Design a Better Boston Back Bay Station

One question i can't tell. Does the Fairmount line (future indigo) go all the way to 128 amtrak? it comes close. If you don't extend the orange line from forest hills to 128 at this point, does it make more sense (financial and engineering ease) to make the indigo (relatively) rapid transit from 128 to SS?

Fairmount junctions with the NEC right about here at Horne St. Stoughton trains make midday deadhead moves back to Readville yard through here because there's no layover yard at Stoughton.

The NEC cannot go >4 tracks through the Neponset reservation because of the wetlands. There's a pinch point where the embankment is surrounded on all sides by water. You can do a turnout to extra 128 platforms right about here where that signal box is located. The 128 overpass is wide enough to expand the station to double its current size. But you can't make it rapid transit without busting the NEC down to 2 tracks permanently. And it's not only planned for 3 in the very near future, but will probably need all 4 soon enough. And then Fairmount's too constrained by property lines north of Blue Hill Ave. to lay any rapid transit lines, plus it can't be converted outright to rapid transit because that's the Southie port freight access.

Best you're going to do is bring the Red Line to Mattapan in place of the trolley, bridge the Mattapan-Fairmount ROW gap with a tunnel boring machine here, and go 2 RR + 2 rapid transit tracks to Readville south of Cummins where there is ample space. But then your only choice for going further is Dedham Ctr. because both the NEC and Franklin shoot out to 128 on unexpandable embankments surrounded by swamp and water.
 
The NEC cannot go >4 tracks through the Neponset reservation because of the wetlands. There's a pinch point where the embankment is surrounded on all sides by water. You can do a turnout to extra 128 platforms right about here where that signal box is located. The 128 overpass is wide enough to expand the station to double its current size. But you can't make it rapid transit without busting the NEC down to 2 tracks permanently. And it's not only planned for 3 in the very near future, but will probably need all 4 soon enough. And then Fairmount's too constrained by property lines north of Blue Hill Ave. to lay any rapid transit lines, plus it can't be converted outright to rapid transit because that's the Southie port freight access.

Tunneling Rapid Transit underneath the existing ROW isn't an option, then? You wouldn't even need to lose any of that new station work. Just dig out Indigo Line platforms in the basement and leave the Fairmount Line in as a premium express service - either to Route 128 or Dedham on short-turns.

In a similar vein, what's the status of the abandoned tracks on the north end of the Orange Line that were going to be used for express service? Has Assembly Square been built to accommodate an express service if one was ever to be activated? I'm thinking cannibalize the Reading Line, OLX to Reading as it was supposed to be, and have one OL per hour each way that serves the Reading Line stops, expresses to Wellington, then to Sullivan Square, then to North Station, State, DTX, Back Bay, Ruggles, Forest Hills, and makes all the Needham Line stops?
 
^ Does the central OL tunnels through Downtown and on the NEC have the room to accomodate express trains?
 
Not likely without digging another tunnel underneath. It also wouldn't make sense, as all of those downtown stops are heavily patronized. It is different from New York where the distances in Manhattan are enough to justify transfer from express to local. In downtown Boston, all stops need to be local.

As for NEC I doubt it, given the other desires for track space. If we are thinking just about the Needham ROW, that could be done, but at substantial expense, and I don't think it would be necessary. It's only 12 minutes from Forest Hills to Back Bay. Probably the stretch from West Roxbury to Forest hills would only be another 8-10 minutes, which is only slightly more time than the current commuter rail option.
 
^ That's what I figured. IIRC, the New York Subway's local stops on Manhattan are generally closer together than they are throughout most of the MBTA system, save the Downtown area. The express trains in NYC tend to make stops at major connections and bypass the ones served solely by the local trains on the line.

Would the new stops between Forest Hills and WRox really take almost the same amount of time as the getting from BBay to FH? It's a much shorter distance.
 
Yea our stations are really close its insane....

IRT Lexington Ave line - 6 Local Train
125th Street
116th Street
110th Street
103rd Street
96th Street
86th Street
77th Street
68th Street – Hunter College
59th Street
51st Street
Grand Central - 42nd Street
33rd Street
28th Street
23rd Street
14th Street - Union SQ
Astor's Place
Bleecker Street
Spring Street
Canal Street
Brooklyn Bridge - City Hall
Fulton Street
Wall Street
Bowling Green


IRT Lexington Ave line 4 or 5 Express Train
125th Street
86th Street
59th Street
Grand Central - 42nd Street
14th Street - Union SQ
Brooklyn Bridge - City Hall
Fulton Street
Wall Street
Bowling Green


IRT Lexington Avenue line : 23rd Street to Canal Street

[youtube]HK4jj27PJco[/youtube]

Onbroad a Bronx Bound 4 Express Train between Brooklyn Bridge & 14th Street Union SQ

[youtube]92DHpcKmP9I[/youtube]
 
Ah the 4/5 Express... Ended up on one by accident once and wound up all the way at 125th st.

Flying past station after station, thinking oh sh* where am I going?!
 
Look how close these stations are...thats rapid transit close...

1280px-Highland_MBTA_station.JPG
 
Would the new stops between Forest Hills and WRox really take almost the same amount of time as the getting from BBay to FH? It's a much shorter distance.

That was just a guess, based on the assumption that it would take longer than the commuter rail does to get from West Roxbury to Forest Hills. I was thinking it was about 7 minutes, but I just checked the schedule, and it's a whopping 12 minutes! Amazing how poor the push pull diesels perform on stops that are so close together. I'm still thinking 8-10 for OL service, but maybe more on the 8 minute side. More frequent trains means less time needed for boarding, faster acceleration, etc., so probably it would in fact provide faster performance on rapid transit.

Some quick ROW analysis on google maps:

West Roxbury to Forest Hills: 3 miles
Forest Hills to Back Bay: 4.75 miles

Using this ratio, we get 3::4.75 = 7.5::12, so yeah, 8 minutes seems about right.

And yeah, the station distances are definitely rapid transit like. The distance between Highland and West Roxbury is practically bus stop distance, although your picture compresses the distance a bit. In fact, I'm pretty sure there is only one bus stop between the two closest to each station, although in each case the station is a bit of a walk from Centre St.
 
Is there room for two tracks between Roslindale and West Rox?
 
Is there room for two tracks between Roslindale and West Rox?

The only constraint on double tracking is a couple of bridge spans that would need to be widened. This would be the most expensive part of the project. Three tracking might also be possible, but it require a much more complicated engineering task (similar to GLX) to widen the ROW. So any OLX that retains commuter rail either goes no further than Rozzy Square, or becomes cost prohibitive. That's why it has to be both OLX and GLX/Needham as a single project.
 
The only constraint on double tracking is a couple of bridge spans that would need to be widened. This would be the most expensive part of the project. Three tracking might also be possible, but it require a much more complicated engineering task (similar to GLX) to widen the ROW. So any OLX that retains commuter rail either goes no further than Rozzy Square, or becomes cost prohibitive. That's why it has to be both OLX and GLX/Needham as a single project.

Why not cull the Needham Line back to Needham Junction, get Needham Green Line done, make that one-stop OLX to Roslindale, and then apply pressure against West Rox etc. from both sides?
 
Why not forget about Needham Green Line and Needham Commuter Rail and extend the Orange Line past Forest Hills --> Roslindale Village --> Bellevue --> Highland --> West Roxbury --> "Needham something".

"Needham something" as the terminus of the Orange Line should be enough. Why would they need the Green Line, too? This isn't Somerville - Needham has 2/3 the population of Everett in nearly 4 times the land area.
 
Why not forget about Needham Green Line and Needham Commuter Rail and extend the Orange Line past Forest Hills --> Roslindale Village --> Bellevue --> Highland --> West Roxbury --> "Needham something".

"Needham something" as the terminus of the Orange Line should be enough. Why would they need the Green Line, too? This isn't Somerville - Needham has 2/3 the population of Everett in nearly 4 times the land area.

Transit loss. Needham cannot subsist on the 59 bus/D-line transfer alone...it's a lousy route through godawful Highland Ave. congestion. When the Needham Line was closed for 8 years during the 80's and the T started dropping hints it wasn't so sure it wanted to reopen it, they threatened suit. The T backed off, threw some track gangs at the line, and got it back in service within a year. It's a suit Needham will win if the T tries to shaft them again. They have a dense downtown, and it's their only direct connection to Boston downtown. It's not like "equal or better" could be framed in terms of bus replacement because there's no parallel road route into downtown Boston that would approximate it.

If the line were to be converted to Orange, Green would either have to go first or get a binding (i.e. can't be Arborwayed) commitment to a build. The good news is, it's not so expensive they couldn't swallow both. We're talking a lot less for BOTH than GLX is costing. But what does a "binding" commitment even mean anymore in this state when they've broken most of their binding Transit Commitments.


"Needham-something" on Orange I don't think is worth going for, BTW. It's a long, barren ride across Cutler Park from West Roxbury to 128, there's little room because of all the conservation land to put a station + requisite interstate park-and-ride parking garage on Greendale Ave., little room for TOD for the same reasons, there are NIMBY's around the golf course, there's zero bus connections anywhere, and the accessibility isn't awesome from the Great Plain Ave. exit. The MPO-studied ridership projections on the extension tilt >90% to the Forest Hills-W. Rox stops. There might be a brief rush-hour spike to the 128 park-and-ride, but most hours of the day those OL trains are going to be quite empty. I don't think for the small slice of ridership and very limited hours that ridership would use the line that it justifies going west of W. Rox. That stretch is almost 40% of the entire mileage of the extension, for just 1 stop.

A would-be Green stop (or, hell, 1-stop extension of the commuter rail) at TV Place/128 off the Highland Ave. exit would outslug the ridership of an Orange Needham stop by wide margin. Especially off-peak, when the residential area by the park gets really sleepy and the Highland corridor is still active. Gobs and gobs of TOD potential at that site since it's a major redevelopment initiative for the town (which is why I think the dirt cheap interim CR extension to 128 would have legs).

Needham Jct. is about equally accessible from the Route 135 exit as Hersey is from the Great Plain exit, so they divide the current ridership a lot. Green at Needham Jct. with parking in the middle of the current wye covers Hersey's limited needs just spiffy. Especially if they rail-trail it between Junction and W. Rox through the parks for the locals.
 
But all this is contingent on signalling upgrades for the Green Line central subway? And when will that ever happen?
 
I don't think they should hold up GL extensions purely for reasons of signalling, which will need to get done eventually. In the meantime, Needham GL could turn at Kenmore.
 
The only constraint on double tracking is a couple of bridge spans that would need to be widened. This would be the most expensive part of the project. Three tracking might also be possible, but it require a much more complicated engineering task (similar to GLX) to widen the ROW. So any OLX that retains commuter rail either goes no further than Rozzy Square, or becomes cost prohibitive. That's why it has to be both OLX and GLX/Needham as a single project.

Needham was doubled out to W. Roxbury junction until the line to Dedham Ctr. was abandoned. Those footbridges by the Highland stop in that previous pic used to have (tight-squeeze) double track underneath. That's no issue. The only constraint today is that when the T was rehabbing the line in the 80's it replaced all the formerly double-track rail bridge decks with singles. This is the formerly three-track bridge at Rozzie. This is the former 2-track bridge at W. Rox. The abutments are still there for the extra tracks, but they only left a single-track deck. I thinks there's 2, maybe 3 of these stripped bridges out to W. Rox. Plus a couple stone arch ones they left at their full original width. The W. Rox-Needham Jct. jog has 4 or 5 more, including a small span over the Charles and the 128 bridge that went single when the road was first widened to modern expressway standards (that one isn't being replaced for the add-a-lane project...only the one on the abandoned line by Highland Ave.). So that also factors into the very bleh cost/benefits of going past W. Rox to 128.

FH to Rozzie was 3-tracked because there used to be a freight yard out there. So a 1-stop extension to Rozzie is doable next to commuter rail, so long as a new passing track got installed further out to replace the one next to the Arboretum that the OL extension would replace. The Rozzie extension is a whole separate conversation...that could happen very quick if the City Hall bully pulpit actually acknowledged that Rozzie was a neighborhood of Boston.
 
But all this is contingent on signalling upgrades for the Green Line central subway? And when will that ever happen?

They've programmed study funds for CBTC on the Green Line. You'll probably see Mattapan used as a "laboratory" for testing some trolley PTC technologies over the next 5-8 years.

They aren't screwing around with this. It's a breathtakingly complicated initiative, but they are scared to death of the fallout from the fatal D line wreck and the non-fatal Gov't Ctr. wreck. The NTSB investigations strongly recommended a study and future implementation plan for it. And they don't just recommend things to be helpful. They recommend things because the next bad accident might cause them to hand down a mandatory ruling to install by X date, funding sources be damned.

Plus...it is literally 19th century signaling that cannot handle current loads. It's not like this is going to be optional the way ridership is growing. And they realize that.
 
They've programmed study funds for CBTC on the Green Line. You'll probably see Mattapan used as a "laboratory" for testing some trolley PTC technologies over the next 5-8 years.

Is this the reason they seem to be in no rush to connect the current Green Line system to real-time tracking like everything else? It makes sense not to slap together something makeshift if there's something better on the conceivable horizon. But it would be nice of them to communicate something to this effect rather than "we still have to figure it out," followed by years of no further elaboration.
 
I don't think they should hold up GL extensions purely for reasons of signalling, which will need to get done eventually. In the meantime, Needham GL could turn at Kenmore.

Or they could just not add very many trains. We're talking about replacement of a service that runs about every 40 minutes, where more than half or the ridership doesn't come from Needham. Suppose they limit headways until the signalling project. Three or four trains an hour is probably all they'd need to add.
 

Back
Top