Fitchburg Line Upgrade Discussion

The likely bridge is the one over Main St./Rte. 62, just west of the Sudbury River bridge (though I've been told the bridge over the Sudbury River is failing also - I'm not sure if that was accurate or not). Assuming it's that one, it's actually been hit a few times, and it's had a speed restriction on it for a while now.

Main St UGB is the one that has a 25 mph restriction on it and has had it after multiple truck hits. The adjacent bridge over the river is also being replaced. You can see they are doing work on the piers now. I would not rule out a few culverts too. They plan to get as much work done with this outage.

Hoopyfrood wrote:Does anyone have or know of the final plan for that bridge in Concord? It's needed work since the late 80s; I would imagine that nothing less than "tear it down in sections and rebuild it" is going to suffice.

According to the March project update, the Route 62 bridge in Concord will begin prep work this August, with "Route 62 bridge roll-in August 2015". It makes me wonder if they'll be doing it like those Rte. 93 bridge replacements, where the new bridge is built off-site, and the demolition/removal and replacement happens in a single weekend?

Dan

dth9269 wrote:According to the March project update, the Route 62 bridge in Concord will begin prep work this August, with "Route 62 bridge roll-in August 2015". It makes me wonder if they'll be doing it like those Rte. 93 bridge replacements, where the new bridge is built off-site, and the demolition/removal and replacement happens in a single weekend?

When I hard of the 93 work back when they did it, the idea occurred to me as well. There is space next to the bridge, though they would have to cut some trees (most are already dead, however). It would help them complete the job a lot faster, and would let them simply close the line for a weekend, list the bridge off, do any work on the abutment, then drop the new one on. If they did it in two half pieces, they could even keep one track open full time while the other was tested and set.

My parents were upstanding citizens who didn't like vandals and graffiti artists, but even they appreciated when some wiseass painted "Lionel" on the Rt 62 bridge. An early memory so it must have been in the 1966-68 timeframe.

Lincoln78 wrote:My parents were upstanding citizens who didn't like vandals and graffiti artists, but even they appreciated when some wiseass painted "Lionel" on the Rt 62 bridge. An early memory so it must have been in the 1966-68 timeframe.

This made my day! If that were to mysteriously reappear on the bridge, I wouldn't complain.

The trees on both sides have been cut and cleared. They are putting in a gravel ramp from road-level up to grade-level so that the heavy equipment can get up there. About time they got on this.

The plan for the Route 62 Bridge is to build the superstructure (Steel Beams and Deck) near the existing bridge on temporary supports then next August crews on one weekend closure will demolish the existing bridge and using SPMT's (Self Propelled Modular Transporters) will move the new bridge into place. The state used it to replace the Talbot Avenue Railroad bridge on the Fairmount Line a couple years ago and Last November used it to replace the Red Line bridge over Clayton Street in Dorchester.

This weekend will be the last service suspension from Brandies out to Fitchburg. Service will run 4th of July Weekend and then the real service suspension begins. Starting July 12th until October 18th Service will be suspended every weekend on the ENTIRE Fitchburg Line from North Station to Fitchburg. Hearing work will start along the Waltham Section of track next month and will not only include track and signal work but also Grade Crossing Replacements at Beaver Street (Double Track) and Moody Street (Single Track) and a culvert replacement as well as minor repairs to the bridge over Prospect Street.

It still amazes me that with all the work they're doing on the Fitchburg Line, they didnt get funding to re-double track Waltham.

There was an issue with double tracking Waltham, because two of the bridges would need to be replaced. My understanding was that there was a disagreement between Waltham and the T on the work and so the T eventually dropped the idea.

Waltham would also be a very tricky case - currently both platforms are on the northern side of the ROW, so you'd have to find space to squeeze in a second accessible platform on the south side. Ideally you'd want full-length high-levels for such a busy station, but the only viable location is west of Moody where there's a curve. It would also make the town very happy if it could be arranged so that trains did not block either grade crossing when platformed.

If you were reconstructing the bridges from scratch and had some money funded for station improvements, you could conceivably put full heights east of the Elm St. crossing, and build a new station on the location of the crumbling building that's there now. I believe that lot remains for sale. It would mean a longer walk to the bus connections, but it could work. Also moving both platforms there would make the road traffic better as you would not have inbound trains blocking the crossings. However, that design would not come cheap.

Sitting in my cab today (Yes I am a cab driver in Waltham) noticed a grade stake placed next to the inbound track about 250 Feet West of the Outbound Platform at Waltham on Railroad Ave. I am guessing this is for signal work. Some city councilors have talked about possibly making the Carter Street Police substation a enclosed train station. There has only been talk about this no action as of now. The double tracking idea thru Waltham would be difficult due to the inbound platform needing to be on the side of the former Watertown Freight siding.

I forget how long ago it was but I remember there was a plan to possibly grade separate Elm & Moody Street crossings but putting the train on a bridge over these roads. It was recommended in the study conducted on the entire line but canceled due to the cost ($35 Million). I think this would be a great idea. We could put inbound and outbound full high levels on an elevated bridge and the train would never block the grade crossings. Anyone know what happened to this plan?