A handful of developers could be required to chip in for repairs to Boston’s broken Northern Avenue bridge in exchange for approval of skyline-altering projects on the waterfront.
The crumbling 106-year-old span – one of four bridges connecting downtown and the ever-developing Seaport District – was closed to pedestrians and bicyclists in December because of disintegrating floor beams. Motor vehicles have been banished since 1997.
Boston Mayor Martin Walsh has asked an advisory group and the city’s public works department to come up with a road map for the bridge’s future by early spring. The actual fix will take several years of planning and permitting, city officials say.
The long-term options range from a brand-new bridge to rebuilding the current structure, with repairs in the $60 million range, Boston Redevelopment Authority Deputy Director Richard McGuinness said. But whatever the direction, the city can’t move forward without outside funding.
Tradeoffs For Towers?
An advisory group of stakeholders – ranging from walking and bicycling advocates to preservationists and Seaport businesses – has discussed a public-private partnership as a funding source, said member Greg Galer, executive director of the Boston Preservation Alliance.
The group has been meeting since December and will submit a recommendation to Walsh as soon as next month.
“There’s benefits to the development community from this bridge,” Galer said. “You see all of the complaints from their employees who work over the bridge, and the neighborhood constituents such as the Barking Crab (restaurant) and Hook Lobster properties.”
The city wields leverage over developers with its emerging municipal harbor plan, a regulatory exercise designed to prepare for more intense development on the waterfront.
State law limits the height and density of development on waterfront parcels. The BRA is in the midst of a two-year process which could enable it to approve larger projects in exchange for developers contributing to public facilities.
A BRA advisory committee has offered up such suggestions as art installations, expanded ferry service and new food concessions on Long Wharf.
But addressing the recent bridge closure should take priority, said Bruce Berman, a member of the waterfront advisory committee and director of environmental advocacy group Save the Harbor/Save the Bay.
“If you could do one thing to improve that area right now, [it would be to] resolve the problems with the Northern Avenue bridge. It’s critical to bring people into the Seaport for recreation and for work,” Berman said.
The list of public improvements – expected to be finalized this spring – could be bankrolled by private developers seeking to build on the harbor. Three developers have announced proposals that would require BRA waivers of height, density or open space requirements:
Boston-based Chiofaro & Co. wants to build a $1-billion development at the corner of Atlantic Avenue and Milk Street. The development would replace the eight-story harbor parking garage with a pair of 615- and 538-foot towers containing 1.3 million square feet of office space, a luxury hotel, condos and retail.
Boston-based SKW Partners and the owners of the James Hook & Co. lobster pound proposed a 285-foot-tall residential tower on a half-acre site at Atlantic and Northern avenues. Typically, the height limit on the parcel would be 55 feet.
The Boston Marriott Long Wharf has presented plans for a 20,000-square-foot ground-floor expansion to add retail and restaurant space, which would exceed minimum open space requirements.
Developer Donald Chiofaro could not be reached for comment. William Zielinski of SKW Partners declined to comment on the topic.
Previous Attempt Fizzled
It wouldn’t be the first time the city has asked the real estate industry to toss the bridge a life preserver.
In 1999, the administration of late Mayor Thomas Menino sought proposals from developers to redevelop the structure. Boston-based Architectural Heritage Foundation proposed a combined museum, office and retail development and pedestrian walkway. The Beal Cos. of Boston submitted plans for a retail bazaar comprised of small shops. The city chose Forest City Enterprises, which planned to demolish the bridge and build a 150,000-square-foot retail complex. The project fizzled due to insufficient financing.
Fast-forward to 2015, and the advisory group appears to be leaning toward repairing the bridge, said Vivien Li, executive director of the Boston Harbor Assoc. Informal Department of Public Works estimates for repairs range from $45 million to $60 million, compared with a 2012 estimate of $70 million for a brand-new structure, including demolition and disposal of the old bridge.
“It is not an insignificant cost differential between reusing the historic bridge as compared to a total demolition,” Li said.
Even before a long-range plan is accepted, emergency repairs are under way.
The city’s public works department has begun a $200,000 project designed to stabilize the bridge while it remains in the open position, which is required by the U.S. Coast Guard for passage of boat traffic. A dozen anchor pile clusters, each consisting of 12 timber pilings, are being installed to stabilize the bridge, said Melina Schuler, spokesman for the mayor’s office.
Whatever the preferred option, the city will have to decide on designs to accommodate a variety of users and help circulate traffic in a neighborhood where an estimated 17 million square feet of new development is expected in the next 20 years.
The city is committed to a multi-modal operation including dedicated lanes for pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles, and security at the John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse is adamant that the new bridge be accessible by emergency vehicles, the BRA’s McGuinness said. A South Boston transportation study released in January recommended that motor vehicles be allowed to use the bridge in the westbound direction when it reopens, part of a multi-pronged effort to ease gridlock in Boston’s busiest development neighborhood.
Doug Johnson, an organizer for the Boston Cyclists Union, said the group does not oppose motor vehicle access.
“Whatever they do, we want to make sure that experience is maintained,” Johnson said. “It really depends upon how it’s done. I don’t think vehicle access is incompatible.”
Preservationists say a new bridge shouldn’t be an option.
“Moveable bridges like that were once commonplace and now we have a few rare survivors. It’s important not to lose all of them,” Galer said.
Email: sadams@thewarrengroup.com
