Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

[jass]

Make the D line longer you cowards

(referring to the atrocious map geography)

 

[Jahvon09]

Make the D line longer you cowards

(referring to the atrocious map geography)

Yeah, all that stopping & staring all over again with renovating, they could've been getting it extended out further to maybe Natick or Framingham by now!

 

[Charlie_mta]

'''why didn't they put the USQ branch alongside the Fitchburg Line and put the label below? It would have been easy to just flip the label (they do for BC, so it's not a rule).

I was thinking of doing exactly that when I modified the map, but didn't because it might make it look like there's a connection at USQ with the Fitchburg Line (purple line).

 

[themissinglink]

They can do Route 16 by tightening up the spacing on the other stops, probably. GLX-to-Porter is not sort-of likely, IMO.

The Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership has been advocating for a future GLX to Porter for a couple years now. It's definitely a probable extension in the future (or at the very least it really should be).

 

[Dr. Rosen Rosen]

^^ I get the appeal to extend GLX to Porter (mostly for personal benefit of being even that much closer to the GL), but I don’t see the big areawide ridership impact being that the GL and the RL already connect at Park St in Boston. Is connecting Porter and Union Sq’s transformational enough?

 

[Charlie_mta]

^^ I get the appeal to extend GLX to Porter (mostly for personal benefit of being even that much closer to the GL), but I don’t see the big areawide ridership impact being that the GL and the RL already connect at Park St in Boston. Is connecting Porter and Union Sq’s transformational enough?

I've heard before here on AB that it would relieve some of the crowding of the Red Line between Porter and downtown Boston. But IMO there are far more pressing transit project needs than this one. Namely, BLX to Charles, BLX to Lynn, and a Green Line branch from Lechmere to Everett via Sullivan.

 

[Brattle Loop]

I've heard before here on AB that it would relieve some of the crowding of the Red Line between Porter and downtown Boston. But IMO there are far more pressing transit project needs than this one. Namely, BLX to Charles, BLX to Lynn, and a Green Line branch from Lechmere to Everett via Sullivan.

GLX to Porter would provide an additional route between Red and the northern end of the Green Line without having to clog the (fairly-difficult-to-fix) already-crowded Park Street platforms. It's not a panacea for anything, but it's also a relatively cheap and easy extension compared to some of the others suggested, which is what makes it decent value.

 

[themissinglink]

^^ I get the appeal to extend GLX to Porter (mostly for personal benefit of being even that much closer to the GL), but I don’t see the big areawide ridership impact being that the GL and the RL already connect at Park St in Boston. Is connecting Porter and Union Sq’s transformational enough?

The biggest benefit of GLX to Porter would be the creation of a new (non-downtown) transfer between Red and Green. GLX to Porter would take a lot of pressure off of Park Street itself, which is already crowded enough. Crowding at Park St will only worsen as time goes on, especially with future expansion projects.

Completing GLX to Porter is important because it accommodates for future growth. It is "transformational" with regard to potential future expansion projects such as RLX to Arlington. It is also (obviously) a prerequisite to GLX west of Porter Sq itself, however that obviously isn't a priority project. GLX to Porter is important when it comes to long-term expansion ideas.

But IMO there are far more pressing transit project needs than this one. Namely, BLX to Charles, BLX to Lynn, and a Green Line branch from Lechmere to Everett via Sullivan.

I very much agree with you there. However, I wouldn't necessarily overlook the benefits of GLX to Porter just because it doesn't top the list of priorities. It's an important project which will be necessitated sooner or later, either as a result of future expansion projects or the worsening issue of platform crowding at Park St.

As for the complexity of the extension itself, it's not really a megaproject in any sense of the term, as the only "complicated" or expensive part of the project would be the underground platforms at Porter Sq itself.

 

[Dr. Rosen Rosen]

I see what you’re saying…but then why not just expand/build out Park St stop to handle its overcrowding? And if connecting the commuter rail to the GL is of interest, how about add a commuter stop to Union Sq? Then that could bring in a huge workforce to all the USq and Lechmere/CX developments.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Also the Red-Blue connector (BLX to Charles) would relieve some congestion at Park Street,

 

[themissinglink]

I see what you’re saying…but then why not just expand/build out Park St stop to handle its overcrowding?

How exactly would this be accomplished? Aside from opening a new Red Line entrance/exit here, there's not really much you'd be able to do in terms of modifications to Park Street.

And if connecting the commuter rail to the GL is of interest, how about add a commuter stop to Union Sq? Then that could bring in a huge workforce to all the USq and Lechmere/CX developments.

Connection to the commuter rail is not the main benefit to GLX to Porter; a non-downtown transfer between the Green Line and the Red Line is.

Besides, adding another CR stop at Union Square is definitely not optimal. That would make the already slow trip between Porter and North Station even more slow.

 

[themissinglink]

Also the Red-Blue connector (BLX to Charles) would relieve some congestion at Park Street,

In the short term, absolutely. But with long term considerations in mind, GLX to Porter is an important project to accommodate for future growth. I agree that Red-Blue will majorly help with the overcrowding at Park St, but it will only help up to a certain extent.

Oft-discussed extensions such as BLX to Lynn, RLX to Arlington, GLX to Chelsea, GLX to Nubian, and GLX to the Seaport will all individually put increased strain on the downtown transfer stops. Any number of those expansion ideas together would only further increase strain on the downtown transfer stops.

I wouldn't necessarily consider it to be a prerequisite to any of those expansion ideas individually, but as the system grows so does the need to effectively manage dwells at the downtown transfer nodes. Seeing as how GLX to Porter wouldn't be as expensive or complicated as any of those aforementioned expansion projects, it would be a good project to complete before or in tandem with any future major expansion in order to reduce strain on Park Street as much as possible with a redundant GL-to-RL transfer.

 

[Brattle Loop]

I see what you’re saying…but then why not just expand/build out Park St stop to handle its overcrowding? And if connecting the commuter rail to the GL is of interest, how about add a commuter stop to Union Sq? Then that could bring in a huge workforce to all the USq and Lechmere/CX developments.

I'm not entirely sure which thread it's in, but somewhere F-Line gave a very good description of both the capacity problem at Park Street and the difficulties in ameliorating them. @themissinglink is correct that turning the emergency exit at the northern end of the center Red Line platform would be useful, though mainly in spreading out some of the passengers and smoothing access for people who don't need to transfer (and shortening the walk a bit from the Beacon Hill side of the station).

That said, the main problem is the transfers; narrow platforms (the side platforms can be widened but probably not exactly cheaply) and narrow staircases (especially on the center platform) clog up passenger flow transferring between Green and Red, and the station's layout isn't really able to be altered in a way that really removes that problem because of how the Green and Red levels interact. While there's room for improvement, there's invariably going to come a point where physical improvements at Park are no longer feasible, meaning that we'll have to look elsewhere to relieve load on the platforms there before they start gumming up the RL's works again (pre-pandemic Park and DTX already had dwell time issues because of this); Porter's a readily-available choice for an alternate transfer.

I wouldn't necessarily consider it to be a prerequisite to any of those expansion ideas individually, but as the system grows so does the need to effectively manage dwells at the downtown transfer nodes. Seeing as how GLX to Porter wouldn't be as expensive or complicated as any of those aforementioned expansion projects, it would be a good project to complete before or in tandem with any future major expansion in order to reduce strain on Park Street as much as possible with a redundant GL-to-RL transfer.

This is exactly right. It's a relief valve to pull passengers who don't need to go downtown off of the most-stressed transfer stations to maximize the system's capacity. It's a network add that's value is split between its direct utility in Cambridge and surroundings and the downstream effect it has on Park.

 

[The EGE]

Aside from the Park Street relief, a Porter extension has a lot going for it. There's the one-seat ride to places like North Station, Back Bay, and the LMA, and the potential future extension past Porter. Intermediate stop(s) also have potential given the residential density, and the two large grocery stores. Boston has a shortage of transit-accessible grocery stores (especially Market Basket, which is usually cheaper and better than Star Market).

 

[stefal]

Probably worth splitting this off to Green Line Reconfiguration if this conversation persists...

Has GLX-Porter been studied? I'm following everything being written here, but having a hard time believing there'd be a case worth arguing for the current T.

My thought process:

The benefit I see is mostly for local trips and easier/closer local access to rapid transit. (Personally, living and shopping in the area, I'd love a GLX-Porter for that reason, and GLX-Porter could strengthen growth along that corridor, something I'd love to see..)

What I'm reading here is that its main purpose is to alleviate any Park Street transfers it can, but I'm having a hard time believing general Red Line ridership will find a transfer to Green at Porter useful for it to be noticeable at Park. Where it could potentially find value is in connections to North Station/The Garden and Commuter Rail, but I don't see the demand in ridership to North Station/CR for the Alewife (plus a potential RLX) through Porter area, when there are plenty of bus connections to many of the applicable CR lines that would be faster than any GL-NS or RL-GL-NS configuration. Post-COVID, I'd find it hard to find a population in search of reverse commuting out of Somerville and Cambridge via Green Line and CR over Bus and CR. There's a neat GIS map/chart that could show the quickest route for Somerville/Cambridge to ~North Station/CR forming in my head if I could figure it out..

I'm also thinking about this in the context of Urban Ring, and what value that may have over/with connections at Porter as well.

I'm intrigued in GLX-More-West - what are the stops after Porter?

 

[WestMedford]

The most logical extension past Porter is along the Fitchburg ROW to Alewife with an infill stop around Sherman St. When I say Alewife, I don’t mean the Red Line terminus … I mean further west along the Fitchburg ROW in that giant industrial area where all the warehouses are being redeveloped. Beyond Alewife, we start getting into reasonable / crazy transit pitches I believe.

 

[Blackbird]

I've heard before here on AB that it would relieve some of the crowding of the Red Line between Porter and downtown Boston. But IMO there are far more pressing transit project needs than this one. Namely, BLX to Charles, BLX to Lynn, and a Green Line branch from Lechmere to Everett via Sullivan.

You forgot OLX to Roslindale!

 

[notthemonthaugust]

The most logical extension past Porter is along the Fitchburg ROW to Alewife with an infill stop around Sherman St. When I say Alewife, I don’t mean the Red Line terminus … I mean further west along the Fitchburg ROW in that giant industrial area where all the warehouses are being redeveloped. Beyond Alewife, we start getting into reasonable / crazy transit pitches I believe.

Somewhere on this forum I saw a post (I think from F-Line?) detailing a possible extension of the green line past Porter to Watertown via the old ROW running by the reservoir (and some possible street-running along Arsenal Street I think?). I can see if I can dig up that post, but that extension made a lot of sense to me.

 

[themissinglink]

Somewhere on this forum I saw a post (I think from F-Line?) detailing a possible extension of the green line past Porter to Watertown via the old ROW running by the reservoir (and some possible street-running along Arsenal Street I think?). I can see if I can dig up that post, but that extension made a lot of sense to me.

GLX to Watertown was indeed the extension I had in mind when talking about a possible extension west of Porter Sq. An extension alongside the Fitchburg ROW would also be feasible but is not by any means a priority and is definitely in "crazy transit pitches" territory.

 

[Javier]