My comments:
ONE P. 5 (CR and Rowe) Would EB lane markings also show a spur down Rowe Street? I think they should…
TWO P. 6 (CR and Beaumont) I disagree with asking bicyclists to use the crosswalk. a) For one thing, no bicyclists will use the existing crosswalk (which means leaving the road way, biking across the E/W crosswalk even closer to Comm Ave, separated from Comm Ave and turning vehicles by only a few feet, then winding their way on sidewalk back to the footpath. No way. Even pedestrians don’t use the crosswalk.
b) If the issue is that a curb cut cannot be installed on the east side (where the arrow is and where it says “NO CURB CUT AVAILABLE”) for budget reasons, then I would propose in a later phase should just come up with the funds for that curb cut.
c) That said, there is an immediate option. Do you see where at the intersection of Beaumont and Lakeview where it says “NO CURB CUT AVAILABLE”? Actually there IS a curb cut there. Bicyclists use that heading west and heading east and then bike along the little dirt path that cyclist over the years have created. See the images below.
Eastbound:
and 
Westbound: 
Here is a closeup of the little dirt path that bicyclists have created to connect the footpath on the east with that curb cut. So that dirt path could be easily widened, the bush to its east trimmed back, and striping- which is in this phase 1 plan - could easily be added to connect that curb cut across Beaumont to the other side:
Finally, on Beaumont, this is the intersection where the Police Dept back in 2018 rejected our request for a stop sign at Beaumont before the CR, arguing that a driver who had to stop at Lakeview would not want to stop again before the CR and then again at Comm Ave. Maybe it’s time to revisit and re-docket that request.
But no biker is going to get off the road and follow the pedestrian crosswalk, that I can tell you.
THREE Pp. 10 and 11: Commercial Zone east of Irving St
a) This commercial zone is tricky and the suggestion to make the bike lane along the berm is really interesting and creative. One problem this solves is that technically/legally the berm is NO PARKING, even though cars park there to shop. So this would be my preference and kudos to whoever dreamed that up. I also think this would be consistent with Councilor Bowman’s suggestion for the bridge over the Mass Pike east of Rowe to add a bike lane along the “berm” (EB side there and create angled parking along the WB side.
That said, I have a question: Would there still be two lanes of parking, and would each be now parallel, not angled? I think the only way to make room would be to have parallel parking. Would there be sufficient space now in between the two rows of parking?
If not, then I think that maybe this could be done in several stages: Stage 1, the current one which involves signs and striping, would have sharrows EB and WB. Stage 2 would, to my thinking, --narrow the two street openings in the berm to allow additional parking spaces; --modify/narrow the geometry of the sidewalk at Irving to allow additional parking; --emphasize parking on the south side of Commonwealth and add a pedestrian crossing across Comm Ave that begins at 521 Comm Ave and ends up at the eastern berm opening (no known street name). So if you then have the needed number of parking spaces, you can just create the dedicated bike lane along the berm, and still allow customers to safely park, exit and enter their vehicles.
b) My other idea on this section is to add “LOADING ZONE” parking (at minimum this would requite a sign only. Long run, later phase when there is funding available, modify the curb to enhance this purpose) along the east side of Irving Street. Perhaps this would be suggested at Traffic Council. We see the vehicles from these commercial establishments often parking along the berm or along that angled parking (see two loading vans from the commercial establishments in the photo provided) and this takes away from customer spots. They are also often bigger vehicles and make it more difficult for drivers and bicyclists to see around. So add LOADING ZONE parking along Irving, get those vehicles off of this section, and then that would make it safer for the bicyclists 
and the cars of customers backing out. 
. Because the curbs on Irving would have to be redone, this might not be an immediate option.
c) A later phase solution would narrow the berm openings, which are currently excessively wide, thereby adding more parking spaces, and improving parking along Irving Street, then possibly adding more parking spaces on those locations, and then eliminating the parking by the (new) BIKE PATH.
FOUR Finally, I think the idea also - and this is where everything began years back and can be done in phase 1, this earliest phase - is to add signs on the crossroads for drivers heading south, at the intersection before the CR, indicating “LOOK <–> BOTH WAYS/Bicyclists and pedestrians”. (icon of bicyclist and pedestrians). This is critical. Can this be added to current stop signs, at the bottom? Or does this necessitate an entirely new pole and sign? Or can these signs be added to the left hand side? Drivers do not know to EXPECT bicyclists to be coming east from the west. They’ll need to be trained what to expect. This has been a problem anyway up to now, even just with runners going west to east.
Thank you.
