Andrew Square

M

mass88

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
2,589
Reaction score
1,215
I have noticed some work is being done in Andrew Square. New street lights have been put up. Does anyone know the extent of this work?
 
Many years back the city released a report on rebuilding Dorchester Avenue. The expensive, pretty useless project (I live just off Dot Ave) actually states that since there are six different types of lighting used on the many miles of the street, all should be ripped out and replaced. Even the newer acorn lighting installed within the past ten years in some areas.

Our government is rich, brimming with extra money to throw at anything, so this is a pretty good use of all that spare cash they have laying around.

Additionally, just due to the fact that the regularly-scheduled timing of this wasteful project happens to fall within the hazy window of the failed, so-called "Stimulus Bill" this project has been branded as part of that failure. Even though it would have happened anyway.

Does that answer your question? You just can't have light poles in Andrew Square that look different than light poles in Lower Mills. Duh.
 
$15M in intersection improvements all along Dorchester Ave. See this link for more info. We started it last fall. Should be finished in a 18-24 months.

And Pelhamhall is partly right. A lot of the work is silly aesthetic improvements, but alot of it is legit pedestrian and handicapped improvements. Some of the handicapped stuff comes from threats of a lawsuit - which the City has been especially sensitive to since the State (AAB) handed the City it's ass in a lawsuit over handicapped accessibility along Huntington Ave.
 
Parking lots at street corners, huh?

Not one of the four corners at this intersection engages the pedestrian. Parking lots or parks.

Where will the parks' users come from? Strollin' down the Avenue?
 
Despite the rendering, Ashmont St is one intersection that gets a major improvement (at least from an organizational point of view). Right now there are at least 11 zig zagging crosswalks that I can think of. After the work there will be 6 (mostly at right angles).

The park and parking lot are already there. The park will get used more because it's being reconnected to the sidewalk (right now it's 2 parts traffic island, 1 part park). From a pedestrian (particularly handicapped) POV, this is a big improvement. And this intersection does get a good deal of foot traffic thanks to the T Station 100 feet away.
 
Eh I hate the roundabout. While statistically safe, they never feel welcoming as a walker or biker. Im sure some of those stats are from walkers and bikers just avoiding roundabouts. Regardless I think B1 (third in that post) is the best at limiting entry points and making the square feel like a place to stay and not a place to get through.
 
hmmm, I think I can find fault/dislikes with all the options. An overall "Con" is none of the options create protected bike infrastructure at the congested intersection. Having commuted via bike through this intersection numerous times there is always bikes at the intersection waiting to traverse it. Additionally, it looks like none of the options are taking into account the Dunkin curb cut(s). Is the city intending to close those curb cuts entirely (also Rockland Trust with have altered access)?
  • Concept A: Roundabout
    • Pro: Really like the pedestrian islands integrated into each crossing.
    • Pro: Lack of one ways means we are not a bunch creating cut through streets elsewhere in the neighborhood.
    • Con: Access to/from Dorchester Street. Dorchester Street is a right turn only onto Dorchester Ave, NB. This would presumably create a cut through on Woodward St if a driver doesnt divert at Old Colony or create an exhaustive "loop" up to D Street
  • Concept B1
    • Pro: Much reduced crossing lengths (not every street has a refuge though)
    • Pro: Condensed motor vehicle space makes the space feel more people friendly
    • Con: Multiple one way conversions will create off traffic flow (I feel)
      • Access to Dorchester Ave SB requires a vehicle to go up Boston Street to Father Songin Way and then cut back over to Dorchester Ave SB?
      • Preble Street WB will need to turn left on to Mohawk Street then right on Devine Way then right on to Dorchester Ave to access intersection.
      • Access to Dorchester Street NB would require vehicles to use Preble EB to Ward Street (one way) then right on to Dorchester Street. Or use Preble to the Old Colony rotary and up Old Colony to Dorchester Street.
    • Con: Access from Dorchester Ave NB to Boston Street would require a very tight turn (and possibly vehicles reversing).
  • Concept B2: Similar pros to B1, little less on the one way cons.
  • Concept C:
    • Pro: No one-ways
    • Con: Status quo for pedestrians
Personally, I think the roundabout is the best solution that balances a high traffic intersection while improving the pedestrian interaction with the intersection. I would think maybe an alteration to the Dorchester Street access could 90 degree Dot Street into Dot Ave (aligned with Dunkin curb cut to remain), shorten the rotary approach island, expand the pedestrian zone in front of The Albion and shift the pedestrian crossing to facilitate this alignment. Maybe traffic counts would require a signal to the Dot St into Dot Ave, but I feel like this small adjustment could help make it make more sense.
1787168521725.png
 
I find that roundabouts stop working once you add pedestrians (and, in particular, pedestrian walk signals) into the mix. See the roundabouts near Alewife as a prime example. This single crosswalk on Concord Ave in Cambridge completely ruins the rotary as cars are constantly backed up into it, stopping the traffic flow. I can't even imagine how paralyzed it would be with 5 active crosswalks.

1787170154539.png
 
Clearly Andrew just needs the elevated ring of disconnected hellscape walkways like on the Vegas strip, complete with outdoor escalators. No issues in the salt or snow...

1787170462117.png


But seriously, I think B1 is the right answer. The square has an awful pedestrian feel and hopefully with some of those traffic revisions there can be better timed lights. I like roundabouts as a driver, but stressed drivers trying to jump into the circle is a dicey situation for pedestrians.
 
Suffolk 83 said:
A roundabout would be very unwelcoming to pedestrians as traffic essentially would never stop. I don’t think there are any good answers for Andrew square but they should make Dorchester street one lane each way and install bike lanes and trees
Click to expand...
One can implement a rotary with traffic lights included, to stop flow for other modes. It is done in the UK pretty often at heavy flow roundabouts.
 
DZH22 said:
I find that roundabouts stop working once you add pedestrians (and, in particular, pedestrian walk signals) into the mix. See the roundabouts near Alewife as a prime example. This single crosswalk on Concord Ave in Cambridge completely ruins the rotary as cars are constantly backed up into it, stopping the traffic flow. I can't even imagine how paralyzed it would be with 5 active crosswalks.
Click to expand...
thats not a roundabout, its a rotary. The size/scale is entirely different.
 
DAVE said:
Eh I hate the roundabout. While statistically safe, they never feel welcoming as a walker or biker. Im sure some of those stats are from walkers and bikers just avoiding roundabouts. Regardless I think B1 (third in that post) is the best at limiting entry points and making the square feel like a place to stay and not a place to get through.
Click to expand...
It depends on the design, but this one looks like it would slow car traffic enough, that I'd feel very comfortable riding my bike through it.
 
I feel like emergency vehicles are wary of peanuts or variants thereof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FK4
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top