'Prime developable land' may be lost to Green Line

By George P. Hassett

The Green Line is coming to Somerville but it may bring with it a 10-acre maintenance facility that could strangle commercial development in a part of the city with great potential for commercial development.

At a Monday meeting, state officials unveiled a plan to run seven Green Line stations through Somerville - with stops by the Brickbottom artist studios, in Gilman Square at Medford Street, on Lowell Street on the eastern side of the MaxPak property -- and in Medford by Ball Square, on Boston Avenue and on Medford Hillside.

However, Somerville may also have to host the maintenance facility in the Inner Belt and Brickbottom areas. Chamber of Commerce President Stephen Mackey said the facility would wipe out an opportunity for a station in the area that could spur more significant commercial development than neighborhood stations.

He said Inner Belt and Brickbottom have the potential for millions of square feet of commercial development that could ease the tax burden of residents while also increasing money that could be spent on schools and public safety.

“It's important that the stops are in places where people live but [the commercial development of Inner Belt and Brickbottom] are of consequence to 78,000 people in Somerville,” he said. “Locating a 10-acre maintenance facility in the middle of the Inner Belt, Brickbottom area takes prime developable land away.”

Those neighborhoods host another MBTA maintenance facility already - an eight acre parcel for the commuter rail. Mackey said the combination of the two facilities would create a huge wall cutting the Inner Belt area off from the rest of the city. He is advocating that the state's executive office of transportation find a way to “couple” the two stations and limit the space they may take up.

However, Ward 5 activist Joe Lynch who lives near the Lowell Street stop, said the industrial grounds of Inner Belt and Brickbottom are an appropriate spot for a maintenance facility.

“What's the alternative? [Inner Belt and Brickbottom] land are zoned for industrial use. Everyplace else on the Green Line corridor is residential and none of those neighborhoods can bear the brunt of a maintenance facility. I understand the concern of using up developable land but we can't have it all,” he said.

Comments

[YankeeH8ter]

Nice that Joe Lynch has taken it upon himself to agree with this since it doesn't affect his Lowell Street stop. Hasn't Somerville taken on enough of the burden of the rail system for the rest of MA already? Don't we have enough trains traveling through the city without stopping? Hasn't Somerville already taken on the tax burden of a 8 acre parcel for a train mainenance station already? Hey Joe, wouldn't it make sense to combine the 2? I'm sure the maintenance facility has the room if forced into it. No station will equal more development, more taxes, and less of a tax bill for me. Come on, 18 acres of land in Somerville that generate no taxes is an intense burden on the residents. Get a clue already!

[Ron Newman]

Since the developer of NorthPoint in Cambridge has abandoned and walked away from that project, wouldn't it make sense to put the maintenance facility there?

[JARfromWard3]

The issue of Somerville's inordinate burden on behalf of the rest of the Commuter Rail network is something that I've brought up at public hearings on the Green Line. At no time in the course of those discussions, however, was it infered that there would need to be a Light Rail maintenance facility located here as well and, frankly, I think it stinks.

It is almost as if this were introduced at the eleventh hour as a poison pill to scuttle the project or at least toss it into turmoil locally (which it seems to have done to some extent) and thus further stall or protract its completion. It certainly hasn't helped to build consensus for it.

Brookline has several times the amount of Green Line trackage and several times the number of stops that Somerville is slated to get, and has for many years. Yet no one would even DARE suggest that land be found there for it.

Further, 10 acres sounds like an awful lot of land for a traction car facility. The Commuter Rail facility (BET) is as large as it is because it has to be. It is required to be able to store 9-car train sets which are then staged to various outlying terminals on the commuter rail system. Things like minimum curvature requirements and so on dictate how "compact" such a facility can be. Cabot Shops (Red Line maintenance facility) is about the same size as BET in terms of overall footprint. The same does not hold for Light Rail. The footprint of Riverside shops is less than 10 acres.

I don't know if this maintenance facility is being officially "linked" to the project, but it reeks to me of last-minute manipulation that we are suddenly being told that locations in Somerville need to be considered as a best alternative, ESPECIALLY in that area which BEGS for TOD.

My friends, we're, once again, being taken for a ride by the T, and it's a ride that isn't on the schedule! Absent some MAJOR mitigation by the MBTA, my hope is that this farce gets blown out of the water.

Just my opinion.

73
JAR

[MattC]

This project will be a benefit to the whole of Somerville. Access to GOOD transportation is key to a developing city economy It has been clear to see what the impact of the red line in Somerville has been in the blossoming of Davis Sq. I think our combined hope is that this project has a similar impact along the proposed rail corridor with a focus on and around BrickBottom, Gilman Sq, Union Sq, Mcgoon sq. etc.

I agree with previous posters that we in Somerville do carry a high burden of maintenance without a return on it. As well as the fact that the amount of land required could be reduced. BUT I would be loath to hold up the project over this issue as the benefits clearly outweigh the drawbacks

[Charlie]

My understanding is that the maintenance facility is needed because the existing storage at the Lechmere station will be gone once that stop is relocated, and you will have an additional fleet of trolleys that need to be stored and maintained. There is no room at the end of the line near the Mystic River, so the next logical place is to use the industrial area near Brickbottom. The amount of land used should of course be minimized and consolidated with the commuter rail yard as well.

[Tricky]

I think that's the key: consolidate with the existing rail facility, if not then locate it as close as possible. Joe Lynch was right: where else could this go? The only other place remotely feasible would be Yard 17 (south of the commuter rail, near Union Square). JAR - It would be nice for Brookline to provide some space, but without massive takings, there's really nothing available there.

First, try to tack it on to the side of the existing blue whale. This looks problematic, as I'm sure JAR will point out the unfeasibility of mixing light and heavy rail.

This would leave a couple of options: the parking lots where Inner Belt Road turns the corner - which would make more sense as far as not cutting off Inner Belt from Brickbottom (compared to Yard 8, which I believe is that empty parcel to the south of Inner Belt Road).

Or possibly the north end of the development at North Point - you could make the case that it would shelter the remainder of the site from the commuter rail yards.

JAR - how noisy would a facility like this be, and what configuration? I'm interested to find out a) if this could be a linear building, a long and thin "spaghetti factory" of sorts and b) if you could conceivably build up several floors over such a facility? If you've got enough soundproofing, I don't see why you couldn't have light industrial or even offices above - the facility won't be filled with diesel fumes like the Commuter Rail facility.

[Inman Square]

Actually, Brookline does have some storage areas for trains at the Reservoir stop- not 10 acres but not nothing either.

I'm all for equalizing the burden of infrastructure whenever possible. But clearly Somerville needs to house some sort of storage/maintenance facility. If it can be combined with Big Blue, great. If not, let's keep it as small as possible, but Yard 8 does seem to be a reasonable place for it.

[Ward5]

I love how some people want to put a hold on and complainabout a REAL project that will benefit the city because "Prime developable land" (lets focus on DEVELOPABLE) will be lost.

I don't see many companies clambering to build on this "Prime developable land" yet...

As the rail lines come in there will be many new areas in the city that will go from not prime to prime... think about the assembly sq. transportation centered development.

[somebody]

Ward5: That's short sighted thinking. Do you think Kendall Square always looked like it does now? No, but all those companies in there help make Cambridge a very wealthy city, which has the lowest residential real estate tax rate in the state.

North Point in Cambridge is not too far away from yard 8, so why aren't they taking any of the burden? If Somerville and Cambridge shared the burden, then it would seem more reasonable, but not a single piece of land in Cambridge is being proposed to hold the maintenance and storage facility. On top of that, the storage facility that currently exists at Lechmere will no longer exist in Cambridge when the Lechmere stop moves. That's part of the reason they want 11 acres in Somerville. Not only do they need more space for the additional cars that will be introduced, but also because Cambridge is offloading their burden onto Somerville. Hmmm...

I do understand that the green line needs a maintenance facility on the north side of Boston, but there are better options. Also, both Cambridge and Somerville should SHARE the burden.

[JARfromWard3]

Righteous indignation aside, there are, in my opinion, a couple of things to consider...

First of all, there really are not any insurmountable nut-and-bolt logistical issues with combining heavy (read: commuter train) and light rail facilities. I can't cite any instances where I know it's done, but I'm sure these exist; if not here, then in Europe. Other than incompatibilities with things like couplers and the overhead clearance for the trolley wire, it's a pretty solveable equation. The rail gauge is all the same--just like the legendary Roman chariots' wheel ruts. Flanged wheels tend to go where the rails lead them.

There are shared rights-of-way in Baltimore, Scranton PA and, I believe, San Diego which see both diesel freight and commuter light rail service under "mutually exclusive" agreements. CSX serves industrial consignees in Baltimore at night, running its diesels under the same trolley wire (altho obviously not using it) as the LRV's do during the day.

I had suggested on a number of occasions that this be explored as a possible partial solution to the Urban Ring using the CSX right-of-way from Beacon Park (right next to Commonwealth Ave. and BU) and the Green Line extension. Basically, this would allow Green Line or the Yellow Line or whatever color is in vogue to connect BU, MIT, Kendall Square, Twin City, Brickbottom, Sullivan Square and eventually Assembly Square. The Salad Bowl Express to Chelsea could run at night, as well as the commuter rail and Amtrak equipment ferry moves. I'll shoot the Moon and say a billion dollars--about one half of a B-2 Spirit--would cover the cost. That's for new double track, overhead wire, connections, suitable signalling, stations, mitigation, graft and everything else.

Where these combined use rights-of-way are found, FRA has a number of rules covering their operation. Basically, everyone does their thing, and never the 'train shall meet.

The biggest problem I can foresee with combining Green Line and Fuscia Line shops in Somerville or anywhere else would be related to the respective entities that will presumedly be overseeing these facilities.

BET is run by MBCR and comes under their work agreement. The Green Line facility would likely be run by MBTA and would, I assume, come under their work agreement--and never the 'twain shall meet!

I'm sure there could be some sort of "wall" to delineate one from the other, but it still would not diminish the fact that Somerville is, once again, being forced to bear an unjust burden in terms of sacrificing revenue-generating real estate for the supposed greater good.

The point about creating development above a facility is a very good one. I don't see any technical reason that it could not be done. Perhaps the MBTA could sell "air rights" at such a remove, similar to what The Turnpike Authority has done. Engineering problems are always the easiest to solve.

Again, just my opinion.

73
JAR

[Imux]

Ohhhh for Christ's sake... just get the damn thing built. JAR, I understand your point and, as you are obviously an old rail guy, your opinions are worth more than most, but can we just build the friggin' thing? If we start pissing and moaning the state is liable to say "Those morons in Somerville are to blame for the cancellation!". You're sounding almost like one of the moonbats now. It worries me.

If we build it - they will come. They being money. Lots of money lured by the convenience of easy mass transit.

I intend to not work at all in a few years and want to just sit back on my cigar-smoking, scotch-drinking (single malt only, please), craps-playing, hooker-banging @ss and collect my rents. This can only help my cause.

[Put it under the bridge]

Put it at the Towing Yard facility with a combination service facility/ railway station!

[Tricky]

Imux, wouldn't you rather see "better" land available for development?

Move the facility 200 yards to the east to the parking lots south of the Colospace building; stick five levels of parking on top and grant parking rights to whoever uses that lot.

By doing this, you free up Yard 8, which would appear to be a more desirable parcel for development. Given the concerns mentioned in the article of linking Brickbottom and Inner Belt, I think this would be a reasonable solution.

[JARfromWard3]

Imux;

As I'm sure you well know, the machinations of engineers and architects and "community activists" pale in comparison to those of lawyers.

As to "just building the friggin' thing"...that's pretty much what I'm saying in regard to the Urban Ring. I usually try to apply proven, practical solutions to things that might otherwise get whipped up into a major issue. The optimist says the glass if half full, the pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer (and the Libertarian) says the glass is probably twice as big as it needs to be.

I agree with you in the sense that we can't wait for the crops to come in: we need to be fed NOW! Somehow or other, this maintenance facility will get built, and very likely in Somerville.

But, given a forward-looking choice between a sow's ear and a silk purse, which would you want?

JAR

[Tricky]

Imux - Tricky also says the glass should be full of bourbon (a good American-made libation) and not this "single-malt scotch" nonsense. What's up with that?

[Ward5Born]

Lynch's comments do make sense. I know he has been a fierce defender of that neighborhood he lives in but I doubt that his comments come from a "NIMBY" viewpoint versus a rather well informed resident.

[Instigator]

So Lechmere goes from a former rail depot to a new hotel. That former rail depot gets moved to Somerville and is supersized to allow for the new trains and to work on trains from other areas. Hmmm. My vote is to look into minimizing the overall land usage for this. It's needed, we all realize that. Maybe I'm living in fantasy land, but to free up inerbelt for good jobs like biotech instead of document management and tow yards seems like a no brainer. Expand upon the existing rail facilities sounds to be the best logical location land permitting. A T station is being plunked in the area and there is no reason to believe that industrial zoned land will just sit there as is. That's a win for everybody.

[JR3333]

I don't get why they need 10 acres. The lechmere yard is a fraction of that. How much more space will they need if they increase the greenline 20% or so by adding this extension? Why not keep the lechmere yard where it is. Then you can put a small facility in Somerville to service the additional cars required for the somerville extension. All they need to do is create a track switch where the new line will branch off the existing line. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

[somebody]

One reason given for more space needed is that they expect a large increase in cars, but the exact amount will depend on ridership. The other reason had something to do with improving technology for taking cars on/off tracks into maintenance facility. Apparently, the loop system is outdated at Lechmere, and the modern system they want to use requires more space. It made sense when they explained it, but I didn't quite follow all the details... so I might be getting something wrong. Maybe someone else who gets it better can explain.

They kept mentioning air rights, which to mean implied the ability to build over the site... That would be cool, but I don't know how attractive that would actually be to businesses due to all the noise, etc.

[fefie]

Mentioned at the Green Line meeting on Monday was the fact that 43% of Somerville land is tax-exempt, and the T owns most of it.

[Tricky]

Fefie - 43% seems just a bit high (as Bob Uecker would say). Could it be 4.3% of Somerville land?

[somebody]

I also heard 43%, but that doesn't seem right. That's nearly half!

[Ron Newman]

Tax-exempt land in Somerville would be:

MBTA: commuter rail tracks, commuter rail maintenance yard/engine terminal, Davis Square Red Line headhouses, Linear Park (Buena Vista to Cambridge line), Davis Square busway, Community Path (Grove to Cedar), defunct freight spur from Cedar to Lowell streets.

Tufts University

Various churches, a synagogue, and a chavurah

City-owned land: parks, playgrounds, schools, libraries, City Hall, City Hall annex

State-owned land: Foss Park, Dilboy Field, Draw Seven Park, and the parklands along Alewife Brook and the Mystic River

Have I missed anything? That doesn't seem to me to be 43%.

[Wig Zamore]

Highways and Roads.

[Ron Newman]

And a few items I forgot above: police station, fire stations, DPW, municipal parking lots (Davis, Union, Magoun squares), Somerville District Courthouse, Somerville Hospital

[Tricky]

Even if you include roads (which is disingenuous to a degree), I still can't see how that gets you up to 43%.

Given there's a certain portion of area that needs to be devoted to urban infrastructure (roads and highways), perhaps that portion could be eliminated from the equation.

[Somerspeak]

The problem the city has now is that at least three administations have sat on their asses,along with an ineffective Chamber of Commerce, and have been unable or unwilling to tackle the redevelopment of Innerbelt/Brickbottom.

Now that the greenline is a go, the T and the state will use their land(and take some other land they need)with little regard for the howling from the city.

As for the "we did'nt know about this maintenance facility" crap, don't beleive a word of it. Curtatone has known from the beginning it was a very real possibility it would be located in Somerville.

[Inman Square]

I don't agree that anyone has sat on their asses about Brickbottom and Inner Belt, although I do think that Assembly Square has been getting more attention. The problem is that there is poor access to those areas and that the ways to improve that access is very expensive. The Green Line is one way to do so. It may reduce the overall developable land in Inner Belt but will dramatically increase the redevelopment potential of the rest.

I can't see how we can argue that the maintenance facility needed to extend transit to Somerville should be anywhere other than in Somerville (unless there is an immediately obvious location somewhere else.) Fighting about the need for a facility is really going to play into the hands of anyone looking to get out of the Green Line extension commitment.

Having said all of this, we should do everything we can to get the state to reduce the size of the facility as much as feasible, and also have it designed for the potential for air rights in the future.

[fefie]

Somerspeak, I'm sure anyone who attended the EOT's public meetings about the station locations a few months ago or followed their communications afterward suspected the facility would be likely to land in Somerville, especially if they wanted to keep it in 1 location (as opposed to splitting it into 2 locations which was an option on the table initially). Their presentation on the matter strongly leaned in that direction (and in fact in the direction of Yard 8).

The issue seems to be whether EOT did due diligence on proposing Yard 8. Did they really look at Yard 7 or yard 7/8 combo as many attendees urged them to do, or not even consider it? (In fact was this location already decided before the public meetings?)

Since the investment group that intended to buy North Point has pulled out (according to today's Herald) I wonder whether it will have any impact on the facility location?

[Curious in Cambridge]

The decade-old land-swap agreement between Guilford/NorthPoint and the MBTA incorporated an enlarged turnaround-and-maintenance facility east of the relocated Lechmere Station.

Were the status of that backroom deal and the potential for siting at least a portion of the necessary Green Line service facilities at Lechmere/NorthPoint factored into the recent planning decisions?

What are the T's current plans for the 2-acre "Turnaround Parcel" north of O'Brien Highway that it is slated to receive in exchange for the Lechmere Station parcels?

[neverhappen]

do we really need this. talk of this started

in the 50's - if it happens i wont be alive to

see it. i'm 53. or a very old man. so you all

can yak all you want - never happen!!!!

[bostonmainemike]

I have three words for all of you... Infrastructure means jobs. But for whom?
If Somerville gets the facility, wherever it ends up being built, won't there be some great jobs for the good hard working supporters of the project?

BMMIKE

[forchirstsake]

All we have heard is that we wanted the (T), and now we have it. Now we are crying about maintaning the very trains we had to have. Put it right back at the public safety building, thats a clean, safe place to work!