Blue Line extension to Lynn

Charlie_mta said:
I laid out what I think Option 4 would look like, and I think it's doable without taking any residences. I think the only ROW acquisition would be a small car dealership (as shown below). Here's my take on how it would all fit:

51833907372_9c4a4a04b1_z.jpg
Click to expand...
I was thinking of going closer to the parking garage to keep the park-and-ride crowd invested in a shorter walk than that. The main reason I suggested Scenario 4 was one word: NIMBYs. Any move toward Oak Island and Point of Pines is a minefield of lawsuits waiting to happen. Each homeowner can take the adverse possession tack and kill this project dead. Count the encroachers who have been using the area without an MBTA complaint for 60 years. Multiply by the average lawsuit amount per household. And consider the likely outcome of the SJC siding with the homeowners. It’s a fools errand and the people of Lynn get screwed … again.
The possibility of getting the Blue Line belt grows the closer you get to Wonderland without going through neighborhoods that will fight it or wetlands that will have representation in court as well.
I rate these possibilities from least politically possible to most: 1, 2, 3, 4.
As for #4, I’m sure the church wouldn’t mind a straight buyout or relocation.
And the house (singular) on Dunn Rd. will be much easier to negotiate with than 2 entire privileged and protected enclaves.
Consider it again. For Lynn.
 
Blue Line to Salem increases route length about 200%. Where would you find new yard space for the increase in Blue Line fleet? Orient Heights is pretty crammed and highly vulnerable to rising sea levels, so expansion there seems unlikely and unwise. There's some potential space between the NR Line, Northern Strand, and the GE property, but I don't know the history of that lawn space currently housing solar along its southern edge.
 
nick said:
Blue Line to Salem increases route length about 200%. Where would you find new yard space for the increase in Blue Line fleet? Orient Heights is pretty crammed and highly vulnerable to rising sea levels, so expansion there seems unlikely and unwise. There's some potential space between the NR Line, Northern Strand, and the GE property, but I don't know the history of that lawn space currently housing solar along its southern edge.
Click to expand...
Mostly derelict Castle Hill freight yard immediately south of the Downtown Salem terminal stop. Owned by the T, still nominally under the usage auspices of Pan Am, and not targeted for any other development because it's highly polluted and there are many other crap industrial parcels facing Jefferson Ave. to flip first.
 
Charlie_mta said:
I laid out what I think Option 4 would look like, and I think it's doable without taking any residences. I think the only ROW acquisition would be a small car dealership (as shown below). Here's my take on how it would all fit:

51833907372_9c4a4a04b1_z.jpg
Click to expand...

Sidebar (operating as a double-pun, as readers will see): seeing the "avoid church" label on this diagram reminds me that, before it was a church (and looking at the exterior now, boy, wouldn't it have been perfect as a set in "Goodfellas"?), it was Club Caravan.

And, Club Caravan, for better or worse, has gone down in history as the catalyst for one of the most important drunk-driving cases in Massachusetts history. Reviewing the case particulars now in-depth for the first time, it's appalling to see the driver, who was at least at .20 BAC, drove at least 18 miles from Club Caravan in that wretchedly impaired condition before he hit, wherever it was on Route 24, the Statie and the motorist said Statie was assisting.

(That said, the most notorious bar in Revere Beach history will always of course be the Ebb Tide Lounge, given that its owner was murdered at Whitey Bulger's behest...)
 
I know that Blue Line extension to Lynn has been floated over the years, but does anyone know if an extension terminating at Salem ever been formally proposed by the T, MassDOT, electeds, etc. over the years?
 
lainpimicaja said:
I know that Blue Line extension to Lynn has been floated over the years, but does anyone know if an extension terminating at Salem ever been formally proposed by the T, MassDOT, electeds, etc. over the years?
Click to expand...
Yes. 2004 Program for Mass Transportation report, by Boston MPO and the MBTA. Costs, ridership, and project rating summarized in this post.

EDIT: screencapped. . .
BLXS.png
 
Last edited:
The 2004 PMT has a lot of the same extension projects often discussed throughout the various AB transit threads. Agree that BLX to Salem is a worthy extension as the density and demographic profile (mainly low income, EJ neighborhoods) almost contiguous along ROW (minus Swampscott of course). The hang up as mentioned is less Lynn to Salem and more Wonderland to Lynn.

Agree with Oak Island station (#2 routing) to Lynn. However disagree Swampscott would want BL station in replacement of existing CR given NIMBYism and wanting to exclude “those people” ala 70’s Melrose OLX opposition. Could see BLX through routed Swampscott and them retaining CR station.
 
WestMedford said:
The 2004 PMT has a lot of the same extension projects often discussed throughout the various AB transit threads. Agree that BLX to Salem is a worthy extension as the density and demographic profile (mainly low income, EJ neighborhoods) almost contiguous along ROW (minus Swampscott of course). The hang up as mentioned is less Lynn to Salem and more Wonderland to Lynn.

Agree with Oak Island station (#2 routing) to Lynn. However disagree Swampscott would want BL station in replacement of existing CR given NIMBYism and wanting to exclude “those people” ala 70’s Melrose OLX opposition. Could see BLX through routed Swampscott and them retaining CR station.
Click to expand...
There isn't enough room to have a CR+BLX superstation at Swampscott, so something has to give. I also wouldn't blindly assume retrograde politics there. Swampscott Station is located only 2 blocks in from the Lynn city line, in a very urban neighborhood that's functionally contiguous with East Lynn and dominated in walkup and bus transit shares from East Lynners. 7/8ths of Swampscott is not where the station is. But Swampscotters in those 7/8ths of town do ride the bus at respectable shares for the town's density, and see those bus shares explode when BLX-Lynn fixes the bus frequency anemia and reinvests the local routes with more outlying frequencies. BLX-Salem bringing the home stop just asplodes the bus shares one step further by more than halving the length of the routes and netting a way faster trip. The good-fences-make-good-neighbors faction isn't really forced to navel-gaze at "others" in their backyards, because rail only clips the most already-urbanized far corner of their town.


FWIW, the '04 PMT had Lynn-Salem pegged slightly higher than Wonderland-Lynn on all-new transit trips (that is: people not taking transit in any way/shape/form): +8900 vs. +7900. Total increase in ridership on Blue favored Wonderland-Lynn over Lynn-Salem +21,000 to +15,850...but that's a function of how many people in Lynn already do bus-to-Blue (the whole festering bus sore BLX-Lynn aims to fix). To give you some overall sense of scale, the only system expansion projects the PMT benchmarked that came out higher than that on all-new riders were Urban Ring (+15,000 for the hybridized LRT/BRT Phase II circuit, +54,000 for the mythical all-rail Phase III circuit) and NSRL (+54,350)...a couple almost mythically transformative ones. And the only ones that came out higher for on-mode increases (new + existing transit riders) were: Urban Ring (+134,700 for all-rail Phase III, +53,000 for hybridized Phase II), NSRL (+96,100), and Green Line to Nubian (+34,282).

The North Shore is dense, y'all. And too many of them desperately want to drop their cars if we'd only give them a choice.
 
Last edited:
Agreed there’s not enough room for both a CR and BLX Swampscott station (one or the other proposition). Maybe I’m being too judgmental on the community, but my thought was if East Lynn gets its own BLX station, its proximity to the densest part of Swampscott would allow for the existing CR station to remain while BLX passes through. Also wondering if the professional class from Swampscott would trade a 20 minute essentially express to NS for the 15 stop, 40+ minute BLX commute. Although the CR trip + walk or add’l transfer to the Financial district would probably equal the total time to the office on an entire BL Swampscott to State St commute.

Yes as one who grew up on the North Shore, I can attest to the density. If it wasn’t for the constraints posed by the Salem tunnel, BLX to Beverly or Peabody would also be viable given how far north is a favorable, contiguous density and demographic profile along the Eastern route (and Peabody spur).
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Swampscott Station is located only 2 blocks in from the Lynn city line, in a very urban neighborhood that's functionally contiguous with East Lynn and dominated in walkup and bus transit shares from East Lynners.
Click to expand...

I just looked up density of tract around Swampscott station and you’re right it’s 10k pop per mile which means it would absolutely be better served with heavy rail vs locomotive. Hopefully they’d choose that if this scenario BLX-Salem ever happens.

East Lynn Station at or south of Chatham Street. East Lynn has Somerville-level density at 21-23k pop per mile. This corridor should have rapid transit service by now.
 

Attachments

  • C6AED000-4845-4F3B-923D-EE85A66A2269.jpeg
    C6AED000-4845-4F3B-923D-EE85A66A2269.jpeg
    916.9 KB · Views: 102
F-Line to Dudley said:
The North Shore is dense, y'all.
Click to expand...

Let's run the numbers! Obviously, there is some arbitrary selection going on for each of the three geographic sectors; it's an inherently subjective exercise... still, perhaps folks will find this illuminating.

Statewide Average:

897/sq. mi.

Densest [Boston-Area]:

Boston: 13,977/sq. mi.
Cambridge: 18,529/sq. mi.
Chelsea: 18,456/sq. mi.
Somerville: 19,671/sq. mi.

North Shore (10 community sample):

Winthrop: 9,706/sq. mi.
Saugus: 2,400/sq. mi.
Revere: 10,910/sq. mi.
Lynn: 8,777/sq. mi.
Nahant: 3,198/sq. mi.
Danvers: 2,112/sq. mi.
Swampscott: 4,875/sq. mi.
Marblehead: 1,000/sq. mi.
Salem: 5,212/sq. mi.
Beverly: 2,828/sq. mi.

South Shore (10 community sample):

Quincy: 6,134/sq. mi.
Weymouth: 3,425/sq. mi.
Hingham: 920/sq. mi.
Hull: 3,573/sq. mi.
Braintree: 2,845/sq. mi.
Cohasset: 331/sq. mi.
Scituate: 1,080/sq. mi.
Norwell: 540/sq. mi.
Hanover: 951/sq. mi.
Marshfield: 906/sq. mi.

Route 128 Belt (10 community sample):

Canton: 1,289/sq. mi.
Milton: 2,200/sq. mi.
Dedham: 2,416/sq. mi.
Needham: 981/sq. mi.
Newton: 4,987/sq. mi.
Waltham: 5,119/sq. mi.
Lexington: 2,100/sq. mi.
Burlington: 2,200/sq. mi.
Woburn: 3,231/sq. mi.
Reading: 2,600/sq. mi.

North Shore Mean: 5,102/sq. mi.
South Shore Mean: 2,071/sq. mi.
Route 128 Belt Mean: 2,712/sq. mi.
 
Municipal bounds themselves are arbitrary and some of those numbers are flawed because they don't account for land use or water area. For example, three quarters of the territory within Marblehead's bounds is water. Marblehead has a population of about 20,000 and is just under 20 square miles, so it appears to have a density of 1,000/sq. mi., but the land area of the town is only about 4.4 square miles, so its true density is closer to 4,500/sq. mi.. For someplace more inland, there are huge swaths of Burlington that are non residential (almost everything west of the Middlesex Turnpike, and almost everything south of Route 128 / west of US 3 (Cambridge St), as well as the Great Meadow just north of the Mall, and several relatively large Town-owned conservation areas on the east side of town). The overwhelming majority of Burlington's population lives in the northern and eastern sides of town. For the sake of argument, I'd venture to guess that about third of land within the town's bounds is non-residential. Burlington has 11.88 square miles (round up to 12) and a population of 26,300, so 2,200/sq. mi. is correct using the whole square milage, but if a third of the town is non-residential, its density is probably closer to 3,300/sq. mi..
 
Roxxma said:
Municipal bounds themselves are arbitrary and some of those numbers are flawed because they don't account for land use or water area. For example, three quarters of the territory within Marblehead's bounds is water. Marblehead has a population of about 20,000 and is just under 20 square miles, so it appears to have a density of 1,000/sq. mi., but the land area of the town is only about 4.4 square miles, so its true density is closer to 4,500/sq. mi.. For someplace more inland, there are huge swaths of Burlington that are non residential (almost everything west of the Middlesex Turnpike, and almost everything south of Route 128 / west of US 3 (Cambridge St), as well as the Great Meadow just north of the Mall, and several relatively large Town-owned conservation areas on the east side of town). The overwhelming majority of Burlington's population lives in the northern and eastern sides of town. For the sake of argument, I'd venture to guess that about third of land within the town's bounds is non-residential. Burlington has 11.88 square miles (round up to 12) and a population of 26,300, so 2,200/sq. mi. is correct using the whole square milage, but if a third of the town is non-residential, its density is probably closer to 3,300/sq. mi..
Click to expand...

Great catch. I see now that the yo-yo who created Marblehead's wiki page absurdly included the water sq. mi. territory in the pop. density--whereas the *very stable genius* (not I) who did Nahant's wiki page wisely excluded the island's massive water territory from its pop. density. When I have time tonight I'll recheck all the towns and make adjustments where necessary, if there are any more cases like Marblehead. I'll also include the aggregate populations and sq. mileages for each of the regions, so we can see how comparable the regions are in population mass and landmass, overall.

I don't have a good answer re: the Burlington example. Of course you're right--what's ultimately desired here is "regional comparison of densities of all communities' already-developed AND remaining still-legally developable land," thus excluding playgrounds, preserves, parks, all greenspaces, etc. Alas, I don't know how to do that...
 
DBM said:
I don't have a good answer re: the Burlington example. Of course you're right--what's ultimately desired here is "regional comparison of densities of all communities' already-developed AND remaining still-legally developable land," thus excluding playgrounds, preserves, parks, all greenspaces, etc. Alas, I don't know how to do that...
Click to expand...

I'd say maybe precincts or some other macro division might be more accurate, but even that's not without its flaws. For example Burlington has seven precincts of about the same population, and on the map, six appear to be roughly the same size, but Precinct 7 takes up the whole southern end of town and is at least twice the size of the next smallest. The only heavily populated part of the precinct is Winnmere, which is the eastern panhandle of the precinct, with a few subdivisions in the southern tip and a couple of apartment complexes off of the Middlesex Turnpike around where it borders with Precinct 4.
 
ZIP Codes or Census tracts might be useful boundaries here.

The other way to approach this is based on walkshed and “busshed” — how many people would have meaningful access to each station.
 
As promised, revised figures. I had to revise 5 or so pop. densities due to Wikipedia contributors having bizarrely included the sq. mi. of water when doing the calculations.

North Shore sample (Winthrop/Saugus/Revere/Lynn/Nahant/Beverly/Marblehead/Salem/Swampscott/Danvers):

74.5 sq. mi. of land;
365,500 people;
4,913 per sq. mi.

South Shore sample (Quincy/Weymouth/Hingham/Hull/Braintree/Norwell/Hanover/Marshfield/Cohasset/Scituate)

164.5 sq. mi. of land;
312,025 people;
1,897 per sq. mi.

Route 128 sample (Canton/Milton/Dedham/Needham/Newton/Waltham/Burlington/Lexington/Woburn/Reading)

136.3 sq. mi. of land;
391,820 people;
2,875 per sq. mi.

So... even by this highly-imperfect methodology, the North Shore is massively more dense than the South Shore--well more than double--and significantly more dense than the 128 Belt (though not quite double)
 
Salem.png
Swampscott.png
Lynn.png

Think these infographics from MHP help the convo a little too. Several stations along the red line for example have lower units per acre.


I wonder how the Multi-family for MBTA communities bill will affect cities and towns reactions to proposed extensions of heavy/light rail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top