Harvard Square Station and Tunnel Discussion

Rail
That store at Washington & the Parkway was a Firstie,used to deliver Colonial meat products there. The A & P was down the hill in the block where Brannelly's has the whole thing now. Love the mack's ( B-61 tractor the balls ). Dedham line bus used to stop at Ronnie's donuts and turn around at the Boston/Dedham line, and Washington street in Rossie square was two way straight through. That was wheb there was no B in the T!!!!!!

Teamdriver wrote: Washington street in Rossie square was two way straight through.

The Dedham Line Pullman tracklesses would barrel straight ahead through there and the Charles Rivers would de-wire on the frog at South just before the Rialto. Good memories !

jamesinclair wrote:A large set of stairs could easily fit, directly connecting the 77 with the fare gate area. The fare machines would simply need to be moved a bit.

When the T stops eliminating employment positions I'll consider millions of dollars wasted on eliminating an inconvenience to the passengers of a single bus route to not be absurd. I love how the budget is only a concern when it's convenient.

Frequently, I ride the 77; Sometimes, I miss the 77; Every time, I live.

3rdrail wrote:

Teamdriver wrote: Washington street in Rossie square was two way straight through.

The Dedham Line Pullman tracklesses would barrel straight ahead through there and the Charles Rivers would de-wire on the frog at South just before the Rialto. Good memories !

Indeed , walk up to the NHRR stop, getting a slice of square pizza at Messina's, which was built almost into the rail grade like a cave, and then hop onto the tracks to walk home,dodging whatever trains came! That was the balls!!!!!!!

Speaking of the outbound 77 berth at Harvard - I don't understand why the T insists of locating it all the way to the right. Why not locate the heaviest route right at the top of the ramp? There's more platform room there as well for waiting passengers.

Because you want the heaviest dwell times at the end of the tunnel where it won't back up other service (this theory applies to all mode of transportation, not just buses ). If the heaviest line boarded in the middle or beginning of the platform, it would cause too many back ups into the ramp of the tunnel.

Here's a couple of rare shots of a couple of Pullmans - the first year on the first line. May 4, 1938 Trackless trolleys had been operating here for one month.

CRail wrote:Because you want the heaviest dwell times at the end of the tunnel where it won't back up other service (this theory applies to all mode of transportation, not just buses ). If the heaviest line boarded in the middle or beginning of the platform, it would cause too many back ups into the ramp of the tunnel.

From what I understand, the yellow trains wait outside the bus tunnel because diesel dwelling in tunnel = death to us all.

Look, they can wait here:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 6&t=h&z=20

before going in, so it would be very easy to make sure the buses enter in the right order.

This would work great if the schedules matched for every line.

They cannot layover in the tunnel because of the tunnel being single track. For this reason, vehicles depart the alley immediately prior to there scheduled time through the station, which is also used for arrivals.

If a Heights is boarding by that doorway, and a Medford Sq. loops the alley and goes into the tunnel behind it, it has to wait behind the boarding heights before it can board. Now a Huron goes in to board, which now about fills the platform as the Heights is still boarding. A Waverly and a Watertown show up back to back to drop off, and now have to wait outside the tunnel for the Heights leave.

Other routes take a while to board as well, but their headways aren't nearly as tight. Like I said, I often take that route, and have for years... I've thought about it before

BERy had it right by putting streetcars and trackless in there, but internal combustion buses ? I doubt very much if that tunnel was built with exhaust fumes in mind. BERy knew what they were doing. Anybody know if buses got down in there pre-MBTA ? Notice that at Broadway Station, they had a level for each mode with buses up above and streetcars mid-level. I'm surprised- especially in Cambridge of all places, that there hasn't been air quality controversy inside the Harvard Tunnel. Harvard is the only station that I can think of that is or was used as a combination bus/trolley or bus/trackless, rapid transit station that has a restrictive opening at both entrance and exit. Going underground must diminish air flow also. Usually, they were covered but wide open and above ground - Forest Hills, Dudley, Egleston, Sullivan, Everett, Andrew, Broadway, Fields Corner, Ashmont, etc etc.

The MBTA started in 1964, and I'm sure some of the routes were already dieselized by then.

Is there any sort of diagram that compares the Harvard station pre- and post-renovation?

Just from being in there I would say the air quality at Back Bay is far worse then the Harvard "yellow train" tunnel. Ive spent a decent amount of time waiting in there and haven't noticed any obvious diesel fumes. Then again the real problem is CO2, which of course is odorless so that may still be an issue. Perhaps the tunnel is constructed in such a way that it naturally ventilates?

CRail wrote:Because you want the heaviest dwell times at the end of the tunnel where it won't back up other service (this theory applies to all mode of transportation, not just buses ). If the heaviest line boarded in the middle or beginning of the platform, it would cause too many back ups into the ramp of the tunnel.

I understand that in theory, but in practice it forces a large number of riders to walk a longer distance to a substandard waiting area, which can get very crowded and often forces passengers to stand close to the curb as multiple coaches pass by (none of them going the posted 10 mph speed limit). It's obvious that no one in MBTA management or customer service has ever been a regular 77 rider.

FP10 wrote:Just from being in there I would say the air quality at Back Bay is far worse then the Harvard "yellow train" tunnel. Ive spent a decent amount of time waiting in there and haven't noticed any obvious diesel fumes. Then again the real problem is CO2, which of course is odorless so that may still be an issue. Perhaps the tunnel is constructed in such a way that it naturally ventilates?

I agree with you about Back Bay. I actually was thinking about Back Bay when I wrote the post and was going to mention it but didn't as the fumes come from a different source, and a source which it was supposedly designed to accomodate, unlike Harvard. Actually, there was much controversy about Back Bay's air a few years ago and supposedly, work was done to try to alleviate some of the fumes, but I've been in there recently and it still can get quite dense. I will say however, that prior to the work that they did with the ventilation, it was worse. A train would come in and the place was like a house on fire.

The Harvard tunnel intrigues me however as I doubt if it was designed to ventilate much more than what humans produce for carbon dioxide (CO2). The carbon monoxide (CO) coming out of tail pipes is another matter. Somebody must have an idea when buses first got down there. I don't think that I've ever even seen a photo of a bus in the tunnel prior to MBTA.