HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-19-TMG-minMinutes for Traffic Mitigation Group Meeting
December 19, 2006
Members Present: Richard Canale, David Cannon, Elaine Dratch, Jeanne Krieger, Scott Schilt, and Jerry
VanHook.
The Traffic Mitigation Group (TMG) met on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 at 9:30 AM in the Planning
Depaitinent of the Town Office Building. The following summarizes the discussion.
Hartwell Avenue Traffic Study
➢ The BSC Group has submitted a preliminary scope of work for a traffic study on Hartwell Avenue.
Limited funds are available for the study, consisting of funds remaining from prior projects conducted
by the Engineering Division and a contribution from Lincoln Labs.
➢ The proposal is to establish baseline data of existing conditions and then to prepare a model to test
different growth scenarios and roadway delineation configurations.
➢ It was noted that establishing traffic counts for bicyclists and pedestrians could be hypothetical.
➢ It was noted that past town actions have supported to keep Hartwell Avenue functioning as one lane
in each direction, primarily as a mechanism to limit growth at Hanscom Air Field, Town Meeting has
felt that additional cargo operations at Hanscom would be detrimental for the Town given additional
truck trips and noise from airplanes.
➢ MassPort has prepared a draft of their annual Environmental Status and Planning Report (ESPR), and
has identified six scenarios that show additional cargo operations at Hanscom, with a build -out
ranging from 2010 to 2020. Ail truck routes would be via Hartwell Place or through the Air Force
Base, however most of the truck traffic would use Hartwell given the historical limitations to use of
Route 2A. MassPort will need to go through MEPA for permitting for any expansion.
➢ The traffic study must confirm whether the Town's desired objectives can be achieved, recognizing
that an increase in the floor area ratio (FAR) along Hartwell Avenue would likely result in an increase
in automobile traffic.
➢ There is a need to balance the interests of upgrading Hartwell Avenue to accommodate future growth,
given MassPort's projections and the Town's goals for economic development in the area, as opposed
to citizens groups who want to prevent further expansion of the Air Field.
➢ The town should be proactive to ensure that Hartwell Avenue function as a multi -modal corridor. If
the proposed striping plan for one - traffic lane and a bicycle lane in either direction is determined by
the study to be functional, than all it would take is for the Town to issue a work order to DPW, and
then MassPort must conform to the new configurations.
➢
It was noted that a public process component should be added to the study, with at least one meeting
with stakeholders to identify issues to be evaluated, and another meeting to discuss the findings or
other alternatives.
➢ The traffic counts should be done in the spring, as more cyclists would likely be encountered in the
warmer weather; the intersection with the bicycle path should also be one of the intersections that is
evaluated. It was noted that use of Hartwell Avenue for commuting by bicyclists is a potential
alternative, but is currently not realistic given safety concerns.
➢ The model that is developed by the consultant should be for the entire length of the corridor, and not
just for specific segments. The constraints within each of the different segments should be a part of
the model to evaluate improvement alternatives.
➢ Any increase in FAR that is approved should be tied to specific mitigation commitments.
➢ The right -of -way along Hartwell Avenue is 100 feet. There is plenty of room for creativity when
identifying alternatives to accommodate additional economic growth and /or expansion by MassPort.
➢ The Bicycle Advisory Committee wants a solution that meets the needs of all business entities along
Hartwell; the Committee has a strong preference that an off -road shared pedestrian and bicycle path
be established from the bikeway to the jug handle at Bedford Street.
➢ It was suggested that the study start with something simple and achievable; adding a public process
component will add more fodder to take the discussions for improvements to the next level by
generating more support and interest. It was noted that the Economic Development 2020 Task Force
should also be included in the study.
D Sidewalk construction would require survey work and wetland delineation, which could be quite
costly. Jerry VanHook wanted to go on record as stating that he did not think it would be cost
prohibitive. Considerations should be given for facilities that accommodate both bicycle and
pedestrian safety.
D The study should consider both a signing and striping plan for a bicycle lane.
➢ The study should also ensure compliance with federal regulations consistent with the Highway
Capacity and Safety Manual.
➢ When asked if existing data could be used to save costs, it was noted that the data should be reviewed
but not relied upon as it was collected for different purposes.
➢ It was noted that Rob Addelson and Carl Valente should be consulted about appropriations for the
study, and whether it will need to be approved by the Board of Selectmen.
➢ Next Steps: Get a real proposal from BSC for final review by the TMG at the January 9 meeting. Any
data that has been collected by the Bicycle Advisory Committee should be forwarded to David
Cannon for review as part of the study.
Next Meetings
D Tuesday, January 9, 2007 at 9:30 AM.
D Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 9:30 AM.
Minutes submitted by Scott Schilt, Senior Planner on December 19, 2006.