Roads and Highways General Development Thread

[Arenacale]

Arborway upgrade plans! Looks like these would benefit drivers as well as pedestrians and cyclists - I would much rather have to sit at a light than deal with Murray Circle. https://www.universalhub.com/2025/dcr-unwraps-latest-plans-arborway-would-turn

 

[BOS2BON]

Councilor wants speed bumps on major Boston roads and a citywide speed limit of just 20 m.p.h.

City Councilor Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown) said yesterday the city should expand its side-street speed-hump program to the city's main thoroughfares - and lower the citywide speed limit - to reduce the number of pedestrians sent to the grave by impatient speeders...

www.universalhub.com

Speed humps everywhere.

 

[kdmc]

Councilor wants speed bumps on major Boston roads and a citywide speed limit of just 20 m.p.h.

City Councilor Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown) said yesterday the city should expand its side-street speed-hump program to the city's main thoroughfares - and lower the citywide speed limit - to reduce the number of pedestrians sent to the grave by impatient speeders...

www.universalhub.com

Speed humps everywhere.

Interesting. Ed Flynn has proudly gone on record as being "opposed to bike lanes on main streets and commercial roads", as recently as May 2024. I guess not everyone fits into either a pro- or anti-urbanism box.

 

[HenryAlan]

Interesting. Ed Flynn has proudly gone on record as being "opposed to bike lanes on main streets and commercial roads", as recently as May 2024. I guess not everyone fits into either a pro- or anti-urbanism box.

He has always favored slower streets, but did sort of tone that down when he was mulling a run for mayor. I think some of the anti-bike lane rhetoric was also an effort to curry favor among a certain subset of voters he saw as a potential foundation for the run. We'll see, but he is now saying that support for things like road diets is situational.

 

[Equilibria]

Councilor wants speed bumps on major Boston roads and a citywide speed limit of just 20 m.p.h.

City Councilor Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown) said yesterday the city should expand its side-street speed-hump program to the city's main thoroughfares - and lower the citywide speed limit - to reduce the number of pedestrians sent to the grave by impatient speeders...

www.universalhub.com

Speed humps everywhere.

The political gambit is that enough drivers in Boston want to virtue-signal so much that they don't realize how useless and irritating speed humps actually are... I've been to cities where they have done this, and the public despises them and talks about it multiple times per day, since driving over them becomes constant.

 

[Badusername]

The political gambit is that enough drivers in Boston want to virtue-signal so much that they don't realize how useless and irritating speed humps actually are... I've been to cities where they have done this, and the public despises them and talks about it multiple times per day, since driving over them becomes constant.

I don’t agree that speed bumps are useless. From my anecdotal experience of living on a Somerville street before and after speed bumps were added, speeding dropped significantly once they were introduced. Obviously they are not the only measure, and I question their value in main streets with frequent bus routes compared to curb extensions, raised crossings, chicanes, and other traffic calming measures.

 

[jbray]

The political gambit is that enough drivers in Boston want to virtue-signal so much that they don't realize how useless and irritating speed humps actually are... I've been to cities where they have done this, and the public despises them and talks about it multiple times per day, since driving over them becomes constant.

Am I reading this wrong? I live in the Ball Square area and all of the speed bumps on Powderhouse Blvd and Morrison Ave have been wonderful for slowing cars down and even causing cars to go onto the main thoroughfares instead of incessant cutting through residential streets at top speeds. That said, he is pushing for them on the major arterials which is a tougher ask. Narrowing would probably be the better solution there.

 

[Equilibria]

I don’t agree that speed bumps are useless. From my anecdotal experience of living on a Somerville street before and after speed bumps were added, speeding dropped significantly once they were introduced. Obviously they are not the only measure, and I question their value in main streets with frequent bus routes compared to curb extensions, raised crossings, chicanes, and other traffic calming measures.

Am I reading this wrong? I live in the Ball Square area and all of the speed bumps on Powderhouse Blvd and Morrison Ave have been wonderful for slowing cars down and even causing cars to go onto the main thoroughfares instead of incessant cutting through residential streets at top speeds. That said, he is pushing for them on the major arterials which is a tougher ask. Narrowing would probably be the better solution there.

I'm referring to putting them on the thoroughfares - speed humps are fine on side streets in part because the encourage traffic to go where they aren't. I also get the sense that both of you are speaking from the perspective of non-drivers. My point is that drivers in places where speed humps on thoroughfares are pissed off, and while that might be just fine with a lot of people, most voters are drivers, and active transportation advocates make up a pretty small portion of the electorate unless we're talking specifically about Somerville or Cambridge.

Of course the people who don't have to experience them think they work well, because this is all about disadvantaging some road users in favor of others. Again, that's perfectly fine with a lot of bike, ped, and safety advocates, but if you piss off the majority enough, you will lose in a democracy.

 

[JeffDowntown]

I'm referring to putting them on the thoroughfares - speed humps are fine on side streets in part because the encourage traffic to go where they aren't. I also get the sense that both of you are speaking from the perspective of non-drivers. My point is that drivers in places where speed humps on thoroughfares are pissed off, and while that might be just fine with a lot of people, most voters are drivers, and active transportation advocates make up a pretty small portion of the electorate unless we're talking specifically about Somerville or Cambridge.

Of course the people who don't have to experience them think they work well, because this is all about disadvantaging some road users in favor of others. Again, that's perfectly fine with a lot of bike, ped, and safety advocates, but if you piss off the majority enough, you will lose in a democracy.

I can attest from local experience that narrowing lanes is probably a more politically palatable way to reduce speeds rather than speed bumps.

DCR reworked Lynn Shore Drive a couple years ago. If you are not familiar, Lynn Shore Drive has both a lot of traffic and a lot of pedestrian crosswalks for beach access. An original plan was to use raised crosswalks to reduce driver speeds, which met a lot of local (driver) opposition. Instead, DCR restriped the road, adding a extra buffer between the parking spaces along the road and the travel lanes, so the lanes are now narrow enough to feel constrained. Drivers slowed down noticeably in response. They also increased the visibility of the crosswalks (bolder markings) but did not raise them. Driver compliance with the crosswalks also seems to have improved.

 

[Equilibria]

I can attest from local experience that narrowing lanes is probably a more politically palatable way to reduce speeds rather than speed bumps.

DCR reworked Lynn Shore Drive a couple years ago. If you are not familiar, Lynn Shore Drive has both a lot of traffic and a lot of pedestrian crosswalks for beach access. An original plan was to use raised crosswalks to reduce driver speeds, which met a lot of local (driver) opposition. Instead, DCR restriped the road, adding a extra buffer between the parking spaces along the road and the travel lanes, so the lanes are now narrow enough to feel constrained. Drivers slowed down noticeably in response. They also increased the visibility of the crosswalks (bolder markings) but did not raise them. Driver compliance with the crosswalks also seems to have improved.

I agree with that take. Narrowing lanes naturally encourages people to slow down and they typically don't even notice. It's also a better strategy because the usual behavior with a speed hump is to slow down to pass over it, then to speed back up, maybe even faster than before because you're resenting the speed hump. Designing the whole road to be slower makes the whole road slower.

 

[BOS2BON]

I agree with that take. Narrowing lanes naturally encourages people to slow down and they typically don't even notice. It's also a better strategy because the usual behavior with a speed hump is to slow down to pass over it, then to speed back up, maybe even faster than before because you're resenting the speed hump. Designing the whole road to be slower makes the whole road slower.

One thing properly designed speed humps are great at is stopping the SUPER fast speeders on a street. Like if there's one dude who does 80 mph on a residential street, a speed hump will absolutely stop him. For folks going closer to the speed limit, it might not be as big of an impact. They're also a lot cheaper to install without having to redo the entire street.

 

[TheRatmeister]

One thing properly designed speed humps are great at is stopping the SUPER fast speeders on a street. Like if there's one dude who does 80 mph on a residential street, a speed hump will absolutely stop him. For folks going closer to the speed limit, it might not be as big of an impact. They're also a lot cheaper to install without having to redo the entire street.

Even pretty shallow speed bumps are a PITA (literally) if you're cycling. The only ones I've encountered that are fine when you're cycling are the super shallow moped ones which just feel like a little roller coaster.

 

[FK4]

I agree with that take. Narrowing lanes naturally encourages people to slow down and they typically don't even notice. It's also a better strategy because the usual behavior with a speed hump is to slow down to pass over it, then to speed back up, maybe even faster than before because you're resenting the speed hump. Designing the whole road to be slower makes the whole road slower.

This is my complaint with Boston traffic planning across the board. Rarely are roads redesigned to constrain drivers in a way that makes them slow down — without even noticing. Instead, planners just love adding lights, which appeases the same crowds you're talking about. But if you're a driver, you know which intersections actually need lights, and which don't. Having a pointless light imposed on you, and knowing it was done because of the loud voices pushing for it, only pisses off drivers more. And it does nothin whatsoever to address actual speeding and in many cases probably makes it worse, as you said.

Hence why in my neighborhood, the decision to add a light at Walter & Centre St by the Arboretum. It's going to add a lot of traffic and only going to encourage people to speed even worse on a stretch of Centre St that has outrageous speeding already. Instead, they could reduce the lane width, remove a lane, or add a rotary (which they claim they cant do, but any European country could easily fit a rotary into this space). All of these things actually slow traffic down consistently. Anything that does not consistently slow traffic down is a lazy move that is superficial, feels good (but does little) for some and pisses off the rest.

 

[HenryAlan]

[T]hey could reduce the lane width, remove a lane, or add a rotary (which they claim they cant do, but any European country could easily fit a rotary into this space).

It's interesting that they are now saying this, because a rotary was one of the three initial design alternatives back in 2020:

 

[North Shore]

It's interesting that they are now saying this, because a rotary was one of the three initial design alternatives back in 2020:

View attachment 59602

FYI, for MassDOT reviewed projects that involve potential signalized intersections, the state often requires a roundabout alternative analysis. There pros and cons to be weighed in doing so. Limiting factors typically include available real estate (right-of-way), site grading and design/construction costs.

And the warrant analysis for proposed traffic signals are explicitly laid out in the MUTCD. You have to meet a specific criteria.

 

[FK4]

It's interesting that they are now saying this, because a rotary was one of the three initial design alternatives back in 2020:

View attachment 59602

FYI, for MassDOT reviewed projects that involve potential signalized intersections, the state often requires a roundabout alternative analysis. There pros and cons to be weighed in doing so. Limiting factors typically include available real estate (right-of-way), site grading and design/construction costs.

And the warrant analysis for proposed traffic signals are explicitly laid out in the MUTCD. You have to meet a specific criteria.

All I can say is, the criteria are wrong. In the UK, this would be a rotary. This intersection is scary and dangerous right now, because cars drive 50 mph through it. It's also high volume and is a major left turn need which adds additional reasons why a rotary would work best. Adding a stoplight is going to cause horrendous backups for the left turn onto Walter during rush hour, and otherwise only going to cause drivers to floor it when the lights are green.

The goal of every single traffic project should not be to make driving difficult, or to make any form of movement stop-start. It should be to make movements slow and smooth, especially driving. Rotaries do this; lights do not.

 

[themissinglink]

The feds gave Mass. $63 million for EV charging. Now Trump is taking it back. - The Boston Globe

The state has yet to award a single dollar it was allotted by the 2021 infrastructure law to build charging stations.

www.bostonglobe.com

The state has been among the slowest in the nation to award funding from the 2021 infrastructure law, which set aside a total of $5 billion to help fill gaps in the EV charging network. Despite several years of planning and negotiations with potential contractors, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation has yet to award a single dollar from the program to build charging stations.
[...]
Now the money may never arrive. On Monday, Trump issued an executive order halting any new disbursements under the law for EV charging. “It is the policy of the United States ... to eliminate the ‘electric vehicle mandate’ and promote true consumer choice, which is essential for economic growth and innovation,” the order stated.

 

[KCasiglio]

I would argue the slow rollout of IIJA and IRA funds was the single greatest failure of the Biden administration.

 

[JeffDowntown]

I would argue the slow rollout of IIJA and IRA funds was the single greatest failure of the Biden administration.

Generally these allocation bills require the states to have defined projects for the funds to support.

It takes time for the states to spin up the projects for the funds requests (the bills also include lots of rules about the nature/features of the projects). Feds cannot just send funds out into the ether.

 

[Equilibria]

All I can say is, the criteria are wrong. In the UK, this would be a rotary. This intersection is scary and dangerous right now, because cars drive 50 mph through it. It's also high volume and is a major left turn need which adds additional reasons why a rotary would work best. Adding a stoplight is going to cause horrendous backups for the left turn onto Walter during rush hour, and otherwise only going to cause drivers to floor it when the lights are green.

The goal of every single traffic project should not be to make driving difficult, or to make any form of movement stop-start. It should be to make movements slow and smooth, especially driving. Rotaries do this; lights do not.

Building on his point, MassDOT's intersection control evaluation (ICE) process favors roundabouts heavily. They will default to it whenever possible precisely because they agree with you. One can take issue with the criteria, but not the intent.

I would argue the slow rollout of IIJA and IRA funds was the single greatest failure of the Biden administration.

The article says it is the Commonwealth that has been slow in distributing the funds, not the Feds.