MBTA "Transformation" (Green Line, Red Line, & Orange Line Transformation Projects)

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
1,551
I believe its just minor updates/"beautification." They may potentially be moving the tracks to the center of Comm Ave, but I may be imagining I heard that.
That's the preferred alignment, but City has been deadlocked on it for years. They say it's too expensive and without MassHighway involvement (it being State Route 30) they can't center the reservation and need to default to half-measures dressing up the current alignment. State says as a city-control street the layout isn't their baby and this is BDPW's fix. T is caught in the middle because they can't do anything for GLT planning Packards-Warren until something shakes loose with other parties.

They're all half-decade or more behind schedule because of the stalemate. Maybe there's now behind-scenes movement afoot on a resolution, but we don't know yet what that might be because it's been years since any public presentation info has been updated. From outside view it's still as much a TBD as ever, pending any sort of news refresh on the renders.
 

HelloBostonHi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
821
Reaction score
769
Screenshot_20200723-174429_Drive.png

Screenshot_20200723-174914_Drive.png

E branch work is kinda underwhelming in scope, also no dedicated bus lane.
 
Last edited:

OldColony

New member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
3
Reaction score
5

cjbski

Active Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
925
Reaction score
171
Does this include from Brigham Circle to the Huntington Ave. curve finally being repaved? Sorry if I'm not seeing it...!
 

HelloBostonHi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
821
Reaction score
769
Does this include from Brigham Circle to the Huntington Ave. curve finally being repaved? Sorry if I'm not seeing it...!
The GLT vision is that section being entirely rethought to remove all surface stops in the middle of the road which are inaccessible and very user unfriendly...
 

Bananarama

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Messages
138
Reaction score
167
The GLT vision is that section being entirely rethought to remove all surface stops in the middle of the road which are inaccessible and very user unfriendly...
How is that gunna work? All of the stops from Fenwood to Heath lack a platform and side load. Or do you mean they're just adding curb ramps.
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
1,551
How is that gunna work? All of the stops from Fenwood to Heath lack a platform and side load. Or do you mean they're just adding curb ramps.
Or Frisco-style "transit in the center, cars bear right" combo trolley/bus platforms, offset on either side of intersection. See here: https://goo.gl/maps/Vqcxq2LQQfC7zzrK9.

That was actually an explicit suggestion in the E-centric GLT public meeting, per the comments section. It works extremely well in-practice from my own observation on multiple past trips to SF. The platform median does an excellent job chopping up the roadway width to make crossing less daunting, and the cars bearing right around stopped transit vehicles are traffic-calmed by the act of turning so you get way fewer speeders through those intersections as the lights are changing.

The major problem with all-curbside transit pickup is the time-chewing turnouts. It's bad enough on bus where it's the mode-default virtually everywhere, but weaving trolleys around traffic lanes really really doesn't work that well in-practice. Arborway restoration was predicated on curbside stops...and from the renders circulated way back when it looked like a born shit sandwich done that way, only validating the prefab gripes that trolleys couldn't hack it in 21st c. JP Center. If you've got enough room to stay on laser-straight trajectory in the center accessibility from platform is almost always enormously better than with a hasty curb turnout. Market St. in SF is narrower than all street-running parts of Huntington, and roughly par width with all of South Huntington...so that style of ADA-kosher platforming can be implemented there it can certainly be implemented here. Causes some add'l complication around snow removal, but how many total stations are we talking...two? Fenwood + BoTH are both dead-men-walking stop consolidations way too close to next-adjacent stops, so you only have to do this at Mission Park & Riverway...plus any Hyde Sq. extension stops if that goes forward. Easy as hell.


All of the Hyde Sq. extension renders I've ever seen have kept the center-running strip and either done PoP-enabled left-hand exiting onto a center platform or the San Fran-style staggering, so it's vastly more likely that's going to be the preference here and not any change from center-running tracks. Where they do have a golden opportunity to do an above-and-beyond improvement is--City-willing--Mission Park. Because if BHD were willing to trade out the (superfluous) front-wrapping driveway and relocate all of 20 resident parking spaces elsewhere on the complex Huntington Ave. would be able to re-bulb out to full 100 ft. width of the reservation-bearing section, and the full reservation would be able to reappear for 1 full block to house this stop on a full grade-separated platform. MP residents would also get some fatter street-facing greenspace buffer to mingle on rather than the bizarre one-way circulator driveway eating up so much space to their front steps. That would be the truly ideal fix...whack Fenwood, reposition the short-turn offsetted Brigham platforms squared-up to the intersection...run on-street solely on the space between stoplights, then reservation restarts again from Mission St. to Parker Hill Ave., inclusive of MH station in the middle with plenty of room to spare. Riverway is then the only one you have to do in-street tricks with San Fran-style or otherwise, unless Heath-Hyde service goes online.

Given who we're dealing with politically here I'd expect complete and total ANTI-cooperation from the City and BHD on ^this^ and for any such first suggestion of a Mission Park reservation-creating cosmetic surgery to Huntington to get shot out of the sky with violence. But that's uncooperative city politics for you. It is extremely, extremely feasible and cheap to do if it weren't for the politics. If I were a Mission Park resident I'd probably rather want more grass and benches facing the street too rather than that anachronism of a one-way loop driveway and a handful of "privileged" parking spots that could easily be re-striped on the side streets. Alas...turf warrage, UNGH-UNGH!
 

HelloBostonHi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
821
Reaction score
769
How is that gunna work? All of the stops from Fenwood to Heath lack a platform and side load. Or do you mean they're just adding curb ramps.
I mean building platforms of some type, somewhere. It has to happen at some point to meet ADA/MAAB, even type 10 vehicles need platforms.
 

Tallguy

Active Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
160
Reaction score
36
This is probably a good time to mention the Furth-Guo study done a few years ago but just as valid today.
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
1,551
Are you referencing: Transit Lanes on Huntington Av (Mission Hill section) ?
(a page that has a pdf, a paper, and an .avi)
That's a variation of the SF style...except in Frisco there's no lane prohibition. There it's a 2-lane road (fewer than Huntington) with the transit-goes-left/cars-go-right platform bulbs only splitting at stops. Fully legal for cars to stay in the left/transit lane, including past platforms, when there are no transit vehicles...but they bear right around the platform bulb in presence of train/bus brake lights slowing for a station stop instead of the bus always being the mode kicked awkwardly to the curb. Thus, it's the least space-invasive possible transit setup on a road that doesn't have any multi-lane give and is otherwise forced to take parking spaces at the corners where there are transit stops.

Huntington being 4-lane vs. 2-lane Market SF gives them a little more luxury to make an always-prioritized center lane...which is what that presentation does. It's 'superset' of the SF style. If squeezing from 2 to 1 travel lanes each direction is undesireable they can still do it the somewhat more car-permissive SF way and be able to retain good semblance of a bike lane.


Still though...even on Furth/Guo's grainy overheads that senseless asphalt expense of the Mission Park Apts. front wraparound driveway just screams "¡RESERVATION HERE!" as the Captain Obvious re-sculpting of that whole damn 600 ft. block + station if the politics were ever capable of basic cooperation. It's kind of the elephant in the room given what space is available to re-spread Huntingon for that one station-containing block. We shouldn't have to be in total in-street platform kludge mode right here if the City-representing parties were more willing.
 

Bananarama

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Messages
138
Reaction score
167
I mean building platforms of some type, somewhere. It has to happen at some point to meet ADA/MAAB, even type 10 vehicles need platforms.
Oh nice, yeah I see now. I imagined middle platforms but figured squeezing road space and taking away street parking would be a no-go.
They should definitely do this.
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
1,551
While the in-service numbers have been stuck at 16 for interminably long, the second-to-last Type 9--car 3922--is now delivered and in-testing at Riverside. One more from the CAF factory and that's a wrap. No clue what their excuse is this month for the glacial acceptances pace that's now backlogged 7 deep, because there's been zero reports of any in-service faults lately and the train tracker is lit up with unaccepteds in-testing on any given day.

Then it becomes a guessing game when the Type 8 component refresh program gets funded so they can repair the 7 broken Bredas collecting dust on the dead line. That right there is pretty much the only question mark for imminently instituting 3-car trains on the D + up to one other branch during the first post-COVID schedule revision of '21. So far the Type 7 rebuilds are making good time-on-clock for parts orders when they get cycled through the shop as there's yet to have been more than a rotating cast of 2-3 units out for longer-term repair at any given moment.
 

ra84970

New member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
69
Reaction score
41
While the in-service numbers have been stuck at 16 for interminably long, the second-to-last Type 9--car 3922--is now delivered and in-testing at Riverside. One more from the CAF factory and that's a wrap. No clue what their excuse is this month for the glacial acceptances pace that's now backlogged 7 deep, because there's been zero reports of any in-service faults lately and the train tracker is lit up with unaccepteds in-testing on any given day.

Then it becomes a guessing game when the Type 8 component refresh program gets funded so they can repair the 7 broken Bredas collecting dust on the dead line. That right there is pretty much the only question mark for imminently instituting 3-car trains on the D + up to one other branch during the first post-COVID schedule revision of '21. So far the Type 7 rebuilds are making good time-on-clock for parts orders when they get cycled through the shop as there's yet to have been more than a rotating cast of 2-3 units out for longer-term repair at any given moment.
Given the budget realities that the MBTA have been telegraphing, do we really feel like 3 car trains are going to be coming back anytime in the near future? Given how the 2012 cuts bled the bus network to save rapid transit and commuter rail, doesn't it seem like the next way to spread the pain is going to be those two networks?
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
6,656
Reaction score
1,551
Given the budget realities that the MBTA have been telegraphing, do we really feel like 3 car trains are going to be coming back anytime in the near future? Given how the 2012 cuts bled the bus network to save rapid transit and commuter rail, doesn't it seem like the next way to spread the pain is going to be those two networks?
If the crowding comes back...then yes, absolutely. How can you social distance on a standing-room-only D? That is the easiest of all avenues to keep service fluid on the Central Subway when we still have to mind our social P's & Q's in the post-COVID recovery. I'd argue it's more important than ever once we hit a certain comeback ridership threshold since it's not like snapping out of 2020 precautions is going to be as open-shut as the flick of a light switch.

Yeah...until AFC 2.0 it does mean staffing the extra operator. But if only one of them is doing the driving then rear cars on the triplets are where to pencil in the rookies so at least there's a salary gradation for the door-handlers in the interim.
 

ra84970

New member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
69
Reaction score
41
If the crowding comes back...then yes, absolutely. How can you social distance on a standing-room-only D? That is the easiest of all avenues to keep service fluid on the Central Subway when we still have to mind our social P's & Q's in the post-COVID recovery. I'd argue it's more important than ever once we hit a certain comeback ridership threshold since it's not like snapping out of 2020 precautions is going to be as open-shut as the flick of a light switch.

Yeah...until AFC 2.0 it does mean staffing the extra operator. But if only one of them is doing the driving then rear cars on the triplets are where to pencil in the rookies so at least there's a salary gradation for the door-handlers in the interim.
Of course, it all depends on how the response changes to COVID, but, I mean all indications are that the activity centers along the GL branches don't seem to be in a rush to "return" to normal. Other than the medical institutions, there's not a huge cluster of work locations with lot of essential workers that I can think of. And the medical workers travel around during hours that are not like the white/pink collar workers.

Also, as the years have gone on, the number of transit-dependent riders without mobility options seems to have moved away from the branches and more toward the buses.

As a point of data, I was looking through the MBTA's open riders data for bus routes that have returned to baseline ridership the week before the March and the one that surprised me is that there's a handful of routes that are approaching 100% of pre-pandemic ridership. I'm struggling to imagine *any* subway route getting close to that in the next 6-12 months without a vaccine. Moot with a vaccine, but, if a vaccine remains generally unavailable for the public going into Fiscal 2021, seems like the dreams of any of the GLT, RLT, OLT resulting in increasing more motormen (what is the gender neutral term, here? motor-ist? motor-person?) or street car operator .... seem far off with ridership on the buses being this resilient.

RouteAverage weekday ridership week of 3/2Average weekday ridership week of 8/24Percentage
9981159673.5
216115482873.5
43564943867.5
1093124206766.2
20150931361.5
1044038241459.8
11110201606959.5
 

Top