bigeman312
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 2,163
- Reaction score
- 1,764
General Electric HQ (Necco Buildings Reno) | 5 Necco Street | Fort Point
- Thread starter stick n move
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
It is time to start taking surface lanes from cars (particularly parked ones) and devoting them to HOVs, bus priority/preemption and bikes.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2012
- Messages
- 5,078
- Reaction score
- 1,652
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
I agree. Let's find a nice deep well of political capital to do that with. Maybe try getting the bus lanes we already have enforced before restriping Congress Street and having a car commuter revolt on our hands.
I agree. Let's find a nice deep well of political capital to do that with. Maybe try getting the bus lanes we already have enforced before restriping Congress Street and having a car commuter revolt on our hands.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2012
- Messages
- 5,078
- Reaction score
- 1,652
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Just add express to Seaport bus routes? Seems so obvious that they should have done it years ago.
Just add express to Seaport bus routes? Seems so obvious that they should have done it years ago.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Where's TheRifleman? Dropping 10 new buildings like GE on the Seaport is going to drop 10,000 new employees on the Seaport...a lot like a Bruins game every rush hour, except there's no CR/GL/OL to move it.
Think the traffic is bad and the commutes are slow now? Wait til these buildings are actually occupied! As they strangle on their own commutes, businesses are *not* going to demand more lane-miles of surface parking, they are going to demand more people-per-lane-mile-hour and that means bus/bike lanes.
We're talking about this in GE's thread (it is a little unfair but) because they represent yet another straw on the camel's back. Congestion build non-linearly. At some point there's going to be 1 new marginal office building that breaks Innovation District surface grid. When that happens, they're going to have to take lanes from SOVs.
Folks thinking they can drive and park on street are going to break the city. So take a faster moving bus to get there. Surface parking is diametrically opposed to mobility
Car commuters, almost by definition, don't live/vote in the City. The revolt within downtown offices is going to be from *everyone* who demands relief to the pending Seaport gridlock. I'm already hearing it from anyone I know who works there "normal hours"
Where's TheRifleman? Dropping 10 new buildings like GE on the Seaport is going to drop 10,000 new employees on the Seaport...a lot like a Bruins game every rush hour, except there's no CR/GL/OL to move it.
Think the traffic is bad and the commutes are slow now? Wait til these buildings are actually occupied! As they strangle on their own commutes, businesses are *not* going to demand more lane-miles of surface parking, they are going to demand more people-per-lane-mile-hour and that means bus/bike lanes.
We're talking about this in GE's thread (it is a little unfair but) because they represent yet another straw on the camel's back. Congestion build non-linearly. At some point there's going to be 1 new marginal office building that breaks Innovation District surface grid. When that happens, they're going to have to take lanes from SOVs.
Last edited:
SeamusMcFly
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2008
- Messages
- 2,050
- Reaction score
- 110
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
It's funny. On other threads folks champion on street parking as a buffer to pedestrians and bikers from traffic making it a better urban experience. On street parking also deals with transients better as they are at times meters vs. all day work parkers. Which of course are the folks we want on mass transit anyways.
Now on this thread, on street parking is going to kill the whole area. Which is it? Make up your minds.
It's funny. On other threads folks champion on street parking as a buffer to pedestrians and bikers from traffic making it a better urban experience. On street parking also deals with transients better as they are at times meters vs. all day work parkers. Which of course are the folks we want on mass transit anyways.
Now on this thread, on street parking is going to kill the whole area. Which is it? Make up your minds.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
People champion buffered bike lanes, and accept buffers made of just about anything (trees, concrete, pylons, or, yes, cars). But that's where on-street parking is assumed to be acceptable/needed. In those threads it is usually a question of asking that the bike lane be moved from the driver's side of a line of cars to the passenger's side (the sidewalk side). It is done there as a way of pointing out that bike lane can work on either side of a line of cars (without using "war on cars" political capital), but that the protected side is better-- not that the line of cars is preferred.
Take away the parking so that it can be better replaced with frequent, free-flowing, all-day bus and bike alternatives that serve both commuters and transients. Clear?
You need to re-read those more carefully or come up with better joke material.
People champion buffered bike lanes, and accept buffers made of just about anything (trees, concrete, pylons, or, yes, cars). But that's where on-street parking is assumed to be acceptable/needed. In those threads it is usually a question of asking that the bike lane be moved from the driver's side of a line of cars to the passenger's side (the sidewalk side). It is done there as a way of pointing out that bike lane can work on either side of a line of cars (without using "war on cars" political capital), but that the protected side is better-- not that the line of cars is preferred.
There's no conflict here either. This is the "war on cars" part of increasing the capacity of our surface streets, first by going after parked cars and later by going after moving cars. Both are huge space hogs, but immobile cars are particularly bad at moving people.
Take away the parking so that it can be better replaced with frequent, free-flowing, all-day bus and bike alternatives that serve both commuters and transients. Clear?
WarpedReality
New member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2013
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 40
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
According to the brochure sent to GE, water transportation was a big part of the pitch. In particular, there seems to be a proposal for a new ferry running from Lovejoy wharf. I suspect this is the plan to get people from North Station to the Innovation District. Some of the proposed parcels highlight the possibility of an on site ferry terminal.
According to the brochure sent to GE, water transportation was a big part of the pitch. In particular, there seems to be a proposal for a new ferry running from Lovejoy wharf. I suspect this is the plan to get people from North Station to the Innovation District. Some of the proposed parcels highlight the possibility of an on site ferry terminal.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
A Lovejoy ferry is worth a try but it is so hard/unusual to do ferries right.
1) docks are half as walkable as land stations for the axiomatic reason that half of the station catchment is in the water
2) ferries are fuel hogs and generally expensive
3) they have long dwell times (slow to dock, slow to load, slow to disgorge)
4) while uncongested they don't move particularly fast
5) being point to point, they can't accumulate network connections. They dangle. And most connections are not at the waters edge (involve ~2 blocks outside)
A Lovejoy ferry is worth a try but it is so hard/unusual to do ferries right.
1) docks are half as walkable as land stations for the axiomatic reason that half of the station catchment is in the water
2) ferries are fuel hogs and generally expensive
3) they have long dwell times (slow to dock, slow to load, slow to disgorge)
4) while uncongested they don't move particularly fast
5) being point to point, they can't accumulate network connections. They dangle. And most connections are not at the waters edge (involve ~2 blocks outside)
TheRifleman
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 4,431
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Sorry Arlington I gave up with common sense thinking.
I still think the casino will bring this area traffic problems onto a new level.
Traffic is getting worse everywhere. Its a major problem in this state:
I'm not Republican I actually can't stand those corporate scumbags.
But the Democrats are in serious trouble. If you notice these people are like parasites and suck the life out of the city: See Detriot & Chicago as an example.
The Democrat thinking is in big trouble the states that the continue to hold are California, Illinois, NJ (Which are financially broke) along with MASS.
They are actually losing clout in every other state. I believe most states will become Republican thinking so called (conservative) since people want commonsense type thinking, balance budgets.
I'm just praying Boston doesn't turn into LA traffic scenario.
I would like see a major overhaul with Transit/MBTA/Masshighway
Bring MIT engineers to help development ideas something 21th century for transportation in our city.
Flying cars might be here sooner rather than later.
Sorry Arlington I gave up with common sense thinking.
I still think the casino will bring this area traffic problems onto a new level.
Traffic is getting worse everywhere. Its a major problem in this state:
I'm not Republican I actually can't stand those corporate scumbags.
But the Democrats are in serious trouble. If you notice these people are like parasites and suck the life out of the city: See Detriot & Chicago as an example.
The Democrat thinking is in big trouble the states that the continue to hold are California, Illinois, NJ (Which are financially broke) along with MASS.
They are actually losing clout in every other state. I believe most states will become Republican thinking so called (conservative) since people want commonsense type thinking, balance budgets.
I'm just praying Boston doesn't turn into LA traffic scenario.
I would like see a major overhaul with Transit/MBTA/Masshighway
Bring MIT engineers to help development ideas something 21th century for transportation in our city.
Flying cars might be here sooner rather than later.
whighlander
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2006
- Messages
- 7,812
- Reaction score
- 647
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Arlington -- You need to stop slurping ??? through that straw
Not everyone who is a transient visitor is a suitable candidate for either a bike or a bus. Indeed, I would suspect that the % is nearly insignificant. There are likely to be more walk-up visitors, including those people arriving by Uber or cab, than people who bike or take a bus to most venues in the district.
Some transient visitors can be accommodated in a parking garage, but for many the use of a meter on the street is ideal -- although the rates and maximum duration of parking should be set to discourage long-time usage
Arlington -- You need to stop slurping ??? through that straw
Not everyone who is a transient visitor is a suitable candidate for either a bike or a bus. Indeed, I would suspect that the % is nearly insignificant. There are likely to be more walk-up visitors, including those people arriving by Uber or cab, than people who bike or take a bus to most venues in the district.
Some transient visitors can be accommodated in a parking garage, but for many the use of a meter on the street is ideal -- although the rates and maximum duration of parking should be set to discourage long-time usage
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Private cars parked at curbside is the absolute stupidest use of street capacity. It is utterly indefensible and any pricing/maket mechanism for allocating lane-feet would quickly demonstrate this.
Save the curb space for STOPS not standing and definitely not parking. Quick high value stops (Taxi/Limo/Uber and delivery) and high volume (bus). Particularly at rush hour: how can a line of 10 parked transient visitors possibly be worth more than moving buses carrying 50 commuters (each). Any rational pricing /allocation method would quickly see parking kicked from the curb.
This is hard to picture 'cuz the Seaport was once acres of surface parking rimmed by lane-miles of meter parking. If it is staionary we have to stack it tall. Only moving parts should be allowed to use our very rare, very precious "not stacked" street. And even then, maybe it's time for double decker buses--a nice way for a new Seaport-to-transit-hubs route to call attention to itself.
Private cars parked at curbside is the absolute stupidest use of street capacity. It is utterly indefensible and any pricing/maket mechanism for allocating lane-feet would quickly demonstrate this.
Save the curb space for STOPS not standing and definitely not parking. Quick high value stops (Taxi/Limo/Uber and delivery) and high volume (bus). Particularly at rush hour: how can a line of 10 parked transient visitors possibly be worth more than moving buses carrying 50 commuters (each). Any rational pricing /allocation method would quickly see parking kicked from the curb.
This is hard to picture 'cuz the Seaport was once acres of surface parking rimmed by lane-miles of meter parking. If it is staionary we have to stack it tall. Only moving parts should be allowed to use our very rare, very precious "not stacked" street. And even then, maybe it's time for double decker buses--a nice way for a new Seaport-to-transit-hubs route to call attention to itself.
Last edited:
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Such a terrible argument. Should we go ahead and eliminate all street parking in the back bay? What about Fenway? Maybe the whole city should eliminate street parking.
The fact is, its extremely unrealistic. The city makes millions off of meters and more off of parking enforcement. On the other hand, the MBTA is going broke and can't even function properly at its current level.
Suburban people are not going to hop on the commuter rail then get on a bus to go to dinner in Fort Point. They are going to drive. Option one is 4 hour street paking. Other options are valet or garage. Let's just be realistic with public transportation pipe dreams.
Such a terrible argument. Should we go ahead and eliminate all street parking in the back bay? What about Fenway? Maybe the whole city should eliminate street parking.
The fact is, its extremely unrealistic. The city makes millions off of meters and more off of parking enforcement. On the other hand, the MBTA is going broke and can't even function properly at its current level.
Suburban people are not going to hop on the commuter rail then get on a bus to go to dinner in Fort Point. They are going to drive. Option one is 4 hour street paking. Other options are valet or garage. Let's just be realistic with public transportation pipe dreams.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,308
- Reaction score
- 2,636
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
There is nothing wrong with the suburbanites getting in their cars and driving into the city for dinner, etc. They just need to expect to pay real market-based parking rates for the extremely valuable privilege of parking their car in the dense urban center.
There is nothing wrong with the suburbanites getting in their cars and driving into the city for dinner, etc. They just need to expect to pay real market-based parking rates for the extremely valuable privilege of parking their car in the dense urban center.
whighlander
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2006
- Messages
- 7,812
- Reaction score
- 647
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Arlington -- there needs to be a judicious allocation of the scarce resource of the curb. Yes, there is a need for fixed stops for buses as well as taxi / Uber dropoffs / pickups. However, on a typical block of a typical commercial street e.g. Newbury St., you need to have accommodation for handicap plates as well as the person [from the suburbs or just the other side of the city] making a quick stop for an ice cream, on a hot day, or some other quick purchase. Of course the pricing of the meter has to be appropriate to encourage rapid turnover.
Indeed the easiest way to discourage retailers from staying on a street is to eliminate on-street parking. If the person driving by, doesn't see a place to park for that quick errand -- they wont stop, and eventually the retailer will go for lack of customers.
On major arterials, of course, you don't allow parking during rush hour -- that is easily taken care of by meters that don't accept payment say from 3 to 6 PM or 6 to 9 AM depending on flow directions.
Arlington -- there needs to be a judicious allocation of the scarce resource of the curb. Yes, there is a need for fixed stops for buses as well as taxi / Uber dropoffs / pickups. However, on a typical block of a typical commercial street e.g. Newbury St., you need to have accommodation for handicap plates as well as the person [from the suburbs or just the other side of the city] making a quick stop for an ice cream, on a hot day, or some other quick purchase. Of course the pricing of the meter has to be appropriate to encourage rapid turnover.
Indeed the easiest way to discourage retailers from staying on a street is to eliminate on-street parking. If the person driving by, doesn't see a place to park for that quick errand -- they wont stop, and eventually the retailer will go for lack of customers.
On major arterials, of course, you don't allow parking during rush hour -- that is easily taken care of by meters that don't accept payment say from 3 to 6 PM or 6 to 9 AM depending on flow directions.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
And yet even then the argument didn't hold: the only study I'm aware of was by William Whyte who observed actual turnover and followed people as they left their cars. It showed that a big slice of the retailer's trash talk on this subject was because street spots were being used by shop owners and employees, not a commercially-critical % of customers. (and these non-customer parkers would repeatedly re-feed the meter to defeat then-available technology for encouraging "shopping" turnover)
Retailers call it "foot traffic" for a reason and in dense Central Business District settings are under no illusion that anyone drives to their stores. There is no such thing as popping to any CBD by car to buy an ice cream cone, nor should their be. Nor is any retailer going to locate in the Seaport for anything other than office-worker traffic which is entirely accessed by foot.
[Newberry street is an edge case, but arguably, as a neighborhood of brownstones, does not have the same immediate density anywhere close to the ~10stories+ everywhere Seaport will have. I'd also argue that the even Newberry no longer gets/needs the drove-from-the-burbs traffic because of traffic (not parking) so parking is probably bad for the real shopper's modes: Uber & Foot)]
Sure, I'll give you a spot for any limited specific use you can name: handicapped, delivery, ride pickup/drop, bus, and any flowing use you can name (bike, bus, or unrestricted). But this "hey, you never know" kinda parking is unsupportable, and the reality is that spontaneous car trips are a suburban thing, not a CBD/Seaport thing.
To the extent that these parkers are not employees, they are people doing trips that could have been handled on the 77 or 86 or 96 bus. Same is going to be true in the Seaport. Thousands of delay-minutes are being imposed on hudreds or thousands of street-travelers for the sake of saving a few tens of parkers few tens of minutes. That's how you know it is a market failure. Ain't no way those few parkers would outbid those hundreds of travelers in any kind of efficent market for lane-foot-minutes.
Its more likely that stores would profit from commuters whose commutes were smoother/faster/less-stressed than from a literal handful who might pop in or out of spots.
Your thinking is straight outta the 1970s--a time when there were half as many registered vehciles are there are today. [Or you're picturing Lexington Center (Centre?) as if its somehow analogous to the Seaport]
And yet even then the argument didn't hold: the only study I'm aware of was by William Whyte who observed actual turnover and followed people as they left their cars. It showed that a big slice of the retailer's trash talk on this subject was because street spots were being used by shop owners and employees, not a commercially-critical % of customers. (and these non-customer parkers would repeatedly re-feed the meter to defeat then-available technology for encouraging "shopping" turnover)
Retailers call it "foot traffic" for a reason and in dense Central Business District settings are under no illusion that anyone drives to their stores. There is no such thing as popping to any CBD by car to buy an ice cream cone, nor should their be. Nor is any retailer going to locate in the Seaport for anything other than office-worker traffic which is entirely accessed by foot.
[Newberry street is an edge case, but arguably, as a neighborhood of brownstones, does not have the same immediate density anywhere close to the ~10stories+ everywhere Seaport will have. I'd also argue that the even Newberry no longer gets/needs the drove-from-the-burbs traffic because of traffic (not parking) so parking is probably bad for the real shopper's modes: Uber & Foot)]
Sure, I'll give you a spot for any limited specific use you can name: handicapped, delivery, ride pickup/drop, bus, and any flowing use you can name (bike, bus, or unrestricted). But this "hey, you never know" kinda parking is unsupportable, and the reality is that spontaneous car trips are a suburban thing, not a CBD/Seaport thing.
All you have to do is look at Mass Ave (a major arterial) through Porter Sq at rush hour to say that, as "obvious" as it should be to remove about 10 parking spots through the pinch points (from Roseland/Lesley U to WaldenSt/Henderson Carriage), somehow we haven't managed to do so. Those 10 spots "convenience" probably, at best, 40 trips during a 180 minute rush hour, yet clog a key bus route that 's probably handling 800 people (call it 800 delay minutes) and inconvenience at least 50 "local" trips that start/end at Porter.
To the extent that these parkers are not employees, they are people doing trips that could have been handled on the 77 or 86 or 96 bus. Same is going to be true in the Seaport. Thousands of delay-minutes are being imposed on hudreds or thousands of street-travelers for the sake of saving a few tens of parkers few tens of minutes. That's how you know it is a market failure. Ain't no way those few parkers would outbid those hundreds of travelers in any kind of efficent market for lane-foot-minutes.
Its more likely that stores would profit from commuters whose commutes were smoother/faster/less-stressed than from a literal handful who might pop in or out of spots.
Last edited:
whighlander
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2006
- Messages
- 7,812
- Reaction score
- 647
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
Arlington -- Ultimately its all supply and demand and price and value -- if you come to the Seaport for a fancy dinner and plunk down $100 for two -- well then a garage or a vallet makes economic sense. However, consider that there are people who work in the Financial District and have garage parking -- they may want to drive to the Seaport for lunch and only spend $15 -- that might not be consistent with a $20 parking tab in a garage or for a vallet -- however -- $1.00 for a meter is just right
I'll give you your learned study by Whyte -- ok -- I'm sure that there are plenty of other studies -- what I am reporting is my personal experience with on-street parking
Primary observation: There never seems to be any available when the businesses are open -- someone is either parked, parking or rarely leaving with someone else ready to park or they are "Double Parked" -- this should indicate that there is a considerable demand
Secondary observation -- on days when there is no parking enforcement such as on a Sunday or holiday, but there is large demand such as some downtown event -- people park everywhere except in front of a fire hydrant
And while you will say that Mass Ave in Arlington Heights is not CBD or urban -- the 2hr parking spaces [not metered by the way] are always in demand in front of stores such as Wanamaker's Hardware where people truly do pop in for a minute or two
Arlington -- Ultimately its all supply and demand and price and value -- if you come to the Seaport for a fancy dinner and plunk down $100 for two -- well then a garage or a vallet makes economic sense. However, consider that there are people who work in the Financial District and have garage parking -- they may want to drive to the Seaport for lunch and only spend $15 -- that might not be consistent with a $20 parking tab in a garage or for a vallet -- however -- $1.00 for a meter is just right
I'll give you your learned study by Whyte -- ok -- I'm sure that there are plenty of other studies -- what I am reporting is my personal experience with on-street parking
Primary observation: There never seems to be any available when the businesses are open -- someone is either parked, parking or rarely leaving with someone else ready to park or they are "Double Parked" -- this should indicate that there is a considerable demand
Secondary observation -- on days when there is no parking enforcement such as on a Sunday or holiday, but there is large demand such as some downtown event -- people park everywhere except in front of a fire hydrant
And while you will say that Mass Ave in Arlington Heights is not CBD or urban -- the 2hr parking spaces [not metered by the way] are always in demand in front of stores such as Wanamaker's Hardware where people truly do pop in for a minute or two
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,700
Re: General Electric HQ | TBD | Innovation District
That the buildings get taller than walkup (as in the Seaport CBD) is the tipoff that real markets judge that the land is supremely valuable there--far too valuable to park on, whether the spot is privately owned or public. Private owners are smart enough to switch from low value surface parking to a better/higher use and so should the plublic owners of the street.
To complement those high-value uses in high-density buildings you need a high-density transportation system which maximizes the flow in the street. First eliminate the parking, then, if throughput is still too low (strangling the tall stuff at its base) then you go after the SOVs.
What's criminal malpractice here is that the Seaport is/was planned from scratch but they never planned for dense on-street flows, and wrongly assumed that the Silver Line would get up to speed (the Silver Line looked crazy over-built when it was only Fidelity out there on the ferry pier, but a planner should have known better)
Arlington Heights has live-over-the-store type densities: 1, 2, and 3 stories tall. Like Newberry St and Lexington Centre [sic]. Your model can/does work in a "main street" district. It simply does not work once the surrounding buildings get taller than "walk up".
That the buildings get taller than walkup (as in the Seaport CBD) is the tipoff that real markets judge that the land is supremely valuable there--far too valuable to park on, whether the spot is privately owned or public. Private owners are smart enough to switch from low value surface parking to a better/higher use and so should the plublic owners of the street.
To complement those high-value uses in high-density buildings you need a high-density transportation system which maximizes the flow in the street. First eliminate the parking, then, if throughput is still too low (strangling the tall stuff at its base) then you go after the SOVs.
What's criminal malpractice here is that the Seaport is/was planned from scratch but they never planned for dense on-street flows, and wrongly assumed that the Silver Line would get up to speed (the Silver Line looked crazy over-built when it was only Fidelity out there on the ferry pier, but a planner should have known better)
Those people are *not* going to retrieve their car from their safe FiDi garage to drive to the Seaport to circle the block. Terrible use of their time. They will walk to the curb of their office and take an Uber/taxi--and expense it or not care its costs--and that trip will be sped if there's extra lanes flowing. Speed of movement is the aim. Parking is either irrelevant or harmful.
Last edited: