Search results

Im assuming those limits are just for the Union Square branch, which is understandable given the curves and gradients. The way it written though makes it seem that those limits would also apply to the Medford branch which would be asinine.

N. Station to Union is almost exactly 2 miles. 10 minute trip is 12 MPH average. I think 12 MPH should be the floor rather than the ceiling on brand new/heavily rehabbed grade separated rapid transit. Is there an overzealous safety culture at the T (honest question)? EDIT. From page 1-4 of the...

I also thought stop signs were only for cars ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The motorman said the limit at first was 3(!??) MPH. Assuming he meant for testing. Again, Im hopeful they will at least permit 20 MPH (annoying but relatively minor travel time impacts). I’m doubtful trains will ever cruise at 40 though...

Took my first ride today. Snagged the “railfan” seat both ways. Came in to Union via the left hand track (no path crossing) and noticed a stop sign on that track too prior to the station. Also chatted to the motorman and asked about the speeds over the viaduct; 10 MPH limit and said it may or...

No idea why the mainline isn’t blasted through the middle other than to save the bushes. Definite head scratcher since all those signals don’t exactly make it a low cost alternative. That said Im also 128% for it.

Bikes, pedestrians, and horses are apparently allowed to use the rotaries on 28, but are prohibited on the mainline. These signs are posted just downstream of each rotary and on interchange ramps. Outright prohibited on 25, 3, and 6 until Orleans. Cycle accommodations should and will be provided...

And then some. Point l was trying to make is that a decent size market basket going in may be required to pay for roadway improvements. $14 million is way more than what most developers pay; however DBC is so large it still isn’t enough imo.

Its required per the enviromental impact process. Per DOT's TIA guidelines, DOT may require mitgation measures if, "Generation of 2,000 or more new ADT by motor vehicles on roadways providing access to a single location or Generation of 1,000 or more new ADT by motor vehicles on roadways...

Another thing to note is that their congestion analysis doesn’t look as bad as actual operations since the existing network operates at LOS E or F already. If one just glanced at the results, a degradation of one letter grade from an E to an F or holding constant at an F doesn’t look that bad...

If the proponent wasn’t proposing underground parking under literally every building (net 3000 new spaces) I would agree with you. Their own analysis predicts the addition of 1500 new peak hour vehicular trips, enough to overwhelm Columbia point even if the roadway network wasn’t already...

For greenfield development in the Midwest, admittedly not terrible. Though in typical MDOT fashion, no accommodation for non-motorized users. The problem with doing something like this for K circle is that it would be about four times the size, significantly lengthening the pedestrian detour...

Very suboptimal from a pedestrian perspective due to the circuitous routing. Also God help the guy unlucky enough to have to design the vehicular guide signs.

However, l whole heartedly agree that it is ridiculous that it costs $9.40 to travel from Reading to DTX on CR VS $2.40 from Braintree and Riverside when the latter two have objectively better service with rapid transit. In what world does worse service warrant a 400% premium? Personally, its...

While l agree with most of it, the presumption that 100 MPH operation could be achieved on the inner Haverhill line strains the credibility of the whole report. Even if the track geometry allowed it, with the five Melrose-Wakefield stations averaging a mile apart (plus all the grade crossings)...

Wow, the recommended alternative in that report is cut and cover the whole thing. Maybe this time around the alternative analysis was actually done to select the best alternative instead of sandbagging the whole thing (shocking l know).

Approval yes, but funding not necessarily. Town might have thought it could have been done cheap enough that they would only need to get an access permit and (at least mostly) fund it themselves. Same process as when a town or developer wants to connect a new street to a non-limited access state...

The weaving condition is caused by exactly that. Functions the same as the inner ramps of a cloverleaf, except some Washington St entering traffic stays within that lane to exit onto 93 S, further complicating the weave for 128 N - 93 S traffic. Thats why this flyover in the most recent...

Im assuming primarily local traffic with minimal effect on the 128 or 93 mainlines. The queues on the Washington St on ramp are brutal, in addition to the slog of lights South along Washington, especially the LT movement at the on ramp. Reading between the lines of the feasibility study, it...

Nope, Nope, Nope. Splicing a new ramp on to an existing one at an entrance gore is about the worst thing you could propose, not even considering the speed differential from the tight curve up the embankment. Also the 93 S breakdown lane is already stripped as a travel lane. Don’t know how...

Bog standard third rail electrification for mainline rail, like in NYC, southeast England, and Berlin would be the equivalent. Pre HS1, even Eurostar trains ran on legacy third rail power from London to the Chunnel. Not sure if FRA allows new third rail grade crossings (Metro North, LIRR, and...