I-90 Interchange Improvement Project & West Station | Allston

The May 15 Task Force meeting will be held at the Josephine A. Fiorentino Community Center, 123 Antwerp St., Brighton, MA from 6 pm – 8 pm.
The meeting agenda, which is subject to change, is proposed as follows:
  • Welcome/Introductions
  • Layover Update
  • Multimodal Local Connections
  • Temporary Grand Junction Rail Outage
  • Next Steps
Attached is a Layover Response document that was prepared to respond to questions and comments previously received. This is meant as a supplement to the presentation made during the April 16th Task Force Meeting.
 

Attachments

  • AMP Layover Response 4-30-25.pdf
    1.8 MB · Views: 44
Harry Mattison said:
Attached is a Layover Response document that was prepared to respond to questions and comments previously received. This is meant as a supplement to the presentation made during the April 16th Task Force Meeting.
Click to expand...
They're totally dodging the most important question: Readville Yard 1 temp layover provides more total space than Beacon Park, so why are they planning to abandon it when the Yard 2 VMF and layover are complete? They're literally throwing away an investment to dig in on Beacon Park layover at twice the price.
 
www.crwa.org

I-90 Project: Is This The Best We Can Do? — Charles River Watershed Association

Join us for a free presentation and Q&A at the Josephine A. Fiorentino Community Center to discuss the Allston Multimodal (I-90) Project and design options to improve water quality and naturalize the riverbank. Light refreshments will be served.
www.crwa.org www.crwa.org

I-90 Project: Is This The Best We Can Do?​

  • Wednesday, June 11, 2025
  • 6:30 PM 8:00 PM
  • Josephine A. Fiorentino Community Center123 Antwerp Street Brighton
The Allston Multimodal (I-90) Project entails straightening the Mass Pike, building a new commuter rail stop, and enabling a new neighborhood to be built on what is now an abandoned rail yard. Join us for a free presentation and Q&A at the Josephine A. Fiorentino Community Center to discuss the project and design options to improve water quality and naturalize the riverbank. Light refreshments will be served.
 
https://commonwealthbeacon.org/transportation/federal-funding-for-i-90-allston-project-in-jeopardy/

THE MASSIVE PACKAGE of tax and spending cuts President Trump signed into law on July 4 contains a provision that eliminates a federal transportation grant program that set aside $335 million last year for the nearly $2 billion I-90 Allston highway project in Boston.

The provision rescinds “the unobligated balances” of the roughly $3 billion Neighborhood Access and Equity Grant program [...]
Click to expand...

While there will surely be years of lawsuits and wrangling over this, it seems like the odds of getting that federal funding are near zero at this point. As others have mentioned, there's likely hundreds of millions of savings to be had by removing layovers, fixing the West Station layout, changing construction phasing, and reducing the final number of Pike + SFR lanes.

It is also worth reiterating that Harvard is only contributing $90 million to the project. While soaking Harvard (or having them pay their fair share depending on you POV) wouldn't look great in the current political climate, buying the land back at cost ($130 million after adjusting for inflation) would avoid those optics. Financing the project against future land sales after it finishes should not be too difficult and should be able to generate far more income. Using the assessed land value for St. Elizabeth's (what I consider as a clear lower bound) of about $7 million/acre, the Beacon Park Yard land would be valued around $630 million. Even removing the $220 million coming from Harvard, that more than makes up for the federal funding.
 
BeansTheCat said:
https://commonwealthbeacon.org/transportation/federal-funding-for-i-90-allston-project-in-jeopardy/



While there will surely be years of lawsuits and wrangling over this, it seems like the odds of getting that federal funding are near zero at this point. As others have mentioned, there's likely hundreds of millions of savings to be had by removing layovers, fixing the West Station layout, changing construction phasing, and reducing the final number of Pike + SFR lanes.

It is also worth reiterating that Harvard is only contributing $90 million to the project. While soaking Harvard (or having them pay their fair share depending on you POV) wouldn't look great in the current political climate, buying the land back at cost ($130 million after adjusting for inflation) would avoid those optics. Financing the project against future land sales after it finishes should not be too difficult and should be able to generate far more income. Using the assessed land value for St. Elizabeth's (what I consider as a clear lower bound) of about $7 million/acre, the Beacon Park Yard land would be valued around $630 million. Even removing the $220 million coming from Harvard, that more than makes up for the federal funding.
Click to expand...
Alas, I don’t think the state is brave or competent enough to do this
 
  • Like
Reactions: FK4
stick n move said:

The Path Forward for Allston’s Highway Megaproject Is Getting Narrower​


Is MassDOT ready to admit that Allston needs more trains and fewer lanes?

I90ThroatAerial.png


“Although parts of Interstate 90 through Allston are currently 8 lanes wide, MassDOT has told stakeholders to expect that the highway will be reduced to 6 lanes for the duration of the project's decade-long construction period.

Several members of the Allston project's stakeholder task force are beginning to wonder if the Turnpike should be designed to be 6 lanes for good – an idea that could considerably simplify the project's construction logistics.

“Can we survive with a 6-lane Turnpike? Sure we can, because we’re doing it right now,” observes Emily Norton, a Newton resident and executive director of the Charles River Watershed Association.

Norton points out that nearby segments of the Turnpike have already been narrowed to a 6-lane configuration for several years for the construction of air-rights developments in the Fenway neighborhood.

“If MassDOT wants to build 8 lanes here, then what we’re actually talking about is a highway expansion project. Because it’s been 6 lanes for over 5 years now. It would be 6 lanes through the decade-plus of construction (of the Allston Multimodal Project)," says Norton. "Can you tell me anywhere else in the state where you’re planning a highway expansion next to a new commuter rail stop?”…….”



“By similar reasoning, Norton thinks that the adjacent Soldier's Field Road should also be considered for a road diet. The agency in charge of that highway, the state's Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), has already endorsed plans to turn that roadway into a calmer 2-lane street on the other side of Allston, in Herter Park……”



“Mike Hall, a project consultant from TetraTech, presented data from MassDOT's automated toll collection gantry 13, which is located in the "throat" segment of the Turnpike.

"The capacity of the highway is about 1,760 vehicles per hour per lane, or a capacity of about 7,000 cars per hour on the highway" in each direction, said Hall…….”



“What Hall didn't mention, though, is that the numbers he was using were roughly 20 percent higher than actual observed traffic volumes from the present day.

StreetsblogMASS downloaded the actual eastbound traffic data from that gantry for the first quarter of 2025, which you can look at in this spreadsheet.

It shows that hourly traffic volumes on Interstate 90 rarely exceed 6000 cars per hour in either direction…….”



Renders showing how miluch more waterfront park space there could be with lane reductions:

Current plan
View attachment 62055

Mass pike minus 1 lane each direction
View attachment 62056

Mass pike and Sfr minus 1 lane each direction
View attachment 62057

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...BWvn1oj6_3nIAEXQeQ_aem_MoeUe0FeGbaevjHK2NTx2A
Click to expand...
There are intelligent arguments to be made about whether or not we need the highway of a certain width here. But it just drives me up the wall here these stupid people when they say stuff about “highway expansion next to a commuter rail stop”. That one little statement reveals so much ignorance and simplistic reasoning. If you were talking about a massive reconstruction of the Worcester line to be high speed rail, sure. Or some other major transit investment. But to suggest that even the best case scenario for West Station, out in the hinterlands of western Boston, comes close in any way, shape or form to the vast and diverse uses of the highway, that is exactly the type of stupidity that makes car oriented people scoff and smell conspiracy.

If you want to actually invest in the future undergirded by a philosophy that represents a real change from auto culture toward public transportation, fine. Then do that. But we hear so many versions of this argument. Some random rail or bus station does not achieve the same thing as an interstate highway. Wanna fix the transit system? Please, do it! But so often we get these obnoxious and condescending arguments for reducing pavement while very little is done to make the alternative (transit) any better in any truly meaningful way.
 
Last edited:
StreetsblogMASS said:
We've been able to confirm that all but $8 million of the $335 federal grant has been rescinded by the Trump budget cuts.

And because this is a legislative act, it'll be almost impossible to challenge it in court. MassDOT didn't get a legally-binding grant agreement signed in time, and now there's no funding left:
https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...deral-funding-for-allston-highway-realignment
https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...deral-funding-for-allston-highway-realignment
Click to expand...
Why is the McGrath grant not affected?
 
cubbe8 said:
Why is the McGrath grant not affected?
Click to expand...

I tried to explain this in the story – the grants colloquially referred to as "reconnecting communities" actually came from two separate laws, and thus have two legally-distinct funding sources from the Treasury.

The Allston I-90 money was supposed to come out of the Neighborhood Access and Equity grant program, which was part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Most of the big Reconnecting Communities grants that were announced in early 2024 came from the IRA funding.

But other grants, like the McGrath grant, came from the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program (RCP), which was part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act aka Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Trump's budget law was focused on rolling back a lot of Inflation Reduction Act programs, but it didn't touch the older Reconnecting Communities funding that was authorized in 2021.
 
StreetsblogMASS said:
I tried to explain this in the story – the grants colloquially referred to as "reconnecting communities" actually came from two separate laws, and thus have two legally-distinct funding sources from the Treasury.

The Allston I-90 money was supposed to come out of the Neighborhood Access and Equity grant program, which was part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Most of the big Reconnecting Communities grants that were announced in early 2024 came from the IRA funding.

But other grants, like the McGrath grant, came from the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program (RCP), which was part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act aka Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Trump's budget law was focused on rolling back a lot of Inflation Reduction Act programs, but it didn't touch the older Reconnecting Communities funding that was authorized in 2021.
Click to expand...
Of the two. I think the McGrath grounding project is more important anyway, so I'm glad that the funding for it remained in place. The I-90 project is great, but so massive and complex that it would've been mired down for years in endless nit-picking. The McGrath is fairly straightforward and has a big bang for the buck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top