Revere officials defend Route 1A roundabout plan as emergency‑access and park‑access fix; residents raise traffic and construction concerns

Revere City officials described a two‑phase plan to build a roundabout and a Gibson Park access road off Route 1A to speed emergency access to a new housing development and to add a separated pedestrian and bicycle path to the park. The presentation drew questions from neighbors about traffic cut‑throughs, the timing of park access (phase 2) and construction impacts.

Tom (Planning and Development) and Pete (project engineer, Howard/Stein‑Hudson) outlined the design: phase 1 is the roundabout and associated infrastructure in the state highway right‑of‑way and requires a MassDOT construction access permit; phase 2 is the park access road that will require an Article 97 review if it is deemed a taking of parkland. Tom said phase 1 plans are at roughly 75% design and the project team has submitted traffic studies and MEPA documentation.

Nut graf: City staff say the roundabout will shorten emergency response times to the adjacent Redgate development by about four minutes and create a wider, separated shared‑use path under the bridge that staff described as safer than the current narrow sidewalk; residents repeatedly questioned whether the design would make it easier for nonlocal drivers to cut through neighborhood streets and whether phased implementation would temporarily deliver access to the new development without the promised park access.

Tom said the roundabout design closes a “slip lane” that residents had used to speed onto a laneway and adds sidewalks and a stop movement to slow turning traffic. He said the chosen alternative was the only one accepted by the state among four options the city presented. Pete explained engineers will reallocate existing pavement and hardscape under the bridge to widen the pedestrian and bicycle space “without damaging the structure,” and the team will improve lighting beneath the underpass.

Residents pressed several points: how Riverside residents will reach the park once the slip lane is closed; whether the planned access road for the park (phase 2) will be approved under Article 97; how construction staging will affect on‑street parking and neighborhood circulation; how contractors’ workers will be staged and where they will park during construction; and whether overnight or evening shifts will be used to minimize daytime traffic impacts.

Tom said the city anticipates phased construction and intends to minimize daytime detours by scheduling most lane closures overnight where feasible; he described an anticipated set of overnight 8‑hour shifts (non‑sequential) to limit disruption. He also said the city will require a contractor staging and parking plan and that, in some scenarios, the boatyard or Redgate property might be used for contractor staging subject to environmental and permitting constraints. He acknowledged the project will be disruptive during construction but said the long‑term design aims to improve pedestrian safety and emergency access.

On legal and permitting matters, staff said the park access road could trigger Article 97 (Massachusetts’ parkland protection) if it is classified as taking parkland; the city argued the project will add more compensated parkland — new tennis courts and expanded green space — so the net parkland is likely to increase. Tom said the Article 97 review and other state permits make phase 2 take longer, which is why the city separated the project into phase 1 (state right‑of‑way work) and phase 2 (city land/park work). He said both phases will proceed in parallel where possible but that the park road could not be constructed until required filings and approvals are complete.

Ending: Staff said the MEPA public comment period is open (materials and submission portal available on the MEPA website under the Route 1A project listing) and that planners will return to the community with construction phasing and scheduling details as the project moves toward bidding and permitting.