Author: WalkMassachusetts

SomervilleWalks Map

SomervilleWalks Map

By |

Somerville is a compact city. Neighborhoods are close together, retail areas easy to find, and sidewalks go everywhere.

Less than a 10 minute walk:

  • Sullivan Sq. to Assembly Sq.
  • Inman Sq. to Union Sq.
  • Tufts University to Ball Sq.
  • Davis Square to Powderhouse Circle

Less than a 15 minute walk:

  • Davis Sq. to Porter Sq.
  • Teele Sq. to Davis Sq.
  • Winter Hill to Mystic River
  • Sullivan Sq. to Foss Park
  • Union Sq. to City Hall

Less than a 25 minute walk:

  • Davis Sq. to Alewife
  • Union Sq. to Lechmere Stn
  • Magoun Sq. to Foss Park
  • Sullivan Sq. to Union Sq.
Click for “SomervilleWalks Map” PDF
Haverhill-Merrimack River Walkway Comment Letter

Haverhill-Merrimack River Walkway Comment Letter

By |

October 1, 2007

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Expanded Environmental Notification Form (EENF)
Haverhill-Merrimack River Walkway
MEPA # 14097

Dear Secretary Bowles:

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state – encouraging walking, helping with advocacy for pedestrian improvements and sponsoring walks. We have extensive experience in helping residents and local government with pedestrian issues, safe routes to school and safer street crossings and sidewalks. We have reviewed the ENF for the Haverhill- Merrimack River Walkway proposed by the City of Haverhill, and offer the following comments.

The proposal calls for a 2.5 mile walkway circling the Merrimack River on both banks between the Upper County/Comeau Bridge and the Basiliere Bridge in the center of Haverhill. The proposal will provide access to the river in areas where the downtown area is visually and physically walled off from the river by the seawall built in 1935. The proposed walkway connects to the Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority bus station, downtown bus stops and the Haverhill MBTA commuter rail station. It is consistent with Haverhill’s ongoing efforts to improve the riverfront and with the discussions generated by the EOEEA’s UrbanRiver Visions Charette, held in Haverhill in March 2007. The project is also consistent with the Merrimack Valley Regional Planning Commission 2006 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), and the 2006 Priority Regional Economic Development Actions List.

The proposed walkway will take advantage of the improvements to the river water quality resulting from intensive pollution abatement efforts. It also builds on increased public awareness of and interest in the river. On the north side of the river, the walkway will begin at the existing Riverfront Park walkway and will extend it, with a limited portion at grade and behind a 3-high seawall, and an extension by means of a 12-foot wide boardwalk atop the seawall, cantilevered 10 feet over the water. On the south side of the river, the walkway will be a 10-ft paved pathway with a 2-ft gravel border on each side to allow storm water infiltration. The south side walkway may be located on an abandoned rail line, which the city is negotiating to purchase.

WalkBoston heartily salutes the city for undertaking this project that will help make downtown Haverhill a destination for recreational walkers. The project is imaginative in its proposal to cantilever construction over the river. The project, to be built in stages, will ultimately provide a valuable resource to the city and the region. This is precisely the type of project that should be copied throughout the Commonwealth.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal.

 

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Taunton High School, Parker Middle School, New Pole Elementary Additions and Renovations Comment Letter

Taunton High School, Parker Middle School, New Pole Elementary Additions and Renovations Comment Letter

By |

September 28, 2007

Secretary Ian A. Bowles
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Comments on Taunton High School and Parker Middle School Additions and Renovations/New Pole Elementary School Environmental Notification Form

EOEA # 14099

Dear Mr. Bowles:

We have reviewed the ENF for the proposed project at the site of the existing Taunton High School. The 105-acre site includes the existing High School and Parker Middle School Building. The proposal calls for renovation and additions to the existing buildings and the addition of the new Pole Elementary School. When completed, the High School/Middle School building will have 3200 students and 660 staff and the Pole Elementary School will have 770 students and 87 staff. We are pleased that the city is making investments in this relatively centrally located facility that can be accessed on foot by many students.

We received detailed site plans from the proponent, showing facilities for walking – sidewalks, paths and plazas at the entrance to major facilities. We were impressed that new pedestrian access to the renovated High School/Middle School is a major portion of the renovation plan. In particular there are plazas at the main entrances and sidewalks extending out to the frontage on Williams Street and on Hon. Gordon M. Owen Riverway. Sidewalks surround the new “green” and line the loop road in front of the building. Access from parking lots into the main entrances connect to these walkways.

We do not know from the ENF if pedestrian access off-site is included and hope that the city will make an effort to address off-site issues. The site is about a mile from the center of the city. Its central location suggests that it is accessible by walking for many students. Sidewalks along Williams Street and Owen Riverway already exist and some are being rebuilt as part of this project. Encouraging walkers may require special attention to crosswalks and pedestrian countdown crossing signals, for example, at the intersection of Williams Street and Owen Riverway.

On the site, we suggest that the plans be reviewed to assure that crosswalks are available in all principal pedestrian activity areas. The plans are a bit unclear about pedestrian access to tennis courts, playing fields and the stadium. While we hope that students will be discouraged from driving if they are within walking distance of the school, we also hope that the site improvements will ensure the safety of people who do drive. We note that the major parking area near the school entrance has sidewalks along each edge, and suggest that marked walkways across the parking areas be considered as an added safety feature for students. The principal parking area near the main entrance to the High School has only indirect pedestrian facilities. As a result, many walkers will cross diagonally on the lawn, a situation that could be remedied by installation of a diagonal walkway. We also suggest that sidewalks be provided between the High School/Middle School and other buildings on the site, such as the skating rink.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ENF.

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Green Line Extension Comment Letter

Green Line Extension Comment Letter

By |

September 7, 2007

Katherine Fichter
Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation katherine.fichter@eot.state.ma.us

Christine Kirby
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection christine.kirby@state.ma.us

Re: Green Line Extension
Dear Ms. Fichter and Ms. Kirby:

WalkBoston is Massachusetts’ leading pedestrian advocacy organization, and we are currently working with the City of Somerville on their innovative efforts to improve the health of their citizens through community-wide nutrition and physical activity programs. The City recently received international attention for these efforts, which are beginning to have measurable benefits for Somerville children. The State should do its part to vigorously support Somerville by following through on its commitment to extend the Green Line to Somerville and Medford.

Why should the Commonwealth promptly honor the commitment to construct the Green Line?

  • The project will serve the densest community in Massachusetts – one with a high proportion of low-income, minority and transit-dependent residents.
  • Somerville and Medford are poorly served by existing transit and suffer from poor air quality as a result of extremely high vehicle volumes and rail diesel fumes. As a result of this poor air quality, Somerville suffers from high rates of lung cancer and heart disease. Thus, the residents of Somerville bear the burden of rail impacts without the benefits of transit service.
  • Since 1990 the state has been legally obligated to provide this transit expansion – it is time to make good on that commitment.

    While we believe the state should vigorously pursue federal transit funds, such efforts should in no way slow progress on the Green Line extension.

    Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this important project. Sincerely,

    Wendy Landman
    Executive Director

Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Osborn Hills

Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Osborn Hills

By |

January 22, 2007

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Osborne Hills, Salem, MA

EOEA # 13965

Dear Mr. Bowles:

WalkBoston is delighted to have the proponent of Osborne Hills in Salem respond positively to our comments on the ENF for this project. After addressing certain comments satisfactorily in the DEIR, the proponent has modified aspects of the plan to incorporate these suggestions.

We would like to take this opportunity to review our comments and refine the observations in view of the ENF responses from the proponent. We request that the proponent respond to these issues as described below:

 

A.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 1 in the ENF has been satisfactorily answered. The proponent will be constructing sidewalks on both sides of all internal roadways – a commendable and very useful incorporation of physical facilities that will provide significant safety and convenience for pedestrians living in the community. We are very happy that this change was made by the proponent.

B.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 2 in the ENF suggested that on-site trails currently planned to be dead end should loop back into the path network. There are three such locations: Two are in the northeast corner of the site and connect to the site boundary and dead end there. A third loops into and through the grounds around the Water Storage Tank, ending at the site boundary. We continue to think it would improve the project to do so.

C.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 3 in the ENF referred to trail connections between the on-site trails and paths or sidewalks outside the property. No connections are indicated, although we remain hopeful that, at minimum, a pedestrian connection might be feasible at the site boundary where a proposed roadway ends in a cul-de-sac that abuts the end of Barcelona Avenue.

D.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 4 in the ENF has been satisfactorily answered. The proponent will use the irregular site topography to make trails interesting and challenging.

E.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 5 received a response that is discouraging. WalkBoston had hoped that on-site resident children might be able to walk to school – a feature that many suburban communities do not encourage. The response indicated that walking to school could not be accomplished because busing was likely to be available. Furthermore, Marlborough Road would have to be crossed by the children and the adjacent neighborhoods there are no sidewalks. We would hope that, the sidewalks being produced for the proponent’s site may show the way toward a neighborhood sidewalk network that allows children to walk to school.

F.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 6 did not receive a response in the DEIR. It suggested that the proponent try to show all pedestrian connections on the map as “actual” proposals rather than “potential.” The DEIR shows pathways along the west property line and a path connection at the northeast corner of the site as “potential” additions to the network. Both would add significantly to the ultimate network of paths and should be included in the build-out of this plan.

G.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 7 in the ENF has been satisfactorily answered. Small footbridges will be constructed as needed for wetland crossings.

H.   WalkBoston’s comment no. 8 in the ENF has been satisfactorily answered. The utility corridor is not a good alignment for walking paths.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this DEIR. Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner