Greenline Expansion to Medford

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Postby Cotuit » Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:43 am

I agree that a two branched extension is the best option. Two of the current green lines can run through to Lechmere and byond with one terminating in Union Square and one in West Medford. Current development proposals in East Cambridge should justify running two lines through Lechmere.
Cotuit
 

Spliting the Medford Extension

Postby juni0r75 » Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:16 am

I completely agree that the line should really be split in order to allow for both neighborhoods to get service. However, this being the T, I am sure that they will not do this for the simple fact that the thought of extending Light Rail services goes against the T's corporate culture which is abandon LR as much as possible. Splitting the line would also require a more intricate headway timing in order to make sure that tehre was even service to both areas and to avoid a glut in the Central Subway.

Also, would the Medford line really be another line? I can reasonably see the T running the Medford line as an extension of a trunkated E-Arborway line (Ie: Heath-Medford Hillside) with the line terminating at Heath.
User avatar
juni0r75
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:02 pm
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK and East Providence, RI

Postby efin98 » Mon Mar 22, 2004 5:04 am

One flaw though Junior, the E Line by the time the extention was built would already be running to Arborway. Otherwise you are on the money.
The central subway can handle the traffic, provided that Bs and Cs are not scheduled in front of Bs and Ds. The line handled a heck of alot more trains 50 or 60 years ago so it can handle the traffic.
efin98
 

Postby juni0r75 » Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:58 pm

efin98 wrote:One flaw though Junior, the E Line by the time the extention was built would already be running to Arborway. Otherwise you are on the money.
The central subway can handle the traffic, provided that Bs and Cs are not scheduled in front of Bs and Ds. The line handled a heck of alot more trains 50 or 60 years ago so it can handle the traffic.


True enough Efin. The reason I said "trunkated E-Arborway" is because I don't completely trust that Arborway is going to be rebuilt even at this stage. I almost can see the T making the argument that due to forward funding it is a case of "either-or" and that Arborway should be left hanging simply because it is within a mile of the Orange line. It all boils down to the fact that as hopeful as I am that the T will honor its committments to Arborway, until I see the contractors laying new track on So. Huntington, I won't believe it.

As for the Central Subway, Hear Hear! I am so sick of listening to the T say that Green Line service can't be improved because of constriction in the Central subway. When built, it used to carry suburban cars from the whole metro district. Though something could be said about the fact that the cars were much smaller then and probably less frequent, there were more of them in number, so logically, there would have been the same amount of congestion then as now.

-A :D
User avatar
juni0r75
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:02 pm
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK and East Providence, RI

Postby efin98 » Mon Mar 22, 2004 1:31 pm

The key to the handling capability is the logistics. The heck with the size, it's the quantity of cars that mattered.

And if they wanted the could truncated the West Medford/Somerville extention to Government Center to make use of the Brattle Loop(a shame to have it and barely use it :wink: ).

And the extention is far enough away that there is no bloody reason the Arborway extention should not have been built by then :D .
efin98
 

Postby Reddy Rocker » Mon Mar 22, 2004 2:29 pm

The only reason I can think of is if the T reneges on it, but IIRC the T is court ordered to restore Arborway.
Karl "Reddy Rocker" Speth, the one and only.
User avatar
Reddy Rocker
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:29 am
Location: Malden, Massachusetts

Postby Cotuit » Mon Mar 22, 2004 9:37 pm

Reddy Rocker wrote:The only reason I can think of is if the T reneges on it, but IIRC the T is court ordered to restore Arborway.


The T is obligated through Big Dig mitigation to do Arborway, Medford, and Blue/Red. So far all they've done is piss away money on the non-obligated Silver Line.

Where's Romney's focus on the urban core? So far all he's done is cancel FR/NB and give lip service to Greater Boston.
Cotuit
 

Postby ceo » Tue Mar 23, 2004 11:41 am

Commuter rail and Green Line service are not equivalent. Green Line headways are 5 to 10 minutes; the Fitchburg Line runs more like 1-2 hours (maybe 1/2 hour at peak).
ceo
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 9:28 am

A branch with CR is much better than just CR/ Street Running

Postby juni0r75 » Wed Mar 24, 2004 12:02 pm

ceo wrote:Commuter rail and Green Line service are not equivalent. Green Line headways are 5 to 10 minutes; the Fitchburg Line runs more like 1-2 hours (maybe 1/2 hour at peak).


True Ceo, but if you are making the point that CR service is no subsitiute for the Green line, in this case, the only reason a person might want to use the CR at Union Sq. vs. a Green Line branch extension would be to go out of town to the suburbs, or <i>quickly</i> downtown to North Station (ie: a morning commute). Let's face it, if I am standing at Porter Square and a train comes in for North Station before my Red Line RT, I would take it hands down because it would get me downtown in half the time (sorry Reddy :wink: ).

My point is, there probably will be very little traffic originating from a Green Line station at Union Sqr. which would be going outbound to Medford Hillside. Thus, it would make more sense to not build a very expensive tunnel to make the line continious when a branch would work just as well for traffic flows.

A side point: is the study going to address the possibility of street running from Union Square over Prospect Hill to the Lowell Alignment to avoid the building of a tunnel? I know that since I moved to the UK I started calling them <i>trams</i> but we do refer to trolleys as <b>streetcars</b> for a reason in this country! Maybe that could be a viable solution if the trans ran up a fairly low traffic side street...

-A :P
User avatar
juni0r75
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:02 pm
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK and East Providence, RI

Postby jdreed » Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:04 pm

Cotuit wrote:The T is obligated through Big Dig mitigation to do Arborway, Medford, and Blue/Red. So far all they've done is piss away money on the non-obligated Silver Line.


The T has a social obligation for the Silver Line too, from long before the Big Dig CLF lawsuit. Well, not in its current form, but they have an obligation for the "Washington St Replacement Service". They promised Washington St would have replacement service after the El came down and they they just sat or their ass for years before doing something. Granted, they've done something stupid instead of what people actually want, but they couldn't have just ignored them completely.
jdreed
 

Postby jwhite07 » Wed Mar 24, 2004 6:36 pm

I think the reference here is to Silver Line Phase III, that absurdly expensive tunnel linking the Washington Street "replacement" service to the South Boston Piers Transitway. Nowhere is it stated that the Washington Street Silver Line must be linked to South Boston and the airport, but that is what the MBTA is vigorously supporting, while in the meantime trying to ignore or discredit legally mandated service improvements.
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby Cotuit » Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:53 pm

Yes, I was refering to the third phase when speaking of pissing away money on the Silver Line. Though the Washington Street obligation I've always heard, was "equal or better." Granted, I never had the pleasure of riding the elevated, but I assume service was better than a bus.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the new low-emmission buses (including the Silver Line buses) part of Big Dig mitigation as well?
Cotuit
 

Re: Green Line

Postby atkelly » Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:11 pm

GP40MC1118 wrote:IMHO, one big problem not mentioned in the Union Square routing is
the area between the former B&M Yard 8/7 "Red Bridge" and Medford
Street. What's the problem? Well you have to figure out a way to get
over or under McGrath Highway and CSX's Grand Jct Branch at
Swift Interlocking.

You can't have a grade level crossing of the Green Line and CSX's
Grand Jct (which crosses the T's Fitchburg Route mainline at grade
under McGrath). And there's no room anyway. This leaves some
sort of viaduct/bridge over McGrath and the Fitch. Don't think
that's going to fly.


The story here was that there was going to be a Lechmere land swap. That MBTA would get to shift the stop to the B&M yard 7 (I believe) and Gilford Rail would get the old Lechmere stop which they would then turn into a commercial development. The Idea from here would be that the Yard would provide access to the Red Bridge which would then carry the Green Line up to Medford.
atkelly
 

Postby GP40MC1118 » Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:54 pm

I know all about the land swap. I was not refering to the extension to
Medford - there's little problems there. What I was responding to is the
extension to Union Square. There is a significant problem getting
over O'Brien/McGrath highway, CSX's Grand Jct Branch in that compact
area starting at the south end (Yard 7) of Red Bridge.

Dave
GP40MC1118
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:06 pm

Postby Charliemta » Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:25 pm

A green line from Union Square to Lechmere should be located along the NORTH side of the Fitchburg rail line. That way it can pass under McGrath Highway, and also avoid the need for a crossing of the Grand Junction line.

East of McGrath Highway, the new Green line could ramp and then cross the Fitchburg line on a new bridge next to the existing rail bridge where the rail line that parallels McGrath Highway crosses over the Fitchburg line. Then the Green line would follow that rail line to the new Lechmere station location.
User avatar
Charliemta
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:51 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bgl, Type 7 3684 and 9 guests