Crazy Transit Pitches

KCasiglio said:
I'm sure there are very good reasons, but why do crayon maps never seem to pitch a restoration of service on Comm Ave all the way to Norumbega (or pick your ~128 end point). Obviously not a viable service under existing conditions, but neither are so many pitches. This seems to be a straightforward, "upzone the whole corridor and build the tracks". There's plenty of RoW, it's pretty poorly used in existing conditions. Are the grades too steep? Something else I'm missing?
Click to expand...
It could be that people are too busy looking at corridors with more density that are not or underserved as well as areas that have no close connections. Because that would currently have to be hubbed onto the already slow and long (station wise) B or C lines it doesn't make sense to consider it strongly when busses to D or Kenmore might be a better fit (again, for now).
 
KCasiglio said:
I'm sure there are very good reasons, but why do crayon maps never seem to pitch a restoration of service on Comm Ave all the way to Norumbega (or pick your ~128 end point). Obviously not a viable service under existing conditions, but neither are so many pitches. This seems to be a straightforward, "upzone the whole corridor and build the tracks". There's plenty of RoW, it's pretty poorly used in existing conditions. Are the grades too steep? Something else I'm missing?
Click to expand...
Speed, connecting to the already unreliable B branch, lack of density, and few opportunities for increasing density without demolishing existing homes.

In my opinion, to really make it work:
  • Each stop along the route would really need to be a bike Park & Ride, which while easier than a parking garage, is still space intensive.
  • It has to be connected up to the D branch or at least the C, not the B.
  • The Central Subway needs to be sped up a fair bit.
And even that it likely wouldn't be that time-competitive with the D branch at Newton Centre or Framingham/Worcester Line for people that are already cycling to the nearest station.
 
I’ve sometimes sketched a locally-oriented service that runs from Auburndale to Cleveland Circle and then interlines with the C to Kenmore where it loops. But yes, the density is quite low.

@TheRatmeister, good call on the cycling integration. I wonder if low-floor cars and lower-ridership could make it viable for bicycles to be brought on board, at least along the Newton segment.
 
Riverside said:
@TheRatmeister, good call on the cycling integration. I wonder if low-floor cars and lower-ridership could make it viable for bicycles to be brought on board, at least along the Newton segment.
Click to expand...
Folding bikes or scooters? Sure. Full sized bikes? Definitely not, unless you want to attach a whole car filled with bike racks and even then you couldn't fit that many.
 
TheRatmeister said:
Folding bikes or scooters? Sure. Full sized bikes? Definitely not, unless you want to attach a whole car filled with bike racks and even then you couldn't fit that many.
Click to expand...
There are some systems with a few bike racks at the end of every car. I've ridden on such cars in L.A., and they are well used pretty much throughout the day.
 
HenryAlan said:
There are some systems with a few bike racks at the end of every car. I've ridden on such cars in L.A., and they are well used pretty much throughout the day.
Click to expand...
You can definitely build a light rail line that can have a few bike racks, but that's very different from building a line primarily based on "bike-up" ridership with large numbers of people hoping to take bikes on board for their trip. They would fill up rather quickly and most people would just be disappointed. Better (in my opinion) to have everyone leave their bikes at the stops and not start down the rabbit hole of chasing bike capacity on trains.
 
I severely doubt that Comm Ave west of BC will ever be suitable for anything more than a local bus route. It made sense in the streetcar era to access Newton Centre, Newton Highlands, and Norumbega Park - poaching ridership from the railroads - but there was never anything more than single-family houses on Comm Ave itself between BC and Auburndale. Ridership on the bus routes using Comm Ave collapsed after the Highland Branch was converted to light rail, since it provided high-quality frequent transit from the villages where the actual density is. The NETransit history has this to say about the BC-Auburndale route (the only route using Comm Ave by 1964): "Route 535 was discontinued in June 1976. In its final days, it was used primarily by domestics reverse commuting to Newton"

1741981579615.png


Comm Ave would require a massive removal of trees which the locals would riot about, and the existing single-family housing would not be likely to densify fast enough to justify rail. It makes more much sense to focus on densifying the existing rail-served villages (replacing parking lots and single-story commercial), and doing the Riverside TOD. Newton's transit priorities should be getting frequent electric service on the Worcester Line, building the GL spur to Needham (with major TOD potential on the east side of Newton Upper Falls), and upgrading bus service on corridors like Washington Street and Boylston Street where there are pockets of density.
 
Here's the catchment area of Comm Ave Newton that's being discussed, on the population density map:

1742005449521.png


This is quite literally one of the sparsest regions in metro Boston, only after South Brookline. Even south-central Milton's main road corridors are denser.

Notwithstanding Newton's reputation of "not needing transit", if there are places in Newton that we think should get better transit and/or developments... It's along the Worcester Line and points north towards Watertown/Waltham. The second-best option would be along the D. While adding service to Comm Ave West can theoretically provide "full" coverage for Newton, the same can almost be achieved by simply improving the 52 and 59 buses.
 
Random thought experiment:

Suppose you're tasked with adding rail transit to South Boston. How would you decide between:
  • Streetcar vs. Tunnel? (This also affects stop spacing)
  • Where to connect to the Red Line: Andrew, Broadway, or South Station (via Seaport)?
    • Theoretically, a Broadway route can still continue to downtown, either Financial District or Copley
    • "South Station" typically refers to entering South Boston via Summer St / L St
South Boston is extremely dense, with the vast majority of residents far from the Red Line stations. However, I think there are a few unique factors at play, which could mean "any random route that has a stop in South Boston" may not be the most ideal:
  • South Boston's employment patterns are very downtown-centric, especially Financial District-centric. It may be one of the most downtown-centric neighborhoods in metro Boston. A direct, shorter ride to downtown may be preferable over a transfer, especially an "out of the way" one.
  • Since it's somewhat geographically isolated, South Boston is primarily a destination, not a transfer hub (unlike Harvard, Nubian, Sullivan etc). This means that compared to a fast service that makes fewer stops and requires more walking, it's plausible that that residents may prefer a "local" service with more stops closer to home.
  • West Broadway seems busier than Dorchester St with more commercial activities. Meanwhile, anything from Seaport (Summer St or L St) misses out on a huge chunk of South Boston's population.
It may or may not be a coincidence that all three of my points argue for a W Broadway - E Broadway streetcar. Indeed, this is what I've been considering for a while. (You can then try to figure out a way to hook it into Tremont St subway or something.) I'm making this post precisely because I want to hear some counterarguments, and/or justifications for alternative proposals.
 
Teban54 said:
Random thought experiment:

Suppose you're tasked with adding rail transit to South Boston. How would you decide between:
  • Streetcar vs. Tunnel? (This also affects stop spacing)
  • Where to connect to the Red Line: Andrew, Broadway, or South Station (via Seaport)?
    • Theoretically, a Broadway route can still continue to downtown, either Financial District or Copley
    • "South Station" typically refers to entering South Boston via Summer St / L St
South Boston is extremely dense, with the vast majority of residents far from the Red Line stations. However, I think there are a few unique factors at play, which could mean "any random route that has a stop in South Boston" may not be the most ideal:
  • South Boston's employment patterns are very downtown-centric, especially Financial District-centric. It may be one of the most downtown-centric neighborhoods in metro Boston. A direct, shorter ride to downtown may be preferable over a transfer, especially an "out of the way" one.
  • Since it's somewhat geographically isolated, South Boston is primarily a destination, not a transfer hub (unlike Harvard, Nubian, Sullivan etc). This means that compared to a fast service that makes fewer stops and requires more walking, it's plausible that that residents may prefer a "local" service with more stops closer to home.
  • West Broadway seems busier than Dorchester St with more commercial activities. Meanwhile, anything from Seaport (Summer St or L St) misses out on a huge chunk of South Boston's population.
It may or may not be a coincidence that all three of my points argue for a W Broadway - E Broadway streetcar. Indeed, this is what I've been considering for a while. (You can then try to figure out a way to hook it into Tremont St subway or something.) I'm making this post precisely because I want to hear some counterarguments, and/or justifications for alternative proposals.
Click to expand...
Of course the historical street car pattern in South Boston was exactly that configuration, Broadway streetcar connecting into the Tremont Street Tunnel via the Pleasant Street Portal. The configuration was easier then because before the Pike was built, and urban renewal reconfigured the street in the South Cove area, Broadway ran all the way from Southie to the Pleasant Street Portal (under now Eliot Norton Park). There is still a small piece of Broadway on the edge of Bay Village.
 
Teban54 said:
It may or may not be a coincidence that all three of my points argue for a W Broadway - E Broadway streetcar. Indeed, this is what I've been considering for a while. (You can then try to figure out a way to hook it into Tremont St subway or something.) I'm making this post precisely because I want to hear some counterarguments, and/or justifications for alternative proposals.
Click to expand...
I think it really comes down to whether people want something mainly for getting around the neighborhood or whether they want something that helps with those trips to downtown. If the rapid transit connection is at Broadway, then I suspect most people would continue to use one of the bus routes, rather than take the street car to the Red Line. Ideally, the street car could be laid out in a way that connects it to rapid transit closer to the core. If only we had a tunnel that did that! But I agree that a South Station/Silver Line routing would mean less useful local service, so again, it's what is the greater transit need? If we answer that question, then we can design the solution that fits best.
 
HenryAlan said:
If the rapid transit connection is at Broadway, then I suspect most people would continue to use one of the bus routes, rather than take the street car to the Red Line.
Click to expand...
A streetcar on Broadways is nice, but at this point, I think the benefits of it seem to mostly duplicate the benefits of the existing 9 and 10 for local service. Still stuck in traffic, vulnerable to accidents, and slow speeds. I think a reservation (like what is planned at the end of the E) would be met with fierce opposition. Southie loves their car space and the grid is working against you here with 17 cross-streets between the Red Line and City Point. There would be a lot of uproar about who loses their left or right run onto Broadway and I'm not sure how much faster it would be in the end. Tunnelling would mean it would be a lot less local and a whole lot of money.
Teban54 said:
South Boston's employment patterns are very downtown-centric, especially Financial District-centric. It may be one of the most downtown-centric neighborhoods in metro Boston. A direct, shorter ride to downtown may be preferable over a transfer, especially an "out of the way" one.
Click to expand...
Employment patterns are the main reason why I think an extension of an LRT Silver Line down to East Broadway makes the most sense. 1SR to Financial District and it's nearest commercial center, Seaport. There's space on Summer St and L St for a reservation, and there are only 5 cross-streets. Additionally, there is a slight incline from 2nd street, potentially making it easier to bury the last leg of the line ( cutting down crossings to 3 and avoiding any interference with Broadway). Another cool aspect of this is that now the entirety of South Boston has a 15-minute walk to a major transit connection.
1744900635184.png
1744900782036.png
 
This is more of a question than an actual “idea” I have to share (which is basically me slightly changing that Crossrail idea that was floated a little while back here). My “idea” is basically reusing the original Eastern R.R. ROW to reroute the entire Newburyport/Rockport Line. It would follow the old ROW until it goes behind that truck depot off of 1A. Then it would go underground, with a singular station under Logan (likely located under central parking, with either tunnels to the terminals, or to a connection with an APM), before going under the harbor. It would then curve and go under Summer street, with a station around the convention center. Finally, it would go under South Station (probably around the bus terminal), and connect with the NEC either right before Back Bay, or a little after it.

Throwing the cost aside, is this even logistically possible? Also, would this be too redundant, given it mostly follows the Blue Line? A new station would be made right before the junction in Revere, and an extension of the urban ring from Sullivan to a tunnel under the BL airport station would take over the old tracks. This also would also be paired with the NSRL.
 
Teban54 said:
Random thought experiment:

Suppose you're tasked with adding rail transit to South Boston. How would you decide between:
  • Streetcar vs. Tunnel? (This also affects stop spacing)
  • Where to connect to the Red Line: Andrew, Broadway, or South Station (via Seaport)?
    • Theoretically, a Broadway route can still continue to downtown, either Financial District or Copley
    • "South Station" typically refers to entering South Boston via Summer St / L St
South Boston is extremely dense, with the vast majority of residents far from the Red Line stations. However, I think there are a few unique factors at play, which could mean "any random route that has a stop in South Boston" may not be the most ideal:
  • South Boston's employment patterns are very downtown-centric, especially Financial District-centric. It may be one of the most downtown-centric neighborhoods in metro Boston. A direct, shorter ride to downtown may be preferable over a transfer, especially an "out of the way" one.
  • Since it's somewhat geographically isolated, South Boston is primarily a destination, not a transfer hub (unlike Harvard, Nubian, Sullivan etc). This means that compared to a fast service that makes fewer stops and requires more walking, it's plausible that that residents may prefer a "local" service with more stops closer to home.
  • West Broadway seems busier than Dorchester St with more commercial activities. Meanwhile, anything from Seaport (Summer St or L St) misses out on a huge chunk of South Boston's population.
It may or may not be a coincidence that all three of my points argue for a W Broadway - E Broadway streetcar. Indeed, this is what I've been considering for a while. (You can then try to figure out a way to hook it into Tremont St subway or something.) I'm making this post precisely because I want to hear some counterarguments, and/or justifications for alternative proposals.
Click to expand...
I think your analysis here is spot-on, particularly with regard to the Downtown-centricity and the (possible) preference for a local service.

A few datapoints for consideration:
  • Current bus ridership: looking at the 2018 Better Bus Profiles (for ease of reference, gambling that the underlying dynamics haven't shifted post-COVID):
    • 7, Summer Street <> South Station (ish): 4,400 daily riders
    • 9, E Broadway <> Broadway station <> Copley: 6,400 daily riders
      • But note: ~1,000 of these riders board at Broadway, likely transfering from the Red Line to reach destinations in the South End; effective ridership in South Boston proper may be closer to 5,400
    • 11, 8th St <> 6th St <> Broadway station <> downtown: 3,000 daily riders
That also points to a W Broadway <> E Broadway streetcar. Also worth noting that such a streetcar (running into the Central Subway via Pleasant Street) did survive for a relatively long time -- I think making it all the way to 1953. In terms of Central Subway routes, I think the only route that lasted longer was the Leonx Street branch on Tremont.

I think it's also worth noting that, to my knowledge, there has never been a particular push locally for grade-separated rapid transit service in Southie, nor any push to restore a streetcar. (Indeed, some original BERy plans called for El service to Southie, but they were dropped early on.) And I think this largely makes sense; of the reasons to institute a light rail line, not many present a strong case:
  • Dedicated ROW and speed opportunity: 🔴
    • Most of Southie's streets are narrow, so even bus lanes are difficult. There are also a lot of intersections. Given that, it seems unlikely that a streetcar would be faster than a bus -- and might actually be slower, given acceleration rates
  • Stop spacing:🟡
    • Current stop spacing is often every block, typically well-below 1000'; obviously stop consolidation is an option, but given the constrained street space, it seems reasonable to try to spread the load out rather than have larger crowds boarding at fewer stops
  • Capacity:🟢
    • These are high ridership routes, so the capacity boost of light rail could be a good fit
  • Integration into a subway:🟡
    • Yes, a light rail line could either hook into the subway at Pleasant Street, or could connect at what is now Silver Line Way
    • That being said, I don't think there's a hugely urgent need for this kind of integration
Assuming an LRT conversion of the Silver Line, I would probably look at some way to extend SL2 to City Point, or add a second branch that pops down along Summer St. Yhe original SL3 did poorly due to competition from the 7, but an LRT line would offer a 1SR to Back Bay and either Kenmore or Huntington, so it would probably command greater interest. I like @samsongam's thought process and visualization.

Heck, you could even have a second branch into Southie proper, with one going down Summer St (like @samsongam showed) and a second one reclaiming some space for a semi-dedicated ROW along Pappas Way, with about a quarter-mile of running on Dorchester St, into a transit plaza at the intersection with the Broadways:

1745179367562.png


1745178199307.png


1745177294148.png


Between those and the Red Line stations, that puts most of Southie within a 10-minute walk of a transit station.

But to me, I think the biggest swing would be serving Southie more centrally by way of a Red Line Realignment to the Seaport, with the new subway hooking down along either D Street or Dorchester St (or Track 61). Topologically, a lot of the subway <> surface connections would remain similar, just relocated east. But the advantage is that x% of Southie would be within the walkshed of a subway line, which certainly would be an upgrade.

1745179704723.png


That being said, I don't think there's a particularly urgent (Southie-based) case for the Red Realignment; to me the primary draw is serving the Seaport -- if you can tack on service to Southie, all the better of course.
 
The EGE said:
I think that's been proposed on here before, and I know Ari Ofsevit has proposed it. It's certainly not easy - you're talking 4-5 miles of new tunnel, almost entirely under water and filled land - but certainly intriguing.
Click to expand...
I don't think I had seen Ari's suggestion before, that's cool.
CheapLeak said:
This is more of a question than an actual “idea” I have to share (which is basically me slightly changing that Crossrail idea that was floated a little while back here). My “idea” is basically reusing the original Eastern R.R. ROW to reroute the entire Newburyport/Rockport Line. It would follow the old ROW until it goes behind that truck depot off of 1A. Then it would go underground, with a singular station under Logan (likely located under central parking, with either tunnels to the terminals, or to a connection with an APM), before going under the harbor. It would then curve and go under Summer street, with a station around the convention center. Finally, it would go under South Station (probably around the bus terminal), and connect with the NEC either right before Back Bay, or a little after it.

Throwing the cost aside, is this even logistically possible? Also, would this be too redundant, given it mostly follows the Blue Line? A new station would be made right before the junction in Revere, and an extension of the urban ring from Sullivan to a tunnel under the BL airport station would take over the old tracks. This also would also be paired with the NSRL.
Click to expand...
As The EGE mentions, it's been discussed here before (sometimes excluding the cross-harbor tunnel aspect).

I know I've said this before, but I think we underappreciate how good the Silver Line actually is. Believe me, it could and should be much better, don't get me wrong. But I think we don't realize how unusual it is to have a curbside 1SR directly into the CBD and to the major transit hub. Most airports with a transit connection require the intermediate use of a people-mover, which connects to a train that then goes to the CBD. SFO, JFK, and Newark are all like this, as will LAX. The only two that I can think of in North America with a direct connection to the terminals are Philadelphia and O'Hare. In Philadelphia, the Airport Line runs half-hourly (why), using 2-car trains running from platforms shorter than the Green Line's; O'Hare is best-in-class, but even there you need a people mover to get to one of the terminals.

This is why my default preference for any cross-harbor tunnel is one that can accommodate light rail trains that serve the front doors of Logan's terminals, just like the Silver Line does today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top