Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

For those in the know about these things, what do you think would be cheaper, assuming the current GLX project is complete:

A four stop Green Line extension beyond Union (Porter, Alewife Brook Parkway, East Belmont/Brighton St, Belmont Center)

OR

A one stop Red Line extension beyond Alewife (Belmont Center)?

If the answer is RLX, then I believe that should be prioritized over GL2Porter, as it would be a much bigger impact project.

If the answer is GLX, then I believe that project should be completed at once, rather than a single-stop Union-Porter extension.
 
They DID scale this project down a bit to save some money.
 
bigeman312 said:
For those in the know about these things, what do you think would be cheaper, assuming the current GLX project is complete:

A four stop Green Line extension beyond Union (Porter, Alewife Brook Parkway, East Belmont/Brighton St, Belmont Center)

OR

A one stop Red Line extension beyond Alewife (Belmont Center)?

If the answer is RLX, then I believe that should be prioritized over GL2Porter, as it would be a much bigger impact project.

If the answer is GLX, then I believe that project should be completed at once, rather than a single-stop Union-Porter extension.
Click to expand...

If the GL were to be extended beyond Union those wouldn't be the stops I'd want. And similarly, if the RL were to be extended beyond Alewife that wouldn't be the stop I'd want. So... neither?

Watertown (GL) and Arlington (RL) are both better candidates for transit extensions than Belmont. Belmont only makes sense as a stop along the way to Waltham.
 
Would any future RLX plans into Arlington/Lexington be following the old plans from the 70's in terms of station placement/etc?
 
bigeman312 said:
If the answer is RLX [to Belmont Center], then I believe that should be prioritized over GL2Porter, as it would be a much bigger impact project.

If the answer is GLX [Porter, Alewife, Brighton St, Bel Cen], then I believe that project should be completed at once, rather than a single-stop Union-Porter extension.
Click to expand...

Belmont Center is a pretty bad terminus. I think you're way better off at Waverly (as bus hub), or spending the $ on a Cambridge Park Drive CR stop with a bike/bus/pedestrian overpass
to connect the Concord Ave/Fawcett stuff to CR & Alewife, which probably does a better job of connecting locals to the Red.

With a CR & overpass, iAlewife becomes ideal as a terminus for a GLX that'd run:
Union-KentSt(Rink)-Porter-Sherman-Alewife

And eventually do
GLX onward
BrightonSt-BelCen-Waverly-(onward to Beaver Brook & Waltham/Brandeis/128)

Or it is fun to think about GLX
Porter-Apple Cinemas-Huron Ave-MtAuburn-Watertown Mall
 
128 would be the idea terminus. Waltham center is densly populated so any line should definitely go through there.
 
Wash said:
Would any future RLX plans into Arlington/Lexington be following the old plans from the 70's in terms of station placement/etc?
Click to expand...
That's the other big consideration for RLX: the tunnel & tail tracks all point out the Minuteman Path to Arlington (as far as Magnolia field), which is also where the ridership is (currently on foot via Minuteman or on a 77/79 or 62/67/76 bus.
 
The best would be to branch out the red line from the Alewife terminus. One branch going to Waltham and the other going to Lexington.
 
tysmith95 said:
The best would be to branch out the red line from the Alewife terminus. One branch going to Waltham and the other going to Lexington.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't branching on the other end of the Red Line really screw up timings/headways across all branches?
 
bakgwailo said:
Wouldn't branching on the other end of the Red Line really screw up timings/headways across all branches?
Click to expand...

Not sure why, or anymore than the Ashmont/Braintree branching?

You could even dedicate the branching at each end (making essentially two line that interleave in the middle), say Waltham - Ashmont and Lexington - Braintree.
 
I would imagine it would work like the NYC subway where each trunk line has multiple routes.
 
Waltham needs better access to what, via what?

These vague generic assertions are so pointless--for the love of god, please ground your declarations in some semblance of statistical reasoning/fact-based evidence. If you think Waltham is underserved comparable to similar communities, then state what those comparable communities area, cite the variables/data points that make Waltham comparable to those similar communities, and then do the "whereas community X has Z amount of transit, Waltham, being comparable because of A, B, C, has only 1/10th of Z"... how hard is it?

"It's hard to get to my friends/restaurants/office complexes/etc." in Waltham is just useless not only for its anecdotal nature but also for its total decontextualization/isolation.... it can be hard to get to many places in metro Boston via mass transit that are of equal or lesser distance to the downtown core than is Waltham.

Also, it's ridiculously easy to argue the opposite here, given that Waltham has 3 commuter rail stops (Brandeis, Downtown, and Waverley is just 200 yards from the Waltham line), and at least 5 separate express line buses to downtown.
 
Re: Waltham

Waltham ought to be getting more frequent service using commuter rail equipment on the existing tracks.

Just outbound of Belmont Center, the ROW for the third and fourth tracks has ended up in the ownership of private businesses (which is why the Mass Central Rail Trail route through Belmont has been proposed to find some alternate route); I think the actual land use on that former rail ROW is mostly parking lot space, so converting that land ownership back to railroad might be possible without any significant demolition of buildings, but the key question is whether it's more cost effective to just run Indigo frequencies on the current tracks, or do some massive subway build.
 
davem is right, of course, but it is worth remembering that among the many elements that drove price up from the original $800m was the branch to Union SQ (instead of just at Washington&McGrath) an extra station, and all the flyovers/switch/signals. (And double tracked it all)

I think we rightly diverged from the ancient MTA plan and the CLF settlement (at considerable cost) to buy an option for future expansion. But all beyond that is for other threads.
 
Arlington said:
davem is right, of course, but it is worth remembering that among the many elements that drove price up from the original $800m was the branch to Union SQ (instead of just at Washington&McGrath) an extra station, and all the flyovers/switch/signals. (And double tracked it all)

I think we rightly diverged from the ancient MTA plan and the CLF settlement (at considerable cost) to buy an option for future expansion. But all beyond that is for other threads.
Click to expand...

davem would be well served to get a life. Not everybody can be bothered to go look at postings from 10 years ago, especially as you say circumstances may have changed. A lot of those discussions are also pure insanity, so if someone has a question grounded in reality, a reference to some long ago comment is just stupid IMHO.
 
Rover said:
davem would be well served to get a life. Not everybody can be bothered to go look at postings from 10 years ago, especially as you say circumstances may have changed. A lot of those discussions are also pure insanity, so if someone has a question grounded in reality, a reference to some long ago comment is just stupid IMHO.
Click to expand...

Plenty of new people sign up on ArchBoston, don't fully understand the organization of threads, and post things in incorrect threads. 99% of these new users, when directed to the correct thread by a longstanding member, sensibly just move their discussion over to the correct location. No harm, no foul.

You're the only new user I can think of who instead is a dick about it, and insults people who have been using this site for years instead of just following the damn rules.

If you can't "be bothered" to post in the right place, and you act disrespectfully to people who point you in the right direction, then you shouldn't be posting at all.

Nobody is saying that you have to read through the entire catalog of ArchBoston content before posting. What we are saying is that you should respect the organization of content, and at least make an effort to post whatever comments or questions you may have in the correct place. Don't just be like "eff that, all your posts are stupid, y'all have no lives, imma post where I want, bitches".
 
JumboBuc said:
Plenty of new people sign up on ArchBoston, don't fully understand the organization of threads, and post things in incorrect threads. 99% of these new users, when directed to the correct thread by a longstanding member, sensibly just move their discussion over to the correct location. No harm, no foul.

You're the only new user I can think of who instead is a dick about it, and insults people who have been using this site for years instead of just following the damn rules.

If you can't "be bothered" to post in the right place, and you act disrespectfully to people who point you in the right direction, then you shouldn't be posting at all.

Nobody is saying that you have to read through the entire catalog of ArchBoston content before posting. What we are saying is that you should respect the organization of content, and at least make an effort to post whatever comments or questions you may have in the correct place. Don't just be like "eff that, all your posts are stupid, y'all have no lives, imma post where I want, bitches".
Click to expand...

Then let people be nice about it. Whenever you ask a simple question you inevitably get some snarky response to go find a discussion that was had in the previous decade about a certain subject when a quick answer would suffice. If someone posts "we covered that here" of course I take a look. If someone posts something like "stop hijacking the thread, you should have already known this discussion was had in this other thread" then I'll respond in kind. IMHO too many people who've been out here for a very long time tend to think everybody remembers every discussion as well as they do, and don't have a problem letting you know it. A little give and take on this matter isn't a bad thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top