MA Casino Developments

[George_Apley]

It's on the future Urban Ring route - which will be GL in all likelihood. Potentially this could jump start that project.

 

[DominusNovus]

I got this question in at the end of a page a couple back, so I feel justified bumping it given these transit comments...

A short spur would seem to be relatively easy (in theory; my faith is eroded day by day with the GLX). It would seem a shame to just end it right there, between the shopping center and casino, though. After the location, however, I count 5 at-grade crossings pretty quickly after (including that pretty ugly one right next to the Chelsea station). Perhaps part of the proposal could include, to start, grade separation for those crossings, along with a station for the casino (whatever line would be running through it).

 

[Arlington]

It's on the future Urban Ring route - which will be GL in all likelihood. Potentially this could jump start that project.

Actually, unless they've re-aligned the ring since 2010 (and I know there's been talk) the 2010 alignment misses the Wynn Site because the Urban Ring was designed to hit Sullivan, Assembly, and Wellington (the fat yellow line in the Northwest corner) before coming back to Everett.

The Wynn site fronts onto Route 99 and backs unto the Purple Line (and Costco and Target, beyond)

Only if the Urban Ring was "short cut" up Rt 99 would it touch the Wynn Site. Open the detailed view by clicking this preview

 

[Arlington]

Let's review the Transportation options for Wynn:

0) Do nothing. The reality is cleaning up the brownfield and creating union jobs is such an attractive package that nobody needs to offer anybody any transit spiffs anywhere.

1) Commuter Rail Station (behind Costco/Home Depot in Everett).
Pro: right on the site's edge
Con: Bad grade coming off the bridge,
Con: low frequency of service (Newburyport/Rockport line)

2) Spur from someplace:
Pro: purports a direct connection
Con: Even if Wynn paid for a station, nobody would want to see "their" trains diverted to it. Not gonna happen.

3) Pedestrian connection from Assembly, over A.E. Dam, under Rockport Line to Wynn's waterfront.
Pro: Lots of great connectivity (Assembly-Costco-Wynn)...makes a connection that today takes both a car *and* a circuitous routing
(If I owned the Target/Costco shopping center, I'd push for this and TOD on my riverfront "back lot" and tout the short walk to the Assembly station)
Con: A long hike for Wynn patrons and too many non-Casino non-glamorous users, so he's not going to like it.

4) Aerial/Cable Gondola
Pro: Flys from Assembly, over river, dam, and railroad, straight to Wynn. Solves all the thorny over/under egress problems at ground and water level.
(If I were Wynn, this would be my preferred option because its nearly-exclusive and straight from Orange Line to the Slot Machines)
Con: No public benefit

5) Divert the Urban Ring. Convince MBTA to cut Assembly & Wellington from the ring and run from Sullivan, up Rt 99 and rejoin the exclusive (former railroad ROW) busway in Everett (just before the Rotary with Rt 16)
Pro: Urban ring finally gets a reason and a sponsor
Con: Cuts off a lot of TOD users with 'real life' trips at both Assembly and Wellington in favor of just Wynn's workers (and a future "revitalized" 99?)

 

[Arlington]

The Everett site is located right next to the commuter rail line to Chelsea, correct?

It is marked on this Aerial View in Bing of 42.393925,-71.071722 (Bing zooms you out, so please zoom in) and worth a some "flying around" because there are a lot of problems in 3D.

Between the water needing to be passable, the locks needing high clearance, the bridge being humped, and Wynn being to the east of all 3 and Assembly being west of all 3, you have a lot to deal with to connect any to any there.

Which is why the Earhart dam looks easy to cross/connect but it hasn't been, and part of the reason why the Urban Ring had chosen to "around" rather than "through" this area.

 

[DBM]

EVERETT:
- Where the hell is Everett and how do you get there?

This comment inadvertently brings up a widely understood reality about Boston geography that nevertheless still deserves more thought and attention: how our twisting/sinuous waterways lead to formidable geographic isolation in the heart of our metro core.

The answer to the question is: Everett casino site is 2.35 miles from Boston City Hall. Fenway Park is essentially the same distance: 2.25 miles. Yet the configuration of the confluence of Charles River/Mystic River/Chelsea Creek reduces Everett to a Siberia-like isolation, in comparison to the Fens. Of course, the present transportation infrastructure and the policies/assumptions underlying it compounds/aggravates this, I'm sure.

P.S. It's also been said before, but from a cultural perspective, this isolation, of course, creates our uniquely provincial/idiosyncratic tribalism/authenticity, which has been such a gold mine for Mr. Affleck, et al.

 

[DominusNovus]

It is marked on this Aerial View in Bing of 42.393925,-71.071722 (Bing zooms you out, so please zoom in) and worth a some "flying around" because there are a lot of problems in 3D.

Between the water needing to be passable, the locks needing high clearance, the bridge being humped, and Wynn being to the east of all 3 and Assembly being west of all 3, you have a lot to deal with to connect any to any there.

Which is why the Earhart dam looks easy to cross/connect but it hasn't been, and part of the reason why the Urban Ring had chosen to "around" rather than "through" this area.

I'm confused. Assuming the RoW for the commuter rail is wide enough, why couldn't any green or orange line tracks just be routed along the CR bridge thats already there?

 

[Shepard]

Let's review the Transportation options for Wynn:

0) Do nothing. The reality is cleaning up the brownfield and creating union jobs is such an attractive package that nobody needs to offer anybody any transit spiffs anywhere.

1) Commuter Rail Station (behind Costco/Home Depot in Everett).
Pro: right on the site's edge
Con: Bad grade coming off the bridge,
Con: low frequency of service (Newburyport/Rockport line)

2) Spur from someplace:
Pro: purports a direct connection
Con: Even if Wynn paid for a station, nobody would want to see "their" trains diverted to it. Not gonna happen.

3) Pedestrian connection from Assembly, over A.E. Dam, under Rockport Line to Wynn's waterfront.
Pro: Lots of great connectivity (Assembly-Costco-Wynn)...makes a connection that today takes both a car *and* a circuitous routing
(If I owned the Target/Costco shopping center, I'd push for this and TOD on my riverfront "back lot" and tout the short walk to the Assembly station)
Con: A long hike for Wynn patrons and too many non-Casino non-glamorous users, so he's not going to like it.

4) Aerial/Cable Gondola
Pro: Flys from Assembly, over river, dam, and railroad, straight to Wynn. Solves all the thorny over/under egress problems at ground and water level.
(If I were Wynn, this would be my preferred option because its nearly-exclusive and straight from Orange Line to the Slot Machines)
Con: No public benefit

5) Divert the Urban Ring. Convince MBTA to cut Assembly & Wellington from the ring and run from Sullivan, up Rt 99 and rejoin the exclusive (former railroad ROW) busway in Everett (just before the Rotary with Rt 16)
Pro: Urban ring finally gets a reason and a sponsor
Con: Cuts off a lot of TOD users with 'real life' trips at both Assembly and Wellington in favor of just Wynn's workers (and a future "revitalized" 99?)

Option 2 - the rapid transit spur - still seems like the best and easiest. True diverting the OL would reduce headways towards Malden, but the GL wouldn't have as much of an issue. Plus it could cross at grade to extend into Chelsea and complete the UR segment to the airport. I see little downside here, even for Wynn.

 

[Arlington]

I'm confused. Assuming the RoW for the commuter rail is wide enough, why couldn't any green or orange line tracks just be routed along the CR bridge thats already there?

I'm confused. "Routed along" seems to involve either a new bridge or severing the Rockport line. Either way, Wynn may have $50m to throw at neighborhood improvements, but not the $500m that your "spur" will end up costing.

Option 2 - the rapid transit spur - still seems like the best and easiest. True diverting the OL would reduce headways towards Malden, but the GL wouldn't have as much of an issue. Plus it could cross at grade to extend into Chelsea and complete the UR segment to the airport. I see little downside here, even for Wynn.

On Railroad.net yours would be known (affectionately) as is a "fantasy map" question, where the lines look easy to draw on a map, but can't happen due to political, financial, or low-ridership realities. It should be kind of a hint how hard these things are that neither Logan Airport itself nor the Convention Center have ever gotten "real" spurs straight to them, but must be satisfied with rubber-wheeled circulators/connectors.

Three problems: Getting there, Crossing the River, Leaving there.

Getting there:
GL - The Green line is already struggling to make its way beyond Lechmere. While they've kinda-sorta left provisions for a far-future branch that goes east of what they're building, it involves several expensive bridges to get from Somerville, cross both the OL and the CR to be alongside the Rockport line.

OL - Depending on where your line branched from, the Orange Line would need a bridge/tunnel just to do a flying junction with the current line (you can't cross trains across each other on the same level, like they did/do in the Green Line in 1910). And you'll probably need a second bridge just to cross to the correct side of the Commuter Rail (the east side) from its current west side location.

Cost: probably $200m to get to the river's edge from either the Green or Orange.

Crossing the River:
Any new line is going to need a new bridge, since you aren't going to get away with running them on the same bridge (it is full) or same tracks. As a practical matter converting doesn't work: you can't throw down a third rail (for the OL) or string catenary (for the GL) on the current CR and consider yourself done (even if you could get the Rockport folks to give up their line).

Also, you can't (as a matter of Federal rules) mix heavy trains and transit vehicles on the same track without spending literally billions. This is why the OL and the CR lines so carefully and expensively avoid each other, at the cost of many tunnels under and bridges over.

So you'll need a $100m bridge, and a $100m station (for transit) and probably an underpass getting to both sides of the CR.

Leaving There:
Ok, so we're at Wynn's Station...now what? Tail tracks beyond? That's cheap, its true, but will the locals go for a "give away" to only Wynn or will they want "their" station too? Answer: add $100m to get to and build station at 99 & 16 and another $100m for a terminus in Chelsea.

Tote it up, and I'm thinking its a $500m spur, and then someone has to make sure there are the vehicles needed to operate it ($50m) and the money to staff the station and trains in perpetuity.

And there are folks in Malden (and Reading) who know that if you divert their Orange line frequencies to Everett, they'll never get more frequent service themselves.

Suddenly an aerial tram from Assembly is looking pretty sweet at ~$50m for a system with two stations, two towers, and little gondolas. Something like:
London's Emirates_Air_Line_(cable_car)
(but requiring only 2 short towers, not 3 huge ones)

 

[Arlington]

Let's review the Transportation options for Wynn:

0) Do nothing. The reality is cleaning up the brownfield and creating union jobs is such an attractive package that nobody needs to offer anybody any transit spiffs anywhere.

1) Commuter Rail Station (behind Costco/Home Depot in Everett).
Pro: right on the site's edge
Con: Bad grade coming off the bridge,
Con: low frequency of service (Newburyport/Rockport line)

2) Spur from someplace:
Pro: purports a direct connection
Con: Even if Wynn paid for a station, nobody would want to see "their" trains diverted to it. Not gonna happen.

3) Pedestrian connection from Assembly, over A.E. Dam, under Rockport Line to Wynn's waterfront.
Pro: Lots of great connectivity (Assembly-Costco-Wynn)...makes a connection that today takes both a car *and* a circuitous routing
(If I owned the Target/Costco shopping center, I'd push for this and TOD on my riverfront "back lot" and tout the short walk to the Assembly station)
Con: A long hike for Wynn patrons and too many non-Casino non-glamorous users, so he's not going to like it.

4) Aerial/Cable Gondola
Pro: Flys from Assembly, over river, dam, and railroad, straight to Wynn. Solves all the thorny over/under egress problems at ground and water level.
(If I were Wynn, this would be my preferred option because its nearly-exclusive and straight from Orange Line to the Slot Machines)
Con: No public benefit

5) Divert the Urban Ring. Convince MBTA to cut Assembly & Wellington from the ring and run from Sullivan, up Rt 99 and rejoin the exclusive (former railroad ROW) busway in Everett (just before the Rotary with Rt 16)
Pro: Urban ring finally gets a reason and a sponsor
Con: Cuts off a lot of TOD users with 'real life' trips at both Assembly and Wellington in favor of just Wynn's workers (and a future "revitalized" 99?)

6) Water Shuttles. Assembly-Wynn is "obvious" And there are plenty of other places that make sense too (Aquarium/Rowes Warf/Airport..etc) Something like this would likely also be tried waaay before something that required any building. Romantic and easy and easily scrapped if it doesnt work.

And, indeed, they're shown in the concept photo:

 

[DominusNovus]

I'm confused. "Routed along" seems to involve either a new bridge or severing the Rockport line. Either way, Wynn may have $50m to throw at neighborhood improvements, but not the $500m that your "spur" will end up costing.

Looking at the map, it seems to me that the OL/GL could be routed alongside the CR. Admittedly, almost certainly requiring the bridge to be widened (IE, a new bridge). After all, the GLX is going to be routed along the existing CR line.

But I can definitely see how such a project could rapidly add up in $. What are your thoughts on simply building a future-proofed Commuter Rail station for the casino, other than the physical problem of the grade and ridership?

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the gondola idea (though it certainly would look cool), as it would serve to segregate the casino from the system, rather than integrate it. Water shuttles are almost the same problem; though there's at least already an existing ferry system that they, perhaps, could be tied into. Just seems a waste (not for Wynn, but for the area) to have a single-use system like a gondola.

 

[Arlington]

But I can definitely see how such a project could rapidly add up in $. What are your thoughts on simply building a future-proofed Commuter Rail station for the casino, other than the physical problem of the grade and ridership?

I'm conflicted., but Everett is totally with you on putting a CR station right there behind Home Depot in this late 2012 redevelopment plan:
http://www.ci.everett.ma.us/Everett...ayPresentation3Updated_Dec10_2012_highres.pdf

First, I'm thinking there's no rush--if Wynn thought any transportation was necessary, he'd have integrated it into the plan already, and so far we see only Water shuttles. I don't see spending dollars we dont have (and which Wynn won't pay) for something that isn't strictly necessary.

But mid-term, the conflicts start. I like in fill CR stations (eg the new New Balance and Yawkey ones and the Fairmont/Purple Line), but they haven't quite proved themselves from a payback perspective, and until the T figures out how to run shorter, faster, and more-frequent trains, the CR infill stations won't work like urban transit should.

Also mid-term, you have the fact that the Urban Ring goes around, rather than through the area. Its more like I'd want to build a CR station at 99 & 16 where it would be on the planned Urban Ring and run a shuttle bus "back" to the casino on a dedicated busway alongside the CR, rather than "landlock" the CR by Wynn and the water's edge.The greater TOD opportunity is further inland.

Or change the Urban Ring plan, but that's hard. Assembly-Station Landing-Wellington is a nice arc of "real" TOD that is hard to chop off in favor of an unproven Casino and the promise of future TOD on the northern stretch of 99 near 16. The most likely change to the urban ring would likely be some kind of extra Sullivan-Wynn-Chelsea/Wellington bus routing.

And Transit Oriented Development along 99 seems unlikely: it isn't like the Power generation station is going to get any smaller or prettier. Its always going to block access and be a big island of ugly, low-transit-demand land. As the only power generation station near the urban core, its a critical piece of infrastructure that is near-impossible to move.

 

[cozzyd]

The problem is that there isn't anything nearby to connect... Anyway, an aerial gondola would still allow for the redevelopment of the immediate area on Rt 99.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msi...&ll=42.390185,-71.07296&spn=0.027988,0.066047

Also, if successful, it might show that aerial trams are a viable means of relatively inexpensive short spurs from T stops, which could be used in other parts of the city (e.g. Navy Yard -> North Station, Logan Airport -> Blue Line, Wood Island -> somewhere in Chelsea, UMB -> JFK).

 

[Arlington]

The problem is that there isn't anything nearby to connect... Anyway, an aerial gondola would still allow for the redevelopment of the immediate area on Rt 99.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msi...&ll=42.390185,-71.07296&spn=0.027988,0.066047

Also, if successful, it might show that aerial trams are a viable means of relatively inexpensive short spurs from T stops, which could be used in other parts of the city (e.g. Navy Yard -> North Station, Logan Airport -> Blue Line, Wood Island -> somewhere in Chelsea, UMB -> JFK).

Any idea on costs? I'm thinking that turning corners wastes money when the reality is that you can fly over barriers that would make other modes (on the ground) have to turn corners.

I'm also seeing that you could probably get away with 1 tower in the middle and two headhouses: one on top of the Assembly T, and the other at the northwest corner of the Wynn parcel, but serving both sides of the CR (and allowing for a future CR station or integrated with one).

I really think Gondola would beat water taxis in the winter. Maybe only run the water taxis to Rowe's Warf.

 

[cozzyd]

No clue on costs, but the Portland Aerial Tram (3,300 ft horizontal distance, 500 feet vertical distance) apparently only cost $57 million to build. This seemingly much more complicated lift: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_2_Peak_Gondola was C$51 million. Medellin's metrocable is much cheaper (with multiple stations), but probably that's partially due to reduced labor costs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrocable_(Medellín)


I'm not sure how much the number of towers matters as long as they're not that tall (which they don't need to be except to clear the river).

 

[George_Apley]

Actually, unless they've re-aligned the ring since 2010 (and I know there's been talk) the 2010 alignment misses the Wynn Site because the Urban Ring was designed to hit Sullivan, Assembly, and Wellington (the fat yellow line in the Northwest corner) before coming back to Everett.

The Wynn site fronts onto Route 99 and backs unto the Purple Line (and Costco and Target, beyond)

Only if the Urban Ring was "short cut" up Rt 99 would it touch the Wynn Site. Open the detailed view by clicking this preview

The UR will likely have to follow the Eastern Route out of Sullivan. No point in a railed UR stopping at Wellington when Sullivan has an OL transfer as well.

Either way, even that map from 2010 has the UR joining the Eastern Route at the northern side of the Wynn casino site.

EDIT:

Why the need for TWO rail transfers at Sullivan, Assembly and Wellington? Cutting out the UR from the northerly stations isn't cutting off TOD... the OL is already there... The UR should primarily be for circumferential movement and transfers between the radial lines. It shouldn't have to parallel the OL for three stops.

I'm also not getting of how it will be cheaper to lay track between Wellington and the Eastern Route than rebuilding the Eastern Route bridge across the Mystic.

 

[Arlington]

The UR will likely have to follow the Eastern Route out of Sullivan. No point in a railed UR stopping at Wellington when Sullivan has an OL transfer as well.

But the UR isn't railed, and even those circumferential trips, if counter-clockwise, would prefer to join the Orange line at Wellington, and if Counter-clockwise would prefer to join the Orange line at Sullivan. In the end, I'd expect them to add at least 1 bus stop between each rail station they serve (like a "Ten Hills / Assembly North" or a "Station Landing West")

Either way, even that map from 2010 has the UR joining the Eastern Route at the northern side of the Wynn casino site.

Not really, the Wynn site is really just along "lower" stretch of the purple, just as it straightens (not much farther north than Assembly Square's station) while the proposed UR station is pretty far north --about 6/10 of a mile--snuggled just below Route 16{Edit}.

 

[George_Apley]

But the UR isn't railed, and even those circumferential trips, if counter-clockwise, would prefer to join the Orange line at Wellington, and if Counter-clockwise would prefer to join the Orange line at Sullivan. In the end, I'd expect them to add at least 1 bus stop between each rail station they serve (like a "Ten Hills / Assembly North" or a "Station Landing West")

The 2nd Phase UR that you posted is bussed. The ultimate plan for the Urban Ring is an LRV main route working in tandem with "BRT" stretches.

If anything, Wynn's money could potentially kick-start the T into forgetting about the wasteful BRT "transition phase".

Not really, the Wynn site is really just along "lower" stretch of the purple, just as it straightens, while the proposed UR station is pretty far north --about 6/10 of a mile--snuggled just below Route 99.

You mean Rte. 16? Ok, I was unaware that Wynn's site was only below Beacham St. All those industrial site in Everett are hard to separate. Of course, with the number of old rail stubs that run through that area, a railed Urban Ring could swing through the site closer to the site and rejoin the Eastern Route somewhere around 2nd St.

 

[Arlington]

The 2nd Phase UR that you posted is bussed. The ultimate plan for the Urban Ring is an LRV main route working in tandem with "BRT" stretches.

If anything, Wynn's money could potentially kick-start the T into forgetting about the wasteful BRT "transition phase".

Sorry to disappoint, but guys like Wynn don't kick-start transit billion dollar transit projects. Hosting the Olympics, maybe. But you don't get to be a billionaire by spiffing the locals down payments on transit empires.

You just don't. Heck, even in Las Vegas itself, they couldn't/wouldn't get the Monorail all the way to the airport (and were happy to fob most of the cost off on outsiders whom they bankrupted).

In Boston, a whole lot of arm twisting might get a couple of million for some water taxi docks and better streetscape on Rte 99. An extra bidding war vs Suffolk downs might get you a $50m for an aerial tram or some Silver Line buses, but it stops there.

I don't see anyone in power or influence (Everett, the Unions, the Governor) having any kind of desire to kill the goose that's going to clean up a brownfield, and hire a lot of union workers and locals over your and my dreams for a real rail UR.

You mean Rte. 16? Ok, I was unaware that Wynn's site was only below Beacham St. All those industrial site in Everett are hard to separate. Of course, with the number of old rail stubs that run through that area, a railed Urban Ring could swing through the site closer to the site and rejoin the Eastern Route somewhere around 2nd St.

Yes, Rte. 16, sorry (fixed it in the post).
Wynn's is even farther south...the L-shaped parcel bounded on the north by Horizon Way, on the East by 99, on the West by the RR and the rest by the river.

To the north of Horizon Way is the big MBTA bus garage/maintenance facility...in "friendly" hands, yes, but if you tried to kick them out, where would they go?

 

[SeamusMcFly]

You just don't. Heck, even in Las Vegas itself, they couldn't/wouldn't get the Monorail all the way to the airport (and were happy to fob most of the cost off on outsiders whom they bankrupted).

The strong cab drivers union is the reason the monorail doesn't go to the airport (per my understanding). They would stand to lose tons (what would be their real purpose then?).