So while the Tobin won't likely be replaced for decades to come, a new routing for its replacement has come up in other threads, so I thought a dedicated topic would be suitable.
My Ideas
Option 1:
Reroute along the Eastern Railroad, tying into I93 above Sullivan Square
Pros: Route goes through what will likely be industrial land for the forseable future, along an existing railroad right of way.
Cons: puts a large interchange right near Sullivan Square, where work is ongoing to do just the opposite. Almost double the length of new highway construction as the other options. Would likely have to be a viaduct or have many land takings.
Option 2:
Reroute along the abandoned leg of the grand junction, tying into I-90 at Wood Island
Pros: Small amount of new highway construction, makes better use of the Ted and I-90 extension. I-90 designation could be extended to use federal money for the project. Tank farm could be used for interchange with 1A
Cons: Tunnel would be expensive, viaduct would seperate Chelsea worse than the current alignment does. existing railroad ROW is too narrow, would require some residential/commercial takings.
Option 3:
Reroute along RT 16 / Mill Creek, tying into RT-1A near Suffolk Downs.
Pros: Route along (mostly) existing highway right of way. Plenty of land. Interchange with 1A could be over the tank farms west of Suffolk Downs. Makes use of the Ted and I-90 extension. I-90 designation could be extended to this point to use federal money. All of RT-1 removed from Chelsea.
Cons: Environmental impact of putting another highway through wetlands may be substantial.
Option 4:
Reroute on / north of Route 60, along the marsh, tying into Route 60 just after the Rotary.
Pros: Makes use of the Ted / I-90 infastructure, as above. I-90 designation could be extended to here to make use of federal funds.
Cons: Upgrading of Route 60 through Revere likely doed more harm than good, as it would probably be elevated, while the existing RT-1 ROW is in a cut. Significant wetlands impact. Massive, expensive reconstruction of RT-60 through Revere.
I used to strongly favor Option 1 (I believe my own creation), however after typing all that I believe Option 3 would be the "preferred alternative". As far as I can tell RT-1 is not that large an obstacle north of RT-16, as it is below grade, has frequent overpasses, and is adjacent to cemeteries half the time. As part of the reconstruction RT-16 could also be fixed through Revere and Chelsea , using some of the old RT-1 ROW. Long term, it might be worth it to extend the I-90 designation all the way up to the interchange with 128, somewhat fixing the errors of canceling the highway projects way back when. RT-1 inside of 128 is more "interstate-like" than any of the other MA Routes, so formalizing that would do no more harm then getting federal dollars to maintain it.
Thoughts?
My Ideas
Option 1:
Reroute along the Eastern Railroad, tying into I93 above Sullivan Square
Pros: Route goes through what will likely be industrial land for the forseable future, along an existing railroad right of way.
Cons: puts a large interchange right near Sullivan Square, where work is ongoing to do just the opposite. Almost double the length of new highway construction as the other options. Would likely have to be a viaduct or have many land takings.
Option 2:
Reroute along the abandoned leg of the grand junction, tying into I-90 at Wood Island
Pros: Small amount of new highway construction, makes better use of the Ted and I-90 extension. I-90 designation could be extended to use federal money for the project. Tank farm could be used for interchange with 1A
Cons: Tunnel would be expensive, viaduct would seperate Chelsea worse than the current alignment does. existing railroad ROW is too narrow, would require some residential/commercial takings.
Option 3:
Reroute along RT 16 / Mill Creek, tying into RT-1A near Suffolk Downs.
Pros: Route along (mostly) existing highway right of way. Plenty of land. Interchange with 1A could be over the tank farms west of Suffolk Downs. Makes use of the Ted and I-90 extension. I-90 designation could be extended to this point to use federal money. All of RT-1 removed from Chelsea.
Cons: Environmental impact of putting another highway through wetlands may be substantial.
Option 4:
Reroute on / north of Route 60, along the marsh, tying into Route 60 just after the Rotary.
Pros: Makes use of the Ted / I-90 infastructure, as above. I-90 designation could be extended to here to make use of federal funds.
Cons: Upgrading of Route 60 through Revere likely doed more harm than good, as it would probably be elevated, while the existing RT-1 ROW is in a cut. Significant wetlands impact. Massive, expensive reconstruction of RT-60 through Revere.
I used to strongly favor Option 1 (I believe my own creation), however after typing all that I believe Option 3 would be the "preferred alternative". As far as I can tell RT-1 is not that large an obstacle north of RT-16, as it is below grade, has frequent overpasses, and is adjacent to cemeteries half the time. As part of the reconstruction RT-16 could also be fixed through Revere and Chelsea , using some of the old RT-1 ROW. Long term, it might be worth it to extend the I-90 designation all the way up to the interchange with 128, somewhat fixing the errors of canceling the highway projects way back when. RT-1 inside of 128 is more "interstate-like" than any of the other MA Routes, so formalizing that would do no more harm then getting federal dollars to maintain it.
Thoughts?