Hey, there! Log in / Register

State works to reduce flooding on Morrissey Boulevard, add bike lanes

The Dorchester Reporter reports on a presentation by state officials to turn Morrissey Boulevard from a flood-prone speedway into an "urban boulevard."

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 

Ad:

Comments

5' is pretty narrow for a sidewalk where folks will stroll 2 or 3 wide.
4' is pretty narrow for one direction of a cycle track.

Without curbs, you're going to see lots more "overflow" and that's a partially avoidable conflict...

up
Voting closed 0

As an engineer I agree completely, those widths are way too narrow.

5' is the absolute minimum you should realistically design a sidewalk at. For Morrissey Blvd I'd expect 8-10 ft sidewalks.

And two-way cycle tracks really should be 10 ft wide, not 8 ft.

Finally, with the narrow sidewalk right up against the narrow cycle track, this design is just asking for ped-bike conflicts.

A terrible design, IMO.

up
Voting closed 0

Of course, their presentation is so downscaled you can't actually see, but it appears through the pixels that they have a 12' lane and an 11.5' lane. If you went to 10' lanes, you'd gain 7 feet which could be used for bikes and pedestrians. 10 foot lanes are safer.

up
Voting closed 0

I see plenty of discussion about the flow of the road and adding bike lanes, but very little on the one major problem. The flooding.

They need to raise the road by several feet. Otherwise the road is of no use to either bike or car.

up
Voting closed 0

This state document from back in March has more info on the issue (scroll down a bit through it), how it's only going to get worse, and what can be done about it. And, yes, raising the roadway in the most vulnerable stretch might be part of the answer.

up
Voting closed 0

That was wasy more informative.

up
Voting closed 0

Punctured bicycle/ On a boulevard desooolate..

up
Voting closed 0

Uh ... "reduce". Not, eliminate. I dunno, I'm not an engineer.

up
Voting closed 0

MassDOT normally requires a minimum 5' bike lane and a 5.5' sidewalk on any state-funded road project - even out here in remotest Cape Cod. How can they get a away with doing any less on Morrissey Boulevard?

up
Voting closed 0

Maybe they're not bike lanes and sidewalks. Maybe they count as paths or other parkway infrastructure rather than roadway infrastructure.

Pure speculation on my part.

up
Voting closed 0

Those requirements aren't 100% rigid. If the design engineer can justify not meeting them in a Design Exception Report, then they don't always have to be met.

On Morrissey Blvd though they should be greater than that, TBH.

up
Voting closed 0

But I haven't got a tube to spaaaare..

up
Voting closed 0

Ok, on the crappy sidewalks, but still, I've got ideas.

Taking a lane off each side of the road is a good idea, with the possible exception of the Freeport Ave light area, which needs work regardless of this project. Admittedly I am never on the road driving at rush hour, but it would seem 2 lanes each way would handle current traffic. If you do that on each side, you would then have space for a protected bike lane in each direction along with ample walking space. Again, other than some spots and financing (of course) this would not seem too tough to accomplish.

Of course, I am also waiting for the pedestrian bridge from Tenean Beach to the drawbridge to begin construction, but I can dream, can't I?

up
Voting closed 0

I travel on Morrissey numerous times each day, at all hours except late night. Reducing Morrissey from 3 to 2 lanes to better reflect the " intended use as parkway" is a very dangerous proposal that will ultimately guarantee more deadlock and traffic jams. Yes it might be ok during some off peak hours but during the heavy traffic times it would be highly problematic. Morrissey may be "intended as a "parkway" but in fact it has long been the secondary north south artery in and out of Boston. And as we know there are tons of current and future development everywhere that Morrissey serves.

Why do we need a bicycle lane if it will cause massive traffic jams for cars? Cars outnumber bikes a zillion to 1, and even if there were a bike lane and more bikes used it, cars would still outnumber bikes . Bike lines are nice to have, but let the bikes continue to use the sidewalks on Morrissey which are hardly ever used by pedestrians. Let the small number of bikes and the small number of pedestrians share the sidewalk. I realize that this is heresy to the biking advocates but the impact of reducing Morrissey by a lane will be extremely harmful, while solving a only a small problem for a small number of bicyclists

They recently reduced Old Colony Blvd next to Moakley Park from 3 to 2 lanes to accommodate a bike land. It's not currently a bottleneck like Morrissey so traffic has not been impacted as far as i have seen. Since they opened the bike lane, when I travel that route several times a day , I have never seen a bike, NEVER.

The new bike lane on Old Colony is used exclusively for double parking, ice cream trucks, and police parking.. It also made it safer for those that park on Old Colony. But there are no bikes using this brand new shiny bike lane. So the theory that if we build a bike lane, they will come is a false theory as relates to Old Colony.

But the most dangerous aspect of this plan is the total lack of long term planning. Is there a plan for the future? Nope. "Its the job of the BRA" or whatever they call themselves now, or to be more clear "we have no specific plans". This is madness and does not bode well for our future . Be afraid. Be very afraid.

up
Voting closed 0

Did installing that increase the flow to your shower head?

No?

What causes massive traffic jams for cars? Not bikes. Not removing lanes in a saturated system. It is the capacity of the surrounding road network.

Oh, and people driving - lots of them, all at one time.

I'd be interested in seeing the studies that you are basing your statements on. The one's I've seen say that it won't make much difference because of what I mentioned above. You can continue to believe in Santa Clause if you want, though.

up
Voting closed 0

I drive on Morrissey Boulevard often. I will see from time to time bike riders in the street. Keep in mind this stretch of road from the Globe over the drawbridge, to Freeport street has side walks that aren't used by pedestrians. How come you bicyclist can just ride on the damn sidewalk for once? Why not just for your own safety? That's a good length of sidewalk not used by pedestrians where you can ride your bike on the sidewalk and not out in the street! Soon they'll be demanding to ride their bikes on the highways. Go ahead and cut Morrissey down to two lanes and see what type of gridlock that it creates: more traffic and pollution just so a handful of bike riders can get the thrill of riding in the street.

up
Voting closed 0

I have. They are barely usable for pedestrians, and besides, cyclists by law should not be on the sidewalks. They belong on the streets.

up
Voting closed 0

Riding a bike on the sidewalk in Boston is illegal, IIRC.

Also, I'm willing to bet you'd be the first person complaining about cyclists dangerously riding on the sidewalk, threatening pedestrians.

up
Voting closed 0

Cyclists have right to use the roads.

Drivers are required to drive safely in their presence.

I doubt any of this delays you much at all - certainly not more than a few seconds. It is your sense of privilege that is being stretched.

In any case, cutting lanes doesn't make much if any difference because the intersections and the capacity of the surrounding road network determine actual capacity for traffic. As has been said here before, you don't install a 6' diameter pipe to feed your shower head.

up
Voting closed 0