Category: Comment Letter

North End Cross Street Boutique Hotel Comment Letter

North End Cross Street Boutique Hotel Comment Letter

By |

Lance Campbell
Senior Project Manager
Boston Planning & Development Agency
April 19, 2021

Re: WalkBoston Comments on North End Cross Street Boutique Hotel

Dear Lance:
WalkBoston attended the public meeting on April 7th for the North End Cross Street Boutique Hotel and offered comments during the virtual meeting. We are pleased that many of the changes will improve the pedestrian experience in approaching and using the proposed buildings, as well as the newly created plaza and passageway.

The passageway between the two buildings will create a new connection between the Rose Kennedy Greenway and Cutillo Park for people walking. We are glad to see the plan will activate the plaza for people along the Greenway, as it includes new seating opportunities both bordering the building with the hotel and restaurant spaces, as well as new public seating closer to the corner of Hanover Street. We appreciate the visual cue of the concrete sidewalk through the site plan’s plaza as recommended by the City of Boston’s Disability Commission.

The Cross Street and Hanover Street intersection is currently used as a geofenced rideshare pickup and drop-off location, as users are directed within their apps to meet their drivers here. This geofencing makes it possible to limit rideshare pickup and drop-off on other streets in the North End, and is one way that the City of Boston can regulate curb use. With an improved pick up and drop-off area included in this project, we hope that this effort will continue.
Finally, we ask that the proponent commit to clearing the entire plaza and crosswalks curb cuts of snow and ice during the winter months in order to ensure safe walking throughout the year. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the plan. We would be pleased to discuss any of these items further with you.

Thank you,
Stacey Beuttell
Executive Director, WalkBoston

Brendan Kearney
Deputy Director, WalkBoston

76 Ashford Street Comment Letter

76 Ashford Street Comment Letter

By |

April 23, 2021

Michael Sinatra
Boston Planning and Development Agency

Re: 76 Ashford Street PNF

Dear Mr. Sinatra:

WalkBoston has reviewed the PNF for the 76 Ashford Street Project with respect to its impacts and benefits for people walking and using transit.

We are very pleased that the proponent is reserving the land and right-of-way necessary to provide walking, biking and bus access to West Station, and that the built condition will be at the elevation necessary for this connection. This is an absolutely critical element of a successful multi-modal West Station that will allow this part of Boston to become home to transit oriented development. We request that the City make this reservation for walking, biking and bus access to West Station a requirement for the project to receive its environmental and development approvals.

We support the interim use of this access reservation land as open space and urge the proponent to work with the City of Boston, MassDOT and the MBTA to ensure that once the I-90 Allston Multi-Modal Project is built that residents of the building will have access to high quality open space in the neighborhood and along the Charles River.

The building ground-level retail space which will face West Station is a welcoming element of the project to transit users and people walking, and is an appropriate and welcome project element.

We are also pleased that the project has been proposed with a low ratio of parking spaces (approximately .25 spaces/unit). We believe that this is appropriate for a development that will be in such close proximity to West Station and that is also well served by existing bus and Green Line service.

Overall, we are excited that the private development community is responsive to the promise of West Station and its potential for excellent transit service, and look forward to seeing a transit oriented development that includes on-site affordable units.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman, Senior Policy Advisor

MassDCR Birmingham Parkway Comment Letter

MassDCR Birmingham Parkway Comment Letter

By |

April 7, 2021

Jeff Parenti
Deputy Chief Engineer, Division of Planning and Engineering
Department of Conservation and Recreation

Re: DCR Birmingham Parkway

Dear Jeff:

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments at this early stage of project development. We are very excited to see DCR’s approach that improves safety for people walking and biking, that repurposes significant areas of pavement into enlarged parklands, and that is designed to slow and tame traffic.

We have several overall observations about the designs, as well as more detailed comments organized into three areas as they were presented during the March 25th public meeting.

Overall comments

  • As we have commented during several DCR design processes, we believe that multilane, relatively high speed traffic roundabouts are less safe for people walking than signalized intersections. We are especially wary of multilane roundabouts where pedestrians can face a double threat when crossing the approaches and exits. People with low or no vision are particularly disadvantaged at these uncontrolled crossings. In this location, less than a mile from the Perkins School for the Blind, this is a specially cogent issue.  We urge DCR to refrain from considering multilane roundabouts.  Tight, traffic calming mini-roundabouts (see MassDOT Guidelines for the Planning and Design of Roundabouts page 11) on VERY low volume, low speed neighborhood streets where sharp turning angles are maintained (primary vehicle movement is not essentially a straight-through path) may be safe.
  • We urge DCR to provide separate walking and bicycling paths wherever there is the space to do so. The speeds of walkers and bicyclists are quite different, and as the number of cycling commuters increases, the conflicts between these two modes are becoming more and more pronounced. In particular, the Birmingham Parkway project area presents ample space for separate paths. This project area includes the Dr. Paul Dudley White Bike Path which is a heavily used bike commuter route so separation is even more important.

The “Eye”

Alternative 1A is our preferred approach in this area because it:

  • Simplifies, rationalizes and signalizes the intersections (and does not use a multilane roundabout).
  • Returns significant usable square footage to the parkland along the river.
  • If better access to the recreation area at the old pool site is deemed to be important for its future use, Alternative 1D could be a reasonable approach.

We suggest considering several design details as the project advances:

  • Add pedestrian safety refuge islands where the crossing distances are long.
  • Tighten up turning radii wherever possible, particularly on those approaches where trucks and buses are not permitted to travel.
  • Ensure that the signal timing is set to allow fully adequate crossings times for walkers of all ages.

Parkway

Alternative 2B is our preferred approach in this area because it:

  • Maximizes the amount of land returned to park and active transportation use.
  • Re-uses the existing pavement in an efficient manner.
  • Will help to calm traffic by having two-way traffic.

We suggest considering several design details as the project advances.

  • Reduce the pavement and lane width of the roadway to help calm traffic.
  • As noted above, provide separate walking and biking paths.

Secondary Intersections

The approach described at the meeting of calming traffic, providing signalized intersections that will provide WALK phases for pedestrians, and reducing the amount of paving all seem appropriate. We look forward to seeing the design concepts as they are developed later in the project.

We look forward to seeing the next iteration of the project concept.

Best regards,

Stacey Beuttell, Executive Director
Wendy Landman, Senior Policy Advisor

Advocates letter re Allston I-90: Next Steps (March 2021)

Advocates letter re Allston I-90: Next Steps (March 2021)

By |

March 30, 2021

Jonathan Gulliver
Highway Administrator
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
10 Park Plaza, Suite 4160
Boston, MA 02116

Subject:  Allston Multimodal Project Recommended Next Steps Regarding Upcoming Notice of Project Change

Dear Administrator Gulliver:

Thank you for convening the recent Allston Multimodal Project Task Force meeting, and for your request for ideas to make Task Force meetings and the environmental review process more productive moving forward.

As evidenced by the voluminous formal comments made to MassDOT last October, as well as the letters from our coalition, there is a demonstrably strong consensus for the Modified All At-Grade option from stakeholders across the region. Based on that strong consensus and in response to your request for ideas to improve the public process associated with this transformative project, we write today with a few specific suggestions requesting they be incorporated now into the upcoming Notice of Project Change (NPC):

  1. Please refine the Modified All At-Grade to ensure no roadway in the river—and include that version in the NPC. MassDOT’s most recent drawings (shared in the fall of 2020) showed about 4-feet of roadway intrusion. Members of the coalition have worked collaboratively and individually, on numerous occasions, to offer design modifications that avoid unnecessary incursion into the river. Refining your current design will allow for continued productive collaboration with stakeholders and ensure that the NPC begins with a refined, improved, and community-supported design.
  2. Please develop a list of issues requiring further analysis to be included in the NPC. Despite several years of hard work by both the project team and the public, this coalition and other stakeholders strongly believe that a number of key issues have yet to be fully developed or presented to the Task Force. We suggest the top three issues on such a list should include:
    1. Constructability and maintenance for all Build and No-Build options, as well as the Substantial Repair Option to temporarily repair the highway viaduct in its current location initially introduced by MassDOT in November 2020;
    2. Methods of mitigating construction and traffic impacts; and
    3. Details for the remediation of the degraded riverbank, infrastructure upgrades needed to address untreated storm drainage, details about ecosystem services, such as constructed wetlands, and the integration of the improved river edge and the Paul Dudley White Path with the Agganis Connector, Cambridge Street South promenade, and River Street into a unified high quality urban design, as well as broader corridor-area analysis to minimize impacts on the Charles River and optimize mobility and open space access.

We know you and the team have a lot on your plate and are up against important and fast approaching deadlines. We are happy to work with MassDOT to identify a more comprehensive list of issues needing further analysis so that the MassDOT project team can maintain its ambitious schedule, while also continuing to resolve outstanding questions to keep us on a positive path to improved communication.

In short, we believe that advancing an improved All At-Grade Option as well as a list of issues requiring further analysis in the NPC will lead to a productive process—and the most ideal outcome for the project.

We look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure the success of the project.

Sincerely,

A Better City
Allston Brighton CDC
Allston Civic Association
Boston Society for Architecture
Charles River Conservancy
Conservation Law Foundation
LivableStreets Alliance
MassBike
Sierra Club of Massachusetts
WalkBoston
Kendall Square Association
Anthony D’Isidoro, Allston resident and Task Force member
Harry Mattison, Allston resident and Task Force member
Jessica Robertson, Allston resident and Task Force member
Fred Yalouris, Cambridge community representative on the Task Force

CC: Secretary Tesler, Project Manager Davidson, Secretary Theohardes, Ken Miller, Commissioner Rooney

 

DeBerry-Homer Elementary School, Springfield MA Comment Letter

DeBerry-Homer Elementary School, Springfield MA Comment Letter

By |

March 16, 2021

Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Kathleen Theoharides
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: MEPA Office, Eva Murray
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Dear Secretary Theoharides:

WalkBoston continues to work in the City of Springfield where we have conducted 14 walk audits to date, nine of them around Springfield elementary schools. Before the COVID 19 pandemic began, WalkBoston was working with the Homer Street School to evaluate the safety and quality of the new walking routes students will take to reach the combined DeBerry-Homer Elementary School between Monroe and Union Streets. It is with this expertise that we submit the following comments on the DeBerry-Homer Elementary School Environmental Notification Form (ENF).

The Pare Corporation Traffic Impact Analysis discusses the proposed vehicular and pedestrian traffic patterns to be implemented with the construction of the new combined elementary school. Our comments are in response to the findings of that analysis.

  1. We applaud the idea of converting Monroe Street into a one-way street with vehicular drop off within (or along) the existing right of way. Too many new elementary schools devote much of their site to absorb traffic congestion with long drop off driveways and circles, which increases the total amount of impervious surface and removes the possibility of using the land for playgrounds, passive green space or other pedagogical functions. That said, a wider Monroe Street will invite drivers to speed during times when school is not in session, or when student drop off and pick up are not occurring. The parking queue shown on the proposed vehicular circulation plan is at least 1000’ long which effectively widens the street section from an 11-foot travel lane to a 20-foot wide speed zone. Additional traffic calming measures should be considered – such as textured paving or flex posts delineating the pick-up lane, speed tables, and/or additional signage.
  2. Given the proposed one-way traffic flow through the site – entrance on Union Street to the parking lot and exit onto Monroe Street – safeguards (such as a staff member at the driveway entrance) may need to be put in place to discourage drivers traveling westbound on Union Street from cutting through the parking lot to drop off their students either in the parking lot or cut into the queue on Monroe Street. Drivers accustomed to two-way traffic on Monroe may see this as the fastest way to drive their student to the front door.
  3. The increase in vehicular traffic causes many of the traffic signals around the school site to fail Level of Service (LOS) standards. The proposed mitigation at the State St/Catharine St/Eastern Ave/Wilbraham Road intersection is to adjust the signal phasing to include a longer green phase. While this may improve vehicular circulation, this will most likely extend the pedestrian wait time. Every effort should be made to reduce wait times to improve compliance with the WALK signal. Research has shown that pedestrian compliance rates drop significantly if wait times exceed 60 seconds.
  4. Additional midblock crossings are needed on Union Street. The pedestrian circulation diagram shows no midblock crossings between Eastern Avenue and Hancock Street (approximately 1,400 feet or ¼ mile). Students walking from the neighborhood to the south or from west of the school site along Union Street will not walk to the Union Street/Eastern Avenue intersection only to double back to reach the school building entrance. Midblock crossing locations with appropriate pedestrian hybrid beacons, signage and crosswalk markings should be identified based on student travel patterns and desire lines.
  5. The pedestrian circulation diagram indicates that bicyclists are expected to ride on the sidewalks to reach the school. While no sidewalk dimensions are provided, mixing cyclists and walkers on sidewalks is not a preferred option. Given the generous width of the existing travel lanes on Monroe Street and Union Street, the option of including bike lanes on these streets is preferable. The City of Springfield is in the process of updating its Complete Streets Prioritization Plan. Every effort should be made to coordinate with the bicycle network planning work already completed and in process when re-allocating space on Monroe and Union Streets.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. Please reach out to us with any questions that may arise from our response.

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell
Executive Director