Boston's Big Dig

[SidS1045]

The purpose of congestion pricing is not to get people to switch to another roadway - it's to get people out of their cars altogether.

In the Boston area this is, plain and simple, a non-starter.  Combine the dearth of rapid transit and commuter rail lines in places where people actually live with their notorious unreliability and under-funding, and you will not get the area's population to abandon their cars in any significant numbers.  (The state legislature seems to think they can go on deferring maintenance and capital improvements on the MBTA indefinitely, especially on the 119-year-old Green Line whose extension into Boston's northern suburbs is now in jeopardy because the morons in state government learned not one thing from the Big Dig's funding disaster.  Last figures I saw, the MBTA is looking at an expenditure of approximately $4 billion just to catch up on deferred maintenance, and there is exactly zero political will to get that funding problem solved.)

Yesterday the MBTA proposed repeated fare hikes over the next few years alongside service cuts, with nothing but verbal promises (so far) that last winter's repeated train cancellations due to weather won't happen again.  This is not the message to be sending when you're trying to get people out of their cars.

[jakeroot]

The purpose of congestion pricing is not to get people to switch to another roadway - it's to get people out of their cars altogether.

In the Boston area this is, plain and simple, a non-starter.  Combine the dearth of rapid transit and commuter rail lines in places where people actually live with their notorious unreliability and under-funding, and you will not get the area's population to abandon their cars in any significant numbers.

There are many people who will always drive, because the inconvenience of locating public transit outweighs the inconvenience of sitting in traffic. However, there are a substantial amount of people who could very easily switch to another mode of transport (within Boston), and only drive because they just feel like it. If you start to propose tolls along their route, they may reconsider their choice to drive. They may also reconsider how many people they have in their car (if HOV was no-charge).

[PHLBOS]

There are many people who will always drive, because the inconvenience of locating public transit outweighs the inconvenience of sitting in traffic. However, there are a substantial amount of people who could very easily switch to another mode of transport (within Boston), and only drive because they just feel like it.

Again and as stated earlier, not all of the commuting traffic is O&Ding in downtown Boston.  Much of it is nearby suburb-to-nearby suburb; something that most mass transit systems aren't very efficient at (by design, they're hub-and-spoke operations).  If one's origin/destination is within close proximity to a T line or bus route; great, then such a mode works.  Otherwise, driving may very well be the only viable/practical option for many people.

Do keep in mind that many Greater Boston highway proposals, some originally planned as far back as 1948; never got built.  One of them being the Inner Belt/I-695.  That highway would've diverted much of the through-traffic away from downtown Boston.

They may also reconsider how many people they have in their car (if HOV was no-charge).

HOV or carpools only work when all parties involved have a similar commute and have the same arrival/departure times at their respective jobs.  During the late 70s/early 80s, especially when gas prices were high & lines at the pumps existed; many companies started establishing either flex or shifted hours as a means of reducing rush-hour congestion (& fuel consumption).  That maneuver, en masse, threw a serious monkey-wrench into HOV/car/van-pools plans/initiatives because more and more people started having different work hours.

Even within the same company, employees can have different work shifts.  During the 90s, when I was working in NJ; a co-worker of mine who lived a few miles form me asked me if I wanted to car-pool/ride-share with him.  We did such for a few months but then had to abandon it because, depending in the project and its deadlines; we were leaving the office at different times too often.

[jeffandnicole]

There are many people who will always drive, because the inconvenience of locating public transit outweighs the inconvenience of sitting in traffic. However, there are a substantial amount of people who could very easily switch to another mode of transport (within Boston), and only drive because they just feel like it.

Again and as stated earlier, not all of the commuting traffic is O&Ding in downtown Boston.  Much of it is nearby suburb-to-nearby suburb; something that most mass transit systems aren't very efficient at (by design, they're hub-and-spoke operations).  If one's origin/destination is within close proximity to a T line or bus route; great, then such a mode works.  Otherwise, driving may very well be the only viable/practical option for many people.

Do keep in mind that many Greater Boston highway proposals, some originally planned as far back as 1948; never got built.  One of them being the Inner Belt/I-695.  That highway would've diverted much of the through-traffic away from downtown Boston.

In theory.

There's a 695 around Baltimore.  There's a 285 around Atlanta.  And we see how jammed the main 2di's are still thru the city.   It's tough to do absolute comparisons because as things were built (and not built), it changed how the areas built up thru the years.

[PHLBOS]

There's a 695 around Baltimore.  There's a 285 around Atlanta.  And we see how jammed the main 2di's are still thru the city.   It's tough to do absolute comparisons because as things were built (and not built), it changed how the areas built up thru the years.

The proposed I-695 for the Greater Boston area would've been less than 8 miles in overall length.  Baltimore's I-695 and Atlanta's I-285 are both much longer (& have a larger radius with respect to the downtown core) and function more like Greater Boston's I-95/MA 128.

[Pete from Boston]

The purpose of congestion pricing is not to get people to switch to another roadway - it's to get people out of their cars altogether.

In the Boston area this is, plain and simple, a non-starter.  Combine the dearth of rapid transit and commuter rail lines in places where people actually live with their notorious unreliability and under-funding, and you will not get the area's population to abandon their cars in any significant numbers.  (The state legislature seems to think they can go on deferring maintenance and capital improvements on the MBTA indefinitely, especially on the 119-year-old Green Line whose extension into Boston's northern suburbs is now in jeopardy because the morons in state government learned not one thing from the Big Dig's funding disaster.  Last figures I saw, the MBTA is looking at an expenditure of approximately $4 billion just to catch up on deferred maintenance, and there is exactly zero political will to get that funding problem solved.)

Yesterday the MBTA proposed repeated fare hikes over the next few years alongside service cuts, with nothing but verbal promises (so far) that last winter's repeated train cancellations due to weather won't happen again.  This is not the message to be sending when you're trying to get people out of their cars.

Why is no one listening?  The fare hikes are necessary.  The legislature is full of professional self-promoters who don't want to stick their necks out and tell voters the answers are all painful, so the T raises money itself. 

Easter Massachusetts has exactly the transit system it demands, no more and no less.  If people demanded better any time other than at crisis points, we wouldn't be in this mess.

I see a verbally-promised fleet of brand-new snow-clearing vehicles under Alewife Brook Parkway every other day.  I saw the shuttle buses as the MBTA did its verbally-promised replacement of the entire southern Red and Orange Line's third rail heating system this fall.  These are steps toward being ready for another nine feet of snow, not actually being ready for it, which is a monumental undertaking. 

I just no longer know what people expect when they aren't breaking down legislators' doors saying "I'm ready to start paying to fix this."  The public reaction implies that the T belongs to some other responsible party, not the voters doing the self-important complaining–"Someone else give me what I need!"

Do keep in mind that many Greater Boston highway proposals, some originally planned as far back as 1948; never got built.  One of them being the Inner Belt/I-695.  That highway would've diverted much of the through-traffic away from downtown Boston.

But not to less congested areas.  As it is, Melnea Cass Blvd., the BU Bridge, and the Inman-Union area are at a standstill at rush hour.  The main way 695 might have lessened congestion is by blighting more neighborhoods that are now lively and thus have traffic.

[vdeane]

AFAIK, VA only; 495 Hot Lanes stop several miles short of the MD state line. Out-of-staters can get them, and are advised to shield any regular EZ Passes to keep them from being accidentally read.

Doesn't Maryland issue Flex transponders even though the HOT lanes don't enter their state?

I think that's what I just proposed here. Seattle proposed a congestion charge, but the lack of a bypass route around the metro area killed the idea (this idea does not exist in Boston...the 95 works as a bypass).

NYC's plan also includes setting up a gantry to toll every single north-south street in Manhattan between 59th and 60th streets.

[SidS1045]

Why is no one listening?  The fare hikes are necessary.  The legislature is full of professional self-promoters who don't want to stick their necks out and tell voters the answers are all painful, so the T raises money itself.

I'm certainly not disagreeing with you, but this goes back to a chronic complaint of mine:  The inability of governors, presidents and legislators to have adult conversations with taxpayers without the inevitable gut reaction "our taxes are too high!"  None of them have the stones to tell people "if you want it, *truly* want it, it costs money."  Massachusetts governor Charlie Baker spoke to the press after a report came out detailing the ongoing costs of deferred maintenance on the MBTA, gave it its moment in the sun, and then proposed an annual MBTA budget of less than a tenth of what the report said was needed *just* for maintenance.  The message just doesn't sink in, and yes, in part it's because the people aren't demanding it.

But, back on topic:  Yes, the fare hikes are necessary, but if faced with both tolls on previously free roads and fare hikes on the rails, how many will opt for the rails?

[jakeroot]

But, back on topic:  Yes, the fare hikes are necessary, but if faced with both tolls on previously free roads and fare hikes on the rails, how many will opt for the rails?

To me, it's a no-brainer: why sit in traffic for an hour, when you can ride a train for thirty minutes, and get some shit done in that time? Even if the cost is slightly more, some people will prefer the cost of the T to the cost of a toll.

[PHLBOS]

Do keep in mind that many Greater Boston highway proposals, some originally planned as far back as 1948; never got built.  One of them being the Inner Belt/I-695.  That highway would've diverted much of the through-traffic away from downtown Boston.

But not to less congested areas.  As it is, Melnea Cass Blvd., the BU Bridge, and the Inman-Union area are at a standstill at rush hour.  The main way 695 might have lessened congestion is by blighting more neighborhoods that are now lively and thus have traffic.

IIRC, Melnea Cass Blvd. was built on what would've been the lower part of the Inner Belt (I-695 plus the upper part of I-95's southwest branch-off the Expressway at Mass Ave.) had it been built.  I-695's Charles River crossing would've either replaced or been built near the B.U. Bridge.

The Inner Belt was to have been an 8-lane expressway (4 lanes wach-way).  Yes, there would've been land/home takings in order to build such but over time (it's been 45 years since Gov. Sargent cancelled it) the area would've recuperated.  Closer to the corridor, there probably would've been more business and/or commercial development than residential development; that former prefers to be closer to a highway corridor than the latter.

In 1970 dollars, it would've costed about $600 million to build the I-695/Inner Belt.

[jeffandnicole]

But, back on topic:  Yes, the fare hikes are necessary, but if faced with both tolls on previously free roads and fare hikes on the rails, how many will opt for the rails?

To me, it's a no-brainer: why sit in traffic for an hour, when you can ride a train for thirty minutes, and get some shit done in that time? Even if the cost is slightly more, some people will prefer the cost of the T to the cost of a toll.

Because you have to include the time it takes to get to the train station, plus waiting for the train, plus departure point, plus walking to place of employment.  Plus transfer if necessary,

Depending on the distance involved, monthly passes can cost upwards of a monthly car payment.   That may be fine for someone that doesn't have a car, but if you already do, that's a nasty extra expense for some people. 

Plus, usually one isn't sitting in traffic for an hour. They're driving and doing normal commuting things.  Traffic delays for most people are probably not much more than 15 or 20 minutes compared to free-flow conditions, even though it seems like it takes much longer. 

[jakeroot]

To me, it's a no-brainer: why sit in traffic for an hour, when you can ride a train for thirty minutes, and get some shit done in that time? Even if the cost is slightly more, some people will prefer the cost of the T to the cost of a toll.

Because you have to include the time it takes to get to the train station, plus waiting for the train, plus departure point, plus walking to place of employment.  Plus transfer if necessary,

For some, it's a painless straight shot, others it's a platform-to-platform switch-job all the way to work. But those factors are all case-by-base, and the difficulty of some shouldn't detract from the gain of the many.

Depending on the distance involved, monthly passes can cost upwards of a monthly car payment.   That may be fine for someone that doesn't have a car, but if you already do, that's a nasty extra expense for some people. 

I'm pretty sure it's cheaper to park in the suburbs than it is to park in the city. Downtown parking passes, in any city, can easily top triple digits.

Plus, usually one isn't sitting in traffic for an hour. They're driving and doing normal commuting things.  Traffic delays for most people are probably not much more than 15 or 20 minutes compared to free-flow conditions, even though it seems like it takes much longer. 

That's a good point. I'm from a city where a typical commute can take 90 to 100 minutes, so my view is slightly skewed towards favoring public transit if available (though I don't have to worry, because I live and work in the suburbs). FWIW, my nearly-retired mother takes the train to work. The parking at the train station is free, the cost of the ticket is $3.75, and it's a straight shot all the way to work (minus a short walk from the train station in Tukwila). For her, it's a no-brainer.

[Alps]

Do keep in mind that many Greater Boston highway proposals, some originally planned as far back as 1948; never got built.  One of them being the Inner Belt/I-695.  That highway would've diverted much of the through-traffic away from downtown Boston.

But not to less congested areas.  As it is, Melnea Cass Blvd., the BU Bridge, and the Inman-Union area are at a standstill at rush hour.  The main way 695 might have lessened congestion is by blighting more neighborhoods that are now lively and thus have traffic.

IIRC, Melnea Cass Blvd. was built on what would've been the lower part of the Inner Belt (I-695 plus the upper part of I-95's southwest branch-off the Expressway at Mass Ave.) had it been built.  I-695's Charles River crossing would've either replaced or been built near the B.U. Bridge.

The Inner Belt was to have been an 8-lane expressway (4 lanes wach-way).  Yes, there would've been land/home takings in order to build such but over time (it's been 45 years since Gov. Sargent cancelled it) the area would've recuperated.  Closer to the corridor, there probably would've been more business and/or commercial development than residential development; that former prefers to be closer to a highway corridor than the latter.

In 1970 dollars, it would've costed about $600 million to build the I-695/Inner Belt.

Something I learned by being "on the inside" - Harvard and MIT were ardent supporters of the Inner Belt because after cleaving Central Square, it would have destroyed the lifeblood of Cambridge, making it much easier to expand on either side of the freeway. Honestly, it needed to be rerouted through Cambridge to have any chance, and pass by the lightly-used rail tracks near MIT's campus (Albany and Portland Streets) instead of along Western Ave.

[cpzilliacus]

AFAIK, VA only; 495 Hot Lanes stop several miles short of the MD state line. Out-of-staters can get them, and are advised to shield any regular EZ Passes to keep them from being accidentally read.

Doesn't Maryland issue Flex transponders even though the HOT lanes don't enter their state?

Yes they do.  I have one.

I think that's what I just proposed here. Seattle proposed a congestion charge, but the lack of a bypass route around the metro area killed the idea (this idea does not exist in Boston...the 95 works as a bypass).

NYC's plan also includes setting up a gantry to toll every single north-south street in Manhattan between 59th and 60th streets.

Better to just do a congestion toll cordon around all of Manhattan south of 59th Street in that case.

[davewiecking]

AFAIK, VA only; 495 Hot Lanes stop several miles short of the MD state line. Out-of-staters can get them, and are advised to shield any regular EZ Passes to keep them from being accidentally read.

Doesn't Maryland issue Flex transponders even though the HOT lanes don't enter their state?

Yes they do.  I have one.

Awesome. I obviously wasn't aware they existed, but I'm not their target audience. Several minutes pouring over ezpassmd.com revealed not a freaking thing about it. Typing "e-zpass hov" or "e-zpass flex" into the website's search engine produces a list of the occurrences of the word "search" on Maryland.gov. Apparently you have to know the passes exist, and have to know to call and specifically ask for one. Chalk up one for aaroads in general, and cpz and vdeane in particular.

[mrsman]

I think that's what I just proposed here. Seattle proposed a congestion charge, but the lack of a bypass route around the metro area killed the idea (this idea does not exist in Boston...the 95 works as a bypass).

NYC's plan also includes setting up a gantry to toll every single north-south street in Manhattan between 59th and 60th streets.

Better to just do a congestion toll cordon around all of Manhattan south of 59th Street in that case.

The congestion pricing plans for NYC also include tolling the bridges that lead into Midtown and Lower Manhattan.  The tunnels are already tolled.

For those traveling from NJ, you pay the existing toll by cash or by EZ-Pass.

For those traveling from Brooklyn and Queens, the bridges are proposed to be EZ-Pass only.  Those who want to pay cash can take the Queens-Midtown Tunnel or the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel instead.

Tolling the avenues at 59th Street must be cash free, as there is no room for a toll booth.  Those coming from the north must have an EZ-Pass.

[cpzilliacus]

Apparently you have to know the passes exist, and have to know to call and specifically ask for one. Chalk up one for aaroads in general, and cpz and vdeane in particular.

I never called them.  I just went to a place that has E-ZPass (the Motor Vehicle Administration's office in Gaithersburg) and asked for one, which they had in stock and sold to me.

[dcbjms]

Why is no one listening?  The fare hikes are necessary.  The legislature is full of professional self-promoters who don't want to stick their necks out and tell voters the answers are all painful, so the T raises money itself.

I'm certainly not disagreeing with you, but this goes back to a chronic complaint of mine:  The inability of governors, presidents and legislators to have adult conversations with taxpayers without the inevitable gut reaction "our taxes are too high!"  None of them have the stones to tell people "if you want it, *truly* want it, it costs money."

. . . .

But, back on topic:  Yes, the fare hikes are necessary, but if faced with both tolls on previously free roads and fare hikes on the rails, how many will opt for the rails?

You can say the same thing here in Rhode Island vis-à-vis RIPTA.  Starting in March, RIPTA is implementing yet another fare increase; this after a huge outcry over charging disabled and senior people for their bus passes (they're currently free).  For the most part, RIPTA is funded through the gas tax (as are a bunch of other things in RI, such as our shitty roads and bridges).  The same problems which afflict the T also afflict RIPTA, except that for the most part nobody wants to touch it because it is seen as what "those people" use.  If a better long-term funding formula can be found, then it will be used - unfortunately, no one has come up with it yet, leading to the whole "raise fares/cut service" mantra that has been the backbone of RIPTA for a while and which inhibits a lot of people from using it.

[KEVIN_224]

Does it have to do with funding from the state as well? In comparison, CT Transit has a base fare of $1.50, a day pass is $3 and transfers are free. METRO day passes in Portland, ME are $5. I think their base fare is higher than ours (I last rode a METRO bus in September).

Getting this back to the Big Dig and Boston...I'm almost certain that a small above-ground piece of a green steel beam is in place somewhere along Atlantic Avenue, within a couple blocks of the New England Aquarium. 

[PHLBOS]

Getting this back to the Big Dig and Boston...I'm almost certain that a small above-ground piece of a green steel beam is in place somewhere along Atlantic Avenue, within a couple blocks of the New England Aquarium. 

Do you know whereabouts or how big the beam is?  I checked Google Earth & GSV but couldn't find anything that looked like such.

[roadman]

Getting this back to the Big Dig and Boston...I'm almost certain that a small above-ground piece of a green steel beam is in place somewhere along Atlantic Avenue, within a couple blocks of the New England Aquarium. 

Do you know whereabouts or how big the beam is?  I checked Google Earth & GSV but couldn't find anything that looked like such.

The girder is located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Clinton Street and the Surface Artery.  It's from one of the support columns for the old elevated highway, but has been relocated and cut off to about one story high.

[Pete from Boston]

There is also a piece in front of the iron workers' union building:

https://goo.gl/maps/g47f8svRUes

[roadman]

There is also a piece in front of the iron workers' union building:

https://goo.gl/maps/g47f8svRUes

Was unaware of that - thanks for sharing.  However, I believe that member, which appears to have come from the old Charles River Crossing truss bridge, was independently preserved by the iron workers union.  The girder on Clinton Street was preserved under the historical/archelogical program mandated as part of the Big Dig construction.

[mrfoxboy]

I am extremely pro-tunnel.

And anti-pumpkin.

I'd love to see a 3-mile tunnel under Hartford for I-84, leading from about exit 47 through exit 57. I'm not sure how to tie it in to the existing freeway network on the east side yet.

Then you could tear down the Aetna Viaduct (it's named after an HMO, that's how bad it is  ) and replace with a boulevard / upgraded streets / another way to downtown.

As a truck driver in the northeast, I have quite a few words about I84 in Hartford, and none of them are nice. I agree with a tunnel, or maybe a real bypass of the city.

[KEVIN_224]

Getting this back to the Big Dig and Boston...I'm almost certain that a small above-ground piece of a green steel beam is in place somewhere along Atlantic Avenue, within a couple blocks of the New England Aquarium. 

Do you know whereabouts or how big the beam is?  I checked Google Earth & GSV but couldn't find anything that looked like such.

The girder is located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Clinton Street and the Surface Artery.  It's from one of the support columns for the old elevated highway, but has been relocated and cut off to about one story high.

It's right here:
https://goo.gl/maps/R5arQNoWbKu