I understand that this thought exercise in unconstrained by money and resources, but I'd think you should strive to propose something that's actually a worthwhile undertaking (even if completely unrealistic).

You'd be better off having the southern half of the Pink Line be DMU service (like the Rail Vision Alternative 4), EMU service (like the Rail Vision Alternative 5), or if you really want to go balls-to-the-wall EMU service through a North-South Rail Linke (like the Rail Vision Alternative 6). That service would be a much more worthwhile pursuit.

What mode is the Pink Line? It seems to be trying to be a jack-of-all-trades, but I can't see how it would be adequate at more than one.

From Widett Circle to Blue Hill Ave, what you drew would be best as part of a regional rail system, or at least something compatible with the common rail network.

Then it has a peculiar subway in Mattapan.

From Broadway to South Station, it appears to share a right-of-way with a heavy rail rapid transit line (the Red Line).

From South Station to Aquarium, it does god-knows-what.

From Aquarium to Maverick, it appears to share a right-of-way with another heavy rail rapid transit line (the Blue Line)

Then it is routed along a route with curves that could only possibly be adequately served by LRT or bus service.

The answer is right in the linked article:

> Repurposing some of Columbus Avenue’s asphalt to create new “green infrastructure” that would narrow the roadway, calm traffic, and provide an additional buffer between the Southwest Corridor and motor vehicle traffic.

I’m all for it. We devote far too much space to the most geometrically inefficient mode of transportation (single-occupancy automobiles). This redesign will increase the throughput capacity of the avenue with respect to the number of people.

Leave at 6:45 and have some peace of mind knowing you’ll have time to park and fill out the paperwork.

>If I remember correctly isn’t most of the tunnel already dug because it was anticipated to be a priority project at some point?

Part of this section has a tunnel, but not it wasn't built in anticipation of this project. Rather, it was built in the 1910s when the proto-Blue-Line was a streetcar line. Tracks continued west from Bowdoin under Cambridge Street to an incline at Joy Street, where streetcars could continue on surface tracks to Charles Street and the Longfellow Bridge to Cambridge. There was even a Central Square (Cambridge) - Orient Heights streetcar line that used that tunnel!

In the 1920s, the Blue Line was converted to the heavy rail rapid transit line that we know today. With that conversion, the Blue Line became a more efficient, higher-capacity transit line, better suited to serving demand. This conversion also meant that the Blue Line's heavy rail rolling stock was no longer compatible with unpowered streetcar tracks, so the streetcar tracks over the Longfellow Bridge were removed, and revenue service through the Joy Street incline was discontinued.

For a few decades, non-revenue service Blue Line trains were towed through this incline to access a maintenance yard. The ramp portal was permanently covered in 1952. So, while part of the tunnel to the old ramp remains, that tunnel will need to be widened, modernized, and extended to accomodate this service. So much so, in fact, that it makes sense to treat this as a complete extension of the Blue Line tunnel from Bowdoin to Charles, rather than trying to force a square peg into the round hole of the 1910s streetcar tunnel.

I hope this explanation helps!

Sure thing! Cambridge Street has a long and fascinating history. It's been rebooted a few times in different eras.

Most recently, as part of the 1960s urban renewal project that razed Scollay Square and replaced it with City Hall Plaza, Cambridge Street was slightly moved and rebuilt from the ground up. The utilities underneath that you allude to are not from 200 years ago, but rather from the 1960s. There are complications that arise in any tunneling project, but as far as tunneling in "old Boston" goes, this is good as it gets. Basically, if we can't tunnel here, we can't tunnel anywhere on Shawmut Penninsula.

>It's an extension through landfill

Not exactly. Cambridge Street was one of the original streets laid out in Boston in the 1630s. This tunnel will mostly be under the original Shawmut Penninsula. The shoreline was expanded a bit by Charles Circle itself and your point about utilities are valid, but this extension will not be primarily through landfill.

>This ain't no cut and cover in a cow pasture.

See this map from 1635. Ironically, you could be right in almost any situation making that statement, except here. There are many things that make this project complicated and your overall point is correct, but your reasoning is flawed. This is one of the few remaining streets from the 1630s on original 1630s land (albeit with some fill by Charles Circle, as I said).

I’ve found the most reliable form of transportation for the able-bodied is walking.

A city can have a downtown that is built for people first, or cars first, but not both. It is impossible to have one’s cake and eat it, too, in terms of getting vehicle traffic through quickly, and creating a safe, pleasant, main street atmosphere for people outside of cars.

Right now, much of Boston is trying to have its cake and eat it, too, and we’re all suffering for it. Ban cars. Build more housing. Let them walk.

Agreed. This type of proposal actually is beneficial in exactly the ways you desire. For example, this would better enable interoperability of fare cards on regional transit authorities across state lines.

For example, right now there is limited fare integration between MBTA and RIPTA (Commuter Rail monthly pass holders can use it to ride RIPTA), but mostly they operate with entirely different payment methods. A system like this would enable all of the RTAs under the umbrella to use the same fare system, and to leverage inherent economies of scale when upgrading something like payment method.

You’ve gotten lucky if the the longest you’ve waited as a daily rider is 10 minutes.

This Sunday, the median headway was 14 minutes.

Other than that, headways have mostly been around every 12 minutes for the last couple of weeks.

Prior to that, the Orange Line had six weeks of 10 minute headways M-Sa, with 12 minute headways on Sundays.

This Spring, the Orange Line had 10-12 minute headways on weekends and 7 minute headways on weekdays. #neverforget

You are right that a national rail system that works as well as a European nation's is unrealistic for the USA at this moment, unfortunately. A realistic solution that learns from other agencies' successes in centralized organizing and scratches your implicit desire for more direct planning and oversight would be to:

Reorganize the MBTA as a multi-county, multi-state entity, with subsidiary transit agencies, much like the MTA in New York and Connecticut.

The new Southeastern New England Transit Authority (SNETA) would serve three counties in New Hampshire, eight counties in Massachusetts, all five counties in Rhode Island, and one county in Connecticut, under contract with the associated state's Departments of Transportation:

• Merrimack County, NH
• Hillsbourough County, NH
• Rockingham County, NH
• Essex County, MA
• Suffolk County, MA
• Plymouth County, MA
• Barnstable County, MA
• Bristol County, MA
• Norfolk County, MA
• Middlesex County, MA
• Worcester County, MA
• Providence County, RI
• Kent County, RI
• Bristol County, RI
• Newport County, RI
• Washington County, RI
• Windham County, CT

Like the MTA has subsidiary agencies (LIRR, Metro-North, NYC Subway, etc), my proposed SNETA would also have subsidiary agencies:

• Southeastern New England Regional Rail (SNERR), responsible for the maintenance, operation, and expansion of Regional Rail lines in the region, such as (not meant to be comprehensive):
  • Fitchburg Line
  • Capitol Corridor (Concord (NH) - Boston, via Manchester, Nashua & Lowell)
  • Worcester Line
  • Providence Line
  • South Coast Rail
  • CapeFlyer
• Massachusetts Bay Commuter Rail (MBCR), responsible for the maintenance, operation, and expansion of Boston-based Commuter Rail lines, such as (not meant to be comprehensive):
  • Newburyport/Rockport Line
  • Haverhill Line
  • Lowell Line
  • Franklin/Foxboro Line
  • Middleborough Line
• Massachusetts Bay Transportation Auhtority (MBTA or the 'T'), responsible for the maintenance, operation, and expansion of Greater Boston's heavy rail, light rail, bus, and ferry service, such as (not meant to be comprehensive):
  • Red Line
  • Orange Line
  • Blue Line
  • Green Line
  • Mattapan Trolley
  • MBTA Bus
  • MBTA Boat
• Regional Transit Authorities (RTAs), such as (not meant to be comprehensive):
  • Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA)
  • Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA)
  • Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority (CCRTA)
  • Manchester Transit Authority (MTA)
  • Southeastern Regional Transit Authority (SRTA)
  • Montachusett Regional Transit Authority (MRTA)
  • Concord Area Transit (CAT)

There are currently 176 cities and towns in the MBTA district. Some just have Commuter Rail service or are adjacent to towns with Commuter Rail service. This includes far-flung places such as Bourne, Wareham, Rehoboth, Seekonk, and Bellingham. This presents the MBTA with the challenge of trying to be both a big-tent regional transit agency, but also a single city's urban area's transit agency.

Under the proposal I've laid out above, these hinterlands towns get moved off of the MBTA and to either MBCR, an RTA, or both. Then, the MBTA is left with ~50 cities and towns and can be more narrowly focused on just those municipalities in the Boston area (south to Foxborough, east to Hingham, north to Wilmington, west to Wellesley).

It’s way better than immediately pre-shutdown, but it’s far worse than three years ago because of the diminished frequency, and it took 8 weeks longer than promised. If this what they said all along “service is going to be wicked fast, but it will still be infrequent and it will take a few months,” it would have been a hard sell. So, you tell me? Is that better worse? I guess that depends upon the mountain you’re standing on.

What did he say?

INFO: What neighborhood is your job in?

“Downtown Boston” is an actual neighborhood. It includes sub-neighborhoods such as the Financial District, the Theatre District, Government Center, Downtown Crossing, etc. Given that you don’t live here, it’s possible that you are using the term “downtown Boston” loosely/incorrectly, and are referring to a different neighborhood, such as the West End, Back Bay, Longwood Medical Area, Cambridge (not technically in the city limits of Boston), etc. So, to give you advice, we’d first need to know if your job is in Downtown Boston or “downtown” “Boston.”

Let's hope the Bus Network Redesign comes to fruition. The "T109" is a proposed route that would run every 15 minutes or better between Linden Square and Harvard Square.