• New CR Station for New Balance in Brighton

  • Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.
Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

  • 116 posts
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
  by The EGE
 
This station is based off the 2007-2009 Allston Multimodal Study which indicates three tracks with an island platform serving two. No way they'd only put in a single side platform - they learned their lesson from the Newton stops and Yawkey. An outbound side platform would require a bridge anyway, so they're going with an island serving two of three tracks. That way, you can get away with a ramp to Everett Street.

That said, however, the rendering in the 2009 study indicates an Arthur Street bridge as well.

...Anyone else note the California cars in slide 5 of Arlington's link?
  by diburning
 
Arlington wrote:Here's a nice set of renderings (I start on page 11 because it has a map to get oriented, but it loops back around)
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/boston/a ... lans?pg=11
It looks to me like they're thinking the station is a single side platform since I see no ADA "bridge" to any island
This explains why Mass Electric Construction Company (MEC) and their neighbors all vacated the area. New Balance must have bought the whole place to prepare it for development.

The EGE, the proposals seem asinine. Why would they put so many stations in Boston? it will turn the hour and a half commute into 2 hours if they stop at all those stops. Stops that close together make sense for rapid transit, but not the CR.

Also, why are they naming the Cambridge St stop Cambridge St and not Allston?

The proposal for Everett st seems dumb as well. Why not an island AND a side platform like Yawkey? It would make it easier to get to the road, and if New Balance wanted to build one, or if Stop and Shop would welcome one, it would make it easier to have a pick-up/drop-off area. Everett st is a pain in the rear end for motorists right now especially with the locals disregarding traffic laws (I would know, I live here!) If there's no pick-up/drop-off area, expect problems!
  by jamesinclair
 
diburning wrote:[q
The EGE, the proposals seem asinine. Why would they put so many stations in Boston? it will turn the hour and a half commute into 2 hours if they stop at all those stops. Stops that close together make sense for rapid transit, but not the CR.
And thats why you have local and distance service.
  by Matthew
 
Arthur street is going to be extended to have a turnaround next to the station, it is the anticipated drop-off point. So I guess there will be a small bridge there. I am also hoping for a ramp from Everett street.
  by The EGE
 
jamesinclair wrote:
diburning wrote:[q
The EGE, the proposals seem asinine. Why would they put so many stations in Boston? it will turn the hour and a half commute into 2 hours if they stop at all those stops. Stops that close together make sense for rapid transit, but not the CR.
And thats why you have local and distance service.
Only one stop (at Everett Street) is to be built for loco-hauled commuter rail service. The remaining 5 stations were to be built as 300-foot platforms for local DMU service, not commuter rail. The DMU plan is out for the time being, though; New Brighton Landing is the only stop we should expect to see in the Allston-Brighton area for a while.
  by jamesinclair
 
The EGE wrote:
jamesinclair wrote:
diburning wrote:[q
The EGE, the proposals seem asinine. Why would they put so many stations in Boston? it will turn the hour and a half commute into 2 hours if they stop at all those stops. Stops that close together make sense for rapid transit, but not the CR.
And thats why you have local and distance service.
Only one stop (at Everett Street) is to be built for loco-hauled commuter rail service. The remaining 5 stations were to be built as 300-foot platforms for local DMU service, not commuter rail. The DMU plan is out for the time being, though; New Brighton Landing is the only stop we should expect to see in the Allston-Brighton area for a while.
Even without DMU service, Worcester passengers could still have 60 minute commutes with express trains and properly timed transfers, and sitll take advantage of local sarvive.

IE:

A is Worcester

Train stops at A, also B then expresses to H (newton) and then expresses to BB and SS
Before Netwon, the train passes a local currently stopped G. Passengers from Worcester going to New Balance get off at Newton, and board the local arriving 2 minutes later, allowing them to get off at New Balance or Yawkey while not inconveniencing those on the express already on their way to back bay.
  by CRail
 
diburning wrote:The EGE, the proposals seem asinine. Why would they put so many stations in Boston? it will turn the hour and a half commute into 2 hours if they stop at all those stops. Stops that close together make sense for rapid transit, but not the CR.
I agree that there are way too many stops being proposed. You stop 8 times before you're even outside of the 128 belt!
Image
Note: Riverside was added as it was mentioned as part of the 1945 plan, it's included because the argument also applies to it, although it does not apply to the discussion.

As it stands everything from Wellesley Farms inbound should be some form of RT, adding stops only makes it worse. I suppose if scheduling and shuffling is handled correctly it would be tolerable, but it would still be better served by a non-commuter mode of transit, separate from the Commuter Rail.
  by MBTA3247
 
Too bad the Pike took half of the B&A's ROW between Back Bay and Riverside. If it hadn't, there'd be room for a rapid transit line there.
  by wicked
 
MBTA3247 wrote:Too bad the Pike took half of the B&A's ROW between Back Bay and Riverside. If it hadn't, there'd be room for a rapid transit line there.
And traffic on Route 9 would be even more of a disaster every day.
  by The EGE
 
The Worcester Line is going to suck right up until the day things get electrified. You've just got too many stops for a good schedule, even with the expresses.

Providence and Worcester are almost the exact same distance - 44 miles - from South Station. But Providence trains beat the pants off Worcester trains: 73 minutes versus 95 for an all-stops local, and 63 versus 76 for the fastest expresses. Speed limits on tracks and curves cause some of that (plus the lengthy move out of Worcester), but the big difference is the widely spaced stations on the Providence Line. That's not so much bad design as it is different development - the NEC has discrete towns 5-7 miles apart, while the Metrowest region is solidly developed out to Framingham.

So what do you do about it? Getting freights off the line and getting it under T control provides opportunities to try some new things. One of those is skip-stop expresses. Once you get consistent 20-minute headways out of Worcester during rush hour, then you can hit the park-and-rides with only every other train. Framingham (or West Natick if Framingham can't get its act together) serves as a convenient transfer point. Use your Framingham short turns as cleanup trains inside Natick - nothing from Worcester should stop in Wellesley or Newton. It's ridiculous that 3 of the 5 trains from Worcester that arrive before 9:00 are all-stops locals.

Everything should probably stop at Yawkey once full-highs make it a quick stop. But, bringing today's EGE rant back on topic, Brighton is going to be an interesting case. If it's almost entirely inbound riders boarding in the morning, then it's a station for Framingham locals and maybe one Worcester local. But if it's a destination as well, with the sports complex and the New Balance complex, then it might be worth to add to more rush-hour trains.
  by Komarovsky
 
When service to Worcester was originally planned, none of the Worcester express trains stopped east of Framingham. The logic behind that was that the stations east of Framingham were so close together that it wouldn't make sense for the express to stop at them and still keep trip times reasonable. Also, service was planned to operate at 79mph rather that 60mph Max speed by now.
  by jr145
 
Theres no reason for a Newton Corner stop. You can walk there from Newtonville in 5 minutes.
  by johnpbarlow
 
jr145 wrote:Theres no reason for a Newton Corner stop. You can walk there from Newtonville in 5 minutes.
Isn't Newton Corner an MBTA bus hub for routes to Watertown, Newton Centre, and other off-commuter rail destinations? Also there is a pretty good sized office complex at Newton Corner.
  by FatNoah
 
Theres no reason for a Newtonville stop. You can walk there from Newton Corner in 5 minutes.
I fixed the quote.
  by jbvb
 
It is discouraging to see how politicians looking for a free lunch screw up regional transportation in Boston. Malden Center was kind of an accident, but it's still a stop for all trains at all times in the middle of a congested single track segment. JFK/UMass is similar, except for the malice aforethought and the duplication of function vs. Quincy Center. Ruggles, Chelsea and Yawkey are only better because they aren't on single track, and some trains skip them. It looks like the Green Line to Somerville will add two more "our bus/RT service stinks/costs too much, let's hijack the Commuter Rail" stops. And this proposal, while it appears the station will allow expresses, is as badly sited vs. present population and commercial/recreational destinations as any of the Orange Line North stations. Only Oak Grove was this bad vs. existing transit.

Of course, this works the other way too: The Blue Line Lynn extension is pretty much "bus service is lousy, Commuter Rail expensive, let's ask for a $1B R/T project".
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8