Top

The North Shore Wind Project

In 2003, MAPC received a grant from The Renewable Energy Trust to provide technical assistance for the siting of onshore wind turbines with the goal of increasing public acceptability in ten North Shore communities: Beverly, Essex, Gloucester, Ipswich, Lynn, Manchester, Marblehead, Rockport, Salem, and Swampscott.

The project included public forums on wind energy for the North Shore, presentations to each community on wind energy opportunities and barriers, a survey of residents, wind resource maps for each community, and a wind turbine siting ordinance for the City of Lynn.

Most of the communities are carrying forward under such programs as the Green Communities Program and the Energy Efficiency Block Grant Program funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

Maps of Land Based Wind Energy Facility Siting:

Climate’s Long-Term Impacts on Metro Boston (CLIMB), is an EPA-funded project aimed at studying the potential impacts of climate change on metropolitan Boston’s infrastructure systems and recommending strategies to prevent, reduce or manage the risk.

Continue reading...

Conservation Subdivision Design Project (July 2000)

The Conservation Subdivision Design (CSD) Project was conducted by MAPC in July 2000 and funded by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. CSD is arguably the best reform made to traditional cluster-type zoning to date. This project is intended to serve as an educational tool particularly for town planners, planning boards, and developers. The project includes positive examples of cluster-type subdivision and outlines the benefits of land development practices that consider environmental, cultural, and fiscal resources as equally important priorities.

The CSD project consists of three components:

  1. a detailed planning discussion/commentary of the basic elements for consideration within a cluster-type open space subdivision bylaw;
  2. a model open space residential design/CSD bylaw and model subdivision regulations, and
  3. a casebook of four existing open space/cluster subdivisions in Massachusetts.

Sections 1 and 2 are available in one PDF and section 3 is available in another PDF.

Continue reading...

Mass Central Connector

In 2009, MAGIC generated several transportation ideas from comments that were submitted at “MAGIC Mobility” meetings regarding suburban mobility services and constraints in each town. In 2010, MAGIC voted to spend special assessment funds on two studies: a suburban mobility study for the region’s towns and a feasibility study for a shared bicycle and bus rapid transit (BRT) path along the Mass Central Railroad right of way.

The Central Mass ROW Study

The Mass Central ROW, extends west from Waltham to I-495. MAPC examined the feasibility of the path for functioning as a shared transit corridor.

MAPC took a broad look at the corridor and devoted significant effort towards gathering data on the community level for support of proposed corridor.

A central component of the study is the engagement of communities along the path to determine their level of support for the proposed project, understand community concerns, and coordinate all stakeholders to develop recommendations for the future use of the corridor.

Coordination among the communities is an important factor in the outreach, as the issues facing the proposed path include trail bridge reconstruction and numerous right of way constraints that have emerged over the years.

Outreach components of the study include:

  • Outreach (community meetings, online survey, website, outreach literature)
  • Research and literature review, global examples
  • Site examination (CTPS field work)
  • Use and ridership
  • Final recommendations

View community outreach materials:

Key Resources

Maps and Data of the proposed project

Definition of Shared Transit/Intermodal Passenger Transportation

Shared transit, or intermodal passenger transportation, involves more than one mode of transport of passengers. Some modes of transportation have always been intermodal such as major airports with facilities for car parking and contain rail or bus connections to the cities nearby. Urban bus systems generally serve train and subway stations, and often extends to the local airport.

A major goal of modern intermodal passenger transport is to reduce dependence on the car as the major mode of ground transportation and increase use of public transport. To encourage this, Intermodal Journey planners are used to make users aware of possible services and to facilitate their use.

For example, a transit rider will walk up to a half-mile to transit stop, however a cyclist will bike upwards of 2 to 3 miles to reach a transit stop; increasing the ridership potential of that stop sixeteen fold.  Connections amongst different modes of transportation whether bike, bus, or train greatly increases accessibility and destinations for all riders.

The shared trail/busway would serve as an alternative gateway for commuters to the economic hubs along Interstate 495, the Route 128 corridors and beyond. Current length between points is 28 miles.

  • Increased growth and development is expected in both (95 & 128) areas in the region.
  • Serve surrounding communities as a connection to transportation hubs.
  • The corridor’s future use, however is contingent on community approval and inter-local coordination.

Definition of Bus Rapid Transit

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is an integrated system of facilities, services, and amenities that collectively improves the speed and reliability of bus transit. It:

  • combines many of the features people like about rail systems with the flexibility and cost savings of using overthe-road vehicles;
  • uses high capacity buses or specialized vehicles on existing roadways or dedicated lanes to quickly and efficiently transport passengers to their destinations; and
  • BRT systems can easily be customized to community needs and incorporate state-of-the-art, low-cost technologies that result in more passengers and less congestion.

The advantages of BRT include: lower capital investment than light rail, higher federal funding opportunity, flexibility & short time frames to implement.

Learn more about Bus Rapid Transit on the National BRT Institute website

Reports

Continue reading...

Weymouth Landing

Weymouth Landing is poised for revitalization as a thriving village center. The Landing has a lot going for it: many successful businesses, a new commuter rail stop, a unique waterfront, a large municipal parking lot, and the purchasing power of 14,000 residents within easy walking or biking distance. Led by Mayors Joseph Sullivan and Susan Kay, Braintree and Weymouth are working together to implement a shared vision and plan for the Landing.

In 2009 and 2010, MAPC developed an overall plan for the Landing, specific zoning recommendations, parking strategies, and design and economic development suggestions.  This project was funded by the District Local Technical Assistance program.

MAPC’s work in Weymouth Landing is now complete.  Both Braintree and Weymouth Town Councils adopted new zoning for their portion of the Landing in December 2010 and January 2011.

Click hereto view the Braintree/Weymouth Landing Zoning Ordinance adopted by Braintree Town Council on January 4, 2011 (link to Town of Braintree website.)

Click here to view Weymouth’s Village Center Overlay District adopted by the Weymouth Town Council on December 6, 2010 (link to Town of Braintree website.)

Weymouth Landing Report and Executive Summary

MAPC has completed its planning report on the revitalization of Weymouth Landing. The report outlines six key strategies for revitalization, as well as short term action steps that can be accomplished in the next six months.

Click here to download a 2-page summary of recommendations.

Key recommendations:

Support new development with zoning and incentives

Improve the walking/biking experience

Make efficient use of existing parking

  • Combine public and private funds to improve municipal parking lot
  • Begin planning for a comprehensive parking study

Strengthen and diversify the business mix

  • Form a business-led Joint Economic Development Committee

Enhance sense of place and aesthetics

  • Establish a Joint Design Committee to advise during site plan review
  • Adopt design guidelines

Leverage waterfront connections

  • Complete construction of Canoe Launch

Download a copy of the report below


What about the “big box” stores?

I’d like to hear what the new rezoning laws put into place and what new meat is put into this that’s going to stop them [big box stores] from coming in” – Wade Killman, Front Street, at March 23 meeting

When it comes to development, the right zoning puts the town in the driver’s seat.  New zoning should set out clear community expectations for design before a developer comes knocking.  If the bylaw requires village-type buildings close to the street, with the entrances in front and the parking in the rear, developers who want to build big boxes won’t be interested, but investors who want to build village-type development will know that they are welcome.

The graphic below shows how MAPC’s recommended zoning can ensure village-style development and prevent stand-alone big-box stores inconsistent with residents’ vision for the future of the Landing.

March 23, 2010 workshop

“Big box” stores, pedestrian improvements top discussion

March 23 meeting crowd photo

Nearly 70 people turned out on March 23 to weigh in on plans for Weymouth Landing, with new storefronts, sidewalks, open space, and homes.  MAPC presented recommendations of a nine-month planning study and town officials provided updates on putting the plan into action.   (Scroll down to see the report, executive summary, maps, and video of MAPC’s recommendations using a 3-D computer model of the Landing.)

People were excited about the strategies and business owners such as Harry Sarras and Charlie Tappa said the proposals could jump-start plans to expand and improve their properties.  Susan Lafoe said the suggested crosswalk designs were “beautiful,” and many participants voiced support for making Brookside Road a one-way or dead end.

Some residents asked how the proposed zoning would ensure the Landing sees village style development instead of stand-alone “big box” stores. In response, MAPC’s Tim Reardon highlighted how the recommended zoning would require village-style development with buildings facing the street, multiple entrances, and parking in the rear.

Mayor Sullivan at March 23 meetingBraintree Planner Christine Stickney reported on the town’s initiatives underway, with a storefront improvement program, business assistance, and PWED design all getting started soon.  Mayor Sullivan stated that the towns intend to file zoning articles with Town Councils within 40 days.  “In April when we make our final presentation you’ll have a better sense what the recommendations will be specifically in Braintree and Weymouth versus what MAPC has offered tonight.”

Senior Regional Planner Tim Reardon reported that MAPC will continue to revise the report based on responses at this meeting and other comments, and will issue a final report in mid-April, after which the Mayors, Town Councils, municipal staff, and residents will choose which recommendations they wish to implement.

Click here to download the meeting notes.

Click here to download the presentation.

November 18, 2009 Workshop

Courtesy of Chris Brown. Braintree and Weymouth residents review maps and exchange ideas at the November 18 workshop. 2009.

Over 70 people came to Braintree Town Hall on November 18 to hear about draft recommendations for Weymouth Landing and to provide their feedback. The meeting featured remarks from the two mayors, a presentation by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, a “tour” of the plan using a 3-D computer model of the Landing, and an hour of participant discussion about MAPC’s recommendations. Downloads:

Highlights from the November 18 discussion:
  • Some people feel that the proposed four story height limits are too tall for the Landing. Others think that higher height limits are needed in order to make new development economically feasible. Design was identified as an important factor. For example, one participant suggested that varying heights (some two story, some four story) contribute to a village feel. Another participant suggested that height limits set at some half-story increment (e.g., 3 ½ stories) would encourage traditional peaked roofs and dormers rather than flat roofs.
  • Participants generally supported the proposed Monatiqout River district comprising the waterfront industrial properties on the Braintree side. However, some East Braintree residents were opposed to any development on the Braintree Electric Light Department property on Allen Street; they felt this property should be converted to parkland and possibly an amphitheater. MAPC planner Tim Reardon noted that the plan calls for residential development with publicly accessible open space and a public walkway along the river; this development would help to pay for cleaning up contamination on the property and would provide tax revenue for the town.
  • Many participants felt that pedestrian safety is a critical issue that should be improved, even if those improvements might impact drivers. For example, two participants suggested making Brookside Road one way or dead-end and one person suggested narrowing Quincy Avenue/Commercial Street to a single lane in each direction, as has been done successfully in congested areas such as Cambridge.
  • Some participants emphasized the need for private sector collaboration in implementing the plan. For example, merchants and property owners have a responsibility to invest in storefront improvements. Another participant noted that public sector investments can only go so far; economics will determine what gets built.

If you have questions about the project so far or if you would like to be added to our mailing list, please email [email protected].

Continue reading...

What are the Benefits of Mixed Use Development?

Different communities choose mixed use for different reasons. Some see it as an excellent way to incorporate a mix of housing types on a small scale while enhancing traditional town character. Others see it primarily as a vehicle for revitalizing struggling areas and spurring economic development. Still others use it to create or enhance village centers. Listed below are some of the many benefits of mixed use development:

  • Spurs revitalization
  • Encourages high quality design by providing both greater flexibility and more control
  • Preserves and enhances traditional village centers
  • Promotes a village-style mix of retail, restaurants, offices, civic uses, and multi-family housing
  • Provides more housing opportunities and choices
  • May increase affordable housing opportunities
  • Enhances an area’s unique identity and development potential (e.g., village centers, locations near bike paths, or “gateway” areas that announce a community’s strengths)
  • Promotes pedestrian & bicycle travel
  • Reduces auto dependency, roadway congestion, and air pollution by co-locating multiple destinations
  • Promotes a sense of community
  • Promotes a sense of place
  • Encourages economic investment
  • Promotes efficient use of land and infrastructure
  • Guides development toward established areas, protecting outlying rural areas and environmentally sensitive resources
  • Enhances vitality
  • Improves a municipality’s Commonwealth Capital score
  • Embodies “Smart Growth”
  • Increases revenues

Although mixed use is especially applicable near public transportation, it has advantages for other areas as well. Benefits include the preservation of undeveloped or environmentally sensitive land elsewhere in the community, opportunities for more or different housing, bicycle and pedestrian-friendly destinations, and an enhanced sense of place or sense of community.

In developing a bylaw, communities should select the advantages that best apply and structure the provisions to accomplish these goals.

Continue reading...