Lots of hubub here as Boston's package of promises to lure GE includes some version of dealing with the closed Northern Avenue Bridge, (https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/01/19/millions-pledged-for-northern-avenue-bridge-part-general-electric-relocation-deal/IRFm8s6gHudUwGeYnoJorM/story.html) possibly returning a vehicular link to the rapidly-developing spot for the first time in twenty years.
(https://www.bostonglobe.com/rf/image_r/Boston/2011-2020/2016/01/19/BostonGlobe.com/Business/Images/wiggs_Bridge_595002.r.jpg)
Countless columnists and politicians are now weighing in for and against outright demolition, a feeding frenzy for media starved for six months without an Olympic debate to waste ink on.
Congressman Steven Lynch doesn't want it rehabilitated. (https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/01/26/northern-avenue-bridge-congressman-stephen-lynch-says-out-with-old/wUy60VQf4ftw3jE2OPDkKN/story.html)
The Walsh administration appears committed to demolition. (https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/01/21/city-plans-start-taking-down-northern-avenue-bridge-march/Kgss34B84RgG14JsHf9CTI/story.html)
Or is it? (http://www.boston.com/news/local/2016/01/20/the-city-wants-reopen-the-old-northern-avenue-bridge/8gryBu8Dn73zd56wmZdMPK/story.html)
Either way, the city has been criticized for its lack of clear direction or public input (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/01/27/northern-ave-bridge-and-how-government-backs-into-bad-decisions/eHkwWDFIOfYaa1Ce5DY8tK/story.html) regarding the bridge.
# # # #
Meanwhile, plans are still on the table to demolish the North Washington St. Bridge (http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2014/12/15/charlestown-bridge-when-will-construction-begin-for-the-north-washington-bridge/) across the mouth of the Charles.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnorthendwaterfront.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F11%2FNorthEndWaterfront-2014-11-27-at-8.40.25-PM.jpg&hash=3c3d3ae3829d6153f81a746a88574fd8ffb9b004)
This bridge, to be replaced by a structure more evocative of the adjacent Zakim Bridge, (http://keepbostonmoving.org/portfolio/north-washington-street-bridge/) features the last extant part of the northern run of the elevated Orange Line subway, which ran through the truss over the road until 1975.
I disagree with the title of this post. Washington St. coming off MA 99 is very much a through truss serving downtown Boston.
Quote from: Alps on January 28, 2016, 11:47:59 PM
I disagree with the title of this post. Washington St. coming off MA 99 is very much a through truss serving downtown Boston.
You mean the second bridge pictured above?
Quote from: NE2 on January 28, 2016, 11:59:17 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 28, 2016, 11:47:59 PM
I disagree with the title of this post. Washington St. coming off MA 99 is very much a through truss serving downtown Boston.
You mean the second bridge pictured above?
I should have phrased my post better (or chosen a different image) to indicate the second pic is of the proposed replacement.
This is the same view of the current North Washington St. bridge:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeepbostonmoving.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F09%2Fimage_1-640x350.png&hash=666cf46c3b47186c773d7dc79890d9b099675adf)
And the proposed replacement again for easy comparison:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnorthendwaterfront.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F11%2FNorthEndWaterfront-2014-11-27-at-8.40.25-PM.jpg&hash=3c3d3ae3829d6153f81a746a88574fd8ffb9b004)
Thanks. I just assumed the new bridge pictured, was a replacement for the old bridge pictured, and didn't realize they were two different bridges.
City of Boston outlines demolition without any public discussion of rebuilding plan:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/02/17/city-boston-reveals-demolition-plan-for-northern-avenue-bridge/Wb8FsZm7UQvY0rJUXFggxO/story.html
It's starting to feel like Mayor Walsh is aiming to emulate the "demolish first, ignore questions later" approach of Mr. Daley from Chicago.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 17, 2016, 11:27:25 AM
City of Boston outlines demolition without any public discussion of rebuilding plan:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/02/17/city-boston-reveals-demolition-plan-for-northern-avenue-bridge/Wb8FsZm7UQvY0rJUXFggxO/story.html
It's starting to feel like Mayor Walsh is aiming to emulate the "demolish first, ignore questions later" approach of Mr. Daley from Chicago.
Or previous Boston mayors. Look at what happened to the Sullivan Square overpass and the Long Island bridge.
Quote from: roadman on February 17, 2016, 12:36:57 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 17, 2016, 11:27:25 AM
City of Boston outlines demolition without any public discussion of rebuilding plan:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2016/02/17/city-boston-reveals-demolition-plan-for-northern-avenue-bridge/Wb8FsZm7UQvY0rJUXFggxO/story.html
It's starting to feel like Mayor Walsh is aiming to emulate the "demolish first, ignore questions later" approach of Mr. Daley from Chicago.
Or previous Boston mayors. Look at what happened to the Sullivan Square overpass and the Long Island bridge.
Long Island was Marty Walsh's doing. I thought I remembered the Sullivan Square Overpass being a Swift administration decision, but that is a vague recollection.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 17, 2016, 12:54:03 PM
Long Island was Marty Walsh's doing. I thought I remembered the Sullivan Square Overpass being a Swift administration decision, but that is a vague recollection.
While Marty Walsh made the decision to close and demolish the Long Island bridge, long-standing plans to rebuild the structure were stalled by previous administrations.
And IIRC, Sullivan Square overpass/underpass were always City of Boston property, not the state's. The only involvement the state ever had in that whole sorry mess was asking the City to defer repairs until completion of the CANA portion of the Big Dig project. When the overpass was deemed too unsafe to handle traffic, the City decided to completely demolish the structure, piers and all, with no plans to put in a replacement structure (under the guise of making the area more 'pedestrian friendly' - which IMO hasn't exactly worked out so well with the present configuration).