Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

Almost no sign of the old Lechmere station, and now apparently there’s a big pile of dirt. Being fenced up.

1DA48FF8-28D4-4FC5-9CAD-ED4E2B107282.jpeg
27DD2D68-C619-419B-8C40-3DB88E989840.jpeg
76BAF136-AA35-4391-8D6E-FB64857924F9.jpeg
CB87C92E-EB5C-4034-801C-C2EFA65B0BE2.jpeg
3B855C2D-01E2-463E-A190-E9C65DCFA295.jpeg
 
Delvin4519 said:
...Winchester and Woburn are going to need a make a good land use plan to justify full rapid transit extension past West Medford, to what is currently a low-density suburb. Otherwise, all transit service past West Medford that could be justified is that hourly 134 bus, or the commuter rail. Car centric sprawl means running transit becomes a lot more expensive, with more areas to cover, when development is spread out in low density and automobile oriented suburbs..
Click to expand...

Winchester (3,800 / sq mile) and Woburn (3200 / sq mile) are not "low-density suburbs." Let's not exaggerate. They are "medium-density suburbs" with higher population densities than:
  • Fall River
  • Framingham
  • Haverhill
The "low-density suburb" moniker should be reserved for places with with less than 1k per square mile, which is less than a third of their population densities, like Easton, Westford, or Wareham.

Unlike low-density suburbs, Winchester and Woburn could absolutely justify and support a couple Green Line stops each. Heck, this board loves to talk about what a great idea extending Green (or sometimes even Orange) Line service to Needham (2500 / sq mile) would be, even though Needham is less dense than either Winchester or Woburn.

Now, whether or not extending the Green Line to Winchester/Woburn is the best solution is a different and interesting conversation, and is certainly debatable.
 
bigeman312 said:
Winchester (3,800 / sq mile) and Woburn (3200 / sq mile) are not "low-density suburbs." Let's not exaggerate. They are "medium-density suburbs" with higher population densities than:
  • Fall River
  • Framingham
  • Haverhill
The "low-density suburb" moniker should be reserved for places with with less than 1k per square mile, which is less than a third of their population densities, like Easton, Westford, or Wareham.

Unlike low-density suburbs, Winchester and Woburn could absolutely justify and support a couple Green Line stops each. Heck, this board loves to talk about what a great idea extending Green (or sometimes even Orange) Line service to Needham (2500 / sq mile) would be, even though Needham is less dense than either Winchester or Woburn.

Now, whether or not extending the Green Line to Winchester/Woburn is the best solution is a different and interesting conversation, and is certainly debatable.
Click to expand...

True, but the problem with the two communities is that while there is population, the land use pattern doesn't support it. Much of the area consists of large lot sizes, SFH zoning, and many parking lots and wide high speed arterials dominate commercial areas. As I said, the communities will need a land use plan to justify an extension. The existing population density, while it supports transit in theory, actual land use patterns and actually trying to access transit, not so much.

It's the same problem with London Ontario Canada trying to build an LRT streetcar line in the 21st century. Some make the excuse "we can't have a streetcar here, our population (density) is too low". Even though the population is much higher than 100 years ago and streetcars ran 100 years ago. The problem is the land use and urbanization pattern.

I like to refer to https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/visualisation.php# for interactive maps of urbanization patterns for all cities across the world, including Boston. As seen below (I changed the color to blank from blue for clarity). It is more precise than census blocks or population density maps, but not precise enough to reflect a zoning map of lots/buildings.

1672620285926.png


It's a rough approximation. I generally associate areas as:
  • Green/Yellow/Gray areas -> "rural". These areas typically don't support transit in the US/Canada.
  • Pale Orange -> "low density suburb". These areas are often car dependent in the US/Canada, generally SFH/SFZ/R1 zoned areas. These areas in theory, would support transit, but the land use pattern doesn't support it. I'll admit, "low density" suburb might be a bit of a stretch, but anyhow, it's a land use/zoning problem. "Low" is relative to inner core Boston. Woburn, Needham, Reading, Melrose fall in this category. Note: If the map is panned over to Europe, pale orange colors are not seen regularly in Europe, deep orange and brown colors make up a much higher porportion of urbanization in Europe.
  • Deep Orange -> "high density suburb". These are walkable suburbs in the US/Canada, generally areas where frequent rapid transit and frequent bus service works best. Frequencies of under 10 minutes, or even 5-6 minutes, can be achieved easily. Medford, Watertown, Roslindale fit in this category.
  • Brown/Red -> "urban". The city itself. Central Sq. Cambridge, Union Sq. Somerville, and South End fit in this category. Rapid Transit could support 5 minute frequencies, if not 3.
  • Pink/Purple -> Usually commercial/industrial areas in the US/Canada.
 
Last edited:
The fancy sculptural lighting on the bridge at Magoun is only half working now. That is probably a land-speed record for the T to give up on installed lighting.
 
It's worth noting that reactivating the Woburn Branch on any mode is pretty much a nonstarter. The ROW in Winchester is sold off, with an apartment building built smack in the middle. (A grocery store too, but that one you could curve around.) There's six street crossings in a mile and a half, only one of which (Skillings Road) is likely to be bridged.* Never mind that you'd have to either widen the viaduct in Winchester, or tunnel under. Realistically, the farthest you can get the Green Line would be Winchester Center, eating part of the parking lot. Would the walk-up ridership in Winchester, plus the bus connections to Burlington and Woburn, be worth it? Especially if every-15 regional rail stops at the Anderson RTC parking sink, a Montvale infill walkable from Woburn and Stoneham, and Winchester Center? Maybe, but it's not anywhere near the highest priority.

*The line passed over Skillings Road on a bridge, and under Swanton Street. Much of the cut for the Swanton underpass has been filled in; I imagine it was and would be prone to flooding.
 
Delvin4519 said:
True, but the problem with the two communities is that while there is population, the land use pattern doesn't support it. Much of the area consists of large lot sizes, SFH zoning, and many parking lots and wide high speed arterials dominate commercial areas. As I said, the communities will need a land use plan to justify an extension. The existing population density, while it supports transit in theory, actual land use patterns and actually trying to access transit, not so much.

It's the same problem with London Ontario Canada trying to build an LRT streetcar line in the 21st century. Some make the excuse "we can't have a streetcar here, our population (density) is too low". Even though the population is much higher than 100 years ago and streetcars ran 100 years ago. The problem is the land use and urbanization pattern.

I like to refer to https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/visualisation.php# for interactive maps of urbanization patterns for all cities across the world, including Boston. As seen below (I changed the color to blank from blue for clarity). It is more precise than census blocks or population density maps, but not precise enough to reflect a zoning map of lots/buildings.

View attachment 32516

It's a rough approximation. I generally associate areas as:
  • Green/Yellow/Gray areas -> "rural". These areas typically don't support transit in the US/Canada.
  • Pale Orange -> "low density suburb". These areas are often car dependent in the US/Canada, generally SFH/SFZ/R1 zoned areas. These areas in theory, would support transit, but the land use pattern doesn't support it. I'll admit, "low density" suburb might be a bit of a stretch, but anyhow, it's a land use/zoning problem. "Low" is relative to inner core Boston. Woburn, Needham, Reading, Melrose fall in this category. Note: If the map is panned over to Europe, pale orange colors are not seen regularly in Europe, deep orange and brown colors make up a much higher porportion of urbanization in Europe.
  • Deep Orange -> "high density suburb". These are walkable suburbs in the US/Canada, generally areas where frequent rapid transit and frequent bus service works best. Frequencies of under 10 minutes, or even 5-6 minutes, can be achieved easily. Medford, Watertown, Roslindale fit in this category.
  • Brown/Red -> "urban". The city itself. Central Sq. Cambridge, Union Sq. Somerville, and South End fit in this category. Rapid Transit could support 5 minute frequencies, if not 3.
  • Pink/Purple -> Usually commercial/industrial areas in the US/Canada.
Click to expand...

It sounds like what you’re advocating for is coupling improvements to transit to these types of communities with transit-oriented development and design around proposed stations. I agree with this approach whole-heartedly.

Our disagreement appears to lie solely with terminology. What you call “low-density suburb” (based on being auto-centric and lower density than what Europeans consider suburbs), I call “medium-density suburbs” (based on being typical of suburbs in this region, much denser than many and less dense than some, but with the shared recognition of their auto-centric orientation).
 
I went for a ride on the Green Line Extension last week, and posted a bunch of photos and observations on my blog. I absolutely geeked out -- it really is a cool new line.

I noticed lots of little things, both operationally and in the built environment. As I alluded to last week, there definitely was a "working out the bugs" vibe. (To be fair, I was there on Dec 26 when they were operating a holiday schedule.) One train I was on had to switch from Union to Medford at Lechmere and we all had to get off to swap. The system at Union to tell you which train would depart first didn't really function as intended. A sign at Union said the ramp was closed (which is wasn't) but neglected to indicate that an apparently-open staircase in fact was sealed in at the top.

I did indeed encounter the apparent "Stop Request" policy on the Medford Branch, which was announced verbally over the PA going outbound but not inbound -- I'm guessing at operator's discretion. And sure enough, we did indeed come to a full halt at Magoun Sq going inbound, but, with no stop requested, did not open the doors before carrying on. I really dislike this policy. Any minor speed benefit is almost completely negated by the full halt, and at best it creates confusion and at worst it is an accessibility issue for Deaf & HoH riders. (There is no signage anywhere to explain this policy, and no indication inside the car [on Type 8s, at least] of how you actually put in your "stop request".)

I was also very disappointed (though not surprised) that, as far as I could see, all of the maps in the downtown stations haven't been updated to show GLX. The T of course is infamous for its out-of-date maps, but at the very least they could have used the sticker approach that was done for the B Line Stop Consolidation project. How many years has GLX been in the works? How long has the T known that it was coming soon? And yet at the network's busiest stations, this long-awaited and widely-lauded expansion of service is literally not on the map.

That all being said -- I think it's important to not lose sight of the fact that the trains are running and the service is usable. It is far from perfect, but it nevertheless is a huge improvement. The T may need some time to keep working out those bugs, but at least in the meantime, residents of Somerville and Medford finally have Green Line service.
 
bigeman312 said:
It sounds like what you’re advocating for is coupling improvements to transit to these types of communities with transit-oriented development and design around proposed stations. I agree with this approach whole-heartedly.

Our disagreement appears to lie solely with terminology. What you call “low-density suburb” (based on being auto-centric and lower density than what Europeans consider suburbs), I call “medium-density suburbs” (based on being typical of suburbs in this region, much denser than many and less dense than some, but with the shared recognition of their auto-centric orientation).
Click to expand...

Yea. As someone who watches Not Just Bikes and heard of Strong Towns, the Greater Boston area, to an extent, has suburbanized with car dependent sprawl signficantly to the point where there is far too much sprawl, and far too many areas, where there is sort of demand of transit (i.e., the Woburns, Wakefields, Framinghams, Dedhams, Peabodys, etc.), but not enough demand to justify high frequencies, rail extensions, and not enough tax and fare revenue to cover the cost of maintainance of roads, trains, tracks, etc. The MBTA is struggling with so many maintance backlogs across buses, trains, and rail tracks, and money for transportation has to cover so many highways, bridges, and roads to cover all the car dependent low density sprawl across Massachusetts.

If unsure, look up NJB and Strong Towns, there's plenty of videos, diagrams, maps, etc., showing this effect.

In this case, there are so many areas that the MBTA needs to serve, the frequencies get spread out so thin for buses. Extending the Green Line to Anderson/Woburn, is an additional 7 miles of LRT Trolley trackage past West Medford that is all liable for maintaince and operation to maintain frequencies. Areas northwards past West Medford all developed long past the age of the walkable streetcar communities, and had developed with car dependency essentially solely in mind. The same goes for BLX to Lynn, which covers an extra 5 miles of swampland, and has to deal with the ocean saltwater along the coast. The only areas in the suburbs that predate suburban sprawl are right along the original train stations on the B&L and B&M mainlines, and some of the ROWs have long since gotten sold off and developed with additional car dependent sprawl.

Hence the term "low density suburb" describing an area like Winchester kind of makes sense. Since, it really is just that, a density too low to generate enough revenue to cover transportation infrastructure costs of that area. I'd argue that Medford is more of a "medium density suburb", and areas of northern Somerville near Medford represent a "high density suburb".

Hence, generally, Rapid Transit extensions should focus on where the streetcars previously ran (i.e. Roslindale OLX, Route 16/W. Medford/Porter GLX), and Commuter Rail/Regional Rail is more suited for an area like Woburn.
 
Last edited:
Riverside said:
I did indeed encounter the apparent "Stop Request" policy on the Medford Branch, which was announced verbally over the PA going outbound but not inbound -- I'm guessing at operator's discretion. And sure enough, we did indeed come to a full halt at Magoun Sq going inbound, but, with no stop requested, did not open the doors before carrying on. I really dislike this policy. Any minor speed benefit is almost completely negated by the full halt, and at best it creates confusion and at worst it is an accessibility issue for Deaf & HoH riders. (There is no signage anywhere to explain this policy, and no indication inside the car [on Type 8s, at least] of how you actually put in your "stop request".)
Click to expand...

How odd. On my first trip on the branch, which was the 21st, they stopped at every station and opened the doors, inbound and outbound. I don't recall if there were passengers boarding/alighting at all of them, so I can't say for sure that they weren't technically in the "Stop Request" policy mode (just not needing to because of waiting pax), but there was no mention of it, and no signage of any kind.

I agree that it's a bad policy on GLX (the surface branches to the west, with the more-frequent stops, is a different story), but it's apocalyptically stupid that there's no consistency, and little-to-no information made available to passengers. In my experience they don't really do a good job at making the "Stop Request" policy clear on the western branches, though there's frequently sufficient ridership that it becomes apparent that one needs to do something to request a stop. That they're clearly not even being consistent on the Medford Branch is in itself a recipe for utterly-unnecessary confusion, not to mention the utter lack of consistent information creating its own accessibility issue.

Tangentially related: my Medford Branch trip also demonstrated that fare control remains a complete joke. No one anywhere bothered to check if fares have been validated, and despite the validation scheme a bunch of people still boarded (and paid) at the front farebox, which slows things down just like on the surface branches. Excellent example of Baker's particular shortsightedness.
 
Arlington said:
I wonder whose water lines? Might be this big distribution line that crosses the tracks there at the station. It is big enough that you'd probably want to de-energize the OCS served from Ball Sq (roughly the stations they're closing)
View attachment 32393
Click to expand...

According to the T press release, it is because water lines serving the station need “additional insulation”. I wish they could tackle something seemingly small like that during the overnight windows, rather than a full day shutdown.
 
RandomWalk said:
According to the T press release, it is because water lines serving the station need “additional insulation”. I wish they could tackle something seemingly small like that during the overnight windows, rather than a full day shutdown.
Click to expand...
Oh dang, I just remembered something. (I thought I took a picture of this, but I guess I didn't...) Story time!

So I was checking out Medford/Tufts and noticed there was a bathroom, which is always a mildly pleasant surprise at T stations. And as I walk in, I literally say to myself, "Wow, look at this! A fully functional bathroom at a T–" and that's when I notice a paper sign above the sink, saying something to the effect of "Don't turn off the faucet all the way, otherwise the pipes will freeze".

PicardFacepalm.gif

So, I'm guessing that is related to the closure. (And I share the suspicion that this falls into a class of items that were intentionally postponed so that GLX would be "completed" during Baker's tenure.)
 
Yes: Medford/Tufts have two very nice bathrooms open to the public, and maybe the GL Operator's contract requires that at least one be operable at all time.
(Just like Alewife has bathrooms that are at least usable for crew and have come and gone for public accesss)

So maybe they're having to close the line for a day to weatherproof the plumbing--sad they couldn't have gotten Tufts Cummings Center to open its bathrooms or rigged temporary bathrooms in a trailer (like fancy farm weddings do).
 
I don't usually get off the Blue Line at Gov't Center during the morning commute, but I did today to run an errand before work. I was pretty impressed with the number of commuters I saw turn left up the stairs from the BL platform and head over to the Medford/Union platform. There was a much bigger morning queue than I've seen when the trains were terminating at Lechmere. I can't wait to see actual numbers for the various stops.
 
Lrfox said:
I don't usually get off the Blue Line at Gov't Center during the morning commute, but I did today to run an errand before work. I was pretty impressed with the number of commuters I saw turn left up the stairs from the BL platform and head over to the Medford/Union platform. There was a much bigger morning queue than I've seen when the trains were terminating at Lechmere. I can't wait to see actual numbers for the various stops.
Click to expand...
Yea. Took the train for the first time yesterday. The ride out of town was packed with winter classic fans. Great to see.
 
Took it for the first time today. It was during peak rush hour and after a moderate and inexcusable OL delay, the Medford branch was also delayed and they had to empty out a train at N Station and everyone waited. At N Station, even more insane--just because this is so typical of the T--all the signs and maps were pre-extension. As in, the platforms servicing the northbound Somerville and Medford lines still said "Lechmere". Some people who excuse things away might find this a minor quibble. It's not. The T had *decades* to prepare for this, and moreover, the stations in Somerville obviously have the right signs and maps. It's not like this took everyone by surprise. What in the everloving fuck is wrong with people making decisions at the MBTA that whoever signed off on new maps and signs didn't think to just, I don't know, you know, make enough new signs that the stations actually have accurate maps? It's just abysmal that this is still the usual for the T. From childhood, the T has always exemplified the absolute worst of ineffectual and thoughtless bureaucracy. This goes beyond Baker, and even goes beyond the state legislature that's sat on its hands allowed the T to deteriorate for 50 years. I don't know what the solution to this deeper disease is, but boy does it seem unlikely the T will ever actually appear to be in capable hands in my lifetime.

As for the line itself, once the train actually came, it was smooth and fast. People I know who live in Somerville are also liking it, though they note frequent service disruptions (as is normal with the T, alas). We have good bones for this system, it's just so frustrating that it seems like a problem nobody wants to actually solve once and for all. Funding is obviously a huge part of the issue, but funding doesn't explain why someone literally didnt bother replacing the signs at North Station.
 
FK4 said:
Took it for the first time today. It was during peak rush hour and after a moderate and inexcusable OL delay, the Medford branch was also delayed and they had to empty out a train at N Station and everyone waited. At N Station, even more insane--just because this is so typical of the T--all the signs and maps were pre-extension. As in, the platforms servicing the northbound Somerville and Medford lines still said "Lechmere". Some people who excuse things away might find this a minor quibble. It's not. The T had *decades* to prepare for this, and moreover, the stations in Somerville obviously have the right signs and maps. It's not like this took everyone by surprise. What in the everloving fuck is wrong with people making decisions at the MBTA that whoever signed off on new maps and signs didn't think to just, I don't know, you know, make enough new signs that the stations actually have accurate maps? It's just abysmal that this is still the usual for the T. From childhood, the T has always exemplified the absolute worst of ineffectual and thoughtless bureaucracy. This goes beyond Baker, and even goes beyond the state legislature that's sat on its hands allowed the T to deteriorate for 50 years. I don't know what the solution to this deeper disease is, but boy does it seem unlikely the T will ever actually appear to be in capable hands in my lifetime.

As for the line itself, once the train actually came, it was smooth and fast. People I know who live in Somerville are also liking it, though they note frequent service disruptions (as is normal with the T, alas). We have good bones for this system, it's just so frustrating that it seems like a problem nobody wants to actually solve once and for all. Funding is obviously a huge part of the issue, but funding doesn't explain why someone literally didnt bother replacing the signs at North Station.
Click to expand...
They have already started replacing the signs at other stations.
 
cubbe8 said:
They have already started replacing the signs at other stations.
Click to expand...
I think the question is why they waited until both GLX branches are already in service just to start replacing them, especially at the most important stations such as Green Line stations downtown.

Many Chinese cities, with one or more new subway lines or extensions opening every year, are able to have maps at every single station on the entire system up-to-date on opening day of the new lines.
 
Teban54 said:
I think the question is why they waited until both GLX branches are already in service just to start replacing them, especially at the most important stations such as Green Line stations downtown.

Many Chinese cities, with one or more new subway lines or extensions opening every year, are able to have maps at every single station on the entire system up-to-date on opening day of the new lines.
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a thread around here somewhere documenting the literal years it took for them to replace the maps at Park Street prominently showing Government Center as closed for renovation long after it had reopened? They have a habit of doing stuff like this.

It is a good question - albeit one of many useful questions we'll likely never get answers to, in part because it seems those in charge of overseeing it don't understand why they should ask. On the one hand, it's entirely possible that with shifting schedules and supply chain problems, things like new signs could be late and therefore unavailable for when the extension opens. It could be that they don't think some temporary stickers are appropriate for a short-term issue. Of course, to believe these things requires giving the agency a benefit of the doubt it tends to demonstrate it does not deserve. More likely is either they literally don't care, or are so mired in other issues that this one's too far down the priority list (which is what I think is likely).

The degree to which apparently "small-ticket" things like this get missed or screwed up, though, does tend to be a bit concerning. It'd be one thing if certain less-critical issues were being knowing and deliberately left to one side to allow them to focus on the most important matters, but I don't think they're in a position where we can trust them to do that. I worry that it's more like these things are the most visible indicators of the level of institutional rot (which, given the FTA's involvement lately seems a distinct possibility).
 
I recall there were the old-school horizontally-oriented spider maps without the Old Colony lines still up in various places for literally decades after Old Colony service was restored. Baffles my why the T hasn't fixed this problem. It's not like they're opening new stations or expansions every other week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top