Top

Managing Neighborhood Change: Anti-Displacement Strategies Toolkit

Written by

MAPC’s Managing Neighborhood Change: Selected Anti-Displacement Strategies in Practice toolkit supports MetroFuture’s Housing Choices goals and strategies for the MAPC regionby providing information on anti-displacement best practices and examples of local strategies in action. These strategies are intended to advance the interests of lower-income individuals and families who are at risk of displacement from their neighborhoods due to new investment in housing, businesses, and infrastructure, including transit. This toolkit is based on a comprehensive literature review of academic and non-academic reports released over the last 10 years. It uses data, case studies, and planning project work to understand indicators of displacement and create a responsive framework that integrates them into planning policies and programs.

The first phase of MAPC’s anti-displacement work, funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Regional Planning Grant for Sustainable Communities, developed a catalogue of best practices to manage neighborhood change and ensure development without displacement across the country. This work informed the creation of transit-oriented development funds in Metro Boston, and the pursuit of specific policies and strategies in Somerville and Medford in anticipation of the MBTA Green Line Extension.

The second phase, funded by HUD, the Herman and Frieda L. Miller Foundation, and the District Local Technical Assistance (DLTA) Fund, further explored these strategies through individual project work in different communities within the MAPC region in order to fine tune interventions and local policies. This includes continued work with the City of Somerville and the Somerville Community Corporation, and the development of Revere’s Shirley Avenue Neighborhood Action Plan with The Neighborhood Developers and the City of Revere.

During the third phase of work, funded by the Barr Foundation, MAPC staff updated and refined this Toolkit to augment it with ideas from throughout the nation, to reflect recent experience here in Metro Boston, and to make it more user-friendly. We are also actively seeking opportunities to collaborate with additional municipalities and community-based organizations to analyze displacement pressures and implement anti-displacement policies and programs. Already, LISC, MHIC, other participants in the Gentrification Learning Community, and community-based organizations in the municipalities where we focus, such as The Neighborhood Developers in Chelsea, are important partners in both testing and disseminating the toolkit. These efforts will result in more work to avoid displacement during neighborhood change, but will also generate additional experience and best practices for MAPC to share through this toolkit.

Managing Neighborhood Change Toolkit Sections

Why It’s Important

Anti-displacement strategies can help communities manage neighborhood change resulting from new investment in housing, businesses, and infrastructure representative of increased market demand. Doing so can help mitigate the impacts of such change on lower-income households in particular, helping to distribute the benefits of new investment among all members of a community. It is important to note that no one single anti-displacement strategy can mitigate the negative consequences of neighborhood change on its own. Several strategies and policies should likely be implemented to have the greatest effect.

Questions?

For additional information, please contact Chief Housing Planner Karina Milchman at [email protected]

Continue reading...

Low Impact Development Toolkit

Written by

SEA Street, Seattle WA LID Retrofit

State standards and EPA’s Phase II rules have made stormwater a critical development issue, and many cities and towns are now considering local stormwater bylaws to expand and centralize local authority.

However, communities and developers are looking for alternatives to conventional “pipe and pond” stormwater controls, which are often considered unsightly, expensive, and ineffective. Meanwhile, combined sewer overflows are forcing municipalities to address runoff from densely developed areas.

Low Impact Development

Low Impact Development (LID) is a more sustainable land development approach that begins with a site planning process that first identifies critical natural resource areas for preservation. LID ensures that maintenance of natural drainage flow paths, minimization of land clearance, building clustering, and impervious surface reduction are incorporated into the project design. LID includes a specific set of strategies that treat stormwater management at the site level, ensuring that water is managed locally rather than engineering the discharge of water away from its source.

Stormwater detail

Low impact techniques are used nationwide, with an established set of design and performance standards that can be applied to achieve compliance with state and local codes.

Increasing interest in low impact strategies has created a growing demand for LID-proficient designers for both new construction and retrofit efforts.

Low Impact Development (LID) Toolkit

The MAPC Low Impact Development Toolkit builds from the efforts of the State’s Smart Growth/Smart Energy Toolkit, providing a practical set of visual fact sheets on Low Impact Development methods including rain gardens, bioretention, pervious pavement, and green roofs. The toolkit also includes model bylaw language and an LID codes checklist.

LID Toolkit Fact Sheets

For more information about the LID toolkit, please e-mail [email protected].

This publication is one component of the Massachusetts Low Impact Development Toolkit, produced by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, in coordination with the I-495 MetroWestCorridor Partnership, and with financial support from United States Environmental Protection Agency. The Massachusetts Low Impact Development Interagency Working Group provided valuable input and feedback on the LID Toolkit.

Continue reading...

Walking Routes to the Lower Mystic River

Written by

Project Background

Sign welcoming walkers to the Malden River

MAPC has been working with Boston, Chelsea, Everett, Malden, Medford and Somerville to identify potential walking routes that would connect neighborhoods with the lower Mystic River and its tributaries (Chelsea Creek, Mill Creek, Island End River and the Malden River). This project is called “Walking Routes to the River.”

To date, the work has resulted in a map entitled “Locally Identified Potential Walking Routes to the Lower Mystic and Tributaries” and three signed and mapped routes ready for public use.

MAPC’s Role

Blueback Herring River Route sign

MAPC plays two important roles. The first is a coordinating and technical assistance role to keep the project moving forward by providing a structure and securing funding.

The second role is to provide a regional perspective and to combine the efforts of individual communities and organizations into a regional system.

Why it’s important

Rivers are unique resources for any urban area.  They are usually rich in history and important as wildlife corridors and for active and passive recreation.  The purpose of developing walking routes to the river is to bring residents from the neighborhoods where they live and work to the river.  Some of the benefits of walking routes to the river include:

  • Higher visibility for the Mystic River and the recreational resources that exist.
  • Higher visibility means more people who care about the river and will advocate for it.
  • Health and fitness benefits of promoting walking – less obesity, car pollution, decreased risk of disease.
  • Potential economic benefits if routes help people walk by local businesses.
  • Programming around walking routes such as organized walks promote a sense of community.

Project Documents

How to Develop Walking Routes to the Lower Mystic River and its Tributaries: A Tool Kit.

Maps

Potential Walking Routes in Chelsea

Potential Walking Routes in Everett

Potential Walking Routes in Medford

Potential Walking Routes in Somerville

 

Continue reading...

Parking Issues and Questions

Written by

Identify Strategies Based on Your Issues and Questions

Both information and local values come into play in identifying parking needs in your community. The checklist below is designed to provide a list of common concerns – more than one probably applies in your community. Clinking on any link will provide a more detailed description of the issue and its roots and strategies that may help in its resolution.

Continue reading...

Eliminating Minimum Parking Requirements

Written by

When Required Minimums Do More Harm Than Good

Minimum parking requirements are so prevalent that eliminating them may seem like heresy, but these requirements may be limiting downtown redevelopment or increasing the cost of providing affordable housing. In some situations, the best way to address this is simply to eliminate minimum parking requirements for certain land uses or certain areas, such as in the downtown, near transit stations, or for affordable housing developments.

The key to success when eliminating minimum parking requirements is to minimize the potential for spillover effects – this is, after all, what the minimum requirements are intended to do – and ensure that there are other ways for people to access the site. Having some paid parking garages or lots nearby that are not at full capacity and access to the site via non-auto modes increase the chances of success. However, even if those pieces are in place, there will likely still be a need to control spillover effects. One of the main concerns is generally spillover into nearby residential districts’ on-street parking. This can be addressed with a residential permit parking program. Residents may resist the transition to permit parking, but one way to win them over is through residential parking benefit districts, which charge non-residents to park in unused resident spaces, and invest some of the revenue in neighborhood improvement projects.

On non-residential streets, eliminating minimum parking requirements without charging for on-street parking can lead to a shortage of curb parking spaces, and the associated problems with drivers circling endlessly seeking a space, even when there are many spaces available in nearby parking garages. One solution to that problem is to charge for on-street parking. The revenue collected from on-street meters can be used to pay for the costs of operating parking and for other traffic management-related activities (see M.G.L. Ch.40, §22A), and if the district is hesitant to install meters, the municipality may be able to make an arrangement to invest part of the revenue from the meters in traffic- and parking-related improvements in the district (see parking benefit districts).

Another concern is that if new developments (or redevelopments) are not required to provide parking where previous developments were, the burden of providing parking may be unfairly distributed on the properties that have been there longer. If this is a concern, one alternative is to maintain required minimums but allow developers to pay a fee in lieu of each required space not provided, with the fees to be used for providing public parking. Another alternative is to allow those with an existing parking supply that exceeds their needs to rent or sell it to newcomers who can’t add parking to their sites.  In some cases, developers may be constrained by requirements from lenders that they provide a certain amount of parking.

If your community is not ready to drop minimum parking requirements altogether, other options include establishing flexible parking requirements, setting parking maximums in addition to minimums, allowing spaces to be held in landscaped reserves, and allowing developers to pay a fee in lieu of providing spaces.

Local examples:
  • The Middleborough Town Manager reported at the Massachusetts Smart Growth Conference in December 2006 that a change to the Town’s zoning code to waive parking requirements for residential units on the second or third story of a downtown building if the building is within a quarter mile of a public parking area available for overnight parking. Because of this policy, the Town has been able to assist building owners to secure 4 different Housing Development Support Grants, creating 25 affordable housing units downtown. The Town Manager credited this change and the additional revenue from upper-story residential units with allowing the property owners to keep street-level retail rents low, increasing property value and property tax revenues, and helping downtown businesses to succeed.
  • The Town of Ipswich does not require parking for developments in the CBD or within 500 feet of municipal parking
  • The Town of Salem does not require parking for places of worship, secondary schools and places of higher education, or non-residential uses in the B-5 District
  • The Town of Gloucester does not require parking for certain uses within 400 feet of a municipal parking facility
National examples:
  • A number of cities across the country have also eliminated required minimums in the Central Business District, including San Francisco and Portland, Oregon.

Additional resources:

Continue reading...

WaterSmart Toolkit

Written by

Working in collaboration with the 495/MetroWest Partnership, MAPC developed the WaterSmart Toolkit, which provides guidance to communities on best practices for addressing storm water, water supply, and wastewater issues. Although the toolkit was developed in collaboration with the 495/MetroWest communities, it is applicable to cities and towns throughout the MAPC region and the state.

The components of the WaterSmart Toolkit include several publications available for download, on CD, and as hard copy documents upon request.

SummerSmart Water Use Guide to Peak Season Water Demand Management (May 2006)

SummerSmart is a guide to managing peak season water demand, including tools such as water pricing, local regulations, and public education. Case studies are included.

Once is Not Enough: A Guide to Water Reuse in Massachusetts

Once is Not Enough: A Guide to Water Reuse in Massachusetts provides an overview of the technical, economic, and regulatory aspects of reusing treated wastewater for nonpotable water uses, such as toilet flushing, landscape irrigation, and industrial process water. Several local and regional case studies are included.

495 Watermarks Brochure (November 2007)

Watermarks 495 is a report that summarizes trends in water demand, wastewater, and storm water for the 32 communities in the 495/MetroWest corridor.

Continue reading...

Mitigating Environmental Impacts

Written by

Large expanses of pavement can be very detrimental to the environment in a number of ways:

  • The impervious surface means that rainwater flows to storm sewers rather than infiltrating into the ground to recharge groundwater;
  • Oil and other fluids that leak from parked vehicles contaminate the stormwater; and
  • The pavement absorbs the heat of the sun and causes heat island effects.

In addition to reducing the number of surface parking spaces constructed through flexible minimum parking requirements, elimination of minimum parking requirements, use of landscaped parking reserves, and/or building structured parking where possible, there are several other strategies that can help mitigate the environmental impacts of surface parking, including landscaping and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques:

  • Reducing the dimensions of parking stalls and encouraging inclusion of compact car spaces
  • Using pervious surfaces for low-volume parking areas to allow infiltration of stormwater
  • Requiring landscaping to provide shade and improve air quality
  • Using bioretention basins or rain gardens to treat and infiltrate stormwater
  • Building parking garages with green roofs to capture stormwater and mitigate heat island effects

MAPC’s Massachusetts Low Impact Development Toolkit contains more details on many of the techniques discussed below.

Reduced Stall Dimensions and Compact Car Spaces

While parking stalls that are too small can result in vehicles taking up multiple spaces, in many cases, required stall dimensions in local ordinances are larger than even the widest SUVs [1, p.22]. In establishing standards for the dimensions of parking stalls, keep them as small as is feasible, and allow smaller spaces for long-term parking (residents and employees) than for short-term parking (customers). Developers of large parking lots can also be encouraged or required to provide some compact car spaces with reduced dimensions. This can help reduce the amount of pavement required to supply the necessary number of parking spaces. Many communities in Massachusetts allow some percentage of spaces in large parking lots to have smaller dimensions and be reserved for compact cars; for example:

  • In Marlborough compact car spaces can represent up to 33% of the total spaces in lots used by residents or employees, but extra open space must be provided at least matching the area conserved with the smaller stall dimensions (see regulation).
  • In Needham up to 50% of off-street parking spaces can be designed for compact cars with reduced dimensions (see regulation).

Pervious Surfaces for Low Volume and Overflow Parking

For parking areas that are used infrequently, especially if they are primarily used during the summer, it may be possible to use a surface other than asphalt in order to reduce stormwater runoff and allow greater infiltration. Depending on the site characteristics, any of the following may be appropriate:

  • Leaving an area unpaved or using turf blocks (for overflow parking areas used rarely): Grass pavers (aka turf blocks) are a type of open-cell unit paver in which the cells are filled with soil and planted with turf. The pavers, made of concrete or synthetic, distribute the weight of traffic and prevent compression of the underlying soil.
  • Using paving stones (for areas that get light use and are not used by heavy trucks or fast-moving vehicles): Paving stones (aka unit pavers) are impermeable blocks made of brick, stone, or concrete, set on a prepared sand base. The joints between the blocks are filled with sand or stone dust to allow water to percolate downward.
  • Using pervious concrete or porous asphalt (for areas that get moderate use but are not used by heavy trucks or fast-moving vehicles): Porous asphalt and pervious concrete appear to be the same as traditional asphalt or concrete pavement. However, they are mixed with a very low content of fine sand, so that water can pass through small openings within the pavement.

For more information on parking surface alternatives, including maintenance and plowing concerns, benefits and costs, see the Permeable Paving Fact Sheet in MAPC’s Massachusetts Low Impact Development Toolkit.

One local example of pervious paving materials used for a parking lot has been constructed at Silver Lake Beach in Wilmington, where a demonstration project funded by an EPA Targeted Watershed Grant included repaving the parking lot with a combination of surfaces:

  • The parking spaces – about 8,000 square feet total – were paved with porous pavers.
  • The parking aisles – 16,600 square feet – were paved with porous asphalt.
  • A portion of the overflow parking area was paved with Gravelpave, a porous paving system consisting of interlocking plastic cells filled with gravel.
  • Another small section of the overflow parking lot was paved with a porous material called Flexi-Pave, made from recycled tires.
  • One half of the existing main parking lot was repaved with standard asphalt for comparison.

Runoff from the part of the lot with standard pavement and any overflow from the pervious portion will drain to bioretention cells in the parking lot. Groundwater quantity and quality impacts will be measured by the U.S. Geological Survey with a collection of groundwater wells installed for the project. For more information on this project, see https://www.mass.gov/dcr/waterSupply/ipswichRiver/demo3-paving.htm

Landscaping for Shade and Air Quality

Most communities have landscaping requirements for larger parking facilities. Requiring, at a minimum, that large surface parking lots include landscaped islands with trees can provide some shade to reduce heat from the asphalt and can provide some air quality benefits. While any landscaping, and shade trees in particular, are an improvement over no landscaping, in communities where stormwater is an issue, it may be desirable to write any landscaping requirements such that LID techniques are allowable and encouraged.

As an example, the Town of Acton has an extensive section in the zoning bylaws specifying the landscaping requirements for parking lots of over 5 spaces, and in the East Acton Village District, consolidated bioretention areas may be substituted for interior landscaping (see regulation). Another option is to encourage LID techniques and stormwater management best management practices more generally for all parking, as the Town of Littleton does (see regulation). Several LID techniques applicable to parking areas are discussed below and can be encouraged through the parking landscaping section of the bylaws.

Rain Gardens and Bioretention Cells

Parking areas where pervious surfaces are impractical can still have a reduced impact on stormwater through the implementation of Low Impact Development techniques such as bioretention cells (shallow depressions filled with sandy soil, topped with a thick layer of mulch, and planted with dense vegetation where stormwater runoff flows in and filters through the soil and into the groundwater) and other strategies that slow and filter stormwater runoff, allowing a greater percentage to infiltrate into the ground.

The landscaped islands that many communities require in large parking lots can be used for bioretention cells that can provide pleasant landscaping and stormwater treatment. Implementing this change will generally require adjustments to the landscaping requirements for parking areas so that they can be designed as bioretention areas, which are depressed rather than raised and must not be fully surrounded by curbs, so that the runoff from the paved areas can flow into the bioretention cell.

For more information on bioretention cells, including maintenance concerns, benefits, and costs, see the Bioretention Area Fact Sheet in MAPC’s Massachusetts Low Impact Development Toolkit. There are also fact sheets on Filter Strips, Infiltration Trenches and Dry Wells, and other LID techniques.

Bioretention basins, also called rain gardens, have been implemented in several places around Massachusetts; for example:

  • In Lincoln, the Drumlin Farm Wildlife Sanctuary incorporates a a bioretention system that will intercept road runoff and filter it prior to discharge to a nearby pond. More information
  • The Town of Cohasset implemented a number of rain gardens around town to treat stormwater runoff and protect drinking water quality
  • Marla Circle development in Tyngsborough incorporated several LID techniques including a bioretention cell in the center of the cul-de-sac and rain gardens on the individual properties
  • The demonstration project at Silver Lake in Wilmington (see above) also incorporated rain gardens.
  • Other examples include Pembroke Town Hall (permeable paving, a grass infiltration trench, and rain gardens) and Kingston Elementary School (bioretention areas, vegetated swales). More information

Green Roofs on Parking Garages

Parking structures can also have reduced impact on stormwater systems by incorporating green roofs to retain and filter stormwater runoff.

A green roof is a low-maintenance vegetated roof system that stores rainwater in a lightweight engineered soil medium, where the water is taken up by plants and transpired into the air. Green roofs provide an extra layer of insulation that reduces heating and cooling costs, and they are likely to last much longer than conventional roofs, since the roofing material itself is shielded from ultraviolet light and thermal stress.

The vegetation on green roofs also improves air quality, enhances the appearance of the building, and reduces the urban “heat island” effect. Green roofs are appropriate anywhere it is desirable to reduce the overall amount of stormwater runoff. They are an excellent technique to use in dense urban areas, in areas where infiltration is difficult due to tight soils or shallow bedrock, or on sites where infiltration is undesirable due to existing soil contamination.

Because green roofs return rainwater to the atmosphere, they should not be used in situations where groundwater recharge is a priority, such as in stressed basins with chronic low-flow conditions. In these circumstances, roof runoff should be infiltrated whenever feasible. For more information on applicability, maintenance, costs, and other concerns, see the Green Roof Fact Sheet in MAPC’s Massachusetts Low Impact Development Toolkit.

Locally, there are a number of buildings with green roofs, but currently just one green roof on a parking garage, though another is proposed:

  • In 2003, Harvard University replaced the asphalt roof of a parking garage at 29 Garden Street with a 10,000 square foot green roof and courtyard.
  • The proposed CitySquare project in Worcester is slated to include a green roof over a parking garage.

Nationally, there are a number of examples of parking garages constructed with green roofs, including:

  • Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan’s new parking garage downtown Detroit incorporates a green roof and employee walking path
  • The 5.5 acre Millennium Park on top of the sloping roof of the parking garage at Soldier Field in Chicago
Continue reading...

What are Municipalities Already Doing in the MAPC Region?

Written by

Map of Municipalities in MAPC that require Transportation Studies and TDM measures

Many municipalities in the MAPC region already require Transportation Studies and TDM measures in their ordinances/bylaws as part of mitigation measures.  The map highlights representative municipalities that require Transportation Studies and/or TDM measures in the MAPC region.  Read more about the measures by choosing one of the municipalities below the map.

 

Bellingham

  • Transportation Study: Transportation Impact and Analysis Study
  • Transportation Demand Management: TDM in Subdivision’s Rules and Regulations
  • Case Study: Dunkin Donuts Northeast Distribution Warehouse
  • Description: The Town of Bellingham requires the preparation of a Transportation Impact and Analysis Study (TIAS) for any project that will generate 25 or more vehicle trips in any single hour of the day.  Specific criteria for the preparation of the TIAS is delineated in the Town’s Subdivision’s Rules and Regulations.

Boston

  • Transportation Study: Transportation Access Plan
  • Description: The City of Boston requires the preparation of a Transportation Access Plan for Large Projects.  The Transportation Access Plan is required to propose measures to mitigate any adverse impacts on the transportation network reasonably attributable to the proposed project.

Braintree

  • Transportation Study: Traffic Study
  • Transportation Demand Management: TDM in Bylaw
  • Case Study: Lenox Farms
  • Description: The Town of Braintree requires the preparation of a Traffic Study for any project that will generate 50 or more new trips during the peak hour of the development.  The Traffic Study has specific criteria for measures to mitigate traffic impacts.
  • Prior to granting a Special Permit or a Site Plan Review, the Special Permit Granting Authority determines whether there will be adequate capacity on all impacted streets and may require implementation of mitigative measures.  Specific TDM measures are outlined in the bylaw.

Brookline

  • Transportation Study: Transportation Studies for Major Impact Projects
  • Description: Town of Brookline requires the preparation of Transportation Studies for Major Impact Projects which are required to include mitigation measures.

Cambridge

  • Transportation Study: Parking and Transportation Demand Management (PTDM) Ordinance
  • Transportation Demand Management: Cambridge’s Special Permit Transportation Indicators
  • Description: The City of Cambridge has a Parking and Transportation Demand Management (PTDM) Ordinance that requires developers to submit a PTDM plan for development projects that meet certain criteria.  Read more about the programs and the Parking and Transportation Demand Management Planning Ordinance (Chapter 10.18).
  • A specific set of indicators is followed to determine whether a proposed project will have a substantial adverse impact.  In making its findings, the Planning Board considers the proposed mitigation efforts proposed, their anticipated effectiveness, and other information that identifies circumstances or actions that will result in a reduction in adverse traffic impacts.
  • Mitigation efforts may include, but are not limited to, TDM plans; roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities improvements; measures to reduce traffic on residential streets; and measures undertaken to improve safety for pedestrians and vehicles.

Danvers

  • Transportation Demand Management: Bylaw Section 4 – Site Plan Approval
  • Case Study: Certification of Action: Site Plan Approval – Partner’s Health Care (100 Endicott Street), and Special Permit and Site Plan Approval – Danvers State Hospital (50 Hathorne Avenue)
  • Description: Danvers requires the preparation of a Community Impact Assessment (CIA) for all structures larger than 20,000 square feet and all projects that include a drive-through.  Mitigation measures that address the project’s traffic impacts are required.

Hanover

  • Transportation Study: Development Impact Statement
  • Description: The Town of Hanover requires the preparation of a Development Impact Statement for projects that require site plans and special permits.  The ordinance specifies the establishment of mitigation funds.

Holliston

  • Transportation Study: Traffic Impact Report with a Roadway Mitigative Measures component
  • Other: Regulations for Site Plan Review
  • Case Study: Casella Transfer Station
  • Description: The Town of Holliston requires a traffic impact assessment report for any non-residential subdivision or any residential subdivision proposing fifteen or more homes.  A Roadway Mitigative Measures component describing all proposed mitigation measures is required.  Holliston requires a cash payment towards the implementation of traffic calming for development projects as well as a tonnage fee for roadway improvements. The Regulations for Site Plan Review State require a Traffic Impact Report if 100 or more vehicle-trips per day are to be generated by the proposal.

Lexington

  • Transportation Demand Management: Transportation Demand Management Policy Bylaw
  • Other: Planned Development Zoning Districts
  • Description: The Town of Lexington’s Transportation Demand Management Policy Bylaw focuses on meeting transportation needs by a variety of measures that affect the demand for, and use of, various modes of travel.
  • Planned Development Zoning Districts for large-scale commercial and residential developments are established by the Town.  A zoning district applies to only one site.  A developer may include improvements to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development such as:
    • Construction of different types of public infrastructure, such as traffic signals, or
    • Specific programs that serve the future occupants of the area such as transportation systems management programs.

The restrictions and improvements are voluntarily offered by the applicant. They are not regulatory restrictions imposed by the Town.

Littleton

  • Other: Policy on Pedestrian and Traffic Mitigation
  • Description: The Town of Littleton has a Policy on Pedestrian and Traffic Mitigation which is used as a backup if mitigation is not proposed as part of a project.  The Town requires receipt of funds prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit.  Usually the funds are placed in a sidewalk fund.

Wellesley

  • Other: Project of Significant Impact Review (PSI) Review, and Zoning Bylaw Section XVIA –Project Approval
  • Case Study: Linden Square Redevelopment
  • Description: The Town of Wellesley requires a Project of Significant Impact Review (PSI) for projects that create at least 10,000 square feet of new floor area or at least 15,000 square feet of area that will be changing in use.  Construction projects are required to comply with Zoning Bylaw Section XVIA –Project Approval.  This bylaw requires the preparation of a Municipal Systems Impact Analysis of which Traffic, Pedestrian and Bicycle safety is a component.

Woburn

  • Transportation Study: Traffic Impact Assessment
  • Transportation Demand Management: Ordinance with a Traffic Safes and Infrastructure Fund, and required to participate in a TMA and implement TDM programs
  • Description: The City of Woburn has an ordinance which is intended to ensure that the City’s infrastructure is upgraded and maintained in a responsible manner consistent with State and Municipal laws and is designed to ensure that major developments bear a proportionate share of capital facilities costs.  The ordinance contains a Traffic Safes and Infrastructure Fund which enables a project proponent to make a contribution equal to three percent of the total costs of a development project.  The proponent is also required to participate in the regional or local TMA and implement TDM programs.
Continue reading...

Development Mitigation Strategies and Transportation Demand Management Toolkit: Additional Resource

Written by

Massachusetts

Citizen Planner Training Collaborative

The Citizen Planner Training Collaborative (CPTC) provides local planning and zoning officials with tools to make effective decisions regarding their community’s current and future land use.  The website has a bylaws collection.

Massachusetts Low Impact Development Toolkit

Low Impact Development (LID) strategies use careful site design and decentralized stormwater management to reduce the environmental footprint of new growth. This approach improves water quality, minimizes the need for expensive stormwater systems, and creates more attractive developments. Prepared by MAPC, the Massachusetts LID Toolkit is a set of materials designed to help citizens, public officials and developers implement LID.

National/International

US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration – TDM Toolbox

The Travel Demand Management (TDM) Toolbox contains resources such as reference materials, training opportunities, and related web site links.

Victoria Transport Policy Institute: The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative and practical solutions to transportation problems.

University of Florida’s Center for Urban Transportation Research – National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse

The National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse provides information  and resources about alternatives to Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) travel and telework programs to meet the congestion, air quality, and mobility challenges facing communities.

Sources

Continue reading...

Sustainable Transportation: Development Mitigation Strategies and Transportation Demand Management Toolkit

Written by

The Development Mitigation Strategies and Transportation Demand Management Toolkit is designed to help municipal planners, local officials, developers, citizen board members and advocates understand the transportation impacts of proposed development projects in their communities and identify potential solutions.

This Toolkit should be used as a guide to help establish standards and to provide a framework for evaluating the transportation impacts of development projects. Impact assessment methodologies are provided and potential mitigation measures are described, including support for Transportation Demand Management (TDM) approaches. MAPC staff can facilitate understanding the toolkit’s content as well as assist with issues pertaining to proposed development projects.

The Toolkit will be continuously updated and modified in response to feedback and recommendations from users. We encourage you to let us know how this resource can be improved (click here to provide feedback).

What is Development Mitigation?

Development mitigation is determined on- and off-site improvements for which a developer is responsible to offset the impacts on the transportation system. The project’s overall impact on traffic, municipal services, the environment, the local economy and the community are taken into consideration. When requesting mitigation, it is important to be explicit in what to ask for, when to ask for it and how to enforce it. Some mitigation tools can be used individually, while others require mutually supportive actions implemented cooperatively by public and private sector groups.

Learn more about development mitigation in Massachusetts:

In addition, information and links are provided regarding Development Mitigation in Other States, Other Initiatives that Support Development Mitigation and Available Resources to support local Development mitigation efforts.

Continue reading...