seaport Archives - WalkMassachusetts

Seaport Walk: “A Stroll Through the Seaport: Past Present and Future”

Every season WalkMassachusetts invites our supporters and friends to join us for free, point-to-point walks along 1-1.5 mile routes where we hear from guest speakers who discuss local projects, area history, built environment changes, and more. It gives us a wonderful opportunity to learn new things about our neighborhoods, connect with our supporters beyond a screen, and of course, walk!

Image: Yanni Tsipis, Senior VP of Fenway | Seaport Development at WS Development explains how this plaza was made to feel welcoming to visitors and residents alike.

For July, we held a walk called “A Stroll Through the Seaport: Past Present and Future.” Yanni Tsipis, the Senior Vice President of Fenway | Seaport Development at WS Development guided us along a fully accessible walking route in the Seaport District. The route began at Our Lady of Good Voyage Chapel and ended at Cisco Brewers Seaport.

Image: Using wood instead of asphalt or concrete can help mitigate the urban heat island effect.

The Seaport District has famously undergone many changes since the early 2000s, going from a largely uninhabited industrial port to a bustling mixed-use neighborhood today. WS Development has devoted their 33 acres of land to “residential, hotel, office, retail, entertainment, civic and cultural uses, as well as signature public open spaces.” For over a decade now, WalkMassachusetts has assisted with walk audits and advised on projects and development to ensure that the area is walkable and welcoming.

Image: Yanni discusses the expansion of the green spaces next to the Institute of Contemporary Art.

Throughout the walk, Yanni took care to explain the intentionality behind WS’ design choices: planter boxes with native wildflowers that buffer pedestrians from traffic; playful sculptures that create a welcoming energy; the use of wood, grass, and trees to mitigate heat; the gently sloping foundations that will be resilient to sea-level rise.

Image: Yanni explains that the building under construction out of frame will be net-zero carbon and source its electricity from renewable resources.

Thank you so much to all who joined us! To read more about Seaport’s history and future, check out this oral history in Boston Magazine.

Keep an eye out for our next event! We’re heading to Franklin Park on September 19th!

Transportation Advocates South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan Comments

April 1, 2022
Jascha Franklin-Hodge
Boston Chief of Streets

Jim Fitzgerald
BPDA, Interim Deputy Director of Transportation & Infrastructure Planning

Re: South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan

Dear Jascha and Jim:

Our collective organizations offer joint comments on the South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan. Our comments build on the many verbal and written comments we’ve offered over the last few years, both about this plan, and specific projects within the project area.

While our organizations are eager to see the City tackle the very significant transit needs of this burgeoning part of the City, we continue to worry that this plan lacks the level of City leadership and cohesive vision needed to allow the neighborhood’s residents, businesses and workers to thrive in the years ahead. We would be pleased to meet with you to discuss our comments and our thoughts about how the project could be more effectively advanced.

Our specific concerns are outlined below:

Coordination + Cohesion: It remains unclear what the big picture goal and overall time frame is for the plan. As presented at the most recent public meeting, the “plan” was offered mostly as a laundry list of current and potent projects and lacked details about the timeline for implementation. It also lacked an appropriate level of coordination with the bike plan and offered no clear plan for improving accessibility for the area. Any successful transit plan must take these interconnected needs into account.

As a first step, we recommend putting all of the recommendations into one description and map color coded by timing of implementation (or perhaps overlays by year). The public needs to understand what is happening when and where.
- A tremendous amount of development is in various stages of planning and permitting, each of which is documenting their anticipated transit, walking, biking, parking and delivery operations. Please provide a consolidated look at all of these proposals and then describe how the plan for transit, sidewalks, bike lanes and roadways can accommodate the anticipated number of people and vehicles.
- Distinguish between the projects for which designs and funding are known (with some degree of certainty) and those which are still only ideas.
- Identify which entity (or entities) will be responsible for paying for, leading on designs and decision-making, and implementing the projects.
- Multi-agency complications exist on the roads in the neighborhood as well as in transit operations. Please clarify the ownership of the roads among MassDOT, MassPort and City BTD & BPDA.

Much is still unknown or unclear about the actual transit components of this transit plan. While there are proposed high level connections, there is very little detail about how those connections will be achieved.

Better bus connections are needed: (1) to/from North Station – and not just connecting to South station; (2) along Summer Street; (3) A Street; (4) Silver Line improvements (5) D Street service to Nubian Square (6) Express bus route changes. In order to provide clarity about what this plan will achieve to improve transit, we recommend:

Including information about the schedules of future service – we understand that precise information is not possible, but a vague description of “increased” service is not adequate.
Provide information about where funding will come from for both capital and operational investment
Provide a description of the current overall capacity of bus service for the district and what the future capacity goals are.
Distinguish between public (MBTA) and private shuttle service. Describe how private shuttles are being considered in the process and whether these services will be opened to the public.
Provide details about where buses will layover. Should there be a central point they all serve? Convention Center and Silver Line Way are the only remaining locations owned by the State with sufficient land area.
Outline how this process interacts and is coordinated with the MBTA Bus Network Redesign process.

MBTA Station improvements are critical to the plan

Improve bus circulation around Broadway station with vastly improved pedestrian crossings at West Broadway.
Build a new headhouse at Broadway Station to get last mile access from the northern side of West Broadway

Accessibility for people with disabilities must be definitively addressed, especially from South Station to A Street (via Congress Street is not an acceptable answer) and Broadway to the whole district.

Schedule a meeting with advocates and Boston Disabilities Commission in Spring 2022.
Focus on the network and connectivity, not just piecemeal, but rather a full concept of developed routes to serve as many needs as possible.

This plan must also compliment and contribute to better and safer bike conditions, especially on Summer Street, Congress Street and A Street.

Clarify the intended network and the timing of each piece of the network.
Clarify the goals, location and design of the South Bay Harbor Trail, including a discussion of the proposed width of the trail and whether it will be adequate to serve people walking and biking as a commuter route.
Prioritize separated bike lanes because bikes must be a core piece of the transportation system. They must be built into the network not just planned on a development-by-development basis.
Additionally, we want to see robust bike parking being considered as critical bike infrastructure – not only indoor bike rooms and bike parking that is accessible to residents and workers in new buildings, but on-street (or street-accessible), high-capacity bike parking, and want to ensure it is accounted for with all transportation planning in the area.

Make a final determination that there will be no vehicles, other than emergency access, on Northern Avenue Bridge. There has not been a public meeting about the Northern Avenue Bridge project since April of 2020. At that meeting there was overwhelming opposition to both the proposed design and the proposed allowance of vehicles on the bridge. It is concerning that several of the proposed routes in the South Boston Seaport Strategic Transit Plan assumed some access over the Northern Avenue bridge, when there are still many outstanding concerns about that project.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the plan. We look forward to working with you in the months ahead.

Sincerely,

Tom Ready, FPNA

Stacy Thompson, Executive Director, LivableStreets

Stacey Beuttell, Executive Director, WalkBoston

Wendy Landman, Senior Policy Advisor, WalkBoston

Becca Wolfson, Executive Director, Boston Cyclists Union

Galen Mook, Executive Director, Massachusetts Bicycle Coalition

Jarred Johnson, Executive Director, TransitMatters

Cc Mayor Michelle Wu
Ed Flynn, District 2 City Councilor
Michael Flaherty, At Large City Councilor
Julia Mejia – At Large City Councilor
Ruthzee Louijeune – At Large City Councilor
MassDOT Secretary Jamey Tesler
MBTA General Manager Steve Poftak

Seaport Square Expanded NPC Comment Letter 11/1/17

November 1, 2017

Matthew Beaton, Secretary
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Analyst Alex Strysky
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Gary Uter
Boston Planning and Development Agency
One City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201

Re: Comments on the Seaport Square Expanded NPC, MEPA 14255

Dear Secretary Beaton and Mr. Uter:

Roughly 13 acres of the Seaport Square project remains to be developed. The remaining parcels primarily sit behind the major frontage of the project on Seaport Boulevard, are sandwiched between off-ramps to the Harbor Tunnel approaches and reach from Summer Street to the water’s edge at Fan Pier. The expanded Notice of Project Change describes a project that is framed around the north-south local streets that flank “Harbor Way,” a new and wide interior pedestrian street that will extend 5-6 blocks between the Harbor and Summer Street.

1. The concept for Harbor Way is very strong. The major and continuous pedestrian street is planned and designed to encourage its use by large numbers of people. Harbor Way is intended to create the focus for a sort of ‘downtown’ for the Seaport District that will serve commuters, visitors and tourists. The success of Harbor Way is critical to attracting and retaining tenants and users of the corridor.

2. Generally, mid-block crossings are provided for pedestrians.

At Congress Street the proposed mid-block pedestrian crossing is protected by signalization, bump-outs to narrow the crossing distance, and a refuge median.
At Autumn Lane, a privately owned minor street designated primarily for service vehicle access, the possibility of a platform or raised crossing has been mentioned.
At Seaport Boulevard the pedestrian crossing is mid-block and will be a fully signalized crossing.

3. At this time a mid-block crossing of Summer Street seems to be missing from the plan and needs to be addressed.

We ask that the proponent work closely with the City and the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority (MCCA) to plan for a major mid-block pedestrian crossing at the end of Harbor Way, where it would logically cross Summer Street. We hope that the MCCA will be able to take on some of the responsibility for helping to plan and fund this mid-block crossing, as its main entrance is only a long city block away and the Harbor Way is likely to form a major attraction for the visitors to BCEC events in the future.
The City should be involved, as it is already programming a major reconstruction of the cross-section of Summer Street from the Fort Point Channel up to Boston Wharf Road, a mere half-block away from this proposed crossing. Continuing this improvement to the BCEC should be a major objective for development of the area. The Summer Steps at the terminus of Harbor Way should not be constructed until the mid-block pedestrian crossing is laid out and programmed for construction.
A disappointing aspect of development along Boston Wharf Road is the existence of the very large Park Lot C owned by the U.S. Post Office Department, which abuts Summer Street, where Boston Wharf Road passes under it. This particular site, with difficult roadway access, is unfortunately situated so that improvements in connection with the construction of Harbor Way are unlikely, even though the mid-block crossing that is so essential for the future success of Harbor Way at its terminus with Summer Street. Ownership and physical configuration of the site mean that the proponent, the City and the Convention Center Authority will need to work together to plan and build the mid-block crossing at this location.

4. The anchor for the south end of Harbor Way has been left partially undefined. The proponent has designed the Summer Steps to take advantage of a 24’ grade change between the site and the level of Summer Street. A supplementary elevator is provided, and the steps have a ramp to be used by cyclists. A portion of the steps could also become the seating in a performance facility, aided by electronic connections and lighting to encourage its use. A generous setback between the bottom of the stairs and Congress Street will allow for staged performances. The two sites that flank the steps are loosely defined as office and a possible hotel, and include the possibility of a 650-seat public performance space. Without development of the two sites, the Steps may not be feasible.

5. A strong anchor for the north end of Harbor Way appears somewhat elusive. Harbor Way ends at a pavilion that would mirror District Hall across the park known as Seaport Common. The building will house a stairway and elevator leading to its roof, which will be open to the public. The two lower floors will house the Mass. Fallen Heroes Mourning Room and perhaps a restaurant. Access to the waterfront will continue along the side of the building, leading to a street to the ICA building and the harbor’s edge. Thus the ICA and its waterfront area is the true anchor at the north end of Harbor Way. Access to the large, nearby Fan Pier Public Green (another possible anchor on the north end of Harbor Way) is indirect, and a diagonal trip across the proponent’s Common Park would complete a slightly different connection between Harbor Way and the waterfront. However, this kind of connectivity to the Fan Pier Public Green appears infeasible with the present plan for the Seaport Common pavilion.

6. Preservation of the pedestrian way between Seaport Boulevard and Northern Avenue should be central to planning of the north end of Harbor Way. The proponent has proposed that service and parking access to Parcel G will be via Northern Avenue which WalkBoston believes is an appropriate location. We believe that an alternative location for this access on Harbor Way (as proposed by others) would introduce very unfortunately add parking entrances and loading docks along this quiet and pleasant pedestrian way and transform it’s character. Harbor Way is designed as a special pedestrian space and parking and loading should not occur in the space, especially since reasonably convenient and accessible alternatives are easily available. We concur with the developer’s plan to keep Harbor Way free of these vehicular functions.

7. The streets flanking Harbor Way may pose challenges for successful pedestrian-focused development. The proponent is committed to expanding the Harbor Way walking focus by lining two parallel streets with retail uses designed to appeal to pedestrians. Boston Wharf Road and the East Service road, parallel to Harbor Way, are proposed to be lined with retail and other public attractions. As the Harbor Way development blocks come on line, retail will be a major element to attract walkers into the district. It seems likely that retail will be somewhat slow to locate on either of the parallel streets until Harbor Way is successfully launched, a challenge in today’s low energy retail environment.

The East Service Road in particular may be difficult to develop as a retail spine. It will provide access to and from the Third Harbor Tunnel and I-90 with connections into and through the Seaport District. Bicycle facilities have already been eliminated from the street because they were precluded by the many highway ramp links into the Interstate system. At the same time, pedestrian connections have been expanded with wider sidewalks, leading to an expanded retail area. Given the anticipated vehicular traffic on the street, retail activities seem unlikely in the near term, especially with the competition of the nearby Harbor Way with its robust pedestrian environment.
Pedestrian crossings should be explored at a mid-‐block crossing of the East Service Road at Autumn Way to connect between Harbor Way and the so-called M-block development on the south side of East Service Road.
Boston Wharf Road may attract retail uses, but will need to contend with the fact that this two-way street provides major roadway access to the Seaport District and is likely to become a major access route for vehicles coming to the Harbor Way pedestrian spine. Sidewalks have been widened in anticipation of this evolution of the area.
Special attention may be needed at two locations on Boston Wharf Road. The first is the connection to Seagreen Park – Site Q – a park on the north side of the street, where a mid-block pedestrian crossing is likely to be needed. Second, attention is being given to a through-building connection further south to provide additional connections with Harbor Way, and it would be appropriate to evaluate whether a mid-block crossing is warranted at this location.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the pedestrian environment at Seaport Square. We are happy to answer any questions you have about our comments.

Best regards,

Wendy Landman Bob Sloane
Executive Director Senior Planner

Cc Yanni Tsipis, WS Development Jim Fitzgerald, BPDA Fred Peterson, MCCA Pat Sullivan, Seaport TMA

Comments on the Seaport Square NPC, MEPA 14255-3/24/17

March 24, 2017

Matthew Beaton, Secretary
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office Analyst: Alex Strysky
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Gary Uter
Boston Planning and Development Agency
One City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201

Re: Comments on the Seaport Square NPC, MEPA 14255

Dear Mr. Beaton and Mr. Uter:

WalkBoston is pleased to submit comments on the revised Seaport Square project in the South Boston Seaport District.

We applaud the developer’s broad and thoughtful approach to creating a walkable and pedestrian focused sense of place. In particular, the new walking connection to Summer Street; the extensive, interesting and continuous connection to the harbor via Harbor Way; and the fact that the development is at the same grade with the rest of the Seaport District provide great opportunities to help transform the district into a lively part of the City.

Our comments are focused on several detailed design and management issues that we believe should be further considered as the project moves toward final development and implementation.

We are very pleased that the proponent is providing an additional entrance to the Courthouse Silver Line station. This will provide weather-protected access to transit and provide very convenient transit access for people walking in the area. We urge the developer to ensure that safe crosswalks are provided to the Silver Line station on Northern Avenue and on the nearby intersecting streets - Marina Park Drive and Boston Wharf Road - two cross streets that are not precisely aligned with one another. The crosswalks should serve desire lines for walkers going to or from the station.
Several of the key pedestrian crosswalks that will serve the project require further attention to pedestrian safety.

The lane widths shown on Figures 1-35 and 1-36 show that Congress Street and East Service Road will have overly wide 12’ and 15’ travel lanes. The un-‐signalized pedestrian crosswalk on Congress Street is 70’ wide and we believe that substantial safety measures are needed to make this a safe place for pedestrians, in particular because many of the vehicles using this street will be coming from or heading toward I-90, a situation that causes drivers to think that they are in a higher speed situation. Among the measures that should be considered are: addition of a traffic signal, narrowing the lanes and the crossing distance, and addition of a raised crossing.
The diagrams of other streets show 10.5 – 11’ foot lanes. We urge the proponent to work with the City to shrink all lanes to 10’ or 10.5,’ which the City’s Complete Streets Guidelines suggest as a reasonable width for an urban street.
At the edge of the project, a crossing of Summer Street to connect Seaport Square with the BCEC is absolutely essential. This crosswalk must be fully protected by a traffic signal. We believe that a gracious and safe pedestrian crossing of Summer Street will be important to the financial success of Seaport Square in addition to fulfilling the needs for a walker-‐centric design.
No signals are provided for five pedestrian crossings of Northern Avenue. While this may be viewed as a slow-‐moving street, great care should be taken with the design to ensure that all the crossings are safe for pedestrians, with minimal crossing distances and street designs and parking management that ensure that pedestrians waiting to cross can be seen by approaching motorists.
It is noteworthy that signalized crossings are added along Seaport Boulevard at pedestrian crossings between Farnsworth Street and the Harbor Shore Drive pedestrian way, between Thompson Street and Fan Pier Boulevard, and at the important pedestrian crossing where the Summer Street–to-‐harbor pedestrian way intersects the Seaport Boulevard and also leads to the new entrance to Courthouse Station on the Silver Line.

The shadow conditions in the project area suggest that the proponent will need to make special provisions to make the pedestrian zones comfortable during colder parts of the year. The developer might look to some of the work highlighted by WinterCities (http://wintercities.com/home/about/) for ideas on this topic.
The proposed design for Seaport Boulevard as shown in Figure 1-6 does not yet accomplish the goals for a truly walkable urban district. Except for a partially widened median strip, the roadway appears to have few distinctions from the existing conditions. Among the measures that should be considered for Seaport Boulevard are:

Narrow lanes and frequent raised crossings to slow traffic
Pedestrian scale lighting
Activated ground floor uses to give a sense of place for people walking along the street • Pedestrian wayfinding
We also urge the proponent to consider whether a widened median is a desirable design feature to be continued throughout the project area. The landscaping with rocks, grasses and sculptures might truly make the boulevard distinctive. Landscaping features could also be added on the sidewalks, making the walking experience more pleasant.

All of the design features noted above could help shift the street from its existing character as an auto-centric roadway to one that is attractive and safe for pedestrians.

The proponent should consider walking conditions and amenities on the edges of the project as well as the center – people will be walking everywhere and the NPC is focused very heavily on the central Harbor Way. We urge that the many other streets be carefully planned as well.
Because the project is so large and will create a significant portion of the Seaport District’s character, it seems to have the potential to provide a pedestrian and land use environment that can serve a diverse and multi-‐generational population. We urge the developer to pay attention to the mix of uses, shops and restaurants and their pricing so that they are attractive to all members of the greater Boston community.
Bicycle accommodations shown in the NPC do not seem to represent Boston’s current thinking about the need to provide low stress bicycle facilities. While this is not WalkBoston’s area of expertise, we believe that it is very important for the Seaport District to accommodate bicycles as well as possible.

For example, Figure 3-13, Transportation Circulation Plan, shows bicycle lanes on Northern Avenue, Seaport Boulevard and Boston Wharf Road, without indicating connections to the City’s planned bicycle routes on Congress Street, Summer Street, the Northern Avenue Bridge, the Evelyn Moakley Bridge, and Seaport Boulevard east of East Service Road. Potential north-‐south connections between these main routes are ignored. Possible bicycle lanes on Sleeper Street, Fan Pier Boulevard, Marina Park Drive or other connecting streets are not indicated.
Bicycle lanes on Seaport Boulevard are shown in ways the City is no longer supporting. Figure 1-6 shows bicycle lanes adjacent to moving traffic, while the City is now working to provide protected bicycle lanes (between parked cars and the sidewalk) on arterials.
The crosswalk on Summer Street will also be used by cyclists on the Summer Street cycle tracks. Cyclists will be interested in crossing the street as they access the proposed development – particularly the critical and focal pedestrian path between Summer Street and the harbor. Special provision for cyclists should be included to preserve the safety of pedestrians throughout this potentially densely used walkway.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the project, and would be pleased to answer any questions that our comments raise.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Yanni Tsipis, WS Development
Jonathan Greeley, BPDA
Vineet Gupta, Boston Transportation Department
Patrick Sullivan, Seaport TMA

A newcomer’s guide to a walkable lifestyle

Tom Palmer covered transportation and real estate development for 15 of his 32 years as a reporter and editor at the Boston Globe. He now owns Tom Palmer Communication, a consulting firm.

I’m a newcomer to Boston. I’ve only been here 40 years. The city has changed a lot in that time, but one thing hasn’t changed. It’s still a walkable city. My friends from the Midwest, and even some who visit from bigger cities closer to us, are invariably pleasantly surprised at how accessible and manageable it is. “I love Boston, because you can walk across town in 45 minutes,” a visitor told me.

There’s a lot of room for improvement, of course. Our walk/don’t walk/take-your-life-in-your-hands lights could be better. Pedestrians could shape up by paying attention to lights, but the streets are often so narrow it’s often tempting to make a run for it.

Another thing that hasn’t changed in my short time living in the Boston area is the price of housing. The front pages of newspapers in the 1970s lamented the high rents and home prices of the day, just like we do now. And today it’s even less affordable.

Even some Boston folks who arrived more recently than I object to the fact that Boston is growing so much, that it’s so much more congested than it was. We are lucky we have the attractions and resources – educational, business, medical, sports, cultural, entertainment – that make people want to come here and stay. In the years since Boston shook off its post-War slump and reinvented itself for the 21st century, we gradually and collectively chose to be a contemporary world-class city – competing for business and talent globally and growing to enable us to do that. As engaging as historical Old Boston was, and while we will preserve much of it, we elected not to remain a provincial, insulated community.

With that choice came the responsibility to overcome the barriers to increasing our housing supply, to accepting density. We’ve taken some steps in that direction, adding thousands of apartments just since the recent recession. Boston was at its most dense at mid-20th century, but the automobile did not yet dominate like it does in today’s car culture. People walked more and took public transportation more. The population then declined and only began growing again in about 1990. If we are going to accommodate continually increasing numbers of fellow residents of the Boston area, we must adjust our ways so we can all efficiently get where we need to go. A young professional woman I met the other day rides a fold-up electric scooter from her home in the Seaport to her job in the Back Bay, wearing a collapsible helmet that she found from a European manufacturer. We need more entrepreneurial commuters like that.

But most people in the city are going to walk at least a portion of their daily trips. Walking is healthy and social. As a counterpart, a big part of the solution to our overcrowded highways and streets is expanding our transit capacity. That means both fixing our ill-maintained existing MBTA system and eventually adding to the network. A good transit system enables and encourages walking.

Our continued economic development and our quality of life depend on it.

This article was featured in WalkBoston’s January 2017 newsletter.
————————————————————————————————
Join WalkBoston’s Mailing List to keep up to date on advocacy issues.
Like our work? Support WalkBoston – Donate Now!
Connect with us on Twitter and Facebook