Traffic Disaster Looming in BOSTON

[tangent]

I think that job density issue is huge though. It becomes a chicken and egg argument.

Just looping back to this...

The smaller regional cities have already been laid out for high job and residential density. To use the chicken and egg argument, they have already been through the chicken and egg cycle many times over. That is their appeal.

These cities were created to be 19th and 20th century industrialized cities with mills, factories and residential areas for large work forces. We aren't talking about taking virgin farmland and creating a city. They did that 100 or 200 years ago. We are talking about taking cities with street grids that were established for density, established mixed use zoning and are already working towards phased redevelopment to eliminate the post industrial blight while maximizing their economic potential.

Redevelopment there is happening much less expensively than it can in Boston. What we need is to stop trying to get more and more people crammed into Boston, but rather better utilize our regional cities for jobs and housing and transportation.

 

[TheRifleman]

^^^^
That is my point: Focus developments on the core of the city before building out a sprawled out campus without anytype of MBTA Grid around the area.

How could the city/BRA/Commonwelath not realize this? They are creating more problems for the everyday person. MASSIVE TRAFFIC

Please tell me how they have our BEST INTEREST IN HAND.
Developments that should have been developed before the SEAPORT Tax Incentive deals that created so called jobs.
SST
Congress St Garage
Harbor Garage
Winthrop Garage
Possibly relocate City Hall

4-7 Million Sq Feet located in the core of the city of Boston
Could have bought us TIME and better planning for the future infrastructure concerning the traffic

 

[whighlander]

Just looping back to this...

The smaller regional cities have already been laid out for high job and residential density. To use the chicken and egg argument, they have already been through the chicken and egg cycle many times over. That is their appeal.

These cities were created to be 19th and 20th century industrialized cities with mills, factories and residential areas for large work forces. We aren't talking about taking virgin farmland and creating a city. They did that 100 or 200 years ago. We are talking about taking cities with street grids that were established for density, established mixed use zoning and are already working towards phased redevelopment to eliminate the post industrial blight while maximizing their economic potential.

Redevelopment there is happening much less expensively than it can in Boston. What we need is to stop trying to get more and more people crammed into Boston, but rather better utilize our regional cities for jobs and housing and transportation.

Tangent -- Up to a point -- the 19th C had its challenges and the highly optimized 19th C solution was the mill cities for textiles and shoes

However -- to take full advantage of those places today -- the basic problem is that you have the city and its infrastructure -- but you need the entrepreneurs and the jobs and the homes for the employees

Note that the entrepreneurs includes Jeff and GE.

If you incentivize the smaller regional cities [e.g. Lowell, Brockton, Fitchburg, etc.] you are creating economic distortions with which entrepreneurs don't want to have to deal

If you de-incentivize the attractiveness of the core Boston / Cambridge by adding additional costs or burdensome regulations you may damage the economy of the whole region

The best solution is to let the entrepreneurs chose where and what to build and then to let the Greater Boston Region accommodate the development challenges to insure that the region remains a desirable place to live, work and recreate.