General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

Uncivil_Engineer said:
Sounds like they're flipping all the platforms to the north side (track 1). This has construction advantages (minimal impact on current low-level platforms while work is going on) and also design advantages (handicap access could be cut into the embankment vs having to use the overpasses for access).
Click to expand...

That's pretty much it though, the space to work with is really tight where it is now alongside the Pike. It would be much easier I imagine to build new platforms on the other side. Now both platforms would be nice to accommodate Indigo but not necessary.
 
Uncivil_Engineer said:
Sounds like they're flipping all the platforms to the north side (track 1). This has construction advantages (minimal impact on current low-level platforms while work is going on) and also design advantages (handicap access could be cut into the embankment vs having to use the overpasses for access). But, it retains all the operational headaches of only being able to offer good service in one direction. Also, if the PM peak opposite-side boarding scheme is retained for the Wellesleys and Naticks, all PM locals would have to cross over at CP-11.

The current plan could work as a phased approach, but when if this moves forward there needs to be a plan for high-levels on the south side as well. I'm guessing that money is the issue here, but condemning this corridor to low-frequency operations seems like a huge disservice given its proximity to the city and potential for good TOD.
Click to expand...
We've since learned that Alt 1 is essentially the same as Phase 1 of Alt 2 and Alt 1 doesn't preclude Alt 2. Selecting Alt 1 allows the project to get moving & funded and then Alt 2 to eventually get built later with another round of funding.
 
datadyne007 said:
We've since learned that Alt 1 is essentially the same as Phase 1 of Alt 2 and Alt 1 doesn't preclude Alt 2. Selecting Alt 1 allows the project to get moving & funded and then Alt 2 to eventually get built later with another round of funding.
Click to expand...

Yep, that was my thought too. There will just need to be a sustained push once the new platforms are done to go back and add the second set.
 
Uncivil_Engineer said:
Yep, that was my thought too. There will just need to be a sustained push once the new platforms are done to go back and add the second set.
Click to expand...

And rest assured, we at TransitMatters will be making a hell of a lot of noise.
 
They wouldn't need to move the tracks, would they? Now that I actually read the PDF, seems like $43M is a lot for what I am imagining would be needed.
 
I can't figure out what project you're talking about. Move tracks for what? I read back and before mention of these mysterious Alts there were only posts about self driving cars??
 
sm89 said:
I can't figure out what project you're talking about. Move tracks for what? I read back and before mention of these mysterious Alts there were only posts about self driving cars??
Click to expand...

Making the Newton stops on the Worcester line accessible.
 
Czervik.Construction said:
Will late night T service ever return to the city? Even on weekends?
Click to expand...

FMCB & the T service planning are finding a way to have overnight bus service on limited routes. It's not if anymore, it's how.

Our statement from the 10/31/17 FMCB meeting:
UPDATES

2017 October 31 — The FMCB yesterday agreed to advance the Overnight Transit Service pilot program sponsored by TransitMatters, Boston, Revere, Chelsea, Cambridge and Somerville. The service, called NightBus, is structured to provide transit service to the nearly 50 thousand workers who leave jobs between 1am and 4 am.

The FMCB decided to delay final approval of the pilot to determine how to implement Nightbus in the most cost-effective manner.

The options that will be considered include:

  • Private Operators servicing the route via a RFP.
  • Utilizing MassPort "Sunrise Service & Longwood Medical Area shuttles to service the routes in the early morning hours.
  • Seeing if private operators could utilize shorter buses to reduce the cost of operation.
  • Working with Carmen's Union to utilize part time employees to service the route at a reduced cost.

The Chair of the FMCB also set a target date of July 2018 (FY19) for it to be implemented.

TransitMatters is committed to seeing NightBus through to implementation. Nightbus is on the Horizon!

https://transitmatters.squarespace.com/nightbus/?p
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: Newton commuter rail

Uncivil_Engineer said:
Yep, that was my thought too. There will just need to be a sustained push once the new platforms are done to go back and add the second set.
Click to expand...

Where does having usable Newton platforms on both sides fit in the priority list relative to the Worcester Union Station second platform?
 
Saw this on the South End facebook page. Thought it might interest someone here:

Ever wanted to explore an abandoned T Tunnel? Well, now is your chance! In celebration of Preservation Month, the Boston Landmarks Commission and City of Boston Archaeology Program will be hosting the first public tours of a segment of the abandoned 1898 south-bound subway tunnel between Government Center/Scollay Square Station and the former Adams Square stations, now under City Hall Plaza. The tour is free and begins with a 5-minute talk by the City Archaeologist followed by 15 minutes of free exploration. We will be hosting no more than 100 individuals on five timed 20-minute long tours on Monday, May 21, between Noon and 1:20 pm. Signup is required at the following link:
Click to expand...

https://www.signupgenius.com/go/5080d44acae2faaf94-preservation
 
Dumb question about the Newton stops. Do they have to build the high level platforms to be considered accessible? It just dawned on me that might be the case.
 
jklo said:
Dumb question about the Newton stops. Do they have to build the high level platforms to be considered accessible? It just dawned on me that might be the case.
Click to expand...

Yes they absolutely have to be high to be accessible, but that's not why the Newtons are costing so much. There's a lot of bloat in there and also some bridge reconstructions that Newton should be helping to pay for.
 
This question could go into the ‘reasonable transit pitch’ thread, but its more just curiosity at the moment: Does anyone know how feasible it would be to add platform screen doors to the stations? It would future proof stations for any eventual automated trains, and it could be done incrementally. On the down aide, the union might think its mainly done to introduce automated trains.
 
DominusNovus said:
This question could go into the ‘reasonable transit pitch’ thread, but its more just curiosity at the moment: Does anyone know how feasible it would be to add platform screen doors to the stations? It would future proof stations for any eventual automated trains, and it could be done incrementally. On the down aide, the union might think its mainly done to introduce automated trains.
Click to expand...

Platform screens only work if all of your cars are standardized. They're a nice safety feature and they can improve performance, but at the end of the day they're just not a necessity.

There are other higher priority items that will (and should) get funded first.
 
Platform doors also keep trash off the tracks, keep drunks and jumpers out, and encourage orderly queues. Bonus: they make basic Air Conditioning feasible.

As soon as we get a "final" train door layout (new OL and RL are wider and sometimes differently spaced than the 3-door Reds in particular) it will be ripe to talk platform doors on the RL & OL. BL might have to wait until that next fleet with it's "final" door design.

Much less urgent on GL where cross-track access is a feature, not a bug. (Eg Park St inbound)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top