Tag: Boston

Comments on the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mohegan Sun Development MEPA# 15006

Comments on the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mohegan Sun Development MEPA# 15006

August 8, 2014

Secretary Maeve Vallely Bartlett
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: Holly Johnson
100 Cambridge St., Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

RE: Comments on the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mohegan Sun Development MEPA# 15006

Dear Secretary Vallely Bartlett:

The proposal included in the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report makes some changes to the components of the Mohegan Sun Development and slightly alters pedestrian access to the site. Construction will include 965,000 sq ft of gross floor area, providing space for 5,000 gaming positions, 450-500 hotel rooms, 44,000 sq ft of meeting/entertainment space and 100,000 sq ft of retail space. Parking for 4,200 cars will be located beneath the structure, with an additional 270 cars on surface but below the first floor of the building.

Pedestrian entry into the site takes place at the two corners of the site, with a southwest corner entrance devoted to people arriving by private vehicles, and a northeast corner entrance devoted to people arriving by public transit (bus and subway), tour buses and walking from the surrounding area. Most of our comments focus on the building’s external design, and the ways in which people find access to and from the building.

1. Access to the site – the balance between transit and driving
Although this casino site is much better served by public transportation than any of the other proposed sites in Massachusetts, access by private vehicle may be encouraged because of the extremely large number of on-site parking spaces. We urge the proponent to give greater consideration to encouraging transit and pedestrian access and discouraging vehicular access.

• A potentially attractive reliance on public transportation may be lost because by the ease of driving and finding a parking space. Perhaps parking should be deemphasized through pricing and location.

• People arriving by vehicle are pampered by weather protection, provided in two ways: either by live access using a porte cochere and valet services, or by direct access into the underground parking garages where access is served by elevators.

• The access area at the porte cochere does not encourage pedestrians who do not arrive by car. For example, walkers using Tomasello Drive to get to the entrance areas of the southwest corner of the site will find a sidewalk that leads into the parking garage where elevators connect to the main floors.

2. Access on foot will be primarily served by public and private transportation to the northeast corner of the site.
At this corner there is access from adjacent MBTA bus stops. The MBTA Beachmont Station on the Blue Line is about 150 feet away. Tour bus bays are immediately adjacent to the concourse of the entry way. The concentration of arrivals into the concourse area appears to be an efficient way to enter the development.

• The grade of the northeast corner concourse may be difficult for certain users to reach. It appears that all people arriving at his corner of the site will have to go up at least one level via elevators and/or stairs to reach the main floor, where further vertical public circulation is available. Access to the concourse level varies. For example, people arriving by public transportation, whether by bus or rapid transit, will need to go up at least eight steps to the concourse level. Arrivals from the tour bus drop-off area may have to do the same. It is unclear how arriving patrons in wheelchairs will access the concourse; there is no evident ADA access ramp from the sidewalk at the intersection of Winthrop and Washburn Avenues up to the concourse level.

• Weather protection for arriving pedestrians should be provided. Covered walkways would be appropriate, particularly on the approach from Washburn Avenue and on the open stairway at the main entrance.

3. Access to and from the Beachmont MBTA station
The proponent should work with the MBTA to enhance access to and from the rapid transit platforms at the Beachmont station. Wayfinding signs inside the station should be used to direct riders to the Mohegan Sun complex. Wayfinding signs at the entrance/exit concourse of the proposed development could reinforce the potential for patrons to take transit, especially because the station is so close.

4. Off-site improvements
The proponent has committed $45 million for off-site roadway, traffic and safety improvements. We hope that the commitment will be honored with full ADA compliance, and with appropriate pedestrian signal equipment at each intersection (including countdown signals, leading pedestrian indicators and automatic recall of WALK signals during the hours when pedestrians will be present). Crosswalks should be provided with zebra striping, and in some locations in-street pedestrian signs such as “yield to pedestrian” may be appropriate. Refuge islands at street centerlines should also be considered on major roadways.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important project.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman              Robert Sloane
Executive Director            Senior Planner

 

Comments on the Single Environmental Impact Report for the Landmark Center Redevelopment MEPA# 15183

Comments on the Single Environmental Impact Report for the Landmark Center Redevelopment MEPA# 15183

August 8, 2014

Secretary Maeve Vallely Bartlett
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: Purvi Patel
100 Cambridge St., Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

RE: Comments on the Single Environmental Impact Report for the Landmark Center Redevelopment MEPA# 15183

Dear Secretary Vallely Bartlett:

For large development projects around the state, WalkBoston provides a review of proposed pedestrian facilities and provide comments that suggest ways to help improve pedestrian conditions and/or mitigate negative impacts on pedestrians.

WalkBoston has reviewed the Single Environmental Impact Report for the Landmark Center Redevelopment. The project is designed to intensify the use of the property by relocating existing parking underground, and constructing 600 residential units, 185,000 sq ft of retail space, and 15,000 sq ft of office space. The existing Landmark building is preserved and circulation is upgraded on the retail level. Public open space will be augmented, and additional paths for pedestrians provided.

The project holds many positive improvements for pedestrians. The new connections between the MBTA station and the neighborhood, both inside and outside of the building are well done and very desirable. The new park at the corner of Park Drive and Brookline Avenue will provide a gathering spot and a “green” that will have multiple uses for people-watching or as an entertainment venue.

We have some suggestions that may improve facilities for pedestrians:

• The proponent might consider extending the weather-protected portion of the walking route along the new building frontage between the existing Landmark building and the north side of the property, including both the MBTA station and the multi-purpose path. Weather protection could be provided either inside the new building, as an extension of the interior network of pathways or by a canopy that would provide some protection for walkers across this small portion of the site.

• On page 1-7 the report cites the “….vibrant streetscape along Park Drive, Brookline Avenue, and Fullerton Street.” These three sides of the project warrant such attention. But the north side of the property, where the multi-use path is proposed to be located, has not been provided with attractive treatments. The walls and landscaping along this path be provided with amenities to make it more vibrant and attractive to walkers. For example, murals could be added on the adjacent walls.

• The proposed design for Fullerton Street is confusing. A connection for pedestrians is provided via Fullerton and Miner Street to reach Beacon Street from the development, but the extensive truck use of Fullerton Street may make this connection uncomfortable for pedestrians. The proposal to increase the corner radii at the intersection of Brookline Avenue/Kilmarnock Street/Fullerton Street should be carefully reviewed for its potential safety impacts on walkers.

There is an important pedestrian safety issue that we hope the proponent of the project will undertake – improving pedestrian access across Park Drive at the top of the bridge where bus stops and the stairs to the Green Line are located. Two different improvements should be implemented.

1. By using the underground passageway adjacent to the MBTA D Line station, a pathway along the MBTA right-of-way through the Fenway Station would connect the Riverway portion of the Emerald Necklace to the multi-use path leading to Kenmore Square. This would enhance safety for pedestrians who want to walk between these two off-street paths.

2. An improved pedestrian crossing of Park Drive is needed at the top of the hill where the bus stops and access to the stairs to the Green Line are located. There is currently no crosswalk or signal at this location, and the hill reduces the visibility of pedestrians. As the location of a busy transit connection serving both Green Line and bus riders, this location warrants a careful study to develop safe crosswalks perhaps including a pedestrian activated signal or other high-visibility markings.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important project.

Sincerely,

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Cc: Jack Murray, Commissioner, DCR
Jim Gillooly, Interim Commissioner, Boston Transportation Department

 

WalkBoston statement on the Anderson Bridge Underpass

WalkBoston statement on the Anderson Bridge Underpass

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.

Comments on the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage MEPA #15134

Comments on the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage MEPA #15134

July 11, 2014

Secretary Maeve Vallely Bartlett
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA)
Attn: Holly Johnson
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

RE: Comments on the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage MEPA #15134

Dear Secretary Vallely Bartlett:

WalkBoston reviews significant proposed development projects to provide comments about their impacts on pedestrians, and to suggest measures that may mitigate negative impacts or generally improve the projects for walkers.

We have reviewed the DEIR for the Redevelopment of the Government Center Garage and find exciting aspects of the project that will benefit walkers. These include:

Enhancement of a major pedestrian-transit hub
The East Parcel contains a high-volume transit hub with extensive pedestrian access. Access to the Orange and Green Line Haymarket Station access points will be maintained, as will access to the many MBTA bus services. Some of the difficult pedestrian crossings to the site will be improved by narrowing the width of the New Sudbury Street and thus the length of the crosswalks at its intersection with Congress Street.

The sidewalk through the East Parcel
The new pedestrian connection proposed for this project between Congress Street and Canal Street respects a traditional walking route between Downtown and North Station. This route will see more intensive use over the coming years as the significant developments at North Station and at this site occur, and the proposed design reflects the many circulation activities that are required of this parcel.

A new signalized intersection for Bowker Street
The proposed signalized intersection at New Chardon Street and Bowker Street is a welcome addition for pedestrians. The nearby intersection of New Chardon and Congress Street is skewed in such a way that the crossing is very long and is inconvenient for walkers going to the courthouse across the street. The new crosswalk makes the move much more convenient.

Improvements to on-site parking
As parking ceases to be the principal use of this site, the plan is much less auto-oriented. A reduction of number of available parking spaces reduces vehicles circulating around the site for access. This is accompanied by a reduction in the number of places where vehicles must cross sidewalks, enhancing pedestrian safety. The removal of garage access from New Chardon Street and its potentially busy sidewalks is a major pedestrian benefit of the proposal.

In addition to these project benefits, we also note several issues that need more attention.

Weather protection for walkers
The current garage has the unusual benefit of covering the bus waiting area and access to the transit station below, thus protecting walkers from rain and snow. Removing the garage and opening up the area for new development is beneficial to the project, and we believe that Figure 1.8 shows that the new structure will also provide cover for the bus station area. However, no cover for the subway entrance area is shown. The diagrams are less than clear on this point and we ask the developer to clarify how the bus waiting area and subway entrance areas will be designed and whether they will be covered.

Widths of sidewalks
Pedestrian improvements included in the project will improve safety at crosswalks and along the major streets. A note suggests that the current sidewalks widths are varied throughout the project, and are “rarely less than eight feet wide.” We trust that the standards for future sidewalk widths in this pedestrian-friendly project will be considerably wider and in keeping with the City’s complete street guidelines.

Services provided at the bus station
Six bus stops are proposed in the redesign of the bus station. Three of the stops will be in the area where they are now located, and three stops will be provided by a nominal widening at the side of the Central Artery Surface Road. The design and operation of the bus stops is critical for pedestrian safety and convenience. We ask that the proponent provide detailed diagrams and sketches of how this area will operate and ensure that bus patrons are well served by the new design.

Truck loading bays facing New Chardon Street
New Chardon Street is the major Downtown/North End access to and from the Central Artery (I-93). Four truck loading docks are proposed for the section of New Chardon between Congress Street and the on- and off-ramps leading to the I-93. The site plan suggests that trucks will back into these docks from the street travel lanes across the sidewalk on this side of the East Parcel. Unless use of the docks are restricted to the middle of the night it is difficult to comprehend how trucks backing into place across the sidewalk on a ramp to I-93 can be safely accommodated. We request that the proponent describe this element of the project in detail, including how pedestrian safety will be maintained.

Cut-ins on sidewalks
Cut-ins are proposed on three sides of the East Parcel and two sides of the West Parcel:
1. New Seabury Street near the Surface Artery
2. New Chardon Street near Canal Street
3. New Chardon Street near Bowker Street
4. Congress Street Near New Sudbury Street toward Leverett Circle
5. Congress Street near New Sudbury Street toward State Street

Although not well defined in the DEIR, a cut-in appears to be a pull out lane that reduces the width of the sidewalk to accommodate vehicles. The drawings in the DEIR show these indentations only vaguely but imply that a cut-in is a lane for vehicles separate from the adjacent thoroughfare but parallel to it.

The next stage of development of the project should include details of:

  •  Why the cut-ins are needed in each of the five locations?
  • How they are proposed to be used (back-in, parallel movement, etc.)?
  • How they relate to, or potentially conflict with, all major adjacent pedestrian flows?
  • Design guidelines that include minimum widths for adjacent sidewalks or crosswalks, as well as bollards or other protections for walkers. We are concerned that the sidewalks seem quite narrow adjacent to some of the proposed cut-ins.

We appreciate your consideration of our comments and look forward to your responses to them. Please feel free to contact WalkBoston with questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman                                 Robert Sloane
Executive Director                              Senior Project Manager

Comments on the Design for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A

Comments on the Design for Commonwealth Avenue Phase 2A

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)