Seaport Transportation

[sm89]

When cruise ships are in terminal, the SL does not make the loop. I'm not sure what the route is, but there's frequently alerts/notices that it is diverted. Which makes no sense, since there's hundreds of people arriving/departing who could use the service...

Yea I got off the cruise ship and it was like only I knew the SL was an option. Just didn't know where to find it.

 

[JohnAKeith]

I've got a crazy question: Why isn't the Silver Line's Convention Center stop in the actual Convention Center?

I've always assumed there were two good reasons: 1) John Drew & Fidelity didn't want the stop to be at the BCEC b/c it would mean fewer potential conventioneers for their space at the World Trade Center; and, 2) Would have been stupid b/c the stop before this is at Courthouse and that would have meant a zig-zag from South Station to Courthouse to Convention Center to tunnel.

 

[Randomgear]

I've got a crazy question: Why isn't the Silver Line's Convention Center stop in the actual Convention Center?

A very partial answer: the stop was designed, built and mostly complete by early 1998 before the Convention Center was designed. The Arabica Coffee company was still burning coffee in their factory at that time - it would later be demo'ed for the Convention Center - it might have been late 1998 or 1999 when Arabica left.

In 1998, I worked briefly for the architectural firm that designed the Convention Center stop and they knew it would be a block away and that there had been some talk about how to connect the two using funky people movers, but those ideas had been abandoned long before I worked there.

edit: The World Trade Center was always intended to be a short walk away, no people movers for that center.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

A very partial answer: the stop was designed, built and mostly complete by early 1998 before the Convention Center was designed.

Designed yes. Built and completed... no. I went to the opening celebration of the SL at the Convention Center station... in Dec 2002.

 

[Randomgear]

If my recollection isn't too fuzzy, I thought the World Trade Center Station was built a few years before the silver line opened. The World Trade Center stop was designed and constructed as part of a CA/T and MBTA arrangement that made sense for the CA/T construction schedule.
I did a tiny little construction admin sketch for a pair of stainless steel service doors, on the not very publicly visible Southwest side of the building for the WTC stop in 1998/ early 1999 (the time period I worked for that firm - I did have to check my resume for that).

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

The Silver Line was built along side of the CAT. The stations could have very well been built first as the SBW was pretty much all parking lots back then and would have been easier to finish than the tunnel under Fort Point Channel (which I remember ran into some giant pre-historic boulder).

 

[Arlington]

I'm just not a big fan of dedicated bus lanes when there is a dedicated bus lane 20 feet below. The roads are ridiculously and unnecessarily wide here. I'd much rather see them shrunk than kept wide in the name of bus lanes. Bike lanes, yes, they take up much less width on the road. Better to walk next to than unobstructed 10 ton vehicles as well.

In most Central Business Districts, it is not uncommon to have a bus route on every arterial (Chicago, Houston, NYC) including bus routes that run directly above full subways below). In fact, I'm hard pressed to think of a place where a subway below means "no bus" on the surface. (It is also insane that we haven't taken a lane from over-wide Boylston to run a Kenmore-South Station bus). It usually goes the other way: A subway below most often works better with or implies the need for *more* buses on the surface as demand for transit more-fully displaces SOVs.

So anyone familiar with either real CBDs or who'd ever played SIM City should have known that the SL Tunnel was not going to be able to work in isolation, to serve a "built out" Seaport (that now looms), particularly given they never built "SL Phase III" to connect the Seaport to the Orange and Green lines (and SL Phase I), but also given that the bus tunnel is really bad at serving radial commutes from the North and West (it is only good at things in the Red, Amtrak, or Worcester directions)

Better that they stake out Bus/HOV lanes on Summer and Congress now while there are fewer drivers to complain than later when, after cars have fully clogged the Seaport at all hours, it looks even sillier (to SOV drivers) to take a lane from them.

And the reality is that the BCEC is a bus destination and will always rely on courtesy/hotel shuttles for handling convention traffic. Dedicated bus lanes are justifiable on at least Summer, probably Congress, and even above the SL.

 

[Arlington]

Booting Up: Monorail would be good idea for quickly expanding Boston
Rose F. Kennedy Greenway needs green travel tech
Jessica Van Sack Monday, January 18, 2016

http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...rail_would_be_good_idea_for_quickly_expanding

These writers must be reading my posts.

I would like to see the Monorail over the water thou not going over the Greenway.

How about we spend just a tiny fraction of this on paint for bus lanes and decent bus shelters (and for breaking Bus 4 into a real "circulator" with a clear, linear route structure and $1 fare)

 

[SeamusMcFly]

In most Central Business Districts, it is not uncommon to have a bus route on every arterial (Chicago, Houston, NYC) including bus routes that run directly above full subways below). In fact, I'm hard pressed to think of a place where a subway below means "no bus" on the surface. (It is also insane that we haven't taken a lane from over-wide Boylston to run a Kenmore-South Station bus). It usually goes the other way: A subway below most often works better with or implies the need for *more* buses on the surface as demand for transit more-fully displaces SOVs.

So anyone familiar with either real CBDs or who'd ever played SIM City should have known that the SL Tunnel was not going to be able to work in isolation, to serve a "built out" Seaport (that now looms), particularly given they never built "SL Phase III" to connect the Seaport to the Orange and Green lines (and SL Phase I), but also given that the bus tunnel is really bad at serving radial commutes from the North and West (it is only good at things in the Red, Amtrak, or Worcester directions)

Better that they stake out Bus/HOV lanes on Summer and Congress now while there are fewer drivers to complain than later when, after cars have fully clogged the Seaport at all hours, it looks even sillier (to SOV drivers) to take a lane from them.

And the reality is that the BCEC is a bus destination and will always rely on courtesy/hotel shuttles for handling convention traffic. Dedicated bus lanes are justifiable on at least Summer, probably Congress, and even above the SL.

Don't confuse what I said with what you typed. I said "dedicated bus lanes" over dedicated bus tunnel. Not no buses. Of course bus routes. I don't like the idea of a rapid dedicated bus lane on top of the one we spent a billion or two installing. Bus lane on Summer is fine, because there is no subway below. The road is plenty wide, and this would serve many people. Maybe I wasn't clear, but was mostly referring to the new Seaport along Seaport Blvd. versus existing Fort Point commuting.

 

[Shepard]

Whether or not the GL will ever expand to take over the SL tunnel, these, to me, are the most logical BRT routes to connect the waterfront (not even just the Seaport).

All these routes run along roads that could easily accommodate dedicated bus lanes. These routes send BRT buses over all major approaches to the Seaport, including all three channel bridges and also A Street. It doubles up service frequencies along the Greenway between South Station and points north, making the Greenway itself into a real transit corridor.

The only major piece of infrastructure I'd feel would be needed would be a Kenmore-style bus depot in the middle of Dewey Square. The space is there to make that happen.

HarborLine 1 (Yellow): North Station to City Point via Greenway, South Station and Summer St.

HarborLine 2 (Pink): Copley/BB to Drydock via Boylston, Essex, South Station and Seaport Blvd/Northern Ave

HarborLine 3 (Teal): Dudley to South Station via Washington, Broadway Station, A St. and Congress St.

HarborLine 4 (Purple): Navy Yard to South Station via City Square and Greenway.

 

[Arlington]

I don't like the idea of a rapid dedicated bus lane on top of the one we spent a billion or two installing

I still don't get it. Other than giving you the willies or making you feel bad because the [SL tunnel] is badly connected (and will cost $1b to connect on the west and $100m to put under D), is there an economic or engineering reason why we can't have a bus lane on Seaport Blvd?

Sometimes poorly-connected tunnels spend time in limbo (and underused) until they get the connections they were designed for (eg. the TWT but also the 63rd St Tunnel). Sad, but not a reason to not build parallel (surface) lane that has an immediate use and payback.

Letting those lanes just get purely clogged by cars is not a good idea, and I don't see that the sidewalks need widening.

The mind boggles, really, that neither the Surface Artery nor Summer St got a surface reservation for some kind of Circulator.

[I don't see how our understanding/use of the sunk costs of the SL Tunnel to prohibit bus lanes from the surface above it]

 

[JeffDowntown]

^ I have to agree with Arlington. We run buses parallel to subways all over the city -- to connect to different end locations not serviced by the tunnel.

 

[Arlington]

HarborLine 1 (Yellow): North Station to City Point via Greenway, South Station and Summer St.
HarborLine 2 (Pink): Copley/BB to Drydock via Boylston, Essex, South Station and Seaport Blvd/Northern Ave
HarborLine 3 (Teal): Dudley to South Station via Washington, Broadway Station, A St. and Congress St.
HarborLine 4 (Purple): Navy Yard to South Station via City Square and Greenway.

^Yes! I might quibble on about a block or two's worth of routings around South Station, but yes, these routes solve the "can't get to the Seaport" problem with just a fleet of buses and some paint.

And for "innovation" you might want to tag Kendall from North Station and Longwood from Back Bay.

 

[The EGE]

Buses paralleling subway lines are often very useful for two things: serving alternate destinations (like a diversion from the SL tunnel to serve the BCEC directly) and providing local service (like stops every block to serve employers and hotels) as a feeder to the subway.

The Boston Elevated operated streetcars under the Charlestown, Atlantic Avenue, and Washington Street els; and over the Cambridge Tunnel, Boylston Street Subway, and Dorchester Avenue Subway. The 92, 4, SL4/5, 42, 1, and 55 bus routes are all remains of these lines.

The 1 in Cambridge is a good example of both the uses. Between Harvard and Central, it works as a local service to feed the Red Line. South of Central, it diverges to serve areas that the subway doesn't.

 

[Randomgear]

The only major piece of infrastructure I'd feel would be needed would be a Kenmore-style bus depot in the middle of Dewey Square. The space is there to make that happen.

We used to have something like that:

 

[whighlander]

Whether or not the GL will ever expand to take over the SL tunnel, these, to me, are the most logical BRT routes to connect the waterfront (not even just the Seaport).

All these routes run along roads that could easily accommodate dedicated bus lanes. These routes send BRT buses over all major approaches to the Seaport, including all three channel bridges and also A Street. It doubles up service frequencies along the Greenway between South Station and points north, making the Greenway itself into a real transit corridor.

The only major piece of infrastructure I'd feel would be needed would be a Kenmore-style bus depot in the middle of Dewey Square. The space is there to make that happen.

HarborLine 1 (Yellow): North Station to City Point via Greenway, South Station and Summer St.

HarborLine 2 (Pink): Copley/BB to Drydock via Boylston, Essex, South Station and Seaport Blvd/Northern Ave

HarborLine 3 (Teal): Dudley to South Station via Washington, Broadway Station, A St. and Congress St.

HarborLine 4 (Purple): Navy Yard to South Station via City Square and Greenway.

Shep -- there are two links that are needed to not be stuck by one big bottleneck near South Station

Clear out the USPO and open Dorchester Ave from Congress St. to A St.

Make A St. a major arterial from Dorchester Ave. to Congress and Summer St. and via Farnsworth or another St. to Seaport Blvd.

 

[George_Apley]

While I don't oppose BRT solutions, they had better be TRUE BRT. Not just articulated busses that no one treats any differently than a regular bus except the MBTA. If the bus can get stuck in traffic, it's not true BRT.

 

[Arlington]

Clear out the USPO and open Dorchester Ave from Congress St. to A St.

It would be so cool if we could negotiate an interim deal for transit to share the USPO's Dot Ave.

 

[Shepard]

We used to have something like that:

Cool! I had no idea. A Kenmore-style bus terminal could certainly fit today where the plaza is, as shown in that picture. And, the hardscape farmers-market food-truck corral could be moved north closer to the vent into what's now very underutilized space.

What would be difficult would be coordinating bus movements from different sides of the Greenway and from all three bridges. I could see the routes getting bogged down with far too many left turns.

One possible solution for the Greenway I've been wondering about would be making one side - say, for example, northbound - a two-way transit "reservation" and the southbound side for vehicular traffic. The complicating factors are of course the ramps and the need for vehicles to reach places like the Intercontinental. Perhaps the transit side could be restricted to only certain movements (Oxford High Street in Oxford, UK operates on this principle). Anyway, this would be a nice problem for a good traffic engineer to solve...

 

[Randomgear]

Shep, I'm not so sure that Dewey Sq (hardscape portion) is really under utilized - the crowds that pass over it during every morning and evening commute while fleeting are very sizable. It's essentially a very wide pedestrian street between Federal St and South Station. And certainly it needs improvement, it's far from perfect.

I tend to agree more with Whighlander, activating Dot Ave and the USPS property have more promise.