These are the Peabody docs of most significance. . .
MIS Summary (p.35):
https://web.archive.org/web/2011111...re_Transit_Improvements/Chapter_3.pdf#page=35
Render #1, Salem to Peabody Sq.:
https://web.archive.org/web/2011111...t_Improvements/Figure_3_9_Peabody_11x17_1.pdf
Render #2, Peabody Sq. to North Shore Mall:
https://web.archive.org/web/2011111...t_Improvements/Figure_3_9_Peabody_11x17_2.pdf
Being '04 in the days before RUR they were speccing 30-min peak/2-hr. off-peak service. That gets flattened now to :30-rules-all. $125M ('04 $$$) capital cost for the North Shore Mall vs. $119M ('04 $$$) for the now-defunct Danversport option. North Shore had higher ridership, though (+2600 weekdaily / +5600 daily net increase in transit usage on the peak/off-peak schedule), so cost-per-rider and ops costs were more attractive for North Shore. Those numbers have probably diverged significantly more in the 15 years since given the diverging TOD fortunes at densifying North Shore vs. stagnant big-box Liberty Tree. RUR utilization would shoot the top-line through the roof because Lahey is an all-day draw and last-mile buses can significantly densify across this whole region with :15 service @ hublet Salem and :30 or better @ diverging-route point Peabody Sq.
As per last post the fuck-up of not doing Salem's 2nd mainline platform when the station was torn up is going to be a problem for cramming :15 service up to Salem, so reopening the Peabody side is the 'easy' way to backfill the frequencies without needing to plot out bi-directional meets on the main platform or engaging pain-in-butt neighbors for half-decade on the mainline build. That's their shortcut punt to implementing baseline RUR and buying an extra 5-8 years of time to dawdle on the 2nd main platform. On Render #1 the circled area (overlaid on pre-garage Salem) corresponds to present-day Google on the tiny aux lot outside the garage, so they faithfully preserved this option in-full. Side platform would be a T-minimum 450 ft. coming out the portal (5 all-door set + front-door only on 6th car) with a DTMF switch at the garage driveway grade crossing for dumping gate queues while the train is stopped. North St. Yard layover is between the distance markers "15+00" and "25+00" on the render (I don't know if that's mileopost shorthand or what???). Per the render, Pan Am would remove the northbound wye and start using this more direct route for the freights so they no longer have to reverse, so the waterfront wye track probably becomes a path extension.
^^That much^^ could indeed be the setup just for the Salem Urban Rail short-turns, and just because it's easier for capacity to work that side of the station first rather than double-up the mainline platform.
From there you just look to the relative ease of adding Peabody Sq. on already-active track, where the Square being a diverging route for buses makes that +1 eminently useful even at :30 all-day. T circles the Dunkies property on Central St. as the would-be station. That's now obsolete. There's not enough room to cram more than a 250 ft. platform on the east side of the Central grade crossing without siting it in the middle of the switch for the South Peabody Branch turnout the freights use. City of Peabody has offered the municipal lot on the west side of the grade crossing along Railroad Ave.--the historic station site--instead. Room for a complete 800 ft. full-high if it started behind the
Little Depot Diner building and spanned to the Sawyer St. grade crossing. Downright comfy room if Sawyer (glorified driveway for the muni lot) were cut and all the area to Crownshield St. were fair game for a nicer facility with bus waiting area. Danvers Rail Trail trail head would meet here from the north on the now-eliminated Danversport fork shown on Render #1. Anywhere from 40-60 parking spaces would be sacrificed for the platform footprint in the muni lot, maybe 20%+ of the deletions offsettable by re-striping elsewhere. And that's probably enough parking for a dense walkable downtown that craves more bus frequencies; this isn't freaking Norwood. Platform can be single-track full-high, but poured to Rowley-width 12 ft. island width so if necessary 2nd track can be laid on parking lot side and initial straight walkup access converted in future to up-and-over if need be. If the Square is Phase I terminus, idling trains would just deadhead 1 mile back to North St. Yard. No layover needed until final buildout to North Shore is complete. Very cheap production overall.
As hinted in last couple posts, if the T has to pursue the Peabody turnout at Salem for implementing :15 Urban Rail strictly
to Salem because they fucked up on the 2nd mainline platform...it's almost faint accompli to just tack on the extra +1 to Peabody Sq. City of Peabody has said they are A-OK at chunking out Square vs. North Shore in separate installments if that's what brings the trains in, so watch the Rail Vision's implementation developments around Salem. If they've got easiest path for
short-turns working Peabody side first solely for sake of
Salem short-turns...then Peabody's got the "it's too easy not to!" sales pitch to hammer them with about lumping the Square in with that build. It's a very pro-rail suburb; they'll be working their RUR exploits to the hilt with that sales pitch.
Render #2 shows the base build to 128 on the Peabody Municipal Light ROW that is
not ever going to be rail-trailed. Most of the cost is for wetlands permitting around Proctor Brook, the uni-bridge overpass spanning Northshore Rd. and 128, and outfitting the layover yard (which wouldn't need to be large on an intra-128 schedule) on the old ROW to ex- Lowell St. grade crossing. There might be minor NIMBY kvetching by Terrace Estates condos on Northshore Rd., but it's mostly their parking lot facing the ROW and not the actual dwellings. This being a city-owned ROW via the city-owned power co. and the city primarily pushing it means that the deck is stacked firmly against resident complaints, however. Render #2 sort of gives up trying with those 90-degree turns inside the North Shore parking lot. Forget those...Lahey long since infilled those paths, which weren't serious to begin with. Station site would be on the ROW at Essex Green Ln. cul de sac upon touchdown on the other side of 128 (you can see on Google that street is meant to be continued around the backside of Harvard Vanguard to span Essex Center Dr. for a full-on perimeter access road). And then the layover is direct-adjacent to the station. Since Simon Malls is shooting for Legacy Place faux-density with its redev of this site, there's probably going to be a mall shuttle van perpetually cycling around the perimeter road hitting the station at regular all-day intervals. And theoretically it can hop across MA 114 on the north end of its loop and do a quick hop to Liberty Tree too if that mall's owners paid in for it...covering the Danversport catchment into this site. Assume the Independence trail gets re-manicured to tie into the new station, and that the 128/Northshore Rd. overpass (which would be build 2-track just in case) can have a ped deck on it so the residential along Northshore Rd. and upper Lowell St. is in easy access.
High-leverage enough with enthusiastic enough local support that it's a gimme with RUR to Salem and at least entertaining the Peabody Sq. poke as a Phase I. And, fortuitously, the TOD trajectory at the Mall has swung in a
much more favorable direction since the last close look 15 years ago with all the med facilities and the huge redev Simon is doing of the big-boxes to wean themselves off the more economically vulnerable tenants and faux-densify themself. The top-line demand here is going to project considerably better than it did in the '04 study because of that TOD, and the fact that now we're talking all-day frequent service not just conventional peak vs. off-peak.