DCR Allston-Brighton Riverfront Parks and Parkways

[Equilibria]

I have no idea if it would help things; and don’t really know why there isn’t an exit there now. But my guess is that the Newton exit will always be clogged and I don’t see it as being replaceable by Birmingham. If the city wanted to make Galen Street nice they could, and they should.

It probably will never be great, but MassDOT found that about 40% of traffic to/from the west (by my lived experience the worst for congestion in the interchange) is tied to areas in East Watertown and Brighton that could theoretically be served by an Exit 129 (slide 29). https://www.mass.gov/doc/newton-cor...working-group-meeting-2-presentation/download

 

[eber]

It probably will never be great, but MassDOT found that about 40% of traffic to/from the west (by my lived experience the worst for congestion in the interchange) is tied to areas in East Watertown and Brighton that could theoretically be served by an Exit 129 (slide 29). https://www.mass.gov/doc/newton-cor...working-group-meeting-2-presentation/download

Oh my god I was just trying to find data like this from FK4's mention of "making Galen St nice". I've worked on Galen Street and heavy trucks and tractor trailers use Galen Street all the time to and from the Pike and I assume it's just a more direct and large road to get to the Pike from points in Watertown/Waltham or further north/east? or is it just to avoid Newtonville or Brighton tolls?. It seems like this document just talks about overall traffic, but it's definitely interesting to see.

 

[Equilibria]

Oh my god I was just trying to find data like this from FK4's mention of "making Galen St nice". I've worked on Galen Street and heavy trucks and tractor trailers use Galen Street all the time to and from the Pike and I assume it's just a more direct and large road to get to the Pike from points in Watertown/Waltham or further north/east? or is it just to avoid Newtonville or Brighton tolls?. It seems like this document just talks about overall traffic, but it's definitely interesting to see.

I think it's the first one - the time spent making the detour probably exceeds the toll. The major road alternatives to the Turnpike - the river roads, North Beacon Street/Brighton Avenue, Arsenal Street - end up using Galen to access Newton Corner.

 

[millerm277]

I think it's the first one - the time spent making the detour probably exceeds the toll. The major road alternatives to the Turnpike - the river roads, North Beacon Street/Brighton Avenue, Arsenal Street - end up using Galen to access Newton Corner.

Pointing out the obvious: No trucks allowed on most/all of the river roads inbound from there - Nonantum, Greennough, SFR, Memorial, etc, nor on a lot of the rest of the parkways.

North Beacon/Brighton Ave, Arsenal/Western yes, but I think it's somewhat obvious that it's probably not a very worthwhile/effective toll or traffic dodge for a heavy truck with the much more limited routing options vs a car.

The only other sort of sane + legal routes for a truck to supply anything in that region (say, the Arsenal Mall) are some limited routes over from Route 2 that are much longer and obviously worse, even with Galen St's traffic nightmare.

 

[FK4]

Pointing out the obvious: No trucks allowed on most/all of the river roads inbound from there - Nonantum, Greennough, SFR, Memorial, etc, nor on a lot of the rest of the parkways.

North Beacon/Brighton Ave, Arsenal/Western yes, but I think it's somewhat obvious that it's probably not a very worthwhile/effective toll or traffic dodge for a heavy truck with the much more limited routing options vs a car.

The only other sort of sane + legal routes for a truck to supply anything in that region (say, the Arsenal Mall) are some limited routes over from Route 2 that are much longer and obviously worse, even with Galen St's traffic nightmare.

Allow trucks on the parkways (would only require a few bridges being redone and maybe a couple extra lanes) and then we're good.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Allow trucks on the parkways (would only require a few bridges being redone and maybe a couple extra lanes) and then we're good.

And busses.

 

[millerm277]

Allow trucks on the parkways (would only require a few bridges being redone and maybe a couple extra lanes) and then we're good.

My point was more that I don't think much of the current truck traffic on Galen St is using it as some kind of shortcut or toll cheat to somewhere further in than Watertown itself. They don't have many ways to do that from there, and the ways they do have do not usually work out better than just staying on the Pike would.

 

[bigeman312]

With or without this discussed Brighton exit, what would be really great would be:

• A busway on Mt Auburn between Fresh Pond Parkway and Watertown Square.
• Center-running bus lanes on Galen Street from Watertown Square to Newton Corner.
• An extension of the 71 to Newton Corner.
• A Regional Rail station in Newton Corner.

Done right, that could dramatically improve options between Cambridge/Watertown and the MetwoWest.

 

[BOS2BON]

Wow, quite the pendulum swing from the mid-1960s when roadway underpasses and ramps were being pushed by the MDC for Memorial Drive at JFK Street, River Street and Western Ave, which would have wiped out much of the old sycamore trees, and transformed Memorial Drive into an expressway.

I agree. The DCR officials still seemed a bit hesitant to include more traffic calming features, but at least there's going to be a much nicer park for this stretch of the river!

 

[Longfellow]

Apologies if this has been posted already and I don't have a photo, but I got to use the new bike lanes on Memorial Drive around the BU bridge. They are awesome! I wish I had them when I was regularly using that stretch of road. It is too bad someone had to give their life to build them.

 

[stick n move]

DCR Will Present New Plans to Improve Chaotic Riverfront Traffic Circle in Brighton​

A 2021 conceptual design for the North Beacon Street-Soldiers Field Road intersections in Brighton would have replaced the existing rotary with two signalized intersections to create about 2.3 acres of accessible riverfront parkland. Courtesy of the Mass. DCR.


“The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) will hold a public hearing later this month to present a new design for the chaotic riverfront rotary where several of its riverfront highways converge on the banks of the Charles River in Brighton.

The virtual public hearing has been scheduled for Thursday, April 17th, from 6 to 7:30 p.m. (Zoom registration link).

"The purpose of this meeting is to present the updated Soldiers Field Road and North Beacon Street intersection design," according to a DCR press release issued Friday……”

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...chaotic-riverfront-traffic-circle-in-brighton

 

[Charlie_mta]

DCR Will Present New Plans to Improve Chaotic Riverfront Traffic Circle in Brighton​

A 2021 conceptual design for the North Beacon Street-Soldiers Field Road intersections in Brighton would have replaced the existing rotary with two signalized intersections to create about 2.3 acres of accessible riverfront parkland. Courtesy of the Mass. DCR.


“The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) will hold a public hearing later this month to present a new design for the chaotic riverfront rotary where several of its riverfront highways converge on the banks of the Charles River in Brighton.

The virtual public hearing has been scheduled for Thursday, April 17th, from 6 to 7:30 p.m. (Zoom registration link).

"The purpose of this meeting is to present the updated Soldiers Field Road and North Beacon Street intersection design," according to a DCR press release issued Friday……”

https://mass.streetsblog.org/2025/0...chaotic-riverfront-traffic-circle-in-brighton

Ouch! That will be one tight and congested bottle neck.
I mean, I like the sentiment of increasing park land and decreasing pavement, but this one might be a bridge too far (no pun intended).

 

[TheRatmeister]

Ouch! That will be one tight and congested bottle neck.
I mean, I like the sentiment of increasing park land and decreasing pavement, but this one might be a bridge too far (no pun intended).

I think it could work, but you'd need to redirect most Soldiers Field traffic onto Leo Birmingham with a new junction there. At that point you could also take back 2 lanes from Soldiers Field between Arsenal St and N. Beacon St.

 

[Charlie_mta]

I think it could work, but you'd need to redirect most Soldiers Field traffic onto Leo Birmingham with a new junction there. At that point you could also take back 2 lanes from Soldiers Field between Arsenal St and N. Beacon St.

Yes, if the two roads on the west and three roads on the east all converging into this spot were put on road diets, eliminating some lanes on those, then this might work. However, as it's depicted, it seems tight with all the 4-lane highways converging into one 4-lane siphon. Traffic modeling would show the possible extent of the congestion.

 

[StreetsblogMASS]

Bear in mind that the two roads to the west (Nonantum Road in Newton and Beacon St. in Watertown) have already been put on a road diet without any issues – they both narrow to 2-lane streets about 800 feet west of the rotary.

Of the three roads to the east, Parsons Street is already two lanes, and is a pretty minor street anyhow: its AADT was only 3940 vehicles in 2016. The second, North Beacon, is already a 2-lane city street south of the Pike; the northern part that comes into the roadway is in the midst of a 2-lane road diet right now as part of the Birmingham Parkway lane reduction, which will extend to include North Beacon Street to the vicinity of IHOP. The busiest roadway is Soldiers Field Road, but even pre-pandemic, its volumes in this area (24617 AADT in 2018) were still low enough that it, too, has been proposed to go to a two-lane cross-section.

Finally, remember that the rotary already has two sets of traffic lights (plus a third light nearby at Brooks Street), so functionally, this proposal isn't radically different from what already exists. In fact, the proposed design makes some movements considerably easier and safer by eliminating awful weaving movements behind both traffic lights that currently back up traffic inside the rotary (e.g. coming east from Nonantum Road to SFR eastbound, or SFR westbound to Brighton, or North Beacon to North Beacon in either direction). The traffic signals that are there now are also pretty old, so modern equipment could also make a difference in reducing backups.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Bear in mind that the two roads to the west (Nonantum Road in Newton and Beacon St. in Watertown) have already been put on a road diet without any issues – they both narrow to 2-lane streets about 800 feet west of the rotary.

Of the three roads to the east, Parsons Street is already two lanes, and is a pretty minor street anyhow: its AADT was only 3940 vehicles in 2016. The second, North Beacon, is already a 2-lane city street south of the Pike; the northern part that comes into the roadway is in the midst of a 2-lane road diet right now as part of the Birmingham Parkway lane reduction, which will extend to include North Beacon Street to the vicinity of IHOP. The busiest roadway is Soldiers Field Road, but even pre-pandemic, its volumes in this area (24617 AADT in 2018) were still low enough that it, too, has been proposed to go to a two-lane cross-section.

Finally, remember that the rotary already has two sets of traffic lights (plus a third light nearby at Brooks Street), so functionally, this proposal isn't radically different from what already exists. In fact, the proposed design makes some movements considerably easier and safer by eliminating awful weaving movements behind both traffic lights that currently back up traffic inside the rotary (e.g. coming east from Nonantum Road to SFR eastbound, or SFR westbound to Brighton, or North Beacon to North Beacon in either direction). The traffic signals that are there now are also pretty old, so modern equipment could also make a difference in reducing backups.

A good, thorough analysis, and you have me convinced!

 

[RandomWalk]

When I lived in the area, I hated negotiating the circle as a pedestrian. It always felt needlessly overbuilt and encouraged stupid behavior by drivers.

 

[FK4]

i’m not very convinced by the fact that they’re already are a couple of stoplights here that this tells us we can expect to not see a significant increase in congestion. The new lights will by necessity have to be long, because they encompass the crossing of 2+ major roads. The current light configuration only stops traffic partially on individual segments/components of these roads. Moreover, the daily vehicle count for Parsons belies the fact that it is often incredibly congested already in the evening rush hour. Averages don’t capture spike patterns and we have a lot of those around Boston. In any case, it’s an incredibly dangerous intersection, even for cars, and restores park from fifties takeovers, so I grudgingly support it. Lastly, though, DCR is beyond abysmal when it comes to any semblance of rational road, intersection, and signal design (@F-Line to Dudley has commented on their perennial fucking up of Mem and J-way signals and maybe can weigh in here), so that gives me more pause than anything that the designers are not managed by people who know what they’re doing.

 

[stick n move]

Theyre coming out with a new design april 17th that is different than the one above so well have to wait and see what it is.

 

[as02143]

But is it going to be an "Corporate needs you to find the difference " kind of different?