You can call me a troll if you want. You are the one that thinks if you personally can’t use something then society as a whole should get rid of it so no one can use it. It’s one of the more ridiculous and selfish opinions I’ve seen on this sub

You were unhappy that the train went to a station that you aren’t allowed to get off at. Then you were unhappy that the train slowed down at the stop you weren’t allowed to get off at.

When I pointed out that other people used public transit besides you, you tried to say that the users of the river works station were the ones who needed to realize that other people exist.

I clarified that you need to realize that other people use the train who get off at the river works station. It’s a real station. I got all that stuff from your words. I used an extreme example to show you how silly the logic was. Sorry that it went over your head

Using your silly logic then trains should only pick people up at the stop where you get on and drop people off at the stop where you get off.

There are tons of stops in between the stops for your personal commute that you don’t use. Should we get rid of all of them? Just for you? No. Like I said, other people exist besides just you.

Just because you don’t personally use it that doesn’t mean anything. Other people use it

So? What’s your point? The whole world should revolve around your transit needs? Other people exist

Get off and go where? The ge facility?

My neighbor used to walk from his house to the train, take it to ge everyday, take the train home, and never use his car. He did it for 25 years and never drove to work. The ge stop is very successful in reducing the number of drivers on the road without additional trackwork or expense. The train just stops a few minutes along a track it was already taking. The ge stop is one of the few times public transit has been done right.

What? Ratepayers pay into the mass save fund and then the state creates incentives for a REDUCTION in electricity usage as part of the ‘Efficiency is our first fuel’ initiative.

The utilities don’t do it from the goodness of their heart OR because they want favor with legislators. They work with the state, ratepayers, contractors and others to help make us the #2 state for energy efficiency right behind California.

Agreed, it’s not altruistic. It’s a way to move the needle for energy efficiency in a state that doesn’t produce much of its own energy. I get that they are being an asshole on your rebate, but that’s how government programs work, they suck and they take forever. It’s not a reflection on the design of the program

Mass save is a state program. It doesn’t make money off of anyone. I get that they are being shitty to you but I don’t think suing will work in this case

Were you not going out in the late 2000s/ early 2010s? That’s literally when sex work in the neighborhood was at its peak. The Dunkin’ Donuts on main was featured in a documentary about prostitution. During the early days of the recession it picked up a lot and local politicians ran on anti sex work campaigns

Using Google maps it looks like it also leads to Malibu beach and Savin hill beach.

The alternative to a drawbridge is just a higher bridge that boats can go under without an operator. Removing the bridge and having no bridge is not an option, it’s also a street that cars go over. It’s Morrissey boulevard. The yacht club does not create the need for the drawbridge nor does it change the fact that a new bridge might be needed due to lack of maintenance. The author of the ‘article’ is just putting out his opinion mixed with misinformation.

**edited to remove my opinion and stick to the facts

Agreed but looking at some of the comments, the fact that this is one persons opinion isn’t clear to everyone.

His “facts” are his interpretation of reality. This bridge is not a subsidy of the DYC pleasure boats. That’s untrue.

The way that he talks about ‘navigable waterway’ being the motive for a costly repair is also untrue. It’s the lack of maintenance that is causing a costly repair.

The yacht club does not create a need for a drawbridge. Several commenters are not understanding that. The water is a navigable waterway per federal AND state definition of what a navigable waterway is. Moving the yacht club does nothing for that definition.

I get that you can tell that he has an agenda, but a lot of people seem to be missing that.

Agreed, the yacht club has nothing to do with it

This is one persons opinion masquerading as a news article. There is no magic fix to ‘decertify’ a navigable waterway or move the yacht club.

I’m also mad that they didn’t maintain the bridge and now the cost to replace it is outrageous. It literally has nothing to do with the yacht club, boats, or navigable waterway.

The guy who wrote this ‘article’ has his own agenda that doesn’t seem to be reliant on facts

It will never NOT be a navigable waterway. Even if the federal definition changes it will still be a navigable waterway by state law 310 CMR 9

Understood and agreed! The title is just misleading

I’m not defending Middleborough, but most towns are NOT going along with the new multi family housing law. You can require all the action plan you want, if the housing isn’t being built then towns are not going along with it