Reasonable Transit Pitches

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
7,813
Reaction score
3,247
Would an extended 96 to Malden center compliment this? It never made sense to me why the 101 and 96 didn't cover the same space through Medford center to Malden center (via Salem and Pleasant). The 101 is nearly the only bus serving Malden Center from the west (the 108 goes a few blocks, then heads south), this would expand capacity on the corridor, and it would create an Orange, Green, Red connection in the reverse of your proposed BRT line on route 16 (Orange line north, then green, then red south). Maybe I'm off base here.
Hard to say, because that whole north region is going to be subject to the major post-GLX Better Bus studies where lots and lots of the route map is likely to change and shape-shift to new priorities. Certainly the options are going to diversify a ton on the Davis(RL)-College Ave.(GL) circuit, Medford Sq. being one of the big beneficiaries having its spate of originating options get much broader than today. The 96 as-is runs a bit long to be thinking of super-extending from a Harvard base...but you may not need to do that at all if there's a new option originating out of Davis/College Ave. (and/or Mystic Valley Pkwy. depending on where it routes from there) that covers it to Malden. I would think one or more new spanning routes between Davis/CA terminal and Malden terminal has got to be pretty high on that after-GLX wishlist. When it gets to that point the community meetings are going to be exhaustive, so everyone will get their chance to sound off on what they think the future route priorities should be.
 

KCasiglio

New member
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
91
Reaction score
109
First some background: https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/projects/betterbus/route-profiles/212.pdf

My proposal to re-route the 212 bus into something actually useful:

Traveling north from Quincy Center, turn right onto Hancock Street, then left onto Coddington. Continue up Sea Street like the 214/216 until making a left onto Quincy Shore Drive. Follow QSR until making a right onto E. Squantom Street. Follow until Victory Road, turn and pass through Marina Bay then come south on Commander Shea Blvd and terminate at North Quincy.

Marina Bay is currently entirely unserved by public transit. This is probably just fine with the residents, but there's plenty of restaurants and shops up there that the workers and some visitors would like access to. Wollaston beach also does not have direct public transit access, the closest being the current poor, wildly infrequent 212 route and next to that a 210 bus that doesn't come within 1/2 a mile of the beach. This route still maintains the unique riders served by the 212, although it makes their trip to/from NQ less direct that's only about 100 people so the gain seems to massively outwiegh their inconvenience. Some would have to walk farther to catch the bus but others would have a shorter walk. The route looks a little weird on a map but clearly the point of this is not a Quincy Center-North Quincy connection.

This route would demand higher frequency than the existing 212, but that can easily be accommodated if and when the new bus depot comes to fruition and the 200 series fleet is expanded.
 

Attachments

jbray

New member
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
95
Reaction score
64
First some background: https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/projects/betterbus/route-profiles/212.pdf

My proposal to re-route the 212 bus into something actually useful:

Traveling north from Quincy Center, turn right onto Hancock Street, then left onto Coddington. Continue up Sea Street like the 214/216 until making a left onto Quincy Shore Drive. Follow QSR until making a right onto E. Squantom Street. Follow until Victory Road, turn and pass through Marina Bay then come south on Commander Shea Blvd and terminate at North Quincy.

Marina Bay is currently entirely unserved by public transit. This is probably just fine with the residents, but there's plenty of restaurants and shops up there that the workers and some visitors would like access to. Wollaston beach also does not have direct public transit access, the closest being the current poor, wildly infrequent 212 route and next to that a 210 bus that doesn't come within 1/2 a mile of the beach. This route still maintains the unique riders served by the 212, although it makes their trip to/from NQ less direct that's only about 100 people so the gain seems to massively outwiegh their inconvenience. Some would have to walk farther to catch the bus but others would have a shorter walk. The route looks a little weird on a map but clearly the point of this is not a Quincy Center-North Quincy connection.

This route would demand higher frequency than the existing 212, but that can easily be accommodated if and when the new bus depot comes to fruition and the 200 series fleet is expanded.
First off, Quincy's buses sucked and I almost always walked rather than take the 245 so props for trying to problem solve this. From my perspective you're trying to solve for two problems:
Connection to Wollaston Beach
Connection to Marina Bay

The proposed route does not really serve anyone but Marina Bay and people who want to go from the train to the beach while making its routing inefficient. You've taken a bus that essentially works as a local pick-up for the Red line and put 50% of its catchment beachfront and parks while really only serving Marina Bay as a feeder for the red line.

The questions I have are:
- Could the current route be utilized better as a local feeder?
- How much beachfront access is needed overall?
- What are the best corridors for potential ridership in Quincy?
- What corridors are not currently served/are under served?

I would say increased coverage of the current route would make the bus more successful. The bus routes that are have the least dwell times and that go to a train station are the most used routes, even within walking distance to the train. The 212 may not need to leave behind it's role as the local to achieve pieces of your vision.

In terms of beachfront access, let's compare to Wonderland. Most people take the train and are comfortable walking down the beach to find a location because that's the appeal of beaches. The better bus initiative has seen the reduction of the 411's operating hours on the revere side because that was the weak link, not the Malden portion. The 411 is not necessarily 1:1 with the proposed 212 that you've made due to the station itself being close to the beach, but it is closer than many other bus routes. It's not clear to me that there is sufficient demand for a Quincy coastal route. If the current 212 route went all the way up West Elm Ave to Quincy Shore Drive, stopped, and stopped again before taking Beach St back to Billings Rd, You would remove none of the old stops, and just add the two beachfront stops within walking distance of the playground, the popular Clam Box, and even the housing development on Vassal Street. This could, of course, be made into one stop instead of two but hey.

So where does this leave Marina Bay? Why shouldn't the 212 continue onward from North Quincy station up to Marina Bay just as the 211 goes up to Squantum? There is a case to be made for doubling service to North Quincy on East Squantum Rd, but I actually think this would not be as beneficial as using Hancock to Quincy Shore Drive. QSD is three lanes in each direction here, has numerous housing developments along it (which are only partially along Commander Shea Blvd, your recommendation), and reconnects with the 211 in the East Squantum neck where there is abundant housing. I'm not certain what a Marina Bay routing would look like here, but I included a spur to the Boston Scientific Corporation. Maybe a loop up Marina Dr to Squantum Point Park, Down the Haulage Rd, and out Seaport Dr back to Victory Rd south would be better?

Basically we have the three main catchements:
- Quincy Center to the Beach serving Hancock st and Eastern Nazarene College
- The Beach to North Quincy serving Billings St business and the Frances Parker Elementary School
- Marina Bay to North Quincy serving the dense residential on Quincy Shore Drive.

At some point, I wonder if the third should just be its own service?
212 Idea.PNG
 

KCasiglio

New member
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
91
Reaction score
109
Points well received on Marina Bay and how much beach access was necessary, plus more of the catchment was lost than I thought at a glance. I don't think the blue line comparison works though, because you're talking about a station that's 500 ft from the beach versus Wollaston/North Quincy both being ~3/4s of a mile. It's not a pleasant walk if you're carrying beach accouterments, and I say that as a young able bodied man. Wollaston beach really has no transit access besides what access the 212 currently provides. Seasonally boosted frequency would really be the key there.

I'm also not sold on it having to run on Hancock on the southern portion of the route. Almost none of the ridership comes from that strip, it's all from Quincy Center and the unique Billings catchment. With way fewer stops and fewer traffic lights, following the 214 route to QSD would will get you to Beach street faster than the current route despite being slightly longer.
 

jbray

New member
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
95
Reaction score
64
Points well received on Marina Bay and how much beach access was necessary, plus more of the catchment was lost than I thought at a glance. I don't think the blue line comparison works though, because you're talking about a station that's 500 ft from the beach versus Wollaston/North Quincy both being ~3/4s of a mile. It's not a pleasant walk if you're carrying beach accouterments, and I say that as a young able bodied man. Wollaston beach really has no transit access besides what access the 212 currently provides. Seasonally boosted frequency would really be the key there.
The Blue line/411 comparison was for how valuable a bus that runs the length of the beach was as opposed to access to the beach itself at a well serviced point. I agree they are not 1:1 at all. I really was looking for a bus that ran the shoreline.

I'm also not sold on it having to run on Hancock on the southern portion of the route. Almost none of the ridership comes from that strip, it's all from Quincy Center and the unique Billings catchment.
Where's that data coming from? The better bus data only gives us stop passenger data for the inbound commute from QC to NQ. Why would anybody on that stretch would choose to either not take the train or the 210 to NQ is beyond me. However, it does tell us that outbound ridership toward QC is ~50 when inbound is ~100, so 1/3 of the total weak weekday ridership takes the bus. There is one clear piece of the weekday data. This bus is ridden by school age children heading to and from schools across the city. There is a special stop on one outbound morning trip at Central Middle School. and a host on inbound (and outbound) boardings between two and three. In this regard, it makes sense that there would be demand on Quincy's central corridor because that's the general location of the schools in the district. Other than that, they even mention in the profile that the section is redundant for commuters on the street.

With way fewer stops and fewer traffic lights, following the 214 route to QSD would will get you to Beach street faster than the current route despite being slightly longer.
I have mixed feelings about this proposal. High school students might benefit from a bus running down Coddington st from Norfolk Downs and Wollaston, but Middle school children would not. The rest of Coddington and Sea Streets are government building wastelands with parking on one side and the cemetery on the other. However, you do pick up the QSD folks both north and south of Blacks Creek who have nothing. The only adjustment I would make to that, would be to have it go down West Elm to Billings instead of to Beach Street to try and pick up some of those left behind.
 

KCasiglio

New member
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
91
Reaction score
109
I'm projecting based on the inbound data I haven't seen stop specific boarding data for the outbound. The single school trip could easily be replaced by the 211, which already variates on Sundays to cover the 212 route.

The city is redeveloping that section of government buildings and parking lots into a "public safety campus" with more offices and a park although I don't know if that would really impact ridership too much. I think having these services better connected to the city other than exclusively to/from quincy center is good in theory though.
 

Riverside

Active Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
615
Reaction score
397
Prompted by a tangentially related discussion in the RUR thread, I got to thinking about what HRT expansions I can really see happening in the foreseeable future. And on reflection, I realized that there seems to be something more fundamental at play here.

If you look at the ideas we throw around here -- whether in Reasonable, Crazy, or God Transit Pitches -- a lot of them are focused on expansions of LRT, BRT and mainline service (usually under the assumption of those last being pantographed EMUs). With the notable exception of the Red Line X proposal, the expansions of the Blue, Red, and Orange Lines are largely variants of ideas that have been around for almost a century -- Orange to Reading, Blue to Lynn, Red to Arlington and so on. Occasionally we'll bandy about ideas of Blue Line Westward Expansion, but often those are rehashes of the Riverbank proposal.

But this brought me back to a core question -- how many of these could I actually see happening? For example, I can easily see things like Green to Needham, Indigo to Riverside (or even Framingham), or an expansion of the Silver Line into Longwood.

By contrast, Blue to Watertown or Red to Dedham are both potentially good ideas, but I can't see them happening in the foreseeable future, at least not with the same confidence of something like Green to Needham or Porter. So where does that line get crossed?

And I think there actually is a pretty simple heuristic that captures a big 'ol chunk of the variability here: with a small number of exceptions (explained below), it seems highly unlikely that any expansion of non-mainline HRT will occur in Boston again, ever.

I think HRT suffers from two key drawbacks in the public eye that serve as "feathers tipping the scales" against the idea.

First, HRT has higher upfront costs compared to LRT or BRT. (The comparison against mainline expansion is a bit more complicated -- adding HRT alongside mainline tracks will probably be more expansive than retrofitting those mainline tracks to support RUR, but the cost of HRT vs RUR on a brand new rail corridor is less obvious and will likely come down to the specifics of the project.) But, either way, to a public that has been burned by the Big Dig (and to a lesser extent GLX), upfront cost is always going to be top-of-mind.

Second, HRT has the appearance of being less flexible than the alternatives. If you build an HRT extension, that extension can only ever be used by HRT unless retrofitted. In contrast, an LRT extension can easily be built to accommodate BRT in the future, and vice-versa. Likewise, LRT and BRT remain usable even if a future extension demands an on-street detour; if an HRT line gets built into the town next to yours, the only way to extend it into your town will be costly elevateds or tunnels, or disruptive grade-separated surface tracks. Likewise, RUR infrastructure does not limit that corridor to RUR service -- you can continue to run regional rail over the same tracks and even in the future decide to change the routing of your RUR service.

Now, some of those concerns don't hold up under reasoned scrutiny: for example, capacity is a non-trivial concern that is easy to overlook if you aren't well-versed in these things. RUR service will be capacity limited by the number of through-trains it must compete with, and neither LRT nor BRT can carry as many people in one trainset/bus as HRT can. But, in my opinion, this kind of objection-handling gets pretty esoteric quickly. So, another challenge.

To be clear: I still personally believe HRT is a better option in many cases, especially when cost is amortized over the lifetime of the service, and when the downtown last mile problem is considered. But when faced against the myriad of political challenges, I see most HRT expansion as highly unlikely.

This trend, by the way, is not limited to Boston. If you look at The Transport Politic's Transit Explorer, which visualizes transit projects in progress across North America, the vast majority are LRT, BRT or mainline. (In fact, the only HRT expansions I can think of are the Second Avenue Subway in NYC, the Silver Line in DC/NoVA, and the Silicon Valley BART extension. And each of these are unusual in their own way: SAS is a host unto itself, the Silver Line is being built largely in a highway median, and the BART -- especially outside the core -- is more like a commuter rail in many ways and is generally one-of-a-kind in any case.)

There are three Boston-specific exceptions that I could still see as being reasonable to believe might be built "soon" (in order from most likely to least likely):

First, the Blue-Red Connector. This is the only seriously proposed HRT expansion in Downtown Boston. It's also the only all-subway one, and moreover its scope would basically be limited to tearing up Cambridge St for a good while. A hassle to be sure, but the major abutters are employers who would benefit greatly from the expansion. Moreover, being limited to Boston, there's only one municipality you'd need to bring on-board. It's also simple and easy to explain: "Connect the only two unconnected T Lines!"

Second, Orange Line South. This would be some form of expansion beyond Forest Hills along the erstwhile Needham Branch. Whether to Roslindale Village, West Roxbury or even somehow to Needham would be something figured out at the time (and yes, I realize that Needham would be a pretty crazy idea). If Green-to-Needham happens -- and I would wager that it will -- I think that the Commuter Rail branch would likely be eliminated (or shortened into a West Roxbury-Forest Hills dingy, with forced transfer to Orange Line), and that elimination would shift the conversation enough to overcome the usual hurdles. Thus the simple slogan for this project: "Replace the eliminated Commuter Rail service".

Third -- and this I grant will sound unusual --, HRT to Mattapan. Though more of a long-shot, this still strikes me as feasible, though more of the kind where the stars need to be aligned and if they do, it'll happen surprisingly quickly, à la SL3. As with Orange Line South, this would really only happen when/if the LRT service can no longer be run, thus raising the specter of wholesale loss of service. Likelihood increases if the mandatory bridge replacement can be done separately as a lowkey maintenance project, thus lowering the upfront cost once the project is proposed.

Other than these three, I really have a hard time imagining any other HRT expansion occurring within this generation. BLX is faced with the choice of a residential neighborhood or an environmentally sensitive area. Orange-to-Reading is faced with grade crossings and quiet suburbs. And so on.

To me, this reflects fundamentals about the mode of HRT itself. As I think back over the last few years, I've definitely been working under this unspoken assumption for quite some time, but I had never quite made the connection in explicit terms. From where I'm sitting, it definitely looks the world of possibilities is much much wider for expanding LRT, BRT and mainline rail.
 

JeffDowntown

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,551
Reaction score
918
^ I am not sure I buy this argument. If you look at potential ridership, I have to think the HRT catchment for BLX to Lynn and Salem is a no brainer. There is zero risk of the extension not attracting ridership in those population centers. It is also a diagonal out of Boston that is massively underserved by highway access. The lack of progress there is largely due to the messed up federal funding priorities that favor fake BRT over real transit.
 

Riverside

Active Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
615
Reaction score
397
^ I am not sure I buy this argument. If you look at potential ridership, I have to think the HRT catchment for BLX to Lynn and Salem is a no brainer. There is zero risk of the extension not attracting ridership in those population centers. It is also a diagonal out of Boston that is massively underserved by highway access. The lack of progress there is largely due to the messed up federal funding priorities that favor fake BRT over real transit.
I don't disagree with you per se. I think BLX would be an absolute slam-dunk in terms of ridership, quality of life improvements, environmental improvements (from cars off the road), reinforcing walkable transit-oriented communities, the whole nine yards....

But I also think all of that has been true for close to 100 years, and it hasn't made a difference. Transit expansion is a fickle thing under the best of circumstances, and those messed-up federal funding priorities you mention aren't trivial, nor do I expect them to go away anytime soon.

My skepticism isn't a comment on the suitability of HRT itself -- as I say, I think BLX would be transformative. But given all of the factors that go into determining whether or not a given project happens -- from the politics to the funding to the NIMBYism to the studies to the advocacy -- further HRT expansion is not something I would bet on nor plan around realistically.

(Though -- I do grant that, beyond the three projects I mentioned -- BLX is the most likely to surprise us here, because as you say the pay-offs would be so demonstrably high.)
 

Arlington

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
5,013
Reaction score
1,271
Could the brownfield pile in the middle of Rumney Marsh (along the CR, and potentially tagged by BLX after Oak Island) be capped and redeveloped as TOD?

I could even imagine a lot of tall stuff, trackside, maybe just 1 or 2 blocks deep but all along it, built on the margins of the pile, and going tall because the big hill of bad stuff puts anything trackside very far from any abutters.
 

Arlington

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
5,013
Reaction score
1,271
Nope...squint hard and you'll see the 'margin' is the power company ROW where the towers run instead of being on the marsh..
To create TOD, I'd say Part of the pitch would be to re-route the power to cross the unbuildable mound part (not that expensive).
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
7,813
Reaction score
3,247
To create TOD, I'd say Part of the pitch would be to re-route the power to cross the unbuildable mound part (not that expensive).
I don't understand...where's the "TOD" here? The capped ash landfill from the Wheelabrator trash-to-energy plant slopes down a steep hill to the perimeter road, then another graded runoff hill straight into a drainage ditch. Then there's all but 18-20 ft. from the ditch to the track ballast and RR clearance envelope to host a row of power poles. What could you possibly put there? It's not even safe for a trackside path from lack of side emergency access over the ditch. And you can't get to a trackside path from anywhere, because the southwesterly third of the landfill abutting 107 is still very much active and a 24/7 beehive of ash trucks coming from the onsite trash burning plant up the road.

Now...this could become a nice park for Rumney Reservation in due time when Wheelabrator has used up the last of the fill. Transact it to DCR and put some ballfields and whatnot on it. But the whole slab today is owned by Wheelabrator with at least another 10-15 years' ash capacity left in the still-active portion of the fill and all access roads--including the one closest to the tracks--in-use for traffic-managing the ash truck shuttle to/from the plant. This is going to be the status quo for awhile longer. But regardless, its end state is not "Development" with that kind of typical steep-sloped landfill grading and gradual soil settling underneath. Just a DCR park. There's no "TOD" inquiry here.
 

JeffDowntown

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,551
Reaction score
918
I don't disagree with you per se. I think BLX would be an absolute slam-dunk in terms of ridership, quality of life improvements, environmental improvements (from cars off the road), reinforcing walkable transit-oriented communities, the whole nine yards....

But I also think all of that has been true for close to 100 years, and it hasn't made a difference. Transit expansion is a fickle thing under the best of circumstances, and those messed-up federal funding priorities you mention aren't trivial, nor do I expect them to go away anytime soon.

My skepticism isn't a comment on the suitability of HRT itself -- as I say, I think BLX would be transformative. But given all of the factors that go into determining whether or not a given project happens -- from the politics to the funding to the NIMBYism to the studies to the advocacy -- further HRT expansion is not something I would bet on nor plan around realistically.

(Though -- I do grant that, beyond the three projects I mentioned -- BLX is the most likely to surprise us here, because as you say the pay-offs would be so demonstrably high.)
We would need a transit oriented Speaker of the House who's district is in Lynn or Salem.
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
7,813
Reaction score
3,247
We would need a transit oriented Speaker of the House who's district is in Lynn or Salem.
Yeah, that. There's a reason why we haven't had a Gov. truly act (as opposed to talk) semi-aggressive about transit expansion since 1st-half-of-1st-term Weld. It all goes to die as soon as the Speaker-for-Life of the era asserts who's really in charge. This isn't a transit problem. There is more rapid transit being constructed right this second across the U.S. than there has been in 100 years, and at our most dysfunctional T/MassDOT are nowhere near New York dysfunctional. It's political-structural with who holds the purse strings at the state level and is willing to chop off anyone's balls for the sheer sake of asserting who's jealously guarding those purse strings. Even Deval Patrick contoured to this reality by basically talking a great game but proposing little of actionable substance and failing to blink when his signature transpo bill was bludgeoned in House committee. It was a pre-approved kabuki dance. Same as the pre-approved rules being dutifully followed that we must bellyache about spending anything on any transit whatsoever UNLESS it's South Coast FAIL that held strong for 6 Administrations and 3 Speakerships.


Now, honestly...if you wanted to push buttons to make things a little interesting...DO mount a serious BLX study and whip up the corridor into a frenzy. Because northern Revere Beach + Point of Pines is DeLeo's district (albeit not the part he has to count on for reelection, because the Winthrop cottagegoers are his main base). The appendix sections of prior BLX activity and the '04 North Shore Transit Improvements study are *chock full* of photocopied support statements by his truly boilerplating the project's importance to his district. I'm sure he never thought tossing those empty peanut shells at the rump end of his district would ever see the light of day again...but if you wanted to jam a spanner in the works that makes him have to think on his feet for once in his Speaker life, get serious about BLX. Wild guess: he probably surveys the landscape and throws his weight publicly behind it as a 'mulligan' of sorts to part with for district-level's sake since sidestepping resistance there eases any challenges to the rest of his throne. I wouldn't exactly expect him to be Man of Action at delivering all goods, but it's a "safe" calculation to support it in the mind of a guy who won't so much as take a shit without assessing its long-term effects on his power structure.

So...no, it's not necessarily a totally predictable outcome. Sometimes the very predictability of our system serves up its own form of exploits. Look at how the very nature of advocacy has changed in the TransitMatter era; public advocates can bend things to their will, but it's gotta be by very specific targeted means that almost aim to know the hacks' tendencies better than the hacks know themselves. As vectors of change go, it's not pretty to work with but it's what we've got. It's not like our endemic state governance problems are going to be settled like gentlemen by them self-calling a Constitutional Convention to recalibrate the Speaker-Member and Gov-Speaker-Senate Preznit divisions of power for inequity correction. Sometimes we gotta find buttons to push in hard-to-reach places. BLX advocates are gonna have to learn how to do that just as well as GLX advocates eventually did after their own multi-decade struggles gaining traction, but if they find that button they know exactly who it's direct-attached to and a big PUSH of it will surely get 'a' reaction where none has so far been forthcoming.
 
Last edited:

DBM

Active Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
973
Reaction score
247
Because northern Revere Beach + Point of Pines is DeLeo's district (albeit not the part he has to count on for reelection, because the Winthrop cottagegoers are his main base).
Not per the district map on his official webpage (although his district certainly does extend a fair bit north of the Revere/Winthrop line, onto Revere Beach):

https://malegislature.gov/Legislators/Profile/RAD1/District

That said: I know this sounds perverse, but, the *problem* is, Hurricane Sandy hooked west instead of north, eight years ago, and thus Boston dodged a bullet. Can you imagine the urgency DeLeo would've acted with, eight years back, if his constituents, along with

Logan Airport,
Route 1A,
the Blue Line,
the Deer Isle MWRA facility and its access road
the Chelsea Creek LNG facility
and the combined Suffolk Downs/petro-chem farm footprint

were as devastated as NJ/NYC were by Sandy?

But that didn't happen. And NowDeLeo is 70 years old, instead of 62, that much closer to the end of his actuarial allotment. And inertia remains the most powerful force in the universe.

What I'm saying is--what the connection is with Blue Line extension---we've got to be holistic about this stuff. We can't look at mega-transportation projects such as Blue Line extension, that would traverse one of THE most sea level-rise sensitive areas of Eastern Mass., in isolation from mega-sea level rise prep projects. Nor can we look at them in isolation from mega private developments in that area (hello, Suffolk Downs redevelopment). I truly believe that:

--Suffolk Downs redevelopment
--prepping Logan, Route 1A, Chelsea Creek LNG facility, preexisting Blue Line, Newburyport CR line, for sea level rise
--and Blue Line extension

Must be integrated together into a massive multi-component project. Impossible? At the moment, perhaps. But it gets less and less impossible with each 3 mm rise in sea level, each year, as the urgency ratchets up commensurately. Tick-tock, tick-tock...
 

Stlin

Active Member
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
224
Reaction score
200
When and if AFC 2.0 happens, program it in such a way that having tapped in on any B, C or D train or station, tapping onto a different branch within some time interval at Chestnut Hill, Cleveland Circle, or Resevoir is treated as a free transfer. Also, find some way of showing that on the map.
 

Arlington

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
5,013
Reaction score
1,271
It seems to me that Kendall MIT (Red Line) station needs a makeover almost on the scale of the Harvard Sq makeover.
  • Higher Capacity Platforms
  • More entry points
  • Easier, higher-throughput entry points
Using the EGE's diagram from the diagram's thread:


Stuff like:
"Far End Cross Street" Entrances
  • 3rd Street (far corner on other side of Broadway, it already has a "near corner" entry, upper-right)
  • Ames Street (tunnelling out Main from the current "dead ends" on the west (left in drawing above))
Midblock Capacity
  • More & wider escalator and "one long stairs" (no switchbacks), such as on the east side of the Kendall "plaza"
  • Extra Entrance at Dock St? or Google's Lobby (a shorter tunnel on the West end of the platforms shown above
 
Last edited:

Top