Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

Also the jumble of:
  1. Some Green Line stations have fare gates that you need to pay at
  2. Some have fare validation machines on the platform that you need to tap at before boarding
  3. Some have no fare validation mechanism and you need to pay on board (at the front door only)
    1. Except on some trains you'll be able to get on and pay at that back door
  4. Some have fare validation machines on the platform that don't work, and you need to ignore those and pay on board (see 3)
is legitimately confusing, even for regular T riders! And with the potential for this legitimate confusion, it's going to be hard to enforce "stiff fines" on people who don't have validated tickets.

From what I glean, it sounds like the MBTA is going to have an interim condition on the GLX where one would be expected to tap to pay at FVMs with AFC 1.5 equipment.

It would add to the concern you have on the "confusion" of fares on the T. However, in the long-term it seems like it'll be come clearer, as we move to the completion of AFC2.0.

  • Later this year, the MBTA will be installing a fare gate at the Commuter rail terminals in Boston.
  • At some point in the near future (2022-2023) AFC 2.0 equipment will be rolled out to GL vehicles and buses and new equipment at stations.
  • By 2024, it sounds like things will be fully implemented at subway stations too.
It's a bit far out there, but, it sounds like,

1. At all stations, you'll pay at fare gates.
2. On "surface" green line stops and on buses, you'll pay in the vehicle.
 
Haven't seen this mentioned yet, though may have missed it. GLX reports the last two bridge reopenings are slated for June/July. School Street in June and Medford Street in July. There was ample talk by the City that they'd leave Medford closed to all but emergency traffic and turn the stretch from the Pearl St intersection up to the first slopeside multifamily into a woonerf-ish pedestrian situation. That was pre-COVID and I haven't heard anything recently.

If GLX makes those dates I'd say we are on track for a December closeout of the project. It looks like a lot of work to go right now, but after they finish the bridges, the only outstanding items are
- the short wall separating GL from CR
- A few retaining wall panels
- Remaining tracks, leveling and drainage
- Electrical work
- Elevators and remaining platform work
- Art
- The entire community path with gravel, concrete/pavement, fencing and lighting.

Actually, that's a lot...
 
Haven't seen this mentioned yet, though may have missed it. GLX reports the last two bridge reopenings are slated for June/July. School Street in June and Medford Street in July. There was ample talk by the City that they'd leave Medford closed to all but emergency traffic and turn the stretch from the Pearl St intersection up to the first slopeside multifamily into a woonerf-ish pedestrian situation. That was pre-COVID and I haven't heard anything recently.

If GLX makes those dates I'd say we are on track for a December closeout of the project. It looks like a lot of work to go right now, but after they finish the bridges, the only outstanding items are
- the short wall separating GL from CR
- A few retaining wall panels
- Remaining tracks, leveling and drainage
- Electrical work
- Elevators and remaining platform work
- Art
- The entire community path with gravel, concrete/pavement, fencing and lighting.

Actually, that's a lot...

I kind of doubt the community path being done by December - I'd say it's likely soft opening in December, in parts - maybe the East Somerville to North Point bit?. And a full opening in spring 2022.

Don't forget that there's all that irksome fault-free testing of all the systems - power, signal, communications.
 
Well, if the new OL trains are any indicator, that whole fault-free testing thing is more of a nice-to-have.
 
Not seriously, there's the need for a laugh-cry emoji reaction there.

But, wholly seriously, it's a must-have on a new line with federal dollars.
 
1619049503320.png

1619049557920.png


Google put up some new imagery from October 2020, you need the desktop version of Earth and have to use the time travel function to see it but its pretty neat to see GLX from above
 
Whats the stub pointing up/right?
The stub is for a track to the new GLX LRV maintenance facility, although I think its been deleted in the final design.
 
Last edited:
There was the discussion about that earlier this month. The access to the VMF is via a set of crossings near the East Somerville station.
 
The stub is for a track to the new GLX LRV maintenance facility, although I think its been deleted in the final design.

Yep. That was intended to be a direct-to/from-Lechmere access point for the carhouse, as third access point accompanying the direct-to/from-Union and direct-to/from-Medford ramps. It was VE'd out for cost savings because it's not strictly necessary. The Medford ramp joins at a tri-track section with multiple crossovers right before East Somerville Station, and so it's also possible for a Lechmere deadhead to turn out onto Track 3, pause, and reverse onto the carhouse lead without blocking any Medford Branch revenue traffic. So they're going to pocket the savings and do it that way. Lechmere deadheads would be comparably rarer equipment shuffles than trains that simply run to Union/Tufts and deadhead back on the branches (i.e. the usual practice for shift changes), so they don't need optimal efficiency with a direct ramp from Lechmere to pull off those "other"-category moves.

The ramp stub is left for backfilling on future considerations. It's obviously a must-have if revenue service ever runs on the carhouse leads to Sullivan Square as either a +1 addition or the full on Mystic River-crossing Urban Ring NE quadrant to Chelsea/Logan. In that case the missing overpass would be added later, and the track configuration at the junctions would be substantially altered for the split in that direction. To illustrate:
1619049503320-png.12310


Right now you've got a flying junction, and only one track is going to be laid on the loop ramp for flying outbound-to-Union off the Lechmere split. But you can see the first leg of the Viaduct before the ghost ramp is built at 2-track width...albeit squeezed out of emergency-egress side room because it's up on stilts in a constrained area and the signal system mid-junction is dense enough to stop all traffic fail-safe on the second berth to permit emergency egress on the other track. The ghost ramp is likewise 2-track width (and likewise without emergency egresses for same reason of other evacuation fail-safes being present). But the high loop to Union is much narrower single-track width...and does have the side room for emergency evacuation (obviously with only 1 track you need some side means of evacuating a train).

If revenue service to Sullivan/etc. were ever enacted, you'd see the mainline junction at the very bottom of the photo changed from total-flying to partial-flying (for the Medford split) + partial-flat (for Union-or-Sullivan). That is: flat bi-directional junction switch and 2 inbound/outbound tracks on that first leg of ramp...then flat junction at the 'ghost' split where 1 OB-only Union track splits off from 2 Sullivan IB/OB tracks. Therefore everything is properly provisioned, and you just need to come back later to build a northern bridge abutment on the carhouse side and lift 1 prefab bridge deck into place spanning the tracks.

The cost savings from VE'ing that out probably weren't enormous, since we really aren't talking much missing infrastructure. But it was always somewhat of an ops mystery as to why this just *had* to be there in the base build because reversing off the Medford-side pocket always seemed plenty easy enough given how relatively few trains would be going in/out of service from the strictly Lechmere direction on a daily basis. It might've been a design hedge all those years the Brickbottom NIMBY's were fighting the carhouse and they were still iffy on the yard's exact parcel placement (and, thus, fluidity or lackthereof questions re: access dependencies from the branches).
 
Last edited:
Wait up. They aren't building the maintenance facility?

They're building the facility. Construction's proceeding at torrid pace. They just VE'd out the carhouse flyover specifically to/from the Lechmere direction because it was surplus-to-requirement. A train going out-of-service at Lechmere, instead of deadheading directly over this deleted flyover to the carhouse, simply:
  1. goes onto the Medford Branch outbound
  2. crosses over to pocket Track 3
  3. stops and changes ends on the pocket clear of all revenue traffic
  4. crosses over to the inbound track then onto the carhouse lead
...and opposite sequence for a train going into service @ Lechmere.

This is doable without fouling any revenue traffic because it's a tri-track segment. Plus very few daily trains will ever need to make this move, because standard practice for shift changes is to run all the way to Union Sq. or Tufts...then scoot as a deadhead back to the carhouse via the Union/Medford leads. Only equipment shuffles to/from North Station Yard or trains bailing their passenger loads early because of mechanical trouble actually have any need to aim straight off Lechmere to the yard, and that's a very small slice of the daily pie of non-revenue moves so they deemed it unnecessary to build the most-perfect straight shot when the backup move from East Somerville pocket was deemed "good enough" for the low utilization.

The ghost ramp matters when it's time to bring revenue service to Sullivan, which is why it's full-provisioned (incl. the double-track width and bi-directional allowances via changes to the junction switches). But it's pretty superfluous in the meantime for just the very occasional non-revenue move, so they cut it when they were fishing for dollars to VE in the project audit.
 
I hadn't realized that's a two-track stub. Combined with the VMF leads from the Union Square branch, that also makes it possible to link in a Grand Junction branch (which we've discussed before) that connects to both the Sullivan extension and the central subway.
 
I hadn't realized that's a two-track stub. Combined with the VMF leads from the Union Square branch, that also makes it possible to link in a Grand Junction branch (which we've discussed before) that connects to both the Sullivan extension and the central subway.

I was wondering about that but it seems the McGrath gets in the way unless you took a really weird angle which I doubt would fly. You could go underneath the CR tracks I guess.
 
I hadn't realized that's a two-track stub. Combined with the VMF leads from the Union Square branch, that also makes it possible to link in a Grand Junction branch (which we've discussed before) that connects to both the Sullivan extension and the central subway.

S.T.E.P. nailed them to the floor to make sure they didn't cheap out on those multi-route provisionings so there wouldn't be an "Oops!" moment when it came time to talk turkey on UR LRT. Give them enormous credit: they anticipated every single avenue the State might deploy to try to ratfuck this thing...anticipated it from Day 1...and got every promise in return written in triplicate to make sure there'd be no late shennanigans. As hard as they fought to get a straight "Yes" answer on whether Union-Porter future extension was possible?...that's how hard they fought to make sure the Urban Ring was similarly plug-compatible with the design.

I was wondering about that but it seems the McGrath gets in the way unless you took a really weird angle which I doubt would fly. You could go underneath the CR tracks I guess.
It would be a duck-under of CR (or rather open-trench flyunder with each Fitchburg ROW surface track reset on tiny overpasses of the cut). There's conclusively enough room underneath the bridge to do the junction turnouts and inclining-down because of the helpful way the abutments are placed well out of the way. Dates back to the ancient mid-century track config where there was a small freight yard fanning out by Medford St. onto the current Target plaza site.

If you figure that McGrath's grounding will probably square up Somerville Ave. & Poplar St. into a single-point signalized intersection, then the dank (and occasionally dangerous) Somerville Ave. Ext. underpass one-way wraparound becomes functionally fully expendable. That's literally +2 extra turnout tracks' worth of extra side room to be had on top of all the stuff already being constructed here. The GLX tracks themselves will have enough fence separation from the road to double-up the sidewalk on both sides when it's done, so they're not even using all the underpass slack space currently available to them next to the as-is wraparound road.
 
ENR article has a photo inside the VMF (says courtesy of MBTA). Ordinarily I would include a link but I don’t consider it a public service to give a pay wall and link to what is a public source image


So if you can’t get behind a pay wall maybe we can google up the picture directly from an MBTA source?
 
The ghost ramp matters when it's time to bring revenue service to Sullivan, which is why it's full-provisioned (incl. the double-track width and bi-directional allowances via changes to the junction switches). But it's pretty superfluous in the meantime for just the very occasional non-revenue move, so they cut it when they were fishing for dollars to VE in the project audit.

I'm legit surprised someone had the forethought to include this. Can you explain how this is supposed to work since I've been out of the loop for so long.
 

Back
Top