Seaport Transportation

Please contact your state rep and senator and let them know that you'd support an additional 10 cent gas hike to support the next 20 years of the Accelerated Bridge Repair program. Serious. Only way its going to happen. You're preaching to the choir here.
 
Boston.com has a story up about Seaport transport present and future (not sure if it has been liked here before--sorry anything except text is hard from an iPhone). Gist is:
1) signal priority or the SL at D is working
2) A deal to consolidate corporate shuttles is imminent
3) the "$125m" promised to GE is actually $100m for Northern Ave bridge and $25m for street stuff that was all already programmed but is now double pinky swear sure to happen
4) refurb of SL "tunnel" fleet
5) new surface-only SL service

Uncommitted includes:
1) adding 60 more SL bus (diesel-trolley)
2) bus, bike, HOV
 
Yeah, I saw that article as well. If I was in Boston I'd go over to D street and watch this supposed signal priority in action! Gotta see it to believe it.

Anyone experience it first hand?
 
Matthew said:
If I was in Boston I'd go over to D street and watch this supposed signal priority in action! Gotta see it to believe it. Anyone experience it first hand?
Click to expand...
Yes: anyone here experienced it?? (I'd have thought it'd be much discussed here if really on and making a difference.
 
I've only ridden that stretch a few times in the past year. Didn't experience the endless wait to cross of trips past, but I couldn't tell if I got lucky, or if it was actually working better.

The State Police onramp is the elephant in the room that needs to be addressed. There's no reason why a Silver Line bus shouldn't be able to leave Silver Line Way, make two right turns and be in the damn tunnel to the airport.

Hilariously, Google Maps currently lists the special snowflake police onramp as an extension of Silver Line Way.

https://goo.gl/maps/9GYWoHh9Z2E2
 
I walked down D today and saw the light change only right after a silver line bus crossed, FWIW.
 
Back to the bridge for a minute, Dante Ramos has a column in the Globe today about adaptive reuse of the Northern Avenue bridge, and he cites this AHF proposal from 1999.

http://www.ahfboston.com/old_northern_avenue_bridge.php

With $100M from the city, what are the odds in 2016 that a developer will pay the rest of the costs to make this happen? I realize we run the risk of being tacky, but European cities have been making hay out of shopping bridges for a thousand years...
 
Equilibria said:
Back to the bridge for a minute, Dante Ramos has a column in the Globe today about adaptive reuse of the Northern Avenue bridge, and he cites this AHF proposal from 1999.

http://www.ahfboston.com/old_northern_avenue_bridge.php

With $100M from the city, what are the odds in 2016 that a developer will pay the rest of the costs to make this happen? I realize we run the risk of being tacky, but European cities have been making hay out of shopping bridges for a thousand years...
Click to expand...

I think Beelines post in the Northern Avenue Bridge Thread shows why this is a challenge.

http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=222763&postcount=89

The bridge beams are swiss cheese. This is why the Coast Guard is demanding demolition. It is a hazard.

Nothing short of total rebuild is possible now. Not sure if that is within the City's and a Developer's cost range.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I think Beelines post in the Northern Avenue Bridge Thread shows why this is a challenge.

http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=222763&postcount=89

The bridge beams are swiss cheese. This is why the Coast Guard is demanding demolition. It is a hazard.

Nothing short of total rebuild is possible now. Not sure if that is within the City's and a Developer's cost range.
Click to expand...

JeffD -- Yup -- thats what the chemistry of the combination of Salt, water and an active metal -- that's also why the Navy is constantly painting

Back in the mid 1980's I stood on the partially exposed bottom of the Prinz Eugen during a real low tide in the Kwajalein Lagoon -- the really thick steel plates [70 to 80 mm] had been reduced to paper thickness -- the only places you could stand on safely was where the deep steel frames were located -- on the other hand the Monel alloy propellers and the rudder were in almost factory mint condition

192c857a6fccbcbba9738cabeef5fe98.jpg
 
JeffDowntown said:
I think Beelines post in the Northern Avenue Bridge Thread shows why this is a challenge.

http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=222763&postcount=89

The bridge beams are swiss cheese. This is why the Coast Guard is demanding demolition. It is a hazard.

Nothing short of total rebuild is possible now. Not sure if that is within the City's and a Developer's cost range.
Click to expand...

I gotta think the Coast Guard choosing to go public with that within a day of the GE announcement was their exasperated way of saying "Wait a minute! We already told you after the Long Island debacle about its dangerous condition, and scrambled the plans to take it down. WTF is this???" City's announcement and Coast Guard announcement are contradictory enough and timed curiously enough that it sounds like a rebuttal/rebuke.


$100M for a new auto bridge over the saltwater channel is implausible. Especially if that $100M pot is getting subdivided for other amenities related to the deal. Either they expect a private developer to finance all points upwards to the going rate, or they gruesomely stuck foot in mouth by ignoring facts spelled out to them well in advance and are going to have to walk it back in short order.

If it's the former, then who? It's improbable that GE would underwrite the full above-and-beyond cost. Too far against their nature. Either they have multiple private investors in mind, or. . .?
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
I gotta think the Coast Guard choosing to go public with that within a day of the GE announcement was their exasperated way of saying "Wait a minute! We already told you after the Long Island debacle about its dangerous condition, and scrambled the plans to take it down. WTF is this???" City's announcement and Coast Guard announcement are contradictory enough and timed curiously enough that it sounds like a rebuttal/rebuke.


$100M for a new auto bridge over the saltwater channel is implausible. Especially if that $100M pot is getting subdivided for other amenities related to the deal. Either they expect a private developer to finance all points upwards to the going rate, or they gruesomely stuck foot in mouth by ignoring facts spelled out to them well in advance and are going to have to walk it back in short order.

If it's the former, then who? It's improbable that GE would underwrite the full above-and-beyond cost. Too far against their nature. Either they have multiple private investors in mind, or. . .?
Click to expand...

FLine -- I suspect that at or immediately after the GE show on Feb 18th there will be some sort of transportation to Seaport study announced perhaps with some preliminary talking points

By the time GE moves in the is Summer to Farnsworth St. there will a plan in place with a budget and who is paying what for what -- my totally wild guess is about $350M for Seaport Access over the next 5 years including the Northern Avenue Bridge, Silver Line and Water Transport
 
Remember how we discussed taking parking spaces for more seaport BRT or bikes? At the time, the best I could do was remember William Whyte's studies that showed that shop employees were parking curbside, not shop customers (from his book, City, Rediscovering the Center)


Here is a great 2013 report (and a bit depressing) report from San Francisco on the HUGE perception gap between where merchants think their customers come from and want and what their customers actually do and want.

First, merchants *way* overestimate the importance of street parking:
arrival1.jpg


Then merchants *way* under appreciate the net change in customer traffic that BRT would bring:
impact.jpg


And as a result, merchants' outcry is basically opposite of what their customers actually want:
priorities.jpg


So retail foot traffic in/on urban arterials arrives by foot, bike, & transit, not cars, and what merchants need is more people, not more cars.
 
My theory as to this disconnect between merchant perceptions vs customer reality is that (a) most merchants drive to their stores and assume that most customers do too and (b) customers who have trouble finding parking are more likely to complain to the merchants about it than customers who think transit access sucks.
 
Maybe this means the Aquarium people are, as I suspect, completely full of shit regarding their existential dependence on having a parking garage 20 feet from their door.
 
cden4 said:
My theory as to this disconnect between merchant perceptions vs customer reality is that (a) most merchants drive to their stores and assume that most customers do too and (b) customers who have trouble finding parking are more likely to complain to the merchants about it than customers who think transit access sucks.
Click to expand...

cden -- Nice for SF -- not clear that it relates to Boston -- major difference is New England Winter

All of the West coast models when dragged East -- assume that it's just is a bit colder here

Wrong -- its not just quantitatively different --- its qualitatively different here -- we have 2 real seasons Winter and the Rest of the year

In Winter:
  • no one wants to walk, or wait, or linger on the street corner, for any longer than is absolutely necessary
  • the nice promenade along the waterfront is even less pleasant than walking a block or two away
  • sidewalks are made for hurrying not browsing and certainly not sitting and chatting
  • Gerbil Tubes and Pedestrian Tunnels are nice to have
  • wide Arcades and broad overhangs are much better than shear vertical walls

PS: despite the nice December and January this year -- Winter is not going away -- get used to it
 
whighlander said:
cden -- Nice for SF -- not clear that it relates to Boston -- major difference is New England Winter

All of the West coast models when dragged East -- assume that it's just is a bit colder here

Wrong -- its not just quantitatively different --- its qualitatively different here -- we have 2 real seasons Winter and the Rest of the year

In Winter:
  • no one wants to walk, or wait, or linger on the street corner, for any longer than is absolutely necessary
  • the nice promenade along the waterfront is even less pleasant than walking a block or two away
  • sidewalks are made for hurrying not browsing and certainly not sitting and chatting
  • Gerbil Tubes and Pedestrian Tunnels are nice to have
  • wide Arcades and broad overhangs are much better than shear vertical walls

PS: despite the nice December and January this year -- Winter is not going away -- get used to it
Click to expand...
Whigh,

I think this is perhap a bit overstated.

Your commentary is certainly correct for a day like yesterday (windy, wet snow, really yuck winter weather). No one wanted to be out in it.

But today, I observed exactly the opposite -- a milder day (still cold, but not bitter, sunny), tons of people all over downtown, strolling not hurrying, enjoying the snow coating the trees, etc.

Many people in northern climates have actually adapted to being outside in the winter (at least on the nicer days).
 
Any reason why there is not a proposal to extend the red line from andrew through southie/ the seaport to South Station?


 
Last edited:
JeffDowntown said:
Whigh,

I think this is perhap a bit overstated.

Your commentary is certainly correct for a day like yesterday (windy, wet snow, really yuck winter weather). No one wanted to be out in it.

But today, I observed exactly the opposite -- a milder day (still cold, but not bitter, sunny), tons of people all over downtown, strolling not hurrying, enjoying the snow coating the trees, etc.

Many people in northern climates have actually adapted to being outside in the winter (at least on the nicer days).
Click to expand...

Exactly. I lived 2 blocks of Newbury St last year. The only days it wasn't full of pedestrians were when it fell below about 10-15 degrees. For the proper shopping street, people will walk through nearly anything here.
 
stick n move said:
Any reason why there is not a proposal to extend the red line from andrew through southie/ the seaport to South Station?


Click to expand...

1. There isn't room for 2 tracks along Track 61. The Haul Road is so narrow because that's the physical max they could expand it to without cannibalizing the last freight track on the ROW. I don't think you want to get rid of the Haul Road with what that would do to traffic in the neighborhood.

2. Pure $$$$$. Finding a way to loop back to South Station is going to be an absolute back-breaker. I'm not even sure how you'd do it with how oblique an angle it would take to wrap slowwwwly back into the Transitway...then rebuild all the SL stations for high platforms...then figure out where end-of-line train storage is going to live around the loop...then figure out what to do with SL1. You'd get more consequential congestion relief throughout downtown just cutting the check for Red-Blue vs. trying to force-fit a loop-back around here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top