Category: Newsletter

Town of Lenox on the move

Town of Lenox on the move

By |

Lenox, in the Berkshires, has just over 5,000 residents.
It is largely rural with a small downtown, parks, public
art, great restaurants, Tanglewood, and The Mount/Edith
Wharton’s Home. In Lenox, you get the small-town vibe
but big-city culture.

Residents want to stay in Lenox as they age. Millennials
across the country are opting to live in traditionally
dense, accessible neighborhoods. So in the past year, Lenox has embraced walkability and adopted
a Complete Streets policy. The process started by
conducting two walk audits with WalkBoston and
working with local partners to install “pop-up” Complete
Street interventions. Working with Age Friendly
Berkshires, the town installed two temporary curb
extensions on Main Street and ordered “WalkYourCity”
signs directing residents and visitors to destinations
such as Tanglewood, Shakespeare and Co., restaurants, and playgrounds.

Getting decision makers and stakeholders into the neighborhood has been a
big “win.” Seeing is believing. The “pop-up” curb extensions were a low-cost
and very effective tool to demonstrate how to slow down car traffic and give
walkers better visibility and more ability to be seen.

During one walk audit, a Board of Selectmen member joined us. Noting an
inaccessible curb ramp, the group stopped to take a look. The Selectmen
asked the Department of Public Works Superintendent and Town Planner to
fix the ramp before the current repaving project ended. It got fixed that week.

Partnerships, walk audits, temporary, low-cost installations all make what
often seem like lofty or challenging goals and solutions, seem doable. You
leverage resources and expertise, and get feedback immediately.

We plan to submit our curb extension project as part of our Complete Streets
Tier III funding request. This project makes the street safer for all users and we
know we have support after testing and educating people about the benefits.

This effort has been positive due to the many partnerships including
WalkBoston, Mass in Motion, Be Well Berkshires, MassDOT Complete Streets
Program, Berkshire Regional Planning Commission, Age Friendly Berkshires,
the Department of Public Works, and members of the Board of Selectmen.

Gwen Miller is the Land Use Director and Town Planner for Lenox, MA.
This article was featured in WalkBoston’s October 2017 newsletter.

————————————————————————————————
Join WalkBoston’s Mailing List to keep up to date on advocacy issues.

Like our work? Support WalkBoston – Donate Now!
Connect with us on Twitter and Facebook

Automated enforcement?

Automated enforcement?

By |

Our streets are experiencing a rise of serious injuries
and fatalities. As the Boston Globe recently reported, all
traffic deaths in 2017 are up 46% over the same period
of 2013. This unacceptable trend affects people walking,
biking, and driving. Drivers who are distracted by texting
and apps are a major cause of crashes.

An Act to reduce traffic fatalities (Senate Bill 1905 /
House Bill 2877) is intended to make our roads safer in
the face of troubling trends. Drafted with broad input,
it has 85 cosponsors led by Senator Will Brownsberger
and Representatives Jon Hecht and David Rogers.

Recognizing that cities and towns need tools to enforce
traffic rules, the legislation allows use of automated road
safety cameras to enforce speeding, red-light, and school
bus stop sign violations. While Massachusetts does not
currently enable this, 29 states have some form of camera
enforcement and it is common in other countries.

Research shows automated cameras are effective. In Montgomery County, Maryland, streets with speed
cameras experienced a 39% reduction in fatal and
serious injuries. A University of North Carolina
Highway Research Center study found installation of red-light cameras can
contribute to a slight rise in rear-end crashes, but almost always leads to
significant reductions in typically more severe side-impact crashes. The
National Transportation Safety Board has endorsed automated enforcement
as an effective way to reduce speed and crashes.

With the right regulations, automated enforcement can be a highly effective
safety tool, and one that doesn’t increase traffic stops—a concern by many in a
time of increased racial profiling, and immigration issues. The language In this
bill is designed to ensure the best system of enforcement:


• Location of cameras would be based on safety benefits, not targeting any
population or neighborhood. Cameras would be at high-crash locations
where other interventions such as road redesign are not feasible.

• It would not be a money grab. The best cameras act as deterrents and
not to trick people into fines—few violations are a sign of success. The
bill directs the majority of revenues into road improvements, not general
funds. Cameras would be well-marked. Revenue-sharing with private
camera installation or operating companies would be prohibited, avoiding
inappropriate incentives.

• Photographs would be of rear license plates, no faces or identifying
information, and only if a violation has occurred. Photos would be
permanently deleted after ruling. Fines, assessed to the owner of the
vehicle, would not exceed $50, won’t increase with additional violations,
nor add to insurance points. Law enforcement would need a court-approved
warrant to access photos for purposes beyond traffic enforcement.

• There would be state oversight, an appeals process, and common-sense
emergency exemptions.

Charlie Ticotsky is the policy director of Transportation for Massachusetts (T4MA). Sign up for their email list & follow T4MASS on Twitter.
This article was featured in WalkBoston’s October 2017 newsletter.

————————————————————————————————
Join WalkBoston’s Mailing List to keep up to date on advocacy issues.

Like our work? Support WalkBoston – Donate Now!
Connect with us on Twitter and Facebook

October 2017 Newsletter

October 2017 Newsletter

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Our newsletter is out and hitting mailboxes of supporters! Thank you to all the contributors & volunteer newsletter committee who helped make it happen.

“A note from the Executive Director”
By Wendy Landman/Executive Director, WalkBoston
“Automated Enforcement?”
By Charlie Ticotsky/Policy Director, T4MA
“Town of Lenox on the move”
By Gwen Miller/Land Use Dir. & Town Planner, Lenox
“Rural walking in Massachusetts”
By Stacey Beuttell/Program Director, WalkBoston

Download the October 2017 Newsletter PDF

From the Executive Director

From the Executive Director

By | | Comments 0 Comment

By Wendy Landman/Executive Director, WalkBoston

Over the last six months WalkBoston worked to craft our 3-year action plan. The journey was as important as arriving. We took stock of what WalkBoston has achieved and thought about the critical next steps toward “Making Massachusetts More Walkable.” This newsletter and the next focus on our new goals and how you can be a part of the change-making process.

We have accomplished the formidable task of making walking a part of transportation and planning conversations statewide and have helped spread the word that walkability is critical to the health of people and communities.

Next we must ensure communities are safer for people walking, and that investments are made to improve the built environment across the state. By using an equity lens as we work to meet these goals, we will be intentionally inclusive of all ages, abilities, and communities.

How you can help:
• Ask for and support changes. Speak up for walking in your own neighborhood, city or town —make sure that local officials hear your voice.
• Support laws that improve safety. Ask your State senator and representative to support laws such as banning hand-held device use, and allowing automated traffic enforcement.
• We can coach you on how to ask for changes. Reach out to us when you see problems that need to be addressed—we can’t be everywhere all the time but we can support you.
• Donate your voice, time, and money to WalkBoston.

This article was featured in WalkBoston’s October 2017 newsletter.
————————————————————————————————
Join WalkBoston’s Mailing List to keep up to date on advocacy issues.
Like our work? Support WalkBoston – Donate Now!
Connect with us on Twitter and Facebook

Automated Enforcement?

Automated Enforcement?

By |

By Charlie Ticotsky/Policy Director, T4MA 

Our streets are experiencing a rise of serious injuries and fatalities. As the Boston Globe recently reported, all traffic deaths in 2017 are up 46% over the same period of 2013. This unacceptable trend affects people walking, biking, and driving. Drivers who are distracted by texting and apps are a major cause of crashes.

An Act to reduce traffic fatalities (Senate Bill 1905 / House Bill 2877) is intended to make our roads safer in the face of troubling trends. Drafted with broad input, it has 85 cosponsors led by Senator Will Brownsberger and Representatives Jon Hecht and David Rogers.

Recognizing that cities and towns need tools to enforce traffic rules, the legislation allows use of automated road safety cameras to enforce speeding, red-light, and school bus stop sign violations. While Massachusetts does not currently enable this, 29 states have some form of camera enforcement and it is common in other countries.

Research shows automated cameras are effective. In Montgomery County, Maryland, streets with speed cameras experienced a 39% reduction in fatal and serious injuries. A University of North Carolina Highway Research Center study found installation of red-light cameras can contribute to a slight rise in rear-end crashes, but almost always leads to significant reductions in typically more severe side-impact crashes. The National Transportation Safety Board has endorsed automated enforcement as an effective way to reduce speed and crashes.

With the right regulations, automated enforcement can be a highly effective safety tool, and one that doesn’t increase traffic stops—a concern by many in a time of increased racial profiling, and immigration issues. The language In this bill is designed to ensure the best system of enforcement:

  • Location of cameras would be based on safety benefits, not targeting any population or neighborhood. Cameras would be at high-crash locations where other interventions such as road redesign are not feasible.
  • It would not be a money grab. The best cameras act as deterrents and not to trick people into fines—few violations are a sign of success. The bill directs the majority of revenues into road improvements, not general funds. Cameras would be well-marked. Revenue-sharing with private camera installation or operating companies would be prohibited, avoiding inappropriate incentives.
  • Photographs would be of rear license plates, no faces or identifying information, and only if a violation has occurred. Photos would be permanently deleted after ruling. Fines, assessed to the owner of the vehicle, would not exceed $50, won’t increase with additional violations, nor add to insurance points. Law enforcement would need a court-approved warrant to access photos for purposes beyond traffic enforcement.
  • There would be state oversight, an appeals process, and common-sense emergency exemptions.

This article was featured in WalkBoston’s October 2017 newsletter.

————————————————————————————————
Join WalkBoston’s Mailing List to keep up to date on advocacy issues.
Like our work? Support WalkBoston – Donate Now!
Connect with us on Twitter and Facebook