MBTA "Transformation" (Green Line, Red Line, & Orange Line Transformation Projects)

Might be the wrong place to post this, but the Blue Line from Airport to Bowdoin will be closed for two weeks beginning Apr 2.

T Announces 2-Week Closure on the Blue Line’s Harbor Tunnel in Early April
While most transit riders’ attention on Monday was focused on the opening of the Green Line Extension, the T quietly posted an announcement on its website that the Blue Line between the Airport and downtown Boston will shut down from April 2 to April 14 to allow crews to replace 1,800 feet of track and upgrade other infrastructure in the tunnel under Boston Harbor.
https://mass.streetsblog.org/2022/0...-the-blue-lines-harbor-tunnel-in-early-april/

Official alert:
1647909769273.png
 
W-4 said:
Apparently a deep clean of the OL platforms was not part of the project :(
Click to expand...
I think it’s a rule that orange Line stations must look horribly dowdy
 
I'm just so sick of this bus replacement service disrupting almost every line, picking the worst time to do repairs. Why can't they do this work at night?! :mad:
 
HelloBostonHi said:
But they ripped the bandaid and got it done with by doing a 2 week shutdown back in May 2020 and here we are again
Click to expand...

This counterpoint is my largest concern to ripping band-aids. If given a choice, I virtually always pick ripping band-aids to do it right once rather than repeated half-measures.

But the guiding principle is the reward is we don't have to deal with constant painful half-measures. A one time closure of Government Center means a truly shiny Government Center after the closure rather than constant construction for 10 years. A long closure of the Lechmere Viaduct means Green Line trains can run at full speed and no more closures for a long time. The Blue Line long time closure should mean no more half-ass weekend/night-time bussing.

Are we getting that? Or just creating a new normal where we still have the same half measures AND multi-week closures.

I ask that and I truly want to know with examples and data. I have read Green Line trains aren't going full speed own Lechmere Viaduct yes. I know I had some recent Red Line weekend closures. But are these getting better?
 
Out of curiosity... Does anyone know if and where the MBTA updates its projected SGR backlog? Back in May 2019 they were projecting 10.7B, +600m additional in October for power systems, with full catch up in 2032. Since then, we've had almost 2 full years of the T dumping significant capital dollars into "Building a Better T" acceleration programs, and quoting things like completed x number of months / years earlier than originally planned via these full time full access closures, to include this BL tunnel project. For example, this closure is cited as "bring[ing] the tunnel to a state of good repair a year earlier than planned." Does this mean that we're ahead of schedule and going to get to SGR before 2032? I'm hopeful that at the point when we just have to fund "keep up" instead of both "catch up and keep up" we will start to see progress on the significant expansion opportunities for the T.

Another question I have... Is there a Blue Line crossover anywhere between Bowdoin and Aquarium? If there is, surely if its affecting just harbor tunnel work it should theoretically be possible to turn trains at say... aquarium, and run the two ends of the service independently with a single pair of shuttle points, without affecting fully half of the BL station stops? Though admittedly, its geographically compact enough that people are unlikely to take Blue just from Gov't Center to State or Aquarium. If it isn't an option for the BL to turn anywhere downtown instead of Bowdoin... how exactly is Red-Blue Construction going to happen? multi-year construction timeline with no cross harbor BL service would be painful. Is there enough space to build a crossover between State and Gov't Center?
 
Stlin said:
Another question I have... Is there a Blue Line crossover anywhere between Bowdoin and Aquarium? If there is, surely if its affecting just harbor tunnel work it should theoretically be possible to turn trains at say... aquarium, and run the two ends of the service independently with a single pair of shuttle points, without affecting fully half of the BL station stops? Though admittedly, its geographically compact enough that people are unlikely to take Blue just from Gov't Center to State or Aquarium. If it isn't an option for the BL to turn anywhere downtown instead of Bowdoin... how exactly is Red-Blue Construction going to happen? multi-year construction timeline with no cross harbor BL service would be painful. Is there enough space to build a crossover between State and Gov't Center?
Click to expand...

From the Blue Book. . .
BL.png
 
What’s In the T’s New 5-Year Construction Plan
The CIP draft does include one potentially significant new project: an $86 million set-aside for an “Green Line E Branch Accessibility and Capacity Improvements” project.

According to T spokesperson Joe Pesaturo, the proposed $86 million capital project in the T’s new CIP will “achieve accessibility at all stations and improve Green Line operations” between the E branch’s Northeastern Station tunnel portal and the western end of the line, at HeathStreet.

“The work will include building new station platforms through the streetcar area and providing safe access between sidewalks and platform entrances across Huntington Ave and South Huntington Avenue,” wrote Pesaturo.
Click to expand...
 
Going through the full CIP, here are some notable highlights I haven't seen before:

1) Suffolk Downs Station Reconstruction
2) Longfellow Approach program will include platform reconstruction at Charles MGH and new elevators
3) aforementioned E branch accessibility improvements
4) 80 40ft BEBs to support launch of North Cambridge BEB service by March 2024.
5) $70m of a total 114m for Mattapan HSL transformation (mostly infrastructure and SGR)
6) Lots of GL type 10 enabling work. test track, yards and facility design, power etc.
7) BL station improvements planning (may be to evaluate possiblity of OL size cars?)
8) an additional proposed order of Hyundai Rotem bilevel coaches, exercising a previous option?
9) what appears to be ab additional 15m to support RedBlue Planning and design
 
Stlin said:
8) an additional proposed order of Hyundai Rotem bilevel coaches, exercising a previous option?
Click to expand...

That's just payments on the 83-car order already underway for delivery starting later this year. One-and-done contract...there's no further options to exercise because Rotem is penned in by lack of Buy America compliance.

The next-next order was supposed to be an RFP for 181 bi-levels to displace all remaining single-levels. They've postponed that...probably because they need to sort out what they'll be ordering for EMU's before they can get a firm grasp on quantities and probable makes.
 
ant8904 said:
Are we getting that? Or just creating a new normal where we still have the same half measures AND multi-week closures.
Click to expand...

I said this in the beginning. I lived in DC. They started "ripping off the band-aid" with extended closures after the 2009 crash. A decade later and it has never stopped. Horrendous weekends. Extended closures. It's now the new norm.
 
I'm a bit OOTL on the E branch improvements. Are they putting the tracks in a center median similar to the B and C branches?
 
themissinglink said:
I'm a bit OOTL on the E branch improvements. Are they putting the tracks in a center median similar to the B and C branches?
Click to expand...
They were evaluating several alternatives: varieties with side-running tracks with platforms and center-running tracks with platforms. It's been a long time since they've had any public meetings on the various concepts, so it's not known where they're currently leaning. Hopefully the momentum behind the recent center-running bus lanes + platforms favors a center+platforms approach, because the side tracks looked like a blockage and bicycling nightmare.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
They were evaluating several alternatives: varieties with side-running tracks with platforms and center-running tracks with platforms. It's been a long time since they've had any public meetings on the various concepts, so it's not known where they're currently leaning. Hopefully the momentum behind the recent center-running bus lanes + platforms favors a center+platforms approach, because the side tracks looked like a blockage and bicycling nightmare.
Click to expand...

I really hope they go with the center running tracks, I remember seeing a render of the side running tracks a long time ago and it did look like a nightmare. Wasn't sure if they were still favoring that option.

Any word on station closures? Fenwood Road and Back of the Hill seem like they should be closed for better stop spacing.
 
themissinglink said:
I really hope they go with the center running tracks, I remember seeing a render of the side running tracks a long time ago and it did look like a nightmare. Wasn't sure if they were still favoring that option.

Any word on station closures? Fenwood Road and Back of the Hill seem like they should be closed for better stop spacing.
Click to expand...
Side-running tracks were what they proposed back in the 90's/early-00's for the Arborway restoration, and it was a self-fulfilling prophecy of "See...the delivery trucks will block the tracks. Street-running is patently bad!" when they subsequently trolled the shit out of their own design. I smelled the stink from those memories the second a render was circulated of the Brigham-Heath reconstruction that showed side tracks. So, yes...hopefully it dies. It didn't seem to be very popular at all in the last public meetings on this reconstruction, mainly on safety concerns. The T thankfully did say that all options with all alignments were well on the table and that they were way too early on in design to be leaning any one way.

I would imagine Fenwood and BotH are goners in any scenario, though they haven't gotten detailed enough yet to say so. Center platforms are plenty doable because they were doable with the new 28 bus lanes, but it helps a lot if they only have to fit it at 2 stations instead of 4. Remember...they want to get one other branch besides the D certified for running 2-car trains of super-stretched Type 10's so all of GLX can take advantage, meaning they need 225(?) ft. platforms. The E is the next-closest branch to achieving compliance with that, which is why this funding item precedes any B or C work. They're going to want to take the straightest path possible for achieving that, which means stop spacing will get all due priority and those too-close low-ridership intermediates are probably toast.
 
jass said:
Any E line reconstruction will involve electric wires over a public street and we've been told that just doesnt work. Curious.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the T's pathological hatred of wires and street running is outweighed by the federal political nightmare that visits them whenever they try and get rid of service to the VA Hospital.
 
I hope an extension to Hyde Square follows shortly after the E branch improvement project.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top