By adamg on Mon., 8/24/2015 - 2:54 pm
The Herald reports state officials now think extending the Green Line through Somerville might cost upwards of $3 billion - and the federal government has only committed to $1 billion of that, and might take that away if state officials can't figure out how to pay for the rest, which apparently they're have trouble doing.
Topics:
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
How the Heck does an
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 2:57pm
How the Heck does an extension along an existing ROW get to cost so much money? What's responsible for the cost escalation?
I'd like to know too
By cybah
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:04pm
I'd like to know this too.
And I might add (and shameless self plug) that the Silver Line Gateway, which is also running in a abandoned ROW is moving right along, on schedule and budget.
April 2015 Pics
June 2015 Pics
August 2015 Pics
EVERY construction project...
By Daniel
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 5:24pm
EVERY construction project goes way over budget. It's just the way it seems to work in our country. Part of the problem might be that government is legally required to take the contractor who offers to do it for the least money, but then the contractor is under no obligation to meet the estimates they were judged by. That's a HUGE incentive to estimate substantially under the actual cost. But private projects have that problem, too. Now, if they had to meet their estimates, maybe they'd be able to guess a little closer to actual cost...
Yeah, that isn't exactly how
By Charlie
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 11:42am
Yeah, that isn't exactly how it works. You do have to stick to your bid, but there is something called change orders, where if something is going to cost more, you have to explain why, and prove that wasn't part of the initial scope of your bid, if it is under the original scope, but it is just costing more because of poor estimation, you have to eat the loss. For instance, a change order can happen when something isn't on the blueprints for the project you bid on, or the prints were speced wrong, which happens all of the time. If you missed something that is on the drawings, or you misread them, it's your loss. If there is disagreement about a change order, it can go to court. GM's have to put up a bond too before they can get job too, so if they screw up, they can't just walk away because they are going to lose money on the deal, they will lose more if they walk. Like the big dig, one reason it was so over budget was because they didn't really know what was under the city, hence alot of change orders.
That's true enough, Daniel.
By mplo
Fri, 08/28/2015 - 4:25pm
The Big Dig went way, way the hell over budget and over schedule and it didn't get called off! What gives here?
How about this
By roadman
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 2:59pm
Cancel the remaining "design group" meetings, public hearings, progress updates. Cancel the plans for the "community pathway", eliminate the sound barriers and other "necessary" mitigation measures. And just build a basic transit line.
If Somerville wants all the other nonsense, let Somerville pay for it.
Couldn't agree more
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:52pm
The Tremont Street Subway took 2 years to build AND IT HAD NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE! All these environmental impact studies and ridership studies are BS! Build the same thing!!
Except for one thing...
By Bob Leponge
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:54pm
.... which is that one of the basic "everything I need to know I learned in Kindergarten" rules is "put things back the way you found them."
In this case, that means, "if you are going to build something noisy like a rail line, then sound barriers aren't an add on, they're part of the job."
Yep. Putting sound barriers
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 4:32pm
Yep. Putting sound barriers in from word go is ultimately cheaper than the hundreds of (justified) lawsuits from homeowners who just saw their property values crater when their homes became unlivable.
Except for one thing
By roadman
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 6:05pm
Sound barriers are an UNNECESSARY waste of money. And don't give us that BS about unacceptable noise. For one thing, it's not like people are suddenly going to go deaf by having electric streetcars passing by. For another thing, it's a CITY. Noise is part of a city, and people have this amazing capability to adapt to change.
But let's fleece the state for unnecessary and costly 'mitigation" (like ugly and pointless concrete walls), which provides no legitimate benefit to the end users of the project, under the guise of "quality of life". And given that sound barriers in urban settings cost about $1 million per half mile, it's no wonder the price tag is up to $3 billion.
Politically necessary
By Markk02474
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 7:03pm
to have sound barriers! How else would the MBTA get needed local public support for the project and developers to make as much money than by other people paying for sound barriers?
The GLX is 4.3 miles. I'm not
By anon
Wed, 08/26/2015 - 8:36am
The GLX is 4.3 miles. I'm not sure how you got 4.3mi * $2M/mi to equal $3B ($3000M)...
Compared to the noise from
By Irmo
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 10:15am
Compared to the noise from the commuter rail, and the truck traffic on nearby streets, the Green Line trolleys are sotto-voce.
They're building a trolley on
By MattL
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 4:49pm
They're building a trolley on what's an existing commuter rail line. Why do they need to add sound barriers?
oh good
By cybah
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:01pm
Let's.. so maybe in another 70 years we can try at this again. (this extension has been planned since the 1940s)
*eye roll*
I understand the cost thing, but this just shows that the politicians are all full of hot air when it comes to expanding and fixing transit for our region.
They were planning on
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 4:03pm
They were planning on extending it all the way to Woburn and converting it to heavy rail rolling stock.
I could have sworn the
By J
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:04pm
I could have sworn the opening date was set for 2016. Surely theyre already testing the line right?
The thing about a democracy is that the officials cant lie to the people because they get held accountable, right?
3 billion? 1 billion?
By Pete Nice
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:07pm
Man, if you told me this green line extension was going to cost 250 million I would say to just scrap it.
Hey Somerville, take the bus like the rest of us!
Except that Somerville is
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:17pm
Except that Somerville is under-served by buses, is crisscrossed by roads that aren't car friendly (and therefore not bus friendly either), and all of the buses it does have terminate at outer T stops. There's no one-seat rides downtown except the Red Line at Davis.
More buses then, please?
By Michael
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:28pm
There's Davis in the west, Sullivan in the east (I know it's not technically in Somerville and Assembly is, but that's where all the buses go) and nothing but bus service in between. And the geography of the city makes it apparently impossible to run a bus up and down the hills and into Cambridge. So can we get buses that won't fill beyond bursting at any time of day when people try to use them?
Hey, Pete:
By Irmo
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 10:18am
Hey, Pete:
We got stuck with I-93. We got the noise. We got the pollution We got our city split in half. We got property values diminished. And the suburbs to the north got a faster car commute.
Then the Big Dig meant more traffic on 93. More noise. More pollution.
You think we should give up on the Green Line extension? Fine. Bring 93 back to pre-dig traffic love.s Close one lane each way Deal?
This project cost benefit doesn't add up
By Alex_Toth
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 10:48am
I've been on the 80 and 87 numerous times. They parallel the train route for much of the way. I find these routes aren't super full except when you start getting close to McGrath. I suspect ridership isn't going to be that great on the GLX. I think a commuter rail station at Tufts and better frequency would have been a better used of funds. Hell none of the Somerville bus routes qualify for the T "Key Bus Route" designation. Any of those corridors would be better served with rapid transit.
keep in mind
By anon
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 5:55pm
Good point regarding key bus routes, but that doesn't mean this route wouldn't draw many more numbers on the GLX than currently on bus. Bus ridership does not translate directly to transit ridership in that more people are attracted to light rail than bus. Think about no traffic and more frequency offered by GLX. Buses on the routes you mention do not run frequently because of low ridership, but they also have low ridership because of lack of frequent runs. Chicken and egg. Change the quality of service and you'll also change the number of users.
As a Somerville resident, I disagree with you, Pete.
By mplo
Fri, 08/28/2015 - 4:30pm
Somerville, too, is a very densely-populated city, and many people (myself included) want the Green Line extension.
Many people in Somerville also work at the hospitals, so they, too want the Green Line extension to go through.
Having public transportation within a 5-mnute walk from my place would be great. Here's hoping the GLX goes through.
They finished buying the land, right??
By Kaz
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:12pm
I know the "start" of the project was largely delayed due to needing to acquire certain lands surrounding the track, right? That was the most expensive part, wasn't it?
After you have the land, why isn't it just laying down the track, building a few stations and you're done?
Why is that BILLIONS of dollars at all??
Why can't the state just lay
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:19pm
Why can't the state just lay track, put up catenary & signals, make stations simple concrete platforms with grade crossings and JC Decaux bus style shelters for now? Build fancy stations later, but just get the bare bones for a functional extension done for now. Why is this any more complicated than it was to build the D line in the 1950s?
POP
By Saul
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:35pm
And implement proof-of-payment so that in the 21st century, a train with 100 passengers on-board doesn't have to wait till a fellow passenger loads crinkly dollar bills into a fare box.
the line
By geep9
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 5:11pm
is below street grade. you need elevators at least.
Because the Americans with
By anon
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 9:08am
Because the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in the 90s and those street level stops don't meet the requirements.
Why is this any more
By roadman
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 10:59am
What is now the D line was an existing rail line that was converted, so the tracks and much of the other infrastructure were already there.
I wish I could remember...
By octr202
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:20pm
...how much is going for building the ridiculous, convoluted yard & shop behind BET, condemning several businesses, rather than putting it in Yard 8 where it should be. There's some major cost savings right there.
Union Square will probably happen.
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:19pm
It's fairly far along. The other section in the Lowell Line bed does have a lot of cooks arguing the broth but it may go up a few stops and then finish in increments over the next half century.
They've also already built
By anon_wd
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 9:59pm
They've also already built some of the station-area walkways around Medford & School Streets over the last several months- was surprised by the relatively quick work on that
Every time I see that picture
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:19pm
Every time I see that picture of the construction of the original subway (now the green line from Park Street to Boylston station) - I'm amazed at how much they accomplished using manual labor and horses. That whole thing only took a couple of years. They didn't have the luxury of advanced engineering, diesel-powered construction machinery, or the fact that the green line extension's tracks will neither be underground nor elevated.
I have no idea why, but about
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 4:56pm
I have no idea why, but about a mile of the Green Line Extension between Lechmere and Washington Street will be elevated. And it will have an elevated bicycle viaduct next to it.
I've said it before: figure out how to build transit cheaply. For a billion (or 3 billion) dollars, we should be building rail all over the place, not blowing it all on giant glass boxes along a single 4-mile line.
Even if this project somehow gets finished, the monumental waste of money will make sure no more rail transit gets built in Boston for a really long time.
Fixed the article
By Michael
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:19pm
"Pollack said there are several reasons the T vastly underestimated the price. Chief among them, she said, is that everything in the world was cheaper 20 years ago, when this was supposed to have been finished."
Rule #1 in public projects
By Markk02474
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 4:49pm
Underestimate the cost until the public is on the hook. People fell for it with the big dig and GLX. Olympics 2024 was an exception. Most aren't falling for it in various states with high speed rail either.
Math
By karenz
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:26pm
So they realize that putting this off now will just make any future extension plans even more expensive, right? God bless the patience of the people of Somerville for dealing with this crap all these decades.
baker
By geep9
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:32pm
the bakerization of the T has started... privatize this, cancel that, next a fare increase?
huh?
By ccd
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:48pm
How so? This was signed Deval's job and construction officially started in 2013, two years before Baker took office.
Hes talking about
By angry guy
Tue, 08/25/2015 - 12:40am
cancelling the project. Not starting it.
This doesn’t even make sense…
By Jeff B
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:54pm
If the T were actually privatized, a company would have skin in the game to keep it on budget and actually running. Find another lame boogyman perhaps?
More likely that crony deals made in the past for this fast track construction deal are now coming to roost (isn’t that DePaola’s specialty?) or simple matters of time and inflation for all we know. Labor is the bulk of the T’s cost problems last I checked, and I imagine all of this T expansion work was won by union shops to boot (further increasing cost) I’m guessing this is how the Big Dig went from 1B -> 15B, special interests all getting theirs because taxpayers are paying for it.
As for fares, they have been too low to support the system for ages now. We could be so lucky for them to keep pace with the rest of the country’s transit systems.
privatization
By geep9
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 5:12pm
here's the way it works. privatize....something...something.... save money.
Privatization
By roadman
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 5:44pm
is Republican patronage.
"Bakerization"
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:55pm
I think holding off and reviewing the current proposal which at this point seems to be WAY over budget is called due diligence, smart and calculated.
Even at $2 Billion, it sounds
By RhoninFire
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:44pm
Even at $2 Billion, it sounds high to my head. I don't understand why it is costing so much. It seems the article is blaming the "hot construction" market, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Are you saying the contractor is charging more now? The material to build spiked ~40%?
Actually, I do have one speculative theory that could explain it, but the article did not mention it - the railyard they need to build that now has to be built on land that they now have to buy. Originally, it was planned to be built on lands it already owned, but now has to buy the land (Eminent Domain?) which I can see buying it now is much more expensive than 5 years ago during the lowest point of the recession. I don't know if that math really works out, but that's the one part - aside the standard corruption and graft line so commonly thrown about, but never seen - that I can see raise cost by a good chunk.
I have to say this, but the metrics are a getting questionable. I remember a fight a while back with Markk as we argued about cost and benefits. To me, GLX is justified because the ridership estimates justify the costs. But intellectual honesty means having ask "Well, how about if it now cost a billion more?" And I don't know the answer, but it means I have to redo the numbers if it still means justified. Though ideally, we should figure how to stop the overrun as it really hard to make sense that it should cost so much for only a few miles on an existing ROW.
My most worrisome thing that says cancellation is even more heighten is we have Baker. I have no qualms with Baker's performance so far, but one of things I seen him do so far is cut stuff (like the convention center). My guess of his modulus operandi, that he would not kill GLX if the price stayed on budget, I think he would pull the kill switch rather than double down as the price dramatically rise (as it is right now).
Since they are likely not going to kill the corruption (assuming that is it is the reason, I just don't know, I just can't figure how the money if pocketed and accounted), it means they have to kill features. Move the trainyard plan back to the original plan, apologies to the artist loft. Kill the bike trail from it's really nice on-ramps, well-lit, and everything plan to be more like the Bike-to-the-sea bike trail. And can we just do stations like the D line rather than Heavy Rail gated stations (Or just strips of asphalt like how they first did it for the D, but I know that is not legal anymore)?
Many good points
By anon
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 3:58pm
...but cutting the convention center was a lay-up. Green line extension services entire communities but the cc just serviced hotels, seaport restaurants (many from out of town) and of course, the hacks of the convention bureau.
If Baker can thread the needle of killing dumb projects and facilitating good ones, that would be nice, but I agree it's more than likely he'll cut more than needed (from my moderate viewpoint).
The hard choices vs. Christie option
By Markk02474
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 7:16pm
which is to can the whole thing.
I think Baker and especially Pollock will try to go the cost cutting hard choices route. I would hope that includes some serious, serious cash from Somerville mayor Curtatone who is the largest beneficiary here via increased property values and property taxes. If he wants some frills back then he needs to pay for them much like BU has contributed to Comm Ave rebuilding, only more dollars.
[edit: On the MBTA ppt there is an option of "saving" $138M by delaying a road project on Rt. 16 that would connect to the GLX endpoint. This is a very bad idea. Such a project is long overdue and should have been done decades ago. Id rather see a couple more cents of gas tax. This is the ideal time to increase gas taxes when people won't feel it due to record gasoline supplies and plummeting prices.]
State limits the ability of
By KBHer
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 6:46pm
State limits the ability of towns to raise property taxes. Somerville doesn't have any excess capacity in their allowed limit and the state restricts that growth to 2.5% per year from the previous levy. Can't tell Somerville to pay for something, and then refuse to allow them the power to actually do so.
Ever hear of an override?
By Markk02474
Mon, 08/24/2015 - 7:17pm
If residents want the GLX they can vote for a property tax override exceeding the 2.5% as others do.
Residents have actually been having their taxes increase less than 2.5% in recent years with commercial property owners paying more.
http://www.somervillema.gov/news/property-tax-rate...
Pages