HomeMy WebLinkAboutSouth Lexington Transportation Study Technical Memorandum 2 FINAL, January 2015Technical Memorandum 2 – Projections and Options
South Lexington Transportation Study
Lexington, Massachusetts
FAY, SPOFFORD & THORNDIKE
January 2015
Engineering and Planning Departments
With RKG Associates, Inc.
Contents
Page
2.1 INTRODUCTION 1
2.1.1 Overview 1
2.2 PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS 8
2.2.1 Programmed Transportation Facilities 8
2.2.2 Background and Programmed Traffic Growth 11
2.2.3 Moderate Year 2023 Traffic Projections and Peak Traffic Operations 13
2.2.4 Future Safety Concerns with Moderate Year 2023 Traffic Projections 20
2.2.5 Future Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity 21
2.2.6 Future Mitigation Assessments and Allocations 23
2.3. ALTERNATIVE MITIGATION MEASURES 26
2.3.1 Area 1 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Lincoln/School Streets 26
2.3.2 Area 2 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street 35
2.3.3 Area 3 - Route 2 Westbound off-ramps to Waltham Street and Hayden Avenue 47
2.3.4 Area 4 – Concord Avenue at Pleasant and Walnut Streets 58
2.3.5 Area 5 – Lincoln at Middle Streets 64
2.3.6 Other Strategies 70
List of Figures
Page
2.1 Study Area – Aerial Base 3
2.1A Study Area with Traffic Signals Identified 4
2.2 Summary of 2013 South Lexington Traffic Problem Areas 5
2.3 Potential South Lexington Development Sites 6
2.4 Roadway Network Lane Configurations 7
2.5 Recent and Programmed Transportation Enhancements Assumed by 2023 9
2.6 Trip Distribution Pattern for New Development at Spring/Hayden Streets 15
2.7 Projected Year 2023 AM Peak Hour Volumes with Approved Developments 16
2.8 Year 2023 Projected PM Peak Hour Volumes with Approved Developments 17
2.9 Consolidated 2023 Circulation Issues Summary 25
2.10 Northwest on Marrett Road (Route 2A) to Lincoln Street 27
2.11 Southwest on Lincoln Street to Marrett Rd (Rte. 2A) 28
2.12 South on School Street to Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) Just North of Lincoln Street 29
2.13 West on Lincoln Street (South) to Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) 30
2.14 Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) at Lincoln Street Option 1 – Signalized w/ One-way Segment 31
2.15 Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) at Lincoln Street Option 2 – Signalized w/ Enlarged Green Spaces 32
2.16 Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) at Lincoln Street Option 1 – Roundabout w/Enlarged Green Spaces 33
2.17 North on Cary Street to Middle Street and Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) 36
2.18 Northeast on Middle Street to Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) 37
2.19 North on Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) to Cary Avenue 38
2.20 West on Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) to Middle Street at Crosswalk 39
2.21 North on Middle Street to Cary Avenue 40
2.22 Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street
Option 1 – Enlarge Island and modify circulation 41
2.23 Marrett Road (Rte. 2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street
Option 2 - Simplified Circulation with Median 42
2.24 Marrett Road (Rte.2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street
Option 2A - Simplified Circulation with Median 43
2.25 Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street
Option 3 – Mini-roundabout 44
2.26 South on Waltham Street at Hayden Avenue 48
2.27 West on Route 2 off-ramp to Waltham Street 49
2.28 West on Hayden Avenue to Route 2 WB off-ramps 50
2.29 Northeast on Route 2 WB off-ramp to Hayden Avenue 51
2.30 North on Route 2 WB off-ramp left to Hayden Avenue 52
2.31 Waltham Street at Hayden Avenue and Route 2 Ramps
Option 1 - Provide Bike Enhancements, Signalize & Modify Route 2 WB Ramps
at Waltham Street with Single Controller 53
2.32 Waltham Street at Hayden Avenue and Route 2 Ramps
Option 2 – Provide Bike Enhancements and Create Dual Roundabouts
at Route 2 WB Ramps at Waltham Street 54
List of Figures (Continued)
Page
2.33 Waltham Street at Hayden Avenue and Route 2 Ramps
Option 3 – Provide Bike Enhancements Create Deflections and Roundabouts
At Route 2 WB Ramps and Waltham Street 55
2.34 North on Walnut Street to Concord Avenue 59
2.35 Southeast on Concord Avenue to Walnut Street 60
2.36 East on Concord Avenue to Pleasant Street Approach 61
2.37 South on Pleasant Street to Concord Avenue 62
2.38 Concord Avenue at Pleasant Street Options for Consideration 63
2.39 Southeast on Middle Street to Lincoln Street 65
2.40 East on Middle Street to Lincoln Street 66
2.41 Northeast on Lincoln Street to Middle Street 67
2.42 Lincoln at Middle Streets
Option 1 – Alter Alignment – Relocate Middle Street Stop Control to Lincoln Street 68
2.43 Lincoln at Middle Streets
Option 2 – Re-align and Retain Lincoln Street Continuity 69
List of Tables
Page
2.1 Trip Generation – Approved South Lexington Sites 12
2.2 Intersection Level of Service Criteria 13
2.3 South Lexington Intersection – 2023 Optimize Traffic Operations
with Programmed Improvements 14
1 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.1.1 OVERVIEW
The Town of Lexington retained Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, LLC,
and (FST) to conduct a South Lexington Transportation Study.
Overall, this study provides an operational analysis of walking,
biking, and motor vehicle modes under existing and future traffic
conditions with recommendations for additional enhancements.
Study findings are being coordinated with the Town as well as
community residential and business growth area stakeholders.
Technical Memorandum 2 follows up on Technical Memorandum
1 (Existing Conditions) by identifying 10-year horizon traffic
projections pertaining to infill of existing approved developments
with anticipated background growth to estimate a moderate and
high development growth scenarios in the Study Area. Moderate
and high development scenarios were identified by RKG, our
Economic Development consultant. After consultation with the
Town of Lexington, it was agreed to identify the high development
scenario on an assumption that allows the Town to have a general
idea about how much additional development can conceivably be
absorbed on the Hayden Avenue/Spring Street/Concord
Avenue/Waltham Street corridors before a major congestion
problem emerges.
As requested by the Town, the moderate or conservative
development scenario assumes that approved development
expansions at 100/600 Shire Way and at 97 Hayden Avenue (Three
Ledgemont) are fully constructed and occupied and that
background traffic grows in accordance with projections of the
regional model by the Central Transportation Planning Staff
(CTPS). CTPS projects background traffic to grow approximately
2% in the South Lexington Study Area between 2012 and 2022.
Included in the analysis are programmed infrastructure changes as
well as alternatives for non-programmed infrastructure changes
associated with the base-case and high-end development
assumptions as they pertain to the developments and its
surrounding neighborhoods.
2 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Figures 2.1-2.3 summarize a few of the displays from the
Technical Memorandum 1 analyses. Figure 2.1 identifies the
South Lexington Study Area and the 15 intersections where traffic
counts were performed and analyzed. Figure 2.1A identifies the
Study Area with the intersections where signals or pedestrian
flashers are provided. Figure 2.2 summarizes South Lexington year
2013 transportation system focus areas and issues. Figure 2.3
identifies commercial development parcels and those where
development expansions have been approved but not yet
constructed. Approved additional new South Lexington
development parcels generally are either immediately west of or
immediately east of the Hayden Avenue at Spring Street
intersection. Recent changes in the status of developments in the
Ledgemont parcel may slow changes in the area, but programmed
growth within the next ten years is still assumed. Figure 2.4
illustrates existing lane configurations of the road network
evaluated.
The 10-year horizon addressed in this memo examines South
Lexington Study Area office/commercial areas that have already
largely been constructed and occupied. A range of alternative
potential safety and congestion improvements is provided for
identified problem areas, as well as an assessment of the
environment for pedestrians and bicyclists within the context of
pedestrian generators like parks, trails, and schools within the area.
Specifically, this Technical Memorandum examines the
cumulative impacts of the Hayden/Spring Streets development
areas projected during the next 10 years.
The Town of Lexington seeks to improve its pedestrian, bicycle
and vehicular safety environment while improving overall traffic
operations such that future economic development along the
Hayden Avenue and Spring Street corridors is adequately
accommodated without adversely affecting the quality of life in
nearby residential neighborhoods
Hayden Avenue
With RKG Associates, Inc.Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2. 1–Study Area-Aerial Base
LEXINGTON
WALTHAM
LINCOLN
Signal
Pedestrian Flasher
Not to Scale
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.1A – Study Area with Traffic Signals Identified
*
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
N
Network: AM peak volumes 18% higher than PM
Crash rate exceeds State/District
Averages
High calculated rate, small sample,
fewer than 1 crash/year
Pedestrian crossing/bike crossing
desire Line
AM Congestion (LOS E or F)
PM Congestion (LOS E or F)
Additional bike accommodations may
be needed
Existing signal
Marrett Road
Sp
r
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2A
2A
2
2
Not to Scale
Assumes all signals optimized
Legend
0.0
0.72
1.00
0.69
0.79
1.03
1.98
0.95
0.0
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.2 – Summary of 2013 South Lexington Traffic Problem Areas With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
N
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
o
n
l
y
w
i
t
h
re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
3
–
H
a
y
d
e
n
/
S
p
r
i
n
g
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
Marrett Road
Sp
r
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2A
2A
2
2
Lane Configurations
Traffic Signal Location
Not to Scale
Legend
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.4 - Existing Intersection and Corridor Lane Configurations
*
Single lanes marked on Waltham Street
wide enough and driven as two lanes
*
*
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
N
8 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.2 PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS
Projecting traffic conditions for the South Lexington Study Area
involves a five-step building block process.
First of all, the Town of Lexington provided a list of programmed
infrastructure modifications and programmed development
projects that may affect the multi-modal circulation system in the
South Lexington Study Area.
Second, to estimate regional traffic growth unrelated to South
Lexington growth areas, FST contacted Central Transportation
Planning Staff (CTPS) to obtain a general background traffic
growth rate for the South Lexington Study Area. This makes
traffic projections somewhat conservative (high side) as the
background traffic growth rate is assumed to represent CTPS’s
best approximation of growth from its regional traffic model
inclusive of development within the Town of Lexington.
Third, traffic from approved but not yet constructed sites in the
Hayden Avenue/Spring Street traffic growth areas was generated
using the latest edition of the Institute of ITE Trip Generation
report, 9th Edition (2012).
Fourth, FST distributed and assigned the traffic projected to be
generated to the roadway network to represent the year 2023
moderate projected traffic conditions.
2.2.1 Programmed Transportation Facilities
Refer to Figure 2.5 for a summary of recent and programmed short
term enhancements the Study Area transportation infrastructure.
The Town of Lexington is continuing to implement measures that
enhance the viability of the South Lexington Transportation
network for all modes on its roadways as well as the trails
traversing its extensive open space network of recreational parks
and woods. Since this Study was initiated, a sidewalk has been
implemented on the north side of Hayden Avenue. Other
programmed measures within the South Lexington Transportation
network include:
Marrett Road
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2
2
New sidewalk
Recently upgraded traffic signal
Recent new traffic signal
Pedestrian Crossing w/Flashers
New ‘Traffic Calming’ with speed humps
shoulders & bike shared use markings
New Crosswalk (ADA/unsignalized)
Not to Scale
Legend
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2. 5 - Recent and Programmed Transportation Enhancements by 2023
2A
2A
*
*
*
* Enhancements within the past 5 years
*
*
*
*
*
*
N
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
10 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.2.1 Programmed Transportation Facilities (Continued)
Shade Street traffic calming measures including a two-foot
striped shoulder for pedestrians, no centerline, and bike
shared use markings, or “sharrows” as well as recently
implemented speed humps to reduce travel speeds.
Hayden Avenue bike lanes on both sides were added
during 2013, following up on the construction of a sidewalk
on the north side of Hayden Avenue during 2012.
Concord Avenue bike sharrows and a new sidewalk on its
south side are to be implemented within the next few years.
Concord Avenue at Spring Street signalization
improvements are under construction and will be
implemented within the next year.
Concord Avenue and Waltham Street signalization and
markings improvements are under design and are scheduled
to be implemented within the next few years.
Route 2 ramps to and from Waltham Street are being
reviewed for potential design enhancements during the next
few years. Since specific design elements have not yet
been identified, this study identifies potential enhancements
based on the existing intersection operations and crash
analysis and a review of historical crashes and the potential
for traffic growth.
Within the past few years, the Town restriped and resurfaced
Spring Street including sharrows spaced 250 to 350 feet apart.
As noted above, the Town recently implemented traffic
calming measures on Shade Street, which has also recently
been resurfaced. As on Spring Street, sharrows for Shade
Street are spaced every 250 to 350 feet. Striped shoulders
offset 3 feet from the edge of the road have been added to
delineate pedestrian space on Shade Street. No centerline is
being provided to alert motorists that they should carefully pass
pedestrians and bicyclists, as they may encroach on the
opposing traffic to do so. Following a door-to-door survey of
residents regarding traffic calming features, the Engineering
Department installed new speed humps and are considering
constructing a sidewalk on Shade Street. These measures are
outside the scope of this South Lexington study, but are noted
as on-going projects.
11 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.2.2 Background and Programmed Traffic Growth
Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) and nearby
communities were contacted to obtain information on the potential
for traffic unrelated to nearby developments in Lexington at the
Hayden Avenue/Spring Street areas programmed for additional
commercial development. As the regional planning agency, CTPS
models traffic forecasts for eastern Massachusetts, including
Lexington. It is interesting to note that between 2007 and 2011,
vehicle miles traveled in Massachusetts urban areas declined by
0.02 percent overall. However, the CTPS model forecasts that a
reversal of this trend will occur and that South Lexington VMT
will slowly grow by 0.2% per year to approximately a 2-percent
traffic increase over the next ten years by the year 2023. CTPS
projects the 2-percent growth will account for both background
and programmed development in the South Lexington study area.
Adjacent communities did not indicate there were any new area-
specific programmed developments that will directly affect streets
in the South Lexington study area.
To be conservative, FST assumed that background traffic growth
would be increased by the traffic projected to be generated by new
developments already programmed in the South Lexington area
including:
1) 162,000 gross square feet (gsf) of new offices at 97
Hayden Avenue; and
2) 380,000 gsf of new offices at 100/600 Shire Way.
As stated in Technical Memo 1, FST was originally going to
estimate both “moderate” and “high” end build-outs of the Spring
Street/Hayden Avenue corridors. However, the “moderate”
projections produced intersection LOS E/F at several intersections.
After discussions with Town representatives, it was deemed that
conducting a “high” end buildout, was an unreasonable exercise, as
it would have resulted in traffic analysis conditions still more
inconsistent with the Town’s zoning guidelines which call for peak
hour LOS’s being in the range of A-D.
To estimate the traffic associated with the two above development
sites – essentially the “moderate” buildout -- trip generation rates
from the ITE Trip Generation report (9th Edition, 2012) were
applied from the above programmed, but not yet constructed
developments. See computations on Table 2.1.
12 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Table 2.1
Trip Generation – Approved South Lexington Sites
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
100/600 Shire Way
490 in 86 in
67 out 418 out
557 Total 504 Total
97 Hayden Avenue
248 in 44 in
34 out 216 out
282 Total 260 Total
Trip generation rate source: ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012
The above trip estimates were compared to previous projections of
the Shire, Ledgemont and Cubist facilities and found to be
reasonably consistent. When approved developments within the
South Lexington study area are completed, trips projected from
Table 2.1 imply that during the AM and PM peak hours, the as yet
unconstructed development will generate approximately 750-840
new AM or PM peak hour trips within the study area.
After comparing CTPS 2010 Journey to Work data with traffic
distribution patterns developed by others and the 2012/2013
ground counts, the distribution patterns developed by BSC in
2008-91 for growth areas in South Lexington appeared to be
reasonable and still applicable.
Figure 2.6 illustrates the trip distribution pattern used to distribute
traffic from the development sites shown previously on Figure 2.3
and create the year 2023 moderate case for analysis. Figures 2.7
and 2.8 illustrate the AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes
respectively projected for 2023 based on the background traffic
growth plus full build out of the approved developments within the
Spring Street/Hayden Avenue commercial development areas. In
aggregate, Study Area traffic is projected to grow approximately
12% during the AM peak hour and 10% during the PM peak hour.
1 Traffic Impact Study Three Ledgemont Office Building; BSC;2008
2 2000 Highway Capacity Manual; Transportation Research Board 3 A Guide on Traffic Analysis Tools; MassDOT February 2011
13 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.2.3 Moderate Year 2023 Traffic Projections and Peak Traffic Operations
All capacity analysis for the study area intersections in Lexington
was performed in accordance with the methodologies set forth in
the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual2 using the SYNCHRO
Version 7 software approved by MassDOT Highway Division3.
Level of service (LOS) at signalized and unsignalized intersections
is based on estimates of delay per vehicle. Table 2.2 presents a
summary of the Level of Service criteria for unsignalized and
signalized intersections.
Table 2.2
Intersection Level of Service Criteria
Unsignalized Signalized
Level of Service Delay (seconds/vehicle) Delay (seconds/vehicle)
A <10 <10
B >10 to 15 >10 to 20
C >15 to 25 >20 to 35
D >25 to 35 >35 to 55
E >35 to 50 >55 to 80
F >50 >80
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2000
From Figures 2.7 and 2.8, traffic operations at the study area
intersections were evaluated assuming all programmed
infrastructure modifications are implemented and all remaining
approved development along the Hayden Ave/Spring St corridors
is constructed and occupied.
As noted above, the Town of Lexington zoning considers LOS’s
A-D as being representative of acceptable peak hour traffic
operating conditions. Room for additional growth beyond
approved development quantities could be possible within the
Hayden/Spring Streets area if, at some time in the future, the Town
modifies its zoning policy to assume that intersections, with
mitigation can be returned to no-worse-than conditions found in
the No-Build alternative, which may be LOS E/F. This would be
similar to the MEPA environmental impact criteria.
Based on anticipated an assumption that programmed
improvements will be place by 2023, the AM peak hour, as was
found in the 2013 analysis, will continue to represent worst case
conditions within the South Lexington Transportation Study area.
Table 2.3 summarizes analysis results of year 2023 peak hour
levels of service within the South Lexington Transportation Study
area.
Table 2.3
South Lexington Intersections - 2023 Optimized Traffic Operations
With Programmed Improvements
Intersecting Street Names Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C
Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Waltham Street 74 E 1+55 E 0.97
Concord Avenue at Spring Street*46 D 1+63 E 1+
Concord Avenue at Waltham Street*63 E 1+49 D 0.96
Hayden Avenue at Spring Street & Shire Way 82 F 1+2+ min F 1+
Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Spring Street 2+ min F 1+55 D 0.96
Intersecting Street Names Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C
Waltham Street at Rte 2 WB off right turn 76 F 0.95 95 F 1+
Concord Avenue at Walnut Street 48 E 0.69 18 C 0.39
Concord Avenue at Pleasant Street 2+ min F 1+79 F 0.96
Concord Avenue at Route 2 Eastbound Ramps*2+ min F 1+18 C 0.53
Shade Street at Spring Street 2+ min F 1+18 C 0.28
Hayden Avenue at Route 2 Westbound On-Ramp 9 A 0.18 10 B 0.27
Hayden Avenue at Route 2 Westbound Off-Ramp LT 2+ min F 1+29 D 0.48
Hayden Avenue at Route 2 Westbound Off-Ramp RT 13 B 0.51 22 C 0.44
Hayden Avenue at Waltham Street 2+ min F 1+2+ min F 1+
Lincoln Street North at Marrett Road (Route 2A)14 B 0.37 12 B 0.18
Lincoln Street South at Marrett Road (Route 2A)2+ min F 1+2+ min F 0.85
Middle Street at Cary Avenue 10 A 0.09 20 C 0.21
Lincoln Street at Middle Street 13 B 0.24 9 A 0.02
Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Cary Avenue 24 C 0.16 18 C 0.18
Middle Street at Marrett Road (Route 2A)14 B 0.08 11 B 0.05
LOS - Level of Service from A-F; A is best; F is worst. Signal LOS is overall; unsignalized LOS is for worst movement.
Intersections with calculated peak hour LOS E/F congestion or 1+ V/C are highlighted in yellow.
* Assumes programmed signal and striping/geometric modifications.
V/C - Calculated Volume to Capacity ratio.
2023 AM 2023 PM
Signalized Intersections with Optimized Timing
Unsignalized Intersections
2023 AM 2023 PM
Delay expressed in seconds per vehicle during peak 15 minutes of the peak hour. At high
Marrett Road
Sp
r
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2A
2A
2
2
Approved, Not fully
built out development
sites
Distribution pattern assumed
for future Hayden Avenue/Spring
Street Development
Traffic Signal Location
Not to Scale
Legend
X%
5%
10%
Note: Same traffic distribution pattern from BSC Group in connection with Ledgemont Three site.
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.6 – Projected Traffic Distribution Pattern of Approved Developments With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
N
Sp
r
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2A
2A
2
2
Not to Scale
Legend
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.7 - 2023 Projected ‘Moderate’ Growth – AM Peak Hour
68
277
340
325
133
40
505
11
3
15
7
Traffic Signal Location
Future Traffic Signal Location
1
32
N
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
Sp
r
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2A
2A
2
2
Not to Scale
Legend
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.8 - 2023 Projected ‘Moderate’ Growth – PM Peak Hour
157
42
174
405
565
184
621
29
5
47
2
Traffic Signal Location
Future Traffic Signal Location
9
23
N
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
18 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.2.3.1 AM Peak Hour Operations – 2023 estimates vs. 2013
Of the signalized intersections, with the exceptions of Concord
Avenue at Waltham Street and Concord Avenue at Spring Street,
all traffic signal controlled intersections will experience greater
congestion during the 2023 AM peak hour than found in 2013. Of
the five signalized locations, only Concord Avenue at Spring Street
is expected to operate at an overall LOS D. Both Marrett Road at
Waltham Street and Concord Avenue at Waltham Street are
expected to be operating at an overall LOS E by 2023. This
represents an improvement for the intersection of Concord Avenue
at Waltham Street. Analysis indicates it was operating at LOS F
during 2013. The intersection of Hayden Avenue at Spring Street
and Shire Way will decline from an LOS D to LOS F by 2023.
Marrett Road at Spring Street is expected to be operating at an
LOS F in 2023, as it was in 2013, but with longer queues and
delays.
Of the unsignalized intersections, congestion experienced at stop
or yield controlled intersections during the AM peak hour will
noticeably increase at:
Lincoln Street at Marrett Road (Route 2A). This stop
controlled four way intersection has existing difficulties
processing left and through movements. Increased
congestion with longer queues and greater delays will
occur as traffic grows in the future.
Hayden Avenue at Waltham Street. Stop-controlled on
the Hayden Avenue left lane approach, traffic
operations at this intersection are compounded by the
Route 2 WB exit merge onto Waltham Street just to the
south.
Waltham Street at the westbound Rte. 2 off-ramp.
Projected LOS F operations here are compounded as
some motorists seek to cross over to the left lane
northbound on Waltham Street toward Hayden Avenue.
Concord Avenue at Pleasant Street. The stop controlled
Pleasant street approach will continue to experience
long delays, as it does today with slightly higher traffic
demands.
Shade Street at Spring Street. Traffic on this stop
controlled intersection will worsen, as right turn
19 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
demands, an undesirable product of cut through
motorists, are expected to increase.
Concord Avenue at the Route 2 eastbound off-ramp.
Operating at an LOS D during 2013, the LOS for right
turning traffic exiting Route 2 is expected to decline to
an LOS F. At this location, the merge may not be as
severe as indicated, given that the merging volumes are
expected to be less than 1,100 vehicles per hour.
2.2.3.2 PM Peak Hour Operations – 2023 estimates vs. 2013
Similar to what was found during 2013, projected year 2023 PM
peak hour operations at study area intersections will not be as
congested as 2023 AM peak hour operations.
Of the signalized intersection, Marrett Road (Route 2A) at
Waltham Street’s operations are expected to worsen from an LOS
D to E. Following signal and lane improvements, the Concord
Avenue at Waltham Street, analyzed as an LOS F during the 2013
PM peak hour, will improve to LOS D. However, Hayden Avenue
at Spring Street and Shire Way operations are expected to decline
from LOS D in 2013 to LOS F in 2023. PM peak hour operations
at the soon-to-be signalized Concord Avenue at Spring Street
intersection will improve from LOS F to LOS E. With
programmed improvements, the intersection of Waltham Street at
Concord Avenue will operate at an overall LOS D, as opposed to
its LOS F operations during 2013. While slightly more congested
with longer queues, Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Spring Street will
remain at an overall LOS D during the PM peak hour.
Of the unsignalized intersections evaluated, all will operate at LOS
D or better with the exception of:
Hayden Avenue at Waltham Street. Similar to the AM
peak hour, the Hayden Avenue left lane approach will
experience long delays compounded by the Route 2
WB exit merge onto Waltham Street just to the south.
Waltham Street at the westbound Rte. 2 off ramp.
Projected LOS F operations here are compounded as
some motorists seek to cross over to the left lane
northbound on Waltham Street toward Hayden Avenue.
Concord Avenue at Pleasant Street. Similar to the
morning peak hour, the Pleasant street approach will
20 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
continue to experience long delays, as it does today
with slightly higher traffic demands.
Lincoln Street at Marrett Road (Route 2A).
Approaching Lincoln Street traffic on this four-way
intersection will continue to experience long delays,
though the volume to capacity ratio will be less than 1,
indicating there is reserve capacity to accommodate the
intersection’s demands.
2.2.4 Future Safety Concerns with Moderate Year 2023 Traffic Projections
As documented in Technical Memorandum 1, during the most
recently available five-year period from 2006 to 2010, statewide
crash data reviewed within the South Lexington Study Area,
reveals that crash rates exceeded either Statewide or District
average crash rates at seven intersections, six of which had more
than 1 crash reported annually. Ranked in order of the highest
crash rates, the following four of the seven South Lexington Study
Area intersections exceeded Statewide or District average crash
rates for comparable intersections during the five-year period.2
Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Lincoln Street (1.02 crash rate)
Hayden Avenue at Waltham Street (1.00 crash rate)
Marrett Road(Route 2A) at Cary and Middle Streets (0.79
crash rate)
Concord Avenue at Walnut Street (0.72 crash rate)
Because traffic will increase by the year 2023, absent mitigation
measures, the potential for crashes will also increase proportionally
to increases in traffic volumes at locations where mitigation
measures have not already been installed or are programmed for
improvements.
1 Due to its low volumes, the intersection of Lincoln at Middle Streets experienced a relatively high crash rate of
1.98 per million entering vehicles, but fewer than one (1) crash per year with three reported crashes during a
five year period, none during the most recent 2009/2010 reporting years. Additionally, while Concord Avenue
at Spring Street (0.69 crash rate) and Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Waltham Street (0.95 crash rate) exceeded
State or District average crash rates, both had mitigation signal upgrades installed after 2010.
21 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
With the exception of Marrett Road at Cary and Middle Streets, all
the intersections cited above also experience congestion during the
AM and PM peak hours.
Improving the safety of all travel modes is an important aspect of
this study and is addressed in the Alternatives section of this
Technical Memorandum.
Figure 2.9 identifies projected study area transportation issues that
should be addressed over the next 10 years. The analysis finds
that, for the most part, the Town has been addressing major
circulation issues in the area. Unresolved issues are focused on
roadways that are not controlled by the Town, primarily Marrett
Road and the Route 2 interchange at Waltham Street.
2.2.5 Future Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity
General
Another key element of the South Lexington transportation study
is the coordination with other Town committees, departments and
groups to consider the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian
amenities in the area. The Town has historically been very active
in initiating improvement measures. This is evident with the shared
lane markings (sharrows) placed on roadways throughout Town,
new bike lanes, for example on nearby Hayden Avenue and some
recent examples include new sidewalks such as along both Hayden
Avenue and Spring Street, including handicap ramps. Included
with the new sidewalk along Spring Street are new crosswalks and
two (2) pedestrian signal devices to alert motorists of pedestrian
crossing activities. On Concord Avenue in the South Lexington
area, a new sidewalk is in the conceptual stage for the south side of
Concord Avenue and on Shade Street some traffic calming devices
were installed to accommodate pedestrian and bicyclists.
Pedestrian Connections
Coordination should occur with the “Across Lexington” program,
which is a group to encourage walking and hiking across parts of
Lexington through a full network of routes including conservation
lands, recreational areas, general open space, school zones and
roadway systems. Currently two major routes are identified on the
web site (www.acrosslexington.org), one of which (Route B)
covers a portion of the South Lexington area. This organization is
an initiative of the Lexington Greenways Corridor Committee.
The Greenways Corridor Committee also coordinates with the
22 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Western Greenway, which is a walking/hiking path, parts of which
are improved and unimproved, and passes through the Towns of
Belmont, Lexington and Waltham. The Lexington portion of the
Western Greenway crosses Walnut Street, just south of Potter’s
Pond Condominiums and there remain a multitude of possible
connection opportunities.
With the current Across Lexington Routes, there are considerations
that should be given to crossing public ways to provide safe
crossing for mountain bikers and hikers and facilitate pedestrian
connections. Locations in the South Lexington area that should be
considered for a supplemental or new warning device, signing,
pavement markings or if warranted a regulatory device include:
Spring Street near Shire
Spring Street, near Grassland Street
Waltham Street near Hayden Avenue and
Walnut Street, south of Potter Pond Road
At the Spring Street crossing near Shire, there already is a speed
warning device in place, but no marked crossing area or signing. In
some locations, an ADA ramp system should be accented, while at
other locations, measures to highlight the street crossing could be
enhanced. Some crossing locations could benefit from improved
sight lines along the roadways, so motorists are aware of possible
crossing activity to addition to signing or markings. There are
numerous measures to improve crossing locations, many of which
the Town is currently utilizing in other parts of Town. Many of
these should be considered in the South Lexington network of
trails and paths.
Bicycle Connections
The most popular and busiest bicycle facility in Town is the
Minuteman Commuter Bikeway. The Town has been very active in
promoting the use of this facility as well as other parts of Town. In
one of the project workshops for this project, it was indicated that
there was a regular bike commuter group that identified a dis-
connect of the bicycle network. There is an established bicycle
advisory committee that has taken the lead with Town officials to
promote bicycle safety and developing a network of routes. While
the Town has been pro-active in recently accommodating bicycles
such as the addition of bike lanes on Hayden Avenue, from
23 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Waltham Street to Spring Street, and the addition of shared lane
markings on Spring Street, there are other network opportunities
the Town is investigating, such as the mechanism to use on
Concord Avenue and continuation of the network on Spring Street
to the south. Locations in the South Lexington area that should be
considered for bicycle connections or improved connections
include:
Waltham Street
Marrett Road
Spring Street south
Concord Avenue
Lincoln Street
Wayfaring and guide signage should be included, not to just
identify the bike route, but provide mileage destinations on the
signing. In the alternatives section FST has provided some
additional considerations for biking opportunities.
2.2.6 Future Mitigation Assessments and Allocations
Development projects in the South Lexington area typically come
before the Town boards for approvals. These approvals could be
for a change in use, a new project or an expanded site seeking
additional permitted space. As part of the approval process, a
mitigation package is developed in part with Town staff, the
development team and occasionally state agencies such as
MassDOT and the Boston MPO.
In working towards implementing mitigation strategies for these
projects, Town staff is presenting investigating additional funding
associated with already-permitted development once a project is
constructed. This is part of the developer’s MOU (Memorandum of
Understanding) and becomes a key element for future
infrastructure needs. The key objective with future development is
to create a mechanism for correlating off-site mitigation with area
needs, determining how the funds will be utilized, determining the
sequence of implementation and internally determining how
mitigation funds are distributed. A mechanism for prioritization of
mitigation funds should be established. For example, the
signalization of Shire Way/Spring Street and Spring
Street/Concord Avenue have been discussed for decades and it was
24 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
only until recently that the intersections have become signalized to
improve mobility.
Simply determining what the mitigation should be and where the
mitigation funds are to be allocated is critical to enhancing
mobility. A few considerations for determining priority of projects
and use of mitigation funds are:
Ranking of locations by accident rates, severity of damage and
unacceptable operations;
Proximity of future mitigation locations to sensitive land uses
in the area;
Benefit of mitigation to all users (improved level of service,
enhanced mobility);
Enhancement of transportation network connections to other
parts of Lexington and surrounding communities;
Coordination with Town Master Plan and programed Capital
Improvement Program (CIP); and
Emergency upgrade conditions.
Crash rate exceeds State/District
Averages
Addressed High Crash Location
High calculated rate, small sample,
fewer than 1 crash/year
Pedestrian crossing/bike crossing
desire Line
AM Congestion (LOS E or F)
PM Congestion (LOS E or F)
Additional bike accommodations may
be needed
Year 2023 signal location
Marrett Road
Sp
r
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
95
95
Exit 55
Exit 54
Exit 30
Exit 29
Exit 53
2A
2A
2A
2
2
Not to Scale
Assumes all signals optimized
Legend
0.0
0.72
1.00
0.79
1.03 2
3
4
5
1
N
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.9 – Year 2023 Focus Areas and Issues
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
26 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.3 ALTERNATIVE MITIGATION MEASURES
Based on the analysis findings of intersections and crashes, alternatives
were developed for unaddressed issues highlighted on Figure 2.9.
From Figure 2.9, while the Town of Lexington and MassDOT have
addressed most of the key issues, the most pressing needs for additional
potential mitigation measures tend to be focused on intersections with
MassDOT jurisdiction and thus would likely be required to go through the
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and permitting process. In all
the recommendations listed, any historical issues would need to be
investigated. Based on the most congested and highest crash rate
potential, we would suggest the following additional intersections/areas be
addressed within the next ten years:
Area 1 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Lincoln Street
Area 2 - Marrett Road(Route 2A) at Cary and Middle Streets
Area 3 - Hayden Avenue at Waltham Street and Hayden Avenue at the
Route 2 WB off-ramp left turn lane (combined)
Area 4 - Concord Avenue at Pleasant and Walnut Streets (combined)
Area 5 - Lincoln at Middle Streets
2.3.1 Area 1 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Lincoln /School Streets
Unusual geometric features of this intersection, along with relatively high
peak hour traffic demands are contributing to the congestion and high 1.03
crashes per million entering vehicles at this intersection. High pedestrian
and bike crossing volumes also suggest this intersection should be
considered for safety improvements.
Figures 2.10-2.13 are photos of the intersection, while Figures 2.14 to 2.16
illustrate three potential strategies for addressing observed issues. Three
options were evaluated including:
Option 1 – Signalized with a One-way Lincoln North segment
Refer to Figure 2.14 for an overview sketch of this option. The main
Lincoln Street at Marrett Road intersection would be controlled with a
fully actuated traffic signal as peak hour and volume signal warrants
would be met, and there have been 3 crashes involving cyclists and 10
angle crashes during the past five years. Single lane approaches would be
retained. The north leg of Lincoln Street around the park would be
converted to one-way westbound operation. The pavement of North
Lincoln Street and School Street would be reduced. Sidewalks and green
space would be added.
No
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
o
n
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
to
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 10
So
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
o
n
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
(
N
o
r
t
h
)
to
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 11
So
u
t
h
o
n
S
c
h
o
o
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
d
.
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
Ju
s
t
n
o
r
t
h
o
f
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
(
N
o
r
t
h
)
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 12
We
s
t
o
n
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
to
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 13
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
1
4
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
a
t
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Op
t
i
o
n
1
–
S
i
g
n
a
l
i
z
e
d
w
i
t
h
O
n
e
-
W
a
y
S
e
g
m
e
n
t
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
No
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
Ne
w
f
u
l
l
y
ac
t
u
a
t
e
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
s
i
g
n
a
l
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
w
i
t
h
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
To
r
e
d
u
c
e
c
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
s
,
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
o
f
S
c
h
o
o
l
St
r
e
e
t
a
t
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
;
a
d
d
ne
w
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
a
n
d
la
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
Ne
w
g
r
e
e
n
-
s
p
a
c
e
wi
t
h
r
e
t
a
i
n
e
d
dr
i
v
e
w
a
y
s
NN Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
1
5
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
a
t
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Op
t
i
o
n
2
–
S
i
g
n
a
l
i
z
e
d
w
i
t
h
E
n
l
a
r
g
e
d
G
r
e
e
n
S
p
a
c
e
s
Ne
w
f
u
l
l
y
ac
t
u
a
t
e
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
s
i
g
n
a
l
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
:
T
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
co
n
f
l
i
c
t
s
,
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
of
S
c
h
o
o
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
St
r
e
e
t
;
a
d
d
n
e
w
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
an
d
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
Co
n
v
e
r
t
N
o
r
t
h
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
St
r
e
e
t
t
o
g
r
e
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
re
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
d
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
s
,
ut
i
l
i
t
y
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
AD
A
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
NN
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
Not
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
1
6
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
a
t
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Op
t
i
o
n
3
–
R
o
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
w
i
t
h
E
n
l
a
r
g
e
d
G
r
e
e
n
S
p
a
c
e
s
De
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
t
r
u
c
k
s
w
i
t
h
ra
i
s
e
d
a
n
d
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
ce
n
t
e
r
i
s
l
a
n
d
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
a
tr
u
c
k
a
p
r
o
n
.
(
N
O
T
R
U
C
K
U-
T
U
R
N
S
)
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
dr
i
v
e
w
a
y
s
a
n
d
A
D
A
si
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
a
n
d
cr
o
s
s
w
a
l
k
s
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
F
H
W
A
m
i
n
i
-
ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
.
A
l
l
r
o
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
ma
r
k
i
n
g
s
/
s
i
g
n
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
w
i
t
h
la
t
e
s
t
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
M
U
T
C
D
.
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
a
n
d
T
o
w
n
de
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
Al
l
s
p
l
i
t
t
e
r
is
l
a
n
d
s
r
a
i
s
e
d
an
d
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
Mo
u
n
t
a
b
l
e
mo
u
n
d
e
d
sp
l
i
t
t
e
r
i
s
l
a
n
d
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
:
T
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
co
n
f
l
i
c
t
s
,
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
of
S
c
h
o
o
l
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
St
r
e
e
t
;
a
d
d
n
e
w
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
an
d
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
NN
Co
n
c
e
p
t
Not
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
1
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
34 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.3.1 Area 1 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Lincoln /School Streets (Continued)
Option 1 benefits:
Enhances safety by reducing pedestrian/vehicle conflicts
Enhances Marrett Road pedestrian/bike crossings
Reduces overall peak hour congestion (LOS C or better)
Option 1 drawbacks:
Estimated costs, $350,000 - $550,000
Continuing signal maintenance costs
Marrett Road motorist/bicycle delays greater than existing
May reduce Marrett Road’s attractiveness to through traffic
Signalization may increase rear end collisions
Option 2 – Signalized with enlarged green spaces
Refer to Figure 2.15 for an overview sketch of this option. Like Option 1,
the main Lincoln Street at the Marrett Road intersection would be
controlled with a fully actuated traffic signal. Unlike Option 1, the north
leg of Lincoln Street around the park would be converted to green space
and the triangular park expanded. However, to operate without congestion,
the westbound Lincoln Street approach, now accommodated by two
separate approaches would require a relatively short left/through lane and
an exclusive right turn lane. The pavement at North Lincoln Street and
School Street would be reduced. Sidewalks and green space would be
added.
Option 2 benefits:
Enhances safety by reducing pedestrian/vehicle conflicts
Enhances Marrett Road pedestrian/bike crossings more than Option 1
Greener environment than Option 1
Reduces overall peak hour congestion (LOS C or better)
Option 2 drawbacks:
Estimated costs, $400,000 - $600,000
Signal maintenance costs
May increase rear end collisions at the new signal
Marrett Road delays greater than existing
Option 3 – Roundabout with enlarged green space
Refer to Figure 2.16 for an overview sketch of this option. Unlike Options
1 or 2, the main Lincoln Street at the Marrett Road intersection would be
controlled by a modern roundabout with a truck apron, splitter islands, and
35 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
crosswalks. Sidewalks and net new green space would be added, but
significant park issues would need to be addressed.
Option 3 benefits:
Roundabouts are a top-ten USDOT crash reduction measure
Reduces pedestrian/vehicle conflicts
Eases Lincoln Street traffic access to Marrett Road
Enhances Marrett Road pedestrian crossings
Reduces overall peak hour congestion (LOS C or better)
Slows intersection vehicle conflicts
Overall greater green space than “Do Nothing.”
Option 3 drawbacks:
Estimated costs, $450,000 - $600,000
Adverse Lincoln North park impacts/tree impacts (requires relocation
of established trees and park features to newly-created green spaces)
May not be suitable on an arterial (MassDOT would need to approve)
to maximize its attractiveness for through traffic
Marrett Road traffic (including bicycles) requires slowing to negotiate
the roundabout
Impacts of the three potential options were discussed with the
Town/public on October 21, 2013. While none of the three potential
options was particularly disliked or liked, some attendees liked the notion
of enhancing the green space for the walking and biking environment
compared to the “Do Nothing” alternative. Based on follow-up feedback
with the Town, a recommendation will be made concerning a preferred
strategy in Tech Memo No. 3.
2.3.2 Area 2 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street
Cary Avenue and Middle Streets criss-cross one another just south of this
dual intersection with Marrett Road (Route 2A). Like the intersection of
Lincoln at Marrett Road, we have developed a range of three options that
might be considered to reduce crash rates at this intersection that has a
pocket park and a multi-use path just north of the intersection. Figures
2.17-2.21 are photos of the exiting intersection, while three potential
strategies for addressing observed issues are illustrated on Figures 2.22-
2.25. The three options evaluated included:
Option 1 – Enlarge island and modify circulation
Refer to Figure 2.22 for an overview sketch of Option 1. New curb
extensions and green space would be added to Middle Street and the
segment of Cary Avenue between Marrett Road and Middle Street.
No
r
t
h
o
n
C
a
r
y
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
n
d
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
2
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 17
No
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
o
n
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
Ma
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
2
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 18
No
r
t
h
o
n
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
to
C
a
r
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
2
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2. 19
We
s
t
o
n
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
to
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
C
r
o
s
s
w
a
l
k
2
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.20
No
r
t
h
o
n
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
C
a
r
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
2
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.21
2
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
2
2
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
o
u
t
e
2
A
)
a
t
C
a
r
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Op
t
i
o
n
1
-
E
n
l
a
r
g
e
I
s
l
a
n
d
a
n
d
M
o
d
i
f
y
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
No
t
e
:
I
f
s
t
r
e
e
t
s
r
e
m
a
i
n
t
w
o
-
wa
y
,
m
i
n
i
m
a
l
g
r
e
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
ch
a
n
g
e
s
a
r
e
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
.
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
in
l
a
y
o
u
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
wi
t
h
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
&
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
En
l
a
r
g
e
i
s
l
a
n
d
;
a
d
d
g
r
e
e
n
sp
a
c
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
o
n
v
e
r
t
i
n
g
t
o
1-
w
a
y
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
s
h
o
r
t
se
g
m
e
n
t
s
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
1
6
-
f
o
o
t
wi
d
t
h
;
a
c
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
a
l
l
dr
i
v
e
w
a
y
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
A
D
A
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
w
a
l
k
s
/
c
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
Co
n
s
i
d
e
r
R
e
c
t
a
n
g
u
l
a
r
R
a
p
i
d
Fl
a
s
h
i
n
g
B
e
a
c
o
n
(
R
R
F
B
)
o
r
Le
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
s
t
y
l
e
o
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
fl
a
s
h
e
r
s
t
o
a
s
s
i
s
t
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
NN Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
2
3
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
o
u
t
e
2
A
)
a
t
C
a
r
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Op
t
i
o
n
2
-
S
i
m
p
l
i
f
i
e
d
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
M
e
d
i
a
n
2
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
En
l
a
r
g
e
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
g
r
e
e
n
sp
a
c
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
t
r
e
e
s
an
d
b
e
n
c
h
e
s
/
p
a
r
k
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
an
d
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
m
a
r
k
e
r
s
t
o
bo
t
h
s
i
d
e
s
o
f
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Mo
u
n
d
e
d
o
r
ra
i
s
e
d
m
e
d
i
a
n
NN
Co
n
s
i
d
e
r
R
e
c
t
a
n
g
u
l
a
r
R
a
p
i
d
Fl
a
s
h
i
n
g
B
e
a
c
o
n
(
R
R
F
B
)
o
r
Le
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
s
t
y
l
e
o
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
fl
a
s
h
e
r
s
t
o
A
s
s
i
s
t
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
2
4
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
t
e
.
2
A
)
a
t
C
a
r
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Op
t
i
o
n
2
A
-
S
i
m
p
l
i
f
i
e
d
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
M
e
d
i
a
n
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
2
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
NN
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
En
l
a
r
g
e
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
g
r
e
e
n
sp
a
c
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
t
r
e
e
s
an
d
b
e
n
c
h
e
s
/
p
a
r
k
f
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
an
d
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
m
a
r
k
e
r
s
t
o
bo
t
h
s
i
d
e
s
o
f
r
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
Mi
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Mo
u
n
d
e
d
o
r
ra
i
s
e
d
m
e
d
i
a
n
Co
n
s
i
d
e
r
R
e
c
t
a
n
g
u
l
a
r
R
a
p
i
d
Fl
a
s
h
i
n
g
B
e
a
c
o
n
(
R
R
F
B
)
o
r
Le
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
s
t
y
l
e
o
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
fl
a
s
h
e
r
s
t
o
A
s
s
i
s
t
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
2
5
-
M
a
r
r
e
t
t
R
o
a
d
(
R
o
u
t
e
2
A
)
a
t
C
a
r
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Option 3 –Mini-roundabout
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
Al
l
s
p
l
i
t
t
e
r
is
l
a
n
d
s
r
a
i
s
e
d
an
d
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
d
Al
l
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s
ha
v
e
y
i
e
l
d
l
i
n
e
s
an
d
y
i
e
l
d
s
i
g
n
s
No
t
e
:
D
e
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
F
H
W
A
mi
n
i
-
r
o
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
.
A
l
l
ro
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
m
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
/
s
i
g
n
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
t
w
i
t
h
l
a
t
e
s
t
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
M
U
T
C
D
.
Re
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
b
y
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
Re
l
o
c
a
t
e
a
l
l
t
r
e
e
s
an
d
i
s
l
a
n
d
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
t
o
n
e
w
gr
e
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
s
NN De
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
t
r
u
c
k
s
w
i
t
h
mo
u
n
d
e
d
c
e
n
t
e
r
i
s
l
a
n
d
(N
O
T
R
U
C
K
U
-
T
U
R
N
S
PE
R
M
I
T
T
E
D
)
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
al
l
d
r
i
v
e
w
a
y
s
a
s
w
e
l
l
a
s
AD
A
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
s
a
n
d
cr
o
s
s
w
a
l
k
s
2
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
45 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.3.2 Area 2 - Marrett Road (Route 2A) at Cary Avenue and Middle Street
(Continued)
Left turns from Marrett Road would occur at Cary Avenue allowing better
visibility of oncoming traffic.
The southbound Cary Avenue approach to the Middle Street sight line
looking to the right would improve. All left and right turns from Cary and
Middle Streets would be made at a modified Middle Street approach to
Marrett Road. Consider a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) for
the Marrett Road crosswalk at the multi-use Path and skip-dashing the
double yellow centerline on Marrett Road across Middle Street to make it
clear that Marrett Road is the main route of travel.
Option 1 benefits:
Enhances Marrett Road safety compared to “Do Nothing” option
Generally enhances pedestrian/bike environment & clarifies Marrett
Road edge at Middle Street
Adds green space
Improves Cary Avenue at Middle Street sight line
Overall peak hour operations remain LOS C or better
Option 1 drawbacks:
Estimated costs, $100,000 - $150,000
Slightly increases pedestrian/vehicle conflicts at multi-use path
While improving the existing Middle Street skew at Marrett Road, it is
still less than 90° (preferred)
Slight concern with rear-end collisions with northbound Marrett Road
left to Cary Avenue
Option 2 – Simplified circulation with median
Refer to Figure 2.23 for an overview sketch of Option 2. The island
between Cary Avenue and Middle Streets would disappear, with larger
adjacent green spaces. The two Cary Avenue and Middle street
approaches would be replaced by a single intersection, assumed the
continuation of Middle Street, where all movements would occur. Marrett
Road would have a new 6-foot median at the multi-use path crossing. The
RRFB proposed under Option 1 would be an option.
Option 2 benefits:
Enhances Marrett Road safety compared to “Do Nothing” option
Removes one intersection
Enhances the pedestrian/bike environment & clarifies Marrett Road
edge at Middle Street better than Option 1
Adds net green space
46 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Improves Cary Avenue/Middle Street sight lines/eliminates skew
angle
May reduce the attractiveness of Cary Avenue as a cut-through
Overall peak hour operations remain LOS C or better
Option 2 drawbacks:
Estimated higher costs than Option 1, $150,000 - $250,000
Slightly increases pedestrian/vehicle conflicts at multi-use path
Park impacts (requires relocation of all park amenities)
Option 2A – Simplified circulation closer to Cary Avenue with Median
Refer to Figure 2.24 for an overview sketch of Option 2. The island
between Cary Avenue and Middle Streets would still disappear, with a
larger adjacent green space, located primarily east of the existing short leg
of Cary Avenue. The two Cary Avenue and Middle Street approaches
would be replaced by a single approach, assumed the continuation where
all movements would occur. Marrett Road would have a new 6-foot
median at the multi-use path crossing. The RRFB proposed under Options
1 and 2 should remain.
Option 2A benefits:
Enhances Marrett Road safety compared to “Do Nothing” option
Removes one intersection
Enhances the pedestrian/bike environment & clarifies Marrett Road
edge at Middle Street better than Option 1
Preserves more of the existing island than Option 2
Adds net green space
Improves Cary Avenue /Middle Street sight lines/eliminates skew
Overall peak hour operations remain LOS C or better
Option 2A drawbacks:
Likely higher costs than Option 1, $150,000 - $250,000, but slightly
lower than Option 2
Slightly increases pedestrian/vehicle conflicts at multi-use path
Park impacts (requires relocation of most park amenities on the island)
Reduced visibility of left turning motorists for following westbound
Marrett Road traffic.
Option 3 – Mini-roundabout
Refer to Figure 2.25 for an overview sketch of Option 2. The island
between Cary Avenue and Middle Streets would disappear, with larger
adjacent green spaces. The two Cary Avenue and Middle street
approaches would be replaced by a single intersection, assumed the
continuation of Middle Street, where all movements would occur. Marrett
47 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Road would have a new 6-foot median at the multi-use path crossing. The
RRFB proposed under Option 1 would be an option.
Option 3 benefits:
Roundabouts are a top-ten USDOT crash reduction measure
Removes one intersection
More green space than existing, but located on roadside rather than
concentrated in an island
Overall peak hour operations remain LOS C or better
Option 3 drawbacks:
Estimated costs of $200,000 - $250,000
Slight offset at multi-use path
Smaller radius mini-roundabout requires mountable center island for
trucks
Park impacts (requires relocation of all park amenities to newly
created green spaces)
Requires all traffic to slow entering intersection
May not be suitable on an arterial (MassDOT would need to approve)
to maximize its attractiveness for through traffic
2.3.3 Area 3 - Route 2 Westbound off-ramps to Waltham Street and Hayden Avenue
During the past couple of years several improvements have been made to
Hayden Avenue in the vicinity of the WB Route 2 off-ramps. It is
understood that the Town also briefly reviewed conceptual options at this
interchange, so strategies evaluated in this report are conceptual only.
Figures 2.26-2.30 are photos of the existing interchange area, while three
potential strategies for addressing observed issues are illustrated on
Figures 2.31-2.33. The three options evaluated include:
Option 1 – Provide Bike Enhancements, Signalize & Modify Route 2 WB
Ramps at Waltham Street with Single Controller
Refer ahead to Figure 2.31 for an overview sketch of Option 1. Basically
this alternative would reconfigure the interchange and signalize three
intersections coordinated with one controller. It would permit traffic on
the westbound off-ramp to make either a left or right off the interchange
onto Waltham Street, provide bike lanes through the interchange and
signalize the left turn movement to Hayden Avenue (the right turn onto
Hayden Avenue would be eliminated). It would allow traffic coming from
Route 2 to make an easier weave across northbound Waltham Street traffic
to turn left onto Hayden Avenue under a controlled condition. It would
also allow Route 2 westbound traffic to turn left under positive control,
rather than at a stop sign.
So
u
t
h
o
n
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
at
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
3
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.26
We
s
t
o
n
R
o
u
t
e
2
o
f
f
-
r
a
m
p
to
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
3
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.27
We
s
t
o
n
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
to
R
o
u
t
e
2
W
B
o
f
f
r
a
m
p
s
3
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.28
No
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
o
n
R
o
u
t
e
2
W
B
of
f
r
a
m
p
r
i
g
h
t
t
o
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
3
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.29
No
r
t
h
o
n
R
o
u
t
e
2
W
B
o
f
f
-
r
a
m
p
le
f
t
t
o
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
3
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.30
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
3
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
3
1
–
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
R
o
u
t
e
2
R
a
m
p
s
Op
t
i
o
n
1
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
B
i
k
e
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Si
g
n
a
l
i
z
e
&
M
o
d
i
f
y
R
o
u
t
e
2
W
B
R
a
m
p
s
a
t
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
w
i
t
h
S
i
n
g
l
e
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
3
2
–
–
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
R
o
u
t
e
2
R
a
m
p
s
Op
t
i
o
n
2
–
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
B
i
k
e
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Cr
e
a
t
e
D
u
a
l
R
o
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
s
o
f
2
W
B
R
a
m
p
s
a
t
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
3
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
;
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
3
Co
n
c
e
p
t
:
N
o
t
t
o
S
c
a
l
e
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
De
s
i
g
n
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
T
o
w
n
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
/
M
a
s
s
D
O
T
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
w
i
t
h
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
Ma
s
s
D
O
T
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
3
3
–
–
W
a
l
t
h
a
m
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
t
H
a
y
d
e
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
R
o
u
t
e
2
R
a
m
p
s
Op
t
i
o
n
3
–
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
b
i
k
e
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Cr
e
a
t
e
T
w
o
P
a
r
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
o
n
e
F
u
l
l
R
o
u
n
d
a
b
o
u
t
a
t
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
56 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.3.3 Area 3 - Route 2 Westbound off-ramps to Waltham Street and Hayden
Avenue (Continued)
Option 1 – Signalize three intersections controlled by a single controller
and Enhance Pedestrian/Bike Circulation (Continued)
Option 1 benefits:
Enhances safety compared to ‘Do-Nothing’ option.
Generally enhances pedestrian/bike environment through the Route
2/Waltham Street interchange.
Reduces length and speeds on Waltham Street and reduces bike
conflict zones
Adds green space/bike lanes
Overall peak hour operations would be LOS D or better
Option1 drawbacks:
High costs exceeding $1-$1.5 million to implement
Long term signal maintenance costs
Signals may increase rear end collisions
Requires two lanes southbound on Waltham Street and would convert
the exclusive right lane to Hayden Avenue to a shared through/right
lane
Requires a lane drop south of the newly configured interchange
Option 2 – Convert two intersections into modern roundabouts with
approaching bike lanes.
Refer back to Figure 2.32 for an overview sketch of Option 2. This
alternative would reconfigure the interchange and convert the two of the
intersections coordinated into modern roundabouts designed to
accommodate all allowable turning movements. Roundabouts would
permit traffic on the westbound off ramp to make right turns to
accommodate all traffic movements and would eliminate much pavement
in the interchange. We assume bike lanes would be provided within the
interchange, similar to Option 1 south of the Route 2 WB off ramp. At the
roundabouts, bikes would either merge with reduced speed vehicle traffic
or cross at the pedestrian crossings. Option 2 would eliminate the need for
traffic coming from Route 2 to weave across northbound Waltham Street
traffic to turn left onto Hayden Avenue. It would also slow traffic flow
through the interchange, thereby benefitting pedestrian and bike
movements.
Option 2 benefits:
Enhances safety compared to ‘Do-Nothing’ option
Generally enhances pedestrian/bike environment through the Route
2/Waltham Street interchange area.
57 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Reduces length and speeds on Waltham Street and reduces bike
conflict zones
Overall peak hour operations would be better than existing, but LOS E
for some roundabout movements
Adds green space/bike lanes
Option 2 drawbacks:
High costs exceeding $1-$1.5 million to implement
Requires Waltham and Hayden Avenue traffic using the interchange to
slow down below
Waltham Street at Hayden Avenue roundabout may need partial multi-
lane treatment to operate without congestion during the AM peak hour
Option 3 – Provide bike enhancements; create two partial roundabouts
and one full roundabout at interchange
Refer to Figure 2.33 for an overview sketch of Option 3. This alternative
would reconfigure the interchange and convert the two of the intersections
into partial roundabouts designed to accommodate all allowable turning
movements under yield control. The partial roundabout would permit
traffic on the westbound off ramp to travel both north and south on
Waltham Street to provide redundancy to the westbound off ramp to
Hayden Avenue that would serve all traffic movements. It would
eliminate much pavement in the interchange. It assumes bike lanes will be
provided through the interchange, similar to Option 1 south of the Route 2
WB off ramp. It would eliminate the need for traffic coming from Route 2
to weave across northbound Waltham Street traffic to turn left onto
Hayden Avenue. It would also allow traffic to operate slower through the
interchange, thereby benefitting pedestrian and bike movements.
Option 3 benefits:
Enhances safety compared to ‘Do-Nothing’ option
Generally enhances pedestrian/bike environment through the Route
2/Waltham Street interchange area.
Reduces length and speeds on Waltham Street and reduces bike
conflict zones
Overall peak hour operations would be better than existing, but LOS E
for some roundabout movements
Adds green space and bike lanes
Option 3 drawbacks:
High costs exceeding $1.5-$2 million to implement
Requires all traffic using the interchange to slow down and traverse
the interchange area at 20 mph.
Waltham Street at Hayden Avenue roundabout may need a multi-lane
treatment to operate without congestion during the AM peak hour
58 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Operations of through movements will be slower than with Option 2
Potential confusion for Route 2 westbound motorists accessing Waltham
Street south as to which exit they should take. It is assumed that the
Hayden Avenue off-ramp would remain the signed exit for Waltham Street
south.
2.3.4 Area 4 - Concord Avenue at Pleasant and Walnut Streets
Concord Avenue is free flowing across the closely-spaced Pleasant and Walnut
Streets intersections. Peak period congestion exists on the approaches of both
Walnut and Pleasant Streets to Concord Avenue, although Pleasant Street
carries more traffic than Walnut Street. The steep 11-12% downslope of
Walnut Street at Concord Avenue coupled with the raised median produces
skidding crash related issues during periods when the Walnut Street pavement
becomes icy or snowy. Residents noted the absence of a sidewalk on Walnut
Street should be addressed, as people do walk down to Concord Avenue from
the MWRA water tower park area to the southwest. The layout of Walnut
Street appears to be sufficient to permit the addition of a sidewalk on its west
side, as it its layout varies from 7-9 feet to the west of the edge of pavement,
according to the Lexington GIS files. Restricted to using the pavement at
present, pedestrians are competing with motorists in a relatively narrow
environment.
Figures 2.34 - 2.37 are photos of the two intersections of Concord Avenue with
Walnut Street. Figure 2.38 illustrates potential options for improving the two
intersections. Improvement options at both locations are rather limited.
For the Walnut Street approach to Concord Avenue, consideration should be
given to:
Increasing the friction of the Walnut Street approach by paving with a
larger aggregate (i.e., ‘popcorn’ pavement).
Consider reducing the height of the hedge and width on the west side of
Concord Avenue.
Consider creating a maximum 4’ raised sidewalk on Walnut Street between
the Beaver Brook Conservation Land and Concord Avenue. This would
involve taking of a few large trees and some steep vertical grades so its
environmental impact must be carefully weighed. If environmental
considerations make it only possible to create a corner sidewalk landing is
created on the west side of Walnut Street at Concord Avenue, consider
providing a crosswalk on the west side of the intersection if crosswalk
warrants are met.
Unlike Walnut Street, the intersection of Pleasant Street with Concord Avenue
meets minimum motor vehicle peak hour volume warrants for signalization.
The recent history of crashes indicates that its crash rate is lower than the
statewide and District 4 rate for similar unsignalized intersections.
No
r
t
h
o
n
W
a
l
n
u
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
to
C
o
n
c
o
r
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
4
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.34
So
u
t
h
e
a
s
t
o
n
C
o
n
c
o
r
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
to
W
a
l
n
u
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
4
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.35
Ea
s
t
o
n
C
o
n
c
o
r
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
to
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
4
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.36
4
So
u
t
h
o
n
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
to
C
o
n
c
o
r
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.37
Base Map: Town of Lexington GIS
?
Consider higher friction pavement on downgrade only.
Neighbor requested improved pedestrian
accommodations to Western Greenway. To avoid tree
removals and address the narrowness of Walnut Street
perhaps a 4’ sidewalk only at the intersection southwest
corner only plus warning signs for pedestrians
Consider signalizing in future with
low impact post mounted signals
with x-walks.
Signal aesthetic compatibility is an
issue; AM/PM peak police control is
a costly option*
Wa
l
n
u
t
St
r
e
e
t
Not to Scale
Consider improved pedestrian
accommodations on Walnut
Street to Western Greenway. To
avoid necessary tree removals
with a continuous raised 4’
sidewalk on the west side and
steep sidewalk grades, a 4’
sidewalk only at the intersection
southwest corner only plus
yellow-green warning signs, like
W11-2 (see below) added for
motorists in both directions.
Consider crosswalk if warrants are
met, with ADA-compliant sidewalk
landings on both sides. A
Lexington-style flasher may be
needed to draw attention to the
pedestrian crossing.
South Lexington Transportation Study
Figure 2.38 - Concord Avenue at Walnut and Pleasant Streets
Options for Consideration
4
Consider crosswalk with ADA
landings to connect sidewalks
already provided on the north side
of Concord Avenue. Relocate
Pleasant Street stop line.
With RKG Associates, Inc. Town of Lexington Engineering and
Planning Departments
* Signalization may help reduce congestion on Pleasant Street, but will increase delays on Concord Avenue and may increase
rear end collisions. A signal at this intersection also does not fit well into the tight residential neighborhood environment, so it
should only be considered as a last resort, and only if the future crash rate at the intersection increases due to increasing
approach demands on Pleasant Street. A crosswalk at the Pleasant Street approach with Concord Avenue with ADA-compliant
landings should be considered in any event.
64 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.3.5 Area 5 - Lincoln at Middle Streets
Stop-controlled at intersection with Lincoln Street, Middle Street is set
back from the intersection which has a large expanse of pavement for
potential conflict points. Though only a few crashes have been reported at
this intersection is has a statistically high crash rate, as relatively few
motorists traverse the intersection on a typical weekday. We estimate
Figures 2.39 - 2.41 are photos of the intersection of Lincoln at Middle
Streets. Figures 2.42 and 2.44 are optional reconfiguration strategies for
the intersection. All options reduce pavement at the intersection and aid in
clarifying its turning movements.
Option 1 – Alter alignment – Relocate Middle Street Stop Control to
Lincoln Street
Option 1 benefits:
Should enhance safety compared to ‘Do-Nothing’ option
Creates a slow point on Lincoln Street that could reduce the
attractiveness of short cutting via Lincoln Street
Adds green space to the northwest corner of the intersection and could
include sharrows on Lincoln Street to increase bike use/driver
awareness
Overall peak hour operations would still be LOS A or better
Eliminates a stop on Middle Street
Option1 drawbacks:
Costs roughly $60,000-$80,000 to realign
Creates a kink in Lincoln Street; loss of continuity, as it would convert
southbound through movements to right turns and northbound through
movements to left turns.
Option 2 – Realign and Retain Lincoln Street Continuity.
Option 2 benefits:
Should enhance safety compared to ‘Do-Nothing’ option
Provides better sight lines for traffic turning left or right from Middle
Street onto Lincoln Street and reduces pavement and speeds of
vehicles traversing the intersection.
Overall peak hour operations would still be LOS A or better
Adds green space & could include a sidewalk extension
Option 2 drawbacks:
Costs roughly $70,000-$80,000 to realign with added green space
So
u
t
h
e
a
s
t
o
n
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
at
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
5
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.39
Ea
s
t
o
n
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
to
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
5
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.40
5
No
r
t
h
e
a
s
t
o
n
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
to
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Figure 2.41
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
–
–––
T
t
o
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
T
t
o
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
T
t
o
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
T
t
o
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
5
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
4
2
–
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Op
t
i
o
n
1
–
A
l
t
e
r
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
–
R
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
S
t
o
p
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
t
o
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Li
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
–
–––
T
t
o
T
t
o
T
t
o
T
t
o
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
Li
n
c
o
l
n
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
Li
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
St
r
e
e
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
St
r
e
e
t
5
Ba
s
e
M
a
p
:
T
o
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
G
I
S
So
u
t
h
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
Fi
g
u
r
e
2
.
4
3
–
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
a
t
M
i
d
d
l
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Op
t
i
o
n
2
–
R
e
-
a
l
i
g
n
a
n
d
R
e
t
a
i
n
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
Wi
t
h
R
K
G
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
To
w
n
o
f
L
e
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
70 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
2.3.6 Other Strategies
It is evident that additional development will occur in the South Lexington
area as referenced by the areas permitted or approved, but yet to be built
out. This does not include any potential change in use, re-zoning or
expansions of existing uses that are not currently in the planning process.
Additional growth improves the economic vitality of the Town, but if
managed properly can be a successful asset to the community. While
economic downturns traditionally occur and many times cannot be
predicted the downturn presents an opportunity for communities to re-
evaluate future mitigation and infrastructure improvements as well as
Town policies on development. An example is the new signalization along
Spring Street that was initially studied and discussed in the 1980’s and
recently implemented.
Typically more growth means additional traffic but if mechanisms are in
place to encourage multi-modalism such as adopting MassDOT Complete
Streets policies on roadway and intersection projects, providing clear,
concise mitigation for development projects and strictly enforcing
transportation demand measures (TDM) and other strategies. Some of
these are discussed below and further details can be found on the MPO
website.
Emphasize and Maximize Site TDM Measures
As the Hayden Avenue and Spring Street area develops, encourage
existing site users and members of the 128 Business Council to continue
the strong promotion of Travel Demand Management measures. These
measures should be reviewed in detail for effectiveness on a before/on-
going and after basis and provide the Town with updates or progress
reports of the operating system. At a minimum, these measures include:
Flextime
Initiate an on-site transportation coordinator
Employee discounts and promotions of the private shuttle bus
services in the area and the Lexpress Service.
Bicycle parking/storage facilities
Carpooling/vanpooling
New pedestrian or bicycle accommodations where missing
Care must be taken to address sight line issues and minimum crosswalk
warrants established by the national FHWA study “Safety Effects of
Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations”, Final
71 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
Report and Recommended Guidelines FHWA Pub No. HRT-04-100,
September 2005 (ref: Table 11, P. 54).
Marrett Road (State Route 2A)
Consider installation of 3-4 foot shoulders, with 11-foot lanes and
sharrows in the travel lanes in accordance with MUTCD spacing
guidelines, typically between the interchange with I-95 and Waltham
Street.
Waltham Street
Consider installation of sharrows and 11-foot travel lanes between Marrett
Road and the Waltham City line except at the interchange where bike
lanes would be appropriate along straight sections of the interchange with
buffers of a few feet, if possible.
Optimize and maintain signals regularly
Signal maintenance should be performed routinely, in accordance with the
manufacturer’s recommendations, with new timing plans as appropriate to
ensure all modes using signalized intersections are accommodated as
safely and efficiently as possible.
Evaluate the Effectiveness of Shade Street Traffic Calming Strategies
Following a completed study evaluating various traffic calming measures
for Shade Street3, the Town recently repaved and implemented Shade
Street traffic calming measures. At the October 2013 public meeting,
several Shade Street residents indicated there is a need for further
investigation of Shade Street calming measures. We conclude it is
important for the Town to test the effectiveness of measures recently
implemented before it embarks on an alternate traffic calming strategy for
Shade Street. Implemented measures include sharrows, edge lines, and
with selectively-placed dynamic speed signs to improve the definition of
the pedestrian walking environment. Records of post-implementation
speeds and before/after crashes should be reviewed to see if it is necessary
to consider adjustments to the implemented measures.
We further understand that Shade Street abutters are canvassing neighbors
to obtain feedback on the range of appropriate and/or acceptable traffic
calming measures that should be considered for Shade Street. This level
3 “Potential Traffic Calming Treatments – Shade Street Traffic Calming Study Memorandum”, FST, March 7, 2012
72 | Page
South Lexington Transportation Study – Tech Memo 2 – January 2015
Alternatives Evaluation - FST
of neighborhood involvement is a good strategy moving forward
simultaneously with evaluation of the traffic calming measures already in
place. In the event desired speed or through traffic reductions are not
achieved, the neighborhood data will be useful in identifying alternate
supplemental measures that might be considered.