With two light rail lines, one commuter rail line and more than a dozen bus routes, Cambridge is far from a transit desert. But a historic rail line running through one of its densest business corridors could offer an attractive opportunity to run a fourth stream of trains through the city – and connect two of the MBTA’s most ambitious long-term projects.
The Grand Junction railway, which is used by the MBTA to transfer trains from its northern and southern commuter rail lines, runs from the Worcester-Framingham commuter rail line, crosses the river under the Boston University bridge and continues through Kendall Square before meeting up with the Fitchburg commuter rail and continuing north.
The railway has been studied directly and indirectly more than a dozen times in the past two decades, but a new comprehensive study from the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority and consultants WSP estimates high potential ridership for the line, along with a low cost of implementation – at least compared with other large MBTA projects: in the range of $300 million to $400 million.
CRA’s study proposes connecting the Grand Junction Line to North Station over the Draw One Bridge, which the MBTA is actively working to replace after receiving a $472 million federal grant.
At the other end, the line could connect to the MBTA’s massive multimodal interchange redesign in Allston, which will create a West Station along the Worcester line in the former Beacon Park Yard that separates Allston’s two halves. Trains could run between the two as little as every 15 minutes, with as many as four stops imagined between them: Cambridgeport, MIT/Massachusetts Avenue, Kendall Square and East Cambridge. It could shave as much as 40 minutes off the travel time of workers coming to Kendall Square from the North Shore and the areas of Worcester and Framingham or Allston-Brighton, according to the report.
The study, by the WSP engineering consulting firm of New York, is due to be presented at a 5:30 p.m. Wednesday meeting of the authority at Google Kendall Square, 355 Main St., Kendall Square, Cambridge, that can also be attended remotely.
Councillors are aboard
Cambridge city councillors Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler and Burhan Azeem, who serve on the council’s Transportation & Public Utilities committee, expressed optimism about a future rail service through Kendall Square.
Azeem said this project should be a priority, as it’s comparatively inexpensive and part of it is already built. “This is a doable project,” Azeem said. “I have concerns if we don’t act on it, this is such a low-hanging fruit.”
“It’s really exciting to see it sketched out,” Sobrinho-Wheeler said. “There’s not an easy way to get from Allston-Brighton to Kendall Square to North Station right now.”
The council will likely look at the report, Sobrinho-Wheeler said, but it’s a long-term project. While he said this line should be a high priority, the timing may be more complicated, given that it could rely on the completion of West Station, which has yet to even begin construction.
TransitMatters sees possibilities, questions
Cambridge itself is already working to develop a sliver of the rail line’s right-of-way for the new Grand Junction Multi-Use path through Kendall Square. A small portion of that path has been built, between Main and Broadway, and the section before Binney Street is under construction. The path, which switches back and forth across the rail, has been designed to accommodate future double-tracking of the rail line, according to the study.
Advocacy group TransitMatters previously discussed the Grand Junction line in its January analysis of the Framingham-Worcester line, which argues that the MBTA should modernize the Worcester and Framingham lines to provide frequent all-day service.
The TransitMatters report says it does not recommend connecting the Grand Junction line directly into the Worcester line, as it would require taking some service away from South Station and Back Bay.
Still, TransitMatters noted in its report that the line “may have transit potential under another model”; it suggests that service along Grand Junction should be operated separately, rather than merging with the Worcester line. The CRA report comes to a similar conclusion, and recommends separate service along the “core route” between the future West Station and North Station.
“It offers some exciting possibilities,” said executive director of TransitMatters Jarred Johnson about the new report. “Some big questions remain around how this intersects with dramatically increased commuter rail frequencies as we transition to regional rail, so we’re looking forward to learning more.”
Down to details
As for what kind of train could actually coast down the urban tracks, the CRA report suggests “urban rail” cars that have yet to be introduced in the region. The cars might look somewhat similar to green line trains – smaller and shorter than commuter rail – but would have a higher “buff strength” to comply with Federal Railroad Administration requirements for the Grand Junction tracks.
To reduce fossil fuel emissions, the report also suggests that the cars be electrically powered via an aerial cable, or even partially battery-powered for portions of the track, which would reduce infrastructure costs but increase the cost of the vehicles.
The line could garner between 5,800 to 9,800 daily boardings along its core route, the new report estimates. For most of the track, the right-of-way is large enough for double-tracking, but some slivers of land may be required in a few locations.
Depending on the scenario, the report estimates the cost of the track renovation at $187 million to $282 million. When the cost of procuring electric-powered train cars is included, the price tag estimate runs from $331 million to $427 million. If the MBTA wanted to pursue four-car trains, costs would rise considerably again, to around $600 million or more.
“This is a service that could be delivered, they estimated, in the hundreds of millions of dollars as opposed to several billion dollars,” said Kyle Vangel, director of projects and planning at CRA.
Street crossings are a concern
Aside from the cost, one of the most significant obstacles to fast and reliable train service along the Grand Junction line is the number of times the tracks cross streets and pedestrian paths as they meander through Cambridge. Several key arterial streets, including Massachusetts Avenue, Main Street, Broadway and Cambridge Street intersect directly with the tracks.
On most of these streets, only flashing lights indicate an oncoming train – a result of how little the tracks are used. If frequent service were to run along the line, the report suggests adding safety gates and timing street signals to allow for safe crossings.
“The number of grade crossings is the most significant obstacle or hurdle to this service,” Vangel said.
TransitMatters also took issue with the street crossings, which its report said would present serious problems with regard to pedestrian and street traffic while slowing trains.
While Azeem agrees the number of street crossings presents complications – “there’s a lot of things we’d have to solve here,” he said – in his math the transit line would ideally take cars off the road, reducing traffic even as signal timings may rise.
Reaching farther
The study also explored the possibility of an extended service toward Everett, Revere and Lynn and providing service for them into North Station and Kendall Square. The report ultimately concludes that a commuter rail expansion, as suggested in the MBTA’s Rail Vision plan, would be more beneficial to those communities than the Grand Junction line.
The consultants suggest that the core route, between the future West Station and North Station, should be the focus.
“The future potential of this line should continue to be a factor in how these infrastructure projects move forward,” Vangel said. “So that decisions are not made that foreclose the possibility of taking advantage of this line in the future.”
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.
Ummmm yes please this would be amazing. I wish there was a map posted with this but still yes wow.
This was the plan in 1994. It did not happen then. It will not happen now.
Yes, please.