Blue Line extension to Lynn

We shouldn't declare Blue to Lynn "dead". It is - like every major transit project in the state except for GLX - in Limbo. The right combination of local activism and political advocates at all levels of government could get it done. The hard part is getting all of that lined up. Somerville did a great job of doing that. Lynn hasn't so far. It takes a village.
 
You would think that with Lynn's Senator (Tom McGee) chair of the Transportation Committee that this would get more attention.
 
You would think that with Lynn's Senator (Tom McGee) chair of the Transportation Committee that this would get more attention.

Lynn's new Congressman (Moulton) has been talking it up since November. Maybe he's hoping to get a conversation rolling.
 
He's also all for electrification of the commuter rail according to his website, http://www.sethmoulton.com/transportation

Mostly a lot of political jargon on the site, but at least it's jargon in the right direction.

As a freshman in the minority party he's basically only got jargon to play around with. But a Congressman, minority freshman or not, has a lot of power to shift conversations and advocacy.
 
As a freshman in the minority party he's basically only got jargon to play around with. But a Congressman, minority freshman or not, has a lot of power to shift conversations and advocacy.

Busses


The only game changer since the major capital program was developed is the potential of the Olympics

In that context -- don't see Lynn as an Olympic venue -- so not likely to see any action on Blue Line to Lynn until the next Major Capital Program
 
The North Shore line crosses the Orange line before it goes underground. If the North Shore Line was four tracked and electrified to Lynn it would be eminently doable and far cheaper to extend the Orange line to Lynn instead of the Blue Line.

Orange line trains could run on the outside tracks to Lynn with stops in Everett Chelsea and Revere and provide a single ride to far more of the city for far more people than the Blue Line could ever accomplish.

The right of way is wide enough, it had four tracks in the past. The only big stumbling blocks are the Orange Line tie in, the need for a viaduct over Everett Ave in Chelsea, and electrification. Everything else is just renovation of existing infrastructure.

Politically, getting the T to Everett and Chelsea is huge. For Revere it would put the T closer to where the people are. A stop at Winthrop Ave and Rte 16 on Revere would be far more accessible to more people than any current blue line stop.
 
The North Shore line crosses the Orange line before it goes underground. If the North Shore Line was four tracked and electrified to Lynn it would be eminently doable and far cheaper to extend the Orange line to Lynn instead of the Blue Line.

Orange line trains could run on the outside tracks to Lynn with stops in Everett Chelsea and Revere and provide a single ride to far more of the city for far more people than the Blue Line could ever accomplish.

The right of way is wide enough, it had four tracks in the past. The only big stumbling blocks are the Orange Line tie in, the need for a viaduct over Everett Ave in Chelsea, and electrification. Everything else is just renovation of existing infrastructure.

Politically, getting the T to Everett and Chelsea is huge. For Revere it would put the T closer to where the people are. A stop at Winthrop Ave and Rte 16 on Revere would be far more accessible to more people than any current blue line stop.

No:

  1. The "North Shore Line" (usually called the Eastern Route, Eastern Railroad, or Newburyport/Rockport Line) is not four-tracked. So, the premise of your proposal is pure fantasy.
  2. Electrifying common rail does not magically make it compatible for HRT transit, let alone the Orange Line rolling stock.
  3. Given points 1 and 2 above, you would need to lay entirely new Orange Line compatible, HRT track, signals, power, etc, along the ROW.
  4. There are many bridges along the way that are not at four-track width. Not the least of which is the Mystic River Crossing. Creating that crossing alone would be an incredibly expensive project.
  5. Given points 1-4, both BLX and your proposed OLX would need to lay an entirely new set of tracks, signals, power (not just "renovation of existing infrastructure"), bridges, tunnels. BLX has as clear of a path/ROW to work with, and BLX also has a MUCH shorter path to Lynn (approximately 5 miles to approximately 10 miles). Just on track miles alone, your OLX proposal gets blown up in costs.
  6. To add to how long and silly that route would be, your proposal basically passes Wonderland, the Blue Line terminus, along the way. Basically a parking lot away from giving all riders the chance to transfer to the Blue Line for a quicker ride downtown. Or maybe they could already be on the Blue Line? you know, if it were BLX.
  7. You are proposing a branch rather than an extension. Therefore, the rolling stock expansion required so as to give both the Oak Grove Branch and the Lynn Branch reasonable head ways is very large. As opposed to BLX, which is only an extension and the rolling stock would just need to be scaled up based on that fact.

EDIT: Now, in a crazy-transit-pitch fantasy, it would be awesome to see the Orange Line branched into Everett and maybe even Chelsea. But sending the Orange Line to Lynn is more expensive and less useful than sending the Blue Line to Lynn.

In the short term, just extending the Silver Line from Chelsea to the Orange Line would do wonders for connectivity.
 
The proposals I saw for the BLX are all a bad joke requiring fantasy bridges across the Saugus River either above or below the General Edwards bridge, either of which would require substantial private land taking. The old ROW is just narrow gauge single track width and building a bridge there, just below the GE bridge would be ridiculously expensive and face massive opposition from the neighbourhood. Then it would be on the wrong side of the Lynnway and dead end with no hope of future expansion further north.

All in all no good is coming from that.

An even better idea than mine would be to electrify the entire route and replace the train sets with light rail vehicles.
 
The proposals I saw for the BLX are all a bad joke requiring fantasy bridges across the Saugus River either above or below the General Edwards bridge, either of which would require substantial private land taking. The old ROW is just narrow gauge single track width and building a bridge there, just below the GE bridge would be ridiculously expensive and face massive opposition from the neighbourhood. Then it would be on the wrong side of the Lynnway and dead end with no hope of future expansion further north.

All in all no good is coming from that.

An even better idea than mine would be to electrify the entire route and replace the train sets with light rail vehicles.

What??? There's no private land-taking involved on any BLX plan. Where are you getting this nonsense?

And it was already explained to you that you can't put light rail vehicles on a mainline railroad. Freight runs on the Eastern Route, and it's federally protected from eviction by interstate commerce law.
 
Thank you F-Line.

mtnorshore - I think what you are trying to propose, but don't know how to say it, is something along these following steps:

Step 1 - Pricing/Marketing CR from Lynn so that it is more competitive with rapid transit and buses. I've proposed changing our fare scheme before, to create a new "Zone 1" that includes stations like Lynn, and is the same price as their corresponding express buses.
Step 2 - Increasing frequency. Better pricing leading to higher ridership will cause increased demand for off-peak frequency. This coupled with proper marketing, gets you most of the transportation you are looking for, without any pie-in-the-sky.
Step 3 - DMUs and infill stations. We have covered this a few times. Search for it. I think you may find it is the reasonable idea, with new rolling stock and increased frequency at a lower cost, that you are looking for.

BLX to Lynn is still the way to go if you want true rapid transit, though.
 
What??? There's no private land-taking involved on any BLX plan. Where are you getting this nonsense?

That's because there is no actual BLX plan. But the least disruptive plan discussed here would likely require at least one eminent domain taking. That plan, the one you were promoting, crosses 1A at the rent a tool and would probably require taking that property. Also some accommodations will need to be made for the apartments along there.
 
Thank you F-Line.

mtnorshore - I think what you are trying to propose, but don't know how to say it, is something along these following steps:

Step 1 - Pricing/Marketing CR from Lynn so that it is more competitive with rapid transit and buses. I've proposed changing our fare scheme before, to create a new "Zone 1" that includes stations like Lynn, and is the same price as their corresponding express buses.
Step 2 - Increasing frequency. Better pricing leading to higher ridership will cause increased demand for off-peak frequency. This coupled with proper marketing, gets you most of the transportation you are looking for, without any pie-in-the-sky.
Step 3 - DMUs and infill stations. We have covered this a few times. Search for it. I think you may find it is the reasonable idea, with new rolling stock and increased frequency at a lower cost, that you are looking for.

BLX to Lynn is still the way to go if you want true rapid transit, though.

Yes, this. These are all good short to medium term options that will enable more downtown Lynn, waterfront and GE development without waiting for BLX. (For overall transportation needs I would also add better road access via a rt1 to rt107 bypass rd and maybe another bypass road along the Riverworks over to Rt 1A). All these things should happen.

Once these developments are moving forward, then Blue Line extension will get more likely, which in turn could help enable the next rounds of development.

Although looking at Revere, even with the blue line in place it has taken decades to get just the relatively small development that is happening now, which quite frankly look small in comparison with the previously built apartment buildings. And Suffolk Downs with two Blue line stations doesn't appear to be getting redeveloped any time soon. Just to say Blue line isn't a silver bullet solution either.
 
That's because there is no actual BLX plan. But the least disruptive plan discussed here would likely require at least one eminent domain taking. That plan, the one you were promoting, crosses 1A at the rent a tool and would probably require taking that property. Also some accommodations will need to be made for the apartments along there.

Yes, there is an actual plan: https://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Por...s/PublicPrivate/BlueLineExtP3ScreeningRpt.pdf. The DEIS and Alternatives Analysis was conducted in 2011 with 4 different routing options screened and a cost range of $737M to $1.05B depending on which Alternative is chosen.


  • Alternative 3, the crossing of Diamond Creek Marsh to jump on the other side of Route 1A, required zero land takings.


  • Alternative 4, the BRB&L ROW with a slip-under of the Route 1A interchange in Point of Pines, required exactly 1 land-taking: Mirage, Inc. The Lynn side of the river would slip behind the strip of Lynnway car dealerships, then turn towards the Eastern Route and meet up with it behind Atlantic Toyota. The encroaching apartment towers would be a problem, but they encroached on MBTA property so nothing gets taken even if the tracks go right up alongside the buildings.

I don't know what Alt. 2 was or which route--Eastern or BRB&L--it followed, since the full report has disappeared. Alt. 1 was most likely "no-build", as Alt. 1's usually are.


On any modified alignments, there are only these potential land-takings:

  • If the marsh is an EIS nightmare or cost-bloater because of the trestle that would have to be built, going 2 blocks further would require 1 land-taking: a 40 ft. strip of Rent-a-Tool's parking lot. They'd lose exactly 1 toolshed, and can be compensated by gifting more asphalt for generator storage in back on a sandy strip that used to be a freight siding. No actual business displacement involved.
  • The BRB&L ROW can potentially shave cost of bridge construction by choosing to curve across the narrower river inlet containing the power line causeway, then doubling-up with the Eastern Route on a 4-track fixed-bridge replacement for Saugus Draw. 1 land-taking required: G.J. Towing.
Note that Saugus Draw has 4-track abutments on either side. Both the original Eastern RR drawbridge and its current 1911 Boston & Maine replacement were designed to be doubled-up on those 4-wide abutments if the need arose for a twin bascule. The bridge needs a full replacement in the next 20 years because its piers are starting to sink in the silt and require temp fixes once every several years to compensate for the movement. Whenever they get around to it a new high fixed bridge will replace it just like Mystic Draw was replaced by the tall Somerville-Everett span in 1989. This will happen all the same whether there's just 2 tracks of commuter rail, 4 tracks of CR + BLX, or 2 tracks of commuter rail with 4-wide piers they can slap a second 2-track deck on when they're ready.






So...2 officially studied alternatives: 0-1 business displacements. Potential modified minor realignments otherwise matching Alts. 3 & 4 if cost-savers necessary: 0-1 business displacements.


"Substantial land-taking" is not true. Nor are the major bridge impacts true; Alt. 3 constructs one road overpass of 1A and nothing else, other than grabbing its slot on the commuter rail river crossing that has to be replaced anyway. That poster's claims are debunked hyperbole.
 
The proposals I saw for the BLX are all a bad joke requiring fantasy bridges across the Saugus River either above or below the General Edwards bridge, either of which would require substantial private land taking. The old ROW is just narrow gauge single track width and building a bridge there, just below the GE bridge would be ridiculously expensive and face massive opposition from the neighbourhood. Then it would be on the wrong side of the Lynnway and dead end with no hope of future expansion further north.

All in all no good is coming from that.

An even better idea than mine would be to electrify the entire route and replace the train sets with light rail vehicles.

The generally accepted alignment swings out to the intact 4-tracked ROW of the Eastern Route; the BRB&L alternative still exists on paper and as an historical footnote, but in all likelihood is DOA. The Eastern Route alternative doesn't require ED (or very little), re-uses intact Eastern width through Lynn station, allows for any deep-future North Shore ++ extension, but it does come with pricy wetlands mitigation and requires Red-Blue.

However, for the sake of conversation let's say that your original Orange branch idea is structurally feasible. Here's a major issue with an OL branch:

Wellington-State is the most consistently and severely congested segment of the entire rapid transit system in current circumstances. It's running up against a travel pattern shift for the near-North Shore: Everett, Somerville, Medford have all experienced substantial increases over the past 25 years in the number of their resident workers commuting to Boston, many well-within Orange's catchment area. Wellington-DTX is structurally over-capacity under normal operating conditions from ~ 8:15-9:00, with peak-of-peak regularly achieving load factors higher than the MBTA's crush capacity threshold. New rolling stock will offer marginal increases in frequency, more substantial improvements in reliability, but we're not talking world-altering differences. The OL today has the most frequent headways (in theory, when it's running smoothly) in the rapid transit system, excluding the GL subways.

The only comparably structurally congested segments are the final legs on the Red branches and the Boylston Subway. And these vulnerable spots are shorter, usually no longer than one or two station-station intervals - the OL is dangerously congested along it's entire northern and downtown sections at peak. This is a function of ridership-heavy outer nodes and the major bus-terminal at Sullivan. By contrast, the Blue Lynn doesn't approach the MBTA service policy for congestion, save for Maverick-Aquarium on days with multiple delays.

Unless there is drastic improvement in schedule reliability, signal systems, an OL branch will enforce lower levels of service along one-half of the most vulnerable leg in the system. Even if Lynn-Everett-Chelsea service (really, just Everett; Chelsea and Lynn are, generally, bus-blue feeders) limits riderships along the northern stretch, it won't be enough and the Malden branch buckles under it's own weight. Everett is a massive market with substantial growth prospects; any half-way feasible rapid transit extension is going to drum up significant ridership, which is going to threaten Sullivan Square, an absolutely essential bus node if no boarders can get on a damn train. You can't reduce Sullivan Service and the express track isn't likely to be much a help here anyways since it only speed you up as far as CC if it were re-incorporated.

A branch OL will not, should not happen. Blue is the better option for Lynn, it's quicker, there's already an established travel pattern of Lynn-Wonderland transfers, and the line is not nearly as saturated as Orange. That leaves out Everett and Chelsea, yes, but there's no point expanding service even if it were feasible if the result threatens kills off Orange.
 
Both of you present commanding arguments on the two separate halves of the issue. Thank you!

The BRB&L was entirely double-tracked, I believe from the beginning of operations since it was built much later than most railroads.

Thoughts about land-taking on the right-of-way: who actually owns it? The MTA bought the section from Day Square (approximately Cowper Street) to Revere Street around 1941 for transit use. Massport presumably owns the section that crosses the airport. But who owns the remaining sections (particularly the right-of-way through Point of Pines, in Lynn, and the Jeffries Point tunnels)? I know that the Eastern Mass Street Railway paved the Lynn section for use as a busway for a few years in the 1940s, but I have no idea whether they actually owned it.
 
I've spent some time looking at MassGIS / Oliver, Boston Tax Parcel Viewer, and Lynn and Revere's respective registries of deeds. It appears that the ROW from Revere Street to Point of Pines (minus road crossings, and a chunk taken for the Mills Avenue jughandle) is actually owned by the Massachusetts Electric Company, a National Grid subsidiary, and used as a utility corridor.

In Lynn, it looks like GE bought up the right of way when they expanded the Riverworks plant during WWII. As far as the Atlantic Toyota property is owned by Lynnway Associates (the Lynnport developers) which bought the GE Gear Plant site in 2014. The 2015 Lynn property map indicates that New England Power Company (another NG subsidiary) has an easement for their power lines. The parcel that Atlantic Toyota's back building and lot sit on (minus the squarish chunk behind Hacienda Corona) were sold to a private developer by GE in 1989. The MBTA acquired from there to Commercial Street in a land swap with GE in 1991. That squarish chunk, plus the wooded area behind Sullivan, were sold to the same private developer in 2014. The final section from Commercial to Market Street has no real transit value and is owned by various private entities. If anyone desires to look them up, parcel numbers are 9-157A-2 in Revere, 035-796-074 (also -082, 083, 084, 092) in Lynn.

In Eastie, Massport owns from Cowper Street to Tomahawk Drive (including a few hundred feet of the Blue Line ROW). A private landowner actually owns the parcels from Tomahawk Drive to just west of Webster Street, including the entire abandoned tunnels. They pay over 5 grand a year in property taxes on undeveloped - and largely undevelopable - land. The former terminal area is owned by the shipyard.

The MBTA owns the Orient Heights yard area. The casket company owns its building (the former BRB&L carhouse). The chunk of land and swamp just east of the MBTA yard is owned by the city via foreclosure, probably after the bankrupt BRB&L declined to pay taxes on property it was unlikely to sell. Most of the Winthrop Loop has been divided up into private property; notable exceptions are the DCR path near Argyle Street, Veterans Road (built on the former ROW), and the former Winthrop Cove trestle which is owned by the town.
 
Wouldn't the cheapest/easiest solution be to build a few more stations along the commuter rail lines and stick with the DMU plan? This will also give chelsea their much over due subway lines as well. Id say start there and get this going first its quick and fairly easy and then reassess after. Id honestly do just like they are and get all of the DMU's in place all over the city and move from there. Obviously this doesn't solve red-blue or NSRL so those are separate issues. But as far as expanded subway service I think the DMU's will help a lot. A combo of the green line extension, NSRL, red-blue, and DMU's will vastly increase ridership and the reach of the system.
 
I've spent some time looking at MassGIS / Oliver, Boston Tax Parcel Viewer, and Lynn and Revere's respective registries of deeds. It appears that the ROW from Revere Street to Point of Pines (minus road crossings, and a chunk taken for the Mills Avenue jughandle) is actually owned by the Massachusetts Electric Company, a National Grid subsidiary, and used as a utility corridor.

In Lynn, it looks like GE bought up the right of way when they expanded the Riverworks plant during WWII. As far as the Atlantic Toyota property is owned by Lynnway Associates (the Lynnport developers) which bought the GE Gear Plant site in 2014. The 2015 Lynn property map indicates that New England Power Company (another NG subsidiary) has an easement for their power lines. The parcel that Atlantic Toyota's back building and lot sit on (minus the squarish chunk behind Hacienda Corona) were sold to a private developer by GE in 1989. The MBTA acquired from there to Commercial Street in a land swap with GE in 1991. That squarish chunk, plus the wooded area behind Sullivan, were sold to the same private developer in 2014. The final section from Commercial to Market Street has no real transit value and is owned by various private entities. If anyone desires to look them up, parcel numbers are 9-157A-2 in Revere, 035-796-074 (also -082, 083, 084, 092) in Lynn.

In Eastie, Massport owns from Cowper Street to Tomahawk Drive (including a few hundred feet of the Blue Line ROW). A private landowner actually owns the parcels from Tomahawk Drive to just west of Webster Street, including the entire abandoned tunnels. They pay over 5 grand a year in property taxes on undeveloped - and largely undevelopable - land. The former terminal area is owned by the shipyard.

The MBTA owns the Orient Heights yard area. The casket company owns its building (the former BRB&L carhouse). The chunk of land and swamp just east of the MBTA yard is owned by the city via foreclosure, probably after the bankrupt BRB&L declined to pay taxes on property it was unlikely to sell. Most of the Winthrop Loop has been divided up into private property; notable exceptions are the DCR path near Argyle Street, Veterans Road (built on the former ROW), and the former Winthrop Cove trestle which is owned by the town.

This is absolutely right from what I have heard. A little while ago I posted pictures here of the ROW as it travels up from the northern edge of Revere Beach and enters the Point of Pines neighborhood. The pictures were taken looking south from the garage of the 1 Carey Circle condo complex, where my cousin used to live.

Based on the pictures, it looks like the 1 Carey Circle parking lot has completely encroached on/obstructed the ROW. And for the years there were rumors that the developer and Revere had done something shady in that regard--rumors easily reinforced by the abrupt obstruction the 1 Carey Circle garage poses. But again, I've been told it's exactly as you describe and everything's aboveboard.

Physically, though, if those route is chosen, how would the tracks be squeezed in on the east side of 1A without demolishing the Carey Circle garage? I'm reattaching my pictures.

The first one is looking due north, with Route 1A just off-frame to the left. That crushed gravel bed leading to the 1 Carey Circle garage complex/parking lot is, as best I can tell, the "shadowy outline" showing the ROW path.

The second one is from the exact same location, but having turned 180 degrees, looking due south. Pretty obvious that's the ROW barreling northward, squeezed in by Revere Beach blvd. to the east (left) and Route 1A to the west (right)!

Again, assuming what the developer did was totally legally--but given that things still look highly encroached-upon--what is the technical solution at this exact juncture?

picture.php


picture.php
 
I love Boston. Where else would a proposal, the Blue Line extension to Lynn, initially made in the 1960's still be the topic of discussion 50 years later!
 

Back
Top