MA Casino Developments

The only thing I envision: Is Gridlock Traffic:
99
93 North & South
Sullivan Square
Wellington & Assembly Square.
There is no Solution for the congestion of the transit;
Its horrible now on Morning, day and night:

I'm not sure how they can make this better: This will affect everybody going in and out of the city.

Please enlighten me as our traffic scenario gets worse and worse by day without a billion dollar casino.

Possibly one of the most idiotic developments next to a city that has lack of infrastructure going in & out of the city 5 mins away.

Thank the Stupid Democrats for legalizing Gambling in the state.
 
^^^ I'm surprised that nobody's brought up the traffic issue sooner. Was it overlooked?
 
No but off peak a lot of those roads aren't all that bad (I'm not saying traffic is good but it doesn't seem paralyzing) and most people who go to/ work at a casino are not traveling during peak hours so I don't think it was considered to be a major issue. Also Wynn is paying for more orange line service off peak which should help some.
 
chmeeee said:
^^^ I'm surprised that nobody's brought up the traffic issue sooner. Was it overlooked?
Click to expand...

original_40269972.jpg
 
chmeeee said:
^^^ I'm surprised that nobody's brought up the traffic issue sooner. Was it overlooked?
Click to expand...

Essentially, yes. The EIS is a marvelous slate of hand that uses deceptive and dishonest methods to claim that the traffic impacts will be minimal. They use static traffic models rather than more appropriate dynamic models which take into consideration things like one intersection backing up into another. Those static models assume a linear relationship between traffic volumes and speeds, which does not take into effect highly nonlinear effects. Such models are not microscopic - they do not consider the presence of different vehicle types with different sizes, speeds, and accelerations. They use VISSIM - a high quality traffic simulation software - and then use it on one intersection at time rather than on whole areas at a time as it is designed for. They failed to use an actual regional model to determine real demand and what corridors that demand will take. They're planning to put 1,700 cars per hour through the Sullivan Square tunnel - which won't be there when the casino opens.

That is not merely flawed, and it is not merely a poor EIS. If this was a transit project, that EIS would get laughed out of the FTA funding process. Laugh all you want at Rifleman, but there's some big minds saying the exact same thing. Look at what Fred Salvucci is saying (or check out his comments on the EIS. He's the guy who created the part of the Big Dig that actually worked well; he might know a thing or two about traffic.

This is what Mikel Murga - MIT professor, "26 years of consulting in transportation, traffic and land use impacts", one of the top guys for traffic impacts anywhere, had to say:
I conclude that the assessment of traffic impacts in the SSFEIR is incomplete and does not provide a realistic, state-of-the-art depiction of traffic impacts as, in my experience, is often required for projects of this significance to the regional transportation system.

In my opinion, given the existing traffic conditions, and the multi-modal accessibility foreseen for the Casino, as described in the report, a properly calibrated 4-Step Demand Model of the Greater Boston Area, such as the one developed by CTPS (a multi-modal model which includes rail and bus services, parking restrictions, and automobile traffic) is an essential pre-requisite to estimate how potential patrons might choose different access modes to the Casino, depending on their home or work location, income level and time of day, among other factors.

On the other hand, the road assignments to be performed both under pre-existing conditions and under the assumption of the Casino operation for different week days and time of day, needs to be a dynamic assignment, rather than a traditional static assignment, in order to capture realistically the generation of traffic queues, bottlenecks, etc.
Click to expand...

In the EIS, they completely fail to consider real transit-based alternatives (not just a few shuttle buses and maybe a footbridge to the Orange Line). (The proposed footbridge is at least a half-mile walk from the station to the front door - and that's if Wynn pays for an east-side entrance to the station). They fail to actually consider the impacts on Everett shops for current and future needs, fancy bus turning diagrams aside. They refuse to consider any alternatives that do not add large numbers of auto trips. They fail to preserve room for the Urban Ring ROW (which would provide a transit stop right at the casino). They fail to consider enhanced bus service in Everett for the local workers they claim they will employ. They fail to scope out any alternatives whatsoever that actually feature direct public transit connections to the casino.

We can argue all day about the legality of land deals, whether this is actually good economically and socially for the region, etc etc etc. I can tell you how a lot of Wynn's promises look alarmingly similar to promises the Connecticut casinos made and failed to deliver on. But the plain and simple fact is that the EIS does not properly determine and analyze traffic impacts, and that it was carefully written to disguise that fact.
 
TheRifleman said:
The only thing I envision: Is Gridlock Traffic:
99
93 North & South
Sullivan Square
Wellington & Assembly Square.
There is no Solution for the congestion of the transit;
Its horrible now on Morning, day and night:

I'm not sure how they can make this better: This will affect everybody going in and out of the city.

Please enlighten me as our traffic scenario gets worse and worse by day without a billion dollar casino.

Possibly one of the most idiotic developments next to a city that has lack of infrastructure going in & out of the city 5 mins away.

Thank the Stupid Democrats for legalizing Gambling in the state.
Click to expand...

Slap a 3000 car garage next to Sullivan Square Station. It is idiotic that you have a major intermodal hub next to a Superhighway with no parking.
 
I'm not against Gambling I could careless about that aspect.
This overall development will be successful for Wynn and his investors.

The overall Development will be a loser for the community and the people who commute around this area along with using the daily transit.

This is a complete fuck job.
Not only that the Taxpayers will be stuck with the bill for expanded the MBTA and the Infrastructure for that development area.
 
Sorry, but the post count threw me off. From what I could remember, your previous posts have been logical. We've had a few newer people here lately that post totally late news or topics that have been discussed to death as if they are groundbreaking questions.
 
Sarcasm never works on the internet.

In all seriousness, I get that people are nervous about traffic. It's going to generate a ton of trips, I think that's a given. It's when and how they're generated that I disagree with Rifleman on. There's not going to be a ton of people zooming over to the casino in their car at peak commuting hours. And honestly, it can't really generate much if any new peak hour traffic, because there's no capacity left in which to generate those trips.

I also believe that the 9 figure mitigation spending will do far more good for our region than the traffic can do bad.
 
chmeeee said:
Sarcasm never works on the internet.

In all seriousness, I get that people are nervous about traffic. It's going to generate a ton of trips, I think that's a given. It's when and how they're generated that I disagree with Rifleman on. There's not going to be a ton of people zooming over to the casino in their car at peak commuting hours. And honestly, it can't really generate much if any new peak hour traffic, because there's no capacity left in which to generate those trips.

I also believe that the 9 figure mitigation spending will do far more good for our region than the traffic can do bad.
Click to expand...

The traffic in the area is a nightmare already.
Now factor in a 24 Hour casino with nightlife along with world-class A list entertainers.
I finally disagree with F-Line for Dudley as he claims if they make a couple of adjustments like the casino on off ramp:
Along with fixing Sullivan Square route: Possibly adding another lane on 99 we will have traffic issue but with those adjustments will make it bearable.

I actually see a lot of issues on 93

I just don't agree at this point. This is not an easy fix with out pumping 1 billion dollars in infrastructure & MBTA adjustments:

The footbridge scenario really should be sometype of SKYRAIL going from Wellington to the Casino.
 
chmeeee said:
There's not going to be a ton of people zooming over to the casino in their car at peak commuting hours. And honestly, it can't really generate much if any new peak hour traffic, because there's no capacity left in which to generate those trips.
Click to expand...


To your first point: there are two distinct populations that will go to the casino. The first is those for whom it is a tourist destination; they are indeed likely to travel off-peak. However, there are also locals who will wish to go out to eat / to gamble / to dance / to see a show after work - and they will indeed be traveling from their workplaces to the casino at rush hour.

To your second: you are correct, there is very little additional capacity available. However, that does not always deter people from seeking to use very crowded facilities, even for optional trips. There are also two nonlinear factors with traffic that come into play here. The first is that near capacity, the marginal cost of additional autos is much higher. A freeway lane can generally support about 2000 autos per hour. An additional 50 autos at 500 or even 1500 per hour has relatively little effect; an additional 50 at 1900 per hour will often slow the whole thing from 30mph to 2 mph. The second is that upstream effects can propagate very quickly and cause significant delays in areas rather far from the additional usage. If Sullivan Square gridlocks from the extra traffic (and don't forget that Wynn is relying on the tunnel which the city has been planning to close), that can clog the 93 offramp, which ripples back on 93 NB, which screws up the South Bay interchange, and suddenly Joe Schmo from Natick trying to make his Thursday night flight at Logan finds himself in standstill traffic on the Pike.

That's not just paranoia; we see that happen every day on the crowded roads of the area. An accident in Burlington on 128 will make 93NB back up in Stoneham during the morning rush. That's a near-daily event. Adding a major activity center in an auto-centric location near major crowded arterials is at best something that deserves much more detailed regional analysis than it has been given, and at worst a very, very bad idea.
 
I would guess that most locals would avoid the casino during rush hour. I would also guess that events, entertainment activities, and yes, even a dinner out at the hotel, will happen later in the evening. No one wants to get in the middle of rush hour traffic unless they absolutely have to!
 
TheRifleman said:
with nightlife along with world-class A list entertainers.
Click to expand...

Wynn has already said there will be no nightclub. I am not aware of the casino having a large concert/entertainment venue. Last I heard they were considering a theater/venue for a couple thousand at most but nothing was set in stone. That will have virtually no impact on traffic. Some people will come early for dinner and others will arrive later when the show starts. When the show ends, some will stay to gamble and/or for drinks and others will leave immediately. Let's not pretend this project has a 10,000 seat venue or anything remotely close or even nightclubs like Foxwoods and Mohegan do.
 
It's Friday night. What time do folks head to the casino, and what time does rush "hour" (a very antiquated term) end?
 
Pretty sure that is just environmental remediation/site clean up.
But it is a precursor to actual construction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top