Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

[F-Line to Dudley]

Does anyone know when the Brickbottom/Washington Ave station got renamed to East Somerville? Also if the station names have been finalized?

Believe they're still in placeholder limbo with the Washington name. Sign shop's not going to be pressing new placards for years, so city and neighborhood can keep arguing amongst themselves for a few more years if they want. Everything else has been set for awhile, with only other mid-project change (and it was early) being "Medford Hillside" going to the more location-specific "College Ave."

I'm sure Tufts would love to change or prefix CA to "Tufts" since they're sinking big bucks into that stop, but that's not going to be allowed as long as the Orange Line stop at the Med Ctr. bears their name.

 

[Arlington]

So can anyone answer my question upthread about how likely an MVP GLX station is now that the MPO has slotted $126m of CMAQ and STP money (and $32m of State money) for it in the next TIP?

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

So can anyone answer my question upthread about how likely an MVP GLX station is now that the MPO has slotted $126m of CMAQ and STP money (and $32m of State money) for it in the next TIP?

"When", not "if" is the question. I think it's a cinch to happen eventually because of a few things:

-- Layup storage at College Ave. being kinda limited and awkward with just the mainline tracks dragged short distance behind the station. Route 16 has a proper side mini-yard baked in.

-- The Legislature played right into STEP's hands by passing a non-binding commitment to build a few years ago. Which was meaningless in the real world until now when some funding got attached. Given how STEP has mastered the use of sharp, blunt objects to push this much through it's a pretty straightforward and single-tasked advocacy to get just 1 more station built. Now that there's some ammo assigned to it and the main project is more or less in maintenance mode advocacy-wise, watch the sharp, blunt objects crack skulls on expediting 16. Design-first. It's futile to think we're going to see an actual shovel in the ground within 8 years, but pushing design far enough and publicly enough where a cut-and-run is going to be really embarrassing to stage is good use of time and relatively short money for the next 5 years. STEP has already gamed this out.

-- TuftsTuftsTuftsTuftsTufts. Their investment in College Ave. isn't a one-shot deal. Their Engineering Center is on Boston Ave. on the block before 16. Large, 4-story structure in a converted factory. And they are almost certainly going to be the muscle money that buys up the UHaul building, the autobody parcel on the literal corner, the Whole Foods plaza, and everything non-residential on that 16-North St.-Boston Ave.-Auburn St. block and puts on its master developer hat.


Many, many other benefits especially for buses, but those are the primary motivators for finishing the job.

 

[Arlington]

Can I pose a follow up? Why can't we guess that MVP would get done in maybe 6 or 7 years (by 2021 ...the scope of the TIP) it is a project where I think all the bridges (at Winthrop and North Streets) have enough clearance and no big utility issues, ready to be a railroad again thanks to being a 4-track ROW from the 1830s

When the MPO allocates $ do they "happen" roughly in the years committed? Are the risks to timely implementation budget-political, engineering-surprise, legal-regulatory, Land-acquisition, or admin-contractual?

I've learned not to think any of the above are "easy" but MVP-as-Phase-II has had more of these pre-packaged and fore-known (they were at 30% design) than just about any other big capital project you can name, and feels in some ways like a Silver-Line-to-Chelsea that actually can get pulled off pretty fast once they pull the trigger.

 

[chumbolly]

^I'd say getting in the TIP is very important. A project is very unlikely to advance unless it is in a funded TIP (unless there is a surprise source of funding like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act or whatever the big transportation bill was called that passed during the depths of the recession), but being funded in a TIP does not guarantee the project will move forward, generally for budget or political reasons. Example, the Concord Rotary was scheduled for replacement in, I believe 2009. It was put on hold and withdrawn from the TIP after they did the design work.

 

[Arlington]

Upon review, I think the Winthrop St Bridge will have to be replaced in order to get to MVP (but North St is still a generous 1-2-1 4-track bridge). Most stuff I've seen shows Winthrop St being the stop-point for any study or tail tracks coming from a College Ave Phase I terminus, so Phase 1 probably saved itself the trouble of replacing it.

To get to MVP would seem to require:
- widening the Winthrop St bridge
- using retaining walls to widen the ROW from Winthrop to North St
- Taking the U-Haul building and tiny strips for the station
- Taking 1 parcel fronting Boston Ave

Clearly, as F-Line has said, if you're Tufts, you're going to try to work with Somerville on TOD anywhere you can (the Somerville line runs through the parking lot at Sav Mor Liquors), inviting all kinds of parcel-assembly on the little finger of Somerville on which the station will sit (surrounded on 3 sides by Medford). It'll also make sense to put something on top of Tufts' current structured parking at 200 Boston Ave, like something fronting on Boston Ave, and having parking up its backside.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

^I'd say getting in the TIP is very important. A project is very unlikely to advance unless it is in a funded TIP (unless there is a surprise source of funding like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act or whatever the big transportation bill was called that passed during the depths of the recession), but being funded in a TIP does not guarantee the project will move forward, generally for budget or political reasons. Example, the Concord Rotary was scheduled for replacement in, I believe 2009. It was put on hold and withdrawn from the TIP after they did the design work.

Figure also that getting onto the TIP is Tufts' cue to open up the checkbook and start buying up that whole block. Then start applying the pressure. Sure, things can come off the TIP. But the state's going to think twice about doing it when one of Greater Boston's largest universities has made its move enacting a master plan built around that TIP item. Especially when it's not a backbreaker on price tag. If something has to get shifted around or dropped because of funding problems they're more likely to let sleeping dogs lie and go cut a softer target somewhere else rather than lock horns with Tufts over TOD hopes dashed. Really, Tufts is in the driver's seat on this more than any other entity including STEP. It's all about how fast they buy everything non-residential up from underneath that block.



BTW...there is a MassDOT site plan on-file on STEP's website for 16 station. It's old, from 2009, but the gist of it is what you see here:

Layover siding's supposed to be a little downwind towards North St. where side space is a little more plentiful. Small storage, but it prevents them from having to do an unfavorable number of deadhead moves to Brickbottom carhouse on shift changes, which is a minor ops inefficiency that stopping construction at College Ave. creates.


Interestingly, this serves up a much bigger parcel on the corner of Boston Ave. for Tufts to work with by taking the UHaul building footprint but freeing up its equal-size parking lot for new development.

And it's just a kiss-and-ride/busway. They successfully resisted the temptation to go parking sink here. That's still Alewife's and Wellington's job.


EDIT: Another render. This is an elevated station level with the Lowell Line, so it's 28 feet up (as tall as the stone arch commuter rail bridge). They're going for a compact lateral footprint with the ROW embankment excavated out to tuck the lobby downstairs. I don't know what that's going to entail construction-wise to prop up the commuter rail side of the embankment while they do the excavation, but certainly looks very space-efficient on land use.

http://greenlineextension.eot.state...5_DEIR_EA_V2_Fig3_7-30_MVP_Rte16Elevation.pdf

 

[ceo]

Note that the most recent design (from 2010, linked above) has the western track gently curving to the south as it enters the station. Coming in in a straight line would have required taking the 200 Boston Ave building for the tiny sliver of its footprint required to diverge the tracks around the center platform.

 

[whighlander]

Can I pose a follow up? Why can't we guess that MVP would get done in maybe 6 or 7 years (by 2021 ...the scope of the TIP) it is a project where I think all the bridges (at Winthrop and North Streets) have enough clearance and no big utility issues, ready to be a railroad again thanks to being a 4-track ROW from the 1830s

When the MPO allocates $ do they "happen" roughly in the years committed? Are the risks to timely implementation budget-political, engineering-surprise, legal-regulatory, Land-acquisition, or admin-contractual?

I've learned not to think any of the above are "easy" but MVP-as-Phase-II has had more of these pre-packaged and fore-known (they were at 30% design) than just about any other big capital project you can name, and feels in some ways like a Silver-Line-to-Chelsea that actually can get pulled off pretty fast once they pull the trigger.

Arlington -- remember that MPO is a planning organization they don't really control any money

While it might be a necessary condition that the MPO is on-board it is definitely is not sufficient -- this is particularly the case when State [i.e. MA Taxpayers] funds are needed [as opposed to Massport with its independent source of revenue to cover bonds] -- in the case of General Obligation Bonds from the Commonwealth you need a specific appropriation from the Legislature to the DOT

 

[ceo]

I'm sure Tufts would love to change or prefix CA to "Tufts" since they're sinking big bucks into that stop, but that's not going to be allowed as long as the Orange Line stop at the Med Ctr. bears their name.

I asked about that possibility at the College Ave/Ball Square station design meeting; they said that the station was being presented as a neighborhood station as opposed to being for Tufts, so it was pretty unlikely they'd name it for Tufts.

 

[George_Apley]

I asked about that possibility at the College Ave/Ball Square station design meeting; they said that the station was being presented as a neighborhood station as opposed to being for Tufts, so it was pretty unlikely they'd name it for Tufts.

They'll just put Tufts on as a secondary. Like Kendall - MIT.

 

[whighlander]

Figure also that getting onto the TIP is Tufts' cue to open up the checkbook and start buying up that whole block. Then start applying the pressure. Sure, things can come off the TIP. But the state's going to think twice about doing it when one of Greater Boston's largest universities has made its move enacting a master plan built around that TIP item.

....... Really, Tufts is in the driver's seat on this more than any other entity including STEP. It's all about how fast they buy everything non-residential up from underneath that block.

.....Interestingly, this serves up a much bigger parcel on the corner of Boston Ave. for Tufts to work with by taking the UHaul building footprint but freeing up its equal-size parking lot for new development.

F-Line -- Tufts may not necessarily wield a Big Checkbook here

It is a mid-sized Boston Area U in terms of students [10k total]
certainly not all that rich [$1.5B] compared to several similar sized Boston-area U's]

and it doesn't have eminent domain as an option -- they just have access to cheap bonds [tax exempt] through the MassDevelopment

Furthermore, unless Tufts already owns the land they may have to deal with a land owner, who may have their own development ideas -- such as condos

Overall I would say that given the above and the current Federal and State Gov't finances -- this proposed Green-Line extension beyond the current commitment is by no means a done deal

 

[Arlington]

Here's how the Somerville Bus Routes should be reformed once the GLX gets to Union Sq and Washington St:

80: Terminate at Washington-Union
87: Same Route + All-hours service to Arlington Center
88: Intensified
90: Terminate at Washington-Union; Extend along 80 or 87's route

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

I was always shocked there wasn't a bus from Arlington Center to, say, Malden Center via West Medford and Medford Center. Not sure what the ridership would have been but it would have at least given commuters an option to take the CR or OL as well as made shopping easier through these towns.

 

[Arlington]

I was always shocked there wasn't a bus from Arlington Center to, say, Malden Center via West Medford and Medford Center. Not sure what the ridership would have been but it would have at least given commuters an option to take the CR or OL as well as made shopping easier through these towns.

The ancient hubs at Harvard (via 77), Davis (87) and Lechmere (80) worked well enough at soaking up Arlington demand (plus DMUs to North Station on the Minuteman Path) that tendrils from the Sullivan needed only come counter-clockwise around to West Medford (95). If they'd ever made such a circumferential route, I think the time would now be ripe to kill it and use its fleet to densify Red Line access (e.g. a 90 parallel to the 80, and more 91s)

The whole arc of Rt 16/60 between Alewife and Wellington has CR/Orange/Green access that looks great--excessive, even--on a network map, but the reality is it is too infrequent to be as truly-useful as the 77 is.

I'd really like to see fewer, more frequent (or at least overlapping) bus routes hit both Red+GLX or, as consolation prize, terminate at some kind of bus-priority Union-Washington loop.

 

[Arlington]

Here's how the Somerville Bus Routes should be reformed once the GLX gets to Union Sq and Washington St:

80: Terminate at Washington-Union "Loop"
87: Same Route + All-hours service to Arlington Center
88: Intensified
90: Terminate at Washington-Union, keep Davis, out via College on 80's route

And here's the next set of changes when the GLX gets to College Ave. Redirect traffic onto a super-dense Medford Sq-College-Davis axis:

326: Winchester-Medford Sq-College-Davis (via Playstead)
134W: Woburn-Winchester-Medford Sq-College-Davis (via Winthrop St)
134E: Wellinton-Medford Sq-College-Davis
96: Unchanged Medford Sq-College-Davis-Porter-Harvard

And clean up all the circumferential running of the 94, 95, 101, and/or terminate some of them at Assembly instead of Sullivan.

Current System Map Detail for all routes named above.

 

[Arlington]

the MBTA Green Line Extension Facebook Account has posted a photo of the nearly-complete Harvard St Bridge rebuildwhich they describe as:

A bird’s-eye view of the widened rail bridge over Harvard Street in South Medford. The two bays to the right of the relocated commuter rail tracks will carry tracks for the Green Line Extension to Medford. Also note the nearly completed noise barriers at the top of the photo along the outbound commuter rail track.

 

[bigeman312]

Uhhh damn and I had stats I want to share. (mods?)

Just saying, the US census tries to assign census tracts to encompass 4000 people at the most - that's a standard to measure from. Belmont's (also bogus) claim is that somehow Somervile isn't dense enough to support a light-rail system - which is a specious argument. Of the two towns, the census tract covering Bellingham Square in Chelsea is the most populated at 9000. The next six tracts in order of population are all in Somerville (5000-7000), which is well above average for an American city and well within the average density required to support light rail. The argument isn't that Somerville isn't dense enough, it's that other areas are so dense that deserve/need to be wired in to the rapid transit with better facilities.

I agree with you. This project is so important! Currently, there are tens of thousands of people living in densely populated census tracts with no T or KBR stops within walking distance.

The fact that Chelsea and Everett are also underserved does not give this project any less merit.

 

[belmont square]

I agree with you. This project is so important! Currently, there are tens of thousands of people living in densely populated census tracts with no T or KBR stops within walking distance.

The fact that Chelsea and Everett are also underserved does not give this project any less merit.

Cantab's point about total population per census tract is irrelevant. It's the pop density that matters.

If you were looking for a corridor to implement rapid transit and could only choose two of the following criteria to guide your decision which would you choose?

1) overcrowded high frequency bus routes
2) high population density in the corridor
3) high population density over a larger area defined by municipal boundaries that bear no relationship to travel patterns

I would think you'd base it on 1 and 2, but since those aren't winning justifications for glx, its supporters typically resort to #3

 

[datadyne007]

The fact that Chelsea and Everett are also underserved does not give this project any less merit.

Absolutely agreed, as a Chelsea resident. It's not a mutually exclusive situation. Somerville deserves its GLX just as much as Chelsea deserves better transit.