Massachusetts Turnpike – Boston Ramps Study
Meeting Summary
Massachusetts Turnpike – Boston Ramps Study
Study Advisory Group
July 14, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Boston Redevelopment Authority Board Room
Attendees:
Name
Pam Beale
Mark Berger
Glen Berkowitz
Doug Carnahan
Fritz Casselman
Peter Cavicchi
Bill Conroy
Lourenco Dantas
James Folk
Jim Fitzgerald
Jonathan Greely
Sarah Hamilton
Reuben Kantor
Shirin Karanfiloglu
Sanjay Kaul
Romin Koebel
Marc Laderman
Gregg Lantos
Kye Liang
Barbara Lucas
Meg Mainzer-Cohen
Myron Miller
Paul Nelson
Jeremy Rosenberger
Laura Sargent
Representing
Kenmore Association
Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works
Worcester Square Neighborhood Association (South End)
Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works
Resident
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority
Boston Transportation Department
MassPort
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
Boston Redevelopment Authority
Boston Redevelopment Authority
MASCO
Councilor Michael Ross
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority
Central Transportation Planning Staff
Fenway Community Development Corporation
Resident
Central Transportation Planning Staff
Chinatown Gateway Coalition
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
Back Bay Association
Neighborhood Association of Back Bay
Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works
Boston Redevelopment Authority
Representative Marty Walz
1. Project background
Mark Berger from the Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works opened the
meeting with a brief description of the project background. The purpose of this project is to
conduct a transportation study that will evaluate new or revised on/off ramps along the
Massachusetts Turnpike to better connect the Back Bay/Fenway/ Longwood Medical Area
with the Seaport District/ Logan Airport. In 1997, a similar study was conducted, but focused
only on serving the Back Bay.
2. Scope of Work
Mr. Berger continued with an overview of the scope of work. The first step will be to
determine the goals, objectives, and evaluation criteria, which were covered later in the
Office of Transportation Planning
Page 1 of 4
7/22/2008
Massachusetts Turnpike – Boston Ramps Study
Meeting Summary
meeting. The next step will be to identify the existing conditions. Once the existing
conditions are complete, then EOT will begin the alternatives development phase. This phase
will be closely overlapped by the alternatives analysis phase. Once all the alternatives have
been analyzed then EOT will formulate a set of recommendations in consultation with the
Work Group, Study Advisory Group, and general public. A final report will be produced for
publication and distribution.
Fritz Casselman pointed out that little is mentioned about the Storrow Drive tunnel
reconstruction. He asked if this study will address this project and involve the Department of
Conservation and Recreation. Mr. Berger stated that Storrow Drive is included in the study
area and that the Department of Conservation and Recreation is a member of the SAG and
will be made aware of all meetings.
Marc Laderman pointed out that the first paragraph of the scope contained many
controversial statements that are not in sync with what the neighborhoods desire. New access
to the neighborhoods is not necessary and growth should be limited.
Myron Miller pointed out that the growth of the Longwood Medical Area (LMA) was
missing from the list. Growth in the LMA area is very important and has a large impact on
traffic in the area. He added that Storrow Drive is currently being used improperly and that
diversion of traffic to the Masspike should be emphasized in this study. He pointed out that
additional ramps could also help improve traffic as the many projects in the area
(reconstruction of the Charles River bridges, Storrow Drive, etc) are constructed. Fritz
Casselman agreed with Mr. Miller, pointing out that both Storrow Drive and Memorial Drive
were originally envisioned as parkways, not as divided highways. He added that maybe this
should be rethought as part of the study. Mr. Berger replied that the LMA is included in the
study area and incorporated in the goals and objectives. Mr. Berger added that CTPS will be
using their regional travel demand model to help determine traffic volume changes, resulting
in the ability to examine the volume changes along Storrow drive for each alternative
examined.
Glen Berkowitz pointed out that the scope was a good start but that improvements could be
made. Mr. Berkowitz asked if the study was focusing primarily on single occupant vehicle
access or if it would look at transit and other modes of transportation. He pointed out that the
new ramps could be used exclusively by high occupancy vehicles (HOVs). Mr. Berger
responded that the study would explore the feasibility of HOVs, HOTs, or even bus access to
the MassPike.
3. Goals and Objectives
Mr. Berger introduced the goals and objects to the group, mentioning that each goal was
designed to focus on the transportation accessibility based on the economic need to link Back
Bay, Fenway, and Longwood Medical Area to the Seaport District and Logan Airport. Mr.
Berger continued by reviewing the objects aimed at accomplishing the goals, with a more
direct focus on the transportation system.
Myron Miller asked how tolls would be incorporated into the study. Mr. Berger replied that
the regional travel demand model developed by CTPS would be able to examine the impact
of tolls on any alternative considered.
Office of Transportation Planning
Page 2 of 4
7/22/2008
Massachusetts Turnpike – Boston Ramps Study
Meeting Summary
Barbara Lucas requested that the mobility analysis examine mobility for vehicles and
bicycles and pedestrians separately because improving vehicle access and travel times may
have a negative impact on bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access. Mr. Berger agreed
and stated that the evaluation criteria would reflect her concerns.
Sarah Hamilton asked why so much of the focus was on accessing the LMA. She wanted to
be sure that other destinations were also included and that EOT may want to consider some
origin-destination research to get a better understanding of the travel patterns in the area. Mr.
Berger responded that the study area includes access from many other neighborhoods in
Boston including Back Bay, Fenway, and Kenmore. Fritz Casselman stated that DCR had a
large amount of origin-destination data available from their work on the Storrow Drive tunnel
project that may be very helpful in conducting travel time analyses.
4. Study Area Defined
Mr. Berger displayed the maps of the proposed study area and described the two study areas,
a core study area representing the region where proposed alternatives would be developed
and a second regional area representing locations that will have traffic impacts evaluated
against each proposed alternative.
Lourenco Dantas suggested adding the intersections of the South Boston waterfront to the
study area because any improved access to the turnpike would affect these intersections. Mr.
Berger agreed that these intersections should be included in the study area.
Myron Miller stated that he was pleased to see Memorial Drive included in the study area.
He felt that the Allston ramps would also be impacted by any proposed changes and should
be included in the study area. Mr. Berger responded that some monitoring of the Allston
ramps would be conducted. While there will be no detailed analysis of the ramps, the key
ramp volumes will be included as part of the study.
Sarah Hamilton suggested that all of Melnea Cass Boulevard and Ruggles Street along with
Francis Street and Tremont Street should be added to the study area because these streets are
also used to access the LMA. Mr. Berger agreed that these intersections should be included
in the study area.
Reuben Kantor pointed out that any new ramp along the turnpike would affect the Riverway
and suggested that the study area include the Riverway and Brookline Avenue intersection.
Mr. Berger agreed that this intersection should be included in the study area.
5. Evaluation Criteria
Mr. Berger then presented the proposed evaluation criteria.
Marc Laderman stated that this study was meant to encourage more people to drive cars
which would be counter to the requests of the neighborhoods and the good of the
Commonwealth by increasing traffic congestion.
Glen Berkowitz stated that the new ramps would not encourage more driving, but help shift
drivers to more efficient routes potentially reducing traffic congestion.
Office of Transportation Planning
Page 3 of 4
7/22/2008
Massachusetts Turnpike – Boston Ramps Study
Meeting Summary
Meg Mainzer-Cohen agreed that many vehicles that are now using the side streets could be
diverted to the highway system with new ramps. She pointed out that many of the benefits of
the Big Dig have bypassed the Back Bay and LMA regions. The current ramp configurations
along the turnpike make it very difficult to get around the area. Ms. Mainzer-Cohen stated
that she was looking forward to the fresh look at the highway network that this study would
bring. She also stated that the concerns about public transit raised at the meeting were
important but that it may be better to discuss these at a different time.
Fritz Casselman asked if the study will examine parking in the LMA and possibly establish a
freeze on parking supply. Jim Fitzgerald replied that City of Boston is currently looking at
parking policies and has developed a parking inventory in the Fenway, Kenmore Square and
LMA neighborhoods. A draft of the report is available on the City of Boston website.
Ms. Mainzer-Cohen asked if there was a list of the study advisory group members. Mr.
Berger replied that a full list of the SAG members will be available soon.
James Folk thanked EOT for inviting the MBTA to the meeting and stated that the MBTA is
committed to improving public transit and would welcome comments on how to improve
their service. They also are prepared and ready to take advantage of any new opportunities
identified by this study.
Pam Beale asked that the meeting materials be distributed to the SAG members before each
meeting so that they are able to gather input from their respective groups. Mr. Berger agreed
to send out meeting materials in advance of all future meetings.
6. Next Steps
Mr. Berger wrapped up the meeting by thanking all for attending and stated that they next
step is to collect data on the existing conditions. The next SAG meeting will be scheduled
after the existing conditions are evaluated.
Office of Transportation Planning
Page 4 of 4
7/22/2008