BPDA Archives - WalkMassachusetts

Channelside DEIR/DPIR comments

August 20, 2021

Secretary Kathleen A. Theoharides
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn via email: Alex Strysky (alexander.strysky@state.ma.us )

Director Brian Golden
Boston Planning and Development Agency
Attn via email: Aisling Kerr (Aisling.Kerr@boston.gov)

Re: Channelside DEIR/DPIR comments

Dear Secretary Theoharides and Director Golden:

WalkBoston, LivableStreets Alliance, Boston Cyclists Union, FPNA and MassBike are submitting our joint comments on the Channelside Project regarding transportation within and to the development site.

We have focused our comments on the broad and underlying transportation conditions that will impact the existing and future neighborhood as well as the residents and workers who will occupy the proposed 1.4 million SF development that is undergoing review. While we have detailed comments on several aspects of the proponent’s site design and proposed mitigation, these are issues that later project phases could address.

We are pleased that the proponent has fully embraced the idea of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and Complete Streets designs, and has provided travel projections for the project that predict a net total of 4,633 trips generated by the site of which 4,089 are walking, biking and transit trips – an impressive 88% of all trips! We also applaud the plan to redevelop what currently is non-permeable parking lot pavement into a park and pathway system which will help control the impacts of tidal flooding along the channel.

However, we are disappointed and concerned that the DEIR/DPIR devotes so little analysis of future conditions and, more specifically, how these thousands of trips will be served. Section 4.4 Transportation Build (2028) Condition of the document devotes (excluding maps and tables) ½ page to bike accommodation, 2 pages to transit, and 0 pages to walking (this notwithstanding that both walking and transit mode shares will depend on pedestrian facilities – including especially walking access from South Station and Broadway Station). And we are disappointed the project team is seeking to “not overburden” a transit system which currently does not serve this area sufficiently, instead of actively increasing capacity and service in advance of the rapid growth expected at Channelside. This development cannot be “Transit Oriented” without providing for increased transit usage.

Unfortunately, the DEIR/DPIR is following the precedent of several prior development projects in the Seaport, South Boston and Fort Point Channel neighborhoods, by focusing on this project in isolation of the rapid transformation that is occurring around it. Given the growth of these neighborhoods over the course of the last two decades, continuing to review all development projects in the area as single projects and not more holistically as a large agglomeration of projects that together require significantly better transit, walking and biking conditions to work well for its residents, workers, visitors and businesses, risks the future success of this, and many other projects in the area.

Continuing down this piecemeal development planning path is unsustainable for the neighborhood and the City, and places undue burden on individual developments to solve problems that may include their project yet go beyond their boundaries. This parcel at 244-284 A Street is a crucial connection to a network of safe bicycling and walking routes that flow throughout the city, and needs to be incorporated into a vision of a connected, sustainable, and safe waterfront trail and harborwalk that includes all of the City’s waterfront neighborhoods.

We ask that MEPA require the City of Boston (along with MassDOT, the MBTA and Massport) to complete, fund and begin the implementation of the South Boston Transit Study prior to advancing the permitting of new projects. We believe that without such action the proponent’s project (along with existing and other new development projects) will choke the neighborhood with traffic, provide insufficient transit service, not include an accessible sidewalk system (both within the development zone and connecting to South and Broadway Stations), and lack safe bicycle facilities connected to a larger network for those most vulnerable on our roads.

We have included below excerpts from the MEPA and BPDA Scopes for the project that we believe call for an analysis of how all trips (auto and non-auto) trips will be managed and provided for. We do not think that the DEIR/DPIR answers these scope items.

MEPA Scope

Trip Generation
The DEIR should fully describe and document existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle facilities, transit operations and roadway and intersection conditions within the study Area. (page 9)
The TIA should describe the project’s anticipated transportation impacts and identify appropriate mitigation measures. The Proponent should indicate a clear commitment to implement proposed mitigation measures and describe the timing of their implementation, including whether measures are implemented based on phases of the project or occupancy levels. (Page 10)
Multimodal Facilities
It should describe all existing and proposed pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks, crosswalks, bicycle paths and bicycle parking spaces, located within the study area. The DEIR should review the regional pedestrian and bicycle network, evaluate the safety and capacity of the network and describe potential measures to enhance connections between the site and other locations and routes. (page 9)

BPDA Scope

“Melcher Street will be another important pedestrian connection for the site and its high volume of transit users connecting to South Station. Pedestrian safety and accessibility improvements are needed and a priority for the City and community. The Proponent should commit to working with the city to design and construct improvements to Melcher Street from A Street to Summer Street.” (Page 26)
“Additional transit service and connectivity was identified as needed on A Street in the South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan [and the South Boston Dorchester Avenue Transportation Plan]. “The Proponent should provide shuttle service on A Street that connects to Broadway Station and South Station. Ideally, this would be in partnership with other corridor stakeholders such as State Street Bank that currently provides shuttle service on A Street that connects to South Station. New and efficient shuttle stop locations will need to be determined through consultation with the City.” (Page 26)

A private shuttle service should not be the primary solution for the lack of transit access in the area. In addition to completing the long awaited South Boston Transit Study, the City should study the potential implementation of BRT on Congress Street, connecting to North Station. Additionally the MBTA is currently in the process of a system-wide bus network project. Now is an opportune time to work with the MBTA to determine the current and future transit needs for the neighborhood and to build the necessary street infrastructure to accommodate that bus service (i.e. bus lanes, new bus stops, ADA accessible sidewalks).

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell, WalkBoston Executive Director
Stacy Thompson, LivableStreets Alliance Executive Director
Becca Thompson, Boston Cyclists Union Executive Director
Tom Ready, FPNA
Galen Mook, MassBike Executive Director

Cc Senator Nick Collins
Representative David Biele
Boston City Councilor Ed Flynn
Boston City Councilor Michael Flaherty
Greg Rooney, Commissioner, Boston Transportation Department
Jamey Tesler, Secretary, MassDOT
Steve Poftak, General Manager, MBTA
Joel A. Barrera, Massport, Director of Strategic and Business Planning
Patrick Sullivan, Seaport TMA, Executive Director
David Gibbons, Executive Director, MCCA
Rick Dimino, President and CEO, ABC

WalkBoston comments on 819 Beacon Street

October 16, 2020
Director Brian Golden
Boston Planning and Development Agency
Attn via email: Edward Carmody
Re: 819 Beacon Street

Dear Director Golden,

The proposal for 819 Beacon Street is admirable for its attention to the many uses of the site by people on foot. WalkBoston commends the proponent, Boston Children’s Hospital, for its focus on developing pedestrian facilities at three edges of its site in addition to a significant amount of open space with walkways as a focus of the development.

The proponent has outlined the development of a large residential building to provide temporary housing for families of patients in Children’s Hospital in about 50 units and provide 499 small units with kitchenettes for students or nurses to use for either long or short term rentals. The site of the building is a large parking lot over the MBTA’s underground Green Line D branch which leaves the main underground Green line at the boundary of the site. The D line occupies space under much of the site’s north and west sides, resulting in a proposed building which skirts the subway and occupies the east and south sides of the property. The portion of the property not occupied by the building will be largely landscaped open space.

The pathway proposed by the city to connect the Emerald Necklace to Kenmore Square runs directly along the south side of the site. This path is entirely off-road, and will connect the T’s Fenway Station and provide an option to pass under Park Drive to the Landmark Center and the Green Line Fenway Station. The path continues to Maitland Street, the east boundary of the 819 Beacon Street site. At Maitland Street, the path reaches David Ortiz Way, which connects to the new Lansdowne commuter rail station, to Brookline Avenue and the gates of the Red Sox Fenway stadium.

The proponent has indicated considerable enthusiasm about the connection to the proposed path, by including the path layout in its drawings and by showing landscaping of a long row of trees along the path for shade. The proponent also proposes path and sidewalk connections between the Necklace-to-Kenmore path and Beacon Street along the east side of the parcel. We hope and trust that the proponent will commit to its proposed landscaping along the path, and also commit to the permanent maintenance of the portion of the path along its southern boundary.

Access between the site and other Children’s Hospital locations – several less than a mile away from this site – will be enhanced by the path which makes the walk pleasant and safe. Access will also be provided by shuttle vans or buses that will pick up riders at the corner of David Ortiz Way and Maitland Street. The street crossing here will need additional study to make certain that crossings are protected and safe for walkers seeking wheeled access.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important project. Please feel free to contact us for further explanation of our comments and suggestions.

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell

Executive Director

WalkBoston Comments on the South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan

July 24, 2020 | WalkBoston Comments on the South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan

To:
Brian P. Golden, Director Boston Planning & Development Agency
Chris Osgood, Chief of Streets
Councilor Wu, Chair Planning, Development and Transportation
Councilor Flynn, District 2

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to comment on the plan and are glad to see that a broad set of options are under consideration. We also are glad that a diversity of perspectives is represented by the four criteria used: Expand, Rely, Respect and Equalize.

We offer the following comments and look forward to hearing from you with responses to our comments and the opportunity to comment again as the plan is advanced.

We are pleased that Improving Pedestrian Connections has emerged as one of the top candidates for short term implementation and agree that this strategy will serve many people and improve transit access and use for a broad range of users and locations.
After reviewing the options for short term strategies that are now under consideration, we believe that an evaluation that gives greater weight to Equalize as a value would better serve the needs of the District and of Boston as a whole.

The strategies with the highest Equalize ratings are:

Expand Off-Peak Transit Service 100 points
Dedicated Transit Corridors 70 points
North Station – South Station – South Boston Seaport Direct Bus or Shuttle Service 61 points
Bus or Shuttle connection from Nubian Square to South Boston Seaport Link via Broadway 60 points
Bus or Shuttle connection from Central Square to South Boston Seaport via LMA and Nubian Square 58 points

While we are pleased that Expanding Off-Peak Transit Service has been flagged as one of the top strategies, we are concerned that Extend Private and Consolidated Shuttles on A St to Broadway has also been given a top rating as this is the ONLY strategy among all of those evaluated that received a negative rating for Equalize, and that it actually increases travel time for many transit users.

We believe that the Bus or Shuttle connection from Nubian Square to South Boston Seaport Link via Broadway or the Bus or Shuttle connection from Central Square to South Boston Seaport via LMA and Nubian Square (# 2 and 3 in overall ratings) should be included as one of the strategies to be advanced. These two options also directly serve some of Boston’s neighborhoods with the greatest number and density of people of color.

There seems to be a disconnect between this BPDA Plan and the work of the Public Works Department on the Northern Avenue Bridge. As WalkBoston and a number of our fellow advocates have commented, we strongly disagree with the plan to allow shuttle buses to use a new Northern Avenue Bridge because it will negatively impact people walking and biking on the bridge, will require that the bridge be very large and expensive, and because it provides very little benefit to shuttle users.

None of the numerous bus service improvements suggested and reviewed in the South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan (short or long term) are shown to be using a future Northern Avenue Bridge. The bridge itself is called out as a strategy, but it is not incorporated into any of the other strategies – all of the routes that cross the Fort Point Channel are shown using the Summer Street or Congress Street Bridges. We urge the Public Works Department to look again at its proposal and eliminate the use of the bridge for shuttle buses.

WalkBoston looks forward to working with you as this plan progresses.

Comment Letter on Kenmore Hotel Project (560-574 Commonwealth Avenue)

June 27, 2019

Brian Golden, Director
Boston Redevelopment Authority
Attn: Tim Czerwienski
One City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201-1007

Re: Kenmore Hotel, 560-574 Commonwealth Avenue, WalkBoston Comments

Dear Director Golden:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Kenmore Hotel Project.

WalkBoston believes that the re-configuration of Kenmore Square proposed by the proponent will significantly enhance the environment and improve the safety and convenience of people walking to and through Kenmore Square. It will also create new pedestrian-focused civic space that is presently missing from this important Boston crossroads – where many residents, transit users, students, Red Sox fans and Boston Marathon fans will find new space to enhance their experience of Kenmore Square.

We believe that the re-configuration will also significantly improve the safety of bicyclists and drivers, with its simplified pattern of movement. Based on the traffic analysis provided in the DPIR it also appears that the new traffic pattern will improve the levels of service for vehicles, potentially providing a benefit for the many bus riders who pass through the Square each day.

We are very pleased that the proponent has proposed building a hotel without on-site parking or below-grade service access – either of which would require a curb cut interrupting the sidewalk. With Kenmore Square’s good transit access the hotel will truly reflect an urbanist vision for the City which we applaud. While we have not reviewed any financial information about the project, we wonder whether the decision to forgo the construction of parking spaces (@ approximately $25,000 – $30,000/space) has provided the proponent with the financial capacity to build the extensive plaza and streetscape improvements that are proposed. If this is the case, we hope that future Boston development projects will be encouraged by the City to take advantage of this opportunity.

We urge the City to work with the proponent to bring this new vision for Kenmore Square to fruition.

We have several questions and comments about the project that we urge the City to work with the proponent to address.

The new, much safer, bicycle circulation system is an important improvement for Kenmore Square. We urge the design team to carefully design the western edge of the site to actively discourage eastbound cyclists on Commonwealth Avenue from riding through the plaza area rather than taking the New Road-Beacon Street-Commonwealth Avenue bike route that is the intended route.
Based on the wind study results presented at the June 19 public meeting, several spots on the plaza may be quite windy. We urge the proponent to develop designs that both reduce the wind and avoid the use of walls along Commonwealth Avenue. We believe that walls will serve to privatize the feel of the space and may also cause unintended noise impacts (wooshing sounds) as traffic passes by the intermittent walls.
We hope that the plaza will include seating that has a softer feel than that which seems to be illustrated to date – seating that invites people to linger and enjoy the great people-watching.
For how many years has the proponent committed to maintaining and programming the Plaza?
It appears from the site plan that there are two left turn lanes from westbound Commonwealth Avenue feeding into one receiving lane on Brookline Avenue – is this intended, or is the site plan incorrect? In addition, westbound Commonwealth Avenue traffic will need very clear lane markings (and perhaps a tweaking of the shape of the nose of the plaza) to ensure that traffic does not mistakenly head westbound on Beacon Street.

We look forward to a significantly improved walking experience in Kenmore Square when the project is realized.

Please let us know if you have any questions about our comments.

Best regards,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Comments on Policy of Guidelines for Outdoor Café within Public Ways

WalkBoston comments to the Boston Public Improvement Commission regarding:

“A Policy of Guidelines for Outdoor Café within Public Ways, Effective: September 1, 2017”

Submitted August 24, 2017

We would be happy to meet with PIC or other City staff to review and discuss our comments.

1. Pleased that new regulations will allow alcohol to be served on the “far side” of the sidewalk– a good change for the liveliness of the City.

2. Interesting and good to allow the expansion onto the curb and street areas—Curbline and Roadway seating. Again this creates new opportunities.

3. Technical issue: 2f should refer to the seating located within the restaurant’s property, not only that located within the City’s sidewalks. I think they have to approve both.

4. Technical issue: 14 should say “planters and their contents” because a lot of cafes have plant material hanging out far—even up to a foot. That subtracts that distance from the walking right of way.

5. Regulations should provide a simple table that indicates which department is responsible for different elements of the regulations – it might clarify that there are still many, many actors in the process.

6. Minimum dimension for path of travel 4 feet, preferred minimum is 6 feet – exclusive of street furniture or any other obstructions. Minimum should be 5 feet unless there are extraordinary circumstances.

7. Minimum sidewalk dimension to allow any cafe should be at least XXX feet – to ensure adequate POT plus dimension for café. The City should make this determination before finalizing the guidelines.

8. Modify the rule that the café should not occupy more than 50% of the sidewalk because that may not be appropriate for wide areas and may be insufficient for narrow sidewalks where there should be no café at al (see #2 above).

9. Require a minimum of 15 business days of notice for review by the public, and require that the plans available electronically so that upon request they can be reviewed by the public (much as the way in which BPDA now posts filings on line).

10. The cafe must be removed from the sidewalk when not in continuous use. The season can extend beyond May-September, but the cafe equipment and furnishings must be removed from the sidewalk if they are not used for more than ten days.

11. Set a schedule for fees and permitting costs – may be based on size, location, restaurant revenues, etc. but should be transparent.

12. Provide opportunities for pop up cafes for short-term (1-5 days) use.

13. Set a schedule and program for enforcement, including a point person for responding to public complaints when cafes are not following the rules (see attached photo).