Fantasy T maps

Thanks for the commentary!

- I agree that this map makes us question our assumptions about our system. A lot of aspects are arbitrary at one point or another.

- When it comes to interlining, it does get pretty complicated. I agree it does feel pretty real as many North American Cities have heavy interlining. I don't know much about the exact logistics, but I hoped each colored line's "trunk" would have 6-minute headways. Meaning that all interlined stretches would be 3-minute headways and branches 12 minutes. Obviously, 12 minutes is not great, but it is also realistic to Boston's modern-day conditions. 3 minutes headways for the Orange Line, for example, which is interlined by the red, then immediately the green, might be too ambitious. I am curious to know how and if that would work.

-I could definitely see the Blue Line being built later. Right now, Boston is missing a radial line that is slightly offset and can, therefore, act orbital as well. The Blue Line aslo makes a transfer triangle between Kendall, Fenway/Longwood, and Downtown, three important job and cultural centers.

-Boston Center Station and New England Station are kind of the new North and South Stations here, and yes not convenient for every transfer.

-I think most neighborhoods get a better result in this system, and it is more balanced then what we have today.

-You are right about commons

Here are some zoomed-out looks.
Screenshot 2024-07-20 at 11.37.31 PM.png
Screenshot 2024-07-20 at 11.35.45 PM.png
 
Lost my original file for my "in another universe" map from years and years ago, so decided to create a new version.

Here's how it started (2012-ish is when I would have worked on it):
Screenshot 2025-01-10 at 10.41.01 PM.png


And how it's going:
Screenshot 2025-01-10 at 10.10.13 PM.png

Taking an approach that's more like a combination of NYC (different services noted by distinct numbers/letters but sharing a same color based on a trunk route that is used) and Paris (overall color palette and network density).
 
Great to see you again, @omaja! Your maps from ~10 (!) years ago have remained a source of inspiration (which I'm sure is visible in many of my ideas which have built on yours). The new map looks fantastic, I'm eager to see the rest!

More specifically, the map looks fantastic both aesthetically as well as conceptually. Your H rightfully draws attention to the 86, which does surprisingly good ridership down to Reservoir. Your T addresses one of the largest gaps in the system (one that we accept as a foregone conclusion can never be filled): Back Bay <> Kendall. I continue to appreciate your use of the Grand Junction as a trunk line with diverging branch lines (your original map being, I think, one of the earliest examples I remember seeing of "breaking up" the Urban Ring), and conceptually like the idea of running A and Arborway Line services into that trunk (although obviously IRL I think that would pose reliability challenges.) And is that a Kenmore Model for Roxbury-Dorchester running out of Nubian? (I feel like a bit of a hack linking my own work, but the phrase is useful!)

(And I like the idea of an NSRL bore that hits the Seaport!)
 
Thanks, Riverside! :)

I've never really liked the Urban Ring as proposed because it feels too tightly constrained (especially if it were ever to be rail)... breaking it up into more lines that provide more unique combinations of direct and one-connection routings makes more sense in my mind.

You are correct about Nubian - the trunk splits into local routes to Egleston, Mattapan and Ashmont. The basic idea is a reincarnation of the streetcar network that used to serve the area. Here's what I have going for that:
Screenshot 2025-01-23 at 6.47.15 PM.png
 
I've never really liked the Urban Ring as proposed because it feels too tightly constrained (especially if it were ever to be rail)... breaking it up into more lines that provide more unique combinations of direct and one-connection routings makes more sense in my mind.
Yeah, this goes back to my thesis that the Urban Ring is really about building radial networks for Longwood and Kendall. (Obviously not exclusively, but I think first-and-foremost.)
Yeah this looks really cool!
  • I like how much your map has lines that start in one direction and then just keep plowing ahead in that direction. Your T is a good example of that, as is the P you've drawn out here
  • You've piqued my interest with those Granite Branch services!
  • Are the M, N, R and Q grade-separated? (Would you consider visually differentiating routes based on grade separation?)
    • The R and M reflect something I was thinking about the other day: in general, Boston's southern higher density "built-up" limit runs diagonally from Waltham to South Quincy (not a perfectly straight line but that's the overall thrust -- take a look at @Teban54's density map and kinda blur your eyes and you can see it), with Dorchester + Mattapan + Hyde Park (and to a lesser extent, Roslindale) creating a unique southerly "protrusion" of the density.
    • If we assume that density generally maps to need for transit, and we assume that transit should be available in two dimensions (not just single dimensional radial lines running north-south), that necessarily entails that Dorchester + Mattapan + Hyde Park ("Dorchesmattapark?") will have short crosstown lines that ping back and forth between the Red and Orange Lines. These lines might look extravagent (crazy transit pitches in their own right) because they're short, but I think that's a perception worth interrogating
  • I like the interaction between the 1 and L through Dorchester, both visually and from a planning perspective. The L acknowledges Dorchester Ave as a primary axis for the community, while the 1 provides an express bypass
  • One other "fantasy T map" idea I've been chewing on is a "Red X" design similar to your "Mass Ave Bypass" approach, but which instead runs through Back Bay and Kendall.
    • From Kendall, this line could continue to Inman Sq before turning west to hit Harvard, after which it could continue to Watertown or Arlington (or wherever you have your Braintree service running to right now)
    • This would provide doubled capacity to Harvard while still serving Kendall and providing a Harvard <> Back Bay 1SR.
    • You could have your South Boston T service cut over to Mass Ave to pick up the lost corridor and then switch back over to Inman (crude sketch below)
1737830436796.png


(I hadn't been planning to sketch out all of the lines but)
 
Riverside - I liked the idea of swapping the Mass Ave and Dartmouth Street lines, so did that in the latest of my working map. :)

Also went a little crazy with reworking more of the "Green Line" system in Cambridge and Somerville to bring back more of the lost streetcar network in those cities. Added in some other cross-town options for Everett and Chelsea, too.

Most of the new letter lines would be street-running or at-grade, except for areas where streets would be too narrow or the transitions would require some sort of grade separation. The idea of such a dense network would be to modernize street infrastructure (smart signals to start) and minimize single-occupancy vehicle traffic along the corridors. Haven't decided how exactly to do this without making the map appear too busy, but I'll play around with maybe a white line "cutting" the route line in half.

Screenshot 2025-02-14 at 8.21.49 PM.png
 
Finally got around to making a revised fantasy map, featuring a new Urban Ring design, more regional rail, more streetcars, more colors, and more Brockton.View attachment 60249
There's a lot of neat ideas in there.
One thing I'd change that stands out right away is stopping the Blue Line at Kenmore. Having a full HRT line to downtown is so incredibly valuable, you'd want to extend that as far as makes sense to take full advantage of it. There have been lots of proposals here for how to do that, like retracing the old A train to Watertown, or following the Pike in parts. The easiest way to extend the Blue Line without disrupting other plans on you map would be to extend it from Kenmore, down Brookline Ave, to at least Longwood. Past there there are options to Brookline Village or JP. Stops along the way to Longwood would serve Fenway and give a transfer to your Circle Lines.

I feel like any corridor with this kind of bus density is screaming out for a subway line.

1739889426221.png
 
Small design notes, I think including Chelsea Creek would help visually clarify that the yellow line isn't going from Charlestown to East Boston. Also it seems like the Braintree and Quincy Center connections between RL and regional rail are indicated differently than the rest of the map.

On a service note, no Peabody branch?

I love a lot of these concepts, particular the branching teal line, I don't think I've seen anything like that before.

One question, how do you envision the Ruggles to Nubian routing? Is this deep boring under Madison park? I imagine Ruggle St is too narrow to fit in a cut-and-cover.
 
There's a lot of neat ideas in there.
One thing I'd change that stands out right away is stopping the Blue Line at Kenmore. Having a full HRT line to downtown is so incredibly valuable, you'd want to extend that as far as makes sense to take full advantage of it. There have been lots of proposals here for how to do that, like retracing the old A train to Watertown, or following the Pike in parts. The easiest way to extend the Blue Line without disrupting other plans on you map would be to extend it from Kenmore, down Brookline Ave, to at least Longwood. Past there there are options to Brookline Village or JP. Stops along the way to Longwood would serve Fenway and give a transfer to your Circle Lines.

I feel like any corridor with this kind of bus density is screaming out for a subway line.

View attachment 60254
The Existence of bus routes like this in an UR world doesn't necessarily make the corridor a good fit for an extension. UR access to Longwood is pretty good on this map, so the main benefit would be giving BL riders a OSR to Longwood. I don't think that's worth a billion dollars given the many 2SR opportunities, but it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility.
On a service note, no Peabody branch?
Fair point, I should think about what to do with it.
One question, how do you envision the Ruggles to Nubian routing? Is this deep boring under Madison park? I imagine Ruggle St is too narrow to fit in a cut-and-cover.
You need to deep-bore that part, no getting around it. Ruggles needs to be pretty deep so that also doesn't help in that regard. To be honest though, I don't think it matters that much. The cost-discreptancy between bored tunnels and C&C is smaller than people generally think because of all the utilities work that needs to happen, the main benefit is shallower stations and 1/2 relevant stations here wouldn't take advantage of that.
 

Back
Top