Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
CREATIVE SOLUTIONS • EFFECTIVE PARTNERING ®
April 12, 2012
To:
Steve McLaughlin
Project Manager - Accelerated Bridge Program
MassDOT
Through:
Essek Petrie
HNTB
Project Manager
From:
Nathaniel Curtis
Howard/Stein-Hudson
Public Involvement Specialist
RE:
Design Advisory Group (DAG) Meeting
Meeting Notes of April 3, 2013
Overview & Executive Summary
On April 3, 2013, the Design Advisory Group (DAG) met to begin its role in the Casey Arborway 75% design
process. As part of the 75% design process, the DAG is responsible for advising MassDOT on specific topic areas
such as construction management, the new green space associated with the Casey Corridor, pedestrian and
bicycle accommodations particularly wayfinding, figuring out how best to buffer the Asticou/Martinwood
neighborhood from increased bus traffic in the upper bus-way associated with the Route 39/taxi swap and the
new MBTA head-house which will allow direct access to the Orange Line platform from the north side of the new
Casey Arborway. The local knowledge provided by DAG members will help to guide the Casey Arborway team
and inform the 75% design.
The 75% design DAG process also begins with two significant changes from the 25% design phase: Michael
Trepanier of MassDOT’s environmental planning group has replaced Kate Fichter as the process’ facilitator. On
the DAG, Allan Ihrer has stepped down and has been replaced by Daniel Scanlan representing the Stony Brook
Neighborhood Association.
The meeting summarized in these minutes was held to begin the DAG’s 75% role. Key themes of the session
included the following:
• Ensuring that adequate time is given to the open space process in the 75% design phase.
• Making sure that new open spaces, particularly the expanded MBTA plaza do not generate litter that winds up in
surrounding residential areas.
• DAG members see the expanded MBTA plaza as an opportunity to create a real “gathering space” within the
corridor, ideally this space should have some kind of focal point as it becomes the “front” of Forest Hills Station
as opposed to the “back yard.”
• There should be a variety of plantings and tree types within the corridor to provide color and visual interest.
• Signage should be clear for all modes. Where off-street bicycle paths and sidewalks merge, a variety of
warnings should be provided that users are arriving in a shared space. There remains concern over
pedestrian/bicycle conflicts on the off-street pathways. Vehicle signs should provide motorists with clear
indications as to what lane they should be in to access various destinations.
• Construction period conditions are becoming of greater concern as the project becomes more real and moves
toward final design. DAG members expressed a strong desire for a dedicated project liaison for the
construction phase. Effective monitoring of and steps to prevent cut-through traffic are likewise seen as
important.
38 Chauncy Street, 9th Floor  Boston, Massachusetts 02111  617.482.7080 www.hshassoc.com Page 1
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Detailed Meeting Minutes
Opening Remarks
C: Steve McLaughlin (SM): Welcome, everyone to our 10 th DAG meeting. I want to introduce Frank DePaola, the
highway division administrator. He’s going to be here tonight, in this room, to answer questions about the
project. When the boss says he wants to come to the meeting, he comes. I’d also like to introduce Michael
Trepanier. He will replace Kate Fichter in facilitating future meetings. When you send in emails or call, he’s
your point of contact and all his information is now up on the website. George Batchelor is the head of
MassDOT’s landscape architecture section. He’s been working with all of the other public agencies on this
new open space and getting the design for that together and collated. He’ll be presenting to you at this and
subsequent DAG meetings during the 75% phase.
Q: Bernard Doherty (BD): Can we have the DAG members introduce themselves?
A: SM: Sure, that’s a good idea.1
C: Michael Trepanier (MT): Good evening everyone. Thank you for being here. Most of you know the consultant
staff, but a few more introductions: Kevin Horgan is one of our landscape architects, Essek Petrie, Jonathan
Kapust, Elizabeth McChesney and Jeff Kellner are with HNTB, Gary McNaughton and Maureen Chlebek are
with McMahon Associates for Traffic, and Don Kindsvatter, who you know, will help us tonight with open
space.
Tonight, we’re focused on the 75% design and we’ll be breaking into small groups after an initial introduction
by George. Groups tonight will address construction staging and changes to the 25% design, that group will
be led by Jonathan. Another group, led by Essek will focus on wayfinding. In the corner, led by Ruth [Helfeld]
and Robin [Bergfors], we’ll have a group addressing the Arborway Corridor and Shea Square. George’s
group will address the Southwest Corridor Extension and MBTA Plaza and then Don will work on Washington
Street west of Forest Hills Station. Our administrator will be in his own meeting room and you can visit with
him to talk about the process. I’m going to briefly update you on the operations and maintenance plan
(hereinafter O&M), but in terms of upcoming evenings, we anticipate another DAG meeting in May, which will
go into O&M in more detail, there will be a 75% public information meeting in June, and then another DAG
meeting in July or August to talk about open space issues and construction staging.
C: SM: In May we will also discuss head-house design, location and appearance.
C: MT: We’re in the process of developing the O&M plan. We know for you that the limits of jurisdiction need to
be reorganized. We’re developing four overlays for that plan including snow and ice removal,
daily/weekly/monthly O&M like mowing the grass and removing litter, the medium-to-long term care and
control plan to address potholes and then police jurisdiction since we have so many entities involved. So,
before I hand this over to George, any questions?
Q: Michael Reiskind (MR): So said there were four overlays. I think I only got three?
Q: MT: Did I say three, I’m sorry if there were only three.
A: Paul Godfrey (PG): No, there were four: there’s snow and ice, standard operations and maintenance, care
and control and then police jurisdiction.
Q: MR: And what’s care and control?
1 For a listing of DAG members who attended this meeting, as well as consultant staff and community
members, please see Appendix 1.
Page 2
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
A: SM: That’s more about ownership. Operations and maintenance are more about the day-to-day activities.
For example, the signals along the corridor are owned by many agencies, the day-to-day operations and
maintenance of the signals belongs to the City of Boston.
Q: MR: So in the future, will all the signals belong to just one agency?
A: SM: That’s our intent and there’s nothing I see stopping us from going in that direction.
C: MR: Good, I think we agree that that’s all for the best.
A: MT: We think so too.
Q: Jeffrey Ferris (JF): There were a lot of comments at the 25% design hearing as well as maybe letters that were
sent in. Do you have a summary of the comments that were made for 25%?
A: MT: We don’t have a summary, Jeff, but we have the stenographic transcript which includes all of those
comments coming. The official record will be on the website shortly.
Q: JF: Don’t you think the 25% design comments would have been pertinent to moving forward on the project
here tonight? That was kind of the point of it, wasn’t it?
A: MT: Yes and we’ve recorded them.
C: JF: But you’ve had a month or more to make a summary so we could have it here tonight. This is a DAG
meeting. You need to be providing the information for the give-and-take that’s going forward. I’m
disappointed that we don’t have a summary of that with which to move forward.
C: BD: Mine is more of an observation. I know you’re developing the O&M plan. I’d like to see something done
about the present state of the bridge which is full of potholes. I’d like to avoid what happened last year and
have MassDOT go up there and fill in those holes. The condition of the bridge is unconscionable. You’re
dealing with a PR situation. It makes good sense to fix it. If I can’t drive over the bridge faster than 5 miles
per hour, something is wrong. I’d ask that you look into that tomorrow.
C: Wendy Williams (WW): I saw something in the 25% meeting packet regarding imminent domain. I thought
there weren’t any takings associated with this project.
A: MT: I assume you saw the design public hearing package. That’s standard operating procedure language we
put into all of our packets. What we’re doing is making public notification of the fact that imminent domain
might be needed for strip takings and permanent easements for the placement of sidewalks.
A: SM: We have about five permanent construction easements and some strip takings. We have some slopes to
grade and some sidewalks to put down.2
C: WW: I just want that brought to the board of Arborway Gardens if any of that concerns our complex. I can set
that meeting up if one is needed.
2
It should be noted that no full property takings are required for the Casey Arborway project. Any takings
associated with the project are “strip takings” that generally speaking acquire a narrow strip or band of property
for the right-of-way. Most of the strip takings associated with the Casey Arborway project would serve to correct
the fact that some existing sidewalks have actually been laid on private property. As part of this project, these
sidewalks will be brought into the MassDOT right-of-way.
Page 3
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Open Space Overview
C: George Batchelor (GB): Good evening. Thank you for coming. I appreciate your insight and input. You’ve
had a lot of WAG and DAG meetings. From my perspective open space is an inflection point in this project.
I’ve been a couple of these meetings and have been meeting with the Southwest Corridor PMAC and other
agencies on open space. I want to introduce Ruth Helfeld of DCR who will also be at one of the stations for
the breakout groups, Tad Read from the BRA and Gretchen von Grossman from MBTA facilities. We’re
working closely with all of them. This is an ongoing thing within the DAG and among the agencies. You’ve
done so much work and we appreciate it.
We have a full agenda tonight and we wanted to address ongoing concerns about construction staging,
getting design updates, and getting into detail about the parts of the corridor. We’ve developed a break-out
structure with six stations. The idea is that we’ll have 20 minute sessions at each station. The station
facilitator will give you a two-five minute presentation and then you’ll have about 15 minutes for discussion.
Michael and Nate will let us know when 20 minutes is up and it’s time to rotate. You don’t have to leave the
station you’re at, but it gives you an opportunity to wrap up. You can focus on the MBTA plaza or the
Southwest Corridor Park or talk with the Administrator or about construction staging.
C: MT: We have two full hours for that.
C: GB: So that’s the basic structure. For the open space parts of the project, we have Ruth Helfeld from DCR and
Robin Bergfors from DOT with the overarching Arborway corridor. The second station which I will work with
Kevin Horgan will talk about the new entrances at the Southwest Corridor Park and Forest Hills Station and
how we’re opening these important movement points. The third station will be Don Kindsvatter and Paul
Godfrey talking about what’s happening at the Washington Street and the Asticou/Martinwood
neighborhood. Construction staging is over at this table and wayfinding is in the back corner. That’s about
signage and how pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles move through the corridor. Essek and Liz McChesney will
be working on that. Jonathan and Gary will do construction staging. The Administrator is in this room here
with Representative Holmes. Any questions before we break out?
Q: Anne
McKinnon (AM): Where are the design engineering changes?
A: GB: That’s going to be right here.3
C: AM: Oh, O.K. you didn’t say that.
A: GB: I’m sorry if I missed that: design engineering and construction staging is grouped together.
C: BD: I want to make two observations. Everyone who is a DAG member, please raise your hand. That’s 15
people. We have 31 members on the DAG so we’re a little less than 50%. 4 I’d like that noted for the
minutes. I did send an email to Michael noting that the amount of information being presented tonight is
tremendous and being able to absorb and respond to it is going to be very difficult. I’ve asked Michael to
spread these out so that we can go back to our constituencies and tell them what’s being proposed because if
we can’t, we’re just rubber stamping. We’ve worked long and hard on this process and I’m trying to work
with you on it and I have to say I object to this. Our last DAG meeting was in November or December and
we’ve had several months in which to hold meetings. I don’t know what you did with the time, but you didn’t
give it to us and that’s not fair to us.
A: MT: This is our first DAG meeting on these topics and we’re going to have more.
3
Here, George pointed to the table for design changes and construction management.
Several DAG members arrived late. The final attendance of the meeting in terms of DAG members was 20
including Anne McKinnon who stood in for Elizabeth Wylie. This gives a DAG attendance rate of roughly 2/3.
4
Page 4
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
C: GB: At the stations we have trace paper, markers and note cards so please mark those plans up. Someone
will take notes at each station and so at the end we can come back together and report on what we heard.
All of these materials will eventually make it to the website.
Q: Community Resident (CR): I’ve been to other government meetings and it feels like you’re doing a divide and
conquer strategy by breaking us up. Perception-wise it makes us feel isolated and divided as opposed to
getting a full idea of what we’re thinking. I think doing at least two or three of these stations are worth it to
everyone, but I suggest you take the advice and extend the open space discussion beyond tonight’s meeting.
What are you expecting from us? What input did you take under advisement from the community from past
meetings? I would be nice to know what changes you made from previous meetings. Another question is
what do you expect us to comment on? Can we actually come in and say this is a poor design that should go
back to ground zero?
A: MT: A lot of your questions will be answered in the breakout groups. I’d ask that you please let the leaders
give their presentations.5
Q: Sarah Freeman (SF): As a follow-up to Bernie’s question, maybe it would be helpful for those of us with
organizations to report back to, to tell us when you give your feedback; a month, a week?
A: MT: Our next scheduled DAG meeting is in about six weeks.
A: GB: This isn’t the last open space conversation. If there are specific issues that come out of tonight, the
sooner we hear about them the better. The other thing I want to say is that there was a handout on the signin table which breaks out the different sections: construction staging, wayfinding, the overview of the Arborway
and tree plantings, Shea Square as an entrance, the Arborway Yard fence, Stony Brook crossings etc. We
started highlighting those things, but the individual group leaders will try to draw those from group members.
C: MT: O.K. I’m going to be tough: if you want to come and talk to me further, please do, but I’m breaking us
up for the groups.
Report from the Breakout Groups6
C: MT: It looked like we got a lot of good participation. Wayfinding wasn’t as popular as we’d thought it might
be, but overall this looks like it worked to me.
Toole Square, Washington Street West of the Station, Asticou/Martinwood
C: PG: Thank you Michael. Our group talked about Toole Square and down along Washington Street,
particularly in terms of options and opportunities regarding headlights’ impact on Asticou Road. Don talked a
lot about fencing which would be metal, strong and durable. The charge and challenge is to stop headlights
from the upper bus-way from hitting Asticou Road. The size, shape and height of the fence is open to what
you think. We want to hear from people who live on Asticou Road to understand what they want. Continuing
the granite wall along Washington Street was positively received. Some people liked the idea of vegetative
screening along the fence, but there were concerns over how fast that would mature.
We also discussed Toole Square which seems quiet and under-utilized. Maybe this could be a route into the
Arboretum. We can discuss that more. There was continue discussion and dialog relative to bicycle paths
and whether that’s still the right bicycle path. Some people suggested bringing the bicycle lanes back to this
section of Washington Street in one or both directions. There was concern about the path by the end of Forest
5
Here Michael paused to recognize Bill McGregor from the office of Councilor O’Malley and Liana Poston from
the office of Representative Malia.
6 Photographs of the materials from the breakout groups appear as Appendix 3.
Page 5
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Hills Station and having that adequately signed to avoid conflicts among the buses, pedestrians and bicycles
sharing that space.
We talked about having a raised table at Asticou Road, still providing access but lowering speeds and
dissuading cut-through traffic. There’s a strong sense among people on Asticou Road that mechanisms need
to be in place to ensure that DOT keeps its promises and there remains concern over noise generated by the
moved 39 bus. That’s pretty much it in two minutes. We’ll go back and look at what we can do, but we
would still like more commentary from folks on Asticou Road. If I missed something, please shout it out.
C: BD: When you talk about Toole Square, keep in mind that it’s a monument to servicemen and it should be
kept as a passive area for reflection. I’ve spoke to the American Legion and they feel it should be preserved
in a way that’s reflective. This should be done for people who’ve sacrificed for our freedom. I’d be happy to
set up a meeting with our neighborhood association. 7 I agree with your idea for a raised table. Traffic is
coming up Asticou Road today. They’re even crossing the double yellow line. We’ll talk to you about that. At
that meeting, we also want the MBTA and DCR there, not just MassDOT because they will be responsible for
this when it’s done. We want all the parties there. They will receive what comes out of this process and we
need to know what they have to say about it.
C: JF: I brought up the idea that some of the Arboretum land could be used for a path along the inside of the
sidewalk.
A: Nina Brown (NB): On one side of the entrance the land drops down dramatically and on the other side it
berms up. It may be difficult.
The Arborway Corridor to Shea Square
C: Ruth Helfeld (RH): Our overarching theme was the restoration of the historic parkway, the parallel rows of
trees and connections to open space areas as well as the smaller key features along the way. We broke the
corridor down into smaller spaces such as entering Shea Square which would now be a calmer entrance and
discussed how pedestrians and bicycles move through the corridor. Some general comments and concerns:
there were comments about “making a bolder gesture” and finding ways to make this a more “gracious
space,” with multiple tree types, colors, different materials, raising the bicycle path and sidewalk to a level
above the roadway and giving some undulation to the bicycle and pedestrian pathways.
A key concern was what will happen along the edge of Arborway Yard. We talked about a colorful,
decorative security fence and whether that’s permanent or semi-permanent. At the space where the end of
the Southwest Corridor, Arborway and Arborway Yard all intersection there was concern about how cars
turning right might impact cyclists. Another point of concern was the western median U-turn and whether
large vehicles turning there might intimidate pedestrians so perhaps we might try to protect pedestrians with
some bollards. We also discussed the idea of having a sidewalk running up into the Arborway Hillside.
The Southwest Corridor Extension and MBTA Plaza
C: Kevin Horgan (KH): We discussed the Southwest Corridor Extension and the MBTA plaza. The upper area is
seen as more of a green space with the plaza area seen as more paved hardscape. Some of the concerns we
discussed were programming this edge by Washington Street and the MBTA sub-station. We thought about
possibly a dog park or maybe a tot-lot.
C: GB: Some of the things that emerged were that we don’t have anything programmed for that corner by the
sub-station and maybe the best way to envision that is to understand that Washington Street will change
dramatically in the future and that we shouldn’t rule out future park development at that site.
7
At the time of writing, MassDOT has reached out to Mr. Doherty regarding setting up this meeting.
Page 6
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
8
C: KH: At the promontory, we talked about the view possibilities and using this as a place for viewing the trains.
You have a great view towards Boston and being able to see the view looking across what is now New
Washington Street towards the Arboretum, currently blocked by the bridge, will become a very nice sweeping
view. One the the big things mentioned was that we’ve gone through this process where were originally had
the MBTA plaza more green, but the idea we got from the group was opening up that space even more,
creating a real gathering space there, and then moving the green edge up towards the taxi stand on the new
Casey Arborway.
C: GB: The central court of the MBTA plaza and arrival area would grow towards South Street. We had been
looking at the MBTA plaza as a spot for retail kiosks, but we heard from the MBTA that with the moving of the
head-house to the north of the Arborway that the plaza might become less active and so it might make sense
to push an kiosks towards the street or the upper bus-way.
Q: MR: With the plaza becoming a little less active, can we absolutely prevent what is happening there now with
the MBTA police using it as the “back of station” and their private parking lot?
A: GB: I appreciate that coming up again. We’re having internal conversations with the MBTA police about that
issue.
C: BD: On the kiosks, I think that’s a good idea, but I am concerned with the trash generated by that winding up
in the surrounding communities. Could we put into the rental agreements for those kiosks that some of the
money paid will support someone whose job it is to clean up? I’m not opposed to the kiosks, I think it’s a
great idea, but I am worried about the litter and people throwing their trash in our neighborhood. I’d hope
we could put some money aside for someone to keep the area clean.
C: NNG: We also discussed the pick-up/drop-off area and it seemed like that area might be too small for
parents dropping their kids off for the school bus.9
C: Mark Navin (MN): To me, the opportunities to remake these areas along the corridor is the biggest part of the
project and I do think we need more time on this. I’d like to see some more time within the remaining
scheduled dedicated to landscaping.
C: GBe: Up to this point we’ve been focused on the road and while we’ve had concepts for landscaping, it hasn’t
really be developed until now. More energy and time needs to go into landscaping so that we can program
these spaces. The existing grading hasn’t been considered as much as it could be. The landscape architects
need to be supported.
A: MT: Until about a month ago we didn’t have 25% design in and our landscape architects couldn’t really start
their work.
C: GBe: I understand that, but this is a fast schedule and I guess this is my plug for saying we need to beef up my
discipline.
C: SF: I didn’t get to spend a lot of time in this area, but it feels wrong to see that vacuum in the center of the
MBTA plaza. We’re blessed to live so near Mass Audubon and Franklin Park Zoo. Rather than leaving it
empty, perhaps we can call on our neighbors to fill it.
8
This is the space overlooking the MBTA and Amtrak lines and facing towards downtown Boston.
Beginning in the 25% design phase, the project team has been working with the Boston Public Schools and
METCO to relocate the school bus operation to a different space within the project area. Both the school
department and METCO are flexible with regard to where their bus operation is located.
9
Page 7
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Signage and Wayfinding
C: Essek Petrie (EP): For the few of you who didn’t get down here, this station dealt with wayfinding and signage.
We had regulatory signs, pavement striping, guidance between open spaces and bicycle/pedestrian signage.
We had a good conversation with Julie Crockford about their work with the MBTA and City of Boston to sign
the Emerald Necklace. We’d like to look at their signs for adoption or integration with our design. It’s a
great opportunity for this corridor to be re-linked to the Emerald Necklace throughout the city.
We talked with a few people about specific areas they want to see pointed out. Those include Roslindale
Square, JP Center and Egleston Square. If you have other locations you’d like to see specifically signed, get
them to Michael so he can give them to us. We had some discussion relative to a raised table at Asticou Road
and truck restrictions on South Street. Mark Tedrow mentioned bicycle signage to give everyone a warning
about the presence of the upper bus-way. We discussed the potential opportunities for overhead signage to
keep people in the right lane and let motorists know what to expect. One of our biggest concerns I think was
to ensure that vehicles would be in the correct lanes when approaching the intersections.
We also talked about pedestrian signage and whether distances to various locations should be given in time
or mileage. Todd raised the point that with the bicycle paths at the intersections, the paths should be pulled
closer to the street so motorists can see the cyclist sooner before making a right turn. We discussed signage
reminding vehicles to yield to bicycles and pedestrians so that vehicles are looking for and expecting both.
We talked about the pedestrian/bicycle path merger zones and possibly creating a center fast lane. There
was a lot of discussion about making sure that the bicycle path has multiple signs and alerts, either paint or
inlays, which were preferred because they last longer, maybe rumble strips and warnings when things are
merging. We looked at potentially accommodating bicycle signals. We may not be able to pursue that, but
we’ll discuss it with the City. We also discussed the idea of extending the sidewalk to the western U-turn to
allow a crossing from the Arborway Hillside to the Arboretum.
Design Changes and Construction Staging
C: Jonathan Kapust (JK): As the last one, most of the design related comments were covered by other presenters.
When discussing the proposed retaining wall to provide for the potential future Arborway Hillside sidewalk,
there was a discussion of potentially adding a pedestrian signal to the western U-turn. People wanted to
make sure pedestrians and bicycles feel safe with the idea that a truck might use the truck apron and perhaps
providing a flashing warning signal for when they’re going to do it. There was some concern over on-street
bicycle facilities and how pedestrians and bicycles interact.
As far as construction goes there was some concern from Arborway Gardens residents about noise
mitigations. They would like a construction liaison and a citizen management committee. There was concern
that short-term detours might be implemented suddenly, but there will be notification. Walkways between
Forest Hills Station and the temporary bus-way should be wider. We’re going to focus more on cut-through
traffic now that we have the phasing for our signals down particularly on Rossmore Road. Construction will
take approximately two-and-a-half years and run through seven stages from March 2014 to September
2016. It was requested that informational boards and signs be placed during construction to help people find
their way to businesses and residences.
C: Michael Epp (ME): The MBTA has guidelines for temporary pathways, particularly with regard to wheelchairs,
the blind and people with strollers. Those standards are worth checking.
C: JF: You left off the most significant discussion about the loss of bicycle lanes.
A: JK: I mentioned it.
C: JF: But you glossed over it and the issue of conflicts between pedestrians and bicycles on bicycle paths.
Page 8
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
A: Mark Gravallese (MG): Jeff, the district made some similar comments on the 25% design plans. We hear you
loud and clear.
C: Maureen Chlebek (MC): We also got a comment about making Forest Hills Street one-way to discourage cutthrough traffic.
Q: NNG: Can you show us the core staging area?
A: JK: We would create a temporary roadway to the north of the existing overpass that utilizes the northern edge
of the Arborway during construction while demolish the bridge. During some phases of demolition, the
contractor could use the spaces under the bridge. There are ongoing discussions about using portions of the
Arborway Yard. Those are happening with the MBTA at this time.
A: MT: That’s part of what we’re designing right now; that’s not quite finished yet.
Q: MN: What’s the plan or approach for monitoring cut-through traffic? Are we calling the powers-that-be and
trying to convince them of when there is an issue? Will there be counts on Rossmore Road?
A: JK: I can’t speak to counts, but we did get the suggestion to have a dedicated liaison that people could call.
A: MG: When the job gets advertised, there will be a pre-construction meeting at which the contractor will collect
contacts for all the involved parties. With a project of this magnitude we will definitely discuss a dedicated
liaison for you. The resident engineer, who is a DOT employee, will be in charge of the job and be your
direct point of contact.
A: MC: During the 75-100% stage, we’re going to spend some significant time on construction period traffic.
C: MT: So, it’s time we all went home and got some food. The next meeting will be in May. We’ll discuss a lot
of the same topics, but we’ll add in the O&M plan and some conversation about the head-house.
C: PG: For those of you here who represent other groups, if these materials will help you to present the project to
your constituency, get in touch with Michael and ask for these materials. Call us with those requests. We will
respond.
C: MT: If there’s something you want, just contact me. My email is there on the website. I’m your new contact
for the project. Our next DAG meeting is in May, we’ll have a 75% public information meeting in June and
then another DAG in July or August. We’ll tell you the dates as we get closer. Next time you see us, we’ll
have looked at your suggestions and comments. If there are burning interests in advance of the next DAG
session, let me know and we’ll try to work them in.
Next Steps
The next milestone in the public involvement process will be the second DAG meeting of the 75% design process.
This meeting is tentatively scheduled on May 22, 2013 from 6:00-9:00PM (an email confirming the date and time
will be sent to the DAG members). The meeting will take place in the library of Boston English High School. The
library is on the school’s second floor. Topics for discussion will again include planning for the new open space,
an update on the evolving operations and maintenance (O&M) plan for the new Casey Corridor, and discussion
of the new Orange Line head-house.
Page 9
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Appendix 1: Attendees
First Name
Last Name
Affiliation
George
Robin
Nina
Maureen
Todd
Julie
John
Frank
Keith
Bernard
Julieanne
Michael
Dorothy
Jeffrey
Giannalda
Liz
Sarah
Mark
Michael
Ruth
Russell
Kevin
Janet
Jeff
Sarah
Elizabeth
Bill
Anne
Steve
Gary
Jessica
Mark
Liz
Rebeca
Essek
Liana
Michael
Matt
Daniel
Edward
Steve
Gail
Gooding
Mark
Michael
Frederick
David
Karen
Wendy
Cam
Batchelor
Bergfors
Brown
Chlebek
Consentino
Crockford
Dalzell
DePaola
DeSutter
Doherty
Doherty
Epp
Farrell
Ferris
Fontanna
Forsythe
Freeman
Gravallese
Halle
Helfeld
Holmes
Horgan
Hunker
Kellner
Kurpiel
McChesney
McGregor
McKinnon
McLaughlin
McNaughton
Mink
Navin
O’Connor
Oleveira
Petrie
Poston
Reiskind
Robare
Scanlan
Schantz
Schneider
Sullivan
Tamera
Tedrow
Trepanier
Vetterlein
Wean
Wepsic
Williams
Wilson
MassDOT
MassDOT
DAG
McMahon Associates
DAG
Emerald Necklace Conservancy
BRA
MassDOT
Resident
DAG
Office of Mayor Menino
DAG
DAG
Resident
Resident
Resident
DAG
MassDOT
DAG
DCR
State Representative
MassDOT
Southwest Corridor PMAC
HNTB
DAG
HNTB
Office of Councilor O’Malley
[for Elizabeth Wylie]
MassDOT
McMahon Associates
DAG
DAG
DAG
Jamaica Plain Gazette
HNTB
Office of Representative Malia
DAG
Wicked Local
DAG
Resident
DAG
DAG
Resident
Resident
MassDOT
DAG
DAG
DAG
Resident
Resident
Page 10
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Kevin
Wolfson
DAG
Page 11
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Appendix 2: Received Emails
Please see the following pages.
Page 12
Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
freemansherwood@hotmail.com
Friday, April 05, 2013 6:02 PM
michael.trepanier@state.ma.us; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis
Re: Arborway greenery: Shrubs between the trees
Hi again, Michael & Nate,
I've had an ongoing dilaogue re: tree selection for the Casey Arborway & thought you'd appreciate the
information below from Clay Harper if you didn't already know the history. Olmsted didn't tend to use
"flowers", but there are plant lists available.
Sarah
Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid
-----Original message----From: SARAH FREEMAN <freemansherwood@hotmail.com>
To: SARAH FREEMAN <freemansherwood@hotmail.com>
Sent: Fri, Apr 5, 2013 20:33:47 GMT+00:00
Subject: Arborway greenery: Shrubs between the trees On the Roses/Rhododendrons:
As you know from Zaitzevsky, the Olmsted firm wanted Tulip trees (liriodendron tulipfera) and Cucumber
magnolias (magnolia acuminata) along the Arborway originally, and had ordered 550 of each to be delivered in
the spring of 1897 (note 36 on p.248). This was part of his plan to differentiate the parts of the parkway
(Riverway, Jamaicaway, Arborway) with different types of trees, with flowering varieties specified along the
Arborway. Instead, superintendent Pettigrew planted Lindens along the Riverway and then Red Oaks from
Huntington all the way to Franklin Park. The Arborway section had "shrub roses" planted between the oaks,
presumably put there on Pettigrew's orders. That photo of them makes them look quite lovely - You're most
welcome to use any of the photos I've collected for any reason at all.
I've been unable to find a reference to what specific kind of roses they were, and I'm more than adaptable when
it comes to what kinds of flowering shrubs are preferable - but I do personally very much like the idea of
parkway-hardy flowering shrubs to soften the hardscape of our retaining wall (dangling ivy anyone?), to save us
from the tyranny of overgrown grass and to signal that you've entered the realm of one of the world's great
collections of plants at the Arboretum. Perhaps flowering native shrubs are the most sensible way to go? That
would create a different kind of character than what we're used to, but at least short-term really show the work
off and put a smile on everyone's faces. No small thing after such a lengthy, expensive and contentious effort.
I'd of course be most happy with a seasonal succession of perrenial periwinkle, daffodils, tulips, Rhodies,
azaleas, and roses, but I'm sure the DCR mowing crews have other preferences. The nice thing about the "roses"
is that they presumably flowered for more than a week or two. But a handsome wall of rhododendron would be
great too if it creates less of a maintenance burden. But I'm also reminded of the Gateway effort and it's
suggested shrubs (whatever they were!) from the hillside Vegetation Management Plan, especially if we want
one to eventually match the other. I seem to recall that palns were drawn up for new shrubs along the hillside
path and around each of the DCR's signs on the median?
1
Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
freemansherwood@hotmail.com
Friday, April 05, 2013 5:36 PM
michael.trepanier@state.ma.us; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis
Arborway plantings - trees and shrubs
Hello Michael & Nate,
At the DAG breakout group on the Arborway Corridor on Wed., I mentioned that in the early days,
there were rose bushes between the oak trees on the Arborway, and most people seemed
surised. The oaks grew larger & created shade - not great for roses, (but other shrubs, e.g.
rhododendrons, can tolerate shade & perhaps plowed snow etc.) Olmsted expected people would
want a less rustic/more urban feel as more houses were built in the area. So, there are no longer
shrubs between the trees.
Clay Harper has scanned a photo from Cyntia Zaitzevsky's book, page 195, showing the roses (the
link is below), along with a second link showing dense rustic greenery on the Arborway.
Perhaps the pendulum has swung too far to the urban extreme, and now we are ready for a more
rustic look & feel again. Questions have come up re: security & shrubs - are there options that are
not too tall or dense (as recommended in the Gateway to the Arborway)?
Arborway Roses:
http://m.flickr.com/photos/10041103@N06/8610295843/lightbox
Arborway with dense greenry:
http://m.flickr.com/photos/10041103@N06/8614592558/lightbox
Thank you for thinking about these issues,
Sarah
Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid
2
Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Trepanier, Michael (DOT) <michael.trepanier@state.ma.us>
Tuesday, April 02, 2013 11:06 AM
Batchelor, George (DOT); dkindsvatter@kleinfelder.com; Essek Petrie; Bergfors, Robbin
(DOT)
McLaughlin, Steve (DOT); King, Paul C. (DOT); Paul Godfrey; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis
Fwd: Casey Arborway Project - Next DAG Meeting - Detailed Agenda and Overview
Hey gang, The first of the DAG comments on open space. Unfortunately, Jody will not be able to attend tomorrow night. Please include these comments in our records and considerations. Michael T
Begin forwarded message: From: Jody Burr <josephine.burr@gmail.com>
Date: April 2, 2013, 10:40:24 AM EDT
To: "Trepanier, Michael (DOT)" <Michael.Trepanier@dot.state.ma.us>
Subject: Re: Casey Arborway Project - Next DAG Meeting - Detailed Agenda and
Overview
Dear Michael,
Welcome to the team! I am sorry that I won't be able to attend tomorrow night's meeting; my
husband has a commitment and I am on childcare duty. I'm especially sorry to miss a meeting
that will involve small group breakout sessions and focus on the details that will define the
function and feel of the area surrounding the Casey Arborway.
As an abutting resident (I live on South Street in Roslindale, just past the Arboretum, about 3/4
mile from Forest Hills) and representative of my neighborhood, I would like to make a few
points in absentia, mostly surrounding the Forest Hills and Washington Street area toward
Roslindale.
- I feel strongly that the landscaping emphasis along both sides of the Casey Arborway - and on
medians - should prioritize trees, shrubs and creative plantings over open "plaza" space. This is
important both for cushioning the noise and visual distraction of the roadway, and for creating a
sense of a safe space to walk and linger. Looking outside of the Roxbury Crossing T station, one
can see a good example of how the more open "plaza" feel creates an unwelcoming atmosphere
which adds to the expanse of asphalt. Especially in the early years when plantings are immature,
this will be critical to drawing pleasure walkers and bicyclists to the area.
- A dog run and/or playground area along the north side of Washington Street both get my
support. How about a small sprinkler park? Anything that encourages non-commuter use and
discourages sketchy loitering is, in my opinion, a great idea.
- In the past there has been discussion of including a kiss-and-drop-off area (no long-term
parking) on the north side of New Washington Street. I want to reiterate how important I think
3
this is, especially as a means to encourage use of the head house on that side. It also provides a
safe place for emergency vehicles, school buses and other vehicles that may need to stop along
that block.
- I'd love to see any features which encourage the use of the Arboretum annex that empties out
onto Washington just south of the Asticou area. It's a wonderful path that runs the risk
of becoming dangerous if under-used. A clear connector to the Arborway bike path from there
should be prioritized (last I saw I think there was a short off-road multi-use path on that side of
the street running between the Arborway gate and the Casey path? I may be remembering wrong
though)
- I am not sure where the discussion currently lies with regard to constructing some sort of
barrier to protect Asticou residents from bus headlights and noise, but I hope that a.) there is
some plan to invite those residents into a discussion of possible options, and b.) one or more of
the options involves a "green wall" - a vertical garden that maintains some sort of visual interest
through the winter months as well. This has been a really effective tool in other similar
conditions, could be a beautiful public art addition to the project, and has the added benefit of
further offsetting carbon emissions.
- As the former executive director of Roslindale Village Main Street, I'd like to point out that the
two Washington Street intersections are important gateways to several nearby small business
districts, including Roslindale Village, Egleston Sqare and JP Centre/South. At least two of
these districts have implemented wayfinding signage with particular visual "branding" in their
areas. I think it would be a valuable asset if signage at these intersections could include signs
pointing to each district, ideally using each district's wayfinding branding. This would also be a
politically important nod to the local businesses that will be impacted by the Casey Arborway. I
am sure that the Main Street organizations in each of these districts would be more than happy to
provide designs for these signs.
Thanks for taking these points into consideration. Sorry again to miss the meeting and the
chance to meet you in person.
Jody Burr
647 South Street
Roslindale
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Trepanier, Michael (DOT) <michael.trepanier@state.ma.us>
wrote:
Hello DAG Members,
I am pleased to provide a more thorough description of the format and discussion topics for our
upcoming Design Advisory Group Meeting to be held on:
Wednesday, April 3rd at 6pm
Boston English High School - Library
4
144 McBride Street, Boston
As mentioned in previous emails, our next meeting will include revolving breakout sessions
designed to maximize the efficiency of our meeting. The attached document provides a list of the
topics and details for each group. Please review it at your convenience and contact me with any
questions you may have.
Also, I would like to invite those members of the group that I have not yet had the chance to
meet, to come and introduce themselves to me at the Library. I will be there early and available
throughout the night to get to know you!
I look forward to seeing you all on Wednesday evening.
Thanks,
Michael
Michael Trepanier
Senior Environmental Planner
Environmental Services
MassDOT Highway Division
10 Park Plaza, Room 4260
Boston, MA 02116
(857) 368-8828
www.mass.gov/massdot
5
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Appendix 3: Breakout Group Materials
Please see the following pages.
Page 13
,
/1
I
II
•
•
I•
I
-.J...L.. i
I
•
•
•
•
.
.,
•
•
•
I
I
I
•
I
•
' .::
,
•
I
t,
~I
,
,
,
1
• e;lZ.1l!
•
:<
SJ,tl
/.
\
I
•
I
I} -
I
. -l ~..._
\
. .J
o
o
,
•
•
o
•
o
I ,
!
•
' VtHICLf.$ YI[LD
• IN Cf.<,S'" w4<-&
~ JUoo~ -41-1 [.
T1J W=+-s/feo 5
ft J-l3O U :'''k c.ItTE /~"1
"rrr
6I\~
'"-)~"':'",.1VL
"",
-t$I~'";~
'?D
a""'-E..
.--.....,
' \ ,.... ..... !50
ry (:_
b
"1'
,
,f
,
,
~
t
)1 • ."
\
I
,,I
S
I
L
0
I
'-'
,
I
I
I
\
p~ 11~'"'' 7
1'I\ttJT v.
r:.1 ~E
"""Y?
,1r'Ttf.,.
S~ V
,<0
'"'~
-;,1W1 P
..., 0.,
-
,•
,
\
~/
•
7
()f
70 CIPSS G2
<fi1I LINe..
(J)
Lt./rST 1'4>V/~ ~ 1
•
•
>I1fAAI
I
CoIf11~UE i/~1.l.L '5Ibtl..1U:
- ) vAy_ f;,oAu tp~ ~ "'I f~"JS
-==] ~C.L
. )r
t
I
"'- ­ /)J! 11IEre IE Alltell"l'\'lLEfIi1az1cw
11> ~~ /VI1Jt.Kr-TIW ASr/{JXJ
~~57
•
- JJ:;O f£TTtl:. fjJ~ flJf- JM:}(1<%R1(IIiJ</
"" 5OO1J{
s-r