sidewalks – Page 12 – WalkMassachusetts

Route 138 Reconstruction Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | March 2, 2010

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

Alewife Brook Parkway Bridge Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | October 13, 2009

October 13, 2009

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

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF)
Mystic Valley Parkway Bridge No. 2 over Alewife Brook Somerville, MA
MEPA # 14487

Dear Secretary Bowles:

WalkBoston has reviewed the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for Mystic Valley Parkway Bridge No. 2 over Alewife Brook in Somerville.

Located on an historic parkway bridge, the project is a reconstruction that will add significant width to the bridge cross-section to widen the bridge sidewalks and better accommodate pedestrians and bicycles, while maintaining access for automobile traffic.

Our understanding of the project is that the DCR plans to retain the curb-to-curb width of the bridge, striping 12’ lanes with 8’4” shoulders that could be converted to bike lanes in the future. An addition of 8 feet to the sidewalks will make both directions 10 feet wide to better accommodate pedestrians and bicycles and connect to the existing and proposed multi-use paths in the adjacent riverbank parks.

While we are very pleased that the sidewalks will be widened, we urge DCR to consider the following possibilities:

With the guidance of DCR, we have learned over time that a parkway is not solely a road,but a park that has a road that passes through it. The Mystic Valley Parkway is a case in point. It is a set of continuous open spaces located within neighborhoods that are densely built. These open spaces are the major parks available to nearby residents. Since roadways are but one element of the parkway, they should not be allowed to determine the character of this remarkable string of urban parks.
It is difficult to imagine traffic moving more rapidly than 30 mph inside a park. That should be the maximum speed. All speed limits in the park and on the parkway roads should be made 30 mph or less to safely accommodate non-motorized traffic.
The parkway and its roads are intended for non-commercial traffic only. We have serious reservations about the need for 12’ lanes for traffic if no trucks are using the bridge. Wide lanes will encourage drivers to move faster through the corridor, to the detriment on non- motorized traffic of all kinds. Since it is not a truck route and will never serve heavy trucks in the future, it seems that narrowing the travel lanes to 11’ or less could be accomplished without inconveniencing traffic. This very simple design feature would produce safety benefits for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles by slowing speeds.

The shoulder of the roadway should be designed for installation of bike lanes, even if not intended immediately. The Mystic River Corridor Parks are destined to become increasingly attractive to bicycle riders for both commuting and recreation. As bike traffic grows, all parts of the Mystic Valley Parkway should be upgraded to accommodate on- road bike lanes that are sufficiently wide for rider safety. The bridge sidewalks should be reserved for pedestrians, in keeping with a long-term goal of separate paths for pedestrians and bicycles through the length of the riverbank parks.
The Mystic Valley Parkway Bridge No. 2 is in line to provide major access to the future Route 16 Green Line station at the Somerville/Medford line. It has been described as one of three key routes people will use to get to the new station. That means that there will be peak hours of all types of traffic on the bridge. It should be designed to accommodate peak hour transit rider traffic on foot and by bicycle.
The nearby rotary at Mystic Valley Parkway and Alewife Brook Parkway is only a few hundred feet from this bridge. This rotary is to be redesigned to bring it up to modern standards in connection with the proposed Green Line extension to Route 16. The rotary is on the walking route to the new Green Line station, a new senior housing facility, Dilboy Stadium and the Mystic River Reservation, and is currently extremely dangerous to cross, as there are NO pedestrian accommodations of any kind. The plans (or at least conceptual changes) for this rotary should be considered when deciding how to reconstruct the bridge so all the elements ultimately work together for the benefit of all the users.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ENF. We look forward to further development of the project.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Cc:DCR Commissioner Rick Sullivan
DCR Planner Dan Driscoll
MHD Chief Engineer Frank Tramontozzi

Renaissance Village Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | July 10, 2009

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for the Renaissance Village project in Brockton. The project is a 40-R mixed use project of 6 stories, including 308 residential units, commercial and retail space, and a 460-space parking garage.

The project is located in an urban setting that occupies one full city block of downtown Brockton. It is readily accessible on foot to the Brockton commuter rail station, one of three serving the city. It will be a good addition to the city by helping to establish downtown as a place to live as well as work or shop.

Read the full letter here:
WalkBoston-CommentENF-RenaissanceVillage-Brockton

Jackson Street Safe Routes to School Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | May 24, 2009

May 14, 2009

Frank A. Tramontozzi, P.E.
Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Highway Department
State Transportation Building
10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116
Attn: Martin Leelman, Project Manager

Re: Comments on Jackson Street Safe Routes to School project, Northampton MA Prepared for Public Hearing on May 20, 2009

Dear Mr. Tramontozzi:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Jackson Street Safe Routes to School project in Northampton. We have been involved with Safe Routes to School projects since 2000, and are currently under contract with the Commonwealth to provide services to many schools across the state (more than 50 from 2007 – 2009). We have long advocated for physical improvements that enable and support programs that encourage children to walk to school.

This project is the first of a series of improvements that will be undertaken near 5 schools in five Massachusetts municipalities. We hope that this project and the others will pave the way for subsequent, similar projects across the state. They are desperately needed for the health and safety of our children.

Location and setting: The project addresses the portion of Jackson Street between Prospect Street and Gleason Road, a distance of about 2500 feet. Jackson Street carries approximately 6300 motor vehicles per day, and is anticipated to carry 6900 vehicles 10 years from now. No counts or projected numbers for pedestrians using the streets or sidewalks were provided for the area.

Project description: The proposed Jackson Street project consists of improvements including sidewalk widening and reconstruction, school driveway entrance reconstruction, pavement markings, granite curbing, fencing, wheelchair ramps, signage, traffic calming measures, and a new pedestrian ramp from Jackson Street to the Northampton Bike Path below it.

• Sidewalk widening and reconstruction: a permanent concrete sidewalk is planned for about 1500 ‘ of the distance along the east side of Jackson Street between Prospect Street and Barrett Street. The proposed sidewalk is to be 5.5 feet wide, enlarged to 10 feet wide between the bike ramp and the existing crosswalk at Barrett Street.
• School driveway entrance reconstruction: The existing wide radius of the school entrance driveway will be reduced. The new driveway will require drivers to make slower turns, providing greater safety for walkers.
• Crosswalks: 8’ wide crosswalks are planned for three of the legs at the 4-way intersection of Jackson and Prospect Streets. A single north-south crosswalk is planned for the intersection of the three-legged intersection of Jackson and Barrett Streets.
• Raised Crossings: The 8’ wide east-west crosswalk at Barrett Street leading to the school will be rebuilt as a raised speed table. An additional raised crosswalk is planned for the other end of the school property near the entrance to the parking lot. Thus two raised 2 crosswalks – one at Barrett Street and the other 320 feet further north at the school driveway, will serve the school. The two raised crosswalks will be supplemented by signs warning of the raised crosswalks and pavement painting to emphasize their location.
• Warning signs and pavement markings: Speed table warning signs and pavement markings are to be located both north and south of each crosswalk. No signals are planned.
• Pedestrian ramp to the Bike Path: A permanent connection between Jackson Street and the bike path is proposed via an accessible ramp. The Bike Path can currently be accessed only at Blackberry Lane to the west where the Bike Path rises and meets Blackberry Lane at grade. The Bike Path is reported to be an increasingly important means of access to the school for students commuting on bikes and on foot.
• Wheelchair ramps: Ramps are located at the crosswalks at the intersection of Jackson and Prospect Streets and at the north-south crossing of the intersection of Jackson and Barrett Streets. Wheelchair access will be an integral part of the 8’ wide raised east-west crosswalks.
• Concrete curbs: New curbs are proposed along the Jackson Street sidewalk between Prospect and Barrett Streets, and again at the school entrance driveway.
• Fencing: A 4’ chain link fence is proposed between the school entrance driveway and the north property line to discourage children from crossing Jackson Street where there is no crosswalk. A 6’ chain link fence is proposed for the ramp to the Bikeway, to be connected into the existing fence at that location.

Comments –
This is a prototype for improvements on routes leading to schools. We think it is a wonderful idea and are happy to see it getting underway. We offer the following considerations:

1. It is possible that initial operations of the raised crosswalks will require crossing guards or flashing lights to warn motorists of children crossing.
2. The proposed sidewalk on the east side of Jackson Street has many interruptions for cuts that lower the sidewalk at each driveway resulting in a roller coaster effect for people on the sidewalk. Are there any studies that explore whether walkers or more probably, cyclists, might be affected by such cuts? Would it be possible to keep the sidewalk level and require vehicle to cross up and over the sidewalk?
3. Adding a crosswalk at the far north end of school property might be considered. At the point where the internal sidewalk network in the Hampton Gardens projects leads to Jackson Street, jaywalking by children has been reported. Jaywalking by children is unsafe and may not be controllable by simply fencing school property across the street.
4. Follow-up actions might include analysis of pedestrian and bicycle numbers to determine whether there has been an increase in these two modes, review of the safety of the raised crossings, and the effects on Jackson Street traffic (if any) after project is completed. The analysis might give guidance to similar projects.

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

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Queset Commons Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | May 22, 2009

Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIR for the Queset Commons Chapter 40R Smart Growth Development in Easton, a proposed mixed-use retail, office and residential development within a Smart Growth Overlay District.

Our conviction is that developments of the size and character of Queset Commons should follow a number of general guidelines in building a mix and relationship of uses that will encourage residents and visitors to walk more and drive less.

Read the full letter here:
WalkBoston-CommentDEIR-QuesetCommons-Easton