New England Revolution Stadium | 173 Alford Street | Boston-Everett

The problem with MLS compared to the Big 4 American sports is that the league is not the highest level of competition that the sport has to offer. In fact, most would say it's not even a Top 5 league worldwide. In the NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL, the team that wins the championship is typically the best team in the world at that sport. Is the team that wins the MLS even considered a Top 50 team in the world?

Personally, I'd rather watch the best league that a sport has to offer than minor league anything. Despite the misleading name, MLS is absolutely considered a minor league on a global level.
 
“A bit of a hike” is what absolutely kills transit mode share, especially when the “hike” is one of the most unpleasant stretches of river in the country.
I really don't know what people are jumping on here. It's really obviously, demonstrably true that the further people are from a train station, the less likely they are to use it. Numbers will dwindle as distance grows, but a 1/2 mile walk is pretty common (if long) cutoff for what's considered "walkable." It's close, but I can't find a scenario where the stadium is less than a 1/2 mile walk from an orange line station. And people are less willing to do that walk if it is an unpleasant walk. I wouldn't agree that the river itself is unpleasant there, but crossing it on foot is pretty dismal. Having thousands of people trying to walk the narrow sidewalks of the Alford street bridge sounds unpleasant, especially alongside game-day traffic. The planned pedestrian bridge to Assembly would be better, but first of all, it doesn't exist yet. Second, IIRC the plans for it looked surprisingly narrow. Like, already too narrow to comfortably carry both bikes and pedestrians, and that's before adding thousands of people just getting out of a soccer game at the same time. (plus that's still a long walk). And I also agree that attitude of "It's just a bit of a hike..." is a disastrous attitude for public transit. A "hike" is a literal obstacle here, and that attitude just feels like telling people to "suck it up." That is a cheap but totally ineffective way to get people to take public transit. People with any means will drive instead. And the people who have to or choose to not drive are left with a long, crummy walk alongside all the car traffic just getting out of the game. That's a bad way to treat public transit riders.

This is an urban, transit-oriented stadium proposal.

Would a soccer stadium there in Everett be "transit oriented"? I think part of the problem with this conversation here is that is treated like a binary question, but my answer is no-ish? Partially, but not really? It's kinda far from rapid transit. The last plans I saw for a Rev's stadium said it would be a 20-25 thousand seat stadium. MBTA busses mostly hold around 50 people, so sending a few more busses or extending the silver line doesn't really cut it.

The obvious comparison is you could go look at the transit plan for the White Stadium renovation. That's similarly far from orange line stations, has similar nearby bus connections, and holds only 11,000 people. There, transit access wasn't considered nearly adequate, and so they came up with pretty extensive game-day plans. Their plans involve keeping cars away entirely, all parking is done at satellite lots, and a fleet of shuttle busses would move people to/from parking, Orange Line, and Commuter trains. It seems workable because they're keeping cars away, and the shuttles would largely go down (relatively) low traffic streets. A possible Rev's stadium, by contrast, would need to handle twice as many people. You would need a lot more shuttle busses than the White Stadium plan, but that stretch to Sullivan is always really packed in my experience, even without a game going on. That hurts any shuttle plan. Also, I would support not allowing any parking whatsoever at the proposed Rev's stadium, but I think that's unlikely. So even if a small fraction of fans drive and park at the Rev's stadium, that a couple thousand more cars getting on that road at the same time, which is a traffic jam, and which also hurts any bus/shuttle plans. And if people are going be stuck in traffic even when they chose to take public transportation, then lots of people will opt to drive instead.... So generally, no, this site in Everett is not inherently set up for public transportation for stadium sized crowds. I don't know what transit mode share you would need to consider this stadium "transit oriented," but maybe you could hit whatever threshold you pick with massive game-day effort. What you would actually need to do to pull it off isn't obvious to me, nor are the chances of success.
 
Reading all these comments is kind of crazy. I think the stadium would certainly kick-start the construction of the footbridge, and it could be really amazing. I know that Assembly Orange Line station would have to modified to allow for access to the river-side (East) of the station, and that's a good thing too! Having thousands of potential fans use Assembly would put pressure on the MBTA to construct access that would also enable easier access to the park along the river there. Currently, it's quite a round-about hike to get to the park. As other people have stated, Silver Line extension is also a great idea. I really don't see a problem here. As they say.........."A rising tide floats all boats." This could be the development that puts more focus on public transportation access to the entire Everett Area. I'm totally a boomer........and I think it's a great idea. LOL
 
Reading all these comments is kind of crazy. I think the stadium would certainly kick-start the construction of the footbridge, and it could be really amazing. I know that Assembly Orange Line station would have to modified to allow for access to the river-side (East) of the station, and that's a good thing too! Having thousands of potential fans use Assembly would put pressure on the MBTA to construct access that would also enable easier access to the park along the river there. Currently, it's quite a round-about hike to get to the park. As other people have stated, Silver Line extension is also a great idea. I really don't see a problem here. As they say.........."A rising tide floats all boats." This could be the development that puts more focus on public transportation access to the entire Everett Area. I'm totally a boomer........and I think it's a great idea. LOL
I forgot to add: I'm a boomer and have NO hair on my head anymore. :)
 

Globe article today. Picks up on the Commonwealth magazine opinion piece.

Backers of the stadium plan want language to open up the site included in a state supplemental budget that’s expected to emerge in the coming days, and to be passed before lawmakers wrap up formal sessions for the year in mid-November. The measure would lift restrictions on the parcel, home to a shuttered section of the Mystic power plant, so that nonindustrial uses can take place there.

Of note,
The House bill last year would have removed the Everett parcel from the DPA [Designated Port Area] while also bypassing restrictions for tidelands regulated under a law geared at ensuring public waterfront access, known as Chapter 91. While the new language is still being refined, representatives for the city say they’re not looking to avoid the Chapter 91 review this time, in part to address previous concerns raised by environmentalists, and are mainly focused on removing the site from the DPA.
 
Having thousands of potential fans use Assembly would put pressure on the MBTA to construct access that would also enable easier access to the park along the river there. Currently, it's quite a round-about hike to get to the park. As other people have stated, Silver Line extension is also a great idea. I really don't see a problem here. As they say.........."A rising tide floats all boats." This could be the development that puts more focus on public transportation access to the entire Everett Area.

You’re very very optimistic about the MBTA, its capability, its priorities, and its ability to react to increased demand in a meaningful way.

There’s no way the current Authority would react this way to a new soccer stadium being built in Everett. It can’t even keep up with construction projects and expansions that make sense based on current demand let alone future.
 
I think the aforementioned article mentions the traffic mitigation. I could be wrong? It’s been a week of WW3 anxiety attacks.
The Globe article says nothing about traffic, parking, or fan accessibility.

The Commonwealth magazine commentary (authored by the head of the Conservation Law Foundation) included this paragraph:

Since that first attempt, the Legislature has had over a year to introduce a standalone bill, hold hearings, and hear from affected communities. Those communities include not only Everett, but also Charlestown and Somerville, all of which suffer from endless gridlock on the roads that would provide stadium access: Route 99, Sullivan Square, and Rutherford Avenue. Whether by inadvertence or design, elected officials didn’t seize their chance to engage the public.

Commonwealth magazine in that same issue reported this:
State questions need for 1,687 new parking spaces at Encore
New garage part of casino's expansion across Broadway in Everett

....The Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs this week declined to approve the project’s environmental impact report. Instead, the state ordered the casino company to submit an updated version that includes “a comprehensive response” to public comments that EEA said “raise serious concerns about the level of parking proposed by the project, question the methodology used to estimate parking needs for the project change, and request further analysis and consultation to ensure that mitigation commitments are commensurate with the increase in impacts proposed.”

Link below to the State House News Service summary of the Commonwealth's disapproval. The disapproval, IMO, is relevant to any future proposal to build a soccer stadium on the site.

https://www.statehousenews.com/enco...pdf_e97dd61e-6ec2-11ee-882f-5bd415feda73.html

Link below to the 25 page pdf file with the Commonwealth's disapproval of the Environmental Impact report. Lots of numbers for the traffic engineers.

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.tow...-11ee-882f-5bd415feda73/6531998f7cfb7.pdf.pdf
 
The Commonwealth magazine commentary (authored by the head of the Conservation Law Foundation) included this paragraph:
Commonwealth Magazine said:
Since that first attempt, the Legislature has had over a year to introduce a standalone bill, hold hearings, and hear from affected communities. Those communities include not only Everett, but also Charlestown and Somerville, all of which suffer from endless gridlock on the roads that would provide stadium access: Route 99, Sullivan Square, and Rutherford Avenue. Whether by inadvertence or design, elected officials didn’t seize their chance to engage the public.
This guy is lying. I bike through Sullivan Square and on 99 fairly often during commute times. Yes, there is traffic, but it is not remotely close to being gridlocked. And it's not like soccer games would take place at the same time as commuter based congestion. The area can actually handle pretty high traffic volumes.
 
This guy is lying. I bike through Sullivan Square and on 99 fairly often during commute times. Yes, there is traffic, but it is not remotely close to being gridlocked. And it's not like soccer games would take place at the same time as commuter based congestion. The area can actually handle pretty high traffic volumes.
I live and work near Sullivan and pass through it multiple times a day/night. Yes - it is often absolutely gridlocked. If you bike through Sullivan anywhere near 4:30-6:30 pm, you have to be aware of that.
 
Someone should tell the Legislature to make sure they detail in the "change of land use" law that no NFL level football is to be played at this stadium. I wouldn't put it past the Kraft organization to use the guise of "Soccer stadium" as a backdoor to bring the Patriots up to Boston. Then the traffic really would be bad!!! Tailgate parties require cars and trucks and parking lots!

I would allow for Olympics. Then we may get the Housing village built on Gateway Center, and public transportation and pedestrian bridges that connects all the points of Wellington, Assembly, Wynn and Chelsea.
 
I am an EMT in Somerville and Everett, and in my experience, this area is fine most of the time (like normal Boston traffic), but when it is congested it is hard to get through even with lights and sirens.
 
I am an EMT in Somerville and Everett, and in my experience, this area is fine most of the time (like normal Boston traffic), but when it is congested it is hard to get through even with lights and sirens.
Precisely.
 
I live and work near Sullivan and pass through it multiple times a day/night. Yes - it is often absolutely gridlocked. If you bike through Sullivan anywhere near 4:30-6:30 pm, you have to be aware of that.
I see cars moving faster than I am biking, except for at controlled intersections. Isn't the definition of gridlock something about cars not moving at all? That's definitely not the case most of the time I ride through, which is around 8 AM and 5:45PM. I'm sure it's not fun to be in that traffic, but it seems pretty similar to traffic everywhere else in Boston.
 
I assure you actual gridlock happens consistently -- the truly awful "sweet spot" seems to be right around 6-6:30 in my experience. As per your definition, we're talking sitting in a car that is unable to move forward or laterally for minutes at a time.
 
I assure you actual gridlock happens consistently -- the truly awful "sweet spot" seems to be right around 6-6:30 in my experience. As per your definition, we're talking sitting in a car that is unable to move forward or laterally for minutes at a time.
But I’m sure the buses will speed on through
 

Back
Top