Suburban Complete Streets
- Thread starter Arlington
- Start date
North Shore
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2014
- Messages
- 234
- Reaction score
- 244
That is not a MassDOT standard grate. MassDOT standards call for cast iron and the grate in question is some sort of steel or steel alloy. Nor does that look like any MassDOT standard type grate, design-wise.
Furthermore, per the standards, bar grates are not to be used on "facilities where bicycle travel is legally allowed".
Since that drain is on a bridge it categorized as a scupper. Mass DOT has a different set of standards for bridges.
Found Bridge Manual Scupper Details ( I don't know if this current standard) it appears to show the grate should have been installed rotated 90 degrees. ----https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2013/06/bfw/7_3_3.pdf
Found Bridge Manual Scupper Details ( I don't know if this current standard) it appears to show the grate should have been installed rotated 90 degrees. ----https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2013/06/bfw/7_3_3.pdf
North Shore
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2014
- Messages
- 234
- Reaction score
- 244
The project in question is MassDOT #606448.
If you refer to Addendum #1 issued for this contract, there was a question by a prospective contractor regarding the scuppers. In response, a revised detail was provided for the scuppers showing the grates.
Now, if you look at said detail, it clearly shows that the scuppers were to be installed such that the bars run perpendicular to the flow of traffic:
From the photo provided, it appears that perhaps the scuppers were installed in the wrong orientation. I cannot confirm this nor do I know with any certainty that this was the case.
If you refer to Addendum #1 issued for this contract, there was a question by a prospective contractor regarding the scuppers. In response, a revised detail was provided for the scuppers showing the grates.
Now, if you look at said detail, it clearly shows that the scuppers were to be installed such that the bars run perpendicular to the flow of traffic:
From the photo provided, it appears that perhaps the scuppers were installed in the wrong orientation. I cannot confirm this nor do I know with any certainty that this was the case.
Reno and NorthShore, along with Brattle Loop and Arlington… you all are my HEROES. Thank you so much for these excellent details!
I will be attempting to follow up with MassDOT and, if folks are interested, will include in this thread any pertinent replies I get that may be of interest. Or, I can send it to folks directly if I'm dragging this thread too far off-topic.
By the way, I happened to be driving across the BU Bridge today, and saw a similar scupper, installed correctly:
I will be attempting to follow up with MassDOT and, if folks are interested, will include in this thread any pertinent replies I get that may be of interest. Or, I can send it to folks directly if I'm dragging this thread too far off-topic.
By the way, I happened to be driving across the BU Bridge today, and saw a similar scupper, installed correctly:
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,111
- Reaction score
- 15,000
Does anybody know when the most recent non-highway road in eastern Ma was built? I dont think I can remember a single main road being built here in my entire life. You still see new roads being built in the south, but it seems like up here we just have what we have and the most youll see is a suburban street built off of an existing road.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,196
- Reaction score
- 9,002
South Boston Bypass Haul Road dates to the Big Dig. At nearly 2 miles that's a pretty significant one despite the restricted traffic.
DrFreewind
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2016
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 349
id say the patriot parkway/bill delahunt parkway in weymouth at the old air base, completed in 2017
stick n move
Superstar
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,111
- Reaction score
- 15,000
Does anyone know why the vast majority of new streets that are built are (for lack of a better term) self contained? It seems the only new streets that are built anywhere are streets that spur off of a main road and either just dead end at a cauldesac or if they loop around at all they still lead back to the same road they started at. For some reason we never really connect two different roads together with a new road in between. This has created a massive problem as far as infill, walkability, and traffic as so many roads have now been built with a suburban style descending order.
In order to make communities more walkable/bikeable and denser we should be trying to connect many more roads together, but for some reason this isnt happening. Is it due to how much more work it would take for a developer to do this? Also developers are really just there to make money not fix the street grid, so it seems like it needs to be more of a city/state thing. I really dont see any progress towards this at all and Im really wondering why nothing is really being done to address this?
In order to make communities more walkable/bikeable and denser we should be trying to connect many more roads together, but for some reason this isnt happening. Is it due to how much more work it would take for a developer to do this? Also developers are really just there to make money not fix the street grid, so it seems like it needs to be more of a city/state thing. I really dont see any progress towards this at all and Im really wondering why nothing is really being done to address this?
dshoost88
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2008
- Messages
- 2,158
- Reaction score
- 2,510
I can attempt to take a crack at this one (but please note I am by no means 'the authority' on State-level transportation planning). It's comprehensive, so bare with me...
As I've mentioned in the past, I am the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Coordinator at MassDOT's Office of Transportation Planning. Where federal-aid projects are concerned, MassDOT is responsible for prioritizing investment in different highway and transit programs consistent with goals outlined in our modal and long-range plans. Massachusetts receives an apportionment of federal funds each year that can only be programmed on projects ready to advertise for construction that year, or that have advanced construction from a previous year. The budget is fiscally constrained: we cannot program more federal aid projects in a year than we receive federal funds for... thus the prioritization of our investments.
Unlike 48 other States, Massachusetts does not prioritize highway capacity projects (I read Colorado recently followed suit). Massachusetts transportation vision and goals prioritize the safe throughput of people and goods while simultaneously reducing carbon emissions in the transportation sector; there is a body of research that demonstrates widening highways and creating new routes induces demand for more vehicular travel, increases carbon emissions, and worsens congestion over the long-term. There are ultimately enough vehicular connections/options between the places people live, work, and recreate. We do, however, prioritize bicycle and pedestrian facility expansion projects... something like 8% to 10% of our federal aid-spend is on bicycle and pedestrian network expansion. This is because--as any MA cyclist knows--our network across the state is very fragmented and there are opportunities to improve these connections. Additionally, bike/ped facilities enable travel mode shift, have a demonstrated air quality benefit, promote better public health outcomes, and are consistent with public input to local, regional, and statewide transportation planning visions laid out year-after-year.
I have a little more funding context to provide: building new roads is expensive. Not only are there the material and labor costs to their actual construction, but there is a lot of work that happens to the lead up of the construction project including project design, right-of-way acquisition, environmental permitting, and the public hearings process. And if there's an endangered species habitat in the preferred alignment of the project, add in the mitigation costs or project scope revisions. As noted upthread, Massachusetts also has design directives for complete streets features on all new and active highway projects, which significantly adds to project cost. If a municipality or a developer want to foot those costs, that's on their dime. Generally when a municipality has a significant highway investment they're looking to fund/build, they would go the route of initiating the project with MassDOT and working toward design of that project (i.e. figuring out what the project is and what it would take funding, permitting, and ROW-acquisition-wise to get it to fruition). With federal aid projects, 80% of the project cost is generally federal and 20% of the project cost is local match... however, Massachusetts is unique in that it generally provides a state match for regional and state target projects that land in the STIP. The expectations is that municipally-initiated projects have design funded by the municipality and that the munis do their part to advance project design to a deliverable place (i.e. fundable and buildable). As such, municipalities, regions (MPO's), and MassDOT coordinate very closely on most highway projects.
So @stick n move , back to your post. I say this with total sincerity and 0 derogation: communities in Massachusetts are getting more walkable/bikeable and denser, and we are making progress to further complete streets and facilitate infill. Although an armchair urbanist could track Walk Score data, STIP investment, and development permitting data from the Internet, I implore you and others to take a walk or bike ride to these new places and witness the proliferation of people-friendly places appearing throughout the Commonwealth. Check out the hundreds of state-funded projects funded through MassDOT's Shared Streets & Spaces program the last couple years. If there are specific places where connections need to be made or accessibility is concerned, reach out to the respective municipal DPW, MassDOT Highway District Office, or regional planning agency (staff to the MPO) to see if there's an opportunity to initiate a project. I've said this before at work, at conferences, and now on here: every person has a role when it comes to making a transportation project happen.
If you or others have project ideas, questions, or need some guidance on who to reach out to about a project or program, email me at derek.shooster@dot.state.ma.us. We do listen, and I do give a shit.
Cambridge Crossing has a whole network of new streets.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,558
- Reaction score
- 3,189
I would argue that the Rose Kennedy Greenway Surface Artery counts as a new street, and a pretty significant one at that.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,707
Arlington residents ! ? Take this survey on how to stripe Medford St between Arlington Center and MVP Double Rotaries (Medford)
www.surveymonkey.com
The town is pretty sure there's going to be some kind of bike lane or lanes and some kind of alternate-side parking but wants input
I live in Medford now and my family walks this quite frequently. We also bike it (it is popular for getting to/from the Minuteman), and drive it.
Free Online Survey Software by SurveyMonkey: Closed Survey
This survey is currently closed. Please contact the author of this survey for further assistance.
www.surveymonkey.com
The town is pretty sure there's going to be some kind of bike lane or lanes and some kind of alternate-side parking but wants input
I live in Medford now and my family walks this quite frequently. We also bike it (it is popular for getting to/from the Minuteman), and drive it.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,707
Billerica / Route 3A Update (and request for political action)
There are a large number of mis-oriented storm grates that are aligned in the "highway"/bike-tire-trap direction along Boston Rd (Route 3A) in Billerica.
If you happen to live along Route 3A in Billerica, and wouldn't mind writing or calling your State Rep (Mark Lombardo) and State Senator (Cindy Friedman) and asking them to help get MassDOT District 4 to send a crew out to rotate the grates 90deg (into the safe "rumble strip" direction) please do so.
The list of badly-oriented grates includes (but is not limited to)
514 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
641 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
685 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
722 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
741 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
841 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
Boston Rd @ Lexington Rd
Example: 722 Boston Rd
There are a large number of mis-oriented storm grates that are aligned in the "highway"/bike-tire-trap direction along Boston Rd (Route 3A) in Billerica.
If you happen to live along Route 3A in Billerica, and wouldn't mind writing or calling your State Rep (Mark Lombardo) and State Senator (Cindy Friedman) and asking them to help get MassDOT District 4 to send a crew out to rotate the grates 90deg (into the safe "rumble strip" direction) please do so.
The list of badly-oriented grates includes (but is not limited to)
514 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
641 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
685 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
722 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
741 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
841 Boston Rd, Billerica MA
Boston Rd @ Lexington Rd
Example: 722 Boston Rd
North Shore
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2014
- Messages
- 234
- Reaction score
- 244
The only problem is that more often than not, the grates have a chamfered corner so that they sit in the frames in only one orientation. To fix the problem for bicyclists, MassDOT would have to dig up the entire casting and rotate it 90 degrees and repair the asphalt around it. And that's only if there is no curb behind it. Frames used with curbs only have 3 flanges (as opposed to four) so they can be placed right up against the curb. Fixing those requires a whole new frame.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,707
I have never encountered "more-often-than-not" chamfering. The vast majority of squarish grates I've encountered are perfectly square but carelessly oriented.
My experience with MassDOT in Reading (the same District 4) was that the grates were square enough* that they could be turned in their frame, and that it took no more than 1 crew-day to turn nearly a dozen on a stretch of MA-28. (this was upthread during MA-28's re-striping from 4 lanes to bikeShoulder-lane-turn-lane-bikeShoulder
So at least as far as MassDOT Distrct 4, Grate Frames of the vintage in question are perfectly square and the real problem is that they DON'T have a physically-enforced orientation, so that the crews often orient them in the "interstate-highway"/"limited access" standard (the tire-eater direction) merely out of habit or not being trained to care.
Other Not-Square Shapes:
*or the frames didn't have the bump to mate with the notch.
PS I"m still hoping y'all in Greater Billerica-Burlington will write to your reps about 3A.
My experience with MassDOT in Reading (the same District 4) was that the grates were square enough* that they could be turned in their frame, and that it took no more than 1 crew-day to turn nearly a dozen on a stretch of MA-28. (this was upthread during MA-28's re-striping from 4 lanes to bikeShoulder-lane-turn-lane-bikeShoulder
So at least as far as MassDOT Distrct 4, Grate Frames of the vintage in question are perfectly square and the real problem is that they DON'T have a physically-enforced orientation, so that the crews often orient them in the "interstate-highway"/"limited access" standard (the tire-eater direction) merely out of habit or not being trained to care.
Other Not-Square Shapes:
- Nearly-Square: Winchester had a bunch of these in square holes and they always "migrated" toward the curb, leaving a tire-catching gap. (have been replaced with cascade/checkerboard grates)
- Circular with bars: DCR grates on the Mystic Valley Parkway from the early 1900s were circular, like an concave manhole (and often turned perfectly-wrong and sometimes installed convexly) and when I asked my State Rep to replace them (c.2015?) they installed a "tombstone" shape that could only go the safe way. And this happened within 3 weeks of complaint (they used asphalt patching where they'd torn out the circular grate)
- Tombstone: Yes, a keyed shape, but since they're really obvious, I've only seen them done right.
- Rectangle: We've discussed these upthread--these are right if constructed right and wrong if constructed wrong (like the chamfered)
*or the frames didn't have the bump to mate with the notch.
PS I"m still hoping y'all in Greater Billerica-Burlington will write to your reps about 3A.
Last edited:
HelloBostonHi
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 1,422
- Reaction score
- 3,685
MassDOT only allows bar grates on highways anyway so they should be fully replaced with cascade grates
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,707
Massachusetts doesn't seem to have signed up for the notched frames, though. A bit hard to tell if the notch on the left is a chip or intentional, but there's no notch in the frame here at 741 Boston Road (from Google Maps)
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,707
Yes, absolutely, but you'll see that the right people at District 4 know enough to turn the grates they have (once alerted to the danger and motivated) as a great interim fix while we all wait for the "official"/new-build cascade/checkerboard style.