Crazy Transit Pitches

I was assuming you'd go between the pike and CR to Boston Landing (presumably with stops at West Station, Cambridge St, and Boston Landing (possibly outright replacing the CR station there since you'd need to rework the station a bit to get 4 tracks under Everett St). Probably the easiest way to get through Allston, but from there you'd probably need either a TBM or a pretty crazy flyover to get to Watertown.

Could do that. You'd miss Harvard Business School, but that may be best left for a GLX anyway.

Would definitely need a TBM to get to Arsenal from the Pike ROW, regardless of whether you cross at Arsenal Street or cross at N Beacon and use Talcott to get to Arsenal.
 
Alright, crazy highway idea:

If we had the budget to big dig the Southeast Expressway, and bury the whole thing all the way down to the Braintree Split, what might we do with the reclaimed land?
 
HOUSING. God, so much housing. Also, the intersection of the Pike air rights parcels and SE Expy tunnel could be a new center of town. To get really crazy we could also bury the Red Line yard and develop both sides of the Channel/Bass River.
 
You do realize that the average height in Boston is like 3 stories? You don't need these ridiculous plans to have more housing, just up zone.
 
I feel like you need improved transit. Growth without some sort of transit plan will result in an over-congested market. Although mixed use does help.
 
I would assume that making the old colony line fully double or triple tracked would help, and would be possible with the highway now buried.
 
Alright, crazy highway idea:

If we had the budget to big dig the Southeast Expressway, and bury the whole thing all the way down to the Braintree Split, what might we do with the reclaimed land?

...build an 8-lane surface boulevard with a planted median, abundant metered parking, and ample green-metal highway signage?
 
...build an 8-lane surface boulevard with a planted median, abundant metered parking, and ample green-metal highway signage?

It would be called the Rose Kennedy Greenway Extension, all the way from South Station to Braintree at a cost of about $90 billion.
 
A new line from Boston Landing to the Seaport. Stops at Boston Landing, Allston Yards, BU bridge, Yawkee, Back Bay, Ink Block, Broadway in South Boston, Convention Center South, Convention Center North/Summer Street, Massport Haul Road.
 
A new line from Boston Landing to the Seaport. Stops at Boston Landing, Allston Yards, BU bridge, Yawkee, Back Bay, Ink Block, Broadway in South Boston, Convention Center South, Convention Center North/Summer Street, Massport Haul Road.

Deep-bored and Red Line type cars: it would be like the new Crossrail line almost finished in London.
 
Last edited:
Deep-bored and Red Line type cars: it would be like the new Crossrail line almost finished in London.

That sounds just like a regular subway line rather than Crossrail. Unless we're planning on feeding it with trains coming from the Worcester Line and OC, comparisons to Crossrail are probably off.
 
That sounds just like a regular subway line rather than Crossrail. Unless we're planning on feeding it with trains coming from the Worcester Line and OC, comparisons to Crossrail are probably off.

Crossrail is a regular subway line.
 
No its not. Crossrail is linking the overground commuter rail lines together.
 
No its not. Crossrail is linking the overground commuter rail lines together.

Crossrail is kind of a hybrid. It is main line size train sets (600 ft long, 1,500 passengers), but operating at subway frequency (2.5 minute headways at peak).

It is, though, essentially a very high capacity commuter/regional rail system, with 42 km of new tunnel across central London (tying into Network Rail lines west out to Heathrow and Reading; east to Essex.)
 
Crossrail is kind of a hybrid. It is main line size train sets (600 ft long, 1,500 passengers), but operating at subway frequency (2.5 minute headways at peak).

It is, though, essentially a very high capacity commuter/regional rail system, with 42 km of new tunnel across central London (tying into Network Rail lines west out to Heathrow and Reading; east to Essex.)

Yeah - wouldn't it be more akin/analogous to the NSRL than anything else?
 
Yeah - wouldn't it be more akin/analogous to the NSRL than anything else?

Yes, particularly part of the reason Crossrail is a such a big deal is that London lacks much through running rail service, and none that east-west. I believe the only ones that currently exist are Thameslink (which has suffered from capacity issues until this year) and another line that goes through a decent ways west of the urban core.
 
The NSRL would only be a 1.5 mile connection between 2 rail nodes. Crossrail on the other hand includes a totally new 13 mile tunnel through the center of London with multiple new stations. It's much more complex then the NSRL would be.

Of course if you add in electrification of all of the commuter rail lines plus some good old Massachusetts corruption and inefficiencies the cost of the NSRL may near the cost of the Crossrail project in London.
 
The NSRL would only be a 1.5 mile connection between 2 rail nodes. Crossrail on the other hand includes a totally new 13 mile tunnel through the center of London with multiple new stations. It's much more complex then the NSRL would be.

Of course if you add in electrification of all of the commuter rail lines plus some good old Massachusetts corruption and inefficiencies the cost of the NSRL may near the cost of the Crossrail project in London.

I'm not sure that would be the case. First, I doubt London is particularly less corrupt than Massachusetts, just going off pure gut instinct. Second, electrification can be done gradually. Third, the construction of Crossrail requires a lot more finessed engineering than I understand NSRL to require.
 
Extra tall double decker 60' articulated buses for route 28 extended to Malden

Seattle has some double decker buses.

Unfortunately, those buses apparently have somewhat limited interior headroom. That's presumably a result of trying to keep the height within the typical 13.5' to 14' limit of state laws; the ADA regulations related to white cane users choose to care about people up to 6' 8" tall, and having two levels able to accomodate 6' 8" people would require 13' 4" plus a bit of extra headroom, ground clearance, and floor / ceiling space.

The big issue with building a bus 16' or 17' or 18' tall would be if the route it operates on needs to pass underneath bridges. If you can find a route that avoids passing under bridges that don't have generous clearance, then there should be no physical problem with a tall bus, although shipping it from the factory to where it gets used might be a challenge.

In looking at Google Street View images of some random parts of the MBTA's route 28, I didn't see anything south of Dudley St that would preclude an extra tall bus; the bus goes above the Fairmount Line. The busways at Dudley Station and Ruggles Station might need some changes to deal with extra tall buses.

If the route was continued northwards above the Amtrak / commuter rail tracks from Ruggles Station to Mass Ave, and then along Mass Ave to Vassar St and somehow to Lechmere, I don't think there any any obvious obstacles there unless the new Lechmere Viaduct ends up being too low.

If a bridge gets built from near Lechmere Station to Inner Belt Road, hopefully that could be above everything else.

I suspect passing under I-93 on Cambridge St to get to the existing Sullivan Station busway would be problematic. However, if the unused western tracks at Sullivan are converted to Green Line, perhaps there would be some way to share the underpasses under Mystic Ave and Broadway / Maffa Way between Green Line and tall buses; the tall bus wouldn't be any taller than the bilevel commuter rail cars, although trying to have Green Line overhead wire share the space with a tall bus might be problematic. But a ramp up to Cambridge St at the south end of the potential Green Line tracks at Sullivan would at least be to the west of I-93 and potentially solve the clearance problems passing underneath I-93.

Sweetser Circle to Malden Orange Line seems to avoid overpasses as long as the bus stays on the east side of the tracks at the Malden Orange Line station.

I'm not aware of anyone ever having built an articulated double decker bus, which might be the real challenge. And it's not clear that there's much value in a double decker articulated bus; while it would offer a good view from the upper level, the staircase(s) waste a significant amount of space (although that would probably be a smaller percentage of the lower level with a longer bus unless that's used as an opportunity to add a second staircase where typical double deckers might only have one staircase). Just running frequent 60' single level low floor buses probably provides adequate capacity.
 

Back
Top