Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-03-NLRISC-rpt.pdf Interim Report to the Board of Selectmen From the North Lexington Road Improvement Study Committee June 3, 1985 George Burnell, Chairman Sally Castleman, Vice-Chairman Myron Miller, Secretary Robert Fitzmaurice Edmund Grant Harold Schmickley William Scouler Howard Smith Lawrence Smith Interim Report to the Board of Selectmen From the North Lexington Road Improvement Study Committee June 3, 1985 Summary Nine area residents were appointed by the Selectmen in early 1985 to evaluate and make recommendations on the Bedford Street reconstruction project. The plan studied by the committee is referred to in this report as "the proposed plan" and is represented by the drawings created by Boston. Survey Consultants, and dated November 1984 The committee met with various town, state and engineering consulting officials involved with the project, and studied the design and traffic issues We have become familiar with the technical issues relating to safety and road design that are involved with this project, as well as the State and Federal requirement for funding a roadway improvement. We also received input from residents of the neighborhood as well as other areas of the town. The committee is unaminmous in recognizing that some form of Bedford Street improvements are necessary However, we are strongly of the opinion that the magnitude of this proposed plan exceeds what is appropriate for a road abutting a residential neighborhood. We are concerned not just for North Lexington but for the town as a whole about the long-term and irreversible effects of a piece of Lexington road that would be wider than much of the Massachusetts Turnpike. The committee also has serious concerns about the additional traffic and development that such a road would attract -- development not just in Lexington but in Bedford and at Hanscom Field as well The same fears that people have expressed concerning possible developments that would result from a Hartwell Avenue Connector would relate to this proposed connection between 128 and Hartwell Avenue. The committee supports the resolution made at the 1984 Town Meeting in opposition to the proposed plan (or any plan) which does not provide more direct access between Eldred Street and Bedford Street. Aside from the magnitude of the project, the increased traffic and development issues, and the lack of adequate access from Eldred Street, other features of the present plan are unacceptable in varying degrees, and those concerns are discussed in the body of this report. We propose that the project be scaled down to a level more appropriate to the town of Lexington, in a manner which would still increase traffic flow and would still be consistent with safety considerations. We recommend that the proposed plan be temporarily set aside and that the initial phase of an alternate design concept be pursued. This new concept would be a roadway in scale with the existing residential neighborhood, interfaced with the commercial interests The committee, while not attempting to design the project, has several suggestions relative to its design and strongly recommends that exploration of the technical merits of our proposals be undertaken. These include (1 ) two rather than three travel lanes in each direction, (2) a shoulder/breakdown lane instead of a frontage road, and (3) an intersection at Eldred Street. Background The history of the Bedford Street project involves approximately 10 years of design effort which has resulted in a proposal which received approval of the 25% design stage by the Board of Selectmen (despite community objections) Conflict between community needs and State and Federal highway standards appear to have caused some of the present controversy Conflict between community needs and the interests of increased commercial devel- opment also appear to be responsible for some of the controversy Many area residents are opposed to the present plan. Twice since the current plan was returned to the town from State and Federal officials, they have filled the Selectmen's Meeting Room to voice their concerns At a North Lexington Association Candidates Night meeting (which usually attracts 5-10 residents) held on 2/26/85 those present rejected the present plan by a vote of 78 to 2. While the Board can question how representative that vote is, the committee beleives that it is essential to address many of the concerns that the residents raised Last year the Selectmen urged Town Meeting not to vote for an amendment to withhold funds for work on the proposed plan; they stated to Town Meeting that they would not proceed with the road if the neighborhood did not appprove. In addition to local opposition, it has recently come to the committee's attention that residents from other parts of town as well have strong negative feelings about the extreme width of the proposed road, the lack of adequade screening and softening, and the increased traffic and development ramifications Last year at Town Meeting they supported a resolution that opposed the current plan or any plan that did not have more direct access for Eldred Street. The committee anticipates that the proposed plan would encounter over- whelming opposition if submitted for a public hearing and would further polarize the division between commerical developers and Lexington residents Major Concerns The major concerns are summarized below 1 Access to Eldred Street from Bedford Street. 2. Excessive pavement width 3 Safe pedestrian crossing of Bedford Street. 4 Appropriate screening on median strip(s) 5. Environmental impacts water table, noise, air pollution. 6. Increased commercialization of the area. A discussion of these issues appears later in this report. Laudable Features While several components of the proposed plan were critized, features of the plan applauded as genuine improvements, are (1 ) the jug handle underpass facilitating through flow from Bedford Street to Hartwell Avenue, and (2) a way for Bedford Street residents to safely enter and exit Bedford Street from their driveways The fact that the Bedford Street residents need some relief is often pointed to as an argument for the road improvements It is therefore important to point out that despite the degree to which they are currently negatively impacted by the traffic, even some of the homeowners on Bedford Street would rather leave the road as it is than see the proposed plan executed. Other Issues A direct Hartwell Avenue Connector has often been suggested as an alternative solution to the traffic problems of Bedford Street. The committee feels that the safety and congestion problems of Bedford Street require attention in a more timely manner than could be possible by pursuing a Hartwell Avenue Connector A Hartwell Avenue Connector is a much more complicated project inasmuch as it involes an interstate highway (Route 128) and more severe environmental issues Construction projects involving interstate highways involve stricter regulations Estimates by the state DOT for construction of a Hartwell Connector are a minimum of 10 years There is also the issue of development While many residents express interest in a Hartwell Connector, others feel a Hartwell Connector would be quite detrimental to Lexington's interests, by encouraging Hanscom and Massport development This in turn would increase both automobile and air traffic ThLe_committee feels that it :is important to realize that the current road plan is, in effect a Hartwell Connector -- with all the negative impacts associated with a Har eYY'Connector In summary, (1 ) a Hartwell Connector as an alternative does not apear to be a timely solution to our safety and congestion problems on Bedford Street; and (2) the current plan will serve as a Hartwell Connector and allow further expansion at Hanscom and Massport. Bedford bound traffic from the south side of Bedford Street should also be mentioned These motorists are expected to use the Route 129 ramps to reverse direction. The committee expects that others will use Simonds Road to make U-turns, as they already do. While this is a rather poor way of dealing with the problem, the committee does not give this problem a high priority of concern. Major Concerns/ Recommendations 1 Eldred Street Access There are over 500 households in the area directly affected by the lack of direct access from Eldred Street to Bedford Street -- affected not just during peak hours but 7 days a week, 24 hours a day The proposed plan calls for their travelling down to the signalized jug handle for any entrance to or exit from Bedford Street. There are also all the households on Simonds Road, Hancock Street, Grove Street, Winter Street, Skyview Road, and Volunteer Way that are also affected by the lack of direct access --it is those streets the would be impacted by the additional traffic when the 544 households use alternate routes instead of going down to the jug handle for every coming and going A right turn out of Eldred Street is allowed and is important. The committee is not convinced that preventing right turns from Bedford Street to Eldred Street has serious safety implications and we recommend that it be allowed at all hours of the day 3 A solution for left turns into and out of Eldred Street would be most welcome. 2 Excessive Pavement Width The width of pavement proposed is more than three times what now exists The committee feels this is inappropriate for a Lexington street. The visual impact of 140 feet-width of pavement is not only aesthetically unappealing, but it is a commercialization of our town beyond anything that has yet been done. For reference, the Massachusetts Turnpike from Route 128 to the New York State line is never wider than 100 feet of lanes and has natural medians of varying width or grass medians of 18 feet. Reducing the overall width of the Bedford Street project would also reduce the amount of necessary land-taking and construction, resulting in lower costs as well It would also relieve some of the environmental impacts relating to drainage and runoff 3 Pedestrian Crossing A safe pedestrian crossing for Bedford Street is necessary A survey cited in the Functional Design Report for the proposed plan reported approximately 200 pedestrian crossings per day but the survey revealed that 350 would cross if there were a safe crossing The committee feels strongly that the safe crossing should occur via a pedestrian signal rather than an overpass The engineering consultant assured us that such a signal could be located enough distance from Route 128 so as not to interfere with the flow of Route 128 traffic An overpass is difficult for elderly to use and most overpasses are unsightly A pedestrian-activated signal would also cost significantly less than an overpass 4 Screening of Median Strips The proposed plan has two median strips, one dividing the 6 main travel lanes and one dividing the frontage road from the main highway The town has assured the residents on Bedford Street that there would be plantings to provide a visual separating and "softening" of the project from their homes We have learned that bushes or high plantings would not be allowed on this median for safety reasons The committee believes that if this part of the project is to be built (We recommend its elimination in our alternate concept ), that it is very important to the residents that there be appropriate and adequate plantings as a visual and noise screen. The committee also feels that grass (and trees) on the main median would help to ameliorate the highway nature of the roadway Route 30 in Newton is a State route with a tasteful median of this sort 5 Environmental Concerns Environmental effects such as noise, fumes, and potential hydrological changes must be considered in the environmental study, as is required. We simply state that in this environmentally sensitive area adjacent to Tophet Swamp, the issue of water table changes and pollution dangers must be carefully examined Obviously a large pavement area will have drainage implications (Residents north of Bedford Street have reported more basement flooding since the construction of the buildings on the south side of Bedford Street. ) The committee would like to have the oppportunity to give input to the ENF and we recommend that a full EIR be required. 6. Commercialization The committee fears the additional traffic and development that a road of this scope would attract. The same fears of extensive commercialization that residents have about a Hartwell Avenue Connector apply equally to the proposed Bedford Street plan. Even if Lexington restricts further commercial growth, we will have no control on Bedford, Hanscom Field, and Massport. A roadway such as the one proposed would invite/encourage developments there. Further Recommendations 1 Control of signal at Hartwell Avenue The committee recommends that the town accept the responsibility of maintaining the signals in the project area. This would greatly facilitate the process of changing phasing timings, if and when changes become necessary 2 Continued Committee Involvement We were not appointed as a committee to study the current roadway plan until late January and early February In the short time we have had, we have become not only familiar with the plan, but also versed in the rules and standards of the State and Federal governments We have also received input from the neighborhood and from spokespeople in other parts of town. We feel that now that we are familiar with the issues, it would be to the benefit of the town if we were to remain part of the process and to make further evaluations/recommendations Conclusion There have been sufficient discussions with all the parties individually to lead the committee to believe that it is possible to get State and Federal Cooperation for the design of the kind of road we want. The kind of road we want is different from the proposed plan. We believe that if the interests of the existing businesses, the homes on Bedford Street, the broader neighborhood, and the ambience of the town as a whole were truly considered, a reasonable and more widely-accepted plan would result. The committee concludes that the present plan has several unacceptable features and should be temporarily set aside while the initial phases of an alternate design concept are pursued. We further conclude that an important early step is to have a joint meeting of all the parties involved. We therefore urge the Selectmen to use their "good office" to arrange a meeting of Town, State, and Federal Highway officials and the engineering consultant to discuss the design issues and to reach a consensus on acceptable design approaches It is important that representation from the committee be present at such a meeting Reaching an early consensus would expedite the process of designing a more widely accepted design and moving toward successful Bedford Street road improvements 5