Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

I'm cautious about going under... I think vertical clearances should be maximized, potentially for autoracks, plus electrification.
 
No way you're getting Medford to go along with an elevated structure cutting West Medford Square in half. I wouldn't want it either if I still lived there. Of course, the construction staging for a trench will be an amusing problem if you want to keep the commuter rail in service meanwhile.
 
Arlington said:
F-line has said he thinks there is enough running room to bury it (as Fitchburg @ Waverly). Under or over, you are right that it should be addressed in GLX Phase 5 (GLX@MVP)
Click to expand...

I can't find the post where I actually crunched the numbers, but yes...there's enough running room to do a steep incline off the bridge that 1) stays within max RR grade tolerances, 2) wouldn't crack the Top 3 worst pre-existing commuter rail grades or the worst commuter rail grade that carries daily freight, 3) preserves all of the Lowell Line's freight clearances, and 4) provisions for future electrification without fouling the Lowell Line's freight clearances. It's steep, but not off-scale steep.

River crossing is on a hillside, so starting the incline on touchdown incurs no flood risk. Canal St. would get temporarily severed for construction, then you'd build a new overpass that rises 1:1 for how much the rail incline has dropped by that point (pretty much half-and-half). You'd make it under the square without having to raise the Route 60 pavement. And the width is there. Canal used to be an industrial block with freight sidings stubbing out before the bridge, which is why Circuit St. was never widened around the ROW fence. Depot Square Grille at the grade crossing is the only structure that looks like it might be a close shave. And then on Wedgemere end you can do as gentle a grade as you want to get back up.

It's expensive, though. Lot of retaining wall and drainage culvert work to frame a 4-track ROW, and slow construction because you'd have to swing the Lowell Line out on a temporary single-track alignment to the side while doing half the cut, then swing it single-track into the cut while doing the other half of the cut. Given that both the Mystic and Route 16 overpasses would have to be duplicated too to bring Green in from Route 16 that's an extreme amount of expense in a project area only a half-mile long. Since the crossing elimination is probably going to be needed for commuter rail and Downeaster alone before too long, it's probably cost you want to swallow alone as a CR project that merely cleanrooms the cut for side-by-side modes. THEN go fishing for the funding for the bridge pair and a formal GLX +1. In no way should it even be on the radar screen until you've got the Porter GLX +1 locked/loaded/funded.



There's actually a lot of bus upside out here, with the routes ripe for a reconfiguration after GLX gets going. The 94 and 80 hit Davis @ Red, College Ave. @ GLX, 16 @ GLX, and West Med @ CR (the 80 turning out a block away). That kind of transfer chaining is going to see increased, not decreased ridership under GLX. Check the travel times on some of those routes...it's FAST around the transfer chain. The only thing lacking are the frequencies making the speed attractive. With the extra demand GLX pushes out there I can definitely see the need for some consolidation/reshaping of the diverging routes and more frequencies on the lateral trunk connecting the transfers.

So that's another thing to have to consider: the Yellow Line doesn't get replaced, its demand profile just gets thrown in a blender and what emerges ends up supcharged from today...but not necessarily on the same patterns because of the way that chain of nearby transfers changes the game.
 
ceo said:
Moving the West Medford CR station to the south side of 60 and providing a pedestrian connection to the Mystic Valley Parkway GL station makes a ton of sense. I've always thought the lack of a CR connection was one of the biggest missed opportunities of the GLX, and that station is in dire need of an upgrade.
Click to expand...

The original study when they were still thinking of West Medford had Green stubbing out on the south side of the grade crossing with CR staying on the north side where it is. One of the problems (amongst many) they found with that build is that the ridership cannibalization went one way: CR collapsed to near-nothing, GLX took all. And that's rider psychology: 9 times out of 10 people take the frequencies over the straightest-line path. Unlike Porter which already acts as the lower-case Back Bay for Fitchburg riders who need to get to Red or work in Cambridge, or Malden Ctr. which is a 13-route bus megahub, these two lines go exactly the same place to exactly the same transfers, and travel times weren't different enough for the Lowell Line's express utility to attract a modicum of demand distinct from GLX. Frequencies rule all.

That really doesn't change at Indigo Line frequencies either on Lowell, so really there's no need to keep the CR station at all if you are planting the Green Line in the square. The actual projections don't support the conventional wisdom of location on a map favoring both stops.


Plus, if you're burying the grade crossing there's some physical constraints. The cut is plenty wide to do 2 x 2 CR vs. GLX tracks with a typical GLX island platform, but there isn't enough room in the cut to go side-by-side with both sets of platforms. Especially since as a freight clearance route Lowell can't have full-highs without a passing track. So the only way to do both with the crossing elimination in a cut is to put the GLX platforms at the square-proper, down in the cut more or less same place as the current platforms. And then drag the CR platforms offset way back so they start at Usher Rd. and the rear tip of the Rite Aid parking lot, and stretch at the far end alongside Playstead Park. Not really in the square at all. Also incurs extra expense dragging the cut further back to stay level instead of gently inclining back to the surface along the park. And fitting in that freight passing track. A lot of extra expense for "why not both?" when the ridership projections point to a near-total cannibalization.

I doubt there could ever be justification for that much extra cost and ham-fistedness of the CR platform's entry point vs. the square, since the above-and-beyond upside is so limited.


Best thing to do when +1'ing GLX across the river is to just outright displace the CR station, outright close Wedgemere, run a bus route on the Davis-->College Ave.-->West Med transfer chain that's going to grow bigtime after the first leg of GLX opens, and have one of the diverging routes off that trunk follow the 95 and 134 to scoop Wedgemere and terminate at Winchester Ctr. Then have Winchester Ctr. be first stop on commuter rail with all trains shedding tons of time inbound. Bus to GLX draws WC and Wedgemere within 5-7 minutes of rapid transit and takes advantage of it in large numbers to justify the frequencies, West Med becomes an even bigger transit node because it's got the trunk and a more robust set of diverging routes, and commuter rail gets better at doing commuter rail things at the stops where the travel time difference actually draws some unique, non-cannibalized ridership. Everyone gets their accessibility super-sized in the deal.


That's probably the most equitable way to serve it up, since trying to shiv both modes in with the grade separation starts dumping money down a rabbit hole with only one mode producing the ridership for the 'convenience'.



BTW...nobody, nobody knows why West Med is still waiting for its ADA upgrades while Wedgemere got its relatively inexpensive mini-highs expedited and installed 2 years ago. There may be some tangentially GLX-related political horse-trading going on with the city that's holding up a go-ahead. Possibly related to the superfluous lawsuits filed or threatened by Medford residents who live nowhere near GLX. Like that litigious crazy guy who lives next to Wedgemere. It may be something totally unrelated and quid pro quo like that knocking the West Med platforms down in the upgrade queue.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
There's actually a lot of bus upside out here, with the routes ripe for a reconfiguration after GLX gets going. The 94 and 80 hit Davis @ Red, College Ave. @ GLX, 16 @ GLX, and West Med @ CR (the 80 turning out a block away). That kind of transfer chaining is going to see increased, not decreased ridership under GLX. Check the travel times on some of those routes...it's FAST around the transfer chain. The only thing lacking are the frequencies making the speed attractive. With the extra demand GLX pushes out there I can definitely see the need for some consolidation/reshaping of the diverging routes and more frequencies on the lateral trunk connecting the transfers.

So that's another thing to have to consider: the Yellow Line doesn't get replaced, its demand profile just gets thrown in a blender and what emerges ends up supcharged from today...but not necessarily on the same patterns because of the way that chain of nearby transfers changes the game.
Click to expand...


Anytime someone mentions extending the GLX to Medford Center or something this is what needs to be brought up. All the bus lines out this way are designed to get people from suburban centers to transit centers in Cambridge or Malden. You open the GLX up and BAM the bus ridership demands change overnight. This isn't something that the T is talking about because I doubt they could even guess the needs until opening day is around the corner. But reconfiguring the bus routes up here will accomplish more for a fraction of the cost than tunneling to Medford Center or even crossing the Mystic River.
 
Rendering of the new green line cars being bought for this project, and some technical details if you follow the link
newgreenline.jpg


http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=271
http://www.universalhub.com/2015/imagine-green-line-branch-along-mem-drive
 
Mongo said:
Rendering of the new green line cars being bought for this project
newgreenline.jpg


http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=271
http://www.universalhub.com/2015/imagine-green-line-branch-along-mem-drive
Click to expand...

That is still the early rendering they put out when the contract was first awarded last year, not the final design. The cars will have front doors (the other image if you go to the CAF web site gives the false impression the cars have only two doors). The coupler type will also be compatible with those on the Type 7s and Type 8s (for towing/pushing, the cars won't run in regular trains with the older equipment).
 
winstonoboogie said:
That is still the early rendering they put out when the contract was first awarded last year, not the final design. The cars will have front doors (the other image if you go to the CAF web site gives the false impression the cars have only two doors). The coupler type will also be compatible with those on the Type 7s and Type 8s (for towing/pushing, the cars won't run in regular trains with the older equipment).
Click to expand...

Isn't the front door in that rendering just on the other side? Current GL trains only have front doors on the right side.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Isn't the front door in that rendering just on the other side? Current GL trains only have front doors on the right side.
Click to expand...

The Type 9s will have three doors on each side, just like the Type 7s and Type 8s. The other rendering image makes the front door almost look like an operator-only door.
 
Bump.

So the draft FY 2016 MassDOT and MBTA CIPs have been released. I've had a little bit of fun comparing to the latest 2014-2018 MassDOT and 2015-2019 MBTA CIP, there's a lot to say, but no one thread that's entirely appropriate. As FY 2016 concerns GLX however, the 2015 programmed funds for the Medford extension have been wiped clean from both the MassDOT and MBTA 2016 capital budgets. Obviously without the full 2017-2022 CIP it's impossible to say if/when it's going to happen, but a new line item has been added the GLX in the form of mitigation (i.e. expanded bus service along the corridor, purchase of addition RIDE vans). The State's and the MBTA's FY16 funding shed about $200mil (as far as I can tell - with the State projecting 151mil + 100mil of Federal/non-State funds compared to 428mil projected for 2016 in both the 2014 and 2015 CIPs, I would doubt it's insidious - if work is delayed then capital outlay is too). There's more to uncover - the roughly 300mil divergence from the current draft and the projected spends of the old CIPs is mostly down to the axing of any serious DMU implementation, and tapering down SSX funds and SCR funds for the time being.
 
CantabAmager said:
Bump.

So the draft FY 2016 MassDOT and MBTA CIPs have been released. I've had a little bit of fun comparing to the latest 2014-2018 MassDOT and 2015-2019 MBTA CIP, there's a lot to say, but no one thread that's entirely appropriate. As FY 2016 concerns GLX however, the 2015 programmed funds for the Medford extension have been wiped clean from both the MassDOT and MBTA 2016 capital budgets. Obviously without the full 2017-2022 CIP it's impossible to say if/when it's going to happen, but a new line item has been added the GLX in the form of mitigation (i.e. expanded bus service along the corridor, purchase of addition RIDE vans). The State's and the MBTA's FY16 funding shed about $200mil (as far as I can tell - with the State projecting 151mil + 100mil of Federal/non-State funds compared to 428mil projected for 2016 in both the 2014 and 2015 CIPs, I would doubt it's insidious - if work is delayed then capital outlay is too). There's more to uncover - the roughly 300mil divergence from the current draft and the projected spends of the old CIPs is mostly down to the axing of any serious DMU implementation, and tapering down SSX funds and SCR funds for the time being.
Click to expand...

SSX costs could get tapered without capacity loss if they punted the new headhouse to later and just did the bare track and platform upgrades. Stalled USPS relocation obviously moves it forward by several years and is going to affect how much funding lands within range of the years on the next CIP term, but if it really does end up being something they can't swallow in one bite project segmenting for the track + platform bread-and-butter and the facility expansion is a viable way forward. It would at least light a fire under the Feds to start contributing some assistance in support of Amtrak's goals for SSX, since that's a critical and non-optional piece of the NEC Infrastructure Master Plan. They're a significant stakeholder in it all, and need the capacity from the track expansion load-shifting more than they do the facility expansion, since Amtrak will always be assigned to the existing Atlantic Ave. and current middle platforms. The gains from SSX expansion are simply shifting of the NEC commuter rail branches and Fairmount further over to the current Old Colony side so Amtrak + Worcester + Providence have more room to spread out on the Atlantic Ave. side and swath of middle platforms.
 
CantabAmager said:
Bump.

So the draft FY 2016 MassDOT and MBTA CIPs have been released. I've had a little bit of fun comparing to the latest 2014-2018 MassDOT and 2015-2019 MBTA CIP, there's a lot to say, but no one thread that's entirely appropriate. As FY 2016 concerns GLX however, the 2015 programmed funds for the Medford extension have been wiped clean from both the MassDOT and MBTA 2016 capital budgets. Obviously without the full 2017-2022 CIP it's impossible to say if/when it's going to happen, but a new line item has been added the GLX in the form of mitigation (i.e. expanded bus service along the corridor, purchase of addition RIDE vans). The State's and the MBTA's FY16 funding shed about $200mil (as far as I can tell - with the State projecting 151mil + 100mil of Federal/non-State funds compared to 428mil projected for 2016 in both the 2014 and 2015 CIPs, I would doubt it's insidious - if work is delayed then capital outlay is too). There's more to uncover - the roughly 300mil divergence from the current draft and the projected spends of the old CIPs is mostly down to the axing of any serious DMU implementation, and tapering down SSX funds and SCR funds for the time being.
Click to expand...

Without taking the time to read it, it's also possible that since Federal reimbursement is locked in for GLX, the State funding has been wiped from the CIP. In any case, this is under construction and fully funded to College Ave, so I wouldn't draw any (as you say) insidious conclusions.
 
This could explain a recent tweet from Somerville state representative Denise Provost:

Denise Provost
‏@DeniseProvost1
Dear Baker Administration: you couldn't give the local legislators a head's up about the #GLX delay? #mapoli

https://twitter.com/DeniseProvost1/status/603655459472564225

She didn't provide any additional context, and I did some looking around but couldn't come up with any explanations from media reports at the time. Perhaps this is what she was referencing.
 
Equilibria said:
Without taking the time to read it, it's also possible that since Federal reimbursement is locked in for GLX, the State funding has been wiped from the CIP. In any case, this is under construction and fully funded to College Ave, so I wouldn't draw any (as you say) insidious conclusions.
Click to expand...

That is correct. State no longer has to stick a "carry the 1" placeholder on the Fed contribution since that was secured since the last CIP. And I believe majority of the design money was front-loaded and spent since most of the station designs are in final-final round of revisions. As has much of the most expensive ROW prep (retaining walls, utility relocation, shifting the Lowell Line alignment, etc.) that comes first on the project and has already been contracted out and/or structured to drain the Fed money first. The stuff they are spreading over multiple installments and fiscal years on purely state money are the actual rail + station construction, the carhouse, and the contingencies for overruns (mostly carhouse- and station-related).


Since nothing bread-and-butter project-specific have changed, chalk this up to accounting games 101. And I would say the SSX reductions are probably the same, since they likely back-loaded it off-range of the fiscal years covered in this CIP rather than make any project changes. The USPS relocation delays ensure that large portions of that project are going to fall out of any current CIP's date range by default.
 
Two renders from Tufts showing how they want to develop the air rights over the College Ave Station by their campus. Also shows the pedestrian overpass from their campus directly into the station building.

11426330_10152865043376681_8880054473794803377_o.jpg


11236558_10152865043541681_8557159602571673708_o.jpg
 
I love that they render a cyclist going the wrong way (the right side of the image), and another cyclist on the opposite side of the street, looking at him like, "WTF?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top