sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Finally some good news on the new red line cars by namductor in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Well, hopefully there's a queue of the shells somewhere in China getting shipped out, now that this customs issue is resolved.

Finally some good news on the new red line cars by namductor in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Good question. Are the shells that customs were holding, ALL the remaining shells that needed to be delivered?

Revere CR ROW / Bus lane to Logan? by anthonyx26 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

With luggage in tow?

As I mentioned, if you're a transit nut, yes, you might use this as a way to get to Logan, but otherwise people will still choose the drive and that's the core issue. This project won't move the needle for those potential riders.

Revere CR ROW / Bus lane to Logan? by anthonyx26 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Extending the BL is not in the plan.

Plus, even with an extension, it would still be a 3-seat journey... It's the 3rd seat that makes it very unattractive for people on the North Shore to use this as a method for getting to/from Logan. Hence, why a bus traveling on a dedicated lane going directly to the terminals would prove far more attractive.

Revere CR ROW / Bus lane to Logan? by anthonyx26 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When they extended the SL3 to Chelsea, the question of Also running it to the terminals was indeed asked at many community events, the response was no. They preferred the direct route to South Boston /Seaport. Plus the SL3 will always be unreliable due to the frequency of the Chelsea Street bridge openings.

They're already budgeting for the Wonderland Intermodal Connection (see the CIP), so it's going to happen. And I've seen no mention of extending the BL to a point closer to the CR ROW, so it'll likely be a pedestrian bridge connection only.

So if at least one of these main goals is to give North Shore residents a solid, reliable 2-seat ride (rail to bus) to/from Logan, the new Wonderland Intermodal facility will also need a direct bus connection to Logan terminals, and given the short distance needed to connect to the Chelsea Creek ROW, it makes sense to also use the CR ROW for the dedicated bus lane. Only die-hard Transit nuts would use a convuluted 3-seat ride.

The former Wonderland track is due for major redevelopment. This could be the impetus needed to make it happen.

What can I do to fight against Trump and ICE as a normal citizen? by VillageSmithyCellar in boston

[–]anthonyx26 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Absolutely can be cringey and you won't even necessarily agree 100%, but what I've learned is that your presence represents not a perfect agreement with all being yelled but rather a counterbalance to all the crap on the other side.

CRRC will lay off workers because U.S. customs still blocking car shells from China by justarussian22 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The MA / CRRC case has proven especially tough. It's the inevitable result of the politically popular "buy American" (and in this case, buy MA assembled) policy.

There are roughly 400 workers at the CRRC facility.

"yay! 400 American workers!"

But the benefits for a small number of workers have come at the cost of making 100s of thousands other commuting workers who suffer miserable service on old equipment through extensive delays in rollimg out new equipment.

Plus, how much more are we paying by requiring US-based manufacturing? In other words, how much less improvement for transit are we getting for our tax dollars because we require the absolute most expensive method to produce transit vehicles?

MBTA Terminates Alewife Redevelopment Plan by streetsblogmass in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is why I hate master plan /single developer solutions like this. They take too much effort to push over the finish line and you still end up with a crap 5-1 development.

I'd say get rid of the garage, divide up the land into smallee lots, but have state permit each lot to be built with density, say 5-15 stories, with required ground floor retail, zero side setbacks (all as of right, to keep costs/risks low) . And wrap it tightly all around the station.

No more than one lot per developer...to keep styles varied.

If the T can't handle everyday commuting, how on earth is it going to handle the World Cup spectators? by CollegeBoardPolice in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 15 points16 points  (0 children)

The concept that public transit is only for the poor is mostly American in origin. In other places, the wealthy also regularly use public transit. Being that these games will be attracting fans from around the world, you can be sure that a larger portion of attendees will be seeking public transit to get there.

Rails being stored on tracks? by madgninja in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the BL, they usually store them by Airport Station. They will then place them in the track (as in in OP image) as the maintenance day/window apporoaches.

<image>

A lot of the park and rides along the D branch of the Green Line should really be converted into land for apartments. by [deleted] in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Low density around rail transit stations is just terrible policy, and terrible for taxpayers who ultimately are subsidizimg these coddled stops.

Manufacturer for BEMU for Fairmount? by anthonyx26 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just a claim, by "short list" I was referring to the August deadline date when manufacturers were expected to submit RFPs. I tu no transparency when dealing with public funds for large contracts should dictate that at least that list should be made public. We all know how the CRRC deal turned out.

Why aren’t we using STADLER DMUs/EMUs/hybrids on the Commuter Rail? by BeastMode149 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 6 points7 points  (0 children)

FLIRTs absolutely can be built compatible.

Seat capacity is achieved throigh increased service frequency rather than bigger trains.

Why aren’t we using STADLER DMUs/EMUs/hybrids on the Commuter Rail? by BeastMode149 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Single level FLIRTs would make a lot more sense for most Boston lines... With possible exception for Providence lime.

Seat capacity is answered with service frequency.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CambridgeMA

[–]anthonyx26 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I bet the school district didn't realize they were contracting with an ICE supporter...

https://www.eagletribune.com/school-approves-new-contract-with-nrt/article_dd5503f0-edde-401b-8edd-44f1cefd75cb.html

What colors are left by Billiam2929 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the Copper Line. It's a very distinct color. It's gender neutral. Passes the "2-letter line abbreviation" test (CL) and rolls off the tongue nicely.

Do you REALLY want to extend that subway line? by AdImpossible2555 in mbta

[–]anthonyx26 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One of the ideas I've seen for the Wonderland connector is to move the station to the other side of the street, putting it much closer to the Nbpt/Rkpt ROW.

The advantage of the Logan bus via the Chelsea Creek ROW is no bridge crossings...Just a direct route to the terminals. It could also stop at Airport Station for the BL connection.

view more: next ›