Grand Junction Branch (The North/South Side Connection)

The railroad officially id's this crossing as Medford St.

Dave

GP40MC1118 wrote:The railroad officially id's this crossing as Medford St.

Dave

Gore St. turns into Medford St. at the Somerville town line, 50 feet shy of the grade crossing. The crossing is on the Somerville side, so it is indeed Medford St. The border is at the driveway running between the back of the shopping plaza and the cold storage facility, here. The City of Cambridge street sign mounted at the exact spot has Gore St. pointing one direction, Medford St. pointing the other.

Well, what's 50 feet between friends?

Except when the Cambridge PD or Somerville call in a crossing failure as Gore St. Unless the person
taking the report realizes this is Medford St, there can be confusion.

This is a problem with many police departments with crossings located at or next to intersections.
A lot of times, they will ID the other street!

D

Are there any proprietary markings on the signal poles at all,similar to those on utility poles which indicate who owns the pole and also to ascertain the location?

Teamdriver wrote:Are there any proprietary markings on the signal poles at all,similar to those on utility poles which indicate who owns the pole and also to ascertain the location?

Don't think so. They're old, beat-up signals. Although ironically that's the only currently gated crossing on the whole line other than the MIT pedestrian crossing in Cambridgeport. Somerville ordinances must've been stricter than Cambridge's because Medford St. doesn't need the gates one-eighth as badly as Cambridge St., Main/Broadway, and Mass Ave. do even today with only a couple 10 MPH moves per day.

Teamdriver wrote:Are there any proprietary markings on the signal poles at all,similar to those on utility poles which indicate who owns the pole and also to ascertain the location?

I haven't seen this crossing, but all of the others I've seen on the Grand Junction had CSXT's standard emergency contact signs posted on them, which were changed for MBCR ones after the sale.

octr202 wrote:

Teamdriver wrote:Are there any proprietary markings on the signal poles at all,similar to those on utility poles which indicate who owns the pole and also to ascertain the location?

I haven't seen this crossing, but all of the others I've seen on the Grand Junction had CSXT's standard emergency contact signs posted on them, which were changed for MBCR ones after the sale.

Broadway crossing's still got the CSX signs as of the last time I walked by there in Dec. Might just be an isolated miss on the change-out.

GP40MC1118 wrote:The railroad officially id's this crossing as Medford St.

Dave

Sorry Dave, I forgot about that, sorry. It's been a long time since I ran over the Grand Jct and won't anytime in the future unless I bump to Portland, lol.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

Teamdriver wrote:Are there any proprietary markings on the signal poles at all,similar to those on utility poles which indicate who owns the pole and also to ascertain the location?

Don't think so. They're old, beat-up signals. Although ironically that's the only currently gated crossing on the whole line other than the MIT pedestrian crossing in Cambridgeport. Somerville ordinances must've been stricter than Cambridge's because Medford St. doesn't need the gates one-eighth as badly as Cambridge St., Main/Broadway, and Mass Ave. do even today with only a couple 10 MPH moves per day.

Cambridge Street has gates: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=42.3 ... ,,0,-19.33

This line has two pedestrian-only crossings, both with gates and lights. The other one is next to an MIT parking garage, about halfway between Mass. Ave. and Main Street.

The EGE wrote:It is a pity that the second bridge is not being restored to lower the chance of this ever happening again. If it is in usable condition, a second track could be extended from Memorial Drive to the bridge over Storrow Drive.

I agree with EGE that it should be at least made ready for a track installation as a provision. I think the MIT area has been developed enough to warrant some kind of service. Even if it's just a DMU shuttle during rush hours, it would be a nice track to have open.

What would the purpose of having a second track from Memorial Drive across this bridge to the mainline be?

DMU shuttles? to where from MIT?

The T is broke. This is all pie in the sky.

nicely put newpylong. Gotta be realistic here, this line sees 4 moves on a good day, and unless the commonwealth is going to pay for upgrades to the rest of the line, nothing more is going to happen after this bridge project is complete

There's an existing half-mile long passing siding just east of the bridge between the Memorial Dr. overpass and the Mass Ave. grade crossing. If the line were ever upgraded for passenger service that is fully adequate for handling any and all train meets on such a short branch. Another 1000 ft. of double across the bridge adds no capacity they wouldn't already have with the existing siding.

I think the 2nd track went so they could re-center under the tight Memorial Dr. overpass for wide freights. There's not a lot of room under there.