Mass DOT takes comments

Advocates for and against the rebuilding of Mass. Ave. in East Arlington went into overdrive, and comments from the public went into overtime, at a sometimes-raucous project hearing at Town Hall on April 12.

Some 400 people came to the Department of Transportation hearing on the Town’s proposed design. 79 gave comments, and many more were turned away when the hearing adjourned at 10:40.

Arlington Town Hall on Tuesday night. Not quite to capacity, but very full.

My slightly cynical crystal ball

Concentrate and ask again

Though I am hardly shy with my opinions, the focus here has been reporting on news of the Mass. Ave. projects and what others are saying and doing.

I depart from that for this post to make some outright predictions.

First, I think the state will approve the project, which will be built very much along the lines of the plan submitted. (My magic 8-ball is still cloudy about when.)

Second, Mass Ave. will neither become a paradise nor a parking lot. With a few important exceptions, the effect of the new design on traffic and safety will be small — for good and for ill. Here’s why.

Facts on the ground

Here’s Mass. Ave. at rush hour.

Zero seconds (8:08:47)

It’s a little after 8 a.m. on Thursday, December 2. The temperature is about 35°. I’m standing at the corner of Mass. Ave. and Henderson Street, looking more or less west.

Long shadows mark the bright clear morning. And there’s no traffic.

The face of a new Mass. Ave.

Never mind the sausage factory of process and meetings and interim drafts.

If Mass. Highway approves the 25-percent plans as submitted, what will we get? What will be different?

Cut-through traffic and other paradoxes

So far, concerns about cut-through traffic and Mass. Ave. have focused on fears that changes in the design of the street, and especially the new traffic signal at Bates Road, will cause outbound drivers to detour through side streets.

I took a look at this last year. Ultimately, it is not credible that drivers would take a time-consuming detour that includes two left turns on Broadway in order to avoid a 40-second delay (max) at a stoplight.

However, this whole discussion has ignored the other cut-through traffic, namely drivers who use side streets to get to Mass. Ave., for instance on the way to Lake Street and Route 2.

Design evolves, at the margins

The latest iteration of plans for Mass. Ave. in East Arlington would, like previous version, introduce bicycle lanes and a three-lane configuration for much of the length of the street.

The drawings, made available to the public at a meeting of Arlington’s Mass. Ave. Review Committee at the Senior Center on August 4, largely tinker at the margins of the design. They are still drafts labeled “for discussion.”

But compared to the plans unveiled at the community meeting last June, the new version sports narrower travel lanes for cars, wider sidewalks in the business district, and a 3-foot flush buffer zone between bicycles and cars on the westbound side of the street.

Not restored in the latest version is a five-foot traversable median, flush with the street, that would provide a refuge for pedestrians.

Public views Mass. Ave. plans

About 200 Arlington residents and fellow travelers came to Town Hall last night for the seventh public hearing on much-delayed plans to refurbish Mass. Ave, which is still slated for 2012.

It was the first opportunity for the public to question the consulting engineers about the plan since April of 2009. The Board of Selectmen submitted the plans for State review last August.

New drawings were on display at the meeting

Most of the basic elements of the plan are unchanged: the lane configuration, including bicycle lanes, new pedestrian crossings, and traffic signals at Teel/Thorndike, Lake, Bates/Marion, and Linwood/Foster.

As described last week, however, the latest drawings remove a proposed traversable median from  much of Mass. Ave., widen traffic lanes, and reduce or eliminate proposed sidewalk widening in the business district around the Capitol Theater.

One sidewalk would even be narrowed in one place to accommodate the wider traffic lanes.

The engineers made these and other changes in response to criticism of the 2009 version made earlier this year by Mass. Highway District 4.

Comments and questions following a presentation by Rick Azzalina of Fay Spofford & Thorndike were wide-ranging. Azzalina repeatedly described the design as “a work in progress” that could be influenced by public comments.

However, his responses to comments mostly explained why particular changes were unlikely or inexpedient.

Azzalina said the plan is to resubmit the so-called 25% plans to Mass. Highway next month, for a formal hearing in September paving the way (through many intermediate steps) to advertise the project in December of 2011.

My notes, incomplete and unofficial as usual, follow; my personal comments are in red.

The best traffic improvement we’ll never make

The worst choke point on Mass. Ave in East Arlington has got to be at Lake Street inbound. (Route 16 might be worse, but is in Cambridge.)

Lake Street and Mass. Ave. (proposed), detail from the Town's Mass. Ave. web page.

Morning drivers hoping to turn right onto Lake St. must crowd into the turning lane only to be trapped behind an MBTA bus, stopping to pick up commuters in front of the Capitol Theater.

Traffic can back up for blocks, waiting for and often missing a traffic cycle (or three) while buses board passengers. It is the Sargasso Sea of East Arlington.

Here’s how to fix that—and why we shouldn’t (and won’t).

The mystery of Mass. Ave. traffic jams

There’s a great variation in traffic inbound on Mass. Ave. during the morning rush hour.

Most of the time traffic moves quickly, clearing traffic signals completely on the first go-round. Sometimes, however, the very eastern part of Mass. Ave eastbound is, to use a cliche, a parking lot. I think most regular commuters must have horror stories of how it took them ten, or twenty, minutes to move two blocks from Thorndike Street to Route 16.

Why are there so many more cars clogging Mass. Ave. some morning than others? Do car commuters all get up on the same morning and say, I think I’ll try Mass. Ave. today? You would think that with so many commuters, random variations would mostly even themselves out.

Also, given the fact of these traffic jams, how can traffic engineers possibly talk about there being excess capacity on Mass. Ave.?

Cut-through traffic

Many are worried about the redesign’s potential to increase the number of cars leaving Mass. Ave for side streets.

The fear is that either the lane configuration or (especially) the placement of traffic lights will cause delays, causing drivers to seek alternate routes.

Are these fears realistic? It’s a hard issue to discuss because it’s so murky. As Laura Wiener, the senior town planner assigned to the project said (at the June 16 meeting of the Mass. Ave. Review Committee), the question entails personal choices that may not be rational or predictable, and therefore can’t be modeled or projected. (Not a direct quote by any means.)

Actually, based on some of the things I learned at the two committee meetings, I think she is wrong. It is possible to model all kinds of behaviors, rational or not. Here are two examples of how you could think about this problem in terms of Mass. Ave.

Committee Sends Plans to Selectmen

Summary of the decision: The expanded 18-member committee overseeing the redesign of Mass. Ave. in East Arlington last night (June 24) voted to submit a basic design to the Board of Selectmen.

The plan features two eastbound lanes, one-and-a-half westbound lanes, dedicated bicycle lanes, and traffic signals at all existing locations and at Bates Road.

If the Selectmen submit this plan to Mass. Highway on behalf of the town, and the state highway agency approves it, this design will be the framework within which other design issues are worked out.

Meeting Notes: (to the best of my ability, and completely unofficial. My personal comments are in red.)

The meeting began with a presentation from John Michalak and Doug Prentiss, consultants retained by the town for this project, recapping their work and explaining their requirements, methods, and some of their conclusions. This was for the benefit of those of us recently appointed to the panel, the second of two meetings at which we newcomers essentially dominated the agenda with questions and comments. The main points follow after the break.