http://g.co/maps/zvvey
To be paid for by adding electronic tolls.
North Shore plans are here:
http://g.co/maps/5emk8
Not mapped: Transit extensions of Red, Orange, and Blue lines out to 128.
I know I'm going to get a lot of unfavorable reactions to this, but the reality is that the highway system in MA is basically entirely built to 1960 or 1965 capacities. 128 was upgraded to 8 lanes when there were still farms on both sides of the highway-- even the northern end that is 6 lanes does have extra room on the bridges for an additional lane. The reality is that outside of 128, no amount of transit service will reduce dependency on cars, and even inside 128, many areas do not have high enough population density to support current transit systems. The idea of putting shuttle buses on 128 to relieve congestion is a joke-- tens of thousands of parking spaces would need to be added to remove a difference making amount of cars. Secondly (and this is why park and ride transit often fails) is that the time it takes to park and then change to a train and get to work is more than the amount of time that sitting in horrendous traffic takes under the current system. Transit utilizing park and ride should be used, but the transit systems should be upgraded to allow for express (no stop) access from the park and ride to downtown or the employment clusters (Cambridge, Longwood) to make up for the wasted time in changing mode of transit.
The T receives a huge subsidy from non-T users, so naturally, the playing field should be tilted in favor of self-funding transportation system and where future job growth is going to come from. The only place that this shouldn't happen is with access to downtown Boston and because of the takings required to expand the roads, transit utilizing park and ride should be used, but the transit systems should be upgraded to allow for express (no stop) access from the park and ride to downtown to make up for the wasted time in changing mode of transit. Additionally, the passenger volume on the T isn't going to change appreciably because of the archaic zoning laws in residential areas that want to keep the 1880s population density.
Source of subsidy claim: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/portals/0/downloads/InfoCenter/financials/T_CaucusDay_32311.pdf Page 2 and 3
25% of revenue comes from T users, fares should be doubled and operation of the T should be outsourced to sidestep the union and lottery hire system so that wages and benefits don't consume almost half of all revenue. That would at least generate some incremental dollars to eliminate the backlog and then increase borrowing to pay for capital improvements. Oh, also, eliminate prevailing wage on construction projects so save money.
Self funded roads:
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/portals/0/downloads/InfoCenter/financials/FY12_BudgetHearing.pdf Page 13 and 14 (Sales tax revenue is presumed to come from the sales tax on cars, even if this is fully backed out, 79% of revenue is self-funded)
To be paid for by adding electronic tolls.
North Shore plans are here:
http://g.co/maps/5emk8
Not mapped: Transit extensions of Red, Orange, and Blue lines out to 128.
I know I'm going to get a lot of unfavorable reactions to this, but the reality is that the highway system in MA is basically entirely built to 1960 or 1965 capacities. 128 was upgraded to 8 lanes when there were still farms on both sides of the highway-- even the northern end that is 6 lanes does have extra room on the bridges for an additional lane. The reality is that outside of 128, no amount of transit service will reduce dependency on cars, and even inside 128, many areas do not have high enough population density to support current transit systems. The idea of putting shuttle buses on 128 to relieve congestion is a joke-- tens of thousands of parking spaces would need to be added to remove a difference making amount of cars. Secondly (and this is why park and ride transit often fails) is that the time it takes to park and then change to a train and get to work is more than the amount of time that sitting in horrendous traffic takes under the current system. Transit utilizing park and ride should be used, but the transit systems should be upgraded to allow for express (no stop) access from the park and ride to downtown or the employment clusters (Cambridge, Longwood) to make up for the wasted time in changing mode of transit.
The T receives a huge subsidy from non-T users, so naturally, the playing field should be tilted in favor of self-funding transportation system and where future job growth is going to come from. The only place that this shouldn't happen is with access to downtown Boston and because of the takings required to expand the roads, transit utilizing park and ride should be used, but the transit systems should be upgraded to allow for express (no stop) access from the park and ride to downtown to make up for the wasted time in changing mode of transit. Additionally, the passenger volume on the T isn't going to change appreciably because of the archaic zoning laws in residential areas that want to keep the 1880s population density.
Source of subsidy claim: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/portals/0/downloads/InfoCenter/financials/T_CaucusDay_32311.pdf Page 2 and 3
25% of revenue comes from T users, fares should be doubled and operation of the T should be outsourced to sidestep the union and lottery hire system so that wages and benefits don't consume almost half of all revenue. That would at least generate some incremental dollars to eliminate the backlog and then increase borrowing to pay for capital improvements. Oh, also, eliminate prevailing wage on construction projects so save money.
Self funded roads:
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/portals/0/downloads/InfoCenter/financials/FY12_BudgetHearing.pdf Page 13 and 14 (Sales tax revenue is presumed to come from the sales tax on cars, even if this is fully backed out, 79% of revenue is self-funded)