Category: Comment Letter

Comment Letter RE: MEPA 16015 Mystic River Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing

Comment Letter RE: MEPA 16015 Mystic River Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing

May 13, 2019

Kathleen Theoharides
Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge St., Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: MEPA 16015 Mystic River Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing

Dear Ms. Theoharides:

WalkBoston has worked closely with other community and advocacy groups in support of this proposed bridge over the Mystic River. Because of its critical location at the junction of several lengthy riverside paths, it is of regional significance as a key element in the area’s network of pedestrian and bicycle thoroughfares – a system of facilities that WalkBoston has long supported. The critical nature of the connection is magnified by its potential service as a major walkway between a high traffic generating facility (the casino in Everett) and public transportation (the Assembly Station in Somerville). This new walkway will provide a three- minute walk to public transit (as opposed to a twelve-minute existing walk) and encourage a reduced amount of vehicular traffic in the area.

The Casino operators have supported the proposed bridge with investments of $2,000,000 to date, and have committed to help with further capital funding. We are grateful for this assistance and hope that this provision of private funding will encourage the state to fund a portion of the capital costs, giving the project a higher priority than it now has.

We were surprised that the proposed bridge width has been reduced from 15 feet to 12 feet. Given the impending opening of the casino, the bridge will see a great deal of use by cyclists and walkers who need to share the limited space. Nearly all other pedestrian bridges recently built or under construction by MassDOT exceed this reduced width, adopting a standard that is 14′ or wider. We urge you to adopt the more generous standard that reflects the design standards for 21st century bike and pedestrian bridges. When it is constructed, the bridge will be the only safe, off-road non-vehicular connection between North Shore communities and Boston.

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell
Deputy Executive Director

Comment Letter Re: a car-free option for Memorial Drive Phase III

Comment Letter Re: a car-free option for Memorial Drive Phase III

Commissioner Leo Roy
Department of Conservation and Recreation

May 9, 2019
Dear Commissioner Roy,

As part of the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s Memorial Drive Phase III redesign between Eliot Bridge and the B.U. Boat House we ask that you consider a car-free option in the planning process.

As recently highlighted by Governor Baker’s Commission on the Future of Transportation, 40% of Massachusetts’ greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions come from transportation infrastructure and vehicles, half of which come from passenger vehicles alone. The pressing need to limit passenger vehicle trips, in concert with the City of Cambridge’s 1992 Vehicle Trip Reduction Ordinance, justify consideration for a car-free Memorial Drive.

This planning process allows the State a unique opportunity to enhance regional park access by connecting adjacent parks (Riverbend Park, John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Riverside City Park, Riverside Press Park, Magazine Beach, and others) to the Charles River. Creating truly safe and accessible connectivity between walking and biking facilities along the Charles River and adjacent neighborhoods will have lower positive impact then a car- free option. By limiting vehicle infrastructure, the State will be expanding space for new parkland and an expanded tree canopy. Limiting car access to Memorial Drive will align with ongoing climate resiliency initiatives by reducing GHG emissions, increasing green space, but also by establishing space for further flood mitigation, an ongoing issue near Magazine Beach and Micro Center.

This concept of a car-free Memorial Drive is not new, but a logical extension of the existing weekend Riverbend Park Street closures, which demonstrate the desire for this type of expansive riverfront parkland. While recognizing that over 1,000 vehicles use Memorial Drive during peak hours, we believe that ongoing transportation initiatives including the Green Line Extension, the Allston I-90 Multimodal Interchange, West Station, the Grand Junction path and regional rail concepts, and the MBTA’s Better Buses initiative will provide viable alternatives in the long-run, significantly reducing the need for Memorial Drive as a private vehicle throughway.

The existing sub-standard conditions of the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path along Memorial Drive currently have high usership. There are currently over 1,000 daily bike commuters and over 1,000 daily runners and pedestrians. The existing conditions do not provide safe accommodation for existing users, and with future expansion of the regions multi-use paths, including the Watertown-Cambridge Greenway and the Grand Junction Path, this section of paths will see increased daily users. Providing safe and reliable accommodations for sustainable transportation and recreation modes should be the highest priority of the DCR.

There is precedence for a project of this scope, as when a two-mile stretch of a busy highway along the Seine in Paris, France, was permanently closed to cars in 2016, and turned into a bicycle and pedestrian promenade. This type of project could prove to be similarly iconic for the Charles River.

This is a complicated project. We recommend, along with The Charles River Conservancy and Magazine Beach Partners that a task force or advisory group be created to help better inform decisions throughout the process. The groups listed on their letter can help you provide better transparency and inclusiveness in the project. While early in the planning phase it is important to consider this highly impactful, once in a lifetime opportunity to restore Cambridge’s public shoreline. Thank you for your consideration of this unique opportunity to prioritize climate resiliency and public health.

Sincerely,

Tony Lechuga, LivableStreets
David Read, Longwood Area Cyclists
Alex Auriema, Memorial Drive Bicycle Group
Nathanael Fillmore, Cambridge Bicycle Safety
Janie Katz-Christy, Green Streets Initiative
Steven Nutter, Green Cambridge
Becca Wolfson, Boston Cyclists Union
Brendan Kearney, WalkBoston

Comment Letter Re: Worcester Kelley Square Improvement Project

Comment Letter Re: Worcester Kelley Square Improvement Project

April 13, 2019

To: MassDOT Highway Division
10 Park Plaza, Suite 6340
Boston, MA 02116 kelleysqproj.worcester@dot.state.ma.us

Re: Worcester Kelley Square Improvement Project

To the Project Team,

On behalf of the LivableStreets Alliance Advocacy Committee and WalkBoston, we would like to provide you with some feedback regarding the Worcester Kelley Square Improvement Project, particularly in response to the design presented at the February 27, 2019 Public Meeting.

Overall, we think the project is moving in a very positive direction. In particular, we are very supportive of the hybrid roundabout, which uses less pavement than traditional signalized intersections and also creates a calmer, safer environment for all roadway users. We are also pleased about the attention that is being paid to placemaking and transforming Kelley Square into a place for people rather than just a place mainly for cars. However, we have some significant concerns about pedestrian safety and bicycle facilities in key portions of the project.

Please consider the following suggestions:

1. The roundabout and Madison St should be one lane in each direction rather than two.

We recognize that for traffic capacity reasons and to better accommodate large trucks, MassDOT has chosen to make the roundabout and Madison St two lanes in each direction. However, this has significant downsides:

Pedestrians face a double threat risk at every unsignalized crossing of more than one lane. ​While we agree that signals are not desirable at these locations, the double threat of a vehicle in one lane yielding to a pedestrian who is crossing while a vehicle in the second lane fails to yield is very real. In Boston, there have been multiple pedestrian fatalities on roads with this type of design in recent years. As such, the Boston Transportation Department is working to redesign these roadways with a single lane in each direction instead. It would be negligent for MassDOT to build more of these types of roads given the threat they pose to pedestrians.

A two-lane roundabout design is confusing for drivers, and will draw their attention away from pedestrians who may be crossing.​ With the current design, drivers must choose the correct lane prior to entering the roundabout. Given the multiple exits from the roundabout, it would not be surprising to see drivers choosing incorrectly, especially for those who are unfamiliar with the area. These drivers may then illegally change lanes within the roundabout. Furthermore, drivers who are entering the roundabout from either Harding St entrance or from Green St who wish to travel further around it will need to cross one or more lanes of roundabout traffic in order to do so. This is a very challenging maneuver to make, especially when traffic is heavy. All of these complex movements that a two-lane roundabout requires will draw drivers attention away from pedestrians (or bicyclists) who are crossing at various locations around the roundabout.

Providing two lanes in each direction on Madison St means that there is not room for appropriate bicycle facilities there.​ The proposed shared use paths along either side are an inappropriate facility for an urban street like Madison St, and room is needed to provide bicycle facilities that are separate from the sidewalk. (We will discuss this further below.)

Therefore, we would strongly urge MassDOT to consider a single lane roundabout and a single through lane in each direction on Madison St. This may have some negative impact on traffic capacity during peak times, however we think the safety benefits are well worth that tradeoff. Furthermore, we are confident that large trucks can be accommodated with a single lane roundabout by using mountable truck aprons in the center of the roundabout and at intersection corners, as well as recessed stop lines where needed​.​ Both of these elements are recommended by the MassDOT Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide.

2. Physically separated bike lanes should be provided around the roundabout, on Madison St, and on Vernon St

Around the roundabout, the current design proposes shared use paths. ​While shared use paths may be appropriate in some contexts, we feel strongly that this is not one of them. We recognize that it is often recommended practice to design for shared use around a roundabout, however, this may not work as well in urban areas with high pedestrian activity. We therefore ask that you provide physically separated bike lanes around the roundabout. This type of design was considered for Inman Square in Cambridge.

Here is an illustration of the Inman Square, Cambridge proposal. Note the mountable truck aprons in the center of the roundabout:

On Madison St, the current design proposes shared use paths in place of traditional sidewalks. As with the roundabout, we feel very strongly that this is not an appropriate context for shared use paths.​ Madison St is an urban street with buildings at the street edge, and especially once the nearby ballpark opens, will have significant pedestrian activity. Having pedestrians and bicycles share the same space in this type of environment is not desirable and will result in much conflict. We therefore recommend that protected bike lanes that are separate from the sidewalk be provided along Madison St. (A design similar to the contraflow protected bike lane on Harding St may be appropriate. Please refer to the MassDOT Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide for best practices.)

Lastly, the lack of any kind of bicycle facility on Vernon St is a big problem​, in our opinion. The current proposal contains a single through lane in each direction that is to be shared by bicycles and motor vehicles. This is not an acceptable design. There are a limited number of streets for which people bicycling can cross I-290, and it is essential that they all be safe and inviting for them to do so. Rather than providing a 4 lane cross section, we recommend a 3 lane cross section along with separated bike lanes.

Therefore, around the roundabout, and on Madison St and Vernon St, we urge MassDOT to use physically separated bike lanes for bicycle accommodation.​ The separated bike lanes should be designed with proper intersection treatments to keep bicycles, pedestrians, and motor vehicles separate. (Again, please refer to the MassDOT Separated Bike Lane Guide.) This is a perfect opportunity to demonstrate the excellent guidance that MassDOT has created for physically separated bike lanes, and for the City of Worcester to be at the cutting edge of safe and accessible streets for people of all ages and abilities.

Some examples from the guide:
Roundabout with separated bike lanes and mountable truck apron

Protected intersection of two major streets with mountable truck apron and recessed stop line

Protected intersection with side street and raised crossing

3. Use small curb radii and provide two curb ramps at all corners rather than a single apex ramp

There are some intersections that are part of this project that have large curb radii or where there only a single apex ramp is provided on certain corners (for example two of the corners at Millbury St and Endicott St.) This is not good for people in wheelchairs, as it points them into the street an an angle rather than in the desired direction of travel. ​We ask that you adjust the curbs at these corners to provide two ramps, one for each crossing.

Thank you for considering our comments as this project moves forward. Please feel free to contact me at any time if you have further questions or comments on our ideas.

Sincerely,

Charlie Denison
Board Member, LivableStreets Alliance

Wendy Landman
Executive Director, WalkBoston

WalkBoston testimony on traffic calming in Somerville

WalkBoston testimony on traffic calming in Somerville

Below is a written version of WalkBoston’s comments on traffic calming in Somerville, which Adi Nochur delivered verbally at the Council hearing on Wednesday, April 3.

April 3, 2019
Somerville City Council
City Hall
93 Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02143

RE: WalkBoston comments on traffic calming in Somerville

To the Somerville City Council,

My name is Adi Nochur and I am testifying before you as an East Somerville resident and a member of Somerville’s Vision Zero Task Force. I am also commenting as a Project Manager at WalkBoston, a statewide pedestrian advocacy organization. WalkBoston is a signatory to the traffic calming petition that spurred today’s Council hearing.

I want to briefly comment on three issues, as follows:

  1. Speed Limits: WalkBoston supports efforts to reduce speed limits on residential streets in Somerville to 20 miles per hour. Achieving this goal is a fundamental issue of roadway design. WalkBoston also supports state legislative efforts to align speed limits on MassDOT and DCR roadways with local speed limits (H.3092/S.2042). As an illustrative example, we know high traffic speeds are an ongoing concern on Route 16/Alewife Brook Parkway.
  2. Equitable Enforcement: Data gathering is critical to ensure equity in traffic enforcement. Concerns over racial profiling are front and center in the current state legislative debate over hands-free/distracted driving legislation and local enforcement efforts also need to demonstrate sensitivity to these issues. State legislation that would enable automated enforcement (S.1376) can be part of a potential solution here.
  3. Concurrent Signalization: WalkBoston supports concurrent pedestrian signalization with a leading pedestrian interval at most signalized intersections. Our stance on this issue is further detailed in a letter we submitted to Mayor Curtatone on March 29, which is included as an attachment to these comments.

Thank you for your consideration of these issues. WalkBoston looks forward to continuing to work with the City Council to help Somerville achieve its Vision Zero goals.

Sincerely,
Adi Nochur
Project Manager

Cc: Mayor Joe Curtatone
Brad Rawson, Director of Transportation and Infrastructure

Letter to Mayor Curtatone about signal timing & LPIs

Letter to Mayor Curtatone about signal timing & LPIs

Mayor Joe Curtatone
Somerville City Hall
93 Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02143

March 29, 2019

Dear Mayor Curtatone,

We wanted to reach out to you regarding recent signal changes on Beacon Street where exclusively phased pedestrian signals have been converted to concurrent phasing.

We appreciate that both City staff and residents are concerned about pedestrian safety and are pressing for more protections for people on foot. You said it yourself in the Somerville Times in 2015: “When you plan for people, you get walkable neighborhoods that create vibrant communities, with faces you recognize of people walking, pushing strollers and biking.”

LivableStreets and WalkBoston have advocated for years to move to concurrent phasing with leading pedestrian intervals (LPI). We ask that you please support the continued implementation of an overall policy of concurrent with LPI pedestrian signal phasing in Somerville, with limited exceptions applied in locations with (1) high volumes of seniors or children, (2) very high turning movements (250+/hour), or locations where data show a special need for exclusive signals.

We recommend:

  • The Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) be lengthened to give pedestrians a longer head start.
  • No Turns on Red signs be installed to restrict motor vehicles from turning during the LPI.
  • The concurrent walk signal phases should be automatic and not require a button. This is one of the key benefits of a concurrent signal. The shorter wait times for pedestrians are also shown to reduce the number of pedestrians who cross the street against the light.

At the intersection of Beacon Street & Park Street, 100% of vehicles coming from Park are turning. The City should consider whether an exclusive WALK signal is needed for pedestrians to cross Beacon Street or whether the volumes are low enough that a concurrent signal for the Park Street green phase (for pedestrians crossing Beacon) would be appropriate. There could still be a concurrent phase during the Beacon Street green (for pedestrians crossing Park Street or Scott Street) depending on the turning volumes.

At the intersection of Beacon Street & Washington Street, you might look at the signal timing adopted this week in Central Square, Cambridge. A right red arrow is now displayed during an extended LPI  (a “Super LPI”) which eventually turns to a flashing yellow arrow to remind drivers that they must yield to pedestrians and do not have an exclusive turn.

The reasons for, and benefits of, concurrent phasing and LPI are well presented in the brief by the City of Cambridge which implements LPI/concurrent phasing at almost every signalized intersection. There is also some fairly well documented research on LPI safety that is shared by the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO). Jeff Speck in his recent book Walkable City Rules says, “Keep signals simple: most intersections should be concurrent and quick.” (Rule 74, page 176).

It should be noted that while concurrent phasing with LPI is generally safer and more convenient for people walking than exclusive phasing, there are exceptions. Older residents, people with mobility challenges, and small children in particular may feel more at risk. In most cases, when exclusive phasing is used, it is often near schools or senior centers, or locations with high volumes of turning cars (such as Inman Street at Mass Ave in Cambridge).

With the ongoing construction detours around Union Square there is presently the potential for increased vehicle volumes through these intersections and Somerville could consider combining concurrent and exclusive phasing to get the benefits of both for the duration of the detours.

Another option that could be tried is a push-button activated exclusive phase (noted by signage) that could serve the needs of people who feel uncomfortable crossing during a concurrent phase. Automatic concurrent phases would be retained during the balance of the time.

Sincerely,

Brendan Kearney
Communications Director, WalkBoston

Adi Nochur, Somerville Resident & Vision Zero Task Force Member
Project Manager, WalkBoston

Stacy Thompson
Executive Director, Livable Streets Alliance

Mark Chase, Somerville Resident
Urban Transportation Planner

Jim McGinnis, Union Square Resident

Jon Ramos, West Somerville Resident

Charles Denison, Somerville homeowner Ward 5

Steven Nutter, Somerville Resident Ward 4

Alex Epstein, Somerville Resident Ward 6 & Vision Zero Task Force Member