Tag: Boston

Turning Trauma Center Injury Prevention Efforts toward Vision Zero

WalkBoston will soon begin working with greater Boston’s Level 1 Trauma Centers to engage them in pedestrian injury prevention efforts. From 2001-2014, more than 25,000 pedestrians were struck by vehicles in Massachusetts, resulting in unacceptably high numbers of preventable pedestrian injuries. As announced by the Gillian Reny Stepping Strong Center for Trauma Innovation at Brigham & Women’s Hospital, the Center is awarding a grant to WalkBoston to implement a training program to greater Boston’s Level 1 Trauma Centers, giving staff the necessary tools to pursue pedestrian safety improvements as a component of their injury prevention efforts, and laying the groundwork for national efforts.

WalkBoston Comments on DCR Arborway Parkways Improvement Project

November 6, 2020

Jeffrey R. Parenti, Program Manager
DCR
Division of Planning and Engineering
251 Causeway St.
Boston, MA 02114

Re: WalkBoston Comments on the DCR Arborway Parkways Improvement Project

Dear Jeff:

WalkBoston is enthusiastic about the direction that DCR is taking for the Arborway Improvement Project, both the range of choices that you have shown and the approach of providing opportunities for extensive public comments and input well before any decisions have been made about the project design. We look forward to working with you and the design team to arrive at a truly transformative design for this beautiful but dangerous piece of the Emerald Necklace.

Our comments are framed from the standpoint of design options and operations and are therefore not focused on the specific concepts that have been illustrated to date. As you and the designers have noted, the drawings are indicative of design approaches rather than design specifics.

We applaud the Common Features proposed in all three alternatives as outlined on the project website, including: the focus on safety for all modes, vehicle speed reduction throughout, increase in the amount of parkland and reduction in the amount of pavement, and special care given to the landscape design and trees along the corridor.
We understand that the project is still in its early phases of planning and design, but echo the comments at the public meeting that the travel data for all modes is needed to better understand the pros and cons of each option. We caution that pedestrian and bike volumes will likely be understated if existing conditions are the baseline because so many walkers and cyclists avoid this portion of the Arborway in its present configuration. We hope that DCR and the consultant team can provide some understanding of how future conditions might reflect the likely increase in pedestrian and cyclist use of the project area.
We believe that separate walking and biking paths must be provided throughout the project area. The Arborway is an important bike commuting corridor, and mixing pedestrians and commuting (higher speed) bicyclists reduces the safety and comfort for both groups. Once the improvements to the Arborway are made, we believe that the corridor will see significant increases in both pedestrian and bike usage.
We like the introduction of a signalized pedestrian crossing between Kelley and Murray Circles in Alternatives B and C, and think it is an effective way of slowing traffic and making it clear to drivers that this is an area where there will be many pedestrians and cyclists.
We believe that eliminating the traffic circles at Murray and Kelley Circle will provide significant safety improvements for both pedestrians and bicyclists. As noted in MassDOT’s September 2020 Guidelines for the Planning and Design of Roundabouts, locations specifically called out as places where “roundabouts may not be advantageous” include those with “intersections with a heavy concentration of pedestrians and bicyclists,” and “intersections with acute angles between approaches.” Since the Arborway project is being specifically designed to address pedestrian and bicycle safety, and because its geometry may pose problems, we believe that the elimination of the traffic circles is an important element of project design.
While the different concepts show improved pedestrian crossings in many locations, we are concerned that there are still quite a few unsignalized slip lane crossings that remain in each of the alternatives. Significant design features, and possibly signals, will be needed to make these crossings safe for walkers and bicyclists.

In addition to our comments on the concepts and the broad conversation that DCR is undertaking, we also urge DCR to engage in more detailed conversations and outreach with the neighbors directly adjacent to the project whose travel patterns will be affected by the changes to the Arborway. We know that there is a long history of high concern by neighbors, and hope that intensive outreach can both answer questions and reduce anxiety about potential changes.

WalkBoston looks forward to continuing to work with you on this exciting project, and we also look forward to walking safely along a rejuvenated part of the Emerald Necklace from Jamaica Pond to Forest Hills in the (relatively) near future.

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell, Executive Director

Wendy Landman, Senior Policy Advisor

Cc: Nate Lash, nlash@hshassoc.com

WalkBoston, LivableStreets, Boston Cyclists Union Comments 244 – 284 A Street “Channelside” PNF

October 9, 2020

Director Brian Golden
Boston Planning and Development Agency
Attn via email: Aisling Kerr

Secretary Kathleen A. Theoharides
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn via email: Alexander Strysky

Re: Comment on 244 – 284 A Street “Channelside” PNF

Dear Director Golden and Secretary Theoharides:

WalkBoston, LivableStreets Alliance and the Boston Cyclists Union are Boston’s leading advocates for active transportation and transit access. We frequently provide comments on major public and private development and infrastructure projects, with a focus on how those projects serve and affect people walking, biking and taking transit.

We realize that these comments are arriving at MEPA after the due date. However, the City’s transportation focused project meeting occurred on September 16, and it’s urban design and resiliency meeting was held on October 7 and we felt that the content of these meetings was important to our understanding of the project.

The development of the 244 – 284 A Street site along the Fort Point Channel will transform a large and unattractive parking lot into a major site for living, working, and enjoying the Harbor Walk and the large new open spaces that are planned. In a broad sense we believe that the scale and mix of uses is reasonable for the growing mixed-use neighborhood around it, and that the plan for most of the project’s users to access the site on foot, by transit or by bike is appropriate and absolutely necessary for the City to decrease its dependence on private vehicles with their intensive congestion and environmental impacts.

We believe that it is incumbent on the Developer and the City to work together to make sure that the site design, the mitigation and transportation access agreement committed to by the Developer, and the planning and implementation of City transportation improvements (some requiring the City to work with the MBTA, MassDOT and MassPort) are in place to ensure that the site and its surroundings work well for people walking, biking and taking transit.

Our comments therefore are directed jointly to the Developer and the City. We understand that the responsibility of the Proponent to remedy (some of) the off-site issues will be in the form of mitigation dollars rather than execution, so we urge the City to immediately take the steps necessary to plan and design the needed improvements and then include an appropriate contribution from the Proponent in its negotiations.

Project Site Plan

Explore reducing the amount of space devoted to vehicles within the site plan by removing Wormwood Street extension.
Rationalize bike routes (see comments below)
Describe mix of open space uses and include active uses such as playgrounds, basketball etc. to help create a true neighborhood not a “front door” to commercial use

Accessibility

As the Fort Point Channel area and the City’s “100-acre” plan district are developing into a significant residential and commercial neighborhood dependent on good transit and walking access, the need to address accessibility has become ever more evident.

Walking route from South Station to the site – With a projected 70% mode share of walk and transit trips (which are thus also walking trips) this issue deserves careful attention. Improving the walking route from South Station to the site via Summer Street, particularly for people with disabilities who will not be able to use the stairway that connects Summer Street to the Harborwalk and then to the main entrance of this project is critical. We understand that the City has begun to look at these issues and request that information about the planned improvements be included in the next project filings for Channelside.

There is no curb ramp provided from Dorchester Avenue onto the Summer Street Bridge (south side of the bridge). A fully accessible curb ramp should be provided.
Accessible access from Summer Street will need to be provided via Melcher Street. The sidewalk along the south side of Melcher Street appears to have an excessive cross slope that is hazardous for persons with disabilities, and difficult for anyone pushing a stroller or pulling a suitcase. This cross slope will need to be fixed. The slope of the sidewalk exceeds a safe path of travel and may require the addition of several “landing areas” to the sidewalk.

Walking route from Broadway to the site

Walking access to the site from South Boston and Broadway Station via A Street and West 2nd Street also requires accessibility upgrades including curb ramps, sidewalk repair, and possible widening of the sidewalk where the path of travel is narrowed by hydrants, street light poles etc.

Winter weather conditions and general maintenance

Management and operations planning should ensure good snow clearance between the site and South Station along the Harborwalk and the sidewalks of Necco and Melcher Streets, and between Broadway and the site. The proponent should work with adjacent property owners and business associations to assure good access to its site under winter weather conditions.

A Street Walking, Biking and Transit Improvements

A Street is the “Main Street” of this part of Boston and needs to be safe and inviting for all street users. Balancing the needs of people walking, biking and taking transit with those of the cars and trucks using the street is a balancing act that has not yet been achieved.

Calming A Street for everyone – This will be a first step to turning A Street into a main street and a number of approaches should be used including:

Improve the safety of street crossings with the addition of bumpouts, signals (where needed), parking and loading restrictions to ensure daylighting of crosswalks, etc.
Narrow travel lanes, add separated bike lanes, restrict parking to protect bus stops, provide bus shelters etc.
Add landscaping and benches

Improved Transit + Curbside Management: A Street serves as a critical transit connection between South Boston and South Station and will need to serve many more people as the neighborhood continues to evolve and grow. The City should explore implementing several of the below interventions to improve transit + curbside management:

Work with the MBTA to determine the best bus priority interventions for current and future bus service. These may include a dedicated bus lane, cue jumps and/or transit signal priority.
Improve the accessibility and comfort of existing bus stops on the corridor.
Develop a curb management plan that includes designated loading zones for trucks, taxis + TNC services. The City should also explore time of day loading restrictions, in order to limit or eliminate loading activities along the corridor during peak travel hours.

Provide Safe and Comfortable Bike Network Connections to and through the site. We appreciate the intention to provide a bike connection to the South Bay Harbor trail, Harbor trail and A Street through the site. However, these connections as they are currently described are disjointed and potentially dangerous, especially at intersections and areas where cyclists and vehicles mix.

Weaving the bicycle connection to the South Bay Harbor Trail through the site creates multiple potential conflict points at Necco Street and on the Wormwood extension. A more direct connection on Binford Street may be preferable and should be explored in addition to ensuring there are safe bicycle accommodations on both Necco and Binford Street.
Given the above mentioned transit and large truck uses on A Street, a more detailed plan for how cyclists will safely travel from the site to A Street is needed – specifically at the Binford Street and A Street intersection.
Eliminating the Wormwood extension removes another potential point of conflict both along the street and at the A Street intersection.

We look forward to working with Proponent and the City as the project planning and design continue.

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell
Executive Director, WalkBoston

Stacy Thompson
Executive Director, Livable Streets Alliance

Becca Wolfson
Executive Director, Boston Cyclists Union

WalkBoston Comments on Harbor Garage Redevelopment

October 9, 2020

Director Brian Golden
Boston Planning and Development Agency
Attn via email: Ebony DaRosa

Secretary Kathleen A. Theoharides
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn via email: Alexander Strysky

Re: The Pinnacle at Central Wharf (Harbor Garage Redevelopment)

Dear Secretary Theoharides and Director Golden:

WalkBoston is Massachusetts’ leading pedestrian advocate. We frequently provide comments on major public and private development and infrastructure projects, with a focus on how those projects serve and affect people walking, biking and taking transit.

The redevelopment of the Harbor Garage has been under discussion for many, many years with major public disagreement about the appropriate scale and mix of uses that the project should comprise. We will not specifically weigh in on those issues because the Municipal Harbor Plan has now set the stage to allow a very large mixed-use development. And while a number of commenters will raise public process issues, broad public benefit issues and questions about the timing of required design and use standards as they apply to the timing and design of this project we look to others to provide detailed and focused attention on these issues.

Our comments focus on a more detailed and fine-grained set of concerns about the ways in which people walking, biking and taking transit to, through and next to the project will be affected.

From a site planning perspective, we believe that the current proposal has a better footprint and urban design than earlier development concepts. Improvements to the sidewalks, landscaping and scale of the pedestrian areas around the site will contribute to a more comfortable and attractive streetscape than the existing conditions surrounding the garage. However we do have significant concerns.

Garage and loading access

Our significant and consequential comment is that garage access and egress should be removed from Atlantic Avenue in order to provide an acceptable site plan that will be safe for people walking and biking along Atlantic Avenue.

The building site presents a complicated puzzle for the circulation of people and vehicles because all four sides of the site are public facing, each with its own personality and constituency.

Atlantic Avenue

Over many years, the advocacy community has invested an enormous amount of time and energy to establish and preserve the integrity of a wide and pedestrian-friendly sidewalk along Atlantic Avenue, both as a core walking route for thousands of people every day and as a component of the Rose Kennedy Greenway. We remain committed to maintaining the preeminence of this walking route. Atlantic Avenue’s significant pedestrian volumes can only be expected to grow in the coming years.

Milk Street

Milk Street is the primary connection from Downtown and the Greenway to the Aquarium, serves millions of visitors every year, and will be part of the Aquarium’s planned Blueway. Special attention to this walking link to the harbor is an essential component of the site’s redevelopment.

Harbor Walk

The Harbor Walk is the City’s waterfront front door and pedestrian corridor with critical public realm and resiliency functions and serving thousands of walkers every day. As one of Boston’s most loved and important pedestrian assets and spaces, the Harbor Walk deserves great attention to design, programming and management.

East India Row

East India Row provides access to both the project site and the Harbor Towers residential development. It is used by both pedestrians and vehicles as a key link between Atlantic Avenue and these sites.

Vehicle Access

As currently configured and programmed, vehicle access into the garage for most of the garage users and all of the building deliveries will require vehicles to cross the Atlantic Avenue sidewalk. Access via this garage entrance will be for all passenger vehicles for office, retail, Aquarium and public parking, and for all loading (residential, office, retail). Egress across the sidewalk will serve all loading (residential, office, retail). As shown on the plans in the PNF, the driveway serving the garage entryway looks almost as wide as Milk Street.

According to the PNF (Table 2-7), during the morning peak hour there will be 292 vehicle trips turning across the Atlantic Avenue sidewalk – or about 5 vehicles/minute. The pedestrian data provided in Figure 2-7B indicates that under existing conditions approximately 700 pedestrians walk along Atlantic Avenue during the morning peak hour – or about 12 people/minute. The volume of vehicles turning across this busy sidewalk, without traffic signals to provide a safe time for pedestrians to walk along the sidewalk, is comparable to the right turn volumes of 238 vehicles from Seaport Boulevard onto Atlantic Avenue during the weekday PM peak hour (see Figure 2-6B), and the pedestrian volume walking along Atlantic Avenue of 738 people is also comparable. (PM pedestrian trips along Atlantic Avenue at the project site are even higher than AM trips, so a shift from garage access to garage egress would create even greater conflict.)

Bike volumes in the Atlantic Avenue bike lane are approximately 60-80 bikes/peak hour under existing conditions.

The PNF does not include projected walking and biking volumes (it does include those projections for vehicle trips). Given the rising numbers of walking and biking trips that we are seeing across downtown Boston, we request that these projections be included in the Draft EIR and PIR.

No specific information is provided about the number of loading trips that will enter and leave the building across the sidewalk. This information should also be provided in the Draft EIR and PIR.

In addition to the safety hazards of vehicles turning across people walking and biking, we also believe that vehicles exiting (and possibly entering) the garage will queue up across the sidewalk as they wait to enter the travel lanes along Atlantic Avenue (or potentially as they wait to enter the garage itself).

We do not believe that a garage and/or loading entrance into the project site should be allowed on Atlantic Avenue because it would require vehicles to turn across the sidewalk and bicycles traveling along Atlantic Avenue. We ask the City to require a shift of garage access to East India Row where it will impact far fewer people walking and biking, and where it will not negatively impact one of Boston’s premier walking routes.

Aquarium and Harbor Towers Parking Long-Term and During the Construction Period

Because the site will continue to provide parking for the Aquarium (as required under the Municipal Harbor Plan) and also for the Harbor Towers, as well as serving the Project’s commercial, retail and residential occupants, it is not realistic to ask that the garage use on the site be eliminated. However, we urge the Proponent, the City, the Aquarium and Harbor Towers to re-examine the amount of parking included and reduce it to the greatest extent possible. Additionally, we urge the developer to explore the feasibility of repurposing any reduction of parking into maximizing the number of onsite affordable housing units.. As the City is in the midst of revising its maximum allowable parking regulations, this Project should at a minimum adhere to these new lower limits. Any reduction in total vehicle trips into the site will reduce the Project impacts on people walking and biking as well as its contributions to traffic and greenhouse gas emissions.

We understand that publicly available parking spaces are needed for the Aquarium to maintain its operations – and especially in light of the financial hardship caused by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is critical to insure the Aquarium’s healthy operations when the Harbor Garage is out of service. Given that the City and the Proponent will be working closely with the Aquarium to develop a parking plan for the approximately 3-year construction period when there will be no parking at the site, we believe it would be valuable to explore if any of the short-term parking mitigation sites may serve as a better long-term parking solution than building 500 new parking spaces.

Site Design, Operations and Management Comments

Pedestrian circulation around and through the development site
Site grade in relation to the surrounding waterfront
Public programming to support a lively public realm and welcome a diverse set of visitors
Shadow, wind and microclimate
Coordination with existing and future waterfront resiliency efforts that will affect people walking

Pedestrian circulation around and through the development site

Pedestrian circulation around the building, on the site and through the building seems to provide attractive pedestrian routes and easy access to all the public spaces within the development. The Proponent has noted that a variety of sidewalk, accessibility and landscape improvements will be made to enhance the walking environment.

We could not find a description of whether the diagonal interior pedestrian passage through the building would be open to the public 24/7. We ask that the Proponent describe the operating plans for this pedestrian circulation in the next filing.

Relationship between the raised grade of the proposed site plan and the surrounding waterfront

The document provides a description of the proposed grade changes to raise the site level above projected water levels in future years, but it is not clear to the lay reader how the transition between this site and adjacent sites will affect the experience of people walking on this site or adjacent sites. Please include a detailed description and diagrams in the next project filing.

Public programming to support a lively public realm and welcome a diverse set of visitors

While the document provides several sentences describing the Proponent’s intent to provide site programming worthy of this important site and significant development, very little detail is included. We ask that the following questions be addressed in the next filing.

How will the Proponent ensure that people of all races, ethnicities and income groups feel welcome and included in both the interior and exterior spaces of the project?
What low and no-cost activities will be provided?
What will be the annual budget for programming of public activities on the site and how many years of programming will the Proponent provide?
Will there be children’s programming to align with Aquarium? Will the Aquarium have the opportunity to provide (and be compensated) for such programming?
How will the Proponent enliven the site during winter months?

Wind, shadow, and microclimate

We are pleased that the developer has explicitly worked to design a building façade/skin that is intended to reduce the wind impacts of the building and we look forward to seeing the wind studies that will be provided in future filings.

A project of this scale will have unavoidable shadow impacts on the streets, sidewalks and open spaces around it and this project is no exception.

Given the hope that this project will invite many people to enjoy the waterfront, we urge the developer to look in detail at ways to create comfortable outdoor spaces that are sheltered from the existing windiness of the waterfront; are shaded in the summer; and take full advantage of the sun in colder months. We suggest that the design team look at best practices for creating human-friendly microclimates on the site. This could mean spray stations for the summer, seating with solid legs and backs and wind protection for the winter, and different orientations to take advantage of the sun at every season. We look forward to learning more about the designs in the next filings.

Coordination with existing and future waterfront resiliency efforts that will affect people walking

The development plan meets the City’s resiliency guidance for the development site itself. We ask that the developer formally commit to working with the City and with other waterfront property owners and managers to ensure that public access to the HarborWalk will be safe and attractive over the long term as sea levels rise.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this significant new project. WalkBoston would be pleased to answer any questions about our comments and to meet with City or development team staff.

Sincerely,

Stacey Beuttell
Executive Director

Boston Herald: Woman struck by stolen vehicle suffers life-threatening injuries at Boston Public Garden, police say

Boston Herald: “Woman struck by stolen vehicle suffers life-threatening injuries at Boston Public Garden, police say”

Brendan Kearney of the WalkBoston advocacy group said he counts five fatal crashes in Boston this year, including the one earlier this week in Andrew Square. He said the city should use its current Boston Common master planning project to take a hard look at the wide streets surrounding the pedestrian-heavy parks downtown that “really just invite speeding.”
“These streets – they are built for high speed,” Kearney said, noting other fatal crashes around that area over the past few years. “It doesn’t matter who’s driving, if the truck was stolen or not – we need fewer roads that are overbuilt like this.”
He added that the big-picture question people should be asking is, “How do we reduce speed and make it safer?”