archBOSTON.org

Go Back   archBOSTON.org > Boston's Built Environment > Transit and Infrastructure

Transit and Infrastructure All things T or civilly engineered within Boston Metro.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-07-2019, 11:21 AM   #5881
Coyote137
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Jamaica Plain
Posts: 681
Send a message via AIM to Coyote137
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by jass View Post
national initiative.
LOL!
__________________
All opinions expressed in this post represent the views of your employer.
Coyote137 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2019, 11:30 AM   #5882
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by F-Line to Dudley View Post
They come around every few years with that one: combine Ballardvale and Andover with a stop at Lowell Junction that includes construction of a new 93 exit at Lowell Junction Rd./Burt Rd. at the industrial park. Usually resurfaces again when Pfizer drops off its lobbying checks at the Capitol.

Proposal gets violently opposed by Town of Andover every single time. And they're correct in doing so, because Ballardvale and Andover are just about pitch-perfect neighborhood walkup stops that consistently outperform the surrounding density and have good existing bus coverage. Also don't know how another 93 exit that close to Dascomb Rd. would work without merging trouble.

There's definitely multiple possibilities for Haverhill infills if the Reading schedule were sheared off and the outer-half saved time by reverting to the Lowell Line-Wildcat routing. So other than this appears to be photocopying verbatim the last old proposal from 10 years ago to combine stops at Lowell Junction, I'm not sure why there's such a rush to mess with what works. I'm personally not sold on the LJ stop because the surroundings are a little sparse, but South Lawrence (495 @ 28...replacement for old Shawsheen stop) and Ward Hill (495 @ Industrial Ave., North Andover...1 exit from 495/MA 213 interchange) are very good candidates.
If anything I think North Wilmington should be the stop replaced by a new I93 station. North Wilmington is in a low density neighborhood, with no TOD and only 20 parking spots. Adding a garage to Wilmington train station, plus a new I93 train station could serve people from that neighborhood.

Plus North Wilmington gets its last train of the morning at 630 AM and doesn't get another one until 930. A 3 hour gap at the peak of rush hour. This is because the two rush hour trains just past 7 and at 8 am go onto the Lowell line.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5907...!3m1!1e3?hl=en

This is where the Haverhill line crosses I93. I'm not sure if there are any wetland restrictions there that would preclude the building of a new transit station (F-Line probally knows more). But that stop would be closer to North Wilmington than it would be to Ballardvale.

I'm not sure why you'd get rid of one of the Andover stations, they aren't close together and they do get healthy ridership. It's not like Winchester where stations are within easy walking distance.

Last edited by tysmith95; 03-07-2019 at 12:23 PM.
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2019, 12:48 PM   #5883
HenryAlan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Rozzie Square
Posts: 1,969
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by F-Line to Dudley View Post
.
  • TEXRail, Tarrant County, TX -- 8 Stadler FLIRT3's
  • A-Train, Denton County, TX -- 11 Stadler GTW 2/6's
  • Capital MetroRail, Austin, TX -- 6 Stadler GTW's
  • Sprinter, San Diego, CA [considered diesel light rail] -- Siemens Desiro VT642
  • NJ Transit RiverLINE [considered diesel light rail] -- 20 Stadler GTW 2/6's
  • Ottawa O-Train Trillium Line [considered diesel light rail] -- 6 Alstom Coradia LINT 41's
There is also eBART, using Stadler GTW coupled pairs in Contra Costa County, CA
HenryAlan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2019, 03:07 PM   #5884
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,983
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by tysmith95 View Post
If anything I think North Wilmington should be the stop replaced by a new I93 station. North Wilmington is in a low density neighborhood, with no TOD and only 20 parking spots. Adding a garage to Wilmington train station, plus a new I93 train station could serve people from that neighborhood.

Plus North Wilmington gets its last train of the morning at 630 AM and doesn't get another one until 930. A 3 hour gap at the peak of rush hour. This is because the two rush hour trains just past 7 and at 8 am go onto the Lowell line.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5907...!3m1!1e3?hl=en

This is where the Haverhill line crosses I93. I'm not sure if there are any wetland restrictions there that would preclude the building of a new transit station (F-Line probally knows more). But that stop would be closer to North Wilmington than it would be to Ballardvale.

I'm not sure why you'd get rid of one of the Andover stations, they aren't close together and they do get healthy ridership. It's not like Winchester where stations are within easy walking distance.
That's down the street from the earlier Lowell Junction stop. Eons before I-93 was built there was a Wilmington Junction stop there siphoning up traffic off the Western, off the Wildcat, and off the long-defunct Salem & Lowell RR which is more or less traced by the Exit 41 loop ramps. Same general problem as LJ: too 9-5'er centric and in a sprawled-out industrial park that's in a bus desert. All-day utilization would be poor, which is a no-no for RER planning. And the traffic impacts on 93 around the exits would be yucky...and "not-yucky 93" should be a standard to uphold at this location when Anderson RTC is only 5.5 miles south. I really can't see this more or less 1.5 mi. stretch of track getting its locational flaws pounded out well enough to support a stop unless those flanking industrial parks take on a new life and quick.


As described in threads over the past week, Salem St. on the Wildcat would displace N. Wilmington on the Western Route if Reading and Haverhill schedules were sheared off from each other. Salem St. has a somewhat better neighborhood walkup profile and less duplication with Wilmington station down the street, while not sacrificing any real utility over the current stop.

The highest-leverage parking sink infill is Quannapowitt/128 halfway between Wakefield and Reading, which sits by a booming industrial park on a golden TOD parcel (Subaru of Wakefield/128 Volvo), has good bus access, excellently-positioned highway ramps, and Wakefield neighborhood walkup to boot. After that it's probably the South Lawrence and Ward Hill infills, which help defray 93 traffic coming out of NH via 1 exit north on 495 or the length of MA 213 + 1 exit north on 495. Each with the TOD potential, neighborhood walkup, and area bus routes to tap for a diverse profile.

Tackle those load relievers first and we can talk about pounding square pegs in the far north of Wilmington.
F-Line to Dudley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2019, 11:42 AM   #5885
jass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,389
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

All this talk about improvements, and it looks like many bus routes are getting hidden service cuts.

http://milesintransit.com/2019/03/07...rvice-changes/
jass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2019, 12:08 PM   #5886
HelloBostonHi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 247
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by jass View Post
All this talk about improvements, and it looks like many bus routes are getting hidden service cuts.

http://milesintransit.com/2019/03/07...rvice-changes/
To my untrained eye it seems to be more adjusting the schedules to match reality on most routes, things like buses coming every 11 minutes instead of every 10, and the silver line trips getting more spaced out etc don't really signal a loss in buses and operators as much as the reality of how the service runs. That being said there are definitely a few routes that distinctly lose out and are dropping trips this time around.
HelloBostonHi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 09:25 AM   #5887
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Another thing about the rail vision presentation, the Needham line. I'd assume that increased service there would require double tracking. F-Line, how feisable is that?
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 09:51 AM   #5888
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,983
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by tysmith95 View Post
Another thing about the rail vision presentation, the Needham line. I'd assume that increased service there would require double tracking. F-Line, how feisable is that?
DT is feasible, but substantially increased service is not because of congestion in the SW Corridor tunnel. It will never, ever meet an Urban Rail standard of :15 bi-directional headways. Probably won't ever meet a Regional Rail standard of :30 bi-directional headways, either.

I don't know if what they were presenting at the meeting was the option about forced transfer at Forest Hills most of the time. That is technically feasible for the headways with just double-tracking because trains wouldn't be entering the NEC, but the neighborhoods would violently reject it over loss of the one-seat. And because the FH commuter rail platforms are squished to one side requiring crossover moves, not many Providence/Stoughton or Franklin trains can pick it up as a stop to accommodate 'dinky' transferees without interfering with Amtrak. Thus, the forced transfer is as good as a gun to the Orange Line's head for making an already bad FH platform overcrowding situation worse.
F-Line to Dudley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 11:46 AM   #5889
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Fare proposal meeting going on now
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 04:29 PM   #5890
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Yep fare increase is finalized.

I regret voting for Baker.
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 04:44 PM   #5891
JumboBuc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: The Fenway
Posts: 1,936
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by tysmith95 View Post
Yep fare increase is finalized.

I regret voting for Baker.
So in November you thought that Baker would oppose a fare increase? I thought it's been pretty clear for years that Baker supports periodic incremental fare increases.
JumboBuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 04:47 PM   #5892
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by JumboBuc View Post
So in November you thought that Baker would oppose a fare increase? I thought it's been pretty clear for years that Baker supports periodic incremental fare increases.
In November I had a different job and didn't take the train to work. So frankly I didn't study the position on this issue.

I guess looking at history he isin't any worse than Patrick.
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 05:32 PM   #5893
jass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,389
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

I too am shocked that a member of the Republican party would push for transit fare hikes well about the rate of inflation while holding the gas tax low. Shocked
jass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 05:45 PM   #5894
TallIsGood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 346
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

T needs more revenue, right? Then itís a good decision.
TallIsGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 06:12 PM   #5895
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by TallIsGood View Post
T needs more revenue, right? Then itís a good decision.
My issue with this is why does the state keep pouring more money from the general fund and from local tax dollars into roads, while the gas tax has basically stayed the same since 1991? Well 21 cents then, 24 cents now, but cars are more fuel efficient so per mile likely less.

Also MBTA pensions are the more lucrative than any other state agency. Why should I have to pay higher fares so bus drivers can retire at 55?

Another thing, reverse commute trains go out pretty empty, why can't the MBTA lower prices a bit for reverse commutes to stimulate ridership like they did for the weekends?
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2019, 11:59 AM   #5896
Kinopio
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 93
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by TallIsGood View Post
T needs more revenue, right? Then itís a good decision.
Then we should triple the gas tax. Make people who use the road actually pay for it. It'll still be cheaper than most advanced countries.
Kinopio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2019, 12:24 PM   #5897
tysmith95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: North Shore
Posts: 2,436
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinopio View Post
Then we should triple the gas tax. Make people who use the road actually pay for it. It'll still be cheaper than most advanced countries.
With Massachusetts being one of the only states with a flat income tax, and increased use taxes, you basically have a regressive tax structure.

I understand why voters are against things like the gas tax. For the most part the gas tax is regressive. But raising MBTA fares is also regressive. MBTA fare increases should have to be approved by the legislature like gas tax increases.

Something like the millionaires tax did have lots of support, and likely would have passed (and eliminated the need for T hikes).
tysmith95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2019, 09:04 AM   #5898
Lrfox
Senior Member
 
Lrfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,426
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Red Line was awful this morning coming from the North. Apparently there was a "track issue" between Harvard and Central and the trains were "running at reduced speeds out of an abundance of caution." The first I've seen "out of an abundance of caution" used in a T alert. By about 8:45, the apps and announcements were saying 10 minute delays, but it was nearly 50 minutes from Davis to Charles this morning. That's close to the worst I've experienced.

The small silver lining for a nerd like me is that it appears the old abandoned Harvard station is the staging area for whatever they're doing to alleviate the track issue. So it was all lit up as we creeped through. Really kind of neat.
Lrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2019, 09:30 AM   #5899
stevebikes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 235
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lrfox View Post
Red Line was awful this morning coming from the North. Apparently there was a "track issue" between Harvard and Central and the trains were "running at reduced speeds out of an abundance of caution." The first I've seen "out of an abundance of caution" used in a T alert. By about 8:45, the apps and announcements were saying 10 minute delays, but it was nearly 50 minutes from Davis to Charles this morning. That's close to the worst I've experienced.

The small silver lining for a nerd like me is that it appears the old abandoned Harvard station is the staging area for whatever they're doing to alleviate the track issue. So it was all lit up as we creeped through. Really kind of neat.
They've been bustituting on the weekends north of Harvard to replace the concrete under the rails. Wonder if today is related to that.

https://www.mbta.com/projects/red-li...ab-maintenance
stevebikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2019, 12:37 PM   #5900
Lrfox
Senior Member
 
Lrfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,426
Re: General MBTA Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevebikes View Post
They've been bustituting on the weekends north of Harvard to replace the concrete under the rails. Wonder if today is related to that.

https://www.mbta.com/projects/red-li...ab-maintenance
Probably something to do with that. This is the actual message (still in effect, apparently):

"Due to a track condition discovered during an inspection and out of an abundance of caution, trains are operating at reduced speeds southbound between Harvard and Central. There are delays up to 15 minutes in both directions due to the restriction."

I'm guessing this will be an all day nuisance. Maybe even into tomorrow.
Lrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A discussion regarding Chinatown commuter guy Boston Architecture & Urbanism 31 05-07-2016 05:30 AM
MBTA thread(s) cleanup Arlington Board Issues and Announcements 2 03-12-2015 05:46 PM
General RER-type service thread BostonUrbEx Transit and Infrastructure 26 11-22-2014 01:16 PM
General Real Estate/Rental Discussion BostonUrbEx Boston Architecture & Urbanism 5 04-16-2012 01:46 PM
aB Awards General Discussion statler 2008 Awards Nominations & Discussion 10 02-18-2009 05:40 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.