McMAHON ASSOCIATES
300 Myles Standish Boulevard | Taunton, MA 02780
p 508-823-2245 | f 508-823-2246
www.mcmtrans.com
PRINCIPALS
MEMORANDUM
Joseph W. McMahon, P.E.
Joseph J. DeSantis, P.E., PTOE
John S. DePalma
William T. Steffens
Casey A. Moore, P.E.
Gary R. McNaughton, P.E., PTOE
ASSOCIATES
TO:
Steve McLaughlin, MassDOT
FROM:
Gary McNaughton, P.E., PTOE
SUBJECT:
Casey Overpass Project – CDM Smith Peer Review Comments
DATE:
May 23, 2012
John J. Mitchell, P.E.
Christopher J. Williams, P.E.
John F. Yacapsin, P.E.
R. Trent Ebersole, P.E.
A peer review of the traffic analysis for the Casey Overpass project was performed by CDM
Smith in December 2011 and a comment letter was received on January 10, 2012. Below is a
summary of our responses to CDM Smith’s peer review comments.
General Comments
Comment 1
Although the ‘No Build’ alternative is not a viable option, it is recommended that a written
summary of Level of Service (LOS) and Queue analysis results for the 2035 No
Build condition be provided. Providing a No Build analysis summary will clearly illustrate the
difference in LOS and vehicle queuing between the “in‐kind” replacement of the structure (with
no network improvements), the at‐grade Build Alternative and the Bridge Build Alternative.
Response 1
The No‐Build condition has been analyzed and will be incorporated into the ENF filing
documents. McMahon has provided No‐Build LOS and queue comparisons based upon
Synchro results.
Comment 2
Based on our review of the materials, it is our understanding that Synchro was used to
determine levels of service and vehicle queuing. Why was SimTraffic or VISSIM not used to
obtain levels of service and vehicle queuing as they could provide a better understanding of the
traffic operations of the system versus each intersection in isolation?
Corporate Headquarters: Fort Washington, Pennsylvania
Serving the East Coast from 10 offices throughout the Mid-Atlantic, New England, and Florida
Response 2
Synchro remains the most manageable and professionally accepted comparison. VISSIM was
used to provide visual assessments of the operations. Additionally, select analysis results from
VISSIM were reviewed for comparison to the Synchro results at key intersections.
Comment 3
A table summarizing 50th and 95th percentile queue lengths was provided in the appendix for
the existing and the two (2) Build Alternatives. However, the available storage length for each
lane group was not specified; the level of impact due to spillback on the adjacent intersections
cannot be determined. We recognize that the storage lengths would change between existing
conditions and the build alternatives. It is recommended that the available storage be provided
for each lane group.
Response 3
The available storage has been added alongside queuing table for comparison purposes. An
updated Queue table is provided.
Comment 4
It appears the existing conditions were not modeled using VISSIM. Providing an existing
conditions model in VISSIM, which can be calibrated based on actual queue lengths in the field,
is recommended.
Response 4
While the modeling and calibration of existing conditions in VISSIM would have been beneficial
for public presentation purposes, the future conditions for an at‐grade solution vary too much
from existing conditions to derive any significant benefit from an existing conditions analysis
and calibration.
Comment 5
It appears that a traffic operations analysis was not conducted at Shea Circle. Although
Shea Circle is technically beyond the limits of the project, however, traffic operations at this
location will impact the entire traffic network. It is recommended that a traffic analysis be
performed and summarized for this location under Existing, No Build, and Build Alternatives
consistent with the surrounding intersections.
Response 5
Shea Circle will be reconfigured to a traditional intersection layout and an analysis has been
prepared in Synchro. Updated LOS and queue summary tables are provided and include this
intersection (Arborway at Forest Hills Drive)
Existing Conditions
Comment 6
Input traffic volumes in Synchro appear incorrect during PM peak period at the following
intersections:
• Arborway On‐Ramp/South Street/N. Washington Street (NB approach)
• Morton St./Courthouse Parking area/Arborway EB Road (EB approach)
Response 6
(A)Volumes in Synchro are correct for the Arborway On‐Ramp/South St intersection. They have
been adjusted to fit the BTD Synchro model where this intersection was analyzed as one
intersection instead of two individual intersections, whereas the counts and volume graphics
depict this intersection as two separate intersections. (B) Eastbound volumes at the Morton
St/Arborway EB Road were updated in Synchro to match the volumes shown on turning
movement graphic. There was no significant change in analysis results.
Comment 7
Use of Peak Hour Factors in Synchro – A default peak hour factor of 0.92 was used at the
Arborway Off‐Ramp/South Street intersection (AM peak period only). During the PM peak,
actual peak hour factors were utilized. At other intersections, actual peak hour factors were
utilized.
Response 7
The AM peak hour factors for the intersection of Arborway Off‐Ramp/South St have been
updated to reflect actual peak hour factors. Existing Synchro model has been updated and LOS
summary has been updated. The change results in an overall decrease of LOS, further
supporting the need for a new alternative. Updated LOS Summary Table is provided.
Comment 8
Use of Heavy Vehicle Percents in Synchro – A default heavy vehicle percent of 2 percent was
used at the Arborway Off‐Ramp/South Street intersection (AM peak period only). During PM
peak, it appears that actual heavy vehicle percents were entered. At other intersections, actual
heavy vehicle percents were entered.
Response 8
The AM truck percentages for the intersection of Arborway Off‐Ramp/South St have been
updated to reflect actual truck percentages. Existing Synchro file has been updated and LOS
summary has been updated. The change results in an overall decrease of LOS, further
supporting the need for a new alternative. Updated LOS Summary Table is provided.
Comment 9
Traffic signal timings/cycle length – It appears that the traffic signal timings and cycle length
used in the existing conditions analysis does not match the available signal plan information.
Were the signal timings/cycle lengths adjusted based on field observations?
Response 9
Signal timings were adjusted to match field observations.
No Build Conditions
Comment 10
Did the CTPS model provide link volumes taking into consideration the mode split associated
with the background traffic growth?
Response 10
Yes, CTPS did account for mode split. See below for CTPS summary table for the mode split
changes that were used.
TOTAL
2007 am
2007 pm
2030 am
2030 pm
%Auto D % Auto O % Transit D % Transit O % Walk D % Walk O
0.70
0.61
0.10
0.24
0.20
0.16
0.74
0.77
0.14
0.10
0.12
0.13
0.68
0.58
0.11
0.25
0.21
0.17
0.72
0.75
0.15
0.10
0.13
0.15
Comment 11
How was the mode split calculated for the eight (8) projects considered in addition to the
background traffic growth?
Response 11
BTD standard mode split methodology was applied for this zone (Zone 6) and has been
attached to this document.
Comment 12
Input traffic volumes in Synchro appear incorrect during the AM peak period at the following
intersections:
• Arborway On‐Ramp/South Street/N. Washington Street (NB approach)
Response 12
Volumes in Synchro are correct for the Arborway On‐Ramp/South St intersection. As described
in Response 6A, they have been adjusted to fit the BTD Synchro model where this intersection
was analyzed as one intersection instead of two individual intersections, whereas the counts
and volume graphics depict this intersection as two separate intersections.
Comment 13
Use of Peak Hour Factors in Synchro – What is the rationale in increasing the peak hour factors
between existing and no‐build at the Arborway Off‐Ramp/South Street intersection (AM peak
period only)? During the PM peak, it appears that the existing peak hour factors were utilized.
At other intersections, the existing peak hour factors were utilized.
Response 13
The actual peak hour factors used in the No Build AM analysis are correct. The existing peak
hour factors were changed from the default to reflect actual conditions to match the no build
analysis and the increase in peak hour factor from existing to no build has been eliminated.
Existing conditions have been updated reflect the correct peak hour factors as shown in item #7.
Comment 14
Traffic signal timings/cycle length – It appears that the traffic signal timings were adjusted
between existing and no‐build conditions. Although No Build conditions typically indicate no
changes are made to existing roadway networks and intersection operations, we concur with
this approach, as it appears reasonable to expect future timing adjustments provided by Boston
Transportation Department (BTD).
Response 14
Yes, signal timings were optimized assuming that future timing adjustments would be
implemented by BTD.
Build Conditions – At‐Grade & Bridge Alternatives
Comment 15
Input traffic volumes in Synchro appear incorrect during the AM peak period under the
Bridge Alternative at the following intersection:
• Arborway Off‐Ramp/South Street/Washington Street (NB approach)
Response 15
Volumes in Synchro are correct for the Arborway On‐Ramp/South St intersection. They have
been adjusted to fit the BTD Synchro model where this intersection was analyzed as one
intersection instead of two individual intersections, whereas the counts and volume graphics
depict this intersection as two separate intersections.
Comment 16
Summary table – Please check the summary table entitled “Capacity Analysis Summary–
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour”; for the Washington Street/Ukraine Way intersection, the letter
showing LOS is missing under the Bridge Alternative.
Response 16
The LOS Summary file has been updated to correct this. Updated LOS Summary table
provided.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Analysis
Comment 17
The pedestrian and bicycle growth between existing and future conditions seems higher than
the vehicular growth. Please clarify if the CTPS model was used to estimate the growth for
non‐vehicular modes.
Response 17
Yes, the pedestrian/bike growth was based on the CTPS model mode share for background
growth. For the BRA development parcels, the mode split was based on BTD’s standards.
VISSIM Model
Comment 18
Was VISSIM utilized solely as a visual tool? There is no summary of Measures of
Effectiveness (MOE’s) using VISSIM provided in the materials.
Response 18
At this point, yes, VISSIM has primarily been used as a visual tool and to adjust signal timings
Comment 19
How were the VISSIM models calibrated for use in future analysis?
Response 19
Although we tweaked signal timings and worked to manage queue spillbacks, it is not possible
to calibrate a future condition; particularly of a street network that currently doesn’t exist.
Comment 20
The following intersections were modeled in Synchro, but were not modeled in VISSIM:
• McBride and Washington (not in Appendix 2 diagram either);
• Bus Lane & Washington Street;
• Tower St and Hyde Park Ave;
• Ukraine Way and Hyde Park Ave;
• Ukraine Way and Washington St;
• Walk Hill and Hyde Park Ave;
• MBTA Repair Facility and Washington St.
Response 20
While Synchro was used to analyze all of the study area intersections, VISSIM was used only for
the east‐west corridor.
Comment 21
For signalized locations in VISSIM, detectors are drawn in the files and, although they are
labeled as “disabled”, a call is indicated.
Response 21
As noted in the comment, the detectors are working properly and vehicles are placing calls for
their appropriate phases.
Comment 22
Peak hour factors and % heavy vehicles – many intersections (both signalized and
unsignalized) are the default values – However, it appears that for the major study
intersections actual values have been entered.
Response 22
Peak hour factor is not a direct input in VISSIM, unlike in Synchro which considers the highest
15‐minutes of peak hour traffic and analyzes as though the highest 15‐minutes of traffic occurs
simultaneously on every approach. Vehicles in VISSIM are distributed based on random seeds
which present a more realistic model. A standard two percent heavy vehicle percentage was
applied to the vehicle fleet in the VISSIM model which is comparable to what was observed
within the study area. In addition, routing decisions were introduced for the specific bus routes
in the study area. The buses were routed based on the projected arrival/departure times.
Capacity Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐May 2012
Weekday Morning Peak Hour
Existing 2010
Intersection
Movement LOS
South Street at
EB
R
New Washington Street/
Arborway Ramps
LT
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
L
TR
Overall
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
WB
LR
MBTA Busway#2
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
L
R
Ukraine Way
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
L
R
Ukraine Way
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
LR
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
NB
TR
SB
LT
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
R
New Washington St/
Orchard Hill Road
L
T
Arborway WB Surface Road/
WB
LTR
NB
LT
SB
LT
R
Overall
Morton Street (Route 203)/
EB
LTR
Cemetery Road
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
Overall
1
2
3
Level‐of‐Service
Average vehicle delay in seconds
Volume to capacity ratio
1
Delay
2
V/C
No Build 2035
3
LOS
Delay
V/C
F
A
278.2
1.4
1.34
0.30
F
A
104.2
1.4
0.84
0.34
E
D
F
B
D
64.8
41.6
85.5
17.4
50.4
0.81
0.89
0.88
0.24
1.34
F
F
F
C
F
181.8
83.9
542.5
20.3
113.7
1.19
1.09
2.05
0.34
2.05
F
D
C
C
E
243.2
36.8
24.0
29.5
65.0
0.89
0.25
0.79
0.45
0.89
F
C
D
C
D
90.8
23.9
36.8
23.4
41.8
1.02
0.27
0.86
0.48
1.02
A
A
A
2.5
1.7
2.2
0.34
0.18
0.34
A
A
A
2.8
0.9
2.1
0.37
0.21
0.37
E
B
C
C
B
C
59.5
17.9
20.1
25.8
18.4
23.6
0.69
0.81
0.37
0.53
0.21
0.81
E
B
C
B
A
C
57.8
18.5
25.6
15.5
7.8
22.6
0.73
0.82
0.46
0.60
0.23
0.82
B
C
E
A
C
17.7
31.1
68.6
6.1
26.6
0.78
0.68
0.62
0.21
0.78
B
C
E
A
C
17.4
33.6
55.6
7.5
26.7
0.79
0.74
0.65
0.23
0.79
D
C
D
D
D
54.8
23.4
37.0
40.3
37.5
0.76
0.62
0.87dl
0.49
0.84
E
C
E
A
D
75.2
25.3
78.7
6.2
53.9
0.90
0.64
1.37dl
0.35
1.11
D
C
B
B
B
53.0
26.7
16.0
10.6
16.0
0.56
0.19
0.43
0.24
0.56
E
C
B
A
B
61.1
26.1
11.6
3.4
11.0
0.56
0.19
0.45
0.27
0.56
A
B
A
A
0.0
14.0
2.7
9.9
0.01
0.43
0.27
0.43
C
A
A
A
26.2
1.0
3.3
2.1
0.14
0.44
0.23
0.44
E
E
B
F
C
C
A
D
62.2
77.9
10.8
86.6
26.4
34.4
2.2
48.1
0.71
0.86
0.28
1.01
0.69
0.59
0.12
1.01
E
E
A
E
C
C
A
D
76.7
63.3
7.0
72.9
32.7
30.0
3.8
46.7
0.95
0.87
0.22
0.96
0.87
0.61
0.13
0.96
A
D
B
C
C
8.9
35.4
17.4
33.6
29.0
0.37
1.00
0.02
0.72
1.00
A
C
C
D
C
7.6
32.9
21.4
48.1
28.3
0.37
1.00
0.02
0.83
1.00
Queue Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Weekday Morning Peak Hour
Existing 2010
50th Queue
95th Queue
Lengths3
LT
~76
#178
R
0
0
148
163
80
102
211
#630
#205
157
66
0
~186
~665
~117
142
#154
0
#283
m#771
#243
191
600
600
550
160
350
350
265
33
146
203
368
76
#475
279
~317
17
376
226
#526
46
#487
m222
430
500
400
160
South Street at
EB
Arborway Ramps
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
Storage
95th Queue2
Movement
New Washington Street/
No Build 2035
50th Queue1
Intersection
L
TR
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
WB
LR
MBTA Busway#2
NB
LT
SB
TR
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
81
36
127
40
220
21
46
m25
460
400
Washington Street at
WB
L
117
m114
R
58
m196
139
76
188
72
60
m113
m99
286
102
87
210
210
1000+
460
460
16
439
181
102
0
#601
249
105
180
330
370
640
189
120
~316
94
#311
247
#970
72
210
210
630
400
88
44
m184
34
440
1000+
150
330
Ukraine Way
NB
TR
144
225
SB
L
119
88
212
184
T
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
14
0
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
395
484
L
T
187
79
256
94
L
148
232
R
104
224
NB
LT
SB
TR
418
167
#768
308
Washington Street at
EB
LR
35
88
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
11
43
NB
TR
SB
LT
255
50
393
138
36
11
217
24
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
0
18
0
0
#446
m91
1
2
23
25
13
m101
150
330
260
Washington Street at
EB
L
139
182
T
164
#230
#282
#269
17
#344
151
181
m32
510
500
160
1000+
260
880
270
111
#662
12
#238
200
1000+
300
240
SB
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
Ukraine Way
Arborway WB Surface Road/
New Washington St/
Orchard Hill Road
R
WB
LTR
NB
LT
SB
LT
R
Morton Street (Route 203)/
EB
LTR
Cemetery Road
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
1
50th Percentile Queue Length in feet
2
95th Percentile Queue Length, in feet
3
Available Storage Length, in feet
N/A Not Applicable
0
29
~253
137
151
0
#336
324
192
24
188
160
7
266
126
140
0
74
~384
3
97
132
#669
11
171
81
~449
3
117
Capacity Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐May 2012
Weekday Evening Peak Hour
No Build 2035
Existing 2010
Intersection
Movement
South Street at
EB
Delay
V/C
91.2
216.9
280.8
74.0
84.2
30.0
0.90
0.68
1.24
0.93
0.91
0.56
F
83.0
0.81
R
F
150.0
0.64
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
L
TR
F
D
D
C
87.2
35.6
48.2
32.0
0.77
0.78
0.62
0.52
F
F
F
E
F
C
Overall
E
68.4
0.81
F
141.6
1.24
F
D
B
C
D
101.0
0.97
39.6
0.34
13.8
29.4
38.8
0.45
0.64
0.97
F
D
C
D
D
106.9
38.4
21.3
42.2
47.4
1.04
0.34
0.56
0.78
1.04
A
A
A
1.6
0.8
1.1
0.20
0.29
0.29
A
A
A
2.8
1.2
1.9
0.24
0.33
0.33
L
D
44.8
0.75
R
B
11.5
0.67
NB
TR
SB
L
B
D
A
C
17.2
52.4
8.6
26.8
0.35
0.97
0.29
0.97
F
E
D
E
A
D
113.4
61.0
37.0
58.1
7.7
50.0
0.95
0.71
0.67
0.93
0.33
0.95
54.9
39.7
52.4
22.1
35.8
0.91
0.61
0.84
0.53
0.91
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
WB
LR
MBTA Busway#2
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Overall
Washington Street at
LOS
LT
New Washington Street/
Arborway Ramps
LOS1 Delay2 V/C3
WB
Ukraine Way
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
F
80.3
1.00
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
C
33.7
0.49
SB
L
C
T
A
C
32.4
4.8
26.9
0.79
0.46
1.00
D
D
D
C
D
E
B
B
B
C
55.6
19.4
14.2
18.4
20.4
0.78
0.76
0.99dl
0.74
0.78
D
E
D
C
D
37.6
72.3
35.5
29.9
40.2
0.81
0.88
2.11dl
0.83
0.88
D
C
B
A
B
49.3
34.8
11.2
8.1
10.9
0.34
0.25
0.43
0.58
0.58
C
A
A
A
26.2
2.9
6.1
5.1
0.23
0.49
0.60
0.60
78.0
61.4
5.6
67.4
14.9
46.6
4.7
42.5
0.95
0.85
0.37
0.93
0.64
0.91
0.26
0.95
38.7
18.4
13.4
169.7
56.8
0.98
0.76
0.03
1.29
1.29
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
Ukraine Way
L
R
NB
SB
LT
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
LR
E
58.6
0.34
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
C
34.1
0.23
NB
TR
SB
LT
B
A
A
14.3
2.6
9.5
0.37
0.52
0.52
C
A
A
B
34.6
0.26
9.0
0.53
9.6
10.6
0.59
0.59
L
E
60.4
0.68
T
E
73.2
0.82
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Overall
Washington Street at
R
A
9.9
0.35
WB
LTR
NB
LT
SB
LT
E
A
C
A
C
59.9
5.5
31.8
1.9
34.9
0.87
0.48
0.61
0.18
0.87
E
E
A
E
B
D
A
D
B
B
B
F
E
19.4
13.1
15.9
230.5
58.7
0.82
0.64
0.03
1.43
1.43
D
B
B
F
E
EB
Arborway WB Surface Road/
New Washington St/
Orchard Hill Road
R
Overall
Morton Street (Route 203)/
EB
LTR
Cemetery Road
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
Overall
Queue Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ September 2011
Weekday Evening Peak Hour
Existing 2010
95th Queue2
50th Queue
95th Queue
Storage
Lengths
LT
96
#174
R
0
66
TR
219
262
68
217
271
m#446
#223
370
127
30
~315
348
105
246
#248
133
#445
m#505
#276
365
600
600
550
160
350
350
#523
65
223
m410
430
500
400
160
Intersection
Movement
South Street at
EB
New Washington Street/
Arborway Ramps
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
No Build 2035
50th Queue1
L
South Street at
EB
LR
267
#468
Washington Street/
WB
LR
24
59
MBTA Busway#2
NB
LT
SB
TR
112
321
128
286
~322
26
176
438
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
30
10
35
m15
71
10
82
m31
460
400
Washington Street at
WB
L
124
137
R
60
48
183
86
248
294
94
m#268
141
#330
#582
133
210
210
1000+
460
460
158
266
312
323
116
#345
m#434
480
180
330
370
640
204
368
230
505
m215
m444
#282
#748
210
210
630
400
27
27
180
91
m59
69
200
121
440
1000+
150
330
7
20
154
42
22
m188
150
330
260
186
151
6
252
62
347
22
#346
#280
26
#361
91
#483
m72
510
500
160
1000+
260
880
270
360
215
4
#532
295
14
~412
#615
200
1000+
300
240
Ukraine Way
NB
TR
SB
L
132
196
T
~324
160
#515
176
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
~156
117
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
217
281
L
T
241
95
#263
114
L
148
m144
R
89
m114
NB
LT
SB
TR
116
447
m135
#655
Washington Street at
EB
LR
29
m58
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
25
65
NB
TR
SB
LT
256
36
243
42
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
Washington Street at
EB
SB
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
Ukraine Way
Arborway WB Surface Road/
New Washington St/
Orchard Hill Road
53
104
LTR
61
153
29
187
L
134
202
T
156
228
R
WB
LTR
NB
LT
SB
LT
R
Morton Street (Route 203)/
EB
LTR
Cemetery Road
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
1
50th Percentile Queue Length in feet
2
95th Percentile Queue Length, in feet
3
Available Storage Length, in feet
N/A Not Applicable
0
47
222
13
234
0
286
39
323
30
277
165
5
~418
371
228
15
#617
Capacity Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Weekday Morning Peak Hour
At Grade Alternative
1
B
A
C
C
D
C
D
C
10.3
9.3
20.3
24.4
43.0
34.6
38.6
22.2
0.53
0.48
0.97
0.82
0.71
0.55
1.15dl
0.97
D
C
C
C
42.4
28.1
23.9
29.3
0.84
0.87
0.51
0.87
B
A
A
12.5
2.2
9.0
0.75
0.22
0.75
D
B
C
A
B
A
B
44.0
15.7
33.1
5.1
11.0
9.5
19.3
0.75
0.82
0.68
0.33
0.51
0.27
0.82
B
C
E
A
C
14.6
31.6
60.1
9.0
26.1
0.77
0.81
0.91
0.26
0.91
E
B
C
B
C
71.2
13.8
28.1
16.8
27.3
0.91
0.64
1.23dl
0.46
0.98
D
B
B
B
B
38.8
19.2
12.3
10.8
12.9
0.58
0.19
0.47
0.28
0.58
C
A
A
A
23.6
1.8
2.8
2.2
0.03
0.44
0.23
0.44
B
F
B
E
C
C
C
C
E
18.2
88.8
11.4
64.7
20.9
28.7
34.1
34.5
55.7
0.85
1.15
0.39
1.05
0.31
0.60
0.09
0.11
1.15
C
C
C
F
C
C
B
F
32.1
21.5
28.2
277.0
32.6
24.4
12.3
119.9
0.85
0.69
0.07
1.54
0.44
0.09
0.63
1.54
B
A
C
B
14.5
1.0
20.6
12.8
0.53
0.41
1.00
1.00
B
B
A
A
13.0
16.9
1.7
7.5
0.50
0.65
0.55
0.65
B
F
C
F
F
17.7
260.6
26.1
85.5
183.8
1.55dl
0.93
0.03
0.98
0.98
South Street at
EB
T
R
WB
TR
NB
L
T
R
SB
LTR
Overall
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street
NB
LT
MBTA Busway#2
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
L
R
Ukraine Way
NB
T
R
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
L
R
Ukraine Way
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
LR
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
NB
TR
SB
LT
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
TR
Arborway WB Surface Road/
WB
TR
New Washington St
NB
L
TR
SB
L
TR
NE
L
SW
L
Overall
Arborway at
EB
L
TR
Forest Hills Drive
WB
L
TR
NB
LTR
SB
LT
R
Overall
Arborway at
EB
U
T
East Bowtie
WB
T
Overall
Arborway at
EB
T
West Bowtie
WB
U
T
Overall
Morton Street (Route 203)
EB
LTR
at Cemetery Road
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
Overall
1
Level‐of‐Service
2
Average vehicle delay in seconds
3
Volume to capacity ratio
3
V/C
Movement LOS
New Washington Street/
2
Delay
Intersection
Queue Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Weekday Morning Peak Hour
At Grade Alternative
Intersection
Movement
South Street at
EB
New Washington Street/
Arborway Ramps
T
R
WB
TR
NB
L
T
R
SB
LTR
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
NB
LT
MBTA Busway#2
SB
TR
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Washington Street at
WB
L
Ukraine Way
R
NB
T
R
SB
L
T
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
Ukraine Way
L
R
NB
LT
SB
TR
Washington Street at
EB
LR
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
NB
TR
SB
LT
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Washington Street at
EB
TR
Arborway WB Surface Road/
WB
TR
New Washington St/
NB
L
TR
SB
L
TR
Arborway at
NE
L
SW
L
EB
L
Forest Hills Drive
TR
WB
L
TR
NB
SB
LTR
LT
R
Arborway at
EB
East Bowtie
U
T
WB
T
Arborway at
EB
T
West Bowtie
WB
U
T
Morton Street (Route 203)
at Cemetery Road
1
50th Percentile Queue Length in feet
2
95th Percentile Queue Length, in feet
3
Available Storage Length, in feet
N/A Not Applicable
EB
LTR
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
1
Storage
2
50th Queue
95th Queue
Length3
75
57
~237
76
131
90
94
97
169
m177
m49
m106
m54
132
620
200
480
60
150
150
100
174
31
73
233
#533
#202
430
400
160
487
21
#724
39
460
400
113
90
209
0
58
70
m132
m122
#409
39
116
142
210
210
1000+
1000+
460
460
10
~341
100
44
8
#507
#236
170
180
330
370
640
129
22
~465
30
#245
76
#466
162
210
210
630
400
25
7
191
99
71
34
m242
116
440
1000+
150
330
0
7
12
11
17
m71
150
330
260
~148
~591
10
~314
19
126
7
9
#419
m#589
14
#355
43
164
26
29
460
600
70
120
160
800
n/a
n/a
143
228
18
~533
51
11
171
#577
285
m23
m#595
77
27
275
130
960
1000+
1000+
110
390
390
84
0
118
m96
m39
m#533
200
600
740
154
175
15
193
m201
m36
1000+
300
620
123
355
4
136
148
#671
14
#289
400
1000+
1000+
700
Capacity Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour
At Grade Alternative
1
D
C
C
C
C
B
E
C
35.5
20.5
25.4
29.7
27.8
19.1
63.4
31.9
0.90
0.71
0.91
0.60
0.27
0.46
0.92
0.92
D
C
C
C
52.1
22.4
31.0
32.1
0.84
0.58
0.63
0.84
A
A
A
8.9
3.7
5.9
0.52
0.37
0.52
F
C
D
A
D
B
D
109.2
21
36.3
5.9
50.8
11.2
37.2
0.95
0.71
0.63
0.38
0.91
0.38
0.95
E
D
D
B
C
62.8
36.5
37
13
29.4
0.94
0.56
0.82
0.51
0.94
E
D
C
D
C
60.8
35.6
23.3
36.4
34.8
0.80
0.90
1.42dl
0.80
0.90
E
D
A
A
A
75.6
47.8
8.2
3.1
7.8
0.60
0.43
0.40
0.54
0.60
C
A
A
A
30.2
1.5
6.8
4.8
0.23
0.46
0.56
0.56
E
C
E
D
C
F
E
E
D
61.2
26.3
69.3
37.9
32.7
83.2
55.6
55.4
51.4
1.07
0.82
0.80
0.82
0.48
1.05
0.14
0.13
1.07
D
C
D
C
D
D
C
C
42.4
23.1
49.1
32.0
45.6
46.9
23.4
29.0
0.76
0.70
0.05
0.82
0.18
0.23
0.74
0.82
D
A
B
B
52.3
4.3
17.1
13.1
0.64
0.61
0.70
0.70
D
E
A
C
38.8
69.0
0.1
30.8
0.92
0.87
0.38
0.92
F
C
B
F
F
225.5
31.4
17.1
100.6
131.2
1.45
0.79
0.03
1.10
1.45
South Street at
EB
T
R
WB
TR
NB
L
T
R
SB
LTR
Overall
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
NB
LT
MBTA Busway#2
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
L
R
Ukraine Way
NB
T
R
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
L
R
Ukraine Way
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
LR
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
NB
TR
SB
LT
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
TR
Arborway WB Surface Road/
WB
TR
New Washington St
NB
L
TR
SB
L
TR
NE
L
SW
L
Overall
Arborway at
EB
L
TR
Forest Hills Drive
WB
L
TR
NB
LTR
SB
LT
R
Overall
Arborway at
EB
U
T
East Bowtie
WB
T
Overall
Arborway at
EB
T
West Bowtie
WB
U
T
Overall
Morton Street (Route 203)
EB
LTR
at Cemetery Road
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
Overall
1
Level‐of‐Service
2
Average vehicle delay in seconds
3
Volume to capacity ratio
3
V/C
Movement LOS
New Washington Street/
2
Delay
Intersection
Queue Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour
At Grade Alternative
Intersection
Movement
South Street at
EB
New Washington Street/
Arborway Ramps
T
R
WB
TR
NB
L
T
R
SB
LTR
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
NB
LT
MBTA Busway#2
SB
TR
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Washington Street at
WB
L
Ukraine Way
R
NB
T
R
SB
L
T
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
Ukraine Way
L
R
NB
LT
SB
TR
Washington Street at
EB
LR
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
NB
TR
SB
LT
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Washington Street at
EB
TR
Arborway WB Surface Road/
WB
TR
New Washington St/
NB
L
TR
SB
L
TR
Arborway at
NE
L
SW
L
EB
L
Forest Hills Drive
TR
WB
L
TR
NB
SB
LTR
LT
R
Arborway at
EB
East Bowtie
U
T
WB
T
Arborway at
EB
T
West Bowtie
WB
U
T
Morton Street (Route 203)
at Cemetery Road
1
50th Percentile Queue Length in feet
2
95th Percentile Queue Length, in feet
3
Available Storage Length, in feet
N/A Not Applicable
EB
LTR
WB
LTR
NB
LTR
SB
LTR
1
Storage
2
50th Queue
95th Queue
Length3
394
134
228
74
84
130
249
#555
m125
m#472
107
83
99
273
620
200
480
60
150
150
100
271
165
284
302
285
m440
430
400
160
228
212
342
60
460
400
183
77
276
8
213
91
#282
95
430
72
#322
113
210
210
1000+
1000+
460
460
164
257
274
419
121
328
m361
529
180
330
370
640
233
157
313
441
m253
m260
m361
#706
210
210
630
400
28
32
153
31
m#64
75
242
36
440
1000+
150
330
6
16
167
37
16
m160
150
330
260
~838
335
55
302
42
~475
12
11
#934
482
#161
383
77
#610
36
34
460
600
70
120
160
800
n/a
n/a
378
92
14
236
24
30
371
#654
283
m18
m306
50
64
523
130
960
1000+
1000+
110
390
390
257
137
396
m247
m98
477
200
600
740
578
521
0
#702
m580
m0
1000+
300
620
~886
406
6
~597
#1032
502
18
#831
400
1000+
1000+
700
Capacity Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Bridge Alternative
Intersection
Movement
South Street at
EB
L
New Washington Street/
TR
T
R
WB
L
TR
NB
LTR
L
TR
SB
LTR
Overall
South Street at
EB
LR
Washington Street/
WB
LR
MBTA Busway#2
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
NB
TR
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
Ukraine Way
L
R
NB
T
R
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
SB
L
T
Overall
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
L
Ukraine Way
R
NB
LT
SB
TR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
LR
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1
WB
LR
NB
TR
SB
LT
Overall
Washington Street at
WB
LR
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
Overall
Washington Street at
EB
L
Arborway WB Surface Road/
New Washington St
TR
WB
L
TR
NB
L
T
R
TR
SB
LT
R
L
TR
Overall
Arborway at
EB
L
Forest Hills Drive
TR
WB
L
TR
NB
LTR
SB
LT
R
Overall
Arborway at
EB
U
East Bowtie
T
WB
T
Overall
Arborway at
EB
T
West Bowtie
WB
U
T
Overall
1
Level‐of‐Service
2
Average vehicle delay in seconds
3
Volume to capacity ratio
Weekday Morning Peak
Hour
Weekday Evening Peak
Hour
LOS1
Delay2
V/C3
LOS
Delay
V/C
C
B
n/a
n/a
28.1
11.4
n/a
n/a
0.23
0.50
n/a
n/a
B
E
n/a
n/a
13.4
73.1
n/a
n/a
0.14
0.86
n/a
n/a
C
C
D
n/a
n/a
B
C
22.7
27.6
42.8
n/a
n/a
15.1
31.5
0.73
0.84
0.91
n/a
n/a
0.93dl
0.91
E
C
E
n/a
n/a
D
E
68.1
29.0
78.0
n/a
n/a
46.9
60.9
0.93
0.57
1.02dl
n/a
n/a
0.97dl
1.00
E
C
C
C
D
74.9
24.8
30.9
33.7
39.3
0.90
0.24
0.89
0.49
0.90
F
D
C
D
D
113.6
36.6
23.6
42.1
49.2
0.89
0.28
0.64
0.65
0.89
A
A
A
1.6
5.2
2.8
0.38
0.21
0.38
A
A
A
3.4
1.0
2.0
0.24
0.33
0.33
D
C
C
A
C
B
C
51.3
30.8
29.3
4.3
25.2
18.7
27.1
0.74
0.83
0.52
0.28
0.59
0.23
0.83
105.5
51.9
44.4
6.2
77.3
6.1
D
25.4
38.4
0.0
0.3
27.1
0.2
49.7
0.16
0.16
0.34
0.34
0.63
0.67
0.95
B
C
E
B
C
18.7
25.1
74.6
10.5
25.5
0.81
0.62
0.84
0.22
0.84
E
D
D
B
C
62.8
36.5
37.6
14.3
30.1
0.94
0.56
0.82
0.51
0.94
E
C
E
B
D
78.8
20.4
58.9
16
45.3
0.86
0.63
1.28dl
0.35
1.06
D
D
C
C
C
45
38
26.2
26.3
30.2
0.78
0.88
1.94dl
0.81
0.88
C
B
B
A
B
33.8
15.4
16.1
8.1
14.1
0.53
0.18
0.55
0.33
0.55
F
D
A
A
A
88.5
49.1
6.1
2.9
7.1
0.61
0.44
0.40
0.54
0.61
B
A
A
A
13.4
5.4
3.7
4.9
0.07
0.43
0.23
0.43
C
A
A
A
28.6
5.8
6.1
6.3
0.28
0.45
0.56
0.56
E
C
E
E
B
D
A
n/a
C
A
n/a
n/a
D
58.8
31.3
77.9
77.7
16.0
36.5
6.1
n/a
21.7
1.1
n/a
n/a
40.2
0.85
0.67
0.85
0.97
0.31
0.84
0.19
n/a
1.01dl
0.12
n/a
n/a
0.97
D
C
E
E
D
C
A
n/a
C
A
n/a
n/a
C
46.3
32.9
68.2
67.3
40.9
23.3
1.5
n/a
26.7
1.2
n/a
n/a
32.2
0.72
0.85
0.83
0.89
0.65
0.52
0.27
n/a
0.68
0.23
n/a
n/a
0.89
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Queue Analysis Summary
Casey Overpass
Boston, MA
DRAFT ‐ May 2012
Weekday Morning Peak Hour
Morning Peak
Afternoon Peak
Bridge Alt.
Bridge Alt.
Intersection
1
2
Movement 50th Q 95th Q
South Street at
EB
Storage3
50th Q
95th Q
Length
L
31
59
25
40
170
New Washington Street/
TR
18
89
348
431
460
Arborway Ramps
T
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
R
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
WB
L
56
m70
109
m#262
190
TR
182
m226
219
m263
610
NB
LTR
167
#667
~223
#545
200
L
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
TR
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
SB
LTR
76
108
212
272
350
South Street at
EB
LR
280
#439
270
#397
430
Washington Street/
WB
LR
23
44
28
64
500
MBTA Busway#2
NB
LT
~261
#589
189
256
400
SB
TR
247
323
271
m324
160
Washington Street at
NB
TR
30
77
76
108
460
MBTA Busway#2
SB
LR
61
129
18
14
400
Washington Street at
WB
L
141
m104
183
m#279
210
Ukraine Way
R
55
m50
m#279
213
210
NB
T
265
425
213
0
1000+
R
0
38
0
283
1000+
SB
L
198
294
283
29
460
T
164
239
29
0
460
Hyde Park Avenue at
WB
LR
16
0
164
121
180
Walk Hill Street
NB
TR
363
527
257
328
330
SB
L
163
#290
298
m404
370
T
49
156
418
523
640
L
193
#299
242
m250
210
Hyde Park Avenue at
EB
Ukraine Way
Washington Street at
R
99
193
290
m385
210
NB
LT
367
#942
321
m#479
630
SB
TR
25
285
533
#734
400
EB
LR
18
49
27
m#68
440
LR
5
29
31
76
1000+
NB
TR
180
m256
81
139
150
SB
LT
49
87
1
1
330
Tower Street/MBTA Busway#1 WB
Washington Street at
WB
LR
0
15
7
43
150
Fitzgerald Parking Lot/
NB
LTR
8
#93
81
102
330
MBTA Busway#1
SB
LTR
0
m134
206
151
260
Washington Street at
EB
Arborway WB Surface Road/
New Washington St/
WB
NB
SB
L
190
m226
137
m165
210
TR
189
m233
239
m282
500
L
167
#242
204
297
180
TR
335
#478
260
#409
1000+
L
50
75
48
#188
50
T
356
367
183
269
200
R
64
105
4
19
150
TR
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
LT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
100
R
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
L
131
165
284
384
n/a
0
17
2
25
800
TR
Arborway at
EB
L
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
200
TR
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
200
WB
L
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1000+
TR
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1000+
NB
LTR
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
300
SB
LT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
240
R
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
240
Forest Hills Drive
Arborway at
EB
East Bowtie
WB
U
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
T
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
T
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Arborway at
EB
T
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
West Bowtie
WB
U
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
T
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1
50th Percentile Queue Length, in feet
2
95th Percentile Queue Length, in feet
3
Available Storage Length, in feet
N/A Not Applicable
Zone 6
Mode Share by Purpose* and Time of Day
Trips Beginning in Zone 6
Daily avg. mode shares All Purposes
Auto
61%
Transit
23%
Walk
16%
Home
Work
Other
61%
25%
14%
58%
35%
7%
61%
15%
24%
AM peak mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
45%
42%
13%
44%
44%
12%
38%
56%
6%
48%
28%
24%
Rest of day mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
65%
19%
16%
68%
18%
14%
59%
34%
7%
62%
14%
24%
PM peak mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
54%
26%
20%
56%
26%
18%
53%
38%
9%
54%
15%
31%
All Purposes
Home
Work
Other
61%
23%
16%
61%
25%
14%
58%
35%
7%
61%
15%
24%
AM peak mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
54%
26%
20%
56%
26%
18%
53%
38%
9%
54%
15%
31%
Rest of day mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
62%
23%
15%
62%
25%
13%
62%
33%
5%
63%
14%
23%
PM peak mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
45%
42%
13%
44%
44%
12%
38%
56%
6%
48%
28%
24%
Trips Ending in Zone 6
Daily avg. mode shares
Auto
Transit
Walk
*Purpose refers to the activity that occurs in Zone 6.
Development Review Guidelines
pg. A-6
Boston Transportation Department