Hey, there! Log in / Register
Gov coming to Allston for Multi-Modal announcement
By HarryMattison on Sun, 09/28/2014 - 8:07pm
Possible future site of West Station
On Tuesday, Governor Patrick and MassDOT officials will visit Allston to make an announcement about multi-modal improvements in the I-90 Interchange Improvement Project.
Also, Monday is the deadline to submit comments to [email protected] about this project. More info at http://peoplespike.com/AllstonEsplanade/
------- Details of Tuesday's event -------
Who: Governor Deval Patrick, MassDOT Secretary Richard A. Davey, Highway Administrator Frank DePaola, MBTA General Manager Dr. Beverly Scott
When: Tuesday, September 30th at 2:30 PM
Where: Beacon Park Yards in Allston, intersection of Lincoln and Cambridge Streets.
On Tuesday September 30th, Governor Deval Patrick, will be joined by MassDOT Secretary Richard A. Davey, Highway Administrator Frank DePaola and MBTA General Manager Dr. Beverly Scott to make an announcement relative to multi-modal improvements to be included in the I-90 Allston Interchange Improvement Project.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
This is great, its ridiculous
This is great, its ridiculous how many commuter rail lines run right through Boston but don't stop until back bay or downtown, ignoring all the Boston residents who need to get downtown as well as the people who, increasingly, are working in Boston but not downtown. This will also help reverse commuters, who won't have to take the T downtown to catch a commuter rail to suburban office parks. I hope the candidates for governor both promise to build this station and keep investing public transportation in dense areas and not just in far flung suburbs like the Weld-Romney years. The first subway station since the Dukakis era finally just opened (Assembly), lets hope both governors promise to keep the momentum going.
Where is all this money
Where is all this money coming from, for all these projects? How can you do all these good things ( ridership numbers ) , if they are going to quagmire themselves into Southcoast Rail. The new Capeflyer has shown that that line could go to Buzzards Bay daily, that seems viable, but NB and Fall Rive, forget about it! They still owe the trolley line from the Arborway !
Not sure what you are getting at here
Do you expect transit users to pay full freight when drivers do not?
This is likely coming from federal money being spent on the Pike project. Part of the process is seeing how to fix other problems and part is that it is a TRANSPORTATION project, not just a HIGHWAY project - moving people, not just moving cars.
You don't trust Ike?
You don't trust Ike?
Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aid_Highway_Act_of_1956
Swirls , I was talking of the other grandiose schemes that lack a critical mass. These are not the times to spend on public transportation for the sake of having public transportation . We have eroding existing infrastructures that need to be addressed before quaqmiring a new line through a swamp.
We need more and better public transit
Sorry, but it isn't an either or - this is a both/and.
We can't pour money into highway infrastructure when the capacity of that structure cannot be increased, and our rail and transit systems are also suffering from serious neglect.
The US has increasing demand for rail and public transit systems, especially now that most cities are growing at their core, not their edges, due to oversaturation of the highway systems. Commutes have grown long enough that people are moving into cities, not out, and the more people can go about their business without cars, the more liveable those cities become. Moreover, with an aging populace, we need to provide alternatives to driving everywhere.
My Dad started out paving county roads and eventually moved up (through the exam system) to being a highway engineer. He worked on all the major interstate projects in our state during his career. Even he understood the need for better transportation, and that better transportation meant better public transportation and alternatives to car use for shorter trips. He knew this ten years ago - and, it appears, he was ahead of his time in that realization. It is about moving people, not moving cars.
It's about moving freight my
It's about moving freight my Swirls.......
Your commute to work theory might work in the email fax gadgetry world, but where did Stop and Shop move their distribution from ? From South Boston , to Readville , and now to Freetown. What would it cost, and where could you build , one million square feet , of warehousing , in or near the city ? At one time , the big commercial place to be was University ave Westwood , now that is changing to retail. You can't build public transportation to everywhere , the real three dimensional world of physical goods follows the law of supply and demand. Carry on , Swirls. Be happy , soon you can ride the bike to the Roche Bros. In Davis Square, you will like it. The Bros. ( not the original Pat and Bud ) do a good job.
I ate my own apples for lunch , am I in your club yet ?
Fewer cars
= more room for freight hauling. Less traffic is a win for trucks.
Also, this is a small fraction of the money being spent on I-90, as others have noted. Best to fix existing problems while the whole mess is still being designed.
Besides, Boston is not a port like, say, the 50 miles of container ports stretching from Seattle to Olympia or LA. The freight needs are mostly needs of local people, not a need to ship half the output of China into the rest of the continent.
Swirls , you are dissing the
Swirls , you are dissing the Longshoreman ? They do china work too at Conley,
China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) and its partners, "K" Line, Yang Ming Line, and Hanjin call Boston weekly, providing direct service between Boston and ports in China (Qingdao, Shanghai, Ningbo, Yokohama).
Ocean Carriers
OCEAN CARRIER SERVICES IN THE PORT OF BOSTON
Some of the world's largest container carriers call at the Port of Boston, opening up markets to more than 100 ports around the globe. The Port of Boston's trading areas include Europe, the Mediterranean, North and South Asia, and the Middle East.
The Port of Boston is served twice weekly by Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC).
MSC offers a weekly service from Europe (Bremerhaven, Felixstowe, Rotterdam, Antwerp, and LeHavre) with Boston as the second U.S. port inbound.
MSC offers a weekly service from the Mediterranean (Valencia, Gioia Tauro, Naples, Leghorn, La Spezia, Valencia, and Sines) with Boston as the first U.S. port inbound.
China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) and its partners, "K" Line, Yang Ming Line, and Hanjin call Boston weekly, providing direct service between Boston and ports in China (Qingdao, Shanghai, Ningbo, Yokohama).
Boston is New England’s gateway to the Midwest via truck. Cargo off-loaded in Boston can reach Chicago in 24 hours by truck.
The following container carriers offer service to Boston:
Steamship Line Trade Area Frequency
China Ocean Shipping Co.
Tel: (800) 242-7354
COSCO China, Japan,
SE Asia Direct Weekly Service To Asia (AWE-2)
Hanjin Shipping Co, Ltd.
Tel: (781) 849-3130
Fax: (781) 849-1539
Hanjin China, Japan
Asia, Indian sub-continent Direct Weekly Service to Asia (AWE-2)
K Line America, Inc.
Tel: (781) 961-9595
Fax (781) 986-3659
"K" Line Japan, China Direct Weekly Service to Asia (AWE-2)
Mediterranean Shipping Co.
Tel: (978) 532-3712
Fax: (978) 532-3718
MSC UK/Continent,
E/W Mediterranean,
Middle East Direct Weekly Service from Europe and from the Mediterranean
Yang Ming Line
Agent: Moran Shipping
Tel: (617) 443-0616
Fax: (617) 428-6037
Yang Ming China, Japan,
SE Asia Direct Weekly
Service to Asia (AWE-2)
https://www.massport.com/port-of-boston/conley-terminal/ocean-carriers/
And that doesnt include Moran , that does cars,
SHIPPING MOTOR VEHICLES THROUGH THE PORT OF BOSTON
Automobile imports and exports are an important market for the Port of Boston. The Boston Autoport is located on an 80 acre site in Charlestown and can accommodate the processing of 70,000 motor vehicles per year for import or export.
Still nowhere near a major port
Boston may be #23 in in this list, but look at the relative port volumes. Boston comes in at 100,000 TEUs, while Los Angeles and Long Beach together total over 7,000,000 TEUs! NYC handles about 28 times the volume of Boston.
Boston's needs are for moving people and goods into and out of the city. The port volume doesn't warrant the building an I-405!
It has potential, is serviced
It has potential, is serviced by China lines, and provides jobs. Are you posturing to eliminate the port, to expand the new world order ? Recently I went to Castle Island for a few hot dogs, took a ride down 1 st Street , East and West , broke my heart to see all those businesses gone , no White Fuel , the warehouses , gone. I think Linde used to make acetylene down there on the corner with K , can still see the name on the brick stack. Ah , the inhumanity of it all.....
not his point
I don't think he's complaining about transit getting funded. Rather, I think he's (very reasonably) worried about West Station and other worthwhile, cost-effective transit projects struggling to compete for limited funding with politically motivated bloat like South Coast Rail. I don't think that's been a problem so far, but it certainly could be in the future.
I'm very interested to see the plans for West Station. If the state commits to creating frequent, all-day, service to downtown and hopefully to Kendall, this will be a game changer for Beacon Park just like the orange line station was for Assembly. In both cases, highway access is important, but the area can't unlock its full potential without rapid transit.
frequent, all-day, service
Frequency of service is key, which is why it is essential that the construction of West Station also include the construction of a 2nd track for the Grand Junction line. Currently, MassDOT is not planning this 2nd line, which means ~30 minute service. With two lines it could be more like ~10 minutes.
As much as I would like to see a 2 track Grand Junction...
how in the world would the T or the Commonwealth pay to get the ROW wide enough through the stretches of MIT where it is only wide enough for one track now (e.g., between Mass. Ave and Main) where MIT apparently has and has built on air rights?
More than anything else (and this is a separate discussion) I would like to see DMU service on 15 minute headways between Waltham and North Station. It would be absolutely transformative and would be so immediately.
Right-of-way width
Does anyone know what the true story is on the right-of-way here? I just eyeballed it from street and satellite views, and naively, it seems wide enough for two tracks, even through the buildings. If I'm right about this, then there's only the relatively cheap/easy problem of laying new tracks, and telling some people to find someplace else to park. However, I'm just some rando with a computer and I'm certainly not qualified to say for sure one way or the other. Does anyone reading know the answer for sure?
Another concern I've heard about for this stretch is interference with road traffic on the at-grade crossings. Some people on the internet say it wouldn't be an issue. Others people on the internet say it will grind traffic to a virtual halt for many hours a day. My non-expert opinion on this is that it seems like such a rail line would relieve more traffic than it causes. But, here again, who am I to say? I wonder if anyone has done a real analysis of train headways vs. predicted traffic impacts for this stretch?
Answer?
I think I may have an answer to my own question.
First, the land in question is a single lot, Cambridge map 53, lot 70: http://www.cambridgema.gov/Assess/PropertyDatabase/2640&pv=Yes
This parcel encompasses the track, and stretches all the way from Main St. to Mass Ave. No building is listed on the Assessor's property page, so I am assuming that the entire width of this property is clear of any parts of any buildings at train height.
The parcel is owned by MIT, but we know that the MBTA (and Amtrak, and freight railways) do indeed have the right-of-way over the land. Do they have the right to build more track? Do they have the right to use the entire width of the parcel? I don't know.
The City of Cambridge lists the area of the parcel as 110,208 square feet. I used Google Maps' measuring tool to discover that the parcel is approximately 1497 feet long. That means that the parcel is approximately 73 feet wide.
Is 73 feet wide enough for double-track? Yes, indeed, it is. See section 2-B-4 of this set of MBTA guidelines. It says that track centerlines should be separated by at least 14 feet, and that no structure should be within 8.5 feet of the centerline of the track. So, it looks like that means that you only need 30 feet of width for two tracks.
So, absent any other information (or maybe I made a bonehead math error?), it seems like there's plenty of room to support two tracks through here.
according to the deed for the
according to the deed for the property, it is partially 72.5 feet wide, partially 82.5 feet wide. There is specifically an easement on the property for rail, which refers to plans for the property which don't appear to be available as part of the deed online. To get real details on the easement, one would presumably have to visit Middlesex County in person.
I'd prefer that the state
I'd prefer that the state spend this money running frequent, direct buses. You can run a whole lot of buses, plus some cheap time-saving infrastructure like queue-jump and contraflow bus lanes, for a lot less than the cost of a West Station.
Indeed , J man !
Indeed , J man !
Why are you only asking about
Why are you only asking about public transit projects? Where is all the money coming from for the Mass Pike straightening part of the project, or the renovations needed for storrow highway tunnels, or the Mass Pike project now under construction, or the 128 lane addition, or the recent 93 bridge replacement project? We are still paying for the Big Dig (all taxpayers, not just user or drivers) thanks to Weld and Bakers pay it later scheme.
The vast majority of the money for Beacon Yards project is going to highways and roads (straighten 90 and redo ramps and parts of storrow), saying that people that live there should be able to benefit with better transit assess and walkability with a much smaller portion of the funds is not unreasonable, and we shouldn't have to fight for scraps when it comes to pedestrian/bicycle/transit funds when highway and road/bridge funds are so much larger and rarely questioned.
The real beneficiary isn't
The real beneficiary isn't roads -- it's Harvard.