stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,114
- Reaction score
- 15,007
Not doing the Bourne at the same time makes it pretty likely that the Bourne won't be replaced and will probably just be torn down eventually. Which is fine I think as long as this new Sagamore bridge has enough lanes.
I still maintain that doing either should be at the bottom of the list.
How would this work though? I know technically it is rt-25 but in practice the bourne bridge and rotary is functionally the end point of I-495. Would they then need to route rt-25 over to the sagamore? That would then make the brand new bridges obsolete because theyd have to carry twice the traffic. Also why are they choosing the sagamore first? It seems to me that due to the radial nature of the highways that it wouldnt be that bad for drivers heading south on rt-3 to get to I-495, but drivers on I-495 would have to backtrack in order to get to rt-3. The bourne rotary also exists for a reason and it allows drivers to easily jump on 6A and get to rt-6. It seems that doing the bourne bridge would make more sense.
I think there would sooner be a a pitch to close (and fill) the canal than to reduce it to one road bridge crossing.
Whats ironic is that it would most likely never even have a chance of happening due to environmentalists, even though it is an artificially created waterway. Just like how they freaked out about filling in a tiny part of the charles river shore near the throat, which is entirely created by artificial fill. That being said I think the canal is a jewel of the cape/massachusetts and I would hate to see it ever filled in. Hopefully that is never a seriously considered proposal.