The Mass Pike doesn't HAVE to be 4 lanes by BU

[Andreae Downs]

In MassDOT's proposals for replacing the deteriorating viaduct, MassHighway has insisted on four lanes plus two breakdown lanes--nearly doubling the width of the road in a very tight section--the Charles River is on one side, BU on the other (and Storrow Drive and the Commuter Rail--with 4 rather than 2 tracks--are also squeezed into this area. dubbed "the Throat"). 

Losing Federal highway money (already clawed back by the current administration) has been the excuse for upsizing the Turnpike.

But it doesn't have to be that way:

The “Jerry Lundegaard” Defense Fails in New Jersey: A Lesson for the IBR. For years, state highway departments have perfected a specific kind of bureaucratic theater. When local leaders ask for smaller, more urban-friendly infrastructure, DOT officials perform their best “Jerry Lundegaard” impression—insisting that their “manager” (the federal government) simply won’t allow a better deal. They solemnly swear that any change to a bloated project would trigger a catastrophic loss of federal funds or restart a decade of environmental reviews.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill just proved that this is a convenient fiction.

By downsizing the $10.7 billion Newark Bay Bridge “boondoggle” by half—eliminating a massive capacity expansion even after the federal environmental review (FONSI) was signed—Sherrill has demonstrated that right-sizing is entirely legally possible. This follows a similar 40 percent reduction of Cincinnati’s Brent Spence Bridge.

 New Jersey and Cincinnati prove that even after federal money is committed, leadership can—and should—trim the fat. the precedent is now undeniable: it is never too late to stop a boondoggle.

[Nedeljkovic, Srdjan S.,MD]

Hi all,

Regarding the ongoing discussion about "the Throat" at the Rt 90 Allston project, I have long been advocating for reducing the lanes on the Turnpike. It would allow for a much better design with no degradation of traffic flow.

See my recent comments about this below (Sept 24, 2025; July 9, 2025; April 27, 2025; April 18, 2025; July 4, 2024)

The Allston turnpike plans need to be revised to have a 3-lane design. Consider this a compromise... because the more radical solution is to deconstruct the Turnpike completely and turn it into a boulevard!

Srdj

From: Nedeljkovic, Srdjan S.,MD <snedel...@mgb.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 8:29 AM
To: Leo Hannenberg <lhann...@gmail.com>; TAG <newt...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: I guess elections do matter

 

Hi all,

It's a shame to see some of the lower-cost neighborhood projects unfunded. Perhaps state/local funding can make up the difference. Maybe there are some cost cuts that can be implemented?

As for the larger projects, like the Allston Turnpike project, I remain opposed to expanding the turnpike from 3 lanes to 4 lanes and believe this is counterproductive towards our transportation and climate goals. By keeping the Turnpike a consistent 3-lanes, this may reduce the cost of the project and allow for more space otherwise.

Srdj

From: Nedeljkovic, Srdjan S.,MD <snedel...@mgb.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 3:47 PM
To: Andreae Downs <andrea...@gmail.com>; TAG <newt...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Federal funding for I-90 Allston project in jeopardy - CommonWealth Beacon

 

Andreae and all,

Honestly, folks, if the state and DOT don't reconsider reducing the lanes on the Pike at the Throat, I wouldn't be unhappy to see the project paused.

Going "back to the drawing board" is not necessarily a bad outcome!

Srdj

From: Nedeljkovic, Srdjan S.,MD <snedel...@mgb.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2025 8:00 PM
To: Andreae Downs <andrea...@gmail.com>; TAG <newt...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: Emily Norton <em...@emilynorton.org>
Subject: Re: The Path Forward for Allston's Highway Megaproject Is Getting Narrower - Streetsblog Massachusetts

 

All,

I am completely aligned with Emily on the matter of sensible planning for the number of travel lanes for the Rt 90 Allston project. But here is the biggest impediment, as quoted from the Streetsblog article:

""If the highway were reduced from 4 lanes to 3 lanes in each direction, the new capacity would be about 5,300 vehicles per hour'" in each direction.

Hall then asserted that traffic would overwhelm a 6-lane Turnpike."

Ever since I guy named Downs (🙂) first described the "Fundamental Law of Traffic Congestion" in 1962, traffic engineers and planners have been obstinate in failing to understand the basic realities of roadways. 

Also, modeling should be done with the expectation that our population will not only get older and drive less and use more transit, but that our overall population will decline, as described in this recent official US Census report:

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023/population-projections.html

The greatest decline would occur if there were to be a zero-immigration scenario, in which case the US population will be 226 million in 2100, which is about 100 million fewer people than now. 

The basic data inputs for this project should not be determined by the traffic/highway consultants (who are prone to outdated highway-centric thinking) but by the project management team or by a task force of citizens and public officials. I think it would be safe to assume that there will be at least a 20% reduction in traffic demand by the time this project is completed.

Srdj

From: Nedeljkovic, Srdjan S.,MD <snedel...@mgb.org>
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2025 11:44 AM
To: Andreae Downs <andrea...@gmail.com>; TAG <newt...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Allston interchange

 

Hi all,

As I've said many times, there is no need to expand the Turnpike. It should be three lanes, not four. I'm glad that others are also recognizing the fallacy that the pike needs to be widened and expanded.

Of course, in the last e-mail I sent to this group on this topic, I called for completely dismantling the "Turnpike extension." However, I don't think people are ready yet to accept such a radical solution! Maybe the best we can hope for is a 3-lane Pike in Allston, rather than a bloated 4-lane roadway.

Srdj

From my note on July 4 2024:

Also, the current plans show that the Pike shrinks from 4 lanes to 3 lanes at the Cambridge Street exit eastbound, mainly because of the presence of new slip lanes on either side that are 2 lanes each. Why then would the turnpike have to re-expand to 4 lanes for a distance of just 2 miles east of here when it once again shrinks to 3 lanes at the Prudential Center? ... The 3-lane option would help alleviate the issues at the "throat' where Soldiers Field Road and the Pike come in close proximity. 

---

---

---

---

From: newt...@googlegroups.com <newt...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Andreae Downs <andrea...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2026 2:14 PM
To: Newtongreenissues <newtongr...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: TAG <Newt...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: The Mass Pike doesn't HAVE to be 4 lanes by BU

 

        External Email - Use Caution        

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TAG" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to NewtonTAG+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/NewtonTAG/CAMXFXcOfkEZY1JE%2B2O3CWDe1EedOv1BkwGW7Zp2iOJh9iB4E4Q%40mail.gmail.com.

The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed.  If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Mass General Brigham Compliance HelpLine at https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/complianceline .

Please note that this e-mail is not secure (encrypted).  If you do not wish to continue communication over unencrypted e-mail, please notify the sender of this message immediately.  Continuing to send or respond to e-mail after receiving this message means you understand and accept this risk and wish to continue to communicate over unencrypted e-mail.