Cape Cod Rail, Bridges and Highways

No it's not. A navigable waterway is a navigable waterway, and building a bridge over it that obstructs marine traffic is just as illegal as filling it in.
Given that drawbridges exist over navigable waterways, I'm going to say that it's far more possible to build a bridge over a canal than it is to fill the canal in. Obviously both filling in the canal and constructing a fixed span are illegal, I literally said as much. But to say that eliminating the entire canal is exactly the same difficulty as building a bridge over it is ludicrous. No marine life impact. No need to source the fill (which is going to have environmental impacts as well given the volume). Boat traffic can still transit. The list of differences in degree is staggering.

Seriously, all I'm saying is that in terms of the political capital it would expend it's easier to sell a lower bridge or drawbridge than it would be to sell filling in the entire canal. Are either easy? No! Obviously not! It's a navigable waterway and those are protected. Literally everyone on this forum knows that. But to pretend there's no difference between the two from a political perspective is ridiculous.

Which do you think is more likely (given the ACOE won't approve anything at all right now): Congress approving a new drawbridge over the canal, or Congress totally eliminating the Canal?
 
Given that drawbridges exist over navigable waterways, I'm going to say that it's far more possible to build a bridge over a canal than it is to fill the canal in. Obviously both filling in the canal and constructing a fixed span are illegal, I literally said as much. But to say that eliminating the entire canal is exactly the same difficulty as building a bridge over it is ludicrous. No marine life impact. No need to source the fill (which is going to have environmental impacts as well given the volume). Boat traffic can still transit. The list of differences in degree is staggering.

Seriously, all I'm saying is that in terms of the political capital it would expend it's easier to sell a lower bridge or drawbridge than it would be to sell filling in the entire canal. Are either easy? No! Obviously not! It's a navigable waterway and those are protected. Literally everyone on this forum knows that. But to pretend there's no difference between the two from a political perspective is ridiculous.

Which do you think is more likely (given the ACOE won't approve anything at all right now): Congress approving a new drawbridge over the canal, or Congress totally eliminating the Canal?

I think you're getting really hung up on "this impractical and entirely unrealistic idea is less impractical and entirely unrealistic than that other idea" which, while objectively true for the reasons you state, is kind of irrelevant since it's also impractical and unrealistic.
 
Given that drawbridges exist over navigable waterways, I'm going to say that it's far more possible to build a bridge over a canal than it is to fill the canal in. Obviously both filling in the canal and constructing a fixed span are illegal, I literally said as much. But to say that eliminating the entire canal is exactly the same difficulty as building a bridge over it is ludicrous. No marine life impact. No need to source the fill (which is going to have environmental impacts as well given the volume). Boat traffic can still transit. The list of differences in degree is staggering.

Seriously, all I'm saying is that in terms of the political capital it would expend it's easier to sell a lower bridge or drawbridge than it would be to sell filling in the entire canal. Are either easy? No! Obviously not! It's a navigable waterway and those are protected. Literally everyone on this forum knows that. But to pretend there's no difference between the two from a political perspective is ridiculous.

Which do you think is more likely (given the ACOE won't approve anything at all right now): Congress approving a new drawbridge over the canal, or Congress totally eliminating the Canal?
You are really not understanding the priority order of transportation in the United States. Water-based traffic always gets priority over land-based traffic, based on Federal law and long historical prescident. Drawbridges in the locations of the Sagamore and Bourne bridges would be controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers. And they would be operated in favor of water traffic at all times. In other words they are going to be open to boats and closed to cars and trucks MOST OF THE TIME. (Just like the Cape Cod Rail Bridge!)

Can you understand why taking days to travel to and from the Cape by car or truck might be a non-starter?
 
And bridge traffic? As Vagabond pointed out this evening, it is an issue nearly year-round, not just tourist season.

It's really not. Doing maintenance during the Other 9 months is perfectly fine.

And WFH, which I see in your posts you frequently diss, is not going away, however much you wish.

Boston's future might depend on you being wrong. Which is what scares me. I still unconvinced WFH will survive the next recession, whenever that ends up coming.

When it comes to retirement, I am getting the impression that Portland (Maine) might be the place people will go those who are able to retire in NE. I don't have an explanation as to why.
 
Last edited:
It's really not.
Citation, or are we sextupling-down on vibes here?
Doing maintenance during the Other 9 months is perfectly fine.
What makes you think they aren't already doing that? They do 9 months of work on the bridges already with frequent lane closures, and the offseason backups get horrendous when there's a lane out-of-commission. The whole point of replacing the bridges is that 9 months of maint every year is no longer cutting it at keeping them at acceptable state-of-repair.
 
Citation, or are we sextupling-down on vibes here?

Me being there?

Take for example, I stayed there during March. I did see some people who were clearly WFHers walking around despite the fact that nothing was open.

I think people just don't understand how extreme the seasonality is on the Cape. Even in the towns that have a year round (albeit aging) population.
 
Me being there?

Take for example, I stayed there during March. I did see some people who were clearly WFHers walking around despite the fact that nothing was open.
You're changing the subject...again. You said the traffic was really not a year-round problem. "Traffic on the 3's" disagrees with you on the regular when there's a lane closure for said offseason maintenance, and you've been presented with the offseason traffic-count data that shows the bridges are overloaded year-round. What in the hell does bad traffic existing year-round have to do with you seeing some perjorative-WFH's walking around that one time you visited (side question: how the hell do can you tell from people walking that they work-from-home? Do they do a funny WFH strut announcing their presence?)

Are you going to address any of that with facts, or is this more trollolol?
 
You're changing the subject...again. You said the traffic was really not a year-round problem.

And it's not. I don't know how else to put it if you are just going to completely ignore what I am saying.

Serious question, have you ever been to the Cape outside of the Summer?
 
And it's not. I don't know how else to put it if you are just going to completely ignore what I am saying.
Everything you're saying should be ignored, because you absolutely double-down refuse to substantiate it with any facts other than your intensely personal vibes. That, and your shiftiness once you get called out on it with actual facts/citations/data, is such a longstanding chronic bad posting behavior we can see it coming from a mile away on the boards.
 
because you absolutely double-down refuse to substantiate it with any facts

Personal anecdotes aren't good enough for ya? If not, then I have no idea what else to say.

You can tell the WFHers by their age of course.

IIRC, it was Harwich that held the "OMG depopulation" meeting. I think it was in 2018 or so.
 
Can you understand why taking days to travel to and from the Cape by car or truck might be a non-starter?
Can you please understand what I'm actually trying to argue here, and who I'm disagreeing with? This is all because Tallguy said we should just fill in the Canal; a proposal which we can all agree is never going to happen.

I'm not saying we should do this! I'm saying that filling in the Canal is an awful idea, and that if we're eliminating it as a navigable waterway the best approach is to just build shorter bridges, not fill it in. I even mention getting Congress involved because it's obvious that the ACOE isn't going to let drawbridges or low bridges fly here. Where in my post do you see that I'm actually calling for drawbridges to be constructed over the Canal? Is it the part where I say that other drawbridges exist? Or the part where I ask a hypothetical about them? Or is it the part where I repeat for the tenth time that I'm flabbergasted at the fact people think that filling in the Canal and just building a bridge are exactly the same in terms of political capital?

I don't know how many times I can repeat that I understand how navigable waterways work.
 

Unlike the Cape I haven't spent any time there. It could very easily be that Portland's growth is more about WFH than retirement.

I'll tell ya what my beef is with this bridge. It's just yet another example that the Powers that Be have little interest in doing what it's going to take to keep College Grads here (and Corpos to hire them) while wasting money on vanity projects. And the Grads are the future of Boston. They need to be focusing on the Inner Core.
 
Unlike the Cape I haven't spent any time there. It could very easily be that Portland's growth is more about WFH than retirement.
  1. You can do this thing called data analysis wherein it's possible to determine trends even if you haven't personally seen them in action.
  2. Although personal observation can be helpful, it is in no means sufficient to understanding what is actually happening.
I'll tell ya what my beef is with this bridge. It's just yet another example that the Powers that Be have little interest in doing what it's going to take to keep College Grads here (and Corpos to hire them) while wasting money on vanity projects. And the Grads are the future of Boston. They need to be focusing on the Inner Core.
This position you've staked out is based on having visited the Cape last March? See point 2 above, for why that isn't particularly useful. But let's pretend that you also took a deep dive into the data and could demonstrate that your claims are correct about population decline on the Cape, WFH waning, and all the rest. Are you actually arguing that the Commonwealth should simply abandon the 230,000 year round residents? o_O
 
Meanwhile the Bike Trail replacement of the Falmouth Branch saga continues with breathtaking ignorance (especially the follow-up op-ed)!

The Bourne Enterprise​

Sen Moran Wins Senate Approval To Fund New Rail Spur To Military Base​

PROJECT WOULD PROVIDE RAIL-TO-TRAIL SOLUTION​

  • By NOELLE ANNONEN
  • Jul 18, 2024
ENTERPRISE FILE PHOTOGRAPH/GILDA GEISTSusan MoranState Senator Susan Moran
Last week, an amendment aimed at kickstarting a bike path in place of the Falmouth Secondary (F2) rail line was withdrawn by its petitioner, State Senator Susan L. Moran. But the senator already had another plan in motion for how the plan, known as the Rail-To-Trail project, might go forward, and its funding was approved by the Senate.
The second amendment Sen. Moran filed set aside $8.75 million for a new railroad track connecting the Hyannis Main Line to Joint Base Cape Cod. This might free up the F2 tracks for another purpose, such as a bike path. Sen. Moran said the bike path would provide an economic advantage to communities situated near it by promoting tourism and offering people another opportunity for recreation and even commuting.
Upper Cape towns have been trying to solve a problem that has halted the Cape Cod Commission’s “Vision 88” efforts. This plan aims to connect Woods Hole to Provincetown with one single bike path. But a 6.5-mile stretch across protected wetlands and waterways between the end of the Shining Sea Bikeway in North Falmouth and the Cape Cod Canal Bikeway in Buzzards Bay has proven to be a sticking point.
Committees in Bourne hoped to solve this problem with the rail-to-trail plan, calling for the F2 tracks to be torn up and replaced with a bike path, just as the Shining Sea Bikeway was constructed. This plan is cheaper and easier to construct than its alternatives so far, since it would follow an existing railbed over marshes and creeks. But select boards in Falmouth and Mashpee voted to support the alternative in December: rail-with-trail. Even though exactly how a path running alongside the tracks might be permitted and paid for is unclear, this plan prioritizes keeping the tracks operational.
Sen. Moran, Lieutenant Governor Kim Driscoll and other lawmakers have been working on how best to support Upper Cape communities in their endeavor for several months. Tearing up the F2 line for the path was an ideal plan, Sen. Moran said, since the whole project would have cost the Commonwealth nothing. All $20 million of the funds set aside by the Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority came from the federal government, according to administrator Thomas S. Cahir. But then the Army National Guard made its stance on the topic known.
Senator Moran and other lawmakers working on the project learned that the guard does technically support Upper Cape efforts to have the bike path built, but only conditionally.
“I feel it is important to clarify that the [Army National Guard] supports the community’s bikeway initiative so long as the project does not impact the Army’s strategic rail capability and that a rail corridor provides accessibility to Camp Edwards,” Major General Gary W. Keefe wrote in a letter dated December, 2023.
The letter further clarifies that rail access is important for national defense, whether that line is the F2 track or some other alternative. In light of this, Senator Moran filed a second amendment last week: amendment 331.
Amendment 331 sets aside $8.75 million for a new rail spur connected to the Hyannis Main Line. This line runs along the northern portion of the Cape, cutting through Barnstable, Sandwich and Bourne on its way to the rail bridge. A spur, or a new track connecting to Joint Base Cape Cod, could ensure continued rail access to the base while freeing up the F2 line for other purposes, Sen. Moran said.
Cavossa Disposal currently operates a disposal service at the Upper Cape Regional Transfer station, using the F2 tracks to haul construction materials and other debris off of Cape Cod. Carl F. Cavossa Jr., who owns the company, expressed concern at plans for the bike path being laid on the F2 rail bed at government meetings throughout the last year. The rail is essential for hauling, he said.
Additionally, the line offers critical redundancy for municipal waste. Falmouth authorities have noted that the Integrated Solid Waste Management Facility in Bourne, where Falmouth’s curbside trash is taken to be placed in a landfill, will eventually run out of capacity. At that point, where and how Falmouth’s trash will be taken will become an important question in need of an answer. The rail line might offer that alternative.
The new rail spur funded by Sen. Moran’s amendment could be constructed so that it connects the Upper Cape Regional Transfer station to the Cape Cod railroad, offering an alternative to the F2 tracks.
“We’re still in preliminary conversations,” Sen. Moran said.
Ultimately, Sen. Moran said she filed both amendments to draw attention to the conversations that still need to be had. While funding is in place, exactly how and when a rail spur might be constructed still has yet to be decided. And even though funds are already in place for the rail-to-trail plans, there still needs to be an alternative railroad providing service to the base. In light of the need for that railroad access, she withdrew her first amendment and with it, the directive to the Department of Transportation to support the Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority in building the rail-to-trail.
“I filed the amendments so that the conversation could be fully had,” Sen. Moran said. “It is my job to support these communities.”
The amendment was made on an economic development package bill, which is now going to a conference committee for deliberation. Members of the state House and Senate will together craft a final report and if Sen. Moran’s amendment is included in that report, it will go back to both the House and Senate for a final vote.

Op-ed - Please Note This Article Contains Lies / Misinformation* :
*Facebook commentary!

The Bourne Enterprise, July 19, 2024

Bourne Musings: Another Setback For The Rail Trail
By Wesley J. Ewell

" Senator Susan Moran has been a strong supporter of extending the Shining Sea trail through Bourne from North Falmouth to the canal service road. When she tried to introduce legislation to move that plan forward, however, she ran into a political roadblock and had to back off. That is unfortunate, because federal money is currently available to build the trail and its construction has broad public support. It appears that two politically powerful men who benefit financially from keeping the rails in place may have built that roadblock.

Carl F. Cavossa owns Cavossa Disposal and P. Christopher Podgurski is president, CEO and COO of Massachusetts Coastal Railroad. Both of these companies receive substantial indirect subsidies from the state each year through their lease and use of the state-owned rails between the canal and the waste transfer station located south of Joint Base Cape Cod in Falmouth. The rails continue onto the base but have seen negligible use by the military over the last 75 years.

Extension of the Shining Sea trail is a key element of the Cape Cod Commission’s plan to build a pedestrian network connecting every town on the Cape. Such a network of trails would contribute tens of millions of dollars to the local economy every year. It would also offer enormous benefits in road safety, public health and public access to the shore. Keeping the rails in place for the sole benefit of two private companies blocks those potential benefits, reduces the value of abutting properties and costs taxpayers several million dollars a year in track maintenance and repair.
I would like to suggest that proponents of the rail trail work to change the public perception of their plans. That perception may have been negatively affected by the advertising blitz made by the railroad last year. First, stop referring to the proposal as a bike trail. It is a recreational trail that may actually be used by more people walking than biking. The arrogance of cyclists on public roads, and too often on the trails, has turned many people against them, and frequently appears in comments on social media by rail trail opponents.

Second, stop pretending that the F2 rail line through Bourne is an active railroad. It is not. It has not carried scheduled passenger or freight service, even during the summer, in more than 60 years. Most importantly, the railroad does not have to give up the trash hauling or the dinner train by ceding use of the rails through Bourne to North Falmouth. The transfer station can be relocated without increasing the number of trash trucks crossing the canal or using local roads. The dinner train can continue to run between Wareham and Hyannis. And the military base can be served by a new spur off the main line. That spur would be so seldom used that crossing Sandwich Road would not be an issue. Finally, I encourage Sen. Moran, Representative David Vieira, the Cape Cod Commission and other local officials to keep up the fight and get this essential public asset built.

Wesley Ewell is retired from a career in community planning, real estate development and construction project management. He lives in Bourne. "
 
...could demonstrate that your claims are correct about population decline on the Cape, WFH waning, and all the rest. Are you actually arguing that the Commonwealth should simply abandon the 230,000 year round residents? o_O
WFH is waning in Boston (+10% in-office in 2024 vs. 2023), but, if anything, the way it is waning should bolster the case for robust infrastructure to/from the Cape, not the opposite. This is because the mode in which WFH is waning is simply a few more days in the office here or there, as opposed to full RTO, which means the overall context still enables living far from work, while the need for a physical route to/from is becoming more real. Stated differently: in 2021 there was no difference between working on Mars vs. working on the Cape for many people; in 2024, there is.
 
Last edited:
As others have pointed out, the vast majority of people either drive to the cape, drive/get a ride once they arrive, or both. But as a crazy urbanist/transit person, I have to ask...what reasonable car-free trips between Boston and Cape Cod are possible today? I have a few ideas...

Fast Ferry to Provincetown: This is the most obvious and, I would assume, the most popular. The boat takes 90mins, has a bar on board, and P-Town is famously walkable once you arrive. This is the one car-free cape trip I've done, and I would definitely do it again!

Cape Flyer to Ferry to the islands: The one time I went to Nantucket, I was driven to Hyannis. But. Once on the island, there are plenty of places to stay and things to do in the main village near the docks. And the island itself is very bikeable, being smallish and flat. If I remember correctly, there is a tourist shuttle on Nantucket that's not bad either. I've never been to the Vineyard but I wonder if a similar trip to Oak Bluffs without a car is doable.

Bus to Woods Hole: Okay this one is maybe less attractive than the first two, but I would totally do this for a solo trip - maybe for a long weekend. Get on the bus in Boston, and get to Falmouth 2hrs later. Once there, it's easy to walk to an inn. And then from there, walking and renting bikes is easy. Especially with the beautiful bike path nearby.

Are there any others?
 
Last edited:
I also think Cape Cod presents a lot of challenges for transit, and sadly it doesn't seem feasible to provide the kind of local service that's frequent enough, fast enough, and wide-spread enough to allow people to visit most parts of the cape without a car. So I would challenge folks here to think about what specific trips they would like to see targeted, and how that could reasonably be done. For example, MA burying the hatchet with the Army Corps and getting more Cape Flyer trips in the summer. Or seeing more transit-oriented development in Hyannis.

The other interesting thing to think about is, do we have enough bus service to the cape today, that connects the region with the places people are coming from?

Just some food for thought!
 
MV is eminently bikeable; I've gone there with just bikes a few times (though it's been a few decades). It's hillier than Nantucket, but many of the roads have separate bike paths next to them. Oak Bluffs to Edgartown is a very pretty ride.
 

Back
Top