Casey Overpass

[matredsoxfan]

Just saw this in the Boston Globe E-edition:

New bid dates for the Casey Arborway:
Filed sub-bids due August 26 – previously July 22.
General bids due Sept 7 – previously due August 5.

This doesn’t seem surprising, most Saturdays MassDOT has a legal notice for a project or two that has a bid extension. Contractors and subs may be saying that they need more time or the State may be trying to make sure more bidders are bidding so that they actually have more than one responsible bidder to choose from.

State is trying to figure out if the federal money will be there. If no one has heard the "Highway Trust Fund" is about to be at a balance of ZERO $$$$. States are holding back, canceling and delaying projects all across the country because there is no guarantee that there will be federal money to fund the project. The Casey Overpass is being paid with Accelerated Bridge Program bond funds (which I am against using by the way on anything but the demolition of the existing bridge the rest should have been paid with Transportation Improvement Program Funds and that nearly $70 Million dollars put into other bridges across the state) which thankfully means the states 80% of the funds is secure but the last 20% of Federal Funds is still a question. Congress needs to act now, not tomorrow on a new funding plan not till next May but for the next 5-Years.

 

[rinserepeat]

State is trying to figure out if the federal money will be there. If no one has heard the "Highway Trust Fund" is about to be at a balance of ZERO $$$$. States are holding back, canceling and delaying projects all across the country because there is no guarantee that there will be federal money to fund the project. The Casey Overpass is being paid with Accelerated Bridge Program bond funds (which I am against using by the way on anything but the demolition of the existing bridge the rest should have been paid with Transportation Improvement Program Funds and that nearly $70 Million dollars put into other bridges across the state) which thankfully means the states 80% of the funds is secure but the last 20% of Federal Funds is still a question. Congress needs to act now, not tomorrow on a new funding plan not till next May but for the next 5-Years.

bridge has to come down regardless - the big thing I worry about is the bike/ped improvements being value engineered out of the project - because making sure someone from quincy gets to their job at longwood 2 seconds faster is far more important than the safety of thousands of bikes/peds who pass through the area daily.

 

[statler]

You know who else needs to get to Longwood really fast?

 

[rinserepeat]

You know who else needs to get to Longwood really fast?

I was making a joke about the history of designing primarily for LOS (car level of service) over pedestrian safety, but I'll bite. I'd like you to read this:

http://www.howwedrive.com/2010/05/12/the-fallacy-of-speed-and-emergency-response/

also - from what I understand, the removal of shea circle should help improve emergency response times - and make it a lot safer to drive in the area.

besides - there's a closer emergency room at the faulkner.

 

[clayville]

FWIW, MassDOT's Steve McLaughlin stated repeatedly that the pending Casey Arborway Project is "fully funded regardless of the funding source" at the last few Design Advisory Group meetings when, err, challenged on the details. I believe him. But I also believe that a primary strategy of the "organized" opposition to the project has been Delay By Every Means to get past the deadline for Accelerated Bridge Funds in fall 2016.

 

[clayville]

Bid opening for the general contract on the Casey Arborwayhas been pushed out again, to 9/23/14 @ 2:00

 

[Matthew]

 

[Randomgear]

The latest bid postponement from MassDOT brings the latest GC bid opening to October 21st at 2pm. It was posted in the legal notices section of the Boston Globes EPaper - the online version of the print edition.
I'm told that these delays have been due to the legal requirements and contractor confusion or contractors suggesting better methods of trying to administer normal Mass Highway work - horizontal construction (I think that this work falls under MGL Chapter 30b, but I could easily be wrong) with building construction, the new headhouse, extended subway platform and new upper busway (so called Vertical construction) that is governed by Ch 149 of the Mass General Laws.

 

[AmericanFolkLegend]

Bid results from yesterday.

Barletta Heavy Division, Inc. $59,925,000.00
Casey Arborway Partners (JV McCourt & Consigli) $63,602,218.00
Middlesex Corporation, The $68,157,494.63
White Contracting Co., J. F. $76,196,485.27

 

[Randomgear]

The MassDOT Board voted unanimously to award the contract to Barletta this afternoon. The award is still pending approval of portions of the contract such as the Women and Minority Business requirements.
Bridging Forest Hills was in attendance to protest the project, leading to several questions by the board to the design team regarding community outreach, involvement and the number of public meetings.

Almost forgot: there is a clause in the contract to have a temporary roadway built within 90 days of the Notice to Proceed, with penalties for going over 90 days and incentives for finishing the temp roadways in less time. There are also incentives and penalties for the project to be functionary complete (I'm sure I have the phrase wrong) in, I believe, 670 days from the notice to proceed.

 

[FK4]

Yay, now we can have our 6 lane, ground level highway with some median strips and even worse traffic in this area... what a joke.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Anytime a highway is torn down people cry out about worse traffic but if it's designed correctly then it's a non issue. Highways don't fix traffic; they divert it and increase it. This will be a huge improvement.

 

[FK4]

Anytime a highway is torn down people cry out about worse traffic but if it's designed correctly then it's a non issue. Highways don't fix traffic; they divert it and increase it. This will be a huge improvement.

That is true in some cases, but Im sorry, saying that this bridge increases traffic because that is ridiculous. This bridge diverts cars, yes - diverts them away from a major series of intersections down below. And highways - whether this is one or not - are necessary piece of infrastructure, like it or not. This issue has been argued to death but the only reason this project really won approval in the first place is because it was cheaper than replacing the bridge, not for any of the oft-toted other reasons. The wise solution would be to replace the bridge with something sleek and attractive that doesnt hulk the way the Casey does. If this were anywhere in Western Europe, that's exactly what would be done... we always look to them for their pedestrian and bike friendly designs but they also are smart about how they get their cars around, too. The Riverway system works well because it's limited access, one of the few good roads to move around the Boston environs on, and adding a whole series of stoplights is not going to help anybody. Right now, with the bridge in place, traffic in rush hour backs all the way back to the Monument in JP and Doyle's t on Washington. Having grown up in this area and lived there my whole life, I can't say I'm enthusiastic that traffic can possibly be "designed correctly" to prevent this from getting worse, let alone ameliorate the issue. I'll eat my hat if this fixes things, but sometimes a bridge or a highway needs to exist. We're not pulling down I-93 in Dorchester because it makes the area unlivable, nor should we do so here.

 

[North Shore]

That is true in some cases, but Im sorry, saying that this bridge increases traffic because that is ridiculous. This bridge diverts cars, yes - diverts them away from a major series of intersections down below. And highways - whether this is one or not - are necessary piece of infrastructure, like it or not. This issue has been argued to death but the only reason this project really won approval in the first place is because it was cheaper than replacing the bridge, not for any of the oft-toted other reasons. The wise solution would be to replace the bridge with something sleek and attractive that doesnt hulk the way the Casey does. If this were anywhere in Western Europe, that's exactly what would be done... we always look to them for their pedestrian and bike friendly designs but they also are smart about how they get their cars around, too. The Riverway system works well because it's limited access, one of the few good roads to move around the Boston environs on, and adding a whole series of stoplights is not going to help anybody. Right now, with the bridge in place, traffic in rush hour backs all the way back to the Monument in JP and Doyle's t on Washington. Having grown up in this area and lived there my whole life, I can't say I'm enthusiastic that traffic can possibly be "designed correctly" to prevent this from getting worse, let alone ameliorate the issue. I'll eat my hat if this fixes things, but sometimes a bridge or a highway needs to exist. We're not pulling down I-93 in Dorchester because it makes the area unlivable, nor should we do so here.

The Casey Overpass was structurally deficient. With lane closures, it was over capacity as well.

I'm a proponent of the tear down/ boulevard replacement here. As with any roadway project, you study existing traffic volumes and project future volumes based on available data (growth rates, proposed developments in the vicinity, etc.) and design both the roadway cross section and corridor signalization/coordination accordingly. Generally, these types of projects will have a positive impact on traffic flow in the area because they've been based on current and projected data, rather than the antiquated design process that was used to build the original overpass. In addition, the added cost of a new overpass was not a justifiable expense in this case, where a level throughway provided a reasonable solution at a much lower cost.

 

[underground]

This issue has been argued to death

Right, and taking down the overpass won because real actual data supported it.

If this were anywhere in Western Europe, that's exactly what would be done

If this were anywhere in Western Europe, the overpass never would have been built. It would have either been an intersection or a rotary.

 

[Alex]

Almost forgot: there is a clause in the contract to have a temporary roadway built within 90 days of the Notice to Proceed, with penalties for going over 90 days and incentives for finishing the temp roadways in less time. There are also incentives and penalties for the project to be functionary complete (I'm sure I have the phrase wrong) in, I believe, 670 days from the notice to proceed.

Glad to hear. It seems like Barletta has really dragged their feet with GLX Phase 1.

 

[clayville]

... but Im sorry, saying that this bridge increases traffic because that is ridiculous. This bridge diverts cars, yes - diverts them away from a major series of intersections down below.

I live right here too, and in my view (literally) the Casey Overpass absolutely creates rush hour traffic both below and on the ramps. It sits directly on top of what *should* be the eastbound Arborway, causing serpentine, zig-zag routes for drivers trying to get anywhere in Forest Hills. Among the many other benefits of the project, the removal of the Overpass allows for a more rational, direct and efficient layout on the ground.

Interestingly enough, the uncoordinated traffic lights at South St/New Washington have been flashing yellow for about 48 hours (storm related?) and rush hour traffic is miraculously much reduced. Perhaps there is a lesson there.

I'm very much in favor of this project despite the short-term inconvenience. The data analysis and design sensitivity from MassDOT and their consultants as well as their reponsiveness to most community input was convincing and compelling to me. And the long list of area improvements made possible by the at-grade choice will benefit the immediate community for decades: new and revamped plazas at the T station, at newly safe Shea Square, at Toule Square and at the end of SW Corridor Park with it's new head house providing direct access to the T platform; an expanded upper busway; bike routes throughout - most off-street; safer crosswalks and coordinated lights; blue sky and a net 400+ trees where the crumbling overpass now stands.

 

[Matthew]

The Riverway system works well because it's limited access, one of the few good roads to move around the Boston environs on,

Riverway is NOT a limited access road! And it is NOT a highway! It does not work well. We just had another fatal crash there a few nights ago. I hope you are not speeding on it, for your own sake.

and adding a whole series of stoplights is not going to help anybody.

There's no politer way to say this than: Bullshit. One area I do trust traffic engineers is in designing a system of traffic lights that moves cars efficiently. MassDOT would not be building this if they didn't have the math showing it works.

On a side note, Bostonians seem to have an irrational fear of traffic lights, I've noticed, both here and in other projects. Arrangements of traffic lights that would be standard procedure in other cities seem to provoke some kind of crazy fight response in Bostonians. I wonder why that is... maybe it's because BTD has sucked at it for so long that people assume there's no better way?

Right now, with the bridge in place, traffic in rush hour backs all the way back to the Monument in JP and Doyle's t on Washington.

Perhaps you should sit back and reflect on this statement: "with the bridge in place, traffic in rush hour backs up." Do you realize that you are refuting yourself? The bridge does not help! It actively hurts, as clayville has well pointed out.

 

[AmericanFolkLegend]

Glad to hear. It seems like Barletta has really dragged their feet with GLX Phase 1.

Barletta took FOREVER on the Kenmore Station but I understand that had design issues. Gov't Center seems to be going well, but who knows.

The station portion of this project is only about $9M. The rest is the bridge demo, earthwork, roadwork and landscaping. There's a lot of money being spent on hardscape / landscaping.

 

[FK4]

Riverway is NOT a limited access road! And it is NOT a highway! It does not work well. We just had another fatal crash there a few nights ago. I hope you are not speeding on it, for your own sake.

Excuse me. What I had meant to write is that the Riverway functions essentially as a limited access road. No left turns anywhere except at designated intersections. I'm not talking about speeding; when I said it works I mean that it functions very well at getting one around town (excepting rush hour) which is rare in Boston.

Let's be clear here: driving from the Arborway rotary to Blue Hill Ave on 203, one currently goes through Shea Circle (at which there is NEVER a point to yield to traffic, when going in this direction, then the Forest Hills St light, Canterbury, and Harvard. Those lights are all times heavily in favor of 203 traffic. This will not be the case for the new lights - so for anyone using the Riverway/203, timing will not be improved, but slowed. And regarding the crazy traffic patterns that exist there now, I don't see how any of that is going to change; the only ramp that really gums things up is the offramp coming off 203 E. The rest of the crazy zigzags will remain as before.

Yes, it will look better, probably, but not that much better, since it will be lots of paved lanes with a few median strips with trees. As I said, if traffic improves in the area, I will be stunned but I still think a better way to go about this would be to replace the bridge with something thin and attractive and redesign traffic circulation down below. Throw in some takings by the state of a fringe of MBTA property and you could have the Emerald Necklace link as well.