Cambridge making progress in traffic congestion

[wolfgang239]

I hope the Alewife garage isn't a ticking time bomb. Imagine if they had to take it out of service for a year or so to repair it for structural issues? The ship has sailed for red line to 128 in this generation, that is a total archboston transit nerd type pipe dream. Unless there is some crazy multi trillion dollar Dem infrastructure bill coming after the next election I wouldn't hold my breath.

I know a non-trivial number of people who gave up on Alewife. Why sit for 45 minutes waiting to get out of the parking garage when you can just drive straight home? And whatever idiot thought consolidating 8 lanes of highway to/from the atrocious intersection at rt. 16 should be publicly shamed, although judging by the design I'm sure they've been dead for 20 years.

You are bumper to bumper along much of Rt. 2 from Route 27 in Acton all the way to 128 starting at like 6AM. Then you hit the wall of 4 lanes backed up that last 1/2 to 3/4mi to Alewife. There is so much wasted potential.

[BosYuppie]

Originally Posted by wolfgang239

I hope the Alewife garage isn't a ticking time bomb. Imagine if they had to take it out of service for a year or so to repair it for structural issues? The ship has sailed for red line to 128 in this generation, that is a total archboston transit nerd type pipe dream. Unless there is some crazy multi trillion dollar Dem infrastructure bill coming after the next election I wouldn't hold my breath.

I know a non-trivial number of people who gave up on Alewife. Why sit for 45 minutes waiting to get out of the parking garage when you can just drive straight home? And whatever idiot thought consolidating 8 lanes of highway to/from the atrocious intersection at rt. 16 should be publicly shamed, although judging by the design I'm sure they've been dead for 20 years.

You are bumper to bumper along much of Rt. 2 from Route 27 in Acton all the way to 128 starting at like 6AM. Then you hit the wall of 4 lanes backed up that last 1/2 to 3/4mi to Alewife. There is so much wasted potential.

Rt 2 was supposed to continue thru Camberville and hook up to 93 and the unbuilt I-295 at the Innerbelt neighborhood of Somerville (named for that interstate), but it got shot down by NIMBY’s, probably for the best, the Cambridge and Somerville we know and love today might never have gentrified.

That said.. Arlington/Belmont/Cambridge have some of the crappiest local traffic in the world at rush hour. Really crazy that the real estate there is nigh untouchable now.

[BosYuppie]

Originally Posted by lrfox

Lechmere is going to be moved (the new station is under construction) across the street as part of the Green Line Extension and will be the heart of the new Cambridge Crossing development which proposes thousands of new parking spaces. It'll be akin to Assembly Row. I'm not sure what rates will be (Assembly charges $10/day if you buy in advance), but there will definitely be a lot more parking there in the future. Though it's so close to town, I'm not sure it helps congestion much. Sullivan has what you're talking about. A small MBTA operated lot right at the station and a few smaller, private lots targeted at commuters right around it.

I agree about 128 and roads outside of it. But we definitely need somewhere for those cars to go and service levels that discourage all of that traffic from trying to drive all the way in.

We need to electrify the commuter rail at least to 128.

[GeePee]

https://boston.curbed.com/2019/5/15/...arking-changes
Downtown Boston parking norms are dying a slow death

decent read guys

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by GeePee

https://boston.curbed.com/2019/5/15/...arking-changes
Downtown Boston parking norms are dying a slow death

decent read guys

Love it. And it makes sense. We have no shortage of parking downtown. You can drive into the city at 9am on a Monday and almost every garage or lot around has parking. So we can afford to lose some parking in the city center. I'm also more than OK with street parking disappearing in spots if it improves other transit options that can move more people more effectively. It's simply a better use of space.

And the redevelopment of surface lots is great. In years past, the economics of keeping surface lots made sense. Very little overhead, and easy income stream from people paying to park. In places like Providence, it still makes sense for owners of these lots to keep them for parking. Here, the value of the land has risen so much, it makes no sense to keep the lot when you can sell it for, say, $218 Million so a developer can put up a building with multi-million dollar condos and office space that leases for $60+ per square foot.

I'll all for new developments including some underground parking or incorporating it into the structure cleverly so that it doesn't dominate the streetscape (see: Gov't Center Garage which is thankfully coming down). But we can definitely stand to change how much parking we accommodate in this city.

[GeePee]

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/h...=pocket-newtab


Another great article on how car culture has divided America.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by GeePee

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/h...=pocket-newtab


Another great article on how car culture has divided America.

Or how a divided America is reflected in car culture.

This was an interesting read. I agree with much of it, but I'm not sure about all of it. There's some implied causation that I really don't agree with, and some things I think were left out - particularly with regard to cost of living. It's getting to be cost prohibitive for all but the wealthiest and most educated people to live in the denser cities where it's feasible to use transit or walk/bike to work. The New York Times actually had a good Op/Ed on this issue and how exclusive many cities are getting. It's worth noting because transit-friendly cities aren't even an option for a lot of the lower class and working class.

The point about Rob Ford talking about the "war on cars" and removing bike lanes is a fascinating flashback to how much I think this debate has shifted. I've always been into urban planning/transit planning and it wasn't that long ago (10 years or so) that any effort to increase density in cities by adding more homes around transit hubs or improve rapid transit was seen as a "war on cars" and an attack on freedom or some government conspiracy to "stack 'em and pack 'em (Agenda 21 Conspiracy).

We've really shifted views (though not completely) and I think that for all the fear mongering about transit/mobility, real life has forced the modified outlook. As people sit in more and more traffic the advantages of transit improvements and the benefits of reduced car dependency become crystal clear. Especially when it's not feasible in most major metro areas for people to move closer to jobs. There are huge rural swaths of the country where this doesn't really apply. But I'm not seeing nearly as many "new trains are an attack on my FREEDOM!" complaints as I used to now that traffic is awful and it's cost prohibitive for many to live anywhere close the center of a major metro area. I think we'll keep inching towards an equilibrium where there are enough options for those of us who don't want to have to rely on our cars for everything while also enabling people to own/use cars when they do want to.

[GeePee]

Funny, I was with a bunch of family members last night who are a bit older than me, and all moved to the suburbs. When one of my cousins was mentioning the bike lanes built over near my neighborhood, Every single one of these people starting berating cyclists, Saying they are a plague, no right to be on public roads, cause so many problems... yaddda yadda.

I can't even really fathom how many cyclist they encounter where they live. Not many.

I pointed out to them that where we were was less than .5 miles from where the majority of them lived and there were 6 people there and 5 cars.
They'll never get it. But who cares.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by GeePee

Funny, I was with a bunch of family members last night who are a bit older than me, and all moved to the suburbs. When one of my cousins was mentioning the bike lanes built over near my neighborhood, Every single one of these people starting berating cyclists, Saying they are a plague, no right to be on public roads, cause so many problems... yaddda yadda.

I can't even really fathom how many cyclist they encounter where they live. Not many.

I pointed out to them that where we were was less than .5 miles from where the majority of them lived and there were 6 people there and 5 cars.
They'll never get it. But who cares.

Some will never get it. Ever. And many more will never understand that part of the "issue" we have with cyclists is that they simply don't have the infrastructure in place to not encounter issues with pedestrians, cars, and even other cyclists. There needs to be a culture shift too with the overall entitlement some drivers have (not just with bikers, but pedestrians and other cars), but I don't expect that to change without first taking some major steps toward improving bike infrastructure.