As summer approaches, we’ve been ramping up our work all over the Commonwealth!
Here are a few places we’ve been working with people lately, either in person or virtually, to help make their community more walkable:
Since September 2020, WalkBoston has conducted a series of walk audits in Gateway Cities across the Commonwealth as part of our “Gateway Cities: Social Infrastructure and Walkability” project in partnership with MassINC and with support from the Solomon Foundation. We’re hosting walk audits in five Gateway Cities, in the area around each city’s downtown commuter rail station, in order to advance better connections to transit-oriented development (TOD) zones and public amenities in these communities.
This project not only assesses the neighborhoods’ walking conditions but also looks at the availability of spaces that foster gathering and social connection, such as parks, plazas, community centers, and cafes. Through virtual discussions, as well as sharing written and visual observations, we’re working with residents, municipal staff, and other community members to identify assets and opportunities, and develop program, infrastructure, and policy recommendations based on participants’ visions for the area. In addition to effecting change at the local level, WalkBoston and MassINC will produce policy papers based on the findings from these walk audits to inform state policy and budgetary investment in Gateway Cities.
So far, we’ve completed virtual walk audits in three cities as part of this project: Springfield, Fitchburg, and Brockton. Over the past year, the desire to live in a community with comfortable walking paths, open space, and street activity has dramatically increased as people spent more time at home and in their neighborhoods. The walk audits we’ve already completed have demonstrated that there is a lot of energy and enthusiasm to create more walkable, vibrant public spaces in our partner communities. In Fitchburg, participants are forming a bike/ped committee to advance the walk audit’s findings. In Brockton, residents looking for ways to get more involved in decision-making in their community used the walk audit to connect with municipal staff and each other and learn about joining committees, boards, and task forces.
Next, we’re kicking off our Haverhill walk audit tonight, Thursday, May 27th. This will be the first walk audit in the Gateway Cities series to include an in-person group walk option – we’re excited to get back to walking together again!
A recent visit to Springfield revealed significant progress on two major pedestrian safety projects in two different Springfield neighborhoods.
Completed in September 2020, the Six Corners Roundabout was years in the making. WalkBoston learned about it back in 2013 when conducting a walk audit at the Elias Brookings Elementary School and the Maple High – Six Corners neighborhood. The project provides protected pedestrian crossings where there once were none. It slows traffic down and provides a connected sidewalk network for residents and kids walking to school.
Begun in August 2020, the North End Pedestrian Underpass Project will provide a safe connection for people walking in the Brightwood neighborhood. No longer will residents have to walk along highway ramps or cut across railroad tracks to get from Plainfield Street to Birnie Avenue. WalkBoston conducted two walk audits in the Brightwood neighborhood, including at the German Gerena Community School, that identified this connection as a pedestrian safety hazard.
So great to watch these big projects get built!
March 31, 2021
Secretary Kathleen A. Theoharides
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA-regs@mass.gov Dear Secretary Theoharides:
WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the MEPA Regulatory Review effort. As you are aware, we frequently provide comments on projects that are submitted for MEPA review and feel that this step in the Massachusetts regulatory system is vital for maintaining the quality of the environment in the state, and that issues are often surfaced that result in project changes that are beneficial in many areas of environmental quality.
Our comments on the regulations themselves are focused on the transportation requirements of the process. For clarity, where we have pasted text directly from the MEPA forms or regulations the text is shown highlighted in a text box.
Project Notification Form (Page 2)
Summary of Project Size Existing Change Total & Environmental Impacts
Vehicle trips per day Parking spaces
TRANSPORTATION |
We suggest that the summary table be modified to reflect all modes of travel to ensure that project proponents and all reviewers are thinking about the range of transportation demands that projects will generate. In turn, as discussed later in this letter, the review thresholds should be redefined to include transit trips as well as vehicle trips and parking spaces.
This will also address the issue that, in asking for Vehicle trips per day (based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual), the availability and use of other non-auto modes of transportation, including car-pooling/ride-sharing, transit, walking and biking, is not acknowledged or included quantitatively in the PNF. By “adjusting” the ITE trips, all person trips (i.e. the total demand for travel) are accounted for.
Further, we suggest that the form should also ask for peak hour vehicle and transit trips, as in some locations peak hour trips are a better indication of impact than daily trips. We understand that this may require some new modeling tools that make better estimates of non-vehicle trips, but we believe that this is an appropriate step for Massachusetts to be taking with respect to transportation thinking. The reporting of trip generation in the ENF table should include the following:
TRANSPORTATION
* Typically, the peak hours would be weekday commuter peaks but can include other periods or weekends for some land uses such as Retail, Recreation, Entertainment etc.
(Page 16)
TRANSPORTATION SECTION (TRAFFIC GENERATION)
Please delete the qualification phrase “Traffic Generation” from the title – this section is about all transportation modes.
We recommend deleting this question as a threshold question. If a project does not require state permits, but does meet the review thresholds due to the numbers of vehicle trips and transit trips, the proponent should still be required to complete the traffic multi-modal transportation impact questions on the form. The environmental impacts of the transportation demands generated by the project do not disappear if no state permits related to state-controlled roadways are required.
II. Traffic Impacts and Permits
Title – replace “Traffic” with “Transportation” to encompass all transportation modes.
Question identification – please correct the lettering system so that there is only one question per letter. The questions are presently shown as A, B, C, D, C, D, E.
I. Thresholds / Permit
B. Does the project require any state permits related to state-controlled roadways? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit:
2
A. Describe existing and proposed vehicular traffic generated by activities at the project site:
Number of parking spaces Number of vehicle trips per day ITE Land Use Code(s):
Existing _______ ________ ________
Change ________ ________ ________
serving the site? Change
________
________
________
T otal _______ ________ ________
T otal ________ ________ ________
B. What is the estimated average daily traffic on roadways
Roadway
1. ___________________
2. ____________________ 3. ____________________
Existing ________ ________ ________
C. If applicable, describe proposed mitigation measures on state-controlled roadways that the project proponent will implement:
D. How will the project implement and/or promote the use of transit, pedestrian and bicycle faciliti and services to provide access to and from the project site?
The table in Section A should be modified to include daily transit as well as vehicle trips, and peak hour trips by vehicles and transit. The peak hour trips should be appropriate for the land use of the project (e.g. M-F commuting for office use, and Saturday for retail, etc.).
While daily vehicle and transit trips are useful proxies for the scale of transportation impacts and as general thresholds, we believe that projected peak hour trips are a better indicator of potential impacts by each mode. We suggest therefore that the impacts called for in Section B should be based on peak hour trips assigned to the roadway network and the transit network.
Similarly, we suggest that Section C should be modified to include proposed mitigation measures on all transportation infrastructure that the project proponent will implement.
Please add detail to Section D on transit, walking and biking – for example by adding the following questions.
other sidewalks?
3
(Page 17)
TRANSPORTATION SECTION (ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES)
We suggest that the title be changed to “TRANSPORTATION SECTION (for Transportation Infrastructure Projects” to clarify the purpose of this section and the need to complete it.
Section 11.03 Review Thresholds, (6) Transportation
We urge that MEPA review the 3,000 adt threshold in order to look at two questions, both of which we believe are important to understanding how projects will affect the multi-modal transportation systems into which they fit.
The number of parking spaces included in a project is a proxy for many potential impacts on the environment including transportation, use of land (about 8 acres of paving would be required for a 1,000-car surface parking lot), water quality, habitat, and others.
(a) ENF and Mandatory EIR.
6. Generation of 3,000 or more New adt on roadways providing access to a single
(a) ENF and Mandatory EIR.
7. Construction of 1,000 or more New parking spaces at a single location.
4
We recommend reducing the threshold for parking spaces to 500 spaces which still represents a very significant impact that should be reviewed in full through an EIR.
As a result of the new climate bill signed by Governor Baker this week, we will be looking to EEA and MEPA (and others) for guidance on how the new Climate Bill environmental justice requirements will address cumulative transportation impacts and not simply the new impacts that result from an individual project. We believe that the guidance may require significantly greater review of both impacts and mitigation measures.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these important regulations. We would be pleased to speak with the MEPA staff if they have any questions about our comments.
Best regards,
Stacey Beuttell, Executive Director
Wendy Landman, Senior Policy Advisor
Each month in 2021, we plan to post about the fatal crashes in Massachusetts from the previous month, and share any trends that we see. Last month, we took a look at the 4 fatal crashes listed in the MassDOT Crash Portal in February. In this post, we’ll look at crashes in MA in March 2021. The information in the chart below is compiled from news reports, and was checked against the MassDOT Crash Portal Dashboard “Fatal Information by Year.” The Google Street View images included below use the address listed in the crash portal.
| Date | 3/3/2021, 12:00 AM |
| Location | 800 Morrissey Blvd. |
| Town | Boston |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 56 |
| Sex | M |
A 56-year old man was hit and killed on Morrissey Boulevard in Boston’s Dorchester neighborhood. According to the MassDOT Road Inventory, Morrissey Boulevard is under MassDCR jurisdiction. We have not been able to find additional information about this crash.
| Date | 3/7/2021, 12:00 AM |
| Location | 232 Stafford Rd. |
| Town | Monson |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 94 |
| Sex | F |
A 94-year old woman was hit and killed on Stafford Road. According to the MassDOT Road Inventory, Stafford Rd/Rt 32 is under MassDOT jurisdiction. There are no sidewalks on this road. We have not been able to find additional information about this crash.
| Date | 3/7/2021, 12:40 AM |
| Location | Auburn St. + Summer St. |
| Town | Bridgewater |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 34 |
| Sex | M |
Ian Dalgliesh, a 34-year old man, was found unconscious in the roadway at the intersection of Auburn and Summer streets in Bridgewater around 12:40 a.m. on Sunday, March 7. WCVB reported three weeks after that crash that police were still seeking help to find the driver who left the scene. The article noted that the intersection is located in a residential neighborhood, with stop signs located at all four corners.
Google Streetview shows a sidewalk on one side of the street for one leg of the intersection. It also shows a house on the corner with guardrails at the intersection, possibly indicating that drivers have driven recklessly in this area before.
| Date | 3/10/2021, 7:00 PM |
| Location | Meadow St. + Chicopee St. |
| Town | Chicopee |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 53 |
| Sex | M |
A Chicopee man was hit & seriously injured in a hit & run crash on March 10th near Rivers Park. He died later in the month from his injuries. The Chicopee Police released photos of a dark colored SUV on March 25th as part of the investigation to track down the driver. While there is a signalized crosswalk near the Meadow/Chicopee PVTA bus stop at one corner of Rivers Park, there are no crosswalks at the intersection of Meadow & Chicopee Streets.
According to Streetview, a crosswalk across Chicopee Street nearby that did not have curb ramps was removed between 2016 & 2017 during street & sidewalk reconstruction at the corner of Chicopee, Margaret & Whitman Streets.
| Date | 3/12/2021, 9:40 PM |
| Location | 189 Chestnut Hill Ave. |
| Town | Boston |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 77 |
| Sex | M |
A 77 year old man was hit and killed on Chestnut Hill Ave in Boston’s Brighton neighborhood. We have not been able to find additional information about this crash.
| Date | 3/17/2021, 12:00 AM |
| Location | 511 Broadway |
| Town | Everett |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 67 |
| Sex | M |
A 67-year-old man was hit and killed on Broadway in Everett. We have not been able to find additional information about this crash.
| Date | 3/25/2021, 8:10 PM |
| Location | Parker St. + Ellery St. |
| Town | Springfield |
| Type | PEDESTRIAN |
| Age | 40 |
| Sex | M |
A 40-year old man was hit and killed on March 25th at Parker Street & Ellery Street in Springfield. Ellery Street is a private way. Parker Street has 2 travel lanes in each direction, and is at least 48 feet wide curb to curb. While WWLP reported breaking news on March 25th that a crash may have involved a motorcycle at this location, we have not been able to find additional information about this crash. [Update, 3/23/2022: this was re-categorized as a motorcycle crash.]
Updates
If you have an update about a community member who was killed in one of these crashes, please contact Brendan so we can update our . WalkBoston has maintained a list each year since 2016, pulling the information from news reports, social media, and from people like you that share the information with us.
Yearly trackers: |||||
Reminder about the data from the MassDOT portal
DISCLAIMER: The compilation of data is based on preliminary data we receive from a variety of local sources. Some of the data may differ slightly from information provided by NHTSA as this dashboard does not use imputation methods. Information is subject to change when/if updated information becomes available. Data updated daily as reported by police departments.
*Updated 4/29/2021: We listed a crash that occurred in Sterling as not being in the database for March, but this crash occurred in April and is listed. We apologize for the error. We’ve updated the post accordingly.