Grounding the McGrath

[Jeremi]

Why?

IT'S A JOKE

 

[StreetsblogMASS]

Transportation for America doesn't actually cite McGrath as being under threat: https://t4america.org/2025/04/29/re...nder-threat-here-is-whats-at-stake-and-where/

We dug into this a little bit for our localized version of this story:

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/04/30/house-moves-to-rescind-3-1b-for-reconnecting-communities-divided-by-highways

Basically, the "Reconnecting Communities" money comes from two separate laws. The "Bipartisan Infrastructure Law," AKA Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which got passed in 2021, authorized $1 billion over five years for a brand-new "reconnecting communities pilot program".

Then, in 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which appropriated $3.2 billion for a "Neighborhood access and equity grant program" (read the text of the law here). Even though it was a different law, this money was widely interpreted as an expansion of the Reconnecting Communities program.

In the budget proposal being debated now, the unspent money from the $3.2 billion appropriation in the Inflation Reduction Act is being targeted, but not the $1 billion authorization from the IIJA (or at least not yet).

As far as I can tell, Allston I-90 was expecting funding from the $3.2 billion "Neighborhood access and equity grant program", but McGrath was getting its funding from the smaller, original "Reconnecting Communities" funding.

The Biden admin. made three rounds of grant awards through these programs:

• The first round, in 2022, awarded $185 million. MA received only one $1.8 million grant for a study to cap I-90 in Chinatown.
• The second round came in March 2024, and awarded $3.3 billion (roughly the same amount appropriated for the "Neighborhood access and equity grant program" in the IRA). That round funded Allston I-90 and five smaller planning projects in MA.
• The third (and final?) round came in January 2025 and announced $544.6 million in funding, including McGrath Highway.

As far as I can tell (although I haven't confirmed it), the March 2024 grants are the ones currently at risk here, and the IIJA funding would remain intact.

 

[KCasiglio]

We dug into this a little bit for our localized version of this story:
https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...-reconnecting-communities-divided-by-highways

Basically, the "Reconnecting Communities" money comes from two separate laws. The "Bipartisan Infrastructure Law," AKA Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which got passed in 2021, authorized $1 billion over five years for a brand-new "reconnecting communities pilot program".

Then, in 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which appropriated $3.2 billion for a "Neighborhood access and equity grant program" (read the text of the law here). Even though it was a different law, this money was widely interpreted as an expansion of the Reconnecting Communities program.

In the budget proposal being debated now, the unspent money from the $3.2 billion appropriation in the Inflation Reduction Act is being targeted, but not the $1 billion authorization from the IIJA (or at least not yet).

As far as I can tell, Allston I-90 was expecting funding from the $3.2 billion "Neighborhood access and equity grant program", but McGrath was getting its funding from the smaller, original "Reconnecting Communities" funding.

The Biden admin. made three rounds of grant awards through these programs:

• The first round, in 2022, awarded $185 million. MA received only one $1.8 million grant for a study to cap I-90 in Chinatown.
• The second round came in March 2024, and awarded $3.3 billion (roughly the same amount appropriated for the "Neighborhood access and equity grant program" in the IRA). That round funded Allston I-90 and five smaller planning projects in MA.
• The third (and final?) round came in January 2025 and announced $544.6 million in funding, including McGrath Highway.

As far as I can tell (although I haven't confirmed it), the March 2024 grants are the ones currently at risk here, and the IIJA funding would remain intact.

Thank you for digging into this while certain other outlets are too busy with Karen Read.

 

[stick n move]

The mayor should cone off the highway tomorrow and start knocking out support columns

I know this is a joke, but if worst comes to worst and it looks like they wont have the funding to do the project, it wouldnt be a bad idea to come up with a “minimum viable option” of what is the least amount that can be done, for the cheapest, while still accomplishing the objective of removing the viaduct. There is definitely a world where they could just knock down the viaduct, add some new asphalt in a few spots, paint new lines, and install a couple signalized intersections. Then later on when funds come up it could be completed as it was intended. It wouldnt have all the new separated bike lanes and fancy stuff, but in the mean time it could prob get by, no?

 

[cubbe8]

I know this is a joke, but if worst comes to worst and it looks like they wont have the funding to do the project, it wouldnt be a bad idea to come up with a “minimum viable option” of what is the least amount that can be done, for the cheapest, while still accomplishing the objective of removing the viaduct. There is definitely a world where they could just knock down the viaduct, add some new asphalt in a few spots, paint new lines, and install a couple signalized intersections. Then later on when funds come up it could be completed as it was intended. It wouldnt have all the new separated bike lanes and fancy stuff, but in the mean time it could prob get by, no?

Honestly I’m fine with that.

 

[Longfellow]

I know this is a joke, but if worst comes to worst and it looks like they wont have the funding to do the project, it wouldnt be a bad idea to come up with a “minimum viable option” of what is the least amount that can be done, for the cheapest, while still accomplishing the objective of removing the viaduct. There is definitely a world where they could just knock down the viaduct, add some new asphalt in a few spots, paint new lines, and install a couple signalized intersections. Then later on when funds come up it could be completed as it was intended. It wouldnt have all the new separated bike lanes and fancy stuff, but in the mean time it could prob get by, no?

Dead-end the highway where it meets Broadway near 93 to cut off the traffic, and convert to local roads around the station, with no direct route from one side to the other. Somerville Ave is a beautiful street and then you get to target and you're just in hell.

This makes me realize that the GLX has sort of permanently sealed ofoff the inner belt in some ways.

 

[as02143]

Dead-end the highway where it meets Broadway near 93 to cut off the traffic, and convert to local roads around the station, with no direct route from one side to the other. Somerville Ave is a beautiful street and then you get to target and you're just in hell.

This makes me realize that the GLX has sort of permanently sealed ofoff the inner belt in some ways.

View attachment 62684

The glx didn't do that - it's been that way with all the railroads for years!

 

[The EGE]

Almost all of the Inner Belt area was nothing but rail yards and associated industry until the late 20th century. Basically this entire area:

There were a few small residential streets on the south side of Washington, but that's it. Everything else was originally Miller's River, associated swamps, and Asylum Hill. The swamps gradually got filled in for rail yards and industry. Not until the 50s and 60s, when the Boston & Maine sold off the northern part of the yards, did it see non-rail industry. BHCC was built in 1973, and the Cobble Hill Apartments around 1980. While the isolation is not a good thing, it's an area that has never had proper street connections to the surrounding area.

Interestingly, the Brickbottom area (between McGrath and the GLX) was originally residential. It was already beginning to convert to industrial when the McGrath overpass was built in the 50s, and all residential was gone by the end of the 60s.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Almost all of the Inner Belt area was nothing but rail yards and associated industry until the late 20th century. Basically this entire area:
View attachment 62730
There were a few small residential streets on the south side of Washington, but that's it. Everything else was originally Miller's River, associated swamps, and Asylum Hill. The swamps gradually got filled in for rail yards and industry. Not until the 50s and 60s, when the Boston & Maine sold off the northern part of the yards, did it see non-rail industry. BHCC was built in 1973, and the Cobble Hill Apartments around 1980. While the isolation is not a good thing, it's an area that has never had proper street connections to the surrounding area.

Interestingly, the Brickbottom area (between McGrath and the GLX) was originally residential. It was already beginning to convert to industrial when the McGrath overpass was built in the 50s, and all residential was gone by the end of the 60s.

It's one of those netherworld areas like West Cambridge (west of Alewife Brook Pkwy and north of Concord Ave). For areas like these, 75 years ago a connected street grid should have been laid out on paper and some land use planning done along with that. But instead it's just been haphazard infill.

 

[stick n move]

For areas like these, 75 years ago a connected street grid should have been laid out on paper and some land use planning done along with that. But instead it's just been haphazard infill.

This needs to be done across the entire country, everywhere. Not sure when were going to figure this out as a country. The DC suburbs should look like chicago, instead they look like raleigh.

 

[The EGE]

I would argue that the Inner Belt shouldn't be the highest priority for that. The southern half is sandwiched between two elevated rail lines and a rail yard, none of which are going away. The northern half is between an elevated rail line and a semi-active freight rail line. Street connections to the south and east are difficult to impossible. It's as good a location for light-to-medium industry as there is in the urban area, and that doesn't need as complete of a street grid.

That said, there are some improvements that can be made to connect it to other areas, especially to allow employees to reach the businesses:

 

[Charlie_mta]

I would argue that the Inner Belt shouldn't be the highest priority for that. The southern half is sandwiched between two elevated rail lines and a rail yard, none of which are going away. The northern half is between an elevated rail line and a semi-active freight rail line. Street connections to the south and east are difficult to impossible. It's as good a location for light-to-medium industry as there is in the urban area, and that doesn't need as complete of a street grid.

That said, there are some improvements that can be made to connect it to other areas, especially to allow employees to reach the businesses:

View attachment 62754

Those connections are exactly what are needed. No one expects a perfect street grid in a historically carved-up area like this, but a connected network of streets and paths that works with the man-made topography is feasible, and is what you're showing here.