Why don't we build some more housing (Boston, Worcester: homes, school)

[airunxc]

actually here's a really good example of transportation infrastructure not improving: Waltham. Border Road, which connected Rt 117 and Totten Pond road with commercial Market Basket development in the mix. Rather than providing another alternative to get north/south in town, they put a gate which prevents commuters from using the road at certain times of day, because neighbors didn't want additional traffic! This was absurd. NIMBY road planning at its worst

[airunxc]

another good example from Hopkinton. development that would have connected 2 dead end roads, was squashed by neighbors because it would have diverted traffic around the center (which is already a parking lot at rush house). The state has implemented incentives with 40B to get more housing done, but they should consider local incentives for roads that make regional connections to help with transportation.

Developer proposes new plan for subdivision in Hopkinton - News - Hopkinton Crier - Hopkinton, MA

Maybe something like this: any town that has more than X % of its roads as dead ends/not through ways can't received state transportation funding, and a developer can skirt local planning rules if they make additional transportation connections in town...something to consider as something that could actually move the needle to improve development.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

So, one issue is the particular place they chose. But as a mode of development, in terms of removing wooded/meadow/marsh wildlife habitat, and covering rain-absorbing natural land with impermeable streets, driveways and roofs - multistory/multiunit housing will have a lower impact per inhabitant than single family housing.

Sure, I don't dispute that at all. Lots of places in dense areas are being torn down and more multi units are being built in them, or they're being converted. No prob there. We just have to be conscious of not only pragmatic things, like the ability of open land to hold and retain water to decrease chances of significant flooding events, but also intrinsic values of open green space, and of course, we are just one species out of multitudes that have the right to live.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by airunxc

another good example from Hopkinton. development that would have connected 2 dead end roads, was squashed by neighbors because it would have diverted traffic around the center (which is already a parking lot at rush house). The state has implemented incentives with 40B to get more housing done, but they should consider local incentives for roads that make regional connections to help with transportation.

Developer proposes new plan for subdivision in Hopkinton - News - Hopkinton Crier - Hopkinton, MA

Maybe something like this: any town that has more than X % of its roads as dead ends/not through ways can't received state transportation funding, and a developer can skirt local planning rules if they make additional transportation connections in town...something to consider as something that could actually move the needle to improve development.

I think it's important to identify and address legitimate choke points, but a lot of this stuff is removing bypasses that were never intended to serve as major commuter routes. I live very close to the southern 93-95 interchange and making sure local roads don't become 95 alternatives is something the town worries about.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

I think it's important to identify and address legitimate choke points, but a lot of this stuff is removing bypasses that were never intended to serve as major commuter routes. I live very close to the southern 93-95 interchange and making sure local roads don't become 95 alternatives is something the town worries about.

Yes. The issue is that our road infrastructure was never intended to carry the volume of traffic that it currently carries. So traffic gets snarled on the major roads, that trickles down to secondary roads, and next thing you know, people are using residential neighborhoods streets as through streets because it's actually faster than sitting in traffic on primary roads. Waze adds to this, but people have always been clever about finding "shortcuts."

The traffic situation isn't going to get much better in the near term. Outside of some minor, local improvements, there's zero way to fix it. You can't just build new highways. You can't simply widen huge swaths of major roadways. Even if you did, those would choke up and snarl too. There are plenty of comparable sized metro areas with far better roadway systems that have worse traffic than Boston (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Washington DC, etc.). It's been said for a while, but our dependence on cars as our primary transportation method is unsustainable. We need options, and we need balance. We need an improved public transit system that makes taking the bus or train a viable option for more people. That will reduce the pressure on roadways. In the future, self-driving cars may help too since they'll be able to operate more efficiently (collectively, we all suck a driving), and traffic should move more smoothly. But both of those things are a long way off. Spot improvements to roadways should help locally in places, but there is no fix for driving coming any time soon (barring a major recession which will get cars off the road in a hurry).

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by lrfox

Yes. The issue is that our road infrastructure was never intended to carry the volume of traffic that it currently carries. So traffic gets snarled on the major roads, that trickles down to secondary roads, and next thing you know, people are using residential neighborhoods streets as through streets because it's actually faster than sitting in traffic on primary roads. Waze adds to this, but people have always been clever about finding "shortcuts."

The traffic situation isn't going to get much better in the near term. Outside of some minor, local improvements, there's zero way to fix it. You can't just build new highways. You can't simply widen huge swaths of major roadways. Even if you did, those would choke up and snarl too. There are plenty of comparable sized metro areas with far better roadway systems that have worse traffic than Boston (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Washington DC, etc.). It's been said for a while, but our dependence on cars as our primary transportation method is unsustainable. We need options, and we need balance. We need an improved public transit system that makes taking the bus or train a viable option for more people. That will reduce the pressure on roadways. In the future, self-driving cars may help too since they'll be able to operate more efficiently (collectively, we all suck a driving), and traffic should move more smoothly. But both of those things are a long way off. Spot improvements to roadways should help locally in places, but there is no fix for driving coming any time soon (barring a major recession which will get cars off the road in a hurry).

One possible semi-fix is to actually charge to use highways or major roads, with flexing prices depending on demand at the time. If such a system were in place, people would be encouraged to leave earlier and some employers may alter their start times to satisfy employees. I personally think overall things would be much better in such a system. I'm not claiming I have specifics about how to set this up, but just that it is a possibility.

[GeePee]

We could also try and take the mystique and exclusivity of cycling culture in the inner city and act like we've been around like other older cities that have figured this out. I have been commenting on how the bike paths are getting congested and then i stop to think. When i see 6 bikes stopped at a light that looks terrible to me, but imagine if it were 6 cars. It makes no mathematical sense why people (in cars) hate cycling so much, Why is it an us vs. them

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

One possible semi-fix is to actually charge to use highways or major roads, with flexing prices depending on demand at the time. If such a system were in place, people would be encouraged to leave earlier and some employers may alter their start times to satisfy employees. I personally think overall things would be much better in such a system. I'm not claiming I have specifics about how to set this up, but just that it is a possibility.

Surge pricing would help, sure (esp with trucking/deliveries), but negatively impacts people generally on the lower rungs. Those where that extra money hurts more, and those without the clout to get flexible times.


More and better mass transit is really the key.

Originally Posted by GeePee

We could also try and take the mystique and exclusivity of cycling culture in the inner city and act like we've been around like other older cities that have figured this out. I have been commenting on how the bike paths are getting congested and then i stop to think. When i see 6 bikes stopped at a light that looks terrible to me, but imagine if it were 6 cars. It makes no mathematical sense why people (in cars) hate cycling so much, Why is it an us vs. them

It really doesn't make sense. Drivers benefit the most in many ways from both mass transit and cycling. Each person using those means is another car off the road and less congestion.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Surge pricing would help, sure (esp with trucking/deliveries), but negatively impacts people generally on the lower rungs. Those where that extra money hurts more, and those without the clout to get flexible times.


More and better mass transit is really the key.

How about surge pricing for automobiles and using some portion of it to fund the T with specific attention paid to lower income areas?

[GeePee]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

How about surge pricing for automobiles and using some portion of it to fund the T with specific attention paid to lower income areas?

Problem there is...those low income areas are now turned into high income areas solely because of the proximity to the T. It really goes to show you the value transportation has.