I-90 Interchange Improvement Project & West Station | Allston

F-Line to Dudley said:
-2 tracks nets you...what, 25 feet in space. It's not much at all, and certainly not enough to build anything on. Frankly, if the station continues to be designed with giant busways that hardly any feasible routes are going to use...that's the space-waster that should be targeted if they're trying to pack the neighborhood together denser.

The main opposition to express tracks is definitely crying about any trains skipping the station. But...well, those 8-10 Amtrak RT's are not going to be stopping there in any universe and Worcester expresses probably shouldn't stop there most of the time if they care about making good end-to-end time. As said, this is not Back Bay Station in heft. So that's a lot of trains, making express tracks prudent enough if they're not taking up much space. The layout of the express tracks needs to change from the last set of renders, because the number of conflicts with the station track crossovers was stupid...but the general existence of them is smart.
Click to expand...

Maybe with a better layout the bypass tracks wouldn't be so bad, but the current layout with bypass tracks and the layup yard is a big mess. If you want to run as many trains as possible through Allston (with some stopping at West Station and others not stopping there) you probably don't want all those switches and crossovers and inbound trains on outbound tracks and outbound trains on inbound tracks that MassDOT is currently proposing.

To paraphrase US Senator Everett Dirksen, "25 feet here, 25 feet there, pretty soon you are talking about real space" (though apparently that quote is misattributed).

And the bus parking lot above West Station is a big problem too.
 
The key on the drawing seems to be missing some of the coloring. Is the realigned pike designed to support decking or are we stuck with a moat?
 
RandomWalk said:
The key on the drawing seems to be missing some of the coloring. Is the realigned pike designed to support decking or are we stuck with a moat?
Click to expand...
Much of the rest of the Pike is being decked, so I don't see any physical feasibility reasons why this realigned segment through Beacon Park couldn't be as well. It's just a roadway on terra firma. Drive the piles, build the deck, and there you are!

It would be wise to plan ahead the areas that would be decked over, so adjoining parcels on land could be bundled with the air rights parcels to make the decked portion economically feasible.
 
Here are a couple images from a MassDOT presentation in June https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WbX0G8sXObrZAoCQbyCKSpoRLrghY5nR/view?usp=drive_link

WestStation.png


Urban Street Grid.png

https://imgur.com/a/ryk8t9y
 
I realize that MassDOT is planning pretty wide vehicular infrastructure, but given that it's future proofing, I'm not too mad about it -It's width that in the future can be reallocated to transit or other uses that they can't get back if they give it up now.

But once again, I'd like to point people at the City's planning efforts in this area, as anything other than the infrastructure falls under their purview, and as such the City of Boston is leading the Beacon Park Yard Regional Formwork Plan. They literally have been playing a city building game, "Beacon in a Box," to game out the scenarios they are envisioning for this area. The below slides were posted at the end of September; it looks generally like significant height is being proposed, as well as air-rights parcels over the Pike. The height (looks like 30+ stories) will make the roads feel not as wide in comparison to say Seaport Blvd. The slides below are from both the boards and presentation, arranged by theme.

1000038732.jpg

1000038727.jpg
1000038711.jpg
1000038734.jpg
1000038736.jpg
1000038709.jpg
1000038738.jpg
1000038740.jpg
1000038706.jpg
1000038742.jpg
1000038744.jpg

1000038753.jpg
1000038749.jpg
1000038751.jpg

1000038713.jpg

Beacon Park Yard Regional Framework Plan (BPY Plan) | Bostonplans.org

Active planning initiatives being coordinated by the Planning Department. Find more information inside each initiative, including details, associated files, and contact information.
www.bostonplans.org www.bostonplans.org
 
Stlin said:
I realize that MassDOT is planning pretty wide vehicular infrastructure, but given that it's future proofing, I'm not too mad about it -It's width that in the future can be reallocated to transit or other uses that they can't get back if they give it up now.

But once again, I'd like to point people at the City's planning efforts in this area, as anything other than the infrastructure falls under their purview, and as such the City of Boston is leading the Beacon Park Yard Regional Formwork Plan. They literally have been playing a city building game, "Beacon in a Box," to game out the scenarios they are envisioning for this area. The below slides were posted at the end of September; it looks generally like significant height is being proposed, as well as air-rights parcels over the Pike. The height (looks like 30+ stories) will make the roads feel not as wide in comparison to say Seaport Blvd. The slides below are from both the boards and presentation, arranged by theme.

View attachment 58373
View attachment 58362View attachment 58363View attachment 58367View attachment 58368View attachment 58364View attachment 58369View attachment 58370View attachment 58365View attachment 58371View attachment 58372
View attachment 58378View attachment 58376View attachment 58377
View attachment 58379

Beacon Park Yard Regional Framework Plan (BPY Plan) | Bostonplans.org

Active planning initiatives being coordinated by the Planning Department. Find more information inside each initiative, including details, associated files, and contact information.
www.bostonplans.org www.bostonplans.org
Click to expand...
Thank you for posting that! It looks like a very well-done effort, though that's an awful lot of height and density for a neighborhood that will have no transit but busses until we get 15-minute Urban Rail (and even that pales next to light rail or heavy rail transit). That would be the downtown of most American cities, including some pretty big ones. I'd love to see it, but this project really missed the mark by not provisioning for Green Line access.
 
MassDOT isn’t future proofing for transit. There’s no light rail right of way reserved. The 5 plus lane stroads already have bike lanes and sidewalks. Even if at some point there are bus lanes added, they will only be on one or two roads in the area, so there’s no need to have multiple parallel gigantic stroads. Besides, why not build the bus lanes now so that you can have nice stations and priority measures built in from the start? (A bus only road could be used to future proof for light rail!)

The city’s planning design document has been discussed a few pages back. I’d simply say that tall buildings may help with the aesthetic “feel” of wide roads, but they don’t make them less dangerous, loud, or uncomfortable to be around. Downtown Boston feels far more pleasant than (Midtown) Manhattan because of the narrow roads. All the planning in the world can’t make up for stroad-lined superblocks.
 
Last edited:
nortor said:
MassDOT isn’t future proofing for transit. There’s no light rail right of way reserved. The 5 plus lane stroads already have bike lanes and sidewalks. Even if at some point there are bus lanes added, they will only be on one or two roads in the area, so there’s no need to have multiple parallel gigantic stroads. Besides, why not build the bus lanes now so that you can have nice stations and priority measures built in from the start? (A bus only road could be used to future proof for light rail!)

The city’s planning design document has been discussed a few pages back. I’d simply say that tall buildings may help with the aesthetic “feel” of wide roads, but they don’t make them less dangerous, loud, or uncomfortable to be around. Downtown Boston feels far more pleasant than (Midtown) Manhattan because of the narrow roads. All the planning in the world can’t make up for stroad-lined superblocks.
Click to expand...
MassDOT’s priority is, as usual, maximizing how many drivers per hour can plow their 8 wheeled Ford Leviathans into child pedestrians. You know the natural friction and caution that a driver feels when navigating a very tight urban environment? That feeling, which makes drivers slow down, is the sworn enemy of MassDOT’s planners.
 

MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal ​

www.thecrimson.com

MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal | News | The Harvard Crimson

A massive project to realign the I-90 highway in Allston will include a train layover for Amtrak and the MBTA, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation announced last week, an unexpected reversal after the MassDOT secretary said the layover would not be included in the project in April.
www.thecrimson.com www.thecrimson.com
 
Jeremi said:
MassDOT’s priority is, as usual, maximizing how many drivers per hour can plow their 8 wheeled Ford Leviathans into child pedestrians. You know the natural friction and caution that a driver feels when navigating a very tight urban environment? That feeling, which makes drivers slow down, is the sworn enemy of MassDOT’s planners.
Click to expand...
I can promise you that MassDOT, like every DOT in the country, is incredibly serious about pursuing zero fatalities on our roads. People may disagree on which design decisions best pursue that goal.
 
Equilibria said:
I can promise you that MassDOT, like every DOT in the country, is incredibly serious about pursuing zero fatalities on our roads. People may disagree on which design decisions best pursue that goal.
Click to expand...
Well they’re approaching it from an interesting angle here: Eliminate pedestrian deaths by eliminating pedestrians altogether. Can’t run them down if they don’t bother walking around in the first place.
 
Harry Mattison said:

MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal ​

www.thecrimson.com

MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal | News | The Harvard Crimson

A massive project to realign the I-90 highway in Allston will include a train layover for Amtrak and the MBTA, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation announced last week, an unexpected reversal after the MassDOT secretary said the layover would not be included in the project in April.
www.thecrimson.com www.thecrimson.com
Click to expand...
Good. We should be provisioning for intense use of the station and right of way. The Globe article goes into more detail about the politics of this decision and it appears to come from Eng and Amtrak. Wu and allies want such a layover to be in Widett where the MBTA recently acquired land, but Eng says that space is needed for regional rail and its expansion. Amtrak wants a layover and so taking part of a historic rail yard and keeping it a rail yard makes absolutely the most sense. The commentary around this where we should take away land from somewhere else when this is land dedicated to rail space is incredibly short sighted.
 
Equilibria said:
I can promise you that MassDOT, like every DOT in the country, is incredibly serious about pursuing zero fatalities on our roads. People may disagree on which design decisions best pursue that goal.
Click to expand...
And I’m sorry, it is laughably untrue that “every DOT in the country,” even our own MassDOT is “incredibly serious about pursuing zero fatalities on our roads.” They make daily design decisions that they know will kill people and they do it in the name of traffic throughput.
 
Jeremi said:
And I’m sorry, it is laughably untrue that “every DOT in the country,” even our own MassDOT is “incredibly serious about pursuing zero fatalities on our roads.” They make daily design decisions that they know will kill people and they do it in the name of traffic throughput.
Click to expand...
Not really. It sucks, but what they are really doing is trying to achieve it through the political means they have available to them. Better to have something, than nothing. It's like the piecemeal implementation of bike lanes. The people in charge of that plan absolutely know what is truly required. I've been to a good amount of the local meetings for Cambridge, Somerville, and Medford and it's very clear that the teams putting this all together are dedicated to its resolution but they are REQUIRED to play the long game. A street here or there over time creates a connected network. Look at the voting public's backlash to the bike lane overhaul on major roads. It doesn't matter that the data shows that businesses are better off and that mobility flow through the network increases overall, the majority of voters want to drive and are upset that bike lanes have made that harder in the short term. SO now you have to ease an angry public opinion into the unwanted but necessary solution instead of implementing it wholesale only for its supporters in power to be thrown out. It's pretty awful and demoralizing, but it's necessary. You need the political alliance of people who could come round to the solution but currently are against your position for enduring change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top