Grand Junction Branch (The North/South Side Connection)

[Diverging Route]

Except Kendall Square has a population density 10 times that of Wilmington where the Wildcat Branch is located.

An oft-quoted statistic is that 50% of the world's biotech-related business is within a half mile of MIT. MIT itself has a commuting population of about 10,000 (i.e. non-students on campus). It wouldn't surprise me if there were thousands of potential commuters from MetroWest with a destination of MIT and the companies in Kendall Square. That doesn't even include those destined to Harvard. So it sounds to me that it's worth an origin-destination study to determine the exact demand.

[diburning]

Yes, but is the demand for transit there? Are they going to ride off-peak? Are they going to ride at all? How many of these people would rather ride the CR than drive? I can't speak for those people so I guess they'll have to do a survey (in other words, I take back what I said before about there being no demand since it's hard to tell)

[CRail]

But the thing is, there wouldn't be much for any transit connections if any. You can get almost every bus/subway stop in Cambridge from Porter (granted that transfers may be necessary). If they put a stop on the Grand Junction, it would hold up other trains moving on it, resulting on scheduled trains running through there few and far in between, not to mention that the station would only be used by morning and evening rush commuters (SIlver Hill and Hastings, anyone?)

IMHO putting a stop on the Grand Junction is about as justified as putting a stop on the Wildcat Branch.

You must be talking about a Kendall Square Cambridge somewhere in England, because everyone else seems to be talking about the line that passes through Kendall Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Firstly, if I'm coming from the Fitchburg or Worcester area, I've been sitting on a train for about an hour and a half at least at this point, the last thing I want to do is go out and stand in the cold to wait for a bus, or to go downstairs and wait for another train (ditto for the opposite direction). If I can get dropped off right in the immediate area of where I'm going, that's quite an upgrade. Bus connections at Porter will get you to Harvard Square and Central Square, and even if there was a bus from there to Kendall, it would take forever to get there. The red line is a pretty direct connection but the fact is, it's still a connection. Folks are crazy about that one seat ride, and I don't blame them. For time alone, it's a major improvement.

What trains are moving on the Grand Junction during either rushhour that are going to be held up? That track sees a maximum of 6 movements a day, and they're all in the evening or at night. The biggest opposition you're going to get is from the folks that drive through there, because it's a mess as it is and Broadway and Main St. would be a disaster every time a train passed through. Not to mention the crossing upgrades that would have to be done. Even though trains crawl through there, having such busy arteries protected only by crossbucks, lights, and bells (no gates) is quite dangerous.

Because of the traffic reasons, it is likely that a new station would only be used during rush hours. Have you ever been to Cambridge Center after 6pm? It's a ghost land, and the local bus schedules that serve the area reflect that. I think both the shuttle that runs fairly frequent service between Kendall Square and North Station, and the heavy use of the Kendall Square red line station (presumably with a heavy amount of passengers from South Station) serves as enough evidence to warrant some research here.

The only argument against that is that this stop could only be served by 2 lines whereas the people using the services to Kendall/Camb. Ctr. that I listed above, could be coming from any of the Commuter Rail lines. For that, perhaps a shuttle (not unlike Readville) could run between North and South stations to serve Kendall and Yawkee (another up and coming business area). It would not be a decent North/South connector, but if it is determined that the ridership warrants it, I don't see why you wouldn't run that service (I understand too, that with the current track configuration, the train would have to change ends at the Beacon yard. Again, so what? It's not as ridiculous as the Plymouth/Kingston move).

[MBTA3247]

The only argument against that is that this stop could only be served by 2 lines whereas the people using the services to Kendall/Camb. Ctr. that I listed above, could be coming from any of the Commuter Rail lines. For that, perhaps a shuttle (not unlike Readville) could run between North and South stations to serve Kendall and Yawkee (another up and coming business area). It would not be a decent North/South connector, but if it is determined that the ridership warrants it, I don't see why you wouldn't run that service (I understand too, that with the current track configuration, the train would have to change ends at the Beacon yard. Again, so what? It's not as ridiculous as the Plymouth/Kingston move).

Which line besides the Worcester Line are you referring to?

A shuttle between North and South stations via the Grand Junction would be slower than the existing Red/Orange setup and tie up valuable track capacity between South Station and Beacon Park. Doesn't seem like a good deal from the operations or ridership standpoint.

[CRail]

It would not be a decent North/South connector...

Do you ever actually read what I say or just immediately decide to argue with it? The orange line doesn't serve Cambridge at all and therefore is completely irrelevant. My idea is simply to offer Commuter Rail service to the Kendall Square area from all Commuter Rail lines, rather than just Worcester (Diburning's mentioning of Porter Square connections had me thinking of Fitchburg, but it afterward dawned on me that you can't get there from here). Whether or not it turns out to be feasible, it's not a bad concept if I do say so myself.

Before any passenger service is operated over the line, speeds are going to have to be upgraded, cutting time. As far as track capacity between South Station and Beacon Park, I expect that this will be doubled if/when the Yawkee station project is complete.

I will accept, however, the argument that Commuter Rail service between Kendall Square and South Station aren't necessary because the red line does this. So then other than the fact that Yawkee was tied into the little loop shuttle, you could abolish that end of it and run a CR shuttle from North Station to Kendall. At that point though I'm not sure it's worth it. A mini 'urban ring' if you will, stopping at South Station, Back Bay, Yawkee, Kendall Square, and North Station would make a nice link connecting 3 significant business areas with 2 others which also serve as transit hubs. Again, I'm not guaranteeing that this would be a huge success, but I think it's worthy enough of some consideration.

[Teamdriver]

"Do you ever actually read what I say or just immediately decide to argue with it? The orange line doesn't serve Cambridge at all and therefore is completely irrelevant"

What about getting off at Bunker Hill Community College and walking over the Prison Point bridge? Kendall Square is a stretch of the leg,or is there a bus route here?

[danib62]

What about getting off at Bunker Hill Community College and walking over the Prison Point bridge? Kendall Square is a stretch of the leg,or is there a bus route here?

Bunker Hill Community College is almost a 2 mile walk from Kendall Square and not a very scenic one at that. Do you really want to do that ever, let alone in the dead of winter?

[Teamdriver]

Cant please everybody I guess... but nevertheless you can get there from there.

[CRail]

Bunker Hill Community College is almost a 2 mile walk from Kendall Square and not a very scenic one at that. Do you really want to do that ever, let alone in the dead of winter?

Nope! That bridge alone in the winter is miserable.

My statement of "you can't get there from here" was in regards to going onto the Grand Junction branch from the Fitchburg line, which you can't do with a straight shot. It did not regard getting to Kendall from the orange line, which still doesn't serve Cambridge regardless of how far you're willing to walk.

[jamesinclair]

Remember that BU announced 2 years ago that they want a CR stop near the BU bridge.

Meaning a train stopping in Allston, BU Bridge, Kendal and NS would be a great asset to the city.

A nice mix of the A line and the CT2 bus.

And remember, the CT buses were supposed to be "phase 1" of the urban ring, so the routes they follow are important connection.

I have no clue how many people live in Worcester but work in Kendall, but I wager a fair amount live in Allston and work there.

[diburning]

You must be talking about a Kendall Square Cambridge somewhere in England, because everyone else seems to be talking about the line that passes through Kendall Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Right, because this isn't the MBTA forum

Firstly, if I'm coming from the Fitchburg or Worcester area, I've been sitting on a train for about an hour and a half at least at this point, the last thing I want to do is go out and stand in the cold to wait for a bus, or to go downstairs and wait for another train (ditto for the opposite direction). If I can get dropped off right in the immediate area of where I'm going, that's quite an upgrade. Bus connections at Porter will get you to Harvard Square and Central Square, and even if there was a bus from there to Kendall, it would take forever to get there. The red line is a pretty direct connection but the fact is, it's still a connection. Folks are crazy about that one seat ride, and I don't blame them. For time alone, it's a major improvement.

I agree. Your point fits into my point as to how they would need to do a survey to see how many people will actually use the stop.

What trains are moving on the Grand Junction during either rushhour that are going to be held up? That track sees a maximum of 6 movements a day, and they're all in the evening or at night. The biggest opposition you're going to get is from the folks that drive through there, because it's a mess as it is and Broadway and Main St. would be a disaster every time a train passed through. Not to mention the crossing upgrades that would have to be done. Even though trains crawl through there, having such busy arteries protected only by crossbucks, lights, and bells (no gates) is quite dangerous.

What's to say they won't schedule more trains and install gates? If they're going to do regular daily movements, I'd imagine that they would put them in for safety reasons.

Because of the traffic reasons, it is likely that a new station would only be used during rush hours. Have you ever been to Cambridge Center after 6pm? It's a ghost land, and the local bus schedules that serve the area reflect that. I think both the shuttle that runs fairly frequent service between Kendall Square and North Station, and the heavy use of the Kendall Square red line station (presumably with a heavy amount of passengers from South Station) serves as enough evidence to warrant some research here.

Exactly what I said. Is it going to be used all day or just during rush hour? (Like those two stops on the Fitchburg line)

Do you ever actually read what I say or just immediately decide to argue with it?

Funny you should say that.... I think we are actually in agreement here.

[CRail]

Studies are always done before projects are started. Your comments (such as comparing stops on the Grand Junction to putting stops on the Wildcat branch) deemed such service unnecessary. My points were that such service could actually be quite successful. Please explain to me me how those points fit, actually don't bother, because they don't.

"If they put a stop on the Grand Junction, it would hold up other trains moving on it"
There aren't any, was my point. When trains are added, making them stop there isn't going to cause a back up. It's a rail line not a freeway.

Hastings, Silver Hill, Mishawum, Prides Crossing, and the like are stops that see very few trains and only during peak service as a reflection of their demand. Grand Junction stops wouldn't be rush hour only because of lack of ridership, but because they would only be utilized during business hours. They are not comparable.

Now that we've established that, do you ever actually read what YOU say or just immediately decide to argue? (Again, rhetorical)

[parovoz]

Perhaps this sounds way too unorthodox... But how about terminating [some?] passenger trains at the siding between the Charles river bridge and Mass Av, rather than continuing them all the way to the North Station? The siding could be extended to 3 tracks. That would diminish the negative impact on car traffic.

[diburning]

Studies are always done before projects are started. Your comments (such as comparing stops on the Grand Junction to putting stops on the Wildcat branch) deemed such service unnecessary. My points were that such service could actually be quite successful. Please explain to me me how those points fit, actually don't bother, because they don't.

"If they put a stop on the Grand Junction, it would hold up other trains moving on it"
There aren't any, was my point. When trains are added, making them stop there isn't going to cause a back up. It's a rail line not a freeway.

Hastings, Silver Hill, Mishawum, Prides Crossing, and the like are stops that see very few trains and only during peak service as a reflection of their demand. Grand Junction stops wouldn't be rush hour only because of lack of ridership, but because they would only be utilized during business hours. They are not comparable.

Now that we've established that, do you ever actually read what YOU say or just immediately decide to argue? (Again, rhetorical)

Or maybe we just have differing opinions regarding certain subjects. I love how the people here are really anal and make personal attacks against people they disagree with or correct someone as soon as they make a typo or post something that requires clarification. Congratulations, people, here's your shiny internet police badge. (that was sarcasm). Some of the people on here are just plain rude and treat others like they are stupid. Regardless of whether the person actually is stupid, it doesn't justify the rudeness. Being right is one thing. Being rude is another. Not everyone knows everything. We all ask questions and learn.

Going back on topic...

Let me clarify what I meant by "back up." My intention was to say that because of that stop, it would limit the number of possible trains that can be scheduled through there. The situation I am describing is similar to the single track areas on certain lines. With single track areas, especially those with stops in it, the capacity of the line is reduced therefore reducing the number of trains that they can schedule through that area.

[kwf]

Firstly, if I'm coming from the Fitchburg or Worcester area, I've been sitting on a train for about an hour and a half at least at this point, the last thing I want to do is go out and stand in the cold to wait for a bus, or to go downstairs and wait for another train (ditto for the opposite direction). If I can get dropped off right in the immediate area of where I'm going, that's quite an upgrade. Bus connections at Porter will get you to Harvard Square and Central Square, and even if there was a bus from there to Kendall, it would take forever to get there. The red line is a pretty direct connection but the fact is, it's still a connection.

I did the CR from North Leominster to Porter...Red Line to Kendall for about 5 years in the beginning of the decade. It was a long ride, but very do-able....