Park & Ride at Riverside. Commuter Rail stops along the corridor are replaced with Orange Line service. Stops out of Back Bay are Mass Ave/Hynes, Yawkey, Boston University West, Agganis/Student Village, Cambridge St, Market Plaza, Riverview, Newton Corner, Newtonville, Auburndale and a Park & Ride at Riverside adjacent to the Green Line.
M Branch: This branch is a spur off the N Branch. It begins at Riverside and splits off just north of Wellington through a tunnel beneath a RoW into Medford. Stops past Wollaston are at Middlesex Ave, Glenwood and Medford Square. The M Branch runs express between North Station, State St, Downtown Crossing and Back Bay Station before continuing to Riverside.
Q Branch: This branch runs express service between Reading Highlands and Forest Hills along parallel track, with stops at; Reading Highlands, Quannapowitt, Wakefield, Oak Grove, Malden Center, Wellington, North Station, State St, Downtown Crossing, Back Bay, Ruggles, Jackson Square and Forest Hills, then continuing local to Millennium Park.
R Branch: This branch is the northern portion of the MBTA’s original plans for the Orange Line. It begins at Millennium Park and follows the core route to Wellington. It then continues along the Haverhill CR line north to Reading with stops at River’s Edge, Malden Center, a Park & Ride at Oak Grove, Sylvan, Wyoming Hill, Cedar Park, Melrose Highlands, Greenwood, Wakefield, a Park & Ride at Quannapowitt/I-95, Reading and ending with a Park & Ride at Reading Highlands/I-93. Haverhill Line CR service is moved to share the Lowell Line RoW crossing to the Haverhill RoW via the Wildcat line.

The Green Line light rail is greatly expanded and upgraded with six branches. Streetcar lines are converted to new tunnel service and the stops on branches out of Kenmore are consolidated. Central Subway stops are at North Station, Haymarket, Government Center, Park St and Boylston. Branch service is as follows:

A Branch: This new Green Line branch runs northwest out of North Station along the Fitchburg CR to I-95 in Waltham. It begins at Government Center and runs to North Station, then connecting to the Lechmere Viaduct and to the Fitchburg line. Stops out of North Station are Science Park, Lechmere, Twin City, Union Square, Spring Hill, Porter Square, Richdale, Alewife Brook, East Belmont, Belmont Center, Waverley, Waltham Center, Brandeis/Roberts and a Park & Ride at Cedarwood on I-95.
B Branch: The new B Branch follows the old “A” Branch streetcar route that once ran to Watertown. This branch terminates at Watertown Square. It runs underneath the old route (Brighton Ave, Cambridge St, Washington St and Galen St). Service begins at North Station and then runs express from Park St to Copley to Kenmore. Stops from Park St are Copley, Kenmore, BU East, BU West, Babcock, Allston Village, Union Square/North Beacon, Washington St, Brighton Center, Beechcroft, Oak Square, Newton Corner and Watertown Square.
C Branch: The new C Banch follows the old “B” Branch under its old route on Commonwealth Ave to Boston College with consolidated stops, becoming a subway at King’s Corner. Service begins at North Station and makes local stops to Kenmore. Stops from Park St are Boylston, Arlington, Copley, Mass Ave/Hynes, Kenmore, BU East, BU West, Packard's Corner, King’s Corner, Allston St, Washington St, Learnington, Chestnut Hill Ave, Foster and Boston College.
D Branch: The D Branch remains for its original route from Riverside to North Station with no reroutings. At North Station, the line crosses to Charlestown via Commercial St and the Charlestown Bridge running beneath Route 1 along the waterfront and then running as an elevated line over an old RoW to Sullivan Square. Stops from Riverside to Kenmore are a Park & Ride at Riverside, Woodland, Waban, Eliot, Newton Highlands, Newton Centre, Chestnut Hill, Cleveland Circle, Beaconsfield, Brookline Hills, Brookline Village, Aspinwall, Longwood West and Fenway. Out of North Station, the line makes the following stops: City Square, Navy Yard, Spaulding Rehab Hospital, Community Center, Baldwin St and Sullivan Square.
E Branch: The E Branch now begins at government center, and splits after Boylston to a new Stuart St tunnel and shares track with the F Branch to Prudential, from which it continues alone beneath Huntington Ave to the Riverway. To the southwest it continues in a new tunnel beneath its old route via Huntington Ave, South Huntington Ave, Centre St and South St to Forest Hills where it terminates. Stops south of Boylston St are Park Square, Clarendon, Prudential, Symphony, Northeastern, Museum of Fine Arts, Longwood East, Brigham Circle, Mission Park, Heath St, Perkins St, Parley Vale, Monument Square and a Park & Ride at Forest Hills.
F Branch: This new branch runs with the E from Government Center into the Stuart St tunnel to Prudential, where it splits to its own parallen tunnel under Huntington and runs express between Prudential, Northeastern and Longwood East. It then tunnels beneath the Muddy River and meets the D branch at Brookline Village and follows that line to Newton Highlands where it splits southwest into Needham following RoW and abandoned CR track. Stops out of Boylston St are Park Square, Clarendon, Prudential, Northeastern, Longwood East, Riverway, Brookline Villaige, Brookline Hills, Beaconsfield, Cleveland Circle, Chestnut Hill, Newton Center, Newton Highlands, Upper Falls, a Park & Ride at Rte 128/I-95, Needham Heights, Needham Center and Needham Junction.

The Silver Line is a light rail that replaces the Bus Rapid Transit Silver Line system and runs from South Station to Mattapan. From South Station it tunnels under Essex St to Boylston station. From Boylston, it tunnels under Tremont St to Shawmut Ave, cutting over to Washington St and then to Warren St at Dudley Sq where it continues under Blue Hill Ave to Mattapan. Stops are South Station, Boylston St, South Cove, Castle Square, Union Park, Blackstone, Mass Ave, Melnea Cass Blvd, Dudley Square, Warren Gardens, Martin Luther King Blvd, Grove Hall, Franklin Park, Franklin Hill, Woodrow, Blue Hill Ave and Mattapan.

The Indigo Line replaces the Fairmount CR line with heavy rail rapid transit. This branch also uses a new tunnel linking North and South stations, paralleling commuter rail trains and then tunneling beneath the Charles River alongside the Orange Line. Emerging near the MBTA depot in Somerville it parallels the Lowell CR track splitting to Woburn center by tunnel and then continuing along the Lowell RoW to I-95. Stops along the Indigo Line are Woburn Anderson, Mishawum, Salem St, Woburn Center, Cross St, Winchester Center, Wedgemere, West Medford, Mystic Valley, Medford Hills/Tufts, Ball Square, Lowell St, Gilman Square, Brickbottom, North Station, Greenway/Hanover, Atlantic (formerly Aquarium), Rowes Wharf, South Station, Broadway, Newmarket, Upham's Corner, Columbia, Four Corners, Talbot Ave, Morton St, Blue Hill Ave, Cummin’s Highway, Fairmount, Readville, and a Park & Ride at I-95/93 at Westwood Station. Lowell CR service along the line is cut back and transfers to the Indigo Line occur at North Station, Brickbottom and Woburn Anderson.

The Teal Line is a new light rail line that is made up of new tunnels and refurbished RoW. The line begins underground at Cleveland Circle and follows beneath the Beacon St Green Line RoW to Kenmore Square. It then follows a new tunnel under The Esplanade (in the footprint of a downgraded Storrow Drive) allowing an alternative path through Back Bay to Government Center where the Line cuts beneath the North End and the Boston Harbor alongside the Sumner and Callahan tunnels. Emerging in East Boston, the line runs under Marginal Street, across the Chelsea River into Chelsea, along the CR and Yellow Line RoW through South Everett where it goes under Ferry and Broadway until joining the North Point RoW and continuing on through Saugus to Lynn. Stops out of Park St are Public Garden, Dartmouth Landing, Charlesgate, Kenmore, St Mary’s St, Kent St, Coolidge Corner, Summit Ave, Brandon Hall, Washington Square, Dean Rd and Cleveland Circle. Cleveland Station is relocated slightly south and serves as a junction and transfer hub for Green and Teal light rail between the Riverside line, the Beacon St line and the Boston College line. To the north out of Park St stops are at Govt. Center, Greenway/Hanover, Commercial St, Central Square, East Marina, Chelsea Works, Chelsea, 2nd St, Everett Square, Glendale Square, Eastern Ave/Broadway, Linden Square, Salem St, Cliftondale, Elmwood Ave, Saugus, Summer St, Market Square, Lynn Common, Central Ave and Lynn Station.

The Yellow Line is the Urban Ring light rail and is made up almost entirely of new tunnels, while also utilizing some RoW and CR lines. This line has an Outer Loop and an Inner Ring as well as a spur to Revere through Everett and Malden. The Rings connect all other branches of the MBTA. Both rings begin at the Airport stop (Blue) with a loop to all airport terminals (A,B,C,E). The line then continues along the Blue Line to Wood Island where it branches off to Chelsea and parallels the Newburyport/Rockport Commuter Rail line, with stops at Bellingham, Chelsea (Commuter Rail, Teal), 2nd St (Teal) and Gateway; meeting the Orange and Green lines at Sullivan Square.

The Inner Ring leaves Sullivan Square to the southwest through Lechmere (Green A), Kendall/MIT (Red, Blue), Mass Ave/MIT, Cambridgeport and Boston University West (Green BC, Orange MN). It then turns to the east to Fenway (Teal), Longwood East (Green EF, junction with Outer Ring), Ruggles (Orange QR, Commuter Rail), Dudley Square (Silver), Dudley Common, Newmarket (Indigo), a junction between Inner and Outer rings, Andrew (Red), South Boston, L St, and City Point. Turning northwest it goes through Dry Dock, Seaport and World Trade Center. It can then either branch to the Ted Williams Tunnel to rejoin the ring at the airport terminals, or continue to stops at Courthouse and South Station sharing its terminus with Silver Line trains coming from the opposite direction. Trains approaching the Airport from the north are dubbed Y1 trains. Trains approaching from the south are dubbed Y2 trains. Trains approaching South Station are dubbed Y3 trains.
The Outer Loop cuts southwest to Brickbottom (Indigo, Commuter Rail), Union Square (Green A, Commuter Rail), Shady Hill, Harvard Square (Red, Blue), Harvard Stadium, Barry’s Corner, Cambridge St (Orange MN)Allston Village (Green B), King’s Corner (Green C), turns southeast through Coolidge Corner (Teal) and Longwood West (Green D) and meets the Inner Ring at Longwood East (Green EF). It continues southeast to Roxbury Crossing (Orange QR), Jackson Square (Orange QR), Egleston Square, Humboldt Ave and Franklin Park (Silver). It then turns northeast along the Indigo Line to Columbia (Indigo), Upham’s Corner (Indigo), a junction between Inner and Outer rings, Edward Everett Square and Bayside (Red Line) ending at a new JFK/UMass near the university on Harbor Point. All trains with destinations at JFK/UMass are dubbed Y4 Trains.
The Northeast Branch follows the Outer Ring from JFK/UMass to Gateway, where it splits and follows a RoW to stops at Hendersonville, West Everett, South Malden, Centre St, Cross St, Eastern Ave/Broadway, Linden Square and ending with a Park & Ride at Northgate off of Rte 1. Trains coming from Northgate cannot go to the airport out of Hendersonville, but must continue towards Gateway and Sullivan Square. All trains with destinations at Northgate are dubbed Y5 trains.

The Commuter Rail has many metro Boston stops eliminated in favor of rapid transit, to improve travel times from outer stops. Many of the Rail lines have also seen service extended further out to population areas previously without rail options. Rhode Island and New Hampshire rail authorities share responsibility where CR lines run to their states. Amtrak also provides funding for far-flung rail lines.
The Fitchburg Line has been extended into Gardner, and a split after Rte 128 goes to Clinton via Wayland along a RoW. The Stoughton Line has been extended to both Fall River/Newport and New Bedford via Taunton. The Needham Line has been cut off before the turn north, and is now extended to Medway via Millis. A branch off the Worcester Line in Framingham follows a RoW into Marlborough to Clinton and can loop back to Worcester or up to Fitchburg. Additional lines leave Worcester, one connecting with Providence and another to Webster. On the Franklin Line the spur to Foxborough is upgraded to regular service running through to the Providence Line; while a spur to Forge Park is extended to Milford and the main line extended to Woonsocket RI. The Providence Line is extended to North Kingstown via TF Green. The Middleborough/Lakeville Line is extended to Wareham/Hyannis. The Greenbush Line is extended south to Marshfield. The Lowell Line is extended to Concord NH via Manchester. The Haverhill Line is extended to Dover NH. A Branch off the Newburyport/Rockport lines goes to Topsfield via Danvers. The Newburyport line is extended to Portsmouth NH. One of the largest additions supporting the commuter rail is the North-South Station Link; a six track tunnel under the Expressway tunnels, allowing for two lines of CR/Amtrak service and the Indigo Line. This allows the expansion of direct service from destinations out of South Station to points North and unites the Northeast Corridor with Downeaster service to Maine. In addition, several old RoW and some new tracts have been built/refurbished creating a Fitchburg/Worcester/Framingham Connector, creating a MetroWest Loop through the urban environs of eastern MA. This loops allows rail service connecting the cities of Boston, Fitchburg, Framingham, Worcester and Providence.

Fitchburg/Wachusett Line:
North Station, Union Square, Porter Square, Belmont Center, Waltham, Kendal Green, Hastings, Silver Hill, Lincoln, Concord, West Concord, South Acton, Littleton/Rte-495, Ayer, Shirley, North Leominster, Fitchburg, North Wachusett, Gardner

Clinton Line:
North Station, Porter Square, Waltham, Weston, Wayland, Sudbury, Gleasondale, Hudson, Berlin, Clinton → Fitchburg-Worcester Connector

Lowell/Manchester NH/Concord NH Line:
North Station, West Medford, Winchester Center, Mishawaum, North Woburn, Wilmington, North Billerica, Lowell → Tyngsborough, Pheasant Lane, Nashua, Merrimack, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Pembroke, Concord

Newburyport/Portsmouth NH Line:
North Station, Chelsea, Wonderland, Lynn, Salem Depot, Beverly, North Beverly, Hamilton/Wehnam, Ipswich, Rowley, Newburyport → Seabrook, Hampton, Portsmouth NH

Rockport Line:
North Station, Chelsea, Lynn, Salem Depot, Beverly, Montserrat, Pride’s Crossing, Beverly Farms, Manchester, West Gloucester, Gloucester, Rockport

Topsfield Line:
North Station, Chelsea, Lynn, Salem Depot, Peabody, Liberty Tree, Danvers, Topsfield

Haverhill/Dover Line:
North Station, Wilmington, Ballardvale, Andover, Lawrence, Bradford, Haverhill → Plaistow, East Kingston, Exeter, Newfields, Greenland, Portsmouth

Methuen/Rockaway:
North Station, Wilmington, Lawrence, Methuen, Rockaway Park

Worcester Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, Auburndale, Wellesley Farms, Wellesley Hills, Wellesley, Natick, West Natick, Framingham, Ashland, Cordaville, Westborough, Grafton, Worcester Union Station

Fitchburg/Worcester/Framingham Loop Connector:
Fitchburg, North Leominster, Clinton, West Boylston, Greendale, Worcester Union Station, Grafton, Westborough, Cordaville, Ashland, Framingham, Fayville, Marlborough, Northborough, Berlin → Connect @ Clinton

Worcester-Webster Line:
Worcester Line to Boston ← Worcester Union Station, Auburn, Oxford, Webster

Medway Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, Forest Hills, West Roxbury, Needham Junction, Hersey, Dover, Medfield, Millis, Medway

Franklin/Woonsocket Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, Ruggles, Readville, Endicott, Dedham Corp Center, Islington, Norwood Depot, Norwood Central, Windsor Gardens, Plimptonville, Walpole, Norfolk, Franklin → Blackstone, Woonsocket

Milford Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, Ruggles, Readville, Endicott, Dedham Corp Center, Islington, Norwood Depot, Norwood Central, Windsor Gardens, Plimptonville, Walpole, Norfolk, Franklin, Forge Park/Rte 495, Bellingham, Milford

Foxborough Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, Readville, Endicott, Dedham Corp Center, Islington, Norwood Central, Walpole, Patriot Place, Foxborough → Providence Line

Providence/Worcester Connector:
Providence, Pawtucket, Cumberland, Woonsocket, Millville, Uxbridge, Northbridge, Millbury, Quinsigamond Village, Worcester Union Station

Providence RI/North Kingstown RI Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, Ruggles, University Ave, Canton Junction, Sharon, Mansfield, Attleboro, South Attleboro, Pawtucket, Providence, TF Green Airport, North Kingstown

Fall River/Newport RI Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, University Ave, Canton Junction, Stoughton, North Easton, Easton Village, Raynham Park, Taunton, East Taunton, Assonet, Fall River Depot, Battleship Cove/Fall River → Melville, Newport

Taunton/New Bedford Line:
South Station, Back Bay Station, University Ave, Canton Junction, Stoughton, North Easton, Easton Village, Raynham, Taunton → East Freetown, King’s Highway/New Bedford, Whale’s Tooth/New Bedford

Wareham/Hyannis Line:
South Station, Bayside, Braintree, Randolph/Holbrook, Montello, Brockton, Campello, Bridgewater, Middleborough/Lakeville, Wareham, Buzzards Bay → Sandwich, Hyannis

Plymouth Line:
South Station, Bayside, Braintree, South Weymouth, Abington, Whitman, Hanson, Halifax, Plymouth, Village Landing

Kingston Line:
South Station, Bayside, Braintree, South Weymouth, Abington, Whitman, Hanson, Halifax, Kingston

Green Harbor Line:
South Station, Bayside, Braintree, East Weymouth, West Hingham, Nantasket Junction, Cohassat, North Scituate, Greenbush, Marshfield, Green Harbor

Moonliner night bus service makes up for the closure of T rail and regular bus lines at 12:30am. These buses are either standard length or the double-long variety. Moonliner service runs Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights from 12:30am to 4:00am along established routes, roughly serving the same corridors as rail system. Service varies from every quarter-hour to every hour depending on ridership. There are four main hubs where buses depart. The four hubs are linked by the M1 route. Kenmore Square serves as the terminus for routes M2, M3, M4, M5 and M6. South Station serves routes M7, M8, M9 and M10, . Govt Center serves routes M11, M12, M13 and M14. North Station serves routes M15, M16 and M17.

Lines

Red Line

Branch 1 (Burlington to Braintree)
Branch 2 (Alewife to Dedham via Ashmont)
Branch 3 (Burlington to Dedham Express via Ashmont)
Branch 4 (Alewife to Stoughton Express via Braintree)

Blue Line

S Branch (Govt Center to Salem Depot via Lynn)
W Branch (Wonderland to Waltham Center via Watertown)

Green Line

A Branch (Govt Center to Cedarwood via Porter Square)
B Branch (North Station to Watertown Square via Kenmore [Back Bay Express])
C Branch (North Station to Boston College via Kenmore)
D Branch (Sullivan Square to Riverside via Kenmore)
E Branch (Govt Center to Forest Hills via Longwood East)
F Branch (Govt Center to Needham Junction via Longwood East, Newton Highlands [Back Bay/Fenway Express])

Orange Line

N Branch (Wellington to Riverside via Back Bay)
M Branch (Riverside to Medford Square via Back Bay [Downtown Express])
R Branch (Millennium Park to Reading Highlands via Wellington)
Q Branch (Millennium Park to Reading Highlands via Wellington [Express])

Silver Line (South Station to Mattapan via Boylston)
Indigo Line (Woburn Anderson to Westwood Station via South Station)
Teal Line (Lynn Station to Cleveland Circle via Kenmore)
Yellow Line - Urban Ring

Y1 Towards Airport from the North
Y2 Towards Airport from the South
Y3 Towards Towards South Station
Y4 Towards JFK/UMass
Y5 Towards Northgate

Commuter Rail

Rockport Line
Newburyport/Portsmouth NH Line
Topsfield Line
Haverhill/Dover NH Line
Rockaway NH Line
Lowell/Concord NH Line
Fitchburg/Wachusett Line
Worcester Line
Clinton Line
Fitchburg-Worcester-Framingham Loop Connector
Providence RI-Worcester Connector
Worcester-Webster Connector
Medway Line
Foxborough Line
Franklin/Woonsocket RI Line
Milford Line
Providence/North Kingstown RI Line
Fall River/Newport RI Line
Taunton/New Bedford Line
Lakeville/Wareham/Hyannis Line
Plymouth Line
Kingston Line
Marshfield Line

Moonliner Night Bus Service (last bus leaves at 4:00am)

M1 -- North Station to Kenmore Square via Govt Center, South Station / Loop
M2 -- Kenmore Square to Arlington Center via Mass Ave
M3 -- Kenmore Square to Bayside via Mass Ave
M4 -- Kenmore Square to Watertown Center via Oak Square
M5 -- Kenmore Square to Boston College via Comm Ave
M6 -- Kenmore Square to Newton Centre via Beacon St
M7 -- South Station to Milton Village via Dorchester Ave
M8 -- South Station to North Quincy via Neponset Ave
M9 -- South Station to Waterfront/East Boston/Wonderland via I-90/Bennington
M10-- South Station to Mattapan via Washington St/Blue Hill Ave
M11 -- Govt Center to City Point via Brigham Circle
M12 -- Govt Center to Roslindale via Huntington Ave/Centre St
M13 -- Govt Center to Cleary Square via Hyde Park Ave
M14 -- Govt Center to Belmont via Concord Ave
M15 -- North Station to Medford Center via Highland Ave/High St
M16 -- North Station to Everett/Charlestown via Rutherford Ave/Broadway
M17 -- North Station to Oak Grove via Wellington

Musings on Reasoning:

Many of the expansions put forth in this proposal are purely out of a desire to see public transit expanded into the metro-Boston area, leading to more businesses springing into often neglected areas, and a reduced car dependency on residents further afield from the city proper.

Extending the Red Line to Arlington and Lexington was part of the original proposal for the line in the 1970s, but it was beaten back by financing and NIMBY sentiments in Arlington. While this line would be highly unlikely to ever be constructed in the modern era, it would open up transit opportunities for communities in which there is no nearby commuter rail. While the Right of Way that the track was planned for has since been converted into a popular Rail Trail, tunneling beneath the RoW and Mass Ave would expand business further to a thriving Arlington Center, and inject more business into a fledgling commercial district in Arlington Heights. Commuters in Lexington would be served by four stops and a one-seat ride to central business districts like Kendall Square and Downtown Boston. The Park and Ride station near Rte 128 would take pressure off of Alewife station, Rte 128 and Rte 2; which were not designed for the car capacity that they currently carry. This extension also provides outbound commuters access to office parks along Rte 128, and the Park and Ride could serve as a bus terminal for trips farther afield.
The extension to Burlington connects the Burlington Mall and Middlesex Tpk commercial area with the transit system. Adding infill stops in Cambridge and Dorchester brings service closer to many residents, and the slow-down to downtown is mitigated by constructing an express line -- crazy expensive, but necessary. Adding a spur to east Stoughton would allow T riders access to the retail district along Rte 24 and take additional pressure off the over-worked highway by giving commuters from southern Mass access to rapid transit.

Extending the Blue Line to Charles/MGH would give it a transfer with the Red Line, allowing passengers on their way to the Airport and points north to make a single transfer at Charles/MGH, taking stress off of the Green Line at Park St and Govt Center and off of the Orange Line at Downtown Crossing and State St. Further extending the Blue Line into Cambridge takes additional pressure off of the the Red Line from Harvard Square to downtown Boston, and brings rail service to thousands of additional Cambridge and Somerville residents. Stretching the Blue Line north to Lynn has long been in the plans, but has been delayed for a lack of funds. Bringing the line further to Salem gives these up-and-coming North Shore cities a more regular link to Boston than the Commuter Rail, as well as some local service of their own. Connecting the line to Watertown and Waltham in the west provides the downtowns of these two busy first-ring suburbs with one seat rides to Harvard Square, Kendall Square and Boston.

Bringing the Orange Line to Reading was part of the original plans in the 1980s, but funding and NIMBY sentiment nixed it. The towns of Melrose, Wakefield and Reading would all benefit from more regular service to Boston and an influx of business in their communities. The Park and Ride stations at Rte 128/I-95 and I-93 would take pressure off these freeways, helping to defray the miserable traffic that occurs at the junction between the two, as well as helping to alleviate I-93 southbound traffic going into Boston. The rerouting of the Haverhill Commuter Rail to the Lowell Line RoW to Wildcat allows faster rail service to communities farther out on the Haverhill Line. Express track into downtown would speed commutes to riders in population hubs during rushour. The spur to Medford Center needs to be underground, due to development on the at-grade RoW, but would link this car-dependent commercial center to the transit system.
Bringing the line to Needham was also originally planned, but NIMBYism led the MBTA to change their plans to a less frequent and less efficient Commuter Rail line. Engineering difficuties and environmental issues in the swamps bordering West Roxbury and Needham prohibit building up the RoW through them, but the Orange Line can finally connect the Boston neighborhoods of Roslindale and West Roxbury to downtown by rapid transit, and truncate several bus lines that now make needless trips to Forest Hills from Roslindale Square. The Orange Line branch along I-90 takes pressure off of the Green Line through Back Bay, Fenway, Brighton and Newton, as well as speeding the commuter rail from Worcester by replacing several Newton stops with T service. Connecting at Riverside takes pressure off of the D Branch as well as off of Rte 128 and the Mass Pike. This line would be very expensive to construct due to a need to move Commuter Rail track over and/or tunnel/cave alongside the track from a lack of space.
To combat congestion on the main branch a new tunnel could be built beneath the main tunnel between North Station and Back Bay Station removes a bottleneck where branches merge. Third track cut-arounds along the SW Corridor trackway allows the express service to continue to Forest Hills, creating continuous express service from Reading to Jamaica Plain/West Roxbury.

The radically updated Green Line is highly expensive but provides incredible benefits to the most used and most outdated LRV system in the nation. Revamping the line with more modern battery/electric rolling stock and tunneling or elevating all street car lines is costly, but the resulting efficiency of new trains, longer cars (3 long?), the consolidated stations and pre-board ticketing would greatly improve the speed and comfort of trips down this line. Many of these improvements are started with the central subway. The bottlenecks at Park St and Government Center are disastrous for service. Three major new features improve efficiency. Rerout the current E Line off of the Copley bound tracks and tunnel under Stuart St to its current route under Huntington Ave. This tunnel would split off at Government Center and parallel the main track to Park and Boylston. This would take the pressure of all E Line trains off of the main line. Eventually replacing the old C line with the Teal Line would further reduce the number of trains on the Kenmore bound tracks. The new F line follows the new E track and would connect to the D line route at Brookline Village via a new tunnel branching off from Brigham Circle under the Fens into Brookline. The F would split from the E onto parallel tracks after Prudential allowing for more rapid service through Back Bay and Fenway. The final main improvement would build another parallel or submerged tunnel from Park St to Copley and Kenmore allowing for express service along this heavily travelled corridor.
Individually, the street car lines are consolidated and improved. The old B and C Lines are sunk beneath their original routes, and surface buses can replace service to those stops that have been rendered defunct. The old surface rights of way could be utilized as additional traffic lanes, parking or, preferably as linear parks along Commonwealth Ave and Beacon St, making both boulevards more pedestrian friendly and alleviating congestion at traffic intersections. The sprawling turnarounds that the light-rail line required would become obsolete and the property could be developed around the new terminus stations.
A new line based off of the spur to Union Square in Somerville is brought through Cambridge, Belmont and Waltham by following the Fitchburg Commuter line. It releases pressure on the the Commuter Rail, allowing it to bypass Waverly and Belmont, leaving the Indigo line to connect these commercial districts to Cambridge and Boston. It also eases pressure on the Red and Green lines through Cambridge and Somerville. Continuing to Bentley University, Waltham Center and Brandeis University, the line gives the colleges and business district one-ride access to Cambridge and Boston. The Park and Ride station on Rte 128 takes pressure off of the Green Line D and the Orange Line N, while encouraging more commuters to opt for public transit, rather than drive downtown. This extension beyond Porter Square will require some expensive tunneling and/or seizing of private property along the RoW to allow for widening.The replacement for the old A line reconnects parts of Allston, Brighton, Newton and Watertown underserved by rapid transit, and should be sunk. The E line is sunk along its existing route, and brought back to Forest Hills, taking pressure off of the Orange Line and returning Green Line service to Jamaica Plain. The Green Line spur into Charlestown reconnects parts of the neighborhood to the T after the Orange Line was rerouted. It would require the rebuilding of the Charlestown Bridge; something that is in the planning stages.
Alternatively, with so much effort made to get these lines off of the roadways, it may be worth it to convert the lines from Light Rail to Heavy Rail, allowing 4-6 long subway cars along the Green/Teal lines. This would add costs to updating the D line RoW, which is largely maintained as it is if the Green Line system remains Light Rail.

The Indigo Line is an all new rapid transit line; part of which has been in the planning stages for some time. The southern portion of the line replaces the Fairmount commuter rail branch and uses those tracks terminating at the I-95/I-93 Junction. The southern portion adds stations onto the Fairmount Commuter Rail service, giving areas of Mattapan and Dorchester much needed access to transit. At South Station the Indigo line makes use of one of the most significant developments in Boston rail infrastructure: the North-South Station Connector. Running alongside Commuter Rail and Amtrak trains, adjacent to the Central Artery, this new railway tunnel allows thru service beneath downtown Boston directly connecting North and South stations and adding two stations along the waterfront.
The Indigo line then heads west, opening up land for development alongside the relocated Lechmere stop near the Somerville Commuter Rail depot (currently being developed as North Point similar to the Assembly Square development). The Indigo Line takes over the Green Line extension into Somerville and Medford that is currently being planned. This extension brings transit to a woefully underserved and very densely populated community. Bringing the line further into Winchester and Woburn would connect the commercial centers of these towns with Boston. Such an expansion would be very expensive and require tunnels in downtown Woburn, but would greatly expand the impact and ridership of the T, as well as relieve I-95/93 and Rtes 3 and 2A through Woburn, Winchester and Arlington. The Red Line would also be relieved of some ridership originating from Davis and Porter. Crossing the Mystic River in Medford would require rebuilding the bridge crossing as well as retooling the West Medford station to avoid at grade crossings tying up traffic flow.

The Teal Line is another all new line that requires a network of new tunnels. This line begins at the new Cleveland Circle hub and follows the old Green Line C route beneath the boulevard to Kenmore Square. Diving under the Storrow Drive footprint to Government Center, the Teal Line provides another option to get to Kenmore and Brookline from Downtown, taking pressure off the Green and Orange Lines, as well as providing nearby transit to residents of Back Back close to the Charles River. Adding a stop in the North End gives that historic neighborhood direct access to the T. Crossing the Boston Harbor alongside the Callahan tunnel, the line brings service to more western areas of East Boston than the Blue Line. Turning north, the line expands service in Chelsea and Everett; servicing neighborhoods that previosly relied on MBTA buses. The line from Rte 1 to Lynn through Saugus extends transit into communities used to driving on Rte 1 or taking the Commuter Rail from Lynn to get to Boston. It also provides local service along the rail corridor, allowing residents access to local commercial areas in Revere, Saugus and Lynn without driving.
This line would be among the last phases of this megaproject overhaul, being phased in to replace Green Line service, but still using the same rolling stock. It requires Storrow Drive to be downgraded to a surface boulevard and Soldiers Field Road to be routed onto the Mass Pike. The northern half would come later. Should the Green Line be upgraded to Heavy Rail, the Teal Line should likewise be upgraded, to allow operation of the same rolling stock.

The realization of the Silver Line as rail replaces the Silver Line buses with a subway, properly replacing the old elevated train. This line relieves the woefully under-served neighborhood of Roxbury, which has been without rapid transit for 25 years. This line also services parts of Dorchester and Mattapan, bringing rapid transit to these communities and taking pressure off of the Red Line to Ashmont and Mattapan, while also providing the Seaport District with a rail connection to downtown. Tunneling beneath these areas of historic Boston will be a daunting and expensive task. Alternatively, this line could be built elevated in a more modern, less invasive scheme than the old Orange Line elevated. This would still require to be tunnelled along Tremont and Essex, and a portal would require seizing private property. The line could alternatively be rerouted beneath the SE Expressway RoW to South Station, but would lose its connection with Boylston street and the Green Line.

The Yellow Line is the much anticipated Urban Ring, realized as a rail rapid transit system rather than the series of Bus Rapid Transit routes currently under discussion. Making the Urban Ring a rail project requires many new tunnels, track upgrades, bridge renewal and other infrastructure projects, but succeeds in creating a two-tier urban ring connecting the outer neighborhoods and taking pressure off of the downtown transfer stations. The stations at the airport terminals allow travelers from the communities north of Boston to reach Logan without going downtown to the Blue Line, or having to drive, alleviating pressure on Rte 1 and 1A. The two rings splitting in Charlestown connect local commercial hubs around the city center. Pressure is taken off of Park St, Govt Center, State St, Kenmore, North Station and other central transfer stations and gives passengers more convenient options to get to their destinations.
A branch of the Yellow Line leaves the ring design to serve the communities of Everett, Malden and Revere in areas that have been without good transit options. The station on Rte 1 allows southbound commuters another option to get downtown or to commercial districts served by the Yellow Line (Harvard, Kendall, etc.).
An additional loop farther out could be built as bus rapid transit to connect Wonderland, Everett, Wellington, Medford Square, West Medford, Arlington Center, Belmont Center, Waltham Center, Newton Center, Chestnut Hill, Forest Hills, Dorchester Center and North Quincy. This would be separate from the Yellow Line system.

The Commuter Rail expansions and subtractions all serve to speed commutes and extend the reach of the MBTA farther afield into communities that were previously car dependent. Many commuter stations in the metro-Boston area are replaced by expanded T service, allowing commuter trains to bypass them and get downtown faster. The North-South Station connector is also a boon to the Commuter Rail system, allowing thru service for MBTA and Amtrak trains. Line extensions connects many farther flung municipalities to Boston, easing commuter traffic on the roadways as well as taking pressure off of Logan airport, by giving passengers access to a number of regional airports in Worcester, Providence and Manchester. A series of loop connectors link secondary cities in metro-West to one another and to Boston; Fitchburg, Worcester and Providence now have direct service to one another without needing to take the train into Boston first, or drive. This interconnection could help to revitalize these cities. It is possible that a plan even more ambitious than this one could extend the commuter rail loop farther, connecting Lawrence and Lowell, as well as Attleboro and Brockton to the loop. This would require extensive new track and the seizure of private property.

Sorry if the formatting is a mess.

I don't pretend to be an expert, and I'm sure a number of these idea are impractical even discounting the costs and NIMBY issues. Probably a lot of engineering nuances that escape me. Fun thought experiment though!

BostonUrbEx

01-23-2012, 09:28 PM

Very nice, I see alot of similarities compared to my own personal pipe dreams. I wish I had more time to go through this, I'll have to take another look at this tomorrow.

BussesAin'tTrains

01-25-2012, 04:21 PM

And here's a different version. This one demonstrates how all the light rail lines could be tied together in an integrated urban ring vision.

http://g.co/maps/qfmhn

Shepard

01-26-2012, 08:42 AM

Cool map - I like that one better actually. Is the blue light rail line a separate system from the Green Line? If so, why?

BussesAin'tTrains

01-26-2012, 11:14 PM

They're all inter-connected, with most lines having interchanges allowing movement between the lines. I changed the colors to show the general paths that trains take.

Kahta

01-29-2012, 03:27 PM

Very neat.

BussesAin'tTrains

02-12-2012, 01:06 AM

here's a few other maps with the same basic structure but varying modifications from map to map.

http://g.co/maps/78wyh

http://g.co/maps/zvg7j

http://g.co/maps/rtt4u

BostonUrbEx

02-12-2012, 07:51 AM

First map: Very nice. But I don't think the Red or Indigo lines need to be extended south of 128. Westwood/128 is far enough for Indigo, and Braintree is far enough for Red. Orange to Norwood is something I've thought about, though it is pretty far. Love the Green Line to Lynn, I've mapped that as well.

Good stuff.

BussesAin'tTrains

02-12-2012, 09:21 AM

Yeah, Canton probably doesn't have the density or demand to justify more than Commuter Rail service through it, and that corridor will get busier with trains whenever the New Bedford/Fall River extension happens (or at least gets to Taunton). With regards to Orange/Indigo to Dedham/Norwood, I don't really think Dedham needs (or wants) more than one line of rapid transit running through it. Now that Legacy Place is complete and bustling, I think that bringing a line through to Norwood Center makes more sense than rehabilitating the abandoned Dedham Right of Way and stretching it north to the Dedham Mall, which would ruffle a lot of feathers in a town that pretends to be more suburban than it is (not that these silly plans are really accounting for NIMBY at all...).

In putting the Red Line down to Rte 24, I was thinking more of the park and ride at the highway to take more pressure off of the Expressway. But you're right that the commercial zone of North Stoughton isn't hugely wanting for transit to Boston (although it could be convenient for people living further up the Red Line in Braintree and Quincy).

The light rail to Lynn is something that needs to happen someday on that Right of Way, at least to Northgate if not further north. In the map you're talking about I have it broken up into two different lines; one being a branch off the Urban Ring and one being part of the Green Line (both of which are light rail). The Green Line part that I have going all the way through Everett Center and up Broadway is never going to happen, and unfortunately, the densest parts of Everett are probably never going to have rapid transit, but just using that abandoned RoW at least gives the periphery of Everett and parts of Malden a new transit line. Bringing it north to Saugus and Lynn (with a park and ride at Rte 1) would be great, but might not be necessary or wanted after the Blue Line gets bumped up to Lynn. In a more transit-friendly country, having multiple lines going to a city like Lynn might be less of a non-starter, but as it stands, the MBTA would never pay for TWO lines to Lynn...

F-Line to Dudley

02-12-2012, 02:59 PM

I don't really think Dedham needs (or wants) more than one line of rapid transit running through it. Now that Legacy Place is complete and bustling, I think that bringing a line through to Norwood Center makes more sense than rehabilitating the abandoned Dedham Right of Way and stretching it north to the Dedham Mall, which would ruffle a lot of feathers in a town that pretends to be more suburban than it is (not that these silly plans are really accounting for NIMBY at all...).

Dedham had the Orange Line earmarked from West Roxbury from the original 1945 expansion plan into the 70's when it was supposed to be extended out from Forest Hills. It's a weird transit hole because of their reluctance to allowing T buses, but they were once behind the rapid transit plan so maybe they can be ripe for a re-awakening someday. Unfortunately the West Rox spur isn't available anymore because the T parceled off the ROW on Belle Ave. in 2008 for new houses. Almost all the lots on the street are now built over on property easements (WTF, guys???).

Dedham Branch is ideal for a Fairmount Line spur. Totally grade separated, well-buffered from surrounding development, doesn't get near homes until it's past the high school, and no impacts to the high school because they still have 2 footbridges over the ROW from when it was active for freight into the early 90's. And because Dedham's a weird little transit hole they're strangely quiet about trailing it so it just sits there fenced off and trackless but fully ballasted. Spurring it would require rebuilding and reconfiguring the rickety old Readville flyover of the NEC that connects Fairmount to Franklin (due for replacement in about 15 years anyway) to point in that direction, replacing overhead bridges on River St. and East St. that were taken out over fears of collapse, tracking it, and putting in stops at River St. and Dedham Sq.

The commuter rail line that lasted to 1967 stopped on top of the soccer field. You're not getting any further than that to the Mall parking lot, though, because the old connection to the line out of West Roxbury had an insane grade crossing through the crosswalk of the High/East/ intersection and there's no way to elevate it over the highway ramp. And Cobb Way has houses built over that ROW now. But angle the tracks on the embankment between East St. and the soccer field and you'd have a nice little terminal stop that doesn't cannibalize the field.

That'd be a relatively inexpensive one if it's a redux of the pre-1967 commuter rail, off the Fairmount at Fairmount-level headways and done after that Readville bridge is replaced. They might like the somewhat lower-impact CR over full rapid-transit, being the weird transit hole it is. The frequencies would be good (and much better on the Fairmount if they could fork terminals at 128 and Dedham), but not so good they'd get all bent out of shape about it.

BussesAin'tTrains

02-12-2012, 03:46 PM

I love your posts F-Line, I always learn something new!

omaja

02-13-2012, 08:59 PM

Shepard

02-13-2012, 09:51 PM

Nice. I like the idea of thining about the CR as a proto-RER...

For example, I wonder if as a start the MBTA could implement a shuttle service between South Station and Back Bay via EMU, integrated with the subway fare (perhaps reconfiguring Back Bay station to allow direct connection from the OL to a fare-area by the current CR tracks...)

With the Seaport developing and requiring access to Back Bay hotels, businesses and entertainment, I'd think this would eventually be a necessary link.

HenryAlan

02-14-2012, 08:16 AM

A little quick and dirty map to show what the commuter rail network might look like if organized like commuter systems in Europe (Paris RER, Berlin S-Bahn, Madrid Cercanias, etc.):
http://i.imgur.com/74sUM.jpg
Any current commuter rail line not shown would be absorbed into an expansion of the subway/light rail network.

Here's an interactive map that the Sierra Club made showing the North/South Rail Link. Looks a lot like a typical RER/S Bahn/etc. type map.

http://www.sierraclubmass.org/issues/conservation/nsrl/NSRL_new_map.html

Regarding crazy transit pitches, I was thinking today about interoperability, and wondered why the Orange Line isn't simply using 10 car sets composed of Blue Line cars. This lead me to think about New York's BMT and IRT which serve as systems. Boston essentially has four distinct RT systems, represented by each color. Why can't we collapse it to three? This would lead to the possibility of enhanced routing options (such as a train that breaks away from the airport, passes through Chelsea, then heads on to the OL tracks. Ultimately, couldn't such integration even include the Green Line? Imagine a three car train that takes you from the airport to Coolidge Corner. Only the Red Line couldn't fit in this scheme.

datadyne007

02-14-2012, 08:34 AM

I wish I could take the Ring-Bahn/S-Bahn home with me. It would be the perfect urban ring for Metro (and possibly Greater) Boston.

whighlander

02-14-2012, 08:45 AM

Here's an interactive map that the Sierra Club made showing the North/South Rail Link. Looks a lot like a typical RER/S Bahn/etc. type map.

http://www.sierraclubmass.org/issues/conservation/nsrl/NSRL_new_map.html

Regarding crazy transit pitches, I was thinking today about interoperability, and wondered why the Orange Line isn't simply using 10 car sets composed of Blue Line cars. This lead me to think about New York's BMT and IRT which serve as systems. Boston essentially has four distinct RT systems, represented by each color. Why can't we collapse it to three? This would lead to the possibility of enhanced routing options (such as a train that breaks away from the airport, passes through Chelsea, then heads on to the OL tracks. Ultimately, couldn't such integration even include the Green Line? Imagine a three car train that takes you from the airport to Coolidge Corner. Only the Red Line couldn't fit in this scheme.

It's interesting that people are still obsessing over maps and plans made in the 1960's, the 1940's or even earlier

Nothing at all involved the Metro- NW

yesterday I had to pick up some closet doors at a Lowe's and the place I end-up at was in Hudson

This BigBox paradise on a hill top split between Hudson and even more obscure Berlin -- Lowe's , BJ's so far with open land for at least 2 more Big Boxes -- was so new that neither the GPS nor Google could locate the street address (6 Highland Common East)

the growth in the Greater Boston area is coming in places not on those maps and plans

BostonUrbEx

02-14-2012, 11:24 PM

omaja

02-15-2012, 06:55 PM

I'm not sure what you mean? The Haverhill line is along the current route and the Danvers branch is along an existing rail right of way.

BostonUrbEx

02-15-2012, 08:33 PM

JohnAKeith

02-16-2012, 03:52 PM

From Atlantic Cities

In San Francisco, Buses Become the Police (http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2012/02/san-francisco-buses-become-police/1251/)

For transit-only lanes to operate effectively within a city, they must remain clear for the next transit vehicle. But many drivers, frustrated with the crowding of the car lanes, drift into a roomy transit one out of either ignorance or contempt. The problem requires a lot of manpower to enforce, and therefore often goes unenforced.

The result is lost time and money for the transit agency, which in turn can lead to service cuts or higher fares and less confidence in public transit.

San Francisco, with its long-running (if imperfect) "transit-first" policy, has come up with a way to address all these problems at once. By early next year the city's entire fleet of 819 buses will be equipped with forward-facing cameras that take pictures of cars traveling or parked in the bus and transit-only lanes. A city employee then reviews the video to determine whether or not a violation has occurred — there are, of course, legitimate reasons a car might have to occupy a bus lane for a moment — and if so the fines range from $60 for moving vehicles to more than $100 for parked cars.

The new transit-lane enforcement law [PDF] extends through 2015 a successful pilot program that started in 2008. Presently, as part of that effort, about 30 city buses are equipped with cameras, covering about 19 routes, mostly in the Financial District and Chinatown. San Francisco only has about 15 miles of transit-only lanes in all, but it intends to expand that reach in the near future, according to an update on the initiative presented earlier this month [PDF].

City officials consider the pilot program a success. "Schedule adherence" has improved, according to that update, as has general safety, since access to proper bus-stop curbs is impeded less often. In addition, the number of citations issued has risen over the past three years — from 1,311 in 2009 to 2,102 in 2010 and 3,052 last year, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Continues ...

BostonUrbEx

02-16-2012, 04:38 PM

It's simple. Put a camera at intersections which ticket every vehicle in the transit lanes. If you drive in it for multiple blocks, multiple tickets, too.

Shepard

02-17-2012, 08:12 AM

Meanwhile in Boston, our Essex Street SL lane has been turned back over to cars because one car lane is being blocked by construction (Hong Luk House). Heaven forbid drivers should be reduced to only one travel lane.

I've said elsewhere (http://www.archboston.com/community/showpost.php?p=123258&postcount=643)on this part of the forum that streets like Essex should be 100% transit, in this case I'm actually thinking surface GL to South Station in addition to buses.

F-Line to Dudley

02-18-2012, 08:07 AM

The Haverhill Line of the future should run 100% via the Wildcat Branch and Lowell Line, with Malden to Reading being taken over by the Orange Line. The Danvers Branch should run on existing ROW from Salem Station to Peabody Sq, and then to Danvers Center area.

Haverhill used to run exclusively via the Lowell Line + Wildcat before 1979. There was even a stop on the Wildcat at Salem St. (http://g.co/maps/u8jes) that approximated the North Wilmington location. Weren't any passenger trains that went north of Reading through North Wilmington for decades prior, so had the Orange Line been built as envisioned in the 70's it wouldn't have altered the Haverhill Line's trajectory at all.

Commuting Boston Student

02-18-2012, 10:43 AM

I do maintain the opinion that developing new infrastructure or altering existing infrastructure to grow the bus system is an extremely poor opinion compared to putting those same resources towards expanding rail instead.

Maybe it's just me, but I really don't see the appeal in a bus compared to either rail or driving - rail is cleaner, arguably cheaper over time, and not at the mercy of the roadways. Driving, meanwhile, is the absolute single-seat ride to anywhere (parking notwithstanding) and when you drive you're not at the mercy of a bus schedule, free to alter your plans on the fly as needed. The bus itself, to me (and this is especially the case with the Silver Line) is a combination of all the disadvantages of rail transit, all the disadvantages of driving put together in a package that I just don't feel offers that much in exchange - especially when making it work requires proposals like shutting down roads to become transit only.

The rail tunnel that could connect Silver Line light rail branches is still there, isn't it? I'd much rather see a renewed push towards abandoning the BRT and making Silver Line a light rail instead.

JeffDowntown

02-19-2012, 07:05 AM

Kahta

02-22-2012, 07:57 PM

It's interesting that people are still obsessing over maps and plans made in the 1960's, the 1940's or even earlier

Nothing at all involved the Metro- NW

yesterday I had to pick up some closet doors at a Lowe's and the place I end-up at was in Hudson

This BigBox paradise on a hill top split between Hudson and even more obscure Berlin -- Lowe's , BJ's so far with open land for at least 2 more Big Boxes -- was so new that neither the GPS nor Google could locate the street address (6 Highland Common East)

the growth in the Greater Boston area is coming in places not on those maps and plans

Agreed-- I'd love to know future projected job growth in this state is

AmericanFolkLegend

02-23-2012, 03:49 PM

I have to agree with this opinion. BRT is the kind of compromise you get from bureaucrats that spend their commutes in limos with drivers. The officials responsible for these systems (Silver Line, for example) have never ridden transit a day in their lives.

I took a couple transportation policy and transit economics classes when I was at the Kennedy School. There have been a bunch of studies done that measure the economics of each different form of transit (trying to capture all costs - capital expenditures, maintenance, pollution, the opportunity costs of people's time spent on longer commutes, etc.). From a purely economic standpoint BRT is hands down the "best" approach to transit because the capital costs are so low. Of course, that's only true if you have a 100% dedicated bus line.

If I recall correctly the hierarchy went BRT, light rail, regular bus service, subway (separated grade), individual driving.

whighlander

02-23-2012, 05:38 PM

I took a couple transportation policy and transit economics classes when I was at the Kennedy School. There have been a bunch of studies done that measure the economics of each different form of transit (trying to capture all costs - capital expenditures, maintenance, pollution, the opportunity costs of people's time spent on longer commutes, etc.). From a purely economic standpoint BRT is hands down the "best" approach to transit because the capital costs are so low. Of course, that's only true if you have a 100% dedicated bus line.

If I recall correctly the hierarchy went BRT, light rail, regular bus service, subway (separated grade), individual driving.

Folk -- its interesting that if you ask the public you would find that most prefer cars and then light rail well over BRT

czsz

02-23-2012, 06:09 PM

^ The economic studies clearly don't take into account ridership as a criterion of success. Just because you can implement something cheaply doesn't mean it's the most cost-effective way to solve a transportation problem (imagine if New York wanted to implement a transit system today - BRT would be cheap, but it would be totally overwhelmed).

Dedicated lanes are part of this. Perception is another. BRT works well in Latin America because compared to the chaotic chiken buses that came before, it seems like a piece of expensive, clean, organized infrastructure that attracts riders who might have otherwise used growing incomes to go the car route.

In North America, building successful transit lines takes more effort.

BostonUrbEx

02-25-2012, 01:19 PM

Salem Streetcar: http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=Essex+St&daddr=42.5251396,-70.8815675+to:42.518453,-70.8963693+to:42.515689,-70.905409+to:Essex+St&hl=en&ll=42.5207,-70.893316&spn=0.021477,0.045447&sll=42.522487,-70.884948&sspn=0.010738,0.022724&geocode=FWnTiAIdkDjG-w%3BFdPhiAId4W7G-ymlGH08QhTjiTERMM-Y6VYw-Q%3BFbXHiAIdDzXG-ymNwbGkfBTjiTGb3Tz1Fcz9nQ%3BFem8iAIdvxHG-yk3Dch1gBTjiTGaLQou74WQ1A%3BFWDTiAId5jbG-w&dirflg=w&mra=dvme&mrsp=1&sz=16&via=1,2,3&t=h&z=15

(Based upon the idea of a station under Washington St)

AmericanFolkLegend

02-25-2012, 04:31 PM

^ The economic studies clearly don't take into account ridership as a criterion of success. Just because you can implement something cheaply doesn't mean it's the most cost-effective way to solve a transportation problem (imagine if New York wanted to implement a transit system today - BRT would be cheap, but it would be totally overwhelmed).

Excellent point. I don't recall how passenger volume was accounted for in the studies. But I've got to believe the hierarchy of transit options changes when you go from New York (or Boston, or Philly) to Los Angeles (or Houston or Atlanta).

vanshnookenraggen

02-25-2012, 06:13 PM

BostonUrbEx

02-25-2012, 09:35 PM

This basically goes where no one would use it. Why not connect the train station with Salem State through downtown?

http://g.co/maps/q7zvm

You'll never get through 114 and Peabody Sq from 4pm-8pm with your map, unless it has it's own dedicated ROW.

With my map, the loop to the west was mainly for residents over there, and the eastern loop hits up the museum, gets close to Washington Square/Salem Common, goes through a fairly dense area, would hit the Salem ferry and proposed Salem Wharf project, runs down Derby St, House of Seven Gables, the wharfs, Wharf Street. It's also to facilitate more density and more mixed use to the west and east of Washington St.

Commuting Boston Student

03-06-2012, 12:38 PM

Well, I talked about converting the Green Line to heavy rail earlier, and that inspired me to make this. (http://g.co/maps/6unvb)

Now if I can get google maps to cooperate with me for the other things I wanted to make maps of, that'd be great.

Charlie_mta

03-06-2012, 10:56 PM

I like it! I would extend your Watertown Branch line out to Waltham, an area lacking transit service. The line could be elevated above the old Watertown Branch ROW.

Commuting Boston Student

03-06-2012, 10:59 PM

I like it! I would extend your Watertown Branch line out to Waltham, an area lacking transit service. The line could be elevated above the old Watertown Branch ROW.

I figure it's more thematically appropriate to run a Blue Line off of the Charles/MGH connection along the Charles over that way.

EDIT: And totally unrelated to the Blue Line, am I the only one seriously unsettled by the fact that the Mattapan Trolley runs straight through a cemetery? I'm not superstitious in the least, but man, that is creepy.

HenryAlan

03-07-2012, 08:14 AM

I love that stretch of the Mattapan line.

BostonUrbEx

03-07-2012, 08:15 AM

Fact: It's the only light rail/trolley to run through a cemetery in the US.

Commuting Boston Student

03-07-2012, 10:22 PM

I love that stretch of the Mattapan line.

To each his own, I guess.

For me, I don't, so I took care of it. (http://g.co/maps/yf4tq)

I also made this. (http://g.co/maps/thxpz)

Next on the docket is the Blue and Orange Lines, I think.

BussesAin'tTrains

03-08-2012, 01:48 AM

Latest version of my crazy transit system

Voila (http://g.co/maps/8nrp7)

HenryAlan

03-08-2012, 09:05 AM

To each his own, I guess.

For me, I don't, so I took care of it. (http://g.co/maps/yf4tq)

I also made this. (http://g.co/maps/thxpz)

Next on the docket is the Blue and Orange Lines, I think.

I like this idea, but I wonder about extending yellow all the way to Needham. Personnaly I'm enamored of the old plan that used the Needham ROW for HRRT through to West Roxbury then branches more Southward to the Dedham Mall, which would be a perfect spot for TOD, especially if some version of the Indigo line also got there via Readville. The other thing you'd need to do, is extend the Orange Line from Forest Hills to meet up with the Yellow Line in Roslindale. It's too close to not have it terminate at a transfer station.

Latest version of my crazy transit system

Voila (http://g.co/maps/8nrp7)
And this is just downright awesome. Do you envision the Mattapan line being replaced by heavy rail (ie extending the Ashmont branch of the Red Line)? Have you thought about incorporating CBS' idea for a subway under Cummins Highway? This would give some great connectivity between outer branches and would not be a very long extension.

czsz

03-08-2012, 11:37 AM

To each his own, I guess.

For me, I don't, so I took care of it. (http://g.co/maps/yf4tq)

I also made this. (http://g.co/maps/thxpz)

Next on the docket is the Blue and Orange Lines, I think.

I always wonder why people are so determined to extend more frequent transit to Needham. Sure, the Needham Line is one of the busier ones on the commuter rail system, but I think most Needhamites prefer it to a 20-stop subway ride downtown, especially if on a Green Line trolley (there's not much traffic between Needham and Mattapan/Dorchester, or JP/Roslindale if the connection were made by Orange Line, although the extended Green Line to Newton might see some traffic).

What Needham could really use is bus service along 135 between Dedham and Wellesley centers.

BussesAin'tTrains

03-08-2012, 12:55 PM

And this is just downright awesome. Do you envision the Mattapan line being replaced by heavy rail (ie extending the Ashmont branch of the Red Line)? Have you thought about incorporating CBS' idea for a subway under Cummins Highway? This would give some great connectivity between outer branches and would not be a very long extension.

Right; in this vision the Mattapan Line would be upgraded to an extension of the Ashmont Red Line. If the Cedar Grove Cemetery complicates updating the tracks, the line could alternatively be sunk either beneath Adam's St or Dorchester Ave to Milton Station, where a portal to the right of way on the surface would have to be built.

I have some other maps that include the line going further under the Cummins Highway to Roslindale. The issue I have with it is wether there's enough demand to get from Dorchester/Mattapan to Rozzie via a bypass of downtown to justify a two mile bore (more expensive)/ cut & cover (more disruptive) beneath Cummins Hwy. If existing or new bus line indicate the demand is there, it would make sense to add to the line. If not, then the Orange Line extension and bus operations ought to manage it.

I also have other maps (that I've posted further back in here) that have a larger outer loop to the urban ring (my Yellow Line LR system) which goes through Allston, Brighton, Brookline, Roxie, and Dot, which would let riders of my Red and Indigo lines transfer at Andrew Sq/Newmarket Sq and get to the Orange Line at Ruggles/Rox X-ing, and bypass downtown, thought it would be a two transfer trip...

Commuting Boston Student

03-08-2012, 03:48 PM

I like this idea, but I wonder about extending yellow all the way to Needham. Personnaly I'm enamored of the old plan that used the Needham ROW for HRRT through to West Roxbury then branches more Southward to the Dedham Mall, which would be a perfect spot for TOD, especially if some version of the Indigo line also got there via Readville. The other thing you'd need to do, is extend the Orange Line from Forest Hills to meet up with the Yellow Line in Roslindale. It's too close to not have it terminate at a transfer station.

Done. (http://g.co/maps/x7cvv) (I'd actually planned on only having the Reading - Hyde Park Orange Line instead of the branches, but there you go.)

I always wonder why people are so determined to extend more frequent transit to Needham. Sure, the Needham Line is one of the busier ones on the commuter rail system, but I think most Needhamites prefer it to a 20-stop subway ride downtown, especially if on a Green Line trolley (there's not much traffic between Needham and Mattapan/Dorchester, or JP/Roslindale if the connection were made by Orange Line, although the extended Green Line to Newton might see some traffic).

What Needham could really use is bus service along 135 between Dedham and Wellesley centers.

I don't think it's really apparent given how google maps is stubborn and doesn't like it when I try to put a complete system with all the stop markers into a single map (it likes to shove things randomly onto "page 2") and so I've been releasing things one line at a time and splitting things up into different maps so I avoid having to try and figure out under what rhyme or reason google maps says "this page is full now," and I've given up on the expanded Commuter Rail for now, (I have maps that are only stop markers with no lines if you guys want to see those) but...

I'm more determined to have rapid transit go from a hub-and-spoke system like we have now to a full on wheel. Needham is incidental, I was more concerned with better tying together the southbound ends of the Red, Orange and Green Lines. That's why I kept the Needham Line of the Commuter Rail, along with the potential for it to meander southwest into Medfield and Dover, and only cut down the number of stops so that you could theoretically get on at Needham Junction and have a four stop ride to Back Bay, or a five stop ride to South Station. Needhamites who don't want to suffer through a 20 stop ride don't have to.

And at the end of the day, I just really hate buses and love trains. I want to see as many subways inside of 128 as I can possibly cram in there, I want to see subway stations in every city and town inside of 495, and I want to see a Boston where you're never more than 2000 feet from a subway station no matter where you are, even if that's only on paper.

Speaking of which, stay tuned for that Blue Line extension I talked about earlier!

HenryAlan

03-08-2012, 06:07 PM

Done. (http://g.co/maps/x7cvv) (I'd actually planned on only having the Reading - Hyde Park Orange Line instead of the branches, but there you go.)

There's no need to make a spur if you have the Orange meet Yellow along the NEC ROW. Just so long as the two lines cross at a transfer point.

BussesAin'tTrains

03-08-2012, 06:22 PM

^ CBS you can get them all on one page if you copy the KML link (right click on the "KML" hyperlink and hit "Copy Link Address" or whatever your browser calls it) and paste it into the GoogleMaps search bar. You can't edit it in that view, but it's good for a final presentation! :-)

BussesAin'tTrains

03-08-2012, 06:32 PM

To make my lined map (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004b9fb92f3e5c08715 4&msa=0&ll=42.351947,-71.077423&spn=0.269452,0.617294) easier to comprehend, I've started to break it up into individual lines like CBS has done. So far I've only done my heavy rail lines. The light rail lines (Green and Yellow/Urban Ring) will follow I'm sure ...

Here they are, with some minimal explanation in the text:

Red Line (http://g.co/maps/h7p8x)

Blue Line (http://g.co/maps/gmjgw)

Orange Line (http://g.co/maps/7u3pw)

Indigo Line (http://g.co/maps/dhygu)

Teal(?) Line (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004bac41362669450da c&msa=0)

Eventually I might add stop markers to this, but the lines will do for now.

czsz

03-08-2012, 08:00 PM

And at the end of the day, I just really hate buses and love trains. I want to see as many subways inside of 128 as I can possibly cram in there, I want to see subway stations in every city and town inside of 495, and I want to see a Boston where you're never more than 2000 feet from a subway station no matter where you are, even if that's only on paper.

I think you've just won the 2012 ArchBoston Award for Craziest Transit Pitch (can we actually have this category, please?)

Commuting Boston Student

03-08-2012, 08:31 PM

There's no need to make a spur if you have the Orange meet Yellow along the NEC ROW. Just so long as the two lines cross at a transfer point.

Well, it's there now, and I don't really feel like deleting it and sending the Saugus branch somewhere else, like onto the Blue Line (http://g.co/maps/uc254).

To make my lined map (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004b9fb92f3e5c08715 4&msa=0&ll=42.351947,-71.077423&spn=0.269452,0.617294) easier to comprehend, I've started to break it up into individual lines like CBS has done. So far I've only done my heavy rail lines. The light rail lines (Green and Yellow/Urban Ring) will follow I'm sure ... [/URL]

Eventually I might add stop markers to this, but the lines will do for now.

Looking good!

Although, I always thought teal was a darker color than what you've got there, but that's splitting hairs over semantics. Keep up the good work!

I think you've just won the 2012 ArchBoston Award for Craziest Transit Pitch (can we actually have this category, please?)

Yes!

I'd vote for me.

BussesAin'tTrains

03-08-2012, 08:47 PM

Looking good!

Although, I always thought teal was a darker color than what you've got there, but that's splitting hairs over semantics. Keep up the good work!

You're right! I had it darker in an earlier map, but for some reason that I don't remember anymore I made it lighter! I guess I kept the name because it sounds better than Light Blue Line...

Shepard

03-09-2012, 01:25 PM

To my mind this is the least expensive way of bringing real transit to the Seaport, and connecting as much as possible with downtown and Cambridge:

http://g.co/maps/mdnt2

czsz

03-09-2012, 02:25 PM

^ How about extending to East Broadway in Southie, then rejoining the Red Line mainline at JFK/UMass? Red Line trains could then go "Via Seaport" or "Via Dot Ave" (maybe 2/3 trains would go "Via Seaport" to serve its greater number of stops). You could extend this logic to the rest of the line and have Dot Ave trains go to Ashmont and Seaport trains to Braintree (since presumably more commuters would be heading to the Seaport).

BostonUrbEx

03-09-2012, 02:34 PM

To my mind this is the least expensive way of bringing real transit to the Seaport, and connecting as much as possible with downtown and Cambridge:

http://g.co/maps/mdnt2

Unless there's a costly signal upgrade from Broadway to Alewife, you'll have to take away from the Ashmont/Braintree headways. Better off Green Lining it.

HenryAlan

03-09-2012, 03:08 PM

To my mind this is the least expensive way of bringing real transit to the Seaport, and connecting as much as possible with downtown and Cambridge:

http://g.co/maps/mdnt2

I've had that idea, too. Does anybody know whether the haul road still serves a useful purpose?

Commuting Boston Student

03-09-2012, 04:00 PM

You're right! I had it darker in an earlier map, but for some reason that I don't remember anymore I made it lighter! I guess I kept the name because it sounds better than Light Blue Line...

You could always call it the Turquoise Line (http://g.co/maps/z8nwp).

Ergh. Honestly, I feel like that will be hands down the least satisfying Line to have mapped, and the Line I will be least happy with.

I'd set out to have an elevated rail along the various Waterfronts, serving a double purpose as scenic overlook/outlook and rapid transit, and then it just started growing out of my control and getting away from me.

I tried to curve around buildings once I got it into Boston, as well, having not wanted to plow through buildings OR bury the line.

All in all, definitely my worst performance.

BussesAin'tTrains

03-09-2012, 04:53 PM

Here's my map for the Green Line.

The dark lines represent the Green Line as shown in the full system map (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004b9fb92f3e5c08715 4&msa=0&ll=42.372749,-70.993652&spn=0.269363,0.617294) I posted above. The light lines are other possibilities, largely based on alterations to that map or from previous maps I've worked on.

Green Line (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004bad565902c8e412a c&msa=0&ll=42.344843,-71.07811&spn=0.269483,0.617294)

EDIT:

Here's my Yellow Line (Urban Ring) map. Brighter lines correspond to the full system map, while the light lines highlight other possibilities (albeit crazy tunnely ones)

Yellow Line (http://g.co/maps/sa6ra)

Charlie_mta

03-10-2012, 01:20 PM

I've had that idea, too. Does anybody know whether the haul road still serves a useful purpose?

The Bypass Road provides a truck route connecting the SE Expresssway to the Seaport. It also serves as a route for Seaport truck traffic that cannot use the tunnels under Fort Point Channel due to hauling unsuitable loads(explosives, etc.).

HenryAlan

03-10-2012, 07:18 PM

So it's not exactly available for heavy rail. Perhaps light rail, then?

Nexis4jersey

03-11-2012, 12:04 AM

Look at my Crazy MBTA expansion pitch...

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=215312482559953359515.00049d22c1d2aeb0dbe4 8&msa=0&ll=42.314385,-71.064377&spn=0.281799,0.617294

BussesAin'tTrains

03-11-2012, 12:40 AM

Here's a compilation of all the lines that make up this lined map (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004b9fb92f3e5c08715 4&msa=0&ll=42.351947,-71.077423&spn=0.269452,0.617294).
Here they are, with some explanation in the text boxes:

Red Line (http://g.co/maps/h7p8x)

Blue Line (http://g.co/maps/gmjgw)

Orange Line (http://g.co/maps/7u3pw)

Indigo Line (http://g.co/maps/dhygu)

Teal Line (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004bac41362669450da c&msa=0)

Green Line (http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=209982730179003066370.0004bad565902c8e412a c&msa=0&ll=42.344843,-71.07811&spn=0.269483,0.617294)

Yellow Line (http://g.co/maps/sa6ra)

Nexis4jersey

03-11-2012, 09:52 PM

BostonUrbEx

03-11-2012, 10:44 PM

I think you're overestimating on the Red Line unless you're factoring in upgrading the line to support 8-car trains.

whighlander

03-11-2012, 11:01 PM

My Ridership Projections...factor in Extensions , Natural growth , TOD / infill around the stations and increased service.

Current System

(Kingston) / Providence line - 28,000 (2010) > 70,000 (2030)
Greenbush line - 5,600 (2010) > 8,800 (2030)
(Milford) / Franklin line - 13,000 (2010) > 17,200 (2030)
Needham line - 8,400 (2010) > 15,000 (2030)
Fairmount line - 2,200 (2010) > 21,700 (2030)
Old Colony lines - 20,000 (2010) > 48,000 (2030)
Worcester line - 19,000 (2010) > 35,000 (2030)
(Portsmouth) Newburyport / Rockport line - 18,000 (2010) > 31,000 (2030)
(Plaistow) / Haverhill line - 10,000 (2010) > 16,900 (2030)
(Concord) / Lowell line - 12,000 (2010) > 63,000 (2030)
(Wachuetts) / Fitchburg line - 11,000 (2010) > 14,300 (2030)
Stoughton / (South Coast network) - 3,600 (2010) > 62,000 (2030)
Blue line - 67,000 (2010) > 105,000 (2030)
Red line - 179,000 (2010) > 250,000 (2030)
Orange line - 181,000 (2010) > 235,000 (2030)
Mattapan - Ashmont line - 7,600 (2010) > 13,200 (2030)
Green line - 240,000 (2010) > 320,000 (2030)

Future lines....

Blue line extension to Lynn - 25,000
Green line extension to Somerville & Union SQ - 75,000
Springfield - Battleboro line - 7,400
Quonset Branch (seasonal) - 13,000
Woonsocket line - 25,000
Cape Cod line - 16,500

Jersey -- there are Crazy transit pitches and then there are some kind of pyscho-active enhanced visions

I didn't type the numbers into a real calculating system, I just added the rough numbers -- but it looks as if in less than 20 years you've added nearly 500,000 riders to the T

Today the T supplies transit service to about 1 Million people daily -- with many of the trips terminating in downtown Boston -- you are proposing nearly a 50% increase in riders and presumably a nearly 50% increase in the passengers arriving and presumably working in downtown Boston

I've never seen any projections which remotely approach those kind of growth in employment in Boston and certainly not that kind of growth in T passengers

Commuting Boston Student

03-11-2012, 11:21 PM

You are massively over estimating on the Providence line, at least - and doubly so if a Woonsocket line gets going.

I would place an honest bet on the Providence line ridership statistics staying almost exactly the same in the next 20 years.

Nexis4jersey

03-12-2012, 03:27 AM

I might have overestimated the Red line and the Providence line , but I stand by the rest. TOD is factored heavily into those numbers , if I can recall correctly MA doesn't have or is just starting there TOD suburban push. The T is what NJT /PATH was back in 1990 , both agencies added over 700,000 in New riders over 20 years. Yes granted that was due to NYC / Urban Jersey Job Growth , but the rest was due to a aggressive suburban TOD push which can be seen in most towns. The same is probably going to occur in your region over the next 20 years. One station on the PATH went from 20 people a during the 80s to 15,000 after the TOD was built around it , some Suburban stations went from just 300 people to almost 8,000. Suburban TOD is what has driven the growing ridership trend in this region....it might be hard to believe but its possible if you build up right. Ive seen TOD / Redevelopment plans for Quincy , Lynn , along the Fairmount corridor , Providence and Worcester.... Not all of this will be New Ridership , some will be people transferring from one line to another. Like for example Phase 1 & 2 of the Second Avenue Subway (SAS) will be used by an estimated 683,000 daily riders , but only 85,000 new riders will generated. Now with most of the future lines being commuter rail and not Urban Rail you'll see a higher New Ridership rate then when they extend the Green and Blue lines. Most of the New Ridership on those lines won't be newer T users , just current ones transferring between lines. I have a station by Station guide , thats even more crazy....i will post that later.....

HenryAlan

03-12-2012, 05:55 AM

Nexis4Jersey, why do you have no expansion plans for the Orange Line?