General Infrastructure

[datadyne007]

Is there a map somewhere showing exactly where the Coughlin Bypass Road is and goes? Google Maps has shoehorned some of it into the map layer, but it doesn't show on the satellite layer. Does it go only to the airport, or can I also use it to reach Saratoga Street from the Chelsea Street bridge?

It actually leads to Frankfort St. near Wood Island station. It doesn't directly go to the Airport. I had incorrectly assumed it went directly to the airport instead of dumping out on a street. It's probably actually better just to use the Curtis St on-ramp to 1A to get to Logan from that area.

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/east_boston/2012/11/martin_a_coughlin_bypass_road.html

This is where you'd actually enter the airport terminal loop roads (at Airport Station) if you were to use the Coughlin Bypass.

 

[Ron Newman]

Thanks. One last question -- is it totally unfeasible to use orange cones to reconfigure the Haymarket on- and off-ramps, so that the Sumner Tunnel could be made temporarily two-way? This was a common practice before the Big Dig whenever one tunnel needed to be closed temporarily for construction.

 

[datadyne007]

While I was down in Fairhaven visiting family for Christmas, I got to thinking about how absurdly short MA-240 is. It's clearly a cancelled highway project (there's even a ghost stub that's actually the highway itself). Wikipedia has some info (and the Standard Times article it cites gives a little more), but does anyone know the story or have any maps? Where was it supposed to go?

 

[Harry Mattison]

Cambridge St Allston reconstruction meeting - Jan 14

MassDOT is hosting a 3rd meeting about the $10 million project to rebuild Cambridge Street between Harvard Ave and Lincoln Street.

Tuesday, Jan 14 @ 6pm - Jackson Mann Community Center - 500 Cambridge Street - https://www.facebook.com/events/1446934668862883/

The attendance of 150+ people at the December meeting was fantastic! On January 14 let's again show MassDOT how much we care about having Allston be more safe, attractive, and accessible.

If you are also interested in the much bigger Mass Pike realignment project, please join us on the 14th. The more that MassDOT, BTD, and our elected officials see that people are interested in Allston's infrastructure, the more impact we can have in the planning for the Mass Pike project.

 

[cozzyd]

Well, based on my experience Sunday night, it looks like cab drivers are using the Callahan closure as an excuse to take I-90 from the airport instead of the Sumner tunnel (while pointing at the Callahan closed sign...)

 

[matredsoxfan]

Well good news on the Cambridge Street overpass project over I-90. According to the recent meeting notice for the next public meeting the project includes....

-Replacement of the concrete bridge deck, and bearings
- Narrowing of Cambridge Street by one lane
- A Cycle Track in Both Directions
- A Mid Block Crossing at Mansfield Street

Nice job by MassDOT working with the people of Allston. I think this is what Allston wanted right?

 

[davem]

Well good news on the Cambridge Street overpass project over I-90. According to the recent meeting notice for the next public meeting the project includes....

-Replacement of the concrete bridge deck, and bearings
- Narrowing of Cambridge Street by one lane
- A Cycle Track in Both Directions
- A Mid Block Crossing at Mansfield Street

Nice job by MassDOT working with the people of Allston. I think this is what Allston wanted right?

See the overpass thread. The fence is still there, and they refuse to talk about lowering the speed limit. The 11' lanes also have four feet of buffer space, so its going to stay a drag strip.

Its a start, but there's a long way to go…

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

While I was down in Fairhaven visiting family for Christmas, I got to thinking about how absurdly short MA-240 is. It's clearly a cancelled highway project (there's even a ghost stub that's actually the highway itself). Wikipedia has some info (and the Standard Times article it cites gives a little more), but does anyone know the story or have any maps? Where was it supposed to go?

North to Acushnet, but I have no clue where. It either had to dump out somewhere in the eastern sticks or had to nuke some neighborhood to have any path into center of downtown. That debate stretched well into the 90's. I've got relatives in New Bedford I visit semi-regularly whose homes are less than a mile from 240. I'll ask one of them next time I'm down there in a few months, because they probably attended meetings on this at some point over the years and cast a vote or three about it.


195 really needs to go 6 lanes between 140 and 240 because everything falls apart in the vicinity of Route 18. 6 exits in barely 3-1/2 miles is a merging nightmare with such short ramps. I can't understand why the only badly substandard part of 195 in MA was the last piece of it to be constructed. Unfortunately that viaduct from County St. to Belleville Ave. that contains the worst of it is too expensive to rebuild or modify to be worth it.

 

[Matthew]

See the overpass thread. The fence is still there, and they refuse to talk about lowering the speed limit. The 11' lanes also have four feet of buffer space, so its going to stay a drag strip.

Its a start, but there's a long way to go…

In addition, there's only 12' of space to split between peds and cyclists in the new design, so it's going to create conflicts like on Vassar St.

And the crosswalk won't be installed until 2017 likely.

Plenty to talk about at the meeting ... Jan 14th 6pm Jackson-Mann.

 

[Charlie_mta]

While I was down in Fairhaven visiting family for Christmas, I got to thinking about how absurdly short MA-240 is. It's clearly a cancelled highway project (there's even a ghost stub that's actually the highway itself). Wikipedia has some info (and the Standard Times article it cites gives a little more), but does anyone know the story or have any maps? Where was it supposed to go?

I went to college in that area back in the early 1970's, when I-195 (east of New Bedford) and 240 were built. The plan, as I recall, was for 240 to connect with Route 140 as shown here (route approximate):

 

[Matthew]

MassPike Alt 1

MassPike Alt 2

Modified version of Ari's design

 

[Kahta]

MassPike Alt 1

Modified version of Ari's design

I like Ari's version a lot, but it needs a more direct connection from storrow/the pike to cambridge st.

 

[Matthew]

I don't think you can make it any more direct than it is shown? There's ramps from the pike/storrow, they're kinda blocked by the elevated pedway though.

 

[paperless paul]

Modified version of Ari's design

Thanks for doing this. I think this piece might be the most critical of all the connected projects (i.e. Bowker / Storrow / Ramps) because given the temp repairs for Bowker, it sounds like it will be the first one to happen and a lot of choices will get poured into concrete.

Surprisingly, I think the current MassDot proposal (see below), is a fairly good start (I wonder how many lanes the ramps are).

The ramp system is fairly simple, moves away from the river and generates good usable space. Although it loses the space at F, it sounds like there is a municipal demand for that space (not sure).

However, I really like the concept behind The Amateur Planner's proposal. I think it should be very easy to combine the two. Take Soldiers Field Rd, follow the Pike as closely as possible including the westbound Allston ramp. Take Soldiers Field Westbound merge with the Pike Allston East and West Allston offramp before Cambridge St. Possibly dip below Cambridge St with access ramps. Perhaps lose the Back Bay U Turn (D). Then continue on dead straight through on New Soldiers Field. Debate whether to underpass North Harvard and Western Ave (Possibly just one).

Then continue on to a new intersection with the Old Soldier's Field, and the Eliot Bridge crossing. Similar to the Ari's Proposal shown here. Debate the possibility of a new Rte 2 & 3 intersection on the Watertown side and a new crossing that is directly aligned with the New Soldier's Field. And turn Eliot into a pedestrian bridge.

The eastbound Allston Pike onramp might also need to be moved northeast to align directly with the New Soldiers Field Rd. It could merge with a split from the western connection with Soldiers Field Rd East and then rise up almost parallel to the western off ramp and bridge over the Pike to its merge. Probably a little farther east than that shown here.

This proposal could easily be done in stages. You just need to build in the design to the geometry of the ramp changes. It will vastly improve access to the Pike from the Rte 2 & 3 interchange which could allow the removal of Storrow Drive assuming ramp replacements for the Bowker were found.

The new Allston interchange would be much more straightforward than that shown here or in the Amateur Planner proposal. It is also very consistent with the existing MassDot proposal, therefore requiring much less debate.

Most importantly, it is fairly consistent with the long-term vision in the Harvard Allston Campus Master Plan which shows a reasonably major road going between Cambridge and N Harvard at the same alignment as the proposed Allston Pike off ramp (from page 77). With the exception of the sports field area, but presumably there is some flexibility here.

Harvard Allston Institutional Master Plan July 2013 pdf (very large file)

The real challenge would be putting a major artery and traffic (at present on the order of 38k per day) through the Harvard Allston campus. Particularly below grade.

The merge between East / West off bound and West Soldiers Field Road and then Cambridge St in such a short distance would also be difficult. In some sense it might end up being no better than the current interchange intersection with Soldiers Field.

Finally, I strongly support the idea of connecting the BU neighbourhood with the new Allston one. But this should be the last priority.

 

[Kahta]

I would question how badly Allston north of the pike wants to be connected with the rest of Allston- Do they really want more BU students living there?


More owner occupied homes
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma...395324707&mapOSM[s]=blocks82&mapOSM[fs]=false

Median Resident Age
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma...517944336&mapOSM[s]=blocks20&mapOSM[fs]=false

Higher % of families there
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma...395324707&mapOSM[s]=blocks55&mapOSM[fs]=false

% Never married
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma...0163574219&mapOSM[s]=races63&mapOSM[fs]=false

% Not enrolled in school
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma....13072395324707&mapOSM[s]=25&mapOSM[fs]=false

% Enrolled in undergrad
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma...1.1306381225586&mapOSM[s]=23&mapOSM[fs]=false

% income change since 2000
http://www.city-data.com/#mapOSM?ma...0163574219&mapOSM[s]=income5&mapOSM[fs]=false

Note where income has gone up and down- up is because students are moving out and down is where students have increased. Students are moving out of brookline

 

[Shepard]

That's a good observation but I think the studentization is happening anyway from Harvard grad students.

 

[mass88]

Thanks for doing this. I think this piece might be the most critical of all the connected projects (i.e. Bowker / Storrow / Ramps) because given the temp repairs for Bowker, it sounds like it will be the first one to happen and a lot of choices will get poured into concrete.

Surprisingly, I think the current MassDot proposal (see below), is a fairly good start (I wonder how many lanes the ramps are).

The ramp system is fairly simple, moves away from the river and generates good usable space. Although it loses the space at F, it sounds like there is a municipal demand for that space (not sure).

However, I really like the concept behind The Amateur Planner's proposal. I think it should be very easy to combine the two. Take Soldiers Field Rd, follow the Pike as closely as possible including the westbound Allston ramp. Take Soldiers Field Westbound merge with the Pike Allston East and West Allston offramp before Cambridge St. Possibly dip below Cambridge St with access ramps. Perhaps lose the Back Bay U Turn (D). Then continue on dead straight through on New Soldiers Field. Debate whether to underpass North Harvard and Western Ave (Possibly just one).

Then continue on to a new intersection with the Old Soldier's Field, and the Eliot Bridge crossing. Similar to the Ari's Proposal shown here. Debate the possibility of a new Rte 2 & 3 intersection on the Watertown side and a new crossing that is directly aligned with the New Soldier's Field. And turn Eliot into a pedestrian bridge.

The eastbound Allston Pike onramp might also need to be moved northeast to align directly with the New Soldiers Field Rd. It could merge with a split from the western connection with Soldiers Field Rd East and then rise up almost parallel to the western off ramp and bridge over the Pike to its merge. Probably a little farther east than that shown here.

This proposal could easily be done in stages. You just need to build in the design to the geometry of the ramp changes. It will vastly improve access to the Pike from the Rte 2 & 3 interchange which could allow the removal of Storrow Drive assuming ramp replacements for the Bowker were found.

The new Allston interchange would be much more straightforward than that shown here or in the Amateur Planner proposal. It is also very consistent with the existing MassDot proposal, therefore requiring much less debate.

I like the ramp setup with the MassDot proposal you posted. No sharp curves, or cloverleafs that most major interchanges in this state use.


They would have to widen Cambridge street to 3-4 lanes in each direction around the area where the on/off ramps to the Pike come onto Cambridge to give extra space.

 

[paperless paul]

That's a good observation but I think the studentization is happening anyway from Harvard grad students.

Basically agree with both of you. It's a fair observation that I had not wholly considered. Obviously the existing homeowners aren't ever going to want anything to change. But Harvard's new plan is going to bring change, and it will likely include more students, traffic and many things. Not to mention the tolls, development at Brighton Landing, and improved Cambridge St pedestrian access.

And it's in the city's interest to have more access between these neighbourhoods.

But, again, it's the least important part of the piece to put in place to start with. So ultimately there is a political bargain to be struck or not.

 

[davem]

There's already a thread on this where a lot of this has been thrown around.

 

[paperless paul]

So here’s my opening gambit of a concept for Pike Eastbound Off and On Ramps in the BU Area.

The goal is to create an alternate route for the Bowker so it and Storrow can be downgraded. This proposal would be an alternative to an Eastbound interchange at Bowker. The Westbound On/Off would remain at Bokwer.

This proposal is an improvement over a Bowker Eastbound interchange because it would:
(1) retain four travel lanes
(2) maintain greater separation between exits - 1.25 mi vs 0.6 mi
(3) merge under lower traffic conditions
(4) possibly has greater capacity at off-ramps

At the moment it does not include any changes to the BU Bridge / Mountfort / Comm Ave intersection.

Ultimately, this proposal may not work, but the goal is to reason out what is possible before politics and detailed cost.

Here are the main components.
1. Drop St. Mary’s St. Bridge
- It could come back as pedestrian bridge or even a small street TBD

2. New ramps to meet roughly at intersection with Park Drive
- Could Park Drive be straightened here to be perpendicular to Pike?
- Ideally Park Dr. to be 4 lanes between Buswell and Mountfort, but this may not be possible

3. Reroute tracks southward to new retaining wall as close to Mountford buildings as possible by continuing curve at Beacon and Mountfort
- Assuming that we try to maintain 4 lanes Eastbound on Pike
- Remove buffer at Pike
- Remove trees and embankment south of tracks
- Cut back Mountfort St where necessary
- Goal is to achieve ramp width worth of space – i.e. 22.5 ft as according to Davem
- min width face of buildings to southern Pike lane is approx 110 ft

4. Rebuild Montfort including decking to take back additional width


Key remaining problem is that the Pike Westbound On Ramp is not nearby. It's unclear whether the route through Mass Ave or Kenmore would be sufficient to draw traffic from Storrow.

Basic Layout

Traffic Plan of intersection

Section along New Mountfort St