Red Line Extension to Arlington Heights

Operationally, would any RLX need more than two tracks for express runs, or would it be all locals?
 
Lots of really interesting points in the other thread. Wanted to circle back to something:
BosMaineiac said:
I think it's important to point out that the destination isn't Lexington itself, but instead Route 128 in Lexington. With Route 3 terminating nearby and the huge potential for TOD also nearby at the Burlington Mall/Hartwell Ave, the ridership potential far outweighs Lex on its own. Plus, as NIMBY as Lexington would be, I don't think it can stay that way forever with the MBTA communities law, especially if there is in fact a rapid transit connection.
Click to expand...
If the destination is 128, then a median el on Route 2 (and 128, if desired to go further north) would do the trick much more easily than anything else. The downside of course is that Route 2 is far away from where people live. I suppose you could do two branches — one to Arlington Heights, the other to 128 or Burlington via Route 2.

EDIT: the Minuteman alignment is 7.9 miles to Route 128, while the Route 2 + 128 alignment is 9.3 miles to the same point, so, not wildly far off. (The Middlesex Turnpike/Route 3/Burlington Mall is about another 1.9 miles, which makes the percentage difference between the two alignments even smaller -- 9.8 miles vs 11.2.)

I'm a little skeptical about the 128/Route 3 nexus being that much of a draw, but if it's the objective, then I think the Route 2 alignment merits closer consideration.
 
Last edited:
Riverside said:
I suppose you could do two branches — one to Arlington Heights, the other to 128 or Burlington via Route 2.
Click to expand...
Which would you prioritize, though? My sense is that the Arlington stops just obviously deserve rapid transit--they're already dense, both residentially and commercially, and every time I'm in the area it's full of people doing things outside of cars.

The Rt 2 alignment is interesting, but given the limited amount of TOD on the corridor today, it seems like it'd take a long time to pay off.
 
Strawman crazy-tier pitch:

Run the RL under the MM until AH, at which point it continues under 2A, terminating near or under the Burlington Mall. All cut-and-cover. Probably no stops between AH and the mall, but TOD along 2A in Lexington could warrant an infill stop in the future.

The rest of the MM, from AH to Bedford, would be left undisturbed, which I imagine would avoid at least some of inevitable opposition that will come with temporarily tearing up everyone's favorite bike path.

Of course, this would only really be worthwhile if both Burlington and the mall committed to both:

* handling the new P&R demand from 128, and
* making the area more of an Assembly-esque walkable shopping/residential mixed-use district (there seems to be a lot of that energy anyway amongst malls who are trying to fill themselves back up).

I'm sure this would never work, otherwise someone would've already proposed it... but I'm curious to be told why. Is cut and cover for a rural route like 2A simply not feasible?
 
Riverside said:
Lots of really interesting points in the other thread. Wanted to circle back to something:

If the destination is 128, then a median el on Route 2 (and 128, if desired to go further north) would do the trick much more easily than anything else. The downside of course is that Route 2 is far away from where people live. I suppose you could do two branches — one to Arlington Heights, the other to 128 or Burlington via Route 2.

EDIT: the Minuteman alignment is 7.9 miles to Route 128, while the Route 2 + 128 alignment is 9.3 miles to the same point, so, not wildly far off. (The Middlesex Turnpike/Route 3/Burlington Mall is about another 1.9 miles, which makes the percentage difference between the two alignments even smaller -- 9.8 miles vs 11.2.)

I'm a little skeptical about the 128/Route 3 nexus being that much of a draw, but if it's the objective, then I think the Route 2 alignment merits closer consideration.
Click to expand...

Can HRT deal with the grades on the Route 2 alignment? Google says it's about 5% over 0.8 miles.
 
RandomWalk said:
Operationally, would any RLX need more than two tracks for express runs, or would it be all locals?
Click to expand...

Local only. I don't see the need to install express tracks this far out, especially when RL stations are pretty far apart.

Riverside said:
Lots of really interesting points in the other thread. Wanted to circle back to something:

If the destination is 128, then a median el on Route 2 (and 128, if desired to go further north) would do the trick much more easily than anything else. The downside of course is that Route 2 is far away from where people live. I suppose you could do two branches — one to Arlington Heights, the other to 128 or Burlington via Route 2.

EDIT: the Minuteman alignment is 7.9 miles to Route 128, while the Route 2 + 128 alignment is 9.3 miles to the same point, so, not wildly far off. (The Middlesex Turnpike/Route 3/Burlington Mall is about another 1.9 miles, which makes the percentage difference between the two alignments even smaller -- 9.8 miles vs 11.2.)

I'm a little skeptical about the 128/Route 3 nexus being that much of a draw, but if it's the objective, then I think the Route 2 alignment merits closer consideration.
Click to expand...

A median el is out. It's a solution looking for a problem. It doesn't serve the towns well, and it's not like there is even space for large park-and-rides.
 
The two options for 128 termini I can see are:

1) The compost facility off Hartwell Ave, if it follows the Minuteman path. It’s already disturbed and would only need a set of ramps over the wetlands.
2) Burlington Mall, if it follows something like 2A & Lowell St up to Middlesex Turnpike. The mall parking is not exactly packed most days.

Everything else is residential or wetlands.
 
Here's the real Crazy Transit Pitch.

If the goal is to have a P&R on 128 that's reasonably close to Burlington Mall, why not do either:
  • An Orange Line branch from Wakefield down 128 median,
Or:
  • An LRT line running along 128,
between Burlington Mall, Mishawum, and where the Reading ROW intersects 128?

(This makes me wonder why Mishawum has such low ridership to begin with, given how many industrial parks it borders. In a world where it has frequent service and company shuttles, I wonder if its ridership can improve significantly.)
 
Riverside said:
Are you talking about the hill centered on Park Ave? I wonder if you could do a cut-and-cover under one of the frontage roads for that stretch.
Click to expand...
Yes.

If the grade wasn't there, you could probably build it at-grade most of the way without significant pushback. Route 2 is hilariously wide for the purpose it serves today. Tunneling seems like massive cost blowout in comparison.

Because Route 2 is so wide, I don't think getting to Route 128 @ Route 2 is that important, or even Route 128 @ Minuteman. Just let Alewife continue to be the P&R. It's not like that's a prime spot for development either. Burlington seems like a better target to me, as others have suggested.
 
Last edited:
Teban54 said:
(This makes me wonder why Mishawum has such low ridership to begin with, given how many industrial parks it borders. In a world where it has frequent service and company shuttles, I wonder if its ridership can improve significantly.)
Click to expand...
Because people aren't commuting from within walking distance of a CR station to Mishawum, they would be driving to a CR station, riding to Mishawum, then walking, all of which would cost more and take longer than just driving the whole way.

I do think Mishawum has a future, but likely more because the area around it has good potential for TOD and residential ridership rather than as a major employment center.
 
Teban54 said:
(This makes me wonder why Mishawum has such low ridership to begin with, given how many industrial parks it borders. In a world where it has frequent service and company shuttles, I wonder if its ridership can improve significantly.)
Click to expand...
I agree with TheRatmeister, but also, the Anderson/Woburn station nearby has direct highway access to I-93 and thus to Rte 128, plus a lot more amenities.
 
Last edited:
vanshnookenraggen said:
A median el is out. It's a solution looking for a problem. It doesn't serve the towns well, and it's not like there is even space for large park-and-rides.
Click to expand...
I mean, yes, I agree with you — I was specifically saying that, if the goal is to reach 128 @ Route 3 — with greater priority than serving the towns themselves — then Route 2 becomes more appealing. I’m not convinced that 128 @ Route 3 is such a priority, I was just making the argument about what would make sense if you do see it as a priority.
Teban54 said:
If the goal is to have a P&R on 128 that's reasonably close to Burlington Mall, why not do either:
  • An Orange Line branch from Wakefield down 128 median,
Click to expand...
It’s a pretty long dog leg to go Burlington -> Woburn/Wakefield -> Boston. Even the Minuteman alignment isn’t super direct.
Teban54 said:
  • An LRT line running along 128,
between Burlington Mall, Mishawum, and where the Reading ROW intersects 128?
Click to expand...
I’ve crayoned this, should dig up the map. I think there are actually a couple of ways this could be doable. That being said, I’m not sure it actually gets us very much. It’s not likely to be competitive with driving from outer suburbs, which leaves us with reverse commuters, which aren’t the strongest market.

A couple of years ago, @F-Line to Dudley suggested what I would describe as an “open BRT” system, where overlapping routes can use an express busway but then leave to provide front door service. I think that’s a very intriguing idea.
 
Teban54 said:
(This makes me wonder why Mishawum has such low ridership to begin with, given how many industrial parks it borders. In a world where it has frequent service and company shuttles, I wonder if its ridership can improve significantly.)
Click to expand...

If the goal is reverse commuters (who were the only people the schedule served), simply having fare rationalization would be a big step.
The monthly Zone 2 pass is $232 to ride on empty trains, which I think deters reverse commuting across the system.
 
kdmc said:
Strawman crazy-tier pitch:

Run the RL under the MM until AH, at which point it continues under 2A, terminating near or under the Burlington Mall. All cut-and-cover. Probably no stops between AH and the mall, but TOD along 2A in Lexington could warrant an infill stop in the future.

The rest of the MM, from AH to Bedford, would be left undisturbed, which I imagine would avoid at least some of inevitable opposition that will come with temporarily tearing up everyone's favorite bike path.

Of course, this would only really be worthwhile if both Burlington and the mall committed to both:

* handling the new P&R demand from 128, and
* making the area more of an Assembly-esque walkable shopping/residential mixed-use district (there seems to be a lot of that energy anyway amongst malls who are trying to fill themselves back up).

I'm sure this would never work, otherwise someone would've already proposed it... but I'm curious to be told why. Is cut and cover for a rural route like 2A simply not feasible?
Click to expand...
Cost
 
I found F-Line's post about BRT to Burlington Mall, and it's actually from 2015 (much more than "a couple of years ago," lol):

F-Line to Dudley said:
There's no plausible ROW anywhere near which could feasibly connect all that on rail if you aren't building out on the Minuteman. But...nothing prevents them from BRT-ing that whole quadrant of 128 office parks with shuttles out of Anderson, shuttles out of that sorely-needed Fitchburg Line infill at Weston/128/20 near the Polaroid complex and 70 bus terminus, and Indigo-like headways to both Anderson and Weston feeding it. The fact that Anderson today lacks any sort of circumferential bus service is a gaping hole begging to be cheaply filled.

That's plenty robust for the interim. And as I said, an eventual Arlington Heights RL terminus becomes Lexington's transit line all the same by giving the 62 and 76 direct rapid transit transfers and conduit for boosting their frequencies, plus real walkability to the station via the Minuteman. You've got to have something truly grand planned for Hanscom to justify the pain of building direct rail further out, and Burlington's got to have some future that rolls back the parkingparkingparkingparking at the Mall and office parks in favor of reimagined semi-urbanity to make a cut-and-cover worth doing.

This is an application tailor-made for BRT and some public-private partnerships as a funding conduit. Short-term: set up the two spokes with stiff headways at Anderson and Weston, connect them with shuttles pinging out each direction. Mid-term: get the house in order on Arlington Heights, make it a robust transfer hub for trunk buses on Mass Ave. and Lowell St.


That'll have to be some hella grand plans for reimagining Hanscom and the Mall for a spoke-and-circumference transfer plan like this to not adequately serve a few decades worth of growth.
Click to expand...
Like I mentioned, this sounds like a classic example of an open BRT system. This speaks to an underappreciated benefit of (well-designed and well-executed) BRT: in a corridor where there isn't quite enough consolidation/concentration to be amenable to rail (which I'd argue the Burlington / Route 128 corridor is), BRT lets your transit vehicles run speedily and unencumbered for most of their trip, before (briefly) venturing out into the mixed traffic world in order to solve the "last mile" problem.

And I do think the last-mile problem is not trivial in this scenario. I'd mentioned before that Burlington Mall Road looks like a candidate for median LRT, but the downside is that many of the facilities people are actually going to are located some distance away from the Road; for example, the Lahey Internal Medicine building is an 8 minute walk uphill (also, lmao, Google thinks that there's a sidewalk on the road east of the parking garage). That, of course, is doable, but hardly enticing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top