Did I say one farm? Haven't you set up a classic straw man?
Maybe you can tell from the number of exclamation points you think you need to make your point. Oh ... and the demure obscenity, don't forget that.
I did,
I agree with you on most of this, in regards to the true measure of a city being contiguous urban area.
I just think that urban locations with density greater than 8,000/sq mi. and land area greater than 50 sq miles tend to be able to support thriving subway systems while cities below that threshold tend to not be able to support them. These less dense cities are better suited for light rail. This is actually the case in every city's transportation plan.
I agree with you on most of this, in regards to the true measure of a city being contiguous urban area.
I just think that urban locations with density greater than 8,000/sq mi. and land area greater than 50 sq miles tend to be able to support thriving subway systems while cities below that threshold tend to not be able to support them. These less dense cities are better suited for light rail. This is actually the case in every city's transportation plan.
palindrome
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2006
- Messages
- 2,266
- Reaction score
- 117
The new CSX yard is in Worcester. The Allston yard is already owned by Harvard so don't expect anything for another 50 years.
Digital_Islandboy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 371
- Reaction score
- 3
I live off Fresh Pond Parkway and believe me---, I feel your pain. The streets in Cambridge cannot handle the volume of traffic. In the Morning/Afternoon the traffic here is crazy since Route 2 turns into a bottleneck with all the traffic lights in Cambridge. If they have money to burn, they should look at extending a better Northwest corridor in-to/out-of Boston.
I've thought about one.... It may even help your commute depending on the parts of city you goto. It would involve pushing the Fitchburg Line (near Alewife) underground ... From the overpass spanning the Fitchburg Line it can be observed there are four tracks that pass below the Alewife Brook Parkway bridge. There are the two main tracks of the Fitchburg Line, plus a siding of the Watertown Branch Railroad, and one going to a maintenance facility (shed) on the west side of the same Bridge.
I contend, that there appears to be enough land area to build a state-highway above the Fitchberg Line leading directly into Boston. (Since those tracks terminate near North Station).
It could terminate close to McGrath Highway in Somerville or even closer to the Boston Museum of Science area.
It looks to me to be as-wide as Route 9 around Wellesley/Framingham (and it is well known how much volume that route handles daily.)
The route could be a limited access road in order to keep traffic flowing quickly into/out of Boston. (Similar to the access road built between the southeast Expressway and the Ted Williams Tunnel.) and according to MBTA, from Waverly (Belmont) to North Station is 17 minutes. The junction I'm referring is probably about 7 minutes further east so one can easily do that math. I tell you one thing, it would work wonders to keep traffic flowing a lot faster from Route 2.... But that is at least a 3-4 mile long tunnel we'd be talking that would need to be built to put the Fitchburg Line underground between Alewife and Boston. this would open up a final Northwest corridor into/out-of Boston.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 9
Not a good idea. We do not need any new highways. What you propose was planned before, and killed off in the early 1970s for very good reasons. It would clobber Porter Square and Union Square and other worthy neighborhoods.
The Fitchburg Line corridor is quite narrow between Porter and Union squares and could not be replaced by a 4-lane highway without land takings.
Instead of this, a better idea is to run frequent DMUs on the Fitchburg Line between North Station and Belmont or Waltham.
The Fitchburg Line corridor is quite narrow between Porter and Union squares and could not be replaced by a 4-lane highway without land takings.
Instead of this, a better idea is to run frequent DMUs on the Fitchburg Line between North Station and Belmont or Waltham.
Even better would be to extend the red line off to belmont along the fichtburg line, and have the commuter rail trains express into boston.
A 2nd red line branch along the lexington line too.
Digital_Islandboy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 371
- Reaction score
- 3
Yes true. The infamous "Inner Belt" (I-695) proposal. Actually it is a part of the reason why the highway nature of Route 2 just abruptly terminates at the border of Cambridge now.
Actually, what I was talking about would remain below-grade at Porter. The RL at Porter is supposedly the deepest point of the MBTA's entire system. Furthermore, at present Somerville is pushing to have rail service extended to Union Square. However, the only direct route thus far is the Fitchburg Line, meaning they may need access to that right of way for that as well... I contend of they're going to dig any sort of a tunnel for one literally they could drop in both at the same time. (even one below the other). At porter it is actually already below grade when it crosses underneath Mass. Ave. (aka Route 2A)
Cambridge has some possible studies in the works for the Fitchburg Line. They are studying a concept of building an overpass along that Alewife Brook Parkway-Porter stretch for a bike trail. It would connect the Minute Man trail with the Watertown Branch Railroad (behind the Fresh Pond Mall.) And there is some planning to find a way to provide access to the Walden Cattle Path which is a historical "monument" situated adjacent to the tracks. So that area might be congested for trains service during all of this construction anyway.
The part of Somerville Ave, near the Gulf station does have some side-area if those sloping walls were replaced by vertical walls, and again further down on Park Street still looks wide enough for two lanes in each direction? It looks roughly the same width as the Bypass Road that they built in South Boston for Trucks to go from Southeast Expressway to the Ted Williams Tunnel.
About the Diesel trains that could work as well, but that still leaves in place the bottleneck for Northwest Corridor commuters.
If there's enough room for a four-lane highway, why not use that space to quadruple-track and electrify the portion between Porter and North Station? That would make Green Line operations along the corridor much simpler, and extend service beyond Union Station to Porter, with its Red Line connection. Plus, if electrification was continued all the way to Fitchburg, then you could start running high-frequency EMUs between Fitchburg and Boston.
Of course, with all this spending on rail, the highway idea would have to be shelved, at least for a while. But if there's a bottleneck for auto commuters in an area with commuter rail service, shouldn't the solution be to make the commuter rail service as good as possible, encouraging everyone who can to ride it? Better, at least, than expanding road capacity, and allowing it to fill up in another couple of years.
czsz
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 6,043
- Reaction score
- 5
The auto bottleneck in Cambridge is certainly not disincentivizing people from living in wealthy northwest suburbs. Why not just force these drivers to accept the backups as part of the cost of getting to live in historic Concord/Lexington and not opting to take the train?
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 9
There's no train to Lexington.
What train line? The only option is Alewife, and the garage gets full before 9am.
Where should people in Lexington go? Their rail line was eliminated. They have no local MBTA bus service (the 77 ends near the town line), and the express buses are very infrequent (and may not even stop in lexington, they go to burlington mostly)
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 6,963
- Reaction score
- 1,585
BostonUrbEx
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 4,340
- Reaction score
- 127
AND THAT'S THE WAY THEY LIKE IT!
^
If they didn't want to deal with the traffic, they would have allowed the red line extension or would be lobbying for it.
I say we just build a brick wall across Rt 2 and Mass Ave.
AND THAT'S THE WAY THEY LIKE IT!
I guess they like complaining about traffic, then...maybe they'll reconsider a few years down the road. It would be nice if the T could offer a somewhat improved service by then--I'll bet there would be more enthusiasm about it if it did.