Crazy Highway Pitches

Vagabond

Active Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
398
Reaction score
716
It's a "Pitch". The usage case and benefit need to be clearly defined with evidence, not "I thinks..." if
That's demonstrably a poor standard through the continual lack of reengagement after being rudely rebuffed for not doing a full engineering study. This thread has been stifled from producing innovative conversation because of the ridiculous notion that "Crazy" accckktualllyy doesn't really mean Crazy.

In fact, a crazy pitch brings up real ideas, like why are we holding back the entire chelsea creek for a tank farm that could easily have feeders farther south and still be protected?

Not getting paid, not going to write up a cost study. It's an internet forum for water-cooler transportation ideas.
 

BeyondRevenue

New member
Joined
Mar 13, 2020
Messages
79
Reaction score
118
We should start on mine now AND mandate the crap out of development on flood plains, estuaries and all affected watersheds. The layered shore plan should be a given. Really, I’m wondering why we have a highway parent thread but no global warming thread. Sub-tier lip service won’t do. We talk about waterfront development sometimes we let someone grouse a bit about the silliness of regulation regarding height, mass, etc but rarely do we talk about how rising tides will make every project less valuable from it proximity to New Venice.
I honestly think we’ll react much more expensively in 20 years time and by then we’ll be too concerned with breathable methane levels and be bitching about ill fitting OxiPax™ and considering a place in the Berkshires.
 

George_Apley

Not a Brahmin
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
5,078
Reaction score
1,637
Regarding the sniping about what's up for debate in a "crazy pitches" thread... I just updated the What is this Forum? thread:

Crazy Highway Pitches: Use this thread for road infrastructure projects and ideas that are a) not official, b) would require large-scale political advocacy and significant allocation of funds, c) fill a clear road infrastructure deficiency or gap, significantly improve existing travel, or reconfigures the existing environment, and d) are connected to reality with regards to engineering, cost, politics, and ethical questions. Be prepared for folks to dig into the pitch for feasibility/need/etc.
 

Charlie_mta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
2,344
Reaction score
1,404
That sounds pretty fair. However, one parameter is that it would take detailed engineering designs and studies, in many cases, to determine the feasibility or worth of a proposal. It's somewhat of a reach, in many cases, to dismiss ideas out of hand without design-level information.

But, as you say, any crazy highway pitch placed on here is open for discussion and critiquing.
 

George_Apley

Not a Brahmin
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
5,078
Reaction score
1,637
Always feel free to nitpick the nitpick. If you don't want nitpicks at all, go to our God Mode thread.
 

BeyondRevenue

New member
Joined
Mar 13, 2020
Messages
79
Reaction score
118
Poke holes all you want but at least acknowledge an idea without reflexively and immediately bringing an insult or dismissal. Was polio cured in a God Thread? Do you think the Golden Gate Bridge would have made it past this group? If the TVA had to make it out of here the south would still be without power.
I think we can will something into being and people push it along. When the momentum gets going nothing - not law, money, not history - can stop a good idea.
Some people think Regional Rail/NSRL should be in a god thread. I think it should already have been built a century ago.
We’ve all been trained by Business Class NY shuttle passengers to think we don’t need public investment. We have all been cowed into a defeatist mentality since the 80s. It’s not good to abuse the public into submission but it gives them more money to offshore. It’s worse when we let that abuse happen to ourselves. It’s like fiscal and regulatory Stockholm Syndrome.
 

George_Apley

Not a Brahmin
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
5,078
Reaction score
1,637
Poke holes all you want but at least acknowledge an idea without reflexively and immediately bringing an insult or dismissal. Was polio cured in a God Thread? Do you think the Golden Gate Bridge would have made it past this group? If the TVA had to make it out of here the south would still be without power.
I think we can will something into being and people push it along. When the momentum gets going nothing - not law, money, not history - can stop a good idea.
Some people think Regional Rail/NSRL should be in a god thread. I think it should already have been built a century ago.
We’ve all been trained by Business Class NY shuttle passengers to think we don’t need public investment. We have all been cowed into a defeatist mentality since the 80s. It’s not good to abuse the public into submission but it gives them more money to offshore. It’s worse when we let that abuse happen to ourselves. It’s like fiscal and regulatory Stockholm Syndrome.
I agree with all of that. Without detailed feasibility studies all we can do is discuss and debate. Keep on nitpicking.
 

Charlie_mta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
2,344
Reaction score
1,404
Here's my idea to compress Storrow Drive at the Longfellow Bridge interchange. It would require some modification to the eastern leg of the new pedestrian overpass, Green is new park area:
 

Stlin

Active Member
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
253
Reaction score
255
Here's my idea to compress Storrow Drive at the Longfellow Bridge interchange. It would require some modification to the eastern leg of the new pedestrian overpass, Green is new park area:
I like that! Although, I'd be inclined to say that if you're going to consolidate off ramps, it might actually make sense to go a little bit beyond the junction itself, and point the "northern ramps" directly at Fruit St, reversing the direction of traffic on that and N. Grove. This would eliminate the left from Cambridge St onto N Grove, which is the source of a lot of traffic and backups. I mean... Ideally, MGH parking and main dropoff would be on blossom, a relatively under used street with lots more capacity.
 

Charlie_mta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
2,344
Reaction score
1,404
I like that! Although, I'd be inclined to say that if you're going to consolidate off ramps, it might actually make sense to go a little bit beyond the junction itself, and point the "northern ramps" directly at Fruit St, reversing the direction of traffic on that and N. Grove. This would eliminate the left from Cambridge St onto N Grove, which is the source of a lot of traffic and backups. I mean... Ideally, MGH parking and main dropoff would be on blossom, a relatively under used street with lots more capacity.
Based on your feedback and Banarama's from the Red-Blue Connector thread, here is a modified version of my idea for improving the interchange on Storrow:
It would move the interchange to Fruit Street and also consolidate both directions of Storrow under one portal of Longfellow Bridge, which would require depressing Storrow Drive a bit into the ground to get necessary vertical clearance for automobiles (no trucks or buses allowed).
 

mass88

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
2,134
Reaction score
115
In looking at a photo from the On the Dot thread, the way 93 cut through that area really stood out. Bury 93 - from Columbia Road right into the Central Artery tunnels. Make the new tunnels wide enough to accomodate 5 full travel lanes in each direction with full shoulders on each side. You could even run tandem roads (think frontage) for exits to Mass Ave, the bypass road, the Pike and downtown. This would enable traffic to those areas to break away from the main highway a lot earlier than they currently do. Think of the nice development space that would be created, the Widett Circle area becomes even more attractive. This might also help with freight traffic from the port, which will hopefully only increase in the coming years.
 

Charlie_mta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
2,344
Reaction score
1,404
In looking at a photo from the On the Dot thread, the way 93 cut through that area really stood out. Bury 93 - from Columbia Road right into the Central Artery tunnels.
I like the idea but it would cost in the 10s of $billions. Also I'm concerned about tunnels in a high water table area, which this is. It might be easier to leave the highway and ramps as is and cover them with a large deck in the Widett Circle area, staring at Malden Street in the north down to Southhampton Street. Sitting on the deck would be buildings. parks and trails directly connected at the same elevation to a multi-level Widett Circle development.
 

donkeybutlers

Active Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2021
Messages
144
Reaction score
177
In looking at a photo from the On the Dot thread, the way 93 cut through that area really stood out. Bury 93 - from Columbia Road right into the Central Artery tunnels. Make the new tunnels wide enough to accomodate 5 full travel lanes in each direction with full shoulders on each side. You could even run tandem roads (think frontage) for exits to Mass Ave, the bypass road, the Pike and downtown. This would enable traffic to those areas to break away from the main highway a lot earlier than they currently do. Think of the nice development space that would be created, the Widett Circle area becomes even more attractive. This might also help with freight traffic from the port, which will hopefully only increase in the coming years.
A much better idea than building a 10 lane highway the entire length of the city, would be to start taking some of that ROW to decongest single tracked Rail. Maybe put a raised pedestrian trail/flood barrier on the other side along the water too.
 

Top