Silver Line to Chelsea

Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

I agree that they shouldn't dump money into a whole new BRT right-of-way.

The Alt 3 is a little weird though. First of all, what's with Hawthorne St station being split so far apart? Riders don't like getting off the bus so far from where they boarded it earlier. And $25m because of "parking impacts"? Since when does taking parking spaces cost millions of dollars? Buy the equipment, slap some paint down, roll out some service, see how it does.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

*Range of travel times for Silver Line Gateway are for surface and underground WTC stations, respectively.
Click to expand...

FOR FUCKS SAKE FIX THAT ALREADY
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

If the entire goal of the Silver Line corridor is to serve Dudley and Chelsea, why worry about connecting in to Eastie, which already has the BL? Wouldn't this all be more efficient as a Green Line branch from Dudley to Chelsea via South End, Park Street, North Station, Sullivan and Everett Circle? The entire ROW (if we include the Washington St bus lanes) is essentially there, as is the demand, and the capacity can probably be managed as-is. As F-Line has described it, LRT from Chelsea to Airport is still reasonable - I'd say for a later stage but not for an initial build.

I understand that these SL plans are, essentially, the UR, but it seems like a second- (or third-) best plan without any greater upside.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

Shepard said:
If the entire goal of the Silver Line corridor is to serve Dudley and Chelsea, why worry about connecting in to Eastie, which already has the BL? Wouldn't this all be more efficient as a Green Line branch from Dudley to Chelsea via South End, Park Street, North Station, Sullivan and Everett Circle? The entire ROW (if we include the Washington St bus lanes) is essentially there, as is the demand, and the capacity can probably be managed as-is. As F-Line has described it, LRT from Chelsea to Airport is still reasonable - I'd say for a later stage but not for an initial build.

I understand that these SL plans are, essentially, the UR, but it seems like a second- (or third-) best plan without any greater upside.
Click to expand...

The SL works because it can happen fast. The Ted is an existing route, and the Massport Eastie haul road is under construction now and free for the taking as a transit corridor. It's this busway talk on the Chelsea side that is dubious. They hit land-taking obstructions on the very first block after the Chelsea St. bridge. There's no money to do it right as BRT until the Urban Ring billions go on the table. And of course when they do go on the table it SHOULD be LRT because that's not only better but also cheaper when land taking and structural demolition/widening are factored in.

Besides, if it's a SL project that wad of money is vastly better spent eliminating the pointless D St. crossing.


The street-running proposal is a good one. So long as they don't go overboard with the bus stop aesthetics and stick to the basics...key bus routes-spec express stop spacing, ADA curbs, smart traffic signals...they can get it running in 2 years. It'll make very good time with the uncongested Ted, the grade-separated Massport haul road, the new movable bridge, and pretty short distance on Chelsea streets for the terminal loop. I like it. It's maxing resources very miserly. It just can't disintegrate into another overpriced BRT political football like Washington St. The mission creep will guarantee it never happens.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

Okay, I get it - make the buses fast by routing over the Haul Road and the TWT. But I still have no idea why anybody would take this bus over the existing Chelsea buses. It's the same exact mode plying a less direct route. Again, why not skip right to the dual GL extensions (Dudley and Chelsea) and drop the whole SL pretense here?
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

F-Line to Dudley said:
TThe street-running proposal is a good one. So long as they don't go overboard with the bus stop aesthetics and stick to the basics...key bus routes-spec express stop spacing, ADA curbs, smart traffic signals...they can get it running in 2 years. It'll make very good time with the uncongested Ted, the grade-separated Massport haul road, the new movable bridge, and pretty short distance on Chelsea streets for the terminal loop. I like it. It's maxing resources very miserly. It just can't disintegrate into another overpriced BRT political football like Washington St. The mission creep will guarantee it never happens.
Click to expand...

I like it too. It gives the kind of redundancy that makes all the services more attractive. From farther north, you get two really nice Silver line options:
Blue-to-Silver-to-Seaport
Blue-to-Silver-to-Fin.District

It would be a shame to wait for takings and funding in Chelsea before getting a route that makes sense just as
Chelsea-Employee Garage-Blue Line-South Station
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

Shepard said:
Okay, I get it - make the buses fast by routing over the Haul Road and the TWT. But I still have no idea why anybody would take this bus over the existing Chelsea buses. It's the same exact mode plying a less direct route. Again, why not skip right to the dual GL extensions (Dudley and Chelsea) and drop the whole SL pretense here?
Click to expand...

"All of the above, please" is the answer. But the whole deal here is it's a quickie value-added they can initiate at almost no capital cost, usefully up frequencies in the Transitway to track with Southie growth, and get running and drawing revenue in 2 years while their overall finances are still in a vice grip. It's better than nothing. The whole point of UR Phase I was just a substantial expansion of the existing Crosstown bus system: expresses on city streets, streamlined amenities like signal priority, but ops...not capital...based. This is one of those CTx routes. They just have totally dropped the ball on doing every other route in a whole package of 'em and are resorting to this Silver Line rebranding to save face. Functionally it IS the identical CTx route from UR Phase I that was supposed to run out of the Transitway and Ted to Chelsea.

UR definitely has to be put back on the front-burner. It's so big an undertaking under ANY mode that it'll take decades to implement. They're wasting valuable time not EIS'ing it, not doing the whole slate of Phase I crosstown route rollouts, and not doing formal studies for Phase II. But all that stuff is going to take 10 years of paperwork and groundwork-laying like the CTx expansion before they're ready to secure funding for the real-deal LRT/BRT/whatever capital build.

This is 1 teensy-weensy step in the process. But not nearly enough to put a dent in the CTx route rollout that was supposed to lay the groundwork for all the permanent infrastructure that comes later.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

The quick fix is, indeed, already at hand with re-routing the 112 onto Massport's road. And creating a 112S that would go to the Airport and South Station. But not too far beyond that is a real Silver Line Gateway with limited stops.
F-Line to Dudley said:
On this ROW this driveway on Cottage is a busway no-go. No shoulder space, and the building's loading docks are at the far corner of the building leaving trucks backing out blind onto the ROW all day long. This block before Eastern Ave. and the bridge is impossible without land-taking and leveling 1 of these 2 neighboring warehouses. Or having a one-way road between blocks where buses at Cottage wait at a red light for buses at Eastern to pass, and vice versa.
Click to expand...
You're making that too hard. There's an easy fix: bypass this little troublesome hypotenuse by using the on-street legs of the triangle> Outbound, you'd turn North on Eastern and West on Cottage and turn right onto the busway in time to duck under Bellingham. Inbound, either reverse that or use a 1-lane southbound busway on the hypotenuse. In the spirit of keeping it simple, I'd do the right-angle both ways, but I *would* want to get on the rail ROW.

F-Line to Dudley said:
The Family Dollar store abutting the Broadway bridge would have to get leveled to widen that overpass.
Click to expand...
We're not talking prime properties. 615 Broadway assesses at $1.2m. I say take it (or just that little bump out) for $3m and start doing the Urban Ring right

F-Line to Dudley said:
And either a building abutting the south side of the Washington St. overpass has to go or the Heard St./Washington intersection has to get cut in order to shiv a busway next to Chelsea CR station. No way to do this without blowing up buildings or doing some sections of signals + single-file buses at the property pinch points under the overpasses a la the design compromises CTfastrak is making. For the price tag the T is quoting here and the scant travel time difference between alternatives, evidence strongly points to going very constrained and very slow through here.
Click to expand...

Well, I wouldn't underestimate the power of a straight shot to Market Basket ("Mystic Mall") to drive ridership from Eastie, so why not locate the CR/SL connection at Arlington & 6th and have the inbound buses use 6th street to either Chestnut or Broadway+Gerrish to get back to the ROW just before the "Box District" station? You might have to take a vacant parcel, but not much more than that.

I wouldn't take a building, but the T ROW looks pretty wide through the station and I might have to nip at the Heard St side to make room. If the Urban Ring is going to happen and is going to get built by the MBTA, then, well, this is what its gonna look like.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

I don't think MassDOT is in a mood to be replacing bridges that don't need replacing. Or the T in a mood to be assuming more asphalt-related debt that's surplus to a requirement.

We're talking a 3-minute schedule difference between street-running and busway plans, no-build that can start in 2-4 years or build that needs lots more money and 2-3x the design/build time to initiate (and if you're starting point on the design is land-taking, then the cost creep on actual design and construction become another order of magnitude). If that's going to threaten the finances or service start date...it's not worth the extra perfectionism. A re-route gets easier to justify if it starts cheap and gets popular than trying to thread the needle too finely at the start.

I mean...don't their own BRT talking points say this is one of the supposed killer features of the mode???


I get what you're saying, but this seems like "Keep It Simple, Stupid" is the literal difference between the route happening at all. Given that we've been down this path before with the 28X and other self-inhibiting exercises in mission creep and studies-for-studies-sake. I think it's a much more positive omen for sea change in the agency if they can take ready-serve cases of low-hanging fruit for what it is and get 2 easy points on free throws here and there to stoke their shooting touch. I can't think of too many other projects where it's quite this easy. Don't let mission creep fuck this up.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

No matter what alternative happens here, the MBTA needs to also run a branch up Eastern Ave in Chelsea and cover the 116/117. Shoot up Broadway to Revere Center, and from there you can terminate, create a loop, or something. Brown Circle, Revere St, whatever. But I'm sure Datadyne and Cybah can attest to how brutal the 116/117 is. It all pales to 111, of course, but nonetheless, it needs to be addressed.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

BostonUrbEx said:
No matter what alternative happens here, the MBTA needs to also run a branch up Eastern Ave in Chelsea and cover the 116/117. Shoot up Broadway to Revere Center, and from there you can terminate, create a loop, or something. Brown Circle, Revere St, whatever. But I'm sure Datadyne and Cybah can attest to how brutal the 116/117 is. It all pales to 111, of course, but nonetheless, it needs to be addressed.
Click to expand...

A-FREAKING-MEN. The 116/117 are so freaking overcapacity during the peak that it is not even funny anymore. There were 10 people jammed in front of the white line on the bus the other day and many days before that too. The buses never come on time and vaguely follow the schedule. At the very least, the 116 and 117 routes need articulated buses ASAP -- they are Key Routes, afterall.

The Silver Line to Chelsea in its proposed route won't help this at all because it doesn't serve the areas where all the new housing aimed at young professionals is being built like on Webster Ave, Parkway Plaza (Parkside Commons and Chelsea Place), Spencer Ave, Eastern Ave, etc.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

found5dollar said:
They have picked the preferred alternative. "Busway to Mystic Mall"

It looks like virturally all of the trip will be on dedicated busway.

http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/31/Docs/SLG_092413_English.pdf

This thread should probably be renamed to "Silver Line Gateway"
Click to expand...

Why if you are making bus only streets would you not just make it rail? This is not a real adequate solution to bad service. It is better than the other "BRT" in boston because it is actually BRT but BRT is never as good as actual rapid transit or even light rail.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

Arlington said:
Capital Costs.
Click to expand...

wouldn't it be cheeper in the long run to not have to constantly upgrade? they keep having to make improvements, that each cost money, to the silver line. If you build a rail line it is much easier to increase capacity.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

coleslaw said:
Why if you are making bus only streets would you not just make it rail? This is not a real adequate solution to bad service. It is better than the other "BRT" in boston because it is actually BRT but BRT is never as good as actual rapid transit or even light rail.
Click to expand...
System connectivity- you could make the busway rail, but then it would have to end at Airport Station at best (and be an isolated island), whereas BRT can go into the Ted Williams Tunnel and continue to the transitway. (I think that's the plan, anyway?)

While I'm usually a big fan of rail projects, as long as we have to share highway infrastructure I have to admit there are compelling reasons for buses. And once the connecting rail infrastructure exists, the route will be there and able to be converted.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

coleslaw said:
wouldn't it be cheeper in the long run to not have to constantly upgrade? they keep having to make improvements, that each cost money, to the silver line. If you build a rail line it is much easier to increase capacity.
Click to expand...

Overbuilding (e.g. the Greenbush Commuter Rail and triple-tracked north Orange Line) too often lavishes fresh new assets on people who will never ever pay back the investment, and waits its entire useful life for passengers and uses that never materialize.

Underbuilding's first virtue is that it isn't overbuilding, and second virtue is that it (should be, as F-Line points out), faster and cheaper

Ok, so the other reasons are:
Ability to mix/match with other bus routes
Need to get "the rest of the way" there on rubber wheels, whether that's West to Malden-Medford or East to Airport, TWT and Seaport. The roads are ready to go--there's no rail to hook into here. Ergo, bus is best.
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

Bus lane next to an active railroad? I smell another Connecticut-style cost overrun approaching...
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

Matthew said:
Bus lane next to an active railroad? I smell another Connecticut-style cost overrun approaching...
Click to expand...
Yes, that's a notable failure from a nearby state, but in-state, I don't recall the Southie and Eastie haul roads being problems
 
Re: Silver Line to Chelsea (Study Meeting)

What about the issues in getting more silver line busses to add capacity on the already strained portions of the line in the waterfront. When could this be turned around with not only the new build but new busses to maintain and increase headways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top