Reasonable Transit Pitches

[JumboBuc]

What are people's thoughts on Ari Ofsevit's plan, from December, to run trams along Track 61 from Black Falcon to the Red Line at Andrew?

The Amateur Planner: The Track 61 High Speed Line (and new trains for Mattapan)

It's the route of Track 61 which is most intriguing, as it would make a last-mile connection between the Red Line and the Seaport, which currently requires a ride on two over-capacity transit lines (the Red Line to South Station and the Silver Line to the Seaport). For commuters from the south going to the Seaport, a transfer at Andrew would save five minutes of commute time, and (more importantly) it would pull some demand off of the Silver Line at rush hour, when buses run every minute-or-so at crush capacity and leave passengers on the platform. With some minor (seven figure) improvements (stations, overhead, a couple of interlockings), there is an unused rail corridor with mostly-existing rail on which the PCCs (or new rolling stock) could be run in relatively short order.

Sorry if this was discussed here before, but I don't remember it coming up.

 

[Shepard]

My impression is that south-side Red Line riders make up a relatively small number of the total transfers to SL Waterfront, and you'd be building a shiny new train just for those trips.

It also doesn't solve - and indeed simply reproduces - what I believe to be the #1 Achilles heel of the SL service: that it's a stub line with no direct rapid transit connections beyond the Red Line. What's really needed is greater system connectivity. That being said, Ari's rather painless way of bringing this service out to Andrew can be extended into a crazier, but far more useful transit pitch: streetcar onto Southampton Street and up onto Mass Ave for Orange and Green Line connections. You'd obviously need some extreme street-reengineering and signal priority to make this service anywhere near rapid. But, I believe that if you could, you might draw some GL and OL riders off those respective services and onto the Track 61 routing. Where would it end? Central seems logical, maybe using Bishop Allen and Green Streets as parallel routes through that congested section of Cambridge, and looping around on Prospect/Western/River Streets.

 

[curcuas]

Question:
Is there any reason we can't pave around the tracks of the above-ground Green Line reservations and allow busses to drive in them too? It seems like this could speed and enhance the efficiency of the 57 / B and the 39 / E. They'd clearly need to exit before the portals, but that's still a good distance of a protected lane (and combined stops)

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

What are people's thoughts on Ari Ofsevit's plan, from December, to run trams along Track 61 from Black Falcon to the Red Line at Andrew?

Don't build transit where it's cheapest to do so, build it where it will be most effective.

 

[whittle]

Question:
Is there any reason we can't pave around the tracks of the above-ground Green Line reservations and allow busses to drive in them too? It seems like this could speed and enhance the efficiency of the 57 / B and the 39 / E. They'd clearly need to exit before the portals, but that's still a good distance of a protected lane (and combined stops)

The 57 beats the Green Line between Kenmore and Packard's Corner at least 90% of the time, so having the 57 run in the median would lead to the 57 getting stuck behind green line trains.

 

[novitiate]

Question:
Is there any reason we can't pave around the tracks of the above-ground Green Line reservations and allow busses to drive in them too? It seems like this could speed and enhance the efficiency of the 57 / B and the 39 / E. They'd clearly need to exit before the portals, but that's still a good distance of a protected lane (and combined stops)

In addition to the point whittle mentions (which also applies to the 39/E), the lanes are too narrow for buses, especially at stations. I don't think you could fit two buses side by side with the necessary space between them. (Same reason the Silver Line Waterfront stations are wider than Green Line stations)

 

[curcuas]

The 57 beats the Green Line between Kenmore and Packard's Corner at least 90% of the time, so having the 57 run in the median would lead to the 57 getting stuck behind green line trains.

The reasons the 57 beat the green line could be (and are being) corrected with all door boarding, PoP fare payment, and signal priority. Anecdotally, they also seem to be caused by overcrowding.

Interesting that two busses simply can't fit side by side. By splitting the frequency between bus stops and green line stops that aren't coterminus, you're not maximizing headways and reliability

 

[The EGE]

The 57 and the B Branch should serve different markets. Until not too long ago, the 57 ran semi-express (dropoff-only inbound, pickup-only outbound) east of Packards Corner, and the B Branch handled intra-BU traffic. I believe BU pressured the T into making the 57 all-local because they were too lazy to fund a campus bus.

 

[whittle]

The reasons the 57 beat the green line could be (and are being) corrected with all door boarding, PoP fare payment, and signal priority.

These could all benefit bus speed too (signal priority depends on how its implemented) and don't affect the bus's acceleration and braking speed advantages.

 

[dwash59]

The 57 and the B Branch should serve different markets. Until not too long ago, the 57 ran semi-express (dropoff-only inbound, pickup-only outbound) east of Packards Corner, and the B Branch handled intra-BU traffic. I believe BU pressured the T into making the 57 all-local because they were too lazy to fund a campus bus.

But BU does have a campus bus? And during rush hour, the 57 is often so full leaving Kenmore that it doesn't stop at all until Packard's corner, so it doesn't even pick people up going outbound.

 

[The EGE]

BU's official transportation plan claims that the BU Bus is for transit to the Med Campus only, and not intended for intra-bus trips. It also claims that the B Branch and 57 are under capacity at rush hour - using what I believe to be 1995 data.

Without anyone trying to use the 57 for intra-BU trips, it would be somewhat less crowded leaving Kenmore in the first place. The 57 also needs much, much more aggressive terminal dispatching - many trips leave late because the drivers and inspectors don't care enough.

 

[whittle]

BU's official transportation plan claims that the BU Bus is for transit to the Med Campus only, and not intended for intra-bus trips.

The BUS's scheduling emphasizes this. It's every 10 minutes during peak and every 20 minutes midday (10am-4pm), which is okay for serving BU CRC to BUMC demand, but is almost useless for serving intra-CRC demand (particularly when the weather is bad) since most BU classes are between 10 and 4.

Also the B-Line and 57 are well below capacity during midday, so, combined with their better stop frequency through BU, they are fairly well suited to meet the peak demand for intra-CRC trips. (Though the only students who use the 57 or B-Line frequently are off-campus students with T-passes who have much less need for intra-campus trips.)

 

[DominusNovus]

How much could the various vehicles operated by the MBTA be consolidated?

 

[CSTH]

^ my understanding is that on the subway side of things, red orange and blue increasingly have interchangeable parts, even if the dimensions of the actual vehicles are different - its effectively modular.

On the greenline its about the mix of different generations and models of vehicles, and i think its going to take a lot of attrition over time until that gets reasonably rationalized.

Heavy rail is pretty straightforward and no idea about buses.

But that's just what I recall from several years of good comments from F-Line, WinstonBoogie and others...

 

[bakgwailo]

^ my understanding is that on the subway side of things, red orange and blue increasingly have interchangeable parts, even if the dimensions of the actual vehicles are different - its effectively modular.

On the greenline its about the mix of different generations and models of vehicles, and i think its going to take a lot of attrition over time until that gets reasonably rationalized.

Heavy rail is pretty straightforward and no idea about buses.

But that's just what I recall from several years of good comments from F-Line, WinstonBoogie and others...

I think that was true of the Orange + old Blue rolling stock. The new Red + Orange will be exactly the same though (minus cosmetics/dimensions), with the Blue the odd line out.

 

[djohnstonb]

I've read that there's interest in a slx to Everett, but are there any mockups of what that might look like?

 

[George_Apley]

I've read that there's interest in a slx to Everett, but are there any mockups of what that might look like?

I'd imagine it'd involve extending the SLX at Market Basket and somehow interfacing with Second Street to Broadway?

Unless the speculation would be to continue SLX along the RR ROW to the Casino? F-Line has divulged his opinion about why that would be hard for busses contra LRV.

 

[Arlington]

I just think Riverway's location on that corner is perfect. It's a natural spot for a stop- a major crossroads.

I would like to see the Longwood stop on the D re-located 500ft to the south, to be directly at/under Longwood Ave,. This improves its location in two ways:
- Work: a 0.1 mile savings shaves 20% ~ 30% off the typical walk to the BIDMC/DF/Childrens core, making it a much better walk (eliminating the "spooky trees" bit on Chapel Street.
- Residential: better serves apartments along Longwood Ave in Brookline, instead of over-serving places already served by the C.

I'd like to see the station rebuilt with the following elements:
- Elevator directly to Longwood Ave, similar to Fenway.
- broad, open, well-lit sidewalks all along Longwood Ave
- More shelter on both inbound and outbound sides


Even more reasonable: upgrade inbound and outbound side walkways (replace with well-lit covered ramps). Doesn't save the 0.1 mile, but would improve the walk.

 

[DZH22]

I would like to see the parking capacity increased at Alewife and other terminus T stops. How can suburban commuters be encouraged to ride the T when they can't park at the stations most convenient to them during normal work hours?

 

[Arlington]

I would like to see the parking capacity increased at Alewife and other terminus T stops. How can suburban commuters be encouraged to ride the T when they can't park at the stations most convenient to them during normal work hours?

Alewife's structure includes the stumps on top that two additional levels of parking would tie into, and its elevators go 2 levels higher than the garage, ie the garage was originally designed to be expanded by about 50%, as seen in this Wikimedia photo: where you can see the concrete knock-outs for the elevator lobby windows on unbuilt levels "6" and "7" (for which the elevators even have unused blank buttons)

F-Line has written (long ago) that this hasn't happened because they later determined that the foundation/structure could not support it. While I accept that this kind of error can happen in swampy fill, I'd really like to see this confirmed as the "why" it has not happened, and even so see the foundation issue revisited--maybe a new foundation technology like grout injection or helical piles can solve the problem now.

Lift Fan Video showing unused "6" and "7" on the panel above the doors (at 0:03) and the blank buttons(at 2:12):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA1dK9bNim0

Also the glass atrium is tall enough to support escalators to the unbuilt upper levels.