Which atrocious highway-on-the-Charles would you remove first?

[datadyne007]

The notion that Storrow should be eliminated is laughable. The road is very necessary and allows people to get from one end of town to the other with ease. Adding extra on/off ramps to the Pike is not going to cut it.

I think the best scenario would be to bury it from the Charles/MGH area to Fenway.

Thank you so much for saying this. I've been afraid to be the first.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Realign the pike straight across Beacon Yards adjacent to the through tracks. Depress both the through tracks and the highway and rebuild a grid of streets around it to connect the BU area to Lower Allston.

Have SFR run directly into the Pike via a Y interchange .....

 

[Ron Newman]

If the Mass Pike had eastbound on-ramps and westbound off-ramps through the Back Bay and Fenway, and the tolls were eliminated, why would Storrow Drive be needed at all? I like the plan shown in the post above this one.

 

[whighlander]

The notion that Storrow should be eliminated is laughable. The road is very necessary and allows people to get from one end of town to the other with ease. Adding extra on/off ramps to the Pike is not going to cut it.

I think the best scenario would be to bury it from the Charles/MGH area to Fenway.

Oh and also, the notion of having zero tolls in Allston should not even be discussed as they are not going anywhere.

This state is too stupid and ignorant to ever install open lane tolling like other states have.

Mass -- it has nothing to do with anything except neer-no-show-job payoffs for friends, reletives, campaign workers and supporters for the various state reps and senators

Where else in the world would a job requiring the ability to sit and move your arm with grade school math sklls command $50K+ in salary + benefits

NH has demonstrated that open road tolling is very relaible and effective -- 2 open toll lanes + 1 automated human interface provided for the troglydites and remote visitors

 

[mass88]

If the Mass Pike had eastbound on-ramps and westbound off-ramps through the Back Bay and Fenway, and the tolls were eliminated, why would Storrow Drive be needed at all? I like the plan shown in the post above this one.

Well look at it this way, someone who works at MGH and lives in Brighton is going to have a much easier time using Storrow than cutting across to get on 93 to the Pike. Storrow is a necessary roadway in the city. Storrow is useful for those that are going to the West End, Beacon Hill and the large employment center that is MGH. Simply adding a couple of on/off ramps to the Pike will not do.

This will sound crazy, but in a perfect world, the Pike after the Allston tolls would be cut down to only 3 or 4 eastbound lanes. Those lanes would be used for those continuing on to Logan or South Boston, or getting on 93 south. A bridge to tunnel built under the Charles River that carries east and west bound traffic and connects to 93 by the Zakim. This would then allow for some nice infill on the Pike trench through the Back Bay/South End.

But again, that may sound crazy to some.

Mass -- it has nothing to do with anything except neer-no-show-job payoffs for friends, reletives, campaign workers and supporters for the various state reps and senators

Where else in the world would a job requiring the ability to sit and move your arm with grade school math sklls command $50K+ in salary + benefits

NH has demonstrated that open road tolling is very relaible and effective -- 2 open toll lanes + 1 automated human interface provided for the troglydites and remote visitors

Oh it goes without saying that it's all about politics when it comes to installing open road tolling. Nepotism and pandering to the unions is what it's all about. It's a damn shame too. I have used the systems in other states and it works great and keeps things moving. Instead Mass would rather have the bottlenecks and keep jobs where people get paid wayyyy too much.

 

[whighlander]

....This will sound crazy, but in a perfect world, the Pike after the Allston tolls would be cut down to only 3 or 4 eastbound lanes. Those lanes would be used for those continuing on to Logan or South Boston, or getting on 93 south. A bridge to tunnel built under the Charles River that carries east and west bound traffic and connects to 93 by the Zakim. This would then allow for some nice infill on the Pike trench through the Back Bay/South End.

But again, that may sound crazy to some.



Oh it goes without saying that it's all about politics when it comes to installing open road tolling. Nepotism and pandering to the unions is what it's all about. It's a damn shame too. I have used the systems in other states and it works great and keeps things moving. Instead Mass would rather have the bottlenecks and keep jobs where people get paid wayyyy too much.

Mass .. I think that pressure from the growth of the ID will finally start to change the system -- even here real money speaks rather loudly

The two most rapidly developing parts of Boston (ID and BB) are connected together by one vital link -- the TP

When thousands of more people comming from the west have their commute destination the BB and the ID .... there will be changes made to the TP and Open Tolling is likely to be first

The other change that is more subtle is that the patronage havens of the T and the TP are now part of the larger (good / bad?) but more open entity the DOT and there seems to be a pro in the drivers seat

 

[Matthew]

Guess how DCR has been spending their "limited funds" again...

 

[davem]

I will say, it was glorious to ride on today. I had forgotten what fresh asphalt feels like considering the condition of the paths.

 

[matredsoxfan]

I really get sick of people on this forum saying "I-90 Mass Pike is severely under capacity". ? What world do you people live in. I-90 WB is backed from Newton Corner to the Tolls at Allston-Brighton every single weekday after 3:30PM. I-90 EB is backed from Newton Corner to Exit 16.

Now I would definitely make improvements to the river roads. I would eliminate the 3rd travel lane on Soldiers Field Road Westbound at the Gilmore Bridge making the existing 3rd lane at the light a shoulder and the shoulder green space. This also eliminates the 3rd travel lane after the light at the Gilmore Bridge to let traffic coming from the Gilmore bridge safely merge onto Soldiers Field Road. This also eliminates traffic from cutting off drivers at the light at the Gilmore Bridge. Eliminating the right travel lane at the Bowker Overpass WB letting the Bowker traffic have its own lane eliminating the dangerous merging. I would make the center travel lane Storrow WB only and the left lane an off ramp for Bowker. I would also create two roundabouts (One at Gilmore Bridge/Greenough Blvd and another at Memorial Drive at the Gilmore Bridge) and would completely redesign the Mt. Auburn/Fresh Pond Parkway Mess.

 

[BPLange7]

Now I would definitely make improvements to the river roads. I would eliminate the 3rd travel lane on Soldiers Field Road Westbound at the Gilmore Bridge making the existing 3rd lane at the light a shoulder and the shoulder green space. This also eliminates the 3rd travel lane after the light at the Gilmore Bridge to let traffic coming from the Gilmore bridge safely merge onto Soldiers Field Road. This also eliminates traffic from cutting off drivers at the light at the Gilmore Bridge. Eliminating the right travel lane at the Bowker Overpass WB letting the Bowker traffic have its own lane eliminating the dangerous merging. I would make the center travel lane Storrow WB only and the left lane an off ramp for Bowker. I would also create two roundabouts (One at Gilmore Bridge/Greenough Blvd and another at Memorial Drive at the Gilmore Bridge) and would completely redesign the Mt. Auburn/Fresh Pond Parkway Mess.

Are you referring to the Eliot bridge when you are saying Gilmore? I thought the Gilmore bridge was closer to Charlestown.

For what its worth, I believe the DCR experimented with dropping a travel lane WB under the bowker to allow a clean merge lane for traffic coming from the Fenway. After a trial period they switched it back to the current configuration. (Presumably this created backups?) In lieu of the dedicated on ramp, I believe signage indicating for WB cars to vacate the right merge lane if possible (difficult because through traffic - keep left - could incorrectly direct traffic onto the Fenway offramps) and a stop sign instead of a yield on the on-ramp should help the situation. I'm surprised there are not more accidents here as I've seen more than a few cabs fly down the ramp into traffic without considering if there was any running room or not.

 

[bigeman312]

I really get sick of people on this forum saying "I-90 Mass Pike is severely under capacity". ? What world do you people live in. I-90 WB is backed from Newton Corner to the Tolls at Allston-Brighton every single weekday after 3:30PM. I-90 EB is backed from Newton Corner to Exit 16.

Wrong thread, but sounds like the perfect time for improvements to the Framingham/Worcester Line and some peak pricing on the tolls.

 

[Matthew]

I really get sick of people on this forum saying "I-90 Mass Pike is severely under capacity". ? What world do you people live in. I-90 WB is backed from Newton Corner to the Tolls at Allston-Brighton every single weekday after 3:30PM. I-90 EB is backed from Newton Corner to Exit 16.

My impression is that when people say that, they are NOT referring to the section of the Mass Pike that you are talking about (around Newton Corner - Allston) but rather to the section that passes through Back Bay, where we would like to see additional ramps added.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

My impression is that when people say that, they are NOT referring to the section of the Mass Pike that you are talking about (around Newton Corner - Allston) but rather to the section that passes through Back Bay, where we would like to see additional ramps added.

Correct. The Pike is under-capacity for intracity travel. The drivers overloading Storrow all points to/from I-93 to beat the tolls. To/from Newton drivers don't have the option for beating the tolls; they are already getting on in Allston. There's no more of them to be had who aren't already passing through the Allston tolls, whether it's coming straight from downtown or via Storrow. It's the only plausible way out of town.

This is one of the reasons why there is such a jarring difference in traffic loads on the Pike Allston-out vs. Allston-in. There are no more drivers to add Allston-out. There's a ton of drivers Allston-in who are choking Storrow when they should be using the Pike. The exaggerated utilization difference is symptom of the beat-the-tolls disease.

The downtown ramps help, but the induced demand problem that's creating such an imbalance really only gets snapped back into balance if you eliminate tolls to/from Allston and 93. Meaning...if you ENTER eastbound at Allston you pay no toll, and if you EXIT westbound at Allston you pay no toll. Entering at Allston for westbound and exiting to Allston from eastbound get the same toll as allways. That's how the capacity gets re-balanced downtown without adding more drivers west of Allston. You need to add more ramp options, but the intracity toll is the linchpin of it all.

There'd still be some load-bearing traffic A.M. rush only on Storrow east to Kenmore because of the Worcester Line preventing much in the way of new eastbound Pike exits. But Storrow west would clear out its intracity induced demand all day, Storrow east at Copley would clear out its beat-the-tolls induced demand, and the main load-bearing portion of Storrow would be Charles Circle to 93...without the beat-the-tolls traffic lathered on from Kenmore and Cambridge. And the Storrow/Pike interchange would get de-clogged in a big way.


As for Newton...there's mitigation there too. I'm a little baffled they haven't considered a westbound exit/entrance at the Birmingham Pkwy./N. Beacon St./Soldiers Field Rd./Nonantum Rd. rotary. That's almost the opposite situation: Pike's overloaded, western river roads are empty. All those people slamming Newton Corner to get to Watertown Sq. would be much better off taking Nonantum Rd. or N. Beacon and skipping straight to the Square. It's not like there's got to be a megaproject in Newton to make things not-awful. It's the exact same situation: one set of overloaded roads paralleled by one set of empty roads is symptomatic of some artificial barrier that needs to be taken down. In this case it's not the beat-the-tolls effect but an outright lack of physical connection. Jeez...how much would it actually cost to do a slip offramp to Birmingham and a slip onramp from Nonantum...$3M? For that much relief of Watertown-bound traffic at Corner? That should've been done years ago.

 

[Jahvon09]

The Mass. Pike will NEVER be up to par until & unless they make the toll booths at the Beacon Park Exchange like the ones at the Tobin Bridge - where there is no slowing down through the EZ Pass section, nor is there any stopping to pay cash to get through!

I avoid that section of the highway from Newton to the Ted Williams Tunnel like the plague during evening & morning rush hour!

 

[matredsoxfan]

Correct. The Pike is under-capacity for intracity travel. The drivers overloading Storrow all points to/from I-93 to beat the tolls. To/from Newton drivers don't have the option for beating the tolls; they are already getting on in Allston. There's no more of them to be had who aren't already passing through the Allston tolls, whether it's coming straight from downtown or via Storrow. It's the only plausible way out of town.

This is one of the reasons why there is such a jarring difference in traffic loads on the Pike Allston-out vs. Allston-in. There are no more drivers to add Allston-out. There's a ton of drivers Allston-in who are choking Storrow when they should be using the Pike. The exaggerated utilization difference is symptom of the beat-the-tolls disease.

The downtown ramps help, but the induced demand problem that's creating such an imbalance really only gets snapped back into balance if you eliminate tolls to/from Allston and 93. Meaning...if you ENTER eastbound at Allston you pay no toll, and if you EXIT westbound at Allston you pay no toll. Entering at Allston for westbound and exiting to Allston from eastbound get the same toll as allways. That's how the capacity gets re-balanced downtown without adding more drivers west of Allston. You need to add more ramp options, but the intracity toll is the linchpin of it all.

There'd still be some load-bearing traffic A.M. rush only on Storrow east to Kenmore because of the Worcester Line preventing much in the way of new eastbound Pike exits. But Storrow west would clear out its intracity induced demand all day, Storrow east at Copley would clear out its beat-the-tolls induced demand, and the main load-bearing portion of Storrow would be Charles Circle to 93...without the beat-the-tolls traffic lathered on from Kenmore and Cambridge. And the Storrow/Pike interchange would get de-clogged in a big way.


As for Newton...there's mitigation there too. I'm a little baffled they haven't considered a westbound exit/entrance at the Birmingham Pkwy./N. Beacon St./Soldiers Field Rd./Nonantum Rd. rotary. That's almost the opposite situation: Pike's overloaded, western river roads are empty. All those people slamming Newton Corner to get to Watertown Sq. would be much better off taking Nonantum Rd. or N. Beacon and skipping straight to the Square. It's not like there's got to be a megaproject in Newton to make things not-awful. It's the exact same situation: one set of overloaded roads paralleled by one set of empty roads is symptomatic of some artificial barrier that needs to be taken down. In this case it's not the beat-the-tolls effect but an outright lack of physical connection. Jeez...how much would it actually cost to do a slip offramp to Birmingham and a slip onramp from Nonantum...$3M? For that much relief of Watertown-bound traffic at Corner? That should've been done years ago.

Again WRONG! I take the Mass Pike I-90 to the airport almost daily (cab driver). I-90 Eastbound is a mess and gridlock from Allston Brighton tolls all the way to I-93 ramps anytime after 6PM

 

[CSTH]

^ I do that daily too (reverse commute Eastie-Needham). But the EB PM backup is entirely from the 93 ramps (mostly 93NB) and the mega-merge leading into the Ted (plus, lately, the too-quick merge from the tolls down to 3 lanes on the viaduct).

Totally with you on the FUBAR state of affairs on the western river roads, F-line...

...also, why won't someone extend the merge space on 90WB after the Newton Corner onramp by painting a dotted lane where the breakdown lane is now?!?? There's 1.5 miles of breakdown lane there, and only 50 feet of merge space immediately following the lane drop...arghhh....

 

[Matthew]

For the record, I often see the EB evening backup from atop Comm Ave in passing. I find it amusingly notable that the so-called "peak" direction is almost always flowing freely, while the "reverse-peak" is almost always slow. But as CSTH said, it's due to the interchange, and there's basically nothing that can be done about it, beyond something too-sensible-to-happen like congestion pricing. Doesn't change the fact that an additional ramp there would be nice.

 

[ant8904]

Again Matthew, Congestion Pricing is not "something too-sensible-to-happen". If we do tolling, it is to cover the the cost of having the infrastructure, the cost to service the users. We should not use pricing to keep people from using it. Money does not just represent how strongly a user wants to use a service - thus pricing by congestion will just filter out the unnecessary usage, it will filter out that some people will be weighting against how much money they have to spend.

The ones with the most money will enjoy less traffic and would not be bothered weighting it against if the trip is really necessary. The ones with less with be calculating both the options to making the trip and resources. Again, that idea you push is not win-win (I recall that was part of your argument before) and not "something-too-sensible", it is not an idea is so plain obvious that it needs no argument.

And just not everything is off topic, Storrow should be removed or buried. I still like to think there's some way to find a way to add EB ramps to the Pike at Charlesgate. If we can just find a way to ramp there with ramps at Soldier Field, I like to think we can get Storrow removed from Charles MGH to the Solider Field ramps. I still don't understand why moving the tracks over Ipswich does not give enough space for EB ramps.

 

[Matthew]

ant8904, do you also believe that every other commodity we use in daily life should only be priced based on cost to produce, and not on the market supply and demand?

Enjoy your long bread lines, Comrade.

For the record, congestion is a cost as well: it's a cost of not having the infrastructure be reliably available. Congestion pricing lowers the cost of congestion by exchanging time for money. In addition, the revenue from proper pricing can be used to subsidize very nice bus service, which is much more progressive than the status quo.

Right now, the highway facility is for all intents and purposes only available to people who own automobiles, with little dribbles of bus service (that gets stuck in traffic) by comparison. People who own automobiles tend to be richer than people who do not own automobiles. Therefore the status quo is regressive. For the vast majority of people, there is a very high priced tollgate on the highway: the cost of owning an automobile.

However, the implementation of congestion pricing and the use of revenue to provide good, high quality bus service, lowers the toll on the highway to that of a bus ticket.

In addition, even if you aren't rich, but rich enough to own a car, then getting stuck in traffic is still a high cost. Possibly even higher a cost than for a richer person. Usually, it is less affluent people who are more time-starved because their jobs are more stressful, and they have less control over their schedule. So perhaps under the status quo, the rich and the poor get stuck in the same traffic, but it may very well hurt the poor more. Regressive, as I said.

But as I said before, it's too-sensible-to-happen because people like you would rather sit, stew and rage in traffic -- and make up ridiculous excuses. Also, I suspect, for many drivers (likely not on this forum) the idea of doing something progressive such as enhanced bus service is distasteful. Might bring the "undesirables" to their community. You know, the usual NIMBY crap.

 

[DZH22]

I really get sick of people on this forum saying "I-90 Mass Pike is severely under capacity". ? What world do you people live in. I-90 WB is backed from Newton Corner to the Tolls at Allston-Brighton every single weekday after 3:30PM. I-90 EB is backed from Newton Corner to Exit 16.

Most of this thread is from 2011. A little bit of a delayed reaction? You are arguing vehemently against things people said 3 years ago using the 2014 reality that maybe didn't apply in 2011. Just saying.