Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

Arlington said:
The concepts that I have seen for a GLX between Union and Porter Squares generally do propose an intermediate stop.

The exact cross street is the kind of thing that you'd have to have a lot of local input on. I seem to recall any of those 4 "midpoint" streets: Sacramento, Kent, Park, or Dane.
Click to expand...


Conway Park (Kent/Park block) and Wilson Sq. (Elm/Sacramento block) are the likeliest picks for catchments and avg. stop spacing. Conway if you're cost-constrained and doing only 1 stop, because the park itself makes for a ready-made egress. I do think Wilson's worth shooting for for the split-off of Davis-via-Elm buses. ROW's all ex- quad track until the inevitable slip-under of the Porter CR platform in a shallow tunnel, so thankfully choice of intermediates doesn't incur anywhere close to the extra landscaping costs of all the Medford Branch intermediates. You can hedge on two spacers without a cost blowout.


NOTE: Park St. grade crossing would be eliminated with a Dane-like overpass because the rail traffic spike would be too excessive to retain the crossing. So the Conway stop is almost certainly going to abut the park for access and not the present-day crossing.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Conway Park (Kent/Park block) and Wilson Sq. (Elm/Sacramento block) are the likeliest picks for catchments and avg. stop spacing. Conway if you're cost-constrained and doing only 1 stop, because the park itself makes for a ready-made egress. I do think Wilson's worth shooting for for the split-off of Davis-via-Elm buses. ROW's all ex- quad track until the inevitable slip-under of the Porter CR platform in a shallow tunnel, so thankfully choice of intermediates doesn't incur anywhere close to the extra landscaping costs of all the Medford Branch intermediates. You can hedge on two spacers without a cost blowout.


NOTE: Park St. grade crossing would be eliminated with a Dane-like overpass because the rail traffic spike would be too excessive to retain the crossing. So the Conway stop is almost certainly going to abut the park for access and not the present-day crossing.
Click to expand...

How would access work to the south from a Conway Park station? Stairs (and elevator?) up to Park St overpass height?
 
fattony said:
How would access work to the south from a Conway Park station? Stairs (and elevator?) up to Park St overpass height?
Click to expand...


Cheaply: just a solo egress into the park at mid-block.



Ideally: side path to Park at ROW level, then snaking around a ramp to where the overpass ends...no stairs necessary. Don't forget that the Park grade crossing is already in the middle of a pronounced 'dip' in the road, so the default geometry is ideal for spanning with an overpass that more or less splits the difference. Only reason Park wasn't eliminated in the 50's like Dane, etc. was an adjacent factory loading dock with a freight siding. That's been defunct since the early-90's, opening up the crossing for relatively affordable elimination.
 
What would the case be for 2 stops between Union Sq and Porter Sq?

Particularly in a future of barrier-free toll collection and all door boarding on long Type 10s?

One centrally-located stop with good pedestrian-ramp access from either end of the platform (eg ramps from the Sacramento St underpass (and maybe a new Kent St underpass) and ramps to Park St at grade or an overpass) should get you great neighborhood-walk access (and I'm assuming that bus connections & kiss and ride are focused at Porter & Union)
 
Arlington said:
What would the case be for 2 stops between Union Sq and Porter Sq?

Particularly in a future of barrier-free toll collection and all door boarding on long Type 10s?

One centrally-located stop with good pedestrian-ramp access from either end of the platform (eg ramps from the Sacramento St underpass (and maybe a new Kent St underpass) and ramps to Park St at grade or an overpass) should get you great neighborhood-walk access (and I'm assuming that bus connections & kiss and ride are focused at Porter & Union)
Click to expand...


Single stop at Conway is the bare minimum because the distance from Union to Porter is far too great for effective stop spacing. The case for 2 stops is that spacing is still a tad over-long and that a corridor that dense can easily support another. Wilson Sq. ends up being both a match for average spacing and a catchment spike because of the Elm intersection.



Since these are not down in a deep pit like the other GLX stops the cost difference for 1 vs. 2 intermediates isn't that great. So if cost isn't an overriding factor, hedge on 2 spacers because of the more ideal fit for the corridor's characteristics. If for no other reason than it makes redrawing bus routes easier to have the main Som. Ave. drag adequately covered by decent-ish LRT spacing; there are multimodal coattails in terms of degree of bus route double-up required with some stop spacings vs. others.
 
 
 
Hubman said:
Man those are ugly.
Click to expand...

I'm more puzzled about some other design choices rather than their aesthetics.

I'm guessing two separate internal teams designed the stairs and the platforms and neither of them have talked to the other at all yet.

Because I can't think of any other reason that you'd build a covered set of stairs, a covered platform, and have what looks to be about a 10ft uncovered gap between the two for seemingly no reason. If they're going to be 100ft apart, maybe I can buy that it's not worth the expense. If they're going to be that close, it's just sloppy design. Connect them and give the riders a continuous stretch of roofing.


It's really clear in that second Gilman Square (station south headhouse) render, but looking at the overheads it might exist at some of the other stops too.

Hopefully something to be changed as the design progresses.

6QMZgMt.jpg
 
Sad to see the Homan's building coming down.

Always loved it and thought they could rehab it with apartments and ground floor retail.
 
Hubman said:
Sad to see the Homan's building coming down.

Always loved it and thought they could rehab it with apartments and ground floor retail.
Click to expand...

Yeah - that’s a major placemaker for that area... I think it’s how I usually know I’m in Gilman Sq whenever I wander into it. Didn’t know it was meeting destruction.
 
Homans was found to be structurally unsound maybe three or four years ago and has been gated off since (including the sidewalk). It is a beaut of a building and a shame to lose it, but the GLX folks removed some architectural elements during pre-demo that will be installed at either the station or a future building on the site.
 
Lost somewhat in the bigger news about today's Red-Blue endorsement, but the FCMB is also included the GLX Route 16 extension EIS in Focus40. Small step...still short of an ironclad build commitment...but that +1 is on much surer footing today.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Lost somewhat in the bigger news about today's Red-Blue endorsement, but the FCMB is also included the GLX Route 16 extension EIS in Focus40. Small step...still short of an ironclad build commitment...but that +1 is on much surer footing today.
Click to expand...

Good.
 
Originally the Rt16 stop was mostly going to be mostly paid for with $169m in CMAQ funds (about 3 years' worth)

Those CMAQ funds come every year from the Feds (Maine runs the Downeaster with theirs). For the GLX, the CMAQ have variously been penciled in for Rt 16, taken to cover the Phase 1 overrun, shifted and taken back (I think). Which years' worth also shifted back as the GLX Phase 1 got delayed.

In the meantime, though, there are lots of worthy CMAQ-sized projects: PTC on the Commuter Rail & Red-Blue. Any idea if the 3 years of CMAQ is still "promised" to GLX Phase 2?
 
Was there not some Medford-based NIMBYism w/r/t phase 2 of this project?
 
Coyote137 said:
Was there not some Medford-based NIMBYism w/r/t phase 2 of this project?
Click to expand...

Not that I know of?

Proposed station site is also either entirely in or almost entirely in Somerville and not Medford, thanks to weird town lines.
 
Coyote137 said:
Was there not some Medford-based NIMBYism w/r/t phase 2 of this project?
Click to expand...
Yes, that is how it came to be in Phase 2 (better to put it in suspended animation than to see it killed; better to push it into the future and have the natural turnover of the neighborhood to change minds; better to keep the GLX on the Somerville-Arlington side of the Mystic)

And I'd say that all worked.

First, the station location is safely on a little peninsula of Somerville (surrounded on 3 sides by Medford) and Tufts U owns the 3 buildings on the site. The Tufts-Somerville parcel is basically just slightly larger than the station site. These were not accidental choices.

Second, I think the "Phase 2" maneuver dates to 2011, while Medford had its "generational turnover" Mayoral election in 2015 in which there was a very clear positioning of the candidates:

Burke == Yes to Community Preservation Surtax, Green Line, Bike Paths, & Traffic Calming; Tufts is Good.
Penta == No Tax & Spend; Stop the "Somervillization" of Medford; Fancy Tufts People are ripping us off

Burke: 7,060 votes 52%
Penta: 6,505 votes 48%

That Penta (a registered Republican) came that close kinda shows the hold that "No New People; No New Things" had in a nonpartisan local election.

But Stephanie Burke has not had an opponent since. And the folks moving into West Medford are coming from Arlington, Charlestown, and Cambridge and didn't grow up with "It's not just a car, it's your freedom" ** and commute inward about half the time.

Not that bike and transit have an entirely free hand, but the standard line is along the lines of: "We have a good working relationship with Tufts; You can see a lot of "this" working in Somerville (...and Winchester and Melrose*); We're ready to work with the MBTA to give people choices; Revitalizing local streets and stores means having alternatives to driving"

* Everyone loves the part where we might actually be like Winchester and Melrose (which actually have very fine complete streets, cute retail, and some transit riders).

** It's not just a car, it's your freedom (1989 ad)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhYt212HIlQ
 
Last edited:
Well, the original plan was for the extension to go to West Medford, but Medford hated that idea because they hate nice things. In fairness, the other problem was going to be crossing the river, since the bridge is historic and not wide enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top