Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
TO:
This option comes the closest to the HDCs interpretation of an appropriate balance between improving safety
and protecting an important entry point to our town center. This scheme calms traffic patterns, improves
sight lines and accommodates bicycles and pedestrians.
It seems that all of these things can be accomplished without significantly compromising the character of the
existing neighborhood.
As we have found in our review of projects coming before the HDC for approval, simpler "fixes" are often a
great deal more effective yet less intrusive to the historic resources that we are statutorily required to
safeguard.
Option 3, which includes signalization of the intersection, seems a well-intentioned but excessive design response given
the pedestrian and vehicular traffic data presented in the same report.
In this proposal, pedestrians going into or coming from town, who previously crossed Mass Ave near First
Baptist Church, would be pulled by the traffic signal further away from their destination and into a busy
intersection with turning cars and bicycles coming from multiple directions. Improving the existing
pedestrian crossing, possibly moving the bus stop a block closer towards town, seems a safer solution.
These modifications could easily be incorporated into Option 2.
According to our understanding of support material included in the BETA Group report, adding traffic signals to
the intersection would not necessarily reduce the number of vehicular crashes, either. The intersection at
Waltham Street and Mass Ave is a much less complicated configuration than at Woburn/Winthrop, and the
Waltham intersection already has traffic lights. Yet the crash history for the two intersections is the same.
Given this comparison, it is not clear why the introduction of traffic lights into the more complicated traffic
configuration would improve safety, especially if more pedestrians are drawn into the intersection as
discussed previously. Adding lights to an intersection does not automatically make it safer.
The benefits of traffic lights in this location seem limited at best. But the expense to the character of our town
is significant. Option 2 could improve safety and blend in with the existing fabric of this historic area without
the anachronistic intrusion of overhead traffic lights, and we encourage the development of this strategy.
The Historic Districts Commission suggests that future design proposals should
1. Specifically acknowledge the historic importance of Massachusetts Avenue within their goals and
2. Consider Massachusetts Avenue as a continuous whole.
Massachusetts Avenue is not just any other highway that can be chopped up into little bits under the assumption that
more and more lights and signs will automatically make the roadway safer. More nuanced and carefully considered
solutions should be developed for this and all intersections to protect the continuity and integrity of the road that was
Paul Reveres ride.
Respectfully,
Lynn Hopkins, Chair
Lexington Historic Districts Commission