New Red and Orange Line Cars

The EGE said:
There's a substantial difference between "buying a piece of land to make money from developing it" and "buying a piece of land to hold for ransom when the public needs it".
Click to expand...

Why? If this was someone who had bought a parking lot in Fenway, hoping a developer would pay them bank, we wouldn’t bat an eye. It just sucks because we’re the beneficiaries that lose out if this impedes the T.
 
DominusNovus said:
Why? If this was someone who had bought a parking lot in Fenway, hoping a developer would pay them bank, we wouldn’t bat an eye. It just sucks because we’re the beneficiaries that lose out if this impedes the T.
Click to expand...

There's a big difference between holding up a private lot for private development and holding up a railroad right of way for public use.

This parcel is along a ROW and has an easement allowing railroad use! There's no debate about that! The debate is whether subway cars qualify as railroad use.
 
There's no legitimate reason for the folks at No Name to do this. They're trying to take the taxpayers for a ride (no pun intended) by reading the contract in an obnoxious way.

The bottom line is, there's no harm being done to them, there's nothing preventing them from developing in the future, there aren't plans in process for development as of now, and they're not providing any additional value-add here. They want us to fork over thousands of dollars to them so that they'll stop obstructing our ability to have an improved commute.
 
stevebikes said:
Possibly they were waiting to see what the MBTA's long-term plans are for Track 61, because it will affect how/what they build. From the article: "The family indicated in legal filings that it would like to install support structures near the tracks to allow it to build above them in the future."



There's a lot of concern in the neighborhood about kicking up PCBs. Or as the the recent article calls it, "dust." I'd like to hear more about that, since I live nearby.
Click to expand...

That seems a bit... far-fetched and NIMBY-ish. Are there any real studies showing the presence of PCBs on the tracks/ROW? And if if there are, how does that compare with every other subway line?
 
JumboBuc said:
There's a big difference between holding up a private lot for private development and holding up a railroad right of way for public use.

This parcel is along a ROW and has an easement allowing railroad use! There's no debate about that! The debate is whether subway cars qualify as railroad use.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If you think you have a way to make some money with the property you have by exploiting the technicalities of the easement, why wouldn’t you?
 
Remember when Hyundai Radem was going to sue the T because their proposal for the new Red & Orange line cars didn't win? The court threw it out, saying tat the T has a right to choose whoever it wanted.

Well, THIS crap isn't going to fly either!! Hah!! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
The parcel in question is 0602769200, with an address of B St (no number). If you go to Google maps, it starts at the SE corner of Cypher St and the bypass road, and heads south. There are several residual spur tracks on what is otherwise vacant land. The parcel runs irregularly between Cypher and West 2nd.

(Go to the online Boston city assessor and type in the parcel number if you want a map of the parcel boundaries.)

The annual taxes on this 50,000+ square feet of vacant land are about $60,000.

The family has owned this land for 33 years.

The Globe mentions another lawsuit with regard to using this track. It was probably filed by the owner of parcel 0602771100. It abuts 0602769200 on Cypher St., and is only about 18,000 square feet.

IMO, the 'No Name' owners are likely to be awarded some compensation, as current and future use of the land is detrimentally affected by this testing. My guess is that the easement covers not only Track 61, but also the several spurs running off it near Cypher St. (clearly visible on Google satellite).

Here is a link to Streetview on the No Name property.
https://goo.gl/maps/vC8f8Fxh4JF2

Streetview showing spur tracks.
https://goo.gl/maps/fnv64hSCqsP2
 
Last edited:
What do Boston shootings have to do with the issue at hand? :confused:
 
Let me opine that the spur tracks are subject to the easement, else any self-respecting property owner would have pulled them up years ago.

If the test tack ends at Cypher street, I'm pretty sure there is electrical and signaling equipment that needs to be installed at that point, and much of which would not be within the actual Track 61 roadbed.
 
*I don't think that they'll get very far on this. The MBTA has a timetable to meet with CRRC, and if it isn't kept. then CRRC might start thinking about suing.

Also, the suppliers. Things will start to get ugly! So, I think that it's best for those NIMBYS at No Name be on their merry way & forget about this ridiculous crap!! :mad:
 
Jahvon09 said:
*I don't think that they'll get very far on this. The MBTA has a timetable to meet with CRRC, and if it isn't kept. then CRRC might start thinking about suing.

Also, the suppliers. Things will start to get ugly! So, I think that it's best for those NIMBYS at No Name be on their merry way & forget about this ridiculous crap!! :mad:
Click to expand...

The MBTA says it needs a half mile test track. So why not stop the test track at 2500 feet, rather than 2640 feet? End the test track before it reaches the No Name property. Then the problem with the easements goes away, the MBTA meets its timetable, the manufacturer won't sue, etc etc etc.
 
stellarfun said:
The MBTA says it needs a half mile test track. So why not stop the test track at 2500 feet, rather than 2640 feet? End the test track before it reaches the No Name property. Then the problem with the easements goes away, the MBTA meets its timetable, the manufacturer won't sue, etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

More importantly, tell No Name this.
 
DominusNovus said:
More importantly, tell No Name this.
Click to expand...

Whose responsibility is it to tell this (that the test track will be 2500 feet, not 2640 feet) to No Name owner?
________________________________

It ought to be pretty clear to most property owners what's happening here.

The MBTA not only wants use of Track 61 itself, but the spur tracks as well. (And the spur tracks may extend to the abutting property owner who also filed a lawsuit.) And not only does the MBTA want access to the right-of-way for the trackage, but wants right-of-entry and use of the land next to the right-of-way. For many years.

Without getting into the doctrines of adverse possession and/or conversion, it appears that the MBTA has not been forthcoming about how it will respect the rights of the two property owners directly affected by the test track. And that's why the MBTA is in court.

The Globe article noted that the No Name owner agreed to let the Big Dig use this property, back when. I'm guessing if was used to bring in out-size equipment or materials, and/or ship out contaminated materials.

I don't know why the state or the city didn't take these two parcels by eminent domain. Did they not want to pay the price?
 
Whatever it takes to get the job done, the MBTA HAS to try to step up their game & to expidite getting this done, so that it can start testing & getting the new Red Line trains into revenue service in order to start putting some of the old trains out to pasture. :cool:
 
Could they test the cars on the Framingham sub somewhere between Mansfield and Framingham.
 
Also, I thought that some of the new trains would be tested there in Springfield when they come off the assembly lines,
 
stellarfun said:
Whose responsibility is it to tell this (that the test track will be 2500 feet, not 2640 feet) to No Name owner?
________________________________
Click to expand...

Probably a lawyer. They’re usually the ones to deliver bad news. “Sorry, but we’ve gone with another option. Tough luck on that shake down, huh?”
 
Jahvon09 said:
Also, I thought that some of the new trains would be tested there in Springfield when they come off the assembly lines,
Click to expand...

"Production of each $2.43 million car will take 22 days in Springfield. The Springfield complex has a 2,240-foot track where cars will be tested."
Source: https://www.masslive.com/business-n...mbta_gets_first_crrc_orange_line_test_ca.html

Assuming testing goes well in China, officials said earlier this year, the trains will eventually be tested on the tracks in Boston over nights and weekends before the first of the new fleet is put to use for the Boston commute.
Click to expand...
https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2017/10/10/mbta-orange-line-trains-china/

So why are the two test alternatives described above not sufficient for testing?
 
stellarfun said:
"Production of each $2.43 million car will take 22 days in Springfield. The Springfield complex has a 2,240-foot track where cars will be tested."
Source: https://www.masslive.com/business-n...mbta_gets_first_crrc_orange_line_test_ca.html


https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2017/10/10/mbta-orange-line-trains-china/

So why are the two test alternatives described above not sufficient for testing?
Click to expand...

I suspect if the No Name price is high enough, the two testing options you cover will "suddenly" become sufficient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top