Forest City/MIT Project @ University Park | 300 Massachusetts Ave | Cambridge

Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

That's when cambridge will be booming more than boston. The T will be a nightmare, its already packed at Central in the 8-9 am hour. That needs to be fixed and the only real way to fix the one bus is to do something about the boston side of the bridge.

At least they have a hardrailing running through the area. Thats more than you can say for the Seaport Traffic grid.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

work on the street level and the exterior and a few of those do a lot to keep grads and post-grads in the area at reasonable prices. Either that, or existing residents will continue to get displaced as Novartis employees look for housing nearby and outbid the family that's been there for 30 years.

BTW- is your building the one with the fence and playground around it? I walk by that one on main street in kendall every day- its Cambridge's very own harbor tower.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

At least they have a hardrailing running through the area. Thats more than you can say for the Seaport Traffic grid.

Hard rail that's quickly reaching it's capacity at current service levels.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

The Red Line is heavily peaked in one direction, right?

More office space at Alewife would work well. Okay, that's out of scope for this thread :)

Anyone know if there's any study in the works using the new transportation funding about upgrading/fixing the signals on the Red Line, particularly downtown?
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

^very much during crunch time. In the morning there is a fitchburg train that gets to porter at say 8:12. That place the normal station load means trains at Central are barely getting people on. On days when headways are 3 minutes it works, but if its 5 the platforms refill pretty quick. If its any longer there is an issue and god help you. Hopefully new cars stop those times, but how much can be done with 3 minute headways already in place? f-Line- is that a signal issue?
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

Hard rail that's quickly reaching it's capacity at current service levels.

The best billion dollars the T could ever spend is CBTC-signaling Red for 2-3 minute headways, plus buying the requisite number of extra vehicles to feed those service levels. That would fix the overcrowding in a hurry.


The 2003 PMT estimates $789M (2003 dollars) for the installation including extra vehicles, Cabot/Codman/Braintree Yards storage expansion, and power draw increases. Assumes 2-minute headways at peak. Increases would net +9700 new daily Red boardings and +3400 new daily transit riders currently taking no form of transit. Headways in the proposal are on the aggressive end because Alewife Yard is going to have trouble keeping up, but 3 mins. is pretty consistent with other CBTC retrofits worldwide on HRT systems and Red poses no unusual challenges (definitely none of the challenges they have attempting similar on Green). Ridership projections seem very very conservative since the same retrofit on Blue netted +8800 daily boardings. I bet it's closer to the mid/high-teens.


The MTA just released its vision statement for billions in future NYC Subway investment, and this very thing trumps finishing the 2nd Ave. Subway on the priority list for what it would do to relieve overcrowding on their heaviest lines like Lexington Ave. This isn't a speculative maybe...it's real found capacity. Red/Orange/Blue are a piece of cake compared to what the MTA is undertaking.


----------

The other thing that would help is eventually getting GLX to Porter as a load-spreader. If people from Cambridge are going through the gut to downtown to transfer to Green in the EB direction towards North Station, they've got a far easier commute from Central and Harvard going the contra-flow direction on an empty Red train to transfer at Porter instead of riding a sardine-packed Red train and waiting for a sardine-packed trolley at Park that's got par odds of running late.
 
Last edited:
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

The capacity of the red line is fine 90% or more of time. Morning crush will always happen, but people adjust their schedules to accommodate. Until the state is ready to build the Urban Ring rush hour is going to suck.

How short are you going to make headways? 2 minutes? Less? I think people will adjust their commuting pattern before demand ever gets that high.

Mixed-use development at all transit stops can help alleviate the crush in the near term and on into eternity. More jobs mixed into the largely residential outlying stops and more residences in the downtown core will get people moving in all directions or not needing transit at all if home and work are close enough to walk or bike.

Voila - "added capacity" during rush hour that doesn't cost the MBTA or riders a dime.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

5 minute headways are not sufficient long-term on such an important trunk line. Someday, even if they do the right thing and promote mixed use density near all the stations, it will be necessary to bring the frequency more into line with similar class systems. Keep in mind that the frequency is divided on the Ashmont branch, which goes through areas with a lot of growth potential and high ridership already, and the Braintree branch which is hosting the redevelopment of Quincy Center.

The Red Line is not anywhere close to the theoretical capacity limit for fixed block signals. Extension to 8 or 10 cars would be good too, but I don't think that's an option.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

The capacity of the red line is fine 90% or more of time. Morning crush will always happen, but people adjust their schedules to accommodate. Until the state is ready to build the Urban Ring rush hour is going to suck.

How short are you going to make headways? 2 minutes? Less? I think people will adjust their commuting pattern before demand ever gets that high.

Mixed-use development at all transit stops can help alleviate the crush in the near term and on into eternity. More jobs mixed into the largely residential outlying stops and more residences in the downtown core will get people moving in all directions or not needing transit at all if home and work are close enough to walk or bike.

Voila - "added capacity" during rush hour that doesn't cost the MBTA or riders a dime.

The problem with Red is that its old, pre-1988 wayside signal system allowed much tighter headways than today. When they installed the current ATO cab signals it was simultaneous with the introduction of 6-car trains replacing the former 4-car trains. The T incorrectly assumed that 6-car trains would swallow up the crowds so well that dwell times would be trivial forevermore, obviating the need for short signal blocks and letting them permanently relax the headways. Within 5 years flat the demand started overwhelming capacity, dwells at stations like Park with narrow platforms and egresses only on one side got WORSE with 6 cars than they were with 4, and those too-long downtown signal blocks became an escalating choke point. This is why why morning rush has nearly every train pausing on the Longfellow and crawling to Park, and PM rush has so many trains holding at Broadway, SS, and DTX for schedule corrections.

It all used to work, but has been artificially crippled for 25 years. They have to fix what they broke. They CAN fix what they broke without needing to consider boondoggle solutions like excavating 8-car platforms in every station to slam into the same choke points. Now, they don't have to do 2-minute headways if they don't want. NYC Subway so far has only installed CBTC on a few stub-end shuttle lines that never see that much traffic. But the advantage of that system is that it's 2-way, higher-bandwidth communication between train and signal system that doesn't rely on fixed blocks hard-wired into the trackside hardware. The current system can only bark STOP or levy a unilateral speed penalty at a block. It's all-or-nothing. CBTC can do moving blocks with the live 2-way computers self-correcting for choke points so you don't have to have aggravating dead stops in the tunnel anymore...you can just hold back a few MPH from Harvard to Central to Kendall until the next train ahead that's departing Kendall behind schedule catches back up to proper train spacing. This saves those "hold for schedule adjustment" gaps where the Central platform gets dangerously overcrowded. That's immediate gains in schedule resiliency and dramatic reduction in delays even if they buy not one more car to do 1 second's better avg. headway. It'll seem like much better headways simply by closing up the gaps and eliminating those mind-numbing pauses for bunching.

It's also adaptable vs. frozen in time. If they don't want to buy more cars or upgrade the power system now, it'll cost a lot less to do just signals and still reap the OTP benefits of the new system. But if they want to tighten headways later, they can just reprogram the computer for tighter moving blocks instead of being stuck for 25 years with fixed capacity that can only be modified with $$$ and labor.



I do think that flushing headways tighter does more overall for the overcrowding than any other single solution. They still need Red-Blue and a Green-SS/Seaport link to relieve loads because those Park and DTX platform dwells can't be allowed to get any worse. Not even a signal system is going to save the Park platforms from getting so overstuffed right up to the yellow safety line that it takes 5 minutes for the crowds to reach the stairs. But any way you slice it Red's still going to be the biggest load-bearing backbone of them all. And it's not firing on all cylinders today with its decaying condition and self-induced flow mistakes. Fix it now and it still has lots of room to grow.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

Yes, they need to clone the building I live in

Indeed but that requires leadership with backbone to stand up to NIMBY extremism, something that's in rather short supply, backbone that is. Far too often a boutique solution is applied to the huge housing demand—20 new units here 35 there when double that amount would still be underbuilding.

Seemingly everyone, politicians and citizens alike, agree there aren't enough units. But when the rubber hits the road the NIMBYs scream for fewer floors and less square footage and they almost always get it. Again, where is the leadership telling them no, telling them that there is a greater good beyond their own self-centeredness?
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

Well, thank you Beeline for creating this thread for information about 300 Mass Ave...

I look forward to this infill. The ground floor could be quite active if done right. Great to be bringing more people to this area too.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

Well, thank you Beeline for creating this thread for information about 300 Mass Ave...

I look forward to this infill. The ground floor could be quite active if done right.

^iData for moderator, 2013!

While not all that innovative, I like the building as proposed. But it's really going to depend on the materials. If its clad in something cheap its going to look like garbage, but a real stone will make it pop. The big windows are going to look great either way.
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

BTW- is your building the one with the fence and playground around it? I walk by that one on main street in kendall every day- its Cambridge's very own harbor tower.

Yes it is... the ground level sucks (although it might have made more sense in 1967)
 
Re: 300 Mass Ave (Central Sq) Cambridge

The Red Line is not anywhere close to the theoretical capacity limit for fixed block signals. Extension to 8 or 10 cars would be good too, but I don't think that's an option.

Mathew -- By suggesting 8 or 10 cars -- Obviously you were not here when the T went from 4 to 6 cars on the Red Line.

That necessitated lengthening most of the platforms -- for instance a good sized chunk of Main St. in Cambridge was open to the sky for several months as the Kendall platform was lengthened and the challenge at Park St. Under was even more substantial

No the system will have to accommodate permanent levels of increased usage through the previously mentioned improvements to signals to let the trains get closer.

However, even that will be limited due to the capacity of the platforms and the stairs, etc.

The only viable solution to the rush short of huge capital investment -- is spreading of the rush's duration -- which will happen naturally.

For example, gnerd-centric companies don't need to keep everyone on the kind of hours that the Big financial service companies keep as they are not all synchronized. As those kinds of companies proliferate the rush will spread out over more time and become less of an acute peak crowding to an extended chronic lower level of crowding.
 
I think you might not be understanding what the phrase "but I don't think that's an option" means.
 
It seems a bit much to suggest the Red Line needs to expand its capacity even during rush hour. I think having a couple of the "Big Red" high capacity trains should be more than enough...the trains get crowded, but not THAT crowded.
 
^ It's getting THAT crowded quickly, especially with all the TOD growth.
 

Back
Top