General Infrastructure

Do we have a thread for the Anderson Bridge reconstruction?

Anyway, they switched over to the new side a few days ago, and traffic has been the worst I've ever seen it. Backed up to the underpass on the Cambridge side and Barry's Corner on the Boston side. What confuses me is that the traffic configuration is basically the same, yet it's a million times worse after the switch to the other side.

Also, the new lights aren't on at night, so the bridge is creepy-dark.
 
Haven't been using it lately. Enjoying the newly renovated Weeks footbridge, and skirting Harvard Square entirely.
 
God I hope re-timing the signals is part of this renovation. That's still one of those awful brain-damaged MDC installations that's as dangerous as it is rudderless. That intersection wouldn't be one-third as bad if there were any rhyme or reason to the cycles. Is it too much to ask to have matching protected lefts both directions on JFK? 'Cause that would pretty much be a 20% improvement by its lonesome.
 
The median is entirely gone on Staniford Street. I guess the street wasn't already wide enough? Anyone have any insight as to why this was done?
 
The central cycletrack past North Station will be nice, as it lets cyclists skip the cabs, drop-offs, and the double-parked cars that segment is often clotted with.
 
If there was any doubt - turns out the Callahan clearance is approximately 13'7"

16416274417_2af114b6bf_h.jpg


(From February...)
 
vanshnookenraggen said:
Is that even legal?
Click to expand...

Definitely not. I'm pretty sure the clearance is 12'6".

The driver knew he was in a bad situation - he was probably doing about 5-10mph.

The clearance signs at the exit in the 93 tunnel are pretty inconspicuous, so its easy to see how he'd get to the actual entrance to the callahan and say 'oh shit'. I've wondered if he made a phone call and someone who knew the actual dimensions said 'go for it, but go slow' ... or if he was just eyeballing it / winging it.
 
Matthew said:
Wonder if they ever plan to finish this:

IMG_20150523_181054.jpg


Also: Why not make a single-lane roundabout (what could be very safe) as dangerous as it possibly could be? Must be some kind of competition:

IMG_20150523_175020.jpg


Pure incompetence.
Click to expand...

Great post, Matthew. Replying here with a question about the DCR that wasn't really best suited for the Biking in Boston thread.

I'm not well-informed on the subject, but to me it doesn't seem like a coincidence that the most ill-conceived and messed-up roads in Greater Boston are those controlled by the DCR--Alewife/Fresh Pond Parkway, Storrow, Bowker, etc. Could anyone speak to why they control these roads instead of Mass Highway or local municipalities?
 
GDX163 said:
Great post, Matthew. Replying here with a question about the DCR that wasn't really best suited for the Biking in Boston thread.

I'm not well-informed on the subject, but to me it doesn't seem like a coincidence that the most ill-conceived and messed-up roads in Greater Boston are those controlled by the DCR--Alewife/Fresh Pond Parkway, Storrow, Bowker, etc. Could anyone speak to why they control these roads instead of Mass Highway or local municipalities?
Click to expand...

History -- the old Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) which built and controlled the various park lands across multiple municipalities and the parkways (roads) connecting them. Absorbed into DCR when the MDC was disbanded.
 
MDC considered itself more of a highway department than a parks department. A relic of the bad old days.

DCR continues that institutional inertia and has only been able to make slow, halting, insufficient steps in the way of reform.

There's some indication that it might finally be speeding up, but too soon to get our hopes up.
 
Sounds like they could use a good fiscal control board.
 
Matthew said:
MDC considered itself more of a highway department than a parks department. A relic of the bad old days.

DCR continues that institutional inertia and has only been able to make slow, halting, insufficient steps in the way of reform.

There's some indication that it might finally be speeding up, but too soon to get our hopes up.
Click to expand...

In the past I'd suggested that DCR delegate responsibility for the actual roadways to MassDoT while retaining some input into the design criteria for changes and the surrounding landscape. These roads are supposed to be "parkways" in that they traverse or lead to public parks which still makes sense in terms of treating these roads differently or spending more money on landscaping or pedestrian/biking amenities.

Although "parkway" has slowly been usurped by "Greenway" in the lexicon which undermines the distinction. I also think it is important that all road design in the metropolitan area follow "complete street" principles and not just parkways and greenways
 
MassDOT requires that all street designs follow complete streets principles as much as feasible.

I would say that the primary distinction between a DOT street and a DCR 'parkway' ought to be that the latter is meant solely for recreational use.

Of course, that hasn't been true for most of the last century.

So yeah, I've entertained the same notion that MassDOT should be given control over all 'parkways' and not just the bridges/tunnels/viaducts. MassDOT has had better 'green' policies than MDC/DCR lately as well.

But in the long run, maybe we can have some hope of returning DCR 'parkways' to being actual parkways, and not highways, and the transfer to DOT would extinguish all hope of that for sure.
 
What if the parkways could come under the purview of local public works departments? For example, is there any reason why Cambridge wouldn't want to control Memorial Drive?
 
GDX163 said:
What if the parkways could come under the purview of local public works departments? For example, is there any reason why Cambridge wouldn't want to control Memorial Drive?
Click to expand...

The same reason that MassDOT doesn't want them - they're in terrible shape and no one wants to assume responsibility for DCR's management failures. Those aren't their fault, mind you - they have no money - but there isn't an entity out there that wants to have to further subdivide its own pie.

That's especially true when you're talking about shifting State -> Local. What little highway budget DCR has wouldn't magically be shifted to Cambridge. It would be reassigned to other parts of DCR or the Commonwealth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top