I-90 Interchange Improvement Project & West Station | Allston

Equilibria said:
So.... what would you suggest, design-wise? Can you fit 8 lanes of Interstate, 4 lanes of regional highway, and 4 tracks of rail in this narrow space in a way that looks better? Because the only way I can think of to do that is to bury it all at a cost of billions.
Click to expand...

Build it at grade and then cover it with a platform purely for pedestrian use from the back of BU to the river. Get BU to chip in a few bucks since they'd be the primary beneficiary but it would certainly look better and though I'm not an engineer must be cheaper than burying the whole thing.
 
Rover said:
Build it at grade and then cover it with a platform purely for pedestrian use from the back of BU to the river. Get BU to chip in a few bucks since they'd be the primary beneficiary but it would certainly look better and though I'm not an engineer must be cheaper than burying the whole thing.
Click to expand...

They're looking at that, but that's an extension of the at-grade solution they proposed...
 
We need to think bigger.

Eliminate SFR/Storrow all the way from Cambridge Street (SFR will feed directly into the Pike) to Charlesgate. Build the Pike's long-needed Back Bay ramps. Voila - no need for a continuous SFR through to Storrow/Back Bay. Now you've opened up tons of riverfront parkland which functionally extends the Esplanade all the way to Allston.
 
Shepard said:
We need to think bigger.

Eliminate SFR/Storrow all the way from Cambridge Street (SFR will feed directly into the Pike) to Charlesgate. Build the Pike's long-needed Back Bay ramps. Voila - no need for a continuous SFR through to Storrow/Back Bay. Now you've opened up tons of riverfront parkland which functionally extends the Esplanade all the way to Allston.
Click to expand...

I've seen a few posts here advocating for Back Bay ramps. Where would they go /fit??
 
stefalarchitect said:
I've seen a few posts here advocating for Back Bay ramps. Where would they go /fit??
Click to expand...

Here's some ideas I've come up with:

12216819864_8b0597819b_b.jpg


12128915286_ded96ae4dd_b.jpg
 
That's gonna be a no way from me on both counts.

Replacing the on-WB with an off-WB at Mass Ave doesn't seem like it corresponds to any demand, but I guess you're saying this would be the only way into the Back Bay from 93? This also keeps the Bowker overpass and adds another signal a very short distance away from the one at Boylston and the Fenway to get on-EB. I wouldn't have hated having that one in my commuter days at NU but I still don't think it's a good idea.

And the ones at Berkeley St.: off-EB into a traffic light to turn left on a one way, that's a backup nightmare, especially because you'd have to time that signal with the one to the north of it for off-WB. These ramps also foreclose on the possibility of air-rights buildings for two very choice blocks.

But we do need to reduce the footprint of Storrow and Memorial Drives. What if they each only went one way, Storrow EB and Memorial WB? The whole river basin would become a loop from the science museum to Cambridge St/I-90. Give the river-facing lanes back to parkland.
 
cadetcarl said:
But we do need to reduce the footprint of Storrow and Memorial Drives. What if they each only went one way, Storrow EB and Memorial WB? The whole river basin would become a loop from the science museum to Cambridge St/I-90. Give the river-facing lanes back to parkland.
Click to expand...

That's not a bad idea, at least for Storrow Drive. You could make drivers use the Pike to get into the city from Western Ave and they'd have to use the existing Pru exit to get to Back Bay. Outbound lanes would remain in order to get people out of Boston. Doing so would help with the "throat" issue as well behind BU.

Not sure of the need to change Memorial. Its already a parkway complete with multiple lights and IIRC is narrower than Storrow.
 
Hmmm now that Storrow-Memorial idea is interesting. Not sure how well it would actually work in practice, but we need bold ideas like that to pick apart. Youd have to make more and better connections between the two that arent a cluster fck, but its probably do-able. Idk if thats the best option out there but its a great conversation to have. Drastic ideas like this can lead to the changes we need.

Edit- thats true about memorial being more of a parkway with many stop lights. That wouldnt make it a 1 for 1 swap at all. Good point.

One thing I do like in the render above and something we do need is an exit when heading west bound on the pike. Your trapped once your on it and your not able to use the pike as a means to get to parts of the city west of where you are. This is something that definitely needs to be addressed.

The part with the on ramp in the back bay I dont see being necessary. If anything Id want an off ramp there to put you west of the back bay. I dont think people really need to get on the pike there to go east, but people could definitely use an off ramp to get off the pike before the back bay.
 
cadetcarl said:
That's gonna be a no way from me on both counts.

Replacing the on-WB with an off-WB at Mass Ave doesn't seem like it corresponds to any demand, but I guess you're saying this would be the only way into the Back Bay from 93? This also keeps the Bowker overpass and adds another signal a very short distance away from the one at Boylston and the Fenway to get on-EB. I wouldn't have hated having that one in my commuter days at NU but I still don't think it's a good idea.

And the ones at Berkeley St.: off-EB into a traffic light to turn left on a one way, that's a backup nightmare, especially because you'd have to time that signal with the one to the north of it for off-WB. These ramps also foreclose on the possibility of air-rights buildings for two very choice blocks.
Click to expand...

Replacing the on-WB with an off-WB at Mass Ave would fill a traffic need created by the removal of Storrow Drive.

The Bowker overpass would be eliminated in my rendering. The new on-ramp to the eastbound Mass Pike there does add another signal a block away from the one at Boylston and the Fenway, but the whole area already has signals about every block or two, so that would be typical.

As for the ramps at Berkeley St.: there is no eastbound off-ramp there. The new street shown is a surface road from Columbus Ave to Berkeley Street to the new on-ramp to eastbound Mass Pike.

These ramps do foreclose the possibility of air-rights buildings there, but that's a trade-off for eliminating Storrow Drive and providing access to the Mass Pike as a replacement.
 
Charlie_mta said:
Here's the cross-section of it from the report. This is really smart design:

30414499607_c05d7789f6_z.jpg
Click to expand...

It might be, though I notice they don't show the RR side. The smart thing is if this leaves everything else at ground level but saves the need to fill the river for the path, while elevating the part that will deteriorate slowest. If you still need to elevate the rail, though, its hard to see the point.
 
It makes no sense to me to build a platform about one section of the at grade road but not the rest of it. Back when I was young and in shape I used to jog along there and the nice aroma of trains (at the time) and exhaust fumes SFR while you're gasping for air wasn't exactly conducive to having a good run. And that was with the Pike up in the air. Now the path will be next to a major interstate instead? Just cover the whole thing back there from the river to BU and truly open up the space.
 
One thing I've noticed from the report: Despite Secretary Pollack's publicly stated concern last month about the surface options being unwise choices due to flooding risk, the independent report shows that none of the alternatives would result in I-90 being inundated by a 50 year flood.
 
This solution looks like how they've managed to complete parts of the East River Greenway in Manhattan by placing it above the FDR
 
stick n move said:
Hmmm now that Storrow-Memorial idea is interesting. Not sure how well it would actually work in practice, but we need bold ideas like that to pick apart. Youd have to make more and better connections between the two that arent a cluster fck, but its probably do-able. Idk if thats the best option out there but its a great conversation to have. Drastic ideas like this can lead to the changes we need.

Edit- thats true about memorial being more of a parkway with many stop lights. That wouldnt make it a 1 for 1 swap at all. Good point.

One thing I do like in the render above and something we do need is an exit when heading west bound on the pike. Your trapped once your on it and your not able to use the pike as a means to get to parts of the city west of where you are. This is something that definitely needs to be addressed.

The part with the on ramp in the back bay I dont see being necessary. If anything Id want an off ramp there to put you west of the back bay. I dont think people really need to get on the pike there to go east, but people could definitely use an off ramp to get off the pike before the back bay.
Click to expand...

The entirety of Cambridge would be near 24/7 gridlock.
 
Why not just cut-and-cover under the current unused railyard? Harvard I'm sure would love the opportunity to use more of the surface land to build more buildings and or green space like another Harvard Yard.
 
Does anyone know how much Boston/Albany row will be preserved when the new freeway is put down?

i hope there's space allotted for a few miles of 4 tracks.
 
Digital_Islandboy said:
The entirety of Cambridge would be near 24/7 gridlock.
Click to expand...

A large portion of Memorial Drive will be closed to cars this saturday and sunday for the Head of the Charles. A portion is closed to cars regularly on sundays so people can actually enjoy the river. This does not cause the end of the world.

It is time to give the river back to the people. Cities around the world like Paris have recently closed riverside highways. Time for Boston and Cambridge to correct the mistakes of the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top