Northern Avenue Bridge Fort Point Channel

Looking at the connection, incorporating bus lanes on the rebuilt bridge would really only be helpful for inbound from the south and outbound to the north. Bus lanes on Seaport Blvd would be a much better plan for improving that aspect. I'd say build the bridge to support one lane vehicle traffic in each direction with sidewalk in case it is needed during a bridge closure. In practice, the "lanes" will be pedestrian and emergency vehicles only and the sidewalk will be cycle track. Design shouldn't preclude the alt usage, but should be made to look for pedestrians and not just a road that people walk on.
 
I mean its really not too hard to visualize how much it would be used as a pedestrian only corridor... seeing that thats exactly what it was before it closed. Even back then when there was only 1mpd, the court house, the 2 vertex towers, and the ICA tons of people used it and everytime I crossed there was a few other people crossing as well. So it definitely would be used again now that theres a lot more going on there. I used to use it any time I was between seaport blvd and the harbor because it was flat and a straight shot. These days theres a whole neighborhood there and pier 4 is wrapping up now too.

If it were to be used by cars again a one way 2 lane bridge out of the seaport would help seaport traffic the most. Taking the right from downtown onto the bridge is redundant with the moakley bridge just before it, so thats unnessecary. So instead both lanes would lead out of the seaport and right turn only. If you need to go straight across or left onto atlantic ave you just take the moakley as normal. Heading out of the seaport though it leads right into a one way right turn only at atlantic ave. This would allow all cars who wish to head north on atlantic ave an easy route. People learn the roads so people would learn to take northern ave to go right and the moakley bridge to go straight or left.
 
stick n move said:
If it were to be used by cars again a one way 2 lane bridge out of the seaport would help seaport traffic the most. Taking the right from downtown onto the bridge is redundant with the moakley bridge just before it, so thats unnessecary. So instead both lanes would lead out of the seaport and right turn only. If you need to go straight across or left onto atlantic ave you just take the moakley as normal. Heading out of the seaport though it leads right into a one way right turn only at atlantic ave. This would allow all cars who wish to head north on atlantic ave an easy route. People learn the roads so people would learn to take northern ave to go right and the moakley bridge to go straight or left.
Click to expand...

I think you are missing a key point about the traffic flow out of the Seaport.

The right turn most cars are making coming off the Moakley Bridge is not onto Atlantic. It is into the O'Neill Tunnel, I-93 N. The Northern Avenue Bridge provides no such access; it just dumps cars onto a busy, one-way stretch of Atlantic Ave, far from an I-93 entrance.
 
So I attended the public meeting tonight. It seems apparent that Marty’s default position is to go with cars on the bridge. Barring significant pushback, it’s cars, cars, cars. It’s also apparent that the city sees the budget as the greatest weak point in making the bridge car-centric. Arguments based on use will not carry much water, but arguments on the money involved may be persuasive.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I think you are missing a key point about the traffic flow out of the Seaport.

The right turn most cars are making coming off the Moakley Bridge is not onto Atlantic. It is into the O'Neill Tunnel, I-93 N. The Northern Avenue Bridge provides no such access; it just dumps cars onto a busy, one-way stretch of Atlantic Ave, far from an I-93 entrance.
Click to expand...

Well... as someone who has gone through there many times, everybody is trying to get onto 93, just from different entrances like at Sudbury and through Sullivan. The reconstruction of the Charlestown bridge is going to mess with this. If they really wanted to help, a bus lane to North Station would be the easiest way to reduce traffic.
 
so is that a roadway on the middle? Is it proposed to be a 2-way road?
 
My God: we're still at the 'talking about the bridge for years' stage? :roll:

Coyote137 said:
So I attended the public meeting tonight. It seems apparent that Marty’s default position is to go with cars on the bridge. Barring significant pushback, it’s cars, cars, cars.....
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
HenryAlan said:
Of the four presented in the second video, I like the second one far more than the others. It is modern, yet still referential to the original design.
Click to expand...

It also was a nod to pilings and the historical wharves. I like it, but my preference would be a restoration of the original metal. The best part of that bridge is the wooden floor and the metal overhead. I hope they preserve the former regardless of design (tho I doubt it).
 
The first video is so close - just remove the damned roadway across the water. keep a narrow bike/ped bridge and the island in the middle of the Channel as a car-free hangout on the water.
 
First official design (courtesy of Streetsblog, so blame them for the quality :)). It's undecided what the support would be (which is a lot of the aesthetics), but there would be no non-emergency vehicle use.

1576011878862.png
 
It is fantastic news that this is going to be restricted to pedestrian, bike, and emergency vehicles. I'm not crazy about any of these designs, but the purpose restrictions are great.
 
www.bostonglobe.com

Boston has dramatically reworked the design for a new Northern Avenue bridge - The Boston Globe

City officials working on replacing the long-closed bridge over Fort Point Channel appear to be moving toward a span that would prioritize walking and bicycling and prohibit single-occupancy cars. Indeed, conceptual images shared Tuesday don’t show any vehicles.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

Slightly misleading image there - implying the City has selected the double-arch when it hasn't - but that's my favorite so if they're making it more likely that's good news to me.

One span — accommodating one lane of traffic — would be devoted to buses, shuttles, and emergency vehicles. A separate span — on the harbor side — and the space below it would be for walkers, bikers, or just a place for people to congregate. While the bridge would be planned to “evolve” with the city’s transportation needs, officials said, there are no plans to allow regular car traffic.

City engineers are aiming for more specific designs by spring, and “100 percent design” in 2021. They would break ground a year after that and construction would take an additional two to three years. That means a bridge could open in 2025, a little more than a decade after it was shuttered because of safety concerns.
Click to expand...
 
Can they do that: have ADA ramp at the "city" end and only steps at the "Seaport" end? (We sometimes want to have double-ended rail stations where one end only has stairs--I remember asking for steps from the platorm-ends at the Newmarket CR stop and was told "no if you're going to put stairs, there has to be a matching ramp")
 
When's the old one supposed to fall down? Crazy this takes over a decade to fix. Coast Guard sent a letter in the winter of 2016 saying the collapse was imminent. Doesn't look like they've done anything to shore it up either.
 
Double arch is far and away the best one. Absolutely beautiful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top