Northern Avenue Bridge Fort Point Channel

citylover94 said:
I thought there was some legal reason they couldn't block the channel so that any proposal has to allow for access for boats of a certain height.
Click to expand...

City-Lover -- Fear-Not!!!

Nothing that won will be built -- this was just some sort of intelectual / aaesthetic exercise

The closing comment from the BBJ Story is the only one that matters

The city said the Public Works Department is currently drafting a request for proposals for the design of the future bridge that it hopes to release in the coming months.
Click to expand...
 
whighlander said:
Tangent -- I think what is needed is a One way reversing the directions to handle the peaks -- for all vehicles and 2 way for prdestrians at all times

But you are right another Pedestrian Only Bridge should be on the agenda as well -- further along the Channel -- by the middle to end of the GE HQ property
Click to expand...


Not only has traffic adapted without this bridge, the Seaport district has undergone a big expansion without a bridge here. There is plenty of road capacity. People, yes, sure. Making people walk a block disrupts the harbor walk. But making cars drive a block to use a bridge is no reason to build a new bridge for cars.
 
tangent said:
Not only has traffic adapted without this bridge, the Seaport district has undergone a big expansion without a bridge here. There is plenty of road capacity. People, yes, sure. Making people walk a block disrupts the harbor walk. But making cars drive a block to use a bridge is no reason to build a new bridge for cars.
Click to expand...

Hahaha traffic has adapted? Have you ever been here in the morning or evening? The traffic on Seaport Blvd stretches from 93 back to Jerry Remy's on some nights. Traffic is a complete nightmare.
 
Exactly - but the deeper issue is that 93 itself is fully jammed. The traffic stretches from Jerry Remmys all the way to Wilmington. And it extends to the surface artery too, at least as far as the tobin ramps at city square in charlestown, and often beyond that too.

Adding another lane across the fort point channel is not going to change any of that. And even if it did, induced demand would jam the additional capacity in a matter of months anyway.

Traffic is destiny in a prosperous city. Transit is the only sustainable way to mitigate the cost of congestion. This all should be self evident by now.
 
CSTH said:
Traffic is destiny in a prosperous city. Transit is the only sustainable way to mitigate the cost of congestion. This all should be self evident by now.
Click to expand...
^+1.

That is such a beautiful statement of the "supply" solution, but it can be improved it we admit that we can reduce "demand" via a congestion tax / charge and that the Congestion zone in Boston would have to include the Seaport.
 
I've never understood why we spent 20 billion dollars making it easier to drive under downtown Boston without instituting any type of cashless toll or congestion tax. Traffic on I-93 is horrible, a 3 dollar toll to drive into the tunnel might actually help.
 
Last edited:
tysmith95 said:
I've never understood why we spent 20 billion dollars making it easier to drive downtown Boston without instituting any type of cashless toll or congestion tax. Traffic on I-93 is horrible, a 3 dollar toll to drive into the tunnel might actually help.
Click to expand...

The best the CLF could do was extract an ill-considered, ill-implemented set of rail transit improvements (a transit carrot to go with the tunnel carrot).

Had the world known of congestion zones back then (they were just at their dawn of being invented in Scandanavia) we probably could've gotten the carrot-stick-carrot combo of a tunnel, a toll, and transit built with toll proceeds.
 
In this case, while folks debate, gravity might make the decision about what to do with the bridge.
 
I noticed a marine crane outside of the Tea Party museum. Any idea what that is for?
 
28467361973_ed95fa2cf4_b.jpg
 
Pheldy34 said:
How about something similar to this design, but tweaked slightly. Dedicated car, bike, and pedestrian lanes, cool design and lit at night.

http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2015/...ridge-design-new-video-shows-design-at-night/
Click to expand...


What possible need is there to drive a car over this? Absolutely none; the Moakley handles cars just fine- it's a highway bridge after all.

Reserve this bridge for people on foot, people on bikes and add some amenities such as shops, an eatery or two and exhibits about the different types of movable bridges (swing, bastille, sliding, and the former rolling bridge) that can be found along the channel. Use the rest of the space for seating and landscaping.

Keep the bridge parallel with the channel, possibly raise it up so that bike/ped bridges can be connected to it without having to be operable. Let the pedestrian and bike path be a straight shot through so as to help create a desirable route for people to use to get to/from North Station
 
Yeah, no cars please. If anything it would make congestion worse.
 
Randomgear said:
What possible need is there to drive a car over this? Absolutely none; the Moakley handles cars just fine- it's a highway bridge after all....

Keep the bridge parallel with the channel, possibly raise it up so that bike/ped bridges can be connected to it without having to be operable. Let the pedestrian and bike path be a straight shot through so as to help create a desirable route for people to use to get to/from North Station
Click to expand...

RandomGear -- that statement is akin to saying you don't need a street -- a bridge is just a street which happens to be located over water

There is a street -- Old Northern Avenue which now stops while there is a perfectly good place for it to continue to on the other side of the Fort Point Channel -- Atlantic Avenue

The major problem with the Seaport / innovation / Fort Point / GE District is that it lacks enough connections. Due to the lack permission to use a perfectly good Dorchester Avenue next to the USPS facility --- Unless you are prepared to do a lot of meandering you only have the use of the 3 bridges to get to the downtown area

Beside restoring Northern Avenue -- Dorchester Avenue needs to be opened and a connection across the various bridge streets [e.g.] Summer] all the way to Dorchester Ave needs to be established
 
Where does Northern Ave take drivers leaving the Seaport? Left onto Atlantic. That's it. It would add an additional light cycle that would ultimately cause more problems for Seaport Blvd than the additional crossing solved in the first place.

If there HAD to be motor-vehicle traffic on this bridge, it should be a single lane of one-way traffic Seaport-outbound at all times of day.
 
whighlander said:
RandomGear -- that statement is akin to saying you don't need a street -- a bridge is just a street which happens to be located over water
Click to expand...

What's wrong about a street over water for people who are not in cars? for people in cars it's just not very useful. For people on foot it offers great connections; for people on bikes it has an opportunity (if Boston ever builds some separated bike facilities on Atlantic) to offer a great connection to the Connect Historic Boston cycle track on Commercial St to help get people to the North End, North Station and perhaps beyond. No need to rebuild an 80' wide bridge just for pedestrians and cyclists - the North Bank bridge is only 15' wide.

Comparing "Old Northern Ave" to Dorchester Ave is just plain idiotic - Dot Ave is 5 continuous miles from Dorchester lower mills to Summer St, Old Northern Ave is just a 1/3 mile long dog leg off of Seaport Boulevard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top