U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts > Boston
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 07-01-2013, 10:23 AM
16 posts, read 24,415 times
Reputation: 19


what a whole lot of work for something absolutely no one cares about
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 07-01-2013, 11:34 AM
1,702 posts, read 3,224,957 times
Reputation: 2005
Good for you if you can get around in LA with no car. The old story about the Pacific Electric lines and sacrificing them to freeways always seems compelling; also the irony of building new lines at great expense 60 years after giving up the original ones. I agree that the T's buses really thin out beyond the urban core. One reason, I guess, is that LA is so much more consistently dense than Greater Boston, where the building lots get really big outside the core areas. Also it seems as if they've made more of an investment in commuter rail around Boston than in bus service. 40 years ago, for example, there was hardly any service left on the Framingham commuter line but the T maintained a local bus from Natick through Wellesley and Newton. You could take the bus and change at Woodland for the trolley. Now there are many more trains and they've extended the service to Worcester but the bus is long gone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-05-2013, 08:12 PM
Location: south central
606 posts, read 912,489 times
Reputation: 623
Originally Posted by citylover94 View Post
Bostons rapid transit is only 3 lines although it does have much higher mileage and the green line is light rail and has 4 spur routes beats LA even with less mileage. Boston 28 vs LA 70.4

Most of the routes you showed also totally missed the core and would not get high enough ridership to justify and are currently covered by commuter rail.
I know. I couldn't really change the shapes and I was just demonstrating size. I didn't mean to suggest them as actual routes. & I would understand too why LA light rail ridership wouldn't gain. It's slow and a strange choice to really promote, but I guess it has to do with geography and Pacific Railway nostalgia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-10-2013, 10:37 PM
21 posts, read 28,701 times
Reputation: 32
Yeah, do you live in Boston? New England is a lot older than Los Angeles and a lot denser in it's core. Boston doesn't need a rail line going that far out. Most of those communities wouldn't cover the cost.

If I were adding lines to Boston I would first extend the Red Line to bring coverage out to Waltham. Why Waltham, with its restaurants, bars, students, and commuters isn't better connected is beyond me.

This would make sense, those areas actually have a lot more interpenetration.

I would extend the green line deeper into Newton.

I would also extend the blue line to better serve the coast.

I would also turn the Silver line into a streetcar/light rail type setup.

I would extend the hours on the weekends for all lines until 2:00 am for last car.

They've already set to extend the Green line up to Medford.

Most of those lines your map have really would just be cutting through suburbs and not really connecting truly economically dependent areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2013, 10:37 PM
Location: south central
606 posts, read 912,489 times
Reputation: 623
They weren't proposals, just comparisons. Not only in size, but comparing the fairly ubiquitous and well-run system LA has managed to build in a pretty recent time span compared to the Boston system. Yes, I'm from Boston. Blue line to Lynn, green line to Medford, increased line access in Dot, Roxbury, Mattapan, Roslindale, HP. Access in Chelsea, etc. I know there are a lot of improvements, that's the point. Not saying Boston needs LA's system. (Boston's transfer system is much better, for example), although LA does have some things over Boston, such as a much better bus system and a system that better threads into non-immediate "core" (Not really core in LA but definitely more urban) locales. Ok, I think this thread is done for what little it was worth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts > Boston
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top