Ii
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
CREATIVE SOLUTIONS • EFFECTIVE PARTNERING ®
MEMORANDUM
June 6, 2011
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 Working Advisory Group (WAG) Meeting
Meeting Notes of May 4, 2011
Overview & Executive Summary
On June 2, 2011, the Working Advisory Group (WAG) met to continue its role in the Casey Overpass
Replacement Project Planning Study. This meeting is the first of two that the WAG will conduct in
preparation for the third public meeting to be held on June 29th. The alternating schedule of WAG and
public meetings serves to both brief the community and gather its questions and comments to inform the
work of the WAG. The purpose of the WAG is to work through the many details associated with this project
in a compressed timeframe that will allow the current Casey Overpass to be replaced with either an at-grade
solution or a new viaduct by the closing of the Accelerated Bridge Program (ABP) by 2016.
The meeting described herein had two major parts: reporting by small groups on three possible concepts for
New Washington Street followed by a full group discussion of the results of the group exercise. This was
followed by a full group discussion of a concept developed by the project team based on WAG comments for
the area around the intersection of South Street/Washington Street and Asticou Road/Washington Street.
Key themes included the following:
 With regard to the three early concepts for New Washington Street:
o There is concern over bus operations and bicycle/pedestrian accommodations in all three
concepts.
o There is a preference for whichever option best allows the bulk of left turns currently made at
the intersections of New Washington Street/Washington Street and New Washington
Street/South Street to be made at some location in the corridor.
o WAG members were especially positive about the bowtie concept’s potential to create a
pedestrian crossing to the Arboretum gate just to the west of the Casey Overpass’ current
western touch-down point.
o Options which include more and active green space are preferred.
 With regard to the possible concept for the area just to the west of the Forest Hills Station, WAG
members were generally interested in the idea and praised it for taking an even-handed approach
that addresses all modes of transportation. At the same time, many committee members expressed
significant concern that the concept relies too much on the participation of the MBTA which,
according to them, has a long history of backing out of commitments made to the community.
38 Chauncy Street, 9th Floor  Boston, Massachusetts 02111  617.482.7080
www.hshassoc.com
Page 1
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Discussion of Design Challenge Areas
C: John Romano (JR): Welcome everyone. This is WAG meeting 3A and for those of you who might be
curious about this numbering scheme, the numbers of the WAG meetings are based on the community
meetings. So, since our next community meeting will be the third, the two preparatory WAG meetings
are 3A, tonight, and 3B on June 14. We have lots to do tonight, digging down into the design elements.
This should be very interesting. We’ll have some breakout group exercises for you to do as well and
hopefully get you out of here on time or close to it.
C: Paul King (PK): As John said, tonight things are going to start to get good. You’ll start seeing things:
ideas put on paper and streets laid out. We’re at the first step. There’s a lot to do so we’re taking it in
steps. The first thing you’ll see tonight is some basic street layouts and lane arrangements. You won’t
see a bridge yet or bike accommodations, but don’t panic. We need to develop some of these streetlevel items first to help guide the rest of the design and you’ll start seeing some of that next time. We
don’t want to just toss a structure up there without thinking through the at-grade situation.
C: Andrea D’Amato (AD): Today we’re going to focus on at-grade challenges in greater detail in some
focused breakout sessions. We want to give you as much time as possible to mark things up so we’ll be
breaking at 7:00 p.m. or maybe a little before to let you do that. Today we’re looking at-grade. Why?
There are several reasons: the existing street network is confusing and complex. We want to see if we
can fix it because the opportunity is there with this project. We’re at a stage of this project where the
boat is moving through the river quite quickly and we need to see if we can get around the rocks in the
rapids. As Paul said, and it’s important, we need to think the at-grade street network to inform the
bridge option.
Q: Michael Halle (MH): When you talk about at-grade, is it an at-grade solution? What you’re saying is
that tonight we’re looking at an at-grade solution which can handle the traffic without a bridge?
A: AD: We’re trying to solve for certain challenges that exist at grade; we’re balancing and making trade­
offs.
A: PK: Tonight’s exercise doesn’t preclude a bridge; it’s an important first step to thinking out how a bridge
would work.
C: AD: One big question you’ve been asking us and trust me we’ve been pondering it ourselves is whether
it’s possible to relocate the traffic to street level. We’ve tried to test that. You’ll get an opportunity to
shape and form the answer. On June 14th, we’ll be talking about bridge concepts and showing you
cross-sections. We’ll also be coming back to you with evaluation criteria; we’ll be flushing those out and
identifying measurable data points for them. That will help us identify alternatives.
C: Jeff Ferris (JF): It seems to me that there are a lot of evaluation criteria. You’ve said there are about 100
of them. I question whether we’ll have adequate time to evaluate the evaluation criteria.
A: AD: We aim not to disappoint and thankfully we don’t have 100 criteria any more. We’ve been looking
at them as a whole and we had a lot of duplication. When we come back we’ll tell you why certain
criteria were cut. We’re working to develop discrete measurable data points for each criterion. If we
don’t have a way to measure something, we can’t use it.
I want to direct your attention to some priority sub-areas within the design corridor. You identified these
are your previous meetings and through your assignments. Based on your homework we’ve begun
drawing some lines and we’ve started integrating your ideas into concepts. Some could work and some
cannot, but they were all very thoughtful. This group is concerned about pedestrian crossings, gateway
areas, taxis and pick-up/drop-off areas. We cannot solve every problem with this project, but we will try
to get as many as we can. We will be uploading all your contributions to the website so go and take a
Page 2
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
look at those. I would now ask you to turn your attention to Gary, Don, and Maureen. Please let them
get through their remarks so we can give you time for your small group work.
At this point, Andrea turned the meeting over to Gary McNaughton and Maureen Chlebek (both of
McMahon Associates) and Don Kindsvatter (HNTB) who briefed the WAG on specific design challenges within
the Casey Overpass corridor.1 Highlights of this presentation included the following:

Shea Circle2 is a component of the project which can fit into any number of designs for the area
currently spanned by the Casey Overpass. The rotary is characterized by its central island which is
home to a number of large, mature trees which make an appropriate gateway to Franklin Park.
Another important element of Shea Circle is its dominant flow of traffic along Route 203; however
the rotary has seven approaches making for complex operations.
o WAG comments on the Circle have divided into two schools of thought: preserving the rotary
in some way or turning it into a standard signalized intersection.
o It may be possible to simplify the rotary by realigning certain streets so that they enter Route
203 outside the circle. It is also possible that some streets, such as Morton Street and Yale
Terrace could be merged to enter the rotary as one leg of the intersection. If the number of
approaches to Shea Circle could be reduced to four, it would greatly improve its operation;
however this approach as currently imagined would have significant impacts on the trees at
the center of the rotary.
o Signals to control the flow of traffic along Route 203 could also help improve conditions for
pedestrians at this site.
o The option which preserves the Shea Circle trees best converts the rotary into two, off-set
signalized intersections. This option also greatly improves the pedestrian and bicycle
situation at this site.

New Washington Street, the short roadway immediately north of the Forest Hills Station that
connects Washington Street and South Street has been identified by the WAG as a major area of
concern:
o An aerial photo shows an obvious “missing link” that would directly connect the eastbound
off-ramp from the Arborway to Morton Street. The reason for that missing link is the
presence of the Route 39 bus turnaround loop, the ventilation system for the commuter rail
platforms, and a combined structure which contains a vent stack and exit stair for the
Orange Line platform and a starter’s booth for the Route 39 bus. The project team is in an
ongoing conversation with the MBTA about shifting these elements to provide the project
team with maximum flexibility within the design corridor. Thus far the MBTA has not seen
any “fatal flaws” with the options suggested by the project team and has requested that
design work continue. Elements under discussion include:
 Reshaping and moving the commuter rail ventilation system. It could go into the
median of a new roadway system provided it stays over the commuter rail/Amtrak
tunnel.
 The Orange Line vent stack could be made to be parallel to the roadway corridor
rather than perpendicular as it is today.
 The exit stairway from the north end of the Orange Line platform could be separated
from the ventilation stack and pushed further north to the other side of New
Washington Street. This would provide more direct access to and from the
neighborhoods along the Southwest Corridor Park.
1
As much of this presentation consisted of charts and pictures, readers may find it helpful to have at hand as they read these
minutes. The presentation can be found at: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/caseyoverpass/Meetings.html The materials
will be made available by the close of business on Monday, June 6th.
2
Shea Circle is the rotary at the eastern end of the Casey Overpass. Members of the WAG are encouraged to look at
Putterham Circle in Brookline and Holy Name Circle in West Roxbury as examples of well-landscaped rotaries with strong
pedestrian accommodations.
Page 3
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.

The Route 39 bus turnaround could be moved so that the bus would:
 Discharge passengers in a bus bay on the south side of New Washington
Street.
 Turnaround on Washington Street using a priority bus signal.
 Pick up inbound passengers in a bus bay on the north side of New
Washington Street.

In looking at potential at-grade solutions for the New Washington Street area, the project team has
analyzed a variety of options prior to bringing forward a set for discussion by the WAG. These
options were dismissed because they failed to satisfy one or more of the guiding principles3
articulated by the WAG at its earlier meetings. The options below have been dismissed, but are
presented here, as they were at the meeting, to showcase the project team’s thinking, adherence to
the WAG’s guiding principles, and observance of ideas advanced in previous studies addressing the
Forest Hills area:
o A jug-handle concept which would remove all left turns from the New Washington Street
area by merging lefts with the north-south through movements. This option would not work
in this case because of high north-south volumes, limited options for urban design, and
negative impacts to transit. A reverse jug-handle concept was also analyzed and determined
to have similar impacts, but with greater intensity.
o A diverging diamond intersection. These intersections work well and have become popular
around the country, however, these would not work at this location because the cross streets:
South and Washington carry two-way traffic.
o A double roundabout has been dismissed because of high traffic volumes, limited bicycle and
pedestrian accommodations and negative urban design impacts.
o An elongated roundabout was also considered, but dismissed because of the amount of
space needed and negative impacts on open space and transit connections.
o A frontage road concept, with all turning movements taking place from roadways beside the
current New Washington Street was dismissed based on high north-south traffic volumes and
the space required.

The design team has several options for an at-grade design in the New Washington Street area that
could work. All of these options, at first blush, pass in terms of the guiding principles and have the
space for bicycle lanes and off-street multi-use paths.
o The project team has already dismissed the “maximum pavement” bookend concept shown
at the May 18th community meeting, but has created a modified alternative of it with less
pavement, that attempts to address the problems on New Washington Street and the
intersections at its eastern and western ends by prohibiting left turns in both intersections.
This configuration works, but the loss of some left turns could present a significant difficulty
for local traffic.
o Another concept advanced by the project team is the “bowtie” concept. The option would
eliminate all east-west left turns by shifting them to signalized u-turn intersections further to
the east or west in the corridor. In this concept, for example, eastbound traffic seeking to
make a left onto Washington Street would continue east, beyond Washington Street, reverse
direction in the median and then access Washington Street northbound by making a right
turn.
o A third possible concept is the continuous free-flow intersection. In this concept, traffic,
guided and protected by signals, is brought to the opposite side of the street from the one on
which it usually travels. This allows all turns to be made as rights. These intersections are
highly efficient at moving large volumes of traffic smoothly and are becoming more widely
used around the rest of the country.
3
These principles include: improving safety for all modes and users, meeting the Accelerated Bridge Program timeline and
budget, restoring the Emerald Necklace connection, avoiding impacts on the Arborway Yard, providing acceptable local
and regional operations, allowing for urban design opportunities, and avoiding adverse impacts on future transit operations
and intermodal connections.
Page 4
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
o All of these options provide signalization to improve pedestrian conditions and allow for
wider medians for green space. Medians could be as wide as the Commonwealth Avenue
Mall. A key question for the WAG is whether green space is preferable as a median or at
either side of the corridor.
C: Kevin Wolfson (KW): When you talk about the options that didn’t work, it seems hard to ignore that
some of them might work with a bridge.
A: Gary McNaughton (GM): We are focusing tonight on coming up with an at-grade solution that works.
The short answer is yes, some of these options could come back with a bridge, but only those options
which failed in terms of traffic volume.
Q: KW: And so the ones you showed us tonight that you said could work, those could work without a
bridge?
A: GM: They could work inasmuch as that they have not failed when put through the screen of the guiding
principles.
Q: Tom Dougherty (TD): How would the 39 bus turn around in these options?
A: GM: The 39 would use Washington Street to make its turnaround. We would provide a queue jump lane
and priority signalization. That’s something to work out with the MBTA. We could provide interior bus
lanes to keep it out of New Washington Street. We’re not quite there yet with this aspect of it.
Q: TD: And so in the continuous flow intersection, you could make a left onto Washington Street from New
Washington Street?
A: GM: Yes, we would accommodate that.
Q: MH: Could you make a left onto Centre Street?
A: GM: That’s a low volume and we weren’t thinking of accommodating it, but we could.
C: TD: There are a lot of school buses that use this area, they’ll need to be able to turn right onto
Washington Street.
A: GM: That would be accommodated. You’re seeing a mix of different ideas with these. There are
elements we like and elements we don’t like. We want your feedback. Another item we considered
was, based on safety concerns, making Centre Street one-way southbound between New Washington
Street and Ukraine Way, but that caused bigger left turn volumes at Washington Street/New Washington
Street. We’ll be mixing and matching parts of these options based on what you give us from your
breakout sessions.
C: AD: So now you have seen what we’ve been working on and what you will work on next. I want to
reiterate that these options can accommodate regional traffic, but don’t preclude a bridge. They all
accommodate bike lanes and multi-use paths. These are the challenges we’ve been working through
and now you get them.
Q: MH: Two questions in the New Washington Street area: the Centre/South Redesign talked about the
chance to bring buses that stop in Jamaica Plain like the 41 all the way down to Forest Hills. Could we
give up space for taxis and accommodate them?
Page 5
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
A: GM: We could do a double layer of bus lanes and accommodate the 41, yes.
C: MH: And then for that free-flow intersection we saw, it seems like cyclists, pedestrians and even drivers
might wind up in the middle of it confronting something they didn’t expect.
A: GM: It would certainly require some signage.
Q: MH: Is there a body of work on how to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists in those intersections?
A: GM: That is a new, unique type of intersection. Driver expectations are a big thing to manage. Those
are all things we’ll look into if that intersection survives your discussions tonight.
Q: MH: And with the bowtie option, could you have a pedestrian crossing at the western turnaround so
people could get to the Arboretum from the Hampstead neighborhood?
A: GM: We could do that.
Q: David Hannon (DH): Did you look at a one-way loop around Forest Hills?
A: GM: We saw that in a number of studies and we spent some time trying to make it work. The real
problem was trying to jam all the northbound left turns into one location. The advantages of the oneway loop thus far have only presented themselves to us in our modeling on the south side of the station.
We’re not done with the one-way loop yet; we will keep working on it to see if we can make it work.
C: DH: I think the continuous flow intersection is interesting, but it seems like pedestrians will get lost in it.
Could the MBTA vent stacks be made any lower?
A: DK: They could be shorter by about 8-10 feet.
Q: Bernie Doherty (BD): A question on the introduction: what do you mean when you say it takes into
consideration the relocation of regional traffic?
A: AD: It means that these options can take what’s on the bridge and handle it on the ground.
Q: BD: Fine; that’s what I wanted to hear. So in the end, you’ve done the computations and you can make
it work at ground level, but have you included the potential for development in the Forest Hills area?
A: GM: All of these scenarios use 2035 traffic volumes based on CTPS modeling and the BRA’s numbers for
local development.
C: BD: When you say you take into account the BRA numbers, I say you are only doing the BRA-lite. If you
look at the Forest Hills Improvement Initiative, it had three times the amount of development you’re
predicting. I don’t want to see 2035 numbers; I want to see 2016 numbers.
A: GM: We’re using the BRA numbers; they can speak to how they generated them. We definitely have
2016 numbers, but let me assure you that if it works in 2035, there’s no reason to suppose it won’t work
in 2016.
Q: Mary Hickie (MHe): Could the 39 go into the station like the rest of the buses?
A: DK: That’s a great segue. That’s our third sub-area of concern and we’ll do that after your small group
exercises.
Page 6
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Small Group Reporting Group A addressed the concept that prohibits all left turns at the New Washington Street/Washington Street
and New Washington Street/South Street intersections.

Concerns included:
o The difficulty of accessing the Stony Brook neighborhood for residents and school buses that
would be triggered by the prohibition of all left turns. Access to Arborway Yards would likewise
be rendered more difficult.
o Pedestrian crossings appear difficult in this model.
o Some accommodation for left turns needs to be made.
o The lack of connection between the end of the Southwest Corridor and other elements such as
Franklin Park and the Arboretum.
o Multiple lanes for pedestrians to cross.

Positive aspects included:
o The left-turn prohibition from the Arborway to South Street northbound could be tolerated. This
is a low volume move and other routes exist.
o The potential to remove the bridge and improve site lines.
o The potential for a wide, pedestrian-friendly median.

Items to consider further:
o A wider median.
Group B addressed the bowtie concept that accommodates left turns by shifting them to turnaround lanes in
the median outside of the New Washington Street/Washington Street and New Washington Street/South
Street intersections.

Concerns included:
o How the eastern end of the bowtie would interact with the outlet of Orchard Hill Road and
Morton Street.
o How bicyclists would move through the intersections with left turns prohibited. Would they be
allowed to turn left on an exclusive pedestrian phase?4
o Whether the median would be wide enough to be a useful pedestrian/cyclist/green space asset
or whether it would “just die somewhere like some other landscaped medians.”
o How buses would use this concept.
o How pedestrians would navigate through it.

Positive aspects included:
o The squared-off intersections that make things easier for pedestrians.
o The western bowtie’s placement at the Arboretum gate offers pedestrian access.

Items to consider further:
o Should the western bowtie go further west?
o How would the bus stops work on New Washington Street? Should both sides of the road
have queue-jump lights?
o Can the median have a dedicated bicycle lane?
4
An exclusive pedestrian phase is one in which all traffic stops to allow pedestrians to cross the street. This is opposed to a
concurrent pedestrian phase where walkers cross the street with the traffic that has the green light.
Page 7
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Group C addressed the continuous flow concept that accommodates left turns by shifting them to the
opposite side of road and letting them occur as right turns. This group primarily expressed concerns.

Concerns included:
o How the pick-up/drop-off space for kids and school buses would work on New Washington
Street and Hyde Park Avenue.
o Blocking direct local access to Roslindale along South Street.
o The unfamiliar intersection type would cause problems for all modes. Would signage be enough
to explain it all?
o Bicycle and pedestrian access – particularly between the Southwest Corridor and the Arboretum.
o Concern over increased volume on Ukraine Way due to traffic unable to use the one-way
segment of South Street.
o Green space in the center is nice, but would likely be dead space.
Q: KW: The A and B concepts that accommodate a mid-block crossing, is that an optional piece?
A: AD: We’re playing with ideas. We’ve been working on ways to keep pedestrians out of the intersections
and I want to share some of those with you next. What you’ll be seeing next was informed by your
second assignment. We tried to wrestle with some of your issues like the taxis and bus queuing.
Q: MHe: I realize it isn’t the most efficient way to do things, but I feel like group C had trouble operating in
isolation. Can we discuss all three options as a group?
A: AD: All right, we can do that, but we still have some more information to get through. It may mean
staying a little later. Are people comfortable with that?5
C: KW: With regard to the bowtie concept, one of the concerns with that one is crossing six lanes of traffic
as a pedestrian is dangerous. Another concern is the school buses, MBTA buses and taxis. Does
dropping off pedestrians without some kind of barrier dangerous? If you look at Octavia Boulevard in
San Francisco, they have a frontage road concept that provides a buffer for pedestrians exiting transit
vehicles.
C: Sarah Freeman (SF): Like the frontage road concept.
C: KW: I’m saying keep the bowtie concept but mix in the local access roads down the sides.
A: GM: That’s an interesting idea, but we discarded the frontage road concept because of the difficulty with
turns. If we take the far right lane and make it just local access it may cause that lane to become so
slow in operation that people shy away from it.
C: MH: It might also upset the bus U-turn loop.
A: GM: I think it warrants further consideration; we can take a look at it.
C: MH: I was struck at the difference between group A and group B’s plans. Is there is a reason why the
squaring off of the intersections is possible in plan B?
5
The group indicated that it was.
Page 8
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
A: GM: These are variations of the alternatives. As we advance these further we’ll be looking at those
details. There’s nothing to say that same treatment couldn’t apply to the other concepts.
Q: MH: Is there any consensus on how Morton Street would tie into this?
A: GM: You can see how those existing roadways might tie into this, but for the moment we need to focus
on the bigger picture.
C: Don Eunson (DE): A wide green well-landscape median has benefits even with no path on the median: it
boosts the parkway character and provides a pedestrian refuge between the two lanes. I think we
should consider the green medians as a significant benefit.
A: GM: You can get a very wide median if you do away with the left turns at the intersections.
A: Michael Epp (ME): A wide median would also allow better tree growth and bio-swales for runoff. I would
support it too.
C: MH: We briefly discussed how the bow-tie concept could permit conventional left turns for bicycles with a
bicycle signal. Maybe you could take a chunk out of the median to provide the space for cyclists.
C: JF: I don’t think anyone likes option A.
A: MH: At least it gets all the vitriol focused into one spot.
C: SF: I would like to see what a continuous flow intersection looks like from the ground.
A: GM: We can certainly get you something to see.
Q: MH: Does the continuous flow intersection preclude a bus pullover?
A: GM: It might complicate it; we’ll check on that.
C: DE: You transportation experts know that there are roadway projects around the national where
overpasses have been removed, capacity reduced, and the traffic goes away. People take transit or find
other routes. WalkBoston wants to see a lower capacity roadway, like a normal city street. There’s a
major transit hub here and we feel you’re ignoring it, overbuilding again, and encouraging increased
traffic volumes.
A: Suzanne Monk (SMk): I disagree. I think it’s a nightmare now and that’s with the overpass. Traffic won’t
just go away. You’ll still have traffic and that’s before the additional development that’s coming.
A: GM: I think before we make that decision we need to get to the next level of analysis. If we just go to
the Olmstead Plan bookend concept, it would be untenable right now. Once we get into alternatives,
CTPS will come back and provide a deeper traffic analysis. We’ll be able to say, in detail, things like “we
can get rid of a lane here, but here’s the cost.”
C: JF: On something like the bowtie, I think you could do an exclusive walk phase at the intersections to let
cyclists make a creative left.
Page 9
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
A: GM: That could possibly work. As we map out the pedestrian routes, we may discover some creative
things we can do in the median.
C: MH: I want to go back to what Don said. One of the reasons Route 203’s traffic may not go down much
is that there is no strong east-west transit option. This axis has traffic going between Mattapan and the
other side of the river.
C: BD: I appreciate Don’s comments. I think the fact is that people get dropped off here to utilize the
transit hub and the green amenities. We also have to take into account emergency vehicles which use
the Casey Overpass to bypass Forest Hills. Have we considered an ongoing prohibition against trucks?
These are questions we still need to look at. I think we have to take a clear view of this and not from our
own small perspective. This impacts our community and others. There’s no effective alternative for
accessing the Fenway, Back Bay and Cambridge. I want to see this work, but maybe I can’t take that
gamble.
A: KW: There are cases all over the city where emergency vehicles go through red lights. There might be
some delay, but it won’t be big. I understand that most traffic is on 203, but it seems the traffic
problems are on the north-south axis because of the complexity of the intersections and lack of access to
the MBTA station. If the new design encouraged access to it, we might be able to have reduced capacity.
Discussion of Route 39/Asticou Road/South Street The next segment of the meeting consisted of a short presentation provided by Don Kindsvatter regarding
the possible redesign of Washington Street to the west of the Forest Hills Station, South Street and Asticou
Road to accommodate the 39 bus and address issues of taxi operations. This set of ideas owes much to the
homework assignments completed by WAG members.

The area to the west of the Forest Hills Station currently has the following issues:
o The double signal where New Washington Street and the Arborway off-ramp come together
under the Casey Overpass.
o Conflicts between South Street’s outlet and the MBTA bus way.
o Conflicts with the taxi stand.
o Cars parked at Asticou Road.
o The two, 250 upper bus bays cannot accommodate the Route 39 buses; it is currently at
capacity.
o The pedestrian connection between the Southwest Corridor and Blackwell
Footpath/Arboretum are weak.

Taking input from WAG member homework and the same approach it has with the area under the
Casey Overpass, the project team considered the area between the curb on Washington Street and
the west side of the station as a blank slate. This has led to the following ideas for discussion:
o Decking over more of the MBTA tracks to provide either two, 500 foot bus ways or 4, 250
foot bus ways. This would also require shifting 22 MBTA employee parking spaces.
o Pick-up and drop-off lanes would be established along Washington Street along with a
priority bus lane and queue jump signal to bring Route 39 buses from the bus way to South
Street northbound.
o The taxi stand would move up New Washington Street.
o A multi-use pathway would connect the Southwest Corridor and Blackwell Path with New
Washington Street pushed to the south side of the corridor.
Page 10
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
C: AD: We’re not tasked to redesign the MBTA station, but we’re thinking about how all this relates. We
have spoken to the MBTA about this.
C: Cathy Slade (CS): If land is going to be developed and parking may be taken away, I think you need
those pick-up and drop-off lanes.
Q: Liz O’Connor (LO): How much weight should we give to a plan that requires the MBTA to make
significant changes?
A: Steve McLaughlin (SM): We are now one agency. I work at the Highway Division on the 6th floor. Just
down the hall is the MBTA. We get along better than we ever used to. We were over there just a few
days ago and showed this to them. We said we wanted to share it with you. It’s a draft concept that’s
based on what we learned from you. We have to think about this and work it through together.
C: JR: I think we all understand that this area has some recent bad feelings with the MBTA, but let me
reassure you that we won’t get to a point of saying “great idea, but that’s $50 million we don’t have.”
The MBTA said we should keep playing, but we’ll tell you if we hit a point where something can’t
happen.
A: AD: And that’s the challenge for us. By July, we need to start developing our alternatives.
Q: DH: If we have to suggest changes to the MBTA property, where is that money coming from?
A: SM: It’s all taxpayer funding. Some of these improvements aren’t costly, but some are. We don’t know
how big a deal it is to move the head house. We could shrink it relatively cheaply, but moving it could
be very hard. To put a bridge back, in-kind, is $70 million; that would give you what you have today. It
seems like we can get a lot of improvements especially if the bridge is shorter or not there at all. The
MBTA is MassDOT, so if it’s on MBTA property we may be able to accomplish something.
C: DH: I guess I just worry about where the money will come from.
A: SM: For the time being, focus on solving the problems you told us are out there and we’ll see where we
go from there.
C: DH: And there are elements down here that inform what we do on New Washington Street. These are
really intriguing elements.
C: JR: If doing X is $50 million, we all know the MBTA doesn’t have that money. We don’t want to eat $50
million out of our $70 million. We don’t get so far down the line and then say we can do that. Right
now we’re focused on solutions and then we’ll figure out what it costs and make some choices.
A: Kevin Moloney (KM): It’s not just bricks and mortar, its MBTA operations. Their position is that riders
leave transit when the ride gets longer. A lot of us have spent years dealing with the MBTA with varying
degrees of frustration, rejection and failure and I learned not to trust what it says privately or publicly.
You guys under the new organization just haven’t experienced MBTA bureaucracy yet.
A: JR: And this is just why they are always in the room with us.
A: SM: The bus operations group has been very clear about their headways with us.
C: KM: I’m just concerned that we’re drifting into reorganizing the MBTA which is not what we’re here to
do.
Page 11
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
C: ME: One thing this diagram shows is a balance that emphasizes all modes. That’s good public policy to
address all modes in your solution. Whether it works or not is another story, but this is good public
policy.
C: JF: This is fabulous: having stood at Ukraine Way looking north, it’s a bad experience for all the modes.
Aside from what it’s like in the Astiocu Area, you’ve got the landscaping and the recycled granite which
is nice but could be better, getting more space and using it more effectively would be wonderful for bikes
and pedestrians.
C: KW: Seeing the priority bus lane and the multi-use pathway separated from South Street is great.
C: BD: It’s very difficult for me and everyone from Asticou Road to have faith in the MBTA. When you state
that we’ve made you aware of the situation that’s terrific, but we’ve been talking about it every chance
we get for 25 years. This is intriguing, but I don’t want to transfer the bus yard down here. I don’t want
that noise on my community. 13 years ago, I started with the Arborway Yard and the MBTA made us all
sorts of promises and walked away. This comes with a long history of failure, mistrust and lies and that’s
how we look at it. Also, I wonder how many people feel that it’s important for our elected leaders to
have their representatives at these meetings.
A: JR: Julianne Doherty from the Mayor’s Office was here earlier tonight and this is the first of our meetings
that wasn’t well attended by representatives of elected officials or the officials themselves. I think it’s the
Whole Foods meeting that’s going on tonight.
C: Allan Ihrer (AI): If you look on the 203 east-west axis, it’s all cars. We’ve heard it before that we’re a
transportation hub, but we’re not looking at a mass transit solution to our problem here. If you look at
the bus charts and you are trying to go from Forest Hills to Cleveland Circle, you’re going to go through
Dudley Station and its not mass transit. Of course you drive. Any good solution should talk with the
MBTA about a real cross-town transit route to connect Mattapan with Cleveland Circle and points west
without making a stop on every block.
C: JR: All right everyone: that’s all the time we have for tonight. Three public service announcements: one,
sign in if you didn’t already do so. Two, our next meeting is here on June 14th from 6:00 to around 8:45
p.m. Three, starting this weekend and every weekend through Labor Day except the 4th of July,
something called the Fast 14 will be taking place on I-93 in Medford. DOT will replace 14 highway
bridges in quick succession and on the weekends I-93 will be down to two lanes in each direction.
Please allow extra time or take the MBTA.
Next Steps
The WAG will next meet on June 14, 2011 from 6:00-8:30 p.m. at the Boston English High School. The next
major public involvement milestone in the process will be the third community meeting. This meeting will
address elements worked on by WAG committee members and summarized herein and in the minutes of
June 14. The community meeting will be held in the Auditorium of the Boston English High School on June
29th from 6:30-8:30 p.m. A half hour open house will begin at 6:00 p.m.
Page 12
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Appendix 1: Attendees
First Name
Last Name
Affiliation
Genie
Beal
WAG
Susan
Bollinger
WAG
Maureen
Chlebeck
McMahon Associates
Andrea
D’Amato
HNTB
Lisa
Dix
WAG
Bob
Dizon
WAG
Bernie
Doherty
WAG
Julieanne
Doherty
Office of Mayor Menino
Tom
Dougherty
WAG
Mike
Epp
WAG
Jeff
Ferris
WAG
Sarah
Freeman
WAG
David
Hannon
WAG
Mary
Hickie
WAG
Allan
Ihrer
WAG
Don
Kindsvatter
HNTB
Paul
King
MassDOT
Bob
Mason
WAG
Steve
McLaughlin
MassDOT
Gary
McNaughton
McMahon Associates
Kevin
Moloney
WAG
Suzanne
Monk
WAG
Essek
Petrie
HNTB
Tad
Read
BRA
John
Romano
MassDOT
Cathy
Slade
WAG
Fred
Vetterlein
WAG
David
Watson
WAG
Wendy
Williams
WAG
Elizabeth
Wylie
WAG
Page 13
massDOT
-_
..First Name
Honorable Kathleen
Genie
Nina
Welcome to the meeting of the WAG for the Casey Overpass Replacement Project Planning Study!
If your name appears below, please place a check mark in the last column. If not, please print below.
Last Name
Coffey
Title
Beal
Organization
West Roxbury District Court
Greenspace/BNAN (Boston Natural
Areas Network)
,
Address
445 Arborway
44 Allendale
Street,APT#144
City
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
Telephone
(617) 971-1300
Accelerated Bridge Program
Email Address
Present?
kathleen.coffey@liud.state.ma.us
617.971.1635
bealm((j)mindsorina.com
l/"""
Arnold Arboretum
Brown
Mary
Burks
Josephine
Burr
Barbara
Crichlow
Lisa
Dix
Bob
Dizon
Bernard
Doherty
CPCAY - Community Planning
Com mittee for the Aborway Yards
Tom
Dougherty
Area E Police Advisory Board
nbrown@brownrowe.com
burks167@gmail.com
Do rcheste r/Matta pa n
Neighborhood Association
Lower South Street
Neighborhood Association
West Seldon Street & Vicinity
Neighborhood Association
Woodhaven/Colbert/Regis
Neiohborhood Association
Boston Cyclists Union/JP Bikes
Mike
Epp
JP/South Street Main Streets
Don
Eunson
Walk Boston
jospehine.burr@gmail.com
bcrichlow28@aol.com
romoniadix@aol.com
36 Asticou Road
'3 Pe4dfd( l&
7 Greenough Ave
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
vvec,·HiH-
00(1)
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(h) 617-524-2573
(w) 617-449-1554
Co 0 -1>3 r.t;o 1(
(617) 498-4682
./
bob.dizont1ilnmail.com
dohertyjrbc@aol.com
bernard.dohertvt1iloarsons.com
-1& ·diCtJc{kev+14! to{ ItL\t!O (jPl
-" '" .I'\e.l'
effM @. Col'l'\~
l..............
V"""
deunson@amail.com
Jeffrey
Southwest Corridor PMAC
Ferris
·effrev@ferriswhe"lsbikeshon.com
Charles
Fiore
South Street Business Community
55 South Street
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(617) 524-9200
Sarah
Freeman
Arborway Coalition
22 Arborway
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617-524-0602 (H)
617-384-8759 (W)
Eric
Gordon
Forest Hills Neighbors
Michael
Halle
Chair - Boston Police JP Traffic
and Parking Committee
83 Wyman Street, NO.1
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
Boston, MA
02115
(617) 524-5865
1/
freemansherwood@hotmail.com
ericbot((j)mac.com
m@lhalle.us
David
Hannon
Asticou Martinwood South Street
Neighborhood Association
27 Asticou Rd.
Mary
Hickie
Emerald Necklace Conservancy
125 The Fenway
Carlos
Icaza
38 Greenough Ave.
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(617) 524-7997
Allan
Ihrer
JP Business & Professional
Association
Stony Brook Association also
CPCAY
116 Williams St., #2
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617-595-5145 (cell)
617-983-5524 (H)
West Roxbury Courthouse
Neighborhood Association
41 Morton Street
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617.799.5256
Walk Boston
45 School Street
Boston, MA
02108
6177-367-9255
Kathy
Kottarldis
Wendy
Landman
President
Executive Director
\/~
(617) 524-1401
dmhannon@@mindspring.com
(617) 522-2700
hickiemt1ilomail.com
/
allan@bbmc.com
aihrer@comcast.net
kottaridis@aol.com
wlandman@walkboston.org
V
-_ -
massDOT
..
Welcome to the meeting of the WAG for the Casey Overpass Replacement Project Planning Study!
If your name appears below, please place a check mark in the last column. If not, please print below.
First Name
Bob
Last Name
Mason
Dale
Mitchell
Organization
Friends of Healy Field
Neighborhood Association
Ethos Care
Kevin
Moloney
Arborway Committee
Suzanne
Monk
Franklin Park Coalition
Title
~
Address
Telephone
City
I''! ~at(;;y I..D 1<OUltUj);1-Lt
0/T%irtioU
555 Am ory Street
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(617)522-6700
20 Rambler Road
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617.522.3988
Accelerated Bridge Program
Email Address
masonsmith@rcn.com
moloneys@verizon.net
wolfslmiOlvahoo.com
Liz
O'Connor
Michael
Reiskind
Andy
Schell
Karen
Schneiderman
Cathy
Slade
Fred
Vetterlein
David
Watson
Boston Center for Independent
living
Rowe Street Neighborhood
Association
Stony Brook Neighborhood
Association
Mass Bike
Emily
Wendy
Wheelwright
Williams
JP Neighborhood Council
Arborway Gardens
Wesley
Williams
Kevin
Elizabeth
Wolfson
Wylie
Wilmore/Norfolk Neighborhood
Association
Livable Streets
Asticou Neighborhood
A
lf~ ~~rA/vw
\!
West Roxbury Courthouse
Neighborhood Association
JP Business & Professional
Association
Washington Street Business Group
~
;Ceil
V\.CA<oS \'H ii/bur
Present?
1/
liz@strategvmatters.org
jpmichael@rcn.com
3399 Washington SI.
60 Temple Place
Jamaica Plain,
MA02130
Boston, MA
02111
617-524-3800
schellorintino@comcasl.net
(617)338-6665
kschneidermaniOlbostoncil.orn
cathyslade1@aol.com
fsv. ; niOlcomcast. net
171 Milk Street, Suite 33
10 IL~A WG.:/?b
v
27 Asticou Rd.
Boston, MA
02109
davidiOlmassbike.oro
ewheelwrinhtiOlomail.com
1
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
,-
617-542-BIKE (2453)
r/W3 0
Ji
\/
V--..
wwilliams333@verizon.net
wesleywilliams@post.harvard.ed
u
kevin.m.wolfsoniOlomail.com
(617) 522-7325
617-784-8062 Cell
ewvlie325iOlcomcast.net
V
,-t/
-_ -
,.-
massDOT
..
Welcome to the meeting of the WAG for the Casey overpass Replacement Project Planning Study!
If your name appears below, please place a check mark in the last column. If not, please print below.
First Name
Honorable Kathleen
Last Name
Coffey
Organization
West Roxbury District Court
Address
445 Arborway
City
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
Telephone
(617) 971-1300
Genie
Beal
Greenspace/BNAN (Boston Natural
Areas Network)
44 Allendale
Street,APT#144
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617.971.1635
Nina
Brown
Arnold Arboretu m
Title
Mary
Burks
Josephine
Burr
Barbara
Crichlow
Lisa
Dix
Bob
Dizon
Bernard
Doherty
CPCAY - Community Planning
Com millee for the Aborway Yards
Tom
Dougherty
Area E Police Advisory Board
Mike
Epp
JP/South Street Main Streets
Don
Eunson
Walk Boston
Jeffrey
Ferris
Southwest Corridor PMAC
Accelerated Bridge Program
Email Address
Present?
kathleen.coffevraliud.state.ma.us
bealmr1ilmindsnrino.com
nbrownl8lbrownrowe.com
burks167@gmail.com
Dorchester/Mattapan
Neighborhood Association
Lower South Street
Neighborhood Association
West Seldon Street & Vicinity
Neighborhood Association
Woodhaven/Colbert/Regis
Neiohborhood Association
Boston Cyclists Union/JP Bikes
jospehine.burr@gmail.com
bcrichlow28@aol.com
romoniadix@aol.com
.36 Aslicou Road
Jamaica Plain,
MA02130
(h) 617-524-2573
(w) 617-449-1554
7 Greenough Ave
Jamaica Plain,
MA02130
(617) 498-4682
bob.dizon@omail.com
dohertyjrbc@aol.com
bernard.dohertv@oarsons.com
\/
V
deunson@omail.com
·effrev@ferriswheelsbikeshon.com
Charles
Fiore
South Street Business Community
55 South Street
Sarah
Freeman
Arborway Coalition
22 Arborway
Jamaica Plain,
MA02130
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(617) 524-9200
617-524-0602 (H)
617-384-8759 (W)
Eric
Gordon
Forest Hills Neighbors
Michael
Halle
Chair - Boston Police JP Traffic
and Parking Committee
83 Wyman Street, No.1
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(617) 524-5865
David
Hannon
Asticou Martinwood South Street
Neighborhood Association
27 Asticou Rd.
(617) 524-1401
Emerald Necklace Conservancy
125 The Fenway
JP Business & Professional
Association
Stony Brook Association also
CPCAY
38 Greenough Ave.
Jamaica Plain,
MA02130
Boston, MA
02115
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
freemansherwoodralhotmail.com
\/
ericbotl8lrnac.com
Mary
Hickie
Carlos
Icaza
Allan
Ihrer
Kathy
Kollaridis
Wendy
Landman
President
Executive Director
mralhalle.us
dmhannon@@mindsorinQ.com
(617) 522-2700
hickieml8lnmail.com
(617) 524-7997
116 Williams SI., #2
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617-595-5145 (cell)
617-983-5524 (H)
West Roxbury Courthouse
Neighborhood Association
41 Morton Street
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617.799.5256
Walk Boston
45 School Street
Boston, MA
02108
6177-367-9255
allan@bbmc.com
aihrer@comcasl.net
kottaridis@aol.com
wlandman@walkboston.org
1.________
'/
massDOT
-_
..-
Welcome to the meeting of the WAG for the Casey overpass Replacement Project Planning Study!
If your name appears below, please place a check mark in the last column. If not, please print below.
Address
City
Telephone
Mitchell
Organization
Friends of Healy Field
Neighborhood Association
Ethos Care
555 Amory Street
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
(617)522-6700
Kevin
Moloney
Arborway Committee
20 Rambler Road
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
617.522.3988
Suzanne
Monk
Franklin Park Coalition
Liz
O'Connor
First Name
Bob
Last Name
Mason
Dale
Title
c
Michael
Reiskind
Andy
Schell
Karen
Schneiderman
v
West Roxbury Courthouse
Neighborhood Association
JP Business & Professional
Association
Washington Street Business Group
Cathy
Slade
Fred
Vetterlein
David
Watson
Boston Center for Independent
Living
Rowe Street Neighborhood
Association
Stony Brook Neighborhood
Association
Mass Bike
Emily
Wendy
Wheelwright
Williams
JP Neighborhood Council
Arborway Gardens
Wesley
Williams
Kevin
Elizabeth
Wolfson
Wylie
Wilmore/Norfolk Neighborhood
Association
Livable Streets
Asticou Neighborhood
(u\\'(CC{\(\(/
.......
::::::'VI.S{)v-<-...
D;\'~
'--sr~
l\
l
vU'vc(
"
Email Address
masonsmith@rcn.com
Present?
moloneys@verizon.net
V
wolfslm@vahoo.com
~
!~
Accelerated Bridge Program
'lV\o<-'-'l<J" S ~c-e
liz@strategymatters.org
./
\,
jpmichael@rcn.com
3399 Washington SI.
60 Temple Place
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
Boston, MA
02111
617-524-3800
schellorintinot1i!comcasl.net
(617)338-6665
kschneiderman@bostoncil.orn
cathyslade1@aol.com
fsv. i o@comcast.net
171 Milk Street, Suite 33
Boston, MA
02109
617-542-BIKE (2453)
david@ma~sbike.oro
ewheelwrioht@omail.com
wwilliams333@verizon.net
wesleywilliams@post.harvard.ed
u
kevin.m.wolfson@omail.com
27 Asticou Rd.
oJ- {\ e Co-Iv,\d·\r~\ m"~\
v
Jamaica Plain,
MA 02130
<;R\ 1IilJ2\.
\'--t v'-'o",,ll (t<A.J/\ 'SI- . Jf
'''Pl--Z
,
:ro
(617) 522-7325
617-784-8062 Cell
ewvlie325@comcast.net
,IU\\':.a,Y\I\P "do"-E:' fi·-f (.) Q\-< /0"''f;7~'L25-ck;:S1 \UJiJ'-v..J;)", t~~v(i9 9rvuz,.:~
u
v
",r--v---.,
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
Appendix 2: Small Group Flip Charts
Please see the following pages.
Page 14
M~f>_ $!C"'AL It
1&
FUu...S/G""L
itA;;
N~ ~ <pqc~L ks' (IPs) /l> A,"",w"{
L!.fT ~""""' 11> LnL ."T'
'to 11' taT ,. ~ .........,.,<t. 'i!tJ< Km.'1/ ""TIEJ
~
~
')
'Ll .... tlf=
U c-
:rH£L
C"....,l>'ill~"'"
fED
~l..NS
~
~T"?
£.'S
',1\.. (£jl.~11J
C-T/1Jt;
rs
l;1li[/'11.
f!)w"", A~?i<.l< 'oG'-11""r ATfEJ,u"'c. ")
-7 '1,."
"It,..
1b EU\4-..",rt l5LJr.r.~.:..-5/4"tT LllJe.5
'""--7,nt.:r.... f"jII(
.. ~~T 1)0
lPi.H!-bf
'r
y"
~Ia:
... ,CunnI< ",'-
-' rot
,oI~
"
.,
~Wc.i'(
,:"L ill' e-~
U...,.Ll""I'1t.l S
L. JI.-l",-S'
_ Le"- iWJJ
(fI.1) rt,£.. OiJf )
f
•
)
1t.E.
t. ....... ,
M~T 1$ /'\1'SS/N~.'
~t.ce~""T)A. "vr F#t- L-r
w
tz.Dc1.JL.'1""' ...
/~
(f)
-=7
VAP-iJ,iJbN IVE
SJj4M) C,"S __ 7
lU \ D El':.- H ED/ ",j
r,
- ,rrltrnllJ
-
n-,w,w>o- V'hur10 f~r
~,\:.. + p.td. - \ZMJ~
'<'lp~.c:.......
GrtoUi"~
A'~
.. ~ IAr
-
,o\ldl~
flll'l\l tlJ\o.1 \
lJ,. p\
., ,,,,
!... ~~
l'_r.'l','" "
HH I \.,
til"',
1)'stJka
-
"'7V'\ ~ '"IS "1M
,..(~,.ft.-\
""'6
& to "'...
..
,....,
lAo
~
'!
t I. . . .
"" ~ "'It
,~
........ . "''t'' ,,-. ...,......
C.
.. ~....
w,
~.~...
M'\
T
'
'OJ
...
;I
-\II'"'ol.
. ''6''l
l'l.t
·'.....
r"
et""tv-Jll
\,