Crazy Transit Pitches

So, on my latest Crazy Transit Map, I've come around to the idea that the Red Line is never going to get past Arlington Center via the Minuteman route.

I still think that, eventually, the 128 corridor could use some relief; especially if development keeps up the pace. With that in mind, I through around a few ideas for what an LRV system could look like on the 128 and Rte 2 corridors, between Rte 117, Rte 62, and Rte 3A.

Just a concept. Thinking about what's possible given the terrain and development. Stations are also, of course, highly speculative.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zlB7eZcVeXLk.kpFiHwSLIqnk
 
The problem with that route is that it doesn't really go anywhere and takes a long time to get there. It's also running through an area which isn't exactly prime for development even with rapid transit.

If the Red Line was built out like Toronto's subway then the best routing would be to Arlington Heights along the bike path and then northwest along Lowell St to Burlington with dense development nodes zoned around each station. This would avoid Lexington Center and also fill in the gap left when Route 3 was canceled.

That, however, would be quite expensive and require residents along the way to be all for the increased development in their suburban drosscape.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
So, on my latest Crazy Transit Map, I've come around to the idea that the Red Line is never going to get past Arlington Center via the Minuteman route.

I still think that, eventually, the 128 corridor could use some relief; especially if development keeps up the pace. With that in mind, I through around a few ideas for what an LRV system could look like on the 128 and Rte 2 corridors, between Rte 117, Rte 62, and Rte 3A.

Just a concept. Thinking about what's possible given the terrain and development. Stations are also, of course, highly speculative.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zlB7eZcVeXLk.kpFiHwSLIqnk
Click to expand...

How about just 2 stops along Rt 2:
1) Deep NATM/hard-rock tunnel to a large highway-spanning Park-and-Ride at MA-225 and the MassHighway District office
2) A "Shire/128" Stop

I do think it is possible that Arlington would take 1 new stop at Arlington Center (actually cut-and-cover under the "inner" Minuteman) and then go via a deep hard-rock tunnel to St Camillus (there's a lot of extra parish and town land there) and then to the 2 stops above.
 
Arlington said:
How about just 2 stops along Rt 2:
1) Deep NATM/hard-rock tunnel to a large highway-spanning Park-and-Ride at MA-225 and the MassHighway District office
2) A "Shire/128" Stop

I do think it is possible that Arlington would take 1 new stop at Arlington Center (actually cut-and-cover under the "inner" Minuteman) and then go via a deep hard-rock tunnel to St Camillus (there's a lot of extra parish and town land there) and then to the 2 stops above.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I hadn't thought of deep-boring under the town from the Center back towards 2. I think part of the importance of getting transit to 128 is to be able to hit employment centers in Waltham/Lexington, and Hanscom Field at that... Your brainstorm RLX in lieu of my Rte 2 LRV leg in conjunction with the rest of my LRV line paralleling 128 between Waltham and Burlington would be neat.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Interesting, I hadn't thought of deep-boring under the town from the Center back towards 2. I think part of the importance of getting transit to 128 is to be able to hit employment centers in Waltham/Lexington, and Hanscom Field at that... Your brainstorm RLX in lieu of my Rte 2 LRV leg in conjunction with the rest of my LRV line paralleling 128 between Waltham and Burlington would be neat.
Click to expand...

I've always looked at the Rt 2 rock-cut (from Alewife to Mormon Temple) and had two thoughts:
1) No rail is ever going to make it up those grades as a surface line
2) Even as a bored tunnel, it needs an early start (at Alewife) and a more-distant end (MA 225)
3) As a deep rock tunnel making a slow climb under Rt 2 or under (roughly) Appleton St (from Arlington Heights or Center) its costs are manageable and its impact minimal, and hits the demand in Arlington that's proven.

I also really like going out the Fitchburg line to Waltham via Belmont Ctr, Waverly, the gritty Belmont/Waltham office park area, Waltham Center, and 128.
 
Arlington said:
I've always looked at the Rt 2 rock-cut (from Alewife to Mormon Temple) and had two thoughts:
1) No rail is ever going to make it up those grades as a surface line
2) Even as a bored tunnel, it needs an early start (at Alewife) and a more-distant end (MA 225)
3) As a deep rock tunnel making a slow climb under Rt 2 or under (roughly) Appleton St (from Arlington Heights or Center) its costs are manageable and its impact minimal, and hits the demand in Arlington that's proven.
Click to expand...

I think LRV can do it. Trolleys can handle pretty steep grades. Maybe it's too steep between Rte 60 and Rte 225. It would be interesting to see it studied.

But if we want to get the Red Line out to 128 it would definitely need to be in a bored tunnel from Alewife or maybe Arlington Center (like your plan).

I also really like going out the Fitchburg line to Waltham via Belmont Ctr, Waverly, the gritty Belmont/Waltham office park area, Waltham Center, and 128.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a pipe unless Belmont were to someday come around to transit instead of the reflex "no" they historically operate on.

I always wanted to bring Red up to 128 via Minuteman - but the more I've considered it, the more I've realized that Lexington will never allow a surface HRV alongside the bike path going right up through the gut of the town, plus, numerous grade crossings would mean that you'd probably have to bury the whole thing, at which point, it's probably more economical to do a deep bore to the Rte 2 corridor rather than cut-cover the often swampy Minuteman ROW.
 
Here's an idea:

1. Take every new TOD sprouting up (I'm looking at you, Atmark apartments), and make half of it affordable housing. From the P to the Rindge Towers I've seen too many former high school classmates pushed out of Cambridge with their families, due to increasing living expenses and a decreasing availability of housing.

If I were in charge of affordable housing, I'd make it happen... with pour-over coffee and ice cream on tap as a guaranteed right.
 
Not to derail the current red line discussion, but I'd like to propose this - Worcester Rapid Transit.

While Worcester is the second largest city in the Commonwealth and in New England, it feels much smaller due to it feeling so suburban. While transit improvements won't make changes overnight, it certainly can't hurt.

I'm no cartographer or city planner (literally just graduated in college back in May with of all things a B.S. in Fire Science), but I'm a fan of transit and I'd like Worcester to become more walkable and give people the view that you don't need a car to get around.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zUuNt5gXX7iI.k-m2Ao0wPQRg

This proposes a total of 5 rapid transit lines, covering most of the city. Please take the map with a grain of salt, I have no idea what a good catchment area of a rapid transit station is, and a number of proposed stations may need to be scrapped.

Additionally, there are numerous park and ride facilities proposed, including off of 146 & the Pike at exit 10A, 290 (just outside of the city both ways), 190, Route 9, and Route 122, coming down the hill from Paxton and the rural suburbs.

Since Rapid Transit can't go everywhere, I'd also like to propose this Streetcar and Bus route map. My goal with this is to make it possible to get anywhere in at most 2 seats.

As for the streetcars, there are 4 "branches" if you will - a downtown loop, a Elm Park loop, and North Main St. and Shrewsbury St. connectors as well. A Vernon hill loop goes between a station at Quinsig village and the backside of Union Station.

Streetcars would be street running for the most part, with stations being placed in between a pair of curb bump-outs, allowing traffic not to be held up by the car during station dwell. Some portions of the lines may need to be elevated to avoid blocking intersections and making inclines.

Rapid transit would be entirely tunneled, although due to the Worcester hills, that may cause some stations to be rather deep due to hill elevations.

And as for the buses, I have no clue what the hell I'm doing. I'm basically using the WRTA's current system map and plugging the holes not covered by Streetcars or rapid transit with buses.

Let me know what you think about what would be the Commonwealth's second rapid transit system.

Also there are Commuter Rail connections from Clinton, Webster, Fitchburg, Gardner, Leominster, and Clinton to Union Station on a separate map here: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zUuNt5gXX7iI.kB0I-wtaUUKk

And as for the name, I propose the W. :D
 
Last edited:
BussesAin'tTrains said:
I always wanted to bring Red up to 128 via Minuteman - but the more I've considered it, the more I've realized that Lexington will never allow a surface HRV alongside the bike path going right up through the gut of the town, plus, numerous grade crossings would mean that you'd probably have to bury the whole thing, at which point, it's probably more economical to do a deep bore to the Rte 2 corridor rather than cut-cover the often swampy Minuteman ROW.
Click to expand...

Busses -- if you look at potential for residential and business out of Alewife I think the deep bore mostly following Mass Ave makes the most sense

I used to think just cut and cover up the Minuteman -- but the sewer work there makes that difficult

so now I propose:

Alewife to 128 Red Line extension:
  • Arlington Center -- akin to Davis residential and shopping / restaurants
  • Arlington Heights -- akin to Davis
  • Lexington Center -- akin to Davis
  • Hayden Tech -- lower end of Hayden Ave -- industrial
  • The Shire -- Hayden / Spring /Rt-2 / Rt-128
  • Hanscom @ Lincoln Lab
  • Hartwell Tech @ Lexington Town Dump with:
    • Alewife scale garage
    • Rt-128 shuttle Bus center
    • Minuteman Bikeway connector with bike lot
Depending on BRAC status of Hanscom there should be a provision to tunnel under Hanscom AFB to the terminus at the Civilian Terminal and Virginia Road [added bonus can be easy access to the Lexington / Lincoln part of the Minuteman National Historic Park with shuttle buses to Concord]
 
Last edited:
IIRC, Lexington was the town pushing for the red line extension, it was Arlington that blocked it.


Regarding Hanscom, my most recent map had that as the terminus, but another poster pointed out you could bang a right and follow the power line ROW straight to the Burlington Mall. That's a vastly superior terminus IMO as it
a) is a more densly populated area to begin with, and
b) would serve as a great park-and-ride for RT-3 commuters, taking a big load off of 128 (and RT-2, I suppose).
 
whighlander said:
Busses -- if you look at potential for residential and business out of Alewife I think the deep bore mostly following Mass Ave makes the most sense

I used to think just cut and cover up the Minuteman -- but the sewer work there makes that difficult
Click to expand...

That's like 6 miles of tunneling. The question is whether or not a routing up the gut of Arlington and Lexington will ever be worth it for a 128 Park & Ride also servicing Hanscom.


davem said:
IIRC, Lexington was the town pushing for the red line extension, it was Arlington that blocked it.
Click to expand...

Yes, but both Lexington and Arlington are very different places than they were in the 80s. Arlington would probably support a one stop extension to the Center with enough activism and priming, if it was cut/cover up the Minuteman from Alewife to the Center. Past that, anyone who wants to extend Red up the Minuteman ROW is SOL.

Lexington is not going to be on board with tunneling Minuteman or MassAve, and the state won't find it worth it to fight for it.

Regarding Hanscom, my most recent map had that as the terminus, but another poster pointed out you could bang a right and follow the power line ROW straight to the Burlington Mall. That's a vastly superior terminus IMO as it
a) is a more densly populated area to begin with, and
b) would serve as a great park-and-ride for RT-3 commuters, taking a big load off of 128 (and RT-2, I suppose).
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The difficulties with getting the Red Line northwest towards 128 is what prompted me to make my Rte 128 LRV system, that potentially could hook up to the Red Line at Alewife.
 
Last edited:
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Yes, but both Lexington and Arlington are very different places than they were in the 80s. Arlington would probably support a one stop extension to the Center with enough activism and priming, if it was cut/cover up the Minuteman from Alewife to the Center. Past that, anyone who wants to extend Red up the Minuteman ROW is SOL.
Click to expand...
I agree. The Minuteman may be an option to the Center, but beyond that it'd have to go via Mass Ave to the Heights, and no matter what needs a deep tunnel to cut back to Route 2.

Its interesting talking to Arlingtonians about their modal choices. Older-generation locals opposed everything (bike path & Red Line), but now see that the bike path is great for walking (sorry, cyclists) and the people who use it turn out to be nice.

The Arlington that freaked out against the Red Line experienced a generational turnover; took their 2-flats condo; and sold out to couples where 1 commutes "in" other commutes out on Route 2. (The GLX to the MVP/Rt16/U-Haul is basically waiting for the same kind of turnover)

That the "Keep Mass Ave 4 Lanes" 2-vs-4 car-lane vote went pro-car (barely...and the post-referrendum compromise was it'll be 2 inbound and 1 outbound) says that Arlington knows that they are on the front lines of defining what multi-modal means for a semi-dense streetcar suburb (1890-1930). We may say they're getting it wrong, but they're trying to broker fairly between the many interests

And they know the 77 Bus and access to Harvard is a big deal. From this, I agree with Busses that--with work--they'd take a cut-and-cover to Arlington Center (construction will be brutal and they'll claim the bike path is historic now), but you might not get the political consensus as far out as Arlington Heights (where the 77 terminates). You will get an honest brokering/balancing this time, though.

Lexington probably missed its moment in the other direction. Lexington's layout is fully farms-into-large-lot 'burbs. There's nothing in their environment telling them they've got a commuting problem, and I'd bet they've become more pro-car (Sure, it's a plug-in Prius from Lexington Toyota, but its a car they're wedded to) Worse, Arlington's Great Meadows is actually a parcel of land in Lexington along the bike path. The political compromise that might bring the Red as far as Arlington Heights would probably require that that the Great Meadows not be disturbed.
 
Arlington said:
And they know the 77 Bus and access to Harvard is a big deal. From this, I agree with Busses that--with work--they'd take a cut-and-cover to Arlington Center (construction will be brutal and they'll claim the bike path is historic now), but you might not get the political consensus as far out as Arlington Heights (where the 77 terminates). You will get an honest brokering/balancing this time, though.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Arlington will probably be alright with giving the Flats/East Arlington the transit that many of the hoi polloi desire, as long as the bourgeoisie up in the Heights don't have to deal with it too much.

Lexington probably missed its moment in the other direction. Lexington's layout is fully farms-into-large-lot 'burbs. There's nothing in their environment telling them they've got a commuting problem, and I'd bet they've become more pro-car (Sure, it's a plug-in Prius from Lexington Toyota, but its a car they're wedded to) Worse, Arlington's Great Meadows is actually a parcel of land in Lexington along the bike path. The political compromise that might bring the Red as far as Arlington Heights would probably require that that the Great Meadows not be disturbed.
Click to expand...

Yup. Plus, they'll see their bus options potentially get better with the extension to Arlington Center. Lexington is actually being pretty smart about transit - with their MBTA bus routes and their own LexPress van/bus service that is a popular and fairly comprehensive service that hits Arlington Heights, the Burlington Mall, and many of the schools.

I would be interested to see if there would be any support in the next decade for a LRV between Waltham and Burlington vaguely following Rte 128 like the line I fooled around with above. If Waltham and Burlington are serious about building little urban villages like Northwest Park and 1265 Main, I could imagine them being supportive of some sort of transit, that is independent of Rte 128.
 
A busway from Alewife to Arlington along the Minuteman Trail corridor would serve Arlington well. Preferably two lanes, but could be one lane with intermittent turnouts.
 
Charlie_mta said:
A busway from Alewife to Arlington along the Minuteman Trail corridor would serve Arlington well. Preferably two lanes, but could be one lane with intermittent turnouts.
Click to expand...

I doubt the town would ever go for that. The abutters barely tolerated the trail. I think they could probably be convinced to go for a cut-cover job of the trail because it's a temporary disruption. A busway would impose permanently, and get very close to property lines (if it fit at all) and have diesel busses scooting back and forth.
 
Was the Lexington Branch ever double tracked? If it was, then a C&C tunnel would be no wider than the original ROW.
 
The EGE said:
Was the Lexington Branch ever double tracked? If it was, then a C&C tunnel would be no wider than the original ROW.
Click to expand...

It was double-tracked from the mid-1800s to the late 1920s. My concern for the width of the ROW was regarding a two-lane busway alongside the bike path. Even with a two-track wide ROW, there's not likely to be room for that.
 
Agreed...and if anything folks will want a wider bike path when it's all done
 
anything other than a subway would RUIN the trail, and thus will never happen. which i agree with.

and a tunnel is neither justifiable nor probably feasible any further than arlington ctr... though that might be an interesting extension, and if the need and will ever arose, a tunnel could be built under mass ave to lex
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top