Infill MBTA stations

F

FrankG

New member
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
Greetings all,

I have enjoyed reading this messageboard for the last few months, and wanted to pose a question about a topic I was interested in.

I know there is a plan to add a new T stop at Assembly Square on the Orange Line. Are there, or have there been, any plans for additional infill stations, as opposed to line extensions? It seems like as the urban population increases, residents and workers would be well-suited with additional points of entry on the subway to encourage intracity transit use. By comparison, here in Washington DC, the sparse distribution of Metro stops makes the system primarily useful for commuters rather than city-dwellers, and Boston has the advantage of a popular commuter rail system to better serve this purpose.

I was in Toronto last week and I was impressed by the density of the downtown subway stops. I found that the convenience of being able to enter the system without a long walk offset the additional travel time that more stops necessitated, especially in the winter weather (which should be familiar in New England!).

For example, I know the area between Central and Kendall has been heavily developed in recent years, with University Park, the biotechnology industry, and so on. It seems like a new Red Line station would be popular with the folks living and working there, and encourage continued development and growth.

There are other places I think a new T stop would be useful as well. Have any proposals like this ever been on the table?
 
There's some history of this. Charles, Science Park, and Arlington were all infill stations.

I've long thought there should be an Edgeworth station between Wellington and Malden.

DC Metro recently added one at New York Avenue.
 
I think infill stations and close station spacing can work in city centers. Central/Kendall is pushing the boundary of the CBD a little bit, but an intermediate station there might work if the gap was a little bigger (as it is, if you were starting at the projects between Windsor and Portland, you could reach either station in about 7 or 8 minutes).

Charles and MoS are examples of infill stations that serve key destinations that are very inaccessible (due either to distance, topography, the street network) absent the creation of those stations.

Edgeworth (I've argued before) has little merit because 1) very few existing residences are closer to a hypothetical Edgeworth station then they are to Malden or Wellington, 2) I prefer to wait until Lechmere, Sullivan, Community College, and Wellington are surrounded by dense urban fabric before we build any new stations in the hopes same will happen there.
 
Great points Belmont Square. It seems like all of those stops are really ripe for new urban infill development. It sure would help the stations feel less like vast wastelands.
 
Upon further analysis, it does not appear that Frank G's observations in Toronto were of a downtown subway system with more (or at least much more) frequent stops. One might wish the subway lines downtown and the Back Bay were in different places, but station spacing seems to be in line with Toronto:

Toronto
Yonge Street Line (Yellow) from Dupont to Bloor-Yonge: 14 stations in 5.2 miles for .371 miles per stop
Bloor Street Line (Green) from St George to Castle Frank: 4 stations in 1.5 miles for .375 miles per stop

Total .372 miles per stop

Boston
Orange Line from Mass Ave to North Station: 7 stations in 2.8 miles, or .4 miles per stop
Green from Haymarket to Hynes/Symphony: 8 stations in 3.1 miles, or .3875 miles per stop
Red from Charles to South: 3 stations in 1.3 miles, or .433 miles per stop
Blue from Bowdoin to Aquarium: 3 stations in .7 miles or .233 miles per stop

Total: .376 miles per stop
 
Interesting analysis - I think you are right in that the even spacing of the Toronto system gives a false sense of a more comprehensive network. Toronto also has an extensive set of indoor and underground passageways that make getting around far less daunting.

Perhaps what I'm really thinking about, then, is increasing the station density to downtown levels in areas that have grown significantly since the lines were put in place (as has apparently happened in the past in some areas, as Ron Newman mentioned). Cambridge seems like a prime candidate, and so I was wondering what other areas might someday receive this treatment as well.
 
Yes, we should add infill stations on the Green Line E-line between Heath Street and Forest Hills.

Wait, what?
 
Now that the Old Colony Commuter Rail is back how about a new station southern Dorchester (Popes Hill / Morrisey Blvd)? I know it was left out when the Braintree extension was planned because the line was conceived as a way to connect Boston to its southeastern suburbs, which had lost transit into the city when the OCRR shut down in '59. Not that it's back I think the line should/could handle one infill station.
 
Where exactly was this station?

Neponset seems to me a logical place for a station.
 
For the love of god, please someone at the T suggest infill stops between Central/Kendall and Harvard/Porter.
 
There should absolutely be an infill stop between UMass/North Quincy. I'm pretty sure this is the biggest gap between stations in the entire system.

I also agree about adding a stop between Central/Harvard.
 
Between Harvard and Porter would be difficult because the tunnel becomes a deep bore.
 
czsz said:
For the love of god, please someone at the T suggest infill stops between Central/Kendall and Harvard/Porter.
Click to expand...

This actually goes back as far as the subways. When the Boston Elevated Railroad first proposed a transit line (elevated at first) there were going to be 5 stations but community opposition got it down to three. NIMBYs are not new.
 
Are people in favor of infilling stops along the Red Line because they see a real transportation problem that can be solved, or because they think the space between stations looks too long on a map? I'm not saying any of these ideas are the worst I've heard. But the Red Line in Cambridge works so well because it connects 5 obviously major nodes very quickly. High frequency bus service already exists for the person alighting from Chez Henri, or a furniture store in Putnam Square that doesn't feel like an 8 minute walk to the subway. In Dorchester, an intermediate station at Victory Road would serve a very small number of residents that aren't already closer to Fields Corner, and if you move the station south it's on the wrong side of Morrissey Boulevard, cutting into the already light market even more.
 
Why give the person "alighting from Chez Henri" the second-class option of taking the bus and having to transfer when the subway's already right beneath their feet? Really, I wouldn't mind a couple more stops as a passenger on my way between Kendall and Porter if it meant I could sometimes get off at Linnaean Street rather than facing the long walk or annoying bus transfer at Harvard.

Infill stops could even help develop more nodes along Mass Ave. MIT has practically started building one between Central and Kendall, while the stretch of Mass. Ave. between Harvard and Porter is underdeveloped anyway - good riddance to the gas stations and Changsho parking lot.
 
The stretch of Mass. Ave. between Harvard and Porter seems to me to be properly scaled and developed as it is. The only missing pieces are empty lots near Porter Square that will eventually be developed by Lesley University.
 
I just did a quick and dirty measurement on Google Maps and the distances between Kendal and Central, Central and Harvard, and Harvard and Porter are all more or less a mile. That means that any where along the Mass Ave/Main St. corridor is a half mile walk from a T station. If you figure that the average person can walk a mile in 10 to 15 minutes, that means that anywhere along this corridor is a 5-7.5 minute walk from a T station, and seeing as how the majority of places you'd want to go are clustered around the stations themselves, the majority of times, one will not find themselves walking the full 7.5 minutes to get somewhere. If you were to put infill stations in the middle of the existing stations, it would mean that anywhere along the corridor, walking time would be cut down to 2.5-3.75 minutes. So, all told, the infill stations would cost a ton of money, make the actual ride slower, and save 2.5-3.75 minutes of walking time (note that that number is only for people walking from the very furthest distance away). Of course, the people who would have previously had to walk the furthest would now get to walk straight into a station, but it's still pretty easy to see how the law of diminishing returns is in effect here.
 
czsz said:
Why give the person "alighting from Chez Henri" the second-class option of taking the bus and having to transfer when the subway's already right beneath their feet? Really, I wouldn't mind a couple more stops as a passenger on my way between Kendall and Porter if it meant I could sometimes get off at Linnaean Street rather than facing the long walk or annoying bus transfer at Harvard.
Click to expand...

Linnaean Street is already 4 blocks from a subway station. Since Davis/Porter/Harvard/Central/Kendall are all within one mile of eachother, adding intermediate stations is going to attract barely any new riders. As Underground illustrates you have to balance the time savings for the relatively few passengers that will save time accessing the station, with the 90 seconds or so added to everyone else's trip.

It's not uncommon for people to wish there was a subway station across the street from their house, their job, or their favorite bar. But rapid transit subway isn't designed to serve every urban destination. Fortunately we already have buses (and Mass Ave has much less to complain about in this regard than other major streets parrelling subways lines--Bennington in Eastie, Dot Ave, Washington Street south of Dudley), and our feet to access these secondary destinations.
 
underground said:
If you figure that the average person can walk a mile in 10 to 15 minutes
Click to expand...

Not a good assumption. 3 miles per hour (20 minutes per mile) is a more normal walking speed.

Still, I wouldn't add a station between Porter and Harvard. That is what the 77 bus is for. It's pretty frequent, even at the most off-peak times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top