Cape Cod Rail, Bridges and Highways

[Aprehensive_Words]

It's probably political/constituent demand. The Cape is really car-brained. A lot of the discussion around the region's tourism economy revolves around "how are people going to drive here" -- something that's intensified in recent years as house prices and rents have gotten so crazy that it's really hard to find a home there if you're an ordinary working person. Now, instead of solely an economic development concern, it's also an access-to-workforce concern.

In case anyone's curious, a pair of transit YouTubers did a review of the Cape Flyer and what it's like traveling around the Cape by public transit only once you get to Hyannis:

 

[Roxxma]

In case anyone's curious, a pair of transit YouTubers did a review of the Cape Flyer and what it's like traveling around the Cape by public transit only once you get to Hyannis:

I was on that train and saw him! That was Sunday, the 18th.. I sat on the starboard side, on the same car as Max and his friends, two rows behind them..

 

[stick n move]

Senators announce they have secured $350 million to fix Cape Cod bridges
This funding will be part of the 2024 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.

“Massachusetts Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey announced the inclusion of $350 million in federal funding intended to fix Cape Cod bridges.

This funding will be part of the 2024 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.

This is the first part of funding as this initial $350 million is part of a commitment of $600 million to fix the bridges.

“Securing $350 million in the Senate Appropriations bill is a critical win in the decades-long effort to replace the aging Cape Cod Canal bridges. We will continue pushing to ensure this funding is signed into law and appreciate our ongoing partnership with Governor Healey, the Biden Administration and Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Murray as we continue to prioritize this federal investment in our infrastructure.” said Elizabeth Warren in a press release.”

https://news.google.com/articles/CB...zMDk0OTUwLz9hbXA9MQ?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

 

[Charlie_mta]

Senators announce they have secured $350 million to fix Cape Cod bridges
This funding will be part of the 2024 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.

“Massachusetts Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey announced the inclusion of $350 million in federal funding intended to fix Cape Cod bridges.

This funding will be part of the 2024 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.

This is the first part of funding as this initial $350 million is part of a commitment of $600 million to fix the bridges.

“Securing $350 million in the Senate Appropriations bill is a critical win in the decades-long effort to replace the aging Cape Cod Canal bridges. We will continue pushing to ensure this funding is signed into law and appreciate our ongoing partnership with Governor Healey, the Biden Administration and Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Murray as we continue to prioritize this federal investment in our infrastructure.” said Elizabeth Warren in a press release.”

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMicmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lm5iY2Jvc3Rvbi5jb20vbmV3cy9sb2NhbC9zZW5hdG9ycy1hbm5vdW5jZWQtdGhleS1oYXZlLXNlY3VyZWQtZnVuZGluZy10by1maXgtY2FwZS1jb2QtYnJpZGdlcy8zMDk0OTUwL9IBeGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lm5iY2Jvc3Rvbi5jb20vbmV3cy9sb2NhbC9zZW5hdG9ycy1hbm5vdW5jZWQtdGhleS1oYXZlLXNlY3VyZWQtZnVuZGluZy10by1maXgtY2FwZS1jb2QtYnJpZGdlcy8zMDk0OTUwLz9hbXA9MQ?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

First time I've seen "fix" as a euphemism for "replace". On first reading, I thought, wow, $350 million is a lot of money to "fix" these bridges, LOL.

 

[Tallguy]

So, I keep reading that the bridges are "functionally obsolete". Are they dangerous, or just carrying too much traffic? Would a combination of ferries, buses(perhaps with lanes?) and trains be a cheaper solution?
I think of all the cars parked at the ferry lots that could either not be there at all or at least parked in Wareham.

 

[jklo]

So, I keep reading that the bridges are "functionally obsolete". Are they dangerous, or just carrying too much traffic? Would a combination of ferries, buses(perhaps with lanes?) and trains be a cheaper solution?
I think of all the cars parked at the ferry lots that could either not be there at all or at least parked in Wareham.

The bridges are pretty old and it would be nice to have a proper bridge with wider lanes, a median, etc. But it really should be at the bottom of the list.

 

[king_vibe]

So, I keep reading that the bridges are "functionally obsolete". Are they dangerous, or just carrying too much traffic? Would a combination of ferries, buses(perhaps with lanes?) and trains be a cheaper solution?
I think of all the cars parked at the ferry lots that could either not be there at all or at least parked in Wareham.

The structures themselves are fine. With proper maintenance they could last forever.

 

[bakgwailo]

My understanding is that means the bridges no longer meet current standards for automotive bridges (such as lane width) vs any actual structural deficiency.

 

[ulrichomega]

So they're fine, but wouldn't it be really cool if we had even more lanes? Sounds like a great use of a few billion dollars. Way better than any of the backlog of MBTA capital projects/maintenance work.

 

[Equilibria]

So, I keep reading that the bridges are "functionally obsolete". Are they dangerous, or just carrying too much traffic? Would a combination of ferries, buses(perhaps with lanes?) and trains be a cheaper solution?
I think of all the cars parked at the ferry lots that could either not be there at all or at least parked in Wareham.

If you read into the articles, it says they're at the point of closing lanes because the bridges can't take the load. They're old and need to be replaced. End of story.

 

[Aprehensive_Words]

Yesterday's "Getting There" newsletter from the Globe included a note that apparently the Army Corps of Engineers hasn't been terribly responsive to efforts to do as little as boost CapeFlyer service (The Cape Rail study from 2021 essentially says they need to be brought on board to increase train service: https://www.capecodcommission.org/resource-library/file?url=/dept/commission/team/Website_Resources/transportation/Transit/Cape+Rail+Study+Report.pdf) from its once-daily round trip, and added that the CCRTA hasn't seemed particularly eager to push the issue, either.

 

[ulrichomega]

If you read into the articles, it says they're at the point of closing lanes because the bridges can't take the load. They're old and need to be replaced. End of story.

The Purpose and Need Statement clarifies that the bridges are overall fine, but that repairs often necessitate the closure of lanes. That seems standard on all bridges everywhere, no?

The Sagamore Bridge was not considered to be structurally deficient as of the latest available inspection conducted by the USACE in 2021. The deck was in fair condition with an overall rating of 5. The superstructure and substructure were also in fair condition with overall ratings of 5.

Based on latest information available from a routine inspection conducted by USACE in October 2020, the Bourne Bridge was classified as structurally deficient. The deck was in fair condition with a condition rating of 5 due to continuing deterioration in the abutment spans. The superstructure was in poor condition with a rating of 4 due to continuing deterioration of the concrete T-beams, deterioration of gusset plates at truss joints and broken anchor bolts at truss expansion bearings. Gusset plates are considered fracture critical members (FCM), meaning the failure of one of these elements will likely lead to catastrophic failure of an entire span. The substructure was in good condition with a condition rating of 7, although delamination and spalling were noted in the bridge abutment walls. The “structurally deficient” classification does not imply that the bridge is unsafe for travel. However, the classification is an indication that the bridge requires maintenance and repair and eventual rehabilitation or replacement to address existing deficiencies.

The age of the Bourne and Sagamore bridges, combined with heavy vehicular demands and the corrosive saltwater environment of Cape Cod, necessitates frequent, costly, and escalating maintenance and repairs to maintain the structures in a state of good repair. All repair work on the superstructure and bridge deck requires vehicular lane closures to facilitate contractor activities. Typically, these lane closures restrict travel to one lane in each direction.

They are not saying the bridges cannot take the load, merely that they will require lane closures in order to repair the issues. The bigger issues are the fact that they're not up to current traffic or seismic standards. Given that they want to commit to years of construction and delays in order to avoid occasional lane closures, the structural issues are clearly not the priority here.

 

[Wonk]

The Purpose and Need Statement clarifies that the bridges are overall fine, but that repairs often necessitate the closure of lanes.

Not sure if it matters for this conversation, but I do know the ASCE is considering the increased BEV weights in their next ASCE-7 live loads review cycle. Likely won't impact the decision-making process for the replacement project now, but a BEV car can weigh as much as an ICE pickup, and there's going to be a lot of BEV cars, SUVs, and pickups going over those bridges. Depending on how both BEV weights and design standards evolve over the next few years there could be lots of infrastructure questions that need answering.

 

[Charlie_mta]

The bridge's lanes are too narrow, the sidewalks are too narrow as well, and there is no bike path or lanes. The only way to mitigate these with the existing bridge would be to reduce traffic to one lane each direction, which would strangle traffic to the Cape.

 

[ritchiew]

Healey will seek federal funding for just replacing the Sagamore Bridge for now, rather than both bridges at the same time. She says it will be easier to get funding that way.

Trying to finally get new Cape bridges built, Healey tries different strategy - The Boston Globe

Governor Maura Healey believes seeking aid this year for only the Sagamore Bridge will maximize the state’s chances to cover the larger project’s ballooning price tag. “It prolongs the agony for the Bourne Bridge users,” said the chair of the Bourne Select Board. “But you’ve got to start somewhere.”

www.bostonglobe.com

 

[michaelw37]

Great points from two of the higher-rated comments on that article:

pgerlings

8/14/23 - 2:21PM
In most modern nations, there would be reliable, frequent service via trains between Hyannis and Boston, especially in the summer months when car traffic is so heavy.

But the Cape Flier is such a poorly executed excuse for rail service to the Cape that instead most people will drive.

We have the rails, we have the trains, but we don't have anything approaching reliable train service to the Cape.

And:

REB-57

8/14/23 - 2:27PM
The published photo is pretty telling. There is a third bridge that gets no love or attention. The rail bridge exists, but almost no rail service to or from the Cape. A closer look at that would be prudent. Especially as we attempt to decrease miles traveled by car.

 

[jklo]

Healey will seek federal funding for just replacing the Sagamore Bridge for now, rather than both bridges at the same time. She says it will be easier to get funding that way.

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.

 

[NHMaples]

Both the Bourne and the Sagamore bridges are structurally deficient, which is not surprising since they are nearly 90 years old. In addition to the regular repairs, repainting, deck work, and resurfacing, bridges like these require major overhauls every 45 years. In preparation the Army Corp of Engineers completed a study to determine the costs and benefits of the various repair or replace options. After factoring in both the construction costs and economic impact to the areas serviced by the bridges, the report recommended replacement. One significant functional drawback of the existing bridges is the lack of an auxiliary lane. With only four narrow lanes, whenever a lane has to be closed for repair work, traffic backs up for miles. The people in the 14 towns on the other side of the canal don't have a lot of options other than to use a bridge to leave the Cape. Doing the overhaul to keep the existing bridges sound would cost $300 million and would do nothing to address the functional obsolescence of the existing lane setup.

 

[LexSEDotVille]

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'm not sure going down to one bridge should be on the table.

The traffic patterns for rt 28 and rt 25 would need major reconfiguration + land taking + new bottlenecks + zero routes through Edwards/Otis.

Also, these two bridges serve as the only evacuation routes off Cape where hurricanes pose a 'relatively moderate' risk. Maintaining two bridges feels prudent for public safety.

 

[RandomWalk]

I think there would sooner be a a pitch to close (and fill) the canal than to reduce it to one road bridge crossing.