"Missing" Bus Routes

statler said:
Busses on the J-way? That would be a trip.
Click to expand...

Scary as hell is what it would be. I think the only bus that operates anywhere on the parkways is the 38, which very briefly (maybe 50 yards total) is on West Roxbury Parkway.
 
belmont square said:
This sounds a little “Crazy Transit Pitches” worthy. In addition to cozzyd’s acknowledgement of the awkwardness of having this discussion in light of the T’s current financial state, the focus on adding new bus services in middle or upper class neighborhoods north of the Charles that already have decent rail options and bus routes that for the most part have plenty of capacity, seems a little misplaced. What about Roxbury/Dorchester where 7 of the T’s 11 highest ridership routes are? Or Chelsea?
Click to expand...

Until the $150,000+ excutive assistant and oher obscentites are cleaned-up -- the T should be run as if it were in bakruptcy -- a virtual receivership -- with an outside master (with no connetions to the T employees, rtirees, consultants, contracors, or any of the corrupting unions, or the corrutpt politicians) in-charge of the clean-up

Given the current state of Taxpayer anger -- we seriously need to think of 5 years of "virtual receivership" before any local management will be allowed back in -- that means suspending everything except for operations and required maintenance
 
I'd agree to that only if the MBTA can get the main benefit of bankruptcy -- defaulting on all of its debt. Airlines get to do this all the time, why not the T?
 
Ron Newman said:
I'd agree to that only if the MBTA can get the main benefit of bankruptcy -- defaulting on all of its debt. Airlines get to do this all the time, why not the T?
Click to expand...

Ron -- the T's debt ultimately is the debt of the Commonwealh -- the T is really just a part of the Governor's Office -- specifically the Exectutive Office of Transportation

even before the restucturing the T, while it was an qusi-independent authority -- its bonds ultimately were backed by the full faith and credit of the Commonwealth -- as an entity created by an act of the Legislature
 
do you mean Park Drive?

The 79 and 350 run on a short section of Alewife Brook Parkway.
 
The 79 and 350 bus route uses Alewife Brook Parkway between Alewife Station and Mass Ave. The 75 bus route uses part of Fresh Pond Parkway. The 100 bus route uses part of the Fellsway. I'm sure there are others...
 
cden4 said:
The 79 and 350 bus route uses Alewife Brook Parkway between Alewife Station and Mass Ave. The 75 bus route uses part of Fresh Pond Parkway. The 100 bus route uses part of the Fellsway. I'm sure there are others...
Click to expand...

CDen -- Alewife and Freshpond are not the same kind of Parkways as Memoiial Drive and Storrow Drive
For one thing trucks certainly use Alewife Brook Parkway, particularly from Rt-2 to Concord Ave. That stretch of Alewife due to its function as an extension of the Rt-2 highway is wider and straighter than the other historic parkways. Second, neither Alewife nor Freshpond have any height restrictions as there are no underpasses.

Consequenly, T and other buses regularly use Alewife and the part of Fresh Pond from the 2 rotaries up to the intersection with Huron Ave and of course buses cross at Mt. Auburn St.
 
When the Mass. Ave. bridge was closed for construction, the #1 bus took a very long detour down Memorial Drive, over the BU Bridge, and back down Comm. Ave.
 
Salem needs more buses, IMO. Currently they just have some really lame excuses for buses. Not sure if some legit bus routes would actually end up working well or not, but it should be looked into.
 
Great info here about the TTs. Seems like the infrastructure isn't cheap, but not prohibitive either. Are there studies about the relative merits of TT versus bus? Instinctively I see TT as a more "cared for"/"invested-in" service (and businesses and residents would probably see it that way too) but is there a service quality argument to be made as well?

F-Line to Dudley said:
The only proposed extension of the TT's is 71 to Newton Corner where it would tie into a bunch more routes and offer better Waltham and Pike express bus coverage. It's rated in the 2003 PMT from Boston MPO: http://www.bostonmpo.org/bostonmpo/pmt-old/PMT-5.pdf. $1.5M to build (price includes 1 extra bus, so infrastructure alone with the current fleet numbers that's more like $600K-$750K). Adds 800 new 71 riders and +600 riders taking no current transit.

The 71 and Watertown Carhouse are still powered by the old Green Line A-branch underground power cable, which is a FY2016 unfunded line item on the budget for replacement for state-of-good-repair and bumping the juice a little on the Watertown end. That's all the infrastructure needed to handle this extension. So it boils down to running the 1/2 mile of extra overhead down Galen to loop around the Pike rotary, and plugging it into the same spots where the underground cable powered the Green Line overhead until it was shut off in '94.


I think they should wait on this one until there's commuter rail stations added at Newton Corner and Allston with some high-frequency Worcester Line service in the inner 'burbs. Then this is a really high-value connection where CR at Fairmount-like headways can replace the Pike express buses and the 71 gets kicked up a notch as a very big-deal connecting route.


Other one I could see is simply extending the 77A wires to Alewife Brook Pkwy. and the proposed Alewife busways. Another small addition that doesn't require much upgrade whatsoever to the central power draw, and makes it so both the 77A and 79 each bolster half of the 77 coverage to the midpoint. And...if they bought more Silver Line dual-modes you could run the articulated buses under the wires on the full 77, turn out at the Route 16 stop, and power-switch to/from diesel in Arlington. Cambridge would definitely go for that. Think in the interim though there's a lot more they can do to improve the 77-proper before they need this. If the Green Line were extended someday from Union to Porter, then that transfer and downtown rapid-transit bypass would flush enough new 77 ridership (esp. out of Arlington) to merit this TT flesh-out handily. But not before then. I'd rank the officially-proposed 71/Newton Corner run a lot higher.
Click to expand...
 
Trackless trolleys perform better in hilly areas, especially better than the newish CNG buses, which really struggle on hills. They are, of course, quiet, which in my opinion makes for a more pleasant ride. The downside is that they are subject to bunching, in much the same fashion as LRT vehicles. The biggest selling point for buses over street running rail in my opinion is the ability for one bus to pass another, making bunching less of an issue. The TT cannot do this, and also have the capacity issue that already works against buses. For this reason, I think they are best suited for hilly routes or for dedicated right of ways. I wouldn't get rid of our legacy TTs, but I see little reason to build any new lines.
 
HenryAlan said:
Trackless trolleys perform better in hilly areas, especially better than the newish CNG buses, which really struggle on hills. They are, of course, quiet, which in my opinion makes for a more pleasant ride. The downside is that they are subject to bunching, in much the same fashion as LRT vehicles. The biggest selling point for buses over street running rail in my opinion is the ability for one bus to pass another, making bunching less of an issue. The TT cannot do this, and also have the capacity issue that already works against buses. For this reason, I think they are best suited for hilly routes or for dedicated right of ways. I wouldn't get rid of our legacy TTs, but I see little reason to build any new lines.
Click to expand...

Henry -- No the real advantage of buses is flexibility

So for example the T has been running buses from Alewife to Kendal on weekends in place of the Red Line while critical long-defferd maintenance is perfomed -- can't do that with TT

Last year the T ran buses from North Station to Leachmere while Science Park was being redone -- the T will presumably want to run buses from Norh Staion at least some of the time while the New Leachmere is being built

Last time there was a Tall Ships -- perhaps again this summer -- how do you get millions of people down to the South Boston waterfront -- particularly down to the Marine Industrial Park piers -- Buses

Flxibility is the reason why you will never see any extension of the the Trackless Trolleys -- they only go where the wires are located -- the same is true for for street running LRV (only they are even more expensive than the TTs)

Now the never needs to be qualified by -- if the technology world delivers effecient, cost-effective, and reliable batteries and /or fuel cells then you could build hybrids which ran both on/off the wires -- but they are not here today
 
cden4 said:
The 79 and 350 bus route uses Alewife Brook Parkway between Alewife Station and Mass Ave. The 75 bus route uses part of Fresh Pond Parkway. The 100 bus route uses part of the Fellsway. I'm sure there are others...
Click to expand...

The CT2 is briefly on Memorial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top