Last summer in the political doldrums of BMG I suggested a radical plan to eliminate Storrow drive rather than spend 100’s of millions to fix one underpass. It was trounced by many of the BMG Regulars as absurd and ridiculous. Now a reasonable proposal, endorse by even the Boston Globe editorial staff http://www.boston.com/bostongl… has emerged to take a small step towards opening up Storrow to pedestrians, bicycles and joggers for a few hours each Sunday morning. To paraphrase from our first landing on the moon that this is just one small step but no giant leap towards this goal, but the view back from the moon to look at our fragile planet launched a title wave of environmental awareness that questioned how and why we live the way we do. Perhaps a gentle stroll down Storrow on a cool and sultry Sunday morning (as it was intended for before car habitat invaded James Jackson Sorrow’s vision of Parklands along the Charles) might just become the giant leap towards a step away from our autos come first addiction.
(or at least less highly skeptical) if there were another practical way to get into town on Sunday mornings, as I frequently have to do. But there isn’t, because the “Sunday schedule” used by the T, especially on the commuter rail, makes the T basically useless. If DCR can convince the T to run a weekday schedule when Storrow is closed, great. ‘Til then, no thanks.
the proposal is for outbound (west), not inbound, from 7:30 – 10:00 am. What time do you leave town?
That would absolutely, positively RUIN my social life.
<
p>All my friends live in Brookline, requiring me to use Storrow Drive to get there. Multiply this factor by about 1,000,000 people and think of the needs of the many versus the few. If I had to go a different way, along with many other people, it would take me so much longer to get into town that I may as well not go, because I’ll have to get back by the time I get there. It’s bad enough when they close a lane down and it takes me about 30 minutes to go about 1 mile’s distance. But even when that happens, it’s still quicker than going a different way.
<
p>I’m all for public transportation and less cars, but we have to be realistic and admit that people drive and situations can’t change over night. Believe me, I would take the T if it wouldn’t take me upwards of 2 hours to get from Swampscott to Brookline – and cost more than actually driving, between parking fairs at Wonderland and the very expensive T.
<
p>In the meantime, let’s use policies that encourage greener cars and cheaper/more efficient public transportation. I, for one, get better gas mileage than any non-Hybrid car with my Honda Civic… we need everyone driving Civic-Type cars or, if they must, Hybrid SUVs that get at least 35-40 mpg.
<
p>If we want smart policy that stops people from driving over the long run, it needs to start at housing development. Link new housing development near the city or in the city, keep it very close to public transportation and stop the shift toward suburbs and exurbs. Then make sure public transportation doesn’t completely suck – and expand it to make it more convenient. These are the things we need to do, not close down Storrow for for a few dozen joggers. There’s plenty of room to jog on Storrow Drive already. GRR. Millions of people versus a few…
<
p>It’s going to take years to stop this American trend where people want to live further and further away from the city. But, in the meantime, let’s not kill my social life, please. =p More importantly, let’s be realistic and not completely annoying to the vast majority of Greater Boston. It’s tough to get people to go along with smart housing and environmental policy, when half the time people who support the environment annoy the hell out of them with useless/stupid policies such as this.
2. You don’t need Storrow. Take the Pike to exit 20.
3. Your figure for 1,000,000 people using Storrow outbound on a Sunday from 7:30 – 10:00 am are more than suspect.
4. The Toyota Yaris is the non-hybrid with the best mpg, not the Honda Civic. The Toyota Corolla, Honda Fit, and the Mini Cooper also outperform the Honda Civic in fuel efficiency.
Apparently that didn’t come through.
<
p>I will still say that overall I think it a bad idea, especially since some in this thread were suggesting a permanent shut down of Storrow Drive – which was mainly what I was referring to. Sunday mornings in the summer before, let’s say, noon would be okay. Bear in mind, though, that they already shut down a lane of Storrow Drive almost every night in the summer and even during non-traffic hours, Storrow Drive becomes a nightmare because of it (a half hour for a half mile is about what it takes, when it would otherwise take 2 or 3 minutes). Many more people use Storrow Drive as an important way to get into Boston, which saves upwards of at least a half hour (and money, versus the pike) than use it for riding bikes. Closing down Storrow Drive wouldn’t change that fact, it would only add more traffic to Beacon St. and the Pike.
<
p>
<
p>Er. Wrong.
<
p>2008 Yaris vs. 2003 Civic (what I drive).
<
p>
<
p>A 2008 non-hybrid Civic is bested by the Yaris, in mileage, by 3mpg and 2mpg (city, highway) respectively, but has 140 horsepower compared to 106. In other words, the Yaris ought to be more fuel efficient, but isn’t. I’d take that very, very minor difference for the extra kick – and I’m not exactly a speedster or anything.
You’re comparing apples and oranges, since the test to determine fuel economy changed in 2006ish. The new tests are “stricter” in that they come up with results that are numerically lower than the old test.
<
p>Given that the 2007 Yaris outperforms the 2007 Civic in fuel efficiency, I’m skeptical that a 2003 Civic outperforms the 2007 Yaris in an apples-to-apples comparison.
<
p>
<
p>And yes, the punchline-less humor was lost on me.
The ’03 Civic and ’07 Yaris are under the same mileage standard. The fuel economy change did not occur until very recently, with the ’08 models bearing the new stickers, at least on cars.com. Don’t believe me? Check out the ’07 and ’08 Yaris, with exactly the same engines, transmissions, etc.. The ’08 Yaris has not been remodelled. Yet, only ’08 models, such as the Yaris, will have the federally updated mileage standards written in cars.com. Hence why the ’08 Yaris is recorded as having worse mileage than the ’07 on cars.com, though I promise you they’re actually exactly the same in real life. There was a Globe article about the shift, too, but I don’t have the time to find it tonight. It’s no older than 2-3 months. I’d hope you can take my word for it, because I’d rather not have to take time out of my day tomorrow to find it (since I have about 15 hours of work to do), but will if I must.
<
p>Furthermore, your comparison with the ’07 Civic was entirely pointless. That’s a completely different car than the ’03 Civic, with a much larger engine than the ’03. Truly apples to oranges.
<
p>So, again, my ’03 Honda Civic gets better gas mileage than the ’07 Yaris. Heck, the ’03 Corolla did too, if I remember correctly (I looked up all this data before, when the Yaris first came out, because my friend was thinking of getting one and I that’s how I talked him out – worse mileage for a slower, smaller car). Toyota could have made the Yaris far more fuel efficient than it is (given the puny size of the engine), but I’m guessing it wasn’t cost efficient or something, because they didn’t. The same thing can be said of the entire Scion line, which tend to have smaller engines with not-so-great gas mileage compared to their engine sizes. Their HP isn’t impressive either, surprisingly. Note that the Yaris shares many similarities with the Scions, such as their annoying spedometers being located in the middle of the dash board. I believe the Xa/Xb’s are on the same chassis as the Yaris, as well. Whether or not that’s why the Yaris doesn’t have better mileage than it should, I don’t know, but suffice it to say my car gets better mileage and has slightly more horsepower (by a whopping 9 LOL) and this silly, sophomoric conversation should be over.
Let’s start with Sunday mornings in the Summer in one direction (as the article suggests), and see what happens. Cyclovias are all over South America and Australia, and are taking hold in Europe. Why not encourage fitness, enjoying open space, community, and other social activity in a safe setting?
<
p>Storrow Drive is a park after all, and roads dramatically reduce the number of acres that are usable, in some places by 50% or more.
…closing Storrow Drive on Sunday mornings would put more vehicles onto Beacon Street. I’m not sure that that is desirable.
<
p>It’s been a while since I’ve been down there, but, if memory serves, the Esplanade has pedestrian and biking paths that border Storrow Dr, so closing Storrow doesn’t seem to make any sense. I believe I understand that what Boston is trying to do: mirror what Cambridge is doing with Memorial Drive, but Cambridge doesn’t have seem to have much of an analog to the Esplanade.
Cambridge has an exact analogue — a 3 to 4 foot wide paved path along the river.
<
p>It’s just not wide enough to encourage community interaction. It’s not wide enough to encourage families [especially those with kids under 12 years old] to exercise together.
<
p>The paved paths on both sides of the street are for transportation, not for community activity. There’s a major difference.
…3-4 foot wide path next to MemDrive isn’t exactly analogous to the Esplanade.
<
p>I sincerely don’t have a dog in this fight. If Boston wants to close Storrow Drive on Sunday Morning for a few hours, that’s their business. But it seems to me (interpreting Ryan) that all that that will do is shift traffic onto Beacon Street.
<
p>If that’s what they want, whatever. We haven’t been in downtown Boston in years.
<
p>BTW, if you want to see what a city park should be, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E…
along the north side of the Charles is a paved path that is virtually identical to the paved path along Storrow.
<
p>Compare:
<
p>Storrow Drive and the path with dashed white line north of the road here.
Memorial Drive and the path south of the road here.
<
p>
<
p>Both parks have paved paths 3-4 feet wide near the river which are used for cycling and jogging. Cambridge closes down the large road adjacent to the parks on Sunday mornings, allowing for far more people to enjoy the are for recreation, exercise, and socialization uses. Boston does not close down Storrow, but if it did the situation would be quite similar. That’s the analogous part.
<
p>And BTW: as you’ll notice in the part of Storrow Drive and the Esplanade that I mentioned, some parts of the park that are accessible to pedestrians/cyclists are only 4 feet wide because Storrow Drive bends near Charlesgate to allow access to Boyleston, pinching off the park itself. There’s no access to the median between the Eastward and Westward parts of Storrow — so the park may be nice to look at [if your brain can turn off seeing the highway on either side], but it’s utterly inaccessible to park users.
Right. There is a huge beautiful park on the boston side, dude. A sidewalk on the Cambridge side. That’s the non-analogous part.
While I can see where people worry about more traffic being diverged to other streets, not too many people come into town on Sunday mornings anyway, or not as many. Closing Storrow Drive to vehicular traffic on Sunday mornings during the warmer weather (from April/May through October)as they do a section of Memorial Drive would make sense. At this time of year…nah.
Seems to me there’d be zero benefit, since there already is, as raj points out, an esplanade with bike paths and open space. Adding one side of storrow to that would be useless, you still wouldn’t be able to cross storrow into boston. There also already is a closed memorial drive across the river for people that need more space for roller blade slaloms and things like that.
<
p>And there would be costs. It’ll take many police officers to close and open the road, extra traffic on beacon, lost frustrated tourists, etc.
<
p>real costs for zero benefits.
A closed road in that section allows for far more recreation, exercise, and socializing than is currently possible.
<
p>You could argue that those benefits are not substantial [or that nobody will come and those benefits will go unrealized], but their potential certainly exists.
…for Howie Carr to poke fun at Boston about. He already had been doing it with the various marches or 10K runs for this that and the other cause in June.
<
p>Fine with me, if you want to do that. I’m not exactly sure why the roller-bladers from Boston can’t cross the Harvard Bridge to make use of the closed MemDrive to make use of that roadway. Is there really that much of a demand that they have to close off part of Sorrow Drive for the same purpose?
I don’t know. That’s why I support trying it and publicizing it, and finding out.
<
p>And BTW — the Harvard Bridge is about 3/4 of a mile long. For adult exercise it’s no biggie, but an additional 1.5 miles travel for recreation isn’t trivial, especially with kids.
..an economic sense. You know, supply vs. demand.
<
p>If you want to dump westbound traffic onto Beacon Street, feel free. I find it difficult to believe that the number of kids who would use Storrow Dr. would be large enough to require closing off even a portion of it, instead of using the Esplanade (or the Common or Boston Garden), but it’s your choice. As I wrote, I don’t have a dog in this fight.
The problem, as documented by the Globe a few months ago, is that many of our recreational paths, including the Minuteman and the Charles River Paths, are overcrowded on weekends. By closing part of Storrow, it will reduce crowding on the paths and hopefully bring more people out. If I had children, I probably wouldn’t bring them onto the Charles River Paths on many weekends because the paths are so crowded.
n/t
It is only westbound lanes being closed. You will not be able to get out of Boston easily before 11 AM. It makes perfect sense.
It’s only a proposal, right?
<
p>I think it’s just anti-car sentiment at work here among the supporters of this proposal. They just will feel pleasure at having banished cars, it makes no difference to them if there is any benefit or not. They get to pretend that they’ve brought us closer to a green carless future, but it is just an illusion, all the cars will just be somewhere else, pissed off. But then that’s the point, isn’t it?
but I’m not coming from an anti-car sentiment. I’m coming from a pro-exercise, pro-socializing, pro-human powered transport sentiment.
<
p>There’s a finite amount of land useful for both auto drivers and non-auto users, and one example is the land occupied by Storrow Drive. How many more square miles of land have to be covered by roads than park for it to be enough? What’s wrong with changing the ratio over time?
I’m coming from a pro-exercise, pro-socializing, pro-human powered transport sentiment.
<
p>There’s a finite amount of land useful for both auto drivers and non-auto users, and one example is the land occupied by Storrow Drive. How many more square miles of land have to be covered by roads than park for it to be enough?
<
p>Oddly enough, I’ve been to the Boston Common and the Public Garden. There is lots of room there for exercising and socializing. You don’t need to close off a roadway to do so.
<
p>Obviously, you have not clicked onto the link that connects to the description of what a city park should look like: Munich’s EnglischerGarten.
<
p>2. I did click your link. I read about the park. I’ve been to parks like it in Vienna. Frankly, it’s not my style of park. My preference: long, flat, paved surfaces full of people rolling around on all sorts of different human-powered instruments.
Since the Uturn lane on the pike can’t be used by us ordinary folks. People from Eastie won’t be able to get to the Back Bay in any reasonable shape or form until after 11 am on sundays. Brilliant. Just Brilliant. After all its our fault for living in East Boston and not with the beautiful people right.
<
p>Thanks for reminding me to call Carlo Basile about this.
as it was intended for before car habitat invaded James Jackson Sorrow’s vision of Parklands along the Charles
<
p>I have gotten a number of chuckles out of this. Maybe James Jackson would be sorrowful out of what became of his vision but it’s unclear that that was his name. And having driven down Sorrow Drive in decades past, I’ll admit to having been sorry I did.
… but an accurate reflection of the sentiment I am trying to capture. Glad I missed it in the edit and still surprised to see the abject terror that slowing down, for even a few hours and/or losing the ability to jump into a car can strike into the hearts of people given a few of the comments. As I said Car Addiction!!!