blue line Archives - WalkMassachusetts

Comments on Suffolk Downs redevelopment (EEA No. 15783)

January 25, 2018

Mayor Brian Arrigo
ATTN: Robert O’Brien, Director of Economic Development
City of Revere
281 Broadway
Revere, MA 02151

Secretary Matthew Beaton
ATTN: Page Czepiga, MEPA Analyst
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Director Brian Golden
ATTN: Tim Czerwienski, Project Manager
Boston Planning and Development Agency
One City Hall, Ninth Floor
Boston, MA 02201

RE: WalkBoston comments on Suffolk Downs redevelopment (EEA No. 15783)

Dear Mayor Arrigo, Secretary Beaton and Director Golden:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HYM Investment Group’s proposed redevelopment of the Suffolk Downs site in East Boston and Revere. WalkBoston looks forward to working with the City of Revere, EEA, BPDA, HYM, and other agencies and project stakeholders to help advance the proponent’s stated goal of “creating a vibrant, mixed-use walkable community.”

Leveraging connections between walkability and transit

The proponent’s Expanded Project Notification Form (EPNF) reflects a strong commitment in principle to walkability and multimodal transportation connectivity. The proposed Phase 1 project emphasizes new pedestrian connections at the Suffolk Downs Blue Line station on the MBTA, and the Master Plan project is similarly premised upon pedestrian access to and from the Blue Line at Suffolk Downs and Beachmont Stations. Overall the Suffolk Downs site is wellpositioned for walkable transit-oriented development, which is reflected in HYM’s high anticipated mode shares for walking and transit for the Master Plan project. (The projected mode shares for walking range from 10.9% for office uses to 19.6% for residential uses; the projected mode shares for transit range from 45.4% for residential uses to 54.7% for hotel uses.)

The Phase 1 project has a much lower projected transit mode share of 37.5%, as well as a 44.4% projected mode share for single occupancy vehicles. We are concerned that this will create significant auto dependency from the onset of this project that will affect the future Master Plan development as well. The proponent states that “while there will be emphasis to support a high proportion of alternative trip making by the Phase 1 Project, this more conservative mode share profile has been utilized given the Phase 1 buildings are being analyzed as a standalone project without the benefit of a mixed-use environment.” We urge the proponent to aim for more ambitious transit, walking and biking mode share goals for the Phase 1 development to maximize the site’s potential for transit-oriented development.

The proponent also anticipates over 54,000 new transit trips per weekday, including over 4,000 trips during the morning peak hour and over 5,000 trips during the evening peak hour. This number is very high relative to current Blue Line ridership levels. As part of their transit analysis for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), HYM should detail how they arrived at this number and how Blue Line ridership will change as the Master Plan project is phased in over time. This analysis should be accompanied by the proponent also clarifying their plans to invest in capacity upgrades along the Blue Line as part of a broader package of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies.

Exploring opportunities to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips and parking spaces

While the high projected transit mode share and ridership are positive attributes of this development proposal, the proponent still projects over 33,000 new vehicle trips per weekday, including over 3,000 trips during the morning peak hour and over 3,000 trips during the evening peak hour. This increased vehicular traffic has the potential to significantly affect congestion and pedestrian safety within the project site and along surrounding roadways. Given that vehicular access to the site is limited to just two intersections (Route 1A/Tomasello Way and Winthrop Avenue/Tomasello Way), the proponent should clarify how the project site and surrounding streets will handle this traffic in the DEIR. Significant mitigation measures will be necessary to address 33,000 new vehicles on already congested streets.

While HYM does not specify how many new parking spaces will be needed to accommodate these vehicles, WalkBoston calculates that between 10,800 and 16,200 new spaces will be necessary, depending on the development program and parking ratios used. (The proponent states that the following parking ratio ranges should adequately support the Master Plan project’s parking demand into the future: residential, 0.5 to 1.0 spaces per unit; office, 1.0 spaces per 1,000 SF; lab, 1.0 spaces per 1,000 SF; hotel: 0.5 spaces per room; retail: 0.5 spaces per 1,000 SF). We are encouraged by the relatively low proposed parking ratios for the residential units, as well as HYM’s broader recognition that auto trip rates are likely to decrease over time. The final residential parking ratio should be as close to 0.5 spaces per unit as possible and we look forward to reviewing HYM’s TDM plans as part of the DEIR. Any strategies and mitigation measures proposed must further enhance walkability, bikeability and transit access, while reducing single occupancy vehicle use and the associated need for parking.

Exploring opportunities for bus/shuttle connectivity and related pedestrian access

HYM notes that there are several MBTA bus lines (450, 459 and 119) along Route 1A and Winthrop Avenue within a half-mile walk of the project site, and that “there are opportunities to expand MBTA bus service into the project site and provide for internal site transportation/shuttle to further improve access to public transit” as the Master Plan project is built out. The proponent should further explore and detail these options as part of their TDM plans in the DEIR, as increased utilization of MBTA buses and/or shuttles can reduce single occupancy vehicle use. An analysis of bus/shuttle options should examine the potential for increased service on existing MBTA bus lines and associated changes in ridership, as well as the potential to service the neighborhoods surrounding the project site. The proponent should also clarify their plans for investing in such services, whether through funding the MBTA or their own shuttles.

Ensuring that pedestrians can safely and comfortably walk to and from bus/shuttle stops is critical to ensuring that these services will be utilized. Ideally bus/shuttle stops will be located within a quarter-mile of the project site to maximize their usage. We appreciate HYM’s commitment to improving sidewalks adjacent to the project site to meet ADA standards and to include street trees if feasible, as well as their acknowledgement of the need for mitigation measures and infrastructure improvements at the site’s primary vehicular access points (Route 1A/Tomasello Way and Winthrop Avenue/Tomasello Way). The proponent states that “geometric and traffic signal improvements will be recommended at both of these intersections to optimize traffic operations.”

Improvements at these locations must also address pedestrian safety and traffic calming. HYM plans to widen Tomasello Way and Route 1A as part of the Master Plan improvements, yet there are no crosswalks across Route 1A near the project site and the crosswalk across Tomasello Way at Route 1A is already 140 feet wide with minimal pedestrian refuge. Any signal and roadway upgrades at this location and near other shuttle/bus stops must provide safe pedestrian crossings and well-timed WALK signals that provide countdowns and leading pedestrian intervals. Long crossing distances should be reduced as much as possible using curb extensions, and pedestrian refuges should be created and enhanced to provide protected waiting areas. In extreme circumstances, the proponent might consider working with the MBTA to relocate bus stops to more pedestrian-friendly locations.

Creating a walkable project site that meets Complete Streets standards

In addition to leveraging pedestrian access to and from the Blue Line, the proponent has integrated walkability and pedestrian connectivity into many other aspects of their redevelopment proposal. These include creating a new interior street network on site that meets Boston Transportation Department’s (BTD) Complete Streets guidelines, developing a system of multi-use ADA-compliant paths and trails that connects to adjacent neighborhoods and regional path networks, and activating the public realm with open space amenities and extensive ground-floor retail. Creating streets, sidewalks and paths that accommodate road users of all abilities and travel modes is critical to developing more livable and walkable communities, so WalkBoston is pleased to see a commitment to these issues in the EPNF.

We look forward to seeing more detailed plans for the interior streets, paths, intersections and signals as part of the DEIR. The interior streets should be designed to ensure that vehicles follow a 20 mile per hour speed limit to maximize walking safety as well as walking and transit mode shares. They should also include additional measures for pedestrian safety and traffic calming, including narrow vehicular travel lane widths, frequent and well-marked crosswalks, and well-timed WALK signals that provide countdowns and leading pedestrian intervals. We encourage the proponent to maintain their current plans to not have vehicular access to the project site from Bennington Street or Waldemar Avenue, thus prioritizing multimodal connectivity and reducing the potential for increased local traffic.

Improving pedestrian safety throughout the project study area

The need for traffic mitigation is not limited to the immediate project vicinity and access points. To this end, HYM states that a mitigation program will likely focus on improvements to roadway geometry, traffic signals, and multimodal mobility along the broader Route 1A and Winthrop Avenue corridors, as well as Furlong Drive, the on-site roadway network, and other nearby intersections. The proponent also notes that many of the broader study area intersections are located within Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) clusters and thus are potentially subject to Road Safety Audits (RSAs) per Massachusetts Department of Transportation guidelines. WalkBoston looks forward to reviewing a more detailed discussion of the Master Plan project mitigation phasing and recommendations for the timing of specific roadway improvement projects as part of the DEIR. We are also available to participate in future RSAs as needed. Once again, we encourage utmost consideration for pedestrian safety and traffic calming measures as part of any improvement packages.

Thank you again for considering these issues and feel free to contact us with any questions.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc: House Speaker Robert DeLeo
Senate President Harriette Chandler
Senator Joseph Boncore, Transportation Co-Chair
Representative William Strauss, Transportation Co-Chair
Representative Adrian Madaro
Boston City Council President Andrea Campbell
Boston City Councilor Michelle Wu, Transportation Chair
Boston City Councilor Lydia Edwards, District 1
Revere City Council President Jessica Giannino
Revere City Councilor Steven Morabito, Economic Development and Planning Chair
Revere City Councilor Joanne McKenna, Ward 1
Becca Wolfson, Boston Cyclists Union
Stacey Thompson, LivableStreets Alliance
Andre Leroux, Massachusetts Smart Growth Alliance
Richard Fries, MassBike Marc Ebuña, TransitMatters
Chris Dempsey, Transportation for Massachusetts

Comments on the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mohegan Sun Development MEPA# 15006

August 8, 2014

Secretary Maeve Vallely Bartlett
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: Holly Johnson
100 Cambridge St., Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

RE: Comments on the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mohegan Sun Development MEPA# 15006

Dear Secretary Vallely Bartlett:

The proposal included in the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report makes some changes to the components of the Mohegan Sun Development and slightly alters pedestrian access to the site. Construction will include 965,000 sq ft of gross floor area, providing space for 5,000 gaming positions, 450-500 hotel rooms, 44,000 sq ft of meeting/entertainment space and 100,000 sq ft of retail space. Parking for 4,200 cars will be located beneath the structure, with an additional 270 cars on surface but below the first floor of the building.

Pedestrian entry into the site takes place at the two corners of the site, with a southwest corner entrance devoted to people arriving by private vehicles, and a northeast corner entrance devoted to people arriving by public transit (bus and subway), tour buses and walking from the surrounding area. Most of our comments focus on the building’s external design, and the ways in which people find access to and from the building.

1. Access to the site – the balance between transit and driving
Although this casino site is much better served by public transportation than any of the other proposed sites in Massachusetts, access by private vehicle may be encouraged because of the extremely large number of on-site parking spaces. We urge the proponent to give greater consideration to encouraging transit and pedestrian access and discouraging vehicular access.

• A potentially attractive reliance on public transportation may be lost because by the ease of driving and finding a parking space. Perhaps parking should be deemphasized through pricing and location.

• People arriving by vehicle are pampered by weather protection, provided in two ways: either by live access using a porte cochere and valet services, or by direct access into the underground parking garages where access is served by elevators.

• The access area at the porte cochere does not encourage pedestrians who do not arrive by car. For example, walkers using Tomasello Drive to get to the entrance areas of the southwest corner of the site will find a sidewalk that leads into the parking garage where elevators connect to the main floors.

2. Access on foot will be primarily served by public and private transportation to the northeast corner of the site.
At this corner there is access from adjacent MBTA bus stops. The MBTA Beachmont Station on the Blue Line is about 150 feet away. Tour bus bays are immediately adjacent to the concourse of the entry way. The concentration of arrivals into the concourse area appears to be an efficient way to enter the development.

• The grade of the northeast corner concourse may be difficult for certain users to reach. It appears that all people arriving at his corner of the site will have to go up at least one level via elevators and/or stairs to reach the main floor, where further vertical public circulation is available. Access to the concourse level varies. For example, people arriving by public transportation, whether by bus or rapid transit, will need to go up at least eight steps to the concourse level. Arrivals from the tour bus drop-off area may have to do the same. It is unclear how arriving patrons in wheelchairs will access the concourse; there is no evident ADA access ramp from the sidewalk at the intersection of Winthrop and Washburn Avenues up to the concourse level.

• Weather protection for arriving pedestrians should be provided. Covered walkways would be appropriate, particularly on the approach from Washburn Avenue and on the open stairway at the main entrance.

3. Access to and from the Beachmont MBTA station
The proponent should work with the MBTA to enhance access to and from the rapid transit platforms at the Beachmont station. Wayfinding signs inside the station should be used to direct riders to the Mohegan Sun complex. Wayfinding signs at the entrance/exit concourse of the proposed development could reinforce the potential for patrons to take transit, especially because the station is so close.

4. Off-site improvements
The proponent has committed $45 million for off-site roadway, traffic and safety improvements. We hope that the commitment will be honored with full ADA compliance, and with appropriate pedestrian signal equipment at each intersection (including countdown signals, leading pedestrian indicators and automatic recall of WALK signals during the hours when pedestrians will be present). Crosswalks should be provided with zebra striping, and in some locations in-street pedestrian signs such as “yield to pedestrian” may be appropriate. Refuge islands at street centerlines should also be considered on major roadways.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important project.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman Robert Sloane
Executive Director Senior Planner

Comments on the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage MEPA #15134

July 11, 2014

Secretary Maeve Vallely Bartlett
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: Holly Johnson
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

RE: Comments on the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage MEPA #15134

Dear Secretary Vallely Bartlett:

WalkBoston reviews significant proposed development projects to provide comments about their impacts on pedestrians, and to suggest measures that may mitigate negative impacts or generally improve the projects for walkers.

We have reviewed the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage and find exciting aspects of the project that will benefit walkers. These include:

Enhancement of a major pedestrian-transit hub
The East Parcel contains a high-volume transit hub with extensive pedestrian access. Access to the Orange and Green Line Haymarket Station access points will be maintained, as will access to the many MBTA bus services. Some of the difficult pedestrian crossings to the site will be improved by narrowing the width of the New Sudbury Street and thus the length of the crosswalks at its intersection with Congress Street.

The sidewalk through the East Parcel
The new pedestrian connection proposed for this project between Congress Street and Canal Street respects a traditional walking route between Downtown and North Station. This route will see more intensive use over the coming years as the significant developments at North Station and at this site occur, and the proposed design reflects the many circulation activities that are required of this parcel.

A new signalized intersection for Bowker Street
The proposed signalized intersection at New Chardon Street and Bowker Street is a welcome addition for pedestrians. The nearby intersection of New Chardon and Congress Street is skewed in such a way that the crossing is very long and is inconvenient for walkers going to the courthouse across the street. The new crosswalk makes the move much more convenient.

Improvements to on-site parking
As parking ceases to be the principal use of this site, the plan is much less auto-oriented. A reduction of number of available parking spaces reduces vehicles circulating around the site for access. This is accompanied by a reduction in the number of places where vehicles must cross sidewalks, enhancing pedestrian safety. The removal of garage access from New Chardon Street and its potentially busy sidewalks is a major pedestrian benefit of the proposal.

In addition to these project benefits, we also note several issues that need more attention.

Weather protection for walkers
The current garage has the unusual benefit of covering the bus waiting area and access to the transit station below, thus protecting walkers from rain and snow. Removing the garage and opening up the area for new development is beneficial to the project, and we believe that Figure 1.8 shows that the new structure will also provide cover for the bus station area. However, no cover for the subway entrance area is shown. The diagrams are less than clear on this point and we ask the developer to clarify how the bus waiting area and subway entrance areas will be designed and whether they will be covered.

Widths of sidewalks
Pedestrian improvements included in the project will improve safety at crosswalks and along the major streets. A note suggests that the current sidewalks widths are varied throughout the project, and are “rarely less than eight feet wide.” We trust that the standards for future sidewalk widths in this pedestrian-friendly project will be considerably wider and in keeping with the City’s complete street guidelines.

Services provided at the bus station
Six bus stops are proposed in the redesign of the bus station. Three of the stops will be in the area where they are now located, and three stops will be provided by a nominal widening at the side of the Central Artery Surface Road. The design and operation of the bus stops is critical for pedestrian safety and convenience. We ask that the proponent provide detailed diagrams and sketches of how this area will operate and ensure that bus patrons are well served by the new design.

Truck loading bays facing New Chardon Street
New Chardon Street is the major Downtown/North End access to and from the Central Artery (I-93). Four truck loading docks are proposed for the section of New Chardon between Congress Street and the on- and off-ramps leading to the I-93. The site plan suggests that trucks will back into these docks from the street travel lanes across the sidewalk on this side of the East Parcel. Unless use of the docks are restricted to the middle of the night it is difficult to comprehend how trucks backing into place across the sidewalk on a ramp to I-93 can be safely accommodated. We request that the proponent describe this element of the project in detail, including how pedestrian safety will be maintained.

Cut-ins on sidewalks
Cut-ins are proposed on three sides of the East Parcel and two sides of the West Parcel:
1. New Seabury Street near the Surface Artery
2. New Chardon Street near Canal Street
3. New Chardon Street near Bowker Street
4. Congress Street Near New Sudbury Street toward Leverett Circle
5. Congress Street near New Sudbury Street toward State Street

Although not well defined in the DEIR, a cut-in appears to be a pull out lane that reduces the width of the sidewalk to accommodate vehicles. The drawings in the DEIR show these indentations only vaguely but imply that a cut-in is a lane for vehicles separate from the adjacent thoroughfare but parallel to it.

The next stage of development of the project should include details of:

Why the cut-ins are needed in each of the five locations?
How they are proposed to be used (back-in, parallel movement, etc.)?
How they relate to, or potentially conflict with, all major adjacent pedestrian flows?
Design guidelines that include minimum widths for adjacent sidewalks or crosswalks, as well as bollards or other protections for walkers. We are concerned that the sidewalks seem quite narrow adjacent to some of the proposed cut-ins.

We appreciate your consideration of our comments and look forward to your responses to them. Please feel free to contact WalkBoston with questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman Robert Sloane
Executive Director Senior Project Manager

Comments on Notice of Project Change for the Mohegan Sun Massachusetts in Revere EEA #15006

March 7, 2014

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

RE: Comments on Notice of Project Change for the Mohegan Sun Massachusetts in Revere EEA #15006

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston has reviewed the Notice of Project Change (NPC) for the Mohegan Sun Massachusetts project in Revere and offers the comments below.

The NPC was prompted by the shift of the project location to Suffolk Downs property that is located solely in Revere. This change will have significant impacts on pedestrian movement into and through the project. The elements of the project – two hotels, large gaming space, numerous restaurants and spa– have not changed. But, in the new location, the buildings have a substantially reduced footprint and are much closer to existing business and residential areas.

Walking Access to Transit – Beachmont MBTA Station

The principal impact of the project change for people arriving on foot is the much greater proximity of the development to transit access, now shifted to the Beachmont MBTA Station (formerly focused on the Suffolk Downs Station). The revised location for the proposed resort places the main entrance only 300 feet from Beachmont Station, and will likely shift some trips from autos to transit because of this proximity.

In order to encourage transit and walking trips, we suggest exploring several pedestrian amenities including the following:

A significantly wider sidewalk along Winthrop Avenue between Beachmont Station and the site of the resort.
An weather-protected sidewalk along Winthrop Avenue between the primary entrance and exit locations at Beachmont Station to Washburn Avenue. The canopy or arcade should connect directly to the existing MBTA station entrance which already has weather protection.
A weather-protected walkway from the edge of the resort property on Washburn Avenue to the main resort entrance.
Significant upgrades in wayfinding inside Beachmont Station and along the route to the resort to encourage transit ridership and reinforce the convenient transit access.
Upgrades of escalators and elevators inside Beachmont Station to adequately and safely handle greater numbers of riders using transit.
Signalization or signage protection for pedestrians crossing Washburn Street on the south side of Winthrop Avenue.

Traffic Mitigation

We are fearful that the project will add a great deal of traffic to an area that cannot handle it easily. Winthrop Avenue and the Revere Beach Parkway are heavily used already. Improvements to the interchange with Route 1 will only add to the use of these streets, which cannot easily accommodate them.

Better access might be provided via Tomesello Way, from Route 1A the Suffolk Downs Racetrack parking areas, which will have greater capacity for storage of vehicles and a more orderly approach to the casino. We think the proponent would be well advised to encourage use of Tomesello Way and the MBTA Blue Line for principal access points into the casino property.

In addition, the parking garage is enormous, suggesting a commitment only to vehicular access. Perhaps the proponent could save some of the construction cost of this garage through the use of thoughtful techniques of encouraging patrons not to drive – perhaps a benefit of some sort that patrons could use on the floor of the casino.

We appreciate your consideration of our comments and look forward to your responses to them.

Please feel free to contact WalkBoston with questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Project Manager

Cc Massachusetts Gaming Commission
Mayor Dan Rizzo