Transportation Impact Assessment

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT

CYPRESS APARTMENTS AT BROOKLINE HILLS 111 CYPRESS STREET BROOKLINE, MASSACHUSETTS

Prepared for:

107 - 111 CYPRESS STREET REALTY TRUST Boston, Massachusetts

June 2017

Prepared by:

VANASSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 35 New England Business Center Drive Suite 140 Andover, MA 01810 (978) 474-8800 www.rdva.com

35 New England Business Center Drive Suite 140 Andover, MA 01810-1066 Office 978-474-8800 Fax 978-688-6508 Web: www.rdva.com

Dear Reviewer:

This letter shall certify that this Transportation Impact Assessment has been prepared under my direct supervision and responsible charge. I am a Registered Professional Engineer (P.E.) in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Massachusetts P.E. No. 38871, Civil) and hold Certification as a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (PTOE) from the Transportation Professional Certification Board, Inc. of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) (PTOE Certificate No. 993). I am also a Fellow of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (FITE).

Sincerely,

VANASSE & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Jeffrey S. Dirk, P.E., PTOE, FITE Principal

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1

Recommendations ...... 2

INTRODUCTION ...... 6

Project Description ...... 6 Study Methodology ...... 7

EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 8

Existing Traffic Volumes ...... 10 Spot Speed Measurements ...... 12 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ...... 12 Public Transportation ...... 13 Parking ...... 14 Motor Vehicle Crash Data ...... 15

FUTURE CONDITIONS ...... 17

Future Traffic Growth ...... 17 Project-Generated Traffic ...... 19 Trip Distribution and Assignment ...... 21 Future Traffic Volumes - Build Condition ...... 22

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...... 23

PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE AND TRANSIT IMPACTS ...... 33

SIGHT DISTANCE EVALUATION ...... 35

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 37

Conclusions ...... 37 Recommendations ...... 38

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx

FIGURES

No. Title

1 Site Location Map

2 Existing Intersection Lane Use, Travel Lane Width and Pedestrian Facilities

3 2017 Existing Weekday Morning Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

4 2017 Existing Weekday Evening Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

5 2017 Existing Weekday Morning Peak-Hour Pedestrian Volumes

6 2017 Existing Weekday Evening Peak-Hour Pedestrian Volumes

7 2017 Existing Weekday Morning Peak-Hour Bicycle Volumes

8 2017 Existing Weekday Evening Peak-Hour Bicycle Volumes

9 Existing On-Street Parking Regulation Summary

10 2024 No-Build Weekday Morning Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

11 2024 No-Build Weekday Evening Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

12 Trip-Distribution Map

13 Project-Generated Weekday Morning Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

14 Project-Generated Weekday Evening Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

15 2024 Build Weekday Morning Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

16 2024 Build Weekday Evening Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx

TABLES

No. Title

1 Study Area Intersection Description

2 2017 Existing Traffic Volumes

3 Vehicle Travel Speed Measurements

4 Parking Demand Observations

5 Motor Vehicle Crash Data Summary

6 Trip-Generation Summary

7 Traffic Volume Comparison

8 Peak-Hour Traffic-Volume Increases

9 Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections

10 Level-of-Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections

11 Signalized Intersection Level-of-Service and Vehicle Queue Summary

12 Unsignalized Intersection Level-of-Service and Vehicle Queue Summary

13 Sight Distance Measurements

14 Mitigated Signalized Intersection Level-of-Service and Vehicle Queue Summary

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This assessment was prepared in consultation with the Town of Brookline and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT); was performed in accordance with MassDOT’s Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) Guidelines and the scoping determination that was issued by the Town of Brookline for the preparation of this assessment; and was conducted pursuant to the standards of the Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning professions for the preparation of such reports. Based on this assessment, we have concluded the following with respect to the Project:

1. Using trip-generation statistics published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)1 and with adjustment to account for the use of public transportation and pedestrian and bicycle trips, the Project is expected to generate approximately 434 automobile trips, 246 transit trips, 42 pedestrian trips and 40 bicycle trips on an average weekday (two- way, 24-hour volumes), with 32 automobile trips, 17 transit trips, 3 pedestrian trips and 3 bicycle trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour, and 43 automobile trips, 24 transit trips, 4 pedestrian trips and 4 bicycle trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour;

2. In comparison to the traffic volumes that would be associated with full occupancy of the existing office building that occupies the Project site, the Project is expected to result in 66 fewer vehicle trips on an average weekday, with 37 fewer vehicle trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour and 23 fewer vehicle trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour. Accordingly, it can be concluded that the Project will be less impactful on the transportation infrastructure when compared to the impacts that would be associated with full occupancy of the existing office building;

1 Trip Generation, 9th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers; Washington, DC; 2012.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 1

3. The Project will not have a significant impact (increase) on motorist delays or vehicle queuing over Existing or anticipated future conditions without the Project (No-Build conditions), with the majority of the movements at the study intersections shown to operate at a level-of-service (LOS) “D” or better under all analysis conditions where an LOS of “D” or better is defined as “acceptable” operating conditions;

4. The intersection of Boylston Street at Cypress Street was shown to operate at or over capacity (defined as LOS “E” or “F”, respectively) with extended vehicle queuing during one or both peak hours independent of the Project;

5. All movements at the Project site driveway intersection with Brington Road are expected to operate at LOS A during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours with negligible vehicle queueing predicted;

6. Motorist delays and vehicle queuing on the Brington Road approach to Cypress Street are directly related to queuing on the Cypress Street approach to Boylston Street, with observance of the “Do Not Block” signs and pavement markings on Cypress Street allowing motorists to exit Brington Road during the peak periods when vehicle queues are present;

7. The existing pedestrian, bicycle and public transportation accommodations within the study area are sufficient to accommodate the additional trips that are expected to result from the Project;

8. No apparent safety deficiencies were noted with respect to the motor vehicle crash history at the study intersections; and

9. Lines of sight to and from the Project site driveway intersections with Brington Road and at the Cypress Street/Brington Road intersection were found to exceed the required minimum distances for the intersections to function in a safe manner with consideration of the urban environment in which the Project site is located.

In consideration of the above, we have concluded that the Project can be accommodated within the confines of the existing transportation infrastructure in a safe and efficient manner with implementation of the recommendations that follow.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A detailed transportation improvement program has been developed that is designed to provide safe and efficient access to the Project site and address any deficiencies identified at off-site locations evaluated in conjunction with this study. The following improvements have been recommended as a part of this evaluation and, where applicable, will be completed in conjunction with the Project subject to receipt of all necessary rights, permits, and approvals.

Project Access

Access to the Project will be provided by way of the westernmost driveway that currently serves as a one-way entrance to the Project site and intersects the north side of Brington Road west of Cypress Street. The west driveway will be reconstructed to provide full access to the Project site and the existing eastern driveway (one-way exit) will be closed in conjunction with the Project.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 2

The following recommendations are offered with respect to the design and operation of the Project site driveway and circulation within the Project site:

 The proposed access to the Project site and internal circulating roadways should be a minimum of 20-feet in width or as required to accommodate the turning and maneuvering requirements of the largest anticipated responding emergency vehicle as defined by the Town of Brookline Fire Department.

 Where perpendicular parking is provided, the drive aisle behind the parking should be a minimum of 23-feet in order to allow for vehicle maneuvering.

 Vehicles exiting the Project site should be placed under STOP-sign control with a marked STOP-line provided.

 All signs and pavement markings to be installed within the Project site shall conform to the applicable standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).2

 Sidewalks along the Project site frontage on Cypress Street and Brington Road should be reconstructed as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

 The entrances of the building have been designed to provide access to the sidewalks along both Cypress Street and Brington Road.

 Consideration should be given to constructing the Project site driveways as pan-type drives such that the sidewalk along Brington Road continues across the driveways without the need for wheelchair ramps.

 Marked crosswalks with ADA compliant wheelchair ramps should be provided at all pedestrian crossings within the Project site.

 Signs and landscaping to be installed as a part of the Project within intersection sight triangle areas should be designed and maintained so as not to restrict lines of sight.

 Snow windrows within sight triangle areas shall be promptly removed where such accumulations would exceed 2.5 feet in height.

 Consideration should be given to installing electric vehicle charging stations within the Project site and to accommodating the staging of car-sharing vehicles (ZipCar or similar).

Off-Site

Boylston Street at Cypress Street

2 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD); Federal Highway Administration; Washington, D.C.; 2009.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 3

yellow and “all-red” clearance intervals and pedestrian crossing times. With implementation of these improvements, overall operating conditions at the intersection were shown to be maintained at LOS E during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours with the addition of Project- related traffic (no change over No-Build conditions).

Cypress Street at Brington Road

Motorists exiting Brington Road at Cypress Street were shown to experience delays due to vehicle queueing from the Boylston Street/Cypress Street intersection independent of the Project; however, the residual vehicle queuing on Brington Road is relatively minor (2 to 3 vehicles with the completion of the Project). This intersection will serve as the primary access point to the Project site for vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists. Recognizing the importance of the Cypress Street/Brington Road intersection in providing access to the Project site and the relatively minor impact of the Project on the operation of the intersection, the Project proponent will undertake the following improvements:

1. Reconstruct the wheelchair ramps to comply with ADA standards; and

2. Reapply/upgrade the pavement markings at the intersection to include the “Do Not Block” pavement markings, stop-line and crosswalk, and replace the accompanying signs (STOP-sign, “Do Not Block Intersection”, etc.).

These improvements will be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project and subject to receipt of all necessary rights, permits and approvals.

Cypress Street at Tappan Street

The Project was not shown to have a significant impact (increase) on motorist delays or vehicle queuing at the intersection of Cypress Street at Tappan Street over existing or anticipated future conditions without the Project (predicted increase in overall average motorist delay of 0.1 seconds during the weekday morning peak-hour with no change in LOS or vehicle queuing). Tappan Street will serve as the primary connection for residents of the Project to access Brookline Hills Station on the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Green Line subway system and for pedestrian and bicycle trips to Brookline High School. As such, the Project proponent will review the existing pedestrian accommodations at the intersection and will upgrade non-ADA compliant traffic signal equipment and wheelchair ramps. These improvements will be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project and subject to receipt of all necessary rights, permits and approvals.

Transportation Demand Management

The study area is served by public transportation services (Green Line subway and fixed-route bus service) that are provided by the MBTA. The D Branch of the MBTA Green Line subway system abuts the Project site to the north, with Brookline Hills Station located within a 2-minute walking distance of the Project off Tappan Street. The MBTA also operates fixed-route bus service along Boylston Street and Cypress Street to the south of the Project site by way of Route 60, Chestnut Hill – Kenmore Station, which includes a stop in both directions at the intersection of Cypress Street at Milton Road that is located within a 2-minute walking distance of the Project site. In an effort to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation to single-occupant vehicles, the following Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures will be implemented as a part of the Project:

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 4

 The owner or property manager will become a MassRIDES employer partner to facilitate and encourage healthy transportation options for residents of the Project and to coordinate a carpool/vanpool matching program;

 Information regarding public transportation services, maps, schedules and fare information will be posted in a central location and/or otherwise made available to residents;

 A “welcome packet” will be provided to residents detailing available public transportation services, bicycle and walking alternatives, and commuter options available through MassRIDES’ and their NuRide program which rewards individuals that choose to walk, bicycle, carpool, vanpool or that use public transportation to travel to and from work;

 Residents will be made aware of the Emergency Ride Home (ERH) program available through MassRIDES, which reimburses employees of a participating MassRIDES employer partner worksite that is registered for ERH and that carpool, take transit, bicycle, walk or vanpool to work;

 Pedestrian accommodations have been incorporated within the Project site that link the proposed building to the sidewalk infrastructure along both Cypress Street and Brington Road; and

 Secure bicycle parking will be provided consisting of: i) exterior bicycle parking conveniently located proximate to the building entrances; and ii) weather protected bicycle parking located in a secure area within the parking garage.

With implementation of the above recommendations, safe and efficient vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access will be provided to the Project site and the Project can be accommodated within the confines of the existing and improved transportation system.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 5

INTRODUCTION

Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (VAI) has conducted a Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) in order to determine the potential impacts on the transportation infrastructure associated with the proposed construction of a residential apartment community to be known as Cypress Apartments at Brookline Hills and located at 107-111 Cypress Street in Brookline, Massachusetts (hereafter referred to as the “Project”). This study evaluates the following specific areas as they relate to the Project: i) access requirements; ii) potential off-site improvements; and iii) safety considerations; and identifies and analyzes existing traffic conditions and future traffic conditions, both with and without the Project, along Cypress Street and Brington Road, and at the following intersections pursuant to the scope of work that was developed in consultation with the Town of Brookline: Boylston Street (Route 9) at Cypress Street; Boylston Street at Brington Road; Cypress Street at Brington Road; Cypress Street at Tappan Street; and Cypress Street at Davis Avenue.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Project will entail the construction of a 99-unit residential apartment community to be located at 107-111 Cypress Street in Brookline, Massachusetts. The Project site consists of approximately 0.91-acres of land and is bounded by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Green Line tracks to the north; Brington Road and residential properties to the south; Cypress Street to the east; and residential properties to the west. Figure 1 depicts the Project site location in relation to the existing roadway network. At present the Project site is occupied by a two (2) story office building and associated appurtenances that will be removed in conjunction with the Project.

On-site parking will be provided for 66 vehicles consisting of both surface parking (5 spaces) and garage spaces (61 spaces) situated beneath the proposed building, or a parking ratio of approximately 0.67 spaces per dwelling unit, which is below that required pursuant to §6.02 – Off-Street Parking Space Regulations, of the Zoning Bylaw of the Town of Brookline, but is

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 6 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

BROOKLINE HIGH SCHOOL

DAVIS TAPPAN BROOKLINE

STREET AVENUE

STREET

CLARK T SITE

STREET LEVERETT

STREET CAMERON ROAD SMYTHE STREET

PHILLBRICK STREET

ROAD

BRINGTON 9

EAST MILTON B B ROAD BOYLSTON ROAD MILTON

ROAD STREET Legend: CYPRESS T Brooline Hills Station

B MBTA Bus Stop Location

Source: Google Earth. KENNARD WALNUT

N 0 150 300 Scale in Feet Figure 1

Site Location Map Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Transportation Engineers & Planners R:\7574\7574slm.dwg, 4/7/2017 12:32:56 PM 12:32:56 4/7/2017 R:\7574\7574slm.dwg,

within the range of values documented by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for an apartment community in a suburban setting3 with access to public transportation services.

STUDY METHODOLOGY

This study was prepared in consultation with the Town of Brookline and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT); was performed in accordance with MassDOT’s Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) Guidelines, the scoping determination issued by the Town of Brookline for the preparation of this assessment, and the standards of the Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning professions for the preparation of such reports; and was conducted in three distinct stages.

The first stage involved an assessment of existing conditions in the study area and included an inventory of roadway geometrics; pedestrian and bicycle facilities; on-street parking; public transportation services; observations of traffic flow; and collection of pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle counts, and on-street parking demand data.

In the second stage of the study, future traffic conditions were projected and analyzed. Specific travel demand forecasts for the Project were assessed along with future traffic demands due to expected traffic growth independent of the Project. A seven-year time horizon from the current year was selected for analyses consistent with MassDOT’s Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) Guidelines. The analysis conducted in stage two identifies existing or projected future capacity, safety, and access issues, as these areas relate to the transportation infrastructure.

The third stage of the study presents and evaluates measures to address deficiencies in the transportation infrastructure, if any, identified in stage two of the study.

3 Parking Generation, 4th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers; Washington, D.C.; 2010. Observed parking demand ratios for an apartment community were found to range from 0.59 to 1.94 spaces per dwelling unit, with an average parking demand of 1.23 spaces per dwelling unit and an 85th percentile peak parking demand of 1.94 spaces per dwelling unit.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 7

EXISTING CONDITIONS

A comprehensive field inventory of existing conditions within the study area was conducted in March 2017. The field investigation consisted of an inventory of existing roadway geometrics; pedestrian and bicycle facilities; on-street parking; public transportation services; traffic volumes; and operating characteristics; as well as posted speed limits and land use information within the study area. The study area for the Project was developed in consultation with the Town of Brookline and was selected to contain the major roadways providing access to the Project site, Cypress Street and Brington Road, as well as the intersections of Boylston Street (Route 9) at Cypress Street; Boylston Street at Brington Road; Cypress Street at Brington Road; Cypress Street at Tappan Street; and Cypress Street at Davis Avenue.

The following describes the study area roadways and intersections.

Roadways

Cypress Street

 Two-lane urban minor arterial roadway under Town jurisdiction  Traverses study area in a general north-south direction and provides access to Boylston Street (Route 9) to the south of the Project site and to Washington Street to the north  Provides two 11 to 17-foot wide travel lanes per direction within the study area separated by a double-yellow centerline with additional turn lanes provided at major intersections  On-street parking is generally prohibited along the roadway within the study area, with the exception of two (2) loading zone spaces and five (5) metered parking spaces along the east side north of Brington Road  The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour (mph)  Sidewalks are provided continuously along both sides of the roadway  Bicycle accommodations are provided by way of a marked bicycle lane or designated by “sharrow” pavement markings  Land use consists of the Project site and residential and commercial uses

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 8

Brington Road

 Two lane local access roadway under Town jurisdiction  Traverses the study area in a circuitous alignment between Boylston Street and Cypress Street  Consists of a 23 to 24-foot wide paved roadway that accommodates two-way travel with no centerline or edgeline pavement markings provided  A posted speed limit is not provided; measured travel speeds over a continuous 7-day period indicate a prevailing travel speed4 of 19 mph (discussion follows)  On-street parking is permitted along the south/east side of the roadway except where posted (signed) otherwise  Sidewalks are provided continuously along both sides of the roadway  Land use consists of the Project site and residential and commercial (proximate to Cypress Street) uses

Intersections

Table 1 and Figure 2 summarize lane use, traffic control, and pedestrian and bicycle accommodations at the study area intersections as observed in March 2017.

Table 1 STUDY AREA INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION

Traffic Shoulder Pedestrian Bicycle Control No. of Travel Lanes Provided? Accommodations? Accommodations? Intersection Typea Provided (Yes/No/Width) (Yes/No/Description) (Yes/No/Description) Cypress St./ TS 1 left-turn lane and 1 No Yes – Sidewalks along Yes – Bicycle lane on Davis Ave. through/right-turn lane both sides of intersecting Cypress St. southbound on Cypress St. roadways; crosswalks for approach and “Sharrow” northbound; 1 lane on crossing all legs of pavement markings on Cypress St. intersection; pedestrian Cypress St. north and southbound; 1 lane on traffic signal equipment south of intersection Davis Ave. and phasing (concurrent) provided

Cypress St./ TS 1 per direction on No Yes – Sidewalks along Yes – Bicycle lane on Tappan St. Cypress St.; 1 left-turn both sides of intersecting Cypress St. southbound lane and 1 right-turn roadways; crosswalks for south of intersection and lane on Tappan St. crossing south and west “Sharrow” pavement legs of intersection; markings on Cypress St. pedestrian traffic signal north and south of equipment and phasing intersection (concurrent) provided See notes at end of table.

4 The prevailing travel speed is also known as the 85th percentile speed, and is defined as the speed at which 85 percent of the observed vehicles travelled at or below during the observation period.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 9

Table 1 STUDY AREA INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION (Continued)

Traffic Shoulder Pedestrian Bicycle Control No. of Travel Lanes Provided? Accommodations? Accommodations? Intersection Typea Provided (Yes/No/Width) (Yes/No/Description) (Yes/No/Description) Cypress St./ S 1 lane per direction on No Yes – Sidewalks along Yes – “Sharrow” Brington Rd. all approaches; “Do both sides of the pavement markings on Not Block” pavement intersecting roadways; Cypress St. markings provided on crosswalk provided for Cypress St. at crossing the west leg of intersection with the intersection accompanying sign

Boylston St./ TS 1 left-turn lane and Yes – 1-foot on Yes – Sidewalks along Yes – Bicycle lane on Cypress St. two general-purpose Boylston St. both sides of the Cypress St. southbound lanes on both Boylston intersecting roadways; south of intersection and St. approaches; 2 crosswalks for crossing “Sharrow” pavement general-purpose travel all legs of intersection; markings on Cypress St. lanes on Cypress St. pedestrian traffic signal north and south of northbound approach; equipment and phasing intersection 1 left/through and 1 (exclusive) provided right-turn lane on Cypress St. southbound approach

Boylston St./ S 2 general purpose Yes – 1 to 5 feet Yes – Sidewalk along Yesb – shared traveled- Brington Rd. travel lanes on on Boylston St. both sides of intersecting way on Boylston St. Boylston St.; 1 lane on roadways; crosswalk Brington Rd. restricted across Brington Rd. to right-turn only due to median along Boylston St. aTS = traffic signal control; S = STOP-sign control. bCombined shoulder and travel lane width equal to or exceed 14 feet.

EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES

In order to determine existing traffic-volume demands and flow patterns within the study area, automatic traffic recorder (ATR) counts, manual turning movement counts (TMCs) and vehicle classification counts were completed in March 2017 while public schools were in regular session. The ATR counts were conducted over a continuous 24-hour, 7-day period between March 4th (Saturday) and March 10th (Friday) on Cypress Street and Brington Road in the vicinity of the Project site in order to record daily traffic conditions over an extended period, with weekday morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM) and evening (2:00 to 6:00 PM) peak period manual TMCs performed at the study intersections on March 7th (Tuesday). These time periods were selected for analysis purposes as they are representative of the peak-traffic-volume hours for both the Project and the adjacent roadway network, and include the afternoon school peak period.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 10 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts Legend: S Signalized Intersection U Unsignalized Intersection Sidewalk Crosswalk Lane Use and Travel Lane Width S Bike Lane "Sharrow" Marking

SITE

U U U

9 S U

N Not To Scale Figure 2 Existing Intersection Lane use, Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Travel Lane Width and Transportation Engineers & Planners Pedestrian Facilities R:\7574\7574nt1.dwg, 4/10/2017 4:16:43 PM

Traffic-Volume Adjustments

In order to evaluate the potential for seasonal fluctuation of traffic volumes within the study area, traffic volume data from MassDOT Continuous Count Station No. H13142 located on I-90 approximately 0.5 miles west of Cambridge Street in Brighton were reviewed.5 Based on a review of this data, it was determined that traffic volumes for the month of March are approximately 2.6 percent above average-month conditions and, therefore, the traffic counts that form the basis of this assessment were not adjusted downward in order to provide a conservative (above-average) analysis condition. The 2017 Existing traffic volumes are summarized in Table 2, with the weekday morning and evening peak-hour traffic volumes graphically depicted on Figures 3 and 4, respectively. Note that the peak-hour traffic volumes presented in Table 2 were obtained from the aforementioned Figures.

Table 2 2017 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Directional Location/Peak Hour AWTa Saturdayb Sundayb VPHc K Factord Distributione

Brington Road, west of Cypress Street: 335 215 190 ------Weekday Morning (7:30 – 8:30 AM) -- -- 33 15.8 66.0% WB Weekday Evening (5:00 – 6:00 PM) -- -- 45 13.4 55.6 % EB Saturday Midday (11:00 AM – 12:00 Noon) -- -- 18 8.4 55.6% WB Sunday Midday (12:00 Noon – 1:00 PM) -- -- 17 8.9 52.9% EB

Cypress Street, north of Brington Road: 14,090 12,895 11,450 ------Weekday Morning (7:30 – 8:30 AM) -- -- 1,112 7.9 59.5% NB Weekday Evening (5:00 – 6:00 PM) -- -- 1,061 7.5 55.8% NB Saturday Midday (11:00 AM – 12:00 Noon) -- -- 964 7.5 52.4% NB Sunday Midday (12:00 Noon – 1:00 PM) -- -- 965 8.4 52.4% NB

aAverage weekday traffic in vehicles per day. bVehicles. cVehicles per hour. dPercent of daily traffic occurring during the peak hour. ePercent traveling in peak direction. EB = eastbound; WB = westbound; NB = northbound; SB = southbound.

As can be seen in Table 2, Brington Road in the vicinity of the Project site was found to accommodate approximately 335 vehicles on an average weekday, 215 vehicles on Saturday and 190 vehicles on Sunday (two-way, 24-hour volumes), with approximately 33 vehicles per hour (vph) during the weekday morning peak-hour, 45 vph during the weekday evening peak-hour, 18 vph during the Saturday midday peak-hour and 17 vph during the Sunday peak-hour.

Cypress Street in the vicinity of the Project site was found to accommodate approximately 14,090 vehicles on an average weekday, 12,895 vehicles on Saturday and 11,450 vehicles on Sunday (again, two-way, 24-hour volumes), with approximately 1,112 vph during the weekday morning peak-hour, 1,061 vph during the weekday evening peak-hour, 964 vph during the Saturday midday peak-hour and 965 vph during the Sunday peak-hour.

5 MassDOT Traffic Volumes for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; 2017.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 11 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 3 2017 Existing Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Morning Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\7574\7574nt2.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:39:37 PM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 4 2017 Existing Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Evening Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\7574\7574nt3.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:39:49 PM

SPOT SPEED MEASUREMENTS

Vehicle travel speed measurements were performed on Brington Road and Cypress Street in the vicinity of the Project site in conjunction with the ATR counts. Table 3 summarizes the vehicle travel speed measurements.

Table 3 VEHICLE TRAVEL SPEED MEASUREMENTS

Brington Road Cypress Street Eastbound Westbound Northbound Northbound

Mean Travel Speed (mph) 14 16 16 14

85th Percentile Speed (mph) 19 19 23 22

Posted Speed Limit (mph) -- -- 25 25

mph = miles per hour.

As can be seen in Table 3, the mean vehicle travel speed along Brington Road in the vicinity of the Project site was found to be approximately 15 mph. The average measured 85th percentile vehicle travel speed, or the speed at which 85 percent of the observed vehicles traveled at or below, was found to be approximately 19 mph and is reflective of: i) the residential setting of the roadway; ii) the presence of on-street parking which produces a traffic calming effect; and iii) vehicles slowing as they approach Cypress Street. The 85th percentile speed is used as the basis of engineering design and in the evaluation of sight distances, and is often used in establishing posted speed limits.

The mean vehicle travel speed along Cypress Street in the vicinity of the Project site was found to be approximately 15 mph, with the average measured 85th percentile vehicle travel speed found to be approximately 23 mph, which is generally consistent with the posted speed limit (25 mph).

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES

A comprehensive field inventory of pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the study area was undertaken in March 2017. The field inventory consisted of a review of the location of sidewalks and pedestrian crossing locations along the study roadways and at the study intersections, as well as the location of existing and planned future bicycle facilities.

Pedestrian Facilities

As detailed on Figure 2, sidewalks are provided continuously along both sides of the study area roadways, with marked crosswalks provided for crossing one or more approaches at the study intersections. The crossings at the signalized study area intersections are included as a part of the traffic signal system at the intersections (pedestrian pushbuttons, signal indications and phasing are provided for the crossings). Figures 5 and 6 depict the 2017 Existing weekday morning and

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 12 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 5 2017 Existing Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Morning Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Pedestrian Volumes R:\7574\7574nt4.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:40:03 PM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 6 2017 Existing Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Evening Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Pedestrian Volumes R:\7574\7574nt5.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:40:19 PM

evening peak-hour pedestrian volumes at the study area intersections, respectively, and were collected in conjunction with the March 2017 TMCs.

A review of the pedestrian volume data at the study intersections indicates that the Brington Road crossing at Cypress Street experienced the largest number of crossings during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours (258 crossings were observed during the weekday morning peak-hour and 173 crossings were observed during the weekday evening peak-hour). This crossing provides access to Brookline Hills Station on the D Branch of the MBTA Green Line subway system.

Bicycle Facilities

Marked bicycle lanes and/or “sharrow” pavement markings are provided along Cypress Street within the study area, with portions of Boylston Street providing sufficient width (combined travel lane and paved shoulder) to support bicycle travel in a shared traveled-way configuration.6 Figures 7 and 8 depict the 2017 Existing weekday morning and evening peak-hour bicycle volumes at the study area intersections, respectively, which were collected in conjunction with the march 2017 TMCs. Bicycle activity within the study area was found to be relatively modest, with bi-directional bicycle volumes found to range from approximately 2 to 20 bicyclists during the peak hours.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

The study area is served by public transportation services (Green Line subway and fixed-route bus service) that are provided by the MBTA. The D Branch of the MBTA Green Line subway system abuts the Project site to the north, with Brookline Hills Station located within a 2-minute walking distance of the Project site off Tappan Street. The MBTA also operates fixed-route bus service along Boylston Street and Cypress Street to the south of the Project site by way of Route 60, Chestnut Hill – Kenmore Station, which includes a stop in both directions at the intersection of Cypress Street at Milton Road that is located within a 2-minute walking distance of the Project site. In addition, MBTA bus Route 51, Cleveland Circle - Forest Hills Station via Hancock Village, provides special service to Brookline High School during the afternoon when school is in session (one (1) bus) from a stop located at the intersection of Tappan Street at Greenough Street.

As noted in the previous section, sidewalks are provided along both sides of the study area roadways that link the Project site to the available MBTA services, with crosswalks and pedestrian traffic signal equipment and phasing provided at the signalized study area intersections. Given the proximity of Brookline Hills Station to the Project site, it is expected that a significant portion of the residents of the Project will use public transportation and the Green Line as their primary mode of transportation. The public transportation schedules and fare information are provided in the Appendix.

6 A minimum combined travel lane and paved shoulder width of 14-feet is required to support bicycle travel in a shared traveled-way condition.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 13 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 7 2017 Existing Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Morning Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Bicycle Volumes R:\7574\7574nt6.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:40:32 PM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 8 2017 Existing Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Evening Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Bicycle Volumes R:\7574\7574nt7.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:40:47 PM

PARKING

An inventory of on-street parking accommodations within the study area was conducted in March 2017 in conjunction with the field inventories, and is depicted on Figure 9. In general, parking is prohibited along one or both sides of Cypress Street within the study area, with the exception of two (2) loading zone spaces and five (5) metered parking spaces that are situated along the east side of the roadway between Brington Road and the Cypress Street bridge over the MBTA Green Line tracks. On-street parking is permitted along the south or east side of Brington Street between Boylston Street and the west property line of the Project site (approximately 26 spaces), with an additional four (4) parking spaces located opposite the Project site. In addition, parking is provided along Tappan Street that is restricted to Brookline School Department permit holders, with metered parking provided in a small parking lot off Tappan Street at Brookline Hills Station (approximately 8 spaces). Except where otherwise indicated, on-street parking is limited to 2-hours and no over-night parking is allowed.

Parking demand observations were conducted along Brington Road and Cypress Street within the study area on March 29, 2017 (Wednesday) between 7:00 and 9:00 AM, and from 2:00 to 6:00 PM, in order to determine parking demands. Table 4 summarizes the parking demands along Brington Road and Cypress Street within the study area during the observation periods.

Table 4 PARKING DEMAND OBSERVATIONS

Brington Road Unregulated Cypress Street Cypress Street On-Street Parking Meter Parking Loading Zone Time Period (30 Spaces) (5 Spaces) (2 spaces)

Weekday Morning 7:00 – 7:30 AM 9 2 0 7:30 – 8:00 AM 20 3 0 8:00 – 8:30 AM 27 3 1 8:30 – 9:00 AM 30 4 1

Weekday Afternoon 2:00 – 2:30 PM 29 7* 1 2:30 – 3:00 PM 27 7* 1 3:00 – 3:30 PM 28 7* 0 3:30 – 4:00 PM 24 7* 0 4:00 – 4:30 PM 20 6* 0 4:30 – 5:00 PM 13 5 0 5:00 – 5:30 PM 11 6* 0 5:30 – 6:00 PM 8 6* 0

*Includes illegal parked vehicles.

As can be seen in table 4, on-street parking demands along Brington Road were shown to peak between 8:30 and 9:00 AM, with all available parking occupied. After 4:30 PM and before 7:00 AM, on-street parking along Brington Road was limited to between 8 and 9 vehicles. Parking demands for the metered spaces along Cypress Street opposite the Project site were most pronounced in the afternoon, with all five (5) spaces occupied and between one (1) and two (2) vehicles observed to be parked outside of the designated parking spaces. The two (2) loading zone spaces were found to be occupied intermittently during the observation period.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 14 TAPPAN DAVIS Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

DAVIS R7-8C TAPPAN STREET AVENUE R7-1R

R7-1RL

STREET BROOKLINE T R7-1RL R7-8C ROAD R7-1L CAMERON STREET GTON ON-STREET R7-1 STREET BRIN SITE METER PARKING (5 SPACES)

ON-STREET R7-6 R7-8C CYPRESS CLARK PARKING R7-1R (26 SPACES) R7-6 LOADING ZONE (2 SPACES) STREET ROAD R7-8C NO NO PARKING PARKING R7-8C ANY LOADING TIME ZONE ON-STREET PARKING STREET NO NO (4 SPACES) R7-1R PARKING PARKING ANY R7-8C THIS SIDE TIME BOYLSTON NO NO PARKING PARKING ANY ANY 9 TIME TIME Source: Google Earth. N 0 95 190 Scale in Feet Figure 9

Existing On-Street Parking and Vanasse & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers & Planners Parking Regulation Summary - Brington Road and Cypress Street R:\7574\7574 Parking.dwg, 4/10/2017 4:14:01 PM 4:14:01 4/10/2017 Parking.dwg, R:\7574\7574

MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH DATA

Motor vehicle crash information for the study area intersections was provided by the MassDOT Highway Division Safety Management/Traffic Operations Unit for the most recent five-year period available (2010 through 2014, inclusive) in order to examine motor vehicle crash trends occurring within the study area. The data is summarized by intersection, type, severity, and day of occurrence, and presented in Table 5.

Table 5 MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH DATA SUMMARYa

Brington Road/ Project Site Cypress Street/ Cypress Street/ Cypress Street/ Boylston Street/ Boylston Street Driveways Davis Avenue Tappan Street Brington Road Cypress Street Brington Road

Traffic Control Typeb: U S S U S U

Year: 2010 0 1 0 0 2 0 2011 0 0 1 0 5 0 2012 0 0 0 1 5 0 2013 0 0 0 0 1 0 2014 0 2 0 0 0 0 Total 0 3 1 1 13 0

Average 0.00 0.60 0.20 0.20 2.60 0.00 Ratec 0.00 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.22 0.00 MassDOT Crash Rated 0.58/0.53 0.77/0.70 0.77/0.70 0.58/0.53 0.58/0.53 0.58/0.53 Significant?e No No No No No No

Type: Angle 0 2 1 1 4 0 Rear-End 0 1 0 0 7 0 Head-On 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fixed Object 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sideswipe 0 0 0 0 2 0 Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other/Unknown 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 3 1 1 13 0

Severity: Property Damage Only 0 1 1 1 6 0 Personal Injury 0 2 0 0 7 0 Fatal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 3 1 1 13 0

Day of Week: Monday through Friday 0 3 1 0 12 0 Saturday 0 0 0 1 1 0 Sunday 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 3 1 1 13 0 aSource: MassDOT Safety Management/Traffic Operations Unit records, 2010 through 2014. bTraffic Control Type: U = unsignalized; S = signalized cCrash rate per million vehicles entering the intersection. dStatewide/District crash rate. eThe intersection crash rate is significant if it is found to exceed MassDOT statewide or District crash rate for the MassDOT Highway Division District in which the intersection is located (District 6).

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 15

As can be seen in Table 5, the study area intersections experienced an average of three (3) or fewer reported motor vehicle crash per year over the five-year review period and were found to have a motor vehicle crash rate below both the MassDOT statewide and District averages for a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, as appropriate, for the MassDOT Highway Division District in which the intersections are located (District 6). No motor vehicle crashes were reported to have occurred at the Project site driveway intersections with Brington Road.

A review of the MassDOT statewide High Crash Location List indicated that were no locations within the study area that were included on MassDOT’s Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) listing as high crash locations. In addition, no fatal motor vehicle crashes were reported to have occurred at the study area intersections over the five-year review period.

Based on a review of the MassDOT motor vehicle crash data, no discernible safety deficiencies were apparent at the study intersections. The detailed MassDOT Crash Rate Worksheets are provided in the Appendix.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 16

FUTURE CONDITIONS

Traffic volumes in the study area were projected to the year 2024, which reflects a seven-year planning horizon from the current year consistent with MassDOT’s Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) Guidelines. Independent of the Project, traffic volumes on the roadway network in the year 2024 under No-Build conditions include all existing traffic and new traffic resulting from background traffic growth. Anticipated Project-generated traffic volumes superimposed upon the 2024 No-Build traffic volumes reflect 2024 Build traffic volume conditions with the Project.

FUTURE TRAFFIC GROWTH

Future traffic growth is a function of the expected land development in the immediate area and the surrounding region. Several methods can be used to estimate this growth. A procedure frequently employed estimates an annual percentage increase in traffic growth and applies that percentage to all traffic volumes under study. The drawback to such a procedure is that some turning volumes may actually grow at either a higher or a lower rate at particular intersections.

An alternative procedure identifies the location and type of planned development, estimates the traffic to be generated, and assigns it to the area roadway network. This procedure produces a more realistic estimate of growth for local traffic; however, potential population growth and development external to the study area would not be accounted for in the resulting traffic projections.

To provide a conservative analysis framework, both procedures were used, the salient components of which are described below.

Specific Development by Others

The Town of Brookline Planning and Community Development Department was contacted in order to determine if there were any projects planned within the study area that would have an impact on future traffic volumes at the study intersections. Based on this discussion, the following projects were identified for inclusion in this assessment:

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 17

 Children’s Hospital Medical Office Building, 2 and 4 Brookline Place, Brookline Massachusetts. This project will entail the construction of approximately 229,500 square feet (sf) of retail, medical office and office space to be located at 2 and 4 Brookline Place in Brookline, Massachusetts, that will include a 683 space parking garage.

 Age-Qualified Apartment Community, 1180 Boylston Street, Brookline, Massachusetts. This project will entail the construction of a 45-unit residential apartment community that will be age-restricted (persons age 55+) and 7,000 sf of retail space to be located at 1180 Boylston Street in Brookline, Massachusetts.

 Brookline Avenue Hotel, 700 Brookline Avenue, Brookline, Massachusetts. This project will entail the construction of a 175-room/key hotel to be located at 700 Brookline Avenue in Brookline, Massachusetts.

 Audi of Brookline, 308 Boylston Street, Brookline, Massachusetts. This project will entail the reconstruction of the Audi of Brookline automobile dealership located at 308 Boylston Street in Brookline, Massachusetts, and will include: i) replacing the existing paved vehicle display area with a four (4) story, modern showroom; ii) upgrading and expanding the vehicle service area; and iii) associated building façade, access and parking improvements. Ten (10) new employees are expected to be added as a result of the project.

Traffic volumes associated with the aforementioned specific development projects by others were obtained from their respective traffic studies or using trip-generation information available from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)7 for the appropriate land use, and were assigned onto the study area roadway network based on existing traffic patterns where no other information was available. No other developments were identified at this time that are expected to result in an increase in traffic within the study area beyond the general background traffic growth rate.

General Background Traffic Growth

Traffic-volume data compiled by MassDOT from Continuous Count Station No. H13142 located on I-90 approximately 0.5 miles west of Cambridge Street in Brighton were reviewed. Based on a review of this data, it was determined that traffic volumes within the study area have generally decreased by an average of approximately 0.2 percent over the past several years. In order to provide a conservative (high) analysis scenario and a prudent planning condition for the Project, a 1.0 percent per year compounded annual background traffic growth rate was used in order to account for future traffic growth and presently unforeseen development within the study area.

Roadway Improvement Projects

The Town of Brookline and MassDOT were contacted in order to determine if there were any planned future roadway improvement projects expected to be complete by 2024 within the study area. Based on these discussions, no roadway improvement projects aside from routine maintenance activities were identified to be planned within the study area at this time.

7 Ibid 1

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 18

No-Build Traffic Volumes

The 2024 No-Build condition peak-hour traffic-volumes were developed by applying the 1.0 percent per year compounded annual background traffic growth rate to the 2017 Existing peak-hour traffic volumes and then adding the peak-hour traffic volumes associated with the identified specific development projects by others. The resulting 2024 No-Build weekday morning and evening peak-hour traffic volumes are shown on Figures 10 and 11, respectively.

PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC

Design year (2024 Build) traffic volumes for the study area roadways were determined by estimating Project-generated traffic volumes and assigning those volumes on the study roadways. The following sections describe the methodology used to develop the anticipated traffic characteristics of the Project.

As proposed, the Project will entail the construction of a 99-unit residential apartment community. In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the Project, trip-generation statistics published by the ITE8 for similar land uses as those proposed were used. ITE Land Use Code (LUC) 220, Apartment, was used to develop the base traffic characteristics of the Project.

Transit Use

Given the availability of public transportation services to the Project site (Green Line subway and Route 60 bus) and the extensive and interconnected network of sidewalks and bicycle facilities, it is expected that a portion of the residents of the Project will use public transportation services, walk or bicycle, thereby reducing the volume of traffic that may be associated with the Project. In order to determine the proportion of residents of the Project that may use public transportation, walk or bicycle as their primary mode of transportation, travel mode data obtained from the 2011- 2015 American Community Survey for the Town of Brookline were reviewed. Based on a review of this data, the following commuting modes were identified for workers age 16 or older that reside within the Town of Brookline:

 Single-Occupant Vehicle: 37.2%  Car/Vanpool: 5.4%  Public Transportation: 28.6%  Walk: 16.5%  Bicycle: 4.5%  Other: 1.0%  Worked at Home: 6.8%

Approximately 55 percent of workers that reside in the Town of Brookline reported that they used an alternative mode of transportation to single-occupancy vehicles to travel to/from work, with approximately 29 percent using public transportation, 16 percent walking and 4 percent bicycling. Based on the above commuting demographics and: i) the accessibility of the Project site to Brookline Hills Station on the D Branch of the Green Line subway system and the Route 60 bus (both within a 2-minute walking distance); and ii) the interconnected pedestrian and bicycle network along Cypress Street and intersecting roadways; it is reasonable to assume that a

8 Ibid 1.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 19 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 10 2024 No-Build Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Morning Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\7574\7574nt8.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:41:11 PM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. N Not To Scale Figure 11 2024 No-Build Vanasse & Associates, Inc. Weekday Evening Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\7574\7574nt9.dwg, 4/10/2017 3:41:27 PM

significant portion of the residents of the Project will use public transportation as their principal commuting mode or will walk or bicycle.

In order to account for the use of alternative modes of transportation to single-occupancy vehicles, the base ITE trip-generation calculations were first converted to person trips using a vehicle occupancy ratio of 1.13 persons per vehicle, which was obtained from the 2009 National Household Travel Survey, and were then disseminated to the modes of transportation that are accessible to the residents of the Project: public transportation (transit), pedestrian, bicycle and automobile. Given the immediate proximity of the Project site to Brookline Hills Station, a 30 percent transit utilization was assumed for the Project, which is slightly (1.4 percent) higher than the transit utilization aggregated for the entirety of the Town. Pedestrian and bicycle trips were assumed to comprise 5 percent each (10 percent total) of the trips generated by the Project, which is approximately 10 percent lower than the utilization reported by the American Community Survey and more than off-sets the minor difference assumed for the use of public transportation.

Table 6 summarizes the traffic characteristics of the Project using the above methodology.

Table 6 TRIP-GENERATION SUMMARY

Person Trips Total Automobile Transit Pedestrian Bicycle ITE Person Trips Trips Trips Trips Automobile Trip Period/Direction Tripsa Tripsb (60%) (30%) (5%) (5%) Tripsc

Average Weekday Daily: Entering 362 409 245 123 21 20 217 Exiting 362 409 245 123 21 20 217 Total 724 818 490 246 42 40 434

Weekday Morning Peak Hour: Entering 10 11 7 3 1 0 6 Exiting 42 48 29 14 2 3 26 Total 52 59 36 17 3 3 32

Weekday Evening Peak Hour: Entering 47 53 32 16 3 2 28 Exiting 25 28 17 8 1 2 15 Total 72 81 49 24 4 4 43 aBased on ITE LUC 220, Apartment, and 99 dwelling units. bITE vehicle trips x vehicle occupancy ratio (VOR) of 1.13. VOR obtained from: Summary of Travel Trends: 2009 National Household Travel Survey; FHWA; Washington, D.C.; June 2011. cAutomobile person trips divided by 1.13.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 20

Project-Generated Traffic Volume Summary

As can be seen in Table 6, after applying appropriate adjustments to account for the use of public transportation and pedestrian and bicycle trips, the Project is expected to generate approximately 434 automobile trips, 246 transit trips, 42 pedestrian trips and 40 bicycle trips on an average weekday (two-way, 24-hour volumes), with 32 automobile trips (6 vehicles entering and 26 exiting), 17 transit trips, 3 pedestrian trips and 3 bicycle trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour, and 43 automobile trips (28 vehicles entering and 15 exiting), 24 transit trips, 4 pedestrian trips and 4 bicycle trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour.

Table 7 compares the traffic volumes associated with the Project to those of the existing office building that occupies the Project site that will be removed to accommodate the Project.

Table 7 TRAFFIC VOLUME COMPARISON

Vehicle Trips (A) (B) Proposed Existing Residential Office (A-B) Time Period/Direction Community Buildinga Difference

Average Weekday Daily: 434 500 -66

Weekday Morning Peak Hour: 32 69 -37

Weekday Evening Peak Hour: 43 66 -23

aBased on ITE LUC 710, General Office Building; 28,041 sf.

Traffic Volume Comparison

As can be seen in Table 7, in comparison to the traffic volumes that would be associated with full occupancy of the existing office building that occupies the Project site, the Project is expected to result in 66 fewer vehicle trips on an average weekday, with 37 fewer vehicle trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour and 23 fewer vehicle trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour. Accordingly, it can be concluded that the Project will be less impactful on the transportation infrastructure when compared to the impacts that would be associated with full occupancy of the existing office building.

TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT

The directional distribution of generated trips to and from the Project site was determined based on a review of Journey-to-Work data obtained from the U.S. Census for persons residing in the Town of Brookline, and then refined based on existing traffic patterns within the study area during the commuter peak periods. This methodology is consistent with the residential nature of the Project and commuter traffic patterns during the peak hours. The general trip distribution for

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 21

the Project is graphically depicted on Figure 12. The additional traffic expected to be generated by the Project was assigned on the study area roadway network as shown on Figures 13 and 14.

FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES - BUILD CONDITION

The 2024 Build condition traffic volumes consist of the 2024 No-Build traffic volumes with the additional traffic expected to be generated by the Project added to them. The 2024 Build weekday morning and evening peak-hour traffic-volumes are graphically depicted on Figures 15 and 16, respectively.

A summary of peak-hour projected traffic-volume increases outside of the study area that is the subject of this assessment is shown in Table 8. These volumes are based on the expected increases from the Project.

Table 8 PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC-VOLUME INCREASES

Traffic Volume Percent Increase Increase 2017 2024 2024 Over Over Location/Peak Hour Existing No-Build Build No-Build No-Build

Cypress Street, north of Davis Avenue: Weekday Morning 975 1,045 1,055 10 1.0 Weekday Evening 969 1,040 1,052 12 1.2

Cypress Street, south of Boylston Street: Weekday Morning 765 820 821 1 0.1 Weekday Evening 607 649 651 2 0.3

Boylston Street, east of Cypress Street: Weekday Morning 1,811 2,018 2,032 14 0.7 Weekday Evening 1,835 2,067 2,084 17 0.8

Boylston Street, west of Brington Road: Weekday Morning 2,376 2,623 2,629 6 0.3 Weekday Evening 2,380 2,653 2,662 9 0.3

Davis Street, east of Cypress Street: Weekday Morning 389 417 418 1 0.2 Weekday Evening 248 267 270 3 1.1

As shown in Table 8, Project-related traffic-volume increases outside of the study area relative to 2024 No-Build conditions are anticipated to range from 0.1 to 1.2 percent during the peak periods, with vehicle increases shown to range from 1 to 17 vehicles. Such increases are considered nominal when dispersed over the peak-hour and would not result in a material impact (increase) on motorist delays or vehicle queuing outside of the immediate study area that is the subject of this assessment.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 22 Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Not To Scale R:\7574\7574nt10.dwg, 6/19/2017 11:01:28 AM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Not To Scale R:\7574\7574nt11.dwg, 6/19/2017 11:02:01 AM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Not To Scale R:\7574\7574nt12.dwg, 6/19/2017 11:02:19 AM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. Not To Scale R:\7574\7574nt13.dwg, 6/19/2017 11:02:35 AM Transportation Impact Assessment - Proposed Residential Development - Brookline, Massachusetts

SITE

Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. Not To Scale R:\7574\7574nt14.dwg, 6/19/2017 11:02:55 AM

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS

Measuring existing and future traffic volumes quantifies traffic flow within the study area. To assess quality of flow, roadway capacity and vehicle queue analyses were conducted under Existing, No-Build and Build traffic volume conditions. Capacity analyses provide an indication of how well the roadway facilities serve the traffic demands placed upon them, with vehicle queue analyses providing a secondary measure of the operational characteristics of an intersection or section of roadway under study.

METHODOLOGY

Levels of Service

A primary result of capacity analyses is the assignment of level of service to traffic facilities under various traffic-flow conditions.9 The concept of level of service is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and their perception by motorists and/or passengers. A level-of-service definition provides an index to quality of traffic flow in terms of such factors as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety.

Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility. They are given letter designations from A to F, with level-of-service (LOS) A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing congested or constrained operating conditions.

Since the level of service of a traffic facility is a function of the traffic flows placed upon it, such a facility may operate at a wide range of levels of service, depending on the time of day, day of week, or period of year.

9The capacity analysis methodology is based on the concepts and procedures presented in the Highway Capacity Manual; Transportation Research Board; Washington, DC; 2010.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 23

Signalized Intersections

The six levels of service for signalized intersections may be described as follows:

• LOS A describes operations with very low control delay; most vehicles do not stop at all.

• LOS B describes operations with relatively low control delay. However, more vehicles stop than LOS A.

• LOS C describes operations with higher control delays. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping.

• LOS D describes operations with control delay in the range where the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.

• LOS E describes operations with high control delay values. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.

• LOS F describes operations with high control delay values that often occur with over- saturation. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels.

Levels of service for signalized intersections were calculated using the Percentile Delay Method implemented as a part of the Synchro™ 8 software as required by MassDOT. The Percentile Delay Method assesses the effects of signal type, timing, phasing, and progression; vehicle mix; and geometrics on “percentile” delay. Level-of-service designations are based on the criterion of percentile delay per vehicle and is a measure of: i) driver discomfort; ii) motorist frustration; and iii) fuel consumption; and includes a uniform delay based on percentile volumes using a Poisson arrival pattern, an initial queue move-up time, and a queue interaction delay that accounts for delays resulting from queues extending from adjacent intersections. Table 9 summarizes the relationship between level-of-service and percentile delay, and uses the same numerical delay thresholds as the HCM method. The tabulated percentile delay criterion may be applied in assigning level-of-service designations to individual lane groups, to individual intersection approaches, or to entire intersections.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 24

Table 9 LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Percentile Delay Level of Service Per Vehicle (Seconds)

A <10.0 B 10.1 to 20.0 C 20.1 to 35.0 D 35.1 to 55.0 E 55.1 to 80.0 F >80.0

Unsignalized Intersections

The six levels of service for unsignalized intersections may be described as follows:

• LOS A represents a condition with little or no control delay to minor street traffic.

• LOS B represents a condition with short control delays to minor street traffic.

• LOS C represents a condition with average control delays to minor street traffic.

• LOS D represents a condition with long control delays to minor street traffic.

• LOS E represents operating conditions at or near capacity level, with very long control delays to minor street traffic.

• LOS F represents a condition where minor street demand volume exceeds capacity of an approach lane, with extreme control delays resulting.

The levels of service of unsignalized intersections are determined by application of a procedure described in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.10 Level of service is measured in terms of average control delay. Mathematically, control delay is a function of the capacity and degree of saturation of the lane group and/or approach under study and is a quantification of motorist delay associated with traffic control devices such as traffic signals and STOP signs. Control delay includes the effects of initial deceleration delay approaching a STOP sign, stopped delay, queue move-up time, and final acceleration delay from a stopped condition. Definitions for level of service at unsignalized intersections are also given in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. Table 10 summarizes the relationship between level of service and average control delay for two- way stop controlled and all-way stop controlled intersections.

10Highway Capacity Manual; Transportation Research Board; Washington, DC; 2010.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 25

Table 10 LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONSa

Level-Of-Service by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Average Control Delay v/c ≤ 1.0 v/c > 1.0 (Seconds Per Vehicle)

A F ≤10.0 B F 10.1 to 15.0 C F 15.1 to 25.0 D F 25.1 to 35.0 E F 35.1 to 50.0 F F >50.0

aSource: Highway Capacity Manual; Transportation Research Board; Washington, DC; 2010; page 19-2.

Vehicle Queue Analysis

Vehicle queue analyses are a direct measurement of an intersection’s ability to process vehicles under various traffic control and volume scenarios and lane use arrangements. The vehicle queue analysis was performed using the Synchro™ intersection capacity analysis software which is based upon the methodology and procedures presented in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The Synchro™ vehicle queue analysis methodology is a simulation based model which reports the number of vehicles that experience a delay of six seconds or more at an intersection. For signalized intersections, Synchro™ reports both the average (50th percentile) the 95th percentile vehicle queue. For unsignalized intersections, Synchro™ reports the 95th percentile vehicle queue. Vehicle queue lengths are a function of the capacity of the movement under study and the volume of traffic being processed by the intersection during the analysis period. The 95th percentile vehicle queue is the vehicle queue length that will be exceeded only 5 percent of the time, or approximately three minutes out of 60 minutes during the peak one hour of the day (during the remaining 57 minutes, the vehicle queue length will be less than the 95th percentile queue length).

ANALYSIS RESULTS

Level-of-service and vehicle queue analyses were conducted for 2017 Existing, 2024 No-Build and 2024 Build conditions for the intersections within the study area. The results of the intersection capacity and vehicle queue analyses are summarized in Tables 11 and 12. The detailed analysis results are presented in the Appendix.

The following is a summary of the level-of-service and vehicle queue analyses for the intersections within the study area. For context, we note that an LOS of “D” or better is generally defined as “acceptable” operating conditions.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 26

Signalized Intersections

As can be seen in Table 11, with the exception of the intersection of Boylston Street at Cypress Street, all movements at the signalized study area intersections were shown to operate at LOS C or better during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours under 2017 Existing, 2024 No-Build and 2024 Build conditions. The Boylston Street/Cypress Street intersection was shown to operate at or over capacity (defined as LOS “E” or “F”, respectively) during one or both peak hours independent of the Project. Project-related impacts at the signalized study area intersections were identified as follows:

Cypress Street/Tappan Street – No change in LOS or vehicle queuing over No-Build conditions. Project-related impacts were defined as a predicted increase in overall average motorist delay of 0.1 seconds during the weekday morning peak-hour.

Cypress Street/Davis Avenue – No change in LOS or vehicle queuing over No-Build conditions. Project-related impacts were defined as a predicted increase in overall average motorist delay of 0.1 seconds during both the weekday morning and evening peak-hours.

Boylston Street/Cypress Street – A 6.3 second increase in overall average motorist delay over No-Build conditions resulting in a change in overall LOS during the weekday morning peak-hour from LOS E to LOS F. During the weekday evening peak-hour, the overall LOS was shown to be maintained at LOS E with the addition of Project-related traffic. It was noted that several movements operate at LOS F with extended residual vehicle queuing during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours independent of the Project. Vehicle queues at the intersection were predicted to increase by up to two (2) vehicles as a result of the Project. The Project proponent has committed to the implementation of specific improvements at this intersection which are defined in the Recommendations section of this assessment and are designed to address the Project’s impact.

Unsignalized Intersections

As can be seen in Table 12, with the exception of the Brington Road approach to Cypress Street, all movements at the unsignalized study area intersections were shown to operate at LOS C or better during the peak hours with the addition of Project-related traffic. Project-related impacts at the unsignalized study area intersections were identified as follows:

Cypress Street/Brington Road – All movements from the Brington Road approach to Cypress Street were shown to operate at LOS E during the weekday morning peak-hour and at LOS D during the weekday evening peak-hour under 2017 Existing and 2024 No-Build conditions. Under 2024 Build conditions, with the addition of Project-related traffic, operating conditions for the Brington Road approach were shown to degrade from LOS E to LOS F during the weekday morning peak-hour as a result of an increase in average motorist delay of approximately 21 seconds, and from LOS D to LOS E during the weekday evening peak-hour as a result of an increase in average motorist delay of approximately 6.1 seconds. Vehicle queues were predicted to increase by 2 vehicles during the weekday morning peak-hour (from 1 vehicle to 3 vehicles) and by 1 vehicle during the weekday evening peak-hour (from 1 vehicle to 2 vehicles).

It should be noted that motorist delays and vehicle queuing on the Brington Road approach to Cypress Street are directly related to queuing on the Cypress Street approach to Boylston Street. Further, observance of the “Do Not Block” signs and pavement markings on Cypress Street at

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 27

Brington Road allows motorists to exit Brington Road during the peak periods when vehicle queues on Cypress Street extended to and beyond the intersection.

Boylston Street/Brington Road – No change in LOS or vehicle queueing predicted to occur over No-Build conditions, with all movements continuing to operate at LOS C or better with negligible vehicle queueing with the addition of Project-related traffic. Project-related impacts were defined as an increase in average motorist delay of up to 0.2 seconds.

Brington Road/Project Site Driveway – All movements at the Project site driveway intersection with Brington Road were shown to operate at LOS A during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours with negligible vehicle queueing predicted.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 28

Table 11 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE AND VEHICLE QUEUE SUMMARY

2017 Existing 2024 No-Build 2024 Build Queued Queue Queue Signalized Intersection/Peak-hour/Movement V/Ca Delayb LOSc 50th/95th V/C Delay LOS 50th/95th V/C Delay LOS 50th/95th

Cypress Street at Tappan Street Weekday Morning: Tappan Street EB LT 0.67 32.6 C 5/8 0.70 30.2 C 5/8 0.0 30.2 C 5/8 Tappan Street EB RT 0.26 6.1 A 0/2 0.27 6.0 A 0/2 0.27 6.0 A 0/2 Cypress Street NB TH 0.54 10.2 B 6/10 0.50 11.2 B 7/11 0.59 11.4 B 7/11 Cypress Street SB TH 0.42 4.5 A 2/2 0.45 4.8 A 2/2 0.45 4.8 A 2/2 Overall -- 12.5 B -- -- 12.5 B -- -- 12.6 B -- Weekday Evening: Tappan Street EB LT 0.39 25.9 C 2/4 0.41 25.9 C 2/4 0.41 25.9 C 2/4 Tappan Street EB RT 0.24 7.5 A 0/1 0.25 7.5 A 0/1 0.25 7.5 A 0/1 Cypress Street NB TH 0.39 5.7 A 4/7 0.42 6.1 A 4/8 0.42 6.1 A 4/8 Cypress Street SB TH 0.31 2.1 A 1/2 0.34 2.1 A 1/2 0.34 2.2 A 1/2 Overall -- 6.7 A -- -- 6.8 A -- -- 6.8 A -- Cypress Street at Davis Avenue Weekday Morning: Davis Avenue WB LT/TH/RT 0.47 28.3 C 2/3 0.50 28.7 C 2/4 0.50 28.7 C 2/4 Cypress Street NB LT 0.16 2.7 A 1/1 0.18 2.8 A 1/1 0.18 2.8 A 1/1 Cypress Street NB TH/RT 0.69 7.0 A 2/6 0.74 8.7 A 3/6 0.75 9.0 A 3/6 Cypress Street SB LT/TH/RT 0.45 12.0 B 5/7 0.49 12.6 B 5/8 0.49 12.7 B 5/8 Overall -- 10.1 B -- -- 11.3 B -- -- 11.4 B -- Weekday Evening: Davis Avenue WB LT/TH/RT 0.46 27.4 C 2/4 0.49 28.1 C 2/4 0.50 28.2 C 2/4 Cypress Street NB LT 0.10 3.0 A 1/1 0.11 3.1 A 1/1 0.12 3.1 A 1/1 Cypress Street NB TH/RT 0.52 5.0 A 4/5 0.56 5.3 A 4/5 0.56 5.3 A 4/5 Cypress Street SB LT/TH/RT 0.39 10.2 B 5/8 0.45 11.9 B 5/8 0.46 12.0 B 5/8 Overall -- 9.0 A -- -- 9.8 A -- -- 9.9 A --

See notes at end of table.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 29

Table 11 (Continued) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE AND VEHICLE QUEUE SUMMARY

2017 Existing 2024 No-Build 2024 Build Queued Queue Queue Signalized Intersection/Peak-hour/Movement V/Ca Delayb LOSc 50th/95th V/C Delay LOS 50th/95th V/C Delay LOS 50th/95th

Boylston Street at Cypress Street Weekday Morning: Boylston Street EB LT 0.95 >80.0 F 11/20 1.04 >80.0 F 14/22 1.05 >80.0 F 14/22 Boylston Street EB TH/RT 0.76 35.4 D 19/22 0.83 38.6 D 23/26 0.83 38.5 D 23/26 Boylston Street WB LT 0.42 74.1 E 2/4 0.45 76.8 E 2/4 0.45 76.8 E 2/4 Boylston Street WB TH/RT 0.83 50.0 D 16/19 0.86 51.7 D 18/22 0.86 51.8 D 18/22 Cypress Street NB LT/TH/RT 1.12 >80.0 F 10/15 1.30 >80.0 F 13/17 1.34 >80.0 F 13/17 Cypress Street SB LT/TH 0.74 65.1 E 8/13 0.91 >80.0 F 11/16 1.14 >80.0 F 12/18 Cypress Street SB RT 0.41 31.0 C 7/11 0.45 34.2 C 8/12 0.46 34.2 C 8/12 Overall -- 59.3 E -- -- 73.8 E -- -- 80.1 F -- Weekday Evening: Boylston Street EB LT 0.93 >80.0 F 12/21 1.04 >80.0 F 15/23 1.06 >80.0 F 15/23 Boylston Street EB TH/RT 0.48 25.9 C 11/14 0.53 27.6 C 13/16 0.53 27.6 C 13/16 Boylston Street WB LT 0.53 78.2 E 3/5 0.58 >80.0 F 3/5 0.58 >80.0 F 3/5 Boylston Street WB TH/RT 0.85 49.1 D 18/23 0.93 56.7 E 25/28 0.94 57.9 E 23/29 Cypress Street NB LT/TH/RT 0.84 72.6 E 6/8 0.88 79.6 E 6/9 0.88 79.6 E 6/9 Cypress Street SB LT/TH 0.81 71.7 E 9/14 0.86 78.9 E 10/16 0.86 79.0 E 10/16 Cypress Street SB RT 0.37 31.0 C 6/9 0.40 33.1 C 7/10 0.40 33.2 C 7/10 Overall -- 50.5 D -- -- 57.8 E -- -- 59.0 E --

aVolume-to-capacity ratio. bPercentile delay per vehicle in seconds. cLevel-of-Service. dQueue length in vehicles. NB = northbound; SB = southbound; EB = eastbound; WB = westbound; LT = left-turning movements; TH = through movements; RT = right-turning movements.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 30

Table 12 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE AND VEHICLE QUEUE SUMMARY

2017 Existing 2024 No-Build 2024 Build

Unsignalized Intersection/ Queued Queue Queue Peak Hour/Movement Demanda Delayb LOSc 95th Demand Delay LOS 95th Demand Delay LOS 95th

Cypress Street at Brington Road Weekday Morning: Brington Road EB LT/TH/RT 18 40.2 E 1 20 49.7 E 1 40 >50.0 F 3 Driveway WB LT/TH/RT 15 31.2 D 1 15 35.0 E 1 15 36.6 E 1 Cypress Street NB LT/TH/RT 672 0.3 A 0 721 0.3 A 0 725 0.4 A 0 Cypress Street SB LT/TH/RT 450 0.0 A 0 483 0.0 A 0 485 0.0 A 0 Weekday Evening: Brington Road EB LT/TH/RT 25 29.6 D 1 27 33.9 D 1 39 40.0 E 2 Driveway WB LT/TH/RT 38 25.5 D 1 38 28.3 D 1 38 30.8 D 1 Cypress Street NB LT/TH/RT 582 0.2 A 0 623 0.2 A 0 641 0.4 A 0 Cypress Street SB LT/TH/RT 469 0.0 A 0 502 0.0 A 0 512 0.0 A 0

Boylston Street at Brington Road Weekday Morning: Boylston Street WB LT/TH 1,069 0.0 A 0 1,168 0.0 A 0 1,168 0.0 A 0 Brington Road SB RT 6 13.3 B 0 6 14.0 B 0 11 14.2 B 0 Weekday Evening: Boylston Street WB LT/TH 1,310 0.0 A 0 1,468 0.0 A 0 1,468 0.0 A 0 Brington Road SB RT 13 14.4 B 0 14 15.7 C 0 17 15.8 C 0

(See notes at end of table.)

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 31

Table 12 (Continued) UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE AND VEHICLE QUEUE SUMMARY

2017 Existing 2024 No-Build 2024 Build

Unsignalized Intersection/ Queued Queue Queue Peak Hour/Movement Demanda Delayb LOSc 95th Demand Delay LOS 95th Demand Delay LOS 95th

Brington Road at the Project site Driveway Weekday Morning: Brington Road EB LT/TH Project Site Driveway SB LT/RT ------20 0.0 A 0 Weekday Evening: ------26 8.9 A 0 Brington Road EB LT/TH Project Site Driveway SB LT/RT ------27 0.0 A 0 ------28 8.8 A 0

aDemand in vehicles per hour. bAverage control delay per vehicle (in seconds). cLevel-of-Service. dQueue length in vehicles. NB = northbound; SB = southbound; EB = eastbound; WB = westbound; SEB = southeastbound; LT = left-turning movements; TH = through movements; RT = right-turning movements.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 32

PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE AND TRANSIT IMPACTS

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE IMPACTS

Pedestrian Impacts

The Project is expected to generate approximately 42 pedestrian trips on an average weekday (two-way, 24-hour volume), with 3 pedestrian trips expected during the weekday morning peak- hour and 4 pedestrian trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour. As documented as a part of this assessment, sidewalks are provided continuously along both sides of the study area roadways, with marked crosswalks provided for crossing one or more approaches at the study intersections. The crossings at the signalized study area intersections are included as a part of the traffic signal system at the intersections (pedestrian pushbuttons, signal indications and phasing are provided for the crossings).

The majority of the pedestrian activity within the study area is associated with the MBTA Brookline Hills Station on the Green Line subway system which is located off Tappan Street and immediately north of the Project site. Pedestrian crossing volumes at the Brington Road/ Cypress Street intersection were observed to range from 258 crossings during the weekday morning peak-hour to 173 crossings during the weekday evening peak-hour. Assuming that the majority of the transit trips associated with the Project will be oriented to/from Brookline Hills Station and that residents will walk to/from the station, the Project would be expected to add approximately 20 pedestrian trips to the Cypress Street sidewalk during the weekday morning peak-hour (17 transit riders and 3 pedestrian trips) and 28 pedestrian trips during the weekday evening peak-hour (24 transit riders and 4 pedestrian trips). These increases are relatively minor when dispersed over the peak hours and can reasonably be accommodated by the existing pedestrian infrastructure. It important to note that pedestrian access to Brookline Hills Station from the Project site does not require pedestrians to cross an intersecting roadway. That being said, specific recommendations for improvements to the sidewalks along the Project site frontage and at the pedestrian crossings at the Cypress Street/Brington Road and Cypress Street/ Tappan Street intersections are proposed in conjunction with the Project and are defined in the Recommendations section of this assessment.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 33

Bicycle Impacts

The Project is expected to generate approximately 40 bicycle trips on an average weekday (two- way, 24-hour volume), with 3 bicycle trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour and 4 bicycle trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour. Marked bicycle lanes and/or “sharrow” pavement markings are provided along Cypress Street within the study area, with portions of Boylston Street providing sufficient width (combined travel lane and paved shoulder) to support bicycle travel in a shared traveled-way configuration. Bicycle activity within the study area was found to be relatively modest, with bi-directional bicycle volumes found to range from approximately 2 to 20 bicyclists during the peak hours. The additional bicycle trips associated with the Project are relatively minor (3 to 4 peak-hour trips) and can be accommodated by the existing bicycle accommodations within the study area in a safe and efficient manner.

TRANSIT (PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION) IMPACTS

The Project is expected to generate approximately 246 transit trips on an average weekday (two- way, 24-hour volume), with 17 transit trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour and 24 transit trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour. The majority of the transit trips that are expected be generated by the Project are expected to made by way of the MBTA Green Line subway system and accessed from Brookline Hills Station, which is located immediately north of the Project site and within a 2-minute walking distance. The additional peak-hour load on the Green Line from the Project is expected to be 17 additional riders during the weekday morning peak-hour (14 inbound and 3 outbound) and 24 additional riders during the weekday evening peak-hour (8 inbound and 16 outbound).

The MBTA operates 42 cars on the Green Line D Branch during both the weekday morning and evening peak service periods (7:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM, respectively) , which have a seating capacity of 46, a service policy capacity11 of 101 riders and a “crush capacity” of 269 riders. The “crush capacity” is the maximum number of transit riders that can be accommodated by the service or vehicle and exceeds the service policy capacity standards defined in the MBTA’s Service Delivery Policy.12 Individual trips or vehicles can exceed the service capacity; however, the average loading should continue to be within the service capacity standard.

Applying the capacity standards to the Green Line D Branch results in a service policy capacity of 4,242 riders during the weekday morning and evening peak service periods (42 cars x 101 riders per car), and a “crush capacity” of 11,298 riders (42 cars x 269 riders per car). This capacity is sufficient to accommodate the modest increase in peak-hour ridership that is expected as a result of the Project (17 additional riders during the weekday morning peak-hour and 24 additional riders during the weekday evening peak-hour).

11 The service capacity standards are defined in the MBTA’s Service Delivery Policy which specifies vehicle loading standards and levels of crowding that are deemed “acceptable” by time period and transit mode. 12 Service Delivery Policy; Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority; June 2, 2010.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 34

SIGHT DISTANCE EVALUATION

Sight distance measurements were performed at the Project site driveway intersection with Brington Road and at the intersection of Cypress Street at Brington Road in accordance with MassDOT and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)13 requirements. Both stopping sight distance (SSD) and intersection sight distance (ISD) measurements were performed. In brief, SSD is the distance required by a vehicle traveling at the design speed of a roadway, on wet pavement, to stop prior to striking an object in its travel path. ISD or corner sight distance (CSD) is the sight distance required by a driver entering or crossing an intersecting roadway to perceive an on-coming vehicle and safely complete a turning or crossing maneuver with on-coming traffic. In accordance with AASHTO standards, if the measured ISD is at least equal to the required SSD value for the appropriate design speed, the intersection can operate in a safe manner. Table 13 presents the measured SSD and ISD at the subject intersections.

13 A Policy on Geometric Design of Highway and Streets, 6th Edition; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO); Washington D.C.; 2011.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 35

Table 13 SIGHT DISTANCE MEASUREMENTSa

Feet Recommended Minimum Desirable Intersection/Sight Distance Measurement (SSD) (ISD)b Measured

Brington Road at the West Project Driveway Stopping Sight Distance: Brington Road approaching from the east 115 -- 143c Brington Road approaching from the west 115 -- 194 Intersection Sight Distance: Looking to the east from the west Project driveway 115 195/225 118/143d Looking to the west from the west Project driveway 115 195/225 117

Cypress Street at the Brington Road Stopping Sight Distance: Cypress Street approaching from the north 155 -- 265 Cypress Street approaching from the south 155 -- 100e Intersection Sight Distance: Looking to the north from the Brington Road 155 240/280 265 Looking to the south from the Brington Road 155 240/280 100e

aRecommended minimum values obtained from: A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Edition; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO); 2011; and based on an approach speed of 25 mph along both Cypress Street and 20 mph along Brington Road. bValue shown is the intersection sight distance for a vehicle turning right/left exiting a roadway or driveway under STOP control such that motorists approaching the intersection on the major street should not need to adjust their travel speed to less than 70 percent of their initial approach speed. cClear line of sight is provided to/from Cypress Street. dSight line that will be provided with the relocation of parking within the Project site as a part of the Project. eClear line of sight is provided to/from Boylston Street.

As can be seen in Table 13, the available lines of sight at the intersection of Brington Road at the Project site driveway were found to exceed the required minimum distance to function in a safe manner (SSD) based on a 20 mph approach speed along Brington Road, which is consistent with the measured 85th percentile vehicle travel speed (19 mph).

Lines of sight to/from the north along Cypress Street at the Cypress Street/Brington Road intersection were found to exceed the required minimum distance for safe operation based on a 25 mph approach speed, which is consistent with the posted speed limit and slightly above the average measured 85th percentile vehicle travel speed (23 mph). Clear line of sight is provided to/from Boylston Street at the intersection. The presence of vehicle queues from the Boylston Street/Cypress Street intersection during the peak periods reduces the available sight distances; however, the relatively slow travel speeds (less than 25 mph) and the “Do Not Block” pavement markings serve to allow the intersection to function in a safe manner, as evidenced by the low incidence of motor vehicle crashes at the intersection.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 36

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

VAI has completed a detailed assessment of the potential impacts on the transportation infrastructure associated with the proposed construction of a 99-unit residential apartment community to be known as Cypress Apartments at Brookline Hills and located at 107-111 Cypress Street in Brookline, Massachusetts. The following specific areas have been evaluated as they relate to the Project: i) access requirements; ii) potential off-site improvements; and iii) safety considerations; under existing and future conditions, both with and without the Project. Based on this assessment, we have concluded the following with respect to the Project:

1. Using trip-generation statistics published by the ITE14 and with adjustment to account for the use of public transportation and pedestrian and bicycle trips, the Project is expected to generate approximately 434 automobile trips, 246 transit trips, 42 pedestrian trips and 40 bicycle trips on an average weekday (two-way, 24-hour volumes), with 32 automobile trips, 17 transit trips, 3 pedestrian trips and 3 bicycle trips expected during the weekday morning peak-hour, and 43 automobile trips, 24 transit trips, 4 pedestrian trips and 4 bicycle trips expected during the weekday evening peak-hour;

3. The Project will not have a significant impact (increase) on motorist delays or vehicle queuing over Existing or anticipated future conditions without the Project (No-Build conditions), with the majority of the movements at the study intersections shown to operate at LOS “D” or better under all analysis conditions where an LOS of “D” or better is defined as “acceptable” operating conditions;

14 Ibid 1.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 37

7. The existing pedestrian, bicycle and public transportation accommodations within the study area are sufficient to accommodate the additional trips that are expected to result from the Project;

8. No apparent safety deficiencies were noted with respect to the motor vehicle crash history at the study intersections; and

RECOMMENDATIONS

Project Access

 The proposed access to the Project site and internal circulating roadways should be a minimum of 20-feet in width or as required to accommodate the turning and maneuvering

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 38

requirements of the largest anticipated responding emergency vehicle as defined by the Town of Brookline Fire Department.

 Where perpendicular parking is provided, the drive aisle behind the parking should be a minimum of 23-feet in order to allow for vehicle maneuvering.

 Vehicles exiting the Project site should be placed under STOP-sign control with a marked STOP-line provided.

 All signs and pavement markings to be installed within the Project site shall conform to the applicable standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).15

 Sidewalks along the Project site frontage on Cypress Street and Brington Road should be reconstructed as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

 The entrances of the building have been designed to provide access to the sidewalks along both Cypress Street and Brington Road.

 Marked crosswalks with ADA compliant wheelchair ramps should be provided at all pedestrian crossings within the Project site.

 Signs and landscaping to be installed as a part of the Project within intersection sight triangle areas should be designed and maintained so as not to restrict lines of sight.

 Snow windrows within sight triangle areas shall be promptly removed where such accumulations would exceed 2.5 feet in height.

 Consideration should be given to installing electric vehicle charging stations within the Project site and to accommodating the staging of car-sharing vehicles (ZipCar or similar).

Off-Site

Boylston Street at Cypress Street

The signalized intersection of Boylston Street at Cypress Street was shown to operate at or over capacity (defined as LOS “E” or “F”, respectively) with extended vehicle queuing during one or both peak hours independent of the Project. In an effort to improve operating conditions at the intersection and to address the relatively minor impact of the Project (predicted increase in vehicle queueing of up to two (2) vehicles), the Project proponent will design and implement an optimal traffic signal timing and phasing plan for the intersection, to include a review of the yellow and “all-red” clearance intervals and pedestrian crossing times. As can be seen in Table 14, With implementation of these improvements, overall operating conditions at the intersection were shown to be maintained at LOS E during both the weekday morning and evening peak hours with the addition of Project-related traffic (no change over No-Build conditions).

15 Ibid 2.

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 39

Cypress Street at Brington Road

1. Reconstruct the wheelchair ramps to comply with ADA standards; and

These improvements will be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project and subject to receipt of all necessary rights, permits and approvals.

Cypress Street at Tappan Street

Transportation Demand Management

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 40

 Information regarding public transportation services, maps, schedules and fare information will be posted in a central location and/or otherwise made available to residents;

 Pedestrian accommodations have been incorporated within the Project site that link the proposed building to the sidewalk infrastructure along both Cypress Street and Brington Road; and

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 41

Table 14 MITIGATED SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE AND VEHICLE QUEUE SUMMARY

2024 No-Build 2024 Build 2024 Build with Mitigation Queued Queue Queued Signalized Intersection/Peak-hour/Movement V/Ca Delayb LOSc 50th/95th V/C Delay LOS 50th/95th V/Ca Delayb LOSc 50th/95th

Boylston Street at Cypress Street Weekday Morning: Boylston Street EB LT 1.04 >80.0 F 14/22 1.05 >80.0 F 14/22 1.03 >80.0 F 14/21 Boylston Street EB TH/RT 0.83 38.6 D 23/26 0.83 38.6 D 23/26 0.85 41.6 D 24/27 Boylston Street WB LT 0.45 76.8 E 2/4 0.45 76.8 E 2/4 0.46 77.6 E 2/4 Boylston Street WB TH/RT 0.86 51.7 D 18/22 0.86 51.8 D 18/22 0.90 58.3 E 19/23 Cypress Street NB LT/TH/RT 1.30 >80.0 F 13/17 1.34 >80.0 F 13/17 1.21 >80.0 F 12/16 Cypress Street SB LT/TH 0.91 >80.0 F 11/16 1.14 >80.0 F 12/18 0.97 >80.0 F 10/17 Cypress Street SB RT 0.45 34.2 C 8/12 0.46 34.2 C 8/12 0.43 32.1 C 8/11 Overall -- 73.8 E -- -- >80.0 F -- -- 72.0 E -- Weekday Evening: Boylston Street EB LT 1.04 >80.0 F 15/23 1.06 >80.0 F 15/23 1.06 >80.0 F 15/23 Boylston Street EB TH/RT 0.53 27.6 C 13/16 0.53 27.6 C 13/16 0.54 28.1 C 13/16 Boylston Street WB LT 0.58 >80.0 F 3/5 0.58 >80.0 F 3/5 0.55 79.4 E 3/5 Boylston Street WB TH/RT 0.93 56.7 E 25/28 0.94 57.9 E 23/29 0.94 57.9 E 23/29 Cypress Street NB LT/TH/RT 0.88 79.6 E 6/9 0.88 79.6 E 6/9 0.88 79.6 E 6/9 Cypress Street SB LT/TH 0.86 78.9 E 10/16 0.86 79.0 E 10/16 0.86 79.0 E 10/16 Cypress Street SB RT 0.40 33.1 C 7/10 0.40 33.2 C 7/10 0.40 33.2 C 7/10 Overall -- 57.8 E -- -- 59.0 E -- -- 59.0 E --

G:\7574 Brookline, MA\Reports\Cypress Apartments TIA 06_17.docx 42