Is there anyone in Boston intellectually secure enough to discuss a method for implementing the GLX that doesn’t require widening the rail corridor, which is over half of the project costs?
The fundamental requirement of the GLX is that it use steel wheels on steel rails.
The options are straightforward:
1. Share tracks between the GLX and commuter rail.
2. Add the GLX right of way above the existing commuter rail
3. Add the GLX right of way alongside the existing commuter rail
Of those three, the third is the only one that makes sense. The first is a safety and operational nightmare. The second is far more expensive and far more intrusive.
If there are others, then by all means describe it.
drikeosays
There’s this weird subculture that seems emotionally invested in the GLX not happening, and they seem unaware that the state/feds have gone all-in on the project.
jconwaysays
There are false choices being presented. That GLX is coming at the expense of other worthy projects in lower income areas from the Silver Line expansion in Chelsea (largely complete with beautiful looking waiting areas). That GLX is preventing the North/South rail link. Or somehow preventing updates on existing MBTA lines.
These are all false choices being forced on us by a Republican administration and ‘Democratic’ House unwilling to generate the revenue needed to invest in our future. As CMD astutely points out, these developments will be drivers for future growth and economic expansion that will more than pay the Commonwealth back for this investment. Time to invest.
centralmassdadsays
It took maybe 5-6 years for the Red Line expansion to trigger an explosion of development and economic activity along its corridor. It baffles me that this would be seriously opposed.
therleepostsays
Thank you for responding SomervilleTom. But, you haven’t offered all of the options.
There is a lack of problem solving, which should involve some brainstorming. Rail corridors are highly valuable resources.
Let’s suppose we had some sewer drains carrying a very small fraction of the storm water that they could carry, while other lines were at capacity during heavy rains, often backing up and flooding streets. Engineers observed how it is possible to easily divert large amounts of storm water from the over capacity lines to the underutilized pipe line, thus preventing the highly expensive need to upgrade the size of lots of sewer line.
Think about reallocation of resources, and a way that the Somerville rail corridor can be freed up for exclusive use of the Green Line (or better the Orange Line, but then again that is another story; don;t let that distract you).. .
SomervilleTomsays
Feel free to offer a specific proposal.
therleepostsays
Commuter rail users, who already have their long rides heavily subsidized by the taxpayers, are given exclusive use of 9 rail corridors coming from the far exurbs through metro Boston, while 83% of MBTA commuters are given 6 lines in the city. 17% get 9. 83% get 6. That’s a pretty nice deal for one group.
The city/MassDOT should be looking to consolidate commuter rail lines before they enter the densely populated metro area.
The best opportunity for doing that exists with the Lowell Line which uses the Somerville rail corridor. Outside of the densely populated city, the Lowell Line and Haverhill Line come within 1.2 miles of each other..
A single track connection of 1.6 miles can be run out of the north side of the Woburn/Anderson Station. A reverse engine move out of the station is of no issue as the engines are push/pull capable, and indeed typically push all the way to Boston. At least at the time I first spied this opportunity in 2010, the only obstacle for the connection other than buying the right of way,through an industrial park, is the need to bridge over the interstate highway.
The connection to the Haverhill Line allows for a much more efficient use of resources. I have detailed out the many details of this change on another web source. A very few station stops south of Woburn Anderson will be eliminated, they are of minor use, and the affects are easily mitigated. There are no negative effects on either the Haverhill Line or the ride times of the Lowell Line, and even if there were the resource allocation is more than justified.
Spend a $Billion unnecessarily widening the corridor, or spend a fraction doing what should be done.to combine the two commuter lines for a more efficient use of the rail corridors.
If you think the Lowell Line riders have special entitlement, then perhaps we could pay them off to close the line instead . . . . Would $50,000 each do it? We could pay that to the 5,500 daily Lowell Line riders (which was the total when I did my research), that would come to $275M. Wow, we just saved $725M.
But, we don’t need to do that. We can be smart. Spend about $50M on a single track line to connect the two commuter lines, then NOT have to widen the Somerville rail corridor. If frees up the corridor so that we could extend the GLX (or Orange Line) out, not only to West Medford (which has been eliminated in the GLX), but later out to Woburn as demand follows.
Not only have you eliminated the many issues of widening the corridor, it eliminates the access issues caused by the commuter line running alongside.
Other countries pride themselves on creating efficiencies in their transit systems. It’s a shame that we don’t. Instead our system is rigged in favor of those who profit big time from the endless supply of tax dollars.
SomervilleTomsays
Interesting idea. Let me see if I understand your proposal.
1. End service for the Lowell line between Woburn-Anderson and North Station — ending commuter rail service to four of nine communities current served by the Lowell line:
A. Mishawum
B. Winchester Center
C. Wedgemere
D. West Medford
2. Eventually replace existing Lowell Line service with expanded GLX service.
3. Run more trains on the Haverhill line between North Station and Woburn-Anderson
4. Presumably you would also route the Downeaster to the Haverhill line (already done on weekends)
According to the MBTA schedule, this would add 52 commuter rail trips and 10 Downeaster trips each weekday to the Haverhill line. The Haverhill line already supports 44 commuter rail trips (to and from North Station) each weekday.
The “heavily subsidized” commuter rail routes are a bargain compared to the subsidies we squander on automobile and bus infrastructure. In the interest of “intellectual security”, we should therefore establish:
1. What is the likely impact on highway use of this?
2. What do the affected towns want?
3. Is the Haverhill line able to handle the increased traffic?
4. What is the overall impact on public rail transportation availability (commuter rail and GLX together)
I note that Medford has already decided that it did not want GLX service north of Tufts.
Your final paragraph leaves me dubious about your commitment to “intellectual security”. That paragraph does not convey to me a desire for an objective analysis of regional transit system alternatives.
therleepostsays
–
Christophersays
Why are you posting blank replies? If commuter rail is already heavily subsidized I’d hate to see the unsubsidized version. I live in Lowell and am not a regular Boston commuter, but I shy away from using CR when I do need to go to Boston because it is so expensive. My idea for the Lowell line (and maybe others, but Lowell is what I know) is to have local and express trains. The former would make every stop while the latter would just stop at North Station, Anderson, and Lowell. I also favor extending the line at least to the Manchester Airport, but that’s another issue.
SomervilleTomsays
I wanted to address your perhaps facetious “special entitlement” proposal for the Lowell line riders, in the interest of intellectual security.
Your thumbnail analysis excludes the impact of your proposal on their behavior. Presumably those 5,500 daily riders will still need to get from wherever they now board the commuter rail to wherever they go each day.
That means that the cost to the taxpayer of of 5,500 extra highway trips must be added to your “special entitlement”. Presumably, you intend a one-time payment — yet the added highway trips are an on-going cost paid by the taxpayer every day every year. Their vehicles have to be parked somewhere on the other end of each trip. Their greenhouse gas emissions hurt all of us.
The fundamental point that you seem to miss is that the aggregate cost to the taxpayer of a given highway trip is MUCH higher than the cost of a given commuter rail trip.
When we compare Massachusetts to the transportation system of other countries (specifically Germany and Austria), it is even more instructive to compare the total out-of-pocket transportation cost for each resident. For example, many urban residents don’t need to own automobiles because walking, biking, and public transit (rail, streetcar, and bus) are so convenient and reliable.
SomervilleTom says
It’s not a matter of intellectual security.
The fundamental requirement of the GLX is that it use steel wheels on steel rails.
The options are straightforward:
1. Share tracks between the GLX and commuter rail.
2. Add the GLX right of way above the existing commuter rail
3. Add the GLX right of way alongside the existing commuter rail
Of those three, the third is the only one that makes sense. The first is a safety and operational nightmare. The second is far more expensive and far more intrusive.
If there are others, then by all means describe it.
drikeo says
There’s this weird subculture that seems emotionally invested in the GLX not happening, and they seem unaware that the state/feds have gone all-in on the project.
jconway says
There are false choices being presented. That GLX is coming at the expense of other worthy projects in lower income areas from the Silver Line expansion in Chelsea (largely complete with beautiful looking waiting areas). That GLX is preventing the North/South rail link. Or somehow preventing updates on existing MBTA lines.
These are all false choices being forced on us by a Republican administration and ‘Democratic’ House unwilling to generate the revenue needed to invest in our future. As CMD astutely points out, these developments will be drivers for future growth and economic expansion that will more than pay the Commonwealth back for this investment. Time to invest.
centralmassdad says
It took maybe 5-6 years for the Red Line expansion to trigger an explosion of development and economic activity along its corridor. It baffles me that this would be seriously opposed.
therleepost says
Thank you for responding SomervilleTom. But, you haven’t offered all of the options.
There is a lack of problem solving, which should involve some brainstorming. Rail corridors are highly valuable resources.
Let’s suppose we had some sewer drains carrying a very small fraction of the storm water that they could carry, while other lines were at capacity during heavy rains, often backing up and flooding streets. Engineers observed how it is possible to easily divert large amounts of storm water from the over capacity lines to the underutilized pipe line, thus preventing the highly expensive need to upgrade the size of lots of sewer line.
Think about reallocation of resources, and a way that the Somerville rail corridor can be freed up for exclusive use of the Green Line (or better the Orange Line, but then again that is another story; don;t let that distract you).. .
SomervilleTom says
Feel free to offer a specific proposal.
therleepost says
Commuter rail users, who already have their long rides heavily subsidized by the taxpayers, are given exclusive use of 9 rail corridors coming from the far exurbs through metro Boston, while 83% of MBTA commuters are given 6 lines in the city. 17% get 9. 83% get 6. That’s a pretty nice deal for one group.
The city/MassDOT should be looking to consolidate commuter rail lines before they enter the densely populated metro area.
The best opportunity for doing that exists with the Lowell Line which uses the Somerville rail corridor. Outside of the densely populated city, the Lowell Line and Haverhill Line come within 1.2 miles of each other..
A single track connection of 1.6 miles can be run out of the north side of the Woburn/Anderson Station. A reverse engine move out of the station is of no issue as the engines are push/pull capable, and indeed typically push all the way to Boston. At least at the time I first spied this opportunity in 2010, the only obstacle for the connection other than buying the right of way,through an industrial park, is the need to bridge over the interstate highway.
The connection to the Haverhill Line allows for a much more efficient use of resources. I have detailed out the many details of this change on another web source. A very few station stops south of Woburn Anderson will be eliminated, they are of minor use, and the affects are easily mitigated. There are no negative effects on either the Haverhill Line or the ride times of the Lowell Line, and even if there were the resource allocation is more than justified.
Spend a $Billion unnecessarily widening the corridor, or spend a fraction doing what should be done.to combine the two commuter lines for a more efficient use of the rail corridors.
If you think the Lowell Line riders have special entitlement, then perhaps we could pay them off to close the line instead . . . . Would $50,000 each do it? We could pay that to the 5,500 daily Lowell Line riders (which was the total when I did my research), that would come to $275M. Wow, we just saved $725M.
But, we don’t need to do that. We can be smart. Spend about $50M on a single track line to connect the two commuter lines, then NOT have to widen the Somerville rail corridor. If frees up the corridor so that we could extend the GLX (or Orange Line) out, not only to West Medford (which has been eliminated in the GLX), but later out to Woburn as demand follows.
Not only have you eliminated the many issues of widening the corridor, it eliminates the access issues caused by the commuter line running alongside.
Other countries pride themselves on creating efficiencies in their transit systems. It’s a shame that we don’t. Instead our system is rigged in favor of those who profit big time from the endless supply of tax dollars.
SomervilleTom says
Interesting idea. Let me see if I understand your proposal.
1. End service for the Lowell line between Woburn-Anderson and North Station — ending commuter rail service to four of nine communities current served by the Lowell line:
A. Mishawum
B. Winchester Center
C. Wedgemere
D. West Medford
2. Eventually replace existing Lowell Line service with expanded GLX service.
3. Run more trains on the Haverhill line between North Station and Woburn-Anderson
4. Presumably you would also route the Downeaster to the Haverhill line (already done on weekends)
According to the MBTA schedule, this would add 52 commuter rail trips and 10 Downeaster trips each weekday to the Haverhill line. The Haverhill line already supports 44 commuter rail trips (to and from North Station) each weekday.
The “heavily subsidized” commuter rail routes are a bargain compared to the subsidies we squander on automobile and bus infrastructure. In the interest of “intellectual security”, we should therefore establish:
1. What is the likely impact on highway use of this?
2. What do the affected towns want?
3. Is the Haverhill line able to handle the increased traffic?
4. What is the overall impact on public rail transportation availability (commuter rail and GLX together)
I note that Medford has already decided that it did not want GLX service north of Tufts.
Your final paragraph leaves me dubious about your commitment to “intellectual security”. That paragraph does not convey to me a desire for an objective analysis of regional transit system alternatives.
therleepost says
–
Christopher says
Why are you posting blank replies? If commuter rail is already heavily subsidized I’d hate to see the unsubsidized version. I live in Lowell and am not a regular Boston commuter, but I shy away from using CR when I do need to go to Boston because it is so expensive. My idea for the Lowell line (and maybe others, but Lowell is what I know) is to have local and express trains. The former would make every stop while the latter would just stop at North Station, Anderson, and Lowell. I also favor extending the line at least to the Manchester Airport, but that’s another issue.
SomervilleTom says
I wanted to address your perhaps facetious “special entitlement” proposal for the Lowell line riders, in the interest of intellectual security.
Your thumbnail analysis excludes the impact of your proposal on their behavior. Presumably those 5,500 daily riders will still need to get from wherever they now board the commuter rail to wherever they go each day.
That means that the cost to the taxpayer of of 5,500 extra highway trips must be added to your “special entitlement”. Presumably, you intend a one-time payment — yet the added highway trips are an on-going cost paid by the taxpayer every day every year. Their vehicles have to be parked somewhere on the other end of each trip. Their greenhouse gas emissions hurt all of us.
The fundamental point that you seem to miss is that the aggregate cost to the taxpayer of a given highway trip is MUCH higher than the cost of a given commuter rail trip.
When we compare Massachusetts to the transportation system of other countries (specifically Germany and Austria), it is even more instructive to compare the total out-of-pocket transportation cost for each resident. For example, many urban residents don’t need to own automobiles because walking, biking, and public transit (rail, streetcar, and bus) are so convenient and reliable.
therleepost says
–