If you designed a metro/subway for Worcester, MA how would it look?

D

Digital_Islandboy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
371
Reaction score
3
As the second largest city in all of New England, if you were to layout a metro/subway for Worcester, MA how would you plan it? Do you think better mass transit to the Worcester Airport would attract some airlines to serve this airport that Massport currently pays for.
 
Last edited:
Ooh, ooh, pick me!

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=217005306011543244255.0004ef1d4af60a7e1dee8

That ended up a bit of a mess actually.

I was trying the determine which lines to make by looking at the current bus service, and seeing which lines/areas have more than the baseline service of one hour headways. There was supposed to be a downtown loop that all the lines branched off of, but that didn't work out right.

Airport service is a must, though perhaps Mill street would be more suitable for light rail. There was also an actual study/proposal a while back for light rail on rt 9, so that should be considered.

At least with the DMU line, the tracks are already active, although new platforms would have to be built.
 
I've always wondered if bus ridership is the best predictor of successful rapid transit lines. Certainly in a place like Worcester I imagine that the buses are mainly for people who don't have other transportation options (cars). Wouldn't a successful rapid transit line create its own demand across other societal sectors as well, which could suggest other useful lines to replace car trips - that might not currently be bus routes?
 
Thanks for the link to the ridership map, winston. It makes it look like a line from Webster Square up to Lincoln Plaza would be a good start.
 
Shepard said:
I've always wondered if bus ridership is the best predictor of successful rapid transit lines. Certainly in a place like Worcester I imagine that the buses are mainly for people who don't have other transportation options (cars). Wouldn't a successful rapid transit line create its own demand across other societal sectors as well, which could suggest other useful lines to replace car trips - that might not currently be bus routes?
Click to expand...

I wonder much of the same too, however Massachusetts spends quite a bit more on Greater Boston mass transit in comparison to Worcester/Springfield.

To see that main block in Worcester's core which was partially knockdown and rebuilt that area is hoping to rejuvenate, so clearly WOR needs something. The Worcester to Boston Commuter Rail is supposed to be one of the most popular lines as well. Esp. of talk about having Fitchburg Line extend to Worcester. A better (closer) door to door experience might be what Worcester needs to change its fortunes and Central Mass. Worcester currently has all buses but as the second most populated municipality in the Commonwealth that means there's some less populated places in Mass getting metro/subway before anywhere in Worcester. A more friendly door-to-door experience in Worcester between their Union Station and environs other than a bus may bring more people out on public transport. Bus doesn't always mean faster transit. It gets caught in the same gridlock traffic as cars.

Massport acquired the Worcester Airport and it appears the only flight from that airport is Jetblue to/from Orlando, Florida? Sure the Manchester-Boston Airport in New Hampshire is competition but so are Bradley Airport in CT and T.F. Green Airport in RI; both of which have more then one airline and destination on offer.
 
Yeah honestly the Worcester airport should just be closed and redeveloped. It is just not worth the money they keep pumping into it.
 
Two big problems with the Worcester bus routes as they stand are:

1) Most of the routes only have hourly headways.

2) All of the routes terminate at the Union Station hub. There's no routes that go through from one side of town to the other, so unless your destination is downtown you need to transfer. WRTA doesn't have free transfers sadly. The hourly headways make for some painfully long transfers.

For the commuter rail, aside from possible Fitchburg Line connections, I would like to see the Fram/Worc line extended to Auburn, maybe all the way to Oxford.
I think adding some express trains that only stop at Worcester, Framingham, BB and SS with at an hour or less would help ridership a lot. This ties in with the future possibility of Worcester being on the Inland NEC (yeah, a bit of a long shot if that ever happens)

Also, RIDOT is planning an eventual Providence-Worcester passenger line.

http://www.planning.ri.gov/documents/trans/Rail_Plan_12_18_13.pdf
 
Last edited:
found5dollar said:
Yeah honestly the Worcester airport should just be closed and redeveloped. It is just not worth the money they keep pumping into it.
Click to expand...

Just because an airport doesn't have much passenger service doesn't mean it should be closed and redeveloped. New airports in MA simply won't ever happen again, and GA (private planes) are an important economic engine. ORH is still one of MA's busier airports. The terminal/parking/access road complex was built before 9/11 when the airport was well-served and expecting to grow.

I don't understand why JetBlue keeps starting service with flights to FL. I realize that's the O/D market they're looking for (and vacation-goers don't care that the schedule stinks), but why not start with JFK service so people get used to starting all of their trips at their local airport?

Oh, nice transit maps! :)
 
Digital_Islandboy said:
As the second largest city in all of New England, if you were to layout a metro/subway for Worcester, MA how would you plan it? Do you think better mass transit to the Worcester Airport would attract some airlines to serve this airport that Massport currently pays for.
Click to expand...

Isn't Worcester a relatively cheap place to park? I also don't remember traffic congestion (other than heading to/from the highways) being a big problem. Not sure if a subway could ever be justified as long as parking is plentiful, cheap and easy to access.

Even if you were thinking about rapid transit as a way to induce new development patterns that would change the above, Worcester probably wouldn't be the right place to start in New England. Much like Somerville's claim to be the densest city on the planet, Worcester's 2nd largest city in New England claim is dubious--Providence, Hartford, and Springfield are all clearly larger cities (albeit municipally fragmented ones).
 
If a subway costs $500 million a mile to build, and you build three miles of subway, you could buy every one of the daily 10,000 riders a new automobile every four years at a cost of $25,000 a car, over a period of 20 years, and that would be cheaper than three miles of subway.

The problem with Worcester is (to borrow a description of Oakland) there is no there there, and thus no compelling reason for large numbers of people to travel from point A to B, or from point C to D, in Worcester.
 
Well you haven't factored in the cost of building and maintaining the roads or the parking lots for those 10,000 cars. Not to mention the cost of bringing in the gasoline and its subsidies, or the opportunity cost lost to parking etc.

But yes, $500m/mile is insane and we need to figure out why our costs are out of control. Barcelona built a rail tunnel recently for ~$50m/mile.
 
Traffic on 190 and 290 is pretty good, even during rush hour. The main arterials are a mess during rush hour though-Park Ave, Main street, Route 9(Highland/Belmont).

Parking wise, it is pretty cheap. Parking can be had for $3 a day downtown.
http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/rail/lines/stations/?stopId=237
However, it is true that parking lots mar a lot of downtown, and that's not going to change until rents rise enough to justify new construction. I've heard that construction costs are similar to Boston, which frankly seems weird, which implies that rents would have to rise near Boston levels to justify a lot of new construction. That's something I wouldn't want to see.
 
Scalziand said:
Ooh, ooh, pick me!

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=217005306011543244255.0004ef1d4af60a7e1dee8

That ended up a bit of a mess actually.

I was trying the determine which lines to make by looking at the current bus service, and seeing which lines/areas have more than the baseline service of one hour headways. There was supposed to be a downtown loop that all the lines branched off of, but that didn't work out right.

Airport service is a must, though perhaps Mill street would be more suitable for light rail. There was also an actual study/proposal a while back for light rail on rt 9, so that should be considered.

At least with the DMU line, the tracks are already active, although new platforms would have to be built.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the map. I'm looking at it again, and again. I like it! I started trying to look for everything I've ever heard of out in Worcester and it seems your proposed system is close to many of those things. Nice contribution!
 
Won't be so nice when you add another 10,000 cars to the mix. That's 2-4 freeway lanes worth, over the course of 1-2 hours.
 
Matthew said:
Barcelona built a rail tunnel recently for ~$50m/mile.
Click to expand...

I think it's closer to $70m/mile, but your point is very valid. Where do we come up with these wacky costs when other advanced, high-cost, litigious countries do more technically tricky construction for a fraction of the price? Of course, no two geologic contexts are the same, but how is Barcelona seven times less expensive than Boston when they're manoeuvering through eight centuries of historical ruins? :confused:
 
Tombstoner said:
I think it's closer to $70m/mile, but your point is very valid. Where do we come up with these wacky costs when other advanced, high-cost, litigious countries do more technically tricky construction for a fraction of the price? Of course, no two geologic contexts are the same, but how is Barcelona seven times less expensive than Boston when they're manoeuvering through eight centuries of historical ruins? :confused:
Click to expand...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-26/u-s-taxpayers-are-gouged-on-mass-transit-costs.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top