Comments
Maxpowr9 t1_iydon9h wrote
If the State Legislature can't authorize this, vote them all out.
sadomagnus t1_iye234t wrote
Should fix what they have first
ksoops t1_iye4d9j wrote
See you in the next life
crazicus t1_iyf0lvz wrote
This is a needed improvement and this is a vital window to do it
sadomagnus t1_iyf678e wrote
How is this needed its not that hard to get from red to blue
crazicus t1_iyfcc31 wrote
It’s not hard to do, but it creates a lot of congestion on the orange and green lines between state and downtown crossing and government center and park street. This reduces their capacity in the downtown core, and it discourages ridership. Red-Blue is more important than it seems!
sadomagnus t1_iyfdcg3 wrote
Any money should be going to fixing the system in place not building new ones until they can streamline there maintenance system so that we do not need month longe shutdowns of lines any new construction should be put on hold
crazicus t1_iyfe3bu wrote
I disagree. Both maintenance and expansion are necessary for the long term planning and longevity of the MBTA. Again, this is a crucial connection and we have a critical window to do this during the MGH’s major construction over the next few years. If we miss this opportunity, it’ll be who knows how long until it’ll get done
bbqturtle t1_iydv9j6 wrote
This might be a hot take, but I wish there was a non-bus connection between airport T stop and the airport. Could there be a little tram or something for that?
CJYP t1_iydwu33 wrote
Plenty of cities have airport people movers of some sort. It would make tons of sense to build that. Usually they're automated, grade separated light rail, not exactly trams.
SkiingAway t1_iye06t6 wrote
That's probably more a Massport question than a MBTA one.
It's been tossed around as an idea and in some studies but as of now it's not something that has any serious plans to happen.
TurnsOutImAScientist t1_iyedkpv wrote
Hotter take: passengers arriving at Logan should always have a rail option for getting into the city; blue line should be 24/7 or nearly so.
3720-To-One t1_iyex5nw wrote
blue line MBTA should be 24/7 or nearly so.
TurnsOutImAScientist t1_iyeyff8 wrote
Agreed. There'd probably be some practical issues trying to separate one or more lines from the rest of the system during the overnight hours anyhow.
LePoultry-geist t1_iye1gub wrote
Assuming I understand correctly, there was a plan for a people mover as part of the Logan renovations/expansion. It got axed though.
https://www.massport.com/logan-forward/initiatives/looking-ahead/
link0612 t1_iye5fwc wrote
This is correct, as part of the Terminal E expansion there were plans for a people mover that became plans for a moving sidewalk to Terminal E that became no plan.
Ksevio t1_iyerqzw wrote
They really need to bite the bullet and put a little automated underground shuttle like other airports have.
Could just have a single loop that goes A-B-C-E-BlueLine-RentalCar. Difficulty is there's a lot of active infrastructure it would have to go under/over including I90
aehsonairb t1_iyetin9 wrote
lol that what the blue busses do. it’s too bad there’s already a mess of infrastructure around the airport, otherwise you might be making sense.
Ksevio t1_iyeu0kw wrote
Yes, but the busses are slower, have to go through traffic, and you have to go outside to board them. Your typical airport tram is underground or raised out of traffic and connects directly in the terminal
crazicus t1_iyf0qmw wrote
Or at the very least, a dedicated busway
[deleted] t1_iyf6e6h wrote
[deleted]
Master_Dogs t1_iydnsgs wrote
> What's next: The current proposal would take at least eight years to complete.
Jesus, for a half mile extension. I get GLX taking that long or more since it involved half a dozen stations, half a dozen bridges, 3 Cities, new trains to service all the new track, plus it's 2 miles or so of track and an existing Commuter Rail line to play nicely with. The Red/Blue connector should really take a year or two at most. Then we could move onto more extensions:
- Orange Line to Wakefield/Reading and to Needham
- Blue Lynn to Lynn, and start planning a westward expansion along the Charles to Watertown
- Green Line improvements like more combined stations and better signal priority. Maybe even tunnel some of the existing street car routes to get fançy
- Electrifying all Commuter Rail Lines and rebranding / redesigning them all to be regional rail
- North/South Rail Link should be planned, long term funding acquired, and construction started as soon as we've gotten Regional Rail and electrified trains setup.
- Red Line up to Lexington, and out to Waltham is another good thing to consider.
- Major investments in Bus infrastructure too. We need to overhaul a half dozen bus garages, and build another dozen so we can buy, maintain and run 15 minute headways on most bus routes. Turning every bus route into a pseudo BRT system would be a game changer for last mile connections
- Major investments across the State in pedestrian and cycling infrastructure too, so we cover more last mile connections to bus and train stops.
I could totally see some of THESE extensions taking 8 years. The North/South Rail Link is a $10-$20B Big Dig 2.0 Electric Train Boogloo project for example; that'll take years just to get the necessary designs, funding, permits, workers, etc lined up. A half mile extension should be streamlined though, it's not rocket science.
eladts t1_iydsm35 wrote
>The North/South Rail Link is a $10-$20B Big Dig 2.0 Electric Train Boogloo projec
It could have been done during Big Dig 1.0.
Master_Dogs t1_iydw43c wrote
Yeah some plans actually called for that. It would have probably been pretty easy to do then since we were already digging a tunnel for a highway. Had we been bold enough to just remove the Central Artery first we could have probably cut and covered a massive overhaul on the cheap too.
Alternative_Nail1632 t1_iye0vyd wrote
North South Rail link solves zero problems. This would make a difference
Ksevio t1_iyes8kt wrote
It solves lots of problems - reduces load of subway trains from people going between the north/south of the city (similar to red/blue connector but larger scale) and speeds up trains at North/South Stations (no need to reverse/switch tracks)
Alternative_Nail1632 t1_iyev8lr wrote
I disagree. That assumes everyone is going to the place where the station is, which most people are not doing
Ksevio t1_iyeyfs9 wrote
That's not an assumption here. The stations are not just destinations but connection points.
For example, someone could travel from Worcester to a job in Charlestown, they need to go something like:
Worcester -(CR)> South Station -(Red)> Downtown Crossing -(Orange)> Community College
With the N/S link they could do:
Worcester -(CR)> North Station -(Orange)> Community College
Cuts out a connection and a significant amount of slower subway travel.
It also allows people to commute between suburbs. Someone travelling from Dorchester to Woburn has to do:
Four Corners -> South Station -> Downtown Crossing -> North Station -> Anderson
With the link it's just:
Four Corners -> Anderson
Master_Dogs t1_iyf7nfd wrote
> Cuts out a connection and a significant amount of slower subway travel. > >
Transfers take a lot of time too. On the weekends I've seen 20 minutes between Red and Green Line trains. One less transfer could easily save you that much time. Possibly more, if a transfer causes you to miss an hourly bus for example it might cost you an hour or so.
The other cool thing is we could run trains between say Worcester and Lowell, or Lynn and Framingham, or any number of connections that currently are basically "I need to drive or spend 3 hours on a train/subway/train" with the hourly commuter rail trains and occasionally 20 minute headways on the subway being huge "fuck the T, I'll drive" points.
And if we can run trains between North and South station we could probably make due with less trains. Or run trains at higher frequencies. That gives us some good options. Maybe we take a few trains from a lesser used line and put them on those Worcester -> Lowell/Lynn routes I mentioned.
Master_Dogs t1_iyf8tgl wrote
Solves multiple problems:
- Eliminates the need to turn trains around at North and South station. This is a major bottleneck and reduces the amount of trains we can run through those stations, limiting our headways.
- Allows us to run trains between North and South shore stations. Worcester to Lowell, Lynn to Fall River, Fitchburg to the Cape, you name it it's possible if we have the North/South Rail Link and enough trains.
- Allows us to share trains between the North and South shore lines easily too. Currently our main option is the slow overnight transfer of equipment via the Grand Junction Freight railroad in Cambridge. We could easily handle a broken train by sending a spare from the south shore up to the north shore or vice versa.
- Gives us a new connection between North and South Station. This on itself could allow for redundancy in our downtown transit system which is helpful if subway lines need to be repaired.
- All of these things may eliminate the need for some passengers to transfer to the subway at all too. That allows for more capacity in our transit system and faster rides. That Lowell to Worcester route might take 3+ hours today since you need to ride 2 Commuter Rail trains and the subway. Commuter Rail trains have hour long headways at times and the subway may take 15-20 minutes at times between trains. Combine all of this and you may need to catch a 9am train from Lowell to catch a noon train to Worcester out of South Station to get to your destination several hours after someone who drives gets there. Why can't Lowell to Worcester take an hour or two via ONE train?
- And if we get more people onto a train of some sort, we get people out of cars and that frees up highway, roadways and parking for people who need or absolutely want a car. Some of these improvements could lead to a few thousand to maybe tens of thousands of new train riders. Maybe that's a few thousand cars off the roads.
MyRespectableAlt t1_iydolxj wrote
It's an extension through landfill, so you're looking at shoring up/securing everything you excavate so the homes and businesses above don't collapse.
You're rerouting sewer, water, electrical, gas. God knows what else they've buried in the last two hundred years.
Let's not even mention the red tape and multiple jurisdictions and authorities involved.
This ain't no cut and cover in a cow pasture.
Edit: Not to mention cutting off the primary E-W corridor through downtown that also coincidentally services the primary hospital for the area.
Difficult-Ad3518 t1_iydr6sa wrote
>It's an extension through landfill
Not exactly. Cambridge Street was one of the original streets laid out in Boston in the 1630s. This tunnel will mostly be under the original Shawmut Penninsula. The shoreline was expanded a bit by Charles Circle itself and your point about utilities are valid, but this extension will not be primarily through landfill.
>This ain't no cut and cover in a cow pasture.
See this map from 1635. Ironically, you could be right in almost any situation making that statement, except here. There are many things that make this project complicated and your overall point is correct, but your reasoning is flawed. This is one of the few remaining streets from the 1630s on original 1630s land (albeit with some fill by Charles Circle, as I said).
MyRespectableAlt t1_iydsiu0 wrote
Thanks for the clarification.
Difficult-Ad3518 t1_iydty67 wrote
Sure thing! Cambridge Street has a long and fascinating history. It's been rebooted a few times in different eras.
Most recently, as part of the 1960s urban renewal project that razed Scollay Square and replaced it with City Hall Plaza, Cambridge Street was slightly moved and rebuilt from the ground up. The utilities underneath that you allude to are not from 200 years ago, but rather from the 1960s. There are complications that arise in any tunneling project, but as far as tunneling in "old Boston" goes, this is good as it gets. Basically, if we can't tunnel here, we can't tunnel anywhere on Shawmut Penninsula.
HurdieBirdie t1_iyeatil wrote
While the soil type is different, the fact this section of roadway is one of the original in Boston and almost 400 years old makes the other point even more true. The utilities and structures in the ground have got to be so convoluted from being routed around each other for that long. I'd imagine the utility plans to be just black with lines in that area of the city.
Buffyoh t1_iydqc8m wrote
The only sensible answer here! Many years ago there was a study by the Central Tranportation Planning Staff ("CTPS") to run the Blue line out to Riverside via the Central subway. (Until fairly recently, the two center tracks at Kenmore were raised in anticpation of high platfrom RTL cars) I recall that the plan was to tunnel under Bowdoin Street. Either way, Red/Blue will be highly disruptive and high cost.
Master_Dogs t1_iydr8dn wrote
It's a half mile extension. Countries in Europe have built entirely new subway lines in the time it'll take us to decide to actually commit to this basic connector.
ImpressiveEffect8212 t1_iyduc7e wrote
Part of the issues are that the funding and construction resources and accountability here is much higher for cars here whereas it’s for trains there. A second piece is mitigation like managing detours, noise, and utility reroutes as mentioned above. There’s also more uncertainty about what’s under the ground and where it exists, which requires more exploratory digging and planning.
Master_Dogs t1_iydxbn8 wrote
> Part of the issues are that the funding and construction resources and accountability here is much higher for cars here whereas it’s for trains there.
Not sure what you mean about this. We're already looking at spending $850M on a connector; surely that kind of money gets us a <5 year timeline. 8 years is just... insane. NYU has been studying the GLX project for example (study here), we spend significantly more than many other countries on transit as is.
> A second piece is mitigation like managing detours, noise, and utility reroutes as mentioned above. There’s also more uncertainty about what’s under the ground and where it exists, which requires more exploratory digging and planning.
Yeah so maybe I was hybolic about it being done in 2 years. I still don't see how this basic extension takes 8 years to complete. It's a pretty critical extension too, since the lack of a connector leads to more people using the Green, Orange and Silver Lines instead of just hopping on the Blue Line and skipping a third transfer altogether. That added traffic/inconvenience really drives people to drive over just leveraging our pretty awesome (for American standards) public transit system. Especially as more people look to live and work around Cambridge, Somerville, Eastie, Revere, etc.
link0612 t1_iye6e3k wrote
Yes, the extreme lag times and costs are a national regulatory problem with how transit projects are funded, overseen, and constructed. Which means they're going to impact us for any MBTA transit project. It can't be done faster or cheaper without seceding (messy) or passing fundamentally new federal transportation legislation (unlikely since we just passed a new one that made things worse)
NateMayhem t1_iydqwui wrote
Yeah sure but that guy said a year or two at most, so we should really take that into consideration.
3720-To-One t1_iydw55c wrote
They should just have the blue line come above ground and travel down Cambridge street L-train style.
ImpressiveEffect8212 t1_iydtjrl wrote
Out of those infra proposals, the blue line to Lynn, Green Line improvements, bus infrastructure, and pedestrian/bike infrastructure are realistic. I’d put my money on the Lynn extension for most benefit for the cost. Others like extending the Blue Line to Watertown or the red line to Lexington are never going to happen. The latter both because NIMBYs but also because of the minutemen trail in the ROW. The former because most of it is duplicated by the green line (except the former A branch being removed)
Master_Dogs t1_iydvxsh wrote
I love the Minute Man and ride it monthly if not weekly. I don't see how it existing would block a major transit expansion though. As the Wikipedia article points out, the MBTA still owns the ROW:
> The property is currently owned by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and leased to the municipalities through which it passes on an interim basis.[citation needed] The MBTA at one point planned to use this right-of-way to extend the Red Line to Arlington Center and Arlington Heights.[10]
And while NIMBYs at one point blocked the Red Line extension on racist grounds (see this article for the deets) it's not that hard to bypass NIMBYism. We simply tell them to pound sand and commit to funding the entire extension in one go. The State can do whatever it wants with the ROW it owns. It can even play hardball and start denying grants and funding to towns who refuse to play nicely with transit. Watch how quickly Arlington agrees to a Red Line extension if it finds out the millions it gets in State Grants go away.
I also don't see why the Minute Man couldn't be repaved once a Red Line extension is completed. That would serve nicely for MBTA access when needed, and temporarily pathway detours can be setup using parallel streets. Now if we were talking about using it for Commuter Rail that would be an issue, as the Minute Man has dozens of at grade crossings to deal with plus not enough ROW to handle double track trains and a pathway at grade.
The Blue Line to Watertown also isn't duplicated if it's done on the Cambridge side of the Charles using existing roadway ROWs. Motorists would be peeved at losing access temporarily to a major roadway, but there's already Storrow and i90 on the other side plus plenty of alternative routes to use. We could even loop the Blue Line back around via the Watertown/Cambridge Greenway. Or run a branch of the Red Line down that way instead.
Ksevio t1_iyesmvl wrote
I think the idea would be the Red line would go above ground where the Minute Man is now. Putting it underground would definitely allow it to go faster and have less weather issues, but would be considerably more expensive
Master_Dogs t1_iyeuh4f wrote
I'm pretty sure you'd need to tunnel significant portions of it in order to handle (or really remove) at grade crossings. Just in Arlington alone there's a half dozen or so major street crossings. It would likely be done as a cut & cover style tunneling. Expensive? Yeah. But we've spent tens of billions on highways before with significantly less capacity and this would enable us to increase density around a ten mile or so corridor.
Ksevio t1_iyewah7 wrote
It would definitely have to go under in some cases. I'd picture it sort of like the orange line where it's exposed in sections and pops under for periods
theshoegazer t1_iye4mhc wrote
I think the Lynn extension would benefit the most people. And I'm not sure how many Red Line riders would prefer to connect the Blue at MGH to reach the airport (which then requires a bus connection), when they can go up a flight of stairs in South Station and hop on the Silver Line.
link0612 t1_iye5xpg wrote
Blue Line to Lynn is not very feasible without significant state legislation changes due to environmental impacts, and would also require significant takings of private property since the right of way in Revere and Lynn has been built upon.
Maxpowr9 t1_iydoh3g wrote
Seriously. 8 years is a fucking joke. It should be at most half this. Skyscrapers don't even take as long to build.
Master_Dogs t1_iydscfx wrote
And that's also 8 years in MBTA time. Really more like 15 years because we'll take 4 years to plan this, 3 years to fund it, another year of community meetings and then we'll take another 8 years to actually build it because we'll mismanage the entire thing. And we'll probably end up fucking it up the first time too.
SEND-YOUR-PII t1_iydxhg4 wrote
Skyscrapers are far more simple than a tunnel/most infrastructure projects. A skyscraper is some pipes in the ground and a big stick of concrete up into the air with some steel beams coming off the side to hold the floor up.
A tunnel is the logistics of tons and tons of skyscrapers next to each other (not counting station structures) that need to avoid utilities installed in the 1800s, avoid causing settlement of nearby buildings while making a hole under them, and can’t cause any disturbance to the roads above. Going from basically nothing to a year or two of alternative analysis, two years of design, and four years of construction is hasty.
Keep in mind the economies of scale thing, we don’t have a big metro design industry, we need to mobilize/purchase all sorts of specialized equipment, etc, all for a short project.
HurdieBirdie t1_iyeb6t3 wrote
It's also dependent on working around MGHs schedule of rebuilding on top of there at the same time.
CJYP t1_iydwg1z wrote
IMO the suburban subway extensions are mostly redundant with the regional rail conversion. With regional rail, all those cities will already have subway like frequencies, and it'll even be faster than a subway line. If any currently unserved spot on the line needs service, infill stations can handle it. I realize there are some trips that would be better served by a subway extension, but i doubt it's enough to be worth the cost if you're already doing regional rail.
What that lets you do is spend the subway money creating new lines in the city - starting with one on Mass Ave, and another on Washington Street. Then you serve currently underserved areas closer to the city center and the suburban towns, at the same time, with the same amount of money.
Master_Dogs t1_iydzbqf wrote
> IMO the suburban subway extensions are mostly redundant with the regional rail conversion. With regional rail, all those cities will already have subway like frequencies, and it'll even be faster than a subway line. If any currently unserved spot on the line needs service, infill stations can handle it. I realize there are some trips that would be better served by a subway extension, but i doubt it's enough to be worth the cost if you're already doing regional rail.
The Orange Line extension in the 70's single tracked a large amount of the Haverhill Line, so I think it's worthwhile to just run Haverhill Line trains over the Lowell/Wildcat Branch instead and replace the service south of Wilmington with the Orange Line.
The Red Line to Arlington and Lexington has no existing rail either, and would be quite useful to expand our metro a bit. Those towns would hate this but it's a necessary thing to do if we want to provide more space for growth.
The Blue Line to Lynn is certainly redundant, but still quite useful. Connecting Lynn easily to Revere, Eastie and ultimately Cambridge via the Red/Blue connector could be extremely useful for transferring car trips to transit trips. Maybe the North/South Rail Link could work for this too, but it's one of the most costly things I mentioned and I honestly don't know if we're ever actually do it.
> What that lets you do is spend the subway money creating new lines in the city - starting with one on Mass Ave, and another on Washington Street. Then you serve currently underserved areas closer to the city center and the suburban towns, at the same time, with the same amount of money.
Washington St was historically served by the elevated Orange Line, but is already served by replacement service via the Silver Line. We could overhaul the Silver Lane and provide more exclusive ROW via bus lanes, improved stops, etc. I don't know if we really need a subway line there though. The Feds already told us no to any Federal funding back in the 70's and 80's when we moved the Orange Line over to the Amtrak/Rail/almost inner belt ROW. Maybe we could convince them today that we could use more transit service there, or we could commit actual State dollars to it. But I don't know how needed it is when we have transit going there, it's just poorly done.
Not sure what you mean about Mass Ave - like connecting Cambridge/Boston together via a new subway branch? That could be useful to replace the #1 bus that crosses the Mass Ave bridge and often gets stuck in traffic, making it unreliable. But like the Silver Line on Washington St that service could be improved with significantly more exclusive ROW, better stations and more frequent bus headways. Either extension could ultimately be useful though and allow us to redeploy buses to the burbs for better last mile service to other extensions or improvements (like better connections to Regional Rail stations, removing the need for large parking garages at them).
Ultimately I'd say why not all of the above. We dumped $20B into the Big Dig for pretty lackluster return on investment. Dumping $20B into the T could easily let us do most of these things and probably more if we get our costs under control.
CJYP t1_iye2gzk wrote
I'm all for doing all of these things. In the end we do have to prioritize which ones have the most value for their cost, if nothing else just to decide what order to do them in. NSRL has extremely high value, but also extremely high cost. I still think it's so important that we should bite the bullet and do it sooner rather than later.
With NSRL, I'd rather double track the commuter rail line from Assembly to oak Grove than extend the orange line. That would provide connectivity to all the southern commuter rail lines. Some of the route (especially the bridge over the Mystic River) already has 3 orange line tracks, so you could turn the third track into a commuter rail track instead of rebuilding the bridge. You'd mainly need new construction from about Wellington to Oak Grove. Still expensive, but probably somewhat comparable to all the grade separations you'd need to build to extend the orange line.
As for the silver line and 1 bus, the main benefit of rail over bus is higher capacity. They could even be light rail lines. Regardless, they both urgently need their own right of way so they stop getting stuck in traffic.
PS - This debate is much more productive than arguing over whether we even should build transit, which is all a lot of people seem to want to talk about. I hope the legislature and Maura Healey are having a similar debate, not the other one.
Master_Dogs t1_iyeemnq wrote
> With NSRL, I'd rather double track the commuter rail line from Assembly to oak Grove than extend the orange line. That would provide connectivity to all the southern commuter rail lines. Some of the route (especially the bridge over the Mystic River) already has 3 orange line tracks, so you could turn the third track into a commuter rail track instead of rebuilding the bridge. You'd mainly need new construction from about Wellington to Oak Grove. Still expensive, but probably somewhat comparable to all the grade separations you'd need to build to extend the orange line. > >
The triple tracking was done during the mid 1970's because the Haymarket North Extension had plans to go to Reading. My suggested extension was basically just this old extension proposal. Basically just send Haverhill Line trains up the Lowell/Wildcat Line instead and you can reclaim all of the Haverhill Line ROW to Reading for the Orange Line. Makes a triple track a useful thing for express trains. Grade separations can be handled by small tunnel segments. Fun fact, the OL already does this to pass under the old Medford Branch around here. If only we hadn't let the Medford Branch ROW disappear, because that too could have been a nice 1 or 2 station Branch of the OL. Maybe a Spring St station plus a Medford Sq station. Plus there's an old station from the Medford Branch on Park St though no idea who owns it now.
I wonder which option would be better. I'm pretty sure you could get more capacity and frequency with the OL extension to Reading. Whether we'd ever build up Reading, Wakefield and Melrose enough to justify that... who knows. With a Regional Rail improvement you could always branch up through Wakefield, Lynnfield and beyond via other old rail ROWs that are slowly turning into multi use trails. Though we could even build further OL extensions under those if we ever want/need to.
> PS - This debate is much more productive than arguing over whether we even should build transit, which is all a lot of people seem to want to talk about. I hope the legislature and Maura Healey are having a similar debate, not the other one.
I hope so. I imagine the additional tax revenue from ballot question #1 (the 1% tax to fund education/transit) could help change the equation too. I have to imagine they were previously worried about raising taxes to fund infrastructure improvements. Now that that's partially solved, we could start planning some of these extensions/improvements without worrying as much about funding. But they could always try and use funky accounting to negate that increase in revenue. Or just spend it on highways. 🤡 who knows.
psychicsword t1_iyene40 wrote
> Jesus, for a half mile extension.
They are probably coordinating with the other construction that is being done as part of MGH. If that is taking 8 years then it isn't likely that this will be able to be completed any sooner than that.
reveazure t1_iyej07v wrote
The 8 years includes 3 years of design and 1 year of contract bidding, according to the presentation. The construction is only supposed to take around 4 years.
HammerfestNORD t1_iydma9j wrote
Do it.
SlightlyStoopkid t1_iydolju wrote
>MassDOT's plan to connect the two lines calls for digging a tunnel between the Bowdoin Street terminus of the Blue Line under Cambridge Street to the Charles/MGH Red Line station.
>The MBTA estimated last year the project would cost $850 million.
Master_Dogs t1_iydrmu1 wrote
Yes, it'll be expensive, as all subways are. The possibility of easing downtown subway congestion and making it really easy for folks in Cambridge and Eastie to easily visit one and another makes it really worthwhile even if it'll cost almost a billion.
We had no issue coming up with funding for the $20B and counting Big Dig.
ImpressiveEffect8212 t1_iydun7e wrote
Hmmm…where is the debt from the Big Dig/who is responsible for it?
Oh yeah, the state put that debt on the MBTA and is requiring the MBTA to come up with funds to pay that back
Master_Dogs t1_iydxfun wrote
Yeah that is a major issue. IIRC the debt payments the T is responsible are massive, like I want to say half a billion per year. It's a major hamper on our transit system when the T is responsible for paying off the Big Dig...
crazicus t1_iyf14gc wrote
Yep, ~$500MM per year in debt servicing, and it’s a whopping 25% of the operating budget
Buffyoh t1_iydtxgo wrote
Much of the tunnel is already there from the time the Blue line was a Streetcar line. Until the early Fifties, there was a portal that came up on Cambridge Street almost at Blossom Street. There was once a streetcar route from Jeffries Point to Harvard Square. But between the former portal and the Red Line MGH stop, there is a ton of underground utilities. Photo of the Blossom Portal is in this article:
http://www.bostonstreetcars.com/the-growth-of-boston-rapid-transit.html
alc430 t1_iyep05q wrote
Has there ever been a “pretend we can start from scratch with no budget” sort of proposal? Or even a no budget proposal to revamp the entire system?
Obviously that will never happen but I’d love to see a new, strategically and thoughtfully built system that takes into account housing, low income neighborhoods, etc etc and compare to see just how fucked our current system is.
Cabes86 t1_iyf75bf wrote
The article’s point of connecting logan to cambridge’s life science sector doesn’t make sense because the Silverline is better for logan and that line goes straight south station.
The silverline actually stops at each terminal while the logan station requires shuttles.
tusabescomoes t1_iyetsh1 wrote
This would be great
kaitlinkookies t1_iyf0es6 wrote
So they'll be purple now?
Ok_Fact4397 t1_iyf1k7y wrote
I thought I’d never see the day!
Skippypal t1_iydveil wrote
The article mentions that the tunnel would need to be dug.
If I remember correctly isn’t most of the tunnel already dug because it was anticipated to be a priority project at some point?
Difficult-Ad3518 t1_iye8wef wrote
>If I remember correctly isn’t most of the tunnel already dug because it was anticipated to be a priority project at some point?
Part of this section has a tunnel, but not it wasn't built in anticipation of this project. Rather, it was built in the 1910s when the proto-Blue-Line was a streetcar line. Tracks continued west from Bowdoin under Cambridge Street to an incline at Joy Street, where streetcars could continue on surface tracks to Charles Street and the Longfellow Bridge to Cambridge. There was even a Central Square (Cambridge) - Orient Heights streetcar line that used that tunnel!
In the 1920s, the Blue Line was converted to the heavy rail rapid transit line that we know today. With that conversion, the Blue Line became a more efficient, higher-capacity transit line, better suited to serving demand. This conversion also meant that the Blue Line's heavy rail rolling stock was no longer compatible with unpowered streetcar tracks, so the streetcar tracks over the Longfellow Bridge were removed, and revenue service through the Joy Street incline was discontinued.
For a few decades, non-revenue service Blue Line trains were towed through this incline to access a maintenance yard. The ramp portal was permanently covered in 1952. So, while part of the tunnel to the old ramp remains, that tunnel will need to be widened, modernized, and extended to accomodate this service. So much so, in fact, that it makes sense to treat this as a complete extension of the Blue Line tunnel from Bowdoin to Charles, rather than trying to force a square peg into the round hole of the 1910s streetcar tunnel.
I hope this explanation helps!
Comfortable-Scar4643 t1_iyehnfh wrote
I just hope there are more stops so it can take even longer to go a couple miles.
Back to driving.
jtet93 t1_iydj5ez wrote
Makes perfect sense to do it while MGH is renovating!