Category: Comment Letter

Christian Science Plaza Revitalization Project MEPA #14828

Christian Science Plaza Revitalization Project MEPA #14828

By |

January 9, 2012

Richard K. Sullivan, Secretary
Executive Office of Energy and Environment
100 Cambridge St., 9th floor
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Christian Science Plaza Revitalization Project, MEPA #14828

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state encouraging walking, advocating for pedestrian improvements and working for design improvements. We have worked with over 65 communities throughout the state, helping residents and local government with pedestrian issues, safe routes to school, and safer street crossings.

The proponents of the Christian Science Plaza Revitalization have done a splendid job serving and welcoming the public to the plaza. The entire plaza is open to walkers and is a very special place to walk and enjoy the city. The rows of trees are well-maintained and are beautiful even in winter. The fountain in particular is a major attraction to people from the region. It is a wonderful spot that does double duty by providing significant summer service to children from all neighborhoods of Boston.

WalkBoston has many comments on the pedestrian street crossings at the edges of the site. Many of these work well, while some are not as safe for pedestrians as might be possible. For example, the intersection of Cumberland Street and Huntington Avenue is a signalized crossing that does not allow sufficient time for people to cross the street safely.

Thank you for the opportunity to common on this important project. We think it is a good project that could be even more pedestrian-friendly with some modifications to surrounding traffic signals. WalkBoston will continue to work with the city on this issue.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman                                    Robert Sloane
Executive Director                                  Senior Planner

Comments on ENF New Quincy Center Redevelopment

Comments on ENF New Quincy Center Redevelopment

By |

September 9, 2011

Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

RE: Comments on Expanded Environmental Notification Form with Phase 1 Waiver Request, New Quincy Center Redevelopment, Quincy,
MA EOEA No. 14780

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston has reviewed the Expanded Environmental Notification Form with Phase 1 Waiver Request for the New Quincy Center Redevelopment. The project comprises 30.8 acres, with a total of 3.4 million square feet of space in more than 15 buildings, containing office, retail, hospitality and entertainment uses, and 1210 residential units. It is planned for construction in four steps over 7-10 years.

The proposal will have very significant impacts on future pedestrian activity in the central area of the city of Quincy. We are concerned that the potential for improving walking for users of the project area has not been examined in an intensive way. The proponent will need to be cognizant of detailed pedestrian needs throughout the development, because the pedestrian aspects of the site will play an extremely important role in the way it meshes with its surroundings and the possible help in alleviating traffic congestion.

Summary of key points:

  • Analyze pedestrian traffic at levels matching vehicular traffic analysis.
  • Maximize use of Adams Green project as gateway.
  • Need to establish plans for interim periods to ensure pedestrian activity.
  • Consider use of small-scale retail frontage for lively places.
  • Address pedestrian safety in traffic plans.
  • Establish sidewalk and amenity standards to ensure quality.
  • Integrate open space/pedestrian space as integral to the big idea – not yet expressed in the plan

In our comments below, we have outlined some of the ways pedestrian planning could benefit the project and the city.

Planning for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic
Project vehicular traffic is projected to increase by 15,479 trips per day, making a total of 37,256 trips total each day. The project envisions mitigation measures including the widening of 6 streets in the area, restriping for exclusive left-turn lanes, and signal changes at 2 intersections to provide concurrent pedestrian phasing. (other intersections are not cited for measures dealing with potential pedestrian conflicts and safety.) In addition a new bridge over the MBTA tracks is deemed important and has become the focus of a proposed Phase 1 waiver.

Discussion of auto traffic in the report consumes 47 pages of text and 66 figures of traffic analysis, leading to discussions of parking garages, street improvements, traffic lanes, turns, and signals in some detail. Mention is also made of relaxed parking requirements to handle vehicle demands.

In a major information gap, existing and anticipated daily walking trips are not discussed in the report, nor are there suggestions that future planning will include such analysis. It is essential to have some notion of the overall number of walkers to plan adequately for pedestrian connections between building sites. Based on information about numbers of walkers, it would then become possible to think about incremental features that might benefit pedestrians.

Standards for sidewalk widths are not discussed in the report, suggesting that there may be reliance on either state or local standard widths that have not been included or referenced in this report. The widths of the sidewalks should be adequate to address the volumes of traffic that are anticipated, while adding sufficient space for trees, street furniture and signage in a way that does not interfere with pedestrian throughput. We suggest that the proponent use state design standards for sidewalks in central areas that provide a minimum of 12’ for heavily-used sidewalks, and 6’ in all other areas. In areas of heavy foot traffic, the width should be related to anticipated pedestrian volumes. These widths should be clear and continuous in all affected blocks. Street trees, lighting fixtures and other street furniture should not intrude on these minimum clear and continuous widths. Sidewalk paving surfaces should be smooth and easily shoveled during winter snowstorms. Curb cuts for vehicles should be severely limited.

On streets along the sidewalks, retaining a pattern of two lanes of parked traffic is best for pedestrians, because parking on both sides of the street acts as a buffer between moving traffic and pedestrians walking alongside.

Each of the proposed pedestrian corridors follows streets (open space internal to structures does not appear to be available for general foot traffic.) Each street can be classified distinctively, based on a street typology and character as a general guide to function and potential design. Although it is not yet known what pedestrian traffic volumes and issues may arise, each of the streets seems to deserve unique treatment, as far as pedestrian service is concerned.

  • Temple/Hancock/Granite Streets is a new facility and a major route for vehicular traffic. It appears to be set to act as a pedestrian promenade at the edge of the development. The boulevard’s frontage may become a retail focus serving primarily pedestrian traffic.
  • Hancock Street between Granite Street and QC Concourse appears to be envisioned to be a local street – not a major vehicular thoroughfare. The street could become a very interesting, relatively quiet and rewarding pedestrian corridor, especially because it is a direct extension of the pedestrian promenade of Adams Green. Sidewalks along Hancock Street can become integral portions of the open space network, with off-sidewalk paved areas to enlarge upon the feeling of openness, creating at the same time places where people could congregate, meet, sit, watch, and enjoy the daily progression of walkers through the district. This may involve widening the sidewalk in some instances to provide inlets or off-sidewalk squares as useful spaces for walkers. Staging of the Hancock Street portions of the project may allow re-use of existing small-scale commercial uses. Retaining Hancock Street as the focus of the new development is exciting and, we think, essential. There are several elements of the design that would be useful to better understand. Only a few of the existing small-scale businesses appear to be dislocated by Step 1 of the proposed development, and not until the arrival of Step 3 will all of the existing commercial along Hancock Street be replaced by new buildings.
  • Revere Road/QC Concourse will complete a ring-road around downtown and the Quincy Center project. This road will not be expected to facilitate commercial development to a great extent, although a major large retail facility is proposed for the block closest to the bridge over the MBTA tracks.
  • Ross Way appears to be primarily an access road for parking garages, vehicular deliveries and service access. If so, it will be a difficult area for pedestrians to navigate, especially because it will require numerous curb cuts.
  • Chestnut and Cottage Streets will both be minor collectors that might become useful locations for small businesses (some existing buildings are to be retained) because the location of  the two streets may provide spillover space linked to retail opportunities along Hancock Street.
  • Hancock Market Square Connector. This new street seems designed to provide access directly into parking structures. It seems unlikely, from the limited information available that this street will attract walkers. However, the market square located at the Hancock Street intersection holds a promise of a retail focus for pedestrians.
  • Pathway along the MBTA tracks. The project includes paths immediately adjacent to the MBTA tracks that seem unconnected to a larger network. The function of these paths is unclear. Intersection design is important for pedestrian safety. Potential vehicular/pedestrian conflict areas exist in several locations. Already noted are potential conflicts in the Adams Green area, where pedestrian volume from the MBTA stations, the schools and other uses result in walkers crossing busy streets. The entrances to the project on Granite Street where it meets Hancock and Chestnut Streets are likely to have significant areas of conflict. Within the project boundary, all intersections may have significant conflicts and should be analyzed.

Pedestrian-oriented open space
Adams Green, immediately adjacent to the north side of the Quincy Center project, encompasses over 10 acres, a significant addition to the overall open space in the area. Served primarily by walking and transit, the project will include existing open space and the Hancock Cemetery, augmented by open space that re-uses the existing paved area of Hancock Street to form a pedestrian plaza and a major axis of usable open space for walkers. This axis will extend into the Quincy Center project.

The Adams Green project will renew an existing focus for pedestrians in the area, capitalizing on the proximity of Quincy High School, the South Shore YMCA, Quincy College, City Hall, Crane Public Library, the MBTA rail and rapid transit station, Stop and Shop national headquarters, and the U.S. Post Office. This aggregation of uses is unique to Quincy, and forms an exciting base for the success of the proposal. The Green appears to play a very large future role as the principal open space for the entire area and as the gateway to the Quincy Center project.

The Quincy Center plans show little additional open space, though open space is stated as an essential element in the overall design. Instead, the proposal calls for large-scale reliance on sidewalks and their landscaping as open space. However, the design standards for sidewalks and how they will function as open space additions (including both walkways and landscaping strips) are not defined. The principal new open space within the project appears to be a market square on Hancock Street near Revere Road/QC Concourse. Other green space may be located internal to proposed residential or office structures, in places that may not be available to the general public. The acreages of proposed open spaces in the project should be quantified in the report. This could aid in public understanding of the project and help in marketing sites, gaining retail attractions, and bolstering business opportunities.

The text suggests that public gathering places will be added as social focal points, venues for seasonal events, and outdoor marketplaces, each connected to others via the public sidewalks and designed with a clear relationship to the proposed pedestrian network. It would be very useful to know where these open spaces will be located and how they relate to sidewalks, as they are intended to engender pedestrian movements.

Activities needing pedestrian access – Quincy Center
The proposal for this project does not include anchors of activities such as those surrounding Adams Green. In fairness, it may be too early in the process to identify specific uses, but a hint may arise from one of the existing strong points of the existing Hancock Street retail area – its human scale. Building frontages are relatively narrow, uses change every few feet, activities spill out onto the street and it can appear that a great deal of human activity is taking place. Retaining the human scale should be a guideline for future development.

The proposal seems designed to guide the area toward larger scale (large-format) retail activities. Many of the proposed buildings will have first floor retail uses, and the vast spaces envisioned for retail suggest a sort of outdoor shopping mall. The conceptual plans and proposed construction schedule do not seem to construct the retail spaces all in one step. We are concerned that much of the retail space may not be occupied until the project reaches full build-out, leaving vacant space and possibly rather empty sidewalks that are uninteresting and perhaps not comfortable for pedestrians walking alone. Ultimately, the retail market will fill the space; in the meantime (perhaps over many years) pedestrians may have neither a lively nor a safe environment in which to walk. It is important to ensure that existing and new small-scale uses will be accommodated by the phasing of the proposed large-scale uses. An area with many activities to be found within a small area is perfect for pedestrian access for errands, other shopping or services and for strolling. One potential approach might be to encourage restaurants and uses appealing to pedestrians along Hancock Street, much like Moody Street in Waltham, to draw walkers into the district and provide essential services for new development.

Perhaps one of the most pedestrian-friendly approaches could be establishing a permanent focus of retail uses that are small-scale and attractive to pedestrians. This focus might be an appropriate portion of the first stage of development, located in the blocks adjacent to the Adams Green project. The area could then grow along Hancock Street as demand for services expands.

A second approach is the development of an entirely separate focal area around which retail uses might concentrate. One such location is the proposed market square, which appears to be partly included in Step 1 activities. The market square has the advantage of providing an anchor to draw pedestrians through the area between Granite Street and the QC Concourse road.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Please feel free to contact us if there are questions.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman                                   Robert Sloane
Executive Director                                 Senior Planner

Spicket River Greenway Comment Letter

Spicket River Greenway Comment Letter

By |

March 29, 2011

Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr. Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston MA 02114
Attn: MEPA Office, Ann Canaday

RE: Comments on the Environmental Notification Form, EEA No. 14717 Spicket River Greenway

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the Spicket River Greenway in Lawrence. The project is an ambitious undertaking that will significantly expand attractive walking facilities in Lawrence. The proposal is a 2.9 mile walkway from the recently constructed Manchester Street park to the Oxford Mill site near the Merrimack River in Downtown Lawrence. At the mill site, the project will connect to riverside walkways that are proposed on both sides of the river.

The project will follow a stream that is presently open to view but virtually useless as a recreational facility to the residents of Lawrence. Through this project, the river and its path through the densely built-up city will be cleaned up and improved with a new walking facility designed to serve its inner city neighbors. The new 8’ wide paved walkway will be fully accessible for all users. Landscaping and solar powered lighting will enhance the path.

WalkBoston supports this project and congratulates the City of Lawrence for its leadership in providing a facility that will add beauty, recreation and a means for the residents of Lawrence to add walking to their daily lives.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this commendable project. Please contact us if you have questions.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Heather McCann, Executive Director, Groundwork Lawrence James Barnes, Director, Lawrence Community Development Department

Mystic River Recreational Trail Comment Letter

Mystic River Recreational Trail Comment Letter

By |

March 22, 2011

Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

Attn: MEPA Office, Deirdre Buckley

RE: Comments on the Environmental Notification Form, EEA No. 14718 Mystic River Recreational Trail

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the Mystic River Recreational Trail in Somerville. The project has grown out of the analysis of the Assembly Square development project, which will enlarge and improve the riverside park along the Mystic River. The completion of the new riverside park will result in trails along the south bank of the Mystic for about one mile, reaching from the MBTA rail overpass near the Mystic River Dam to the network of paths that outline part of the Ten Hills neighborhood and along the river to Mystic Valley Parkway (Route 16) in Medford. However, these trails are divided into two discontinuous parts on either side of the Fellsway (Route 28), a heavily traveled roadway which is difficult for pedestrians to cross safely.

The proposal calls for construction of an underpass to accommodate a recreational trail beneath the Mystic River Bridge (Fellsway, Route 28). This underpass would link the Assembly Square development with the Ten Hills neighborhood in Somerville and provide a continuous walkway along the Mystic River. Construction of the underpass will also include some improvements to pathway connections to it on both sides of the Fellsway (Route 28).

WalkBoston fully supports construction of the underpass and welcomes the connections it will provide for walking and bicycling along the Mystic River. The facility will strengthen the Assembly Square development and add a new amenity to other areas near the river. The trail will ultimately be an element in a larger network of trails into and through Assembly Square, and will connect with the proposed station on the Orange Line.

WalkBoston continues to support smooth surfaces on walking routes and in public spaces that serve as pedestrian gathering places and plazas. Brick, granite or concrete pavers create a visually distinctive space but without very careful maintenance these surfaces can quickly become uneven, making for treacherous walking. Such materials are also often difficult to clear of snow during the winter months. Specifications for this project should call for smooth materials leading from both sides onto the wooden deck that constitutes the trail under the bridge. We encourage the selection of smooth walking surfaces wherever possible.

The Assembly Square development is described as a transit-oriented development and we understand that the transit station is being constructed early in the development sequence. The proposed underpass is an integral part of providing good pedestrian connections to the Assembly Square transit station from the Ten Hills neighborhood, and will help to draw pedestrians to the new station.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Please contact us if you have questions. Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Monica R. Lamboy, Executive Director, Somerville Strategic Planning and Community Development,
Jaime Corliss, Director, Shape Up Somerville

EENF 1265 Main Street Waltham Comment Letter

EENF 1265 Main Street Waltham Comment Letter

By |

February 15, 2011

Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Expanded Environmental Notification Form (EENF)
1265 Main Street
Waltham, MA
MEPA # 14681

Dear Mr. Sullivan:

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state – encouraging walking, advocating for pedestrian improvements and working for design improvements. We have extensive experience helping residents and local government with pedestrian issues, safe routes to school and safer street crossings.

We have reviewed the EENF for 1265 Main Street, Waltham (formerly The Commons at Prospect Hill), a proposed mixed-use retail and office redevelopment at the site of the former Polaroid buildings.

The project at 1265 Main Street includes approx. 1.28 million sf of mixed office/retail uses in the proposed redevelopment. Phase I of the proposal will use existing buildings formerly occupied by Polaroid along Route 128 to accommodate these uses. Parking for retail and office uses will be shared to provide maximum and successive use of auto storage areas. Phase II of the proposal calls for new buildings scattered around the site.

WalkBoston’s concerns focus on the fact that walking and pedestrians facilities do not appear to be a major component of the project, although the project is frequently called “pedestrian-friendly” in the document. Pedestrian accommodations are listed on p. 92 of the EENF as being primarily along or connected with the residential areas facing Main Street. Plans for the reconstruction of Main Street will surely include sidewalk replacement and widening. Sidewalk connections within the site and between buildings are not discussed, with the exception of the Wayside Trail, which will accommodate pedestrians in addition to cyclists.

WalkBoston is concerned that some opportunities may be lost which could help make walking a part of the project’s benefits. These opportunities are concentrated in six areas:
1. Pedestrian access into the development site
2. Pedestrian connections to transit routes
3. Pedestrian access along the corridor of buildings
4. Pedestrian access along Wayside Trail
5. Pedestrian access into Prospect Park
6. Pedestrian access into Berry Farm

Each of these opportunities is considered below:

1. Pedestrian access into the development site is apparently to be incorporated into three proposed vehicular access routes into the site from Main Street on the south side of the site. The three access routes are Tower Road, the extension of Cutting Lane, and a new roadway that skirts the existing residential community along Hill Road to connect into Main Street at a new location. No access is provided from the north.

2.
• The principal accessways into the western part of the site appear to be along Tower Road on the western edge of the site and the extension of Cutting Lane which goes up the middle of the site. Tower Road connects between all buildings to be reused as part of Phase I. The extension of Cutting Lane connects only to the first two buildings of the former Polaroid site, providing major existing pedestrian access points into the buildings.
• Tower Road is already a major facility for access to the site and is likely to retain its importance as part of Phase I of this development. The proposal calls for two lanes of entering traffic on Tower Road, which suggests it will be carrying a major load of traffic in the future. It connects into the parking areas only indirectly. As such, Tower Road does not appear to be the most appropriate site for major pedestrian access into the site.
• Pedestrian access into the development site is not indicated in the graphics of this proposal. However, the logical location for pedestrian access may be along the proposed new roadway between Main Street and the eastern half of the site. This road is proposed to be located on a new right-of-way that leads to the north part of the site. It provides access to an existing building near the south boundary of Prospect Park which (we assume) will be retained as part of this development. Sidewalks can be created on one or both sides of this new roadway to give access to the existing building if it is to be retained.

3. Pedestrian access to transit from the development site is discussed only vaguely in the EENF. Transit for people working on site and for visitors should be more thoroughly discussed as the project moves forward.
• Transit lines along Main Street will continue to serve this development. At present there is one bus shelter located about one-quarter of the way from Tower Rd/Stow St. to Cutting Lane. Future connections to the transit services along Main Street should be closely connected to the principal pedestrian access within the site. As mentioned above, the future axis could be along the extension of Cutting Lane. If that is the principal on-site sidewalk, it suggests that the bus shelter and stop be relocated to be closer to that axis. Since this portion of Main Street is proposed to be widened and reconstructed, the new bus shelter can become part of that improvement.
•The proponent has expressed a willingness to add a bus route within the site. A new line would be a welcome addition to the access to the site. The proponent should consider where stops will be located on site and whether there should be shelters at those locations.

3. A pedestrian access corridor through the site would be very useful. The proposed development consists of a row of buildings parallel to Route 128/95. This single axis of buildings suggests a prime location for such a corridor.
• The extension of Cutting Lane is on an alignment that appears to be appropriate for pedestrian access to all of the buildings proposed to be activated by Phase I construction. Although there is no continuous roadway for vehicles on the east side of all the buildings, sidewalks and safe pedestrian facilities can readily be provided along this axis. This is particularly appropriate since some of the recommended pedestrian facilities are already in place outside the existing buildings, providing access to existing and proposed parking on the east side of the buildings.
• The pedestrian access corridor would seem to be more efficiently and pleasantly located along the extension of Cutting Lane rather than Tower Road.
• Pedestrian connections will need to be provided across the major parking lot located at the north end of the existing major complex of buildings on the site. This parking lot can be developed with safe pedestrian walkways across it to connect between all buildings on the site.
• The Low Impact Development (LID) for Stormwater Design, calls for underground water storage facilities beneath parking lots. Specifically an underground stone reservoir is planned for the parking lot that is located between buildings. A long-range view of the grouping of buildings might include a building on the site of the parking lot. This in turn would tie the pedestrian portions of the site closer together, and not require pedestrians to walk across a parking lot for access to the buildings. Is it possible to design the underground water storage facility to permit construction of a future building above it?

4. Pedestrian access to the Wayside Trail is welcome. The proponent has generously volunteered to construct a portion of the Wayside Trail along the former railroad right-of-way that passes through this property. The trail is proposed for use by pedestrians as well as bikes. The use of the existing right of way meshes well with state-wide planning effort for this trail.
• On site, all street/trail intersections should be carefully protected. If traffic signals cannot be provided, traffic calming measures should be considered. Signing should be plentiful to warn motorists of the crossings by pedestrians and bikes.
• Additional consideration should be given to the most appropriate location where the trail can safely cross Main Street. If the trail is located within the rail right-of-way, it will reach Main Street in the vicinity of either Cutting Lane or the new access road that skirts the Hill Road residential area. A traffic signal at either location would allow for safe crossings of Main Street. Alternatively, the trail could extend to Stow Street/Tower Road and cross at the signal proposed for that location, although the traffic at the Tower Road/Stow Street/Main Street intersection is expected to be relatively heavy. • If Main Street is to be widened as part of this project, it may be appropriate to incorporate the Wayside Trail as an integral element in the design of Main Street between the Hill Street residential area and Route 128/95. It might become a facility parallel to Main Street but somewhat separated from it. The trail could be on either side of Main Street, depending on the design. It is important to provide a sufficient width to make this portion of the trail spacious for all users – a minimal sidewalk will not suffice.

5. Pedestrian access into Prospect Park is critical. One of the beauties of this site is the extensive background of nearby adjacent public parkland. People working on the site or visiting will be able to see the park and should be provided with options for walking or jogging in it. • Direct access to the parking is cut off by the Low impact Development (LID) for Stormwater Design, which calls for water quality swales to control runoff from nearby steep land. The proposal calls for 2 water storage areas in what appears to be the southeast corner of Prospect Park. These water storage areas are proposed to be bounded by a new site access road, which will ultimately connect to Route 128/95. Pedestrian access through these sites appears to be difficult but not impossible. Perhaps a landscaped walkway could connect between the park and the buildings lined up along Route 128/95. Consideration of this connection would add significantly to the amenities of the site. • Signing on walkways would be appropriate to lead walkers from business areas into the park’s trails and potential jogging routes. Signs could also lead people from major parking areas and from site roadways into the park. • Use of the trails and walkways within the park should be encouraged through signage, promotion among employers on the site, and by sharing maintenance responsibilities between the City and the proponent.

6. The proponent will donate Berry Farm area to the city as part of this project. Pedestrian access into Berry Farm open space could result from this project. This will expand and greatly enhance the availability and accessibility of open space in the area.
• A direct trail or walkway connection between the proposed Wayside Trail and Berry Farm should be considered. There appears to be a physical connection between the main portion of the farm and the former rail right-of-way. This “leg” of Berry Farm should be used to construct an entranceway into the farm. An area directly adjacent has been designated for parking for Berry Farm. This means that people can drive to both the park and the trail and have access from this site.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EENF. Please feel free to contact us for clarification or additional comments.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director