MPO Meeting Minutes
Draft Memorandum for the Record
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Meeting
December 15, 2022, Meeting
10:00 AM–12:00 PM, Zoom Video Conferencing Platform
David Mohler, Chair, representing Jamey Tesler, Secretary of Transportation and Chief Executive Officer of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) agreed to the following:
See attendance on page 12.
There was none.
T. Teich announced that Sandy Johnston will be leaving CTPS to take on a new role with the MBTA. S. Johnston’s six-year tenure was spent first overseeing the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) and then as the freight program manager. S. Johnston has often been a key contributor on several initiatives, including leading MPO working groups, working on studies, and supporting the development of other core MPO documents. This is S. Johnston’s last MPO board meeting as his last day will be Friday, December 30, 2022.
T. Teich announced that MPO staff has received the draft report from the 2022 Federal Certification Review, which happens every four years. MPO staff has had the opportunity to review the narrative and recommendations in the draft. Once the final version is released from the MPO’s federal partners, MPO staff looks forward to discussing recommendations and corrective actions with the MPO board.
MPO staff met with seven of the eight MAPC subregional groups to discuss the planning process and subregional transportation priorities. MPO staff met with the Southwest Advisory Planning Committee on December 6, 2022, and the North Suburban Planning Council on December 13, 2022. A meeting date with the MetroWest Regional Collaborative is still being worked out. MPO staff also met with the 495/MetroWest Partnership to discuss the Long-Range Transportation Plan on November 30, 2022.
MPO staff will be hosting the quarterly Inner Core Committee (ICC) Transportation group meeting on January 11, 2023, at 9:00 AM. The ICC Transportation group meetings bring together transportation planners from the inner core to discuss coordinated transportation planning and regional visions. The January meeting will feature MPO updates and a discussion on bus priority.
T. Teich reiterated that the deadline for TIP project applications for funding in the FFYs 2024–28 TIP is December 23, 2022. MPO staff have met with numerous municipalities across the region to discuss local initiatives and answer questions about the project application process, and staff will continue these conversations throughout the TIP development cycle.
There were none.
Brian Kane, MBTA Advisory Council, stated that the Administration and Finance Committee met before the MPO board meeting to continue discussions on the Operations Plan. The committee discussed the topics of TIP project readiness and MPO resolutions. The next meeting of the Administration and Finance Committee is January 5, 2023, at 9:00 AM.
Lenard Diggins, Regional Transportation Advisory Council, stated that the Advisory Council had last met on December 14, 2022, to discuss MPO corridor studies and the Multimodal Mobility Infrastructure Program. The Advisory Council further discussed MPO public education strategies and methods to better educate and involve the public in the MPO’s work.
1. October 20, 2022, MPO Meeting Minutes (pdf)
2. October 20, 2022, MPO Meeting Minutes (html)
Laura Gilmore requested her name be reflected in the meeting’s attendance.
A motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of October 20, 2022, with a correction to the attendance list, was made by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (Eric Bourassa) and seconded by the MBTA Advisory Board (Brian Kane). The motion carried.
1. November 3, 2022, MPO Meeting Minutes (pdf)
2. November 3, 2022, MPO Meeting Minutes (html)
1. FFYs 2023–27 TIP Amendment Two (pdf)
2. FFYs 2023–27 TIP Amendment Two (html)
3. FFY 2022 5307 Split Letter Agreement Boston UZA (pdf)
Ethan Lapointe, TIP Program Manager, stated that this was the second amendment to the FFYs 2023–27 TIP. This amendment follows Amendment One, which was approved by the MPO board on November 17, 2022. FFYs 2023–27 TIP Amendment Two proposes four project cost adjustments based on revised engineers’ estimates. Amendment Two further includes a design earmark for the Assabet River Rail Trail in Stow, as well as changes to regional transit authority (RTA) projects from the Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA) and MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA). E. Lapointe presented the proposed project and budget changes, available in the Amendment Two document. (See the link above.)
MPO staff requested that the MPO board vote to release Amendment Two for a public comment period, which would commence December 15, 2022, and conclude on January 19, 2023.
Tom Bent, City of Somerville, asked for an explanation on the increase in budget for Project 610726: Medford–Reading–Somerville– Stoneham–Winchester–Woburn – Interstate Pavement Preservation on I–93. Marie Rose, MassDOT, answered that the cost increase was related to bridge preservation items that were added to the scope of the project and stated that she would have to consult with staff to gain additional information.
A motion to release the FFYs 2023–27 TIP Amendment Two for a 21-day public comment period was made by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (Eric Bourassa) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (Tom Bent). The motion carried.
1. Initial Ideas for the Destination 2050 Planning Framework Memo (pdf)
2. Initial Ideas for the Destination 2050 Planning Framework Memo (html)
Michelle Scott, Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Manager, stated that MPO staff is seeking feedback on ideas for the planning framework for the Long-Range Transportation Plan, Destination 2050. There are multiple opportunities to respond, including a post-MPO meeting workshop on December 15, 2022, a written feedback form, and other communication methods that work for respondents.
M. Scott stated that MPO staff is working on six areas to develop Destination 2050. These six areas include identifying current and future needs facing the region, establishing the MPO’s vision and goals for transportation, revisiting investment programs and candidate projects, allocating funds to projects and programs, documenting MPO decisions and related information, and engaging stakeholders and the public. This conversation was focused on the planning framework. The LRTP vision, goals, and objectives are created based on various inputs including MPO member feedback, partner and public input, partner plans and policies, and MPO staff ideas. The LRTP vision, goals, and objectives guides MPO investment programs, shapes project and study selection criteria, and communicates MPO values to partners and stakeholders.
M. Scott reiterated that MPO staff held workshops in the summer and fall of 2022 with MPO members and members of the Advisory Council to gain feedback on the existing structure of the MPO’s vision, goals, and objectives. Input received from members was summarized into a few high-level themes. Members generally found the existing structure of LRTP vision, goals, and objectives planning to be a sufficient framework to create Destination 2050. Feedback received emphasized safety, resiliency, equity, and carbon reduction. Feedback further requested MPO staff find ways to measure and evaluate whether the MPO’s plans are successful. Reducing greenhouse gases, emphasizing mode shift and the reduction of vehicle-miles traveled were objectives prioritized over electric vehicles. Further, there was support for coordinating the development of Destination 2050 with other plans and goals.
M. Scott highlighted the engagement events held to receive feedback on the LRTP vision, goals, and objectives, such as subregional outreach efforts, a Transit Working Group discussion, as well as a survey. As of December 8, 2022, the survey has received approximately 160 responses.
Over the summer, MPO staff undertook an extensive review of plans, policies, and studies to support the LRTP Needs Assessment. MPO staff reviewed MAPC’s Metro Common 2050 plan, the Commonwealth’s Decarbonization Roadmap, MassDOT’s recently updated Strategic Highway Safety Plan, as well as federal initiatives such as provisions of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, among other sources.
MPO staff ideas were also considered as part of the planning framework. Past work that was reviewed and considered for the planning framework included lessons learned from the 2021 TIP criteria updates, new tools and emphasis on destination access, and resiliency and safety challenges.
MPO staff set a series of guiding principles when creating the LRTP’s vision, goals, and objectives, including clearly communicating MPO values, being able to measure and monitor framework elements, facilitating MPO decision-making, building framework elements on one another, balancing aspirations and reality, and allowing for process flexibility between LRTP development cycles.
M. Scott read the draft vision statement for the Destination 2050 LRTP which states, “The Boston Region MPO envisions an equitable, pollution-free, and modern regional transportation system that enables people to safely and reliably reach where they need and want to go. This system supports an inclusive Boston region that is healthy, resilient, and economically vibrant.”
M. Scott summarized the six goal areas within the Destination 2050 LRTP. The first goal is equity, which supports an inclusive planning process that redresses and addressees past burdens and disparities. The objective of the equity goal is to maintain an inclusive engagement process, involve people, and inform MPO decision-making, and to reduce harmful impacts on and improve outcomes for disadvantaged communities.
The second goal is safety, focused on achieving zero transportation-related fatalities and serious injuries. The objectives of the safety goal are to reduce safety outcomes and events for all modes of transportation, and to eliminate disparities for disadvantaged communities, overburdened areas, and vulnerable roadway users.
The third goal is mobility and reliability, which supports excellent mobility for people and freight. The object of the mobility and reliability goal is to emphasize reliability and non-single occupancy vehicle (non-SOV) solutions for reducing travel delay, to incorporate state-of-good-repair and modernization themes to support mobility, and to address disparities in transit reliability and frequency.
The fourth goal is access and connectivity, which focuses on providing options and improving access to key destinations. The access and connectivity goal emphasizes non-SOV options, addressing travel barriers and network gaps, as well as emphasizing frequent, high-quality options and improved access for disadvantaged communities.
The fifth goal is resiliency, which supports response and adaptation to climate change and other changing conditions. The resiliency goal identifies current and future resiliency issues to guide investments, with the objectives of investing to improve emergency response and prioritizing investments in disadvantaged and environmentally burdened communities.
The sixth goal is clean air and healthy communities, which aims to provide transportation free of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and air pollutants, and to support sustainable environments and good health. The clean air and healthy communities goal aims to induce mode shift and/or reductions in vehicle-miles traveled, to reduce GHGs and other air pollutants, to address environmental burdens on disadvantaged communities, and to reduce the impacts of transportation on the environment.
M. Scott noted opportunities to provide feedback regarding LRTP planning, such as the post-MPO meeting workshop on December 15, 2022, the written feedback tool, as well as other forms of communication. MPO staff will continue to review survey results and other input and plans to provide an updated vision, goals, and objectives early in 2023. M. Scott invited questions and discussion.
D. Mohler asked how many responses the feedback survey had received. M. Scott answered that the survey had received 160 responses as of December 8, 2022.
L. Diggins suggested adding an additional question to the feedback survey to ask respondents to explain their ranking of priorities on how to improve the Boston region’s transportation system.
1. Safety and Operations Intersection Study in Hull (pdf)
2. Safety and Operations Intersection Study in Hull (html)
3. Safety and Operations Intersection Study in Randolph (pdf)
4. Safety and Operations Intersection Study in Randolph (html)
J. Dombrowski introduced the Safety and Operations at Selected Intersections studies in Hull and Randolph. Safety and Operations studies are used to analyze existing conditions and assess potential improvement concepts that can be further analyzed during future project development. The study location discussed was the intersection of George Washington Boulevard and Rockland Circle which borders the towns of Hull and Randolph. George Washington Boulevard is one of three main routes in and out of the town, and it is also an area that is vulnerable to coastal flooding and sea level rise. This intersection was identified by the Town as a priority because of its lack of adequate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure connections to other areas of the town.
Staff began by collecting crash and traffic volume data and analyzed their findings to understand the existing conditions at the intersection and project for future conditions. This analysis also included considerations for rising sea levels in its projections.
Staff assessed a range of short- and long-term improvements to the intersection. Short-term improvements included road restriping and signal retiming; long-term improvements included a crosswalk installation, new sidewalks, multi-use path installations, and a road diet on George Washington Boulevard. J. Dombrowski discussed the engagement activities conducted for this project, which included a survey with 426 responses.
Once staff completed analyzing the data and survey responses, they provided two major recommendations. Short-term improvements included upgrading signal systems, signal retiming, and coordinating signals at intersections. Longer term improvements included geometric changes to Turner Lane, meaning Turner Lane would become a one-way road. Additionally, staff proposed adding pedestrian warning signs and a flashing beacon to improve the visibility of pedestrians who are crossing. Staff encouraged the Town to implement the low-cost, short-term improvement first, and then find a way to prioritize the long-term improvement.
D. Mohler asked whether staff estimate the costs of recommendations at a planning level, and about how much these interventions would cost. J. Dombroski answered that she did not conduct a cost-benefit analysis on the long-term improvements.
Jen Constable, Town of Hull, asked why staff did not conduct a survey on the Hull side of the intersection. J. Dombrowski answered that the intersection has a relatively high crash rate and is also a high traffic area, so staff was looking for the perspectives of residents who drive through that part of the intersection frequently. J. Constable responded that in the summer months, when the town’s population increases sixfold, safety concerns are higher, especially for pedestrians and bicyclists. J. Dombroski stated that data for the intersection was collected in the spring, so staff were not able to measure the intersection’s traffic rates in the summer.
J. Constable questioned the integrity of the project from the perspective of the community considering the entire picture of the intersection’s traffic needs was not taken into account. J. Dombrowski replied that staff still recommend that the Town implement the short-term improvements. Further, the long-term improvements would be undertaken with MassDOT and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. That being said, the short-term improvements do have the potential to improve safety.
Rebecca Morgan, MPO staff, added that this study was the first step toward larger projects in the region, and there is certainly additional work that can be done at this intersection.
Christopher DiIorio, Town of Hull, asked whether the short-term improvements require more study or analysis, or if the Town can proceed with implementation. J. Dombroski responded that certain interventions such as signal retiming or lighting improvements may need further work by the Town, but most of the other interventions can be implemented by the Town. C. DiIorio followed up asking whether MassDOT would be implementing these improvements. J. Dombrowski responded that she may not be the correct person to answer that question.
M. Rose stated that the Town reached out to MassDOT to ask for a study and ultimately either MassDOT or the Town would be the project proponent.
Michelle Tyler, Town of Randolph, expressed her thanks to J. Dombrowski
and the team who completed the Randolph study, and she stated that she will be
looking to integrate some of these recommendations into the town’s Complete
Streets policy.
M. Rose clarified that Randolph should coordinate with Erin Kinahan, the
project development engineer for MassDOT District 6. The Town of Hull should
coordinate with Pam Hazner in MassDOT District 5.
1. Norwood Route 1 Priority Corridor Study (pdf)
2. Norwood Route 1 Priority Corridor Study (html)
S. Asante began his presentation with an overview of several opportunities that will increase safety conditions for all users of Route 1 in Norwood, including transforming an automobile-centric corridor into a more multi-use one and developing the infrastructure to support future transit services along Route 1. The study corridor was chosen for a number of reasons: it has many high-crash locations and minimal transit services, walking and biking infrastructure, and first-mile last-mile connections.
Recently, MAPC completed the Neponset Valley Route 1/1A Mobility Study for the Neponset Valley Transportation Management Association (TMA). The study recommended interventions to make the corridor more accessible to multi-modal forms of transportation. This study is especially important because Route 1 contains many businesses and opportunities for economic development, but it is almost entirely inaccessible except by car.
Staff engaged members of the community through a task force, whose members included staff from the Town of Norwood, MassDOT District 3, MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning, MAPC, the Neponset River Regional Chamber, and the Neponset Valley TMA. Staff additionally conducted a survey of community members and received nearly 700 responses. MPO staff met with the task force frequently to present progress and ask for feedback. Many responses indicated that residents felt safe driving along the corridor, but not walking or biking.
The near-term recommendations from the study included expanding microtransit services in the area, adding pedestrian signals on nearby side streets, upgrading signal equipment to include countdown time, installing pedestrian refuge islands along the longer crosswalks, and installing ADA-compliant curb ramps and curb cuts.
The recommended long-term improvements address the future needs of the corridor. These include new sidewalks to close the substantial gaps in the sidewalk network, leveling the sidewalks, creating additional safe crossing opportunities, incorporating green infrastructure improvements, and Complete Streets improvements as proposed by the Town of Norwood’s Complete Streets program. Overarching improvements should address the need for multimodal mobility along the corridor and establish first- and last-mile connections to nearby MBTA stations.
L. Diggins asked how staff estimate crash reduction that will result from the safety improvements. S. Asante replied that those estimates are obtained through a crash-modification practice conducted for each improvement in a before-and-after study.
E. Bourassa asked whether any of the land use considerations raised by the Town were incorporated into the study. S. Asante responded that staff did incorporate land use patterns and usage along the corridor when assessing current and future needs.
Tom O’Rourke, Three Rivers Interlocal Council/Neponset River Regional Chamber, expressed his thanks to S. Asante and the project team for undertaking this work.
Sarah Dixon Bouchard, Town of Norwood, stated that Norwood rezoned the Boston-Providence Highway to create a new highway district especially for this corridor and has begun implementing some landscaping improvements to support sidewalk expansion. S. Bouchard additionally expressed her thanks for this study.
M. Rose asked which staff member from District 5 worked with S. Asante on this study. S. Asante responded that Pam Hazner, Barbara Lachance, David Soares, and others from MassDOT District 5 were very involved in this study.
M. Rose additionally stated that there is a TIP project scheduled for 2026 located at the intersection of Route 1 and University Avenue.
Amira Patterson, MBTA Advisory Board, provided an update on a recent MBTA Advisory Board meeting where the board agreed on certain policies regarding reporting on the Bus Network Redesign’s progress.
T. Bent thanked the MPO and its members for its support for the Green Line Extension (GLX) project throughout the process.
Dennis Giombetti, MetroWest Regional Collaborative, recognized T. Bent for his work on the GLX project and his advocacy to the board. D. Giombetti additionally noted that the Framingham portion of the Bruce Freeman Trail has progressed, with a Purchase and Sale Agreement having recently been signed with CSX. This will result in a 3.5 mile extension which will connect to the town of Sudbury.
A motion to adjourn was made by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (Eric Bourassa) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (Tom Bent). The motion carried.
|
Members |
Representatives
and
Alternates |
|
At-Large City (City of Everett) |
Jay Monty |
|
At-Large City (City of Newton) |
David Koses |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) |
Claire Ricker |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Brookline) |
Todd Kirrane |
|
City of Boston (Boston Planning &
Development Agency) |
Jim Fitzgerald |
|
City of Boston (Boston Transportation
Department) |
Bill Conroy |
|
Federal Highway Administration |
|
|
Federal Transit Administration |
|
|
Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) |
Tom Bent |
|
Massachusetts Department of Transportation |
David Mohler Marie Rose |
|
MassDOT Highway Division |
John Romano |
|
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
(MBTA) |
Laura Gilmore |
|
Massachusetts Port Authority |
Sarah Lee |
|
MBTA Advisory Board |
Brian Kane Amira Patterson |
|
Metropolitan Area Planning Council |
Eric Bourassa |
|
MetroWest Regional Collaborative (City of
Framingham) |
Dennis Giombetti |
|
Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal
Coordination (Town of Acton) |
Austin Cyganiewicz |
|
North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly) |
Darlene Wynne |
|
North Suburban Planning Council (Town of Burlington) |
Melisa Tintocalis |
|
Regional Transportation Advisory Council |
Lenard Diggins |
|
South Shore Coalition (Town of Hull) |
Jennifer Constable |
|
South West Advisory
Planning Committee (Town of Medway) |
Peter Pelletier |
|
Three Rivers Interlocal Council (Town of
Norwood/Neponset Valley Chamber of Commerce) |
Tom O’Rourke Steve Olanoff |
|
Other
Attendees |
Affiliation |
|
|
Karl Allen |
|
|
|
Miranda Briseño |
MassDOT |
|
|
Joe Collins |
Town of
Norwood |
|
|
Christopher DiIorio |
Town of Hull |
|
|
Sarah Dixon Bouchard |
Town of Norwood |
|
|
Joy Glynn |
MWRTA |
|
|
Holly Jones |
Town of
Norwood |
|
|
Drashti Joshi |
MassDOT |
|
|
Chris Klem |
MassDOT |
|
|
Ali Kleyman |
MBTA |
|
|
Josh Klingenstein |
MBTA |
|
|
Raissah Kouame |
|
|
|
Derek Krevat |
MassDOT |
|
|
Jackie LaFlam |
CATA |
|
|
Gene Manning |
|
|
|
Bianca Marshall |
|
|
|
Eric Molinari |
City of Everett |
|
|
Adi Nochur |
MAPC |
|
|
Valerie Oorthuys |
|
|
|
Franny Osman |
Regional
Transportation Advisory Council |
|
|
Peter Pelletier |
|
|
|
C. Senior |
MassDOT
District 5 |
|
|
Jon Seward |
|
|
|
Tyler Terrasi |
MWRTA |
|
|
Michelle Tyler |
Town of
Randolph |
|
|
Andrew Wang |
MassDOT |
|
|
MPO Staff/Central
Transportation Planning Staff |
|
Tegin Teich, Executive Director |
|
Seth Asante |
|
Logan Casey |
|
Jonathan Church |
|
Annette Demchur |
|
Julie Dombroski |
|
Sabiheh Faghih |
|
Hiral Gandhi |
|
Betsy Harvey |
|
Sandy Johnston |
|
Stella Jordan |
|
Ethan Lapointe |
|
Marty Milkovits |
|
Rebecca Morgan |
|
Srilekha Murthy |
|
Meghan O'Connor |
|
Gina Perille |
|
Michelle Scott |
|
Judy Taylor |
|
The Boston Region
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) operates its programs, services, and
activities in compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws including Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the Civil Rights Restoration
Act of 1987, and related statutes and regulations. Title VI prohibits
discrimination in federally assisted programs and requires that no person in
the United States of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, or
national origin (including limited English proficiency), be excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal
assistance. Related federal nondiscrimination laws administered by the
Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, or both,
prohibit discrimination on the basis of age, sex, and disability. The Boston
Region MPO considers these protected populations in its Title VI Programs,
consistent with federal interpretation and administration. In addition, the
Boston Region MPO provides meaningful access to its programs, services, and
activities to individuals with limited English proficiency, in compliance
with U.S. Department of Transportation policy and guidance on federal
Executive Order 13166. The Boston Region MPO also
complies with the Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law, M.G.L. c 272
sections 92a, 98, 98a, which prohibits making any distinction,
discrimination, or restriction in admission to, or treatment in a place of
public accommodation based on race, color, religious creed, national origin,
sex, sexual orientation, disability, or ancestry. Likewise, the Boston Region
MPO complies with the Governor's Executive Order 526, section 4, which
requires that all programs, activities, and services provided, performed,
licensed, chartered, funded, regulated, or contracted for by the state shall
be conducted without unlawful discrimination based on race, color, age,
gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression,
religion, creed, ancestry, national origin, disability, veteran's status
(including Vietnam-era veterans), or background. A complaint form and
additional information can be obtained by contacting the MPO or at http://www.bostonmpo.org/mpo_non_discrimination. To request this
information in a different language or in an accessible format, please
contact Title VI Specialist By Telephone: For people with hearing or speaking difficulties,
connect through the state MassRelay service: · Relay Using TTY or Hearing Carry-over: 800.439.2370 · Relay Using Voice Carry-over: 866.887.6619 · Relay Using Text to Speech: 866.645.9870 For more information, including numbers for Spanish
speakers, visit https://www.mass.gov/massrelay. |