Tag: Boston

115 Winthrop Square PNF Comment Letter

115 Winthrop Square PNF Comment Letter

By |

January 20, 2017

Casey Hines, Senior Project Manager
Boston Planning and Development Agency
Boston City Hall
One City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201

Re: 115 Winthrop Square PNF

Dear Ms. Hines:

WalkBoston is Massachusetts’ leading pedestrian advocacy organization. We have reviewed the Project Notification Form for this project and believe that it will provide benefits to the economic strength and vitality of downtown Boston by replacing a dilapidated parking garage that has blighted the Winthrop Square neighborhood for decades. We also believe that there are several issues that require further evaluation and improvement.

1. The Great Hall that has been proposed has the potential to be an exciting gathering place that attracts people from both downtown and Boston’s neighborhoods. We urge that the Great Hall be open to the public 18 hours a day, 52 weeks a year and that it be given programming that goes well beyond a food and shopping court. The ground floor of the building (both as part of the Great Hall and also adjacent to the Great Hall) should have rooms and spaces for talking, working or observing. Programs to encourage use of the space will be essential. The proponent should clarify the plan for activating this space, including the types of programs and the agency or individuals who will be assigned the task of programming and managing the space. We urge the Proponent to provide a description of the mix of uses, the cost to users
(for events that are open to the public), and the anticipated intensity of programming that is to be provided in the Great Hall.

2. Because of its prominent, strategic location, the Great Hall will also be a walking connection between Federal and Devonshire Streets that adds to Downtown’s rich tradition of publicly accessible lanes and alleys. The balance between circulation space and usable public space should be carefully studied and described.

3. Wind studies of the building should identify its impacts on pedestrians using adjacent streets and sidewalks. Wind may also be a factor in the design of the Great Hall, where pedestrians and users of the space should be protected from gusts or periodic and protracted winds around the building.

4. Pedestrian scale lighting should be designed to enhance the usefulness and attractiveness of both interior and exterior portions of the building with attention to creation of a sense of place, traffic safety at street crossings and personal safety.

5. We urge the Proponent to explore building shapes, heights and orientations to reduce or eliminate shadow impacts on the Common and Public Garden.

6. We also urge the City and the Proponent to work with the many organizations and individuals who are deeply concerned that the project will set a precedent that allows shadow impacts on the Common and Public Garden. Prior to approval of the project, the City should describe permanent and binding protections for the Common and the Public Garden from further shadow impacts.

Thank you very much for your consideration of our comments.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc: Senator William Brownsberger
Senator Joseph Boncore
Representative Jay Livingstone
Representative Aaron Michlewitz
Representative Byron Rushing
City Council President Michelle Wu
Elizabeth Vizza, Friends of the Public Garden
Howard Kassler, Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay
Patricia Tully, Beacon Hill Civic Association
Greg Galer, Boston Preservation Alliance
Todd Lee, LightBoston
Kathleen MacNeil, Millennium Partners
Cindy Schlessinger, Epsilon Associates

Comments on General Electric Headquarters Project SEIR 15547

Comments on General Electric Headquarters Project SEIR 15547

By |

January 20, 2017

Matthew Beaton, Secretary
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office
Analyst: Alex Strysky
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Re: General Electric Headquarters Project SEIR 15547

Dear Secretary Beaton,

WalkBoston submitted comments on the EA for this project in September, 2016. We made a
number of suggestions about specific improvements that we believe the Proponent might make
themselves, or work with the City to secure, in order to assure comfortable and safe access to and
through the site.

We believe that the GE Headquarters will add vitality and opportunity to the Fort Point Channel neighborhood and to Boston. But, we feel that there is considerable work still required to improve access to the site for the vast majority of employees and visitors who will be arriving on foot.

Necco Street: It appeared to us from the drawings provided in the EA that the sidewalk was to be widened to 12’ in some areas, but narrowed to allow for vehicular drop-off at the main entrance.
The response in Comment 8.4 was that the designs would in keeping with the guidelines of Boston Complete Streets, which calls for a minimum of 8’ wide sidewalks in Downtown Commercial or Mixed-use Districts. Based on further conversations with the project team we are reassured that
the sidewalk at the entrance will largely meet that minimum standard. We hope that the proponent will also:

• Ensure that the narrower portions of the sidewalk not be encumbered with street
furniture or signage and thus remain unobstructed for walkers; and
• Create the pull-outs for vehicle drop-off in locations that are offset from the building
entrances so that there is ample space for people entering and leaving the buildings.

Necco Street Crosswalk: In Comment 8.7 we asked if there would be a crosswalk from the
Headquarters Building to the Necco Street Parking Garage. The following response was provided that does not answer the question: “The project incorporates substantial sidewalk improvements and pedestrian ramping to accommodate ADA compliant crossings.” Since the garage is likely to attract many people going to the GE building, a crosswalk aligned with its single entrance would seem to be appropriate

Accessible Routes to the Site: Comments 8.8, 8.9, 8.10 and 8.11 asked that the Proponent work
with the City and with other property owners in the neighborhood to improve the walking route
from South Station to the site via Summer Street, particularly for people with disabilities who will
not be able to use the stairway that connects Summer Street to the Harborwalk and then to the
main entrance of this project. The response provided in the EA was, ”The Proponents cannot
orchestrate improvements off the Project Site.”

WalkBoston’s comments were made because along the direct route from the Proponent’s main entrance to Summer Street there is no complete or accessible sidewalk. With a projected 70% mode share of walk and transit trips (which are thus also walking trips) this issue deserves careful attention. We believe that GE is very interested in working to remedy this situation in concert with the City and with its new neighbors. We urge GE to work with the City to solve this accessibility
problem before construction is completed on the Headquarters.

We look forward to working with GE and the City to ensure that pedestrians find a safe, accessible and inviting environment on and around GE’s Headquarters.

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

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

Sincerely,
Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Peter Cavanaugh, GE Project Manager
Elizabeth Grob, VHB Project Manager
Chris Osgood, Boston Chief of Streets

————————————————————————————————
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

Comment Letter: Tremont Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Report MEPA #14900

Comment Letter: Tremont Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Report MEPA #14900

By |

November 23, 2016

Matthew Beaton, Secretary
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office
Analyst: Erin Flaherty
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Tremont Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Report  MEPA #14900

Dear Mr. Beaton,

WalkBoston has reviewed the DEIR for the Tremont Crossing proposal in Roxbury. We believe that the very auto-oriented proposed development is inconsistent with the urban character of the neighborhood and needs to be substantially modified to benefit its neighbors.

Parking Spaces Proposed are Excessive
The development calls for a multi-level parking garage of 1,371 spaces that will generate 8,000 vehicle trips per day.  WalkBoston questions the need for such a large garage given that the development will be less than two blocks from Roxbury Crossing and Ruggles Transit Stations, and within a 10-minute walk of Dudley Square that is served by twenty bus lines.

By comparison the two large Target Stores in the Fenway (Boston) and Cambridge have only a couple of hundred parking spaces.  Numerous parking studies of big box stores and shopping malls throughout the country have shown that parking lots/garages are underutilized.

The emphasis on parking and downplaying of the use of transit suggests an imbalance for so large a project in the heart of the city.   As stated in the 2012 comment letter from Boston Transportation Department a consistent supply of available parking will counteract efforts to encourage alternative travel modes.

Tremont Street Should Not Be Widened
To accommodate the large number of vehicles accessing and exiting the proposed development Tremont Street is projected to be widened to eight or nine lanes.  Such a wide roadway at this location is incompatible with the urban character of the street and will create safety hazards to the pedestrians and bicyclists moving to and from the transit services, residences and institutions.

Also, the environmental review should include an assessment of the impact of increased traffic on the busway at Ruggles.  Numerous buses leave Ruggles headed for Dudley and WalkBoston has concern that at peak hours buses will be waiting through numerous traffic signal cycles to exit unto Ruggles Street.  The result could be a backlog of congestion from Ruggles to Malcolm X Boulevard.

Roxbury Crossing Development Should be Integrated into the Neighborhood
As currently designed, the development will be an island, separated from its neighborhood setting.  The proposed development has the opportunity to contribute to the street by creating easy walking access from the transit stations as well as nearby residential developments (Madison Park and Whittier Housing) and institutions (Northeastern University).  The Tremont Street Development is located in an area where Transit Oriented Development is particularly appropriate.

Proposed Project Could Acknowledge Changing Retail
The retail environment has changed since the project was proposed 4 – 5 years ago.  More and more shopping is done on line and traditional walk-in retail is struggling.  Evidence of this is in Dudley Square, the heart of Roxbury.  WalkBoston would like to see the City devote greater efforts to supporting viable retail in Dudley.  Promoting retail within a 10-minute walk of Dudley will only further depress the market for shops in Dudley Square.  However even within the proposed development the liveliness of the retail is questionable given that the proposed network of bridges will connect the garage on the second floor, discouraging patronage of the ground level retail.

Ensure Safety of Major Pedestrian Crossings.
The major pedestrian crossings of Tremont Street will take place at intersections with Ruggles/Whittier Street, South Drive and Prentiss Street. The primary crossing is likely to be at Ruggles/Whittier Street, because of the direct access it provides to the Ruggles MBTA Station. Care should be taken to provide for significant numbers of people wanting to cross Tremont Street at this location. Retention of the median strip in the center of Tremont Street would be useful as a refuge for pedestrians who may not be able to cross the entire width of a widened Tremont Street in one signal cycle. Similarly, leading pedestrian signal intervals should be incorporated to facilitate safe pedestrian crossings at the intersection. Analysis should also be undertaken to determine if a crosswalk is truly needed at South Drive, in view of the nearby Prentiss Street crossing.

Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. Please feel free to contact us with questions you may have, and we look forward to hearing how our suggestions are incorporated into subsequent revisions to this plan.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Dorothea Hass
Sr. Project Manager

cc: Councilor Tito Jackson
Byron Rushing, State Representative
Deirdre Buckley, MEPA Director
Dana Whiteside, Boston Planning and Development Agency
Kay Matthews, Friends of Melnea Cass Boulevard (FMCB)
Marah Holland, FMCB
Alison Pultinas, FMCB

 

Comments on The Draft Downtown Waterfront Municipal Harbor Plan (DTW MHP) 11/18/16

Comments on The Draft Downtown Waterfront Municipal Harbor Plan (DTW MHP) 11/18/16

By |

November 18, 2016

Mr. Richard McGuinness
Deputy Director for Waterfront Planning
Boston Planning and Development Agency
One City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201

Dear Mr. McGuinness,

We write to you with comments regarding the Draft Downtown Waterfront Municipal Harbor Plan (DTW MHP), with particular reference to the relationship of that plan to the future of the existing historic Northern Avenue Bridge.

Several elements of the draft plan are particularly relevant to our comments, and we have attached a number of citations from the DTW MHP and the Greenway District Planning Study Use and Development Guidelines that underlie our comments.

The Northern Avenue Bridge is an important contributing element to the downtown waterfront, and in fact, is a critical piece of the existing Harborwalk. Yet, the Bridge was seldom discussed at the public meetings. Mention of it was consistently dismissed or put on hold citing the City’s sponsored competition and unclear future plans for the fate of the historic bridge.

Part of the Downtown Waterfront vision included in the public realm plan includes clearly defined connections with well-­‐organized, high quality, and walkable pedestrian links. Failure to include a meaningful discussion of benefits and proposed interim connections to the Northern Avenue Bridge, we feel is shortsighted. As made clear from decades of resident and visitor use, the Bridge is key to enhancing pedestrian access and should be included and acknowledged in the Municipal Harbor Plan.

  •  The Bridge is a critical element of the walking environment providing the most convenient, attractive and harbor-­‐connected way for people to walk between the waterfront, downtown and the South Boston Harborwalk. This connection is called out as a core component of the MHP. Because the bridge is flat, is directly adjacent to the Harbor, and provides at-­grade connections to the street grid it is uniquely well suited to serve pedestrians and bicyclists.
  • The Bridge’s historic character is one of the most important contributors to District’s sense of place and connection to Boston’s industrial past. As stated in the DTW MHP (page 10), “Boston’s history and development are inextricably linked to the Downtown Waterfront District.” What better way to provide continuity than to keep the historic Bridge as a lively and well-­‐used element of the Harbor and Harborwalk.

We urge the City to include the Northern Avenue Bridge in the revisions to this draft Municipal Harbor Plan, with a discussion of the relevance of its flat profile, the proximity to the water surface that it provides for Harborwalk users, and the contribution of its industrial superstructure to the downtown waterfront environment. Not doing so is a conspicuously missing piece of what is otherwise an excellent draft plan.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the draft plan.

Sincerely,

Greg Galer, Boston Preservation Alliance
Jill Valdes Horwood, Boston Harbor NOW
Paul Farrell, Michael Tyrrell, Dan McNichol, Friends of the Northern Avenue Bridge
Sara McCammond, Joe Rogers, Fort Point Neighborhood Association
Wendy Landman, WalkBoston

Cc Matthew A. Beaton, Secretary, EEA
Bruce Carlisle, Director, CZM
Ben Lynch, Waterways/Chapter 91 Program Chief, DEP
Brona Simon, SHPO, Massachusetts Historical Commission
Susan Goldberg, Circuit Executive, First Circuit Court of Appeals

Relevant citations from the DTW MHC and Greenway District Planning Study Use and Development Guidelines

From page 5 of the DTW MHP: “The DTW MHP implements the goals established in the Request for a Notice To Proceed (“RNTP”). The six goals in the DTW RNTP are to: 1. Continue to Develop the District as an Active, Mixed-­‐Use Area that is an Integral Part of Boston’s Economy; 2. Promote Access to Boston Harbor, the Harbor Islands and Water Transportation; 3. Improve Waterfront Wayfinding and Open Space Connections; 4. Enhance Open Space Resources and the Public Realm; 5. Create a Climate-­‐Resilient Waterfront; and 6. Implement the Greenway District Planning Study Wharf District Guidelines.”

And, from page 30 where the goals for the plan are described: “Connectivity: Strengthened connections from Downtown to the Harbor, Downtown to the South Boston Waterfront, from the Greenway to the waterfront, and from north to south. Boston has an incredible wealth of linear park systems and paths, from the Freedom Trail to the Walk to the Sea to the Rose Kennedy Greenway. This plan is an opportunity to enhance these connections and their relationship to the waterfront, and strengthen the Harborwalk and the Greenway—to draw people along the water’s edge and along one of the great park systems of the city. The key priorities are:

  •  North-­‐south connections, along both the Harborwalk and the Greenway. • East-­‐west links between the Greenway and the waterfront, building on the
  • Crossroads Initiative.

o  Connections from Northern Avenue to the South Boston Waterfront.
o Increasing water transit opportunities and connections, both within the Inner
o Harbor and beyond to neighboring communities.
o  Increasing accessibility by all modes, with a special emphasis on the pedestrian.

As noted above, the DTW MHP includes as one of its goals the implementation of the Greenway District Planning Study Use and Development Guidelines that include the following Wharf District Guidelines:

“The Hook Lobster Site (15 Northern Avenue), the U.S. Coast Guard Building and 400 Atlantic Avenue together frame important new connections to the emerging South Boston waterfront. These include the Old Northern Avenue Bridge, a part of the Oliver Street/Northern Avenue Crossroad, and the Moakley Bridge. While these sites are limited in size and development potential (particularly the Hook site), they nonetheless offer the possibility of increased legibility for both pedestrians and motorists where it is currently lacking. These parcels should contribute to the continuity and accessibility of the Harborwalk, which presents a significant challenge where the Moakley Bridge ramps up above grade. (Page 20)

“All developments in the Wharf District should enhance the continuity and accessibility of the Harborwalk by providing additional points of connection from the Greenway and by “repairing” breaks in the community caused by grade changes and buildings or other obstructions.” (Page 21)

Egleston Square Walk Audit

Egleston Square Walk Audit

By |

In the summer of 2016, Urban Edge and WalkBoston initiated a conversation about scheduling a walk assessment for the Egleston Square area to examine pedestrian infrastructure conditions in this highly trafficked Main Streets corridor. Concurrently, the Boston Planning and Development Agency (BPDA – formerly the Boston Redevelopment Authority) was pursuing (and continues to pursue) its PLAN: JP/Rox planning and development study for the Washington Street corridor. This area includes Egleston Square as well as Stonybrook, which has been designated a “Neighborhood Slow Streets” pilot as part of the City’s Vision Zero efforts to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries. Urban Edge’s push for a walk assessment and BPDA staff’s interest in applying innovations from the Slow Streets pilot more broadly both highlight a strong desire for transportation infrastructure that accommodates all road users, whether they are walking, bicycling, driving or taking transit.

Read the full report here:
WalkBoston-EglestonSquareWalkAudit