Project 3
Student id: m21
To select another student or project, return to the Project Page.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-model href="../schema_3302.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>
<!--the second line in the document associates the schema, so be sure not to change it-->
<DOC>
<docHead>
<!--required header includes metadata about the assignment (title, author, version)-->
<title>Mass Ave. Bike Lane Improvement</title>
<author xml:id="m21">Chris Murphy</author>
<version n="5" date="2016-08-22"/>
<!--note that the date must be YYYY-MM-DD for the document to be valid-->
</docHead>
<pub_init_proposal>
<cover_page>
<title>Mass Ave. Bike Lane Improvement</title>
<author> Chris Murphy</author>
<submit_date> </submit_date>
<audience> To The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Massachusetts Department of
Transportation </audience>
</cover_page>
<tbl_cont>
<section n="1">Introduction</section>
<section n="2">Background</section>
<section n="3">Purpose</section>
<section n="4">Action Plan</section>
<section n="5">Feasibility</section>
<section n="6">Conclusion</section>
</tbl_cont>
<intro type="abstract">
<!--attribute options: ltr_int, exec_sum, abstract-->
<p>Boston is a city well known for its traffic congestion and bad drivers. In an effort
to beat the congestion and go green, many people have turned to biking as an
alternative method of transportation in the city. While Boston has become
increasingly bike friendly over the years, there are still many problem areas, the
two most prominent being Commonwealth Avenue and Massachusetts Avenue. These two
roadways account for largest contributions to bike accident numbers in the city,
with a third of the nine biking fatalities in the last five years occuring on these
two roads ("Boston Cyclist Report"). Although Commonwealth Ave. has a higher total
number of accidents, Mass Ave. has the most potential to increase the safety of bike
travel through upgrades to the roadway.<note type="instructor" resp="#kgs">I think
it is good you narrowed the scope to MA and MDOT, but this should be somehow
reflected in the abstract, I think. Also, I think the abstract should include a
sense of *what* the proposed project is--here you are just outlining the
problem, which seems more appropriate for the background section</note>
</p>
</intro>
<background>
<p>
<crnt_cond> From the Huntington Ave. intersection to the Charles River Bridge is the
most problematic section of Mass Ave. This stretch of road is characterized by
poor road conditions, dark areas, and random sharrows,<note type="instructor"
resp="#kgs">nice! I learned a new word today</note> or shared bike/car
lanes. It should also be noted that on a northern section of the road, the
current safety measures of steel poles separating the bike and car lanes are
actually a major threat to bikers at night, as they are very poorly illuminated.
It is through poor maintenance and improper planning that Mass Ave. has
developed into the unsafe travelway that it is today. </crnt_cond>
<subj_hist> The vast majority of Boston bike infrastructure has been installed very
recently, with most improvements taking place within the last decade. Since
2008, over 90 miles of bike lanes and markings have been put in place. An
additional 3600 public bike parking spots have also been installed in the same
time frame ("Infrastructure and Network Overview"). It is clear that the city is
still undergoing the process of becoming bike friendly and the improvements to
Mass Ave. would be the next logical step in this process. </subj_hist>
</p>
</background>
<purpose>
<p>
<scope type="what"> In order to organize the necessary construction, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts must give funding to the Massachusetts Department
of Transportation (MassDOT); the agency in charge of upgrades to roadways and
transportation safety. </scope>
<scope type="when"> The two major steps towards action being taken are approval by
the Commonwealth, followed by the construction bidding process. At current
processing rates, it would take approximately a year before any phyiscal work
was done. Once started, it should take approximately one month or less to
complete the project in its entirety. If persued<note type="instructor"
resp="#kgs">pursued</note> immediately, the project could be finished by
fall of 2017. </scope>
<scope type="who"> When completed, the improved bike lanes will increase travel
safety and efficiency for commuters while satisfying the demands of Boston bike
advocate groups. </scope>
<objective>The proposed project would include repaving most sections of Mass Ave,
followed by creating clear markings for the bike lanes. It would also include
reclaiming the areas around the Huntington Ave. and Boylston St. intersections,
where mismanaged construction has left concrete barriers indefinitely blocking
the bike lanes. Lastly, there would be lighting upgrades along the stretch from
Newbury St. to the Charles River Bridge, where the roadway is very poorly
illuminated at night. </objective>
</p>
</purpose>
<approach>
<!--attribute options: execution, action-->
<p>
<action>To implement the changes, the first step that must be taken once funding is
acquired is having the MassDOT hire out a private construction company to
perform the upgrades. From there, a plan must be created to carry out the
construction process with minimal disruption to daily traffic flows. Ideally,
the ripping, paving, and repainting process could be completed along the
1.2-mile stretch within 2 weeks of night work. Since the installation/upgrade of
streetlights on the sidewalks is a more intensive but much less disruptive
process, it could take closer to a full month to complete. <!--text here-->
</action></p>
</approach>
<feasibility>
<!--attribute options: economic, social, environmental-->
<p><economic>The two main obstacles in the process are costs and disruptions to traffic
flow. The latter problem could be best mostly resolved by limiting work to night
shifts and if necessary, weekends. This would eliminate most lost revenues from
employees being late or storefronts being inaccessible. Furthermore, since the
department of transportation already has allotted budgets for roadwork and
improvements, the funding problem is mostly a matter of securing those funds
through petitions and demonstrations as to why the Mass Ave. upgrade is a
pertinent problem. Several years ago the state approved Chapter 90, which
allocated $200 million towards road repeairs ("Massachusetts wins $200 million
in state funds for road projects"). The US DOT average for repaving a 4-lane, 1
mile stretch of road is $502,000 ("Paving Cost / Mile"). For the 1.2 mile
stretch of repaving + light fixtures, the project would likely cost around $1.5
million. Given the funds available and the relevance of Mass Ave. to
transportation, the listed improvements are highly feasible from a financial
standpoint.</economic>
</p>
<p><environmental> Since the entire stretch of road already exists, no clearing of any
greenspace or natural elements would be required. As a result, the construction
process would have no environmental impacts on the road or surrounding areas.
</environmental><note type="instructor" resp="#kgs">there seems to be a social
impact that you aren't addressing here</note></p>
</feasibility>
<conclu>
<p> By taking action on this pertinent problem, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has
the potential to increase both the usability and safety of bike travel along a major
city road within its capital. If persued, the project would lead to an increase in
city bikers and decrease in congestion due to cars. Viewed holistically, the changes
will lead to improved transportation and efficiency in the city of Boston. </p>
</conclu>
<references>
<citation style="MLA"> "Boston Cyclist Report". City of Boston. 15 May 2013. web 21 Aug,
2016. http://www.cityofboston.gov/news/uploads/16776_49_15_27.pdf </citation>
<citation style="MLA"> "Infrastructure and Network Overview". Boston Bikes. Web, nd. 10
Aug, 2016 http://www.bostonbikes.org/infrastructure/overview </citation>
<citation n="1" style="MLA"> "Paving Cost / Mile". U.S Department of Transportation.
Web, nd. 10 Aug, 2016
https://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Finance/GASB%2034%20Documents/PavingCostpermile.pdf</citation>
<citation n="1" style="MLA"> Ring, Dan. "Massachusetts wins $200 million in state funds
for road projects" Masslive. 12 Jul, 2012, Web. 9 Aug 2016
http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/07/state_funds_fuel_road_projects.html</citation>
</references>
</pub_init_proposal>
<docReview>
<reviewer type="peer" xml:id="c12"/>
<report type="peer" resp="#c12">
<p> Chris' public proposal is on the issue of bike safety on the major Mass Ave. and
Comm Ave. The proposal is allocate funds to repave and repaint bike lanes in order
to make them safer on these roads. </p>
<p> I'll first address the 2 areas to focus on in the paper. When looking at the scope
"who", I took that as literally who this is going to effect. So in your case I think
that would be MassDOT and the government in general because they'll have to foot the
bill. The approach meanwhile, should outline how your proposal will be implemented.
For example, how the lanes will be paved over what course of time. The second area
was the strength of the feasibility section. In this section, you should show how
its possible for the task to be done. I would split it up into 2 or 3 sections.
First section could be economic, explain how much it would cost and how the funds
could get allocated towards the task. The second could be environmental and show
that it would not have any major environmental impact. </p>
<p> Some general schema comments: approach and feasibility should not have type
attributes. Approach should have an execution or action element contained within a
paragraph
<!-- <approach> <p> <execution> Text here </execution> </p> </approach> --> element.
Feasibility should have economic, social, or environmental elements within a
paragraph element as well. I would include some references to back up points that
you are trying to make. Maybe include an article about the number of bike crashes on
those roads to add credibility to your comments. I think your objective element
under purpose could be taken out and just added to your approach element. The
objective element should show why the project should show the actual purpose. I.e.
that it would make biking safer, encourage more people to bike, and save fossil
fuels. Overall its a well formed idea, just deciding what information to put in what
section is tough given that the schema is very broadly defined. </p>
</report>
<reviewer type="instructor" xml:id="kgs"/>
<report type="instructor" resp="#kgs">
<p>Good work here; I like the narrowing of your audience. Pay attention to the notes I
added above, especially w/r/t revising the abstract. Overall nice work.</p>
</report>
</docReview>
</DOC>