Tag: comment letter

Route 181 Reconstruction Comment Letter

Route 181 Reconstruction Comment Letter

By |

November 18, 2008

Frank A. Tramontozzi, P.E.
Chief Engineer Massachusetts Highway Department
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116

RE: Route 181 Reconstruction and Minor Widening project in Belchertown, MA
Project File No. 604433

Dear Mr. Tramontozzi:

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state – encouraging walking, supporting pedestrian improvements and sponsoring walks. We have extensive experience in helping residents and local governments with pedestrian issues, safe routes to schools and safer street crossings and sidewalks.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed reconstruction and minor widening of Route 181 in Belchertown and are pleased to have been notified by MHD about the project. We are commenting because we think there may be ways to further enhance pedestrian safety.

As we have seen in the plans, the project focuses on Route 181 between its intersection with Maple Street (the town center) and the Belchertown-Palmer town line. The reconstructed road will have two 11-foot wide travel lanes and 4-foot wide shoulders. The project will include safety improvement measures such as bicycle accommodation; sidewalk reconstruction; enhanced roadway drainage; improved sight distance in some areas; and installation of guardrail, pavement markings and signage.

We are concerned about pedestrian access in the Route 181 corridor for these reasons:

1. Safe Routes to Schools. WalkBoston is involved with a number of communities across the state in providing walking programs and encouragement, along with planning for physical improvements that could better accommodate children walking to school. In Belchertown, sidewalks connect to both the Center School on Rte 181 north of Maple Street and the Cold Spring School on Rte 181 at Old Springfield Road. Pedestrians going to schools are accommodated along Rte 181 by sidewalks between Maple Street and by a sidewalk between Old Springfield Road to a point about 2000 feet south on Rte 181. These sidewalks should be maintained and, if rebuilt, should be maintained at 4’ or 5’ clear walking width. Poles, signs or other impediments should not be located within the clear walking width.

2. Continuous sidewalk on at least one side of the street. Sidewalks are available on both sides of the street between Maple Street and Old Springfield Road and along only one side of Rte 181 to a point about 2000 feet south of Old Springfield Road. Sidewalks should extend outward for at least 1 mile from schools, assuming there are residences where students might live within that radius. Along Rte 181 south of Old Springfield Road and within 1 mile from the Cold Spring School, there appear to be residences that might warrant extending the sidewalk beyond the 2000’ length.

3. Crosswalks. Along Rte 181, crosswalks are provided at the intersection of Rte 181 and Maple Street and Rte 181 and Old Springfield Road. There is a single intersection with Rte 181 at Fuller Street that does not presently have a crosswalk. Consideration should be given to installation of crosswalks at the Fuller Street intersection, in addition to repainting the crosswalks at the two existing intersections.

4. Detailed design. Sidewalks already in place along Rte 181 should be reconstructed if possible – largely to bring them to a standard width. Care should be taken to assure that any widening of Rte 181 does not narrow sidewalk widths. Where possible, sidewalks should be separated from the roadway by a minimum of 4’ to provide greater safety and comfort for walkers along this relatively high speed road.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. We look forward to working with you and welcome any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Bob Sloane
Senior Project Manager

Cc: MABPAB
MHD Commissioner Luisa Paiewonsky

Lynn Harbor Line Relocation Comment Letter

Lynn Harbor Line Relocation Comment Letter

By |

July 29, 2008

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF) Lynn Harbor Line Relocation
MEPA # 14278

Dear Mr. Bowles:

WalkBoston has reviewed the ENF for the Lynn Harbor Line Relocation, which proposes the relocation of an electrical transmission line from its current route along the edge of the harbor, to a route at some distance inland. As the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking, with a responsibility to note projects that may affect large groups of pedestrians, we think this project may have significant and exciting potential for the City of Lynn and the state.

When this project removes the existing electric power transmission line directly abutting Lynn Harbor, the relocation will release the existing right-of-way at the edge of the harbor for potential reuse as a path or trail. The relocated power line, approximately a mile long, will be on a new right of way significantly distant from the present alignment.

In the short term, the existing right-of-way can be useful as a walkway/bikepath along the harbor. Over the long term, links could be made between this path and the existing Lynn Shore Drive waterfront paths (extending north) and the Rice Avenue/Revere Beach Parkway beach frontage in the Point of Pines section of Revere (to the south). In addition, the Bike to the Sea project, which is part of the long-distance East Coast Greenway, might also be connected to the seafront paths, as its alignment along a former rail line extends nearly into the harbor district.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ENF. Please feel free to call if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc: Jim Cowdell, Executive Director, Lynn EDIC

Commonwealth Avenue Phase 3 Landscape Improvements Comment Letter

Commonwealth Avenue Phase 3 Landscape Improvements Comment Letter

By |

July 15, 2008

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF)
Commonwealth Avenue Phase 3 Landscape Improvements
Newton, MA
MEPA # 14269

Dear Mr. Bowles:

We have reviewed the ENF for the Commonwealth Avenue Phase 3 Landscape Improvements in Newton. We are pleased that walking and pedestrian facilities are major organizing features of the development. We are commenting because details of this worthy project may need further analysis to serve the needs of pedestrians safely and comfortably.

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state encouraging walking, advocating for pedestrian improvements and working for design improvements. We have extensive experience helping residents and local government with pedestrian issues, safe routes to school, and safer street crossings.

In the case of the Commonwealth Avenue project, we commend the emphasis on rationalized pedestrian crossings of both the boulevard and the carriageway.

We noted that proposed crossings of the carriageway call for granite pavers of various sizes. Granite pavers have a relatively long history of use in Massachusetts, but do not provide a crosswalk surface that is a benefit for all types of pedestrians. These pavers raise specific questions:

1. Granite pavers cause difficulties for wheeled vehicles of any kind, such as wheelchairs and baby carriages because of the rough surface and cracks between pavers. For others, the surface and the cracks between pavers pose difficulties for, among others, disabled persons or those wearing high-heeled shoes.

2. Over time, granite pavers settle or break under vehicular traffic, frequently in an irregular, causing an unintended roughness in surface and specific hazards where pavers go missing or are destroyed.

3. Maintenance of the pavers is an issue that occurs regularly, Despite offers of continued care, budgetary difficulties and agency staffing problems can confound the best intentions over time. Without proper maintenance, granite pavers can rapidly become hazards for walkers.

4. A somewhat separate issue is pedestrian safety in the face of oncoming traffic. Granite pavers are not always visible to motorists in the same way the painted crosswalks are. The reduced visibility of the pavers may require supplementary signing and pavement painting. With many if not all of the curbs to be reset along this portion of Commonwealth Avenue, pedestrian needs should be included. For example, many of the existing curb radii at intersections are being increased to provide for more smooth passage of vehicles. If traffic moves faster as a result, pedestrians may be in danger at these intersections. In some instances this also results in numerous islands for pedestrians to negotiate along circuitous paths across a single street.

Signage for the project seems to avoid mention of the presence of pedestrians and the need for motorists to respect the rights of people on foot. The few “Pedestrian” signs are to be removed and destroyed, as are the few “Children” signs and the “Speed Limit 30” signs – all of which are designed to provide for pedestrian safety. It is difficult to believe that there are no plans to replace the pedestrian warning signs on this 21st century project.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Commonwealth Avenue project. Please feel free to contact us if further questions arise.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Hamilton Canal District Comment Letter

Hamilton Canal District Comment Letter

By |

June 6, 2008

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF)
Hamilton Canal District, Lowell
MEPA # 14241

Dear Mr. Bowles:

We have reviewed the ENF for the Hamilton Canal District in Lowell, a proposed mixed-use retail, office and residential redevelopment in the historic canal district near downtown. We are pleased that walking and pedestrian facilities are major organizing features of the development. We are commenting because details of this worthy project may need further analysis to serve the needs of pedestrians throughout the city.

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state encouraging walking, advocating for pedestrian improvements and working for design improvements. We have extensive experience helping residents and local government with pedestrian issues, safe routes to school, and safer street crossings.

Project description
The proposed Hamilton Canal District is located adjacent to downtown Lowell and is bounded on the south and west by Thorndike/Dutton Street, a major arterial into downtown Lowell with relatively heavy traffic. The north boundary of the site is immediately adjacent to the National Park Service Visitor Information Center on Market Street. The development is separated into three parts by the Middlesex, Pawtucket and Hamilton Canals which spread through the site. Considerable vacant land remains where factories were demolished. The few on-site historic buildings will be retained, rehabilitated or rebuilt as parts of larger structures.

The proposal comprises 11 new buildings on 13 acres with 50,000 SF of ground level retail space, 420,000 SF of office space, 600 new housing units and 1800 new parking spaces. Components are designed to blend with the historic city: frontage is lined with retail outlets and on-street parking and pedestrian amenities are key design elements. Building heights will range from 6 to 15 stories, with the tallest structures adjacent to the open space along the canals. A new trial court building is located south of Jackson Street.

A trolley line now arcs through the National Park sites along Dutton Street at the edge of the site. The trolley will be realigned to pass directly through the site over new bridges and right-ofway. The ultimate goal for the trolley is a further off-site extension to the Gallagher Transportation Center’s buses and commuter trains to Boston.

We believe that there are five issues that need more detailed exploration:
1. Sidewalk widths and surfaces
2. Canal crossings
3. Signage and wayfinding
4. Access to transit
5. Conflicts with vehicular traffic

Issue 1: Sidewalk widths and surfaces
A rule of thumb for a minimum clear sidewalk width is 5.’ A minimum of 8’ clear width is preferable in commercial areas. The proposed “Street Types,” as detailed by diagrams for this project do not always meet this standard.

  • Sidewalk widths of 7’ to 10’ should be adequate, but these widths are frequently diminished because of lights and signs located on the sidewalk.
  • On Street Types 1B, 1C, 2B, sidewalks are 6’ wide, but include space for light poles and other streetside elements. As these intrusions into the width of the sidewalk will be centered 20” from the curb line, the remaining clear width of the sidewalk will be 4’ – possibly a little less. This does not allow for wheel chairs or baby carriages to smoothly pass each another or other walkers or for people to walk comfortably side by side.
  • Street Type 3B permits only a 4’ wide sidewalk on one side. This width is not acceptable for foot traffic, as there are intrusions for railings.
  • Most of the canalside paths are the responsibility of the National Park Service. The NPS standards for sidewalk widths appear to be somewhat more generous than those designed by the developer and/or the City of Lowell. What happens when the two systems must be integrated, as, for example, where connections between canal paths require walkers to cross the bridges over the Pawtucket and Hamilton Canals?
  • How will bicycles be accommodated in the project area? It is not clear whether some of the paths are intended to be multi-purpose, and designed or signed for use by cyclists.
  • Walkway surfaces will be made of scored concrete with broom finish. Care should be taken that walkers are not forced to use cobble- or brick-paved surfaces along any part of their routes through the development. All “tree ways” abutting the sidewalks should be crossed by smooth sidewalks at intersections.

 

Issue 2: Canal crossings
Six bridges and one trestle over the canals will be rebuilt or rehabilitated; two bridges and the trestle are solely for pedestrian use, and the bridge at the Swamp Locks serves only pedestrians and the trolley. The trestle, with rail removed, will be rehabilitated as part of the canalside pedestrian path network and constructed separately from this project.

  • The two Hamilton Canal pedestrian bridges appear to connect through the Appleton Mills buildings. Are both bridges part of the pedestrian network? Will walkers have access into and through the buildings?
  • The reconstructed bridge at the Swamp Locks will offer a spectacular view of the locks and waterfall at the center of the site. Will the bridge (Street Type 1C) have a wide sidewalk where visitors may stand to view the locks and the waterfall? Will the bridge have extra width to accommodate the continuation of 10’ wide canalside paths?
  • Will the trolley bridge over the Merrimack Canal also be available for pedestrian crossings? If not, how will pedestrian access be controlled?

 

Issue 3: Signage and wayfinding
Central to the use of a new pedestrian network are wayfinding directions and signage for pedestrian pathways.

  • The central axis of the development will connect the NPS Visitor Center to the Swamp Locks, a highly desirable destination for visitors to the site. Will there be wayfinding signage or pavement markings along this route to help walkers get to the attraction?
  • Wayfinding is also essential for the large canalside pedestrian network envisioned for the site. Does the proposed plan include wayfinding on these pedestrian ways, especially in locations where continuation of the path involves turns to cross a bridge?

 

Issue 4: Access to Transit
 We hope that transit will play an important role in connecting visitors and employees to this project and other parts of downtown. Shuttle bus services may be provided through or near the project. Ultimately the trolley will connect downtown Lowell to the Gallagher Transportation Center’s buses and trains.

  • Will trolley construction be phased into an early stage of development? Can shuttle services be routed through the project for service until the trolley is constructed?
  • Will pedestrians be able to reach the Gallagher Center on foot?

 

Issue 5: Conflicts with vehicular traffic
Through movements by vehicles are minimized by an indirect routing via a large “S” curve on a single street connecting Broadway and Revere Street. Several pedestrian issues remain:

  • Jackson Street at the south edge of the development site now serves the large Jackson- Appleton-Middlesex (JAM) parking garage and is being extended to Thorndike/Dutton Street. Where Jackson intersects Revere Street, monitoring will be necessary to determine if traffic and pedestrian signals are warranted.
  • The intersection of Jackson Street and Thorndike/Dutton Streets will need to be made safe with traffic signals and countdown pedestrian signals, as it is the replacement for a longplanned pedestrian overpass above Thorndike Street.
  • The intersection of Broadway and Thorndike/Dutton Streets will become a primary access point to this development, connecting to a new on-site parking garage and other new underground parking. The intersection may warrant countdown pedestrian signals.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this document, which offers great promise for pedestrians. Please feel free to contact us for clarification or additional comments.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman                                            Robert Sloane
Executive Director                                          Senior Planner

Taunton High School, Parker Middle School, New Pole Elementary Additions and Renovations Comment Letter

Taunton High School, Parker Middle School, New Pole Elementary Additions and Renovations Comment Letter

By |

September 28, 2007

Secretary Ian A. Bowles
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Comments on Taunton High School and Parker Middle School Additions and Renovations/New Pole Elementary School Environmental Notification Form

EOEA # 14099

Dear Mr. Bowles:

We have reviewed the ENF for the proposed project at the site of the existing Taunton High School. The 105-acre site includes the existing High School and Parker Middle School Building. The proposal calls for renovation and additions to the existing buildings and the addition of the new Pole Elementary School. When completed, the High School/Middle School building will have 3200 students and 660 staff and the Pole Elementary School will have 770 students and 87 staff. We are pleased that the city is making investments in this relatively centrally located facility that can be accessed on foot by many students.

We received detailed site plans from the proponent, showing facilities for walking – sidewalks, paths and plazas at the entrance to major facilities. We were impressed that new pedestrian access to the renovated High School/Middle School is a major portion of the renovation plan. In particular there are plazas at the main entrances and sidewalks extending out to the frontage on Williams Street and on Hon. Gordon M. Owen Riverway. Sidewalks surround the new “green” and line the loop road in front of the building. Access from parking lots into the main entrances connect to these walkways.

We do not know from the ENF if pedestrian access off-site is included and hope that the city will make an effort to address off-site issues. The site is about a mile from the center of the city. Its central location suggests that it is accessible by walking for many students. Sidewalks along Williams Street and Owen Riverway already exist and some are being rebuilt as part of this project. Encouraging walkers may require special attention to crosswalks and pedestrian countdown crossing signals, for example, at the intersection of Williams Street and Owen Riverway.

On the site, we suggest that the plans be reviewed to assure that crosswalks are available in all principal pedestrian activity areas. The plans are a bit unclear about pedestrian access to tennis courts, playing fields and the stadium. While we hope that students will be discouraged from driving if they are within walking distance of the school, we also hope that the site improvements will ensure the safety of people who do drive. We note that the major parking area near the school entrance has sidewalks along each edge, and suggest that marked walkways across the parking areas be considered as an added safety feature for students. The principal parking area near the main entrance to the High School has only indirect pedestrian facilities. As a result, many walkers will cross diagonally on the lawn, a situation that could be remedied by installation of a diagonal walkway. We also suggest that sidewalks be provided between the High School/Middle School and other buildings on the site, such as the skating rink.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ENF.

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner