General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

www.bostonglobe.com

Massachusetts has $1.3b in extra millionaires tax money. Democrats disagree widely on how to spend it. - The Boston Globe

Massachusetts Senate leaders on Thursday released its roadmap for spending nearly $1.3 billion in surplus money generated by the state’s tax on high earners, offering the MBTA less than half of what the House passed weeks ago.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
The Senate’s plan would funnel $670 million toward transportation, including $370 million for the cash-strapped MBTA. That includes $200 million to replenish the agency’s budget reserve and $100 million for training, according to a summary released by Senate leaders.

The House sought far more for the beleaguered agency. In its version of the bill lawmakers passed last month, the chamber dedicated nearly $800 million to the MBTA alone, most of which — $700 million — was tabbed for the agency’s reserve and deficiency funds.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
$100M our of 370M for training? I get that there's safety training that's required, but $100M/yr+ worth?
 
www.natickreport.com

Natick Center Station has been under construction for 5 years. Here are 5 things to know. - Natick Report

It’s been five years since construction began on major accessibility updates at Natick Center Station, and commuters are still waiting for it to be done. The MBTA is spending $40 […]
www.natickreport.com www.natickreport.com
Construction began in February 2020 and was estimated to conclude in 2023. More than five years later, the MBTA has updated its timeline to indicate that the train tracks will be shifted to their final location in early summer 2025, the new accessible platforms will come into service in late summer, and the project will be completed in early fall.
[...]
Instead of using weekend shutdowns, tasks were done overnight, which helped cut busing costs but extended the construction schedule. Keeping the station open to riders throughout the project also limited productivity.

Progress was also slowed by more specific issues, including a 2021 storm in Texas that knocked out the factory producing fiber-reinforced polymer–a modern material replacing concrete and rebar–for the station’s platforms.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Teban54 said:
Splitting the details of the ROW into two followup comments due to the character limit:

ParcelsSatelliteReasonable maximum (with simple parcel purchases, parking eliminations, etc.)
Prospect St - Webster Ave
(will need widening regardless)		50 ft42 ftarbitrary
Webster Ave - Washington St50-66 ft49-66 ft48 ft or less
Washington St - Dane St47-54 ft37-57 ft46 ft at the turn, 55 ft west of the turn
Dane St - Park St45-54 ft50-56 ft50 ft
Park St - Kent St52-81 ft50-75 ft70-80 ft for the most part, 50 ft or 74 ft to the west
Kent St - Lowell St52-59 ft with parcel purchase, 45-50 ft without49-59 ft49 ft
Lowell St - Beacon St47-70 ft47-50 ft47 ft to the east, 60 ft to the west
Beacon St - before Porter CR55 ft50 ft50 ft
  • Prospect St - Webster Ave:
    • Parcel: 50 ft
      • This includes the Eversource substation, which will need to be dismantled in order to extend the existing GLX tracks
    • Satellite: 42 ft
  • Webster Ave - Washington St:
    • Parcel: 50-66 ft
      • Immediately west of Webster Ave, thanks to a short elongated MBTA-owned parcel, you get 66 ft
      • The parcel ends around the 15 Webster Ave building, which is also where residential houses to the south start having backyards and parking immediately bordering the tracks (23-41 Clark St)
      • 50 ft during this entire section, from 23 Clark St to Washington St
    • Satellite: 49-66 ft
      • Mostly agree with parcen boundaries (accounting for the MBTA parcel)
      • The pinch point is at 15 Webster Ave / 23 Clark St, with 49 ft between track boundaries
    • Reasonable maximum: 48 ft or less
      • Before Washington St, you're maxed out at 50 ft without disruptions
      • However, the real pinch point is where you need to cross Washington St. There's only 48 ft of width between the two diagonal buildings
      • Accounting for safety margins would reduce it even further
  • Washington St - Dane St:
    • Parcel: 47-54 ft
      • 45 ft at the curve just west of Washington St
      • West of the curve, narrows from 48 ft (just beyond the curve) to 47 ft right at the Market Basket building
        • Measurements include an elongated parcel owned by the City of Somerville
        • The narrowing happens mostly to the north (Market Basket), where the parcel's shape is irregular
      • West of Market Basket, immediately widens to 54 ft
    • Satellite: 37-57 ft
      • 37 ft just west of Washington St, which also accounts for crossing the building north of Washington St
      • Widens to 45-52 ft between the curve and Market Basket; more lenient than parcel measurements
      • West of Market Basket, 57 ft station-to-station
    • Reasonable maximum: 46 ft at the turn, 55 ft west of the turn
      • The section immediately west of Washington St involves a triangular parking lot owned by the City of Somerville, which can be modified with ease; but the "48 ft or less" pinch point crossing Washington St still applies
      • But then you run into housing on both ends (299 Washington St and 22R Lake St), with 46 ft in-between unless you take over people's backyards
      • Once you complete the turn, there are a few building-to-building pinch points:
  • Dane St - Park St:
    • Parcel: 45-54 ft
      • Changes east to west from 54 ft (Dane St bridge) - 45 ft (the smoodi building) - 54 ft - 45 ft (Park St bridge)
    • Satellite: 50-56 ft
      • Largely agrees with parcel measurements, but with more leeway
      • Two pinch points:
    • Reasonable maximum: 50 ft
      • See two pinch points above
  • Park St - Kent St:
    • Parcel: 52-81 ft
      • Most of this block has MBTA parcel, but the western end near Kent St does not; the calculations below include the MBTA parcel
      • 65 ft at the west end of Park St bridge, but widens to 81 ft near the midpoint of Conway Field
      • The Conway Field parcel is irregular, creating a 70 ft pinch point through the western half of it
      • West of Conway Field, narrows from 70 ft to 68 ft until where the MBTA-owned parcel ends
      • The last stretch is affected by parking lots for Kent Street Apartments, narrowing the ROW to 52 ft
    • Satellite: 50-75 ft
      • Largely following parcel measurements, accounting for trees etc
    • Reasonable maximum: 70-80 ft for the most part, 50 ft or 74 ft to the west
      • 70 ft east of Kent St Apartments is easy; 80 ft possible by fully utilizing the MBTA parcel
      • Without purchasing part of Kent St Apartments' parking lots, the western part approaching Kent St is maxed out at 50 ft
      • If you get rid of about 13 parking lots there, gets you 74 ft building-to-driveway
Click to expand...
IMG_6132.jpeg

Apologies for the poor quality of this photo through the fencing.

I can’t quite see how they can squeeze the GL tracks through this area, unless they rebuild Union Square station. If you look closely, the GL tracks are pointing the wrong direction.
 
RandomWalk said:
View attachment 62712
Apologies for the poor quality of this photo through the fencing.

I can’t quite see how they can squeeze the GL tracks through this area, unless they rebuild Union Square station. If you look closely, the GL tracks are pointing the wrong direction.
Click to expand...
They'd punch through the fill and retaining wall on the northerly side of the Prospect St. bridge with a reinforced double-arch, then move the abutting Eversource equipment back 10-15 feet. Webster Ave. bridge is a question mark for the overall width, but the GLX tracks would be back on-alignment from the station turnout by that point. The station would not have to be rebuilt, but the entrances would have to be converted to up-and-over instead of at grade.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
They'd punch through the fill and retaining wall on the northerly side of the Prospect St. bridge with a reinforced double-arch, then move the abutting Eversource equipment back 10-15 feet. Webster Ave. bridge is a question mark for the overall width, but the GLX tracks would be back on-alignment from the station turnout by that point. The station would not have to be rebuilt, but the entrances would have to be converted to up-and-over instead of at grade.
Click to expand...
The current Eversource substation rebuild is allegedly provisioned to not block a GLX to Porter based on commitments made in community meetings. Not sure if that means they’re not further encroaching on the ROW or if the new substation will be pulled back a few feet.
 
Badusername said:
The current Eversource substation rebuild is allegedly provisioned to not block a GLX to Porter based on commitments made in community meetings. Not sure if that means they’re not further encroaching on the ROW or if the new substation will be pulled back a few feet.
Click to expand...
binj.news

REDESIGNING UNION SQUARE’S SUBSTATION

Eversource hears from neighbors on future of electrical infrastructure within a changing urban landscape (Somerville Wire) – With its dazzling array of commercial and residential buildings currently under construction or in the pipeline, and its cutting-edge plans to rapidly decarbonize to...
binj.news binj.news

Found an interview of some kind if people want a soruce.
 
Regarding the Webster Ave bridge - it's actually being replaced in the next 1-2 years, there was a recent-ish MassDOT 75% design public hearing about the replacement project. The vertical clearance is being increased ~1 ft (just enough so that it's no longer the lowest compared to the adjacent MWRA pipeline and the Prospect St bridge). See 38:44 of the meeting recording.

However, they are reducing the horizontal clearance: they are building the new bridge foundations in front of the existing ones to avoid having to relocate the MWRA water pipeline (see 1:04:28). But their rationale is that it still won't be narrower than the adjacent Prospect St bridge so they don't consider this impinging upon the ROW.

1:14:57 has another public comment that results in a bit more discussion of the water pipeline/potential GLX to Porter/why they decided to build new abutments in front of the existing ones.

The MassDOT project team did say the MBTA signed off on all the plans so far (see 40:38), so is there a way this doesn't impede GLX to Porter? Could they punch through the Webster bridge abutment, similar to what would be needed at the Prospect bridge?

(Previously posted about this here but that probably wasn't the right thread, and the meeting recording wasn't available at the time)
 
RandomWalk said:
The high bid is by someone named “Halifaxhustlers”… That inspires confidence.
Click to expand...
If your point is that it's a shame it won't be preserved, I don't think I agree. I highly doubt anything substantial from 1928 is left on the car, and by now it's probably more a hodgepodge of spare parts and scrap than anything historical. It's historical relevance is little more than a fun bit of trivia.

If your point was something else, disregard this message.
 
Last edited:
www.wbjournal.com

Mass. Senate passes $1.3B spending bill, declines to tweak MBTA housing law

The Massachusetts Senate on Thursday avoided making any changes to the controversial MBTA Communities Act while advancing a $1.3 billion spending bill packed with one-time investments in education and transportation.
www.wbjournal.com www.wbjournal.com
Senators rejected an amendment from Minority Leader Bruce Tarr that would have required the MBTA to, within the next year, craft and submit a "comprehensive plan" to achieve a state of good repair, then update the roadmap annually for at least five years.
The T in 2023 estimated it would cost $24.5 billion to fix all of its assets that at the time were not in a state of good repair.
The Senate tackled the majority of the 317 amendments to the bill with a pair of bundles, which rejected or adopted dozens of changes to the bill at once with a single unrecorded voice vote.
The "yes" mega-bundle added language calling on the MBTA to study expanding the commuter rail to Buzzards Bay and extending the Orange Line to Roslindale Village.
Click to expand...
 
themissinglink said:
www.wbjournal.com

Mass. Senate passes $1.3B spending bill, declines to tweak MBTA housing law

The Massachusetts Senate on Thursday avoided making any changes to the controversial MBTA Communities Act while advancing a $1.3 billion spending bill packed with one-time investments in education and transportation.
www.wbjournal.com www.wbjournal.com
Click to expand...
Is this the same amount that’s in the graph above?

Also, how are the going to cram 2+ platforms at Roslindale with an OLX? They proposed it in Focus40, so there is clearly some way, but I. just don’t see it. I also don’t see a way to fit 4 tracks through most of that section, unless they will single track the Needham line.
 
CheapLeak said:
Is this the same amount that’s in the graph above?

Also, how are the going to cram 2+ platforms at Roslindale with an OLX? They proposed it in Focus40, so there is clearly some way, but I. just don’t see it. I also don’t see a way to fit 4 tracks through most of that section, unless they will single track the Needham line.
Click to expand...
If it's just a +1 the Needham ROW is tri-track width from Forest Hills to Rozzie, so the Needham Line would be singled with OLX taking the other two berths. You'd probably need to install a passing siding on Commuter Rail between some of the other stops to offset the loss of the double-track near Forest Hills, but it'll all fit. The platforms probably wouldn't be side-by-sided (after all, OLX swallowing the whole joint out to West Roxbury is the eventual end goal), but you could easily fit a single side CR platform behind the municipal lot and Citizens Bank.

It's good that they're giving this renewed attention.
 
Great! In my opinion, OLX to Rozzie should be the second heavy rail rapid transit expansion priority after BLX to Charles.

Personally, I’d love to see an intermediate stop at South St (I imagine being called “Arboretum”) at the very least studied. I see a value in being able to dramatically pair back bus service on Washington St even more than a +1 would facilitate and in having a premier transit access to Roslindale’s half of Boston’s best park (with a new path to access that station), even if it would be the lowest ridership stop on the Orange Line.
 
Last edited:
bigeman312 said:
Great! In my opinion, OLX to Rozzie should be the second heavy rail rapid transit expansion priority after BLX to Charles.

Personally, I’d love to see an intermediate stop at South St (I imagine being called “Arboretum”) at the very least studied. I see a value in being able to dramatically pair back bus service on Washington St even more than a +1 would facilitate and in having a premier transit access to Roslindale’s half of Boston’s best park (with a new path to access that station), even if it would be the lowest ridership stop on the Orange Line.
Click to expand...
Axing the 77 back from Arlington Heights to Arlington Center would also be very useful in the event RLX to Arlington Heights is built. It's unnecessarily redundent to have the 77 to duplicate service between Arlington Heights and Arlington Center if the Red Line runs between the two places.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top