- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 6,621
- Reaction score
- 525
This is what we really need.
The slide on map 9 indicates that the 2 new stations will still be comically close together, to the point that I wonder if a single station between St Paul and Pleasant would have been even better.Presentation for B Line stop consolidation project, from last week's virtual meeting. . .
Includes construction schedules and staging details.
Not really. St. Paul to Babcock is 1500 ft. crosswalk egress to crosswalk egress, which is right about ideal for LRT spacing. On platform tip to platform tip it's 1250 ft, but there won't be a mid-cycle crosswalk at the east tip of Babcock so the shorter tip-to-tip length doesn't count for accessibility.The slide on map 9 indicates that the 2 new stations will still be comically close together, to the point that I wonder if a single station between St Paul and Pleasant would have been even better.
Jas -- that's a one dimensional view of spacingCopley to Hynes is 3,000. Could be 2,500 if they could be bothered to open the existing closed entrance. Clearly, they dont care, so why is it so important to keep the B stops at ~1,000?
Just because its easier to build stops above ground doesnt mean its needed. Ive never heard anyone complain that the subway stops are too far apart. D line stops are all over 2,000 apart, and everyone agrees it's the best line. Additionally, South Street to BC is 2,500, with a closed station in the middle. That was also a well-liked change.
The thing is, in the BU area, there are a lot of options. BU runs (or at least was running) a shuttle that basically replicated the B line+ went to the med campus. On top of that, the 59 makes even more stops. And theres Hubway as well. Never mind most students walk.Jas -- that's a one dimensional view of spacing
It depends a great deal on what has been or can be built in the "catchment" of the stop -- if you have single family or couple of family homes on the prime street and nearby 2ndary streets then 1/2 mile might be almost too close together
On the other hand -- if your "catchment" includes numerous multifamily, multistory buildings then 1/4 mi be to far apart
You can see this phenomenon on the 77 bus which used to be a streetcar run [there were until recently still some tracks buried in Mass Ave in Arlington]
There are several 5 or 6 story apartment / condo blocks along Mass Ave west of Arlington Center -- at 77 bus stops in that area the bus can fill/empty in a couple of stops
even for a large metropolitan university like BU or Northeaster -- the density of "commuting" varies a considerable amount throughout the campus -- and since that part of the B Line is all about servicing BU -- the stops should be appropriate to the demand
The Green Line isn't amenable to flat-world stop spacing, assuming demand even skewed across all 4 branches to total generica there...which it most certainly does not.Copley to Hynes is 3,000. Could be 2,500 if they could be bothered to open the existing closed entrance. Clearly, they dont care, so why is it so important to keep the B stops at ~1,000?
Just because its easier to build stops above ground doesnt mean its needed. Ive never heard anyone complain that the subway stops are too far apart. D line stops are all over 2,000 apart, and everyone agrees it's the best line. Additionally, South Street to BC is 2,500, with a closed station in the middle. That was also a well-liked change.
Would it make sense to eliminate the Blanford stop, and shift BU East to the block between Silber Way and Granby?Now...keep in mind BU East/BU Central spacing is still all fucked up at 500 ft. apart and no room on BU East to extend the platforms for Type 10 'supertrains' sans permit to close the Cummington Mall grade crossing.
Henry -- if this is verging into "Crazy Transit Pitch" territoryWould it make sense to eliminate the Blanford stop, and shift BU East to the block between Silber Way and Granby?
No. (1) Blandford Yard makes shifting the BU East platform impossible. (2) If you've ever been around Kenmore after a Sox game you know how much Blandford (and, correspondingly, Blandford Yard) is absolutely needed. That and the swells of BU students between classes give it a robust 1500+ daily ridership. (3) Distance-wise it's a league-average 1350 ft. nearest Kenmore headhouse to Blandford crosswalk, so also isn't an outlier on spacing. The only consolidation you'd ever see here is if Urban Ring LRT built the subway out to BU Bridge with a BU East intermediate stop...in which case the would-be flanking egresses of BU East Under would probably hit Marsh Plaza and Hinsdale St. closing up the between-stop spacing in a way that crosswalk positioning does not. But of course you have to be committed to building the UR as an LRT appendage for that to go on the table.Would it make sense to eliminate the Blanford stop, and shift BU East to the block between Silber Way and Granby?
Not totally Crazy Pitch. To interface with the Grand Junction at all with LRT for the Urban Ring, you are required to extend the subway to BU Bridge with a junction popping 1 portal out shallow-level to the hillside on the SW corner of BU Bridge, and another at Amory St. for the B and *new* St. Paul after it slices under the Pike. Simply no other way to square the level difference for an LRT interface, so that's an ironclad requirement (BRT Ring would have to plow under on different trajectory and portal-up on Mountfort, so construction costs in this area are either mode-neutral or slightly more favorable to LRT). Would be a cheap dig because it's 90% a dig under the 1890 reservation footprint with minimal utility relocation and would only have one inermediate station--BU East "Under"--spanning egresses built at Marsh Plaza and into Warren Towers. Flying junction somewhere right past the station as the UR stays level and cuts diagonal under Comm Ave. WB to hit the shallow bridge portal and the B descends down and straight for the underpin of the Pike. Assume Kenmore-BU Bridge then becomes some extension of Comm Ave. Mall with a cycle track on the restored surface.Henry -- if this is verging into "Crazy Transit Pitch" territory
the T should just dig a deep tunnel to go under the Turnpike all past PACKARDS CORNER [the fork between Comm Ave and Brighton Ave] with:
Station just before BU Bridge [about where the current BU Central]Station just before the current Packards Corner surface stationStation at Harvard Avecoming up to a surface station at or near to the Griggs St surface station
That would get rid of most of the light-related problems as well as the issues with small platforms
Some if this is self-inflicted, with front-door boarding creating a full decade of extended dwell times. All door boarding (and vehicles with more doors) would help massively. Also adding frequency would as well. No reason you cant have a trolley every 4 minutes. But I agree that narrow stations are an issue as well. With Harvard, you could fix that by creating a crosswalk on the other end.The Green Line isn't amenable to flat-world stop spacing, assuming demand even skewed across all 4 branches to total generica there...which it most certainly does not.
(1) The stops are variable on demand, so dwells--even on a longer platform with all-doors--start to become an issue around BU if you combine too many stops and too much multi-stop demand in one place. It's already an issue, for example, at Harvard Ave. which does the second-highest boardings behind Longwood of any reservation stop and has some particularly nasty time-of-day crush loading. The Comm Ave. Phase III Reconstruction design is going to have to find a way to come up with a wider platform, because the minimum-width current platforms choke on simultaneous boarding/alighting movements in such a way that more doors are not going to help enough with all foot-traffic converging on one set of crosswalks at one single end of the platforms. BU Central and Packards--the stations abutting this current consolidation zone--are at risk for much the same congestion backfires if consolidation goes too aggressive in-between...and both of those sitting at busy intersections means dwell management is all the more critical for hitting a transit priority-signal + queue-dump slot. I think you can argue about +1/-1 stations within those margins...but total scorched-earth will most definitely impale itself as far as the dwells v. transit priority dance is concern.
That would combine to a trolley a minute in the core section. Even with CBTC you'd struggle to run those headways smoothly without inevitable bunching and slowdowns.No reason you cant have a trolley every 4 minutes.