Shepard
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,518
- Reaction score
- 65
In the spirit of year-end wrap-up season, I?ve compiled what I think to be the top five defining contributions on this forum to ?design a better Boston.? I?ve tried to limit these to either larger infrastructure projects or major downtown improvements, leaving out neighborhood-centric proposals (e.g. Cleveland Circle, South Boston ?Canal District?) or spot-improvements (e.g. replace the Midtown Hotel). I?ve also limited the list to ?dreams? ? I haven?t included projects that already have a fairly visible level of official planning (e.g. Red-Blue Connector, Indigo Line, or seaport development). Therefore, this isn?t meant as a complete list of most necessary Boston improvements. Also, I must admit, not all of these have been posted this year, but I still think that they inform many of the conversations we continue to have. (One other caveat: I?ve refrained from attributing any of these ideas to individual members; I feel that while the origin of perhaps a couple of these can be linked with individuals, each of these ideas has been discussed and debated by ? and evolved within ? the forum as a whole. If anyone objects, though, I?ll happily edit this post to add those in.)
Please comment or add to this if you think I?ve missed anything?
1. Slow down Storrow and bring down the Bowker. In the case of both Storrow and Bowker, the objective is the same: reclaim the waterways as essential elements of the Boston pedestrian experience. Whether you?re standing around BU, Back Bay or Beacon Hill, the Charles should be perceived as where it actually is: one or two short blocks away. Grade intersections and pedestrian crossings on Storrow would achieve this. There seems to be quite widespread enthusiasm for these infrastructure changes on this forum, although based on the virulent comments on blogs and articles about this idea, some short-sighted suburbanites would likely be enraged (even better!). Members noted that the Mass Pike can actually handle extra volume, although better connectivity with Soldiers Field Road in Allston and new Back Bay ramps would probably be necessary if we really wanted to divert all Storrow Drive traffic elsewhere to avoid gridlock. In reality, though, studies and experience have shown that a slower Storrow would probably reduce overall traffic as fewer trips are taken and more people switch to transit.
2. Build away the Greenway. Most of us would probably be opposed to building up every parcel, but many here do agree that its vast open expanses continue to cut the waterfront off from the city. If only to recoup some of the project?s costs, a good number of these parcels should have been developed; beyond that, though, development would stitch the city back together far better than a stretch of empty land which at best can be described as disjointed and underutilized, and at worst as a highway median (an insult which might not sound all that horrific until you consider what it was meant to replace).
3. North-South transit corridor. I?ve lumped together a number of proposed designs which essentially have the same objective: connect North and South stations with rapid transit via the Greenway/Big Dig, which, as it stands, is an auto-centric nightmare and a completely missed opportunity for mass transit improvements. One oft-mentioned proposal on this forum involves trams running along the Greenway - either in the median and/or the current left lanes, or entirely on either Atlantic or Surface Streets (the other being made two-way for vehicle traffic). One advantage of the tram line includes connections around ? and therefore relief on ? the Green Line and its downtown transfer stations. Another advantage is the possibility of extensions beyond the Greenway corridor. North, the line could continue to the Navy Yard or even beyond ? for example to Everett. South, the line can utilize the Silver Line tunnels and stations to connect with the Seaport (let?s be honest: the Silver Bus would go faster than 15mph on surface streets) and beyond to City Point. Of course, the, disadvantage here is that while tram lines move people, they do not actually move trains between the two stations as ?North-South Rail Link? advocates hope to see. More tunnels under Boston are clearly infeasible for the time being. But couldn?t a determined leadership close one of the existing Big Dig tunnels to vehicular traffic and throw down rails? Couldn?t a few cosmetic changes render the other tunnel two-way? And even if capacity is severely reduced, would it create a horrific choke point - or would fewer trips be made down I-93? Doesn?t Boston, at the end of the day, have a perfectly good ring-road/bypass?
4. (Re-)densify government center and the West End. As a start, this would include reconnecting the street grid ? pulling Hanover Street through City Hall Plaza to Cambridge Street as a starting example, or reconstituting the Charles River Park ?paths? as actual streets. While we?re on the subject of streets, we?ve also dreamed about narrowing existing ones such as Merrimac/Congress Streets, Staniford and New Chardon to improve the pedestrian experience. Define the public spaces with active street walls, and re-scale them for human dimensions. Build and re-use: for example, a new city hall on another corner of the plaza such as on top of the T station, while re-using the existing City Hall (some have suggested BAC should take the space, and others have noted it could usefully house the city morgue; I would also propose an inter-collegiate art museum to display a rotating selection of college and university collections in the Boston area).
5. Redefine the Urban Ring as Red Line. The Urban Ring (the rail vision, not the BRT vision) has occupied a lot of D.A.B.B.-babble in the past, but recently there?s been a lot more said around a relatively simple and elegant solution: a new Red Line branch between Central Square and JFK/UMass via Mass Ave and Columbia Road, which could be largely cut-and-cover. Among other possibilities, the extension could include stops at MIT, Hynes (with a north-south station alignment also placing an exit on Comm Ave), Symphony/Mass Ave (with a new connection between E line and orange line), Tremont Street, Washington Street/BMC, South Bay (with a connection to the already-in-?planning? Indigo Line), and Richardson Square. Advantages of this proposal would be to relieve pressure on the Green Line with an earlier connection to the Red, as well as better connect the underserved south side of Mass Ave. Of course, the simplicity of this proposal comes at a cost. The line would neither reach underserved communities along the so-called ?Urban Ring corridor? like Everett and Chelsea or, on the other side, Dudley; nor would it offer a new connection into employment centers like Longwood. Additionally, there have been voices calling for the Urban Line to be placed further out around either the Grand Central RR or, perhaps even better, the 66 bus route. So, since we?re dreaming here, let?s supplement this Red Line extension with a trolley running from Savin Hill to Dudley Square via Dudley Street, to Harvard via the 66 bus route, and then some combination of Cambridge and Washington Streets to serve Inman, Union, and Sullivan Squares.
Please comment or add to this if you think I?ve missed anything?
1. Slow down Storrow and bring down the Bowker. In the case of both Storrow and Bowker, the objective is the same: reclaim the waterways as essential elements of the Boston pedestrian experience. Whether you?re standing around BU, Back Bay or Beacon Hill, the Charles should be perceived as where it actually is: one or two short blocks away. Grade intersections and pedestrian crossings on Storrow would achieve this. There seems to be quite widespread enthusiasm for these infrastructure changes on this forum, although based on the virulent comments on blogs and articles about this idea, some short-sighted suburbanites would likely be enraged (even better!). Members noted that the Mass Pike can actually handle extra volume, although better connectivity with Soldiers Field Road in Allston and new Back Bay ramps would probably be necessary if we really wanted to divert all Storrow Drive traffic elsewhere to avoid gridlock. In reality, though, studies and experience have shown that a slower Storrow would probably reduce overall traffic as fewer trips are taken and more people switch to transit.
2. Build away the Greenway. Most of us would probably be opposed to building up every parcel, but many here do agree that its vast open expanses continue to cut the waterfront off from the city. If only to recoup some of the project?s costs, a good number of these parcels should have been developed; beyond that, though, development would stitch the city back together far better than a stretch of empty land which at best can be described as disjointed and underutilized, and at worst as a highway median (an insult which might not sound all that horrific until you consider what it was meant to replace).
3. North-South transit corridor. I?ve lumped together a number of proposed designs which essentially have the same objective: connect North and South stations with rapid transit via the Greenway/Big Dig, which, as it stands, is an auto-centric nightmare and a completely missed opportunity for mass transit improvements. One oft-mentioned proposal on this forum involves trams running along the Greenway - either in the median and/or the current left lanes, or entirely on either Atlantic or Surface Streets (the other being made two-way for vehicle traffic). One advantage of the tram line includes connections around ? and therefore relief on ? the Green Line and its downtown transfer stations. Another advantage is the possibility of extensions beyond the Greenway corridor. North, the line could continue to the Navy Yard or even beyond ? for example to Everett. South, the line can utilize the Silver Line tunnels and stations to connect with the Seaport (let?s be honest: the Silver Bus would go faster than 15mph on surface streets) and beyond to City Point. Of course, the, disadvantage here is that while tram lines move people, they do not actually move trains between the two stations as ?North-South Rail Link? advocates hope to see. More tunnels under Boston are clearly infeasible for the time being. But couldn?t a determined leadership close one of the existing Big Dig tunnels to vehicular traffic and throw down rails? Couldn?t a few cosmetic changes render the other tunnel two-way? And even if capacity is severely reduced, would it create a horrific choke point - or would fewer trips be made down I-93? Doesn?t Boston, at the end of the day, have a perfectly good ring-road/bypass?
4. (Re-)densify government center and the West End. As a start, this would include reconnecting the street grid ? pulling Hanover Street through City Hall Plaza to Cambridge Street as a starting example, or reconstituting the Charles River Park ?paths? as actual streets. While we?re on the subject of streets, we?ve also dreamed about narrowing existing ones such as Merrimac/Congress Streets, Staniford and New Chardon to improve the pedestrian experience. Define the public spaces with active street walls, and re-scale them for human dimensions. Build and re-use: for example, a new city hall on another corner of the plaza such as on top of the T station, while re-using the existing City Hall (some have suggested BAC should take the space, and others have noted it could usefully house the city morgue; I would also propose an inter-collegiate art museum to display a rotating selection of college and university collections in the Boston area).
5. Redefine the Urban Ring as Red Line. The Urban Ring (the rail vision, not the BRT vision) has occupied a lot of D.A.B.B.-babble in the past, but recently there?s been a lot more said around a relatively simple and elegant solution: a new Red Line branch between Central Square and JFK/UMass via Mass Ave and Columbia Road, which could be largely cut-and-cover. Among other possibilities, the extension could include stops at MIT, Hynes (with a north-south station alignment also placing an exit on Comm Ave), Symphony/Mass Ave (with a new connection between E line and orange line), Tremont Street, Washington Street/BMC, South Bay (with a connection to the already-in-?planning? Indigo Line), and Richardson Square. Advantages of this proposal would be to relieve pressure on the Green Line with an earlier connection to the Red, as well as better connect the underserved south side of Mass Ave. Of course, the simplicity of this proposal comes at a cost. The line would neither reach underserved communities along the so-called ?Urban Ring corridor? like Everett and Chelsea or, on the other side, Dudley; nor would it offer a new connection into employment centers like Longwood. Additionally, there have been voices calling for the Urban Line to be placed further out around either the Grand Central RR or, perhaps even better, the 66 bus route. So, since we?re dreaming here, let?s supplement this Red Line extension with a trolley running from Savin Hill to Dudley Square via Dudley Street, to Harvard via the 66 bus route, and then some combination of Cambridge and Washington Streets to serve Inman, Union, and Sullivan Squares.
