March 12, 2014 Meeting
3:00 PM, State Transportation Building, Conference
Rooms 2 and 3, 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA
David Montgomery, Chair (Needham) called the meeting to order at 3:00 PM. Members and guests attending the meeting introduced themselves. (For attendance see page 6)
At its February 20 meeting, the MPO discussed the development of performance measures for performance-based planning practice. The MPO also voted to release FFY 2014-17 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Amendment Two for public review. The MPO’s UPWP Committee met following the regular meeting.
The March 6 MPO meeting was held in Melrose. Topics covered included a report on an MAPC Transportation Oriented Development Study in Melrose, a TIP Highway Program update by MPO staff concerning price increases on existing projects and the Capital Investment Programs for MassDOT, the MBTA and We Move Massachusetts.
The Advisory Council’s TIP/UPWP Committee is scheduled to meet prior to the April meeting to discuss ideas for drafting a comment letter on the TIP/UPWP documents. The LRTP Committee will meet for the first time in this program year immediately prior to the May Advisory Council meeting.
The scope of the various committees and the level of interest in them as well as time and budget considerations will be discussed at future committee meetings. This will help to target committee meetings to be effectively scheduled throughout the year.
A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of the January, 2014, meeting. The meeting minutes were approved.
Mr. Guptill gave a brief profile of the MBTA and defined the Capital Investment Program (CIP) as a rolling 5-year program which implements the 25-year Program for Mass Transportation (PMT). The CIP, unlike the PMT, is financially constrained and is focused on State of Good Repair projects and existing infrastructure.
Mr. Guptill explained that the Draft MassDOT Transportation Capital Investment Plan covers Fiscal Years 2014-2018 and the MBTA Capital Investment Program covers Fiscal Years 2015-2019. The statewide MassDOT CIP covers investments of $12.2 billion; the MBTA’s CIP is a subset of statewide plan representing $3 billion. The MBTA 5-year budget is a $6 billion spending plan; half is derived from funding sources in MassDOT’s $12.2 billion (statewide) transportation budget. The remaining half of MBTA funds come from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and other sources.
The CIP is funded with Federal and non-Federal grants, and alternative financing which includes project financing and so-called Grant Anticipation Notes. Typically, about three-quarters of the CIP funds are from the FTA. The CIP invests in vehicles, stations, track, bridges, tunnels and maintenance shops. The MBTA’s infrastructure is extensive and has major capital needs.
State funding is scheduled for expansion, the largest category in this CIP. Vehicle purchases and enhancements are the next two top project categories. The CIP crosses all transit modes. Roughly 75 percent of invested funds are made in the geographic core service areas (including bus, subway and Silver Line investments) and a quarter of the investments go to suburban service areas mostly representing commuter rail services.
Several key projects that are included in the FY15-19 CIP are Bus Procurement ($355M), Bus Overhaul Program ($67M), Maintenance Facility Upgrades ($58M), and Trackless Trolley – Power System Rehab ($38 M). The Green Line Extension Project Phase 1 (to Union Square and West Medford) is expected to cost $1.28 billion. Other Green Line Service Projects totaling $277M include funding for the Car Rehab Program, Station Accessibility Improvements, Signal System Improvements and a Real-Time Tracking System.
Some of the rapid transit improvements will include the procurement of 74 new Red Line vehicles, 152 new Orange Line vehicles, new locomotives and coaches for the Commuter Rail, overhaul and infrastructure improvements on all of the transit lines including station improvements, as well as the South Coast Rail Expansion Project. Key systemwide initiatives include the Bridge Program, the Accessibility Program, replacement and modernization of elevators and escalators, environmental compliance and transit security.
Members asked if Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) trains will be used in conjunction with Commuter Rail lines. R. Guptill stated that $192M is in the Commuter Rail spending category dedicated to this alternative vehicle stock, initially on the Fairmont Line and then later on five other corridors. One member expressed interest in the source of manufacture of the DMUs.
In response to a question on the Green Line Real-Time Tracking System project, R. Guptill indicated that the project would sign and signalize segments and stations throughout the Green Line.
R. Guptill emphasized that the CIP plan is a five-year document used for projects that lie within the MBTA district (176 cities and towns) and not statewide projects. One member was interested in the relationship between the new Commuter Rail Management Company and their commitment to spend on any capital improvements. R. Guptill said any such projects are not listed in this CIP.
Mr. Guptill indicated that the positive turnaround for spending for capital projects is a direct result of the passage of The Way Forward, the state transportation financing legislation. Nonetheless, transit remains a small percentage of overall transportation spending and undertaking any building activities requires a funding mechanism.
Several members offered comments on the subject of the CIP. One member questioned whether the data on projected costs was accurate and was interested in the benefit the South Station Expansion Project has to residents north of the core area.
One member noted that some of the long-term commitments made in the past, including the Big Dig, the Route 128 Add-A-Lane project and the Accelerated Bridge Program should all have the positive impact on making more transit investment in the future.
R. Guptill stated, in response to one comment, that the MBTA Advisory Board is an active citizens’ advisory group and is scheduled to meet on March 19 to review and comment on the Draft CIP. One member pointed out that water was leaking onto seats on Green Line trains and hoped that some money was being spent to upgrade existing trains.
Transit and highway funding is programmed in the TIP. The MPO is responsible for prioritizing approximately $65M annually in Regional Target Funding through the TIP document. Projects in the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) are funded in the TIP. There is consistency within the LRTP and the TIP regarding scheduling for construction.
TIP development begins with the initial request for projects in November, and continues through April when the First Tier List of Projects is recommended. All projects at or beyond a certain stage of project development undergo staff evaluation based on criteria developed from the goals and objectives set forth by the MPO. The six categories of criteria are weighted by the priorities established by the MPO. Each project is assessed based on how well it advances the objectives of each particular category. The six criteria categories are: system preservation, modernization and efficiency; livability and economic benefit; mobility; environment and climate change; environmental justice; and safety and security.
Sixty total projects were evaluated this year, including projects that were evaluated in previous years that were programmed on the TIP but needed updating. Forty percent of the projects were previously programmed. Nine new projects were evaluated in February, of which six advanced in the selection process. The First Tier projects will be developed after project evaluation is complete. Projects that are selected are ones that score well on the evaluation and that can be made ready for advertisement for construction in the next four years.
The staff recommendation includes existing projects being carried forward and new projects to be considered by the MPO for inclusion in the next TIP. The staff recommends projects based on project evaluation list results, and its presence in an LRTP time band year covered in the scope of the TIP. Also considered in developing the staff recommendation is the MPO’s commitment to geographic equity, ensuring that projects are spread throughout the region.
The TIP is fiscally constrained which in turn influences what projects the MPO can fund. Project readiness, particularly for those projects in the immediate TIP elements, is a factor in placing and keeping the project on the TIP.
The staff recommendation will be placed on the MPO Website on March 27 for consideration and discussion at the April 3 MPO meeting. Previous projects that were on the TIP that experienced cost increases or schedule delays and the impact on subsequent TIP elements will be considered at that meeting.
S. Pfalzer described the environmental justice (EJ) standard for selecting projects, saying that it relies on a threshold of providing service to an EJ population, including accessibility to places of work and other effects.
One member questioned the believability of a score for one project that serviced a predominately wealthy suburb. It was noted by other members that complete streets was one component to the selection of the project and that it did fit the criteria for project scoring.
According to one member, project advocacy can make the difference in a project advancing or not, citing the current funding of the Green Line Extension project. Another member suggested that employment generators should also be used to determine EJ accessibility.
In response to a member’s question, S. Pfalzer stated that the Canal St. project in Salem is currently scheduled to be advertised in late summer of 2014.
Another member expressed concern that there is not enough money in the TIP nor in the CIP for projects relating to freight and the distribution of goods.
The Freight Committee met earlier today with presentations on the Industrial Rail Access Program (IRAP) and the Massachusetts Rail Association. IRAP is a matching grant program between the Commonwealth and rail companies which mostly covers small short-line railroads. The $3 million budget for 2014 is matched by private rail companies and allows for mostly smaller-scale projects to increase freight capacity through the expansion of their rail lines. Many of the critical issues facing small short lines are bridge load and capacity related.
There was none.
D. Montgomery asked for input from members on items that are of most concern that he could take to the MPO meeting on the Council’s behalf.
One member expressed concern over the ability to pay for expansion projects in the CIP in light of increases in operating expenses. Another member wanted the MPO to evaluate noise as a component to air quality evaluation for bus and other transportation projects. It was determined that the criteria for evaluating noise impacts are designed by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP); often municipalities do the enforcement.
The TIP Committee should invite S. Pfalzer to an upcoming Committee meeting to work through the TIP when composing the response letter to the TIP.
Several members expressed appreciation for the condensed table format used in the TIP.
One member announced that the Quincy Square project is ongoing and distributed a list of talking points on the project’s progress.
A motion to adjourn was made and seconded at 4:30 PM. The motion passed, unanimously.
ATTENDANCE
|
Agencies (* MPO & other
non-voting) |
Attendee |
|
MassDOT - Aeronautics
Division* |
Steve Rawding |
|
MAGIC* |
Franny Osman |
|
TRIC* |
Steve Olanoff |
|
EOHHS HST |
Theodora Fisher |
|
Agencies (Voting) |
|
|
MassRides |
Catherine Paquette |
|
Municipalities (Voting) *MPO Member |
|
|
Acton |
Mike Gowning |
|
Belmont |
Bob McGaw |
|
Cambridge |
Cleo Stoughton |
|
Millis |
Dom D'Eramo |
|
Needham |
David Montgomery |
|
Quincy |
Kristina Johnson |
|
Wellesley |
Frank DeMasi |
|
Citizen Groups |
|
|
AACT |
Mary Ann Murray |
|
American Council of
Engineering Companies |
Thomas Daley |
|
Association for Public
Transportation |
Barry M. Steinberg |
|
Boston Society of
Architects |
Schuyler Larrabee |
|
Boston Society of Civil
Engineers |
Todd M. Clark |
|
Massachusetts Bus
Association |
Chris Anzuoni; Mark Sanborn |
|
MassBike |
David Ernst |
|
MASCO |
Tom Yardley |
|
National Corridors
Initiative |
John Businger |
|
Riverside Neighborhood
Association |
Marilyn Wellons |
|
Guests |
|
|
John DePriest |
Chelsea |
|
Fred Koeg |
Cohasset |
|
Sarah Garcia |
Gloucester |
|
William Crawford |
Nahant |
|
Rhain Hoyland |
Needham |
|
Robert Luongo |
Saugus |
|
Steve Magoon |
Watertown |
|
Abby Swaine |
US EPA Region 1 |
|
MPO Staff |
|
|
Pam Wolfe |
Anne McGahan |
|
Matt Archer |
Sean Pfalzer |
|
David Fargen |
Michelle Scott |