Tag: Green Line

Comments on Landmark Center Expanded Environmental Notification Form – MEPA #15183

Comments on Landmark Center Expanded Environmental Notification Form – MEPA #15183

May 9, 2014

Secretary Richard Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: Deidre Buckley, Director, MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Re: Landmark Center, Boston MA
Expanded Environmental Notification Form – MEPA 15183

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

The Landmark Center, formerly the Sears Warehouse and Distribution Center, occupies an 8.8 acre site in the Fenway. It is a major city landmark and retail center that is at the heart of a burgeoning residential district. This proposed development will intensify the use of the site, making it more of a transit-oriented development, and includes 600 housing units, additional retail and new office spaces. The residential units will be housed in a high-rise building of some 12-13 stories immediately adjacent to the Fenway MBTA station. There will be 110,000 sf of new retail space, including a new Wegman’s Supermarket. Office space, already the single largest use in the building, at 635,000 SF, will be only slightly increased.

Many of the design features of this proposal will benefit pedestrians. Surface parking is replaced by about 1.3 acres of open space, setting off the historic Sears Building and including generous pedestrian walking and sitting accommodations. A new public green at the corner of Park Drive and Brookline Avenue is located where the heaviest pedestrian traffic crosses the street. The existing surface parking and the existing parking garage will be removed. A new underground garage will replace the existing 1500 parking spaces.

The proposed design is organized around pedestrian access. The existing internal circulation in the old Sears Building will be augmented by new pedestrian facilities connecting the Wegman’s market facing Fullerton Street on the east side of the property with retail facilities that face Park Drive on the west. A new pedestrian connection will be made via a walking route that passes through the building connecting the MBTA station on the north side of the site and Brookline Avenue on the south.

To build on these excellent elements of the proposal, we suggest that the proponent also consider the following possibilities:

1. Rationalize the odd combination of parallel streets on the east side of the site. 

Both Fullerton and Minor Streets, directly parallel and adjacent to each other, abut the site on the east side. At present, pedestrians may be only slightly affected by this oddity, largely because both streets are narrow and carry little traffic. However, under the proposed design Fullerton Street is being laid out as the major access route for all trucks and service vehicles and a major entrance into the underground parking garage. Fullerton Street is also called out as a pedestrian connection to the Fenway Multi-Use Path on the north side of the site, and carries large volumes of pedestrians before and after Red Sox games when the garage is in heavy use. Pedestrian safety on Fullerton Street may become an issue, depending on traffic volumes using the street for site access.

2. More clearly define and design the proposed use of the pedestrian areas.
The spacious new open space on the Park Drive side of the site is only vaguely outlined in the EENF. It replaces a large parking area, and will provide a substantial improvement in safety and amenity for pedestrians walking between the MBTA station and both the project and Brookline Avenue. To make this a successful outdoor space that functions as more than a passage around the buildings consideration should be given to sitting, eating, strolling and potential assembly areas. Design of each of the spaces might take into account the need for some protection from the elements (sunlight included). Major features of interest such as a fountain, a sidewalk café, or a sculpture or other visual displays might be added.

3. Work with the City to complete the portion of the Fenway Multi-Use Path that is adjacent to the property
This project and the air rights project (Parcel 7) at Kenmore both include segments of the proposed path that connects the Riverway and Kenmore Square. The proponent has made construction of the path contingent on the City obtaining necessary approvals, and we urge
the proponent to work closely with the City to accomplish that goal, and to work with the City to clarify a list of needed approvals and explain how they will obtained. We also suggest that the proponent explore the possible use of the space for Red Sox related displays, photos, sculptures, artifacts since it is a potentially essential walking route for fans moving between the Fenway MBTA station and Fenway Park. The proponent should also work with the City to provide wayfinding signs along the path.

4. Clarify responsibility for building the Fenway Multi-Use Path connection to the Emerald Necklace.
In addition to the portion of the path that is adjacent to the property (described above), there is an additional relatively short section of the Path between the Riverway and the project site that is extremely important. Under existing conditions, some Fenway Station patrons must cross Park Drive at grade, in a location directly above the station that does not even have a crosswalk. Driver’s sight lines of pedestrians are compromised due to the ‘hump’ of the bridge as it crosses over the Green Line. The completion of the Fenway Multi-Use Path under the Park Drive viaduct, directly adjacent to the Green Line tracks, would allow station patrons and other pedestrians to make this connection more safely and conveniently. This connection is important to the success of the site as a transit oriented development and the proponent should take a positive and active role in its construction. We urge the proponent to work with the MBTA and commit to constructing this important pedestrian facility. It would also be helpful if the pedestrian access that will be adjacent to the station could provide access to St. Mary’s Street to improve safety for riders coming to the station from northwest of the point where Park Drive crosses Fenway Station.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this significant project.

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Green Line Extension Comment Letter

Green Line Extension Comment Letter

September 7, 2007

Katherine Fichter
Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation katherine.fichter@eot.state.ma.us

Christine Kirby
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection christine.kirby@state.ma.us

Re: Green Line Extension
Dear Ms. Fichter and Ms. Kirby:

WalkBoston is Massachusetts’ leading pedestrian advocacy organization, and we are currently working with the City of Somerville on their innovative efforts to improve the health of their citizens through community-wide nutrition and physical activity programs. The City recently received international attention for these efforts, which are beginning to have measurable benefits for Somerville children. The State should do its part to vigorously support Somerville by following through on its commitment to extend the Green Line to Somerville and Medford.

Why should the Commonwealth promptly honor the commitment to construct the Green Line?

  • The project will serve the densest community in Massachusetts – one with a high proportion of low-income, minority and transit-dependent residents.
  • Somerville and Medford are poorly served by existing transit and suffer from poor air quality as a result of extremely high vehicle volumes and rail diesel fumes. As a result of this poor air quality, Somerville suffers from high rates of lung cancer and heart disease. Thus, the residents of Somerville bear the burden of rail impacts without the benefits of transit service.
  • Since 1990 the state has been legally obligated to provide this transit expansion – it is time to make good on that commitment.

    While we believe the state should vigorously pursue federal transit funds, such efforts should in no way slow progress on the Green Line extension.

    Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this important project. Sincerely,

    Wendy Landman
    Executive Director

Comments on Expanded Environmental Notification Form for the Green Line Extension EOEA # 13886

Comments on Expanded Environmental Notification Form for the Green Line Extension EOEA # 13886

November 23, 2006

Secretary Robert Golledge
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, MEPA Office 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Comments on Expanded Environmental Notification Form for the Green Line Extension in Cambridge, Somerville and Medford.

EOEA # 13886

Dear Mr. Golledge:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Expanded Environmental Notification Form (EENF) for the Green Line Extension submitted by the MBTA. We are commenting because of concern about the pedestrian issues associated with this proposal.

If the EENF is to become a single EIR as requested, we would like to see these issues addressed:

1. Philosophy of the project.

  • Pedestrian access to the project should be paramount in planning the new facility. Thisis an unusual project, with virtually no parking envisioned at transit stations. All riders will arrive on foot – directly from their homes, from a kiss and ride drop off spot, from a bicycle parking area or from a bus stop. Thus, pedestrian movements should guide station locations and designs. Sidewalk widths, surfaces, street furniture, signing and street crossings are major concerns. Bus stops and drop off sites must be incorporated into the design to maximize convenient pedestrian access, Bicycle storage racks must be provided at all stations.
  • Consideration should be given to extending the Green Line terminus to Mystic Valley Parkway at the Mystic River at the Medford/Somerville line, as is recommended by the Medford Green Line Neighborhood Alliance, to serve an additional densely populated area and to spur transit-oriented development. This terminus should also be evaluated in terms of potential ridership and ways of integrating it with area bus lines.
  • Potential integration with commuter rail service should be examined as EIR work gets underway. For example, the proposed location of the station near Tufts University may be worthy of consideration for commuter rail service. Since Tufts can be considered a regional destination, a commuter rail station nearby may attract more riders to the MBTA system. The proposed Tufts station is roughly the same distance from downtown Boston as Forest Hills, where a commuter rail station is also immediately adjacent to the Orange Line rapid transit station. No stations are proposed for this geographic quadrant of the region where riders can be exchanged between the Green Line and the commuter rail line except for North Station.

• The proposed Community Path should be integrated with the transit proposal from the beginning. The Somerville community agrees on the need for it. Medford residents and officials should be interviewed for views on extending the path from Lowell Street in Somerville to Route 16 at the Alewife Brook Parkway via the Green Line right of way.

2. Planning for the Community Path.

  • The available railroad right of way has sufficient width to include a path for nearly its fulllength. The path can be constructed at the level of the tracks or up the hillside on an alignment supported by retaining walls. If absolutely necessary, the path could be cantilevered above track level.
  • For safety, the path should be completely grade-separated. All new or rebuilt bridge structures should be wide enough to accommodate the proposed Community Path beneath them. Bridges to be retained should be examined carefully for adaptations that accommodate a right of way for the Community Path. Bridge issues for the pedestrian pathway will be particularly difficult at McGrath Highway and at Washington Street, where grade crossings may be unsafe because of heavy street traffic.
  • Pedestrian access between cross streets and the Community Path should be maximized. All street crossings above the right of way should have ramps between the path and street level.
  • Between Washington Street and Lechmere Station, the Community Path should share the alignment of the Green Line extension. A bridge shared with the Green Line will be the only way for the pathway to cross the Fitchburg Commuter Rail Line.
  • The relocation of Lechmere Station in Cambridge is on schedule for construction prior to the Green Line extension. It is important that the station project be designed and built to permit connections to the Community Path from the relocated station and the North Point walkways.

3. Maximizing access and use

  • Pedestrians will literally be coming to this project from all directions. The project shouldfacilitate access to all cardinal points surrounding each station, and not just north-south over the bridges. Pedestrians and cyclists should be able to arrive at stations directly from the Community Path. Additional right of way crossings may be necessary where existing north-south streets do not suffice.
  • An extension to the Mystic Valley Parkway site offers the possibility of extensive transit- oriented and pedestrian-friendly development around a new station that affects both Somerville and Medford. Transit-oriented development will help grow ridership at this station.
  • In examining the proposed extension to the Mystic Valley Parkway, it is important to look at potential pedestrian connections into the neighborhood north of the river to maximize the transit market for the terminal station. At Route 16, the proposed extension of the Green Line can also connect with the growing network of intercity pathways along the Mystic River and Alewife Brook.
  • As recommended by the Medford Green Line Neighborhood Alliance, a station between College Avenue and Winthrop Street in Medford Hillside may be extremely desirable. It could replace the need for the two closely-spaced stations proposed for College Avenue and Winthrop Street. The densely populated area within a half-mile radius might be

2

better served at this location, and it might be the best location to serve Tufts University

riders. Several bus lines run along Boston Avenue and can readily serve this location.

  • The dangerous pedestrian path from the end of Brookings Street in Medford should bereplaced with a bridge connecting this neighborhood to the proposed new Green Line Station. The bridge will provide good access for this portion of Medford Hillside to the Green Line, as Brookings Street forms the central axis of the residential neighborhood which lies north of the tracks.
  • Somerville High School, directly on the Green Line Extension, will provide many potential users of the Green Line Extension. Great care should be taken to design good connections to the High School, as well as the adjacent City Hall and Main Library.
  • Both Somerville and Medford may want to examine the potential for air rights above the tracks to expand open space in the city or to provide the basis for other needed construction, such as housing.

4. The Union Square Connection

  • To best serve pedestrians, the proposed Union Square station should reach the heart ofactivity in the square. An underground station beneath Webster Avenue at the square should be examined to provide efficient and easy access from the business community and the surrounding residents. All station options should be connected to the square’s pedestrian facilities by convenient pathways or sidewalks.

The Community Path should be extended into Union Square. An opportunity exists to coordinate the path with local development. Somerville is redeveloping the area adjacent to the Fitchburg Commuter Rail Line. The 80-acre Boynton Yards Revitalization Area, planned as a mixed-use area, already includes office buildings constructed as the first step in the renewal process for the area.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EENR. Please feel free to contact us for clarification or additional comments. We would be very pleased to work with the MBTA on this important project.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner