Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

shmessy said:
OK, I'm taking bets on the over/under for how long will it be before that ramp is closed to the public for safety concerns after the first several "I lost the grip on my baby's stroller" accidents.
Click to expand...

Its hard to tell from the photo, but my understanding of ADA laws is that there needs to be a flat rest point ever x feet. Im not seeing that.

Charlie_mta said:
Pedestrian/bike tunnels are not in favor because of derelict people using them as placing to hang out. It seems a more ground level/small bridge design could have been possible.
Click to expand...

Valid concern, but I feel that managing that issue is better than making a ramp to steep for 99% of the population to want to use
 
Equilibria said:
Then why spend all the money building it? Related question, WTF? Medford St. is a major road, people who live on it are used to traffic, the traffic will simply divert into the neighborhood, and we're spending millions to build a dedicated Community Path explicitly to parallel it. Maybe they modeled this and it makes sense, but it stinks of "f_ck cars, that's why".

Thanks for the info, btw!
Click to expand...
Well, I'd imagine they had to dig in to the embankment on the high school side for the inbound glx track anyway and the bridge was going to have to be extended no matter what went over it. I think they plan to make it accessible to emergency vehicles so it would have to be built back to code.
It's been closed long before covid (just the stretch behind the high school and library) and it didn't flood the neighboring streets with traffic. Now that area is only going to get busier as the high school will be using the north facing station entrance a lot. Plus, no harm taking one more road out of the Gilman sq junction of streets. Gives it a chance to be some sort of focal point.
If done right, this could be quite a good civic space tying in the library, school, t stop and community path. It will tie the stuff south of the tracks to Gilman sq.
good idea in my book.
 
jass said:
Its hard to tell from the photo, but my understanding of ADA laws is that there needs to be a flat rest point ever x feet. Im not seeing that.
Click to expand...

You're just looking at the support structure, though. I'm guessing that it's easier to do that in how you do the decking/concrete work on top rather than in the support girders.
 
jass said:
Valid concern, but I feel that managing that issue is better than making a ramp to steep for 99% of the population to want to use
Click to expand...

Lol all this complaining about the ramp is honestly hilarious. It's called exercise, it's GOOD for you. If that ramp deters 99% of the population then we are truly doomed as a species.
 
lexicon506 said:
Lol all this complaining about the ramp is honestly hilarious. It's called exercise, it's GOOD for you. If that ramp deters 99% of the population then we are truly doomed as a species.
Click to expand...

It is 5 or 6 stories up. I believe that tall enough that many people will have quite valid concerns that you're exposed to wind, insecure without railings, and a long enough ramp that will take some time to get up to the top and come down far too fast.

It's also high enough that people with fear of heights will avoid the bridge.
 
millerm277 said:
You're just looking at the support structure, though. I'm guessing that it's easier to do that in how you do the decking/concrete work on top rather than in the support girders.
Click to expand...

There also an ADA standard for a less steep slope that will allow for eschewing the landings.
 
ra84970 said:
It is 5 or 6 stories up. I believe that tall enough that many people will have quite valid concerns that you're exposed to wind, insecure without railings, and a long enough ramp that will take some time to get up to the top and come down far too fast.

It's also high enough that people with fear of heights will avoid the bridge.
Click to expand...

So now we have to build our infrastructure to assuage little Johnny who's scared of heights? I'm sorry I know I'm being insensitive, but I think these complaints are absolutely ridiculous. And there will obviously be railings on the final product.
 
lexicon506 said:
So now we have to build our infrastructure to assuage little Johnny who's scared of heights? I'm sorry I know I'm being insensitive, but I think these complaints are absolutely ridiculous. And there will obviously be railings on the final product.
Click to expand...

Clearly there will be railings but there will be valid concerns about the height of the railings and height of the bridge.

And at a certain point a 5 or 6 story height makes a structure not usable for everybody.

Every body pays the taxes that are paying for the path bridge and glx so everyone *should* have access to it and the design should be accessible to all.
 
The ramp is going to be ADA compliant, so it'll either be 8.33% slope with landings every 30" of rise or 5% with no landings required. For the majority of the population I think that'll be manageable... If it's not ADA compliant well, I can't imagine that happening because that will certainly be a lawsuit

As for railing height, it's crossing a railway so usually you're looking at 10'+ and absolutely no views whatsoever
 
I think one of the unused proposals for the GLX Mark II involved a prefabricated tunnel box being shoved behind the Medford Street abutment, like part of the Big Dig tunnels under the South Station leads.
 
HelloBostonHi said:
The ramp is going to be ADA compliant, so it'll either be 8.33% slope with landings every 30" of rise or 5% with no landings required. For the majority of the population I think that'll be manageable... If it's not ADA compliant well, I can't imagine that happening because that will certainly be a lawsuit

As for railing height, it's crossing a railway so usually you're looking at 10'+ and absolutely no views whatsoever
Click to expand...

According to this Globe story from September, it's a steady 4.8% grade: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09...ne-extension-cyclists-will-rise-above-it-all/

As far as the views are concerned:
“It’s going to be a great vantage point to see a lot of cool stuff — for seeing a lot of transit operations, a good view of the city,” said John Dalton, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s Green Line project manager. “For bikers and joggers and walkers, it will be worth the effort.”
Click to expand...

Personally I'm torn. I think it'll be neat. And I seek out hills when I'm out on my road bike. But I sweat a lot! I don't want to deal with that on a quick jaunt to work. I see a Van Moof S3 or some other ebike in my future.
 
Last edited:
lexicon506 said:
Lol all this complaining about the ramp is honestly hilarious. It's called exercise, it's GOOD for you. If that ramp deters 99% of the population then we are truly doomed as a species.
Click to expand...

Its transportation infrastructure not an exercise park.

Most of us would rather not show up to work sweaty.

For reference, a quick google search got me this:

BROOKLYN BRIDGE

Manhattan side to tower: 86' rise over .47 mile -> 3.5% average grade
Manhattan side to crest: 100' rise over .63 mile -> 3.0% grade

Brooklyn side to tower: 92' rise over .46 mile -> 3.8% grade
Brooklyn side to crest: 100' rise over .60 mile -> 3.2% grade
Click to expand...

I did that on a Citibike, and I was pretty damn tired (the crowds didnt help)
 
jass said:
Its transportation infrastructure not an exercise park.

Most of us would rather not show up to work sweaty.

For reference, a quick google search got me this:



I did that on a Citibike, and I was pretty damn tired (the crowds didnt help)
Click to expand...
Well it's a good thing this won't be half a mile of upgrade, or anything even close to that.
 
HelloBostonHi said:
Well it's a good thing this won't be half a mile of upgrade, or anything even close to that.
Click to expand...

The equivalent walk today means breaking somewhat of a sweat going up/down both sides of the McGrath Overpass. And there you have to squeeze for dear life against a guardrail to let a stroller pass and get blasted by dirt from high-speed traffic. And...sucks to be you...try to do it after winter weather when it's a crapshoot whether the sidewalk has gotten any plowing or melt treatment whatsoever. I did that walk home to East Somerville from Lechmere for a couple of years, and it was intensely unpleasant on a good day.

If we've been putting up with that walk for 70 years the new path really isn't going to be all that much different. Similar total length bottom-grade to bottom-grade, considerably wider accommodations, no more putting your head down against screaming traffic. And, yes, ADA means there has to be flat landings every few feet...and, yes, it'll be treated for snow/ice much more faithfully. About the only overall demerit might be that it's up in the wind column a little bit more...but even that we can't fully gauge until it's open.
 
jass said:
BROOKLYN BRIDGE

Manhattan side to tower: 86' rise over .47 mile -> 3.5% average grade
Manhattan side to crest: 100' rise over .63 mile -> 3.0% grade

Brooklyn side to tower: 92' rise over .46 mile -> 3.8% grade
Brooklyn side to crest: 100' rise over .60 mile -> 3.2% grade
Click to expand...
I did that on a Citibike, and I was pretty damn tired (the crowds didnt help)
Click to expand...
A painted stripe separates the Brooklyn Bridge walkway between foot and bike traffic. Will there be a similar dichotomy on the new GLX viaduct?
 
lexicon506 said:
Lol all this complaining about the ramp is honestly hilarious. It's called exercise, it's GOOD for you. If that ramp deters 99% of the population then we are truly doomed as a species.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it seriously doesn't look that steep to me, very easy for walking, fairly easy for bike riding. People are forgetting that all of this is controlled by ADA regs, and it can't actually be so steep as to be dangerous or too taxing. Otherwise it's not compliant. The whole conversation is pretty funny.

Norval Elliot said:
A painted stripe separates the Brooklyn Bridge walkway between foot and bike traffic. Will there be a similar dichotomy on the new GLX viaduct?
Click to expand...
LOL, that stripe is completely meaningless on the Brooklyn Bridge. The entire path is dominated by pedestrians on both sides of the line. This will be far better, if for no other reason that it will be significantly less crowded. Riding a bike over the Brooklyn Bridge is a bit frustrating, but I don't think that will be true for this bridge.
 
Last edited:
HenryAlan said:
LOL, that stripe is completely meaningless on the Brooklyn Bridge. The entire path is dominated by pedestrians on both sides of the line. This will be far better, if for no other reason that it will be significantly less crowded. Riding a bike over the Brooklyn Bridge is a bit frustrating, but I don't think that will be true for this bridge.
Click to expand...
Not completely meaningless. While there are too many transgressors, those who prefer to avoid wearing a body cast stay on the walkers' side.

In any case, the new GLX high bridge could draw elevated traffic levels, so to speak, should it become a destination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top