[CANCELED] Summer St. Gondola

Status
Not open for further replies.
ceo said:
Here's some more detail I hadn't seen before, page 3 of this newsletter: http://files.constantcontact.com/c5...-42c7-a014-d54d24a30f94.pdf?ver=1481757906000
That's why they're talking $100 million, with five stations over a 1.4-mile route; remember that stations are the expensive part. You can get rid of the "A St" station really easily; it's a 5-minute walk from South Station anyway.
And if they're talking 40-person cabins, which I think is ludicrous overkill for this route, that makes it a 3S, with 2 track ropes and a haul rope, which is *much* more expensive.
Click to expand...

Also, from the link above:

vTky7qAh.png
 
falcon42 said:
In all honestly, as a resident of the seaport/fort point, I don't think these theaters will be successful. I have seen very little to no traffic at the Art Society in Pier 4, which was built as a requirement but rarely seems open.
Click to expand...

Not really fair to compare the Art Society to a 600 person theater that will have ticketed events. The Pavilion has no trouble drawing thousands of people to dozens of concerts.

My concern is whether this is the right size venue. 600 capacity can be a tricky size. What kind of events does a 600 person venue draw? It's too small for Broadway style productions. Big name comedians often sell out the 1,200 capacity Wilbur. Even the Paradise fits about 900 people. Is there another venue in town in the 600 capacity range? Is there a void for such a size venue? I think I would have rather seen 2 performance spaces, one in the 800-1,000 capacity range which would open up a lot more options and a smaller "community theater." But I am sure they have done their research and know far more about the market than I do....
 
Agreed but I wouldn't but the BHB Pavillion in the same category. That's a 4-5k capacity seasonal venue that attracts national acts and is on the water. I do wonder what types of acts a 600 seat theater would be good for? Comedians are most likely going to go the the established Laugh Boston or Wilbur as you mentioned.
 
This isn't the appropriate place for this. Could a mod move this discussion over the to Seaport Square thread? That being said:

BosDevelop said:
Not really fair to compare the Art Society to a 600 person theater that will have ticketed events. The Pavilion has no trouble drawing thousands of people to dozens of concerts.

My concern is whether this is the right size venue. 600 capacity can be a tricky size. What kind of events does a 600 person venue draw? It's too small for Broadway style productions. Big name comedians often sell out the 1,200 capacity Wilbur. Even the Paradise fits about 900 people. Is there another venue in town in the 600 capacity range? Is there a void for such a size venue? I think I would have rather seen 2 performance spaces, one in the 800-1,000 capacity range which would open up a lot more options and a smaller "community theater." But I am sure they have done their research and know far more about the market than I do....
Click to expand...

The city has been researching this exact question in depth lately. They came out with a big report about it, and here's a brief Globe write-up.

Basically, Boston has a bunch of big venues for big ticket shows (more than we need, actually) but very few small venues for community performance arts organizations. The city has worked with these groups, and determined that the community needs a 400-600 person venue and a 150 person venue. Thus, this is exactly what we're seeing proposed for Seaport Square.

"Broadway style productions" and "big name comedians" have plenty of venue options in Boston. Your local amateur dance troupe that hopes to sell 500 $20 tickets for its semi-annual performance doesn't. Those are the sort of productions that this venue will host.
 
datadyne007 said:
Also, from the link above:

vTky7qAh.png
Click to expand...

OK I acknowledge that someone actually took the time to create a brochure for this.

But I will never ever consider this an actual proposal. This is even less serious than 'Monorail on the greenway!'. There is literally nothing this does that a bunch of buses and a bus lane can't do better, faster, and cheaper. Its not even that compelling as a PR gimmick.

p.s. I recognize that gondolas can make for really compelling transit in the right context, but this is literally the furthest from that kind of context that I can imagine....we're talking about going straight down a wide road for crying out loud.

p.p.s This thread is now dead to me

p.p.s Ok i concede that a gondola has a tighter turning radius than a bus. And maybe a better view. But that's it.

Edit: Gondolas can also be a great place for a handful of bros to get baked between runs. Which isn't nothing.
 
Last edited:
Gondolas seem to me to be the equivalent of cable cars - of limited use to the regular commuter.

Having said that, I took the cable cars as often as possible to commute when I was in SF but only because my transit pass included the fares.

The brochure above implies that fares for a gondola would be higher than what one of us would want to pay, but I think the idea here is specifically that it would be for commuters in/out of South Boston, too.

I am confused as to why Millennium would want to spend $100 million on a transportation system that doesn't get its workers / visitors actually to its location. I think the renderings are not what would be built - to me, the route would have to go in to the Marine Park and over to where the dry dock is located.
 
This gondola idea is the stupidest thing I've seen in a long time. There is already a busway tunnel through most of the route, which for the cost of the gondola could be improved. I don't get it.
 
Charlie_mta said:
This gondola idea is the stupidest thing I've seen in a long time. There is already a busway tunnel through most of the route, which for the cost of the gondola could be improved. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

They're property developers. A gondola is a "sexy" thing to tout for their new buildings.

"The buses will be a bit faster and the system will have a little more capacity", may be significant in reality, but it's really hard to make that sound exciting to someone looking to buy a luxury condo.
 
It's a means of transportation for those going to and from the developer's new project and South Station. It's not more; it's not less.

Everyone loosen up your girdles.
 
Charlie_mta said:
This gondola idea is the stupidest thing I've seen in a long time. There is already a busway tunnel through most of the route, which for the cost of the gondola could be improved. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

I cringe every time I hear a pitch for this.. a BRT line with dedicated lanes down Summer Street could accomplish the same thing, and wouldn't be as ugly as a gondola. You could build it within a year and probably do it for a faction of the cost of a gondola system.
 
Leaving aside ROI/efficiency/etc. I can't be the only one here who would prefer riding in a gondola to riding in a bus, right?

Though some may try to forget it, Boston is a tourist city. Tourists who would never dream of taking a bus would eat this up. And it still provides a connection (and a pleasant ride) for commuters.

Not saying I'm in favor of this without seeing the final plan, but I don't understand the extreme negativity.
 
Justin7 said:
Leaving aside ROI/efficiency/etc. I can't be the only one here who would prefer riding in a gondola to riding in a bus, right?

Though some may try to forget it, Boston is a tourist city. Tourists who would never dream of taking a bus would eat this up. And it still provides a connection (and a pleasant ride) for commuters.

Not saying I'm in favor of this without seeing the final plan, but I don't understand the extreme negativity.
Click to expand...

I was just about to say something alonge these lines. If I were doing something in the seaport, its almost certainly something recreational, like going to a bar or restaurant. This would be more fun than a bus. Not really viable as a major transit option, but fun.
 
The negativity & frustration isn't as much about the gondola itself than it is about the further distraction this ridiculous proposal takes from actually making truly substantive transit improvements in the Seaport. This shiny low-function object fills in a gap in the public discourse that is presently open for & should be filled in with high impact, high volume solutions. It's a wasted opportunity to truly address transit needs.
 
datadyne007 said:
The negativity & frustration isn't as much about the gondola itself than it is about the further distraction this ridiculous proposal takes from actually making truly substantive transit improvements in the Seaport. This shiny low-function object fills in a gap in the public discourse that is presently open for & should be filled in with high impact, high volume solutions. It's a wasted opportunity to truly address transit needs.
Click to expand...

Bingo -- light rail the Silver Line out the Seaport (Dual mode with Airport/Chelsea buses); Fix D Street; Fix Ted Williams access -- rather than building a gimmicky transit toy.
 
And no, we shouldn't be designing for tourists in the Seaport. The Seaport neighborhood that is coming together is largely all local office & residential. They are the ones who need true, high-functioning mass transit, not a gimmicky gondola.
 
datadyne007 said:
The negativity & frustration isn't as much about the gondola itself than it is about the further distraction this ridiculous proposal takes from actually making truly substantive transit improvements in the Seaport. This shiny low-function object fills in a gap in the public discourse that is presently open for & should be filled in with high impact, high volume solutions. It's a wasted opportunity to truly address transit needs.
Click to expand...

But public discourse isn’t a finite resource. If anythig, this proposal, as ridiculous as it is, can help bring more attention to transit issues. Even if it gets built, then it draws even more attention, since, as a ridiculous shiny object, people will use it, but most will realize its impractical, and wish they cold have a one seat ride on a real transit option.

And given that this is a private project, I don’t see the harm. If it was the MBTA saying they’d build it, I’d be annoyed. But a private company building something silly and flashy with some modest public benefit... cool.

And its not like Boston is unfamiliar with silly transportation projects. Did we really need a cutting edge cable stayed bridge to cross the Charles?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top