Tag: Medford

Mystic River Recreational Trail Comment Letter

March 22, 2011

Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston MA 02114

Attn: MEPA Office, Deirdre Buckley

RE: Comments on the Environmental Notification Form, EEA No. 14718 Mystic River Recreational Trail

Dear Secretary Sullivan:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the Mystic River Recreational Trail in Somerville. The project has grown out of the analysis of the Assembly Square development project, which will enlarge and improve the riverside park along the Mystic River. The completion of the new riverside park will result in trails along the south bank of the Mystic for about one mile, reaching from the MBTA rail overpass near the Mystic River Dam to the network of paths that outline part of the Ten Hills neighborhood and along the river to Mystic Valley Parkway (Route 16) in Medford. However, these trails are divided into two discontinuous parts on either side of the Fellsway (Route 28), a heavily traveled roadway which is difficult for pedestrians to cross safely.

The proposal calls for construction of an underpass to accommodate a recreational trail beneath the Mystic River Bridge (Fellsway, Route 28). This underpass would link the Assembly Square development with the Ten Hills neighborhood in Somerville and provide a continuous walkway along the Mystic River. Construction of the underpass will also include some improvements to pathway connections to it on both sides of the Fellsway (Route 28).

WalkBoston fully supports construction of the underpass and welcomes the connections it will provide for walking and bicycling along the Mystic River. The facility will strengthen the Assembly Square development and add a new amenity to other areas near the river. The trail will ultimately be an element in a larger network of trails into and through Assembly Square, and will connect with the proposed station on the Orange Line.

WalkBoston continues to support smooth surfaces on walking routes and in public spaces that serve as pedestrian gathering places and plazas. Brick, granite or concrete pavers create a visually distinctive space but without very careful maintenance these surfaces can quickly become uneven, making for treacherous walking. Such materials are also often difficult to clear of snow during the winter months. Specifications for this project should call for smooth materials leading from both sides onto the wooden deck that constitutes the trail under the bridge. We encourage the selection of smooth walking surfaces wherever possible.

The Assembly Square development is described as a transit-oriented development and we understand that the transit station is being constructed early in the development sequence. The proposed underpass is an integral part of providing good pedestrian connections to the Assembly Square transit station from the Ten Hills neighborhood, and will help to draw pedestrians to the new station.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Please contact us if you have questions. Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Cc Monica R. Lamboy, Executive Director, Somerville Strategic Planning and Community Development,
Jaime Corliss, Director, Shape Up Somerville

Alewife Brook Parkway Bridge Comment Letter

October 13, 2009

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

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF)
Mystic Valley Parkway Bridge No. 2 over Alewife Brook Somerville, MA
MEPA # 14487

Dear Secretary Bowles:

WalkBoston has reviewed the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for Mystic Valley Parkway Bridge No. 2 over Alewife Brook in Somerville.

Located on an historic parkway bridge, the project is a reconstruction that will add significant width to the bridge cross-section to widen the bridge sidewalks and better accommodate pedestrians and bicycles, while maintaining access for automobile traffic.

Our understanding of the project is that the DCR plans to retain the curb-to-curb width of the bridge, striping 12’ lanes with 8’4” shoulders that could be converted to bike lanes in the future. An addition of 8 feet to the sidewalks will make both directions 10 feet wide to better accommodate pedestrians and bicycles and connect to the existing and proposed multi-use paths in the adjacent riverbank parks.

While we are very pleased that the sidewalks will be widened, we urge DCR to consider the following possibilities:

With the guidance of DCR, we have learned over time that a parkway is not solely a road,but a park that has a road that passes through it. The Mystic Valley Parkway is a case in point. It is a set of continuous open spaces located within neighborhoods that are densely built. These open spaces are the major parks available to nearby residents. Since roadways are but one element of the parkway, they should not be allowed to determine the character of this remarkable string of urban parks.
It is difficult to imagine traffic moving more rapidly than 30 mph inside a park. That should be the maximum speed. All speed limits in the park and on the parkway roads should be made 30 mph or less to safely accommodate non-motorized traffic.
The parkway and its roads are intended for non-commercial traffic only. We have serious reservations about the need for 12’ lanes for traffic if no trucks are using the bridge. Wide lanes will encourage drivers to move faster through the corridor, to the detriment on non- motorized traffic of all kinds. Since it is not a truck route and will never serve heavy trucks in the future, it seems that narrowing the travel lanes to 11’ or less could be accomplished without inconveniencing traffic. This very simple design feature would produce safety benefits for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles by slowing speeds.

The shoulder of the roadway should be designed for installation of bike lanes, even if not intended immediately. The Mystic River Corridor Parks are destined to become increasingly attractive to bicycle riders for both commuting and recreation. As bike traffic grows, all parts of the Mystic Valley Parkway should be upgraded to accommodate on- road bike lanes that are sufficiently wide for rider safety. The bridge sidewalks should be reserved for pedestrians, in keeping with a long-term goal of separate paths for pedestrians and bicycles through the length of the riverbank parks.
The Mystic Valley Parkway Bridge No. 2 is in line to provide major access to the future Route 16 Green Line station at the Somerville/Medford line. It has been described as one of three key routes people will use to get to the new station. That means that there will be peak hours of all types of traffic on the bridge. It should be designed to accommodate peak hour transit rider traffic on foot and by bicycle.
The nearby rotary at Mystic Valley Parkway and Alewife Brook Parkway is only a few hundred feet from this bridge. This rotary is to be redesigned to bring it up to modern standards in connection with the proposed Green Line extension to Route 16. The rotary is on the walking route to the new Green Line station, a new senior housing facility, Dilboy Stadium and the Mystic River Reservation, and is currently extremely dangerous to cross, as there are NO pedestrian accommodations of any kind. The plans (or at least conceptual changes) for this rotary should be considered when deciding how to reconstruct the bridge so all the elements ultimately work together for the benefit of all the users.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ENF. We look forward to further development of the project.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Cc:DCR Commissioner Rick Sullivan
DCR Planner Dan Driscoll
MHD Chief Engineer Frank Tramontozzi

Environmental Notification Form (ENF) Alewife Brook Greenway MEPA #14431

June 29, 2009

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Environmental Notification Form (ENF) Alewife Brook Greenway
MEPA # 14431

Dear Secretary Bowles:

WalkBoston is pleased to review the Alewife Brook Greenway Environmental Notification Form (ENF). We have found the proposal extremely interesting, as it expands the off-road network of trails and walkways that are so important to metro arearesidents for transportation and recreation. The ENF details improvements that will be made for both pedestrians and bicyclists on a corridor between Alewife Brook MBTA Station and the Mystic Valley Parkway that leads through Cambridge, Somerville and Arlington, and has connections to the Minuteman Pathway, the Linear Park/Community Path route into Somerville, the Mystic River parklands and future paths into Belmont and Watertown.

This is an extremely important piece of the regional trail network. We are happy to endorse its construction and even happier to realize that it may be constructed relatively rapidly as part of the national stimulus construction agenda.

In our review, we noted a few concerns of importance to pedestrians:

1. The proposed network does not provide for fully separated bicycle and pedestrian paths.
In two segments of the proposed improvement (1. Between the Mystic Valley Parkway and Broadway; and 2. between Henderson Street and Massachusetts Avenue) there appears to be a partial separation of bicycle and pedestrian paths. By contrast, there is only a single path between Broadway and Henderson Street and between Massachusetts Avenue and the MBTA Alewife Station. This will result in an effective capacity of two 10’-wide paths in the areas of separated paths and only one 10’-wide path in the other parts of the corridor. We are concerned about the safety of pedestrians in portions of the corridor where the capacity is limited. In those areas, consideration should be given to a wider cross-section on the path to accommodate potential demand.

2. The proposal does not indicate whether there will be signage to can foster safe walking. Pedestrian safety in mixed walking and cycling traffic can be an issue of concern, depending on the volume of traffic that uses the paths. While we would prefer separate facilities that are clearly designated as such, it does not appear to be feasible throughout the entire corridor. We therefore suggest that signing and warnings be provided to make the route safe for all users. This might include, for example:

Lane separation lines for the north and south directions.
Signs warning pedestrians to stay to the right of the path.
Signs advising cyclists to ring a warning bell as they approach pedestrians from behind.
Route signs designating a cyclist trail along the paths that abut Alewife Brooke Parkway.

3. The Boardwalk parallel to Alewife Brook Parkway has the potential for becoming a bottleneck, as it accommodates all path traffic in a narrow corridor. The boardwalk overlooks and is cantilevered over the river in the section extending north of Henderson Street and is one of the most accessible portions of the pathways for nearby residents. It is also close to Dilboy Field, which has occasional special sports events. If the boardwalk accommodates both pedestrians and cyclists and is closely fenced on both sides, it has the potential for becoming heavily used and potentially unsafe for people on foot. Would it be possible to widen the boardwalk to at least 12 feet in this location?

4. Seating and observation areas should be maximized.The path promises to be a very pleasant route. Many people will want to sit occasionally along the route, and children, among others, will be interested in closely examining the stream.

5. For the security of people who are using the path lighting may be appropriate. Lighting of the paths would extend their usefulness to walkers and cyclists in evening hours and in fall and winter.

6. Crosswalks may be needed in several locations. Near the Dilboy Park baseball diamonds, a fence opening and curb ramp have been provided that appear designed to help people cross Alewife Brook Parkway. The addition of a crosswalk in this location would be appropriate. Other crosswalks should be examined to cross Alewife Brook Parkway at Massachusetts Avenue, at Matignon Road, at Powder House Boulevard (two curb ramps), and at Broadway. For continuity of the path network, a Mystic Valley Parkway crosswalk should be considered at the north end of this project.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to provide comments on the ENF. Please let us know if you have any questions or need further detail.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner

Cc Dan Driscoll, DCR Bicycle and Pedestrian Planner

Green Line Extension Comment Letter

September 7, 2007

Katherine Fichter
Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation katherine.fichter@eot.state.ma.us

Christine Kirby
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection christine.kirby@state.ma.us

Re: Green Line Extension
Dear Ms. Fichter and Ms. Kirby:

WalkBoston is Massachusetts’ leading pedestrian advocacy organization, and we are currently working with the City of Somerville on their innovative efforts to improve the health of their citizens through community-wide nutrition and physical activity programs. The City recently received international attention for these efforts, which are beginning to have measurable benefits for Somerville children. The State should do its part to vigorously support Somerville by following through on its commitment to extend the Green Line to Somerville and Medford.

Why should the Commonwealth promptly honor the commitment to construct the Green Line?

The project will serve the densest community in Massachusetts – one with a high proportion of low-income, minority and transit-dependent residents.
Somerville and Medford are poorly served by existing transit and suffer from poor air quality as a result of extremely high vehicle volumes and rail diesel fumes. As a result of this poor air quality, Somerville suffers from high rates of lung cancer and heart disease. Thus, the residents of Somerville bear the burden of rail impacts without the benefits of transit service.
Since 1990 the state has been legally obligated to provide this transit expansion – it is time to make good on that commitment.
While we believe the state should vigorously pursue federal transit funds, such efforts should in no way slow progress on the Green Line extension.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this important project. Sincerely,
Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Comments on Expanded Environmental Notification Form for the Green Line Extension EOEA # 13886

November 23, 2006

Secretary Robert Golledge
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, MEPA Office 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

RE: Comments on Expanded Environmental Notification Form for the Green Line Extension in Cambridge, Somerville and Medford.

EOEA # 13886

Dear Mr. Golledge:

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Expanded Environmental Notification Form (EENF) for the Green Line Extension submitted by the MBTA. We are commenting because of concern about the pedestrian issues associated with this proposal.

If the EENF is to become a single EIR as requested, we would like to see these issues addressed:

1. Philosophy of the project.

Pedestrian access to the project should be paramount in planning the new facility. Thisis an unusual project, with virtually no parking envisioned at transit stations. All riders will arrive on foot – directly from their homes, from a kiss and ride drop off spot, from a bicycle parking area or from a bus stop. Thus, pedestrian movements should guide station locations and designs. Sidewalk widths, surfaces, street furniture, signing and street crossings are major concerns. Bus stops and drop off sites must be incorporated into the design to maximize convenient pedestrian access, Bicycle storage racks must be provided at all stations.
Consideration should be given to extending the Green Line terminus to Mystic Valley Parkway at the Mystic River at the Medford/Somerville line, as is recommended by the Medford Green Line Neighborhood Alliance, to serve an additional densely populated area and to spur transit-oriented development. This terminus should also be evaluated in terms of potential ridership and ways of integrating it with area bus lines.
Potential integration with commuter rail service should be examined as EIR work gets underway. For example, the proposed location of the station near Tufts University may be worthy of consideration for commuter rail service. Since Tufts can be considered a regional destination, a commuter rail station nearby may attract more riders to the MBTA system. The proposed Tufts station is roughly the same distance from downtown Boston as Forest Hills, where a commuter rail station is also immediately adjacent to the Orange Line rapid transit station. No stations are proposed for this geographic quadrant of the region where riders can be exchanged between the Green Line and the commuter rail line except for North Station.

• The proposed Community Path should be integrated with the transit proposal from the beginning. The Somerville community agrees on the need for it. Medford residents and officials should be interviewed for views on extending the path from Lowell Street in Somerville to Route 16 at the Alewife Brook Parkway via the Green Line right of way.

2. Planning for the Community Path.

The available railroad right of way has sufficient width to include a path for nearly its fulllength. The path can be constructed at the level of the tracks or up the hillside on an alignment supported by retaining walls. If absolutely necessary, the path could be cantilevered above track level.
For safety, the path should be completely grade-separated. All new or rebuilt bridge structures should be wide enough to accommodate the proposed Community Path beneath them. Bridges to be retained should be examined carefully for adaptations that accommodate a right of way for the Community Path. Bridge issues for the pedestrian pathway will be particularly difficult at McGrath Highway and at Washington Street, where grade crossings may be unsafe because of heavy street traffic.
Pedestrian access between cross streets and the Community Path should be maximized. All street crossings above the right of way should have ramps between the path and street level.
Between Washington Street and Lechmere Station, the Community Path should share the alignment of the Green Line extension. A bridge shared with the Green Line will be the only way for the pathway to cross the Fitchburg Commuter Rail Line.
The relocation of Lechmere Station in Cambridge is on schedule for construction prior to the Green Line extension. It is important that the station project be designed and built to permit connections to the Community Path from the relocated station and the North Point walkways.

3. Maximizing access and use

Pedestrians will literally be coming to this project from all directions. The project shouldfacilitate access to all cardinal points surrounding each station, and not just north-south over the bridges. Pedestrians and cyclists should be able to arrive at stations directly from the Community Path. Additional right of way crossings may be necessary where existing north-south streets do not suffice.
An extension to the Mystic Valley Parkway site offers the possibility of extensive transit- oriented and pedestrian-friendly development around a new station that affects both Somerville and Medford. Transit-oriented development will help grow ridership at this station.
In examining the proposed extension to the Mystic Valley Parkway, it is important to look at potential pedestrian connections into the neighborhood north of the river to maximize the transit market for the terminal station. At Route 16, the proposed extension of the Green Line can also connect with the growing network of intercity pathways along the Mystic River and Alewife Brook.
As recommended by the Medford Green Line Neighborhood Alliance, a station between College Avenue and Winthrop Street in Medford Hillside may be extremely desirable. It could replace the need for the two closely-spaced stations proposed for College Avenue and Winthrop Street. The densely populated area within a half-mile radius might be

better served at this location, and it might be the best location to serve Tufts University

riders. Several bus lines run along Boston Avenue and can readily serve this location.

The dangerous pedestrian path from the end of Brookings Street in Medford should bereplaced with a bridge connecting this neighborhood to the proposed new Green Line Station. The bridge will provide good access for this portion of Medford Hillside to the Green Line, as Brookings Street forms the central axis of the residential neighborhood which lies north of the tracks.
Somerville High School, directly on the Green Line Extension, will provide many potential users of the Green Line Extension. Great care should be taken to design good connections to the High School, as well as the adjacent City Hall and Main Library.
Both Somerville and Medford may want to examine the potential for air rights above the tracks to expand open space in the city or to provide the basis for other needed construction, such as housing.

4. The Union Square Connection

To best serve pedestrians, the proposed Union Square station should reach the heart ofactivity in the square. An underground station beneath Webster Avenue at the square should be examined to provide efficient and easy access from the business community and the surrounding residents. All station options should be connected to the square’s pedestrian facilities by convenient pathways or sidewalks.

The Community Path should be extended into Union Square. An opportunity exists to coordinate the path with local development. Somerville is redeveloping the area adjacent to the Fitchburg Commuter Rail Line. The 80-acre Boynton Yards Revitalization Area, planned as a mixed-use area, already includes office buildings constructed as the first step in the renewal process for the area.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EENR. Please feel free to contact us for clarification or additional comments. We would be very pleased to work with the MBTA on this important project.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman
Executive Director

Robert Sloane
Senior Planner