Not a Brahmin
- Jan 22, 2012
- Reaction score
Are we doing this in this thread too? Blowing up Boston's transit environment by *getting rid of* North Station is Design a Better Boston fodder.
Who says Jacobs' land is even *mostly* over RR tracks like the 100% stilts job at South Station? Look at the slabs in question on Google, bisected by the cutting Leverett ramps. NS ≠ SS by a million degrees.Building over a railroad tracks is MUCH more expensive than building on open land. That is what held up South Station and the air rights over the Pike. My suggestion of eliminating North Station also eliminates the cost of building over the tracks, and makes the land more valuable .
Tunnel stations would be constructed as such:So North Station surface stays. As for its theoretical future best configuration and how many platforms it requires, I leave that to F-Line and engineers that know a lot more about this than I do. (All of this, BTW, is also why a 4-track tunnel would conceptually be better than a 2-track tunnel ... the latter is inherently brittle even WITH ample short-turn provision on both ends).
Wouldn't work. The grades on 93 are too steep and meandering for rail. Drive it NB and see how right at the bottom of the incline you've got the curve + sudden upslope after the first merge. That's a definite no-go for rail grades.Crazy transit pitch: put I-93 through downtown on a diet, have trains run through that tunnel.