Fitchburg Line Improvement Plan

I recently became aware of this plan from a front page article in yesterdays' Worcester Telegram and Gazette.

As a follow on to the current track upgrade on this line, the MBTA contracted with McMahon Associates for a plan to improve travel times to 1 hour between Fitchburg and Porter Sq.

I took a look at the plan which can be accessed at the MBTA site

http://www.mbta.com/projects_underway/fitchburg.asp#

I agree with many of the observations in the plan. However I wonder about the cost effectiveness of building a flyover at Willows. It does not seem to me that Guilford freight traffic is enough to justify this expense.

Also I suspect closing some stations and building new stations Devens (to replace shirley/Ayer) and Lincoln (replacing hastings/kendal green/silver hill) will be controversial and may garner NIMBY opposition to the new sites. However, from my trips it does seem the number of stops in the Lincoln area is excessive and soemthing needs to be done.

I commend the MBTA for addressing these long neglected improvements. Once the travel times are improved it might be practical to consider restoring service to Gardner.

I'd chime in that the distance between Ayer and Shirley merits keeping those two as separate stations. If not,
Ayer people drive west to take the east to Boston. I suppose they could drive to Littleton.

Combining Belmont and Waverley stations does not make sense. Both are busy commercial districts, and they are not especially near each other. A new station between the two would be within walking distance of many fewer people than the current stations.

On the other hand, combining Kendall Green, Hastings, and Silver Hill is long overdue. Weston and Lincoln are two of the least densely populated towns in the entire metro area, and certainly don't need four stops.

(Replying to above: Lincoln station already exists, and would be unaffected by the T's proposal.)

Rockingham Racer wrote:I suppose they could drive to Littleton.

Not until there is a new station or more parking at the existing one...

I'm actually GLAD I don't take the train any more. Although the addition of the express runs were nice, If I needed to go in later in the day finding ANY parking space was an adventure. You'd often park off behing the trees on what I believe is private property but the property owner was kind enough not to make a big deal about it.

Local politics however are getting in the way of relocating the station. If the town would allow a regional station like the T wants it could be a big boon, IF the town would allow further development of the area with convenient shops, etc. I don't see it happening here though.

Speaking of Littleton...

I was at the CR station on Friday morning and it looks like they are significantly expanding parking. There was a sign that said "Monthly Permit Parking Coming Soon" or something like that. It looks like the land has been cleared and the heavy equipment is now grading it.

I agree, combining Waverley and Belmont doesn't make sense. Both stations are in busy commercial and residential zones with transfers to the 74 bus to Harvard, the 554 Bus to Newton/Downtown and the 73 Trackless trolley to Harvard. Combining the stations and putting it somewhere in the middle would eliminate the convenient transfers. The middle would be somewhere on Pleasant street where there are few houses and only car repair shops and dealerships.

I think closing Waverly makes sense; I hardly ever see anybody using it. Combining the Kendall Green- Silver Hill stations makes sense too, as long as the new one has more parking than the old three combined. A couple of grade crossings (Church St., Viles St.) should be very low priority; however, fixing the Waltham station area (grade separation, double tracking, high
level platforms) is long overdue. Overall, the Fitchburg line has been long neglected, and is considerably behind many of the others in quality of
track and station facilities. Improving it should be a boon to Metrowest commuters.

trainhq wrote:I think closing Waverly makes sense; I hardly ever see anybody using it. Combining the Kendall Green- Silver Hill stations makes sense too, as long as the new one has more parking than the old three combined. A couple of grade crossings (Church St., Viles St.) should be very low priority; however, fixing the Waltham station area (grade separation, double tracking, high
level platforms) is long overdue. Overall, the Fitchburg line has been long neglected, and is considerably behind many of the others in quality of
track and station facilities. Improving it should be a boon to Metrowest commuters.

Hey, that's my station!

Granted, though, Waverly doesn't see a lot of traffic, although some of the rush hour trains do get anywhere from 5-15 boardings/alightings. When I moved there this summer, I was surprised at the level of traffic. If the schedule works for you, its a 20 minute trip down town that is usually an hour or more by 73 trolley and Red Line.

The biggest impediment to using it more at stops like Belmont and Waverly is the lack of frequencies. Aside from rush hour, the trains are infrequent enough that its usually not worth going out of your way from Boston up to North Station -- especially if your cutting it close to departure. You add a lot of time backtracking to the Red Line if you miss your train, and the next one is two hours or more away.

From what I can see, I would have to think that the Fitchburg Line's eastern end could use more service, and should some of the Indigo Line plans for the Fairmont line ever pay off, I think we have a model for it. The existing stations at Porter, Belmont, Waverly, Waltham, and Brandeis, plus new stations at Union Square, perhaps one on the east side of Belmont, or at Alewife, and in East Waltham, near Route 20, could probably generate a lot of traffic if service operated at "near rapid transit" levels. The ideas of using DMUs on 20-30 minute headways could probably work well here -- most of the areas seem like they are densely populated enough. Further, to really develop potential, a possible new park and ride facility near Route 20 and 128 could further support ridership on the "locals."

Belmont Center and Waverly both already look like exactly the kind of transit-oriented development that the Romney administration claims to want to encourage. For that reason alone, it would be folly to close either station.

flyermike wrote:I agree, combining Waverley and Belmont doesn't make sense. Both stations are in busy commercial and residential zones with transfers to the 74 bus to Harvard, the 554 Bus to Newton/Downtown and the 73 Trackless trolley to Harvard. Combining the stations and putting it somewhere in the middle would eliminate the convenient transfers. The middle would be somewhere on Pleasant street where there are few houses and only car repair shops and dealerships.

I'm sure that if they re-located the rail station, they'd figure out how to move the bus stops--and in fact make a stronger set of connecting points by bringing the routes from either station out to a single nexus.

Most abutters in the Belmont Center or at Waverly would declare their little neighborhood to be perfect--in contrast to the derelict former car dealers, warehouses, and weed spotted parking lots along today's Pleasant Street. Now *that*s an area that everyone should agree could use a little bit of condos-over-stores transit oriented development. In fact, you'd make a nice promenade from Belmont Center to Waverly through what is now a wasteland.

You'll be better able to make the case for multiple stops throughout the day if you concentrate your traffic at the sort of single connecting hub that a new station would represent.

I agree Waverly would make a nice stop for a DMU based transit system that ran from North Station to Route 128. However, it present, it doesn't serve anybody very well; it slows down the long distance commuters, and doesn't have frequent enough service to attract many locals. I still think they should close it
for now, and re-open it as part of a DMU based service.
Also, I think the best thing for Kendall Green would be to just move it down to I-95. That way you could connect it to Route 20 and pick up traffic from both 20 and Route 117, as well as serving the office park area on Route 117 with reverse commuter service. It would make a good regional commuter rail station.

I'm sure that if they re-located the rail station, they'd figure out how to move the bus stops--and in fact make a stronger set of connecting points by bringing the routes from either station out to a single nexus.

I really like this idea. Move the Waverly CR stop to the abandoned auto dealer Pleasant St. zone and also make it a terminus for the Waverly TT and Belmont Center bus routes. This could all be done as part of a smart growth plan. I have a feeling that there is a developer or two that would like to build and sell some homes/condos in Belmont...