Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

Equilibria said:
Well, sort of. The original tweet thread this was based on was RT'd by Adam Vaccaro, who has left the Globe. Seems this might be his successor.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1401957340899913734
Click to expand...
I don't follow. That guy with the byline and the tweet thread is a BostonDotCom writer (not a Globe writer) and Vaccaro (who is no longer at the Globe) didn't even RT his thread, as far as I can see. How does that imply that guy is Vaccaro's successor?
 
JumboBuc said:
I don't follow. That guy with the byline and the tweet thread is a BostonDotCom writer (not a Globe writer) and Vaccaro (who is no longer at the Globe) didn't even RT his thread, as far as I can see. How does that imply that guy is Vaccaro's successor?
Click to expand...

I have no idea how the Globe plans to fill Vaccaro's shoes, but I only saw this thread because I follow him and he liked it (had the effect of retweeting it). Had he posted it, would you think it was legit?
 
Equilibria said:
I have no idea how the Globe plans to fill Vaccaro's shoes, but I only saw this thread because I follow him and he liked it (had the effect of retweeting it). Had he posted it, would you think it was legit?
Click to expand...
I don't think there's any question of "legit" or not about this. The Boston.com and Twitter posts are just one guy's take on a fairly mundane question of scheduling and project finalization (as F-Line notes).

Will the GLX open in Fall / Winter 2021? Maybe. That's been the plan, but plans sometimes change. This is basically what the official statements say, and also what the posts say. It is what it is.
 
JumboBuc said:
I don't think there's any question of "legit" or not about this. The Boston.com and Twitter posts are just one guy's take on a fairly mundane question of scheduling and project finalization (as F-Line notes).

Will the GLX open in Fall / Winter 2021? Maybe. That's been the plan, but plans sometimes change. This is basically what the official statements say, and also what the posts say. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

It is an actual change in messaging. The MBTA had been officially confirming the October 2021 opening for Union Square when asked. If Aiello isn't willing to confirm that anymore, or if they're laying the groundwork to announce a delay at next month's meeting, that's news.
 
Ahem: [news outlet John W. Henry owns] publishes absolutely broken piece full of 100% pure supposition utterly unsupported by official statements..official statements on the matter making up the *bulk* of the word count. That's what this is about. Not whether web mastheads are separated by church-and-state this week compared to last week.

It's an objectively TERRIBLE piece of writing/reporting. No editor should've allowed it to be published under either of their mastheads under any circumstances. Pure...unadulterated...trollbait. The fact that it occupies a prime slot at the top of the headlines in the explicit NEWS section is doubly-problematic, because BDC rarely ever puts its pure clickbait efforts under the frickin' NEWS section. BOTH mastheads in this organization lately sure do like to traffic in a lot of transpo trollbaiting, so this thin-assed story making it to pub extends that rapsheet and absolutely does impugn the Globe too for contributing to the same behavior pattern. I don't buy this argument that we shouldn't trust BDC's lying eyes on-spec or should stuff the notion that this is an org of fellow travelers with same upper-level management down a memory hole. The organization cross-pollenates between the two mastheads routinely and always has historically tried to boost BDC's street cred with its Globe huevos and vice versa when the shoe fits. Plus: prime placement in the @#$% top NEWS section. When an indie BDC has stepped in it, the Globe has taken it on the chin. For 25 years now. They're intentionally presented as cogs in the same machine regardless of what this past week's snapshot of the newsroom org chart splits for hairs. How is any of this news to anyone remotely familiar with Boston media???


The fact that it still a day later is prominently featured on the homepage and near the top of the NEWS section headlines is disqualifying for the outlet's editorial standards. And if this was supposed to be the reporter's showcase audition for the Vaccaro vacancy, it and the accompanying limp Twitter thread are immediately disqualifying. Of both the reporter and the organization. The official quotes so very generously padding the word count here do not hint at any conclusion that the project is in trouble of missing a deadline. It mischaracterizes the unchanging official line on the sanctity of the deadline. It pushes a willfully naive premise about the very nature of how construction sprints are full of born interdependencies that...yes...*could* result in a delay if something goes out-of-sync. Which has not happened yet according to any of the quotes, and for which no follow-up was asked by this or any other of their reporters.

It's a garbage piece that shouldn't have been published. Not by the Globe. Not by BDC. Not by any news outlet that stops some distance short of throwing a parade for their own proud trashiness.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Ahem: [news outlet John W. Henry owns] publishes absolutely broken piece full of 100% pure supposition utterly unsupported by official statements..official statements on the matter making up the *bulk* of the word count. That's what this is about. Not whether web mastheads are separated by church-and-state this week compared to last week.

It's an objectively TERRIBLE piece of writing/reporting. No editor should've allowed it to be published under either of their mastheads under any circumstances. Pure...unadulterated...trollbait. The fact that it occupies a prime slot at the top of the headlines in the explicit NEWS section is doubly-problematic, because BDC rarely ever puts its pure clickbait efforts under the frickin' NEWS section. BOTH mastheads in this organization lately sure do like to traffic in a lot of transpo trollbaiting, so this thin-assed story making it to pub extends that rapsheet and absolutely does impugn the Globe too for contributing to the same behavior pattern. I don't buy this argument that we shouldn't trust BDC's lying eyes on-spec or should stuff the notion that this is an org of fellow travelers with same upper-level management down a memory hole. The organization cross-pollenates between the two mastheads routinely and always has historically tried to boost BDC's street cred with its Globe huevos and vice versa when the shoe fits. Plus: prime placement in the @#$% top NEWS section. When an indie BDC has stepped in it, the Globe has taken it on the chin. For 25 years now. They're intentionally presented as cogs in the same machine regardless of what this past week's snapshot of the newsroom org chart splits for hairs. How is any of this news to anyone remotely familiar with Boston media???


The fact that it still a day later is prominently featured on the homepage and near the top of the NEWS section headlines is disqualifying for the outlet's editorial standards. And if this was supposed to be the reporter's showcase audition for the Vaccaro vacancy, it and the accompanying limp Twitter thread are immediately disqualifying. Of both the reporter and the organization. The official quotes so very generously padding the word count here do not hint at any conclusion that the project is in trouble of missing a deadline. It mischaracterizes the unchanging official line on the sanctity of the deadline. It pushes a willfully naive premise about the very nature of how construction sprints are full of born interdependencies that...yes...*could* result in a delay if something goes out-of-sync. Which has not happened yet according to any of the quotes, and for which no follow-up was asked by this or any other of their reporters.

It's a garbage piece that shouldn't have been published. Not by the Globe. Not by BDC. Not by any news outlet that stops some distance short of throwing a parade for their own proud trashiness.
Click to expand...

As I read it, a reporter asked a question of a public official and got a response that threw doubt on meeting a deadline that those same officials had committed to it the past. That's news. That's all there is to it.

The MBTA's comment had nothing to do with crunch time. They were asked if they'd meet the deadline. They hedged. They've not hedged before.
 
The upcoming construction page summary is a positive reflection of progress on the Union branch. Missing are any updates on the Viaduct and Science Park progress. Even getting Lechmere back in service to halt the shuttles would be a win. Any known bottlenecks there?
 
<tinfoil>The lack of public webcams to call BS on rosy predictions of progress sure is convenient…</tinfoil>

The T management is really wary about being painted as hacks. The press really likes to paint T management (and government in general) as a bunch of incompetent hacks.
 
Vagabond said:
The upcoming construction page summary is a positive reflection of progress on the Union branch. Missing are any updates on the Viaduct and Science Park progress. Even getting Lechmere back in service to halt the shuttles would be a win. Any known bottlenecks there?
Click to expand...

T posts those updates under the Green Line Transformation project updates. While its being done at the same time as the Green Line Extension its a different project.
According to their June 4th update, the Leachmere Viaduct project is overall 77% complete with a complete run down on items as....
- Track Work- 100% complete (minus punch list work)
- Signals- 86% complete
- Power- 80% complete
- Structural & Concrete Repairs- 74% complete

I believe the plan is to open this section again when the Union Branch is ready for service. Can't run service to leachmere as the Station is still not done.
 
matredsoxfan5 said:
I believe the plan is to open this section again when the Union Branch is ready for service. Can't run service to leachmere as the Station is still not done.
Click to expand...
Correct. There's no turnback at Lechmere anymore, so they can't stack the work to reopen just SP+Lechmere in approximation of the old setup. It has to be either Union or the VMF leads that are openable before the shuttle buses can go away.
 
I do think the GLX project team/MBTA could have done much better job messaging the time frames of these closures.

This is still posted on the GLX Project website:
Starting on May 24, 2020, Green Line service will shut down at Lechmere and Science Park stations for approximately one year
Click to expand...

If the best case scenario is an October re-opening of Science Park/Lechmere, the MBTA really should have updated this closure notice when a year rolled around and there was still almost another 6 months to go.
 
SomerJeff said:
If the best case scenario is an October re-opening of Science Park/Lechmere, the MBTA really should have updated this closure notice when a year rolled around and there was still almost another 6 months to go.
Click to expand...

Totally agree - this is the line that stuck out to me that we've heard no update on and is likely the bottleneck:

matredsoxfan5 said:
Structural & Concrete Repairs- 74% complete
Click to expand...
 
Here's a good video, that starts out with a bit of back history and then does a nice fly by of work so far, well as of May 2021

 
GW2500 said:
Here's a good video, that starts out with a bit of back history and then does a nice fly by of work so far, well as of May 2021

Click to expand...
Really well done video.

In the video where the lines split just after Lechmere he mentions that they built an off ramp to points east for a future branch. What’s that all about and where would it even go?

... Also, I’m sure it’s been addressed a million times but why in gods name did they not built all the way to Porter? Talk about low hanging fruit
 
NoShJFK said:
Really well done video.

In the video where the lines split just after Lechmere he mentions that they built an off ramp to points east for a future branch. What’s that all about and where would it even go?
Click to expand...

It was not expressedly designed for future branching...but rather as straight-on yard access point for non-revenue moves to/from Lechmere. The trajectory to the Brickbottom carhouse will take it on-alignment to Sullivan Station, so it coincidentally can serve as an Urban Ring LRT routing to/from Chelsea and Logan Airport when the time comes if given some slight track modification. Either Downtown-Chelsea via Lechmere, or Urban Ring NE quadrant Chelsea to Urban Ring NW quadrant in Cambridge (which would branch off the Union Branch underneath McGrath Highway). However, its expressed build purpose for GLX was simply yard access not revenue service. The missing overpass was VE'd out during the project cost audit. Now any disabled trains that have to go out-of-service will pull onto the tri-track pocket on the Medford Branch, reverse, and pull into the yard instead...slightly less efficient, but also pretty rare in occurrence so not a big deal. The ramp stub was left so it could be grafted on later should they ever need/want it.

... Also, I’m sure it’s been addressed a million times but why in gods name did they not built all the way to Porter? Talk about low hanging fruit
Click to expand...
Because the original study tried to mash Union and Medford together in a single branch with a subway deep-bored through Winter Hill. That proved too expensive and was rejected as a build Alternative, but by then the project scope was set at Union but not Porter so they couldn't go back and re-add. Porter extension is a S.T.E.P. advocacy plank, but it couldn't be backfilled onto the main thrust of the GLX project because that had already been set as a CLF Big Dig mitigation Transit Commitment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W-4
F-Line to Dudley said:
Porter extension is a S.T.E.P. advocacy plank, but it couldn't be backfilled onto the main thrust of the GLX project because that had already been set as a CLF Big Dig mitigation Transit Commitment.
Click to expand...
You've mentioned STEP many times, but Google has so far failed me on what/who exactly that is? Who exactly are they?
 
Prospect Hill, not Winter. :) Also, a station at Porter would be incredibly expensive, since it would have to be under the commuter rail station.
 
ceo said:
... a station at Porter would be incredibly expensive, since it would have to be under the commuter rail station.
Click to expand...
Or tunnel under Somerville Ave, with an underground station under Somerville Ave next to the commuter rail station. I'll try to lay that out tonight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top