Hey, there! Log in / Register
Rail deal: Worcester Line could go to North Station; Harvard to get vast new amounts of land to do nothing with
By adamg on Wed, 06/16/2010 - 9:11am
The Globe updates us on the deal between the state and CSX to move freight operations from Allston to Worcester and for the state to take over the tracks between here and there.
Among the interesting tidbits: State officials say the deal could mean Worcester service from North Station. And Harvard, which techically owns the land under the Allston yards, will be able to develop the land - or just let it sit there until surrounding neighbors get old and die.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Let's bear in mind that
Let's bear in mind that Harvard won't even be able to take possession of the land until 2012, and then it's going to have to get the easements repealed, its planning approved, achieve institutional consensus as to which parts of the university should occupy the land, pass the projects through the community review process, and prepare the site.
If the university still had billions burning a hole in its pockets, it couldn't break ground for another two years, and probably not for significantly longer. It doesn't, of course. But then, one need only look around the city at the long litany of stalled developments to realize that there isn't exactly private-sector demand for the site, either. We're in a prolonged downturn with tight credit and weak demand for new space.
I'll resume Harvard-bashing if they simply stockpile the site in 2012, leaving it vacant. But I have to say that the university's master plan for Allston, though certainly flawed in some key respects, has evolved into a promising vision. And after much prodding, they're finally taking steps to improve Western Ave. So perhaps we can wait until 2012, when they actually take possession, to hit them for inaction?
What about...
...Amtrak service to Chicago, the Lake Shore Limited and proposed expansions to the Northeast Corridor via the inland route through Worcester, Springfield and Hartford? They use or will use Back Bay and South Stations. I assume they would have to build baggage handling facilities at North Station and would have to shunt the sleeper and food service equipment to South Boston for turnaround...
Grand Junction
I read it as some Worcester-Framingham commuter trains might terminate or originate at North Station. Since the state would control the Grand Junction line which connects North Station to the Beacon Park yards. I doubt Amtrak would have much interest in an 8 mile detour from South Station.
But it would be good to terminate some Worcester-Framingham commuter trains there given the rising capacity issues at South Station. Plus a North Station bound train could presumably stop at MIT, with a small Yawkey-style platform around Mass Ave.
Rail Deal - overlooked benefit
If commuter trains from Worcester might be routed to N.Station, that implies that those trains would use the trestle over the Charles (you know, the one that the universities battle to paint and which runs right under the BU Bridge). This would be very interesting, partly because it runs right through MIT, but mostly because it would also presumably allow for the long fabled north-south rail link (although not in the location originally anticipated).
A train arriving at S. Station from, say, New York, could then go back out to the west, get to what are now the Allston yards, hit a switch, go over the river there and proceed to N. Station. This would mean you could actually take the train to Maine from NYC and points south and west without changing. Now that would be, dare I say it? Downright european of us.
It would also take forever
The real N/S rail link would allow for seamless through service, trigger the electrification of the commuter rail and allow for a new CR station around State St, unburdening the heavy / light rail rapid transit lines and shortening commutes.
But that'll never happen with the shortsighted, inept and corrupt system we have in MA.
Hey, why don't you just let
Hey, why don't you just let us borrow your checkbook and we'll get right on that, arborway.
I proposed this last year. SS
I proposed this last year. SS needs capacity, and NS has excess room. A worcester train wouldnt have to detour to get to NS, just pass a switch to the left instead of to the right.
The only cost would be 4 quadrant gates in cambridge, unless they want the train to run at 5mph like the current freight that goes through, and constantly lay on the horn.
Numerous commuter rail crossings in the Greater Boston area
still have only two quad gates (and most are also subject to those silly horn bans), and trains are run through these crossings at regular track speed. Yet somehow, life somehow seems to go on without scores of motorists and pedestrians getting hit by these trains. Why, because most people have enough common sense to avoid getting hit by them.
BTW, I suspect the trains on the Grand Junction only run at 5 mph because of the deplorable condition of the track, and not because of the grade crossings.
But I would have no objection to installing four-quad gates along the Grand Junction, provided that the People's Republic of Cambridge foots the bill for them, and not force the cost on the state or MBCR.
Right now, the Grand Junction
Right now, the Grand Junction crossings at Mass Ave., Main St., Broadway, and Binney are all just bells and lights, no crossing gates at all. There is also no signal system at all on this line. The tracks on the Somerville end also connect directly into the commuter rail maintenance faclity, but only cross (at grade) the Fitchburg Line tracks to North Station. A reconfiguration of tracks would be required there to accomodate a connection to North Station.
Compared to the costs of building something like the New Bedford/Fall River commuter rail line, the cost for this would be "cheap". But how many existing Worcester/Framingham commuter rail riders are actually going to jobs or other destinations closer to North Station than South Station or Back Bay? Even those who are can transfer to the Orange Line at Back Bay, and that will probably still be a faster route even if the Grand Junction has its speeds improved. Seems like there should be a lot higher spending priorities for the state/MBTA to spend money on than to send a few Worcester trains to North Station. Spending money on new cars for the Orange and Red Lines for example seems like a more important project.
Orange and Red cars are kinda maybe on the way
They went out to bid ages ago, but I haven't heard a peep since. Then again, the Green Line refurb program has been almost ready to happen since the bidding process in 2008. Gonna happen for real this time in 2011. Maybe.
They did not request bids for
They did not request bids for the Red/Orange cars yet, the requested bids for a consultant to design the specs for the cars a few years ago. They have not yet requested bids for for a company to actually build new Orange and Red Line cars, although the specs should be done by now.
The point isnt convenience
The point isnt convenience for those who work near NS, it's to get trains out of SS.
With the indigo line coming online in 2012/2013, SS will be full. In fact, the indigo line will be limited to 20 minute headways at best due to capacity problems. We won't get more capacity at SS until the new bedford project adds 4 tracks to the station.
Until then, the only way to expand worcester service from 13 to 20 trains a day is to send some of the trains elsewhere. NS has two tracks that have never been used and would love to see service.
Amtrak could also benefit, if they wanted a Maine-North Station-Worcester-Springfield-NYC line (aka, terminate the downeaster further down)
So if North Station isn't
So if North Station isn't convenient for existing Worcester/Framingham line riders, then why would any choose to ride a North Station train vs. a South Station train if given a choice?
Also, most of the proposed new Worcester trains would be added in the off-peak (midday and evening), when South Station is not at capacity. The Worcester Telegram says the new trains will leave Worcester at 7:55 AM, 9:15 AM, 12:30 PM, 2:45 PM, 8:25 PM, 9:10 PM and 11 PM while new trains would arrive Worcester at 5:50 AM, 7:14 AM, 9:00 AM, 12:15 PM, 2:31 PM, 8:09 PM, 10:40 PM, and 1:02 AM. Only a couple new rush-hour trains are proposed, presumably those are the ones that might run to North Station, Murray says half of the new added trains might run to North Station, that means only 3 or 4 round-trips. Tim Murray was also quoted that the North Station trains would connect Worcester to the bio-tech jobs in Cambridge, so I guess he envisions a high-level platform station being built somewhare near Kendall. Nowhere does the Lt Gov say that the reason to send Worcester trains to North Station would be to free up space for more Fairmount Line trains at South Station
The built but never used extra two tracks at North Station cannot be connected to anything unless the Spaulding Rehab hospital is relocated.
Im not saying it wont be
Im not saying it wont be convenient to all users, I said some. Some might want to go to Kendall, and will love the new trains. Others might be going to government center and thus be indifferent. Other will chose SS trains.
He's not saying it, but yes capacity is an issue. The very large document talking about indigo line service goes into detail about capacity constraints at SS, and if I recall correctly, they mention that theyre not taking into account added service on any line.
On a separate note, I like that there will finally be a late night option TO worcester. The current 10pm Boston departure is lame.
For all of these plans to
For all of these plans to work, CSX must expand their freight yard in Worcester to replace Beacon Park.
Some people in Worcester who live near the proposed expanded yard have begun to raise concerns about added pollution, truck traffic, and noise. The Worcester city council must apporve the plans to expand the yard. The announcemnt about the new trains and the potential for some of them to directly connect Worcester with MIT in Cambridge is all about Tim Murray trying to sweeten the deal to get his hometown to go along with the plan. Murray has made expansion of Worcester service a corner stone of his entire politcal life. It would be a huge problem for him if the entire plan fell apart because Worcester wouldn't go along with expandng the freight yard. I doubt anyone is promoting this because they are thinking about creating capacity for other train lines at South Station. When the full costs for upgrading the Grand Junction line for carrying revenue passenger trains at speed and building a Cambridge stop is realized, it will probably just be quietly added to the long list of "maybe someday" expansion ideas and placed on the back burner.
CR track capacity
The unused tracks at North Station aren't actually connected to anything. They terminate at the Spaulding Rehab parking lot, and are merely a thoughtful placeholder for when the hospital eventually moves.
South Station won't get any more space until the Post Office relocates, and the entire complex is razed to make room for them. But we'll get enough room for six more tracks when that happens. Sadly, this is going to an enormous amount of money to accomplish, and will bring the station closer to the capacity it had back before it was largely demolished and scaled back in size decades ago.
I believe having 4 quadrant
I believe having 4 quadrant gates is a new federal requirement for silent (horn free) zones. I also think it's excessive, Ive never heard of the daily CSX train hitting anyone.
Although many agencies are adopting 4-quadrant gates in
so called "sealed" rail corridors with high speed trains, my understanding of the current Federal rules regarding quiet zones is that the installation of four-quadrant gates is not yet a mandatory requirement for a quiet zone to be approved. Rather, four-quadrant gates are one of several different engineering and safety measures communites can adopt - like the raised medians recently installed at the MBCR crossings with Broadway, Chestnut, and Prospect Streets in Wakefield - for consideration of a new quiet zone or maintenance of an existing one.
For a short time, the MBTA had an experimental 4-quad gate installation in Abington (?). As I recall, the "exit" gates proved to be horribly unreliable and were disconnected.