Red-Blue Connector

Ok, not sure where I had seen or heard that. My understanding was that the rebuilt station was designed to make a Blue Line connection in the future more simple, i.e. spaces already set aside as "elevators go here, stairways go there" for access to the future Blue Line platforms.

The rebuilt Red Line station placed the elevators/ escalator landings at street level in the middle of Cambridge street at West Cedar St. I don't see this being a simple connection, there has to be some major underpinning issues and maybe reconstruction of the 100 year old red line viaduct.

TurningOfTheWheel wrote:Ok, not sure where I had seen or heard that. My understanding was that the rebuilt station was designed to make a Blue Line connection in the future more simple, i.e. spaces already set aside as "elevators go here, stairways go there" for access to the future Blue Line platforms.

I’m pretty sure I remember hearing about this as well. No specifics though.

The 2002 ENF for the Charles/MGH renovation project specifically called out that in the chosen design, "Connections to the Blue Line are direct and limit need for redundant construction".

This diagram is from the 2010 DEIR for the Red-Blue Connector:

While the DEIR had some questionable decisions like using a TBM rather than cut-and-cover, it serves as a good overview. The platform, and any tail tracks (if built), would not be under the existing station piers. The elevators, escalators, and stairs to the new Blue Line level would all fit in the existing lobby north of the Red Line tracks; minimal construction around and south of the tracks would be needed.

What bothers me about this layout is: How would a further Blue Line extension to Kenmore Square (along the Charles River) fit into this?

What's the point? BL passengers have a connection to Green at Gov Ctr already. Adding stops on the river's edge doesn't make a lot of sense because you're losing half the walking radius (people across the river)

Not worth stalling the overdue R-B connection for that provision.

Are any tests required when reversing ends on stub-ended stations like this one? Like the brake tests required of the Commuter Rail equipment by the FRA?

Interesting question re tests, BandA. If there are, they can't be too much trouble, because both ends of the Orange Line, all three ends of the Red Line, and I think the north or east end of the Blue line have these stub terminals.

This is a complete guess, but I would think such tests either aren't necessary or aren't as intensive as the FRA requirements for standard heavy-rail rolling stock. IIRC the PATH has to undergo more stringent operational testing since they're classified as a commuter railroad rather than a rapid transit system. That would make me think that brake tests, etc. aren't required on turnarounds for FRA-designated rapid transit systems.

Yeah I don’t see the point either of BL to Kenmore via Back Bay. Makes more sense to use the north tail track towards Kendall Square/East Cambridge. Growth area and CBD (jobs) already transit underserved with several parcels still un/under developed. From new Charles BL station, continue under river to a station at or along Binney Street. Many options from there to connect to other transit nodes or unserved areas. Most obvious is to future West Station via Grand Junction. If $$$ wasn’t a consideration, ideal route would be tunnel to Glendale Sq Everett via Broadway, Sullivan (superstation with new CR stop too), and Lechmere. Another option is Waltham via Fitchburg line ROW. So many possibilities from Kendall.

Always had another fantasy BLUE/RED connection in mind:
Build a consolidated new station under Court and State Street between Government Center and State Street (Blue/Orange)
Then turn west under Tremont Street to new Park Street "Super Station" (Blue/Red/Green/Orange)
Continue west under Tremont through unused subway tunnel to new station adjacent to Tufts New England Medical (Blue/Orange)
Continue west under Tremont Street to new station at Mass. Ave.
Continue west to new station adjacent to Ruggles (Blue/Orange/Commuter Rail/Bus Bub)
Continue west under Ruggles Street Transitway, Huntington Avenue and then turn north under Longwood Avenue
End at new station under Longwood Avenue in the Medical Area.

Future extension possible to go under the Charles and become or connect to the Urban Ring.

I cannot imagine using a TBM in an old city of Boston. Here in Atlanta the building of MARTA down town used cut and cover. Herculean efforts were made to locate utilities, The construction found wooden water and sewer lines, telephone, telegraph, and other lines both in conduit and not. The Atlanta street car published that it had 14 different utility companies crossing under its constructed line in one block with some utilities having more than one crossing... Cannot imagine how there was 14 different companies. Sometimes only way to find out who had the service if any was to cut it and wait for the trouble call.

But to TBM an old city like Boston with incomplete utility information just boggles the mind.

Cut-and-cover is massively disruptive to businesses(i.e. Red Line extension in Harvard Square). TBM is massively disruptive to taxpayers' wallets. Oh and nobody has recently mentioned water tables & those old buildings along Cambridge Street built on wooden pilings - the ones not destroyed by Urban Renewal.

BandA wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 2:16 pm Are any tests required when reversing ends on stub-ended stations like this one? Like the brake tests required of the Commuter Rail equipment by the FRA?

Subway equipment is straight air, not train air. You also need a 2 person crew to do a terminal brake test, which takes about 6 seconds to do so it otherwise wouldn’t matter.

BandA wrote:Cut-and-cover is massively disruptive to businesses(i.e. Red Line extension in Harvard Square). TBM is massively disruptive to taxpayers' wallets. Oh and nobody has recently mentioned water tables & those old buildings along Cambridge Street built on wooden pilings - the ones not destroyed by Urban Renewal.

I think given the pedestrian orientation of the short stretch by MGH that would need to be torn up for cut and cover, the businesses wouldn’t be too adversely affected.