Tag: ENF

Comments on Cambridge Common

Comments on Cambridge Common

September 25, 2012

Secretary Richard Sullivan

Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs

MEPA Office

100 Cambridge Street

Boston, MA  02114

RE: Environmental Notification Form for Cambridge Common/Flagstaff Park improvements

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston has reviewed the ENF for the Cambridge Common/Flagstaff Park improvements in Harvard Square. We heartily agree with the proposed changes because of the potential improvements they bring for pedestrians. The proposed improvements include:

  • Reconstruct all pathways in bituminous concrete with brick edging, an especially useful sorting of materials that considers the specific needs and comfort of people with wheelchairs or baby carriages and for those with high heels.
  • Re­align formal pathways along informal pedestrian routes through Cambridge Common, which makes sense because they indicate desire lines for missing walkways.
  • Improve pedestrian access to Cambridge Common at entryways, around the Civil War monument, and around the Washington Elm monument – all improvements that appear to be essential for a fully adequate pedestrian network on the Common.
  • Remove excess paving, outdated planters and benches, and unused utility poles; install new street furniture; improve signage and lighting – all improvements have been designed to serve pedestrians better. Planting of new trees is of great interest to pedestrians because of the shade provided and the esthetic improvement they bring to the park.

We do have one specific concern about the design with respect to the new multi-use path planned to be constructed adjacent to the west side of Flagstaff Park. This portion of the project is clearly designed to provide a method for bicyclists to circumvent the tunnel connection for vehicles between the Harvard Square bicycle lanes and northbound Massachusetts Avenue.

The proposed path might seem to be attractive for walkers until it reaches the northernmost portion of Flagstaff Park – the intersection where Cambridge Street, Massachusetts Avenue and the bus tunnel converge. At this location we are worried about pedestrians crossing the multi-street intersection. We suggest that the new path be specifically marked that it is only a bicycle route and that it is NOT a route for pedestrians because of the difficulties and danger at this street crossing. Signs might be posted saying that it is a bicycle route, and is not a walking route. The signs might direct people across the street to the Cambridge Common side for a slightly less direct, but much safer walking route.

If the City is committed to the use of this path by pedestrians, we believe that better provisions are needed to create a safe foot crossing at the intersection. These should include at minimum: larger islands for pedestrian refuge from the heavy traffic; and, signalization that permits the infirm, elderly or other slow walkers to pass safely across the multiple streets. While a cyclist may be able to cross the street in a matter of a few seconds, it is much more difficult for prospective pedestrians to complete the same trip that fast and in a safe manner. Because of the many vehicular lanes passing through the intersection, it is a very complicated intersection to intelligently signalize for pedestrians.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this project, and we look forward to a significantly improved pedestrian environment around the Cambridge Common.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman

Executive Director

Comments on Tremont Crossing Environmental Notification Form

Comments on Tremont Crossing Environmental Notification Form

June 8, 2012

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
MEPA Office
Deirdre Buckley MEPA # 4900
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Tremont Crossing Environmental Notification Form

Dear Mr. Sullivan:

WalkBoston has reviewed the ENF for the Tremont Crossing proposal in Roxbury. We are impressed with the potential improvements that this project will be able to bring to the area. The pedestrian aspects of the proposal are likely to play an important role in the way in which this project functions and relates to the surrounding neighborhood and nearby public buildings.

The Tremont Crossing project includes 500,000 square feet of development with small shops and boutiques along Tremont Street, a large retail space set back from Tremont Street, 200,000 square feet of office space, an 11-story apartment building with 240 units, and a new museum for the National Center for Afro-American Artists. The development will also include a large public plaza and a multi-level parking garage with 1,700 spaces.

The site of Tremont Crossing is pivotal, as it forms a link between Madison Park Technical Vocational High School, the John O’Bryant School of Math and Science, Northeastern University, the Boston Police Department main headquarters, and the Southwest Corridor Park. The central focus of neighborhood activity and pedestrian trips is the MBTA Ruggles Station with subway, bus and commuter rail connections through the Southwest Corridor. The development site, physically separated from many of these facilities, directly adjoins Madison Park High School and the John O’Bryant School.

The proposed pedestrian facilities in the development include two wide sidewalks the full length of the site. One sidewalk will be immediately adjacent to the curb along Tremont Street, and the other sidewalk is interior to the site parallel to Tremont Street and separated from it by a very short distance.

The proposed layout at this critical location suggests the following possibilities:

  1. A considerable number of the Madison Park High School and O’Bryant School students will use the sidewalks through the site for daily access to transit at Ruggles Station. Depending on the kinds of retail incorporated into the site, students may also visit the site to shop. The school already has strong business partnerships – clinical rotations and internships with industry partners. This movement of people might be the basis for a connection between the project site and the schools, as the site could benefit from a close relationship with students. The proponent could reflect this movement and take advantage of the pedestrian activity as a basis for a physical realignment of the sidewalks toward the access ways leading to the schools.
  2. It is not clear why two parallel sidewalks are needed to serve the site. The interior sidewalk serves the backs of the retail outlets facing Tremont Street, yet provides the principal point of access to the large retail outlet and to the parking garage. It is unlikely that small retail shops will want to have two entrances – one facing Tremont Street and one facing an interior sidewalk. This may result in an unused edge of the stores – which would be unattractive and possibly create an unsafe interior corridor. We think that this two-sidewalk design is unfortunate and may generate walking patterns that are neither safe nor complementary to the proposed development. Perhaps the two sidewalks could be reduced to one along Tremont Street that serves people more directly including, of course, plazas for sitting and eating along the way, and an entrance to the large retail space that is deeper into the development.
  3. The proposed museum and cultural center is a unique feature of the development. Will it be closely related to the two adjacent schools? Will students from both schools be provided opportunities at the museum and cultural center and should there be special attention to pedestrian access from the schools? How will the Museum be “announced” to visitors who approach on foot?
  4. The major pedestrian crossings of Tremont Street will take place at intersections with Ruggles/Whittier Street, South Drive and Prentiss Street. The major 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. Analysis should be performed to ascertain which crosswalk directions will work best for moving pedestrians safely. Analysis should also be undertaken to determine if a crosswalk is 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

Spicket River Greenway Comment Letter

Spicket River Greenway Comment Letter

March 29, 2011

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

RE: Comments on the Environmental Notification Form, EEA No. 14717 Spicket River Greenway

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the Spicket River Greenway in Lawrence. The project is an ambitious undertaking that will significantly expand attractive walking facilities in Lawrence. The proposal is a 2.9 mile walkway from the recently constructed Manchester Street park to the Oxford Mill site near the Merrimack River in Downtown Lawrence. At the mill site, the project will connect to riverside walkways that are proposed on both sides of the river.

The project will follow a stream that is presently open to view but virtually useless as a recreational facility to the residents of Lawrence. Through this project, the river and its path through the densely built-up city will be cleaned up and improved with a new walking facility designed to serve its inner city neighbors. The new 8’ wide paved walkway will be fully accessible for all users. Landscaping and solar powered lighting will enhance the path.

WalkBoston supports this project and congratulates the City of Lawrence for its leadership in providing a facility that will add beauty, recreation and a means for the residents of Lawrence to add walking to their daily lives.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this commendable project. Please contact us if you have questions.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Heather McCann, Executive Director, Groundwork Lawrence James Barnes, Director, Lawrence Community Development Department

Mystic River Recreational Trail Comment Letter

Mystic River Recreational Trail Comment Letter

March 22, 2011

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

Attn: MEPA Office, Deirdre Buckley

RE: Comments on the Environmental Notification Form, EEA No. 14718 Mystic River Recreational Trail

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the Mystic River Recreational Trail in Somerville. The project has grown out of the analysis of the Assembly Square development project, which will enlarge and improve the riverside park along the Mystic River. The completion of the new riverside park will result in trails along the south bank of the Mystic for about one mile, reaching from the MBTA rail overpass near the Mystic River Dam to the network of paths that outline part of the Ten Hills neighborhood and along the river to Mystic Valley Parkway (Route 16) in Medford. However, these trails are divided into two discontinuous parts on either side of the Fellsway (Route 28), a heavily traveled roadway which is difficult for pedestrians to cross safely.

The proposal calls for construction of an underpass to accommodate a recreational trail beneath the Mystic River Bridge (Fellsway, Route 28). This underpass would link the Assembly Square development with the Ten Hills neighborhood in Somerville and provide a continuous walkway along the Mystic River. Construction of the underpass will also include some improvements to pathway connections to it on both sides of the Fellsway (Route 28).

WalkBoston fully supports construction of the underpass and welcomes the connections it will provide for walking and bicycling along the Mystic River. The facility will strengthen the Assembly Square development and add a new amenity to other areas near the river. The trail will ultimately be an element in a larger network of trails into and through Assembly Square, and will connect with the proposed station on the Orange Line.

WalkBoston continues to support smooth surfaces on walking routes and in public spaces that serve as pedestrian gathering places and plazas. Brick, granite or concrete pavers create a visually distinctive space but without very careful maintenance these surfaces can quickly become uneven, making for treacherous walking. Such materials are also often difficult to clear of snow during the winter months. Specifications for this project should call for smooth materials leading from both sides onto the wooden deck that constitutes the trail under the bridge. We encourage the selection of smooth walking surfaces wherever possible.

The Assembly Square development is described as a transit-oriented development and we understand that the transit station is being constructed early in the development sequence. The proposed underpass is an integral part of providing good pedestrian connections to the Assembly Square transit station from the Ten Hills neighborhood, and will help to draw pedestrians to the new station.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Please contact us if you have questions. Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Monica R. Lamboy, Executive Director, Somerville Strategic Planning and Community Development,
Jaime Corliss, Director, Shape Up Somerville

Route 138 Reconstruction Comment Letter

Route 138 Reconstruction Comment Letter

March 2, 2010

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

RE: Comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the roadway reconstruction of Turnpike Street, Route 138 in Canton.
EOEA #14535

Dear Mr. Bowles:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the roadway reconstruction of Turnpike Street, Route 138 in Canton. The proposal calls for reconstruction of the roadway between Sassamon Street and Randolph Street in Canton, and includes a sidewalk on the west side of the street. This sidewalk will be 5.5 feet wide.

We applaud the state for constructing this sidewalk in an area that is in need of facilities for the safety of pedestrians and are pleased to see a pedestrian network beginning to evolve in the vicinity of the town center and the educational campuses on Randolph Street. Our concerns about the installation of the new sidewalks are discussed below.

It appears that the proposed new sidewalk on the west side of Turnpike Street will complement the existing limited width sidewalks along this street north and south of the project area. When completed, this sidewalk plus the sidewalks to the north and south of it will provide a pedestrian facility extending along Washington/Turnpike Street from the Route 128/I-93 interchange to about 600 south of Randolph Street. This is commendable and very welcome. It also suggests the need for continuity of the sidewalks on the full length of this important local street and its connections via sidewalks on Washington Street and Randolph Street into the center of the community. One of the problems we see regularly in sidewalk construction is that the necessary clear walking widths are not always preserved. Frequently, utility poles and signal utility boxes are placed directly within the sidewalk, significantly reducing the clear width available to pedestrians. This is the case with the existing sidewalks along Turnpike and Washington Streets which are very narrow and which have utility poles rendering them difficult to use, particularly for those in wheelchairs. We trust that the new sidewalks will be designed with sufficient clear width to enable comfortable and safe use by pedestrians and people in wheelchairs.

Adequate sidewalk widths are also important if bus service is provided. While there is apparently no current bus service along this portion of Turnpike Street, if future bus service is anticipated, the clear width should be enlarged where buses might stop – especially near intersections such as Randolph Street.

The sidewalk cross slope design should be closely examined for its effects on walkers or wheelchairs, in particular at driveways where steep slopes can be uncomfortable for both pedestrians and wheelchair users, can be slippery in snowy or icy conditions, and potentially dangerous if pitched steeply toward the street.

We note that the principal intersections with Turnpike Street at Randolph Street and at Washington Street already have traffic signals in place. As part of this project, countdown signals should be added in both locations to help pedestrians cross the intersection.

Wheelchair ramps are already in position at both sides of the intersection at Turnpike and Randolph Streets and at Turnpike and Washington Streets, and cut-throughs are in place in the pedestrian refuge island in the intersection of Turnpike and Washington Streets. However, no marked crosswalks exist to connect these facilities. Marked crosswalks should be added to both intersections.

We suggest that the plan include signs in advance of each pedestrian crossing to warn drivers to slow down and be alert for pedestrians.

Over time, we urge MassDot to consider widening the existing sidewalks on Turnpike and Washington Streets which are narrow and have frequent utility poles. In addition, new and or improved sidewalks should be added wherever possible. Future construction of walkways along Randolph Street to the Blue Hills Regional Technical High School and Massasoit Community College would be a welcome improvement.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Environmental Notification Form for the roadway reconstruction of Turnpike Street, Route 138 in Canton. Please contact us for any clarification or additional comments that you may need.

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner