Hello everyone.

My name is Naima Said, she her pronouns, World Five Counselor, and your traffic and parking chair.

I would like to call to order today's traffic and parking committee meeting of the Summerville City Council.

First, they will read the legal notice that allows us to have this meeting on Zoom.

Pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2023, this meeting of the City Council Committee will be conducted via remote participation.

We will post an audio video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of these proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the city of Somerview website and local cable access government channels.

Clerk, could you please call the role to establish a quorum?

Council Burnley.

Present.

Present.

Council Zay.

Here.

I don't share all members of Brentwood.

We have the floor.

Let's begin with approval of the minutes from the previous meeting.

No minutes.

Okay, we're good then.

Okay, first item that I'm going to read.

Okay, uh central discussion, but Said, Councilor Wilson and Councillor Strezzo, that the director of mobility discuss with this council strategies for improving the safety of users of the community path as detailed within.

We have tonight with us uh director Rosin, Director Bossaway and staff from the mobility department.

Ums Worth.

Yes.

So we we kept this item in committee last time.

Um my intention is that we uh keep you in committee um and have regular updates when we have updates.

And um yeah, uh it's very exciting to work with all of you uh on this.

Um we'll probably be sharing this uh tonight, but the community is really excited that we're looking into this.

We're looking at ways uh to make the community path safer for all users.

So uh very exciting to uh start this process and can't wait to hear uh the updates you have for us.

Um director Rossin and uh Ms.

Worth.

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Good evening.

Uh my name is Brad Ross, and I serve the city as director of mobility and OSP CD.

We appreciate your work as Ward 5 Counselor as well as all the other counselors at large and ward counselors who have been working to make sure that the city is communicating with the constituents and the council on various short, medium, and long-term solutions to improve safety on the community path.

Um, when we have discussed this in committee previously, Chair, as you know, mobility staff described a community engagement process that we were intending to run in the fall of 2025.

Um, and we communicated to you all that we would then use the input of community members' feedback to help mobility staff develop a series of short and long-term treatments to improve safety for all users of the path.

We intended to cast a wide net with this scoping exercise, and we asked community members to talk to us not only about the obvious pain points of things like street crossings, not only about the obvious things about crowding and different user group sharing, uh, but also about user education, common courtesy.

And the last thing that we communicated is that Somerville is not unique in dealing with growing pains associated with our shared use path network.

Summerville staff are in constant conversation and coordination with peer cities around North America.

And everybody who has shared use paths is dealing with some of these challenges about overuse, about new mobility and micromobility modes, sharing these limited spaces.

So just wanted to offer that kind of level setting to catch us up from our last committee discussion.

Mobility has a three-person staff team chair uh that is working on these issues.

Um, one of those staff is able to join us tonight.

Lily Worth serves as transportation planner.

And if it's okay with you in the committee, I'd like for Lily to take a little lead on catching you all up on our outreach work and some of the path forward.

Um so if it's okay, I'll introduce Lily.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you, Director.

Uh Lily, thank you for joining us tonight.

And uh, yeah, please take it away.

Thank you so much, Chair.

Thank you, committee, and thanks, Brad, for a great introduction.

Um, so as Brad mentioned, I'm a transportation planner with the mobility division, and I'm working with a team of three on the community path safety improvements project.

Um, so the sort of to set the stage, we spent the sort of spring and summer of 2025 doing some research and kind of setting the stage to do an outreach campaign in September and October.

Um, we wanted to really hear from people about their experiences on the path, including their safety concerns, but we also had some potential design options that we wanted to sort of preview for folks to get some reactions and kind of get people thinking about you know, what can we do in the short term and the long term?

We're looking at making improvements um along the path itself.

We also looked at the roadway crossings and the station entrances for the green line stations along the path.

Um, so I'll give a little bit of an overview of our public engagement campaign, and we really wanted to focus a lot on this.

Um we did similar to our other projects, such as our Streetscapes projects, we launched a project website and we did a safety concerns survey, and we also um put up flyers along the path in key locations and in multiple languages.

We publicized the project in our newsletter, a press release, um citywide email, and really any opportunity to get the word out.

We also did a series of in-person outreach pop-up events at different locations along the path and at different times of day to really meet people in person, kind of um catch people kind of as they were using the path, um, no matter what mode they were using, to hear from them about their experiences and kind of identifying some safety concerns.

Uh, we also had a public input map online where people could note down concerns and observations.

Um, we presented people with some of the design options that we had kind of researched and and um thought of initially, which really ranged from you know things like signage and pavement markings to other things such as bollards, um, going as far as maybe even barriers, um, tactile pavements.

So we really wanted to cast a wide net in the things that we were considering to improve safety along the path and give people examples of things to react to.

Um, while we were doing this outreach work, we also informed people about um the engineering division's design and permitting work for the school street crossing and the whole street crossing.

So even though that's you know doesn't have its own project page.

Um, it's known that that work is being done, and we heard a lot about particularly the school street crossing.

Um of the highlights really of our outreach is the response to our safety survey.

So we had over a thousand unique respondents, which is really much higher than what we would expect for some of our streetscapes projects.

And we were pretty thorough in asking people about you know their safety concerns, the particular locations that they were feeling unsafe or that they noticed issues, but also their opinions on some of the design options.

So we do have um we're undergoing the review period right now where we're really trying to thoroughly analyze all of that input so that we can produce a community engagement report.

Um, so that community engagement report will um be published later in the fall.

Um, even though we haven't fully published this, um, I can kind of touch on some of the themes that we heard in our outreach.

So there were a lot of concerns around street crossings, um, yielding, stopping in terms of you know, who has the right of way with vehicles.

Um, a lot of people described a difficulty sharing the narrow space with all the different users.

A lot of people really were hoping we could widen the path, which is not really something that's in the purview of this project.

Um, people commented on the school street crossing, as I mentioned, as well as the difficulties with connectivity through Davis Square.

There were also, you know, in our in-person pop-ups in particular, we got a lot of really nice feedback from folks that were just really happy that we have a path and really grateful that you know we were looking at these issues.

Um, so in terms of our next steps, we will be preparing a strategy document to outline the treatments that we recommend, um, both for the short and long term.

So that will be something we are delivering in early 2026.

We're going to focus on things that will address the issues that the community raised to us through our outreach project uh process and things that we think are achievable and can help us kind of meet some of our goals with helping people feel safe, helping people you know share the path with each other, slow speeds and improve sort of the intersection compliance.

Um we also um it I think we can sort of comfortably say at this point some of these things will include signage and pavement markings, and we're still kind of evaluating what other type of quick build things that we might consider.

And we anticipate implementation in 2026.

And that's kind of I think I'll stop there and I'm happy to answer any questions about the project and what we've learned so far.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Lillian.

Uh, thank you for this update and for all the work you have done to gather input from the community and all the different ways um you've done that.

I forgot to say after we started the recording.

Welcome to Counselor Hart who is joining the committee for the first time tonight.

The council.

I said it before the recording started, but I want to make sure you say yeah.

So any questions from colleagues.

You see Council Bernard's hands up, Council Burnley.

Okay.

Sorry.

Technical difficulties.

Uh through the chair.

Um to pose uh both the director uh and uh Ms.

Worth.

Um how is the the shared kind of jurisdiction of the community path uh impacted our ability to actually implement some of these solutions?

Uh as this is a topic that is of great interest to all of Somerville and folks in beyond Somerville.

Um I'm not that surprised that um this survey has received such wide attention and interest and engagements uh as a result of that.

Um something that I've certainly had people asking me about for years, so whether that's around safety concerns with mopeds and feeding vehicles and uh I'll just say for the record and for context, the council's put in a number of items uh to that point over the years, and we've asked around about things such as whether speed bumps could be installed.

Um, I also heard the concerns of about potentially widening, uh and just briefly on that as well.

There are issues related to uh flood mitigation, uh, in my opinion, regarding if we were to add more impermeable uh space to some parts of the path.

Um that said, I'm curious how the fact that the state is involved in a good chunk of this uh impacts our ability to actually implement and how your team is thinking about working around that.

Chair through you, I'm happy to answer that question.

Counselor, I appreciate it, and it's a good question.

And there's a few different things I would choose to highlight in response.

Um, so as you noted, counselor, um, the path is owned by MBTA.

There's MBTA right of way.

MBTA owns the title to the land in a fee interest.

The city operates the community path from end to end, not just the path extension under a long-term lease that this council has been really great working with us on to support.

And chair, you all may remember that at the time of that lease, we talked about using the first couple years of the paths operation to try to explore different use cases that might require the city to secure formal approval from MBTA for various types of upgrades and activities.

This could be as routine as certain snow clearance activities or as robust as rebuilding the school street crossing that we'll speak about in more detail tonight.

So that work is still underway right now, but I think it's important to communicate to counselors and to constituents that MBTA has been very pragmatic with us.

And if examples of enhancements like minor signage changes will not need to go through months and months of red tape.

However, um bollard installation would probably start to rise to a different level.

Um, obviously, excavation anywhere along the path starts to bring other issues to the table, like soil contamination and assessment.

We know that these old rail corridors tend to have challenging soil conditions.

So we definitely caution anybody who gets excited about planting trees in the rail right of way to know that that is a higher level of red tape, and it's to protect the city and MBTA liability.

Um, one example that I'll call attention to, uh, which is a recent success story, not just a hypothetical, that many of you are probably aware that the city just completed a lighting enhancement project to address one of the important safety and equity deficiencies of the original community path extension construction by MBTA.

So city was able to commission design and engineering process, competitively procure a lighting and electrical contractor to fill in a series of the unlit sections of the path, primarily in the East Somerville neighborhood.

We did have to go through extensive permitting uh with the MBTA.

There was trenching involved, for example.

Um, there were even times where we had to secure flaggers because our contractors had to use cherry pickers to get up to electrical poles along the railway.

But to conclude the answer, Chair, I would say that we've been able to stress test many of those use cases.

And now we know in individual individual human beings, actual divisions within MBTA to ask these questions of.

Uh, if it's something like modifying the pavement um for safety enhancements for traffic calming, et cetera.

So I hope that's a somewhat helpful description of the process we've been going through, and we'll be happy to provide more specific examples uh in the future if that's okay.

I don't have them at my fingertips, but happy to respond in writing with more information.

No, uh through the chair.

No, I think that's a pretty comprehensive response.

Uh I understand why it has to be so broad.

Uh just given the uh variety of uh asks related to the community path.

I mean, I've heard from community members who would like to see us some similar to your point, not necessarily plant trees along uh parts of the path, but have uh uh gardens or even if those gardens were in a small containers of their own uh rather than in what is likely uh ground that it would not be that great.

Um so I guess what uh in how are you guys thinking though about like where those obstacles do become clear, for example, using a speedball type example um to address uh I don't want to say vehicles legally, um objects of high speed uh with two wheels uh or more um going down the path.

The given your answer, I'm I'm understanding that that would take a much longer uh conversation with MBTA.

Uh are you is your team already thinking about what are lower level uh tactics we can use to accomplish the same goals.

Chair through you, yes, thank you, counselor.

And perhaps I can ask Lily to chime in with any specificity.

Lily described a moment ago um as we finish publishing our community engagement report.

Um, the next deliverable that we work towards is is essentially a strategy document.

And Lily, please chime in here if it's okay with the chair about specific elements of that legal and jurisdictional due diligence that could be addressed in a strategy report.

It's very easy for me to imagine a little matrix that says, is this design treatment triggering a three-week review process and that's kind of notification based to the MBTA, as opposed to a three-month process, which is a relatively low bar to clear to get a license versus a one-year process, which is a much more substantial like construction access permit.

Uh, but perhaps Lily can provide a little bit more detail.

Thanks, Brad.

Um, yes, through the chair.

I think at this stage, um, we can say that we are prioritizing um design options that are more quick build that wouldn't require the kind of intensive review or um due diligence with the state.

Um, but we certainly will outline in our strategy document the different kind of levels of um overview that would be required for things that are the little bit more intensive.

Um, I think early indications of our community outreach have sort of seemed to indicate that our community is the is more interested in in things that are less intensive.

Like we do have there was some interest for things like speed bumps.

We also have you know a lot of opposition to that.

So we'll want to, you know, really, if we want to pursue that, um, that would require like a little more thinking.

Um, but I think we will be starting with more quick build strategies.

Oh, for me.

Uh thank you, Lancla Burney.

Thank you for those questions.

Uh, those are uh those are some of the things they brought up uh to director Rossin.

Um, as we were discussing safety improvements, is just first trying to understand what we can actually do, especially in terms of speed limit, which is one that I hear about a lot.

Obviously, there's the motorized vehicles that are not supposed to be on the community path.

Um, but we also have the electric vehicles, uh, the um electric bikes, they mean better.

Um and they had uh the council uh policy analyst look at this and they're the memo attached to this meeting on that, just so we can start educating ourselves on this.

Um just basically what the memo is saying, and uh yeah, if yeah, if you can give us a brief short chair.

Please please caveat any comments that I offer.

Not an attorney.

Many of these questions quickly swerve into legal realms.

Um, but the council's legislative and policy analyst Brendan Salisbury gave a very, very helpful um kind of background memo um that as you noted has been attached to this agenda.

Um, and the policy analyst was able to describe just some of the cautionary tales that you really want to think through in terms of um posted versus regulatory speed limits, what is advisory, what is enforceable.

Is the path considered a public way, like streets in our city are, therefore, is the actual mass general law legal framework applicable to shared use paths.

Uh it's incredible that here we are in 2025, and communities are still having to ask ourselves these questions.

Uh, and that I think in part illustrates the complexity and you know, of some of the laws that we operate under at the state level.

Um there are questions that Brendan describes about um how subjective and objective speed studies can be.

Um how rigorous is data collection method uh to actually capture the speeds in excess of a given um milestone, um, and how context matters a lot.

Um, remember that classic pedal powered bicycles um can easily achieve 20 miles per hour, uh, which can be considered a safe speed in some contexts and an unsafe speed in other contexts.

So I think we all acknowledge that in this new era of electric micromobility, it is very easy to other and to categorize individual users.

We just really need to be cautious and thoughtful uh about having clear rules that are understandable to all, applicable to all.

But I think one thing that it is also worth concluding with chair is Brendan has noted that uh vehicle types can also be a little bit of a blurry line and the difference between a quote unquote legal electric assist pedal bike versus an illegal um electric or even gas-powered moped.

Sometimes it's not as obvious to a casual observer.

Um so Brendan's memo really just kind of diagnoses many of these um thoughts that he recommends the council and our staff keep in mind as we work to to implement uh safety improvements for the path.

I hope that's a reasonable non-attorne's summary.

Yeah, thank you, uh Director Ross and this is uh very helpful.

And I will note that um Brendan Salisbury uh did say at the end of his memo that an ordinance is is not the way to go, at least in his opinion, um, and instead work with city staff, community partners to establish a culture, um like a new way of um like using the path um and figure out ways to make it safe for all users, and uh and during those conversations with uh constituents, one thing that came up is um how about exploring um the idea of having uh a working group that is composed of city staff, constituents, um so that's also something that uh discussed with you, uh Director Ross and if and um yeah, so when we're there for now, we're like waiting for the report and uh but so we're starting to think about design and um yeah, all those different components.

Um, I think this would be if we can do this, that would certainly be very helpful.

Um so yeah, though that's uh for that's it regarding the memo.

And again, this memo you will find it not under the item, but under the meeting agenda.

So if you go to meeting, go to meeting details, and that's where it's attached.

Um my question, um yeah, we're talking about the community path, safety on the community path.

We have you know a lot of people who are on bikes, and we know that the community path is extremely busy right now, especially during rush hours because Highland Ave uh reconstruction hasn't happened yet.

And I'm just my question is more uh are we making sure we're working as we're working on making the community path safer.

We're also thinking about Highland AV project that's you know, I'm not going to get there in this meeting.

This I don't know if it's not about Highland AV, but we know it's we have not received updates on that.

We haven't started the work on the uh, yeah.

So just making sure all these different projects are, you know, with this coordination between all the different projects.

Um if you can speak to that, uh, Director Rossin.

Yes, Chair, I really appreciate you bringing this up.

And it's funny, um, you do hear occasionally constituent feedback that involves a little bit of hypothesis, and the hypothesis could say because the community we now have the community path, doesn't that reduce the need to provide safe and separated bike facilities on other streets?

And we at the staff level recommend that folks maybe take that question and turn it upside down and say part of the reason that the path is used so much by people biking because there are relatively few safe and separated places to bike on arterial streets, not limited to Highland Avenue chair.

I want to be much broader than that.

And this illustrates the value of the work that the staff, our community members, and our city council partners have done on our long-term citywide bicycle network plan and on the implementing ordinance that Council Burnley and many of you worked on.

Um I think we are committed to an all of the above strategy, but it is clear that many people feel unsafe walking and particularly biking in places like Highland Avenue or Medford Street, and we'll choose the path accordingly.

That is a totally legitimate observation that you've made, Chair.

And so the city is committed to building out a safe separated network of streets and separated bike facilities all over the city, uh, really prioritizing our 2030 29 mile target that was voted into ordinance by this council um last year.

Uh happy to answer any other questions on that topic, and I appreciate you bringing it up.

Yeah, thank you, Director.

Um, yeah, really glad to hear that.

It's not, and it's not just about Highland Av, but all the other street reconstruction and uh safety street um improvement projects in the city.

Uh great.

And my other question is about funding for this is not this is more like an ear project, making the community path safer.

Um is just trying to think about how can the council help with these efforts.

So will uh do we before budget season, should we start to think about allocating money for this project or how how does the funding piece here um yeah if you can speak to the funding piece, that would be great.

Thank you, Chair.

Um again, I really appreciate this question and getting six months ahead uh of any you know funding questions.

We are fortunate to have great support from the council and the community that provides us with a variety of funding sources for affordable quick build solutions, pavement markings, flex posts, signs are typically not budget busters.

They're typically very, very affordable, and we can be nimble in terms of purchasing and installing um more substantial construction-oriented activities, obviously it becomes a different question altogether.

Um right now we do not have a scope of treatments, but as we get towards January, as Lily was discussing, thinking about those short and long-term safety upgrades, our strategy document will include order of magnitude cost estimating.

And then our staff will be reviewing with the city's finance department what funding sources are available.

Council has gone through some important um housekeeping and house cleaning on various cash reserves, stabilization accounts.

Um, and those are the types of places that we would recommend using first.

And then if we still have funding gaps, um, then we would come back towards this council and give you plenty of time um to understand the requests that we would make uh for any you know bigger numbers that are needed.

So I think it's a little premature for me to estimate with any accuracy about budgetary needs.

But again, I just appreciate you thinking two steps ahead.

Okay, great.

Yeah, I like to learn now that it's my second year.

Um on the council is if there's no if there's no funding and things don't happen.

So just trying to get ahead uh with that.

Um yeah, lastly, you know, Lily, you've mentioned it before, but once the uh public engagement report is out, where can the public find that?

Thank you, Chair.

Um we will be publishing that on our project website.

We also have um we typically collect emails of everybody who's interacted with the project.

So we will push out an update to anybody who has sort of been in touch with it um with us about the Path Safety Project to let them know um about that critical update.

Okay, great.

Um and if you can request to have you also add it to the newsletter, many to the city's newsletter.

I know the mobility department also has newsletter.

Um as you saw there is uh very high engagement.

Um so yeah, we'll be a lot of people are asking me about it.

So let's put it in as many channels as possible.

Uh again, thanks everyone for your collaboration on this.

Uh, if there are no further questions from the committee, we can um keep this item in committee.

Any questions of other questions from colleagues?

Okay.

Uh I see no questions.

We will keep this item in committee.

And we move to the second item.

Item 25-1171 sent for discussion by counselor and Wilson Streso, Klingon, and Baugh, that the director of engineering update this council and community advocates on current efforts to fix the in-safe crossing of the community path at school street.

This is another item that I get we kept in committee that we've discussed a few times.

So always great to get an update on this.

Um, I've done it to you, Director.

Uh supposed to wait.

Chair say thank you so much for that introduction.

And thank you for keeping this in committee.

Um, this has been a project that we've been working on for a few years now.

Um, but we've been able to get a consult an engineering consultant to really hone in on what are the real possibilities that we have at this location.

Um and as I mentioned a couple months ago, they've also um on their team, they have uh bridge designers, so as well as complete streets designers that we've used uh before in our city on other projects so they understand where we're coming from and understand the the scope and the uh considerations that we need to have on our streets.

Uh so over the past few months, uh they've developed a handful of different options uh for us to consider.

Um I've whittled it down to the key ones that illustrate the um the magnitude of ideas that we're considering.

Um I'll I'll share a couple um of some editorials on what uh what are the concerns that we might be up against.

No, these are all very conceptual designs that we'll share with you this evening.

Uh, we have not discussed these with Mastat yet.

Um, we're in the process of of scheduling meetings with them.

So uh so it's not we believe each of these are possible.

Um, that there's nothing technically uh impossible about it.

But whenever you're working with somebody else's property, in this case, bridges that are owned by the state, uh, there's a certain amount of deference and opinions that they can have with their own facilities, even if even if an option is technically possible, that doesn't mean that's an option that they're willing to consider on their infrastructure.

Um and and I think it's fair to say we have the same thing.

There are there are things that are technically possible on our streets that we wouldn't do because that doesn't fit with how we maintain and operate our infrastructure.

Um so I just wanted to preface it that that this is a negotiation.

Um, and these are just some initial concepts that help us start that negotiation with our partners at the state.

Um I will share my screen.

I believe that should be oh, I gotta request it.

Um hopefully the clerk can give me that.

Uh clerk, can you please allow Director Pulse to share the screen to uh I can share now?

Okay.

Um so I will start off with School Street.

Um, as we discussed a couple months ago, we also oh can you all see my screen?

Yeah, we're not seeing though um are you seeing a plan?

Uh we're seeing uh under pressure.

Oh, that's not what you want to see.

And you're my music.

Okay, now we're seeing okay uh hold on.

I gotta start over.

I picked the wrong screen.

No worries.

Oh, it's because screen one and two are different at home than they are at work.

All right.

Now you should be seeing a plan.

Yes.

Okay, fantastic.

Um so uh as we discussed a couple months ago.

Um the bulk of the the focus of this order was to discuss the school street crossing at your request, and because the project also includes reviewing um the Lowell Street crossing at the Magoon station.

I have a couple of figures at the end for that if we have time.

Um three key solutions that um that our consultants bowman uh came up with.

Uh first is to construct a fully raised crossing at this location.

So right here is the path going towards Davis, and right here is the path going towards Boston.

Um currently, and you can see grayed out here the existing alignment of the crosswalk.

And so, but in dark or black is what we're envisioning a future crosswalk.

Um, this would be a crosswalk that where the roadway is raised up to the level of the sidewalk, and the sidewalk is all one level um at sidewalk level, and that provides probably the most um uh uh clear and barrier-free crossing for both pedestrians but also um uh cyclists, people in wheelchairs, families, etc.

It provides a very wide crosswalk that allows people to run from the two paths that are not in line with each other.

So they're going to be running at a diagonal path across this.

Um and the other benefit is uh because it's so wide, it provides a much brighter and um uh more obvious uh visual key to motorists coming up the hill.

But in addition, we have a raised crossing that further helps slow motorists down and has them provide due caution to to pedestrians, cyclists, etc.

on the path.

Um one thing that you'll notice on all of these figures is that through other planning processes, we've been working on the best side to have a long-term two-way protected bike lane.

At present, based on the existing conditions, it's on the the um the east side or the Boston side of School Street, but we envision um with a with a fully planned out and extended two-way bike lane.

It improves connections in this neighborhood and with Highland and Medford Street on either side to have the two-way bike lane on the Davis or West side of School Street.

So for these figures, it's shown on that side.

When we get to the point of constructing this, um, if that change has not already been made, we would work to execute it in tandem with this project.

Um a couple of concerns that we have with this design that that mass stock may raise and may be uncomfortable with.

And the key is making a raised crossing is a few tons of asphalt.

And actually, in this case, probably a few tons of concrete to actually build up the roadway, the six inches needed.

We believe that the bridge construction should be able to handle that.

We still we will need to do design calculations to make sure, but that may become a non-starter for Mastot.

But we believe this provides most likely the best alignment and most flexible alignment for path users.

And so that's the concept that we want to start with Mastot on and see if we can get to a point where that concern with the weight of the material is acceptable.

I'll go through the three concepts for school street, and then we can stop for questions if that's good with you all.

Concept, the second concept uh provides is it is assuming that Mastot is not willing to accept a raised crossing.

Uh, and so here we're looking at the the both the bike lane and the roadway are at roadway grade, and we have extended bump outs with uh wheelchair accessible ramps on either side, providing bumps out bump outs on either side, which provides ramping down to the roadway elevation.

Uh a couple of uh so first off is it does require a bit of deflection in both the roadway and the bike lane.

Uh, we believe this is consistent and probably actually helpful for traffic calming considering we don't have a vertical deflection in a in a raised crossing.

A few concerns that we anticipate Mastot might have is that it would require reconstructing the sidewalk on the bridge itself to a substantial degree because we'd actually have to lower the sidewalk a little bit to allow for this curb ramp to go in.

And there would be a little warping at the back of it to match up with the existing uh uh community path, which is also on a structure, and we don't want to um build into or reconstruct part of that structure, trying to limit to just one structure we're working with.

Um this would require adjusting the sidewalk, the cast in place concrete sidewalk, uh, and then extending out into the roadway on both sides, a bump out that holds the elevation transition as part of the um accessible curb bram.

It does provide a similar route between the two.

It's a little sharper because the bump out kind of takes up some of that angle.

So the angle is a little bit tighter.

Uh and it's and it kind of constrains people to the 10 feet of the of the actual wheelchair ramp.

Um, in the raised crossing, there's the full width of the crosswalk that can be used for that.

Um, so it's not as good, but it's it it ticks all the boxes of accomplishing the goals we're looking for.

The third option is well, I'm gonna go back to this one for a little bit to say one of the potential concerns on this is ploughing and roadway maintenance.

Um, because we have a bump out on both sides.

There's a concern with how um Mastot, for better and worse, is much more motor vehicle centric than the city of Somerville is.

Um, and so that's a conversation that we have to have with on them with them on a regular basis.

And so there could be a point where they don't like the idea of this bump out in the roadway travel lane.

Uh so we also explored an option where we have an extra large bump out on the west side.

This does a couple things for us.

Um it allows for a common curb line here.

We don't have to change the curb line.

So we're all of the constructions going on one side of the bridge.

So it minimizes the amount of work we're doing.

Uh it provides a clean curb line.

So plowing may be easier to manage.

Um, it might be seen as less obstructive to motor vehicle traffic.

It might be seen as less obstructive to motor vehicle traffic.

But it still provides that narrowing effect that should help ameliorate some of the traffic speed along this corridor.

The other thing that it does for us is it reduces the amount of construction on the sidewalk, the construction, the concrete sidewalk here, where all of the grade change happens in the bump out.

So there's very little construction that has to go into the existing sidewalk.

We just build off of that existing sidewalk.

So this probably has the least amount of impact to the bridge structure itself.

Yet it still provides what we think is a similar and acceptable alignment for cyclists and pedestrians crossing the street.

So I'll pause there because these are the three concepts that we're considering at present for the school street crossing.

Thank you, uh director.

I obviously'm not an engineer.

I'm just really excited that we have designs that we're going to submit soon.

But my question is are these three concepts the way you presented them in the order of your preference your department's preference or like is there like a preferred one that would work best or the I would say generally these are in Chair, I'd say generally these are in the order of our uh Brad, if you have an opinion on that, I I think that's pretty much consistent with what Viola and I have discussed.

Um but there are trade-offs between each of them.

Um there may be some trade-offs that we will want to discuss with uh DPW about, especially the plowing component of it.

Um, we're still very early in the design process.

Um and we know this is important.

So we uh so we're happy to discuss this with the council.

Um, but we haven't had full conversations with DPW.

Chair, if I may build on Brian's point again, um, this is really early hot off the press information.

And I think it's really important that we as staff, US counselors, constituents don't get their heart too set on any specific concept or design element here.

These are illustrative, they're intended to be presented with respect for you all and for the folks who have been advocating.

But as Brian noted, our operations teams in DPW have not needed to and have not had the opportunity to review these for operational consistency yet, nor has Somerville Fire Department.

Those are standard parts of our project development processes.

And so we just want to make sure that folks understand that engineering and mobility staff work with those operations partners on every project.

We iterate designs based on their feedback.

And there are times where we even construct elements and something doesn't exactly work the way we want it to.

And so we work with those teams at DPW and FIRE to modify designs again.

Um, so again, I'm just trying to keep expectations in check for anybody who's getting super excited about looking at these two-dimensional drawings.

Thanks.

Yeah, thank you.

Um yeah, question to uh director postal wait.

Uh when these will be presented to Mass DOT.

Would they be presented like first one accepted rejected, then present the second one, and then the third, or is it all at once?

Give all the three options and discuss them all.

Just curious.

Honestly, I don't have a we haven't thought that far ahead.

We don't know.

Um, we're still in the process of setting up that meeting and trying to determine who's going to be in the room.

Um my gut feel is we're going to discuss them pretty openly on the three options ahead of us.

Um, our our goal is to make sure that the people from Mastodot that are on that call and helping us make this decision um span the scope of uh professional goals that Mastodot has, both from a operations, a bridge construction, but also a complete street side.

Um and I feel like it's important to have an open and honest conversation with our professional partners at the state.

Um, so that's that's my expectation.

Okay.

Uh thank you.

Uh Counselor Hart, I see your hand raised.

Um, thank you.

Uh Chair through you to Director Apostolite.

I was wondering about the safety, and this may be premature, but um, in the designs without the raised uh crossing, you know, I'm thinking just I I know that intersection, and there's not a lot of visibility for folks coming towards the Boston side for especially uh like cyclists going opposite the road traffic down.

Um I'm just wondering like what kind of things would slow down, like two cyclists coming and meeting right there.

So I think there's a handful of things that we use to mitigate safety and interactions between motorists and cyclists, um, but also motorists and runners, any user of the path that is going faster than a walking pace.

Um the the ability to see in enough time each other before the physical interaction um is what we're looking for.

Uh I believe that there are some pros and cons of each of these to that respect.

Um, and just looking at the at this concept that we have on the screen here, uh the fact that there's a rather large bump out here for pedestrians and cyclists going in an easterly direction, that provides much more time before they're actually into the motor vehicle traffic.

Of course, we have the opposite consideration when we have westbound traffic going from uh the bottom of the sheet to the top.

Um, the the visibility corridor here is a little bit better, but that's also one of the reasons why we do have stop signs on each of these approaches.

Um we don't ever want to rely 100% on them, but but these areas have limited visibility because of the structure of the bridges.

Those aren't things that we'll ever be able to get rid of.

Um, and so we have to use all the tools to get both motorists and cyclists to be paying attention to each other.

Um a few of the things that that further help this conversation.

One is um, and director Austin, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure we have looked at uh safety at these crossings before and have installed uh speed humps on the approach on school street for this purpose.

Unfortunately, we can't install them on the bridge itself.

Um it creates too much of a dynamic loading for the bridge, um, which is another concern of a raised crossing.

Um, but those are pieces that we're looking at as slowing down vehicle traffic as they're approaching the crossing with speed humps where we can put them.

Um the the design of this and the previous one um has a narrowing of the travel lane right at the crossing, which also provides a certain amount of traffic calming.

Um people don't like to drive fast through very narrow um annuluses.

Um and then the other component was as shown on the first one, having the raised component, uh, if we can convince Mastodot that that would work at this on this bridge, that would further improve crossing speeds.

Brad, do you have anything to add to that?

No, no, well said.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, again, I appreciate the question.

And um, as the director noted, traffic calming tends to work best at the corridor scale, not in isolation.

So, regardless of the design concept that is advanced ultimately is permitted and constructed.

We do expect to continue to maintain that um speed hump treatment that is on the downhill side, the Medver Street side of the path.

And counselors likely know that we were just able to install one on the path approach just a block away on Walnut Street, um, because we know that uh every 300 feet or so is the best way to get slow, consistent, safe travel speeds.

Um individual isolated raised crosswalk is only going to be effective within one or 200 feet of that treatment.

So again, thank you.

I see uh counselor Brownlee's hand raised.

Uh through the chair uh to director postal weight, um please forgive me for my lack of uh engineering degree.

I'm gonna ask some questions that may be quite obvious uh to you, uh, but I think it's important that the public have some sense about why uh the materials we're talking about are so narrow.

Um, because on the face of it, I can understand why uh mass dot might be concerned about adding thousands of pounds of weight uh to a bridge.

Uh that's certainly something that I think the average resident could have some sort of safety concerns around, even if they don't have uh details around the how much the bridge can bear or um you know what were the long-term implications of uh adding to the bridge in a way that wasn't originally conceived.

Having said all that, to that point, I I imagine that one of my neighbors or constituents would say a well, why aren't we talking about materials other than asphalt and concrete here?

There's you know, other ways in which we do traffic homing or uh change the nature of streets with material that is lighter than those.

Um is that due to the the type of vehicles that are likely to get to go up and down school streets, such as large trucks, is it just uh is it more about cost feasibility?

Um can you give some uh context to that?

Um sure, especially through the chair.

Um, especially when it comes to concrete, there are some lighter weight aggregate concretes.

There are ways to um reduce the density of the concrete.

Uh that's something that we will be looking into further, especially if this option is is chosen for further investigation.

Um those lighter weight aggregates, those lighter weight concrete mixes uh tend not to be as durable.

Um, and they definitely don't tend to be as strong.

I don't believe vehicle loading is a huge factor on this street.

Um, it's not a major trucking route.

Um, but it does have it is a response route for our fire engines.

It does have the full scope of vehicles on it.

Um, but I think the bigger concern with the lighter weight material is likely to be durability.

Um, these bridges are intended to last 50 to 100 years or more.

Um, they're the designs anticipate the concrete structure to be able to withstand the majority of that lifespan.

Um the idea of putting a less durable material on there that may not last as long as the remainder of the bridge could be a problem or long-term maintenance that Mastot will be responsible for.

Um, because Mastot is responsible for the long-term maintenance of these bridges.

Um I wouldn't ever want to get to a place where we propose a change to it that then would that we might get encouraged to become the maintainer of the bridge.

That's not something that the city wants to take over.

Um, so we do need to play with Mastot on the expectations that they have for the long-term viability of the bridge.

So that would be my biggest concern on a lightweight concrete.

Uh thank you for that.

You you touched on a couple of points that I want to actually come back to.

Uh, but actually, to that point, just to make sure we are all on the same page.

Um, if one of these designs were to be uh approved and implemented, um the maintenance of the sidewalk and the the bump outs would go to Mastodot.

Technically, yes, they would.

Um, but that would get a little messy since part of it is on the bridge and part of it is on we would have to come up with an agreement with Mastot on how to manage that.

I think that is, I think that is going to be the easier component of it.

I just want to avoid doing something or reconstructing this part of the bridge in such a way that would limit or reduce the bridge's lifespan or increase either the city's or the state's maintenance costs in keeping the bridge viable for the expected lifespan.

Thank you.

That I think that's important for folks here for at least two reasons.

One of which is we should know who's actually who actually controls what parts of our city.

I mean, the previous uh item we've spoke about has been I don't want to say difficult, has been uh elongated in its uh implementation process because it is a mixed jurisdiction uh area, so just as this is um and that affects pretty significantly, in my opinion, uh, how we're able to actually make changes uh to what most people are just gonna think is just the city and owned by the city.

Um secondly, I think it's important.

Your point is important to kind of show a little bit more of how the sausage gets made because the city does have a relationship with Mastot through its staff, through the work that we do, uh and when we propose things and they're are implemented, and then they do not work out well in our favor, um, that also has impacts on that relationship.

Uh so I not to say Mastodot is holding grudges or anything, but it is it's always I think in our benefit to move with um not reckless abandoned, let's say, uh, when it comes to these kind of projects that are safety projects in particular.

Um I did want to ask, because your your previous response actually surprised me a bit based on what you had uh described each of these um proposals.

Why is proposal two better than proposal three?

Uh, because I I feel like the trade-offs I heard from you in terms of the ease of construction as comparatively um in the fact that it would be, I mean, maybe the fact that it's lighter is actually one of the reasons it's not as uh good based on what you were saying.

But uh yeah, I'm curious because three actually sounded like it had a number of benefits.

Counselor Burnley, I I think there are two components on that.

First, your preface to the question I thought was spot on.

Like this is this is a big world that we have to work in, um, even if it is just the city of Somerville.

And we have to work with our partners and we have to negotiate with them fairly and recognize that everybody is bringing different priorities and goals to the conversation, and we can't ignore any of it.

Um when it comes to the differences between the second uh concept I shared and the third concept I shared.

I think I don't think the city, the city may not have a strong opinion between the two of them at this stage.

We may find that there are greater preferences as we come up.

Um, as we talk to Mastot.

Hopefully, coming out of Mastot, we have multiple concepts that Mastot is willing to negotiate with us on, and we can uh we can have a larger public conversation.

I don't want to start a big public conversation if we don't have choice in the matter.

Um, but if we end up having choice in the matter, then I think we may find that the public has some really good insight on these.

Um, but as a one piece that I didn't share on this one that I probably should have given your question now, uh, is because this area is this bump out is so much shorter.

We are anticipating having to do some changing to the roadway elevation at this location.

Um, even under the bike lane might be something that Mastot is uncomfortable with.

So we know that that's that there's a uh a give and take there.

Uh we also know that the um that this whole alignment evolves less deflection in the roadway.

And for cyclists and motorists, less deflection can be more comfortable, especially when you're going uphill.

Um so there may be some given tape, even on a uh a user's perspective of whether this one is preferred or the third option I shared is preferred.

I think, but these really start coming to the point of value judgments.

Um, and but first I want to have a conversation with the state to see what areas they're willing to negotiate and discuss around before we have larger conversations on those value judgments.

Yeah, and uh one other element here that was mentioned previously uh through the chair uh that I think is important and certainly tempers my expectations around timeline is that this is interdepartmental.

Uh I there has not been a single project I've seen that you know fire hasn't been brought in on other departments who necessarily work on our streets aren't brought in on, and sometimes they're to the point that was made earlier, the their input changes the the conversation, the the design, etc.

Um I I don't know how what their timelines are.

They're not here to I don't I don't want to ask you to say how long you think those parts will take.

Um but I do think it's really important that we keep that in mind because that could take uh some amount of time.

Uh but I'm I'm curious also in terms of your sequencing.

Would you be going to the state first to see which of these is viable uh from their standpoint or before going to the fire department, for example, or vice versa.

We would definitely be discussing with DPW and fire department.

Um before we go fully to the state.

We want to make sure that the city is talking in one voice, um, and we're not talking in multiple voices.

Um I have to commend the council for being for finding this a very important topic.

Um, and and frankly, pushing the conversation.

Um, but we have pushed the conversation a little bit faster than our internal collaboration has been able to be executed.

So I I just want to acknowledge that yes, we would be it in the normal course of work, we would be coordinating with DPW and fire department and other interested parties in the city uh government before we would go to the outside.

Um, but I also wanted to keep with your schedule.

Uh through the chair as it should be, in my opinion.

Um was it trying to be a gotcha question, but there was uh an answer I was hoping for.

Uh that was it.

So thank you.

Uh thank you, Counselor Brownley.

Uh thank you, Director.

Um, for sharing with this, uh sharing this with us.

We're the first ones to uh see it.

And uh yeah, we look forward to uh hearing from um you after you discuss it with DPW and fire and obviously uh the meeting, the big meeting with the state.

Uh if there are no further questions, uh we will go.

Is this Council Burnley's hands again?

Yes, Council Brady, go ahead.

Through the chair, I just want to double back with director Pulsewaite around uh Lowell Street.

Yeah, so we will uh go to the second presentation on uh on Lowell Street.

Yes, we are not done.

Um Chair, I I can roll right into that.

That's just two concepts.

Um they're not mutually exclusive.

Uh so I think they'll be pretty quick.

Uh first is just as a as a uh a prelude.

The station is right here, the Magoon station.

Um the closest crosswalk is this direction at Princeton.

And in the um, which is only like about 400 feet, but in the other direction, the closest crosswalk is Medford Street in Magoon Square, which is I don't know, maybe 2,000 feet or more.

Um, it's it's a long way.

Uh and so for especially for people coming from the neighborhood that filters onto Vernon Street and onto Medford Street, there's no good way to cross um to the um to the station.

And also, if you're coming off of the community path up the existing ramp that comes out onto Lowell Street, roughly about here, there's really no good way to cross between there and the station.

So we were looking at options that help solve crossings from both directions, both kind of from the community path, the VA side, but also from the Vernon Street side.

So uh the first option is right at the top of the bridge.

Um so just a little bit of explanation.

This is the community path and the bridge that goes over the community path.

This is the railroad corridor and the bridge that goes over the railroad corridor.

The state controls both the bridges and the land of the roadway in between the two bridges.

So anything that's done at the intersection to Maxwell's Green will require state um support and approval, even if it's not actually on the bridge.

Um, and in this case, we did look at some options with a crossing on the bridge, and didn't feel like any of them were particularly viable.

Uh so we looked at the next best options.

Um first was to provide a crossing right at Maxwell's Green.

Um, and to make that crossing work and to improve the safety for all users, uh, we looked into narrowing the crossing um because the crossing at Maxwell's Green is already pretty large.

There's a lot of pedestrian traffic coming through there.

So tightening up the entire intersection a little bit and providing improved crosswalks uh for both legs of it.

So this was this was uh concept number one.

Um these aren't necessarily options because we could do both options.

Um the second is looking at Vernon Street itself.

This is entirely on city right of way, entirely outside of the state layout.

So this is something that we could do on our own with essentially no state um approval.

Uh so that is a benefit to it.

It is also a very constrained location.

So to make it ADA compliant to get crosswalks that cross Lowell Street.

We felt that a raised crossing is most likely to provide a safe and equitable crossing of the roadway.

Uh, it is probably one of the tightest raised crossings we've ever designed as far as constrained location, but we do believe it will work.

Um it's it's a raised crossing at the location where Vernon meets Lowell Street.

It has um approach ramps in all three directions.

Um it tightens the crosswalks really close together.

Uh, one of the challenges of this intersection is that the existing crosswalk is so far back, and the existing stop bar is behind that.

You no motor vehicle can turn in or out of this area without sitting and stopping and waiting on top of the existing crosswalk.

So this could improve pedestrian travel for even those not crossing Lowell Street.

It would improve pedestrian crossing on Vernon Street and removing that dog leg that um pedestrians now have to do to get around.

Um it will require a certain amount of drainage uh because we're putting a raised crossing uh on the middle of a slope.

So we're kind of creating a dam.

Um, and so we have to put in some drainage to make that work.

Um, but this does provide a better corridor for pedestrians coming down Vernon Street, primarily from the side streets that feed into Vernon, such as Troll and Bartlett, etc.

And affords them the ability to cross Lowell Street and then up the west side of Lowell Street to the station, which is right here.

So those are the two options or two concepts that we're looking at to provide a crossing across Lowell Street.

And this was it, so I can answer question.

Okay, I see Console Burnley's hand raised.

Or is that from before?

Oh, yes.

Yes, I am.

Uh, very glad that we have um some idea about how we can move forward on this.

I think I may have brought this up during the last discussion on this matter, but uh I remember the first question I ever remember director Pulsewaite asking me uh on a in a 101 situation was where that this crosswalk should be when the green line was to open.

Um as someone who lives off of Vernon Street and uses it quite often, you know, I'm confronted almost every day with seeing vehicles stuttering along near accidents uh more than I would like uh and pedestrians kind of being caught in the middle, um, as well as cyclists uh who are coming off of Vernon Street or onto Vernon Street.

Uh so I I'm a big fan of uh race crosswalks.

I I think that they're uh as much as feasible, we should be in uh recommended, we should be moving forward with those.

So I'm glad to see that.

Um, but I am curious about what if this will shorten at all the uh area in which vehicles are making this these turns.

Just to clarify your question of whether it tightens up the corner, making it more difficult for a motor vehicleist to make the hardest turn is the right hand turned low on to Vernon.

So I I'm assuming you're referring to that one.

Yes, yeah.

So the the goal on this is to not actually change the curb line at either of the two corners.

So it doesn't change the it doesn't change the ability to make those turns.

Um to a certain degree, it may improve uh motor vehicles making those turns, and probably even more so fire engines making the turns because it will because these will be closer to flush being a raised crossing, it'll be easier to cross over it.

There's a negative component to that also because it makes it a little more uncomfortable for pedestrians who are standing there waiting to cross.

So we'll have to look into uh uh safety improvements and to make it clear what is the vehicular space and what is the motor or and the versus the pedestrian space.

Um we have a lot of good examples of that elsewhere in the city uh where we've used uh bollards at selective locations, um uh and often kind of in advance of the intersection to help uh minimize motorists cutting into the pedestrian space while still allowing um emergency vehicles to traverse the area comfortably.

So it's not perfect.

Um, like I said at the beginning, this is a pretty constrained intersection.

Um but it's not going to constrain motorists even further.

That is good to hear.

Uh through the chair.

Uh I don't believe anyone uh would generally accuse me of being uh super on the side of vehicles and the in the mishmash between them and cyclists or pedestrians.

Uh but it it is given what I've seen at this corner in particular, I I do want to just name that as concern.

Uh and also name that frankly already that one particular corner uh does see vehicles get quite close to uh the sidewalk just by the nature of uh what people are doing to try to make it through, particularly when other vehicles are present.

Usually when there's one, it's relatively fine, but as soon as uh there's an interaction at the intersection, uh often becomes a bit more complicated.

Um I would just note uh to your point about making sure that that sidewalk is prepared for uh pedestrians who potentially have to take a step back when there's a turn happening.

Uh ADA already requires this, but let's just make sure that this also includes folks who are visually impaired or who are blind.

Um because we don't want a situation where someone can't see something that's there and steps a little bit too close as uh a vehicle was maybe coming trying to come pretty fast, um, which thankfully the race crosswalks will also help with.

Uh thank you, Consular Burley.

Thank you for your perspective.

Uh, this is I'm sure very helpful for um the director um as someone who uh uses regularly this intersection.

Um so similar to my colleagues, I'm excited that we are looking into this, coming up with designs.

Um also just glad, like, you know, there's a solution.

You know, this one was uh another uh crossing that uh the community has been looking forward to having for a while now.

I said thank you all for your work.

Um just looking to see if there are any other questions from colleagues.

Okay, well, thanks again for this uh for this yeah, opportunity to uh give feedback on this, and um similarly to the previous uh crossing.

We look forward to uh uh receiving updates on this.

All right.

Uh if there are no further comments or questions, uh we can mark, we can keep this uh item in committee.

So those are two items that um and actually we're nearing the end of the year, so all these all these items will need to be resubmitted um, but in the event we have updates from before the end of the year, otherwise they will be resubmitted at the end of the year.

Okay, uh, we keep both items in committee.

Uh clerk, and uh if you could call the roll and adjournment.

On adjournment, counselor Burnley.

Hi Councillor Hutt here.

And counselor Saeed.

Yes, Madam Chair, all members have voted to adjourn.

All right, have a nice evening, everyone.

Goodbye.