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