Tobin Bridge Relocation/Replacement

Charlie_mta said:
A multi-use path on the Tobin replacement would be politically mandatory, I would think. The only hangup is the ADA requirements for % grade maximum, plus flat resting spots along the path. What I could find online is a 8.33% grade maximum, but the resting stop requirement was unclear.
Click to expand...
The approach used in Los Angeles for the 6th Street viaduct would likely be feasible.
FINAL-Sixth-Street-Viaduct-Replacement_6.jpg
 
Longfellow said:
Not to revive this again, but what are people's thoughts on including a bike/ped connection to Chelsea as part of this project if it were rebuilt as a bridge? Does the grade make this infeasible? Currently to bike/walk to Chelsea it requires going through Oil Tank City and Charlestown.
Click to expand...
The famous East River bridges in New York, which I imagine would involve more engineering hurdles than Tobin, are very popular with both pedestrians and cyclists -- not just for commutes, but also for recreational and tourism purposes.

Obviously the Tobin Bridge won't have nearly as much international fame nor residential density as the East River bridges... But in addition to a vital link for communities who are physically cut off from Downtown Boston, Tobin may also offer great views of the harbor and the Downtown Boston skyline. It can also be a natural "continuation" of the Freedom Trail and other destinations in Boston, which kind of end at Charlestown today.

(Of course, the East River bridges were built at a time with fewer accessibility requirements than today. But the 8.33% grade that @Charlie_mta cited, if true, doesn't sound too bad.)
 
Teban54 said:
(Of course, the East River bridges were built at a time with fewer accessibility requirements than today. But the 8.33% grade that @Charlie_mta cited, if true, doesn't sound too bad.)
Click to expand...
Above 5% it's no longer considered a sidewalk/path but instead is functionally defined as a ramp. You can only do 8.33% for discrete lengths before there must be a level resting spot, there are probably regulations for things like railings, and the regs for fittings in general get a whole lot stricter than the sidewalk regs. And it could be like most things where the Massachusetts accessibility regs are tougher than the national standards. So while it might be fully feasible, it definitely gets a lot more expensive to design and build once you exceed 5%.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Above 5% it's no longer considered a sidewalk/path but instead is functionally defined as a ramp. You can only do 8.33% for discrete lengths before there must be a level resting spot, there are probably regulations for things like railings, and the regs for fittings in general get a whole lot stricter than the sidewalk regs. And it could be like most things where the Massachusetts accessibility regs are tougher than the national standards. So while it might be fully feasible, it definitely gets a lot more expensive to design and build once you exceed 5%.
Click to expand...
That's what I was trying to say about anything over 5%. The Tobin takes off from flat ground on both ends, so it needs a steeper rise than, say, the proposed Sagamore and Bourne bridges which take off from hillier terrain, so don't need to ascend as steeply. But I still think a multi-use path is doable for a new Tobin, even if we have to resort to spiral stacked ramps on the ends like HenryAlan showed a few posts above:
HenryAlan said:
The approach used in Los Angeles for the 6th Street viaduct would likely be feasible.View attachment 67596
Click to expand...
 
I'd support relaxing wetland regulations and rerouting Route 1 from the Tobin to the pike via 16 and 1a. You'd only need minor eminent domain towards the Hampton Inn and the Revere Beach Parkway is already 3 lanes (though could use some design improvement). I don't think the wetland taking would need to be significant (and even then it's not natural wetlands there). You'd also need some minor eminent domain to reconfigure the intersection with the current 16 to prioritize traffic from Route 1.

So this would redirect Route 1 from going to the Leverett Connector/Charlestown to connect to the Airport and Ted Williams Tunnel, in both cases signal free and 2 or 3 lanes of traffic.

This would have secondary effects of reducing traffic on Route 60 for those going to Logan Airport and reducing traffic on the Leverett Connector (as route 1 south travelers would be routed to the Pike).

You would save a lot of money by not replacing the Tobin Bridge, and would remove a scar of the elevated highway through Chelsea and Charlestown.

I'd suggest then utilizing funds saved from not rebuilding the Tobin to upgrade the Silver Line to light rail, and dig a new tunnel from the Airport to the Seaport to support a light rail loop from Sullivan Station/Encore to South Station. This could remediate some of the increased traffic on the Ted Williams Tunnel from the Route 1 rerouting and would provide better transit connectivity for the airport, Chelsea and the Casino area. Money would be much better spent on a transit tunnel rather than repeating the mistakes of the Big Dig and building elaborate automobile tunnels (which do not support enough capacity to meet mobility needs of the region).
 
tysmith95 said:
I'd support relaxing wetland regulations and rerouting Route 1 from the Tobin to the pike via 16 and 1a. You'd only need minor eminent domain towards the Hampton Inn and the Revere Beach Parkway is already 3 lanes (though could use some design improvement). I don't think the wetland taking would need to be significant (and even then it's not natural wetlands there). You'd also need some minor eminent domain to reconfigure the intersection with the current 16 to prioritize traffic from Route 1.

So this would redirect Route 1 from going to the Leverett Connector/Charlestown to connect to the Airport and Ted Williams Tunnel, in both cases signal free and 2 or 3 lanes of traffic.

This would have secondary effects of reducing traffic on Route 60 for those going to Logan Airport and reducing traffic on the Leverett Connector (as route 1 south travelers would be routed to the Pike).

You would save a lot of money by not replacing the Tobin Bridge, and would remove a scar of the elevated highway through Chelsea and Charlestown.

I'd suggest then utilizing funds saved from not rebuilding the Tobin to upgrade the Silver Line to light rail, and dig a new tunnel from the Airport to the Seaport to support a light rail loop from Sullivan Station/Encore to South Station. This could remediate some of the increased traffic on the Ted Williams Tunnel from the Route 1 rerouting and would provide better transit connectivity for the airport, Chelsea and the Casino area. Money would be much better spent on a transit tunnel rather than repeating the mistakes of the Big Dig and building elaborate automobile tunnels (which do not support enough capacity to meet mobility needs of the region).
Click to expand...
You are suggesting eliminating 6 lanes of Harbor crossing capacity (Tobin) and routing that traffic into 4 lanes of Harbor crossing, the Williams Tunnel, that is already full. The Williams Tunnel already backs up so much in peak travel times that Logan Airport access from the north (1a) is blocked. (Transit time through the tunnel can reach 30 minutes.)

Your airport bound traveler on Route 60 is not getting there even the same day.

Your dedicated Silver Line Tunnel is a great idea, but it does not address the travel needs of the people on the Tobin bridge.
 
tysmith95 said:
I'd support relaxing wetland regulations and rerouting Route 1 from the Tobin to the pike via 16 and 1a. You'd only need minor eminent domain towards the Hampton Inn and the Revere Beach Parkway is already 3 lanes (though could use some design improvement). I don't think the wetland taking would need to be significant (and even then it's not natural wetlands there). You'd also need some minor eminent domain to reconfigure the intersection with the current 16 to prioritize traffic from Route 1.

So this would redirect Route 1 from going to the Leverett Connector/Charlestown to connect to the Airport and Ted Williams Tunnel, in both cases signal free and 2 or 3 lanes of traffic.

This would have secondary effects of reducing traffic on Route 60 for those going to Logan Airport and reducing traffic on the Leverett Connector (as route 1 south travelers would be routed to the Pike).

You would save a lot of money by not replacing the Tobin Bridge, and would remove a scar of the elevated highway through Chelsea and Charlestown.

I'd suggest then utilizing funds saved from not rebuilding the Tobin to upgrade the Silver Line to light rail, and dig a new tunnel from the Airport to the Seaport to support a light rail loop from Sullivan Station/Encore to South Station. This could remediate some of the increased traffic on the Ted Williams Tunnel from the Route 1 rerouting and would provide better transit connectivity for the airport, Chelsea and the Casino area. Money would be much better spent on a transit tunnel rather than repeating the mistakes of the Big Dig and building elaborate automobile tunnels (which do not support enough capacity to meet mobility needs of the region).
Click to expand...
I love the big idea thinking, though need to sit with it for a bit because I think you're being a little hand-wavey on the impacts.

Initial reaction is that 87K daily vehicles is incredibly difficult to redistribute. Even if you could somehow mode shift away half it's a nightmare. You'd need far more investment than a new transit tunnel on the current SL3 routing. You'd need to go west too and get a fully grade separated route to Sullivan as well. Even then we're really only alleviating the local Chelsea/Everett/Revere traffic on the bridge.
 
JeffDowntown said:
You are suggesting eliminating 6 lanes of Harbor crossing capacity (Tobin) and routing that traffic into 4 lanes of Harbor crossing, the Williams Tunnel, that is already full. The Williams Tunnel already backs up so much in peak travel times that Logan Airport access from the north (1a) is blocked. (Transit time through the tunnel can reach 30 minutes.)

Your airport bound traveler on Route 60 is not getting there even the same day.

Your dedicated Silver Line Tunnel is a great idea, but it does not address the travel needs of the people on the Tobin bridge.
Click to expand...
Would be 4 lanes each way if you include 1a.

And yes technically the Tobin has 3 lanes at parts but I wouldn't consider that 3 lanes of capacity. I would suggest a local 1/2 lane each way bridge to carry traffic from local streets to replace the Tobin.

I agree I'm reducing capacity here. But history has shown that increasing highway capacity does not improve traffic, and we need to move away from that 20th century thinking.

Another part I didn't note, I'd suggest a local road over the current Tobin that would be much shorter and not connect as a highway.
 
tysmith95 said:
Would be 4 lanes each way if you include 1a.

And yes technically the Tobin has 3 lanes at parts but I wouldn't consider that 3 lanes of capacity. I would suggest a local 1/2 lane each way bridge to carry traffic from local streets to replace the Tobin.

I agree I'm reducing capacity here. But history has shown that increasing highway capacity does not improve traffic, and we need to move away from that 20th century thinking.

Another part I didn't note, I'd suggest a local road over the current Tobin that would be much shorter and not connect as a highway.
Click to expand...
The tunnels your are throwing the Tobin traffic onto are already full. I live on the North Shore -- during the Sumner Tunnel rehab (taking just 2 inbound lanes out of service, there were times when you simply could not get to Boston (or even Logan from the north).

You need to add transit capacity that replaces the car capacity (the SL tunnel is useful, but it is not enough because it is not connected to where the Tobin really serves -- the Tobin is not just a bridge to Chelsea, it serves the entire North Shore drive shed.) To eliminate the Tobin and not just crash the economy via gridlock you need upgrades like BLX to Salem; Regional Rail at 15 minute frequency inside 128, etc. Big expensive projects.
 
JeffDowntown said:
The tunnels your are throwing the Tobin traffic onto are already full. I live on the North Shore -- during the Sumner Tunnel rehab (taking just 2 inbound lanes out of service, there were times when you simply could not get to Boston (or even Logan from the north).

You need to add transit capacity that replaces the car capacity (the SL tunnel is useful, but it is not enough because it is not connected to where the Tobin really serves -- the Tobin is not just a bridge to Chelsea, it serves the entire North Shore drive shed.) To eliminate the Tobin and not just crash the economy via gridlock you need upgrades like BLX to Salem; Regional Rail at 15 minute frequency inside 128, etc. Big expensive projects.
Click to expand...
Good point, though I'd upgrade 128 to 4 lanes from 95 to 93 and build the flyover interchange at the 93/128 interchange, pushing more traffic from Peabody north to avoid Route 1 and go to 93.
 
Mode shift for Tobin users:

- Rebuild the bridge from Chelsea St Charlestown to Broadway Chelsea for pedestrians, bikes, and buses
- Electrified Regional Rail on the Rockburyport Line, with infills at Bell Circle Revere, West Lynn, South Salem; double track Salem tunnel and station; branch to Peabody and Danvers
- Silver Line SL3 extension to Sullivan Square
- New subway line from Sullivan to Rt 1 under Broadway in Everett and Malden; extend from Sullivan to Kendal and Back Bay later
- New subway line from Maverick to Brown Circle under Meridian St and Broadway in Chelsea and Revere; extend from Maverick to Seaport and Back Bay later
- Red-Blue Connector

Easy-peasy! Then lay the Tobin Bridge's main span to rest as a really cool 1,500ft-long sculpture/park between Terminal St and Little Mystic and call it a day.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
Mode shift for Tobin users:

- Rebuild the bridge from Chelsea St Charlestown to Broadway Chelsea for pedestrians, bikes, and buses
- Electrified Regional Rail on the Rockburyport Line, with infills at Bell Circle Revere, West Lynn, South Salem; double track Salem tunnel and station; branch to Peabody and Danvers
- Silver Line SL3 extension to Sullivan Square
- New subway line from Sullivan to Rt 1 under Broadway in Everett and Malden; extend from Sullivan to Kendal and Back Bay later
- New subway line from Maverick to Brown Circle under Meridian St and Broadway in Chelsea and Revere; extend from Maverick to Seaport and Back Bay later
- Red-Blue Connector

Easy-peasy! Then lay the Tobin Bridge's main span to rest as a really cool 1,500ft-long sculpture/park between Terminal St and Little Mystic and call it a day.
Click to expand...
Boston isn't ready to eliminate a major expressway. Even just eliminating the Bowker overpass proved to be impossible. So, love it or hate it, a Tobin Bridge for cars, trucks and busses is here to stay.
 
I know, I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. However, I think it is very reasonable to keep the Tobin replacement at 2 lanes per direction (if there are bus lanes or a bus alternative such as a Chelsea St - Broadway bridge). This would be a reduction from the 2.5 inbound lanes (the .5 is all the personal vehicles using the bus lane) and 3 outbound lanes. The reduction to 2 lanes should carry through Chelsea up to Revere Beach Parkway, if not all the way to the existing 2 lane section in Malden.
 
Here's an idea I put on here a few years ago, but I've redone it and made it more detailed. The yellow area is where the NE Expressway currently is, which would be removed and opened up for new development, a multi-use path mini-greenway and maybe even an LRV line. The new highway would be mostly below-grade through west Chelsea. If that proves undoable because of high water table issues, then it would be on the same proposed alignment, but elevated. I'm thinking a one-level cable-stayed bridge for the main span over the Mystic River, then transition in Charlestown to double-deck to match up with the existing setup in Charlestown. Several buildings would have to be demolished, including the Homewood Suites hotel on Carter Street in Chelsea. Also, the existing expressway on/off ramps feeding the Fairfield Marriot in Chelsea would be eliminated, so that building could stay but probably converted to another use (residential?).

On the same alignment and location as the existing Tobin Bridge (bypassed by this new bridge and highway), I'd like to see a new high-level bridge built exclusively for transit, bikes and pedestrians, which would feed right into downtown Chelsea.

1769886917033.png
 
Last edited:
We can't even get the much simpler Allston Pike realignment project done... temper your expectations.
 
393b40 said:
We can't even get the much simpler Allston Pike realignment project done... temper your expectations.
Click to expand...
Chelsea and Everett would be easier to work with on a project like this than Boston, Cambridge and BU. Chelsea and Everett are much more development friendly and hungry for infrastructure improvement. The removal of about 1 mile of the the NE Expressway from the middle of Chelsea and moving it to the periphery of town would be a big incentive.
 
393b40 said:
We can't even get the much simpler Allston Pike realignment project done... temper your expectations.
Click to expand...

This stems from the state not wanting to take on more debt to pay for it. The Turnpike Authority could still float the bonds. They made a choice to have the feds pay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top