Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

^ Not really, they basically led by saying "last presentation was about the stations, this one is about the bridges"

They did stress many times during the Q&A, however, that the cut back station plans they've discussed previously are the bare minimum needed to meet ADA and other legal requirements and they are not final plans or even their final proposals.

It also sounded like the odds are very much stacked against the Community Path.
 
It seems the approach is "What is the cheapest possible version of GLX we can have now?" This designing barebone stations and re-thinking bridges and I guess other topics in future meetings.

Combined together, it should calculate to the lowest cost version, hopefully this also means that if the calculations comes out cheap enough, they can scale back up a features. At least that is what I sense when they kept saying the barebone stations are not final proposals.
 
As we learned in the GC station redo, the policy now is: if a station needs 1 elevator for ADA, it will be built with two elevators. That (and the headhouse bloat that goes with it) is a strong reason to try to do ramps and level crossings
 
How was the turnout for this meeting? Didn't seem to be nearly as much Twitter outrage/posts as there were for the last one.
 
So are all of the solutions they propose physical or is there discussion of the runaway contractor bloat that got us here?
 
A few from the public (myself included) raised that point in the public comments. I'm not sure if it was just a coincidence or I was just burning up time, but when I went up and brought up that we need to fight contractor bloat, the person quickly put up the sign for 30 seconds.

The only time they made a comment back to the audience during the public comment portion was when a person goes up about accessibility. They were quite emphatic that the stations were not final, been working up compliance groups, and does meet ADA compliance even in its barebones form.
 
I don't see how this will help if they aren't careful to address the issues with the contractor. I feel like people are avoiding it because it is easier to say look we changed the design to make it cheaper instead of saying we looked into the issues in our bidding and construction process to find a way to make it more effective and reduced the budget by x.
 
citylover94 said:
I don't see how this will help if they aren't careful to address the issues with the contractor. I feel like people are avoiding it because it is easier to say look we changed the design to make it cheaper instead of saying we looked into the issues in our bidding and construction process to find a way to make it more effective and reduced the budget by x.
Click to expand...

The project will not be rebid as CM/GC. It will likely be typical MA C149A CM-at-Risk or Design-Build.
 
Last edited:
JumboBuc said:
It also sounded like the odds are very much stacked against the Community Path.
Click to expand...

Somerville, and bike groups, should try to lobby the state to fund the path as a totally separate project (?if it isn't already) - then the GLX would "be" less expensive, at least on paper.
 
FK4 said:
Somerville, and bike groups, should try to lobby the state to fund the path as a totally separate project (?if it isn't already) - then the GLX would "be" less expensive, at least on paper.
Click to expand...
This is a guess, but I think the most expensive parts have already been procured (the steel bridgework section over the split and yard leads, I think is in the only part of the GLX that's come in on-budget so far: bridgework steel fabrication)

I have to believe they'll find a way to connect from Lowell St to Washington St, which, because of the retaining walls, is now the most expensive part of the path that's at risk.

The idea of going cut-and-cover through Gilman (to save the existing bridges) probably has the potential to make the path easier (by stacking it on top)
 
Texasian said:
How was the turnout for this meeting? Didn't seem to be nearly as much Twitter outrage/posts as there were for the last one.
Click to expand...

I'd guess that there were probably about 100 people or so, maybe a little less. It was in a big auditorium and there was probably an average of about three people per row.

There wasn't very much outrage in the Q&A session, so that may contribute to the lack of Twitter response. A few people got a bit worked up or went political, but most stayed composed and business-like. I can only think of two commenters who did not speak in support the project.

FK4 said:
Somerville, and bike groups, should try to lobby the state to fund the path as a totally separate project (?if it isn't already) - then the GLX would "be" less expensive, at least on paper.
Click to expand...

The presenter indicated that the retaining walls can become significantly cheaper if they don't need to carry the Community Path.
 
I can't see how a cut-and-cover tunnel would be cheaper than rebuilding the bridges, since it'll need to go under those streets too. Unless it can be done a lot cheaper since it's not in the active commuter rail corridor, which is apparently one of the biggest cost drivers of the project.
 
ceo said:
I can't see how a cut-and-cover tunnel would be cheaper than rebuilding the bridges, since it'll need to go under those streets too. Unless it can be done a lot cheaper since it's not in the active commuter rail corridor, which is apparently one of the biggest cost drivers of the project.
Click to expand...

They hinted they didn't hold high expectations either, but it seems that there's a possibility that it might be cheaper, so they are exploring it until they got an estimate and be able to compare.
 
datadyne007 said:
The project will not be rebid as CM/GC. It will likely be typical MA C149A CM-at-Risk or Design-Build.
Click to expand...

Data, why wouldn't they do this as a design-bid-build project? Or does that approach take too much time to design?



edits for typos galore!
 
The Medford Transcript's coverage of the recent GLX meeting had several nuggets worth reporting here:

1) Medford's Mayor Burke has come out clearly in favor of the extension, including that it get to its "Phase II" terminus at Boston Ave @ MVP (which requires going about .8 miles and one station beyond College Ave. Medford's previous Mayor had kept a lower profile.

2) The $190m in MPO funds for Phase II, which MassDOT had wanted to draw into paying for overruns in Phase I--have apparently been kept dedicated to Phase II. These are CMAQ monies programmed for 2018 to 2020.

http://medford.wickedlocal.com/news...ie-m-burke-route-16-station-is-key-to-project
 
Last edited:
Perhaps I hadn't noticed them before, but a third set of tracks seems to have appeared on the Fitchburg Line in the approach to Union Square.
 
Texasian said:
Perhaps I hadn't noticed them before, but a third set of tracks seems to have appeared on the Fitchburg Line in the approach to Union Square.
Click to expand...

There's always been a third work equipment storage track extending out as far as Allen St. a block east of the Prospect overpass. That'll be cannibalized for the inbound GLX track, the redo of the Medford St. overpass will realign everything to squeeze in the GLX outbound track on the expanded deck, and the commuter rail approaches to the bridge will be shifted on the southerly slack space of the ROW to create the room for Track 4. Eons ago before Medford St. got dug under the tracks to eliminate an old grade crossing Fitchburg was a real 4-tracker all the way through Somerville and Cambridge, so Track 4 more or less shifts everything back into their historical positions.


Way too early to be laying trolley track; that's one of the last very things they do. So if that's new rail and ties and not just the old storage track becoming more visible via early spring brush-cutting...then they're probably prepping for a temp 'lane-shift' of the CR tracks to get at something. More bridge work, misc. culvert work, utility dig (not sure if there's any feeders from the NStar substation @ Prospect buried under the tracks here).
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Way too early to be laying trolley track; that's one of the last very things they do. So if that's new rail and ties and not just the old storage track becoming more visible via early spring brush-cutting...then they're probably prepping for a temp 'lane-shift' of the CR tracks to get at something. More bridge work, misc. culvert work, utility dig (not sure if there's any feeders from the NStar substation @ Prospect buried under the tracks here).
Click to expand...

Yeah, it isn't the old storage track as its on the south side of all the drainage work they were doing in the area. I'll try to snap a picture on my way home tonight.
 
Photo update from the GLX Facebook page, the MPO is cutting funds that were programmed in for the future extension from College Avenue to Route 16.

12932795_10153407945566681_277866613864449464_n.jpg
 
I know this has probably been been discussed already but how the hell does it cost 3 billion dollars to put four miles of light rail tracks next to commuter rail tracks that already exist. In comparison the city of Copenhagen Denmark is building a 3.5 billion dollar expansion of their metro system that includes 10 miles of underground track, self driving rail cars, and 17 stations. And this is a country where McDonalds workers get paid nearly 20 dollars an hour. MBTA is a corrupt organization for allowing this simple project to cost so much. I wish Massachusetts could actually complete needed infrastructure projects without raping taxpayers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Circle_Line
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top