Waltham Mayor Proposes Monorail

[underground]

Uground -- then you have a fleet of Hubways and Zipcars at each station giving the commuter the options of walk, bike, drive depending on weather, fitness level and time, etc.

Makes sense. All people would have to do is get to the monorail station, ride the train, pick up a zipcar, drive it to their office park, pay an entire days worth of zipcar fees for it to sit in a parking lot, and reverse for the way home. If that's not efficient, I don't know what is!

 

[kevtron2000]

Why a monorail? Waltham isn't as density populated as Boston.

If anything, the Commuter Rail works better than a Monorail.

 

[bigeman312]

Why a monorail? Waltham isn't a density populated as Boston.

If anything, the Commuter Rail works better than a Monorail.

Yes. The monorail idea is silly. This proposal is not suited for CR (suburb-to-city) traffic. They are proposing an office-park-to-office-park system, traveling between edge cities, that connects existing transit, with somewhat frequent stop spacing (relative to CR). To address this travel pattern, Commuter Rail would not work better than a Monorail. Things that could work as well, or better, than a Monorail, with a more proven implementation:

• shuttle bus
• light rail
• bus-rapid-transit
• -MU service

All of these services have precedent being implemented in similar settings.

 

[George_Apley]

I've had thoughts (in Crazy Transit Pitches) that a circumferential LRV line paralleling 128 -- between a Fitchburg Line park & ride @ Waltham/Weston town line and the Burlington Mall -- would probably do half decent in terms of ridership.

If you check out the map, that's what I'd imagine. Forget the Rte 2 to Alewife branch and it becomes an isolated, but relevant line. Interesting that Waltham's government is pondering such things...

 

[HenryAlan]

Yeah, I think the tech is wrong, but the routing isn't bad. It reminds me a bit of Maryland's proposed purple line.

 

[metasyntactic]

I try to take both sides seriously when discussing monorails.

Don't make fun of monorail boosters, they're making an honest effort to describe transit that works in sprawly conditions (leaping across parking lots, and threaded under power lines, for example). Disney and Las Vegas have proved that they can move a whole lot of people who'd never otherwise set foot in mass transit, and don't we find that a pleasant thought?

I've been wondering why monorails seem to be associated more with sprawl or one-off demos in the US. I wonder if the LA monorail proposal would have changed this if implemented or just reinforced it. It seems like urban monorails are more successful elsewhere like in Japan, where they weave through the city:

or even over a river:

 

[Jahvon09]

I remember that plans for a monorail was thought about for the Mass. Pike between Worcester & downtown Boston, but it never materialized.

I think that they decided not to do it because it would more than likely cause headaches, construction delays and lane closures, which would restrict traffic flow and initiate traffic nightmares.

Same thing was proposed for Logan Airport, but I think Massport had decided to stay with their bus system to get people into and around the airport.

So I would tend to think that this latest plan for Waltham might just be another "passing thing in the night", and probably won't materialize either.

None of them seem to at all.

Massachusetts still has yes to get a monorail anywhere in the state! Can't believe that they are so bloody behind in the times!

 

[Mongo]

Why wouldn't something like this be better suited to a Gondola system like Portland has?

It is supposed to be far cheaper than nearly any other form of transportation.

 

[Arch101]

I must applaud the boldness and audacity of the idea. 128 is a parking lot as is Waltham's streets at both rush hours. So, any kind of people movement involving buses or anything that adds to road traffic is looney and just adds to the problem. The concept of people-moving unfettered above the ground up and down the 128 belt and linking to the Commuter Rail and the town centers is the only alternative left. However, there simply isn't the money for something like this and I question the political will of everyone it would take to get it done.
Still, a star for inventiveness.

 

[Jahvon09]

It would be nice to get one somewhere in Massachusetts, but I think that the times to have done that was when things were u/c back then, such as the Big Dig, Logan Airport's facelift or the repaving and widening of 128.

Also, the exploration / research into putting one over the Rose Kennedy Greenway when IT TOO, was u/c. To get travelers from North Station to South Station.

 

[Arlington]

It seems like urban monorails are more successful elsewhere like in Japan, where they weave through the city

Folks find Japanese examples uncompelling because just about *any* transit mode works in Japan, including maglevs and monorails both hanging and beam-top. It's going to be more compelling to find a "works in the American suburbs" example and go from there.

 

[Matthew]

Yeah, the Japanese have very high competency at running transit. They don't mess around. I presume they have politics and stuff, but for whatever reason, it doesn't prevent them from doing things right like it does here.

Another issue though: modern American codes require emergency egress at all points along a right-of-way. This pretty much kills monorails. By the time you build enough space to hold the egress path, you may as well put down two rails.

 

[Arlington]

Another issue though: modern American codes require emergency egress at all points along a right-of-way. This pretty much kills monorails. By the time you build enough space to hold the egress path, you may as well put down two rails.

Yes, that ends up being a deal-killer. Where two beams run together, the exit/egress is usually a path down the middle, and everything gets wider/fatter/heavier. Then the real killer is egress on single-beam segments (ugly and cumbersome and hard to build refuges).

Can't build elegant things like Seattle and Disney did (and I forget where Las Vegas was, but it is probably one thing--besides the taxi lobby--that's kept them from building their extension to UNLV arena and the LAS airport) {EDIT: You see from this that LV's monorail has the widely-spaced beams and central egress}

 

[whighlander]

Yeah, the Japanese have very high competency at running transit. They don't mess around. I presume they have politics and stuff, but for whatever reason, it doesn't prevent them from doing things right like it does here.

Another issue though: modern American codes require emergency egress at all points along a right-of-way. This pretty much kills monorails. By the time you build enough space to hold the egress path, you may as well put down two rails.

Mathew -- One word -- ICE

Remember the signs on bridges in these parts about them freezing first -- well a monorail is all bridge

 

[Arlington]

Mathew -- One word -- ICE
Remember the signs on bridges in these parts about them freezing first -- well a monorail is all bridge

Not a choice-driver. Steel rails need heated (de-iced) switches and can struggle in profound cold too. Japan's got roughly our same winter and they at least use brushes, while Newark Airport (also no stranger to winter weather) uses an electric heater on its guideway.

 

[Mongo]

Again, all these problems with monorails aren't a problem with a gondola system, considering the low passenger numbers this route would have it would be perfect. And it has the advantage of short headways, you miss one car you catch the next one in a few minutes.

 

[Arlington]

Makes sense. All people would have to do is get to the monorail station, ride the train, pick up a zipcar, drive it to their office park, pay an entire days worth of zipcar fees for it to sit in a parking lot, and reverse for the way home. If that's not efficient, I don't know what is!

Work the idea before mocking it.

Make the small mental stretch of replacing Zipcar with swarms of Google's self-driving electric 25mph thingies, and you've got a pretty sweet "suburban office park" system regardless of what mode the trunk line is (CR, LRV, Monorail).

The self-driving "station car" is a pretty good "last mile" solution and is about as near (or far) to reality as any heavy transit line through Watham is.

 

[Arlington]

Again, all these problems with monorails aren't a problem with a gondola system, considering the low passenger numbers this route would have it would be perfect. And it has the advantage of short headways, you miss one car you catch the next one in a few minutes.

I love (aerial) gondolas, but they work best in a "barbell" network--a straight shot between two very dense nodes where there's no "shared street" such as plain-old buses might use. (North Station to Kendall Sq, for example)

The Portland (Ore.) Aerial Tram from Oregon Health Sciences campus (on a mountaintop) to the South Waterfront (and light rail) is said to work well (but gets crushed at shift changes).

Maybe an Aerial Tram would be the best way to get from the Winter Street hilltop the Westin's Hilltop (or a Bear Hill transit station), but either is useful only as a spur on some other linear transit.

 

[Mongo]

I love (aerial) gondolas, but they work best in a "barbell" network--a straight shot between two very dense nodes where there's no "shared street" such as plain-old buses might use. (North Station to Kendall Sq, for example)

The Portland (Ore.) Aerial Tram from Oregon Health Sciences campus (on a mountaintop) to the South Waterfront (and light rail) is said to work well (but gets crushed at shift changes).

Maybe an Aerial Tram would be the best way to get from the Winter Street hilltop the Westin's Hilltop (or a Bear Hill transit station), but either is useful only as a spur on some other linear transit.

You can have multiple stops on a gondola system, and if you use detachable cars, you can bank them at a particular station for a rush period. It's way less expensive and the short headways are a big plus. You might not take the monorail if it only comes every 20-30 minutes, because you don't want to be stuck at work or late to work if you miss it. A gondola system is continuous, so it's far more convenient to use.

 

[Arlington]

You might not take the monorail if it only comes every 20-30 minutes

But where is the Gondola going to take you? Where is this dense "home" end that frequent aerial pods are going to?

I agree that any mode if it is on 20 to 30 minute headways can be frustrating (particularly if it doesn't keep a schedule).

But the physical layout of the 'burbs, with activity nodes spread out around 128's perimeter, still favors a "line"...linear transit with evenly-spaced stops along the line (even if it snakes a bit).

The problem with almost any 128 circumferential route is that there's no natural "anchor end"...or if there is, it is either Alewife or Brandeis and these suggest either linear extensions of the modes we have (HRT or CR), or a "light" mode like LRT or shuttle bus than can stop at busy nodes all along its line.

Modern (Las Vegas) monorails are driverless, so they prefer to have shorter trains (4 cars) on shorter headways (5 minutes), and so ends up being pretty useful urban transit....but you'll still have to pick serious endpoints for it (like Downtown Waltham and Dassault Systems or Burlington.

The endpoints of a "Waltham" system are *so* far apart (and suggest so many stops) that a linear mode is going to make more sense than a "Gondola Line". It may be that Gondolas can do intermediate stations, but I suspect that if you actually need intermediate stations badly enough, you always end up going with a more traditional linear mode.