Category: Comment Letter

Environmental Notification Form (ENF) Alewife Brook Greenway MEPA #14431

Environmental Notification Form (ENF) Alewife Brook Greenway MEPA #14431

By |
June 29, 2009

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

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF) Alewife Brook Greenway
MEPA # 14431

Dear Secretary Bowles:

WalkBoston is pleased to review the Alewife Brook Greenway Environmental Notification Form (ENF). We have found the proposal extremely interesting, as it expands the off-road network of trails and walkways that are so important to metro arearesidents for transportation and recreation. The ENF details improvements that will be made for both pedestrians and bicyclists on a corridor between Alewife Brook MBTA Station and the Mystic Valley Parkway that leads through Cambridge, Somerville and Arlington, and has connections to the Minuteman Pathway, the Linear Park/Community Path route into Somerville, the Mystic River parklands and future paths into Belmont and Watertown.

This is an extremely important piece of the regional trail network. We are happy to endorse its construction and even happier to realize that it may be constructed relatively rapidly as part of the national stimulus construction agenda.

In our review, we noted a few concerns of importance to pedestrians:

1. The proposed network does not provide for fully separated bicycle and pedestrian paths.
In two segments of the proposed improvement (1. Between the Mystic Valley Parkway and Broadway; and 2. between Henderson Street and Massachusetts Avenue) there appears to be a partial separation of bicycle and pedestrian paths. By contrast, there is only a single path between Broadway and Henderson Street and between Massachusetts Avenue and the MBTA Alewife Station. This will result in an effective capacity of two 10’-wide paths in the areas of separated paths and only one 10’-wide path in the other parts of the corridor. We are concerned about the safety of pedestrians in portions of the corridor where the capacity is limited. In those areas, consideration should be given to a wider cross-section on the path to accommodate potential demand.

2. The proposal does not indicate whether there will be signage to can foster safe walking. Pedestrian safety in mixed walking and cycling traffic can be an issue of concern, depending on the volume of traffic that uses the paths. While we would prefer separate facilities that are clearly designated as such, it does not appear to be feasible throughout the entire corridor. We therefore suggest that signing and warnings be provided to make the route safe for all users. This might include, for example:

  • Lane separation lines for the north and south directions.
  • Signs warning pedestrians to stay to the right of the path.
  • Signs advising cyclists to ring a warning bell as they approach pedestrians from behind.
  • Route signs designating a cyclist trail along the paths that abut Alewife Brooke Parkway.

3. The Boardwalk parallel to Alewife Brook Parkway has the potential for becoming a bottleneck, as it accommodates all path traffic in a narrow corridor. The boardwalk overlooks and is cantilevered over the river in the section extending north of Henderson Street and is one of the most accessible portions of the pathways for nearby residents. It is also close to Dilboy Field, which has occasional special sports events. If the boardwalk accommodates both pedestrians and cyclists and is closely fenced on both sides, it has the potential for becoming heavily used and potentially unsafe for people on foot. Would it be possible to widen the boardwalk to at least 12 feet in this location?

4. Seating and observation areas should be maximized.The path promises to be a very pleasant route. Many people will want to sit occasionally along the route, and children, among others, will be interested in closely examining the stream.

5. For the security of people who are using the path lighting may be appropriate. Lighting of the paths would extend their usefulness to walkers and cyclists in evening hours and in fall and winter.

6. Crosswalks may be needed in several locations. Near the Dilboy Park baseball diamonds, a fence opening and curb ramp have been provided that appear designed to help people cross Alewife Brook Parkway. The addition of a crosswalk in this location would be appropriate. Other crosswalks should be examined to cross Alewife Brook Parkway at Massachusetts Avenue, at Matignon Road, at Powder House Boulevard (two curb ramps), and at Broadway. For continuity of the path network, a Mystic Valley Parkway crosswalk should be considered at the north end of this project.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to provide comments on the ENF. Please let us know if you have any questions or need further detail.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Cc Dan Driscoll, DCR Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner

Jackson Street Safe Routes to School Comment Letter

Jackson Street Safe Routes to School Comment Letter

By |

May 14, 2009

Frank A. Tramontozzi, P.E.
Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Highway Department
State Transportation Building
10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116
Attn: Martin Leelman, Project Manager

Re: Comments on Jackson Street Safe Routes to School project, Northampton MA Prepared for Public Hearing on May 20, 2009

Dear Mr. Tramontozzi:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Jackson Street Safe Routes to School project in Northampton. We have been involved with Safe Routes to School projects since 2000, and are currently under contract with the Commonwealth to provide services to many schools across the state (more than 50 from 2007 – 2009). We have long advocated for physical improvements that enable and support programs that encourage children to walk to school.

This project is the first of a series of improvements that will be undertaken near 5 schools in five Massachusetts municipalities. We hope that this project and the others will pave the way for subsequent, similar projects across the state. They are desperately needed for the health and safety of our children.

Location and setting: The project addresses the portion of Jackson Street between Prospect Street and Gleason Road, a distance of about 2500 feet. Jackson Street carries approximately 6300 motor vehicles per day, and is anticipated to carry 6900 vehicles 10 years from now. No counts or projected numbers for pedestrians using the streets or sidewalks were provided for the area.

Project description: The proposed Jackson Street project consists of improvements including sidewalk widening and reconstruction, school driveway entrance reconstruction, pavement markings, granite curbing, fencing, wheelchair ramps, signage, traffic calming measures, and a new pedestrian ramp from Jackson Street to the Northampton Bike Path below it.

• Sidewalk widening and reconstruction: a permanent concrete sidewalk is planned for about 1500 ‘ of the distance along the east side of Jackson Street between Prospect Street and Barrett Street. The proposed sidewalk is to be 5.5 feet wide, enlarged to 10 feet wide between the bike ramp and the existing crosswalk at Barrett Street.
• School driveway entrance reconstruction: The existing wide radius of the school entrance driveway will be reduced. The new driveway will require drivers to make slower turns, providing greater safety for walkers.
• Crosswalks: 8’ wide crosswalks are planned for three of the legs at the 4-way intersection of Jackson and Prospect Streets. A single north-south crosswalk is planned for the intersection of the three-legged intersection of Jackson and Barrett Streets.
• Raised Crossings: The 8’ wide east-west crosswalk at Barrett Street leading to the school will be rebuilt as a raised speed table. An additional raised crosswalk is planned for the other end of the school property near the entrance to the parking lot. Thus two raised 2 crosswalks – one at Barrett Street and the other 320 feet further north at the school driveway, will serve the school. The two raised crosswalks will be supplemented by signs warning of the raised crosswalks and pavement painting to emphasize their location.
• Warning signs and pavement markings: Speed table warning signs and pavement markings are to be located both north and south of each crosswalk. No signals are planned.
• Pedestrian ramp to the Bike Path: A permanent connection between Jackson Street and the bike path is proposed via an accessible ramp. The Bike Path can currently be accessed only at Blackberry Lane to the west where the Bike Path rises and meets Blackberry Lane at grade. The Bike Path is reported to be an increasingly important means of access to the school for students commuting on bikes and on foot.
• Wheelchair ramps: Ramps are located at the crosswalks at the intersection of Jackson and Prospect Streets and at the north-south crossing of the intersection of Jackson and Barrett Streets. Wheelchair access will be an integral part of the 8’ wide raised east-west crosswalks.
• Concrete curbs: New curbs are proposed along the Jackson Street sidewalk between Prospect and Barrett Streets, and again at the school entrance driveway.
• Fencing: A 4’ chain link fence is proposed between the school entrance driveway and the north property line to discourage children from crossing Jackson Street where there is no crosswalk. A 6’ chain link fence is proposed for the ramp to the Bikeway, to be connected into the existing fence at that location.

Comments –
This is a prototype for improvements on routes leading to schools. We think it is a wonderful idea and are happy to see it getting underway. We offer the following considerations:

1. It is possible that initial operations of the raised crosswalks will require crossing guards or flashing lights to warn motorists of children crossing.
2. The proposed sidewalk on the east side of Jackson Street has many interruptions for cuts that lower the sidewalk at each driveway resulting in a roller coaster effect for people on the sidewalk. Are there any studies that explore whether walkers or more probably, cyclists, might be affected by such cuts? Would it be possible to keep the sidewalk level and require vehicle to cross up and over the sidewalk?
3. Adding a crosswalk at the far north end of school property might be considered. At the point where the internal sidewalk network in the Hampton Gardens projects leads to Jackson Street, jaywalking by children has been reported. Jaywalking by children is unsafe and may not be controllable by simply fencing school property across the street.
4. Follow-up actions might include analysis of pedestrian and bicycle numbers to determine whether there has been an increase in these two modes, review of the safety of the raised crossings, and the effects on Jackson Street traffic (if any) after project is completed. The analysis might give guidance to similar projects.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Please feel free to call if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Queset Commons Comment Letter

Queset Commons Comment Letter

By |

Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIR for the Queset Commons Chapter 40R Smart Growth Development in Easton, a proposed mixed-use retail, office and residential development within a Smart Growth Overlay District.

Our conviction is that developments of the size and character of Queset Commons should follow a number of general guidelines in building a mix and relationship of uses that will encourage residents and visitors to walk more and drive less.

Read the full letter here:
WalkBoston-CommentDEIR-QuesetCommons-Easton

First Herring Brook Pedestrian Bridge Comment Letter

First Herring Brook Pedestrian Bridge Comment Letter

By |

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the ENF for the First Herring Brook Pedestrian Bridge in Scituate. The ENF documents the Town’s plan to construct a pedestrian bridge at the site of a former railroad crossing of a tidal stream. The bridge is part of a walking path called the Driftway Trail, a roadside route from Scituate Harbor along Jericho Road, Front Street, and Kent Street/New Kent Street to Driftway/New Driftway Road. The trail will extend to a point across the street from the new location of the Greenbush Station of the MBTA’s commuter rail line on New Driftway Road. At that location, the trail turns into the former railroad right-of-way through the tidal marshes to the North River, the border between Scituate and Marshfield.

Read the full letter:
WalkBoston-CommentENF-FirstHerringBrookPedestrianBridge-Somerville

Waterfront Square at Revere Beach Comment Letter

Waterfront Square at Revere Beach Comment Letter

By |

May 8, 2009

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

RE: Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for Waterfront Square at Revere Beach, EOEA #14080

Dear Mr. Bowles:

WalkBoston is happy to submit comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for Waterfront Square at Revere Beach. This project is a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) that embodies many of the precepts of concentrated development and pedestrian improvements that the state and region have been working toward. For this reason, our comments focus on whether the TOD elements will work well for pedestrians using the MBTA Wonderland Station, the new uses to be built on the site and people accessing Revere Beach and adjacent properties. We are pleased that many of the concerns we raised in our previous comments have been addressed by the FEIR, however (as discussed below) we continue to have some specific concerns.

We continue to be impressed that the project is being made possible by the joint efforts of the proponent and several public agencies owning property within the site. The public agencies – the MBTA and the Department of Conservation and Recreation have agreed to become part of the project to further the development goals of better, more intensive uses of their lands and increased use of the existing MBTA Blue Line terminus at Wonderland Station. Unfortunately, one site – the Seaside Site – has not been included in the development, even though it stands at the mid-point of the site and thus prevents contiguous development.

Summary of comments:

• Pedestrian connections to adjacent parcels should be explored.
• All crosswalks should have pedestrian signals timed to afford safe crossings.
• Pedestrian access on the ground level of the South Parking Garage seems to include potential hazards for pedestrians due to the need to cross bus lanes to reach the rail station
• Pedestrian crosswalks are sparse along Ocean Avenue.
• Pedestrian ramps at the Wonderland Station seem to be replaced by elevators and a stair. Does the new plan still include ramps?
• The Transit Plaza may have significant use by pedestrians linking train and bus trips, and should include generous walkways covered for weather protection.
• All bus-rail riders are required to cross above the rail tracks on one leg of their journey. Is there a way to explore all at-grade access between buses and trains on only one side of Wonderland Station?

Many WalkBoston concerns have been addressed by the FEIR. These include:

• Pedestrian access to the Transit Plaza above the roof level of the Wonderland Transit Station will be accomplished as part of the South Garage construction in Phase I. These elevators will be available for movement between the rail and bus stations and each level of the parking garage. A similar elevator will be added in Phase II between the east side of the rail station and the Transit Plaza level.
• The proponent is committed to constructing a pedestrian bridge connecting the site to the beachfront, and has committed to long-term maintenance and repair of the bridge.
• Sidewalks located along Route 1A on both sides of the street will be retained and improved as routes for local residents to walk to the station and the businesses or offices on the site.
• Sight lines and pedestrian connections pass through the proposed Transit Plaza and the pedestrian bridge from the site to the beachfront.
• These sight lines and pedestrian connections also reach to the future Revere stop on the commuter rail line west of Route 1A, through the large parking lot at Wonderland Park, now used for daytime commuter parking (and a future development site).
• The site has connections to regional trails and paths – beachfront and the north-south Border to Boston trail which connects to the Northern Strand Community Trail (aka Bike to the Sea Trail).
• The crosswalk at Route 1A and the access to the MBTA South Parking Garage is moved to the north side of the intersection. Nearly 400 people cross here daily according to August 2008 counts. At the north side of the intersection, pedestrians will be able to have a traffic signal cycle and not be at risk to the many right turning vehicles entering the South Garage site.

 

There are certain remaining concerns that are raised by our review of the FEIR:

• Alternatives should be explored to connect the Transit Plaza with adjacent parcels such as the Water’s Edge Apartments south of the Transit Plaza. Such a connection might be beneficial to this project because it could attract additional walkers to and through the site, either to the MBTA station or the beachfront.
• The Seaside Site, a parcel surrounded by this project but not included in these plans, is largely ignored. Pedestrian connections between this site and the north and south parts of this project and to the MBTA station and parking garages seem sketchy at best.
• A new crosswalk is planned at the intersection of Shawmut Street and the vehicular connection to the MBTA North Parking Garage. When the crosswalk is constructed, pedestrians should be provided with an adequate traffic signal interval to cross the street safely.
• Pedestrian circulation on the west side of the Transit Plaza at the entrance to the Blue Line station is shown in some detail in Figure F-2. The proposed Phase I South Parking Garage on MBTA property has a covered bus terminal directly adjacent to the Blue Line platform for easy pedestrian transfer between bus and rail services. The first floor of the Garage also houses kiss-and-ride and garage ramps. Pedestrian access between the drop-off lanes and the rail station appear to require crossing the bus lanes, and may be unsafe.
• Improvement of the pedestrian environment along Ocean Avenue is needed. Curb cuts for parking access along Ocean Avenue dominate the environment and only 6 widely separated crosswalks connect the site and the beachfront park.
• Existing pedestrian ramps at Wonderland Station provide pedestrian access up and over the station, independent of elevators. However, the ramps appear to be removed as part of the Phase II construction of the Transit Plaza and replaced by a monumental stairway. Will new construction include a physical replacement of the pedestrian ramps? If so, where will they be located in respect to the Transit Plaza, the MBTA train station and the MBTA bus station?
• The plan calls for elevators to be constructed on both sides of Wonderland Station to allow alighting riders to go up and over the station to reach either connecting buses or parking facilities. At the Transit Plaza level, peak period pedestrian movements may be significant, and may require generous connections between elevators, stairs and ramps. Perhaps these Transit Plaza pedestrian connections could be covered to protect transit riders from severe weather conditions? How many elevators are planned to accommodate peak hour pedestrian traffic between travel modes and the Transit Plaza? What volume of peak hour pedestrian traffic is expected?
• Can MBTA operating plans for arriving Blue Line trains at Wonderland Station be modified to reflect access to connecting buses? Currently, both inbound and outbound bus access takes place on the outbound side of the transit station, giving a direct at-grade route for alighting passengers to walk to buses, but requiring inbound pedestrians to climb up and over the station to the inbound tracks. In this proposal, future inbound access to rail from arriving buses will be at-grade on the inbound side of the transit station, and require outbound passengers to cross up and over the tracks to the outbound buses. Is it possible that arriving trains could be routed to the inbound side of the station, where they would have the same cross-platform access to buses without using stairs, ramps or elevators? Is it possible that this change in train routing could obviate the need to construct a Transit Plaza elevator on the east side of the tracks?

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for Waterfront Square at Revere Beach. We hope our comments on the FEIR are incorporated into your requirements for the next phase of design and permitting documents. Please contact us for any clarification or additional comments that would be useful.

 

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner