Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. CREATIVE SOLUTIONS • EFFECTIVE PARTNERING ® MEMORANDUM June 4, 2012 To: Steve McLaughlin Project Manager - Accelerated Bridge Program MassDOT Through: Andrea D’Amato HNTB Project Manager From: Nathaniel Curtis Howard/Stein-Hudson Public Involvement Specialist RE: Second Design Advisory Group (DAG) Meeting Meeting Notes of May 16, 2012. Overview & Executive Summary On May 15, 2012, the Design Advisory Group (DAG) met to continue its role in the Casey Arborway 25% design process. The DAG is composed of a combination of new members and participants in the previous Working Advisory Group. The name change is indicative of the group’s more focused role now that a roadway design has been selected to replace the current Casey Overpass. In the current 25% design process, the DAG will address specific topic areas such as construction management, urban design, traffic, parking, and remaining elements from the planning study including Washington Street west of Forest Hills Station and the design of Shea Circle. The local knowledge provided by DAG members will guide the design team’s efforts and inform the 25% design. Over the next several months, the DAG will meet regularly to ensure that the 25% design process can be completed in a timely manner to allow the Casey Overpass to be replaced with a new boulevard by the end of the Accelerated Bridge Program (ABP) in 2016. In addition to DAG meetings, the project team is willing to hold additional sessions to reach out to the Jamaica Plain business community or particular community institutions or neighborhood groups. Pauses of several weeks are being built in between DAG meetings to allow these briefings to take place. Residents, business owners and other stakeholders are encouraged to reach out to the DOT or their representative DAG member to request such a briefing. The meeting described herein had two major parts. The first of these was a discussion of the new open space that will be created by the removal of the Casey Overpass and the building of the new Casey Arborway. The second item of discussion was a set of answers to questions asked by DAG members at the April 30th meeting. With regard to the new open space, a number of ideas and concerns came up. These included: Ensuring that the sub-surface environment is designed with long-term tree health in mind; Ways to incorporate public art into the project both as way-finding tools and objects to help move pedestrians towards safe roadway crossings; Ensuring that bicycle paths, pedestrian paths and roadways have safe intersections; Concern over care and custody of the different park elements, particularly with regard to law enforcement; Ways to make the outer lanes of the roadway flexible such that they can be incorporated into the open space during off-peak periods and in advance of the 2035 traffic volumes for which the roadway is designed; 38 Chauncy Street, 9th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111 617.482.7080 www.hshassoc.com Page 1 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Ensuring that key existing aesthetic elements such as the pudding stone walls at Shea Circle remain part of the new open space design for the corridor; Reuse of the existing Green Line shelters as shelters for the new 39 turnaround as they already are designed to match the station; and, Finding lighting with a historic appearance to echo Olmsted’s original intention for the corridor. While not directly bearing on open space but linked to the desire for an improved Forest Hills area, DAG members also expressed continued concern about parking operations, pick-up/drop-off operations around Forest Hills Station, particularly with regard to taxis. Members also requested that MassDOT ensure that, if a mid-block crossing will not be provided on New Washington Street, steps be taken to prevent pedestrians from crossing unsafely at this location. A detailed set of answers to questions asked by DAG members can be found in the section of these minutes entitled “Report on Previously Asked Questions.” In brief, the following issues were discussed: The project team has met with the MBTA and has confirmed that all necessary data on MBTA bus operations, including dead-head buses and future plans for operations in the Arborway Yard, have been integrated into the Casey plans. The MBTA sees no fatal flaws with the current Casey Arborway design and will continue to work with the design team to ensure that MBTA operations are maintained or improved by the current project. The project team has met with the Forest Hills Cemetery. Staff members of the Cemetery are excited about the project’s outcome, but noted a concern shared widely by other area residents and stakeholders regarding their operations and access to their site during the construction period. The project team has met with the Boston Public Schools and has learned that the only BPS school buses stopping in the corridor serve West Roxbury High School. All other BPS buses are passthrough traffic. A meeting with METCO is being scheduled at the time of this writing. There are approximately 79-86 on-street parking spaces between Orchardhill Road and Shea Circle. Of these, approximately 28-30 are signed for use by courthouse employees. Detailed Meeting Minutes C: Kate Fichter (KF): Good evening folks, it’s time to get going. Welcome to DAG number 2, I am Kate Fichter with MassDOT Planning. I have a little housekeeping to attend to and then Steve [McLaughlin] will get us going. There are two exits from this room: one is the door you came in and the other is a fire exit in the opposite corner. If you need to dial 911, the telephone is labeled that you should dial 5 and then 911. I am trained in CPR if there’s an emergency and in case of the other possible emergency, the bathrooms are out the main door and to your left. I’d also like to make sure we have just DAG members seated at these tables. We’ve put out additional guest seating for observers. Please resist the temptation of side conversations as it makes it very hard for Nate to get the minutes accurately done. I didn’t hear any questions or concerns about the proposed Meeting Guidelines since our last meeting, so we will make them official and abide by them for all of our meetings. You all asked me to keep the meetings running briskly so I’m going to try to do that. Please stay on point and on the agenda when you speak. That’s in deference to your fellow DAG members. We also wanted to note our ability to do individual briefings for groups during first few weeks of June. Contact me and we can schedule a subset of the staff to brief your group. I also wanted to note that the Bridge Rating Report for the Casey Overpass is now on the project website. It’s approximately 2000 pages long, spread over five sections. C: Kevin Moloney (KM): I have some concerns. One thing I suggested when you asked for suggestions was that it be required to have key PowerPoint Presentations and drawings circulated 48 hours in advance of the meeting. I have these two things [Editor’s Note: meeting hand-outs] that I only saw at 5 minutes to 6:00 tonight. Neither of them was circulated in advance. You’re still showing renderings on the website that are not correct, not to scale and misrepresentative, particularly views 2 and 3 and I object to the way this is being carried out here. We need ample opportunity to review, read and study and not have to deal with these things in a meeting. Page 2 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. A: KF: I appreciate that. There’s a real challenge in trying to send things out in advance given the speed at which this design is evolving. We’re trying to get the agendas out 48 hours in advance and we do give you hard copies at the meeting, but we know it’s not perfect. C: KM: I don’t think you do appreciate it. This isn’t about being perfect, it’s about being adequate. You’ve never defined consensus, your agendas are far too long, you’ve never treated either the WAG or DAG with any respect. You rush and don’t let us think and this is all a waste of time. A: KF: We really do appreciate it, Kevin; nobody is trying to waste your time. O.K. anything else? Q: Allan Ihrer (AI): Did I just hear that new members got a briefing last night? A: KF: Yes, that’s right. We did a welcome session last night for new members of the DAG. C: AI: I just think that the previous membership should have been invited. All the new members got was the DOT and HNTB view of the project without questioning and there was a lot of questioning in the last year. A: KF: We’ll post the presentation tomorrow and the meeting minutes just as soon as we get them written. C: George Zoulalian (GZ): When I got into this group a few weeks ago, it was very overpowering because I didn’t know anything about the WAG process. Another big meeting wouldn’t have helped me learn like I did last night. It wouldn’t have been anything new to you. A: AI: But then that would make you think that there should be another meeting to collectively discuss our feelings about what’s on the website and what was said at the welcome meeting. A: KF: If you want to talk to one of the new DAG members off-line, we always invite you to do that. Get together. Q: Bernard Doherty (BD): I asked some questions about Washington Street; when will I see those? A: KF: Those are forthcoming later in the meeting. Discussion of Green Space C: Steve McLaughlin (SM): Standing with me here is George Batchelor, one of our landscape architects at MassDOT. We went for a four hour jaunt around the project last week and I learned a lot. George is going to join us for the next few meetings. Today is especially important given the discussion we’re going to have about open space. We know this is a big deal for the community: the public realm and accessing the neighborhoods and today we’re going to have a charette and wok on that. At the beginning, we’ll discuss sustainability. I’d also like to acknowledge that at the last DAG meeting, Michael Halle left us to be with his wife who delivered a baby. 1 A: Michael Halle (MH): We were going to call him Casey, but we wanted him to be on time with a fast decision. C: KF: So, with that out of the way, here’s Andrea D’Amato to walk us through tonight. Remember, this is for DAG members. If we have time at the end, we’ll try to take comments from the observers. 1 Michael was given a big round of applause by the DAG and project team. Page 3 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. C: AD: I have a few members of the team to introduce tonight. Essek Petrie is with HNTB and he’s been a part of this process for the last year. Kevin Horgan is our landscape architect. Tonight is a very different night. For former WAG members, it might feel reminiscent of the work we did last summer. There’s no lecture, no back and forth. It’s a quick overview in which we’ll orient you to these maps, and once we’ve done that we have stations with boards for you to visit. We’ll give you a 20,000-foot overview and then really ask for your help on open space and connectivity for Shea Square, the MBTA plaza and the end of the Southwest Corridor Park. Essek will address sustainability and Don Kindsvatter will talk you through the open spaces. This is your meeting tonight to toss ideas around and talk with the design team directly. We’ll give you sharpies to write on the boards and please move through the different stations so that everyone has a chance to visit each one. One thing we did at the welcome meeting was to give new members a key to how the website works since we’ve been told that the site is voluminous and can be daunting. Please look at the key and go through the website, it will help you understand things better. Also, at the last meeting we got a lot of questions. We’ve got answers to almost all of them to discuss tonight. At the very end of the meeting we’ll go over all of that: MBTA bus stops, parking and so forth. In the last two weeks we’ve met with the Forest Hills Cemetery, the MBTA, the parks and school departments and so we are working very hard to get this information for you and to inform the 25% design. Q: BD: When we have someone who is not here ordinarily, could you put their name and telephone number on the agenda so we can contact them? A: AD: Yes, we can do that. A: KF: You can just ask me; I can set that up for you. Q: AI: Sometimes questions are asked for which we don’t have answers at meetings; can we keep a list of those? A: AD: Sure we can and thank you for your questions for the traffic primer. That’s May 24 th, that’s on your agenda, and Gary has compiled all of those questions and we will walk you through that. Q: Karen Wepsic (KW): What time is that meeting? A: KF: It’s at 6:00 p.m. in this room. Q: Elizabeth Wylie (EW): I’m glad to see the website guide. I went on the website and there was no reporting of what happened at the meeting on the 30th. What’s the standard by which you are posting the meetings? A: KF: The meeting materials are typically under documents. Q: EW: But what’s the timeframe? A: KF: Typically the presentations go up in about 48 hours; sometimes things can sit a little while in the IT department. A: AD: And all of the items from tonight will go up to the website. We’ll be putting up the written-on boards if the technology cooperates. C: BD: I think the minutes are very important because it helps us to review and I hope you would come up with a standard. It ought to be about a week. A: KF: They are long, detailed documents; it’s challenging to get them done sometimes. Page 4 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. C: EW: It’s challenging for those of us who have jobs and lives and when we had time to go look at the minutes they weren’t there. The sooner we can have them, the better. Q: MH: By the scheduling you have right now, there’s only going to be one DAG meeting per month? A: KF: There are four DAG meetings. The next one is June 18th with the one after that set for mid-July. We just got overwhelmed with the quick succession of meetings. C: AD: If we can, I’d really like to get to Essek as quickly as possible to give you all time to help with the designing. C: Essek Petrie (EP): Thank you Kate and Andrea. For those of you who are new to this process, I was involved in the WAG and I work in planning at HNTB, particularly our sustainability practice and I have been thinking extensively over the past few months about how to apply that to the Casey project. Let me say a few words about the LEED process. It came out about 12 years ago from the US Green Building Council to rate architecture and design for environmental sustainability. That’s really for vertical construction and buildings, but we have tried to adapt it to Casey. HNTB also has a system for looking at the sustainability for roadway and transit projects and there are a few other nationally recognized systems in their infancy. I would encourage you to look at all of these resources yourself. Another resource we looked at was the MassDOT GreenDOT policy. The GreenDOT policy has the goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, promoting healthy modes of transportation and supporting smart growth development. It’s worth noting that MassDOT is the first DOT to have greenhouse gas reduction targets. We also looked at the Boston Complete Streets guidelines. Those are specific to urban design and things like streets and sidewalks. What we would like you to do is help us to think about the area. Sustainability is context sensitive and you’re the people who live, walk, cycle and drive this space and we need your help. On your 11 x 17” handout is the process we’re using to approach sustainable design. There’s also a list of the resources we have drawn on and we encourage you to review those on line. There are some good opportunities here in things DOT already does: warm mix asphalt reduces the production and laydown temperature of asphalt by 20-40%, which reduces the amount of energy used during the process. It’s also a better working environment for the people putting it down. There’s also recycled pavement which uses old tires and asphalt shingles. There are opportunities with lighting. Boston’s Complete Streets guidelines include high efficiency LED street lights and DOT incorporates LED traffic signals when possible. Those contribute to energy savings and reduction of operating costs. In terms of storm water management, strategies include permeable pavement, vegetated swales and rain gardens. We also provide you with a timeline of when in the design process we will address the various items. For example, 75% design is when we’ll really deal with stormwater management. I also want to apologize for using the cartoon base; it’s just there to talk about sustainable design and practices and the depictions, it’s not area specific. Most of these can be implemented project wide, like lowmaintenance vegetation, permeable pavement and low-impact storm water management. Another opportunity we have is recycling and reuse of materials. We have a great opportunity here to keep materials on site as opposed to diverting it to landfills. When you break out, we’re looking for a few things: if you know of any sustainability resources we haven’t addressed, write it down for us. If you know of design elements we didn’t call out, tell us. If you know of some particular sustainable practice that could be done in a specific area of the project, run that by us. C: KF: I want to welcome Councilor Matt O’Malley; Councilor, thank you for coming. C: EW: I was glad to see light pollution mentioned on the board, but it’s not on the handout or timeline. Please add those. A: EP: We can certainly add those on. Page 5 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Q: Paula Okunieff (PO): When I see sustainability reports, I always see enhancements for pedestrians and transit. Are those a part of this? A: EP: Yes, definitely. Don is going to get into that in greater detail. There’s a lot of pedestrian and bicycle stuff in this project and the idea of making transit more accessible. Don is going to get into paths, pedestrian and bicycle access. Q: PO: What I’ve seen with transit oriented design includes bus-only lanes and preferential treatments. Do you see that as part of sustainable design? A: EP: Also, yes, definitely. That will fall more into Gary’s court, but we consider it part of sustainability. C: Michael Epp (ME): There are new stormwater standards so you have to discharge at a two-year rate. The containment of the amount of discharge offers challenges and opportunities so I would recommend moving that up. You also need to reduce phosphate discharge; that will be a big deal around the bus terminals. A: EP: We will be looking for ways to take pollutants out of stormwater naturally without extensive filtering. Q: MH: Can you mention the interaction between this and the MBTA tunnel, whether these are statewide standards, and the issue of their not being a lot of space for facilities? Is there an ongoing discussion with the A: EP: As far as stormwater design, we’ll develop a system that works between the roadway and tunnel box. There are some challenges associated with that, but we can address them. Q: MH: And then the larger picture: are these two projects that come together? Casey Arborway and the MBTA station, the bus run-off and the tunnels? A: EP: It’s all a single process. Q: Michael Reiskind (MR): On the sustainability: the fresh warm-mix versus hot-mix asphalt is there a difference in the wearing time, when do they break down? A: EP: Warm-mix is fairly new, but it’s not showing any signs of breaking down faster than hot mix. Q: David Wean (DW): How long has warm-mix been used? A: SM: At this point, we are just laying out the possible tools for sustainability. Tonight isn’t the time to decide warm-mix versus hot-mix. We want to have a discussion and throw out some ideas, but don’t get wedded to any one in particular right now. Q: Bill Reyelt (BR): Looking at the designs and renderings I see the decorative trees and some of them I think aren’t worth the trouble, but is there an opportunity here with the continuous median to have larger shade trees to help out with the urban heat effect? A: Don Kindsvatter (DK): Definitely. In fact we’re using Olmsted’s plan as a guide with major shade trees. The medians are 12-20 feet wide so that gives us room for trees. On the sides we’ll also have room for big trees and a continuous amount of earth for big root systems to spread out. Along Washington Street west of the station where we’ll be working in the sidewalk, we’d look to install continuous pits. That’s all for the health of the trees. C: AD: We can look into the life of the pavement. If anyone knows about places that have used warm mix, please email Kate. We are definitely concerned about lifecycle cost as a sustainability issue. Page 6 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Q: Sarah Freeman (SF): Speaking of Olmsted, whatever we do will be a new project, but if we’re trying for a historic parkway feel, can we get energy efficient lights in an old style? A: DK: The LED bulbs can go into many styles. We don’t know which one we’ll pick, but I’d assume will use DCR standards for the parkway and the BTD standards for the city streets. A: Vineet Gupta (VG): The bulb is independent of the light fixture so we can put it into nearly any shaped fixture. The light department has made good progress on that. C: EW: Also, please make sure air quality is part of this from start to finish. I don’t know what measurements you are thinking about, but local residents are worried about emissions and particulates during construction. A: EP: The GreenDOT policy places restrictions on contractor vehicles and forces them to meet lower emission outputs. Many construction machines have been retrofitted as a result. C: EW: In my neighborhood, I have idling taxis and the big volume of cars. I just want to make sure we apply that to the design and think about it. A: EP: Yes, we are aware of the issues with the taxis and will keep working on it. C: Hillary Kelley (HK): There’s a lot of green up there and I’m curious about the idea in terms of ground cover. Grass isn’t very sustainable. What’s the idea for ground cover? A: DK: We are a little ways from that and we know we’ll use some grass, but there are certainly more sustainable varieties which need less cutting and resist drought better. We want to keep maintenance down. We’re working with DCR which owns the corridor on that. Q: Lisa Dix (LD): Have you factored noise into your considerations? You’ll now have the at-grade roadway. A: EP: We will definitely be looking into noise mitigation during construction. In terms of post-construction, we can think about noise control ideas. We definitely would not do walls, but we’ll look into it. Q: MH: When will we as a group have a chance to engage DCR on these issues? I’d just mention that for new people. Did we have DCR representation during the WAG process? A: SM: Yes, Joe Orfant attended lots of the meetings. Tonight George Batchelor from DOT’s landscaping group is here and Ruth Helfeld from DCR is here as well. We continue to meet with DCR outside of these meetings. DCR is here and tuned into the process. C: Anne McKinnon (AM): Maybe it would be useful, since MassDOT won’t own any of this to have the DCR guidelines. That’s your starting point I would imagine. The City of Boston will own some of this so we should have the Complete Streets guidelines. It seems like a waste of time to go forward when there are guidelines that have been developed. A: KF: We can put those on the website [Editor’s Note: these materials have been posted.]. C: AM: I really meant for this discussion. C: DK: As Andrea mentioned, tonight we’re doing a different format. We’ll give you a brief overview and then we’ll go into an open house format where you can have conversations amongst yourselves and with us and get to see how everything works. We’ve talked a lot in this process about traffic and transportation, but tonight I’m happy to talk about open space. Page 7 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. There are three big areas of improved open space: the end of the Southwest Corridor which will get bigger, the MBTA plaza which gets a whole new context, and Shea Square where the entrance to Franklin Park is going to get bigger. Each area represents a specific design task and is owned by a different entity. The Southwest Corridor belongs to DCR, the plaza is owned by the MBTA, and Franklin Park is owned by Boston Parks and Recreation. It will be part of the design team’s challenge to work with each of the agencies and make sure what they get is something they’re happy with and can maintain. Now a little more detail on each of the areas: Shea Square: we talked a little bit about this at the last meeting. The darker green area at the intersection of the Arborway and Morton Street will be new green space. We can pull the park’s frontage down and really make it meet the street. The granite walls here today were built as part of the rotary. We could relocate them or build new ones to ensure the park has a really nice entrance. Using the Emerald Necklace metaphor, each park is a jewel on the necklace and we want each to be unique, but contain common themes. Granite is a commonality throughout the corridor at the MBTA plaza, the entrance to the Arboretum and so we think that’s a great theme. The MBTA plaza: this plaza will get a whole new context. To orient you, here’s the station, the new Arborway, Washington Street here and South Street here. The bicycle storage is here. The Route 39 will pick up here towards Washington Street. The commuter rail ventilation stays will stay where they are today as will these stairs to the lower bus-way, but what about the raised planter beds? We think the major desire lines will become diagonal and a challenge to the design team is making pathways through the raised planters to make things more welcoming. The Southwest Corridor entry: to orient you again, here are the tracks and here’s New Washington Street. The light green represents the park’s edge today. The dark green is the new space which is over an acre. It’s fairly flat so we have some good opportunities. We’ll have the new MBTA head-house and a ventilation grate for the commuter rail tunnel. We know there are some existing properties here and we’d buffer them in some way. The raised granite wall on top of the tunnel portal actually contains three water mains so it has to stay, but what could the wall do? We want to hear from you on that. Maybe we could keep it, maybe slope it down, there’s some choice there. The big dashed lines are the meeting of the north-south and east-west pathways. The circulation will move down to the south and west so we want your ideas about making this a more interesting community gather space. C: KF: If there are any brief questions before we go to break outs, we’ll take those now. Q: BD: On the existing properties, can you show me how big the open space is? A: DK: It’s out to about here. Q: BD: You know there are two units proposed there as a by-right project? Do you know how that factors into the equation? A: DK: Assuming they are built, we’d treat them similarly to these others and provide them with a buffer from the project. C: Frederick Vetterlein (FV): I’m particularly interested in Shea Square. The granite walls are not granite. They are pudding stone and they’ve been repointed by the Parks Department. They blend in with the glacial erratics2. There’s no sidewalk on Forest Hills Street and if you could bump out the curb that would help access to the neighborhoods. Q: Heather Carrito (HC): The proposed head-house and grates, are they next to Asticou Road? Would the grates be flat? 2 Glacial erratics are rocks which are different in size or type from those surrounding them. They were deposited by glacial movement. Page 8 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. A: DK: No, I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear, they would be in the area of New Washington Street. The grates are pretty flat; you can’t drive a vehicle over them. Q: HK: In the MBTA plaza, why are the planters raised? A: AD: It was to give the trees space to grow over the tunnel box. Q: EW: How are we designing the trees to stay healthy and happy? How are we designing their opportunity to live and grow? A: DK: Along the main corridor, we’ll have very good conditions for trees, between 12-25 feet of space, which allows for excellent root growth. On the sides we’ll have 12-15 feet of continuous earth and that will leave us plenty of room as well. There will be some tricky areas to address. Q: BD: In relationship to the green space coming down the middle of the road, there will be snow and sand piled up there. How high up will the curbing be? On VFW Parkway, they are about a foot high to protect the grass. There needs to be some thought put into that. A: DK: Along the main corridor, we’ll have very good conditions for trees, between 12-25 feet of space, which allows for excellent root growth. On the sides we’ll have 12-15 feet of continuous early and that will leave us plenty of room as well. There will be some tricky areas to address. Q: PO: With the ventilation grate, it’s an exhaust grate; will there be a fan in it? A: DK: No, when the train goes through the tunnel quickly, this allows air to exhaust from the platform safely. Q: PO: Do you have a cross-section where you can show the platform in relation to the grates? A: DK: Yes, we can do that. C: AD: And just so you know, we did enlarge the areas of the map that you asked for in the Morton Street area. That’s this map in the middle so make sure you get a look at that. Breakout Group Reporting C: KF: O.K. everyone, thank you for your hard work. Here’s Andrea with the first report. Discussion of the Shea Circle Area C: AD: We had a lot of good conversation on how the pathways would be treated and located. There was an issue about consistent lighting and signage in the corridor. That would be our intent, but we’d need to discuss it with BTD and DCR. One of the more unanimous agreements was that the pudding stone walls are important and should be retained where they are. We might explore cobble stone walls as well. We also wanted to maintain pedestrian access along Circuit Drive. We want to add the sidewalk to the east and west side of Forest Hills, get the U-turn in to access the Stony Brook neighborhood, Gary will address that further at the end of the meeting. There was a strong push to get the buses off the frontage road and onto the Arborway. Members want to access to resident parking spaces and try to keep the cut-off segment of Forest Hills Street for parking. Page 9 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. The fun conversation was about how to treat bicycle and pedestrian areas. There didn’t seem to be much agreement on it, but I thought I heard that if there’s a lot of greenery, keep the pedestrian and bicycle paths moving straight ahead, don’t swerve them all over the place. Keep pedestrians on a straight line and out of harm’s way. C: Jessica Mink (JM): We wanted to avoid having trees right next to the road. That’s healthier for the trees and its better sight lines for cars to see pedestrians, cyclists and other cars. C: AD: Also, we wanted to make sure that bicycles are not right up against the pedestrians. The last thing we talked about was why we have bike paths on both sides? The question was asked, why not really use the space on one side and make it big and glorious? Is there an opportunity for the corridor bicycle connection on the north side and leave the south side under a different treatment. David Wean noted we missed an area by the pocket park leading to the Arboretum. That was actually a big discussion among WAG members and this reminded me that we need to look at it again. C: VG: A few points, relative to bicycles and pedestrians. The easy part is deciding how wide the path should be for cyclists or walkers. The difficult part is crossing the road and that takes a lot of creativity and effort. There are some experts in the City who know how to do this and have seen how it works in Europe. Maybe you can do a side meeting with them to get into the details of how this works out. I’m not expert on bicycles but I know that having them just on one side of the road doesn’t work. They will use the other side even if you don’t provide anything for them. A: AD: We would welcome it if you could help us set that side meeting up. C: HK: Another discussion we had was the idea of not just having a bicycle path on one side of the road or the other, but really figuring out the safest way to get a bicycle through this space. I’m not convinced that the on and off-street mix of facilities is safe. It could be confusing for cars and maybe this isn’t the best edge space with buses stopping and turning off. A: Todd Consentino (TC): The off-street paths come to an end. If there are no on-street facilities, it just ends. C: Kevin Wolfson (KWo): In terms of redundant bicycle facilities, I agree with Hillary that it works if the intersections are done well. It makes sense to just have the off-street path if the crossing is safe, intuitive and quick. The way to do that is what Todd and Pete sent out and I hope that will come out at the mobility meeting. From Livable Streets’ perspective, that’s ideal. A: JM: My point is that coming on the south side of the corridor, there are two destinations: Franklin Park and Forest Hills, both of which are great places for family cycling, especially with little kids. Having a clear route along the south side is desirable and the multiple intersections on the north side are a big difference compared to the one small intersection on the south side. C: BD: With regard to the bicycle path on the north side of the road, and speaking for the CPCAY, we have three entrances to the Arborway Yard there. People should be aware that there may be a parking garage in there, that was before we learned about 500 Arborway coming down, but you have one, two, three curb cuts and that will make traffic, especially with a lot of vehicles going in for parking at the garage at rush hours times and there may be some type of mall thing there that will be make it even more difficult. We have to think of the safety of the bicycles and pedestrians because this is a high traffic area. A: MH: Let me hue and cry and move on. This is a critical issue. A lot of thought is already in it, we have specific information, and thought will continue to go into it. We’re not solving it here in the next ten minutes, let’s defer. Page 10 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. C: DW: The one comment I have is in response to the idea of the bicycle redundancy. Many cyclists will use the street regardless. Even if there is no lane, we need the shoulder width because the side paths are not efficient for commuter riders. C: PO: I would just caution you that when you get down to Washington Street, there are seven lanes of traffic that cyclists and pedestrians will have to cross and that will probably be the highest density crossing in the whole area because that’s the only place that there will be parking, down on Washington Street so you’re going to have a tremendous number of pedestrians crossing that area and it’s the widest point. Discussion of the Southwest Corridor Park Entrance/Exit C: Kevin Horgan (KH): We talked about the circulation at the Southwest Corridor a bit, directing people this way and that and how we might discourage people from crossing mid-block. We discussed ways to move people around such as public art. One big thing was the idea this wall needs to come down to open things up. We also thought about the area by the substation and how it should be opened up because right now it’s very hidden and obscure. A dog park, skate park and public garden were all proposed ideas. I see someone also mentioned picnic tables. Somebody mentioned this connection here along the east side of the train tracks. Right now it’s a vacant space full of homeless people and it could be used to create a gateway all the way up to McBride Street. Lighting would be a concern in that area in order to make sure it is safe. Because the area at the end of the Southwest Corridor is relatively flat, we thought we could terrace it and have some steps coming down, maybe a climbing structure for kids. There’s an opportunity to do something with the landform that directs people to the preferred circulation routes. A concern that was voiced was that this is a great crossing for the Orange Line, but what about bus and commuter rail? Through designing and landscaping, we think we can create a carrot to draw people to the South Street side so they won’t try to cross mid-block any more. C: GZ: I didn’t have a sharpie and my drawing is in pen so it’s hard to see, but I think the Arborway ought to have a giant arbor at this location with granite columns and lit up. I think it would be a nice location that would draw families and be sort of like the arbor in the Arboretum. C: MH: This is really a question of programming. Does it fit on one side or the other? It seems like this might be the place for a farmers’ market. Off-peak, maybe you could take a lane and let the produce trucks park in it. It’s a laudable thing that would bring people here and be a weekend magnet. C: KWo: As an extension of Mike’s comment, the current cross-section of six lanes is for peak hour in 2035. It might be overbuilt for current traffic and for the off-peak periods and so having the outside lanes as somehow convertible to open space, maybe with different pavement, but somehow as an extension of the open space. C: ME: To follow that up, if you are planning on activities like a flea market or a farmers’ market, you can’t just label the plan for it, you have to draw it up and test it. Often, people have great intentions, but they don’t pull it off because you need or organize these things with access and power and the right space for concerts and plays to make them happen. So if you’re going to do this, please test these spaces. C: CR: This is a tremendous opportunity for the Southwest Corridor Park to connect with the Arnold Arboretum in a way that we’ve never been able to do before. This area should really be a gateway to the Southwest Corridor with some public art, think boldly about a big, workable piece of public art that’s really interactive, and makes a statement about the park. Discussion of the MBTA Plaza C: DK: My group talked about the MBTA plaza. If I leave anything out, please feel free to jump in. We need to draw in the bicycle desire lines going through the area and not just to the station. When we have the bicycle discussion, we will cover that. There was agreement that the planters don’t seem to work and we Page 11 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. discussed the idea both of leveling them or punching new pathways through them. There’s some police parking here and there may be ways to manage it better. The existing bus shelters out there for the Green Line could be repurposed for the Route 39 since they match the station. We’ll look into that. A general comment on planting in the area is that we need to look for low pollen trees so as not to make asthma conditions worse. We need to define who owns the public spaces, manages them and pays for their upkeep and so we’ll be looking into that with the three agencies working in the area. Getting back to the current plaza design, we’ll speak to the MBTA to see what their original intent for the space was and if there have been any lessons learned. C: KWo: We also discussed the importance of the location of the 39 bus since it determines the point of conflict between the pedestrians and cyclists and the desire lines for pedestrians. Depending on whether the bus loading point is further west or east, different crossings make sense and may also help to limit the desire to cross mid-block. C: JM: I think a crosswalk would be a good idea here, right in front of the bus stop. It would also make for a shorter crossing. C: Beth Worrell (BW): We also talked about doing something to improve the aesthetics of the ventilation stacks. C: EW: I understood from the WAG process that the mid-block crossing would muck up traffic and to make the at-grade solution work we need to remove it to synchronize the signals. A: JM: I don’t envision it as being mid-block; it would be near the stop line. Q: Mark Navin (MN): Is there some reason the Route 39 bus couldn’t go into the upper bus-way? If you already looked and it doesn’t work, I’ll accept it. A: BD: Speaking for Asticou Road, we’re not even sure about moving the bus-way exit down from where it is today. We ought to meet with the MBTA and find out how this got into the ABP program; I still don’t understand that. The 39 bus going down there will only cause more problems. You say this solution is green, but I can’t figure out and am very confused about how a river of cars, trucks and buses all belching smoke is green. You’re asking us to accept all of this with no real input. A: DK: We made a commitment through the WAG process to keep the 39 where it is today. C: GZ: The 39 is a replacement service for the Green Line and so it needs to be more frequent, more like every four minutes. That’s why it’s where it is. Q: MR: So how does the 39 bus go back downtown? A: DK: If you remember back to the WAG process, we have a queue jump light for it and then it makes a U-turn in Washington Street. C: MH: It’s easy to get caught up in today’s bus configuration, but imagine a replacement for the now-dead trolley loop and you really wouldn’t want the delay of bringing the bus into the station. A: PO: The loop doesn’t even go past here; they would never bring it back that far. C: MN: I’m concerned that people may still try to do that mid-block crossing. There needs to be something to stop them. A: PO: At 2:00 and 3:00 in the afternoon is when all the kids from Boston English High School who live to the south of Jamaica Plain come down through there. They will cross over any fence and that has to be Page 12 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. considered. People are going to cross wherever it is convenient. It doesn’t matter if you steer them west or east; they will cross where it is convenient. You can try to move them, but you won’t. C: BR: I want to pick up on the comment about the ventilation stacks and public art. It would be neat to use the air pressure generated by passing trains to drive a wind sculpture. Q: EW: On the Washington Street side, there are two designated pick-up/drop-off areas. How do we design in some management of the taxis using them? Current taxi policies are not enforced. If the policy is 6 cabs sitting at the curb, it’s 20 idling taxis today. People will overflow and there will be blockages. How do we design in management and containment? It’s a similar idea to dealing with the way the students will walk. I believe in design so let’s really consider it. A: DK: There are two things we can do: one is to create more pick-up/drop-off space and then there is the issue of enforcement. C: EW: That gets back to the issue of ownership. Does the area belong to E-13, the MBTA, or the state? When there’s a riot with 20 kids brandishing knives and throwing garbage cans, we run into this issue. We’d like a response on that before we get further into design. A: PO: Any enforcement on the Arborway would be handled by the State Police. Q: LD: Have you addressed school buses? A: AD: Just as soon as we finish with this, we’ll get into it. Discussion of Sustainability Issues C: EP: Liz and I had a conversation about noise and air quality for buses and pick-up/drop-off. Another thing we got into was the idea of dimmable street lighting. Michael mentioned complete streets, smart streets and sidewalks. You can set up noise and air quality sensors in the sidewalks and we can look into that. Public art came up. We’ll be addressing parking in just a few minutes. Pete mentioned the idea of Silva Cells for trees. Bill also mentioned that if we are going to put MBTA bus stops on the north side of the Arborway that we’ll need to look at putting crosswalks to the courthouse. A: DK: One of the ways we can do to ensure better tree health is not letting the soil around them get compacted. You can do a few things for that. One is structural soil that has more gravel in it. You can also have Silva Cells which are boxes you can put under the sidewalk to stop the soil from getting compacted. We’d be looking at those options in the plazas and sidewalks. C: AI: I think the pick-up/drop-off issue is critical because this is a transit hub for this particular MBTA service area. We need to look forward to how that is accommodated. We know we have the taxi area and we have the area down on the southern concourse and that’s inadequate now because of the bowties for people coming from Mattapan. We look at these drawings and a key programmatic element in the New Washington Street area is pick-up/drop-off and we’re a year plus into this and people are talking about it, but I still don’t see it. A: AD: In our next meeting we’re going to throw it out there and see what you think about it. C: FV: You also said you would list how many parking spaces there are in the area. A: KF: That’s actually a really good segue. Last time around we asked you for your questions and we asked Gary to compile some answers and get back to the group with them. We’ll do that with your questions from this meeting as well. Let me turn this over to Gary. Page 13 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Report on Previously Asked Questions C: GM: O.K. I’m going to try to get through this fairly quickly. We have the traffic primer coming up on the 24th of May and then another mobility meeting on June 18th. The 24th will be about looking back; a refresher for the WAG process traffic, filling in gaps and answering questions. We’ll also tell you a bit more about what we’ve been doing in traffic work since then. On June 18 th, we’ll be looking forward into the details of traffic design for the 25% design stage. Since the last DAG meeting, we’ve had a bunch on meetings. Just this past Tuesday we met with the MBTA to go over our plans and their plans for Arborway Yard. We also have information on dead-head buses which we’ve had for a while and we’ll fill that gap in at the traffic primer. We have a lot of information directly from the MBTA and our meeting with them was very positive. They are happy about the project. We met with the school department to talk about their buses and where they go. The only Boston Public School buses stopping here in the corridor serve West Roxbury High School. Any other Boston school buses in the corridor are just passing through. Q: PO: Did they mention the MBTA supplemental buses? A: GM: They did and we have that information. They also told us about METCO buses and that’s a meeting we’re setting up. We’ll talk to them next. We met with the Forest Hills Cemetery and discussed their operations and access. It turns out they own the land where Franklin Park Villa is and Yale Terrace. They are very excited about this project and the opportunities for Forest Hills. A common theme in those meetings and an item for DAG 4 is construction and how that will work. Cut-through traffic mitigation and maintaining operations during construction are big concerns. There have been construction questions since last March and we’re now digging into how to build this thing and developing ideas to discuss at our July DAG meeting. We also talked with the MBTA about bus stop locations, over in the section of Arborway east of Hyde Park Avenue. We mentioned the DAG’s concern to them about the buses operating on the frontage road and their preference also is for the buses to be on the Arborway itself, near the bowties. They would prefer for the buses to operate curb-side and not from pull-outs so they don’t have to fight their way back into traffic. We have integrated a pedestrian crossing with the eastern bowtie, running concurrent with the traffic flow and with ample opportunity to cross. Some items that are coming up: we have data from CTPS that we’ll discuss at the traffic primer. We also discussed the signalization along Washington Street west of the station with the MBTA and how that might impact pedestrian crossings and we’ll go through that at DAG 3. One topic just starting up is pick-up/drop-off and we’ll be looking forward to your input. We want to provide as much space as we can and we’re getting feedback on how best to program it. One more thing on school buses: BPS is very flexible in terms of location and routing. They’ve been moved around throughout the years, generally in response to the MBTA, and they are willing to move again. They can do their pick-ups on any side of the station and they are confident they can work with a variety of configurations. We’ll keep testing that with them. My last item before I give this over to Don is the U-turn at Shea Square into the Stony Brook neighborhood. We tested it and it’s feasible. It’s wide enough for a passenger car and it’s a low volume so we can allow it. C: DK: This graphic will go up on the website. We were asked about how much on-street parking there is between Shea Circle and Orchardhill Road. When you look at photographs you can see people really jam into any available space. There are between 79 and 86 parking spaces in that area depending on how tightly people are willing to park their cars. 3 of those are handicapped spaces for the courthouse. There are also spaces around the median. That’s between 28-30 cars, again depending on the size of the vehicles, and that’s signed courthouse permit and the rest is for residents. We know there are 104 spaces under the overpass itself. Page 14 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. C: CR: Let’s deal with this issue now; I want to hear what you’re doing. I counted all the cars on Tuesday and it was full. The courthouse has its own huge parking that hold 30-40 cars. Why does the courthouse need parking at all? When I get my jury duty notice it says parking is not provided. A: AD: We were asked for an on-street parking count and that’s what we’re providing here. The parking plan is still ahead of us. Q: CR: The number you gave, 79-86, is that the total number? Are the courthouse spaces a part of that? A: DK: 28-30 are signed for the courthouse. Yes, that’s out of the total. Q: MN: And this just measures the current activity, right? A: AD: This is a count of surface parking and we did that. These numbers will go on the website. A: GM: That answers one discrete question. I know there is an ongoing conversation about parking and we’ll continue to think about parking in front of Arborway Gardens. We’re not replacing the underbridge parking in front of Arborway Gardens. We’re trying to identify how much parking will need to be replaced. Q: CR: Do the residents count in that? A: GM: Curbside uses have not been determined yet. A: AD: And at the last meeting we showed you angle-in parking, you didn’t like it and so it’s been removed. Q: MN: I want to clarify the move of the bus stop. Will the bus now stop out on the Casey Arborway? A: GM: Yes, that’s right. C: MN: Thank you. C: BD: Since the DCR and MBTA are playing such important roles in this, they ought to be up here making presentations to us. They will present to our neighborhood and they should present to this group in general. You say the MBTA is comfortable with all this, but are we? DCR should be up here saying how they plan to manage this and whether or not they agree with it all. DCR used to have the bridge that you took away but then they will get the roadway back once this is all done. There are a lot of entities involved in this: Boston Police, State Police, and the MBTA police. The State Police patrol DCR roadways. Boston Police cover the City roadways. These are things we’ve dealt with for decades and I want to make sure the community understands the nuances in this roadway. C: HK: I’m happy to hear about the school buses being flexible. One thing to bear in mind is the parents will be right behind the buses in their cars, especially when it is dark and cold in the winter; some parking needs to be available for that. Q: AI: Can you bring the animations to the traffic primer. I think they are helpful in understanding all of this. A: GM: Yes, I want planning on it. C: KF: Good night everyone, we’re closing the formal meeting now. Thank you for coming. Page 15 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Next Steps The next milestone in the public involvement process will be a briefing for the Courthouse Neighborhood Association to be held at the Franklin Park Villa on May 21, 2012. The DAG Traffic Primer is scheduled for May 24, 2012. Page 16 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Appendix 1: Attendees First Name Last Name Affiliation George Nathaniel Heather Todd Joe Andrea Lisa Jullianne Michael Dorothy Todd Kate Sarah Emily Kenneth Ruth Kevin Janet Allan Hillary Don Paul Mark Sarah John Steve Jessica Kevin Liz Matt Paula Essek Tad Michael Bill Steve Frederick David Karen Wendy Kevin Beth Batchelor Cabral-Curtis Carrito Consentino Cosgrove D’Amato Dix Doherty Epp Farrell Feathers Fichter Freeman Gallagher Grover Helfeld Horgan Hunker Ihrer Kelley Kindsvatter King Kolonoski Kurpiel McCormick McLaughlin Mink Moloney O’Connor O’Malley Okunieff Petrie Read Reiskind Reyelt Schneider Vetterlein Wean Wepsic Williams Wolfson Worrell MassDOT Howard/Stein-Hudson DAG – For David Hannon DAG MBTA HNTB DAG Office of Mayor Menino DAG DAG West Roxbury Transcript MassDOT DAG Resident Resident DCR HNTB Resident DAG DAG HNTB MassDOT MassDOT DAG MBTA MassDOT DAG DAG DAG City Councilor DAG HNTB BRA DAG DAG DAG DAG DAG DAG Resident DAG DAG – For Sarah Freeman Page 17 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Elizabeth George Wylie Zoulalian DAG DAG Page 18 Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Appendix 2: Received Emails Please see the following pages. Page 19 Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis From: Sent: To: Subject: McNaughton, Gary <Gary.McNaughton@mcmtrans.com> Wednesday, May 30,20128:41 AM Fichter, Katherine (DOT); Andrea D'Amato; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis RE: CASEY comment - unresolved The short answer on this one is that it didn't differ between the two alternatives. Now that we are advancing the design, we are taking a closer look at this intersection and there are designs that work to improve this intersection that we will be discussing at DAG #3. Gary McNaughton, P.E., PTOE McMahon Associates p: 617.556.0020 x 3007 WWW.fficmtrans.com From: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) [mailto:katherine.fichter@state.ma.us] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:40 PM To: Andrea D'Amato; McNaughton, Gary; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis Subject: FW: CASEY comment - unresolved Hey GuysSorry for the deluge of traffic emails - I promise that this will be the last for a while! Kate Fichter Manager of Long-Range Planning Office of Transportation Planning - Massachusetts Department of Transportation Ten Park Plaza, Room 4150, Boston.. MA 02116 617.973.7342 From: SARAH FREEMAN [mailto:freemansherwood@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 3:52 PM To: Fichter, Katherine (DOT); dfingerman@comcast.net Subject: FW: CASEY comment - unresolved Dear Kate, I received the comment below from Arborway Coalition participant David Fingerman last November & submitted it as a formal comment to MassDOT, but it is not clear to me whether this concern has been addressed yet in the evolving design. It is an example where relatively small changes would make a real difference in safety, stress and quality of life for those who travel through the Arborway/South St. intersection, so I am re-sending to you to make sure it does not fall through the cracks. The other issue that is on my mind is the continuity of the bike paths that are being designed. There has been much emphasis on the connection of the Southwest Corridor to Washington St. towards Roslindale & the Bussey Brook Meadow entrance to the Arboretum. There is also a gap that needs to be addressed for cyclists going toward the JamAica Pond & the Jamaicaway path. This is the area that is included in the "Gateway to the Arborway" planning process. 1 Thank you, Sarah Date: Wed, 23 Nov 201116:24:25 +0000 From:• •~.I!I!!I!II.!I To: freemansherwood@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CA5EY Fw: FINAL WAG & PUBUC MEETING SCHEDULE Sarah, Overall, I support the proposed at grade solution for many of the reasons you've expressed so well. One relatively minor element of the plan bothers me. Why isn't the intersection of the upper Arborway and South Street being considered from a traffic and pedestrian standpoint? As I'm sure most in the neighborhood experience, the cars on South Street frequently block this small intersection making it almost impossible to turn into the Upper Arborway or onto South Street either left or right. I have seen cars swerve through the traffic, cutoff pedestrians and block the flow of traffic on South Street trying to turn into the Arborway. One morning recently, a car coming from Washington Street drove into oncoming traffic and onto the sidewalk to get through. Why isn't this intersection being considered in the traffic plan? For example, why isn't there any sign or road markings that indicate 'don't block the intersection'? Frankly, I think the lack of any messaging just communicates to drivers - do whatever you want. Which is what they do! This seems like a small omission, but it directly impacts those of us in the neighborhood. If you have thoughts or suggestions~ I'd appreciate your feedback. Regards and Happy Thanksgiving, David Fingerman From: "SARAH FREEMAN" <freemansherwood@hotmail.com> To: arborway-coalition@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 2:27:28 PM Subject: CASEY Fw: FINAL WAG & PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Dear all, The Casey Public Meeting last night was very well attended (standing room only) and was one of the longest meetings I have ever attended on any subject (5:30 PM open house; meeting from 6 PM until after 10 PM). The presentation, which will be available soon on the MassDOT website, took 2 hours, and then everyone who wanted to speak was given the chance. The fact that MANY residents stayed for 2 additional hours in order to be heard - and to hear each other - shows the depth of commitment, passion and recognition of the importance of this project. The public questions and comments will contribute to a better outcome. 2 As this phase of the planning nears its conclusion, the Working Advisory Group (WAG) has one final assignment: to submit our group's final thoughts, ideas and comments on both alternatives - full message is below, Since it is due Dec. 6, please let me know if you have any specific comments by Dec. 1, and I will compile them for submission in advance of the deadline. Also, written comments can be sent to MassDOT for 10 days after the public meeting. Unfortunately, due to the lack of seating space, some people left without hearing the full presentation and without the opportunity to comment. Here are the e-mail addresses for comments: To: John.Romano@dot.state.ma.us Cc: liz.malia@mahouse.gov, jeffrey.sanchez@mahouse.gov, russell.holmes@mahouse.gov, sonia.chang-diaz@masenate.gov, jullieanne.doherty@cityofboston.gov, matthew.omalley@cityofboston.gov, felix.arroyo@cityofboston.gov, john.r.connolly@cityofboston.gov, ayanna.pressley@cityofboston.gov, stephen.murohy@cityofboston.gov, kate.chang@mail.house.gov, joe.orfant@state.ma.us, soverton@massmail.state.ma.us Also below are: * Some of the reasons why I support the at-grade option and * excerpts from a letter that was written by another WAG member who raises several good points. Thank you all for your positive vision for a healthy future for Forest Hills and the Emerald Necklace, Sarah *********************************** 1 of 3) A few reasons why I (Sarah) support the at-grade option, written in response to an Arborway Coalition participant who asked: Initially, I tried to remain neutral in communications to the group, but as the process evolves, it has become mare & more clear to me that IF the traffic can be handled at-grade, that option is a far better outcome for Forest Hills and the Emerald Necklace parks. Some of the benefits include: * removal of a massive structure that dominates the area and prevents it from feeling like an urban neighborhood. Even if they build a smaller overpass, it will be the defining feature of the Forest Hills area since it has to go over 2 intersections * traffic calming If you have ever stood at the base of Arborway Hillside (at the end of Casey, across from the Arboretum), you will be amazed at the speed of the traffic coming off the Overpass. It contributes to the climate of speeding & aggressive driving in the area ... even if they have to sit through multiple cycles of the light at Murray Circle. It says "we want to move cars as fast as possible"! • cost The bridge is so much more expensive that if we get the bridge, it will be about the only thing we get. (Detail below- next point). 3 * other at-grade improvements that are only possible if there is no bridge If we don't have to pay for a bridge, there can be other improvements in the vicinity (e.g. expansion of the bike network on the Washington St. side of Forest Hills T Station, pedestrian access from the Southwest Corridor Park side of the road down to the T station without having to cross the Arborway.) * shadows The space under an overpass tends to be dark, dreary, attractive to pigeons who leave debris, and often wet from drips. Not a pleasant public space. • noise The high speed traffic on an overpass makes more noise than the slower at-grade traffic, and there is an echo chamber effect. • graffiti. broken glass. trash If you look at Casey, you can find all of the above. I have no reason to expect otherwise for a new bridge. • anti-social activities that can happen under a bridge, especially at night The space underneath can be a magnet for late night drug deals, alcohol, homeless encampments etc. All of these are improtant social issues that need to be dealt with, but do we want to attract them here? Thank you for thinking about this! It is such a HUGE opportunity, I'd hate for us to miss out on the best possible outcome. Best regards, Sarah ************************************** 2 of 3) Letter from another WAG member: -----Original message----­ From: Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 201117:57:19 GMT+OO:OO Hello friends and neighbors ­ As some of you know, I have been part of a working advisory group for the last 5 months to help the Department of Transportation come up with an alternative to replace the deteriorating Casey Overpass at Forest Hills. I'm writing to you because the moment has come where a choice will be made, between two designs that will offer two very different futures for the Forest Hills neighborhood and surrounding communities. A final community meeting will be held to present the two final design alternatives this Monday, November 21 at 6 pm at the William Hinton State Laboratory Auditorium, 305 South Street, JP. There will be a 10-day comment period afterwards. The DOT needs our input to make a choice that will be right for the neighborhood. The choice is essentially between rebuilding the overpass or replacing it with a network of at­ grade streets and off-street paths. Both options have been determined to handle current and future traffic flow equally, and both options will be a significant improvement over existing 4 conditions. For more details and images to help visualize the two designs, check out this verY helpful presentation from our last WAG meeting. More details will also be presented at the community meeting. Having been involved in this extensive analysis and planning process, I have come out strongly in favor of the at-grade (i.e. no bridge) solution, and here's why: • Better use of taxpayer dollars. The at-grade solution is less costly to build and maintain, allowing more resources to go toward elements that will benefit both commuters and local residents like open greenspace and bike and pedestrian amenities. The cost of the bridge means there will be little money left for at-grade amenities, including much-needed improvements to the Washington Street approach from Roslindale. • Connecting the Emerald Necklace parks system. Providing a tree-lined extension of the Arborway through Forest Hills, complete with a multi-use path, the at-grade solution would restore a long-missing link between the Arboretum, Franklin Park, and the Forest Hills Cemetery. • Reconnecting communities. The at-grade solution will finally bring down the noisy, dirty cement wall that now divides JP, Roslindale, Roxbury and Mattapan, creating a new corridor to knit these communities together. • Traffic calming. An overpass contributes to a climate of high-speed and aggressive driving as cars come off the bridge into the residential Arborway neighborhood. The at­ grade design will more effectively meter traffic flow which will also alleviate traffic jams further down the Arborway. East-west travel time is not expected to be significantly affected. • Celebrating public transportation. The at-grade solution will allow Forest Hills Station and the adjacent neighborhood to become a community and commuter hub, rather than an awkwardly located afterthought in the shadow of the overpass. Bus routes are supported by dedicated lanes and an improved bus dropoff/pickup area. • Place-making. The at-grade solution supports further development of the Forest Hills area and strengthens neighborhood identity; a new bridge would perpetuate the area as a 'pass-through' with no commercial or cultural significance of its own. • Sight lines. The proposed bridge would be significantly shorter and lower than the current bridge (proposed bridge height is 16.5', more than 10' lower than the current bridge), creating more shadows and visual obstructions. • Safer pedestrian and bike access. The at-grade plan includes far more improvements for pedestrians and bikes, including a T entrance by the Southwest Corridor Park (across the street from the station), more green space buffers, and off­ street paths on Washington Street as well as the main corridor. • Forward thinking. Replacing 50's style overpasses and speedways with urban boulevards is a noted trend in cities around the country. Urban street grids are known to be better at efficiently distributing urban traffic flow than short, isolated high-speed roads and overpasses. The DOT will be looking at comments and turnout at Monday's meeting to determine where public support lies on this issue. There are a lot of folks out there afraid of losing this overpass and they are definitely organizing, so those of us in support of removing the bridge are working hard to mobilize. Supporters of the at-grade solution include include the Boston Cyclists Union, Livable Streets Alliance, WalkBoston, the Arborway Conservancy, the Emerald Necklace Conservancy, and MassBike. Your comments in support of the at-grade option 5 - either at the meeting or in a letter -are critical! If you can't attend on Monday, even a short note stating your support (citing any number of the reasons above) will help. Written comments should be submitted to: Thomas F. Broderick, P.E., Acting Chief Engineer, MassDOT, 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116, ATTN: (Paul King, Project File No. 605511) and/or emailedtoJohnRomano, DOT Outreach Coordinator for the project, at john.romano@state.ma.us~ Please also copy comments to your city councilor and state rep, as well as Julieanne Doherty, JP liaison for the Mayor's office, and Vineet Gupta at the BTD: julieanne.doherty@cityofboston.gov Vineet.Gupta@cityofboston.gov Thank you in advance for anything you can do - and please forward this info to others! Let me know, too, if you have any questions about this barrage of information. -----Original message----­ 3 of 3) Homework: From: "Romano, John (DOT)" <John.Romano@dot.state.ma.us> ToSent: Mon, Nov 21, 2011 21 :26:22 GMT +00:00 Subject: FINAL WAG & PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Dear Casey Overpass WAG Member: On behalf of MassDOT Secretary Richard Davey, we would like to thank you for you contribution on the Casey Overpass Planning Study Working Advisory Group (WAG) for the last eight months. In lieu of a WAG meeting on December 5th, 2011, MassDOT would like each member of the Working Advisory Group to work with the neighborhood or advocacy group they are representing on the WAG and provide MassDOT with their final thoughts, ideas and comments on both alternatives. We feel that this will give all members of the WAG and their affiliated groups the best opportunity to provide MassDOT with detailed feedback on both alternatives. This information will allow us to make the most informed decision regarding the two alternatives. We would ask that this information be e"mailed (or mailed) to John Romano (john.romano@state.ma.us) or Paul King (paul.king@state.ma.us) no later than December 6, 2011 at 5pm. The MassDOT Casey Overpass Planning Team will meet with the WAG on Monday, December 12th at 6:00pm at a location TBD. The Public Meeting will remain on December 14th at 6:00pm at English High School. Regards, John Romano Municipal Affairs Liaison Massachusetts Department of Transportation Direct: 617.973.70281 Mobile 617.438.4301 For news and updates check out our website www.mass.gov/massdot blog at www.mass.gov/blog/transportation or follow us on twitter at www.twitter.com/massdot 6 Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) <katherine.fichter@state.ma.us> Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11 :55 AM Andrea D'Amato; McNaughton, Gary Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis FW: Casey mid-block crossing from SW corridor Andrea and GaryAnother one to tuck away in the file for discussion at the next DAG meeting ... Thank you! Kate Kate Fichter Manager of Long-Range Planning Office of Transportation Planning - Massachusetts Department of Transportation Ten Park Plaza, Room 4150, Boston, MA 02116 617.973.7342 -----Original Message----­ From: Michael Halle [mailto:m@halle.us] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 6:16 AM To: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) Subject: Casey mid-block crossing from SW corridor Hi Kate, (Since there's a baby waiting upstairs for a daddy bottle, I'll be brief.) I think there's a chance to put the at-grade mid block crossing across New Washington back without impacting traffic operations radically. There's a left turn cycle where traffic from Centre St and Hyde Park Ave. turn onto New Washington St. These are relatively low volume moves. Assuming another high-volume right turn move isn't mixed in with left-turning phase, you could have a coordinated midblock light on this phase that allows for pedestrian crossing while the left turners make their turn. When they get to the mid block light, they'd queue up. The left turners would have to stop anyway by the time they got to the next intersection. Even if you'd have right turners coming from Roslindale or Washington St/JP as part of this cycle, the number of cars to queue on New Washington is still pretty low off-peak, and probably acceptable at peak (500 cars/hour max). I suspect you won't have many right turners, because as many people as possible will use Ukraine Way rather than execute turn moves on New Washington St if they can avoid the bowties. 8 The "porkchop/no porkchop" question makes a difference here, I believe. Anyway, quick thoughts .... --Mike 9 Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: moloneys <moloneys@verizon.net> Monday, May 21, 2012 1:07 PM 'Fichter, Katherine (DOT), 'McLaughlin, Steve (DOT)'; 'King, Paul C. (DOT),; 'Andrea D'Amato'; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis Switch RE: Question for DAG Members - Meeting Room Swfu::h KeT.in F . M c:il:n¥ 20 Ran b:erRoaJ. Lam a±:a P lri1 M as:adJ.l..1Eet:I:s 02130 Tel: 617 522 3988 e-m ail=m obneysgl ver:izon net From: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) [mailto:katherine.fichter@state.ma.us] Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 12:S9 PM To: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) Cc: Mclaughlin, Steve (DOT); King, Paul C. (DOT); Andrea D'Amato (ADAmato@HNTB.com); Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis Subject: Question for DAG Members - Meeting Room Friends ­ In the past week, we received a few complaints regarding the comfort of our meeting room at the State Lab. In light of this, I wanted to reach out to the full DAG membership to check on whether these concerns are broadly felt. We recognize that the room can be tight at times, but it also offers a number of advantages including accessibility for disabled attendees, free parking, close proximity to MBTA services, multiple emergency exits, and close proximity to the project site itself. If a majority of DAG members would prefer that we switch to an alternative location elsewhere within JP, however, we will search for an option for our two remaining DAG meetings of the 25% design process. Some potential options include Curtis Hall or the Boston English High School library. Public information meetings would remain at the Boston English High School Auditorium. Please note also that we anticipate that the air conditioning will shortly be switching on at the State Lab, which will hopefully make our meetings more comfortable. I would appreciate it if you could provide me with your opinion on whether we should (1) stick with our current room or (2) switch meeting rooms by the end of the day on Wednesday of this week (the 23,'). I will send out the results of the tally on Thursday of this week. The vote will be done by simple majority. Lastly, please let me know if you plan to attend the Traffic Primer on Thursday evening. Thank you, Kate 10 Kate Fichter Manager of Long-Range Planning Office of Transportation Planning - Massachusetts Department of Transportation Ten Park Plaza, Room 4150, Boston,. MA 02116 617.973.7342 11 Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) <katherine.fichter@state.ma.us> Monday, May21, 20128:13AM McLaughlin, Steve (DOT); King, Paul C. (DOT); Andrea D'Amato (ADAmato@HNTB.com); Don Kindsvatter Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis FW: Please pass this along to the DAG and MassDOT FYI. Kate Fichter Manager of Long-Range Planning Office of Transportation Planning - Massachusetts Deparbnent of Transportation TenParkPlaza,Room4150, Boston,MA 02116 617.973.7342 From: Todd Consentino [mailto:tconsentino@gmail.comj Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 6:54 PM To: Fichter, Katherine (DOT); Fichter, Katherine (~OT) Subject: Fwd: Please pass this along to the DAG and MassOOT Hi Kate, I'd neglected to include the Casey project design engineers, when I'd sent this last time. Would you please pass these videos on to the engineers? Thank you, Todd Consentino Boston Cyclists Union ---------- Forwarded message ---------­ IIir• • • From: "Pete Stidman" ~'!!!'!Ii Date: May 10, 2012 5:04 PM Subject: Please pass this along to the DAG and MassDOT To: "Todd Consentino" <tconsentino@gmail.com> ••• iIIIlilii SUBJECT LINE: Bike path idea and Meeting this Sat. 10-noon @ lP Branch Library also vineet.gupta@cityoiboston.gov Hello everyone! As promised here are some videos that describe this idea relayed to us about how to design an intersection that organizes bicycles, pedestrians and cars separately. The first video here (b.ttp://youtu.be/FIApbxLz6pA) describes the very basic idea, and I imagine we will need to adapt it to our particular situation in lP, but I am very interested in how it makes it clear how pedestrians 'and bikes interact, and also allows eye contact between motorists and active transportation users. This would be a new item in Boston, but as you can see from the second video here (http://youtu.be/a6gy-ojmdh8) it works very well elsewhere. Obviously there will be 12 differences in our context, but there are many ideas we can steal from these examples as well. Mainly, I think, the configuration of the paths (the path they follow) and how they interact with the roadway. We are also going to have a gathering of anyone from the DAG or public who would like to discuss this and any other bike facilities leading up to our next meeting which is on that topic. The invite is going out to the DAG specifically, but if you know folks who could add to the discussion they are welcome. We've invited Tom Bertulis, a transportation engineer from the neighborhood who loves bikes. As per Kate's request this is a public meeting open to anyone. But we will be focusing specifically on bike facilities on the chosen at-grade solution. We would like to keep the meeting focused on getting this important design work done and hopefully finding some agreements around what we'd all like to see. We will have a projector handy so if anyone has examples from elsewhere they'd like to show everyone please email it to me by Friday at 5pm and I'll get it on my computer to show folks. Bike Meeting for Casey Arborway JP Branch Library (basement auditorium) 12 Sedgwick Street, Jamaica Plain, MA 02130 Sat. May 12, lOam-Noon = o '\ < ,­ ....................... (.)/ (.) Helping Bostonians lead healthier lives by promoting the use of the bicycle for transportation. Pete Stidman Executive Director Boston Cyclists Union PO Box 301394 Jamaica Plain, MA, 02130 Sign up for the Union Rider Newsletter!!! or check out our website at bostoncyclistsunion.org! 13 Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis From: Sent: To: Subject: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) <katherine.fichter@state.ma.us> Wednesday, May 16, 201210:27 AM McLaughlin, Steve (DOT); Andrea D'Amato; Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis FW: Casey Overpass Just FYI. Kate Fichter Manager of Long-Range Planning Office of Transportation Planning - Massachusetts Department of Transportation Ten Park Plaza, Room 4150, Boston, MA 02116 617.973.7342 •••11 From: carlos B. Icaza ~".__~II!I!I!II Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 3:04 PM To: Fichter, Katherine COOT) Subject: Casey Overpass Katherine I apologize for my absence in contacting you. I still am not up to speed after the gall bladder surgery. I'll just list my thoughts about the bridge. No one likes the current bridge. It is ugly, falling apart, and acts as a barrier between Forest Hills and the Centre/South business community. A surface road solution at Forest Hills will not increase business traffic in any of the JP commerce districts. The people using the bridge are trying to get to work in the fastest way possible and have no interest in stopping in JP. I think the estimate was another 24,000 cars would pass on the surface road. Maybe it was 17K, but a lot. Massive congestion is inevitable. Currently the OCR, MBTA, and City of Boston cannot coordinate three directional lights on New Washington Street. How are they going to maintain many more? I envisioned a designed bridge that had a sculptural quality to it. A mini Zakim Bridge, Erasmus Bridge (Rotterdam), Natchez Trace span would add an attractive element to Forest Hills. I suggest a tourist attraction like the Zakim. That would bring folks to the area and alleviate the congestion caused by the very impatient nature of Boston Drivers. Carlos Boudinot Icaza 14 NathanierCabral·Curtis From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Fichter, Katherine (DOT) <katherine.fichter@state.ma.us> Wednesday, May 16, 2012 9:24 AM Anne McKinnon McLaughlin, Steve (DOT) Casey meeting notes and Shea Circle AnneNote takers always try to capture comments accurately and do their best to attribute comments to the right speakers. Unfortunately, there is usually a lot going on, it can be difficult to hear and we don't always recognize every speaker. After we get through the prep for and execution of this evening's DAG meeting, I will revisit your concerns with the recent minutes and will address them. More generally, while I appreciate receiving substantive corrections, I hope you will focus on the key issues that really change the meaning of the minutes that need to be recorded and trust that our team cares about the process and managing the project professionally. Many people at MassDOT are working hard on the Casey project and care about it deeply, and I hope we can work together collaboratively as the project moves forward. Looking forward to seeing you this evening, Kate Kate Fichter Manager of Long-Range Plaruting Office of Transportation Plaruting - Massachusetts Department of Transportation TenParkPlaza,Room4150, Boston,MA 02116 617.973.7342 •••••• From: Anne McKinnon ~~II~~~ Monday, May 14, 2012 11:58 PM To: Fichter, Katherine (DOn Cc: ewylie325@comcast.net Subject: Casey meeting notes and Shea Circle Sent: Hi, Kate. Something has to be done about the meeting notes or I am likely to e-mail after every meeting. The March 29 corrections I requested don't seem to have been made. I do not understand your refusal to correct a completely wrong reporting of my statement. You weren't even there yet you are arguing with me? I am on record saying a state agency should commit to consensus in a study with a ridiculous time frame. Do you think I want people thinking this is what I believe? Please make this change as requested. On the April 30 DAG notes: First, I did not raise the Shea Circle issue at the WAG meeting. Elizabeth Wylie (absent April 30) asked about it March 20 and I said she asked me to follow up. But most important, the statement about the historic status of Shea Circle in the notes is completely wrong. Did anyone read the FAO? Apparently, Steve McLaughlin didn't because both the old and new FAOs say that Shea Circle IS a contributing element of the adjacent historic district. The minutes simply report what he said at the meeting (wrong) and did not bother to correct the record. The Shea Circle issue is important, yet no one seems to be able to remember the details. If the meeting notes are going to be long and boring transcripts then maybe you should use a professional stenographer. And what an insult to Gail Sullivan, a well-known and highly respected and active member of the community, to be identified as Name Not Given (NNG). No one on the team knows Gail? It looks like no one cares. 15 Anne McKinnon 16