DevCJI L PCltnck. Gov ern o r
Trmothy P. Murr<~y. Lt Gov ernor
RrchCJrd A DCJvey. Secretary & CEO
FrCJnk DePCJoiCJ, AdminrstrCJtor
'}~1J1§!~!!2Q[
• I ~ighway
Division
r
March 15, 2013
Subject:
Rehabilitation of the River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Dear Reviewer:
On behalf of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT), we are pleased to
provide a review copy of the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for the Rehabilitation of
the River Street and Western Avenue Bridges project. The goals of the project are described in
the transmittal letter to EEA Secretary Sullivan and in more detail in the attached ENF.
The ENF will be noticed for public review in the Environmental Monitor on March 20, 2013 .
The public conunent period associated with the ENF review is 27-days. Conunents on this
project are due by Aprill6, 2013.
If you submit written conunents on the ENF, please include a return address to facilitate future
correspondence. Written conunents on the ENF should reference the project's name, and be
sent to the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Mfairs at the following address:
Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr., Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Attn: MEPA Office Deirdre Buckley 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114
Please send a copy of your conunents to:
MassDOT, Highway Division, Environmental Services Attn: Beth Suedmeyer 10 Park Plaza, Room 4260 Boston, MA 02116-3973 Beth.suedmeyer@state.ma.us Director, Environmental Services
Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence
Ten Park Plaza, Suite 4160, Boston, MA 02116
Tel: 857-368-4636, TIY: 857-368-0655
www.mass.govj massdot
Deval L Patnck. Governor
Timothy P Murray, Lt Go vernor
Richard A. Davey. Secretary & CEO
Frank DeP::lOla, Admimstrator
•I}Jf!!!.!!~~!2Q[
I ~ighway
Division
March 15, 2013
Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEP A Office
100 Cambridge Street , Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114
Dear Secretary Sullivan:
We are pleased to submit the _attached Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for the
rehabilitation of the River Street and Western Avenue bridges. This project is part of the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation's (MassDOT's) Accelerated Bridge Program. The
Project includes the rehabilitation of the River Street and Western Avenue arch bridges, which
carry their roadways over the Charles River between Cambridge and Boston, and the
rehabilitatiQn of the associated overpass bridges that carry the westerly approaches to the River
Street and Western Avenue arch bridges over the depressed portion of Soldiers Field Road on the
Boston side of the Charles River, where the River Street roadway is named Cambridge Street.
The Project exceeds two MEPA review thresholds. The project involves greater than 'lS acre
impact to other wetlands (301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)l.f.) and impacts greater than 500 linear feet of
inland bank (301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)l.b.).
The River Street and Western Avenue arch bridges are both three-span, Neoclassical-style
reinforced concrete arch bridges that were originally constructed in the 1920s. Both bridges are
structurally deficient and deteriorating. Likewise, the Cambridge Street and Western Avenue
overpass bridges were constructed in the 1950s and are structurally deficient. The purpose of this
project is to rehabilitate the structurally deficient arch and overpass bridges to continue to
efficiently and safely meet the needs of the traveling public, while maintaining the bridges '
structural integrity, rehabilitating their historic and cultural resources, and improving the
conditions for all users including motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians.
MassDOT is utilizing the proposed rehabilitation of the River Street and Western A venue arch
bridges and associated overpass bridges as an opportunity to provide significant improvements to
existing pedestrian and bicyclist accommodations, as well as to improve universal accessibility.
MassDOT has initiated a wide-reaching dialogue with neighborhoods, businesses, civic
associations and agencies impacted by the construction to discuss design and construction
options. To date, a total of six informational meetings have been held in the City of Cambridge
and the City of Boston.
The Charles River Reservation, owned and operated by the Department of Conservation and
Recreation (DCR), borders the River Street and Western Avenue arch bridges on all four
quadrants. The structural repairs to the bridge will require temporary use of the DCR property
Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence
Ten Park Plaza, Suite 4160, Boston, MA 02116
Tel : 857-368-4636, TTY: 857-368-0655
www.mass.govj massdot
during construction. Areas disturbed by the project will be carefully landscaped to tie the bridge
into its historic setting and be consistent with DCR's Charles River Basin Master Plan. All
aspects of the project design and construction, as they relate to the parkland, will be closely
coordinated with DCR.
Thank you for your consideration of this critical public infrastructure project.
Sincerely,
~4~--"'
Frank DePaola, P.E. Administrator cc: Kevin Walsh, Director Environmental Services, MassDOT Highway Division ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Rehabilitation Project
Boston and Cambridge, MA
Submitted to:
Prepared by:
Executive Office of Energy and
Environmental Affairs
MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, Massachusetts 02114
Epsilon Associates, Inc.
3 Clock Tower Place, Suite 250
Maynard, Massachusetts 01754
Submitted by:
In Association with:
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
– Highway Division
10 Park Plaza, Suite 4260
Boston, MA 02116
Hardesty & Hanover, LLP
Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc.
March 15, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges Rehabilitation Project
ENF FORM
ATTACHMENT A
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
ATTACHMENT B
B1
B2
FIGURES
Aerial Locus Map
USGS Locus Map
River Street – Existing Cross-Section
Western Avenue – Existing Cross-Section
River Street/Soldiers Field Road – Existing and Proposed Conditions
at “The Narrows”
River Street - Proposed Conditions
River Street - Proposed Cross-Section
Western Avenue - Proposed Conditions
Western Avenue - Proposed Cross-Section
River Street Intersection Corner Improvements
Western Avenue Intersection Corner Improvements
Environmental Constraints
ENGINEERING PLANS
Existing Conditions Plan, Western Avenue and
River Street Bridges – 9 Sheets
ENF Plans, River Street and
Western Avenue Bridge Rehabilitation– 48 Sheets
Sheet 1
Sheets 2-3
Sheet 4
Sheets 5-16
Sheets 17-21
Sheets 22-25
Sheets 26-30
Sheets 31-44
Sheets 45-48
2755/River Street & Western Avenue Bridges
Environmental Notification Form
Title Sheet & Index
Legend, Abbreviations & General Notes
Key Plan
Bridge Plans
Construction Plans
Resource Area Impact Plans
Utility Plans
Landscape Plans
Typical Sections & Pavement Notes
i
Table of Contents
Epsilon Associates, Inc.
ATTACHMENT C
PHOTOGRAPHS
River Street Bridge
Photo 1
River Street Bridge, aerial view
Photo 2
River Street Bridge, deteriorated parapet
Photo 3
River Street Bridge, separation of arch ring stones from concrete arch
Photo 4
River Street Bridge, misalignment of the parapet (railing) due to spandrel
wall movement
Photo 5
River Street Bridge, cross-slope deterioration of sidewalks
Photo 6
River Street Bridge, significant spalling on the arch barrels
Western Avenue Bridge
Photo 7
Western Avenue Bridge, existing conditions
Photo 8
Western Avenue Bridge, aerial view
Photo 9
Western Avenue Bridge, severe efflorescence and cracking
Photo 10
Western Avenue Bridge, map cracking and concrete deterioration
Photo 11
Western Avenue Bridge, efflorescence and cracking in arch suggests water
intrusion
Photo 12
Western Avenue Bridge, severe spalling near the interface between
structural concrete and architectural concrete
ATTACHMENT D
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL
COMMISSION, BOSTON LANDMARKS COMMISSION, AND
CAMBRIDGE HISTORICAL COMMISSION
ATTACHMENT E
CIRCULATION LIST
ATTACHMENT F
LIST OF PERMITS, REVIEWS, AND APPROVALS REQUIRED
ATTACHMENT G
SEDIMENT SAMPLING REPORT
2755/River Street & Western Avenue Bridges
Environmental Notification Form
ii
Table of Contents
Epsilon Associates, Inc.
Environmental Notification Form Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office
ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM
For Office Use Only
EEA#: MEPA Analyst:
The information requested on this form must be completed in order to submit a document
electronically for review under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, 301 CMR 11.00.
Project Name: Rehabilitation of River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Street Address: River Street and Western Avenue
Municipality: Boston and Cambridge
Watershed: Charles River
Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: Latitude: 42.364201 N (Western Ave. Br.)
UTM Zone 19N: Western Ave.Br. (325675.76
42.361216 N (River St. Br.)
easting, 4692387.27 northing); River St. Br.:
Longitude: 71.116966 W (Western Ave. Br.)
325690.88 easting, 4692055.37 northing)
71.116714 W (River St. Br.)
Estimated commencement date: Spring 2014 Estimated completion date: Fall 2016
Project Type: Transportation
Status of project design: 75% Design Stage
Proponent: Massachusetts Department of Transportation – Highway Division
Street Address: 10 Park Plaza, Suite 4260
Municipality: Boston
State: MA
Zip Code: 02116
Name of Contact Person: Michael Trepanier
Firm/Agency: MassDOT Highway Division
Street Address: 10 Park Plaza, Suite 4260
Municipality: Boston
State: MA
Zip Code: 02116
Phone: (857) 368-8828
Fax: (857) 368-0609
E-mail: michael.trepanier@state.ma.us
Does this project meet or exceed a mandatory EIR threshold (see 301 CMR 11.03)?
Yes
No
If this is an Expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) (see 301 CMR 11.05(7)) or a Notice of
Project Change (NPC), are you requesting:
 a Single EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.06(8))
 a Special Review Procedure? (see 301CMR 11.09)
 a Waiver of mandatory EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.11)
 a Phase I Waiver? (see 301 CMR 11.11)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
(Note: Greenhouse Gas Emissions analysis must be included in the Expanded ENF.)
Which MEPA review threshold(s) does the project meet or exceed (see 301 CMR
11.03)?
The Project exceeds two MEPA review thresholds. The project involves greater
than ½ acre impact to other wetlands (301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)1.f.) and impacts
greater than 500 linear feet of inland bank (301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)1.b.).
Effective January 2011
Which State Agency Permits will the project require?
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP): Chapter 91
Minor Modification, and Section 401 Water Quality Certification (Dredge); and
Massachusetts Water Resources Authority: 8(m) Permit.
Identify any financial assistance or land transfer from an Agency of the Commonwealth,
including the Agency name and the amount of funding or land area in acres:
The Project involves 4 MassDOT-owned bridges and DCR-owned land (no
transfer anticipated). MassDOT is funding the Project through the Accelerated
Bridge Program. The estimated project cost is $ 48,000,000.
Summary of Project Size
& Environmental Impacts
LAND
Total site acreage
New acres of land altered
Acres of impervious area
Existing
5.78 acres
0
4.66 acres
Number of housing units
Maximum height (ft.) (above MHW)
TRANSPORTATION
Vehicle trips per day
Parking spaces
WASTEWATER
Water Use (Gallons per day)
Water withdrawal (GPD)
-0.05 acres
(River St. 2.75;
W. Ave. 1.91)
4.61 acres
(River St. 2.73;
W. Ave. 1.88)
0
RFA: 29,445 sf (temp.)
BLSF: 1,625 sf (temp.)
LUW: 85 sf (perm.)
4,704 sf (temp.)
Inland Bank: 1,114 lf
(temp.)
Acres of new non-water dependent
use of tidelands or waterways
Gross square footage (Bridge)
Total
(River St. 3.47;
W. Ave. 2.31)
Square feet of new bordering
vegetated wetlands alteration
Square feet of new other wetland
alteration
STRUCTURES
Change
0
42,852 sf
+85 sf
(River St. 20,965;
W. Ave 21,887)
42,937 sf
(River St 21,050;
W. Ave 21,887)
n/a
n/a
n/a
23’3” (River St.)
22’0.5” (W. Ave.)
+10” (River St.)
+1’7.5” (W. Ave.)
24’1” (River St.)
23’8” (W. Ave.)
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
0
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
-2-
n/a
Wastewater generation/treatment
(GPD)
n/a
Length of water mains (miles)
n/a
Length of sewer mains (miles)
Has this project been filed with MEPA before?
Yes (EEA #______________)
No
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Has any project on this site been filed with MEPA before?
Yes (EEA # _____________)
No
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION – all proponents must
fill out this section
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1.0
Background
MassDOT is submitting this ENF to MEPA for the River Street/Western Avenue Bridges
Rehabilitation Project (the Project). MassDOT is undertaking this Project as part of the
Commonwealth’s Accelerated Bridge Program (ABP). The ABP was originally being
managed by both the former Massachusetts Highway Department and the bridges and
highway section of the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). Now all
ABP projects have been transferred from DCR to MassDOT and are managed and
overseen by MassDOT (including the subject project).
The Project includes the rehabilitation of the River Street and Western Avenue bridges
over the Charles River between Cambridge and Boston (referred to herein as the River
Street and Western Avenue bridges or the “arch bridges”) and the rehabilitation of the
adjacent bridges that carry the westerly approaches to the River Street and Western
Avenue bridges over the depressed portion of Soldiers Field Road on the Boston side of
the Charles River1 (referred to herein as the “overpass bridges”). Associated with the
Cambridge Street overpass bridge replacement, the Project also includes improvements
to the I-90 access ramp system.
The River Street and Western Avenue bridges are both three-span, Neoclassical-style
reinforced concrete arch bridges that were originally constructed in the 1920s. These
bridges, located approximately ¼ mile apart, function as a one-way pair to connect the
cities of Cambridge and Boston across the Charles River (Figures 1 and 2 in
Attachment A). Both bridges are contributing structures in the State and National
Register-listed Charles River Basin Historic District. Each bridge carries a significant
volume of commuter traffic. Both bridges are structurally deficient and deteriorating. As
1 The name of the road changes from Cambridge Street in Boston to River Street in Cambridge. The
public generally refers to the arch bridge over the Charles River as River Street and the Soldiers Field
Road overpass bridge as Cambridge Street; the ENF follows these conventions. However, the arch
bridge's Structure Inventory & Appraisal sheet lists it as Cambridge Street over the Charles River; this
convention is followed on the plans included in Attachment B.
-3-
detailed below, rehabilitation work will be consistent with the historic design of each
bridge and will include: repairing or reconstructing as necessary the concrete arches,
spandrel walls, piers, abutments, wingwalls and parapets; upgrading the drainage
systems; installing ornamental bridge lighting; and completing other upgrades and
construction work as needed. The Cambridge Street and Western Avenue overpass
bridges were constructed in the 1950s and are structurally deficient; rehabilitation work
will include superstructure replacement.
1.1
Existing Conditions - River Street Bridge
The River Street bridge carries its roadway one-way eastbound across the Charles
River from Soldiers Field Road in Boston to Memorial Drive in Cambridge (see Figures
1 and 2 and Sheets 6 and 7 in Attachment B1). The existing River Street bridge was
constructed in 1925 as an earth-filled reinforced concrete arch bridge with three spans
extending across the Charles River. The wingwalls of the existing bridge, located
behind the abutment spread footings, are supported by 35-foot-deep timber piles. The
roadway was last resurfaced in 1981. The River Street arch bridge carries
approximately 21,380 vehicles per day.
With three lanes of vehicles using this bridge to travel from Boston to Cambridge, the
existing conditions must be upgraded from the original bridge design to meet current
load and vehicular impact requirements. A 2009 Inspection Report classified the
sidewalks, parapets, and the concrete arch/arch ring as poor and the spandrel walls,
substructure, and piers as fair. Several visible signs of aging and deterioration are
apparent on the River Street bridge (see Photographs 1 through 6 in Attachment C):
 Arch ring stones are separating from the concrete arch by as much as three
inches, posing a hazard to users of the waterway below;
 Significant concrete deterioration has occurred on the piers, walls, and parapet
(railing), with visible efflorescence from water intrusion;
 Significant misalignment of the parapet over the arch crown has occurred due to
spandrel wall movement (the current design offers very little resistance to lateral
movement);
 Deterioration of the sidewalks has contributed to water intrusion and subsequent
damage; and
 Significant spalling has occurred on the arch barrels, which may affect load
capacity without rehabilitation.
The existing roadway on the River Street bridge measures 39.5 feet in width and
consists of three 11.5 to 12-foot travel lanes with 2-foot shoulders on each side. The
sidewalks are provided on each side of the roadway and are 8.5 to 9 feet in width (see
Figure 3).
The existing River Street bridge carries two 30-inch water mains beneath the sidewalk
on the northern side of the bridge and two 30-inch gas mains below the sidewalk on the
southern side of the bridge (see Sheets 26 and 27 in Attachment B2). The bridge also
carries several electrical transmission lines controlled by NSTAR and various bridge
lighting and interconnect cables controlled by DCR. A Verizon communications line
-4-
also runs longitudinally across the bridge.
1.2
Existing Conditions - Western Avenue Bridge
The Western Avenue bridge carries its roadway one-way westbound across the Charles
River from Memorial Drive in Cambridge to Soldiers Field Road in Boston (see Figures
1 and 2 and Sheets 2 and 3 in Attachment B1). The existing Western Avenue bridge
was constructed in 1924 as an earth-filled reinforced concrete arch bridge with three
spans extending across the Charles River. The roadway was last resurfaced in 1981.
The Western Avenue arch bridge carries approximately 20,900 vehicles per day.
With three lanes of vehicles passing from Cambridge to Boston, the existing conditions
must be upgraded from the original bridge design to meet current load and vehicular
impact requirements. A 2007 Inspection Report classified the sidewalks and parapets
as poor, the concrete arch/arch ring and spandrel walls as fair, and the substructure and
piers as satisfactory. Several visible signs of aging and deterioration are apparent on
the Western Avenue bridge (see Photographs 7 through 12 in Attachment C):
 Cracks and concrete deterioration are present throughout the parapets, wing
walls, and spandrel walls;
 Efflorescence and cracking, particularly in the eastern Cambridge Arch, suggest
water intrusion; and
 Severe spalling has occurred near the interface between the structural concrete
and architectural concrete.
The existing roadway on the Western Avenue bridge measures 40 feet in width and
consists of three 11.5 to 12-foot travel lanes with 2 to 2.5-foot shoulders on each side.
The sidewalks are provided on each side of the roadway and are 8.5 feet in width (see
Figure 4).
The existing Western Avenue bridge carries two 30-inch water mains beneath the
sidewalk on the southern side of the bridge. In addition, two 10-inch-diameter steam
lines, an 8-inch-diameter condensate line, an electrical duct bank installed by Harvard
University, and a Verizon telecommunications duct bank traverse the bridge (see
Sheets 28 and 29 in Attachment B2).
1.3
Existing Conditions –Overpass Bridges
The River Street and Western Avenue bridges over the Charles River are each paired
with a bridge over the depressed “boat section” stretch of Soldiers Field Road in Boston.
(In this location, the River Street roadway is named Cambridge Street, see Sheets 1, 2
and 7 in Attachment B1 and Sheets 1 and 4 in Attachment B2.) Both of these singlespan bridges were constructed in the 1950s when Soldiers Field Road was widened
and grade-separated. Both superstructures are rated as deficient.
The concrete tee beams and deck of the Cambridge Street Bridge over Soldiers Field
Road have evidence of shear failure near the southwest corner and below statutory load
rating; as well as moderate concrete deterioration present throughout the bridge.
Additionally, the sidewalks on the bridge along Cambridge Street have localized
-5-
deterioration, particularly at the corners, and the existing railing is not capable of
resisting a vehicular impact. There is also limited sidewalk access.
The concrete tee beams and deck of the Western Avenue Bridge over Soldiers Field
Road have below statutory load rating. Additionally, moderate concrete deterioration is
present throughout the bridge.
The Cambridge Street overpass bridge carries approximately 31,000 vehicles per
day. The Western Avenue overpass bridge carries approximately 17,360 vehicles per
day.
The roadway on the River Street overpass bridge is approximately 60 feet in width.
Travel lanes on the bridge are unmarked and carry vehicular traffic in both the
eastbound and westbound directions (see Sheet 7 in Attachment B1). During the
Cambridge/River Street eastbound vehicular phase, three eastbound travel lanes are
generally formed over the bridge. During the northbound Soldiers Field Road phase,
two westbound contraflow lanes are generally formed over the bridge. Sidewalks that
are 8 feet wide are provided on both sides of the roadway (see Sheet 7 in Attachment
B1).
The roadway on the Western Avenue overpass bridge is approximately 45 feet in width
(see Sheet 2 in Attachment B1). Travel lanes on the bridge are unmarked but provide
enough space for three travel lanes. The sidewalk on the south side of the roadway
measures 14 feet wide, and the sidewalk on the north side measures 16 feet wide (see
Sheet 2 in Attachment B1).
1.4
Existing Conditions- Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations
The study area experiences high pedestrian and bicyclist volumes due to the proximity
of the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path system (the “Charles River Path system”) along
the Charles River. In addition to the trail users, pedestrians and bicyclists use the
bridges to connect between the cities of Boston and Cambridge and adjacent
neighborhoods. Bicycle and pedestrian counts were conducted at the study area
intersections in 2009, 2010, and 2011, as follows:
 River Street and Western Avenue Bridges Functional Design Report Turning
Movement Counts
(http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/charlesriverbridges/WesternAvenueRiverStreet
Bridges/WesternAveRiverStDocuments.aspx)
– December 2009
– February 2010
– September 2010
 Charles River Basin Pedestrian and Bicycle Study for Pathways and Bridges
Project (http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/charlesriverbridges/Home.aspx)
– September 2009
– May 2010
– September 2010
-6-
–
–
May 2011
September 2011
These data are available at the websites indicated above.
Observations showed that pedestrians and joggers account for 60% of the nonmotorized traffic on River Street Bridge and 65% of the non-motorized traffic on
Western Avenue Bridge. Bicyclists account for the remaining 40% and 35%,
respectively. Use varied by day and season and bridge non-motorized volumes were
similar to the Charles River Path non-motorized volumes. The majority of bicyclists on
the bridges, crossing the river, travel with the flow of traffic.
Based on field observations, the existing pedestrian and bicyclist accommodations can
be improved. Bicyclists and pedestrians experience delays and high vehicular conflicts
when approaching the intersections. The following are some observations noted from
the field:
 Many of the ramps do not comply with the Americans Disabilities Act (ADA) and






2.0
Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (AAB) standards.
The path width is substandard in some areas, and the effective width of the
sidewalks is reduced due to street furniture.
There is a lack of pedestrian signal indications at River Street/Cambridge
Street/Soldiers Field Road.
There is no crosswalk access to Cambridge Street MBTA stop.
Due to the heavy use of the path system, there is insufficient queuing space at
the intersections.
There is a lack of on-street bicycle accommodations.
On the Boston side of the River Street bridge, there is a narrow pinch-point (“the
narrows”) of the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path. In this location, the sidewalk
width is substandard as it necks down to slightly less than 5 feet at the narrowest
point between the bridge wall and the edge of the sidewalk (see Figure 5 and
Sheet 7 in Attachment B1).
Proposed Work and Impacts to Resources
The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate the structurally deficient River Street and
Western Avenue arch and overpass bridges to continue to efficiently and safely meet
the needs of the traveling public, while maintaining the bridges’ structural integrity and
rehabilitating their historic and cultural elements, and improving the conditions for all
users including motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
MassDOT is utilizing the proposed rehabilitation of the River Street and Western
Avenue bridges and associated overpass bridges as an opportunity to significantly
improve pedestrian and bicyclist accommodations. While these improvements were not
originally included in the Project scope, MassDOT has engaged in extensive public
outreach to all users of the River Street and Western Avenue bridges and associated
overpass bridges to develop feasible means of improving conditions for non-vehicular
traffic.
-7-
2.1
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges (the Arch Bridges) Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation work for the River Street and Western Avenue bridges will include
repairing or reconstructing as necessary the concrete arches, spandrel walls, piers,
abutments, wingwalls and parapets; upgrading the drainage systems to process all
surface runoff in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations; installing
ornamental bridge lighting; and completing other upgrades and construction work as
needed (see Sheets 5-16 and 26-30 in Attachment B2). Proposed rehabilitation will be
consistent with the historic design of each bridge. All bridge rehabilitation work and
related construction activities will maintain the character-defining features of the
bridges and will ensure that the rehabilitation work is context-sensitive within the
National Register-listed Charles River Basin Historic District.
Travel Lanes
Bridge rehabilitation will maintain the three travel lanes that exist today. The roadway
width for both bridges will be reduced to 32.5 feet, providing three 10.5-foot travel lanes
and 0.5-foot shoulders on each side. The remaining width of the bridges will be
reallocated for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such that one side of the bridge will
have a 10-foot multiuse sidewalk and the other side will have 14.5 feet for bicycle and
pedestrian use separated as follows: a 2-foot offset between the curb and a 5-foot cycle
track (travelling the direction of vehicular traffic) at the same grade as the sidewalk
which will be directly adjacent to a 7.5-foot sidewalk (see Figures 6-9).
Wetlands Impacts
The arch bridges component of the Project involves 85 SF of permanent and 4,704 SF
of temporary impacts to Land Under Water Bodies and Waterways (LUW), temporary
impacts to 1,114 linear feet of inland bank, temporary impacts to 1,625 SF of Bordering
Land Subject to Flooding (BLSF), and temporary impacts to 29,445 SF of Riverfront
Area. These impacts are detailed below and are shown on Sheets 22-25 in Attachment
B2.
The only permanent impacts to wetland resource areas (LUW) associated with the
Project are at the River Street bridge. The Project will expand the southwest wingwall
of the River Street bridge into the river by approximately 85 square feet to
accommodate future widening of what is now a narrow pinch-point (“the narrows,” see
Figure 5) of the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path along the Charles River. Expanding
the southwest wingwall will widen the path to an acceptable multi-use width, and will
improve sightlines for pedestrians turning on or off of the River Street bridge. The 85square-foot enlargement of the bridge footprint is illustrated on Sheet 22 in Attachment
B2.
Temporary Project impacts to wetland resource areas (LUW) will occur in conjunction
with the installation and subsequent backfilling of temporary cofferdams. At the River
Street bridge, four temporary cofferdams will be installed at each corner of the bridge,
totaling approximately 3,118 square feet of LUW (see Sheets 22-23 in Attachment B2).
The cofferdams will allow the installation of new piles to support the wingwall
-8-
replacement work. The new piles will be drilled-in among the existing timber piles
behind the abutments, so they will not change the hydrologic characteristics of the river
or infringe upon navigation. Additionally, thickened concrete pile caps to mitigate
potential soil erosion near the wingwalls will be placed above the proposed piles and the
existing timber piles will remain, but will be cut-off below the proposed concrete pile cap.
The thickened concrete pile cap may require up to approximately 8.5 feet of excavation
beneath the wingwalls within the dewatered area behind the cofferdam. The volume of
excavated material is conservatively estimated at 650 cubic yards, which the contractor
will seek approvals to dispose of at an approved location. Following construction, the
sheetpile associated with the cofferdams will be cut-off below the mudline and the
cofferdams will be backfilled with stones or boulders to the level of the existing mudline.
This is characterized as a temporary impact; all impacts are at or below the level of the
existing mudline.
At the Western Avenue bridge, temporary cofferdams will be required on the Boston
and Cambridge sides of the river to provide construction-period access to the structure
for wingwall and abutment repair. These cofferdams will occupy approximately 1,586
square feet of LUW (see Sheets 24-25 in Attachment B2). The work area within the
cofferdam may require up to approximately 5 feet of excavation beneath the wingwalls
within the dewatered area behind the cofferdam. The volume of excavated material is
conservatively estimated at 280 cubic yards, which the contractor will seek approvals to
dispose of at an approved location. Following construction, the cofferdams supports
would be cut-off below the mudline and the cofferdams will be backfilled with stones or
boulders to the level of the existing mudline. This is characterized as a temporary
impact; all impacts are at or below the level of the existing mudline.
Temporary impacts to inland bank, BLSF, and Riverfront Area will occur as a result of
rehabilitating the bridge structure and roadway, as well as clearing brush and trees to
provide construction related access to the arch bridges (see Sheets 22-25 and 31-44 in
Attachment B2). Additional landscaping work within these resource areas will include
removal of any hazardous, detrimental, nuisance, or invasive vegetation within the
Project limits as well as seeding, slope stabilization, and other plantings (see Sheets 3144 in Attachment B2). These activities will result in temporary impacts to approximately
1,114 linear feet of inland bank (approximately 138 linear feet of bank associated with
the River Street bridge and approximately 217 linear feet of bank associated with the
Western Avenue bridge), approximately 1,625 SF of BLSF, and approximately 29,445
SF of Riverfront Area. There will be no permanent impacts to inland bank, BLSF, or
Riverfront Area. The majority of the temporarily impacted Riverfront Area is previously
degraded roadway and/or structural fill. Notably, there will be no permanent change to
BLSF or any associated reduction in flood storage capacity, since all areas will be
restored to their current elevations upon completion of construction.
As part of the landscaping work, MassDOT expects that a total of four public shade
trees 14 inches or greater in diameter at breast height (DBH) will need to be removed.
Twenty-five additional trees with DBH less than 14 inches will need to be removed. The
current locations of these trees are shown on Sheets 31-35 and 44 in Attachment B2.
Additionally the placement of slope stabilization material next to the wing walls of both
arch bridges is proposed and is consistent with landscaping activities of the upstream
-9-
rehabilitation project for the Anderson Memorial Bridge (see Sheets 36-43 in
Attachment B2). Specific slope stabilization will be achieved by installation of coarse
stone treatment selected in consultation with DCR and MassDOT landscape and
cultural resource sections.
2.2
Overpass Bridges Replacement
Other Project work will involve the replacement of the single-span reinforced concrete
T-beam superstructures of the two related overpass bridges that carry Cambridge
Street and Western Avenue over the depressed "boat section" stretch of Soldiers Field
Road on the Boston side of the Charles River. Both superstructures are rated as
deficient; both will be replaced by new pre-cast concrete Northeast Extreme Tee
(NEXT) Beam superstructures (see Sheets 11-16 in Attachment B2). The original
ornamental railings on the two 1950s bridges will be repaired and reinstalled on the new
superstructures. Work on the overpass bridges will partially occur within the 100-foot
Buffer Zone (see Sheets 17 and 19 in Attachment B2).
2.3
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
The Project includes significant improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians while also
maintaining the three one-way vehicular travel lanes that exist on each arch bridge. To
improve bicyclist safety, MassDOT consulted with stakeholders, DCR, the Cities of
Cambridge and Boston and local advocacy groups and selected the preferred option of
establishing cycle tracks throughout the Project area. The selection of the preferred
alternative is consistent with the overall plan (the “Connectivity Study”) being jointly
developed by MassDOT and DCR for bicycle and pedestrian accommodations within
the Charles River basin. The Connectivity Study will be available in late spring/early
summer and will be accessible at
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/charlesriverbridges/Home.aspx.
On the River Street and Western Avenue bridges, a five-foot-wide, off-street cycle track
will be placed between the outermost right hand lane of the roadway and the adjoining
sidewalk. The cycle track will be located on the southern side of the River Street bridge
and the northern side of the Western Avenue bridge and travel in the same direction as
vehicular traffic; see Figures 6-9. A two-foot-wide buffer will separate the cycle track
from the roadway. The sidewalk adjacent to the cycle track will be 7.5 feet wide; while
this is 1 foot narrower than existing conditions, it will reduce bicycle and pedestrian
conflicts by creating new dedicated bicycle-use-only space. Additionally, the sidewalk
opposite the cycle track will be widened from 8.5 feet to 10 feet (see Figures 6-9).
Cycle tracks will be also be provided on the overpass bridges over Soldiers Field Road.
On the Western Avenue overpass bridge, the Project design includes a new six-footwide cycle track on the northern side of the bridge and a new five-foot-wide cycle track
on the southern side of the bridge (see Figure 8). On the Cambridge Street overpass
bridge, a six-foot-wide cycle track will be placed between the southernmost sidewalk
and the right-turn lane (see Figure 6). The cycle tracks on the overpass bridges will
travel in the same direction as vehicular traffic and be separated from the roadway by a
three-inch vertical separation using a tapered curb; the cycle track will be separated
- 10 -
from the adjacent sidewalk by a standard 8” roadway curb and curb-mounted traffic
barrier. The curb-mounted traffic barrier is necessary to deflect potential motor-vehicles
from impacting the historic 1950’s bridge railing, which is being restored in light of
historic preservation, but does not meet vehicular impact criteria.
The cycle track provided along Western Avenue as part of the Project will connect with
future cycle tracks being proposed along Western Avenue in Boston and Cambridge.
The cycle track provided along River Street (over the arch bridge) and along Cambridge
Street (over the overpass bridge) as part of the Project will connect with a proposed
cycle track along Cambridge Street in Boston. On the Cambridge side, the River Street
cycle track will end near the intersection with Memorial Drive; bicyclists continuing on
River Street will operate on a shared use travel lane. Both the Western Avenue and
River Street cycle tracks will connect with the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path along
the Charles River.
The Project will also improve conditions for non-motorized traffic by reducing curb radii
at the River Street and Western Avenue intersections with Soldiers Field Road and
Memorial Drive (see Figures 10-11), thus providing the following benefits:
 increasing queuing space at all corners for non-motorized traffic;
 providing more space for active users of the sidewalk (i.e., users who are not
crossing the roadway);
 decreasing the speed of turning vehicles; and
 shortening the distance across the roadway (see Table 1 in Section 3.4 below).
Of specific significance are the improvements made at the intersection of Western
Avenue and the Soldiers Field Road ramp southbound (i.e. the “Pork Chop”). The
geometry for vehicles turning right from Western Ave onto Soldiers Field Road has been
designed to tighten up the radii of the curb thus slowing down vehicles and placing the
crosswalk such that it is more visible to oncoming traffic (see Figures 8 and 11).
Additionally, ramp accessibility at the corners of the River Street and Western Avenue
bridges and the associated overpass bridges will be improved: ramps will be widened
where needed, ramp alignment will be optimized to shorten crossing distances, and
ramp locations will be moved away from active zones of the sidewalk. Crosswalks will
be widened to 15 feet. See Figures 6, 8, and 10-11.
New traffic signals will be installed where River Street/Cambridge Street and Western
Avenue intersect with Soldiers Field Road and Memorial Drive to provide pedestrian
indications with countdown for all crosswalks, increased pedestrian clearance intervals
(pedestrian clearance times would be calculated using a walking speed of 3.5 feet per
second rather than the current speed of 4 feet per second), concurrent
bicycle/pedestrian signal phases, and modified phasing and timings to improve
coordination and progression along the main corridors for vehicular and non-vehicular
traffic. MassDOT is also exploring the possibility of installing dedicated bicycle signals
for cycle track users, which is considered an experimental design requiring special
approval from the Federal Highway Administration, although they have been used in
similar situations. These signals would avoid uncertainty regarding which signal
- 11 -
(pedestrian or traffic) cycle track users should use. The dedicated bicycle signal would
be phased with the pedestrian signal, although bicyclists would have a longer “green”
clearance interval due to their higher operating speed.
To further improve bicycle and pedestrian conditions, the Project is also proposing the
removal of one of the I-90 ramps at the corner of Cambridge Street and Soldiers Field
Road and realignment of the I-90 on-ramp from Soldiers Field Road (see Figure 6 and
Sheet 17 in Attachment B2 . There are currently three I-90 on-ramps at the intersection
of Cambridge Street and Soldiers Field Road. One is accessed from Soldiers Field
Road eastbound and the other two are accessed from Cambridge Street just west of
Soldiers Field Road. The ramp on Cambridge Street closest to Soldiers Field Road is
the least utilized and any vehicles looking to use this ramp can use the next ramp,
which is only about 60 feet west of the first ramp. The removal of this ramp will be
beneficial to pedestrian and bicycle users as it will eliminate an existing crosswalk
where vehicles can take the right turn onto the ramp at fairly high speeds. Directing
vehicles to the single ramp on Cambridge Street will slow down right-turning vehicles
and reduce confusion for all users.
The I-90 on-ramp accessed from Soldiers Field Road is being altered slightly to create a
geometry that will slow down the vehicles entering this ramp (see Figures 6 and 10).
The existing geometry of this ramp enables vehicles to enter at high speeds and creates
an unsafe crossing for pedestrians and bicyclists. The proposed design tightens up this
right turn and adds a wider ramp for pedestrians and bicycles who will be riding up on
the sidewalk in this location. This shared sidewalk is then carried around the corner
onto Cambridge Street and crosses the other I-90 ramp.
2.4
Construction Methods and Phasing
Preliminary construction is expected to commence in early 2014 with the following
proposed sequencing. The overpass bridges associated with both bridges will be
rehabilitated first, which will take approximately 9-12 months. Rehabilitation of the arch
bridges will follow, with work on both the River Street and Western Avenue bridges
proposed to occur concurrently; the arch bridge rehabilitation work is expected to take
18-20 months.
Construction will be staged such that two lanes of vehicular traffic and at least one
sidewalk for pedestrian and bicycle access will be maintained on each bridge during the
rehabilitation work. A large amount of the proposed work will be conducted from a
barge, since there is very little space available on land near the Project site. Positioning
of the barges will require blocking one of the three navigation channels below each
bridge at any given time; however, the barges will be coordinated such that the same
arch of each bridge will be blocked at any given time, leaving two matching pairs of
arches open to navigation. As described above, temporary cofferdams will be installed
only near the abutments and will not infringe on navigation. Any indirect construction
impacts will be mitigated as required.
MassDOT will coordinate construction activities with the United States Coast Guard. In
addition, MassDOT intends to engage in vigorous public outreach to inform users of the
- 12 -
Charles River of the position of the barges.
2.5
Landscaping Approach
Landscaping goals for this Project are to protect existing resources during construction,
where possible, and to restore areas damaged through construction activities.
Restoration of the landscape in this case does not refer to restoring the landscape to a
particular historical condition; however, it will involve restoring areas damaged through
construction to a condition that is consistent with DCR’s Master Plan for the Charles
River Basin. Landscaping activities will include the planting of deciduous shade trees to
replace trees that need to be removed in order to gain adequate construction access,
aeration of soil compacted during construction, removal of invasive species, and the
placement of slope stabilization material next to the wing walls (see Sheets 31-44 in
Attachment B2). Additional visual improvements will include lighting on the bridge that
will be consistent with the historic character of the bridge.
2.6
Stormwater
In the site’s current conditions, stormwater runoff flows into existing closed drainage
systems located on and off the bridges on River Street and Western Avenue, as well as
along Soldiers Field Road and Memorial Drive. Runoff on both arch bridges is captured
by catch basins at either end of the bridges and then conveyed through drainage pipes
directly into the Charles River. On the Boston side of the River Street arch and
overpass bridges, runoff is captured by City of Boston catch basins which eventually tie
into a 30”x36” drain line flowing east towards the River, and connecting to a 36” line
flowing south along Soldiers Field Road until it discharges into the Charles River about
350 feet south of the project limits. On the Cambridge side of the River Street bridge,
catch basins on River Street and Memorial Drive connect to drainage systems that
outlet into the River on either side of the bridge.
The drainage systems on and around Western Avenue are similar. On the Boston side,
runoff is captured by City of Boston catch basins and is conveyed into the River by
either a 24” line that outlets on the bank just north of the arch bridge, or by a drain line
that runs south along Soldiers Field Road eventually reaching a 36” outlet into the river
in between River Street and Western Avenue. On the Cambridge side, the City of
Cambridge catch basins along Western Avenue, east of Memorial Drive currently tie
into a combined sewer line.
This Project is considered “redevelopment”, and must meet the MassDEP Stormwater
Management Standards to the maximum extent practicable while improving on existing
conditions. The Project is located within the Charles River Watershed and discharges
directly to the Charles River, which is considered an impaired waterbody with two Total
Maximum Daily Load reports (TMDLs). For this reason, MassDOT will ensure all
options to improve stormwater quality within the constraints of the Project area have
been considered and exhausted.
The proposed design will primarily involve using a closed drainage system for
stormwater management, but with the potential for additional structural Best
- 13 -
Management Practices (BMPs) for treatment and groundwater recharge, as well as
possible surface treatment BMPs when space and topography permit.
All proposed catch basins within the Project will be deep sump catch basins, which
immediately add an increase in stormwater treatment that does not exist today (see
Sheets 26-30 in Attachment B2). Stormwater runoff on the arch bridges will be
captured in deep sump catch basins at either ends of the bridges and conveyed to
leaching structures (where subsurface conditions allow) prior to discharging. In some
cases, these outlets are located where there is land sloping down to the river and small
outlet sediment traps are considered which would be graded into the slope in order to
provide some treatment as well as energy dissipation before the water reaches the
river. In other cases, the outlet pipes at the discharge point are coming directly through
the bridge walls or sea walls and must be maintained to avoid any impacts to these
walls.
Another area that is being evaluated for additional stormwater treatment is the large
grassed area between the I-90 ramps in the northwest corner of the intersection of
Cambridge Street and Soldiers Field Road. In addition to the existing grassed area, the
on-ramp off Cambridge Street, closest to Soldiers Field Road, is being removed and will
become additional landscaped area. Some of this space may be utilized for a
detention/infiltration basin with stormwater runoff from Cambridge Street and part of the
I-90 ramps being routed to this basin. An outlet from this basin would tie into the
existing closed drainage system that discharges to the Charles River south of the
project site.
In addition to these treatment BMPs, the overall impervious area for the project is
decreasing and there will be erosion and sedimentation control implemented during
construction and until vegetation is established after construction. Hay bales and silt
fence will be used on the Cambridge side, and compost filter tubes will be used on the
Boston side.
As part of its commitment to public outreach, MassDOT has met with local stakeholders,
including the Charles River Watershed Association, to evaluate options for stormwater
management and will continue to do so as the design progresses.
3.0
Alternatives
Four sets of alternatives are analyzed herein--first, alternatives for the arch bridges;
second, alternatives for the overpass bridges; third, alternatives for bicycle and
pedestrian accommodations across the bridges in the East-West direction; and finally
alternatives for bicycle and pedestrian accommodations along the Charles River, in the
North-South direction. Cost estimates included within this section for arch and overpass
bridge alternatives were made in year 2010 and are comparable to each other, but not
the current project estimate of $48,000,000 (Current cost estimates: for River Street
Bridges is $22.5M and for Western Avenue Bridges is $25.5M).
3.1
Arch Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives (River Street and Western Avenue over
Charles River)
- 14 -
Multiple alternatives were considered for the arch bridges. These alternatives are
summarized below:
 Arch Bridge Alternative 1 includes removing the existing spandrel walls,
parapets, sidewalks, and wingwalls and replacing them in kind, as well as
updating them to current crash test standards. Construction of this alternative
could be completed using staged construction while maintaining two lanes of
traffic on the bridge. Alternative 1 would not extend the service life of the bridge,
since the arch barrel (i.e., the main load-carrying element) would not be
rehabilitated. This alternative would maintain the historic character and design of
the National Register-listed bridges. The estimated cost of Alternative 1 would
be $11,780,000 for River Street and $6,860,000 for Western Avenue.
 Arch Bridge Alternative 1A is similar to Alternative 1, but in addition to
rehabilitating the spandrel walls, wingwalls, parapets, and sidewalks, this
Preferred Alternative will expose and repair the entire arch. In addition, this
alternative includes installation of a new water-proofing membrane over the
existing arch and a new concrete deck cast-in-place over the earth fill.
Construction can be completed using staged construction while maintaining two
lanes of traffic on the bridge. Alternative 1A addresses immediate concerns
regarding the outward movement of the spandrel walls and will extend the life of
the bridge. This alternative will maintain the historic character and design of the
National Register contributing bridges. The estimated cost of Alternative 1A is
$22,270,000 for River Street and $12,990,000 for Western Avenue.
 Arch Bridge Alternative 2 is a complete structure replacement that would match
the visual appearance of the existing structure. However, this alternative would
require an extended detour around the area that could last up to two years,
significantly disrupting local traffic. Alternative 2 is also the most expensive
option, with a preliminary cost estimate of $40,460,000 for River Street and
$29,420,000 for Western Avenue.
Arch Bridge Alternative 1A is selected for both the River Street and Western Avenue
arch bridges since it will extend the life of the bridge, will maintain a visual appearance
very similar to the existing structures, preserve the historic resources, avoid significant
environmental impacts and does not have an exorbitant cost.
Overpass Bridges: Cambridge Street and Western Avenue over Soldiers Field Road
Multiple alternatives were considered for the overpass bridges. These alternatives are
summarized below:
 Overpass Alternative 1 involves deck rehabilitation only. This alternative would
make surface repairs to the concrete girders and cast a new deck over the
existing reinforced concrete girders, thus raising the capacity of the bridge.
Extensive time and care would need to be taken during demolition to protect the
integrity of the existing girders. In addition, this alternative would not extend the
service life of the bridge and would not increase the inventory load rating above
- 15 -
statutory loading of the HS-20 Truck. The estimated cost of this alternative
would be $3,260,000 for Cambridge Street and $3,170,000 for Western Avenue.
 Overpass Alternatives 2 and 2A are superstructure replacement options using
steel stringers and concrete-encased steel stringers, respectively. These
alternatives would include pre-stressed concrete fascia beams to give the
appearance of the original structure elevation. In addition, a new concrete deck
would be cast over the steel stringers as part of the bridge replacement. These
alternatives would provide 75 years of service life and would be designed to
increase the bridge capacity to accommodate the HL-93 Truck. Costs of
Overpass Alternatives 2 (steel stringers) and 2A (concrete-encased steel
stringers) would be $4,350,000 and $4,690,000, respectively, for Cambridge
Street and $4,080,000 and $4,360,000, respectively, for Western Avenue.
 Overpass Alternative 3 is a superstructure replacement using Northeast Extreme
Tee (NEXT) “Type F” Beams. The NEXT Beams are pre-cast and pre-stressed
with 4-inch top flanges. In this alternative, a new concrete deck will be cast over
the NEXT Beams. Overpass Alternative 3 will provide 75 years of service life
and will be designed to increase the bridge capacity to accommodate the HL-93
Truck. The estimated cost of this alternative would be $3,630,000 for Cambridge
Street and $3,530,000 for Western Avenue.
Overpass Alternative 3 is the selected alternative for both overpass bridges since it will
provide a service life of 75 years, will have a visual appearance very similar to the
existing structures, and is the least expensive of all the superstructure replacement
alternatives.
3.3
Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations, East-West Travel Direction
The elimination of one of the three vehicular travel lanes was considered to allow bidirectional bicycle traffic; however, the maintenance of three vehicular travel lanes is
critical to accommodate high traffic volumes on both the River Street and Western
Avenue bridges. Under current conditions, there is lengthy queuing on both of the
bridges due to significant congestion at the adjacent intersections during peak hours;
this queuing would be more frequent with the reduction of a travel lane. Therefore, this
alternative is not practicable and was not considered further.
The following alternatives that maintain three vehicular travel lanes were considered for
improving bicyclist and pedestrian accommodations in an east-west travel direction. All
three alternatives are limited to the existing cross section of the bridges, as the bridges
are being rehabilitated, not replaced. Each option is considered prudent from an
environmental standpoint, as each option similarly avoids significant environmental
impacts to the wetland resource areas associated with the Charles River. Therefore,
the following analysis focuses on the safety and ease of use provided by each
alternative.
River Street Bridge Improvements
- 16 -
A key safety issue in developing the following alternatives for the River Street bridge is
reducing conflict between bicyclists and right-turn vehicular traffic at the intersection of
River Street/Memorial Drive.
 Alternative 1, On-street Bicycle Lane: An on-street bicycle lane would be
provided between the right-most through lane and the right-turn lane at the
intersection with Memorial Drive. This position for the bicycle lane was selected
so that it would not be frequently blocked by the high volume of right-turning
vehicles. In order to accommodate this positioning, wayfinding signage would be
required to inform both bicyclists and motor vehicles of the correct positioning
depending on their destination. This on-street bicycle lane, while enhancing
safety for bicyclists continuing on River Street, does not assist bicyclists in
accessing the Charles River Path system, which is considered a significant
disadvantage.
 Alternative 2, On-street Cycle Track: An on-street cycle track would be provided
along the curb. A signal-separated phase at the intersection of River
Street/Memorial Drive would be required to allocate distinct times to the through
bicyclists and the right-turning vehicles. This would allow bicyclists and vehicles
to remain in their travel lanes without mixing. To reduce-right turning vehicles
from encroaching into the cycle track, bollards or other in-road physical barriers
would be recommended. The on-street cycle track would assist bicyclists in
accessing the Charles River Path system and provides increased safety for
bicyclists, but to a lesser degree than an off-street cycle track.
 Alternative 3, Off-street Widened Sidewalk: The off-street widened sidewalk
alternative would widen the southern sidewalk to 14 feet to accommodate
bicyclists and separate the bicyclists and motorists. This alternative would allow
through bicyclists to continue onto River Street by utilizing the pedestrian signal
phase, or bicyclists could access the Charles River Path system. Bicyclists who
prefer to travel on the roadway would be required to share the road with motor
vehicles. However, this alternative does not meet AASHTO guidelines for shared
use paths.
 Alternative 4, Selected Alternative, Off-street Cycle Track: After much
consultation with the study team, MassDOT, DCR, the City of Boston, the City of
Cambridge, and other stakeholders, the preferred alternative is a combination of
Alternatives 2 and 3. A 5-foot cycle track will be placed at sidewalk level on the
southern side of River Street with a 2-foot buffer from the vehicular travel lanes.
The sidewalk for pedestrians will be located between the cycle track and the
bridge wall. This alternative provides optimized safety for bicyclists and
pedestrians alike, while also providing ready access to the Charles River Path
system. Additionally, each intersection will be improved in accordance with the
specifications discussed below in Alternative 3, At-grade enhancements for the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations in the North-South Direction.
Western Avenue Bridge Improvements
- 17 -
In the cities of Boston and Cambridge, projects are underway to install cycle tracks on
Western Avenue. With the high demand of pedestrians and bicyclists utilizing the
sidewalks, the design team is proposing the same bicycle treatment on Western Avenue
as the River Street selected alternative. As described above, a 5-foot bicycle lane will
be placed at sidewalk level on the northern side of Western Avenue with a 2-foot buffer
from the vehicular travel lanes. The sidewalk for pedestrians will be located between
the cycle track and the bridge wall. Additionally, each intersection will be improved in
accordance with the specifications discussed below in Alternative 3, At-grade
enhancements for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations in the North-South
Direction.
3.4
Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations, North-South Travel Direction
Three alternatives were considered to improve conditions for north-south non-vehicular
travel along the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path system (the “Charles River Path
system”) at the at-grade intersections of the Western Avenue and River Street arch
bridges with Memorial Drive and Soldiers Field Road. These alternatives, two gradeseparated (tunnel and boardwalk) alternatives and the selected at-grade improvement
alternative, would have dramatically different user experiences and environmental and
historic resource impacts. Grade-separated tunnel and boardwalk alternatives are
summarized below. Resource area impacts have been estimated for each alternative.
Where survey was not available (beyond the current project area), these impact
estimates have been calculated based on interpolated resource delineations. The
impacts associated with construction of tunnels or boardwalks will occur in addition to
impacts associated with the selected alternative, as the at-grade impacts will happen
regardless of tunnel or boardwalk construction.
 Alternative 1, Tunnel through Abutment - River Street Bridge: A tunnel would be
constructed through the arch bridge’s wing walls immediately behind the
abutments by installing a concrete box culvert structure with open portals. Each
box would have a minimum vertical clearance of 10 feet and a width of
approximately 16 feet in compliance with American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and Massachusetts Department of
Transportation Highway Division Project Development & Design Guide
standards. Two box culvert tunnel placement locations were considered: either
above or below the 30” MWRA water and National Grid gas mains located on the
bridge.
– 1A: If the tunnel is set above the water and gas mains, extensive utility
relocation and utility owner coordination and assistance is required,
specifically due to the vertical realignment (siphon) of the 30” diameter gas
and water mains. Setting the tunnel above the gas and water mains requires
that the floor of the tunnel be 1 to 1.5 feet below the Charles River Design
Flood Elevation of 108.50 (MDC). The MWRA has reviewed the concept of
relocating the 30” water mains below the tunnel and has determined that it is
not an acceptable alternative.
– 1B: If the tunnel is set below the gas and water mains, far less utility
relocation is required; however, the tunnel floor will be set 3.5 to 4 feet below
the Charles River Design Flood Elevation.
- 18 -
In either scenario, significant design of approach paths and watertight boat section
structures to prevent river spillover and seepage will be required. All of the tunnel, boat
section, and approach path structures would be supported on drilled piles, and
excavation support for the tunnel installation would be provided by drilled soldier piles.
The option to relocate the utilities below the box culvert tunnel has been eliminated
since the MWRA has determined it unacceptable.
Path lengths (from existing bike path, including approaches to the tunnels) are based on
design parameters including maintaining maximum grades less than or equal to 5% to
comply with Americans with Disabilities Acts (ADA) and the Massachusetts Architectural
Access Board (AAB) standards. Path lengths would range from 392-510 feet on each
side of the River Street Bridge.
This alternative would have significant environmental and historical resource impacts
and require considerably greater effort for design and environmental permitting. The
Massachusetts Historical Commission, in a letter dated January 17, 2012 included as
Attachment D, has determined that this option would have an undesirable “Adverse
Effect” on both State/National Register contributing bridges through the destruction of or
damage to all or part of the property. This finding and otherwise avoidable impacts to
wetlands resources, Land Under Water, Bank, and Riverfront Area, make it a more
environmentally damaging option with rigorous permitting requirements. Approximate
estimates for wetlands resource impacts are presented in the following table.
Table 1.
River Street Bridge Tunnel Estimated Wetland Resource Area
Impacts
Resource Area
Riverfront Area (SF)
Bordering Land
Subject to Flooding
(SF)
Land Under Water
Bodies (SF)
Inland Bank (LF)
Alternative 1A
Temp.
Perm.
2430
2575
Alternative 1B
Temp.
Perm.
2640
2875
535
1100
700
1055
0
9035
0
12,125
155
290
220
315
 Alternative 1, Tunnel through Abutment – Western Avenue Bridge: This
alternative is based on a tunnel placement below the existing 30” MWRA water
mains and Harvard University steam lines located on the bridge. However, the
result of installing a tunnel below the 30” utilities and steam lines is that the
tunnel floor will be set at an elevation significantly lower than the Charles River
design flood elevation. Based on vertical clearance beneath the existing 30”
utilities, this alternative requires that the floor of the tunnel be 1.5 to 2 feet below
the Charles River Design Flood Elevation of 108.50 (MDC). This alternative is
consistent with the tunnel alternatives presented for the River Street Bridge on
the Boston side and also requires design of a watertight boat section structures
to prevent river spillover and seepage. Path lengths (from existing bike path,
including approaches to the tunnels) would range from 425-525 feet on each side
- 19 -
of the Western Avenue Bridge.
However, on the Cambridge side, limited horizontal space between the bridge
abutment and the existing shared use path, supported on the Charles River
seawall, requires extensive reconstruction of the seawall and existing shared use
path along the river to accommodate an additional grade separated shared use
path and tunnel. The grade separated path on the Cambridge side will need to
be depressed within the footprint of the existing shared use path, and the
adjacent landscaped buffer abutting Memorial Drive will be replaced by a new atgrade shared use path. The existing seawall will need to be replaced by a
watertight structural wall capable of resisting hydrostatic and earth pressures
from the Charles River, and an additional retaining wall will have to be
constructed to support the existing earth fill and new at-grade path adjacent to
the grade separated path. In addition to the path realignment on the Cambridge
side, there is currently a 42” MWRA water main located beneath the existing
shared use path. Approximately 250’ of this main will have to be relocated to
accommodate the grade separated path.
This alternative would have significant environmental and historical resource
impacts and require considerably greater effort for design and environmental
permitting. The Massachusetts Historical Commission, in a letter dated January
17, 2012 included as Attachment D, has determined that this option would have
an undesirable “Adverse Effect” on both State/National Register contributing
bridges through the destruction of or damage to all or part of the property. This
finding and otherwise avoidable impacts to wetlands resources, Land Under
Water, Bank, and Riverfront Area, make it a more environmentally damaging
option with rigorous permitting requirements. Approximate estimates for
wetlands resource impacts are presented in the following table.
Table 2.
Western Avenue Bridge Tunnel Estimated Wetland Resource Area
Impacts
Resource Area
Riverfront Area (SF)
Bordering Land Subject to
Flooding (SF)
Land Under Water Bodies (SF)
Inland Bank (LF)
Alternative 1
Temp. Perm.
3585 13,600
1165
940
0
140
1140
390
The tunnel alternatives are also cost prohibitive, technically complex, and logistically
challenging. They would also extend project design and construction periods; require
long-term maintenance commitments, mainly in the form of pump stations for
dewatering of the tunnel path, as well as path lighting, which add long-term costs as
well; and have user comfort and safety concerns.
 Alternative 2, Boardwalk Beneath Arches – River Street and Western Avenue
- 20 -
Bridges: This alternative consists of constructing a pile-supported boardwalk to
pass through the outer arches of each bridge on both sides of the river. The
timber boardwalk path elevation will be set at 108.50’ (MDC), therefore boat
sections and pump stations will not be required. The approach paths will be pile
supported similar to the approach paths for the tunnel alternatives. By installing
boardwalks, rather than tunnels, there is no need for extensive soldier pile
installation or utility relocation. Additionally, there is no alteration to the existing
bridges and construction staging for vehicular traffic will be nominal under this
alternative. The benefits of less road user impact, however, are offset by the
impact on the boating community as one or two of the three existing navigation
channels at the bridges would be effectively terminated.
Further, the Massachusetts Historical Commission, in a letter dated January 27,
2012 (Attachment D), has determined that this option would have an undesirable
“Adverse Effect” through the introduction of visual elements that diminish the
integrity of the property’s significant historic features. This finding and otherwise
avoidable impacts to wetlands resources, Land Under Water, Bank, and
Riverfront Area, make it a more environmentally damaging option with rigorous
permitting requirements. Approximate estimates for wetlands resource impacts
are presented in the following table.
Table 3.
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges Boardwalk Estimated
Wetland Resource Area Impacts
Resource Area
Riverfront Area (SF)
Bordering Land
Subject to Flooding
(SF)
Land Under Water
Bodies (SF)
Inland Bank (LF)
River Street
Temp.
Perm.
850
940
Western Avenue
Temp.
Perm.
1480
1785
300
355
225
275
0
10,855
0
9575
100
115
75
95
This option is ultimately not considered prudent due to the elimination of the boating
community’s use of navigation channels under the arches which would be occupied by
boardwalks.
 Alternative 3, At-Grade Enhancements: This option includes the incorporation of
improvements into the Project which promote bicycle and pedestrian use and
improve safety within the existing footprint of the bridge and adjacent shared use
pathway network. At-grade improvements for intersections at both ends of the
arch bridges would include:
– Widening the wheelchair ramp openings to 10 feet
– Widening the crosswalks to 15 feet
– Installing new traffic signals to provide the following:
 Pedestrian countdown indications
- 21 -
Increased pedestrian clearance intervals (pedestrian clearance times
would be calculated using a walking speed of 3.5 feet per second rather
than the current speed of 4 feet per second)
 Optimized signal phasing for bicyclists and pedestrians to cross during as
many concurrent phases as possible while also reducing the number of
conflicting vehicular turns.
 Decreasing curb radii as shown on Figures 6, 8, and 10-11 to provide the
following improvements:
– Expand queuing space at sidewalk corners for non-motorized traffic
– Provide more space for active sidewalk users (i.e., users who are not
crossing the roadway)
– Reduce the speed of turning vehicles,
– Shorten the roadway crossing distance.

Distances across the River Street and Western Avenue roadways would be shortened
and available crossing times would be lengthened as indicated in the following table.
Table 4.
Charles River Path Crossing Summary for River Street and Western
Avenue
Intersection
River
Street
at
Memorial Drive
River
Street
at
Soldiers Field Road
Western Avenue at
Memorial Drive
Western Ave. at
Soldiers Field Road
Crossing Time
Existing
Proposed
19 sec
20-70 sec
(no ped.
Signals)
23-34 sec
19 sec
19-37 sec
19 sec
38-54 sec
Change
Up to
+51 sec
Up to
+34 sec
Up to
+18 sec
Up to
+35 sec
Crossing Distance
Existing
Proposed
Change
55 ft
46 ft
-9 ft
57 ft
33 ft
-24 ft
54 ft
40 ft
-14 ft
56 ft
40 ft
-16 ft
As shown in the table, the proposed crossing times will vary. This is due to the rest-inwalk function, which will extend the WALK time when the concurrent vehicle phases are
extended.
This alternative would significantly improve safety and crossing conditions at each
intersection (by shortening crossing distances and lengthening available crossing
times), without adversely affecting the bridges’ historic character. The Massachusetts
Historical Commission determined that the proposed project without the gradeseparated crossings would have “No Adverse Effect” under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act on the historic properties, in a stamped determination dated
March 30, 2012 (included in Attachment D). Furthermore, there would be no impact to
the Charles River boating community; navigation beneath the bridges would not be
constrained. This alternative involves no significant expansion of the structure and
extensive impacts to wetland resources and the Charles River are avoided. Since this
alternative involves no structural or construction challenges, it would not result in
additional construction cost or duration.
Conclusions: At-grade enhancements are the selected alternative since this option can
significantly improve safety and crossing conditions (by shortening crossing distances
- 22 -
and lengthening crossing times) without negatively impacting the Charles River and
associated wetland resources, the existing parkland, or the boating community’s use of
the river. Further, this option is feasible from a construction standpoint, would not cause
an avoidable Adverse Effect on each arch bridge’s historic character, and does not
appreciably add to the Project’s cost and construction duration.
4.0
Mitigation Measures
The Project design alternatives and construction methods discussed above have been
selected to accomplish Project objectives while minimizing potential environmental
impacts. Specific measures designed to mitigate and avoid impacts are described in
further detail below.
4.1
Landscape Mitigation
Impacts to the landscaping of adjacent parklands and surrounding areas will occur as a
result of providing construction-related access to the abutments and wingwalls, invasive
species management, and changes to the geometry of the intersections surrounding the
arch and overpass bridges. The temporary disturbance area totals approximately 1.17
acres (23,598 sf at Western Avenue and 25,376 sf at River Street). These unavoidable
impacts present an opportunity to restore the landscaping in a manner consistent with
the goals of the Charles River Basin Master Plan. Landscape plans will be closely
coordinated with the parkland landowner, the DCR. Landscaping mitigation will include
the planting of new deciduous shade trees to replace trees that need to be removed to
rehabilitate the bridge, aeration of soil compacted during construction, and replacement
of paths damaged during construction. A total of four public shade trees (> 14”
diameter) and twenty-five smaller trees (of 4-14” diameter) will be removed as part of
the Project (see Sheets 31-35 and 44 in Attachment B2). MassDOT will mitigate at a
2:1 ratio for all twenty-nine trees, however due to the size constraints of the temporary
disturbance area associated with this project, many of the replacement trees will be
used outside of the project area, but within the Charles River Reservation and the
respective city from which they were removed. Locations for replacement trees will be
determined in coordination with DCR’s Landscape Department. Tree protection will be
provided for all trees within the Limit of Work as well as trees within twenty feet of the
Limit of Work where sidewalk and curb improvements are proposed (as shown on
Sheets 31-35 in Attachment B2).
Existing occurrences of state-listed invasive plants, namely Japanese Knotweed
(Fallopia japonica) , Tree of Heaven (Ailanthus altissima), Norway Maple (Acer
plantanoides) and the nuisance plant species, Desert False Indigo (Amorpha fruticosa),
within the project area are identified on the plans for control and removal. An invasive
plant management plan will be developed based on appropriate treatments for each
species. Lawn renovation will be done throughout the temporary impact areas. See
Sheets 31-44 in Attachment B2.
4.2
Construction Schedule and Traffic
As described above, rehabilitation is proposed to occur concurrently on both arch
- 23 -
bridges. Brush and tree clearing on the Inland Bank will be completed first to allow for
adequate construction-period access to the bridge infrastructure. Barges are expected
to be present at the site for most of the 18- to 20-month construction period. Since the
arch bridges are proposed for concurrent rehabilitation, barges will be present at both
bridges. However, the barges will be coordinated such that the same arch of each
bridge will be blocked at any given time, leaving two matching pairs of arches open to
navigation.
During construction of the arch bridges, there will be two lanes of traffic and at least one
sidewalk open at all times on each bridge. However, there may be times when it will be
necessary to detour bicyclists and pedestrians around construction. MassDOT is
currently developing a detailed Temporary Traffic Control Plan to determine the best
solutions for vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian mitigation.
4.3
Construction Equipment and Staging
Although no specific construction staging area has been selected at this time, it is very
likely that staging will occur outside of the 100-foot buffer zone to any wetland resource
area. Given the level of vehicular and pedestrian activity in the area, a construction
staging area will be selected to minimize potential disruptions. As described above, the
Project involves in-water construction, some of which will be performed from a barge.
4.4
Erosion and Sediment Control/Stormwater Management
The proposed Project will reduce impervious surface area, and will mitigate for impacts
on vegetation within the project area, including 2:1 replacement for the removal of four
larger public shade trees and twenty-five smaller trees.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented during all phases of
construction to manage stormwater runoff and prevent erosion. Construction-period
stormwater runoff and erosion controls will be in place in accordance with MassDOT
standards. Hay bales and silt fences will be used in Cambridge, while compost filter
tubes will be used in Boston (see Sheets 17-20 in Attachment B2). Stormwater
mitigation for the Project will be consistent with MassDOT’s Impaired Waterbody
Program and will comply with MassDEP’s Stormwater Management Policy and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) MS4 general permit.
The location and selection of specific stormwater BMPs are being evaluated to improve
water quality and minimize impacts of stormwater runoff to the Charles River to the
greatest extent practicable.
4.5
Water Quality Control and Navigation
MassDOT anticipates that water quality control measures will be installed within the
Charles River during active rehabilitation of each bridge. These measures will likely
include placement of a boom in the water which would include an oil net to protect
against accidental spills or leaks associated with work on the structure overhead.
MassDOT also anticipates that a chase boat will be available during critical activities to
- 24 -
recover any materials that may blow into the water.
Reasonable temporary navigational restrictions may be necessary in the immediate
vicinity of the barges during active construction. The proposed rehabilitation work will
require blocking one of the three navigation channels below each bridge at any given
time; however, the barges will be coordinated such that the same arch of each bridge
will be blocked at any given time, leaving two matching pairs of arches open to
navigation.
MassDOT will coordinate construction activities with the United States Coast Guard as
required to comply with Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. In addition,
MassDOT intends to engage in vigorous public outreach to inform users of the Charles
River of the position of the barges. Furthermore, both barges will be clearly marked and
early warning safety measures will be in place to ensure safe navigation along this
stretch of the river. The Project will not significantly affect navigation, use, or access to
the Charles River. Rather, by rehabilitating the River Street and Western Avenue
bridges, the Project will protect public safety and maintain safe access for users who
may pass beneath the bridges.
4.6
Anticipated Time-of-Year Restrictions
The Charles River is listed as a diadromous fish run. Based on the time-of-year
restriction provided by the Department of Marine Fisheries (DMF) for the Longfellow
Bridge reconstruction and rehabilitation project, MassDOT anticipates that in-water
construction activities will be prohibited from March 1 to July 15 and from September 1
to November 15 to avoid impacts to the fish run.
4.7
Dewatering
Dewatering will be necessary once the temporary cofferdams are installed to provide
access to the structures. Water from behind the cofferdams will be pumped into a
settlement tank for separation of silts before being discharged into the Charles River.
4.8
Construction-Period Air and Noise
Short-term air quality impacts from fugitive dust may be expected during the early
stages of construction. Plans for controlling fugitive dust during construction include
wetting portions of the Project site during periods of high wind and removing debris by
covered trucks. The construction contract will provide for a number of strictly-enforced
measures to be used by contractors to reduce potential emissions and minimize
impacts. These measures are expected to include: using wetting agents where
necessary on a scheduled basis; using covered trucks; minimizing exposed storage of
debris on-site; minimizing transfers and mechanical disturbances of loose materials;
storing aggregate materials away from the areas of greatest activity, where and when
possible; establishing a tire cleaning area to prevent dirt from reaching the street
beyond the construction area; and cleaning streets to minimize dust accumulations.
BMPs defined above in the context of erosion and sediment control and stormwater
management will be in place to manage any potential runoff from wetting implemented
for air quality mitigation.
- 25 -
Noise will be generated during the active construction period, and construction activities
will be conducted generally during daytime hours to minimize impacts. Constructionperiod noise impacts will be minimized through the use of mufflers on heavy equipment
(as appropriate), construction hour restrictions, and other noise mitigation measures
such as minimizing truck idling.
AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN:
Is the project within or adjacent to an Area of Critical Environmental Concern?
Yes (Specify__________________________________)
No
RARE SPECIES:
Does the project site include Estimated and/or Priority Habitat of State-Listed Rare
Species?
No
Yes (Specify__________________________________ )
HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Does the project site include any structure, site or district listed in the State Register of
Historic Place or the inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the
Commonwealth?
Yes (Specify: River Street and Western Avenue bridges are located within the
State and National Register-listed Charles River Basin Historic District )
No
The State Historic Preservation Officer determined that the proposed project
(without the grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings) would have “No
Adverse Effect” under Section 106 on the historic properties, in a stamped
determination dated March 30, 2012 (included in Attachment D).
If yes, does the project involve any demolition or destruction of any listed or inventoried
No
historic or archaeological resources?
Yes
WATER RESOURCES:
Is there an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) on or within a half-mile radius of the
project site?
___Yes
X No
Are there any impaired water bodies on or within a half-mile radius of the project site?
X Yes ___No;
if yes, identify the water body and pollutant(s) causing the impairment:
The Charles River (segment ID MA72-36_2008) has the following listed
impairments: chlorophyll, DDT, Escherichia coli, fish, fishes bioassessments,
non-native aquatic plants, and oil and grease. Associated total maximum daily
loads (TMDLs) include nutrients in the Lower Charles River Basin and a final
- 26 -
pathogen TMDL for the Charles River Watershed.
Is the project within a medium or high stress basin, as established by the
Massachusetts Water Resources Commission? ___Yes
X No
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT:
Generally describe the project's stormwater impacts and measures that the project will
take to comply with the standards found in MassDEP's Stormwater Management
Regulations:
The existing stormwater management facilities located within Project limits are
comprised of a closed drainage system consisting of catch basins, manholes,
piping, pump station and outfalls which primarily discharge to the Charles River.
The City of Boston closed drainage system collects stormwater runoff from the
bridges, Soldiers Field Road, Western Avenue, and Cambridge Street prior to
discharging to the Charles River. The City of Cambridge closed drainage system
collects stormwater runoff from the bridges, Memorial Drive, Western Avenue,
and River Street. No new stormwater outfalls will be created as part of the
Project. Existing storm drainage outfalls will be retained, and in some cases
improved, and utilized as part of the stormwater management system.
The Project is considered a “Redevelopment of a previously developed site”
under MassDEP’s Stormwater Management Policy. Under this policy,
redevelopment projects must meet the Stormwater Management Standards to the
maximum extent practicable. However, if it is not practicable to meet all the
standards, new (i.e., retrofitted or expanded) stormwater management systems
must be designed to improve existing conditions. The Project is located within
the Charles River watershed and discharges stormwater to the Charles River, an
impaired waterway. The watershed has two final TMDLs: nutrients (phosphorus)
in the Lower Charles River, and pathogens. The Project will be consistent with
MassDOT’s Impaired Waterbody Program and will comply with MassDEP’s
Stormwater Management Policy and EPA’s NPDES MS4 General Permit.
MassDOT is evaluating the location and selection of stormwater BMPs to improve
water quality and minimize impacts from stormwater runoff to the Charles River
to the greatest extent practicable.
The stormwater BMPs ultimately selected will control runoff, provide groundwater
recharge (where subsurface conditions allow), and retain contaminants to
prevent their release into the Charles River. Proposed BMPs may include, where
applicable, retrofitting of the existing closed drainage systems by relocating or
providing new deep sump catch basins, piping, deep sump drainage manholes,
subsurface infiltration structures and above ground infiltration or detention
basins. During construction, hay bales and silt fences will be used in Cambridge,
while compost filter tubes will be used in Boston. Conditions affecting the
selection of stormwater BMPs include physical features such as drainage area,
soil type, groundwater, bedrock, land area, and topography. Other items for
- 27 -
consideration include impacts to existing parkland uses, aesthetics, setback
requirements, maintenance, and permitting requirements.
The proposed Project will result in a decreased amount of impervious surface
area, and will have no permanent impacts on vegetation except for the removal of
four public shade trees and twenty-five smaller trees (equal to or greater than 4
inches diameter at breast height); the MassDOT will mitigate at a 2:1 ratio for the
loss of twenty-nine trees.
MASSACHUSETTS CONTINGENCY PLAN:
Has the project site been, or is it currently being, regulated under M.G.L.c.21E or the
Massachusetts Contingency Plan? Yes ___ No
X
No part of the project site is being regulated under M.G.L.c.21E or the MCP.
Is there an Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) on any portion of the project site? Yes ___
No
X
Are you aware of any Reportable Conditions at the property that have not yet been
assigned an RTN? Yes ___ No X
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE:
If the project will generate solid waste during demolition or construction, describe
alternatives considered for re-use, recycling, and disposal of, e.g., asphalt, brick,
concrete, gypsum, metal, wood:
MassDOT adopted its GreenDOT Policy Directive on June 2, 2010, with the
primary goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; promote the healthy
transportation options of walking, bicycling, and public transit; and to support
smart growth development. As part of that policy Sustainable Design and
Construction Best Practices, MassDOT currently uses a range of recycled
materials in pavement, including recycled asphalt pavement, recycled tires, and
shingles, as well as warm mix asphalt. MassDOT is working to increase the use
of environmentally-friendly technologies, and continues to conduct research so
that it can maximize use of recycled materials and warm-mix asphalt paving.
Will your project disturb asbestos containing materials? Yes ___ No X ;
if yes, please consult state asbestos requirements at
http://mass.gov/MassDEP/air/asbhom01.htm
MassDOT Highway Division’s Hazardous Materials Unit reviews all projects to
determine if the project will encounter and/or generate waste containing
asbestos. If asbestos containing materials are encountered, appropriate special
conditions are provided in the project’s contract, such that contractors handle
- 28 -
and dispose of those materials appropriately and in accordance with all
applicable local, state and federal regulations.
Describe anti-idling and other measures to limit emissions from construction equipment:
As stated in MassDOT’s GreenDOT Policy Directive, MassDOT requires that
contractors install emission control devices in all off-road vehicles. MassDOT’s
Revised Diesel Retrofit Specification states emissions control standards must be
met or technology must be used for non-road, diesel powered construction
equipment in excess of 50 horsepower on MassDOT job sites.
DESIGNATED WILD AND SCENIC RIVER:
Is this project site located wholly or partially within a defined river corridor of a federally
designated Wild and Scenic River or a state designated Scenic River? Yes ___ No X
- 29 -
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3..
4
5.
6.
7.
List of all attachments to this document. See Table of Contents.
U.S.G.S. map (good quality color copy, 8-½ x 11 inches or larger, at a scale of 1:24,000)
indicating the project location and boundaries. See Figure 2 in Attachment A.
Plan, at an appropriate scale, of existing conditions on the project site and its immediate
environs, showing all known structures, roadways and parking lots, railroad rights-of-way,
wetlands and water bodies, wooded areas, farmland, steep slopes, public open spaces, and
major utilities. See Figure 1 in Attachment A and Attachment B1.
Plan, at an appropriate scale, depicting environmental constraints on or adjacent to the
project site such as Priority and/or Estimated Habitat of state-listed rare species, Areas of
Critical Environmental Concern, Chapter 91 jurisdictional areas, Article 97 lands, wetland
resource area delineations, water supply protection areas, and historic resources and/or
districts. See Figure 12 in Attachment A.
Plan, at an appropriate scale, of proposed conditions upon completion of project (if
construction of the project is proposed to be phased, there should be a site plan showing
conditions upon the completion of each phase). See Attachment B2.
List of all agencies and persons to whom the proponent circulated the ENF, in accordance
with 301 CMR 11.16(2). See Attachment E.
List of municipal and federal permits and reviews required by the project, as applicable. See
Attachment F.
- 30 -
LAND SECTION – ALL PROPONENTS MUST FILL OUT THIS SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A. Does the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to land (see 301 CMR 11.03(1)
___ Yes X No
II. Impacts and Permits
A. Describe, in acres, the current and proposed character of the project site, as follows:
Existing
Change
Total
Footprint of buildings
0
0
0
Roadways
3.35
(0.17)
3.18
Parking and other paved areas
1.31
0.12
1.43
(Sidewalks, Cycle Tracks, Multi-Use Paths)
Other altered areas
1.12
0.05
1.17
(Landscaped areas)
Undeveloped areas
0
0
0
Total: Project Site Acreage
5.78
0
5.78
An overall goal of the design for this Project is to create an improved experience for all
users, including vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. The overall area for “Roadways” is
decreasing due to narrowing of travel lanes over the bridges to accommodate a wider
sidewalk and cycle track system. The project is also proposing the removal of one of the
I-90 ramps at the corner of Cambridge Street and Soldiers Field Road.
The increase in “Parking and other paved areas” is due to the previously mentioned
wider sidewalks and cycle tracks over the bridges. In addition, wider sidewalks are
proposed elsewhere within the Project limits to either add room for cycle track systems
or to ensure all sidewalks and ramps are ADA/AAB compliant.
“Other altered areas” includes grass strips along sidewalks, landscaped traffic islands,
and landscaping work along the banks of the Charles River. Changes to the geometry of
the intersections surrounding these bridges are creating an overall increase in
pervious/landscaped area within the project limits. The removal of the I-90 on-ramp,
tightening of the right turn from Western Ave (eastbound) onto Soldiers Field Road,
realignment of the I-90 on-ramp from Soldiers Field Road, and extensions of some
landscape strips all contribute to this increase in pervious area.
B. Has any part of the project site been in active agricultural use in the last five years?
___ Yes X No
C. Is any part of the project site currently or proposed to be in active forestry use?
___ Yes X No
D. Does any part of the project involve conversion of land held for natural resources purposes in
accordance with Article 97 of the Amendments to the Constitution of the Commonwealth to any
purpose not in accordance with Article 97? ___ Yes X No
The Charles River Reservation, an open space and recreational area owned and managed
by the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), borders the River Street and
Western Avenue arch bridges on all four quadrants. While temporary use of DCR
property will be required during construction, it is not anticipated that the project will
result in an Article 97 Land Disposition since there is no permanent conversion of public
parkland to transportation or any other use. Pedestrian and bicycle access through the
- 31 -
parkland will be maintained during construction. Landscaping disturbed by the project
will be restored to be consistent with DCR’s Charles River Basin Master Plan. All trees
>4” DBH removed for the Project (a total of 29 trees) will be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio. All
aspects of the project design and construction, as they relate to the DCR parkland, will be
closely coordinated with DCR.
E. Is any part of the project site currently subject to a conservation restriction, preservation
restriction, agricultural preservation restriction or watershed preservation restriction? ___ Yes X
No
F. Does the project require approval of a new urban redevelopment project or a fundamental
change in an existing urban redevelopment project under M.G.L.c.121A? ___ Yes X No
G. Does the project require approval of a new urban renewal plan or a major modification of an
existing urban renewal plan under M.G.L.c.121B? Yes ___ No X
III. Consistency
A. Identify the current municipal comprehensive land use plan
The Project occurs in two municipalities - Boston and Cambridge – with the
following plans:
 Boston: The North Allston Strategic Framework for Planning (2005) was
developed by the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
 Cambridge: The city of Cambridge utilizes two documents as its “Land Use
Plan,” (1) its growth management document, Towards a Sustainable Future:
Cambridge Growth Policy, prepared 1993 and updated 2007, and (2) its zoning
map and ordinances.
B. Describe the project’s consistency with that plan with regard to: 1) economic development,
2) adequacy of infrastructure, 3) open space impacts, 4) compatibility with adjacent land
uses
The North Allston Strategic Framework for Planning lists the following among its
goals, principles, and vision statements: undertake infrastructure initiatives,
including transportation improvements; expand and enhance pedestrian/bicycle
networks, encourage walking and bicycle use, and promote pedestrian safety. The
Project is consistent with these goals through its maintenance of vital
infrastructure, provision of cycle tracks, and proposed pedestrian improvements.
Towards a Sustainable Future: Cambridge Growth Policy includes the following
policies relevant to the Project:
Policy 15: Enact land use regulations that encourage transit and other
forms of nonautomobile mobility by mixing land uses, creating a pleasant
and safe pedestrian and bicycle environment, and restricting high density
development to areas near transit stations.
Policy 22: Undertake reasonable measures to improve the functioning of
the city’s street network, without increasing through capacity, to reduce
congestion and noise and facilitate bus and other non automobile
circulation. However, minor arterials with a residential character should be
protected whenever possible.
Policy 23: Encourage all reasonable forms of nonautomobile travel
including, for example, making improvements to the city’s infrastructure
which would promote bicycling and walking.
- 32 -
The Project will maintain the structural integrity of the existing bridges. The
Project will also improve conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists through the
provision of cycle tracks, restricting sidewalks adjacent to cycle tracks for
pedestrian use, and widening multi-use paths. These improvements will
encourage nonautomobile travel.
C. Identify the current Regional Policy Plan of the applicable Regional Planning Agency (RPA)
RPA: Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC)
Title: MetroFuture (May 2008)
D. Describe the project’s consistency with that plan with regard to:
1) economic development; 2) adequacy of infrastructure; and 3) open space impacts:
The Project area is within the Inner Core subregion of the MAPC, and MetroFuture
is the governing regional plan. The plan establishes a vision for the region in
terms of land use and development. The plan provides 65 goals in six categories:
Sustainable Growth Patterns, Housing Choices, Community Vitality, Prosperity,
Getting Around, and Energy, Air, Water and Wildlife. One of the basic tenets of the
plan is that growth is focused in existing areas and linked by an efficient
transportation system. Specific goals include:
Goal 8:
Goal 47:
Goal 48:
Goal 54:
Historic resources will be preserved and enhanced.
Most people will choose to walk or bike for short trips.
The average person will drive fewer miles every day.
Roads, bridges, and railways will be safe and well maintained. With a renewed focus on growth in developed areas where
infrastructure is available, more funding would be allocated to
maintenance or improvements (including safety enhancements
and multimodal adaptation) of existing transportation assets.
The Project is consistent with the goals of MetroFuture. The Project will preserve
the historic features of the two bridges, maintain the structural integrity of each
arch bridge and its associated overpass bridge, and encourage nonautomobile
travel by improving conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians.
- 33 -
RARE SPECIES SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to rare species or habitat (see 301
CMR 11.03(2))? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to rare species or habitat? ___ Yes
X
No
C. Does the project site fall within mapped rare species habitat (Priority or Estimated Habitat?) in the
current Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas (attach relevant page)? ___ Yes
X
No.
D. If you answered "No" to all questions A, B and C, proceed to the Wetlands, Waterways, and
Tidelands Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the
remainder of the Rare Species section below.
WETLANDS, WATERWAYS, AND TIDELANDS SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A.
Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wetlands, waterways,
and tidelands (see 301 CMR 11.03(3))?
X
Yes
No; if yes, specify, in
quantitative terms:
The Project exceeds two MEPA review thresholds. The project involves greater
than ½ acre impact to other wetlands (301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)1.f.) and impacts greater
than 500 linear feet of inland bank (301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)1.b.). Wetland impacts are
quantified below. All impacts are temporary except for the 85 SF permanent
impact to LUW; this permanent impact does not exceed any MEPA review
thresholds in 310 CMR 11.03(3).
Bank (lf)
Land under Water
Bordering Land Subject to Flooding
Riverfront Area
1,114 lf (temporary)
85 sf (permanent); 4,704 sf (temporary)_
1,625 sf (temporary)
29,445 sf (temporary)
B. Does the project require any state permits (or a local Order of Conditions) related to wetlands,
waterways, or tidelands? X Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit:
The Project will require Orders of Conditions from the Boston Conservation Commission
and the Cambridge Conservation Commission, a 401 Water Quality Certification, and a
Chapter 91 Minor Project Modification from MassDEP.
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Water Supply Section. If you
answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Wetlands,
Waterways, and Tidelands Section below.
II. Wetlands Impacts and Permits
A. Does the project require a new or amended Order of Conditions under the Wetlands Protection
- 34 -
Act (M.G.L. c.131A)? X Yes ___ No; if yes, has a Notice of Intent been filed? ___ Yes X No;
B. Describe any proposed permanent or temporary impacts to wetland resource areas located on
the project site:
Wetland resource areas associated with the Charles River (a perennial river) at the Project
site include: (1) Inland Bank; (2) 25-foot Riverfront Area; (3) Land Under Water Bodies or
Waterways (Inland); and (4) Bordering Land Subject to Flooding (FEMA Zone A, the area
of 100-year flooding). For the purpose of delineating Riverfront Area, Mean Annual High
Water was found to be coincident with Top of Bank. No Bordering Vegetated Wetlands
were delineated at the Project site. The wetland resources in the Project area are
depicted on Sheets 22-25 in Attachment B2. Impacts to wetland resource areas are
detailed in Section 2.1 of the “General Project Description” and are summarized below.
Proposed rehabilitation work on both bridges will involve 85 SF of permanent and 4,704
SF of temporary impacts to Land Under Water Bodies and Waterways (LUW). Permanent
impacts to LUW are associated with proposed work on the River Street bridge and
include approximately 85 square feet of LUW where the southwest wingwall will be
expanded. Temporary cofferdams will be installed at each corner of the River Street and
Western Avenue arch bridges, totaling approximately 3,118 square feet of LUW for the
River Street bridge and approximately 1,586 square feet of LUW for the Western Avenue
bridge (see Sheets 22-25 in Attachment B2). Following construction, the sheetpile
associated with the cofferdams will be cut-off below the mudline and the cofferdams will
be backfilled with stones or boulders to the level of the existing mudline. This is
characterized as a temporary impact, as all impacts are at or below the level of the
existing mudline. The natural grade of the river bottom will be restored.
Temporary impacts to inland bank, BLSF, and Riverfront Area will occur as a result of
rehabilitating the bridge structure and roadway, as well as clearing brush and trees to
provide construction related access to the arch bridges. Additional landscaping work
within these resource areas will include removal of any hazardous, detrimental, nuisance,
or invasive vegetation within the Project limits as well as seeding, slope stabilization, and
other plantings. These activities will result in temporary impacts to approximately 1,114
linear feet of inland bank, approximately 1,625 SF of BLSF, and approximately 29,445 SF
of Riverfront Area (see Sheets 22-25 and 31-44 in Attachment B2). There will be no
permanent impacts to these resource areas, nor will the Project adversely affect flood
storage capacity or exacerbate flood hazards. The majority of the temporarily impacted
Riverfront Area is previously degraded roadway and/or structural fill.
C. Estimate the extent and type of impact that the project will have on wetland resources, and
indicate whether the impacts are temporary or permanent:
Coastal W etlands
Area (square feet) or
Length (linear feet)
Temporary or
Permanent Impact?
Land Under the Ocean
Designated Port Areas
Coastal Beaches
Coastal Dunes
Barrier Beaches
Coastal Banks
Rocky Intertidal Shores
Salt Marshes
Land Under Salt Ponds
Land Containing Shellfish
Fish Runs
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
_________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
- 35 -
Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage _________________
Inland Wetlands
Bank (lf)
Bordering Vegetated W etlands
Isolated Vegetated Wetlands
Land under Water
Isolated Land Subject to Flooding
Bordering Land Subject to Flooding
Riverfront Area
___________________
1,114 lf (temporary)
0
0
85 sf (permanent); 4,704 sf (temporary)
0
1,625 sf (temporary)
29,445 sf (temporary)
D. Is any part of the project:
1. proposed as a limited project?
X Yes ___ No [see 310 CMR 10.53(3)(i)]; if yes, what is
the area (in sf)? 251,777 square feet (5.78 acres)
2. the construction or alteration of a dam? ___ Yes X No; if yes, describe:
3. fill or structure in a velocity zone or regulatory floodway? Yes _ X __ No
4. dredging or disposal of dredged material?
X Yes ___ No; if yes, describe the volume of
dredged material and the proposed disposal site:
Temporary cofferdams will be required at each corner of the River Street and Western
Avenue bridges to provide construction-period access to the structures for wingwall and
abutment repair (see Sheets 22-25 in Attachment B2). The work area within the cofferdam
may require up to approximately ten feet excavation beneath the wingwalls within the
dewatered area behind the cofferdam. The volume of excavated material is conservatively
estimated at 930 cubic yards (cy) (650 cy associated with the River Street bridge and 280
cy associated with the Western Avenue bridge), which the contractor will seek approvals
to dispose of at an approved location.
5. a discharge to an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) or an Area of Critical Environmental
Concern (ACEC)? ___ Yes X No
6. subject to a wetlands restriction order? ___ Yes X No; if yes, identify the area (in sf):
7. located in buffer zones?
X Yes ___ No; if yes, how much (in sf): 48, 077 sf (River Street
bridge); 45,319 sf Western Avenue bridge.
E. Will the project:
1. be subject to a local wetlands ordinance or bylaw?
Yes _X__ No
2. alter any federally-protected wetlands not regulated under state law? ___ Yes X No; if yes,
what is the area (sf)?
III. Waterways and Tidelands Impacts and Permits
A. Does the project site contain waterways or tidelands (including filled former tidelands) that are
subject to the Waterways Act, M.G.L.c.91? X Yes ___ No; if yes, is there a current Chapter
91 License or Permit affecting the project site? X Yes ___ No; if yes, list the date and
license or permit number and provide a copy of the historic map used to determine extent of
filled tidelands:
River Street Bridge: Department of Public Works (DPW) #488, issued December 3, 1924
to the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) to construct a new bridge (plans are
missing from the record).
Western Avenue Bridge: DPW #410, issued March 5, 1924 to the MDC to construct a
new bridge.
The Historic High Water Line depicted on Figure 12 is from MassDEP/Massachusetts
- 36 -
Coastal Zone Management tidelands jurisdiction data provided through the MassGIS
database.
B. Does the project require a new or modified license or permit under M.G.L.c.91?
Yes
X
No; if yes, how many acres of the project site subject to M.G.L.c.91 will be for non-waterdependent use? Current 0 Change 0
Total 0 .
If yes, how many square feet of solid fill or pile-supported structures (in sf)? 85 square feet
C. For non-water-dependent use projects, indicate the following:
As the Project involves rehabilitating existing transportation routes across a waterway,
the Project is a water-dependent use.
Area of filled tidelands on the site: ____________________
Area of filled tidelands covered by buildings: ____________
For portions of site on filled tidelands, list ground floor uses and area of each use: ______
Does the project include new non-water-dependent uses located over flowed tidelands? Yes ___ No ___
Height of building on filled tidelands: ________________
Also show the following on a site plan: Mean High Water, Mean Low Water, Waterdependent Use Zone, location of uses within buildings on tidelands, and interior and
exterior areas and facilities dedicated for public use, and historic high and historic low water
marks.
D. Is the project located on landlocked tidelands? ___ Yes X No
E. Is the project located in an area where low groundwater levels have been identified by a
municipality or a state or federal agency as a threat to building foundations? ___Yes X No
F. Is the project non-water-dependent and located on landlocked tidelands or waterways or
tidelands subject to the Waterways Act and subject to a mandatory EIR? ___ Yes X No;
G. Does the project include dredging? X Yes ___ No; if yes, answer the following questions:
What type of dredging? Improvement _X__ Maintenance
Both ____
What is the proposed dredge volume, in cubic yards (cys) ~930 cubic yards
What is the proposed dredge footprint?
Temporary cofferdams will be required at each corner of the River Street and
Western Avenue bridges to provide construction-period access to the structures
for wingwall and abutment repair. The work area within the cofferdam may require
up to approximately 8.5 feet of excavation beneath the wingwalls within the
dewatered area behind the cofferdam. As this excavation will occur below the high
water line, it meets the definition of “dredging” provided in 314 CMR 9.02. The
total area of these cofferdams is 4,704 sf (see Sheets 22-25 in Attachment B2).
Will dredging impact the following resource areas?
Intertidal: Yes ___ No X
Outstanding Resource Waters: Yes ___ No X
Other resource area (i.e. shellfish beds, eelgrass): Yes X (Land Under Water
Bodies and Waterways) No __; if yes 4,704 sq ft
If yes to any of the above, have you evaluated appropriate and practicable steps to:
1) avoidance; 2) if avoidance is not possible, minimization; 3) if either avoidance or
minimize is not possible, mitigation? Only minor areas of dredging are
anticipated for the purposes of rehabilitating the two public and historic arch
bridges. To provide the access required to perform the necessary structural
- 37 -
rehabilitation of the River Street and Western Avenue bridges, it will be
necessary to excavate up to 8.5 feet beneath the wingwalls. This excavation
will occur within the proposed cofferdams near the wingwalls and will be
minimized to the extent practicable. Since this excavation would be
performed within the area confined by the cofferdams, no turbidity would be
expected. The contractor will receive the necessary approvals to dispose of
this material at an approved location.
If no to any of the above, what information or documentation was used to support
this determination?
Provide a comprehensive analysis of practicable alternatives for improvement dredging in
accordance with 314 CMR 9.07(1)(b). Physical and chemical data of the sediment shall
be included in the comprehensive analysis.
There are no practicable alternatives that would allow the required access to
rehabilitate each structurally deficient bridge without excavation.
Sediment Characterization
Existing gradation analysis results? X Yes ___No: if yes, provide results. See
Attachment G.
Existing chemical results for parameters listed in 314 CMR 9.07(2)(b)6? X Yes
___ No; if yes, provide results. See Attachment G.
Do you have sufficient information to evaluate feasibility of the following management
options for dredged sediment? If yes, check the appropriate option.
Beach Nourishment ___
Unconfined Ocean Disposal ___
Confined Disposal:
Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) ___
Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) ___
Landfill Reuse in accordance with COMM-97-001 _X__(see below discussion)
Shoreline Placement ___
Upland Material Reuse ___
In-State landfill disposal ___
Out-of-state landfill disposal ___
(NOTE: This information is required for a 401 Water Quality Certification.)
Limited physical and chemical testing of sediment samples was performed in April 2010
(see Attachment G). A total of four samples were collected and analyzed: one from the
upstream Boston side of the River Street bridge, one from the downstream Cambridge side
of the River Street bridge, one from the upstream Cambridge side of the Western Avenue
bridge, and one from the downstream Boston side of the Western Avenue bridge.
Sediment samples were recovered to a depth of 2.5 to 3.5 feet below the mudline.
Sediment samples were tested for the parameters listed in the 401 Water Quality
Certification Regulations at 314 CMR 9.07.
Chemical results from each sample were compared to the maximum allowable
contaminant levels for sediment reuse at lined landfills, as presented in Table 1 of DEP
Interim Policy #COMM-94-007: Sampling, Analysis, Handling & Tracking Requirements for
2
Dredged Sediment Reused or Disposed at Massachusetts Permitted Landfills. These
standards identify concentrations at or below which qualifying sediments are exempted
from DEP review for reuse as cover or pre-capping contour material at a landfill with a DEP
approved, functioning liner with a leachate collection system. This comparison indicated
that the tested sediments in the vicinity of the River Street bridge could be reused at a
lined landfill. The tested sediments on the Boston side of the Western Avenue bridge also
exhibited concentrations below the lined landfill criteria; however, the tested sediments on
the upstream Cambridge side of the Western Avenue bridge exhibited lead levels above
2 http://www.mass.gov/dep/recycle/laws/dredge.htm, last accessed January 2013.
- 38 -
the criteria in Table 1. (Note - TCLP testing of all 4 samples for lead indicated that the
material is not a hazardous waste.) The full sediment report is available in Attachment G.
The need for additional testing will be determined in consultation with MassDEP during the
401 Water Quality Certification review process. All sediments will be disposed of at a
location approved by MassDEP.
IV. Consistency:
A. Does the project have effects on the coastal resources or uses, and/or is the project located
within the Coastal Zone? ___ Yes X No
B. Is the project located within an area subject to a Municipal Harbor Plan? ___ Yes X No
WATER SUPPLY SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to water supply (see 301 CMR
11.03(4))? ___ Yes X No
B. Does the project require any state permits related to water supply? ___ Yes X No
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Wastewater Section. If you
answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Water Supply
Section below.
WASTEWATER SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wastewater (see 301 CMR
11.03(5))? ___ Yes X No
B. Does the project require any state permits related to wastewater? ___ Yes X No
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Transportation -- Traffic
Generation Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the
remainder of the Wastewater Section below.
TRANSPORTATION SECTION (TRAFFIC GENERATION)
I. Thresholds / Permit
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to traffic generation (see 301
CMR 11.03(6))? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to state-controlled roadways? __Yes X No;
if yes, specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Roadways and Other
- 39 -
Transportation Facilities Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill
out the remainder of the Traffic Generation Section below.
TRANSPORTATION SECTION (ROADWAYS AND OTHER
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES)
I. Thresholds
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to roadways or other
transportation facilities (see 301 CMR 11.03(6))? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify, in
quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to roadways or other transportation
facilities? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Energy Section. If you
answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Roadways Section
below.
ENERGY SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to energy (see 301 CMR
11.03(7))? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to energy? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify
which permit:
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Air Quality Section. If you
answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Energy Section
below.
AIR QUALITY SECTION
I. Thresholds
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to air quality (see 301 CMR
11.03(8))? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to air quality? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify
which permit:
D. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Solid and Hazardous Waste
Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the
Air Quality Section below.
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION
- 40 -
I. Thresholds / Permits
A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to solid or hazardous waste (see
301 CMR 11.03(9))? ___ Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms:
B. Does the project require any state permits related to solid & hazardous waste? __Yes X No;
if yes, specify which permit:
C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Historical and Archaeological
Resources Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the
remainder of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Section below.
HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SECTION
I. Thresholds / Impacts
A. Have you consulted with the Massachusetts Historical Commission? _
X_ Yes ___ No; if yes,
attach correspondence
See Attachment D for the early coordination letters (dated December 23, 2011) to the State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), Boston Landmarks Commission and Cambridge
Historical Commission. MassDOT received the attached response letter (dated January
27, 2012) from the SHPO. Additionally, the SHPO determined that the proposed project
without the grade-separated crossings would have “No Adverse Effect” under Section 106
on the historic properties, in a stamped determination dated March 30, 2012 (included in
Attachment D).
For project sites involving lands under water, have you consulted with the Massachusetts Board
of Underwater Archaeological Resources? __X__Yes ___ No; if yes, attach correspondence.
MassDOT submitted a PNF to the BUAR on March 2, 2012. In an email dated March 8,
2012, the BUAR stated, “…the project is unlikely to impact submerged cultural resources.”
If any unknown resources are uncovered, MassDOT will follow the BUAR’s Policy
Guidance for the Discovery of Unanticipated Archaeological Resources.
B. Is any part of the project site a historic structure, or a structure within a historic district, in either
case listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological
Assets of the Commonwealth? _X_ Yes ___ No; if yes, does the project involve the demolition of
all or any exterior part of such historic structure? ___ Yes _X_ No; if yes, please describe:
The River Street bridge, constructed in 1925 and the Western Avenue bridge, constructed
in 1924, are both three-span, Neoclassical-style reinforced concrete arch bridges. Both
bridges are contributing structures in the State and National Register-listed Charles River
Basin Historic District.
C. Is any part of the project site an archaeological site listed in the State Register of Historic Places
or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? ___ Yes _X_ No
D. If you answered "No" to all parts of both questions A, B and C, proceed to the Attachments and
Certifications Sections. If you answered "Yes" to any part of either question A or question B, fill
out the remainder of the Historical and Archaeological Resources Section below.
- 41 -
II. Impacts
Describe and assess the project's impacts, direct and indirect, on listed or inventoried historical and
archaeological resources:
This Project will either replace deteriorated features of the bridges in-kind or replicate the
existing conditions of the bridges. Rehabilitation work on the River Street bridge and the
Western Avenue bridge will include the following construction activities: repairing or
reconstructing as necessary the concrete arches, spandrel walls, piers, abutments, wingwalls
and parapets; upgrading the drainage systems; installing compatible ornamental bridge
lighting to replace missing original lighting; and intersection improvements at the ends of the
two bridges. MassDOT will continue to consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer,
the Boston Landmarks Commission, the Cambridge Historical Commission, and the
Department of Conservation and Recreation as the design work progresses to ensure that the
character-defining features of the two bridges are preserved and that the rehabilitation work
is context-sensitive within the State and National Register-listed historic district.
III. Consistency
Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with federal, state, regional, and local
plans and policies related to preserving historical and archaeological resources:
MassDOT anticipates that the River Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project will be supported
exclusively by the state-funded Accelerated Bridge Program. Work in water, however, will
require compliance with the Section 404 Comprehensive Permit for Bridges from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). This project, therefore, will involve a federal permit
action that is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1966 as amended (36 CFR 800). MassDOT will continue to consult with the State
Historic Preservation Officer, the Boston Landmarks Commission, the Cambridge
Historical Commission, and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and
Recreation as plans for the bridge rehabilitation project progress to ensure that the project
will "avoid, minimize, or mitigate" any effects to historic properties as required under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended (36 CFR 800).
MassDOT has also forwarded Project Notification Forms to the Tribal Historic Preservation
Officers of the Narragansett Tribe and the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah), and
to the Massachusetts Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources. MassDOT will
consider any comments those entities may wish to make.
Completing the project review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1966, as amended, fulfills the requirements of State Register review under M.G.L.
Chapter 9, Sections 26-27C, as amended by Chapter 254 of the Acts of 1988 [950 CMR
71.04(2)].
- 42 -
CERTIFICATIONS:
1.
The Public Notice of Environmental Review has been/will be published in the following
newspapers in accordance with 301 CMR 11.15(1):
Boston Herald (On or before 3/20/2013)
Cambridge Chronicle (On or before 3/21/2013)
2.
This form has been circulated to Agencies and Persons in accordance with 301 CMR 11.16(2).
Signatures:
__________________________________
Frank DePaola, P.E.
Highway Division, Administrator
Date Signature of Responsible Officer
or Proponent
Date
Michael Trepanier
MassDOT, Highway Division
10 Park Plaza, Suite 4160
Boston, MA 02116
(857)-368-8828
Signature of person preparing
ENF (if different from left)
Maria Hartnett
Epsilon Associates, Inc.
3 Clock Tower Place, Suite 250
Maynard, MA 01754
(978) 897-7100
- 43 -
Attachment A Figures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Aerial Locus Map
USGS Locus Map
River Street – Existing Cross-Section
Western Avenue – Existing Cross-Section
River Street/Soldiers Field Road – Existing and Proposed Conditions at “The
Narrows”
River Street - Proposed Conditions
River Street - Proposed Cross-Section
Western Avenue - Proposed Conditions
Western Avenue - Proposed Cross-Section
River Street Intersection Corner Improvements
Western Avenue Intersection Corner Improvements
Environmental Constraints
G:\Projects2\MA\Boston\2755_RiverWesternBridges\2011\aerial.mxd
MIL
°
LS
TR
E
ET
3
¤
!2
(
3A £
!
(
0
Scale 1:7,200
1 inch = 600 feet
150 300
600
Feet
FR
AN
KL
IN
ST
RE
GR
ET
N
RE
ST
OC
SS
TR
NC
YE
EE
T
E ET
E NDE
R S TR
EE
E ET
JAY S TR
H OW A R D
PUTNAM
REE T
TONE ST
STRE E T
B LA C K S
EN
FA
AN
ET
ET
ST
D
LS
TO
N
ST
RE
ET
RE
ET
ET
RE
ST
N
TO
RE
RE
ET
D
AV
D
AN
IT
E
EN
ST
CH
ES
TN
UT
ST
UE
RE
ET
HE
NR
RE
ET
!
(2
ST
ST
L
S
ET
NE
W
OO
FT
AR
W
GR
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
RE
ST
E
EN
PE
¦
¨
§
90
ST
OO
NW
RE
OA
P IK E
ER
S TU R N
RE
ET
T
KE
EN
ST
GL
SID
HUSE TT
ST
RE
IN
CE
TU
ER
MAS S AC
AZ
EN
ET
P LA Z A
ST
K
AD
ET
AG
OR
RIV
T OLL
LS TON
FL
M
E
CE
AL
EY
HI
W
TR
IN
ON
AL
TN
ET
AL
ES
ET
RO
RE
ET
AV
EA
RE
PL
ST
ET
SA
RE
E
UE
ST
TL
CA
MB
G
R ID
M
DR
FA
ST
PR
ZA
PLA
NT
OM
Y
IR
EW
IR
M
ST
O
RE
NT
ET
AV
CH
ST
ND
AT
M
Y
UE
LL
RE
WI
SE
AL
L
OL
ET
RE
ST
KE
AV E NUE
ME M ORIAL DRIV E
RO AD
S FIE LD
EET
SO LDIER
STR
HAGUE
ER
RIV
River Street Bridge
NT
STO
ALL
S TR E E T
T
Western Avenue Bridge
T
ET
K
EE S
TR
HING HAM ST REE
T
E
RE
RE
KINN AIR D
C A LL
E
N AV E NU
ST
HA
HA
MAG
WE ST ER
EE
ET
WA LK E R C OU R T
NO
RT
H
HA
RV
AR
D
ST
BANKS S TRE ET
RE
ET
Basemap: 2008 Orthophotography, MassGIS
Y
ST
RE
ET
Boston/C ambridge, MA
Figure 1
Aerial Locus
Scale 1:24,000
1 inch = 2,000 feet
0
500 1,000
2,000
Feet
Basemap: 1985, 1987 USGS Quadrangles, MassGIS
°
Western Avenue Bridge
River Street Bridge
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 2
USGS Locus
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 3
River Street – Existing Cross-Section
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 4
Western Avenue - Existing Cross-Section
River Street / SF Road – “The Narrows” South Approach to River Street Bridge – Boston Side
Existing
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Proposed
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 5
River Street/Soldiers Field Road – Existing and Proposed Conditions at “The Narrows”
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 6
River Street - Proposed Conditions
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 7
River Street – Proposed Cross-Section
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 8
Western Avenue - Proposed Conditions
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 9
Western Avenue – Proposed Cross-Section
Green: proposed change from roadway to sidewalk.
Red: proposed change from sidewalk to roadway.
Boston
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Cambridge
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 10
River Street Intersection Corner Improvements
Green: proposed change from roadway to sidewalk.
Red: proposed change from sidewalk to roadway.
Soldiers Field Road
Boston
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
Cambridge
Boston/Cambridge, MA
Figure 11
Western Avenue Intersection Corner Improvements
G:\Projects2\MA\Boston\2755_RiverWesternBridges\2011\enviro.mxd
MIL
3
¤
!
(2
3A £
!
(
LS
TR
E
LEGEND
ET
Historic High Water (Ch91 Tidelands Data)
Contemporary High Water (Ch91 Tidelands Data)
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer, Zone AE
Article 97 Land
ET
Wetlands
°
AR
D
ST
RE
Open Water
0
HA
RV
Scale 1:7,200
1 inch = 600 feet
300
600
MAG
T
STREE T
ER
RIV
PUTNAM
EET
ONE STR
UE
ST
O
M
DR
FA
EW
IR
FA
RE
NT
ET
AV
EN
CH
AN
PR
ET
ET
ET
ST
D
LS
N
ET
TO
ST
RE
RE
ET
D
D
GR
AN
ET
RE
ST
N
W
TO
OO
AV
IT
E
EN
ST
ST
RE
RE
S
ET
ST
FT
L
W
TU
!
(2
River Street and Western Avenue Bridges
RE
ST
EN
ET
AR
GL
RE
PE
¦
¨
§
90
OA
E
ER
S TURN
P IK
AD
E
SID
HUSE TT
AZ
IN
ER
MAS S AC
ST
AG
CE
M
EN
NE
P LA ZA
OR
RE
ST
RO
ET
OO
W
FL
RIV
TO LL
LS TON
ET
ST
K
Y
RE
NW
UE
HI
E
ST
NT
AL
TN
ET
TR
O
AL
EY
PL
RE
AL
ES
CE
M
KE
EA
ET
ST
EN
RE
E
CA
G
R ID
IN
IR
RE
ET
RE
ST
ST
TL
SA
ST
ZA
PLA
AV
OM
Y
ET
RE
LL
NT
ND
AT
M
ST
KE
AVEN