Tag: MassDOT

Comments on Allston – The I-90 Massachusetts Turnpike Interchange Project, Evaluation Criteria

Comments on Allston – The I-90 Massachusetts Turnpike Interchange Project, Evaluation Criteria

By |

August 6, 2014

Mike O’Dowd
Project Manager, MassDOT
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116

Re: Allston – The I-90 Massachusetts Turnpike Interchange Project, Evaluation Criteria

Dear Mike:

Thank you and the project team for providing the opportunity to provide comments on the evaluation criteria for the I-90 Turnpike Interchange Project. Rather than focus on the detailed design and environmental criteria that will be used, WalkBoston feels that it is important to set out big-picture performance standards for the project. Thus far the broader community-building implications of what this project can achieve – beyond its roadway connections to the Turnpike – have not been fully laid out.

The following performance standards should help define the project more completely. We suggest that they be considered as part of the minimum requirements for a successful reconstruction of the interchange.

1. Soldiers Field Road/Storrow Drive – The project should result in the expansion of open space along the Charles River. Based on the alternatives we have been shown to date this is likely to be accomplished through the relocation of some or all of Soldiers Field Road/Storrow Drive under the Turnpike viaduct. Existing rail lines would likely need to be altered or relocated as part of the reconstruction. Thus, all final rail alignments and viaduct supporting members should be designed to make room for this riverside highway relocation.

2. Cambridge Street Bypass – Separate local and regional traffic operations should be evaluated. Multiple lanes of traffic (6 to 8 minimum) will likely be necessary for Cambridge Street to accommodate traffic movements. The number of lanes should be defined as soon as possible so that the neighborhood can comment on whether MassDOT should explore a two-street option that provides for a residential district on both sides of a narrowed Cambridge Street, plus a New Cambridge Street to provide connections to the Turnpike ramps, Stadium Way/East Drive and the River Street Bridge. (See attached diagrams of several conceptual possibilities.)

3. Connecting roads north of Cambridge Street All alternatives should include the construction of both Stadium Way and East Drive as integral links in the access pattern of the study area. Without the construction of these two roadways, Cambridge Street and North Allston will be swamped with traffic.

4. Turnpike ramps Alternatives for the Turnpike’s new alignment should be based on a minimum of retained fill (embankments) between the viaduct and ground level, as suggested in Alternatives 3-D and 3-G. This will allow for over-Turnpike connections to access ramps and to West Station.

5. West Station access All alternatives should include convenient and attractive access to both Cambridge Street and Commonwealth Avenue for pedestrians, bicycles, and buses (perhaps with separate bus access from the north and the south) to the West Station headhouse.

While we think that none of the alternatives presented to date meet these standards, we look forward to MassDOT’s development of alternatives that demonstrate how these standards can be realized.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman              Robert Sloane
Executive Director            Senior Planner

WalkBoston statement on the Anderson Bridge Underpass

WalkBoston statement on the Anderson Bridge Underpass

By |

WalkBoston enthusiastically supports the construction of the underpass for walkers, runners and cyclists beneath the Anderson Bridge, as well as the suggestion that evaluation of this underpass might lead to similar underpass routes beneath approaches to the River Street and Western Avenue Bridges.

Underpasses add significantly to the capacity of the riverside paths and also add to the network of off-road movement options along and across the Charles River. Capital improvements for the surface of all three bridges have been discussed in detail over the past few years and initial plans show positive agency responses to our advocacy for pedestrian movement across those bridges.

The Charles River paths are a key part of the broader transportation network. This proposal highlights the necessary interconnections and reinforces the need for DCR to receive increased funds for the maintenance of these and other riverside facilities.

Boston Globe: “Anderson bridge proposal backed” 8/5/2014

Learn more about the Charles River Conservancy’s Underpasses Advocacy Campaign.

Wollaston Walk Assessment

Wollaston Walk Assessment

By |

WalkBoston led a walk assessment at the WollastonT station in Quincy, MA to evaluate pedestrian safety at the station and along the major road corridors and intersections leading to the T station. The assessment fulfilled several mutually beneficial goals by bringing together federal agencies, state agencies, municipal departments, and advocacy groups around the central issue of implementing built environment solutions to improve pedestrian safety.

Read the full report here:
WalkBoston-WollastonWalkAssessment-Quincy

Comments on the Design for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A

Comments on the Design for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A

By |

2 July 2014

Commissioner Jim Gillooly
Boston Department of Transportation
1 City Hall Square, Room 721
Boston, MA 02201-2026

Vice President Robert Donahue
Boston University Government & Community Affairs
121 Bay State Road
Boston, Massachusetts 02215

Re: Design for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A

Dear Commissioner Gillooly and Vice President Donahue:

We appreciate you taking the time to meet on Wednesday, June 25 to review the plans and process for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A. The redesign is an exciting opportunity to build a model street that will help achieve our collective goals for safety, enhanced user experience, and multi-modal transportation. These goals are in line with mode-shift, climate change, and public health goals set forward in Boston’s Complete Streets Guidelines, Bike Network Plan, and Climate Plan, MassDOT’s goals to triple biking, walking and transit mode share, and the goals set out in the Boston University Master Plan. The project provides a key opportunity to re-build Commonwealth Avenue to protect the needs of the area’s growing population of people who bike and walk, and address the decline of car traffic on the street and in the city.1

Unfortunately, the current designs for the project do not achieve these admirable project goals. Widening street lanes and adding fences encourages cars to move faster, making the street less safe and less comfortable for people. The plan to narrow the already overcrowded sidewalks does not serve the thousands of people who walk on Commonwealth Avenue every day. The current bike lane, which has been the site of many injuries and at least one fatality, is not significantly improved in the design, though there is a clear opportunity here to prevent more tragedies from occurring.

The safety of our community and the student population of Boston University and many other institutions in the area demands that the plans for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A be redesigned to protect people and meet the project objectives.

  • Increase the comfort and safety of pedestrians
    o  Minimize sidewalk narrowing to maintain adequate width for pedestrian volumes and allow businesses to maintain outdoor café seating
    o  Make crosswalks and curb ramps as wide as sidewalk walking zones
    o  Minimize tripping hazards from curb ramps, for example at the corner of Pleasant and Commonwealth Ave.
    o  Add curb extensions at all intersections
    o  Time the walk signals to allow for a single-stage crossing of Commonwealth Ave
    o  Make all walk signals automatic
    o  Add a mid-block crosswalk at Alcorn St/Naples Rd
  • Protect people biking and encourage more people to bike
    o  Explore all options to add cycle tracks (protected bike lanes) without narrowing sidewalks
    —   Parking-protected one-way cycle tracks
    —  Center-lane one-way cycle tracks (similar to those used on Commonwealth Ave in the Back Bay)
    o  Add bike boxes at intersections (traditional and two-stage turn queue boxes for those waiting to turn left)
    o Incorporate bike signals and leading bicycle phasing at intersections
  • Keep transit moving
    o  Add transit signal priority for Green Line trains and buses
    o  Add curb extensions at bus stops
  • Design for safe and steady traffic speeds
    o  Green Wave: coordinate traffic signals to bike speed (15 MPH)
    o  Make all travel lanes no wider than 10.5’ (MassDOT regularly approves this)

We understand that project funding depends on final designs by FY15. However, funding a design that does not meet the objectives of the City, the University, or Boston citizens is not a win for anyone and public controversy slows the process more than would design changes.

These designs have not had a true public process; LivableStreets Alliance, MassBike, and many other advocates and citizens submitted comments at the 25% design meetings, but heard no response and received no follow up information on the project. To redesign such an important and heavily-used street without an inclusive process is contrary to the City’s guidelines and goals.

We urge the City to engage in an inclusive public process to move plans from 25% to 100% design in order to build a street that we can all support. Past projects (including Connect Historic Boston) illustrate that the City can develop 0 to 100% design plans in less than a year.

We ask you to please respond to this letter by Wednesday, July 9, 2014 to let us know how you intend to address these concerns.

Sincerely,

Jamie Maier
Campaign Coordinator, LivableStreets Alliance

Pete Stidman
Executive Director, Boston Cyclists Union

David Watson
Executive Director, MassBike

Wendy Landman
Executive Director, WalkBoston

 

CC:
Nicole Freedman, Boston Bikes
Mike Wasielewski, BETA
Merrick Turner, BETA
Bill Conroy, Boston Transportation Department
Michelle Consalvo, Boston University
Ken Ryan, Boston University
Bill Egan, Boston Public Works Department

Attachments:

  • Comment Letter on Design for Commonwealth Avenue Phase2A
  • Marked up plans for Commonwealth Avenue Phase2A
  • Photo example of curb ramp/crosswalk as wide as sidewalk to meet high volumes
  • Photo example of cycle track
  • Bike Network Plan

Other Materials

Footnotes

 

1 Bike use has increased as much as 135% since 2007, pedestrian volumes have increased 80% since 2001, and car volumes have decreased as much as 31% since 1987 in the project area, according to the Boston University Master Plan (sections 8.5.1-8.5.6)

Bridge Project Management, Project File No. 606475 (Allston / I-90 Massachusetts Turnpike Interchange Improvement Project)

Bridge Project Management, Project File No. 606475 (Allston / I-90 Massachusetts Turnpike Interchange Improvement Project)

By |

April 24, 2014

Patricia Leavenworth, P.E., Chief Engineer
MassDOT
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116

ATTN: Bridge Project Management, Project File No. 606475
Delivery via email to dot.feedback.highway@state.ma.us

Dear Ms. Leavenworth,

WalkBoston is pleased to provide comments on the Allston I-90, Massachusetts Turnpike Interchange Improvement Project and the April 10, 2014 public meeting. We are also pleased to have been invited to participate in the project advisory group.

We write to note the issues that we hope will be addressed by the project, some of them to be included in long-range planning and others to be included in project design – but all of them will contribute to the successful reclamation of a large and important piece of the City that has for too long been disregarded as a part of the surrounding community.

1. Project scope – The scope of the project needs to extend far enough along the Turnpike to look at bigger picture auto circulation, including access between the Longwood Medical Area, the Fenway, Back Bay and the Turnpike and relief of traffic at the Bowker Overpass and on Storrow Drive. Addressing these major vehicular demands will potentially provide significant opportunities to enhance the regionally important open space, walking, running and bicycling assets along the Charles River.

2. Pedestrian access throughout the project – Scoping of the project should include guidelines for designs to facilitate pedestrian travel through the project and into surrounding neighborhoods.

3. Air rights development – Intensive use of the air rights above the rail yards and the Turnpike can be foreseen as part of any long-range plan. Ramps and access roads, the mainline of the Turnpike and the commuter rail yards should be designed to accommodate development of the air rights.

4. Land uses in the newly available land – The needs of the community and adjacent institutions should guide development, rather than the needs of traffic to and from the Turnpike. Traffic needs should not limit the explorations of the potential uses of the land.

5. Affordable housing for residents of Allston – Housing goals should be outlined early to permit inclusion in all aspects of the study.

6. Minimize the impacts of regional traffic on neighborhood streets – The alignment and connections of turnpike on and off-ramps should be designed to minimize cut through traffic and to protect the integrity of residential areas.

7. Rail Yards – The design for reconstruction of the rail yards should minimize the number of required tracks (possibly looking at other locations to provide some of the necessary rail yards) and provide footprints for the supporting columns that enable air rights development above them.

8. Commuter rail station – The design of a new West Station should be advanced to a point where its location and likely dimensions are known, to allow for planning its access to proceed as part of this project. Station access should be provided for both sides of the rail tracks between North Allston and Commonwealth Avenue.

9. Reconnecting Packard’s Corner area and North Allston – An impenetrable wall of rail tracks and the Turnpike will separate the two parts of this neighborhood forever, unless provision for crossing is planned from the beginning, either with air rights or with bridges, or both.

10. Transit access – Bus, commuter rail and other modes of public transportation should be considered as part of the overall design at a very early date.

11. Turnpike main line – The lanes in the new portion of the Turnpike between Agganis Way and Cambridge St. should be separated sufficiently to allow for the construction of supporting columns for new uses on air rights above the Turnpike.

12. Turnpike access ramps – Access ramps should be designed in spare and efficient ways that afford the maximum use of the land for non-transportation purposes. Short tunnels should not be excluded from consideration.

13. Storrow Drive Alignment – A long-range plan for the area should include relocation of a portion of Soldiers Field Road away from the river. All access to and from the Turnpike and Cambridge Street should take this into consideration and not preclude potential options for connections.

14. A new park along the river – Relocation of Storrow Drive away from the river allows expansion of the adjacent parkland, which is now very narrow and constrained.

15. Connecting the area with the Charles River – Alternatives should be examined for connections between development in this area and the river for both pedestrians and bicycles.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the project.

Best regards,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Bob Sloane
Senior Project Manager