RRP_Northampton_Phase 1_Field Data Summary_Final1
Memo
Phase 1 : Baseline Data
Field Work Data Collection
Northampton
April 6, 2021
Project: Local Rapid Recovery Program
Prepared by: Civic Space Collaborative
This summary is of the Field Work data collected as part of Diagnostic Phase 1 of the Local Rapid Recovery
Program (LRRP) in Downtown Northampton (the “Study Area”). Collecting baseline data will help the
Commonwealth analyze the overall program impact, as well as support future funding and resource
allocations that may be used to implement final projects.
On April 6, Civic Space Collaborative (CSC) collected baseline data in the Downtown Northampton study area
and gave the individual blocks final grade for the following elements:
• public realm: sidewalks, street trees and benches, lighting, wayfinding/signage, and roadbed and
crosswalks,
• private realm: window, outdoor display/dining, signage, awning, façade, and lighting
These public and private realm categories were part of a standardized Public Realm Grading Rubric that was
provided by the state (see appendix for the standardized evaluation criteria).
This field work analysis focused on key streets along the business corridors in the study area. These streets
segments will be referred to as “Upper” and “Lower” Main Street, and Pleasant Street, as described below.
• “Upper” Main Street is from the Main Street/Pleasant Street intersection to the Post Office bus stop.
o Study Area Map Segments: B6, B7, B9, C1, C3
• “Lower” Main Street is from the Main Street/Pleasant Street intersection to New South Street.
o Study Area Map Segments: A7, A10, A11, A12, D3, D8, D9, D12
• Pleasant Street is included from Hotel Northampton down to the rotary.
o Study Area Map Segments: A13, A14, A15, B2, B5, D2
For each of the public and private realm elements, strengths and weaknesses were identified. There are
number of public realm elements were noted as weakness that are being looked into as part of the Picture
Main Street project process that is underway.
Methodology
The field work methodology included the following steps:
1. Field Work + Study Area Scoring
• Each street in the Downtown Study area were surveyed.
• Data across the public realm and private realm were assessed and graded in the following
categories (please refer to the appendix for definitions).
• Public realm: sidewalks, street trees and benches, lighting, wayfinding/signage, and
roadbed and crosswalks
• Private realm: window, outdoor display/dining, signage, awning, façade, and lighting
2. Data Entry + Grade Calculation
• The field work streets segments scores were added in the spreadsheet, and a tally of each
score (e.g. There were three “A” scores; six “B” scores, etc.) was calculated
• The median of each element’s grades were calculated for a final district score.
2
Figure 1: Study area map with segment codes for field work and representative streets highlighted
3
Results
Physical Environment Scoring + Qualitative Assessment
Overall Downtown Score
PUBLIC REALM PRIVATE REALM
SIDEWALK A WINDOW B
STREET TREES + BENCHES B OUTDOOR DISPLAY / DINING B
LIGHTING B SIGNAGE A
WAYFINDING / SIGNAGE B AWNING B
ROADBED / CROSSWALK B FAÇADE A
LIGHTING A
Strengths
• Sidewalks were wide and in good repair and typically received an A grade
• Roadbed/crosswalk received a fairly consistent B grade, which indicates the prioritization of motor
vehicle safety over pedestrian safety. Main Street is a notable corridor to flag for improvement.
• Signage in the private realm was strong
• Lighting was stronger in the Private realm than the Public realm
Areas for Improvement
• Street trees and benches was the category that received the most “Fail” grades, which means that
they were not present.
• Wayfinding received a B grade, however could use improvement for pedestrian wayfinding
• Outdoor display was inconsistent, with over half of the grades being B, C or Fail
Example of a high scoring section of main street
with a strong public and private realm, which include
a clean wide sidewalk, street trees, strong window
display, and retail presence on the on Main Street.
Outdoor dining on Main Street during the during
pandemic
4
5
Main Street – “Upper “
PUBLIC REALM PRIVATE REALM
SIDEWALK A WINDOW B
STREET TREES + BENCHES A OUTDOOR DISPLAY / DINING A
LIGHTING B SIGNAGE B
WAYFINDING / SIGNAGE B AWNING B
ROADBED / CROSSWALK B FAÇADE B
LIGHTING C
QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT
STRENGTHS
• Sidewalks are wide and in overall good
condition
• Streets were located along this segment, but
there could use more benches
• Outdoor display/dining were strong
AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
• Lighting under the bridge
• Windows and signage had more than half B and
C scores
• Awnings and façades could be improved
View of Main Street looking west from the Rail Trail
Bridge
Sidewalk and bike share under the Rail Trail bridge
on Main Street
6
Main Street – “Lower”
PUBLIC REALM PRIVATE REALM
SIDEWALK A WINDOW A
STREET TREES + BENCHES A OUTDOOR DISPLAY / DINING A
LIGHTING A SIGNAGE A
WAYFINDING / SIGNAGE B AWNING B
ROADBED / CROSSWALK B FAÇADE A
LIGHTING A
QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT
STRENGTHS
• Street trees and benches were located
throughout
• Signage, outdoor display and dining, and
windows in the private realm were strong
• One of the most well lit areas for both public
and private realm
AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
• Crosswalk receives a B- they exist but are too
long
• Inconsistent awnings- around 50% of
storefronts have one
• Wayfinding for pedestrians is inconsistent
Pulaski Park
Wide sidewalks on lower Main street in front of
Pulaski Park
7
King Street – Pleasant Street
PUBLIC REALM PRIVATE REALM
SIDEWALK A WINDOW B
STREET TREES + BENCHES A* OUTDOOR DISPLAY / DINING B
LIGHTING A SIGNAGE A
WAYFINDING / SIGNAGE B AWNING B
ROADBED / CROSSWALK A FAÇADE A
LIGHTING A
QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT
STRENGTHS
• Street trees and benches are present but are
less consistent to the north along King St. and
along southern extents of Pleasant St.
• Sidewalk, roadbed, and crosswalk consistent
with the rest of the study area
• Strong façades and lighting
AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
• Wayfinding and signage for pedestrians
could be improved
• Windows and outdoor display and dining
could be improved
There exist opportunities to tie the bike path into
more physical elements of the downtown
Windows and outdoor display and dining could
be improved along King Street
8
Next Steps
The results of the Field Data Summary are meant to serve two critical functions.
First, as they relate to the LRRP process, the results serve as one “input” datasets that will comprise our Phase
1 results. The Phase 1 results will be tabulated along with other inputs, such as baseline data, existing plans &
resources, stakeholder interviews and community partner feedback, to offer guidance on areas of focus for
project recommendations during Phase 2.
Second, as they relate to the Downtown Northampton Study Area, the results provide a block-by-block
qualitative assessment of the public and private realm. From a district level, this can help to understand
prioritization for certain categories for capital improvement, as well as offer potential categories for which to
obtain external funding for improvement. From a block level, this information can be shared with local
businesses and property owners to help understand ways they can improve the physical features of their
brick-and-mortar, as well as for how the City can do the same in the public right-of-way.
9
Appendix
Public Realm Grading Rubric
10
Appendix
Private Realm Grading Rubric