By Michael Coughlin Jr.
On Saturday, June 24, over 150 people in person at the Suffolk Downs Media Room and on Zoom gathered for a listening session regarding the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s (MassDOT) Route 1A corridor study hosted by Senator Lydia Edwards.
Per MassDOT’s website, the study seeks to assess “the potential uses of the MassDOT and MBTA rail parcels located between Route 1A and the Chelsea Creek, and evaluate the Route 1A corridor between Bell Circle in Revere and Day Square in East Boston.”
According to Edwards, the study began in October of 2021; however, now the study has been paused.
“It is paused because the analysis that we’re looking at in terms of numbers, in terms of truck mitigation, did not include Suffolk Downs, which is a major factor,” said Edwards.
Though the study has been paused, Edwards presented data for two alternatives that have been discussed for the area. Alternative one is a bike and pedestrian path that connects East Boston from the Curtis Street Bridge to Belle Circle in Revere.
While alternative two is a bike and pedestrian path with the inclusion of a multi-modal bypass road for transit and freight that begins at the Curtis Street Bridge and ends at Tomasello Way.
Edwards’ presentation identified that the two alternatives were compared through different lenses, such as equity and resilience, and in the case of alternative two, truck diversions projected for 2040 were analyzed.
In terms of equity, the presentation noted that both alternatives provide better connections for environmental justice (EJ) communities. However, alternative one would provide better recreation and access to natural resources for EJ communities.
As for resilience, both options have flood protection for projected 2070 sea level rise. Although, alternative one includes 3.4 acres of additional green space.
Concerning projected 2040 truck diversions which were only analyzed for alternative two because it includes a bypass road, Edwards indicated that about 35-percent of truck traffic would be moved to the bypass road off of route 1A. Though it should be noted, as previously mentioned, the study in which these numbers come from omitted Suffolk Downs.
Shortly after Edwards’ presentation, it was time for the open mic portion of the meeting in which residents, either for or against the bypass road, made their voices heard.
One resident voiced her support for the bypass, alluding to the Maverick Street Mothers in the 1960s.
“I am the daughter of one of the Maverick Mothers. Yes, they did want to stop traffic on Maverick Street, and they did. In actuality, isn’t that what the bypass road would also do — it would take trucks further away from East Boston,” said the resident.
“I agreed with the project when it was first proposed and still do — it will make it safer for children and add more space — for the children anyway — by getting the trucks off the roads,” she added.
Others were for the bypass road because they felt it would help relieve traffic that hampers the area. “We’re drowning in traffic right now from trucks to Amazon trucks to UPS to FedEx,” said a resident.
“Anything that mitigates 35-percent traffic out of my area, I’m for,” added the resident.
While there were a lot of folks who were in support of instituting the bypass road, there were several detractors as well.
One of those residents against the bypass road spoke about how East Boston should not be giving up any more land, especially waterfront land.
“Please keep trucks off our waterfront, defend the legacy of those who fought and lost Wood Island by not giving up one more acre of East Boston’s waterfront to development by these industries,” said the resident.
That same resident also said, “Our waterfront is a limited resource, and we need to preserve and retain it for future improvements.”
Others had concerns about the proposed bypass road, such as a representative from Mothers Out Front East Boston, who wrote in the Zoom chat that there were concerns over a just community involvement process, potential added pollution from the bypass road, and insinuating that the bypass road is essentially airport expansion.
Though many residents were on each side of the aisle concerning the bypass road, some remained undecided. One undecided resident asked about Edwards’ thoughts, but she declined to give them, indicating that the session was for hearing from residents.
Overall, in what seems to be a hot-button issue, it looks like Edwards’ listening session was a good step in ensuring residents’ voices are heard.