I-90 Allston Interchange/West Station/Grand Junction project

So my Bostonian friend pointed me to this:

https://www.mass.gov/doc/allston-multim ... n/download

And as part of straightening out I-90 (Mass. Turnpike) and building West Station for the expected housing on the other side... I saw that the Grand Junction Railroad that goes up next to MIT would be closed off.

Has anyone heard of this? Does MBTA/Keolis use this section to move trains from North side to South side (assuming permission from MIT because of various nuclear labs and you have the mad lads at MIT)?

The T uses the Grand Junction Branch daily (or nearly so) to transfer equipment between the south side commuter rail lines and Boston Engine Terminal for maintenance. They don't need MIT's (or anyone else's) permission to do so, as the railroad was there long before MIT started building around and above the ROW.

There's an alternate route using the CSX line between Worcester and Ayer that would be used during this project (and has been in the past when the Grand Junction needed to be closed for one reason or another).

Oh, so the mad lads figured a way to deal with a train going by? Nice.

Still, will Grand Junction's closure be permanent, or will they be converting it into a fly-over? I didn't see that in the public documents.

The closure will be temporary. In fact, you can see mention of the construction of a new abutment for the GJ bridge on the plans.
This document better shows the expected outcome of the work: https://www.mass.gov/doc/massdot-pim-pr ... 2/download

You can blame rail for the road being crooked in the first place, as the B&A yard prevented a straight shot.

Given declining rail traffic and the way the state used eminent domain to wipe out swaths of Boston and Newton, I'm surprised the same tactics weren't used with the B&A. I'm sure someone (Tom Nelligan?) could further enlighten us.

Sadly, Tom Nelligan passed away in 2021.

wicked wrote: ↑Sat Jun 24, 2023 8:55 pm You can blame rail for the road being crooked in the first place, as the B&A yard prevented a straight shot.

Given declining rail traffic and the way the state used eminent domain to wipe out swaths of Boston and Newton, I'm surprised the same tactics weren't used with the B&A. I'm sure someone (Tom Nelligan?) could further enlighten us.

CSX sold the yard to Harvard University after moving operations out of it. Harvard is working w/the state in turn, and is getting a new station and a ton more land that was once roadway spaghetti but closer to the campus... which can be turned into student housing.

typesix wrote: ↑Sat Jun 24, 2023 9:41 pm Sadly, Tom Nelligan passed away in 2021.

That is sad. He was quite the historian and a great source of knowledge.

Which still leaves me wondering why the Turnpike Authority/state bulldozed its way through neighborhoods in Boston and Newton, yet couldn’t see to it to take the yard by eminent domain. The obvious answer is that the poors had much less leverage, but I’m surprised the financially struggling railroad wouldn’t make a deal re: the yard.

According to the Rail Lines of Southern New England the NYC sold the four track mainline from Riverside in to the Turnpike Authority in 1958 with the usual we have freight rights forever. It was not sold via eminent domain. The Railroad needed money and less capacity. NYC did not sell Beacon Park at that time. Not sure when Harvard bought it.

We are very aware of this project - the people I know aware of it are already referring to it as Big Dig 2.0. It is apt to throw a real wrench in travel for the 10-15 years it will take to execute it. (We should just get the people who fixed the Philly viaduct in like a weekend to come up and do it)

There's a few reasons the state can't (or more accurately, won't) take the land by eminent domain. One is BECAUSE the eminient domain/bulldozing from the mid-20th century resulted in an extended public input/vetting/environmental review process for megaprojects like this.

Two, our elected leadership has not wanted to be known as the people who foisted Big Dig 2.0 upon us - Gov Baker could certainly have forced a decision on this in his last term, but I'm guessing he did not want to risk his high approval ratings at the time. (Hey thanks for leaving us the T in such a great condition, Chuck)

Three, Harvard is dangling a carrot of financial support to the state/MBTA. Pitching in some money for the West Station build, etc. But they have dragged this process way out as well - this land has lain fallow and useless for decades which is frustrating when you consider all the things it could be used for.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Jun 25, 2023 2:58 pm CSX sold the yard to Harvard University after moving operations out of it. Harvard is working w/the state in turn, and is getting a new station and a ton more land that was once roadway spaghetti but closer to the campus... which can be turned into student housing.

The land under Beacon Park was sold to the MA Turnpike Authority in the late 1950's (along with ~11 miles of the east end of the B&A) with a 100-year lease for NYC and the railroad planning and executing for an eventual departure. It wasn't until the late 1980's that the Turnpike Authority sold the land under Beacon Park and railroad lease to Harvard. From that point on the handwriting was on the wall for an exit, studies showed no disadvantage amongst freight demand for a move westward, plans were made and executed for an eventual exit, and with execution waiting for a grand deal to get it done, finalized in 2008.

Interestingly enough, along the way during the late 1960's there was some advocacy within the Commonwealth's railroad regulatory body for tearing up the railroad east of Framingham to accommodate lane expansion of the Turnpike Extension into Boston.

That's the first time I've heard that there was a 100 year lease; I've always read that the railroad sold the land but retained a permanent easement. Then Harvard came along and bought the land from the $Turnpike$ $Authority$ for fairly short money, then bought out the easement for Beacon Park. Oh by the way, the Massachusetts State Constitution exempts Harvard University from eminent domain!!! And it has never been tested in court. Harvard has a history of putting their own interests above state & local governments and using straw buyers to buy up huge swaths of land in Allston, Brighton, and Watertown. They bought the Watertown Arsenal using a straw buyer, for less than the government spent cleaning it up.

The present configuration of I-90 is dangerous because it was designed for vehicles coming to a complete stop. Instead they speed along while going up and down and around a sharp curve with onramps and offramps.

It was my understanding around the time of the sale of Beacon Park's land that the railroad's lease was executed in 1960. Thinking about it further in recollection, I believe it was actually retained between the Commonwealth and Conrail then CSX within the sale of the land by the MA Turnpike Authority.

In terms of a permanent easement, perhaps that was for the ~11 miles of right-of-way and/or within the initial deal between the MA Turnpike Authority and Harvard.

In any case, the smart planners at the New York Central were not planning for a permanent Beacon Park easement nor were the smart planners at Conrail once the land was sold.

Back when I was a ground pounder with CSX the story commonly told was we had a 100 year lease . Just conjecture on my part , I think the money spent by the Commonwealth to rebuild Worcester Yard and to clear the B&A for double stacks was to get CSX to agree to an early exit from that lease and clear the property for the Harvard sale . The story told to the press was all that work was done to improve commuter service to Worcester but I think that was a happy byproduct . I was just T&E , not management so this is , again just conjecture .