Transit via the Grand Junction Corridor | Cambridge and Boston

[stick n move]

I say demolish the damn buildings. They NEVER should have allowed them to build over the air rights there in the first place. How stupid was that. They just built another one over the tracks again too last year. Hello? We have the worlds top institutes right across the street and no one thought maybe this is a bad idea? If a couple mid rises are preventing the urban ring and mit, harvard, and downtown cambridge from having light rail access then just get rid of them. Much larger buildings have been demolished for much less important reasons. Instead of having to do all kinda of stupid ass bandaid solutions like weaving it back and forth to vassar st just demo the buildings. Theyre like 5-8 stories tall.

 

[TheRatmeister]

They NEVER should have allowed them to build over the air rights there in the first place. How stupid was that.

Probably very, but they're there now. So would it be cheaper to demolish them, or work around them? If an El over Albany St is feasible, then it's probably cheaper just to work around them.

and mit, harvard, and downtown cambridge from having light rail access

Let's see if I can get in before @F-Line to Dudley. LRT (Or BRT) that isn't grade separated would really have issues. The lights could be timed with other streets to minimize the disruption. The challenge is grade separation due to both the positive height restriction from the buildings and the negative height restriction from the fairly shallow Red Line.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Transit planning has historically been more timid about demolishing buildings in the way than has highway planning. New highway or widening projects have been able to acquire and demolish buildings, some fairly substantial in size, for the last 80 years or more. The Big Dig took out one very large building adjacent to North Station. I think if need be, taking out portions or even all of a few buildings for transit or commuter rail along the GJ corridor is fully justified. Just pretend it's for a highway.

 

[BeansTheCat]

Let's say 2x that for the elevated sections, 5x for the cutting sections, and 10x for the short tunneled bits. That would put the total cost for the whole Waltham-Sullivan line at around $5 billion. So for about 1.5 South Coast Rails we could get a whole new subway line.

These should probably be viewed as an upper bound for costs (assuming competent management/design). Also, a significant amount of value can come from just the West Station to Sullivan/North Station segment, which is already mostly grade-separated, could likely be done with no tunneling, and would be about 6 to 7 kilometers long. Even with cost overruns and building in preparation of extensions towards both Everett and Watertown, there is a high-quality project here for well under $2 billion.

 

[BeansTheCat]

Instead of having to do all kinda of stupid ass bandaid solutions like weaving it back and forth to vassar st just demo the buildings. Theyre like 5-8 stories tall.

Running along Vassar or Albany St. is barely a detour and would likely add less than 10 seconds to travel time through the area. The additional cost of going around is also likely not huge, given that the tracks would already need to be elevated (or deeply tunneled) over Main St.

In general, there should not be an aversion to tearing down the buildings over the tracks, but it also shouldn't be assumed to be "better" just because that's where the GJ currently runs. The cost of acquiring the air rights and possibly full buildings from MIT, performing the demolitions, and having MIT be an opponent on this project almost certainly outweigh the cost of a solution that keeps the buildings standing. It's also reasonable to think MIT could chip in towards this given how much they would gain, but I doubt they would under any scenario that destroys campus buildings.

 

[TheRatmeister]

These should probably be viewed as an upper bound for costs (assuming competent management/design).

The elevated Vancouver Surrey-Langley Skytrain project is currently costing about $300 USD million per km, I wouldn't be so sure. Regardless though, it's still very cheap for what we'd be getting.

Also, a significant amount of value can come from just the West Station to Sullivan/North Station segment, which is already mostly grade-separated, could likely be done with no tunneling, and would be about 6 to 7 kilometers long. Even with cost overruns and building in preparation of extensions towards both Everett and Watertown, there is a high-quality project here for well under $2 billion.

You may run into an issue with finding yard space if you only build the inner portion. You'd need to acquire land, somewhere in Somerville probably, from existing users. However, this is easily solvable by building at least as far as roughly Sweetser Circle, which opens up the plethora of space available in the Everett Hellscape.™

 

[BeansTheCat]

You may run into an issue with finding yard space if you only build the inner portion. You'd need to acquire land, somewhere in Somerville probably, from existing users. However, this is easily solvable by building at least as far as roughly Sweetser Circle, which opens up the plethora of space available in the Everett Hellscape.™

The area just south of Sullivan and east of 93 isn't exactly urban paradise. I'm not personally familiar with the area, but it seems pretty desolate and full of surface parking. I don't know if yard space is the best use of land that close to rapid transit interchange, but I also doubt anything besides industrial uses should be placed that close to a freeway. Allston would probably also be amenable to yard space in the I-90 project if it came with a brand new metro. Either way, yard space shouldn't be some deal breaker or huge cost driver.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

I say demolish the damn buildings. They NEVER should have allowed them to build over the air rights there in the first place. How stupid was that. They just built another one over the tracks again too last year. Hello? We have the worlds top institutes right across the street and no one thought maybe this is a bad idea? If a couple mid rises are preventing the urban ring and mit, harvard, and downtown cambridge from having light rail access then just get rid of them. Much larger buildings have been demolished for much less important reasons. Instead of having to do all kinda of stupid ass bandaid solutions like weaving it back and forth to vassar st just demo the buildings. Theyre like 5-8 stories tall.

MIT acquired all those air rights in the late-90's from then line-owner Conrail (the state didn't own the GJ until 2010) when Conrail was about to be bought out and corporately dismembered. The company was just pocketing some extra money on the way out, and there were no public interests with the wherewithal to intervene back then. It was a very different time where future safeguards didn't have a mechanism for being secured. Nobody dropped the ball...the ball simply wasn't in play for any kind of public transaction and the fate of those air rights was sealed in excess of 25 years ago.

 

[Charlie_mta]

MIT acquired all those air rights in the late-90's from then line-owner Conrail (the state didn't own the GJ until 2010) when Conrail was about to be bought out and corporately dismembered. The company was just pocketing some extra money on the way out, and there were no public interests with the wherewithal to intervene back then. It was a very different time where future safeguards didn't have a mechanism for being secured. Nobody dropped the ball...the ball simply wasn't in play for any kind of public transaction and the fate of those air rights was sealed in excess of 25 years ago.

Eminent domain on air rights and other property rights can still be used if needed for a public transportation improvement.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Eminent domain on air rights and other property rights can still be used if needed for a public transportation improvement.

The stakeholders need MIT's institutional support to push through a rapid transit project. You're not going to get that support by forcibly seizing their property and blowing up their buildings.

 

[stick n move]

43 vassar was built in 2004, so nothing they could have done there but the n16 cooling tower was built in 2010 so they should have been able to do something about that and the steve schwarzman college of computing was built in 2023! Having 1 building to worry about is a lot easier than 3. Even having 1 building and a cooling tower is much easier to find a way to move compared to now having those 2 plus the brand new college building in 2023. They made it a million times worse building another brand new building over it last year.

43 vassar you couldnt stop then, but its 20 years old now. Until 1 year ago all that was in the way was a 20 year old low/mid rise building and a cooling tower building. Thats really not that bad. That was so much more doable than now having the brand new schwarzman building there too. Absolute insanity to build yet another building over the tracks and this one even constrains the ROW even more. Its too friggin late now the damage is done, but holy shit that was a dumb ass move.

 

[Charlie_mta]

The stakeholders need MIT's institutional support to push through a rapid transit project. You're not going to get that support by forcibly seizing their property and blowing up their buildings.

I suppose, but it is provincial and very un-world-class city-like to be held hostage by special interests. MIT is big and powerful but hopefully we still live in enough of a democracy so that the public good overrides powerful money interests.

 

[737900er]

How much time would the el save riders?

From West to Mass Ave they're basically the same. In the at-grade option one of the pedestrian crossings along Vassar Street might need to be converted to a pedestrian bridge so that the LRT doesn't have to come to a complete stop.
With a modern signal system, the crossings at Binney Street, Cambridge Street, and Gore Street would be nearly full TSP with the light being green by the time the LRT gets there. Presumably the LRT wouldn't have to stop at a fully signalized intersection like the Mattapan Trolley does at Central Ave.

That just leaves Main Street and Broadway. I was in the area today so I unscientifically timed the current lights:

• Main Street: Vassar 37 seconds, Main Street 47 seconds
• Broadway: Galileo Galilei left 13 seconds, Galileo Galilei 33 seconds, Broadway left 16 seconds, Broadway 33 seconds

If the LRT started running tomorrow without modifying the 2 signals, the average delay at those two intersections would be well under two minutes. With some TSP the average delay from the signals could probably be reduced to around 60 seconds.

Unless I'm missing something major, tearing down the buildings and building an el just seems like a lot of cost blowout for not much real-world time savings.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

43 vassar was built in 2004, so nothing they could have done there but the n16 cooling tower was built in 2010 so they should have been able to do something about that and the steve schwarzman college of computing was built in 2023! Having 1 building to worry about is a lot easier than 3. Even having 1 building and a cooling tower is much easier to find a way to move compared to now having those 2 plus the brand new college building in 2023. They made it a million times worse building another brand new building over it last year.

43 vassar you couldnt stop then, but its 20 years old now. Until 1 year ago all that was in the way was a 20 year old low/mid rise building and a cooling tower building. Thats really not that bad. That was so much more doable than now having the brand new schwarzman building there too. Absolute insanity to build yet another building over the tracks and this one even constrains the ROW even more. Its too friggin late now the damage is done, but holy shit that was a dumb ass move.

Again...they acquired those air rights over 25 years ago from a private company that had no interest in dealing with the state, and no state where an Urban Ring Major Investment Study had yet taken place. It doesn't matter if the middle building post-dates the state's acquisition of the GJ. The air rights themselves pre-date the state's involvement in the corridor by over a decade.

What exactly do you expect they could've done differently here, besides eminent domain nuclear options certain to tank a necessary political coalition? FFS, we don't even have a study focusing on a rapid transit option yet...so that nuclear option is wholly theoretical as long as we're pigeonholed into Commuter Rail forever. This is a whole lot of crying over last century's spilled milk.

 

[TheRatmeister]

How much time would the el save riders?

From West to Mass Ave they're basically the same. In the at-grade option one of the pedestrian crossings along Vassar Street might need to be converted to a pedestrian bridge so that the LRT doesn't have to come to a complete stop.
With a modern signal system, the crossings at Binney Street, Cambridge Street, and Gore Street would be nearly full TSP with the light being green by the time the LRT gets there. Presumably the LRT wouldn't have to stop at a fully signalized intersection like the Mattapan Trolley does at Central Ave.

That just leaves Main Street and Broadway. I was in the area today so I unscientifically timed the current lights:

• Main Street: Vassar 37 seconds, Main Street 47 seconds
• Broadway: Galileo Galilei left 13 seconds, Galileo Galilei 33 seconds, Broadway left 16 seconds, Broadway 33 seconds

If the LRT started running tomorrow without modifying the 2 signals, the average delay at those two intersections would be well under two minutes. With some TSP the average delay from the signals could probably be reduced to around 60 seconds.

Unless I'm missing something major, tearing down the buildings and building an el just seems like a lot of cost blowout for not much real-world time savings.

Elevating the line lets you do a few things that a line dealing with grade crossings just can't do:

1. Avoid drivers whining about TSP (minor)
2. Save about 2 minutes from the trip, as you mentioned (also minor)
3. Improve reliability through not having to deal with drivers, well known for being morons (medium-ish)
4. Makes stations easier in a few places. Finding space for a ground level station, especially one with high platforms, around Main St for example would be somewhat difficult, but above the street there's plenty of room (also medium-ish)
5. It lets you automate the line, increasing reliability and reducing operating expenses (major)
6. Automating the line lets you massively increase frequencies, with the possibility of trains running as often as every 90 seconds, which you really really really want for any kind of Urban Ring type service (major)

So yes, you could absolutely build a light rail connection along the GJ, using low-floor vehicles, surface stops, and just using TSP to mostly mitigate the suck of grade crossings. But (part of) an Urban Ring that line will not be. That's not to say it's a bad thing, you could potentially build a combined ROW for both buses and LRT, which would be great for serving shuttles around MIT and Kendall, but it's not going to be a high-capacity mass transit line.

 

[BeansTheCat]

I suppose, but it is provincial and very un-world-class city-like to be held hostage by special interests. MIT is big and powerful but hopefully we still live in enough of a democracy so that the public good overrides powerful money interests.

As someone who is not a fan of the outsize influence educational institutions have here, this feels like a major exaggeration of the circumstances. Firstly, we do not know how MIT would react to grade separation proposals along GJ because no formal studies have been performed. As far as we know, MIT would be fine to open up these air rights in exchange for high-frequency metro along the corridor (although I doubt it). Even if they don't, given how much MIT would benefit, it seems likely they would serve as a partner to help push the project through and possibly contribute financially. Secondly, in this case, MIT would not be given undue influence, because they should be viewed as one of the most important stakeholders. A full mile of the Grand Junction (or a quarter of a likely initial segment) runs along MIT's campus. After the state and the cities along the route, a reasonable argument could be made that MIT's voice should be next loudest. Lastly, it is not clear that it is cheaper to take the air rights by imminent domain and perform the necessary demolitions instead of building around the existing structures, especially considering the costs of working against MIT (lawsuits and delays) versus with them (strong proponent and possible financial contributor). If someone has rough estimates of how much both of these would cost, it would go a ways to inform this discussion.

For context here's the assessed value of the entire buildings in discussion (not including land valuations):
43 Vassar (Brain and Cognitive Sciences Complex): $377,575,800
71 Vassar (Computing Building and Power Plant): $30,705,200

At the end of the day, no one is suggesting a project along the GJ should place MIT's desires over that of the public. I am arguing for what I believe to be a cheaper and faster project, both of which are in the public interest. I believe many other users on here would agree.

 

[737900er]

I would argue automated, grade separated light metro is the best option here, starting from West Station to Sullivan. Over time, it could take over much (or all) of the SL3 route as well. This costs less than many might imagine, and provides excellent service. There's a much more active discussion about this in the Grand Junction Transit thread.

1. It lets you automate the line, increasing reliability and reducing operating expenses (major)
2. Automating the line lets you massively increase frequencies, with the possibility of trains running as often as every 90 seconds, which you really really really want for any kind of Urban Ring type service (major)

Wouldn't full automation necessitate that it be disconnected from the Green Line division though? Even assuming the Back Bay and Huntington subways were built, all the crossings in Needham would have to be eliminated, Watertown would never happen without full grade separation, Harvard-Kenmore has to be Blue, E has to be fully grade separated, etc.
Are there any systems in the world today where a fully automated system shares trackage with a system that doesn't have full grade separation?

 

[TheRatmeister]

Wouldn't full automation necessitate that it be disconnected from the Green Line division though? Even assuming the Back Bay and Huntington subways were built, all the crossings in Needham would have to be eliminated, Watertown would never happen without full grade separation, Harvard-Kenmore has to be Blue, E has to be fully grade separated, etc.
Are there any systems in the world today where a fully automated system shares trackage with a system that doesn't have full grade separation?

We're talking about two separate ideas here. Either you could have an at-grade, low floor light rail line, potentially linking up to the GLX on the northern side, with simple surface stations and TSP to manage grade-crossings. The line would probably operate with 8-10 minute headways. This would be extremely cheap to build, but it's essentially doomed to be a West Station-Brattle Loop dinky service, and therefore nearly entirely reliant on CR/OL/GL transfers forever. However one advantage would be the possibility of a combined LRT/Busway for use by MBTA routes like the 85 and potentially the 101, or by the myriad of corporate and MIT shuttles.

Or, you could build an elevated metro line. This would be standalone, and (in my fantasy world anyway) extendable out to Everett and Waltham on both ends, with a line from Weston/128 to Sweetser Circle being a $5-10 billion project, plus a bit more for a Technology Sq infill on the RL. For the amount of transit you're getting, that is pretty damn good. This would be automated, operating with headways of 3-5 minutes, served by either full or light metro trains which can hold more people, travel faster, and have shorter dwell times due to having more doors than is possible with LRVs. Should the quadrant of the UR as far as Nubian come into the picture, it could be joined to the Grand Junction Line, with headways of around 1.5-2.5 minutes on the shared section. Here's a quick diagram of what that would (roughly) look like:

 

[okin15]

I suggest to start w a CT2 re-route that runs over the rail ROW where feasible. Pave along the tracks if it helps. Connect it to the SL3 and add signal priority BRT and you've got 80+% of what you would with LtR. MBTA figures out the routing, but maybe a segment that overlaps with SL3 extension, or even the whole thing is SL3, that's small potatoes compared to making the general CT2 route into actual BRT.

 

[Jeremi]

I suggest to start w a CT2 re-route that runs over the rail ROW where feasible. Pave along the tracks if it helps. Connect it to the SL3 and add signal priority BRT and you've got 80+% of what you would with LtR. MBTA figures out the routing, but maybe a segment that overlaps with SL3 extension, or even the whole thing is SL3, that's small potatoes compared to making the general CT2 route into actual BRT.

"another bus"