Crazy Transit Pitches

[whighlander]

Thanks!

CZ - pink line is actually two red line branches shown in a differentiated color (as I did also with the GL) -1) Alewife – Readville ,via Mass Ave tunnel and Fairmount Line; 2)South Station – Readville, via Fairmount Line (not connected to through-line at SS)
I suppose you're right about Needham - that's not all that immediately necessary. But I do think OL to WRox is more necessary - and if you're tearing out the Needham line for that purpose, replacement service would be necessary, right?

Van - Honored you like the style! I did this in Sketchup actually, making very heavy use of the offset tool and style window. Here's another view of the same map without the style and angled perspective:

Shep -- its elegant -- but No-one can claim to be serious about expansion of the T to increase its utility rather than as a political gesture -- unless you provide some reasonable way to effectively link Kendall to Hanscom and Burlington NW / Network Drive. After Kendall, Longwood, the SPID, Alston/Brighton -- Hanscom & NW-Park are the two most likely major growth areas in the inner Hub (inside and on Rt-128). They have the right demographics, good highway access and already are developed at a certain level.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Here's my stylized map showing what I believe to be the most critical extensions over coming decades, both to serve new areas and also enhance the efficiency of the network.

Green Line
BC –Government Center
Cleveland Circle – “Silver Line Way”, via surface Essex Street (closed to vehicles)and Piers Transitway (Silver Line Tunnel)
Riverside – Porter
Needham Center – Kenmore
Heath Street - West Medford
Ashmont – Park Street, via BHA and Dudley and Tremont Street Tunnel
Navy Yard – City Point, via surface Greenway and Piers Transitway

Orange Line
Needham Center – Oak Grove

Red Line
Alewife – Ashmont
Alewife – Braintree
Alewife – Readville ,via Mass Ave tunnel and Fairmount Line
South Station – Readville, via Fairmount Line (not connected to through-line at SS)

Blue Line
Charles/MGH – Lynn
Charles/MGH – Chelsea

Shuttle Line
South Station to Back Bay (via DMU) – extended to Yawkee for Red Sox home games

Airport Express Shuttle Bus
Serving South Station, BCEC, terminals, and Airport BL

I like most of it, but I do have a few small problems.

Green Line: There's no reason to run surface-level at Essex Street between two tunnels, you gain nothing by shutting that road off to vehicles but you do create a huge obstacle to through traffic unless you allow crossings over. In my opinion, shutting any roads down in that area should be an all-or-nothing proposition, and I'd lean on the side of ending all non-pedestrian traffic between Tremont, Purchase, and Congress Streets north of Stuart/Kneeland and south of Court if you came to me with a serious proposal for getting that done in 20 years or so. That aside, I'd seriously consider taking at least one or two of those Green Line branches and branding them a separate color - seven branches just feels like too many branches to me. Say... why not call City Point to Navy Yard and Cleveland Circle to "Silver Line Way" (which should be made into a proper station and rebranded Seaport Station or Pavilion Station) the Silver Line? No reason we can't repurpose that color after finally ditching the Silver Bus.
Shuttle Line & Red Line: I'd really like to see these two connected somehow. Is it possible to turn a train at South Station, extending the "Indigo Line" to Back Bay and Yawkey?

 

[whighlander]

I like most of it, but I do have a few small problems.

Green Line: There's no reason to run surface-level at Essex Street between two tunnels, you gain nothing by shutting that road off to vehicles but you do create a huge obstacle to through traffic unless you allow crossings over. In my opinion, shutting any roads down in that area should be an all-or-nothing proposition, and I'd lean on the side of ending all non-pedestrian traffic between Tremont, Purchase, and Congress Streets north of Stuart/Kneeland and south of Court if you came to me with a serious proposal for getting that done in 20 years or so. That aside, I'd seriously consider taking at least one or two of those Green Line branches and branding them a separate color - seven branches just feels like too many branches to me. Say... why not call City Point to Navy Yard and Cleveland Circle to "Silver Line Way" (which should be made into a proper station and rebranded Seaport Station or Pavilion Station) the Silver Line? No reason we can't repurpose that color after finally ditching the Silver Bus.
Shuttle Line & Red Line: I'd really like to see these two connected somehow. Is it possible to turn a train at South Station, extending the "Indigo Line" to Back Bay and Yawkey?

Again -- you are just wasting time and effort extending any existing subway lines inside Rt-128 -- beyond what is in the pipeline or the extended pipeline.

None of those are at all likely in the next 20 to 30 years

The real opportunities for anything other than buses or Commuter Rail for several reasons:
1) economics - where the business is
2) economics -- where the money and political power is located
3) demographics -- where are the people with interests in 1) and 2)

are associated with:
1) SPID -- most probably Silver Line in tunnels
2) Harvard Alston -- possibly the New Balance
3) NW Tech belt (Winter St Waltham - Hanscom - Burlington NW Park

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Again -- you are just wasting time and effort extending any existing subway lines inside Rt-128 -- beyond what is in the pipeline or the extended pipeline.

None of those are at all likely in the next 20 to 30 years

The real opportunities for anything other than buses or Commuter Rail for several reasons:
1) economics - where the business is
2) economics -- where the money and political power is located
3) demographics -- where are the people with interests in 1) and 2)

are associated with:
1) SPID -- most probably Silver Line in tunnels
2) Harvard Alston -- possibly the New Balance
3) NW Tech belt (Winter St Waltham - Hanscom - Burlington NW Park

It's not going to be people like me who are wasting the time and effort. The core of the system needs to be more efficient before we can focus on the fringes, and yes, anything outside of 128 is by definition the fringes.

Opposing any attempts at making the system better starting with the core because there's just so much demand for the Red Line at Hanscom is a) stupid and b) liable to provoke a Chris Christie-esque "Then I'll go back home and order a pizza, you call me when you're willing to negotiate" reaction. I don't think focusing on things like Green Line Heavy Rail and Blue Line to Charles/MGH are really a waste of time and effort, but I'm happy to waste all the time in the world and continue screwing Hanscom, Allston and the SPID if that's the way we want to frame this conversation.

e: In fact, here's the deal: Waltham and Allston want rapid transit? They can get it via the Blue Line. Oh, wait, the Blue Line can't get to Waltham or Allston without going through Charles/MGH. Guess that just means no rapid transit for those communities, since the Red-Blue Connector just can't get done...

 

[whighlander]

It's not going to be people like me who are wasting the time and effort. The core of the system needs to be more efficient before we can focus on the fringes, and yes, anything outside of 128 is by definition the fringes.

Opposing any attempts at making the system better starting with the core because there's just so much demand for the Red Line at Hanscom is a) stupid and b) liable to provoke a Chris Christie-esque "Then I'll go back home and order a pizza, you call me when you're willing to negotiate" reaction. I don't think focusing on things like Green Line Heavy Rail and Blue Line to Charles/MGH are really a waste of time and effort, but I'm happy to waste all the time in the world and continue screwing Hanscom, Allston and the SPID if that's the way we want to frame this conversation.

e: In fact, here's the deal: Waltham and Allston want rapid transit? They can get it via the Blue Line. Oh, wait, the Blue Line can't get to Waltham or Allston without going through Charles/MGH. Guess that just means no rapid transit for those communities, since the Red-Blue Connector just can't get done...

Commute -- " beyond what is in the pipeline or the extended pipeline. "

Red-Blue is in the pipe or extended pipe

I'm talking about the Shep-like Orange Line to Needham -- was in the plan long ago -- but the city was totally different place -- e.g. no Kendall, no Harvard Alston

Besides -- I've always advocated electrified CR to enable frequent, single or double-unit self-propelled service -- now with the new Smartphone Ticket-App this is even more feasible -- i.e. no conductors, no paper tickets

 

[BostonUrbEx]

What a cool map, Shep! Thank you muchly for sharing!

 

[Shepard]

Thanks for the compliments!

Riverside - I understand the point you're making about the Fairmount line and reasons not to cannibalize it for heavy rail. If kept as a DMU/EMU line it can be connected as part of what I've called the Shuttle Line from SS to BB (Commuting Boston Student made that suggestion). I'll render an alternate version showing this arrangement.

Commuting Boston Student - I'm actually very much in favor of the Essex Street transitway idea. I think if traffic is allowed to cross Essex, and the street can still be used minimally to an extent (e.g by taxis, at certain times open to general traffic, etc) then it can be a success and most of the through-traffic can easily be re-routed down Kneeland. It's also a much less expensive option than tunneling under the NEC from the end of the Tremont Street Tunnel towards South Station. In fact, Boylston is so close to the surface (you can actually see daylight from the trains) that a portal on that end would be highly pragmatic. The more expensive portal would be down towards South Station, but even there you'd have the existing Silver Line tunnel right below the surface.

Westie - You're dreaming something silly if you think that Hanscom and Burlington are the most important rapid transit extensions we should be advocating at the moment.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Thanks for the compliments!

Riverside - I understand the point you're making about the Fairmount line and reasons not to cannibalize it for heavy rail. If kept as a DMU/EMU line it can be connected as part of what I've called the Shuttle Line from SS to BB (Commuting Boston Student made that suggestion). I'll render an alternate version showing this arrangement.

Commuting Boston Student - I'm actually very much in favor of the Essex Street transitway idea. I think if traffic is allowed to cross Essex, and the street can still be used minimally to an extent (e.g by taxis, at certain times open to general traffic, etc) then it can be a success and most of the through-traffic can easily be re-routed down Kneeland. It's also a much less expensive option than tunneling under the NEC from the end of the Tremont Street Tunnel towards South Station. In fact, Boylston is so close to the surface (you can actually see daylight from the trains) that a portal on that end would be highly pragmatic. The more expensive portal would be down towards South Station, but even there you'd have the existing Silver Line tunnel right below the surface.

Westie - You're dreaming something silly if you think that Hanscom and Burlington are the most important rapid transit extensions we should be advocating at the moment.

To be honest I'd oppose any expansion of the Red Line in its current form that wasn't a package deal with CBTC (and whatever else is needed to clear out the DTX-SS log jams once and for all) and possibly Red-Blue if I can't find some other project to attach that to (see earlier Blue Line Westbound proposals.) 24 hour service on the Red and Green Lines would be nice too if we can get it.

Essex Street transitway... I'm slowly talking myself into supporting that, although I still don't like shutting streets off piecemeal without a solid plan to eventually shut them ALL off in the area I previously mentioned, which I'm also becoming more convinced is a good idea. Inside Tremont-Stuart-Kneeland-Congress-Court isn't that large of an area when you consider it.

As for transit priorities, after the aformentioned Red Line stuff, Green Line Heavy Rail, I would say the priorities are Blue Line to Allston-Brighton-Watertown-Waltham, Needham and Fairmount Lines companion Rapid Transit Service (which doesn't need to and shouldn't replace the existing Commuter Rail), and you guys are doing a great job of selling me on a Mass Ave. subway after that.

Is it at all feasable or even possible to build an AirTrain Boston/Logan on a bridge over the harbor? I like the idea of a Silver Line Light Rail replacing SL2&4, abandoning SL5 to DTX and running an El or a monorail(!) over the water for service to South Station, Logan Harborside Ferry Terminal, the Airport Terminals, Central Parking and Airport Station.

 

[Equilibria]

As for transit priorities, after the aformentioned Red Line stuff, Green Line Heavy Rail, I would say the priorities are Blue Line to Allston-Brighton-Watertown-Waltham, Needham and Fairmount Lines companion Rapid Transit Service (which doesn't need to and shouldn't replace the existing Commuter Rail), and you guys are doing a great job of selling me on a Mass Ave. subway after that.

Is it at all feasable or even possible to build an AirTrain Boston/Logan on a bridge over the harbor? I like the idea of a Silver Line Light Rail replacing SL2&4, abandoning SL5 to DTX and running an El or a monorail(!) over the water for service to South Station, Logan Harborside Ferry Terminal, the Airport Terminals, Central Parking and Airport Station.

I would actually say that DMU service should be the first thing the T does after signal work (F-Line has sold me on that as priority 1), since Blue Line expansion would be far more costly and serve fewer people (it's hard to gain ridership on a line where there's never been one, and Allston can be served with a DMU stop next to New Balance).

On the subject of the Blue Line, though, it would probably be less expensive to send a spur tunnel off of the Blue Line to a new station under Central Parking at Logan than to build a bridge from SB, even if it were logistically possible (and I don't think it is). Honestly, though, an express bus from South Station to the terminals by way of the Convention Center serves the Silver Line's purpose at the airport fine and probably quicker if the tunnel were to be turned over to a harbor trolley.

Of course, a people mover from the terminals to the ConRac and T Station would also do the job, and of the luxury options is probably the cheapest to build. The silly thing is that if you were going downtown you'd spend more time on the people mover than on the subway...

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I would actually say that DMU service should be the first thing the T does after signal work (F-Line has sold me on that as priority 1), since Blue Line expansion would be far more costly and serve fewer people (it's hard to gain ridership on a line where there's never been one, and Allston can be served with a DMU stop next to New Balance).

On the subject of the Blue Line, though, it would probably be less expensive to send a spur tunnel off of the Blue Line to a new station under Central Parking at Logan than to build a bridge from SB, even if it were logistically possible (and I don't think it is). Honestly, though, an express bus from South Station to the terminals by way of the Convention Center serves the Silver Line's purpose at the airport fine and probably quicker if the tunnel were to be turned over to a harbor trolley.

Of course, a people mover from the terminals to the ConRac and T Station would also do the job, and of the luxury options is probably the cheapest to build. The silly thing is that if you were going downtown you'd spend more time on the people mover than on the subway...

Actually, Blue Line has FAR more ridership than anything they could do with a choo-choo short of the North-South Link. Blue to Lynn is +21,000 daily riders, +7900 who are currently taking no other mode of transit (p.5 of PDF: http://www.bostonmpo.org/bostonmpo/pmt-old/PMT-3.pdf). Red-Blue (p.29 of same PDF) is +6500 new unique boardings at Charles (this does NOT include transfers from Red or increased boardings at other Red stations spurred by that transfer), and +2800 new transit riders currently taking no transit. After GLX there literally are no bigger expansion priorities than these two Blue jobs. They don't have a leg to stand on letting zombie South Coast FAIL continue to persist or dropping hundreds of mil on station frills at Yawkey, Littleton, South Acton, Salem and Beverly stations while backing away from these whoppers. The Blue extensions got put on the Big Dig Transit Commitments for very good reason: they're mega.



"Fairmount-ing" makes sense because it's got a very low barrier to entry and makes very excellent route-priming to give underserved urban core transit corridors a cost-effective boost on building ridership that'll spur better connections later. In Fairmount's case it's pretty self-evident what it does for Dorchester, but also look at the bus tie-ins. The 28X and Urban Ring proposals both intersect it, and so would any sharply scaled-back 28 improvements or crosstown buses. In the Worcester Line's case plopping stations at Allston, Newton Corner, and Riverside gives every stop important bus connections AND functionally replaces the Pike express buses with better service. Same deal if the Fitchburg Line got Fairmount-ed to Route 128 with barebones infill platforms at Alewife and Beaver Brook and the badly needed Anderson/Woburn-style 128 terminal. Waltham Ctr. is one of the very largest bus nodes on the system, and is possibly the most isolated from rapid transit of all the big ones. Huge influx of riders into those bus lines if there were reliably frequent train service there. In each case, these are 3 lines that can't ever have co-mingling rapid transit because of lack of ROW capacity (Worcester), freight needs (Fairmount), or other factors (excessive grade crossings, hysterical Belmont NIMBY's on Fitchburg).

The lack of acceptable FRA-compliant DMU models is a constraint, though. And that has frustratingly not gotten better despite the rising demand for that mode. It's hard to believe that anyone could do this kind of service on the cheap in 1950 with a comfy but inexpensive Budd RDC but can't in 2012 because there's only like 2 vendors producing overpriced, overcustomized, poorly scalable junk. Until that situation improves dramatically I don't think the T should be investing in an all-new specialty mode. It's too much of a maintenance headache and doesn't reduce their reliance on push-pull diesel for all the longer-distance lines.

What they should be doing is stringing up wires on the Fairmount and Worcester and running electrics with their vastly superior start/stop performance. EMU's are all they use on Metro North, Long Island Rail Road, SEPTA, and Chicago Metra in electric territory. The scale is there, there's plenty of models to choose from, the price point on bleeding-edge tech like Metro North's new Kawasaki M8's is going to drop precipitously on subsequent orders, and they've got the Providence Line and Rhode Island's South County starter service to serve a large (and non-outlier) pooled fleet. I think dropping in the substations and stringing up the overhead is where the big bang-for-buck is on the two big southside trunk lines + Fairmount. Hell, even if they keep it push-pull with electric locos and the existing coaches the stop/start performance and dwell times are so much better than diesel it'll seem much more rapid-transitish than what we've got now.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Belmont NIMBYs aren't going to be a problem for Blue on restored A-line -> Watertown -> Waltham, are they? That route bypasses Belmont entirely, can terminate at Waltham Center and hits BU, Allston, Brighton, and Newton Corner on its way over. I see absolutely no downside.

 

[George_Apley]

^ True Belmont won't be an issue if you come in from the south.

What's your route for a restored A-line? Tunnel from Kenmore beneath Comm/NBeacon/Cambridge/Washington/Galen to Watertown? Worcester Line to Newton Corner then tunneling to Watertown? Guessing your route to Waltham is then tunneling/surface running by renovating the RoW through Watertown and Waltham through Bemis and the Chemistry to the center?

Both those options present problems. Tunneling from Kenmore all the way to Watertown would be very costly and would need a crossing of some sort of the Charles. I'd be surprised if, after Oak Square, there's any demand for subway service until Watertown Square. That stretch of Washington St in the eastern reaches of Newton is all suburban-residential and has the 57 bus.

If you use the Worcester Line to get to Newton Corner you run into the same issues with the RoW capacity that running rapid transit to Riverside via Mass Pike does; there's no room for an HRV line without radical and prohibitively expensive project to somehow increase it's capacity.

 

[Shepard]

Here's my question: practically speaking from a scheduling perspective, how can a rapid transit DMU or EMU line coexist on a limited ROW with through-service CR trains?

 

[George_Apley]

^ I'm sure F-Line will have a more comprehensive answer, but I'm guessing station bypasses or cutouts in key locations to allow through-service trains to quickly get downtown.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

^ True Belmont won't be an issue if you come in from the south.

What's your route for a restored A-line? Tunnel from Kenmore beneath Comm/NBeacon/Cambridge/Washington/Galen to Watertown? Worcester Line to Newton Corner then tunneling to Watertown? Guessing your route to Waltham is then tunneling/surface running by renovating the RoW through Watertown and Waltham through Bemis and the Chemistry to the center?

Both those options present problems. Tunneling from Kenmore all the way to Watertown would be very costly and would need a crossing of some sort of the Charles. I'd be surprised if, after Oak Square, there's any demand for subway service until Watertown Square. That stretch of Washington St in the eastern reaches of Newton is all suburban-residential and has the 57 bus.

If you use the Worcester Line to get to Newton Corner you run into the same issues with the RoW capacity that running rapid transit to Riverside via Mass Pike does; there's no room for an HRV line without radical and prohibitively expensive project to somehow increase it's capacity.

Something like this. I don't really see the merit in going to Kenmore when you can just as easily serve the back end of BU, and I imagine an elevated ROW would be cheaper than tunneling. If people freak out over an El at the Esplanade, I'd be willing to tunnel under Storrow/Soldiers Field instead.

I'm pretty sure the only demand for rapid transit between Oak Square and Watertown is Newton Corner itself, which is fine, this isn't meant to replace the #57 - it's meant to compliment it. That does create some rather long stretches between stations but I doubt that anyone would really complain about that.

Lastly, because I took that map from my earlier string of proposals, Beachmont, Aquarium and Esplanade Station are all labeled as transfers to subways that don't and probably won't ever exist. I'm too lazy to edit that, so please ignore it.

 

[George_Apley]

Elevated would be cheaper, but I'm guessing that there would be loud howls along most of that corridor (not just around the Esplanade) if there was an attempt to build an elevated line through Brighton Center, Oak Square, Newton Corner, Watertown Square and Waltham Center. The long stretches of residential suburbs on Washington St between Oak Square and Newton Corner; and on Rte 20 between Watertown and Waltham would fight hard against a heavy rail line rumbling past their bedrooms. I think if you want to bring heavy rail to Watertown and Waltham along that route, you need to tunnel it. The best surface option for Watertown/Waltham that avoids Belmont is refurbishing the Watertown Railroad and running Red or, better, an extended GLX from Alewife past Fresh Pond, through Strawberry Hill and into Watertown past the mall. It would have to dive under Arsenal to Watertown Square. After there it would need to either continue along the RoW (which has been partially developed/torn up) or continue in tunnels (or as you suggested, elevated) to Waltham.

The complications with bringing true rapid transit to those communities (without extensive tunneling) makes the "Fairmounting" DMU/EMU of the Fitchburg Line the easiest solution to connect Waltham. Watertown could be better connected via tunnels or reconstituted street cars (yeah-right) from Packard's Corner.

Actually connecting Watertown and Waltham with rail is politically difficult without tunneling (not that it would be politically easy to tunnel, but easier than convincing them to allow an elevated line).

EDIT:

For what it's worth, this is my latest idea palate for the Blue Line. Darker lines are show it as I envisioned the Blue Line for my overall MBTA system map, light lines are alternative routings. The "Teal Line" referred to within is a hypothetical cross town line that I envision beginning in Watertown and running through Cambridge and down Mass Ave in Boston to UMass.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

^ I'm sure F-Line will have a more comprehensive answer, but I'm guessing station bypasses or cutouts in key locations to allow through-service trains to quickly get downtown.

Most of the CR lines are operating way, way under track capacity and are hamstrung by the old signaling and stiffer dispatching rules today. Lowell is a prime example...it's only 50 MPH southbound, the single slowest on the system. That used to be the "NEC North" with intercity fanning out everywhere, 20 times the freight volumes it's got today, and multiple commuter rail branches (all Haverhill trains went here until the late-70's, the old Woburn Branch was a DMU short-turn line until abandoned in '81, and a handful of Fitchburg/Central Mass extras would use the Somerville cutoff via Davis Sq.). If it merely were up to standard 80 MPH spec with PTC it could host 3x the schedule it currently does on the same 2 tracks...easy. The only constraint is the howls from Medford about the grade crossings, but if this line is envisioned for Concord, NH they're pretty much going to have to eliminate those crossings within the next 20 years for total grade separation.

Worcester's an even bigger one. 60 MPH tops on a line where Amtrak runs the Lake Shore Limited all the way to Chicago. Single-track operation at the 3 Newton stops, with signals so old they're only unidirectional (meaning, when an outbound train's stopping "wrong-rail" in Newton pretty much nothing inbound can move inside of 128). Shitty low platform non-ADA stations on the entire stretch between Yawkey and West Natick, meaning long dwell times and limited accessibility. Until now, 28 freights per day to Beacon Park. And infuriatingly tightwad dispatching from CSX.

They now have the dispatch partially in their control, with the last CSX control at Beacon Park evaporating at year's end. Those 28 Boston freights shrinks to ONE daily mid-afternoon off-peak round trip east of Framingham in about 8 months. Today there's about 35 daily freights going to or passing through Framingham. That shrinks to 6 or so after the double-stack capacity to Worcester and the new Westborough transload facility opens. Worcester-Westborough...down to maybe 10 freights when you tally up that 1 heading all the way to Boston, the other 5 that go to Framingham and points north/south of there, and the 3 or 4 others that'll stop at Grafton or Westborough.

When they say they can double the schedules right away from this CSX relocation, they're not kidding. Now, they're being a little daft because they simply don't have the equipment now to double the schedule. But the Worcester Line absolutely has that capacity and will gain much more when the second running track gets restored through Beacon Park after it's closed and severed, and the Newton stops get rebuilt as 2-track. Beacon Park is also going to leave behind 2 extra tracks on the mainline--the former mainline tracks pre-Pike when it was a full 4-track line to Framingham--running from the Pike Viaduct to Everett St. Maybe one of them eventually gets cannibalized as space for an Allston station, but the other one will stay as a passing and storage track. That's fully adequate to juggle the CR, Amtrak, and inside-128 "Fairmount'ed" schedule. And if the line were to ever go HSR it's still a 4-track ROW from 128 to Framingham, and 3 tracks from Framingham to Worcester. You'll notice that the 2 existing tracks spread out real wide to reach the platforms at the stops in Wellesley, a dead giveaway that there used to be more. And CSX tried to wrangle 3 tracks out of the 1994 restoration of service past Framingham, which was compromised out due to budget. They could absolutely drop in a third express track in the middle for Amtrak without hardly modifying the Framingham-Wellesley Farms stops at all, and it could be done on all of the outer intermediate stops with some modification to that 2000-era cookie-cutter station construction.


Yeah...we got plenty of room for DMU's, EMU's, and many times denser headways in the inner core. Fitchburg too, since that doesn't even get close to the capacity gained inside 128 by replacing the 19th-century tech signals with modern, 80 MPH ones. And they could easily work in tighter fits like Reading by throwing Haverhill thru trains back onto their historical Lowell Line routing like they ideally should be.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Elevated would be cheaper, but I'm guessing that there would be loud howls along most of that corridor (not just around the Esplanade) if there was an attempt to build an elevated line through Brighton Center, Oak Square, Newton Corner, Watertown Square and Waltham Center. The long stretches of residential suburbs on Washington St between Oak Square and Newton Corner; and on Rte 20 between Watertown and Waltham would fight hard against a heavy rail line rumbling past their bedrooms. I think if you want to bring heavy rail to Watertown and Waltham along that route, you need to tunnel it. The best surface option for Watertown/Waltham that avoids Belmont is refurbishing the Watertown Railroad and running Red or, better, an extended GLX from Alewife past Fresh Pond, through Strawberry Hill and into Watertown past the mall. It would have to dive under Arsenal to Watertown Square. After there it would need to either continue along the RoW (which has been partially developed/torn up) or continue in tunnels (or as you suggested, elevated) to Waltham.

The complications with bringing true rapid transit to those communities (without extensive tunneling) makes the "Fairmounting" DMU/EMU of the Fitchburg Line the easiest solution to connect Waltham. Watertown could be better connected via tunnels or reconstituted street cars (yeah-right) from Packard's Corner.

Actually connecting Watertown and Waltham with rail is politically difficult without tunneling (not that it would be politically easy to tunnel, but easier than convincing them to allow an elevated line).

EDIT:

For what it's worth, this is my latest idea palate for the Blue Line. Darker lines are show it as I envisioned the Blue Line for my overall MBTA system map, light lines are alternative routings. The "Teal Line" referred to within is a hypothetical cross town line that I envision beginning in Watertown and running through Cambridge and down Mass Ave in Boston to UMass.

Well, I specifically mentioned the Esplanade because I planned for diving the line at Soldiers Field Station anyway, and went for an El on the Esplanade because I think if you can package the elevated ROW with some kind of multipurpose walkway/bikeway, it'd be an easier thing to convince the masses to go along with than digging up Storrow/the Esplanade/Storrow AND the Esplanade/"hey give us another several billion in cash so we can bore instead."

Cut-and-cover from there to Watertown shouldn't be that hard, so yeah, most of the problem is Watertown to Waltham. With the right leverage though, I bet we can do it.

I never considered GLX to Waltham, to be honest. My Green Line Expansion-Conversion even WENT to Strawberry Hill. (Huh... GLXC... I like the way it sounds. Is it too late to attach Heavy Rail to the Medford/Somerville projects?) Sending Green there and restoring A-branch service would also bring you damn close to a full ring, too.

That having been said, I do have to complain about converting D to Blue Line service, because I don't see B to Heavy Rail getting done, don't see C or E as a good corridor for Heavy Rail, and don't see Green Line Heavy Rail without at least one of those branches getting converted.

What about Blue to Watertown, Green to Waltham, and a non-train connection between the two? (i.e. trolley, bus)

 

[omaja]

Finally happy with how the Downtown area of my future MBTA network idea looks.

Now to finish off the rest.

 

[czsz]

[eyes pop out of head]