Tag: MassDOT

Comments on Morton Intersection Improvements, Project: 608755

Comments on Morton Intersection Improvements, Project: 608755

Patricia Leavenworth, P.E., Chief Engineer
MassDOT-Highway Division
10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116-3973

Attn: Roadway Project Management – Room 6340

Re: Morton Intersection Improvements Project: 608755

December 21, 2018

Dear Ms. Leavenworth:

We are submitting comments in regards to Intersection Improvements at three intersections along Morton Street after seeing the plans at a public meeting on December 19, 2018.

First, we ask the Department to please extend the 10-day public comment period given that the meeting was held just before the Christmas holiday and it may be hard for residents to get feedback in on time. We are pleased to see MassDOT undertaking this project and look forward to continuing to work with you on implementation of safety improvements to the corridor.

Overall, we feel the project will improve safety for drivers, but will do little to improve the safety or convenience for pedestrians or cyclists. In this area, pedestrian safety needs to be prioritized in the design utilizing Complete Streets guidelines. We also ask that these spot improvements are the beginning and not the end of a process to improve the entire stretch of Morton St and create connections from Mattapan to Franklin Park and walking/biking paths in Jamaica Plain, especially as this stretch is identified in Go Boston 2030 for connecting the Southwest Corridor to the Blue Hills Reservation. In addition, we are advocating for the following adjustments and additions the plans presented on December 19:

  • Increased traffic calming on Morton Street
    The high speeds on Morton Street make the street unsafe for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. We applaud that the design calls for narrower travel lanes but additional measures need to be taken to slow speeds. Possible solutions might be raised intersections, additional STOP signs and/or traffic signals.
  • Create a safe pedestrian crossing between Morton/Blue Hill Ave and Morton/Harvard
    There is no crosswalk in the 1000-foot stretch between Blue Hill Ave and Harvard Street. This is a dense residential neighborhood and the lack of a safe crossing here is a major community concern. The crossing could either be at Courtland/Havelock/Morton or Wellington Hill/Morton depending on the neighborhood’s preference.The lack of a crosswalk contributes to the highway feel of Morton Street and hence the high speeds and extremely high crash clusters over the past four years. Any crosswalk should include a HAWK beacon for improved notice and safety of pedestrians crossing the street.
  • Design a traffic signal system which enables pedestrians to easily and safely cross Blue Hill Ave
    People wishing to cross Blue Hill Ave must now push a button to wait for a WALK signal. Once the intersection is redesigned they will still have to push a button to cross the street. We strongly request traffic signals that “rest in WALK”.
    Push buttons result in very long waits for walkers. Depending upon when a walker pushes the button in the traffic cycle he/she may wait for over two minutes to get a walk signal. Furthermore, pedestrians must be able to cross the six lanes of Blue Hill Ave in one cycle. Neither MassDOT staff nor their consultants could guarantee that walkers would be able to cross in one cycle.
  • The bike boxes at the Blue Hill Ave and Morton St intersection are an important safety measure however the placement of one in the Southeast corner of the intersection could pose a dangerous conflict with right turning cars. We would like to look more closely at the designs to assess this. An additional left-turning bike box is needed at the northeast corner in so that cyclists can safely turn left off of blue Hill onto Morton St towards Jamaica Plain.
  • We support the overwhelming response from residents who advocated to keep the bus stop where it currently is on Blue Hill Ave.
  • We applaud the design’s tightening of curb radii at Blue Hill/Morton and if floating bus stops are in a location supported by community members, we would support them and the addition of bike facilities at the intersection. It appeared that at least some people at the public meeting had never seen or experienced floating bus stops and more education is needed about how they work when proposing them. We understand that parking will not be permitted within 20 feet of the intersections but we also heard that there are many violations of this regulation. We recommend that additional curb extensions, either concrete or flexposts, be added to the design.

Sincerely,
Dorothea Hass, WalkBoston
Eliza Parad, Boston Cyclists Union
Galen Mook, Massachusetts Bicycle Coalition
Tony Lechuga, LivableStreets Alliance

WalkBoston comments on Craigie Dam/Bridge Design Alternatives

WalkBoston comments on Craigie Dam/Bridge Design Alternatives

Date: January 2, 2019

To: Secretary Stephanie Pollack, Administrator Jonathan Gulliver, Andy Paul, Jackie Douglas,
James Kersten, MassDOT, Commissioner Leo Roy, Jeff Parenti, Dan Driscoll, DCR

Re: WalkBoston comments on Craigie Dam/Bridge Design Alternatives

We are relieved that MassDOT and DCR are committed to acting to improve the safety of people walking and biking on this critical roadway segment.

We have reviewed the options that were presented to the community on December 18th and have several comments that are detailed below. However, we do not think that the relatively modest improvements that are planned for Spring 2019 are adequate to providing truly safe walking and biking conditions, and we urge MassDOT and DCR to develop more significant plans for safety for the Charles River bridges.

One approach that WalkBoston would like to see explored is the adoption of a pilot 20 MPH speed limit on all the Charles River Bridges from Harvard Square to the Craigie Dam/Bridge that would test an automated speed enforcement protocol. Over the last month we have attended meetings regarding safety and operations for the BU Bridge, the Longfellow Bridge and the Craigie Dam/Bridge. In each case, the completely fixed and limited right-of-way does not allow for the provision of protected bike accommodations within the roadway right-of-way without reducing the number of vehicle lanes. WalkBoston was distressed to hear suggestions by community members at one of these meetings to dedicate one of the sidewalks to bicycles rather than pedestrians in order to free up roadway space for vehicles (a suggestion that we were pleased was simply given, but then not taken up or discussed by any of the state or municipal staff).

MassDOT has already expressed its interest in adding automated enforcement to the state’s safety tools and we urge MassDOT to vigorously support a pilot program for the bridges. Setting and then enforcing a 20 MPH speed limit on all the bridges would significantly increase the safety of bicyclists using on-street bicycle lanes while at the same time allowing the number of vehicle lanes to remain as they are today.

Comments on Design Options A and B

Craigie Dam/Storrow Drive Intersection

Take the following steps to minimize conflicts between people walking, biking and driving:

  • For turns from Craigie into Storrow Drive put in place (and enforce) a permanent No Right on Red regulation and include the permanently illuminated NRTOR sign
  • Set the vehicle for Craigie Dam traffic approaching Leverett Circle stop line back from the intersection (with Don’t Block the Box markings and enforcement) to allow bikes to queue in a bike box ahead of traffic
  • Provide marked bike lanes from Craigie to Martha Way through Leverett Circle
  • Tighten the turning radius of the corner from Craigie onto Storrow Drive and provide a bike ramp to the Paul Dudley White Path at the corner rather than having bikes get on the sidewalk before reaching the intersection. The very tight sidewalk space should be reserved for pedestrians.

Museum of Science Driveway and Museum Way/Craigie Intersection

  • Add crosswalk striping across the Museum of Science driveway.
  • Narrow the driveway to the greatest extent possible given the truck and bus movements needed for Museum of Science operations.
  • Consider signalizing the driveway entrance to the Museum of Science in coordination with the Museum Way signal.
  • Eliminate the conflicting left turn arrow across the WALK signal at the Museum Way crosswalk across Craigie.
  • Improve the street lighting of the crosswalk across Craigie at Museum Way

Craigie/Land Boulevard/Gilmore Bridge Intersection

Configure the signal timing at the Land Blvd/Craigie/Gilmore Bridge intersection to allow safe pedestrian and bike movements. A detailed description is provided below of the maneuver needed to ride a bike safely through the intersection under current conditions. This is in urgent need of improvement.

  • “At the intersection with Edwin H Land Blvd/ Gilmore Bridge, to feel safe as a bicyclist I will often violate traffic signals. The problem is that, whether traveling either inbound or outbound, if you wait for the light to change, traffic builds up next to you. When the light turns green, you are forced into the middle of a pack of fast-moving traffic, with cars and trucks rapidly accelerating and changing lanes.

    The situation is particularly dangerous when traveling outbound and making a left on Cambridge Street (a route most bicyclists take, as Route 28 gets faster and more dangerous beyond the Cambridge St. intersection). As a bicyclist, if you leave the Gilmore intersection with vehicle traffic, you then have to work your way across 2 lanes of fast-moving traffic to get into your left turn, and then must hold your ground in the middle of four lanes of outbound traffic in order to end up on the right-hand side of the two lane Cambridge St. turnoff. You can also hug the left-hand side of the road by the median strip, but traveling on the left side of the road can be dangerous too.

    I have found navigating the Science Bridge is actually safer when breaking the traffic signals. For example, when traveling outbound, if I hit the red light at the Gilmore intersection, there is a break in the signal when I usually run the red light on my bike. The break occurs between the green light for vehicles coming from Charlestown towards Cambridge, and the following green light for traffic moving inbound on 28. Taking the light this way has dangers too – at least one or two vehicles coming from Charlestown almost always speed through their red light (committing their own traffic violation), and you need to be absolutely sure those vehicles have stopped. Nevertheless, this method still allows me to make my way over to the Cambridge St turnoff without needing to cut across vehicle traffic, and feels much safer to me.”

Cc:
State Senator Joe Boncore
State Senator Sal DiDomenico
State Representative Jay Livingstone
State Representative Mike Connolly
Joe Barr, Cara Seiderman, Cambridge
Chris Osgood, Vineet Gupta, Charlotte Fleetwood, Boston
Becca Wolfson, Eliza Parad, Cyclists Union
Stacy Thompson, Steve Miller, LivableStreets Alliance
Galen Mook, Tom Francis, MassBike
Nate Fillmore, Cambridge Bike Safety

Patch – “Activists Call For Protected Bike Lane On Canal Bridge”

Patch – “Activists Call For Protected Bike Lane On Canal Bridge”

Patch: “Activists Call For Protected Bike Lane On Canal Bridge

“This isn’t a new issue to MassDOT and DCR. Transportation advocates have been discussing safe bike facilities on the Craigie Dam and Longfellow Bridge with state agencies since at least 2009,” said Wendy Landman, executive director of WalkBoston also in a statement. “Not only is this the right action to take for the safety of people biking, it is also the right action for the safety of people walking because it means that bicyclists do not ride on the sidewalk.”

Posted December 19, 2018

Event: MassDOT Design Public Hearing – Cypher Street Improvements, 11/13, 6:30pm

Event: MassDOT Design Public Hearing – Cypher Street Improvements, 11/13, 6:30pm

Cypher Street

We led a walk two years ago in November 2016 from near the Broadway T Station (meeting at Dorchester Ave & W 2nd Street) that walked toward the Fort Point area. The route went by the proposed GE Headquarters site and highlighted gaps in the pedestrian network at Cypher Street that neighbors in the area have been trying to shine a light on. One of our guest speakers on the walk described a project that would include improvements for Cypher Street that was proceeding toward 25% design.

There is now a public hearing scheduled to take place at the Condon School on November 13 at 6:30pm:

“The proposed work includes new sidewalks and pavement, street lighting, traffic signal systems, improved drainage, accessibility ramps and crosswalks, separated bike lanes, new pavement markings, signing and landscaping in accordance with current state and federal standards.”

Corner of Haul Road & Cypher Street

The full announcement from MassDOT can be found below. We encourage you to go and speak up for safe walking!


The Commonwealth of Massachusetts – Department of Transportation Highway Division – Notice of Public Hearing

Project File No. 608807
(search for this number on MassDOT project tracking system)

A Design Public Hearing will be held by MassDOT to discuss the new Cypher Street Improvements, including Richards Street, E Street and Fargo Street in the Seaport District of Boston, MA.

WHERE:

Condon School, 200 D Street, Boston, MA 02127

WHEN:

Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 6:30 PM

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this hearing is to provide the public with the opportunity to become fully acquainted with the proposed improvements to the streets listed above. All views and comments made at the hearing will be reviewed and considered to the maximum extent possible.

PROPOSAL:

The project will include improvements for truck access to Massport’s Conley Terminal, and expand/improve multi-modal transportation connections through the corridor. The proposed work includes new sidewalks and pavement, street lighting, traffic signal systems, improved drainage, accessibility ramps and crosswalks, separated bike lanes, new pavement markings, signing and landscaping in accordance with current state and federal standards.

A secure right-of-way is necessary for this project. Acquisitions in fee and permanent or temporary easements may be required. MassDOT is responsible for acquiring all needed rights in private or public lands. MassDOT’s policy concerning land acquisitions will be discussed at this hearing.

Written views received by MassDOT subsequent to the date of this notice and up to five (5) days prior to the date of the hearing shall be displayed for public inspection and copying at the time and date listed above. Plans will be on display one-half hour before the hearing begins, with an engineer in attendance to answer questions regarding this project. A project handout will be made available on the MassDOT website listed below.

Written statements and other exhibits in place of, or in addition to, oral statements made at the Public Hearing regarding the proposed undertaking are to be submitted to Patricia A. Leavenworth, P.E., Chief Engineer, MassDOT, 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116, Attention: Roadway Project Management, Project File No. 608807. Such submissions will also be accepted at the hearing. Mailed statements and exhibits intended for inclusion in the public hearing transcript must be postmarked within ten (10) business days of this Public Hearing.

Project inquiries may be emailed to dot.feedback.highway@state.ma.us

This location is accessible to people with disabilities. MassDOT provides reasonable accommodations and/or language assistance free of charge upon request (including but not limited to interpreters in American Sign Language and languages other than English, open or closed captioning for videos, assistive listening devices and alternate material formats, such as audio tapes, Braille and large print), as available.  For accommodation or language assistance, please contact MassDOT’s Chief Diversity and Civil Rights Officer by phone (857-368-8580), fax (857-368-0602), TTD/TTY (857-368-0603) or by email (MassDOT.CivilRights@dot.state.ma.us).

Requests should be made as soon as possible prior to the meeting, and for more difficult to arrange services including sign-language, CART or language translation or interpretation, requests should be made at least ten (10) business days before the meeting.

In case of inclement weather, hearing cancellation announcements will be posted on the internet at
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Highway/
JONATHAN GULLIVER PATRICIA A. LEAVENWORTH, P.E.
HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR CHIEF ENGINEER

Comments on MassDOT Draft Pedestrian Plan

Comments on MassDOT Draft Pedestrian Plan

October 16, 2018

Secretary Stephanie Pollack
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116

Dear Secretary Pollack:

WalkBoston is pleased to provide comments on the Draft MA Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and to see so many of the comments that we and other members of the Massachusetts Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board captured in the Plan.

The vision, goals and principles set a strong context and base for the Plan, and we are especially pleased that MassDOT has adopted the principle of leading by example and supporting municipalities. As the largest single investor in the State’s roadway and pedestrian system, MassDOT has a critical responsibility to take pedestrian safety, accessibility and convenience seriously in all of its actions and investments.

We specifically applaud several of the action items including:

  • 3-3: Research on benefits and impacts of automated speed enforcement (ASE). We will continue to advocate for legislation that will allow ASE to be is implemented in an equitable manner. Automated enforcement has been shown to be an effective means of discouraging dangerous driver behavior.
  • 4-1: Construct safe crossings to connect bus stops to destinations, starting with MassDOT-owned corridors.
  • 5-1: Pilot a winter snow and ice removal initiative on pedestrian facilities in order to provide the basis for development of a comprehensive plan – and an understanding of potential barriers to make such a program permanent.
  • 6-1 – 6-3: Collecting and analyzing pedestrian focused data.

Our comments below reflect several additional issues and refinements that we believe will strengthen the Plan:

  1. The equity discussion should be updated to include MA Department of Public Health (DPH) injury data for Massachusetts which reveals substantial differences in injury rates by race. Under Initiative 2 we recommend adding an action item of preparing in-depth analysis of injury patterns across the state that combines the crash reporting provided by police and EMS and the hospital data that is gathered by DPH. We understand that MassDOT and DPH have begun this analysis, and think that this process should be formalized as one basis for the prioritization analysis.
  2. Initiative 1 sets ambitious and strong actions for MassDOT’s own design and operations practices, including maintaining pedestrian routes through work sites during construction. We are concerned that Action 1-1 will be difficult to accomplish and measure without outside review, and suggest adding a measure for tracking progress such as the following:
    • Create an annual review process of MassDOT development, scoping, scoring, design and construction that invites advocates and peers from outside the agency to comment on how pedestrians have been prioritized in agency activities. The review should be designed to guide MassDOT in a continuous improvement process to learn from each project:
      • What is working well?
      • What can be improved?
  3. Initiative 5 of the Plan should include specific reference to traffic signals, including a measure that tracks the number of signals on MassDOT roads that include pedestrian-focused attributes, such as concurrent WALK signals, Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI), and automatic recall of WALK signals (not requiring people walking to push a button). In addition, MassDOT should consider providing more in-depth guidance to municipalities about good practice for pedestrian signals – the inconsistency in signals among the State’s 351 cities and towns contributes to confusion for pedestrians and drivers which can lead to unsafe conditions. This section may also be an opportunity to share information on the safety benefit for “No Right Turn on Red.”
  4. Principle 3 of the plan describes that MassDOT will lead by example yet municipalities are critical to the success of the plan, since MassDOT owns just 8% of all sidewalk and 8.2% of all roadway miles in Massachusetts. We encourage MassDOT to add information about that other state agencies that maintain pedestrian facilities, like DCR and the MBTA, and should recommend that they also follow MassDOT’s best practices for communities to emulate.
  5. The presentation of the report was visually pleasing, but has some features that could be improved:
    • If using this web-based ARCGIS format for any future reports, please create a way to easily jump to sections within the document from the introduction. The table of contents is a static list, which makes it difficult to refer back to specific sections since page numbers are not obvious.
    • Using the share link at the top left of the page re-directs a user back to the beginning of the document, not to the page/section of the document that the user is on. There was not a readily apparent way to link to a section.
    • While this web-based ARCGIS report format allows a user to zoom in on statewide maps (which likely would be rendered difficult to read in a printed format), please provide an option to access the final version of the plan in a visually clear PDF form.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director