Talk:Urban Ring Project (MBTA)
|WikiProject United States / Massachusetts / Boston||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
||It is requested that an image or photograph of Map of Urban Ring existing and proposed services, in relation to current hub-and-spoke transit lines be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Massachusetts may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
This sounds to me like slow-- transit... Tons of buses going to Kendall and Central which are already congested areas. IMHO The urban links should have gone around the outter spokes of the current MBTA, e.g. Charlestown-Wellington(orange line), Wellington-Medford, Medford-Arlington, Arlington-Alewife(Red Line), Alwife-Belmont, Belmont-Watertown, Watertown-Brookline(Green Line), Brookline-Jamaica Plain(Orange line), Jamaica Plain-Ashmont(Red line). IMHO- or something close to that. Cambridge's Central Square area doesn't need anymore buses, the Red line is pretty much faster than the bus now anyway. I don't know of anyone that would abandon the red line at Central to take a bus into Boston instead. The CT1 is also redundant with the #1(regular) bus route. While the CT2 is partly redundent I think to the #47? or (that other bus which goes from Central Sq. to Longwood Medical area.), CT7 Sounds like a mix of the #1 and #28 bus routes. CT8 sounds like a mix of the current #91 and #47 bus routes. CT9 is pretty much the current #57 and #66(or #86) bus routes. I think the urban link is a lot of big money that's destined to be a crowded flop. Like for example why are they still planning to focus soo much on Lechmere? Shouldn't they goto locations where the green line is proposed to be extended to? Another example the Blue line (currently stopping at Bowdoin) is in the planning to be extended to Charles MGH(red line), that means coming from the west you can get off at Charles MGH board the blue line, and bypass the green/orange lines when going straight to the airport. That same action nullifies the need for part of the BRT1. CaribDigita 21:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I feel like this line is misleading: "allowing suburb-to-suburb travel without the need to take lines downtown and transfer much like the proposed Purple Line in the Washington Metro system, or the planned Belt Line in Atlanta." (quoted from the intro). This doesn't seem to me like a good description of the Urban Ring. It seems like most people's destinations will be places like Kendall Square, the Longwood Medical Area, and the airport, none of which are suburbs by any stretch of the word. I don't know anything about the Purple Line in Washington or the Belt Line in Atlanta, but if these are for suburb-to-suburb travel they probably aren't much like the Urban Ring. Especially in Phase Three, most of the ridership would probably come from people going from, say the Red Line to Fenway Park, who don't want to have to go through downtown, or from the Orange Line to MIT or Longwood Medical Area, or from the Orange Line to the airport. Any thoughts on this? Foxmulder 17:46, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- The DC Metro is essentially a series of radial spokes. It's a ridiculous process to use it for suburb-suburb travel since you would have take a spoke into the city and another spoke out again to accomplish this. The proposed Purple Line would be essentially a wheel connecting the spokes, not going into the city proper at all. I was under the impression that the Urban Ring would serve a similiar purpose. --Loodog 01:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's certainly similar in that it connects the spokes and allows you to get around without going downtown, so I may have been too hasty in deleting the references to the Purple Line and the DC one. My main issue with that sentence was that it makes it sound like it connects suburbs, which it does not. It will connect a few of the innermost suburbs to most of the non-downtown parts of the city. (Longwood Medical Area, Dudley Square, Kenmore Square, Kendall Square). I think the Purple Line must be farther out from the city than the Urban Ring; keep in mind the Urban Ring would be only a few stops from downtown where it connects with most subway lines, and at least half of it will be within the city limits. The rest will be in downtown Cambridge (not a suburb), east Somerville and Chelsea (those last two are really the only suburbs involved).
- So, in summary, I think they are similar in that they connect the spokes of a radial network, but different in terms of distance from downtown. The Urban Ring won't make suburb-to-suburb travel much easier for anyone; what it will do is make it easier to get to parts of the city that aren't right in the middle of downtown. Feel free to put back a reference to the Purple Line if you want. Foxmulder 19:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Description needs update
Currently, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation (EOT) is advancing the study of Phase II of the Urban Ring. In addition, many of the Phase I recommendations from the MIS were never implemented. In short, the current EOT study work renders most of the MIS description of Phase I and II quite out of date. An update is needed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 17:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC).
Once again, the information has become out of date. The status of the Silver Line connector tunnel is vague, and the South Station Tower project is in limbo. Proposed dates and projects need to be updated. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 03:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I find this article very confusing. If i get it right, there are 3 proposed routes for the urban ring, but they have chosen to use the one under "Revised Draft EIR." If this is so, why are the other two proposed routes still on this page? Also, if this is the chosen route, should someone create a map showing what the line will look like compared to the already existing rapid transit lines?--Found5dollar (talk) 00:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
How about adding a map of the projected route?
It's hard to tell in this article what's reasonably current (say, within the last two years) and what's older. Editors should try to add explicit dates to things (when reports are issued, and so on) so that it is clearer what is dated content and what isn't. Magic♪piano 12:42, 12 September 2012 (UTC)