Silver Line to Chelsea

FK4 said:
This is way off topic but -- does the MBTA ever talk about a ferry from Chelsea? It would be incredibly quick and efficient if it went from long wharf or north station to some pier... the waterside is so close to downtown Chelsea, seems like a no brainer.
Click to expand...

No available parking for those that live farther away from the chelsea pier and a pier would be to be updated/renovated.
 
datadyne007 said:
As a Chelsea resident who rides public transit daily, I have a slightly different take on the potential impacts. As we all know, Chelsea is at the heart of the Nation's opioid crisis and it is no more apparent than on the buses in Chelsea. I do not think it will lead to an increase in violent/random crime on the streets in the Seaport, but I do think drugs may have a *slight* impact on two fronts: a slight increase in people under the influence in the Seaport & theft from the retail stores in the Seaport may sightly rise (given the new easy access). A *lot* of cracked out people ride the buses to & from Chelsea & I have overheard numerous people on the bus talk about stealing from stores downtown, as well as experienced people trying to sell me stolen things from stores (some with the security tags still on). Some of these people will undoubtedly end up on the SLG. I don't think these impacts will be measurable or be felt really in any way besides BPD possibly responding to more overdoses & petty theft calls in the Seaport.

It is what it is. We're in a national crisis and the Silver Line ultimately won't be to blame.
Click to expand...

That is unfortunate to hear and I, with my pessimistic hat on, worry that the negative impact will be more than *slight*. I am glad that police/security presence in the Seaport is generally fairly high, with Massport Police, patrols around the courthouse area, Fan Pier security, and State Police all being in relative vicinity.
 
I have to believe that the trend will be stop-by-stop gentrification of Chelsea with an influx of people looking for access to their jobs in the Airport or Seaport. East Boston got nice in a big hurry, and SLG gives equivalent-or-better access. Any place with good access to employment should see rents rise and low-workforce-participation populations displaced.

The opioid crisis will be pushed to neighborhoods with job access that's equally bad to what Chelsea has today, which could be just elsewhere in Chelsea/Revere/Everett/Malden/Medford. Or the fringes of other "Gateway" cities, like Lawrence & Lowell.
 
Arlington said:
I have to believe that the trend will be stop-by-stop gentrification of Chelsea with an influx of people looking for access to their jobs in the Airport or Seaport. East Boston got nice in a big hurry, and SLG gives equivalent-or-better access. Any place with good access to employment should see rents rise and low-workforce-participation populations displaced.

The opioid crisis will be pushed to neighborhoods with job access that's equally bad to what Chelsea has today, which could be just elsewhere in Chelsea/Revere/Everett/Malden/Medford. Or the fringes of other "Gateway" cities, like Lawrence & Lowell.
Click to expand...

I disagree somewhat - I think it gives great access to the Blue Line, but I am not sold it will be great access to South Station/Seaport vs just using the Blue Line now from Eastie. Being a pessimist it seems like it will be bogged down after it gets out of its row/after the Blue Line connection. Still not that bad, though, but I think most people still looking for a connection to the Seaport/South Station/Air Port will push onward down the Red Line and throughout Dorchester. Mix some real rapid transit onto the Fairmont corridor and that would be even better.
 
Arlington said:
I have to believe that the trend will be stop-by-stop gentrification of Chelsea with an influx of people looking for access to their jobs in the Airport or Seaport. East Boston got nice in a big hurry, and SLG gives equivalent-or-better access. Any place with good access to employment should see rents rise and low-workforce-participation populations displaced.

The opioid crisis will be pushed to neighborhoods with job access that's equally bad to what Chelsea has today, which could be just elsewhere in Chelsea/Revere/Everett/Malden/Medford. Or the fringes of other "Gateway" cities, like Lawrence & Lowell.
Click to expand...

The SLG stops are already gentrified in Chelsea, especially the Box District which has a glut of newly-built extremely pricey luxury apartments/lofts. SLG is an oddball in that the gentrification came first.
 
datadyne007 said:
As a Chelsea resident who rides public transit daily, I have a slightly different take on the potential impacts. As we all know, Chelsea is at the heart of the Nation's opioid crisis and it is no more apparent than on the buses in Chelsea. I do not think it will lead to an increase in violent/random crime on the streets in the Seaport, but I do think drugs may have a *slight* impact on two fronts: a slight increase in people under the influence in the Seaport & theft from the retail stores in the Seaport may sightly rise (given the new easy access). A *lot* of cracked out people ride the buses to & from Chelsea & I have overheard numerous people on the bus talk about stealing from stores downtown, as well as experienced people trying to sell me stolen things from stores (some with the security tags still on). Some of these people will undoubtedly end up on the SLG. I don't think these impacts will be measurable or be felt really in any way besides BPD possibly responding to more overdoses & petty theft calls in the Seaport.
Click to expand...

I'll counter-argue. With things as they are now, I don't think there will be any change.

There's almost no retail in the Seaport to steal from (it's all restaurants and bars), and with all the construction being modern controlled access residential high rises, there's not much potential for petty theft/amateur burglaries.

It's not much fun to be in on foot in my opinion. (which is reinforced every time I'm there on foot.) Wide streets, long blocks, pretty dead a lot of the time, very open, heavy car traffic, some absolutely brutal winds a lot of the year, and a lot of police presence with the State Police barracks and BPD. I don't know much about what makes a place attractive to drug addicts or not, but it doesn't seem very appealing.
 
millerm277 said:
There's almost no retail in the Seaport to steal from (it's all restaurants and bars), and with all the construction being modern controlled access residential high rises, there's not much potential for petty theft/amateur burglaries.
Click to expand...
Not yet, but it's coming. Some is coming online shortly in B & C and later M1 & M2 (among other parcels).
 
millerm277 said:
I'll counter-argue. With things as they are now, I don't think there will be any change.

There's almost no retail in the Seaport to steal from (it's all restaurants and bars), and with all the construction being modern controlled access residential high rises, there's not much potential for petty theft/amateur burglaries.

It's not much fun to be in on foot in my opinion. (which is reinforced every time I'm there on foot.) Wide streets, long blocks, pretty dead a lot of the time, very open, heavy car traffic, some absolutely brutal winds a lot of the year, and a lot of police presence with the State Police barracks and BPD. I don't know much about what makes a place attractive to drug addicts or not, but it doesn't seem very appealing.
Click to expand...

I take your point, but what about being able to just mill about/squat in the park areas (current and upcoming) and waterfront while high. There's also a nice fire pit that people currently like to congregate around (which has been nice so far). This is probably not a perfectly apt comparison, but there are no stores or retail right in Boston Common itself either, but I don't remember the last time I walked through without seeing at least some druggies/addicts about.


Just as a side note:
This probably makes me sound like an ass, elitist, or unsympathetic to addicts. Some may even wonder why the presence of addicts (and lets include others here such as the homeless or gang members/thugs) should bother me if they don't specifically and actively bother me, for example. I'm just saying that none of that exists in the Seaport currently. None. And I am just unapologetically saying that it feels nice to be walking around, construction noise/dust and all, in a part of the city with that perk. It just does. Doesn't hurt that there are also plenty of attractive people in the area. If wanting that to continue makes me an ass (or worse), then I may very well sincerely be one for sure.
 
You guys sound like a bunch of Belmont housewives sweating about the green line
 
CSTH said:
You guys sound like a bunch of Belmont housewives sweating about the green line
Click to expand...

That's fundamentally different. The difference is that the claims Belmont housewives make about the Green Line aren't true, whereas in Chelsea, yes, crackheads do ride the bus & I ride right next to them.
 
jl326 said:
I take your point, but what about being able to just mill about/squat in the park areas (current and upcoming) and waterfront while high. There's also a nice fire pit that people currently like to congregate around (which has been nice so far). This is probably not a perfectly apt comparison, but there are no stores or retail right in Boston Common itself either, but I don't remember the last time I walked through without seeing at least some druggies/addicts about.
Click to expand...

Obviously, it is another population, but I don't see why Chelsea is worrisome to the Seaport when the Silver Line will already get you from South Station, or with a transfer, from Boston Common. The homeless you see on the common can get to the Seaport pretty easily already. They're there because that is where there are services that try to help them. If NECHV and St. Francis move to Seaport Boulevard, you'll see a lot more homeless there.
 
Isolating low income drug and crime-prone neighborhoods by denying them good transit service is a mistake. I'd rather see improved transit service coupled with economic stimulus and drug treatment programs. These festering sores can't be isolated and kept out of sight forever.
 
jl326 said:
I take your point, but what about being able to just mill about/squat in the park areas (current and upcoming) and waterfront while high. There's also a nice fire pit that people currently like to congregate around (which has been nice so far). This is probably not a perfectly apt comparison, but there are no stores or retail right in Boston Common itself either, but I don't remember the last time I walked through without seeing at least some druggies/addicts about.


Just as a side note:
This probably makes me sound like an ass, elitist, or unsympathetic to addicts. Some may even wonder why the presence of addicts (and lets include others here such as the homeless or gang members/thugs) should bother me if they don't specifically and actively bother me, for example. I'm just saying that none of that exists in the Seaport currently. None. And I am just unapologetically saying that it feels nice to be walking around, construction noise/dust and all, in a part of the city with that perk. It just does. Doesn't hurt that there are also plenty of attractive people in the area. If wanting that to continue makes me an ass (or worse), then I may very well sincerely be one for sure.
Click to expand...

Simple answer -- there are no homeless shelters in the Seaport. The homeless and addicts tend to gather in open spaces near shelters (Boston Common Tremont/Boylston corner for example).
 
The idea that criminals take transit as a getaway option is demonstrably false.
 
Charlie_mta said:
Isolating low income drug and crime-prone neighborhoods by denying them good transit service is a mistake. I'd rather see improved transit service coupled with economic stimulus and drug treatment programs. These festering sores can't be isolated and kept out of sight forever.
Click to expand...
What he said. The solution to lack of opportunity leading to crime isn't "keep them away from jobs and opportunity", it's the direct opposite- provide cost effective transit to link potential workers with employment, which this project does.
To try and rerail this thread, a quick busway extension from the mall up second ave to Everett was included in their transit action plan and seems like an obvious win, and I hope advocacy for it ramps up with the opening of phase I so close.
 
curcuas said:
The idea that criminals take transit as a getaway option is demonstrably false.
Click to expand...

Why? Criminals are people. People walk, they bike, they drive cars, they take trains, buses, and taxis to where they want to go. Why should they be any different than everyone else that uses the MBTA for various reasons?

It seems reasonable to me that increasing transit connections between an area with high crime and low wealth and an area with low crime and high wealth would naturally lead to some criminal elements taking advantage of the new opportunities. Thats no reason not to build such connections, its simply a reason to be vigilant about those possibilities and plan accordingly.
 
Studies show little effect (Cleveland) or no effect (Denver, San Diego, Chicago) of new transit on the he occurrence or distribution of crime.
 
DominusNovus said:
Why? Criminals are people. People walk, they bike, they drive cars, they take trains, buses, and taxis to where they want to go. Why should they be any different than everyone else that uses the MBTA for various reasons?

It seems reasonable to me that increasing transit connections between an area with high crime and low wealth and an area with low crime and high wealth would naturally lead to some criminal elements taking advantage of the new opportunities. Thats no reason not to build such connections, its simply a reason to be vigilant about those possibilities and plan accordingly.
Click to expand...

The evidence shows that when people commit crimes they don't tend to be using transit if it is a major thing like a home robbery or something. As mentioned before the residences here are well protected from theft so the most likely crimes are shoplifting and the majority of shoplifting is done be bored teenagers with a small minority done by adults that regularly shoplift or robbing a stores register (less common) and in that case using transit to leave the area as mentioned above is ridiculous they would be apprehended way before they could get anywhere most likely.
 
citylover94 said:
The evidence shows that when people commit crimes they don't tend to be using transit if it is a major thing like a home robbery or something. As mentioned before the residences here are well protected from theft so the most likely crimes are shoplifting and the majority of shoplifting is done be bored teenagers with a small minority done by adults that regularly shoplift or robbing a stores register (less common) and in that case using transit to leave the area as mentioned above is ridiculous they would be apprehended way before they could get anywhere most likely.
Click to expand...

The thought of trying to "get away" on the Silver Line out of the Seaport is totally ludicrous. Given the speed and the bass-ackwards routing, a cop ON FOOT could catch the perp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top