BRA Archives - WalkMassachusetts

Comments on Jamaica Plain and Roxbury Draft Plan:JP/ROX

August 19, 2016

Marie Mercurio, Senior Planner
Boston Redevelopment Authority
1 City Hall Sq, 9th Floor
Boston, MA 02210

Re: Draft PLAN: JP/ROX

Dear Marie:

LivableStreets Alliance, Boston Cyclists Union and WalkBoston appreciate the work the BRA has done thus far to ensure that neighborhood development in Jamaica Plain and Roxbury aligns with residents’ wishes and is done in a sustainable way that preserves neighborhood character. However, our organizations believe that the policies and recommendations outlined in the BRA’s draft plan can be improved. Washington Street is a high-density, transit-accessible corridor, with low rates of automobile usage and a high share of residents traveling via transit, bicycle and walking. The policies and recommendations outlined in the BRA’s report should further advance these aspects of the neighborhood. Please find comments from the LivableStreets Advocacy Committee, WalkBoston, Boston Cyclists Union, and local residents below. Many of these recommendations align with work WalkBoston is pursuing in partnership with the Elderly Commission’s Age-Friendly Boston initiative and other city agencies to improve safety and comfort for seniors and other vulnerable populations.

First, we would like to recommend general improvements for the area in the following categories: Policy Initiatives, Pedestrian Safety and Infrastructure, Bicycle Infrastructure, Transit Improvements, Placemaking and the Public Realm, and Parking. In addition, we recommend a number of specific infrastructure improvements throughout the PLAN: JP/ROX study area, which are detailed later in this letter.

Policy Initiatives

 Commit to Complete Streets, Vision Zero, and other policies and standards that the City of Boston has adopted – don’t just aspire. Roadway design should prioritize pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and personal motor vehicles, in that order. Vehicular capacity/level of service should not trump other needs.

o Page 120 of the draft plan mentions that traffic calming, improved sidewalk and pedestrian crossings, and bike facilities should be created “where possible.” This statement does not go far enough and the words “where possible” should be eliminated from the final plan. Boston has committed to implementing Vision Zero, which requires that streets be engineered in ways that prevent vulnerable road users from being killed by motor vehicles when motor vehicle operators make errors. The term “where possible” implies that nothing will change on a street unless no parking spaces are lost and motor vehicle traffic speeds are not impacted.

 Implement fast and flexible programs for infrastructure that advance Complete Streets and Vision Zero goals. Use flex posts, paint and other inexpensive and temporary materials to demonstrate innovative roadway treatments such as physically separated bike lanes, curb extensions, and pedestrian plazas.

Pedestrian Safety and Infrastructure

 Improve pedestrian safety through appropriately configured WALK signals.

o All WALK signals should be on automatic recall, unless there are streets with very low pedestrian volumes.

o All WALK signals should be concurrent with traffic, unless there are high volumes of turning traffic or special circumstances (e.g. locations near schools or senior centers) that should be further reviewed.

o All concurrent WALK signals should provide a leading pedestrian interval (LPI) of 6 seconds.

o All WALK signals should provide countdowns that give sufficient time for pedestrians to cross the street. At major intersections the timing should be set to accommodate the MUTCD standard of a pedestrian walking 3.0 ft/sec. (MUTCD Section 4E.06, Paragraph 14)

 Establish an aggressive minimum standard for distance between crosswalks (signalized or not) and corresponding installation of new crosswalks at minor intersections and midblock locations.

 Create landscaped pedestrian refuge areas where possible at unsignalized crosswalks.

 Install sidewalk bump-outs at all pedestrian crossings where appropriate for pedestrian safety.

Bicycle Safety and Infrastructure

 Determine feasibility of implementing separated bike lanes along all collector and arterial streets.

o On page 133 of the draft plan, fig. 89 and fig. 90 depict two different conceptual drawings of bike infrastructure. We recommend the fig. 90 conceptual drawing of a separated bike lane.

 Create bike lanes/separated bike lanes, not sharrows, on major streets, and build as much as possible using paint on existing streets.

 Expand Hubway service and stations according to station density requirements and locations within a quarter mile radius of MBTA stations, including at transit hub Forest Hills MBTA Station.

 Bicycle and pedestrian access to the Southwest Corridor should remain as safe as it is today or be made safer.

Transit Improvements

 Study additional options for improving buses and expanding BRT. Options may include extending the Silver Line from Dudley through Forest Hills as an alternative to the BRT corridor planned for Columbus Ave.

 Use transit priority signals and far-side bus stops to provide better bus service, instead of queue jump lanes as currently recommended in the draft plan. Far-side stops are better for bus operations and also help to daylight crosswalks to oncoming traffic.

 Ensure that buses are accommodated if future development takes place at the Arborway Yard and either redesign or relocate bus operations. The memorandum of agreement between the City and the MBTA calls for building a permanent $250 million facility to house 118 buses.

Placemaking and the Public Realm

 Install attractive, high-visibility, main-street-style, pedestrian-scale lighting to not only provide better illumination but to help visually narrow the street and signal to motorists that they are not on a high-speed arterial but in a village/neighborhood commercial center.

 Install attractive and coordinated benches/street furniture, parklets, public art and other placemaking features

 Minimize curb cuts through use of shared driveways and ensure that they have the tightest possible curb radii and level sidewalks.

 Create more robust incentives to encourage store owners to remove metal security covers for storefronts or to replace them with less visually obtrusive interior-mounted alternatives.

 Where appropriate, require setbacks for larger buildings to accommodate wider sidewalks and sidewalk cafes. Any residential or non-storefront, non-active groundfloor uses permitted to front on Washington St should require deeper, well landscaped setbacks, such as those along Marlborough St. in the Back Bay.

Parking

 Conduct a comprehensive neighborhood parking study to assess the proper regulations needed neighborhood wide.

o Regulate on-street parking in business districts for 15% vacancy using a combination of time limits and metering to encourage turnover.

o Assess residential streets, especially near transit stations, for viability of resident parking zones. Permits could be required during the day if people from outside the neighborhood are parking there during the day. Make residential permits required during the day and/or during the night if overnight parking by nonresidents seems to be an issue.

o Institute recommended parking ratios ranging from 0 to .7, consistent with research suggesting parking ratios of .5 to .7 spaces per unit in neighborhoods with similar mode share and vehicle ownership rates as this section of Boston. “Decoupling” usage of private parking spaces from specific residential units and encouraging commercial shared parking can further extend the usefulness of existing and proposed spaces.

o Provide enough loading/drop-off/pick-up zones to reduce/eliminate double parking.

o Explore maximums for off-street parking.

o Reducing parking would save residents more than $8,500/year, which will aid the BRA’s goal of affordable housing. (This is based on the estimate that car ownership costs an average of $8,500/year.)

In addition to these general recommendations, the plan should also address and mention specific infrastructure improvements to existing deficiencies, including the following:

 Create a road diet for Columbus Ave between Egleston Sq. and Jackson Sq.

 Add bump outs/curb extensions to narrow crossing distances and increase turning radii for vehicles turning right onto Washington St from Columbus Ave.

 Add visual cues such as rapid flashing beacons and other high visibility signage to slow northbound traffic on Columbus Ave coming downhill through Egleston Square at Washington St.

 Add and improve crosswalks throughout the study area.

o Add raised crosswalks on all side streets along Washington and Columbus.

o Add a crosswalk, preferably raised, with an in-street pedestrian crossing sign across Washington St at Beethoven St and across Washington St at Kenton Rd.

o Add crosswalks with in-street pedestrian crossing signs across Columbus Ave between Washington St and Seaver St, and across Washington St between Columbus Ave and Dimock St, to enhance pedestrian connections to and surrounding Egleston Square. (Currently there are very few crosswalks across the major arterials of Columbus Ave and Washington St along the aforementioned roadway segments. New crosswalks may be located at side streets or midblock, depending on the circumstances.)

 Fix the WALK signal across Columbus Ave outside Walnut Park Apartments (between Weld Ave and Dixwell St) to shorten wait time and provide regular pedestrian phase. Currently the wait for a WALK cycle is very long even when the button is pushed.  Widen the sidewalks on Amory Street from the Brewery Complex to School Street to a minimum of 8’.

 Establish wayfinding and pedestrian/bicycle links connecting and directing people from the Southwest Corridor, T Stations and Washington St to Franklin Park.

o Page 130 of the draft plan states that connections should be enhanced between the Southwest Corridor and Franklin Park. Maps and diagrams of proposed improvements should be updated to reflect this in the final plan.

o Page 152 of the draft plan cites proposed improvements for Egleston Square, including “new bike lanes, crosswalks, and connections to the Southwest Corridor.” Ideally these bike facilities should be two-way and protected from vehicle traffic. As with connections between the SW Corridor and Franklin Park, such proposed improvements should be consistently mentioned throughout all maps presented in the final plan.

 Install parking meters with 12-or-more hour maximum time on all streets within 1000’ of a train station to better manage commuter parking.

Thank you again for presenting to our group in July and for this opportunity to comment on the draft plan. We appreciate your consideration of our recommendations.

Sincerely,

Boston Cyclists Union
LivableStreets Alliance
WalkBoston

Government Center Garage Redevelopment Environmental Notification Form EOEA #15134

February 7, 2014

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

RE: Comments on the Government Center Garage Redevelopment Environmental Notification Form (ENF)

EOEA #15134

Dear Secretary Sullivan,

WalkBoston appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for the Government Center Garage Redevelopment.

The proposal calls for partial demolition of the underutilized Government Center Garage as an early action, with subsequent demolition and redevelopment to take place over a number of years. Initial demolition will result in opening Congress Street to daylight and allowing redevelopment of the East Parcel, including a new public plaza and pedestrian connection between the Bullfinch Triangle and Greenway. The east parcel is a critical pedestrian link between Downtown Boston and North Station/Bulfinch Triangle, as well as a link to the Rose Kennedy Greenway. The total development will include 812 new housing units, 196 new hotel rooms, over one million gross square feet of office, and 82,500 gross square feet of retail. The garage will continue to provide sufficient parking for the new onsite uses, commercial parking for transient users as well as overnight resident parking.

We offer the following comments:

1. We believe the proposed development will improve the area for pedestrians compared to existing conditions. The existing garage is a large, foreboding structure from the pedestrian viewpoint. While the potential removal of the garage and the reopening of Congress Street to the sky is appealing in its own right, the proposed development offers additional benefits. As the project is refined during subsequent reviews, MEPA and the BRA must ensure that these benefits are not lost during revisions or project changes. We trust that any project approval will condition the following proposed improvements to ensure they are included in the final design:

The removal of overhead parking decks and associated office space, returning sunlight to Congress Street.
The proposed pedestrian-only extension of Canal Street through the newly-configured east parcel that greatly benefits heavy rush-hour foot traffic to/ from North Station.
The narrowing and redesign of Sudbury Street, including elimination and replacement of angled Police Department parking from the right-of-way.
The extension of Bowker Street to make it a through street, eliminating the stairs between Sudbury Street and the existing dead end of Bowker Street.
The project could potentially provide very substantial benefits that would have a lasting effect on the built environment of the immediate neighborhood and the entire downtown core of Boston. Careful attention must be paid to the pedestrian experience in and around the site to take advantage of its tremendous pedestrian and transit access. The project is positioned to capitalize on these features and it is incumbent upon MEPA, the BRA and the City of Boston to ensure that the final design fully accounts for these opportunities.

2. Curb cuts for the garage – All curb cuts provided for the new garage should be kept to a minimum width, should enter the street at a right angle, and should be at sidewalk grade (no curb cut for pedestrians). Appropriate vehicle exiting warning signs must be provided for pedestrian safety. The existing garage access drives are too wide and pedestrians on the sidewalk are often threatened by automobiles traveling at high speeds into and out of the garage’s overly wide parking access ramps.

3. MBTA on-site improvements – The project should not interfere with normal MBTA bus operations, and allowance must be made for continued bus and subway service connections on-site. The proponent and the MBTA should commit to additional design work to improve the walking environment in this area to accommodate the large number of pedestrians using transit, along with the additional pedestrian volumes that will be generated by this very large project.

4. Hawkins and Bowker Streets – Bowker Street should become a through street with a changed gradient that allows an ADA compliant sidewalk. If Hawkins Street cannot also be made a through street, the stairs that connect its dead-end at Sudbury Street should be re-graded into an ADA compliant sidewalk.

5. North End Access – While the project claims to reconnect long divided Boston neighborhoods, it fails to offer the North End the same pedestrian benefits it does for the West End, Government Center and Bullfinch Triangle. In fact the project design seems to turn its back on the North End. A North End pedestrian connection should be explored in greater detail. The connection should work to interconnect the north-south walkway through the east parcel, North End residents, the two Green and Orange Line MBTA subway stations, and the Greenway.

6. Walk Signals – The existing pedestrian walk signals at the intersection of New Chardon Street and Canal Street will need to be adjusted. The pedestrian service from Canal Street through the newly configured east parcel will siphon existing North Station foot traffic away from adjacent streets. As a result, this pedestrian walk signal and the narrow mid-crossing island may be overwhelmed by the additional foot traffic on Canal Street. All walk signals on New Chardon, Friend, Sudbury and Merrimac Streets should be adjusted to handle the additional pedestrian traffic that the project will create.

7. Narrowing Sudbury and New Chardon Streets – A detailed study of the potential for narrowing both Sudbury and New Chardon Streets is essential. Such a study should include provisions for wider sidewalks, coordinate with improvements being planned for neighboring streets as part of the Crossroads Initiative and potential bike lanes. Further pedestrian crossing improvements should be explored including the elimination (or infill) of the truck turning lanes at the corner of Merrimac Street and New Chardon Street, and at the corner of New Chardon Street and Congress Street.

8. Other pedestrian ways – The document does not address whether the proponent will maintain or improve pedestrian connections that skirt the northwestern edge of the site, from New Chardon Street, up the Brattle Way pedestrian mall and ultimately out towards Cambridge Street. This pedestrian mall/walkway and associated small park area is well used during the day and it should be considered with the project’s design. The short length of Brattle Way could be an excellent candidate for expanded pedestrian use.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the ENF for the Government Center Garage Redevelopment. We believe this site provides an opportunity to develop a transit-oriented, mixed-use project that could showcase pedestrian friendly sidewalks and streets. We hope our comments on the ENF/PNF are incorporated into your requirements for the next phase of design and permitting documents.

Please contact us for any clarification or additional comments that would be useful.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman Robert Sloane
Executive Director Senior Planner

Comments on Barry’s Corner Residential and Retail Commons Project

January 8, 2013

Gerald Autler

Boston Redevelopment Authority
One City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201-1007

RE: Barry’s Corner Residential and Retail Commons Project
Expanded Project Notification Form
Submitted Pursuant to Article 80 of the Boston Zoning Code

Dear Mr. Autler:

WalkBoston has reviewed the EENF for the Barry’s Corner Residential and Retail Commons Project in Allston. This project is a first step in a major redevelopment of the surroundings of the intersection of North Harvard Street and Western Avenue, and thus will set the stage for many additional improvements in the vicinity. Our comments reflect the aspects of the proposal that most affect pedestrians, as these components are likely to play an important role in the way in which the project functions and relates to its surroundings.

The area is planned to become the principal focus of North Allston
Preliminary plans for this site are generally following the consensus presented in the 2005 North Allston Strategic Framework for planning and in Harvard’s Institutional Master Plan from 2012. Both plans call for intensive retail and other development at the intersection. The site of this proposal is but one of several sites that will comprise the North Allston activities. Considering only the north side of Western Avenue, plans call for 200,000 square feet at the Charlesview site, 45,000 square feet on the site of this proposal, and, on the arena site, 60,000 square feet for the arena and 140,000 square feet for the office/retail structure that encloses the basketball court. This totals 445,000 square feet altogether – a number that suggests a need for intensive analysis of the vehicular and foot traffic that will be utilizing all of the sites, including the one that is currently being analyzed. Any proposal for a center that will include at least 400,000 square feet should provide for carefully-considered pedestrian interconnections between its parts.
The proposed basketball arena/office building
The Institutional Master Plan of the Allston campus recently distributed by Harvard introduces a combination of a 3,000-seat basketball arena and 140,000 square feet of retail/office/residences on land immediately north of the project site. The arena will attract many people to games during the basketball season, and perhaps, depending on uses of the facility, in other months as well. What it means in terms of future pedestrian or vehicular traffic is not at all clear from this EENF. The scale of the arena project warrants consideration of its effects on this site. For example, retail activities on the proposed site might benefit from consideration of additional retail on the street level under the arena to make the retail functions of the intersection more prominent.
The sidewalk in front of the arena
The arena site is nearly a mile from Harvard Square. People coming to the area will be largely on foot (they will be discouraged from driving because of the paucity of nearby parking spaces). Large numbers of people will be attracted to the basketball arena for games and perhaps for other uses that may be scheduled there, but the volume of visitors has not been described in the EPNF. Many people will walk from Harvard Square, the Yard and from residence halls north of the river, and most will arrive via the west side of North Harvard Street. These walkers should be provided with a very wide sidewalk along the full length of North Harvard Street (currently shown as a wide sidewalk in front of the existing building but not along the stadium or this development proposal). We would recommend that it be wider than the standard 10’ – 12’ width for multi-use paths, something on the order of 20’ would be appropriate.
Extending the sidewalk to the south
A wide sidewalk along North Harvard Street should not end at the arena, but should provide access to the intersection of Western Avenue and the North Allston activity center. This wide sidewalk would pass directly along the North Harvard street side of this project, and connect to the 45,000 square feet of retail activities that occupy most of the ground floor of this proposal.
The Charlesview site
This site on the northeast corner of the intersection of North Harvard and Western has been planned for retail activity and some residential or office development. The current plan estimates 200,000 square feet for the building complex. Access between sites will take place at the intersection, where crosswalks should be redesigned to more directly connect the two sites.
The parks at the North Allston Center
Two potential sites for parks touch directly on the intersection. The existing grove of trees in front of the Charlesview development and the triangle occupied by the gas station are potential assets to the retail center and should be further developed as landmarks within this center. Either of the two sites could become intensively used by walkers as outdoor spaces to get fresh air, to sit, to read or have a picnic. Pedestrian access to either or both of the sites should be carefully considered as a part of developing the network of sidewalks and street crossings.
Crosswalk redesign
The layout of the existing crosswalks at the intersection of North Harvard Street and Western Avenue maximizes the crossing distances for walkers because all the crosswalks have been laid out as diagonals. This layout makes pedestrian crossings unnecessarily long and require walkers to stay in the street longer than they would if the crosswalks were perpendicular to the streets they cross. One example on Western Avenue shows that the existing crosswalk is nearly 80 feet long, while a perpendicular crossing would be approximately half that length. As part of the intersection improvements associated with this project, crosswalks should be redesigned for the safety of pedestrians. Removal of the refuge island on the Charlesview corner should also be considered as part of the project’s efforts to improve the North Harvard Street/Western Avenue intersection.
A new pedestrian crosswalk on North Harvard Street
Access to the proposed arena and to the site of this proposal will require pedestrian access across North Harvard Street. This is particularly important for people arriving by northbound transit, currently served by bus stops at the north and south ends of the Charlesview site. The existing pedestrian crosswalk at Western Avenue may need to be supplemented by an additional crosswalk at the intersection of North Harvard Street and Smith Field Drive Extension, which is more than 500 feet from Western Avenue, suggesting that a new crosswalk at that location would be convenient and well used. It is made particularly important because it does not make sense to have a crosswalk at Grove Street, because the distance between Western and Grove is very short.

Uses of land within the site
The relatively small size of the site and the need for specific services results in relatively constrained pedestrian access.

Vehicle uses
Almost one-quarter of the parcel will be devoted to vehicle access and surface parking because of the proposed new streets. Vehicular access to the site is one-way northbound from Western Ave. on Smith Field Drive, and two-way on Grove Street between Smith Field Drive and North Harvard Street. The description of vehicular access needs (particularly on-site loading and unloading requirements) implies that a further extension of Smith Field Drive will be constructed soon – perhaps in conjunction with this project, to allow full site access in- and out-bound from its intersection with North Harvard Street. Three streets are to be devoted to providing access to a 2.74 acre site. This may be excessive, unless they are necessary to serve the proposed arena, either temporarily or permanently
Parking on the site
The proposal calls for 180 below-grade parking spaces and 41 surface private spaces, making a total of 221 spaces on-site. These spaces will serve the 325 residences proposed for the site, and potentially some of the retail uses as well. A question remains of whether the underground parking could be reached from Smith Field Drive rather than Grove Street, which seems destined to be degraded by many autooriented uses.
New on-site street – Grove Street
Grove Street is primarily a service street designed to provide truck access to the buildings, access to the below grade garage, and 23 surface parking space. The EPNF does not discuss whether service for the arena (potentially including loading/unloading access for trucks and access to underground parking) will also be provided on the street. The combination of service uses could compromise the character of the street and the street-facing residential units as well. In terms of pedestrian use, Grove Street was designated as a “pedestrian trail” in the university’s Institutional Master Plan. This suggests continuity between Charlesview and Smith Field via Grove Street, which would need a crosswalk located midway between Western Avenue and the Smith Field Drive Extension. Such a crossing – likely to be unsignalized – could be dangerous for pedestrians and drivers alike.
A bulky arena as a neighbor
Depending on its design, the proposed arena may loom dramatically over the site of the current proposal. The project design fort his site actually calls for residential units along Grove Street, along with an irregularly shaped sidewalk and major vehicular access for loading and parking. While the vehicular portions of the proposal for this side of the site are not affected by the neighboring arena, the residential units may well be. Although the dimensions of the proposed arena are unknown, its height may reach more than half of the proposed dwellings on the proposal’s site. The prospect of a looming building also affects the proposed sidewalk, where vehicular impacts are major, and where proposed street trees or wider sidewalks will do little to mitigate the impacts of a large building.
New on-site street – Smith Field Drive and Smith Field Drive Extension
Smith Field Drive and its extension have been designed as a major service way for both this project and the proposed basketball arena. It may have operating difficulties when the arena is in use. A convergence of vehicles and pedestrians would be expected, and traffic control on either has not been discussed.
Open space
Roughly 3,600 square feet of the site’s land has been designated as street-level open space. The two parcels are located at the two corners of the buildings – one facing N. Harvard Street and the other on Western Avenue – and both serve to enhance the entrances to the residences. Additional open space of about 8,000 square feet is provided on the second level above the retail uses, and will only be accessible to residents of the site.
Sidewalks
Sidewalks surround the buildings on all sides and are of irregular widths to accommodate building entrances, potential sidewalk cafes, retail entrances and the vehicular entrances to the building. The proposal for a wide sidewalk on the west side of North Harvard Street suggests the possibility of an overhanging building or a street-level colonnade.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this important project. Please feel free to contact WalkBoston with questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Bob Sloane
Senior Project Manager

Garden Garage Project DPIR Comment Letter

January 17, 2012

Geoff Lewis, Project Manager
Boston Redevelopment Authority
One City Hall Plaza
Boston, MA 02201-1007

RE: Garden Garage Project DPIR

Dear Mr. Lewis:

WalkBoston is the Commonwealth’s leading advocate for pedestrians and safe walking. We work throughout the state encouraging walking, advocating for pedestrian improvements and working for design improvements. We have worked with over 65 communities throughout the state, helping residents and local government with pedestrian issues, safe routes to school, and safer street crossings.

The proponents of the Garden Garage Project have worked hard to include a singular emphasis on pedestrian access to and through the site. We are impressed that the barrier that the existing garage creates between the West End apartments and North Station will be removed. Its replacement with a series of pedestrian paths and a plaza abutting the proposed structures is very welcome as a measure to reinvigorate the pedestrian network in the area.

As the focus of a pedestrian network that will extend from the West End and across Lomasney Way/Nashua Street/Red Auerbach Way, the new project appears to enthusiastically attract walkers along the internal paths that were part of the original Charles River Park Project. Chief among these is the existing, wide Thoreau Path, which will be lengthened to connect directly into paths leading to North Station and toward the river. This is a welcome addition to the path and sidewalk network serving pedestrians. It brings a focus of this network right to the edge of Lomasney Way/Nashua Street/Red Auerbach Way.

We are concerned primarily about the ways in which pedestrians will be served by future pedestrian connections into and across this rather wide and busy intersection. There are two proposed pedestrian crossings that are of concern:

The intersection of Nashua Street, Lomasney Way and Red Auerbach Way, at the northwest corner of the O’Neill Federal Building is at present unsignalized, and has a crosswalk that is perpendicular to the southeast side of Red Auerbach Way. Under the proposed plan, pedestrians accessing this crosswalk from the West End will be forced to follow three segments:
A. The plaza sidewalks pointing toward North Station.
B. A dogleg turn from the plaza, to follow Lomasney Way a short distance (which unfortunately involves crossing the two entrance and exit lanes at the mouth of the project garage) to get to this crosswalk.
C. Another turn is required to cross the street without the protection of a signal.
The intersection of Martha Road and Nashua Street may include a similar dogleg for walkers moving from the proposed plaza to the pedestrian crossing of Martha Road, where sidewalks along Nashua Street lead to the Charles River, the Suffolk County Jail and the present and future structures of Mass General Hospital. At this intersection there is an existing traffic signal, which may mitigate some of the safety implications for an increased flow of pedestrians. If a dogleg is included in these plans, crossing the mouth of the garage on this separate entrance/exit location, it will require careful design to make it safe for pedestrians.

The two street crossings are extremely important to the proposed uses of the paths and plaza in the proposed development. They already have considerable volumes of pedestrian traffic, and will grow substantially when this project is constructed. We suggest that the two crossings be given very careful design review and traffic management and traffic calming design to make sure that they provide a safe environment for the thousands of pedestrians who will use them each day.

Thank you for the opportunity to common on this important project. We think it is a good project that could be even more pedestrian-friendly with some modifications to surrounding traffic signals. WalkBoston will continue to work with the city on this issue and would be pleased to participate in a meeting to review the two crossings.

Sincerely,

Wendy Landman Robert Sloane
Executive Director Senior Planner