and move Auburndale to Weston at 128.
There's much more of a population at it's current location and it starts to get really close to Wellesley Farms.
and move Auburndale to Weston at 128.
Newton Corner needs a station but unless the hotel gets torn down the likeliest location would be to the west.500 pax between the two station, of whom nearly 100 drive there. The western half of Auburndales walkshed is park and river. 6000 people take 5xxs. They could be feeding the RR. Several of them cover significant amounts of Washington St and your TOD folk could take the bus if they aren't that close
The walkshed is non existent west and the new W Newton station would be more centered to the density. The Weston station would be more of a P&R and TOD prospect. . Wellesley Farms is over 1.25 miles westThere's much more of a population at it's current location and it starts to get really close to Wellesley Farms.
And Massport would kick in as a Logan Express nodeThe walkshed is non existent west and the new W Newton station would be more centered to the density. The Weston station would be more of a P&R and TOD prospect. . Wellesley Farms is over 1.25 miles west
The walkshed is non existent west
So, a station at Church St would be about 600ft from the present rotary pattern of NC. That's about as close as you can get it to the hotel.Newton Corner stop sort of has to go in Newton Corner to kill the 501/502/503/504 and be fed by the 57 and 71. Just the ridership on those 50x routes would be a top-10 Commuter Rail stop.
An infill station around the Riverview Road access would also have catchment with Arsenal Yards and the various bike infra around the river. Though a bus route connecting Watertown Yard with Central Sq via rt 20 and Cambridge St. would also extend Boston Landing's catchment and supplement the infrequent 64 in Allston.Add a new one Fanuiel infill and provide a Brighton-Watertown Sq pinger and you get good coverage for a lot of people. Might even put a passing track east of the Pike tunnel.
Track 61 is non-abandoned on the RR network, with the RL test track only temporarily taking advantage of its Out-of-Service designation. The T will have to revert it back to RR status when they're done using it for testing. CSX still has active freight rights on it, and Massport is a co-signee since they own the Running Track portion east of Pumphouse Road and have tentative (though stalled) plans to bring freight to Marine Terminal with a spur along Tide St. So everything rapid-transit is off the table unless MassDOT, Massport, and CSX all co-sign on an abandonment/landbanking filing with the feds...and that's pretty unlikely to happen since the Port freight futures are a quantifiable thing.This might belong in crazy. But is the red line test track a viable right of way to be used for anything? A short link between Seaport and Andrew Square? In the long term there could be some type of cut n cover connection with a futuristic GLX extension that existed in the current SL tunnel. For now, my pitch is converting the red line track along (63?) along S Boston Bypass.
I am riding the D line to my office now, with my commute from Eastie to Newton being severed by the Sumner closure, and boy am I impressed by the speed of the D branch. I think I fully see how much inspiration to build a GLX there was from the D branch being a functioning light rail in Boston. Easy to construct and easy to ride too!
Thinking about how nice non-street-running green line branches are, what could be the next extension to be built in the GL light rail network?
100% I think the likeliest next extension will be to Needham. If the stars align, maybe a short extension of the E to Hyde Square might come first, but I think that's less likely.I am riding the D line to my office now, with my commute from Eastie to Newton being severed by the Sumner closure, and boy am I impressed by the speed of the D branch. I think I fully see how much inspiration to build a GLX there was from the D branch being a functioning light rail in Boston. Easy to construct and easy to ride too!
Thinking about how nice non-street-running green line branches are, what could be the next extension to be built in the GL light rail network?
That wouldn't be a bad length of a commute for Needham residents. I wonder if there's more support or nimby from them at the moment?100% I think the likeliest next extension will be to Needham. If the stars align, maybe a short extension of the E to Hyde Square might come first, but I think that's less likely.
I did a kind of "rabbit hole analysis" (as in, "diving down a rabbit hole") of specifically where one might put a Seaport LRT station on a line coming up Track 61. In addition to the problems @F-Line to Dudley lays out in terms of the western end of the line (at Widett Circle), the eastern end poses a lot of problems too: Track 61 is great, right up until Summer St, at which point you have a few different options, all of them varyingly bad.This might belong in crazy. But is the red line test track a viable right of way to be used for anything? A short link between Seaport and Andrew Square? In the long term there could be some type of cut n cover connection with a futuristic GLX extension that existed in the current SL tunnel. For now, my pitch is converting the red line track along (63?) along S Boston Bypass.
Track 61 looks so tempting on the map, but ultimately I just don't think it's viable; it seems to me like it creates more problems than it solves.One thing this exercise illustrates is that the Seaport is not very wide. This sounds obvious and trivial, but one result is that there isn’t really space nor need for a “crosstown” service. The Piers Transitway and Summer St already form strong “east-west” transit corridors (whose elevation difference reduces their overlapping walksheds slightly). But they’re still close enough that a perpendicular service between/across them wouldn’t make much sense (particularly since both originate at South Station and come very close to connecting again at World Trade Center).
So a Track 61 LRT service basically needs to choose a particular point along the “linear Seaport corridor” to terminate. That increases the pressure on that station to be located optimally to maximize access to jobs as well as to transfers. World Trade Center does reasonably well on that front, but both the eastern Seaport (e.g. Design Center) and western Seaport (e.g. Courthouse) would require transfers for short last-mile journeys. But this need to choose lies at the heart of why siting an Urban Ring LRT station in the Seaport is difficult in the first place.
A Track 61 LRT service will likely reach the Seaport in part by passing near Broadway station. Regardless of origin point beyond there, a service near Broadway likely could instead be aligned to pass through South Station instead — and then continue to Seaport along one of the east-west corridors. ...
Sending an “Urban Ring” LRT service down one of the east-west corridors would provide better access to the entire Seaport, and reduce/eliminate the need for transfers. Running LRT service via Track 61 may in fact be unnecessary.
...
- The problems I’ve outlined here will impact any Track 61 proposal; Track 61 will always be on the wrong side of the Mass Pike between Summer and Congress Streets, so you’ll always need to figure out a way to bridge that gap
- This conversation becomes radically different if an LRT connection between Seaport and Logan is built — although even then, Track 61 will still be on the wrong side relative to the Transitway
...- The Seaport is centered on two east-west corridors, and there’s an argument to make that almost all services, even circumferential ones, would do well to feed into or otherwise align with those
This will have a demand for ridership. The area around it is open to TOD. It's an area that's less car-centric. This is well connected to other highly trafficked areas. And I could even see people visiting Porter for leisure. I think Porter could grow from this.The next, most logical one, in my opinion, is an extension past Union to Porter, with an infill stop halfway (that I like to think of being called “Duck Village”). Like the existing segment of the Union branch, it could follow alongside the Fitchburg Line.