traffic calming – Page 5 – WalkMassachusetts

Brightwood Neighborhood Walk Assessment

By WalkMassachusetts | January 11, 2015

A safe walking environment is a critical need for the Brightwood community, as 34 percent of neighborhood residents lack access to cars (compared to 18 percent of residents for the City of Spring eld as a whole). As a result, they are heavily dependent on walking or sporadic PVTA bus service to access food stores and other goods and services on nearby West and Main Streets. However, pedestrian connections to local bus stops and destinations outside the neighborhood are severely lacking and unsafe, and walking conditions within Brightwood are often poor as well.

Read the full report here:
WalkBoston-BrightwoodNeighborhoodWalkAssessment-Springfield

New Bedford Walk Assesment

By WalkMassachusetts | October 29, 2014

The City of New Bedford is one of twelve communities participating in the Massachusetts’ Department of Transportation’s Highway Safety Improvement Program. After evaluating clusters in the City’s crash data, the City identified high-priority intersections that are particularly dangerous for pedestrians. Four such intersections were included in the assessment area. In order to help scope out potential remedies to make these intersections safer, WalkBoston conducted a walk assessment in a portion of New Bedford’s central commercial district on October 29, 2014. The walk assessment was conducted from 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm, and was followed by a discussion and debrief with the walk audit participants.

Read the full report here:
WalkBoston-WalkAssesment-NewBedford

Niagara Senior Center Walk Audit Fall River

By WalkMassachusetts | July 9, 2014

The Niagara Senior Center is located on Tucker Street, in Fall River’s Niagara/Maplewood neighborhood. Under the auspices of the Fall River Division of Health and Human Services Mass in Motion program, led by Julie Kelly, and the Massachusetts Council on Aging Healthy Aging Program, WalkBoston led a walk audit training on July 9, 2014 with approximately 20 participants. Most of the participants were seniors living in Fall River who have expressed interest in helping make the City an easier, safer and more pleasant place to walk.

Read the full report here:
WalkBoston-WalkAudit-FallRiver

Plymouth Rock Studios Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | January 3, 2009

January 3, 2009

Secretary Ian A. Bowles
Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office, Deidre Buckley
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Chairman Marc Garrett
Plymouth Planning Board
Plymouth Town Hall
11 Lincoln Street
Plymouth MA, 02360

RE: Comments on the Expanded Environmental Notification Form for Plymouth Rock Studios in Plymouth EOEA # 14345

Dear Mr. Bowles & Mr. Garrett,

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Expanded Environmental Notification Form for Plymouth Rock Studios (PRS) in Plymouth. We applaud the developer for proposing extensive on site pedestrian circulation. PRS has the potential to be an important economic engine for the lower South Shore region.

While the PRS proposal provides a number of pedestrian facilities, some changes to the design could further improve the pedestrian experience.

Greater attention to the needs of pedestrians could be given to the Studio Amenities Zone. This particular area of the site is very auto-oriented, and it would benefit walkers if the buildings were closer together and linked with sidewalks, and all sidewalks should be directly tied into the site’s recreation paths.
The recreation path along the project’s new access drive crosses and re-crosses the roadway. While these crossings are provided via bridges to avoid conflicts, a pathway that stays to the west of the access drive seems to be more straightforward. Although wetland B is close to the roadway, given the available buffer area, the recreation pathway could be designed to hug the west side of the roadway.
Pedestrian access to the bungalow housing units could be improved by adding a paved path to connect the cul-de-sac to the recreation pathway and the access drive/ring road.
Pedestrian access near the ten single-family home sites on Long Pond Road could be improved by adding a wooded walking trail.
The applicant should explore making a short off-site trail connection to the west, connecting the PRS Campus to Bump Rock Road.
The applicant should explore making better use of the existing shared use path that is being retained in the Studio Amenities Zone by integrating it and connecting it to the 2 proposed recreation paths as a looped walking or jogging route for use by the residents of PRS.
The existence of a Zone I Aquifer and associated buffer should not prohibit the enhancement of this existing shared use path, perhaps using permeable paving. MassDEP permits passive recreation uses within Zone I, such as walking, jogging or bicycling.
The proposed recreation path will connect to existing hiking trails on the adjacent townowned conservation land. The applicant should be asked to provide additional details on how these pedestrian amenities interconnect and complement each other.
Most of the pedestrian trips made daily on the PRS campus will not be able to take advantage of the full pedestrian network. Assuming a majority of the 4,190 proposed parking spaces experience daily turnover, at least 2,000 pedestrian trips a day will be made between parking lots and structures and the various buildings on the PRS campus. Given the propensity for pedestrian and auto conflicts in the loosely-structured driving situations that parking lots provide, and the large number of foot trips that PRS drivers make in accessing their cars, we believe it is paramount for pedestrian safety that a footpath system be established throughout the parking lots. The provision of sidewalks and designated walkways through the parking areas, signage and directional markings, could be combined with the required parking lot plantings that are designed to reduce the heat island effect.

The PRS proposal includes amenities and offers some attractive mitigation that will enhance the pedestrian experience. We trust that the Secretary’s certificate and local project approvals will condition these improvements to ensure that they are built. We recommend that the following proposed improvements and mitigation be conditioned in project approvals:

a. Proposed traffic calming along the area of Long Pond Road, north of Clark Road. At this time, only a commitment to explore such work exists. Traffic calming along this stretch of Long Pond Road will ultimately be very important for the pedestrian experience, as the measured 85th percentile speeds in this location were well above the speed limit.
b. The proposed modern roundabout at the intersection of Clark Road and Long Pond Road. Although it was not included with the Expanded ENF, (and is proposed by others), its existence is critical to the local roadway system if PRS is to be built. The project proponent should ensure that pedestrians and bicyclists are very carefully considered in the design of the new roundabout and all sidewalks and paths leading to it.
c. Pedestrian crossings where the project’s new access road meets Clark Road. Pedestrians traveling along Clark Road and crossing the project’s signalized multi-lane access drive should be able to walk safely and efficiently. The project’s roadway and turning lanes should be kept to minimal widths where they intersect Clark Road.
d. Sidewalks along all internal roadways. These sidewalks, as proposed on page 6-101 of the Expanded ENF, are an important pedestrian amenity and their installation is essential.
e. Details on the placement and type of bicycle accommodations, including weather protected secure storage locations. The installation of bicycle improvements is essential, and would be in keeping with the proponent’s proposed credits in the LEED Project-Wide Credit Summary, Table 5.2.1 of the Expanded ENF.
f. The recreation path from Clark Road, past the Plymouth South School Complex and through the project will provide a significant amenity as proposed, and could connect 3 through the Crosswind Golf Club to Forges Field Recreational Complex, helping to realize the vision for the “Wishbone Trail” in the Plymouth Open Space Plan.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the PRS Enhanced Environmental Notification Form. We look forward to seeing the next phase of project design and permitting submissions.

Please feel free to contact us for clarification or additional comments.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman Robert Sloane
Executive Director Senior Planner

Meadow Walk DEIR Comment Letter

By WalkMassachusetts | March 21, 2008

March 21, 2008

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

RE: Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Meadow Walk at Lynnfield
MEPA # 14096

Dear Mr. Bowles:

We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for Meadow Walk at Lynnfield, a proposed mixed-use retail, office and residential redevelopment of a portion of the Sheraton Colonial Golf course in Lynnfield and Wakefield. We are encouraged that walking is such a major organizing feature of the development and that the Town of Lynnfield is firmly implementing its design standards for the project.

We are commenting because of the need to continue promoting new ways to encourage pedestrian safety and access in suburban development throughout Massachusetts. In this project, the design details can help in making it pedestrian friendly.

Summary of comments:

 A change has been made in parking lot design to incorporate landscaped swales. These swales could be used creatively to offer an opportunity for pedestrian walkways through the parking lots. If equipped with walkways, the swales could be integrated into a network of pedestrian ways. New safety measures such as crosswalks and signage should be added.
 As proposed, the perimeter road remains a relatively high-speed roadway. Speeds should be mitigated by signage, traffic control measures and traffic calming installations.
 Because the residences and the town center are separated by the perimeter road and parking lots, it remains difficult to imagine much walking between these two components of the project. It would be more encouraging for people to walk if the two were located closer together, and were not divided by so much vehicle circulation.
 Pervious sidewalks are now a feature of the design of the residential areas. Walkways at the edges of water and marshy areas should also be paved with pervious materials.
 The former golfing fairway between the Saugus River, the Lynn Canal and Route 128/95 should be designated as open space with walkways. If signage for the shopping center is needed in this area, it would not substantially detract from this use.
 Guiding principles for this project call for the use of traffic calming techniques, traffic controls and signage elements. All should be detailed and mapped in future documents.
 Paving materials that are selected and put in place should maximize wide, smooth surfaces where wheelchairs or carriages can be used in comfort.
 Retaining an option for additional pedestrian access between site walkways and Walnut Street will make a future walking network more complete.

Walking in the parking lots
Town design standards for Meadow Walk at Lynnfield call for large parking lots to be divided into blocks of no more than 200 spaces, with each parking block separated from others by a landscaped area that is a minimum of 10 feet wide. Standards also call for 7 percent of the area of large parking lots to be landscaped. The town design standards do not address the safety of walking in the parking lots.

In following these directives, the proponent has begun to humanize the site’s large parking lots by dividing parking areas into blocks of 200 cars or less divided by long, rhythmically spaced, vegetated biofiltration swales perpendicular to the service drives at the rear of Main Street’s business structures and the perimeter road. The swales are designed as 10-foot wide landscaped, unpaved areas that collect and distribute runoff from the parking areas and filter it through soil and plantings.

From review of diagrams in the report, it appears that the swales, with design modifications and/or widening, could also serve as walkways. Flat walkways on each side of the sloped portion of the swales could be an integral part of the landscaping and provide safer walking through the parking lots. If built of pervious materials, the walkways would help with the biofiltration functions. The walkways would give safe access for walkers who otherwise are forced to wander among vehicles in the midst of the expansive parking areas. The walkways could be part of the 7% of the parking lot area that must be landscaped.

Safe methods for pedestrians to cross the parking lots exist only in a few locations via sidewalks along access streets. Figures 1.4 and 9.2 show the pedestrian network for the project. Based on Figure 9.2, up to 15 parking lot walkways could be assembled along the biofiltration swales and along with the sidewalks accompanying the entrance streets.

Crosswalks, traffic controls/signage and traffic calming
Crosswalks at street crossings within the shopping and residential areas should be identified as part of the pedestrian network for the site. Crosswalks should also be provided at all major access into parking areas, such as the entrances to the Main Street shop groupings. Crosswalks should also be provided at walkways that may be added to the biofiltration swales.

Grade separated crosswalks are cited in responses to our EENF comments (C-003-002), but are not shown in this document. A grade separated crossing for pedestrians within the parking area that connects the Main Street Village Development with the walkway to the Reedy Meadow is cited in responses (C-003-007), but not shown in maps.

Traffic controls throughout the project should be detailed, along with signage that helps direct traffic and make the area safer for pedestrians. Signage should include wayfinding signs and signs relating to the residential areas, as needed.

Traffic calming is hinted at but not fully described. (See Response C-003-009 mentioning a “flush plaza area.” A full explanation of the traffic calming strategies is essential. These should include any raised intersections, narrowed streets, and curb extensions that make street crossings shorter and safer for pedestrians.

The Reedy Meadow/Saugus River/Lynn Canal Walkway
A walkway along the Reedy Meadow is proposed in Figures 1.4 and 9.2, (Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation Plan), extending along the edge of the Saugus River to the bridge where Route 128/95 crosses the stream. The open space associated with this walkway is shown on Figure 5.1. (Plan Changes Since MEPA Submittal.) All paving done to construct this walkway should be made of pervious paving materials to absorb and filter associated run-off.

Details of the walkway along the Saugus River are shown in Figures 3.4 and 3.5 (Buffer Zone Improvement Plan and Saugus River Buffer Zone Improvement Plan). The Lynn Canal, which transports water from the Saugus River to the City of Lynn, will remain a permanent feature. It should be treated in a sensitive way, similar to the plans for the banks of the Saugus River. A buffer zone along the full length of the Lynn Canal is not included. (Figs 3.5 and 5.1)

The Saugus River buffer area affects about half of the Lynn Canal, lying between the Lynn Canal and Route 128/95 in an area that once was a fairway of the Sheraton Colonial Golf Course. The entire former fairway – perhaps 800 feet long – should be part of the designated on-site open space. This would protect the edges of the Lynn Canal, provide additional space for walking and set a welcoming landscaped area for the on-site shopping area. Even if the land is intended for installation of a large shopping center sign, the open space could remain useful as watershed buffer and as an asset for walkers.

Pedestrian access to Walnut Street
Despite adverse local comment, we continue to think that the option for additional pedestrian access between the site and Walnut Street should be retained. With increasing numbers of walkers, future walking possibilities and the need for such connections cannot now be foreseen. Without this access, pedestrians arriving via Walnut Street must enter near the Rte 128 ramps, a location with heavy traffic volumes.

Connecting the residences and shopping components
The on-site luxury housing (180 units) and the LIFE component (40 units) are wholly separated from retail/office uses by the perimeter roadway. The layout is not designed to maximize walking from the residential buildings into the mall. Walking from the LIFE component will be a primary mode of getting to the shops other than driving, as the shuttle bus does not appear to provide this service. Two crosswalks of the perimeter road are indicated between the residences and the main town center buildings. These crosswalks are located at the luxury apartments. We remain concerned that the crossings are located on the relatively high speed perimeter. Raised crosswalks at these locations have been cited but not shown. (See Response C-003-011.)

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this document. Please feel free to contact us for clarification or additional comments.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner