Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

Well, this project has been proposed for 89 years and hasn't been completed yet. I am questioning whether it gets done in the next 89 years, now.

In the last 28 years there have been exactly 0(!) extension of rapid transit on the T. Will we at least see any in the next 28 years?
 
Scipio said:
Powerpoint summary up: http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/A...Presentation for FMCB Final - 08.21.2015.pptx

Cost cutting options:
  • $129 m: Downsize, delay or eliminate vehicle maintenance and storage facility
  • $40 M : Downsize/streamline or delay stations (to be more like stations elsewhere on the Green Line
  • $28 M : Downsize, delay or eliminate Community Path Extension – Up to $28 million in savings
  • Rebid project and step away from current management
  • Kill whole project, or kill the College Ave. Branch, or kill Union Square

Revenue options:
  • $158 m: Reallocate $158 million in federal funds programmed by Boston Region MPO for future Route 16 extension to core GLX projectfacility
  • TIF from immediate neighborhoods to pay for stations
  • Donations for Community Path Extension
  • Get some Federal earmarks and/or shake down Tufts and US2

Obviously, the entries with dollar signs next to them don't add up to $1B.
Click to expand...

That better be wrong. Because the biggest ways to cut costs is probably the stations and the railyard (and maybe the bike trail). Reducing from two-level separated concrete-glass station to D-line style slab of concrete should shave more than $40 mil.
 
Are the in-progress bridge reconstructions going to be completed as planned?
 
Guys, don't forget about all the projects unfairly tacked on. Road redesigns near new stations (should be the city), Millers River Culvert repair/soil remediation/upgrade (should be DEP, DCR, and others). There's more to it than meets the eye, and it all flies under the radar typically. It is sort of out-of-sight and out-of-mind, and we don't question in it because the meetings aren't as transparent as we think. The public dabbles in designing stations over and over again while the Millers River is tucked in as a surprise line item and everyone thinks the price is the still the same, and who's going to say no to improving water quality and drainage for the "same" price?

The curtain is pulled -- this isn't GLX, it is a regional improvement plan with political treats tossed around.
 
ant8904 said:
That better be wrong. Because the biggest ways to cut costs is probably the stations and the railyard (and maybe the bike trail). Reducing from two-level separated concrete-glass station to D-line style slab of concrete should shave more than $40 mil.
Click to expand...

Someone with better knowledge of the station geometries can correct me but:

1) Aren't a number of the stations located where the tracks are in a trench -- you need to get people up and down out of the trench?

2) Don't most of the stations also have co-located commuter rail tracks? For station access, don't you have to get people across both the GLX tracks and the commuter rail tracks safely?
 
So really building stations and the rail itself is more doable than it seems if all the other stuff is taken over by the groups who should be responsible anyways?
 
Minnesota built a brand new 11-mile light rail that connects Minneapolis to St. Paul. THe line has 18 brand new stations. They started construction in 2010 and the line opened in 2014. Why can't we build anything?

Is Massachusetts really that pathetic? I didn't think so, but now...
 
The bridges over are elevated over, but for many of the locations, I can see a station can be put in and access with entrance to the side of the bridge many of the stations are located to. If we do it D-line style, people can cross to Green tracks for the other platform. The Commuter Rail can stay on its side and no one have to cross it. Does that make it hard to access if you are on the wrong side and thus have to go over the bridge? Yes. But that is preferable to cancellation. Arguably preferable than spending $3 billion to make this happen.
 
datadyne007 said:
I'd hope they at least do a VE exercise on the admittedly ridiculous stations to try to shave off costs. The problem is that the new MBTA accessibility & station design standards specify that redundant elevators are necessary, so they can't VE out the extra elevators to save some money.
Click to expand...

They've already got plans to VE the stations, but they estimate that'll only shave off $100m or so. Still a lot of overruns there.
 
I'm concerned they start to slash the ops side. That trainyard and maintenance facility are important to the way the system would function, you can't keep the line and then hinder the MBTA's capacity to run it.

Stations are going to get slashed - which should've happened anyways. Is the Community Path is up the air - can, or rather will, Somerville self-finance? There was a new line item on the 2015 one-year CIP for GLX mitigation - I don't know if that was just incorporated separately in earlier CIPs though.

Also just be clear, this is a $400 million cost variance. Yes the cost has risen over a billion since it's inception, but the Globe's headline:

"MBTA Green Line extension to cost up to $1b more than projected"

Is misleading since we already knew about most of that billion dollar cost overrun.
 
CantabAmager said:
I'm concerned they start to slash the ops side. That trainyard and maintenance facility are important to the way the system would function, you can't keep the line and then hinder the MBTA's capacity to run it.
Click to expand...

LOL. This is so ironic. They're slashing ops by hindering the trainyard and maintenance facility for the commuter rail just to appease the GL's need for its own yard. They're also slashing freight ops at the same time.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
LOL. This is so ironic. They're slashing ops by hindering the trainyard and maintenance facility for the commuter rail just to appease the GL's need for its own yard. They're also slashing freight ops at the same time.
Click to expand...

Northside brings about 28-35k in a day. GLX sits in that range as well for projected ridership, loss of the switch track is an inconvenience, but it's not fatal to northside ops (or is it?). GLX beat Lowell and Fitchburg for ridership, beats them on net cost per pax. If the State and the Feds are going to create a tight funding climate that incentives either/or choices - well......GLX>Northside (and esp L and F) - and yes I realize how ridiculous and annoyingly fatalistic that sounds.
 
bigeman312 said:
Minnesota built a brand new 11-mile light rail that connects Minneapolis to St. Paul. THe line has 18 brand new stations. They started construction in 2010 and the line opened in 2014. Why can't we build anything?

Is Massachusetts really that pathetic? I didn't think so, but now...
Click to expand...

It took over 2 and a half years to build a 3 story elevator at Park Street.....I had little faith this extension would ever get built. Heck, look at how long it's going to take to rehab the Longfellow Bridge. Or look at how long it has taken to widen 93/95 from 24 to 109, or the Ashmont Station rebuild......the list goes on.
 
mass88 said:
It took over 2 and a half years to build a 3 story elevator at Park Street.....I had little faith this extension would ever get built. Heck, look at how long it's going to take to rehab the Longfellow Bridge. Or look at how long it has taken to widen 93/95 from 24 to 109, or the Ashmont Station rebuild......the list goes on.
Click to expand...

What do you attribute this pathetic ineptitude to?
 
That is fucking unreal. Cost overruns are expected, all costs are low balled, but heads need to roll for this.
 
So the Commonwealth gets away with dropping both Arborway Restoration and the Red-Blue Connector without replacing either of them with equitable rapid transit projects, now the Green Line Extension is in danger which would mean that no major rapid transit project might be completed as part of the Big Dig environmental mitigation.

I hope the Commonwealth gets its pants sued off it, but I figure that if a lawsuit occurs that they will only be required to improve some podunk bus service (which would then later get dropped years after).
 
The problem with suing a government agency for screwing over residents/taxpayers is that it ultimately screws residents/taxpayers
 
The government is expected to provide basic services. In this particular instance, they have a legal obligation to provide that service. What are people supposed to do when the government is delinquent in providing a service that they have a reasonable and legal expectation of receiving? If you just sit on your hands because you don't want to do any damage to the "taxpayers" then you get nothing and the government faces no repercussions for bad governance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top