Longfellow Bridge update

I'm not so sure about the livable streets proposal. I guess it depends on how well the traffic can handle with only 1 lane. .

Did you not see the article above?

"The usage figures are part of that, and they include a count of everyone crossing the bridge in both directions in one hour of peak traffic during a recent evening rush: 10,202 Red Line riders; 2,622 vehicle drivers and passengers; 326 pedestrians; and 167 bicyclists. "

1 lane can carry 1,500 vehicles an hour. So one in each direction means 3,000 total, more than enough to handle the 2,622 cars currently using the bridge, especially when you note that car traffic on the bridge has DROPPED every year
 
Lets take a tour of the bridge to see what needs to change.

IMG_8676.jpg


IMG_8678.jpg


IMG_8679.jpg



Stairs to nowhere

IMG_8680.jpg


IMG_8681.jpg


IMG_8682.jpg


IMG_8692.jpg


IMG_8694.jpg




BONUS CONSTRUCTION!

IMG_8691.jpg


IMG_8693.jpg




Now for the Charles mega-fail area. This sidewalk looks new.

IMG_8695.jpg



But we are on the street :/

IMG_8696.jpg



Bonus hotel

IMG_8697.jpg



Traffic fail


IMG_8698.jpg


IMG_8700.jpg


Flashing yellow means !?!

IMG_8701.jpg
 
"EXIT TO STREET" looks like it's left over from when the temporary Charles station entrance was under the bridge.
 
^ and as of today, along with the BU bridge they both are already spray painted on :(
 
It's the season for teenage thugs to run amok and the moron we have for a mayor just declared a "nothing to see here" policy on mass hooliganism of the non-sports variety. This going to be a great summer.
 
So if that is looking towards Cambridge, that means the wider sidewalk is facing towards the Museum of Science right? Not that the views that direction are awful, but it seems like a promenade along the other side would give people some pretty great views of the city.

Previous posts seem to indicate that the traffic flow could have been handled by one lane. It'll be a shame if we miss a chance to do a promenade like this on both sides.

LivableStreets has a great image of what it could look like http://livablestreets.info/projects/longfellowbridge
 
The light posts are oriented to the car it looks like. There's none along the sidewalks, just over the inner lanes?
 
A big constraint here is having to leave the Red Line exactly where it is now.
 
Plus you need the two lanes coming into boston because of the traffic and the ridiculous intersection at the end. going into cambridge it is a much smoother ride and away from the bridge, and hardly ever any significant back up.

can't wait til the T can run full speed and the signals are fixed so it doesnt sit on the bridge for 2 minutes- although as far as places to stop randomly on the T go, longfellow is at the top of the list.
 
This is great news. They had one of the two WB traffic lanes closed all fall for the power washing and it had zero traffic impact, so this a no brainer.

Beyond the quality of the view though, the challenge with making the wider sidewalk on the north side is access.

To get to the north sidewalk from the beacon hill side, you have to cross two storrow on ramps, a parking lot entrance/exit, and a storrow offramp - in the context of a very funky traffic light pattern. And on the kendall side, you either have to dash across the Mem Drive viaducts (which is dicey because drivers treat those like cousins of storrow drive) or make the long, dull walk 1/2 mile walk from 3rd street. So that will be a pretty lonely sidewalk.

On the south side of the bridge, however, you have direct connections from the the esplanade (via the pedestrian bridge) and the cambridge embankment (via a button-controlled mem drive cross walk), and from the area around the NERD building.

So until they either put cross walks on storrow or build a ped overpass north of the bridge (and fix the area around the kendall canal) this will be untapped potential
 
Plus you need the two lanes coming into boston because of the traffic and the ridiculous intersection at the end. going into cambridge it is a much smoother ride and away from the bridge, and hardly ever any significant back up.

can't wait til the T can run full speed and the signals are fixed so it doesnt sit on the bridge for 2 minutes- although as far as places to stop randomly on the T go, longfellow is at the top of the list.

Typical dummmmmm government in action compromise:
1) traffic is a problem -- 25,000 cars/ day
2) pedestrian and bike activists + geenies want more bike space - 2,000 bikes and pedestians/day
3) historiic preservationists at any cost wont let the bridge aspect ratio change - well ok a very little bit where the traffic splits into 3 lanes

There solution - spend $300 million dollars and worsen the traffic while only slightly improving the pedestrian experience

what they should have done is add a few extra feet to the width -- no one would have noticed
provide wider sidewalks and a bike lane without taking out one tavel lane

What will happen now - there will still be 2 travel lanes to Cambridge -- one unofficial and there will likely be accidents and law suits

Typical
 
Hopefully they improve the lighting on this bridge. The Longfellow and Mass Ave bridges are terrible.
 
what they should have done is add a few extra feet to the width -- no one would have noticed

Ummm..... This would involve moving the towers, no? I'm thinking that would be a rather elaborate process that may not go unnoticed. I don't think they could just skooch them a few feet apart.
 
1 lane each way, three Red Line tracks. Middle track can be used to pull off dead sets, good location as it is in the middle of the line. Eventually can be used for expressing and night service in the year 2350.
 
1 lane each way, three Red Line tracks. Middle track can be used to pull off dead sets, good location as it is in the middle of the line. Eventually can be used for expressing and night service in the year 2350.

Exactly, especially because its the only place they can add a 3rd track without spending billions in digging costs.
 

Back
Top