MEMORANDUM |
To:
Michael Trepanier
Project Manager
Date:
January 5, 2015
From:
Nick Gross
Howard Stein Hudson
HSH Project No.:
2013061.03
Subject:
MassDOT Highway Division
McGrath Boulevard Project Development
Working Group Session 5
Meeting Notes of December 10, 2015
Overview
On December 10th, 2015, the McGrath Boulevard Project Development team held its sixth working group
session. The working group is composed of local residents, business owners, transportation and green
space advocates, as well as representatives of local, State, and Federal Governments. The purpose of the
working group is, through the application of its members’ in depth local knowledge, to assist and advise the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) in developing an implementable design that will
ultimately transform the McGrath Highway into an at-grade urban boulevard. MassDOT sees the project
not only as an opportunity to address the structurally deficient McCarthy viaduct but also to improve
safety and connections for all modes of transportation in the project area, specifically at the intersection of
Washington Street and McGrath Highway.
The meeting was kicked off by MassDOT’s project manager Michael Trepanier, who announced that the
project team and working group agenda moving forward will begin shifting its focus from the middle
section of the corridor including the McCarthy viaduct, to looking at the entire McGrath corridor from
Broadway in Somerville to Third Street in Cambridge in order to address the entire context of the corridor
and its relation to the community it surrounds. Subsequent to this announcement, Michael Trepanier
introduced the expansion of the project team including Senior Urban Designer, Don Kinsvatter with
Kleinfelder and Active Transportation Leader, Pete Stidman with Howard Stein Hudson. With the
expansion in focus to address the entire corridor as well as the addition of project members noted above, it
is the intension of the project team to begin focusing on the urban design elements in order to introduce a
new vocabulary of placemaking while beginning to make concrete the abstract goals of improved bicycle
and pedestrian connectivity.
The bulk of the presentation focused on an overview of the historical context of the project area, a brief
discussion of the two alternatives for the Medford Street, Somerville Avenue, and Poplar Street
intersection (G1 and G2), cross section alternatives between Washington Street and Medford Street to the
north including allocation of green space, as well as the definition and understanding of an urban
11 Beacon Street, Suite 1010 | Boston, Massachusetts 02108 | 617.482.7080
www.hshassoc.com
Page 1
boulevard. The project team was warmly praised for advancing the separated bike lane design for the
railroad bridge over the MBTA Lowell Line as well as the proposed interim improvement to provide
separated bike lanes to the south from the Squires Bridge to Third Street in Cambridge. Topics of specific
interest including the functionality of the proposed access road between Washington Street and Somerville
Avenue with a recommendation to create a living street or “woonerf” where all users are given equal
priority and traffic calming strategies are implemented.
After the characteristics of a boulevard were outlined by the urban design team it was suggested that the
project team may be running too much with the term “boulevard” and should instead be focusing on a
“great city street.” A desired crossing at the Stop & Shop north of Broadway was discussed by working
group members and suggested by the project team that it be further analyzed by the City of Somerville as
it is out of the scope for the McGrath Boulevard Project. The decision of a six lane cross section in the
middle section of the corridor was generally understood as the northern and southern sections range from
four to five lanes. It was suggested by members of the working group that if six lanes is necessary now, in
the future and as a result of the potential of climate change, congestion pricing, and increased transit use,
the outside lanes may become parking.
Detailed Meeting Minutes1
C: Michael Trepanier (MT): Welcome everyone to the sixth McGrath Boulevard working group session.
My name is Michael Trepanier and I am the Project Manager from MassDOT. I have a number of new
project team members with me tonight and I will introduce them to you shortly. Tonight we are going
to shift our focus from the McCarthy Overpass section and begin talking about the entire McGrath
corridor. It’s important for us to discuss how we are going to link the context of the entire corridor to
the community that surrounds it. Up to this point we have been focusing on how the traffic works,
where the connections are, and overall connectivity of the area. My goal is to begin shifting our focus to
the urban design elements and introduce a new vocabulary of placemaking.
Howard Stein Hudson’s Active Transportation Leader, Pete Stidman is here with us tonight as well as
Don Kindsvatter from Kleinfelder. Both Pete and Don will be working collaboratively in leading the
urban design effort for this job. Tonight we are going to review some of the design issues that came up
at the last working group session. Pete will provide you with a brief overview of the historic context of
the area. The historic context is going to help inform the urban design effort. You’ll hear from Don
regarding the general urban design approach. We will also discuss the ongoing work that McMahon
Associates have been working on. Since this process began we’ve been using the term “boulevard” very
frequently but we haven’t done much to define what that means. We’re going to open that conversation
Herein “C” stands for comment, “Q” for question and “A” for answer. For a list of attendees, please see
Appendix 1. For copies of meeting flipcharts, please see Appendix 2.
1
Page 2
up tonight to hear some of your ideas on what you believe a boulevard along the McGrath corridor will
be.
As I mentioned earlier, much of our focus has been on the center section of the corridor between the
railroad bridges. This section is the most challenging segment and includes the McCarthy Overpass.
At the initial public information meeting we heard that our focus on the middle section of the corridor
should not orphan the rest of the corridor. The two additional sections of the corridor we are now
focusing on are the stretch from Medford Street to Broadway to the north and the Squires Bridge to
Third Avenue to the south. We are looking at the entire corridor as a whole and will be discussing
regional connectivity to open that conversation.
Most of you will remember the interactive table top discussion we had at the April 16, 2015 working
group session. We looked at cross section alternatives, connectivity, and a specific focus on bicycle and
pedestrian crossings at the Washington Street intersection. Our team recently met with the Service
Planning Group at the MBTA and they provided us with a lot of good information for the 10-year
horizon regarding bus and transit service planning. They also gave us some insight on their ideas on
how to accommodate bus stops and MBTA riders within the corridor.
We have heard from all of you since day one to minimize the crossing distance and make this corridor
as livable as possible. The common themes we took out of the working group session on April 16, 2015
was to create a similar corridor configuration to Commonwealth Avenue. With the work from that
session, we were also able to dismiss the idea of accommodating bicycles and pedestrians in the median
similar to the approach on Connect Historic Boston on Causeway Street. We also heard that there is a
desire to maintain parking, specifically on the west side of the corridor. At this point I’m going to turn
it over to Pete Stidman from Howard Stein Hudson to give you a history lesson of the area.
Discussion of the McGrath Corridor’s History
C: Pete Stidman (PS): Hello everyone, my name is Pete Stidman. Some of you may know me from my
work at the Boston Cyclist Union (BCU). I am now working at Howard Stein Hudson as their Active
Transportation Leader and I am very excited to be working on the McGrath Boulevard Project with
you. Over the last several weeks I have been walking up and down the corridor and researching the
history of the area. If our goal is to restore this area to a proper neighborhood, we should look at it
when it was a walking town.
If we look way back, the first street that was laid out in this area was Washington Street which
connected to Cambridge and Broadway. Paul Revere rode through in 1775 right before the canal was
built. This was part area was originally part of Charlestown. That changed in 1836 when the BostonLowell Railroad Line was built and in 1842 Somerville separated from Charlestown. In 1845 the
Fitchburg Railroad Line was built and streetcars were introduced to the neighborhood.
Page 3
In 1850, the population grew to 2,540 and in 1898 the Fellsway was completed providing impetus for
the McGrath Highway. If you look closely, you can still see a lot of the architectural details in the
buildings from the 1890s. Charles Eliot helped design a lot of parkways and before he passed away in
1896, he voiced is frustration about the lack of roads from Charlestown to Somerville. At the time
there was a maze of City streets but nothing that could conveniently get citizens up to the Fellsway.
The Fellsway was not only a park for recreation but it also provided access to housing.
In 1922 the streetcars were replaced with City bus service and in 1927 the Northern Artery was built.
The population of Somerville peaked in 1930 at approximately 150,000. I have some old Boston Globe
clippings and photographs of the construction. The first photograph is of the Medford Street
intersection. The second is on Cross Street near Medford Street. As you can see on the right side of the
corridor, the buildings are directed at each other. This small area in the middle of Medford Street and
Shawmut Street was known as Central Square. It wasn’t quite a busy downtown center but it did have
businesses and a lot of window shops.
In 1933 the renamed the Northern Artery to the McGrath Highway. In 1957 through 1959 they did a
lot of construction to what is now known as the McCarthy Overpass. In 1974 the I-93 Southeast
Expressway was constructed. At that time, the population of Somerville had steadily been declining
since its peak in 1930. The point of all this information is that this arterial is extremely important for
the communities to the north. We want the area which was once known as Central Square to before a
place of destination again. Tonight as we begin to talk about urban design, I hope you will consider the
history and earlier context of the area. Thank you. I’m going to turn it over to Bob Smith from
McMahon Associates.
Overview of the Major Intersections
C: Bob Smith (BS): Thank you Pete. This historical context is important for us to keep in mind as we
work through the design approach for the project. Pete did a great job of going back in history and I’m
going to go back in time to our last working group session on November 19, 2015. At this session we
were talking about the key intersections and how the design of those intersections will knit the entire
corridor together. We spent a lot of time on the Medford Street and Washington Street intersections.
We got some great comments, mostly supporting the idea of keeping the pedestrian crossings as short a
distance as possible. We received a design suggestion from members of the LivableStreets Alliance
that we are analyzing right now. We should have the results of this evaluation by next week.
There are two alternatives that we are taking forward. Both are dual intersections and bring all five
roads together at two signalized intersections. For the simplicity of understanding we are going to call
them G1 and G2. Intersection G1 aligns Medford Street and Poplar Street. If you’re traveling along
Somerville Avenue and want to cross Poplar Street you will have to come to Medford Street and cross
there. We tried to take the left-turn movement out of the McGrath Boulevard southbound by bringing
people down to the underpass rather than having the left-turn lanes. This is a more conventional
approached compared to the G2 intersection. Intersection G2 is more convoluted but minimizes the
Page 4
number of lanes between the intersections. In summary, they’re basically the same concept; G1 lines
up Medford Street and Poplar Street where G2 lines up Poplar Street and Somerville Avenue with a
jug handle. I should note that Medford Street is aligned to avoid any takings from HubGlass.
C: Gary McNaughton (GM): The design suggestion we received offered up another alternative that takes
the mainline of McGrath and aligns it with Somerville Avenue.
Q: Sharon Tankel (ST): What happens to HubGlass?
A: BS: In any of the scenarios, HubGlass remains untouched. Neither intersection G1 or G2 impacts the
structure. We tried to put everything together to come up with a cross section for the McGrath
Boulevard using insight we heard from you. We came up with an initial cross section that maximized
green space along the eastern side of the corridor. The section I would like to highlight for you now is
shown between Washington Street and Somerville Avenue. This section is shown as having sidewalks
on both sides, separated bicycle lanes buffered by parked cars, and three lanes of traffic in each
direction. We are showing a planted median and a 10’ buffer between cars and bicycles on the eastern
side. We are proposing that the eastern bicycle facility will be a two-way separated bicycle lane with
15-25’ of green space as a buffer.
Q: Wig Zamore (WZ): Did you look at splitting up the green space to better buffer the bicycle facilities on
the western side of the corridor?
A: BS: That is a perfect segue. The first time we looked at the cross section from a conceptual standpoint
that is what we showed. We heard from this group to consolidate the green space on one side to create
the feeling of a boulevard or greenway.
C: Alyson Shultz (AS): It’s the same issue with green space between the cars. Why not forget the green
space buffers in between cars and add it between cars and people?
A: BS: I think that’s a great idea. In the initial section we wanted to see how much green space we could
create. In this section we have a lot of space to play with. As we move further north with the same
concept, the green space gets a lot narrower. The wide median is due to constraint of the left-turn lane.
We have two cross section modifications between Washington Street and Somerville Avenue.
Modification 1 tries to balance the green space on both sides. The green space on the western side of
the corridor is being broken up due to the amount of driveways. People would be allowed to back out
into mainline traffic and we wanted to find a way to mitigation that movement which brought us to
Modification 2. Modification 2 creates a frontage road on the western side of the corridor for residential
access.
C: MT: I don’t want to interrupt your flow but I prefer the term access road over frontage road. Access
road feels more town-like to me.
Page 5
Q: AS: Are you eliminating the connection to Medford Street?
A: BS: No. There is no change to the connection of Medford Street to McGrath from the previous G1 or
G2 intersection concepts. The Access road would serve local properties. It would also allow us to
provide a continuous green strip without the interruption of driveways. The green strip would also
serve as a buffer between slow speed users and higher speed vehicles on McGrath Boulevard.
In order to fit this facility we would need to cut into the green space within the cross section of the
corridor. We are also prosing that this space would be shared for bicycle use. On either ends of the
access road the separated bicycle facilities will continue. We believe bicycle use will significantly
outnumber the amount of vehicular use on this facility. Up next we are going to begin talking about the
northern section of the corridor. We wanted to show you our attempt in mitigating the driveway issue
in this section while creating a green corridor on the western edge of McGrath Boulevard.
Q: Peter Missouri (PM): How wide is the travel lane on the access road?
A: BS: We showing an 11’ travel lane but it could go down to 10’. We could also go as low as 7’ for parking
lanes which would result in 11’ travel lanes. If the travel lane was 10’ we would likely have 8’ parking
lanes. As a preliminary graphic we are showing an 11’ travel lane with a 7’ parking lane.
C: Mark Chase (MC): Tom Bertulis and I are in favor of the Dutch model for access roads. It’s not a
neighborhood access road; it’s a bicycle facility that cars can drive on. Parking on the access road also
removes friction from McGrath Boulevard. I suggest you remove parking from the access road and
place it on the McGrath corridor.
C: Tom Bertulis (TB): It’s also referred to as a shared street. It’s a bit counterintuitive but it works.
Q: MT: Are you suggesting that cars drive on a bicycle path?
A: MC: Essentially, yes.
C: TB: The speed limit would be designated for 5-10 mph.
A: MT: This is an interesting idea. In one case you can separate elements and lose friction. In another
case you can combine elements and gain friction. In regards to the travel lane width, 11’ is as wide as
we need and we are aware of that. We agree narrower lanes are a form of traffic calming and we may
be able to use other elements to slow traffic down on the proposed access road. When I first saw the
access road I thought of Wig because of the distance and buffer between vehicles and people. I thought
it was a good idea from a health standpoint.
Q: WZ: Have you looked at splitting the green space to equal halves on both sides of the corridor?
Page 6
A: GM: We are and we will continue to look at that. The two sections we’ve shown are works in progress.
Over the next two working group session we will take a more in-depth look at this section. We plan on
having a more hands-on session similar to the April 16, 2015 working group session.
C: WZ: I suggest maximizes the buffer potential in this section. In the future you may end up with a wall
there.
A: BS: I don’t think you’ll need a wall as everything is elevated.
C: WZ: You might end up with a wall for exposure mitigation. Exposure is more serious than people
think.
C: BS: Thank you Wig, it’s a good point. We haven’t shown you anything north of Washington Street
because it is the hardest section for us to figure out.
C: WZ: I think it would be great if you could maximize the green buffer on both sides of the corridor.
A: MT: That picks up on an exercise we have coming up. The idea of keeping consolidating most of the
green space to one side of the corridor came out of this group.
Q: Tegin Bennet (TBE): Are there specific constraints as to why the two-way separated bicycle facility is
on the eastern side of the corridor?
A: GM: A lot of the reasoning behind that is again, based on the previous discussions we’ve had with this
group. The two-way separated bicycle facility on the eastern side of the corridor evolved from those
discussion but we are not tied to it.
C: Nathaniel Cabral-Curtis (NCC): We have a lot more information to get through tonight so let’s try to
allow Bob to finish up with the last couple of slides and then we’ll have time for a group discussion.
Q: TBE: I was simply asking if there are specific constraints.
A: BS: There are more constraints in the northern section.
Q: TBE: My question is whether the two-way separated bicycle facility needs to be on the east side of the
corridor or if it can be on the west side?
A: BS: Technically no but there are fewer conflict points on the east side. There is virtually no driveway
access on the west side.
C: TBE: Thank you, that was the information I was looking for.
Q: Jason Stockmann (JS): Is there any way to add a bus stop in this section? There’s no natural place for
a bus to pull over right now.
Page 7
A: BS: We’ve been looking at that and a lot of the bus stops are concentrated on the Washington Street
and Medford Street intersections.
A: MT: That’s a great point Jason. Let me make an overarching comment. We are in project
development. We’re showing figures that look a lot more developed compared to last time we met but
they still require significant refinements. Each iteration of the corridor will be further advanced. The
team has a lot of work to do regarding locations of bus stops. The criteria that were discussed with the
MBTA Service Planning Group focused on the right approach in developing a Bus Stop Plan. We’re not
showing it right now because we want to have a higher level conversation. With that said, it is on our
radar.
C: AS: Many of us originally advocated for a road diet and pushed for less than six lanes. It’s
disheartening that we are here with six lanes and that decision is being driven by traffic.
A: MT: I have a lot to say about that and I feel like I’ve interrupted Bob enough already. That’s a bigger
conversation and I’m happy to get back to that at the end of the presentation.
A: BS: I wanted to show everyone how this section fits into the larger context. Between Washington
Street and Somerville Avenue we are showing six lanes. We have overlaid Don’s section as part of this
in Modification 1.
C: GM: There are a couple of sections on the southern end where we are down to five and even four lanes.
A: MT: I want to talk about the number of lanes as a larger group. I want to let the team get through
their presentation and then we can talk about the elephant in the room. No final decisions have been
made on this subject yet. Up next we have Don Kindsvatter from Kleinfelder.
Discussion of McGrath Boulevard as a Great Street
C: Don Kindsvatter (DK): Hi everyone, my name is Don Kindsvatter and I am a Senior Urban Designer at
Kleinfelder. Pete and I have started working on the urban design approach together and we’ve been
going back and forth on a number of issues. The first is gaining a better sense of what this corridor will
eventually end up looking like. Right now this corridor is called McGrath Highway and throughout this
process the project team has been referring to it as McGrath Boulevard. I have an idea in my mind
what a boulevard looks like but I want to take a few minutes to see if we are all on the same page. I’ve
listed some criteria but in general, a boulevard is an inviting space along its length and across its
width.
Sidewalks are generally wide at approximately 12-16’ which allows sufficient space for people to pass
each other. Boulevards allow for activities such as outdoor cafes to take place. Boulevards also
welcome bicycles on protected facilities similar to how it has been show here. In the past 100 years,
boulevards haven’t accommodated bicycles very well but I think we have an opportunity here to define
what a 21st century boulevard looks like. When people think of a boulevard we often think of trees in a
Page 8
median and along both edges of a corridor. Most boulevards have strong building-edges which help
define its space. The edges of a boulevard help create a distinct character between a boulevard and a
parkway. The existing McGrath Highway doesn’t have supportive edges but the City of Somerville is
looking at developing this area.
Boulevards can be addressed with two main elements. There is the roadway within the right-of-way
(ROW) and there is the space outside of the ROW. In this scenario, the McGrath ROW changes as it
goes along the corridor. We may end up losing trees in the median in some spaces due to ROW
constraints. I’m hoping to hear some feedback from all of you. Does the group feel that we are heading
in the right direction in defining a boulevard?
C: Joel Bennet (JB): When I think of a boulevard I tend to think of it being less defined. A boulevard to
me is Commonwealth Avenue 10 years ago when it wasn’t so organized. To me, delineation and
organization takes away from the feeling of a boulevard.
C: AS: Something that you are missing as part of your boulevard criteria is integration into the City. If
you imagine the boulevards in Paris, they are integrated into the cross streets. Integration into the
City seems to be missed here. In fact, it appears that you are forbidden to enter on some of the cross
streets.
C: WZ: We may be leaning too much on the term “boulevard.” I would rather see this become a great city
street.
C: David Loutzenheiser (DL): When I think of a boulevard I see the West Roxbury Parkway. There is
limited access to driveways. I don’t see an urban boulevard having six lanes.
C: TB: There is a boulevard in San Francisco with stop signs and it works fine. We may want to talk
about traffic control and access as part of this.
A: DK: Thank you all for your comments. I’m hearing that a concrete definition of a boulevard is not
something that we’re looking for. What we are looking for is a great street. One of my favorite urban
designers, Allan Jacobs wrote a book called Great Streets and another book called The Boulevard. Pete
and I have been taking a closer look at the northern section from Medford Street to Broadway. As an
urban designer we often do an issues and opportunities analysis. We’ll walk down the corridor to look
at issues and opportunities and then we’ll look at how these elements can fit into the section of
roadway.
As we come down the corridor from Pearl Street we are still elevated which creates some constraints.
Many of the buildings in this section are facing out which creates a great edge. Many of the buildings
were taken out with the construction of the McGrath Highway which has caused the remaining
buildings to face the side streets. On the south side of the corridor there are no trees within the public
ROW. Our limits of work end at Broadway and we want to ensure that the bicycle and pedestrian
Page 9
connections allow users to cross that intersection safely. We are aware that Foss Park is a strong
destination for many people.
Q: WZ: Can you create a pedestrian connection to the Stop & Shop on the south side? Jaques Street is the
central neighborhood connector street. There’s no crosswalk and a safe crossing at this intersection
would connect the two neighborhoods.
A: MT: We are aware of the desire for a crosswalk at Stop & Shop.
C: WZ: There was a massive effort to get three seconds added to that signal. It’s a major crossing for
elementary school students and the families using Foss Park. This area is Somerville’s largest
environmental justice (EJ) neighborhood and this is their only public park.
C: Ellin Reisner (ER): The control of the pedestrian signal is on the island in the center median. It’s also
right on red so you have to dodge cars when you cross.
A: MT: I agree it’s a really terrible intersection.
C: Brad Rawson (BR): We’ve been doing some work in Winter Hill and we have created some fun,
whimsical crosswalks that are not bounded by engineering constraints. If anyone is interested in
seeing the artists’ renditions of the community planning process, I would invite you to look at the
SomervillebyDesign website. We are going to be looking to partner with MassDOT and create some
sketches for that intersection.
C: Rob Buchanan (RB): I raised this issue the first two meetings. I would like to see the scope of this
project expanded to include that intersection. People run across the highway with kids, groceries, and
strollers. It’s the most problematic intersection in the entire area.
A: MT: This project is not going to cover that intersection. MassDOT can’t print money. The primary
focus and the reason we are all here tonight is the McCarthy Overpass half a mile down the road. We
have been recently reminded in Somerville that projects can become too big and do so at their peril. I
think it is beneficial for all of us to agree that these are the project limits. We will reconstruct the
Broadway intersection but that is it. Wig brought the Stop & Shop crossing issue to us about a year
ago. If anything, maybe there can be some short-term improvements that can be addressed separately
in partnership with the City of Somerville. The redesign of that intersection alone could be upwards of
a multimillion dollar project.
A: BR: That also doesn’t mean we are trying to stop that effort. It would have to be a different process.
C: RB: My impression was that this is a planning process. We know funding may happen in chunks and
over time.
Page 10
A: MT: You’re correct and some of these fixes may come sooner. My worry is that we will continue
expanding and the project will become too big.
C: WZ: That’s a good point, this is an edge issue.
C: AS: We’re advocating for a crosswalk to the City of Somerville. We are training children to walk down
to the light when they want to cross from the field to the corner shop. It’s the only general store in the
area where they can buy soda. If it’s not going to be a part of this project it should be on the states list
of projects to address.
C: NCC: Nick has it documented. Don is also going to be showing you some things that are going to
happen sooner rather than later in the rest of his presentation.
C: DK: Thank you Nate. The neighborhood zoning on the south side of the corridor consist of residential
buildings facing the side street and commercial building which create a nice edge. One of the main
concerns in this section is the limited number of crossings. There are two at-grade crossings, the
pedestrian footbridge, and the tunnel on Gilman Street. Our top three issues from an urban designer
perspective are to change the character from a highway to a boulevard, include separated bike lanes for
the entire length of the corridor, and to create new connections across the corridor from Winter Hill to
East Somerville.
At this point I’d like to talk about rearranging the corridor and discuss its functionality. When we look
at how the corridor currently works there are three lanes to Broadway with an existing planted
median. If you look at it today with the ongoing construction, it functions as two lanes. My thought is
that if it works with a two lanes let’s keep it that way. There is plenty of space to work with along the
corridor but the railroad bridge is the main ROW constraint. Heading towards Broadway we need a
left turn lane onto Medford Street which creates three lanes heading north. There’s still space for a
two-way separated bike lane which seems to be the best option.
C: TBE: Could you have a two-way separated bike lane and a demarcated bicycle are? There is a strong
desire for both.
A: DK: We could. We could put the two-way separated bike lane on the south side but in terms of
restriping, we end up with a leftover lane. Let me conclude by asking that we think about this in a
more flexible mindset.
C: Heather Van Aelst (HVA): I’m really happy to see you taking advantage of the bridge; people have
been asking for a separated bike lane throughout the entire process.
C: DK: I agree. You could basically make these changes tomorrow by simply restriping.
Q: RB: How does elevation change impact design?
Page 11
A: DK: It’s not an issue at a conceptual level.
Q: TB: From an urban design perspective, it’s great to have cycling infrastructure on both sides. On the
Dana Street side, I’m wondering if that’s the best way to have spacing between two roads.
A: DK: We didn’t want to mess with Dana Street.
C: TB: I suggest you look at the mixing areas on the Casey Overpass Project.
A: DK: I’ve heard of that.
A: MT: Don designed it.
Q: David Loutenheiser (DL): In terms of deciding the cross section, what is the minimum width for tree
pits?
A: George Batchelor (GB): There is a 4’ minimum but 6’ is preferred. In a perfect world we would have 8’.
A: Robbin Bergfors (RBE): Medians often act as pedestrian or bicycle refuges as well. For example, if you
have a bicycle with a trailer you may want more than 8’. For this reason we suggest 10’ for medians.
C: DK: Thank you Robbin. Going back to our design goals, we’re comfortable that we can change the
highway to a boulevard. We’re comfortable that we can include separated bike lanes for the full length
of the corridor. The last item is the opportunities we have to reconnect the corridor.
Otis Street and Bonair Street seem to be the two likely candidates for connections. From a traffic point
of view, it might seem like you have to choose one or the other. Personally, I would argue that both
could be a connection because they both extend further into the neighborhood. We’ll continue to discuss
what this group prefers as we take a closer look at those connections in the future. At this point I’m
going to turn it over to Pete to discuss the bicycle accommodations.
C: PS: The Medford Street intersection is the most challenging intersection we have to deal with. I’m not
quite done but we have started to outline how people will move around a protected intersection design.
For those who are unfamiliar with a protected intersection design, the purpose is to give everyone a
place to safely wait while bringing bicycle to the forefront of the stop line. This provides a head start
for cyclists. It also helps organize bicycles and pedestrians so each mode has a designated crosswalk.
This is still a work in progress. This group has been asking for a two-way separated bike lane on one
side and a one-way separated bike lane on the opposite side. I’m sensitive to what Joel Bennet brought
up. Great streets don’t necessarily have everyone organized into specific channels. We may want to
consider have a one-way separated bike lane on both sides and a two-way separated bike lane in the
northern section. How does the group feel about that?
Page 12
C: TB: If you build a separated facility that has a desire line in the opposite direction, people are going to
use it in the opposite direction. I suggest rather than trying to fight it, we use the bare minimum width
to separate it and avoid conflict.
C: MC: Keeping a separated bike lane between 6’-7’ allows it to be a two-way if there are heavy cycling
volumes.
C: PS: Absolutely. We’re still working with the widths. The two-way facility is 12’ and the one-way
facility is 6’. We’ll discuss more about creating the feeling of an urban great street.
C: ER: Access in both directions on the eastern side of the McGrath corridor is important because the
streets in Somerville are narrow. When a person form East Somerville wants to get around, having
access in both directions on the east side would be beneficial. Doesn’t have to be at the expense of the
western side but I think it’s important to make sure that happens.
Q: PS: Is there a particular destination for a two-way? Or is it the whole corridor?
A: ER: It’s just that there’s so little infrastructure for bicycles in Somerville right now that it’s very scary
to ride in most places. I was thinking it might encourage more people to go up and down on McGrath to
commute if they didn’t have to cross the highway. It might be more attractive, quicker and easier. I
should mention I’m going to be optimistic of the Green Line.
C: MT: Something that was on the table was a terminus at Washington Street. One of the major benefits
of the community path is that it provides egress and an alternative exit for Washington Street.
C: PS: Next time we’ll show you a map of all the different bicycle connections.
C: AS: If you’re riding along McGrath, Highland Avenue and Medford Street are desirable destination.
C: TB: Right now there are two crossings. I go to the far side crossing at Medford Street so you only have
one signal to deal with.
C: PS: With the two-way facility coming in here, there’s no place for people to wait to cross. We can look
at that a little closer to see how a full protected intersection design would work.
C: BR: I think it speaks to a question of chemistry between a state project and a City of Somerville
project. The solution can be set here; it’s all part of the network.
C: RB: When you’re crossing the proposed McGrath, there are boulevard islands which are great. It
would be good to see the tree line on Cross Street.
A: PS: There’s an enormous amount of space.
Q: TB: What’s the tan spot there?
Page 13
A: PS: That is actually one of the proposed bus stop locations.
C: TB: I’m completely on board with that.
C: JB: When people talk about cycling, no one is ever going to have perfect facilities. I really liked the
idea of the access road because I feel like you can ride along it with children. It’s a section that begins
to introduce users to riding in the road with safe conditions.
Q: TB: It terms of curvature radius and protected intersections, could we get the geometry really tight for
cars.
A: PS: We haven’t melted the urban design ideas with the traffic engineers yet. Gary is going to come up
now and talk about the southern section.
C: GM: At the very first meeting we had talked about trying to get a bicycle connection as you get over
the Squire Bridge as an interim condition. The cross section is narrow with three travel lanes,
shoulders, and a not so desirable sidewalk. In the short-term, we’re looking at whether we can get you
from the surface streets up and across the Squires Bridge all the way to the improvements at North
Point. Those are the improvements that are being done as part of a punch through coming up in the
not too distant future. This would allow us to introduce separated bike lanes as part of an interim
improvement. Right now we’re showing some sort of a buffer. What that actually turns out to be is to
be determined but there will be a buffered area between the bike lane and the travel lane. On the
Squires Bridge we are proposing two lanes in each direction.
This isn’t ready to go to construction by any means. I’m looking forward to the results of the closure of
the down ramp because I think it will be informative and help us advance some of these ideas. As we
move further south it’s a pretty consistent width keeping two travel lanes and some sort of bike facility.
The idea is not to paint the entire thing green but we would call out conflict areas with paint. This has
a street level bike facility going behind the bus stop island that would go up to the level of the sidewalk.
We’re working with MassDOT to try to advance these ideas.
C: AS: The cement is in dire shape on Squires Bridge.
C: GM: Part of that’s a maintenance issue. One of the reasons Don spent most of his time in the north
segment and not in the south segment is because we’re still trying to figure out the structure, approach,
and storage underneath the bridge. In the long-term, the goal is to ensure the bridge is in good shape.
In the short-term, it may be a maintenance issue.
Q: RB: When you say temporary improvements, is that something in next one to five years?
A: MT: That’s a MassDOT question. Frank Suszynski from MassDOT District 4 was not able to attend
tonight’s meeting but we had a conversation about this today. The timing of the improvements, process
of acceptance, maintenance, and design are all things that we have to work out with the district. We
Page 14
are jumping the gun by showing you this tonight but I wanted to show you that we have made some
progress on this. I should also note that we don’t have money to fund this. Anytime MassDOT touches
a roadway, we have to meet federal facility requirements and bring a certain amount of design to
modern standards. That includes accessibility accommodations, widths of sidewalks, and Americans
with Disability Act (ADA) ramps. These improvements may happen in the next few years but we still
have a lot of work to do.
C: RB: As an alternative, you could do the treatment of the two-way cycle track on the north side.
A: MT: You still run into some of the same issues. Many of the larger issues have to deal with operations
of separate municipalities. Our district offices are very adverse to additional maintenance. You
wouldn’t believe some of the conversations we have. Out in Hadley, they’re talking about wanting a
snow mobile crossing and not wanting a sidewalk. The underlying issue is the same. In this case, what
we’ve shown you is just to show you it can work. We have challenges, we need money, and we have a
lot more work to do.
C: HVA: This is getting us down to two lanes to Lechmere which is fantastic. It’s such an improvement.
C: MT: One thing we haven’t said yet is that we don’t actually know what we’re going to do with the
Squires Bridge. It may not need to be replaced.
C: AS: It will in 20 years.
C: MT: It might.
C: HVA: You’ve got a couple of extra feet that you could take from the travel lane and turn it into a
separated bike lane.
C: MT: It may be a matter of whether or not we can reconstruct and cantilever to create more space.
C: JS: I want to applaud you for looking at this. It’s extremely responsive. Any additional elements to
calm traffic would make this even better, especially outbound which is used as drag strip. It would
make the whole neighborhood more livable.
C: MT: We’ve been hearing that for a long time so it’s a step in the right direction. Just so you know,
Nate emailed me and the next time we would like to meet is January 21, 2016. Please mark your
calendars now.
C: NCC: Please hold both January 21, 2016 and January 28, 2016 in the chance of snow.
C: MT: With that said I would like to get back to Alyson’s comment about the number of lanes between
Washington Street and Medford Street. In general we have six lanes which is what we’ve been showing
on these drawings. McMahon did a traffic analysis which I am happy to talk about. The truth is that if
Page 15
we make this any more narrow the entire system begins to breakdown. We’ve known from the
beginning that Rutherford Avenue and Sullivan Square directly impact the McGrath corridor.
We found through our four lane analysis that regardless of the six or four, we’re diverting a lot of traffic
west into Somerville. We’re heard the concerns early on regarding the number of lanes. To put in a
larger context, since we’ve started working on this a number of assumptions have changed. At the
beginning we were talking about the Green Line and the MBTA was telling us it would be operational
by 2016. What we didn’t have certainty of at that time was the timeline for Rutherford Avenue. The
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has since placed Rutherford Avenue ahead of this project
on the long range transportation plan (LRTP). In addition to all of this, the Wynn Casino decision
came out and directed MassDOT to convene a regional task force to address all of the transportation
issues associated with that project.
Q: ER: Who is on the regional task force?
A: BR: The Secretary of Transportation, CTPS, MassDOT staff, City of Boston, City of Somerville, City of
Everett, and there may be more.
A: MT: On one side of the fence we have a lot of people complaining about congestion and diverting
vehicles which effect regional operations. When we squeeze the corridor down to four lanes from six
lanes everything starts to breakdown in ways that we don’t think we can mitigate.
A: GM: You’re all hitting on a lot of great points. The fact is that we are trying to balance this. We think
we balance this by having four lanes in most sections with turning lanes at intersections. The only
place that has six lanes is the middle section. We’re doing four lanes everywhere we can but the
Washington Street intersection dumps a lot of traffic into the corridor. We are pushing the envelope.
C: AS: What bothers me is that by making it six lanes, you’re creating institutional diversions. People are
going to use Poplar Street and Joy Street to avoid the Washington Street intersection. It seems like the
plan makes that a desirable thing.
C: HVA: It’s not a particularly bad cut through. Doing it to turn east onto Washington Street isn’t bad.
C: GM: It depends on the time of day. At 4:00 or 5:00 PM in the afternoon, there might be the potential of
cut-through traffic occurring. It is a one-way cut through to the east.
C: MC: I want to applaud you for trying to get down to five lanes. We want to be thinking about
designing this in a resilient way. Right now we’re heading towards the 25% design and this probably
won’t get built until 2026. My thinking is that with climate change, congestion pricing, and many other
variables that could affect traffic, the 6th lanes could become parking lanes in the future. The potential
of bus rapid transit (BRT) also gets you in that direction.
Page 16
C: GM: The interesting thing with a 25% design is that we’re establishing the alignment geometry and
creating the baseline of the overall road. Removing a lane is not a huge change. We’re trying to get
through the environmental review.
C: MT: The methods we’ve used for the last 100 years design for the peak period which has continued to
grow and grow over the past couple of decades. All that roadway space is wasted in the non-peak
period and we seem to all agree on that. When we’re talking about roadway conditioning in 2026,
there’s a lot that could change. It would be fairly easy to change after the 25% design after knowing the
physical spacing. It’s fairly easy to change an edge line from dashed to solid and we’re flexible.
Overall, it balances the needs the desires that everyone wants to get out of the project without vast
negative impacts. The only other way to build a road that would meet that standard of care would be to
replace the McCarthy Overpass. Gary and I have had this conversation before. It’s very hard to be as
progressive as possible and think outside the box. When we have conversations about level of service
(LOS), we don’t really have conversations about LOS.
C: DL: From an urban design or city perspective, I don’t agree that a six lane roadway section is
appropriate. I see what you’re saying and there has been a lot of creative work presented tonight but
that all goes out the window when you’re talking about 77’ of asphalt. I’m utterly frustrated that the
traffic volumes trump the scale of the road. If you look at other cities in Europe, all the residential
areas are 18 mph roads.
A: MT: It’s unfair to compare a USA city to European city. Our land use patterns are completely
different.
C: DL: What I’m trying to say is that cut through traffic in residential areas could be mitigated through
speed limits.
A: MT: We’re not just talking about residential areas. When we talk about cut-through traffic and
diversions, we’re talking about major impacts to every other major arterial and collector road in the
City of Somerville.
C: DL: That’s assuming the same car use.
Q: AS: If this is a boulevard, does that mean the traffic goes down to 30 mph?
A: MT: I would imagine the speed limit would be between 30 and 40 mph?
C: GM: It’s hard to say. In the Casey Arborway plan there’s a section that looks exactly like this with six
lanes and separated bike lanes. Next year we’ll be able to go out there and see what six lanes looks like
in a boulevard scenario.
C: DL: The Casey Arborway is only six lanes for one block.
Page 17
A: PS: I hear what you’re saying. I also think it’s not just the scale but also the speed. I recognize that
the street is wide. The reality is that there is a huge population to the north and we have to find a way
to mitigate that by trying to slow traffic down and change the nature of the neighborhood.
C: AS: A major source of frustration to me is that the recent design uses Poplar Street as a cut through.
Joy Street, which is on the other side, has the T stop and you haven’t embraced that intersection. This
encourages the cut through.
C: BS: The connections with Poplar Street are being made.
A: GM: The connection to Poplar Street which we thought was desirable is a potential problem area for
making that connection a little more viable. We’re not trying to make it thoroughfare. If you’re going
out at night, staying on McGrath is going to be a much quicker route.
C: NCC: Remember, this was not part of tonight’s agenda. We’ve gone off in another direction. Michael
wanted to give us some project truths. We’ll come back and spend more time analyzing the middle
section.
C: HVA: I don’t’ know if the whole groups cares about getting in and out of Brickbottom but Alyson and I
do. If at some point we could spend some time on that, either with the whole group or in a smaller
group that would be great.
A: GM: If you’re coming southbound and you want to get into Brickbottom, you would use the Somerville
Avenue extension.
Q: AS: The question is what’s going to happen underneath the bridge?
A: GM: We will show you next time. There’s a lot of stuff to talk about. The City of Somerville has the
ability to think about traffic calming.
C: BR: These are the right conversations to have with us at the City of Somerville.
C: MT: Alyson, we’ll stay and chat with you if you would like. I want to make sure we get any other
closing thoughts.
C: RB: I think it would be helpful to see all this on large sheets of paper.
C: MT: That’s the plan. We wanted to get everyone’s gut reactions for this material and then next time
we’ll have a more hands-on working session.
C: RB: I appreciate that. In thinking about a six, five, or four lane section I’ll be honest, I never thought
we would really end up with four lanes. I appreciate the effort and I think this is great work. The little
things add up to an environment we are aspiring for.
Page 18
Q: MC: It might be a 75% design question but can you make pedestrian crossings possible in a single
phase?
A: MT: I think we can do that.
A: GM: It is the intent to cross in a single phase.
C: MC: That’s a key issue for LivableStreets.
C: MT: Thank you all for coming out tonight. We’ll see you next month.
Next Steps
The next working group session will take place on January 21, 2016 at the East Somerville Community
School located at 50 Cross Street, Somerville.
Page 19
Appendix 1: Meeting Attendees
First Name
Last Name
Affiliation
George
Batchelor
MassDOT
Tegin
Bennet
Working Group Member
Joel
Bennet
Working Group Member
Robbin
Bergfors
MassDOT
Tom
Bertulis
Working Group Member
Jeremy
Bowman
Working Group Member
Robert
Buchanan
Working Group Member
Nathaniel
Cabral-Curtis
Howard Stein Hudson
Mark
Chase
Working Group Member
Maureen
Chlekbek
McMahon Associates
Bill
Conroy
Working Group Member
Jim
Gascoigne
Working Group Member
Nick
Gross
Howard Stein Hudson
Philip
Groth
Working Group Member
Wallace
Jenison
East Cambridge Savings Bank
David
Loutzenheiser
Working Group Member
Matthew
McLaughlin
Ward 1 Alderman
Gary
McNaughton
McMahon Associates
Peter
Missouri
Working Group Member
Scott
Peterson
Working Group Member
Brad
Rawson
Working Group Member
Ellin
Reisner
Working Group Member
Alyson
Shultz
Working Group Member
Bob
Smith
McMahon Associates
Pete
Stidman
Howard Stein Hudson
Jason
Stockmann
Working Group Member
Sharon
Tankel
Working Group Member
Timothy
Toomey
Working Group Member
Michael
Trepanier
MassDOT
Heather
Van Aelst
Working Group Member
Judi
Walker
Community Member
Page 20
First Name
Last Name
Affiliation
Wig
Zamore
Working Group Member
Page 21
Appendix 2: Flip-chart Notes
Chart 1:
Q: What did you say about the glass building?
A: Neither G1 or G2 impacts that property. We are also analyzing WAG generated concepts with McGrath
aligned to Somerville so the trough move is a turn.
Q: Did you think of buffering both bikeways with green space?
A:
Perfect segue, Don got us to look at that.
C: Forget greenery between cars; put it where people are living.
Q: Have you eliminated Medford Street?
A: Not really. Under Mod 2 it gets merged into the residential access road.
Chart 2:
Q: How wide are travel lanes?
A: They are set at 11 feet on the mainline, 10 feet on access road.
C: Dutch model where cars leaving access drive over bicycle lane. Like on street parking friction.
A: Hopefully, residential greenery can fix this, but the driveways are so narrow you need to back out.
A: Remember these are ideas. This is about showing you the trade-offs. We can get some narrow lanes. 11
feet is at the top. Can get narrower. We do like the idea of using that to calm traffic.
A: Getting Don’s input on this.
C: Suggest splitting greens pace to max buffering.
A: Working on that with Don.
Chart 3:
Q: Are there specific constraints that drove these alternatives?
A: Not so much in the middle, but it gets high in the north. We put it where we did to minimize driveway
conflicts.
Q: Can bus stops be added to this?
A: Stops concentrated at Washington and Medford.
A: Looking at stop planning with MBTA service planning. Just not on this figure thinking of this.
Q: Have you really thought about the road diet and four lanes?
Page 22
A: Hold that- I have more on that soon.
A: We are trying. Getting down to four and five lanes at some locations.
Chart 4:
Q: What is a boulevard?
C: Tend to think of boulevards as not being totally linear. Needs to have a little freedom to it.
C: Needs to be integrated into the neighborhood. Make sure side streets are connected.
C: Makes a difference as to whether abutters are commercial or residential. Wig says he’d rather a great
street.
C: Limited driveway. Only four or less lanes.
C: Access roads are key. Octavia Boulevard with stop controlled access roads and signals for mainline.
Q: Can you put pedestrian crossing where Stop and Shop comes out? It would connect two major
neighborhoods.
A: Broadway is part of park, not beyond it, but we would like to fix that before 10 years from now.
Chart 5:
A: City of Somerville working on that. Somerville by Design is looking to partner with DOT on this.
C: Don’t think we should stop here.
A: DOT not made of money. Fact we can even have this chat is good. Too big can fail so let’s be cautious.
Have to agree on somewhere to stop. Will try to work with City on this issue but we can only go so far.
Q: Did you consider a 2-way cycle track on one side and demarcated lane on the other in the northern end?
There are desire lines for that.
A: Nope, but we can.
C: Really happy to see you take advantage of these being 2 lanes now.
Q: Elevation changes across the road? Does that impact your design?
A: No, not really. Just need to work out drainage.
Chart 6:
Q: In terms of tree health, what’s the minimum width?
A: I don’t want lower than 8 feet.
A: 4 feet too small, 6 feet getting there, 8 feet is good.
C: Median can be refuge for crossing bike with trailer. Some value in median width.
Page 23
C: If you build a one-way facility without a parallel facility, people will go the do-not-enter way. Build it
with enough wiggle room for people to misuse it.
C: Two-direction access on the east side important as roads in east Somerville are tight and not good for
cycling.
Q: Would getting across to west side be helpful?
A: Yes it would. East Somerville is scary for bikes at present. More bikes would use this if they didn’t have
to cross highway.
Chart 7:
Q: How do you make sure folks on bikes can turn onto Highland Avenue?
A: Very pinched at this location. Few places to wait, but we’ll look to see if we can get full protected
intersection.
C: Where there is space, would like to see boulevard islands on side streets.
C: Won’t always have perfect cycle ways, really like safe access road. Nice transitional space for safer road
facilities. Could Chester be used that way to cross to Medford?
A: It’s out of the way, but could be an option.
C: Looking to get curb radii down as tight as possible.
Chart 8:
Q: Are unsafe pedestrian conditions on the Squires Bridge being discussed?
A: A maintenance issue. We’re doing an investigation in 3-D of this bridge so Don can analyze this space.
Q: When you say temporary improvements, do you mean 1 to 5 years away?
A: Timing of this and how it goes out needs to be worked out with district. D4 wants to work with City to
go for possibly a large job. Possibly can happen as just paint. Lots of caveats. What about pavement?
What about bringing things up to ADA and AAB? Do have the ROW?
C: Maybe a 2-way bike track on just north side? To punch through.
A: Same batch of issues of getting in without touching everything.
Chart 9:
Q: Gets us 2-lanes from Poplar to Lechemere?
A: Yes!
C: Great. Huge improvement of Brickbottom to Cambridge. Sidewalk on bridge is blocked off. Maybe put
sidewalk inside?
C: Thank you for looking at Squares. Great start. Do anything you can especially northbound would be
awesome.
Page 24
C: Concern over diversions with some 6 lane cross sections. Need to ensure people stay in the corridor if 6
lanes are real.
C: I applaud you for working so hard on this narrowing. If this is built in 2026, I’m thinking of carbon
taxes, things will make us wish for 4 lanes. Think of ways to make the outer lanes convertible.
A: 25% design is basic geometry. This is environmental review. A lane can be pulled without going back to
drawing board.
Chart 10:
C: DL. Don’t agree that 6 lanes is OK for urban design perspective. Frustrated traffic volume lead.
A: Not a fair comparison. Cut through and diversion equal impacts to entire City of Somerville. Need to
use urban design to get speeds down. We are thinking 35-40 mph, but it’s too early. We can learn from
Casey Arborway.
C: Poplar-Joy Street connection- connectivity concern for AS. Concern over Joy Street cut through.
A: We go up to RR bridge. It’s in our mitts
C: Would be helpful for next meeting to be table top.
A: That’s the plan.
C: Appreciate all your hard work on 6-5-4. Really thoughtful and good.
C: Interest in seeing single phase pedestrian crossings. Will give comfort on 6 lanes.
A: Yes, that’s the plan.
Page 25