You have to use rail to get enough surge capacity for a stadium. And that bus/rail reservation better be absolutely car proof, otherwise game day drivers will cluster it up.
Whether it terminates in Chelsea or Everett, the concept is the same.
Even if it is not the service pattern, you need to allow some level of interlining at Innerbelt and Brickbottom. You don't want the rolling stock on the Grand Junction isolated from the rest of the Green Line.
www.bostonglobe.com
I think it's possible sometime in the far future, but I don't think it's at all the expectation. Teams generally prefer to have their own stadium and build their own identity around it without being in the shadow of the other team, just like how the Revolution don't want to be in the shadow of the Patriots at Gillette. Or like how the Kansas City Current moved out of the MLS stadium (18,000) into their own stadium (11,500) and it seems like it's been a big success.
I suspect they already have a fairly good idea of the extent and nature of the hazardous material contamination. For remediation, I believe the plan is to cap the site with gravel and fill. Capping the site will elevate the stadium and substantially increase its resiliency against future storm surges and projected rises in sea level. However, I believe one cannot remediate a site contaminated with PCBs by capping, so if PCBs are found in significant quantities, these must be excavated and sent to a specially designated disposal site.
www.wcvb.com
If I recall F-Line's many responses on this topic, the grade is too steep on the straightaway.
It's a 3% grade on the Mystic Bridge approaches, steepest on the whole Commuter Rail system. You can't have more than a 2.08% grade on the platforms (p.12) and still be in ADA compliance.
