Transportation Improvement Program and
Air Quality Conformity Determination
Federal Fiscal Years 2020-2024
MPO Review Draft
Boston Region MPO
Endorsed by the MPO, xxxx
Prepared by
The Central Transportation Planning Staff:
Staff to the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
Directed by the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization,
which is composed of the:
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
MBTA Advisory Board
Massachusetts Port Authority
Regional Transportation Advisory Council
City of Boston
City of Beverly
City of Everett
City of Framingham
City of Newton
City of Somerville
City of Woburn
Town of Arlington
Town of Bedford
Town of Braintree
Town of Lexington
Town of Medway
Town of Norwood
Federal Highway Administration (nonvoting)
Federal Transit Administration (nonvoting)
The MPO complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and other federal and state nondiscrimination statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. The MPO does not discriminate based on race, color, national origin (including limited English proficiency), religion, creed, gender, ancestry, ethnicity, disability, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, veteran’s status (including Vietnam-era veterans), or background. Any person who believes herself/himself or any specific class of persons to have been subjected to discrimination prohibited by Title VI, ADA, or another nondiscrimination statute or regulation may, herself/himself or via a representative, file a written complaint with the MPO. Complaints filed under federal law (based on race, color, national origin [including limited English proficiency], sex, age, or disability) must be filed no later than 180 calendar days after the date the person believes the discrimination occurred. Complaints filed under Massachusetts General Law (based on race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability, or ancestry) or Governor’s Executive Order 526, section 4 (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) must be filed no later than 300 calendar days after the date the person believes the discrimination occurred. A complaint form and additional information may be obtained at www.bostonmpo.org or by contacting the MPO staff at 857.702.3700 (voice), 617.570.9193 (TTY), 617.570.9192 (fax), or eharvey@ctps.org.
To request additional copies of this document or to request it in an accessible format, please contact MPO staff using the methods described below. It is also possible to download the document by visiting www.bostonmpo.org.
By mail:
Boston Region MPO
Certification Activities Group, Central Transportation Planning Staff
10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150
Boston, MA 02116
By telephone:
857-702-3702 (voice), 617-570-9193 (TTY)
By fax:
617-570-9192
By email:
mgenova@ctps.org
Signature pages to be added
Table of Contents
Introduction
ffys 2020-24 tip investments
regional target program details
financing the ffys 2020-24 tiP
the tip development process
Approving the tip
updates to the tip
stay involved with the tiP
Chapter 1: 3C Transportation Planning and the Boston Region MPO
THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS
THE BOSTON REGION MPO
Introduction to the TIP Process
Funding the TIP
Investment Frameworks
Developing the TIP
Approving the TIP
Updating the TIP
Public Notice
Chapter 3: Summary of Highway and Transit Programming
detailed project descriptions
Chapter 4: Performance Analysis
Overview of Performance-Based Planning and Programming
Performance-based Planning and Programming Activities
The TIP’s Role in PBPP
FFYs 2020-24 Performance Analysis
Performance Monitoring, Reporting, and Evaluation
Chapter 5: Determination of Air Quality Conformity
Background
Conformity Determination
Conclusion
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Project Prioritization and Scoring
Appendix B: Greenhouse Gas Monitoring and Evaluation
Appendix C: Public Outreach and Comments
Appendix D: Glossary of Acronyms
Appendix E: Geographic Distribution of TIP Funding
Appendix F: Regulatory Framework and MPO Membership
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLE #
2-1: Federal Highway Administration Programs Applicable to the FFYs 2020-24 TIP
2-2: Federal Transit Administration Programs Applicable to the FFYs 2020-24 TI5
3-1: Boston Region MPO Regional Target Program MPO Discretionary Funds Sourced from the Federal-Aid Highway Program
3-2: Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Progra3
3-3: Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program MBTA Federal Capital Program
FFY 2019 and FFY 2020-2024 TIP - Project List and Descriptions (80% Federal Share)
3-4: Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program MPO Transit List - CATA
3-5: Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program MPO Transit List - MWRTA
4-1: National and Boston Region MPO Goal Areas
4-2: Federally Required Transit Performance Measures
4-3: Federally Required Roadway Performance Measures
4-4: Boston Region MPO Investment Summary
4-5: MassDOT Investment Summary
4-6: MBTA Investment Summary
4-7: CATA and MWRTA Investment Summary
4-8: Massachusetts Statewide Highway Safety Performance Baselines and CY 2019 Targets
4-9: Regional Target Roadway Projects at Safety-Relevant Locations
4-10: Massachusetts and Boston Region NHS Bridge Condition Baselines
4-11: MassDOT NHS Bridge Condition Targets
4-12: Massachusetts NHS Pavement Condition Baselines and MassDOT NHS Pavement
Condition Performance Targets
4-13: Regional Target Projects Addressing Roadway System Preservation and
Modernization Performance
4-14: SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for Transit Rolling Stock
4-15: SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for Transit Equipment Vehicles
4-16: SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for Transit Facilities
4-17: SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for MBTA Transit Fixed Guideway Infrastructure
4-18: Travel Time Index Analysis for the Boston Region: 2012 to 2015
4-19: Travel Time Reliability Performance Targets
4-20: Truck Travel Time Reliability Performance Targets
4-21: Performance Targets for Annual Hours of Peak Hour Excessive Delay Per Capita for the Boston UZA
4-22: Performance Targets for Percent of Non-SOV Travel for the Boston UZA
4-23: Regional Target-Funded Roadway Projects Addressing Capacity Management and Mobility Performance
4-24: CMAQ Emissions Reduction Targets for the Boston Region
4-25: Regional Target-Funded Roadway Projects Addressing Clean Air and Sustainable Communities Performance
4-26: Regional Target-Funded Roadway Projects Addressing Economic Vitality Performance
4-27: Transportation Equity Populations in the Boston Region
4-28: Transportation Equity Populations within One-Half Mile of Regional Target-Funded Projects
4-29: MPO Investment Programs Serving Transportation Equity Populations
4-30: Funding per Person or Household for Transportation Equity Populations within One-Half Mile of Regional Target-Funded Projects
A-1: Universe of Unprogrammed Projects (as presented to the Boston Region MPO board on February 7, 2019)
A-2: TIP Project Evaluation Criteria
A-3: TIP Project Evaluation Results
A-4: Final Project Evaluation Results and First-Tier List
B-1: Greenhouse Gas Regional Highway Project Tracking
B-2: Greenhouse Gas Regional Transit Project Tracking
B-3: Greenhouse Gas Regional Highway “Completed” Project Tracking
B-4: Greenhouse Gas Regional Transit “Completed” Project Tracking
E-1: Federal Highway Programming for Municipalities in the Boston Region FFYS 2020–24
Figure #
ES-1 FFYS 2020-24 TIP Regional Target Funding by Investment Program
ES-2 MPO Municipalities Containing FFYS 2020–24 TIP Program Projects by Community Type
1-1 Municipalities in the Boston Region
1-2 Boston Region MPO Organizational Chart
1-3 LRTP Goals and Objectives, as of Spring 2019
1-4 Relationship between the LRTP, TIP, UPWP, and Performance-Based Planning Process
2-1: MPO Investment Programs
2-2: Transportation Improvement Program Evaluation Criteria
4-1: Fatalities from Motor Vehicle Crashes
4-2: Fatality Rate per 100 Million Vehicle-Miles Traveled
44-3: Serious Injuries from Motor Vehicle Crashes
4-4: Serious Injury Rate per 100 Million Vehicle-Miles Traveled
4-5: Nonmotorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries
4-6: Nonmotorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries in Massachusetts
4-7: Nonmotorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries in the Boston Region
4-8: Historic Values and Performance Targets for the Percent of Non-SOV Travel in the Boston UZA
E-1: Regional Distribution of Target Funding by Subregion FFYS 2020–24
E-2: Regional Distribution of Target Funding by Municipality Type FFYS 2020–24
E-3: All Federal Highway Funding in the Boston Region by Subregion FFYS 2020–24
E-4: All Federal Highway Funding in the Boston Region by Municipality Type FFYS 2020–24
Executive Summary—Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) five-year transportation capital investment plan, the Federal Fiscal Years (FFYs) 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), is the near-term investment program for the region’s transportation system. Guided by the Boston Region MPO’s vision, goals, and objectives, the TIP prioritizes investments that preserve the current transportation system in a state of good repair, provide safe transportation for all modes, enhance livability, and improve mobility throughout the region. These investments fund major highway reconstruction, arterial roadway and intersection improvements, maintenance and expansion of the public transit system, bicycle path construction, and infrastructure improvements for pedestrians.
The Boston Region MPO is guided by a 22-member board with representatives of state agencies, regional organizations, and municipalities; its jurisdiction extends roughly from Boston north to Ipswich, south to Marshfield, and west to municipalities along Interstate 495. Each year, the MPO conducts a process to decide how to spend federal transportation funds for capital projects. The Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS), which is the staff to the MPO, manages the TIP development process.
MPO staff coordinates the evaluation of project funding requests, proposes programming of current and new projects based on anticipated funding levels, supports the MPO in developing a draft TIP document, and facilitates a public review of the draft before the MPO endorses the final document.
The complete TIP program is available in Chapter 3 of this document and online at www.ctps.org/tip. The TIP tables provide details of how funding is allocated to each programmed project and capital investment program. These tables are organized by federal fiscal year, and are grouped by highway and transit programs.
The Highway Program of the TIP funds the priority transportation projects advanced by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and the cities and towns within the MPO region. The program is devoted primarily to preserving and modernizing the existing roadway network by resurfacing highways, replacing bridges, and reconstructing arterial roadways.
In Massachusetts, Federal-Aid Highway Program funding is apportioned by MassDOT, which allocates funding to Grant Anticipation Notes (GANs) payments, various statewide programs, and Regional Targets for the state’s MPOs. In the FFYs 2020–24 TIP, roadway, bridge, and bicycle and pedestrian programs account for more than $1.2 billion in funding to the Boston region. The Regional Target funding provided to the MPOs may be programmed for projects at the discretion of each MPO, whereas MassDOT has discretion to propose its recommended projects for statewide programs, such as those related to bridge repairs and interstate highway maintenance.
The Transit Program of the TIP provides funding for projects and programs that address the capital needs prioritized by the three transit authorities in the region: the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), the Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA), and the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA). The Transit Program is predominantly dedicated to achieving and maintaining a state of good repair for all assets throughout the transit system. The FFYs 2020–24 TIP includes $3.2 billion in transit investments by the transit authorities that will support state of good repair, modernize transit systems, and increase access to transit. The Green Line Extension project is a major project programmed in this TIP that will expand transit service. Additionally, during development of the FFYs 2020-24 TIP, the MPO decided to allocate a portion of the Regional Target funds in fiscal year 2021 to the MBTA for transit modernization.
During FFYs 2020–24, the Boston Region MPO plans to fund 47 projects and programs with its Regional Target funding:
Figure ES-1 shows how the Regional Target funding for FFYs 2020–24 is distributed across the MPO’s investment programs. As the chart shows, the Boston Region MPO’s Regional Target Program is devoted primarily to modernizing and expanding the transportation network through Major Infrastructure and Complete Streets investments.
Figure ES-1
FFYS 2020-24 TIP Regional Target Funding by Investment Program
Boston Regional Target Program: $533.2 million
These investments will be implemented in 39 cities and towns throughout the MPO region, ranging from high-density, built-out inner core communities to developing suburbs. Figure ES-2 identifies the type of communities—as defined by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC)—that will receive these investments.
FIGURE ES-2
MPO Municipalities Containing FFYS 2020–24 TIP Program Projects by Community Type
The TIP Highway Program was developed with the assumption that federal funding for the state would range between $676 million and $739 million annually over the next five years (these amounts include only federal funds and include the funds that would be set aside as payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program).
The process of deciding how to use this federal funding in the Boston region follows several steps. First, MassDOT reserves funding for GANs debt service payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program; annual GANs payments range between $81 million and $98 million annually over the five years of this TIP.
The remaining Federal-Aid Highway Program funds are budgeted to support state priorities and regional (that is, MPO) priorities. In this planning cycle, $734 million to $792 million annually was available for programming statewide (these amounts include both federal dollars and the local match). MassDOT customarily provides the local match (which can also be provided by other entities); thus, projects are typically funded with 80 percent federal dollars and 20 percent state dollars, depending on the funding program.
Next, MassDOT allocates funding across the following funding categories:
Finally, once these needs have been satisfied, MassDOT allocates the remaining funding among the state’s MPOs for programming. This discretionary funding for MPOs is sub-allocated by formula to determine the Regional Target amounts. MassDOT develops these targets in consultation with the Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies (MARPA).
This TIP was programmed with the assumption that the Boston Region MPO will have between $102 million and $110 million annually for Regional Target amounts (which consist of federal funding and state funding for the local match).
Each MPO may decide how to prioritize its Regional Target funding. Given that the Regional Target funding is a subset of the Highway Program, the MPO typically programs the majority of funding for roadway projects; however, the MPO has flexed portions of its highway funding to the Transit Program for both transit expansion and transit modernization projects. The TIP Highway Program details the projects that will receive Regional Target funding from the Boston Region MPO and statewide infrastructure projects within the Boston region.
The FTA allocates the funds programmed in the TIP Transit Program according to formula. The three regional transit authorities in the Boston Region MPO area that are recipients of these funds are the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA. The MBTA, with its extensive transit program and infrastructure, is the recipient of the preponderance of the region’s federal transit funds.
Under the federal transportation legislation, Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), funding is allocated by the following categories:
When determining which projects to fund through the Regional Target funding process, MPO members collaborate with municipalities, state agencies, members of the public, advocacy groups, and other stakeholders. The MPO uses evaluation criteria in its project selection process to help identify and prioritize projects that advance the MPO’s goals, which are categorized as follows:
Additionally, the MPO has established investment programs, which are designed to direct Regional Target funding towards MPO priority areas over the next 25 years, to help meet these goals. The investment programs are as follows:
Projects that the MPO selects to receive Regional Target funding through the TIP development process are included in one of the five programs listed above.
In recent years, the MPO has been incorporating performance-based planning and programming (PBPP) practices into its TIP development and other processes. These practices are designed to help direct MPO funds towards achieving specific outcomes for the transportation system. The MPO’s goals and investment programs are key components of its PBPP framework. In FFY 2018, the MPO began to set targets for specific performance measures. Over time, the MPO will more closely link its performance targets, investment decisions, and monitoring and evaluation activities.
The outreach process begins early in the federal fiscal year, when cities and towns designate TIP contacts and begin developing a list of priority projects to be considered for federal funding, and the MPO staff asks the staffs of cities and towns in the region to identify their priority projects.
MPO staff compiles the project funding requests into a Universe of Unprogrammed Projects, a list of all projects identified as potential candidates to receive funding through the TIP. The Universe includes projects that are fully designed and ready to be advertised for construction, those that are undergoing preliminary engineering and design, and projects still in the conceptual or planning stage. MPO staff also collects data on each project in the Universe so that the projects may be evaluated.
MPO staff evaluates projects based on how well they address the MPO’s goals. In order for MPO staff to conduct a complete project evaluation, the project must have a functional design report or be at a 25-percent design stage; or its plans must include the level of detail defined in a functional design report. The evaluation results are posted on the MPO’s website where project proponents, municipal officials, and members of the public may review them and provide feedback.
An important step toward TIP programming takes place midway through the TIP development cycle at a meeting—referred to as TIP Readiness Day—that both MassDOT and MPO staff attend. At this meeting, MassDOT project managers provide updates about cost and schedule changes related to currently programmed projects. These cost and schedule changes must be taken into account as MPO staff helps the MPO board consider updates to the already programmed years of the TIP, as well as the addition of new projects in the outermost year of the TIP.
Using the evaluation results and information about project readiness (that is, when a project likely would be fully designed and ready for construction), staff prepares the First-Tier List of Projects. This list contains those projects that are supported by a project proponent (a municipality or MassDOT) and that could be made ready for advertising within the TIP’s time horizon—the next five federal fiscal years. The projects are ranked based on the evaluation results.
MPO staff then prepares a recommendation or a series of programming scenarios for how to program the Regional Target funding in the TIP based on the First-Tier List of Projects and other considerations, such as whether a project was included in the LRTP, addresses an identified transportation need, or promotes distribution of transportation investments across the region.
The staff recommendation is always financially constrained—meaning, subject to available funding. There was approximately $533 million of Regional Target funding available to the Boston Region MPO for FFYs 2020–24. This year, the MPO discussed the staff recommendation and programming scenarios for the Regional Target Program for highway projects and selected a preferred program in March.
In addition to prioritizing the Regional Target funding, the MPO also reviews and endorses the Statewide Infrastructure Items and Bridge Programs that MassDOT recommends for programming. The MPO also reviews and endorses programming of funds for the MBTA’s, CATA’s, and MWRTA’s capital programs.
After selecting a preferred programming scenario, usually in April, the MPO votes to release the draft TIP for a 21-day public review period, during which the MPO invites members of the public, municipal officials, and other stakeholders in the Boston region to review the proposed program. During the public review period, MPO staff hosts open-house style public meetings to discuss the draft TIP document and elicit additional comments.
After the public review period ends, the MPO reviews all municipal and public comments and may change elements of the document or its programming. The MPO then endorses the TIP and submits it to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for approval. MassDOT incorporates the MPO-endorsed TIP into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The FHWA, FTA, and US Environmental Protection Agency review the STIP for certification by September 30, the close of the federal fiscal year.
Even after the TIP has been finalized, administrative modifications, amendments, and adjustments often must be introduced because of changes in project status, project cost, or available revenues. This may necessitate reprogramming a project in a different funding year or programming additional funds for a project.
Notices of administrative modifications and amendments are posted on the MPO’s website. If an amendment is necessary, the Regional Transportation Advisory Council—the public advisory board to the MPO—is informed, and the MPO notifies affected municipalities and other stakeholders via email. The MPO typically holds a 21-day public review period before taking final action on an amendment. In extraordinary circumstances, the MPO may vote to shorten the public comment period to a minimum of 15 days. Administrative modifications and adjustments are generally minor and usually do not warrant a public review period.
Public input is an important aspect of the transportation planning process. Please visit www.bostonmpo.org for more information about the MPO, to view the entire TIP, and to submit your comments. You also may wish to sign up for email news updates and notices by contacting publicinfo@ctps.org or signing up at www.ctps.org/subscribe.
To request a copy of the TIP in accessible formats, please contact the MPO staff by any of the following means:
Mail: Boston Region MPO c/o CTPS
Certification Activities Group
10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150
Boston, MA 02116-3968
Telephone: 857.702.3700
TTY: 617.973.7089
Fax: 617.570.9192
Email: publicinfo@ctps.org
Chapter 1—3C Transportation Planning and the Boston Region MPO
Decisions about how to allocate transportation funds in a metropolitan area are guided by information and ideas garnered from a broad group of people, including elected officials, municipal planners and engineers, transportation advocates, and interested residents. Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) are the bodies responsible for providing a forum for this decision-making process. Each metropolitan area in the United States with a population of 50,000 or more—also known as an urbanized area—is required by federal legislation to establish an MPO, which decides how to spend federal transportation funds for capital projects and planning studies for the area.
The federal government regulates the funding, planning, and operation of the surface transportation system through the federal transportation program, which was enacted into law through Titles 23 and 49 of the United States Code. Section 134 of Title 23 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act and Section 5303 of the Federal Transit Act, as amended, require that urbanized areas conduct a transportation planning process, resulting in plans and programs consistent with the planning objectives of the metropolitan area, in order to be eligible for federal funds.
The most recent reauthorization of the surface transportation law is the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. The FAST Act sets policies related to metropolitan transportation planning. The law requires all MPOs to carry out a continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative (3C) transportation planning process.
The Boston Region MPO is responsible for carrying out the 3C planning process in the Boston region and has established the following objectives for the process:
More information about the federal, state, and regional guidance governing the transportation planning process and about the regulatory framework in which the MPO operates can be found in Appendix F.
The Boston Region MPO’s planning area extends across 97 cities and towns from Boston north to Ipswich, south to Marshfield, and west to Interstate 495.
Figure 1-1 shows the map of the Boston Region MPO’s member municipalities.
Figure 1-1
Municipalities in the Boston Region
The MPO’s board comprises 22 voting members. Several state agencies and regional organizations and the City of Boston are permanent voting members, while 12 municipalities are elected as voting members for three-year terms. Eight municipal members represent each of the eight subregions of the Boston region, and there are four at-large municipal seats. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) participate on the MPO board as advisory (nonvoting) members. More details about the MPO’s permanent members can be found in Appendix F.
Figure 1-2 shows MPO membership and the organization of the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS), which serves as staff to the MPO.
Figure 1-2
Boston Region MPO Organizational Chart
The MPO board agreed upon the following vision statement on January 17, 2019, in preparation for the upcoming adoption of Destination 2040, the MPO’s next Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP):
The Boston Region MPO envisions a modern, well-maintained transportation system that supports a sustainable, healthy, livable, and economically vibrant region. To achieve this vision, the transportation system must be safe and resilient; incorporate emerging technologies; and provide equitable access, excellent mobility, and varied transportation options.
As part of its 3C process, the Boston Region MPO annually produces the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). These documents, along with the quadrennial LRTP, are referred to as certification documents and are required for the MPO’s process to be certified as meeting federal requirements; this certification is a prerequisite for receiving federal transportation funds. In addition to the requirement to produce the LRTP, TIP, and UPWP, the MPO must establish and conduct an inclusive public participation process, as well as maintain transportation models and data resources to support air quality conformity determinations and long- and short-range planning work and initiatives.
The following is a summary of each of the certification documents:
Figure 1-4 depicts the relationship between the three certification documents and the MPO’s performance-based planning and programming process, which is a means to monitor progress towards the MPO’s goals and continuously evaluate the MPO’s approach to achieving them.
Figure 1-3
LRTP Goals and Objectives, as of Spring 2019
Figure 1-4
Relationship between the LRTP, TIP, UPWP, and Performance-Based Planning Process
Chapter 2—The TIP Process
One of the most important decisions a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) faces is deciding how to allocate limited funds for transportation projects and programs. Transportation improvements are part of the solution to many critical regional, state, national, and even global problems, such as traffic congestion, air pollution, fatalities and injuries on roadways, climate change, and environmental injustice. Because there is not nearly enough funding available for all of the necessary and worthy projects that would address these problems, an MPO’s investment choices must be guided by policies that help identify the most viable and effective solutions.
As described in Chapter 1, the Boston Region MPO develops a Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to prioritize the expenditure of federal funds on transportation projects. The MPO staff manages the development of both plans. The annual development process for the TIP involves evaluating project funding requests from municipalities and state transportation agencies. The MPO staff also proposes programming for new and ongoing projects based on anticipated yearly funding levels, supports the MPO board by creating a draft TIP document, and facilitates a public involvement process that affords the public an opportunity to comment on proposed projects and review the draft TIP before the MPO board endorses the final document.
The first step in allocating federal transportation funds is the passage by the United States Congress of a multi-year act that establishes a maximum level of federal transportation funding per federal fiscal year (FFY).1 The establishment of this level of funding is referred to as an authorization.
After the authorization level has been established, the United States Department of Transportation annually allocates funding among the states according to various federal formulas. This allocation is referred to as an apportionment. The annual apportionment rarely represents the actual amount of federal funds that are ultimately committed to a state because of federally imposed limitations on spending in a given fiscal year, referred to as the obligation authority. In Massachusetts, TIPs are developed based on the estimated obligation authority.
The FFYs 2020-24 TIP’s Highway Program was developed with the assumption that funding from the Federal-Aid Highway Program for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts would range between approximately $676 million and $740 million annually over the next five years. These amounts include the funds that would be set aside initially by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) as payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program and exclude required matching funds.
The process of deciding how to use this federal funding in the Boston region follows several steps. MassDOT first reserves funding for Grant Anticipation Notes (GANs) debt service payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program; annual GANs payments range between approximately $82 million and $99 million annually over the five years of this TIP.
The remaining Federal-Aid Highway Program funds are budgeted to support state and regional (i.e., MPO) priorities. In this TIP, there is a total of approximately $734 million to $793 million assumed to be annually available statewide for programming (these amounts include both federal dollars and the state-provided local match). MassDOT customarily provides the local match (which can also be provided by other entities); thus, projects are typically funded with 80 percent federal dollars and 20 percent state dollars, depending on the funding program.
The Regional Targets are discretionary funds for MPOs, suballocated by formula to each metropolitan planning region. (The Boston Region MPO receives about 43 percent of the total funds available statewide for Regional Targets.) MassDOT developed the target formula in consultation with the Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies (MARPA).
Each MPO in the state can decide how to prioritize its Regional Target funding. Given that the Regional Target funding originates from the Federal-Aid Highway Program, the Boston Region MPO board typically programs the majority of its target funding on roadway projects; however, the MPO board has flexed portions of its TIP Highway Program funding to the TIP’s Transit Program, as when the MPO board gave its support to the Green Line Extension transit expansion project.
During the next five years, the Boston Region MPO’s total Regional Target funding will be approximately $533 million, an average of $107 million per year. To decide how to spend its Regional Target funding, the MPO engages its 97 cities and towns in an annual TIP development process.
The Federal-Aid Highway Program dollars discussed in this section come through several Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funding programs, each of which has unique requirements. Table 2-1 shows these programs, which come from the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) and fund projects in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP.
Table 2-1
Federal Highway Administration Programs Applicable to the FFYs 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program
FAST Act Program |
Eligible Uses |
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) |
A wide range of projects to reduce congestion and improve air quality in nonattainment and maintenance areas for ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter |
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) |
Implementation of infrastructure-related highway safety improvements |
National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) |
Improvements to interstate routes, major urban and rural arterials, connectors to major intermodal facilities, and the national defense network; replacement or rehabilitation of any public bridge; and resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitating routes on the Interstate Highway System |
Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) [formerly the Surface Transportation Program (STP)] |
A broad range of surface transportation capital needs, including roads; transit, sea, and airport access; and vanpool, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities |
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
|
A set-aside from the STBGP that funds the construction of infrastructure-related projects (for example, sidewalk, crossing, and on-road bicycle facility improvements) |
Metropolitan Planning |
Facilities that contribute to an intermodal transportation system, including intercity bus, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities |
National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) |
Projects that improve the efficient movement of freight on the National Highway Freight Network |
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
Federal aid for public transit authorities is allocated by formula to urbanized areas (UZAs). MassDOT is the recipient of this federal aid in the Boston UZA. In UZAs with populations greater than 200,000, such as the Boston UZA, the distribution formula factors in passenger-miles traveled, population density, and other factors associated with each transit provider. The three regional transit authorities (RTAs) in the Boston Region MPO area are the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA), and Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA). The MBTA, with its extensive transit program and infrastructure, is the recipient of the preponderance of federal transit funds in the region.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) distributes funding to transit agencies through several different programs. Table 2-2 shows FTA programs that come from the FAST Act and support transit investments in the FFYs 2020-24 TIP.
Table 2-2
Federal Transit Administration Programs Applicable to the FFYs 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program
FAST Act Program |
Eligible Uses |
Urbanized Area Formula Grants (Section 5307) |
Transit capital and operating assistance in urbanized areas |
Fixed Guideway/Bus (Section 5337) |
Replacement, rehabilitation, and other state-of-good-repair capital projects |
Bus and Bus Facilities (Section 5339) |
Capital projects to replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment, and to construct bus-related facilities |
Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities (Section 5310) |
Capital expenses that support transportation to meet the special needs of older adults and persons with disabilities |
Fixed-Guideway Capital Investment Grants (Section 5309) |
Grants for new and expanded rail, bus rapid transit, and ferry systems that reflect local priorities to improve transportation options in key corridors |
Source: Federal Transit Administration.
As mentioned previously, each MPO in the state can decide how to prioritize the Regional Target funding it receives through the processes established by FHWA and MassDOT. The Boston Region MPO’s LRTP defines the investment framework that informs the specific investment decisions made in the TIP by establishing
The MPO’s goals and objectives provide the foundation for the TIP evaluation criteria the MPO board uses when selecting roadway projects to be funded with Regional Target dollars. MPO staff compares candidate projects’ characteristics to these criteria to evaluate whether individual projects can help the MPO advance its various goals. The criteria are based on the MPO’s goals and objectives, which were adopted for its current LRTP, Charting Progress to 2040.
In Charting Progress to 2040, the Boston Region MPO’s current LRTP, the MPO strengthened the link between its spending and improvements to transportation performance by establishing a series of investment programs. These investment programs focus on specific types of projects that the MPO expects will help achieve its goals and objectives for the transportation system. The MPO created these programs to give municipalities the confidence that if they design these types of projects the MPO will be willing to fund them through the LRTP and TIP:
The MPO allocates its Regional Target dollars to these investment programs by assigning them to TIP projects that meet the investment programs’ criteria. Figure 2-1 provides details about these investment programs and their relationship to the MPO’s goals.
Figure 2-1
MPO Investment Programs
When creating investment scenarios for Charting Progress to 2040, the MPO applied guidelines which were designed to strike a balance between large-scale projects that would be included in its Major Infrastructure program and lower cost, operations and management-type projects. (Major Infrastructure projects are those that cost more than $20 million or that add capacity to the transportation network). Such a balance would help the MPO address its goals and provide more opportunities for the MPO to distribute federal transportation dollars to projects throughout the region, as opposed to concentrating it in a few large-scale projects. Charting Progress to 2040 focused on investing federal transportation dollars over a 20-year period, but several guidelines are relevant to shorter-term TIP programming, including the following:
The MPO can consider LRTP-based guidelines such as these when determining how to program Regional Target funding over the relevant five-year period for the TIP.
MassDOT, in coordination with the MBTA, updates its rolling five-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP) on an annual basis. This planning document identifies priority roadway, transit, bridge, and statewide infrastructure projects for the five MassDOT divisions and the MBTA. The CIP process uses a framework that prioritizes funding according to MassDOT’s strategic goals (listed in descending order of priority):
MassDOT and the MBTA have created investment programs for the CIP that relate to these strategic goals, and allocate funding to these goals and programs in ways that emphasize their priority.
The MBTA’s major expansion program is for the Green Line Extension.
Other program areas discussed in the CIP include:
The regional transit authorities (RTAs) in the Boston region—the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA) and the Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA)—coordinate with the MassDOT Rail and Transit Division to develop their capital programs, the federally funded components of which are reflected in the CIP according to the framework described above.
The MPO’s TIP reflects federally funded MassDOT, MBTA, and RTA investments in the CIP that will be made in the Boston region. MassDOT’s Rail and Transit Division also distributes FTA Section 5310 funds and other funds to other transit providers in the region—these investments, when programmed, are reflected in the TIP as well.
The MPO applies its investment framework when developing the TIP. The MPO board’s process for selecting projects to receive highway discretionary—or Regional Target—funding relies on evaluation criteria to help identify and prioritize projects that advance the MPO’s goals. The criteria are based on the MPO’s goals and objectives, which were adopted for Charting Progress to 2040. All projects are required to show consistency with the LRTP and other statewide and regional plans. Other considerations include the readiness of a project for construction and municipal support for the project. Background information about the TIP project evaluation process is presented in Appendix A. Following adoption of the next LRTP, Destination 2040, in June 2019, the TIP evaluation criteria will be reviewed to determine if any changes or improvements are necessary to enhance alignment with the MPO’s revised goals and objectives, or to reflect up-to-date best practices in performance-based planning.
The TIP development process begins early in the federal fiscal year when cities and towns in the region designate staff as TIP contacts and begin developing a list of priority projects to be considered for federal funding. Each fall, the MPO staff asks these TIP contacts to identify their city or town’s priority projects and then the MPO staff elicits input from interested parties and members of the general public.
New projects must be initiated by the MassDOT Highway Division before they can be considered for programming in the TIP. MassDOT details the project initiation process and posts relevant documents on its Project Review Committee’s webpage, www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/Departments/ProjectManagement/ProjectReviewCommittee.aspx.
Municipal TIP Contacts and the MPO staff coordinate to update each project’s Project Funding Application Form through the MPO’s Interactive TIP Database, www.bostonmpo.org/apps/tip11/tip_query.html, which summarizes information about each project's background, infrastructure condition and needs, development status, and ability to help the region attain the MPO’s goals and objectives.
The MPO staff compiles the project funding requests into a Universe of Unprogrammed Projects list, which consists of all identified projects being advanced for possible funding. The Universe includes projects that are fully designed and ready to be advertised for construction, those that are undergoing preliminary engineering and design, and projects still in the conceptual planning stage.
The MPO staff also monitors the anticipated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would result from each project in order to consider these impacts when prioritizing transportation investments. For more information on GHG emission monitoring and evaluation, see Appendix B.
The MPO staff uses its project evaluation criteria to logically and transparently evaluate and select projects for programming in the TIP that advance the MPO’s vision for transportation. This process favors projects that support the following goals:
The project evaluation scoring methodology consists of 28 criteria that support the six goals and related objectives of the MPO’s LRTP. A list of the TIP evaluation criteria (on the following pages) provides an overview of the goals, criteria, and scoring values.
In order for the MPO staff to conduct a complete project evaluation, the project must have a functional design report or be at a 25 percent design stage, or its plans must include the level of detail defined in a functional design report. See MassDOT’s Project Development and Design Guide for information about the contents of a functional design report. This guide is available at www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/DoingBusinessWithUs/ManualsPublicationsForms/ProjectDevelopmentDesignGuide.aspx.
The summary of evaluation results for projects considered for programming in this TIP is available in Appendix A. The table contains the total project rating for each project. For more details about the evaluation criteria used to score projects, see Appendix A.
The MPO staff meets with members of the MassDOT Highway Division and MassDOT District project managers to review cost and schedule changes related to currently programmed projects, which are undergoing design review, permitting, and right-of-way acquisition. The MPO board then considers these updated project construction costs and changes to the expected dates for construction advertisement when making decisions about changes to TIP programming. These changes have an impact on the ability of the MPO to program its target funds for new projects in the five-year TIP.
Using the evaluation ratings and information gathered about project readiness (when a project likely would be fully designed and ready for construction), staff prepares a First-Tier List of Projects. This list cites the projects that both earned the highest ratings in the MPO’s evaluation process and that could be made ready for advertising within the TIP’s time horizon—the next five FFYs.
The MPO staff strongly considers the First-Tier List of Projects when preparing a recommendation to the MPO for projects to program in the TIP. Other considerations for project selection include whether a project was programmed in the LRTP, LRTP-based guidelines for allocating funds to different programs or project types, distribution of investments across the region, and availability of sufficient funding.
Figure 2-2
Transportation Improvement Program Evaluation Criteria
As discussed above, the selection of transit, bridge, and statewide infrastructure projects for programming in the TIP draws primarily from MassDOT’s Capital Investment Plan (CIP). MassDOT and the MBTA select individual projects for inclusion in CIP programs using a process recommended by the independent Project Selection Advisory Council (PSAC) and/or based on data from asset management systems maintained by MassDOT or MBTA divisions. The following criteria from the PSAC process guide project selection:
Projects that receive the highest priority are those that meet MassDOT’s goals for maintaining and improving the overall condition and reliability of the system; modernizing the system to make it safer and more accessible and to accommodate growth; and expanding and diversifying transportation options for communities. These project prioritization processes may also reflect other planning initiatives, such as Focus40, the MBTA’s 25-year investment plan.
As discussed above, the transit element of the TIP also includes the Federal-Aid Programs of the other two RTAs in the region, CATA and MWRTA.
Once selection processes are complete, these agencies submit their lists of bridge projects, statewide infrastructure items, and transit capital projects to the MPO for review.
The MPO board considers the project evaluation results, First-Tier List of Projects, and staff recommendation when prioritizing projects for Regional Target funding. The body also considers public comments, the regional importance of projects, and other factors. In addition to prioritizing the Regional Target funding, the MPO board reviews statewide infrastructure items, the Bridge Program, and the capital programs for the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA before voting to release a draft TIP for public review.
The MPO board votes to release the draft document for public review and invites members of the public, municipal officials, and other stakeholders in the Boston region to review the proposed TIP. The MPO staff hosts outreach events during the public review period to elicit comments on the draft document (see Appendix C).
After the public review period ends, the MPO staff and board review all municipal and public comments, and the board may change the programming or the document as appropriate before endorsing the TIP. MassDOT staff incorporates the MPO-endorsed TIP into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and submits it to the FHWA and FTA for approval. The FHWA, FTA, and US Environmental Protection Agency review the STIP and certify it by September 30, the end of the federal fiscal year.
The TIP is a dynamic program that may be amended and adjusted throughout the year. Administrative modifications and amendments are often introduced because of changes in project status (advertisement readiness), project cost, project design scope, or available revenue. An amendment is a revision that requires public review and a demonstration of fiscal constraint.
Consistent with federal guidelines, the Boston Region MPO must release an amendment if there is (1) a change in project cost of $500,000 or more, for projects valued at $5 million or less, or (2) a change of 10 percent or more of the project cost, for projects valued greater than $5 million. Cost changes that are less than these threshold amounts may be considered in the form of administrative modifications or adjustments, which must still undergo MPO board action for approval. Although a public review period is not required for administrative modifications or adjustments, one may be offered at the MPO board’s discretion.
All proposed amendments are presented in a public setting at an MPO meeting, and details are posted on the MPO’s website, bostonmpo.org. Public notices are distributed through the MPO’s email contact list, which members of the public may join by signing up on the MPO’s website. TIP contacts at the affected municipalities and the public are notified of pending amendments at the start of an amendment’s public review period.
Notices of draft TIP amendments include a summary of the amendment’s contents, dates of the public review period, contact information for submitting a comment to the MPO, and the date, time, and location that the MPO will vote on that amendment. Also during the public review period, the MPO staff notifies and briefs the Regional Transportation Advisory Council about the amendment and relays comments from the Advisory Council, if any, to the MPO board. Municipal representatives and members of the public are invited to submit written or oral testimony at the MPO meetings at which amendments are discussed or voted upon.
The MPO typically holds a 21-day public review period before taking final action on an amendment. In extraordinary circumstances, the MPO may vote to shorten the public review period to a minimum of 15 days. (These circumstances are detailed in the MPO’s Public Participation Plan.)
The MPO’s website is the best place to find current information about the TIP. All changes to the draft TIP and changes to the endorsed TIP, such as amendments and modifications that have been approved by the MPO, are available on the TIP webpage on the MPO’s website, bostonmpo.org/tip.
Comments or questions about the draft TIP materials may be submitted directly to the MPO staff via the website, email, or US mail, or voiced at MPO meetings and other public MPO events.
1 The most recent authorization act, Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), was signed into law on December 4, 2015.
Chapter 3
Summary of Highway and Transit Programming
The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) tables included in this chapter present a listing of all the projects and programs funded with federal highway and transit aid in the Boston region during federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2020–24. These funding tables are also included as part of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
Table 3-1 presents a summary of the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) share of Regional Target funds from the Federal-Aid Highway Program. The allocation of these funds is constrained by projections of available federal aid. As shown in Table 3-1, the MPO has programmed these discretionary funds within the limits of projected funding for highway funding programs. As such, the FFYs 2020–24 TIP Regional Target Program complies with financial constraint requirements. The details of this funding and the specific projects programmed with Regional Target funding are shown in Section 1A of each annual element of the TIP tables (Table 3- 2). Section 1A includes the regionally prioritized projects funded during a given federal fiscal year. The other sections in Table 3-2 (sections 1B, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3, and 4) list the following:
Projects funded with earmarks or discretionary grant funds
State-prioritized bridge repairs and rehabilitation, pavement maintenance, safety improvements, retrofits for accessibility (as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act), intersection improvements, roadway reconstruction, and bicycle and pedestrian projects
Projects funded by sources other than federal aid
Each annual element of Table 3-2 also lists the federally funded transit projects and programs in the Boston region that the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), MetroWest Regional Transit Authority, and Cape Ann Transportation Authority plan to undertake. Tables 3-3 and 3-4 provide additional information related to the MBTA’s programs and projects planned in the region.
The second part of the chapter includes detailed descriptions of projects, including evaluation scores (for projects funded by the MPO’s Regional Target Program), project proponents, and funding details. The pages are organized alphabetically by the municipality in which each project is located.
Table 3-1
Boston Region MPO Regional Target Program
MPO Discretionary Funds Sourced from the Federal-Aid Highway Program
Regional Target Program |
FFY 2020 |
FFY 2021 |
FFY 2022 |
FFY 2023 |
FFY 2024 |
Total |
Regional Target Obligation Authority |
$102,478,656 |
$104,552,877 |
$106,681,829 |
$109,011,849 |
$110,440,638 |
$533,165,849 |
Regional Target Funds Programmed |
$102,478,656 |
$104,552,877 |
$106,681,829 |
$109,011,849 |
$110,440,638 |
$533,165,848 |
Regional Target Funds Unprogrammed |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1 |
| 2020 | Boston Region Transportation Improvement Program | |||||||||||
| Amendment / Adjustment Type ▼ |
STIP Program ▼ | MassDOT Project ID ▼ | Metropolitan Planning Organization ▼ | Municipality Name ▼ | MassDOT Project Description▼ | MassDOT District ▼ | Funding Source ▼ | Total Programmed Funds ▼ | Federal Funds ▼ | Non-Federal Funds ▼ | Additional Information ▼ Present information as follows, if applicable: a) Planning / Design / or Construction; b) total project cost and funding sources used; c) advance construction status; d) MPO project score; e) name of entity receiving a transfer; f) name of entity paying the non-state non-federal match; g) earmark details; h) TAP project proponent; i) other information | |
| ►Section 1A / Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||||
| Regionally Prioritized Projects subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 1A / Fiscal Constraint Analysis | ||||||||||||
| Total Regional Federal Aid Funds Programmed ► | $ - | $ 102,478,656 | ◄Total Budget | $ 102,478,656 | Target Funds Available | |||||||
| Section 1A instructions: MPO Template Name) Choose Regional Name from dropdown list to populate header and MPO column; Column C) Enter ID from ProjectInfo; Column E) Choose Municipality Name from dropdown list; Column H) Choose the Funding Source being used for the project - if multiple funding sources are being used enter multiple lines; Column I) Enter the total amount of funds being programmed in this fiscal year and for each funding source; Column J) Federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the amount and only change if needed for flex. Column K) Non-federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the split/match - if matching an FTA flex, coordinate with Rail & Transit Division before programming; Column L) Enter Additional Information as described - please do not use any other format. | STBG programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ STBG | ||||||||
| HSIP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ HSIP | |||||||||
| CMAQ programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ CMAQ | |||||||||
| TAP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ TAP | |||||||||
| ►Section 1B / Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Other Federal Aid | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | Other Federal Aid | HPP | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Federal Aid subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2A / State Prioritized Reliability Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Inspections | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Inspection | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Inspections subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Off-System | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Off-System | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Off-System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 604173 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-16-016, NORTH WASHINGTON STREET OVER THE BOSTON INNER HARBOR | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 26,291,954 | $ 21,033,563 | $ 5,258,391 | AC Year 4 of 6, Total Cost $176,318,433 | ||
| Bridge Program | 605342 | Boston Region | Stow | STOW- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-29-001, (ST 62) GLEASONDALE ROAD OVER THE ASSABET RIVER | 3 | NHPP-On | $ 6,706,560 | $ 5,365,248 | $ 1,341,312 | |||
| Bridge Program | 605287 | Boston Region | Chelsea | CHELSEA- ROUTE 1 VIADUCT REHABILITATION (SB/NB) ON C-09-007 & C-09-011 | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 39,152,831 | $ 31,322,265 | $ 7,830,566 | AC Year 3 of 4, Total Cost $213,972,689 | ||
| Bridge Program | 604952 | Boston Region | Multiple | LYNN- SAUGUS- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-18-016=S-05-008, ROUTE 107 OVER THE SAUGUS RIVER (AKA - BELDEN G. BLY BRIDGE) | 4 | NHPP-On | $ 14,694,121 | $ 11,755,297 | $ 2,938,824 | AC Year 2 of 5, Total Cost $84,253,135 | ||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) subtotal ► | $ 86,845,466 | $ 69,476,373 | $ 17,369,093 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Insterstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 90% Federal + 10% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Non-Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 609101 | Boston Region | Peabody | PEABODY - PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 128 | 4 | NHPP | $ 5,025,000 | $ 4,020,000 | $ 1,005,000 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 609102 | Boston Region | Multiple | WENHAM - GLOUCESTER - PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 128 | 4 | NHPP | $ 13,083,840 | $ 10,467,072 | $ 2,616,768 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608482 | Boston Region | Multiple | CAMBRIDGE-SOMERVILLE RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 28 | Multiple | NHPP | $ 7,080,000 | $ 5,664,000 | $ 1,416,000 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Non-Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ 25,188,840 | $ 20,151,072 | $ 5,037,768 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Roadway Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Improvements | 609222 | Boston Region | Arlington | ARLINGTON - SPY POND SEDIMENT REMOVAL | 4 | STBG | $ 950,000 | $ 760,000 | $ 190,000 | |||
| Roadway Improvements | Boston Region | Roadway Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Improvements subtotal ► | $ 950,000 | $ 760,000 | $ 190,000 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Safety Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Safety Improvements | 608611 | Boston Region | Multiple | CANTON- MILTON- RANDOLPH- REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION OF THE HIGHWAY LIGHTING SYSTEM AT THE ROUTE 24/ROUTE 1/I-93 INTERCHANGE | 6 | NHPP | $ 8,735,250 | $ 6,988,200 | $ 1,747,050 | |||
| Safety Improvements | 608608 | Boston Region | Braintree | BRAINTREE- HIGHWAY LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AT I-93/ROUTE 3 INTERCHANGE | 6 | HSIP | $ 2,688,726 | $ 2,419,853 | $ 268,873 | AC Year 2 of 2 | ||
| Safety Improvements | 608205 | Boston Region | Multiple | READING TO LYNNFIELD- GUIDE AND TRAFFIC SIGN REPLACEMENT ON A SECTION OF I-95 (SR 128) | 4 | HSIP | $ 4,500,000 | $ 4,050,000 | $ 450,000 | |||
| Safety Improvements | Boston Region | Safety Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Safety Improvements subtotal ► | $ 15,923,976 | $ 13,458,053 | $ 2,465,923 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2B / State Prioritized Modernization Projects | ||||||||||||
| ► ADA Retrofits | ||||||||||||
| ADA Retrofits | Boston Region | ADA Retrofits | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| ADA Retrofits subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Intersection Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Intersection Improvements | Boston Region | Intersection Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intersection Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Intelligent Transportation Systems | ||||||||||||
| Intelligent Transportation Systems | Boston Region | Intelligent Transportation Systems | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intelligent Transportation System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Roadway Reconstruction | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 608835 | Boston Region | Medford | MEDFORD- IMPROVEMENTS AT BROOKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (SRTS) | 4 | TAP | $ 989,895 | $ 791,916 | $ 197,979 | |||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 608743 | Boston Region | Salem | SALEM- IMPROVEMENTS AT BATES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (SRTS) | 4 | TAP | $ 384,658 | $ 307,726 | $ 76,932 | |||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 608791 | Boston Region | Winchester | WINCHESTER- IMPROVEMENTS AT VINSON-OWEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (SRTS) | 4 | TAP | $ 1,671,716 | $ 1,337,373 | $ 334,343 | |||
| Roadway Reconstruction | Boston Region | Roadway Reconstruction | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction subtotal ► | $ 3,046,269 | $ 2,437,015 | $ 609,254 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2C / State Prioritized Expansion Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bicycles and Pedestrians | ||||||||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | Boston Region | Bicycles and Pedestrians | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Capacity | ||||||||||||
| Capacity | Boston Region | Capacity | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Capacity subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 3 / Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| ►Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | ABP GANS Repayment | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Award adjustments, change orders, etc. | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Metropolitan Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | State Planning and Research Work Program II, (SPR II), Research | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Railroad Crossings | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Recreational Trails | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Statewide Items subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 4 / Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| Non Federal Aid | Boston Region | Non-Federal Aid | $ - | $ - | ||||||||
| Non-Federal Aid subtotal► | $ - | $ - | ◄100% Non-Federal | |||||||||
| 2020 Summary | TIP Section 1 - 3: ▼ | TIP Section 4: ▼ | Total of All Projects ▼ | |||||||||
| Total ► | $ 131,954,551 | $ - | $ 131,954,551 | ◄ Total Spending in Region | ||||||||
| Federal Funds ► | $ 106,282,513 | $ 106,282,513 | ◄ Total Federal Spending in Region | |||||||||
| Non-Federal Funds ► | $ 25,672,038 | $ - | $ 25,672,038 | ◄ Total Non-Federal Spending in Region | ||||||||
| 701 CMR 7.00 Use of Road Flaggers and Police Details on Public Works Projects / 701 CMR 7.00 (the Regulation) was promulgated and became law on October 3, 2008. Under this Regulation, the CMR is applicable to any Public works Project that is performed within the limits of, or that impact traffic on, any Public Road. The Municipal Limitation referenced in this Regulation is applicable only to projects where the Municipality is the Awarding Authority. For all projects contained in the TIP, the Commonwealth is the Awarding Authority. Therefore, all projects must be considered and implemented in accordance with 701 CMR 7.00, and the Road Flagger and Police Detail Guidelines. By placing a project on the TIP, the Municipality acknowledges that 701 CMR 7.00 is applicable to its project and design and construction will be fully compliant with this Regulation. This information, and additional information relative to guidance and implementation of the Regulation can be found at the following link on the MassDOT Highway Division website: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Highway/flaggers/main.aspx | ||||||||||||
The transit TIP tables will be included in the public review draft TIP. For now, a summary of MBTA and RTA programming for the FFYs 2020-24 TIP is included in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5.
| Amendment / Adjustment Type ▼ |
STIP Program ▼ | MassDOT Project ID ▼ | Metropolitan Planning Organization ▼ | Municipality Name ▼ | MassDOT Project Description▼ | MassDOT District ▼ | Funding Source ▼ | Total Programmed Funds ▼ | Federal Funds ▼ | Non-Federal Funds ▼ | Additional Information ▼ Present information as follows, if applicable: a) Planning / Design / or Construction; b) total project cost and funding sources used; c) advance construction status; d) MPO project score; e) name of entity receiving a transfer; f) name of entity paying the non-state non-federal match; g) earmark details; h) TAP project proponent; i) other information | |
| ►Section 1A / Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||||
| Regionally Prioritized Projects subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 1A / Fiscal Constraint Analysis | ||||||||||||
| Total Regional Federal Aid Funds Programmed ► | $ - | $ 104,552,877 | ◄Total Budget | $ 104,552,877 | Target Funds Available | |||||||
| Section 1A instructions: MPO Template Name) Choose Regional Name from dropdown list to populate header and MPO column; Column C) Enter ID from ProjectInfo; Column E) Choose Municipality Name from dropdown list; Column H) Choose the Funding Source being used for the project - if multiple funding sources are being used enter multiple lines; Column I) Enter the total amount of funds being programmed in this fiscal year and for each funding source; Column J) Federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the amount and only change if needed for flex. Column K) Non-federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the split/match - if matching an FTA flex, coordinate with Rail & Transit Division before programming; Column L) Enter Additional Information as described - please do not use any other format. | STBG programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ STBG | ||||||||
| HSIP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ HSIP | |||||||||
| CMAQ programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ CMAQ | |||||||||
| TAP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ TAP | |||||||||
| ►Section 1B / Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Other Federal Aid | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 606501 | Boston Region | Holbrook | HOLBROOK- RECONSTRUCTION OF UNION STREET (ROUTE 139), FROM LINFIELD STREET TO CENTRE STREET/WATER STREET | 5 | HPP | $ 1,527,250 | $ 1,221,800 | $ 305,450 | Demo ID MA177 | ||
| Boston Region | Other Federal Aid | HPP | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Federal Aid subtotal ► | $ 1,527,250 | $ 1,221,800 | $ 305,450 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2A / State Prioritized Reliability Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Inspections | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Inspection | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Inspections subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Off-System | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608637 | Boston Region | Maynard | MAYNARD- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, M-10-006, CARRYING FLORIDA ROAD OVER THE ASSABET RIVER | 3 | STBG-BR-OFF | $ 1,646,400 | $ 1,317,120 | $ 329,280 | |||
| Bridge Program | 608079 | Boston Region | Sharon | SHARON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-09-003 (40N), MASKWONIKUT STREET OVER AMTRAK/MBTA | 5 | STBG-BR-OFF | $ 5,755,240 | $ 4,604,192 | $ 1,151,048 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Off-System | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Off-System subtotal ► | $ 7,401,640 | $ 5,921,312 | $ 1,480,328 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 604173 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-16-016, NORTH WASHINGTON STREET OVER THE BOSTON INNER HARBOR | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 30,389,655 | $ 24,311,724 | $ 6,077,931 | AC Year 5 of 6, Total Cost $176,318,433 | ||
| Bridge Program | 605287 | Boston Region | Chelsea | CHELSEA- ROUTE 1 VIADUCT REHABILITATION (SB/NB) ON C-09-007 & C-09-011 | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 29,992,990 | $ 23,994,392 | $ 5,998,598 | AC Year 4 of 4, Total Cost $213,972,689 | ||
| Bridge Program | 604952 | Boston Region | Multiple | LYNN- SAUGUS- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-18-016=S-05-008, ROUTE 107 OVER THE SAUGUS RIVER (AKA - BELDEN G. BLY BRIDGE) | 4 | NHPP-On | $ 12,969,789 | $ 10,375,831 | $ 2,593,958 | AC Year 3 of 5, Total Cost $84,253,135 | ||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) subtotal ► | $ 73,352,434 | $ 58,681,947 | $ 14,670,487 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608596 | Boston Region | Essex | ESSEX- SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, E-11-001 (2TV), ROUTE 133\MAIN STREET OVER ESSEX RIVER | 4 | NHPP-Off | $ 4,511,360 | $ 3,609,088 | $ 902,272 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) subtotal ► | $ 4,511,360 | $ 3,609,088 | $ 902,272 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608610 | Boston Region | Newton | NEWTON- STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE CLEANING (FULL REMOVAL) AND PAINTING OF N-12-055 | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 2,304,000 | $ 1,843,200 | $ 460,800 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance subtotal ► | $ 2,304,000 | $ 1,843,200 | $ 460,800 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Interstate Pavement | 608208 | Boston Region | Multiple | QUINCY - MILTON - BOSTON - INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE AND RELATED WORK ON I-93 | 6 | NHPP | $ 27,371,469 | $ 24,634,322 | $ 2,737,147 | |||
| Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Insterstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ 27,371,469 | $ 24,634,322 | $ 2,737,147 | ◄ 90% Federal + 10% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Non-Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608467 | Boston Region | Marlborough | MARLBOROUGH- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 20 | 3 | NHPP | $ 14,358,240 | $ 11,486,592 | $ 2,871,648 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 607477 | Boston Region | Multiple | LYNNFIELD-PEABODY RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 1 | 4 | NHPP | $ 7,721,542 | $ 6,177,234 | $ 1,544,308 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Non-Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ 22,079,782 | $ 17,663,826 | $ 4,415,956 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Roadway Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Improvements | Boston Region | Roadway Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Safety Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Safety Improvements | Boston Region | Safety Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Safety Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2B / State Prioritized Modernization Projects | ||||||||||||
| ► ADA Retrofits | ||||||||||||
| ADA Retrofits | Boston Region | ADA Retrofits | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| ADA Retrofits subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Intersection Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Intersection Improvements | 608562 | Boston Region | Somerville | SOMERVILLE- SIGNAL AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ON I-93 AT MYSTIC AVENUE AND MCGRATH HIGHWAY (TOP 200 CRASH LOCATION) | 4 | HSIP | $ 5,181,613 | $ 4,663,452 | $ 518,161 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 607342 | Boston Region | Milton | MILTON- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS @ ROUTE 28 (RANDOLPH AVENUE) & CHICKATAWBUT ROAD | 6 | HSIP | $ 1,478,849 | $ 1,330,964 | $ 147,885 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 607748 | Boston Region | Acton | ACTON- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS ON SR 2 & SR 111 (MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE) AT PIPER ROAD & TAYLOR ROAD | 3 | HSIP | $ 5,657,725 | $ 5,091,952 | $ 565,772 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 607761 | Boston Region | Swampscott | SWAMPSCOTT- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT SR 1A (PARADISE ROAD) AT SWAMPSCOTT MALL | 4 | HSIP | $ 1,157,036 | $ 1,041,333 | $ 115,704 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | Boston Region | Intersection Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intersection Improvements subtotal ► | $ 13,475,223 | $ 12,127,701 | $ 1,347,522 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Intelligent Transportation Systems | ||||||||||||
| Intelligent Transportation Systems | Boston Region | Intelligent Transportation Systems | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intelligent Transportation System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Roadway Reconstruction | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 608911 | Boston Region | Belmont | BELMONT- IMPROVEMENTS AT WELLINGTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (SRTS) | 4 | TAP | $ 1,614,288 | $ 1,291,430 | $ 322,858 | |||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 607901 | Boston Region | Dedham | DEDHAM- PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS ALONG ELM STREET & RUSTCRAFT ROAD CORRIDORS | 6 | CMAQ | $ 3,019,061 | $ 2,415,249 | $ 603,812 | |||
| Roadway Reconstruction | Boston Region | Roadway Reconstruction | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction subtotal ► | $ 4,633,349 | $ 3,706,679 | $ 926,670 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2C / State Prioritized Expansion Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bicycles and Pedestrians | ||||||||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | 609066 | Boston Region | Multiple | NEWTON- WESTON- MULTI-USE TRAIL CONNECTION, FROM RECREATION ROAD TO UPPER CHARLES RIVER GREENWAY INCLUDING RECONSTRUCTION OF PED BRIDGE N-12-078=W-29-062 | 6 | CMAQ | $ 2,767,958 | $ 2,214,367 | $ 553,592 | |||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | 607888 | Boston Region | Multiple | BOSTON- BROOKLINE- MULTI-USE PATH CONSTRUCTION ON NEW FENWAY | 6 | CMAQ | $ 3,345,372 | $ 2,676,298 | $ 669,074 | |||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | Boston Region | Bicycles and Pedestrians | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians subtotal ► | $ 6,113,331 | $ 4,890,664 | $ 1,222,666 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Capacity | ||||||||||||
| Capacity | Boston Region | Capacity | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Capacity subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 3 / Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| ►Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | ABP GANS Repayment | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Award adjustments, change orders, etc. | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Metropolitan Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | State Planning and Research Work Program II, (SPR II), Research | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Railroad Crossings | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Recreational Trails | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Statewide Items subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 4 / Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| Non Federal Aid | Boston Region | Non-Federal Aid | $ - | $ - | ||||||||
| Non-Federal Aid subtotal► | $ - | $ - | ◄100% Non-Federal | |||||||||
| 2021 Summary | TIP Section 1 - 3: ▼ | TIP Section 4: ▼ | Total of All Projects ▼ | |||||||||
| Total ► | $ 162,769,837 | $ - | $ 162,769,837 | ◄ Total Spending in Region | ||||||||
| Federal Funds ► | $ 134,300,539 | $ 134,300,539 | ◄ Total Federal Spending in Region | |||||||||
| Non-Federal Funds ► | $ 28,469,298 | $ - | $ 28,469,298 | ◄ Total Non-Federal Spending in Region | ||||||||
| 701 CMR 7.00 Use of Road Flaggers and Police Details on Public Works Projects / 701 CMR 7.00 (the Regulation) was promulgated and became law on October 3, 2008. Under this Regulation, the CMR is applicable to any Public works Project that is performed within the limits of, or that impact traffic on, any Public Road. The Municipal Limitation referenced in this Regulation is applicable only to projects where the Municipality is the Awarding Authority. For all projects contained in the TIP, the Commonwealth is the Awarding Authority. Therefore, all projects must be considered and implemented in accordance with 701 CMR 7.00, and the Road Flagger and Police Detail Guidelines. By placing a project on the TIP, the Municipality acknowledges that 701 CMR 7.00 is applicable to its project and design and construction will be fully compliant with this Regulation. This information, and additional information relative to guidance and implementation of the Regulation can be found at the following link on the MassDOT Highway Division website: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Highway/flaggers/main.aspx | ||||||||||||
The transit TIP tables will be included in the public review draft TIP. For now, a summary of MBTA and RTA programming for the FFYs 2020-24 TIP is included in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5.
| 2022 | Boston Region Transportation Improvement Program | |||||||||||
| Amendment / Adjustment Type ▼ |
STIP Program ▼ | MassDOT Project ID ▼ | Metropolitan Planning Organization ▼ | Municipality Name ▼ | MassDOT Project Description▼ | MassDOT District ▼ | Funding Source ▼ | Total Programmed Funds ▼ | Federal Funds ▼ | Non-Federal Funds ▼ | Additional Information ▼ Present information as follows, if applicable: a) Planning / Design / or Construction; b) total project cost and funding sources used; c) advance construction status; d) MPO project score; e) name of entity receiving a transfer; f) name of entity paying the non-state non-federal match; g) earmark details; h) TAP project proponent; i) other information | |
| ►Section 1A / Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||||
| Regionally Prioritized Projects subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 1A / Fiscal Constraint Analysis | ||||||||||||
| Total Regional Federal Aid Funds Programmed ► | $ - | $ 106,681,829 | ◄Total Budget | $ 106,681,829 | Target Funds Available | |||||||
| Section 1A instructions: MPO Template Name) Choose Regional Name from dropdown list to populate header and MPO column; Column C) Enter ID from ProjectInfo; Column E) Choose Municipality Name from dropdown list; Column H) Choose the Funding Source being used for the project - if multiple funding sources are being used enter multiple lines; Column I) Enter the total amount of funds being programmed in this fiscal year and for each funding source; Column J) Federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the amount and only change if needed for flex. Column K) Non-federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the split/match - if matching an FTA flex, coordinate with Rail & Transit Division before programming; Column L) Enter Additional Information as described - please do not use any other format. | STBG programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ STBG | ||||||||
| HSIP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ HSIP | |||||||||
| CMAQ programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ CMAQ | |||||||||
| TAP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ TAP | |||||||||
| ►Section 1B / Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Other Federal Aid | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | Other Federal Aid | HPP | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Federal Aid subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2A / State Prioritized Reliability Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Inspections | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Inspection | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Inspections subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Off-System | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608255 | Boston Region | Stow | STOW- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-29-011, BOX MILL ROAD OVER ELIZABETH BROOK | 3 | STBG-BR-OFF | $ 3,612,223 | $ 2,889,779 | $ 722,445 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Off-System | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Off-System subtotal ► | $ 3,612,223 | $ 2,889,779 | $ 722,445 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608614 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- BRIDGE SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIRS, B-16-179, AUSTIN STREET OVER I-93 RAMPS, MBTA COMMUTER RAIL AND ORANGE LINE | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 5,000,000 | $ 4,000,000 | $ 1,000,000 | |||
| Bridge Program | 607327 | Boston Region | Wilmington | WILMINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, W-38-002, ROUTE 38 (MAIN STREET) OVER THE B&M RAILROAD | 4 | NHPP-On | $ 10,760,960 | $ 8,608,768 | $ 2,152,192 | |||
| Bridge Program | 604173 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-16-016, NORTH WASHINGTON STREET OVER THE BOSTON INNER HARBOR | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 28,825,728 | $ 23,060,582 | $ 5,765,146 | AC Year 6 of 6, Total Cost $176,318,433 | ||
| Bridge Program | 604952 | Boston Region | Multiple | LYNN- SAUGUS- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-18-016=S-05-008, ROUTE 107 OVER THE SAUGUS RIVER (AKA - BELDEN G. BLY BRIDGE) | 4 | NHPP-On | $ 22,307,071 | $ 17,845,656 | $ 4,461,414 | AC Year 4 of 5, Total Cost $84,253,135 | ||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) subtotal ► | $ 66,893,759 | $ 53,515,007 | $ 13,378,752 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608929 | Boston Region | Wilmington | WILMINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, W-38-003, BUTTERS ROW OVER MBTA | 4 | NHPP-Off | $ 5,183,360 | $ 4,146,688 | $ 1,036,672 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) subtotal ► | $ 5,183,360 | $ 4,146,688 | $ 1,036,672 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608866 | Boston Region | Multiple | NEWTON- WESTON- STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE CLEANING (FULL REMOVAL) AND PAINTING OF 3 BRIDGES: N-12-051, W-29-011 & W-29-028 | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 2,349,900 | $ 1,879,920 | $ 469,980 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance subtotal ► | $ 2,349,900 | $ 1,879,920 | $ 469,980 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Insterstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 90% Federal + 10% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Non-Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608817 | Boston Region | Multiple | SALEM-LYNN - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON RTE 107 | 4 | NHPP | $ 2,278,125 | $ 1,822,500 | $ 455,625 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608818 | Boston Region | Danvers | DANVERS - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 114 | 4 | NHPP | $ 1,003,590 | $ 802,872 | $ 200,718 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608480 | Boston Region | Foxborough | FOXBOROUGH - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON US ROUTE 1 | 5 | NHPP | $ 7,072,920 | $ 5,658,336 | $ 1,414,584 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Non-Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ 10,354,635 | $ 8,283,708 | $ 2,070,927 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Roadway Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Improvements | 608599 | Boston Region | Multiple | CANTON- SHARON- FOXBOROUGH- NORWOOD- WALPOLE- STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS ALONG ROUTE 1, ROUTE 1A & INTERSTATE 95 | 5 | STBG | $ 526,235 | $ 420,988 | $ 105,247 | |||
| Roadway Improvements | Boston Region | Roadway Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Safety Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Safety Improvements | 609060 | Boston Region | Multiple | LYNNFIELD- PEABODY- DANVERS- GUIDE AND TRAFFIC SIGN REPLACEMENT ON I-95/128 (TASK 'A' INTERCHANGE) | 4 | HSIP | $ 495,860 | $ 446,274 | $ 49,586 | |||
| Safety Improvements | 609090 | Boston Region | Multiple | BOSTON- MILTON- QUINCY- HIGHWAY LIGHTING SYSTEM REPLACEMENT ON I-93, FROM NEPONSET AVENUE TO THE BRAINTREE SPLIT | 6 | NHPP | $ 9,568,000 | $ 7,654,400 | $ 1,913,600 | |||
| Safety Improvements | Boston Region | Safety Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Safety Improvements subtotal ► | $ 10,063,860 | $ 8,100,674 | $ 1,963,186 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2B / State Prioritized Modernization Projects | ||||||||||||
| ► ADA Retrofits | ||||||||||||
| ADA Retrofits | Boston Region | ADA Retrofits | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| ADA Retrofits subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Intersection Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Intersection Improvements | 608567 | Boston Region | Peabody | PEABODY- IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 114 AT SYLVAN STREET, CROSS STREET, NORTHSHORE MALL, LORIS ROAD, ROUTE 128 INTERCHANGE AND ESQUIRE DRIVE | 4 | HSIP | $ 1,815,480 | $ 1,633,932 | $ 181,548 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 608569 | Boston Region | Quincy | QUINCY- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 3A (SOUTHERN ARTERY) AND BROAD STREET | 6 | HSIP | $ 3,132,000 | $ 2,818,800 | $ 313,200 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | Boston Region | Intersection Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intersection Improvements subtotal ► | $ 4,947,480 | $ 4,452,732 | $ 494,748 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Intelligent Transportation Systems | ||||||||||||
| Intelligent Transportation Systems | Boston Region | Intelligent Transportation Systems | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intelligent Transportation System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Roadway Reconstruction | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NFP | $ 27,500,000 | $ 22,000,000 | $ 5,500,000 | a) Construction; Total Federal Participating Cost (TFPC) = $189,451,000; AC Yr 1 of 5 | ||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NHPP | $ 12,233,939 | $ 9,787,151 | $ 2,446,788 | a) Construction; Total Federal Participating Cost (TFPC) = $189,451,000; AC Yr 1 of 5 | ||
| Roadway Reconstruction | Boston Region | Roadway Reconstruction | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction subtotal ► | $ 39,733,939 | $ 31,787,151 | $ 7,946,788 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2C / State Prioritized Expansion Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bicycles and Pedestrians | ||||||||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | Boston Region | Bicycles and Pedestrians | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Capacity | ||||||||||||
| Capacity | Boston Region | Capacity | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Capacity subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 3 / Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| ►Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | ABP GANS Repayment | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Award adjustments, change orders, etc. | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Metropolitan Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | State Planning and Research Work Program II, (SPR II), Research | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Railroad Crossings | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Recreational Trails | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Statewide Items subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 4 / Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| Non Federal Aid | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NFA | $ - | $ - | ||||
| Non-Federally Aided Projects | Boston Region | Non-Federal Aid | $ - | $ - | ||||||||
| Non-Federal Aid subtotal► | $ - | $ - | ◄100% Non-Federal | |||||||||
| 2022 Summary | TIP Section 1 - 3: ▼ | TIP Section 4: ▼ | Total of All Projects ▼ | |||||||||
| Total ► | $ 143,139,156 | $ - | $ 143,139,156 | ◄ Total Spending in Region | ||||||||
| Federal Funds ► | $ 115,055,659 | $ 115,055,659 | ◄ Total Federal Spending in Region | |||||||||
| Non-Federal Funds ► | $ 28,083,497 | $ - | $ 28,083,497 | ◄ Total Non-Federal Spending in Region | ||||||||
| 701 CMR 7.00 Use of Road Flaggers and Police Details on Public Works Projects / 701 CMR 7.00 (the Regulation) was promulgated and became law on October 3, 2008. Under this Regulation, the CMR is applicable to any Public works Project that is performed within the limits of, or that impact traffic on, any Public Road. The Municipal Limitation referenced in this Regulation is applicable only to projects where the Municipality is the Awarding Authority. For all projects contained in the TIP, the Commonwealth is the Awarding Authority. Therefore, all projects must be considered and implemented in accordance with 701 CMR 7.00, and the Road Flagger and Police Detail Guidelines. By placing a project on the TIP, the Municipality acknowledges that 701 CMR 7.00 is applicable to its project and design and construction will be fully compliant with this Regulation. This information, and additional information relative to guidance and implementation of the Regulation can be found at the following link on the MassDOT Highway Division website: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Highway/flaggers/main.aspx | ||||||||||||
The transit TIP tables will be included in the public review draft TIP. For now, a summary of MBTA and RTA programming for the FFYs 2020-24 TIP is included in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5.
| 2023 | Boston Region Transportation Improvement Program | |||||||||||
| Amendment / Adjustment Type ▼ |
STIP Program ▼ | MassDOT Project ID ▼ | Metropolitan Planning Organization ▼ | Municipality Name ▼ | MassDOT Project Description▼ | MassDOT District ▼ | Funding Source ▼ | Total Programmed Funds ▼ | Federal Funds ▼ | Non-Federal Funds ▼ | Additional Information ▼ Present information as follows, if applicable: a) Planning / Design / or Construction; b) total project cost and funding sources used; c) advance construction status; d) MPO project score; e) name of entity receiving a transfer; f) name of entity paying the non-state non-federal match; g) earmark details; h) TAP project proponent; i) other information | |
| ►Section 1A / Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||||
| Regionally Prioritized Projects subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 1A / Fiscal Constraint Analysis | ||||||||||||
| Total Regional Federal Aid Funds Programmed ► | $ - | $ 109,011,849 | ◄Total Budget | $ 109,011,849 | Target Funds Available | |||||||
| Section 1A instructions: MPO Template Name) Choose Regional Name from dropdown list to populate header and MPO column; Column C) Enter ID from ProjectInfo; Column E) Choose Municipality Name from dropdown list; Column H) Choose the Funding Source being used for the project - if multiple funding sources are being used enter multiple lines; Column I) Enter the total amount of funds being programmed in this fiscal year and for each funding source; Column J) Federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the amount and only change if needed for flex. Column K) Non-federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the split/match - if matching an FTA flex, coordinate with Rail & Transit Division before programming; Column L) Enter Additional Information as described - please do not use any other format. | STBG programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ STBG | ||||||||
| HSIP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ HSIP | |||||||||
| CMAQ programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ CMAQ | |||||||||
| TAP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ TAP | |||||||||
| ►Section 1B / Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Other Federal Aid | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | Other Federal Aid | HPP | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Federal Aid subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2A / State Prioritized Reliability Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Inspections | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Inspection | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Inspections subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Off-System | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Off-System | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Off-System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 606728 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT B-16-365, BOWKER OVERPASS OVER STORROW DRIVE (EB) | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 24,009,700 | $ 19,207,760 | $ 4,801,940 | |||
| Bridge Program | 606902 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION/REHAB, B-16-181, WEST ROXBURY PARKWAY OVER MBTA | 6 | NHPP-On | $ 6,900,000 | $ 5,520,000 | $ 1,380,000 | |||
| Bridge Program | 604952 | Boston Region | Multiple | LYNN- SAUGUS- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-18-016=S-05-008, ROUTE 107 OVER THE SAUGUS RIVER (AKA - BELDEN G. BLY BRIDGE) | 4 | NHPP-On | $ 18,409,727 | $ 14,727,781 | $ 3,681,945 | AC Year 5 of 5, Total Cost $84,253,135 | ||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) subtotal ► | $ 49,319,427 | $ 39,455,541 | $ 9,863,885 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608197 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, B-16-107, CANTERBURY STREET OVER AMTRAK/MBTA | 6 | NHPP-Off | $ 4,678,280 | $ 3,742,624 | $ 935,656 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) subtotal ► | $ 4,678,280 | $ 3,742,624 | $ 935,656 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608609 | Boston Region | Multiple | NEWTON- WESTWOOD- STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE CLEANING (FULL REMOVAL) AND PAINTING OF 2 BRIDGES: N-12-056 & W-31-006 | 6 | NHPP-Off | $ 2,142,857 | $ 1,714,285 | $ 428,571 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance subtotal ► | $ 2,142,857 | $ 1,714,285 | $ 428,571 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Insterstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 90% Federal + 10% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Non-Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608484 | Boston Region | Multiple | CANTON-MILTON - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 138 | 6 | NHPP | $ 18,639,846 | $ 14,911,877 | $ 3,727,969 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608498 | Boston Region | Multiple | HINGHAM-WEYMOUTH-BRAINTREE - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 53 | 6 | NHPP | $ 8,458,240 | $ 6,766,592 | $ 1,691,648 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Non-Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ 27,098,086 | $ 21,678,469 | $ 5,419,617 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Roadway Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Improvements | Boston Region | Roadway Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Safety Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Safety Improvements | 609053 | Boston Region | Multiple | CANTON- DEDHAM- NORWOOD- HIGHWAY LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AT I-93 & I-95/128 | 6 | NHPP | $ 5,432,056 | $ 4,345,645 | $ 1,086,411 | |||
| Safety Improvements | Boston Region | Safety Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Safety Improvements subtotal ► | $ 5,432,056 | $ 4,345,645 | $ 1,086,411 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2B / State Prioritized Modernization Projects | ||||||||||||
| ► ADA Retrofits | ||||||||||||
| ADA Retrofits | Boston Region | ADA Retrofits | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| ADA Retrofits subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Intersection Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Intersection Improvements | 608052 | Boston Region | Norwood | NORWOOD- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT US 1 (PROVIDENCE HIGHWAY) & MORSE STREET | 5 | HSIP | $ 1,668,001 | $ 1,501,201 | $ 166,800 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 608564 | Boston Region | Watertown | WATERTOWN- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 16 AND GALEN STREET | 6 | HSIP | $ 2,688,000 | $ 2,419,200 | $ 268,800 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 608566 | Boston Region | Marlborough | MARLBOROUGH- IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 20 (EAST MAIN STREET) AT CURTIS AVENUE | 3 | HSIP | $ 2,688,000 | $ 2,419,200 | $ 268,800 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | Boston Region | Intersection Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intersection Improvements subtotal ► | $ 7,044,001 | $ 6,339,601 | $ 704,400 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Intelligent Transportation Systems | ||||||||||||
| Intelligent Transportation Systems | Boston Region | Intelligent Transportation Systems | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intelligent Transportation System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Roadway Reconstruction | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NFP | $ 30,000,000 | $ 24,000,000 | $ 6,000,000 | a) Construction; Total Federal Participating Cost (TFPC) = $189,451,000; AC Yr 2 of 5 | ||
| Roadway Reconstruction | Boston Region | Roadway Reconstruction | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction subtotal ► | $ 30,000,000 | $ 24,000,000 | $ 6,000,000 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2C / State Prioritized Expansion Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bicycles and Pedestrians | ||||||||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | 608943 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- NEPONSET RIVER GREENWAY (PHASE 3) | 6 | CMAQ | $ 6,067,404 | $ 4,853,923 | $ 1,213,481 | |||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | Boston Region | Bicycles and Pedestrians | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians subtotal ► | $ 6,067,404 | $ 4,853,923 | $ 1,213,481 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Capacity | ||||||||||||
| Capacity | Boston Region | Capacity | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Capacity subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 3 / Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| ►Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | ABP GANS Repayment | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Award adjustments, change orders, etc. | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Metropolitan Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | State Planning and Research Work Program I, (SPR I), Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Railroad Crossings | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Recreational Trails | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Statewide Items subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 4 / Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| Non Federal Aid | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NFA | $ - | $ - | ||||
| Non-Federally Aided Projects | Boston Region | Non-Federal Aid | $ - | $ - | ||||||||
| Non-Federal Aid subtotal► | $ - | $ - | ◄100% Non-Federal | |||||||||
| 2023 Summary | TIP Section 1 - 3: ▼ | TIP Section 4: ▼ | Total of All Projects ▼ | |||||||||
| Total ► | $ 131,782,111 | $ - | $ 131,782,111 | ◄ Total Spending in Region | ||||||||
| Federal Funds ► | $ 106,130,089 | $ 106,130,089 | ◄ Total Federal Spending in Region | |||||||||
| Non-Federal Funds ► | $ 25,652,022 | $ - | $ 25,652,022 | ◄ Total Non-Federal Spending in Region | ||||||||
| 701 CMR 7.00 Use of Road Flaggers and Police Details on Public Works Projects / 701 CMR 7.00 (the Regulation) was promulgated and became law on October 3, 2008. Under this Regulation, the CMR is applicable to any Public works Project that is performed within the limits of, or that impact traffic on, any Public Road. The Municipal Limitation referenced in this Regulation is applicable only to projects where the Municipality is the Awarding Authority. For all projects contained in the TIP, the Commonwealth is the Awarding Authority. Therefore, all projects must be considered and implemented in accordance with 701 CMR 7.00, and the Road Flagger and Police Detail Guidelines. By placing a project on the TIP, the Municipality acknowledges that 701 CMR 7.00 is applicable to its project and design and construction will be fully compliant with this Regulation. This information, and additional information relative to guidance and implementation of the Regulation can be found at the following link on the MassDOT Highway Division website: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Highway/flaggers/main.aspx | ||||||||||||
The transit TIP tables will be included in the public review draft TIP. For now, a summary of MBTA and RTA programming for the FFYs 2020-24 TIP is included in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5.
| 2024 | Boston Region Transportation Improvement Program | |||||||||||
| Amendment / Adjustment Type ▼ |
STIP Program ▼ | MassDOT Project ID ▼ | Metropolitan Planning Organization ▼ | Municipality Name ▼ | MassDOT Project Description▼ | MassDOT District ▼ | Funding Source ▼ | Total Programmed Funds ▼ | Federal Funds ▼ | Non-Federal Funds ▼ | Additional Information ▼ Present information as follows, if applicable: a) Planning / Design / or Construction; b) total project cost and funding sources used; c) advance construction status; d) MPO project score; e) name of entity receiving a transfer; f) name of entity paying the non-state non-federal match; g) earmark details; h) TAP project proponent; i) other information | |
| ►Section 1A / Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Regionally Prioritized Projects | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||||
| Regionally Prioritized Projects subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 1A / Fiscal Constraint Analysis | ||||||||||||
| Total Regional Federal Aid Funds Programmed ► | $ - | $ 110,440,638 | ◄Total Budget | $ 110,440,638 | Target Funds Available | |||||||
| Section 1A instructions: MPO Template Name) Choose Regional Name from dropdown list to populate header and MPO column; Column C) Enter ID from ProjectInfo; Column E) Choose Municipality Name from dropdown list; Column H) Choose the Funding Source being used for the project - if multiple funding sources are being used enter multiple lines; Column I) Enter the total amount of funds being programmed in this fiscal year and for each funding source; Column J) Federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the amount and only change if needed for flex. Column K) Non-federal funds autocalculates. Please verify the split/match - if matching an FTA flex, coordinate with Rail & Transit Division before programming; Column L) Enter Additional Information as described - please do not use any other format. | STBG programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ STBG | ||||||||
| HSIP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ HSIP | |||||||||
| CMAQ programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ CMAQ | |||||||||
| TAP programmed ► | $ - | $ - | ◄ TAP | |||||||||
| ►Section 1B / Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Other Federal Aid | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | Other Federal Aid | HPP | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Federal Aid subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2A / State Prioritized Reliability Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Inspections | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Inspection | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Inspections subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Off-System | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | TBD | Boston Region | Canton | CANTON-BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, C-02-042, REVERE COURT OVER EAST BRANCH NEPONSET RIVER | 6 | STBG-BR-OFF | $ 2,721,360 | $ 2,177,088 | $ 544,272 | |||
| Bridge Program | TBD | Boston Region | Hamilton | HAMILTON-BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, WINTHROP STREET OVER IPSWICH RIVER | 4 | STBG-BR-OFF | $ 3,698,544 | $ 2,958,835 | $ 739,709 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Off-System | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Off-System subtotal ► | $ 6,419,904 | $ 5,135,923 | $ 1,283,981 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608703 | Boston Region | Wilmington | WILMINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, W-38-029 (2KV), ST 129 LOWELL STREET OVER I 93 | 4 | NHPP-On | $ 17,137,875 | $ 13,710,300 | $ 3,427,575 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (NHS) subtotal ► | $ 17,137,875 | $ 13,710,300 | $ 3,427,575 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | 608522 | Boston Region | Middleton | MIDDLETON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, M-20-003, ROUTE 62 (MAPLE STREET) OVER IPSWICH RIVER | 4 | NHPP-Off | $ 4,073,920 | $ 3,259,136 | $ 814,784 | |||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS) subtotal ► | $ 4,073,920 | $ 3,259,136 | $ 814,784 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | ||||||||||||
| Bridge Program | Boston Region | Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Insterstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 90% Federal + 10% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Non-Interstate Pavement | ||||||||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 609402 | Boston Region | Multiple | FRAMINGHAM - NATICK - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 9 | 3 | NHPP | $ 25,711,400 | $ 20,569,120 | $ 5,142,280 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 608495 | Boston Region | Multiple | CONCORD-LINCOLN-LEXINGTON RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 2A | 4 | NHPP | $ 3,262,500 | $ 2,610,000 | $ 652,500 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 609399 | Boston Region | Randolph | RANDOLPH - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 28 | 6 | NHPP | $ 7,407,946 | $ 5,926,357 | $ 1,481,589 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | 609396 | Boston Region | Multiple | RANDOLPH - MILTON - RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 28 | 6 | NHPP | $ 7,407,946 | $ 5,926,357 | $ 1,481,589 | |||
| Non-Interstate Pavement | Boston Region | Non-Interstate Pavement | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Non-Interstate Pavement subtotal ► | $ 43,789,792 | $ 35,031,834 | $ 8,757,958 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Roadway Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Improvements | Boston Region | Roadway Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ► Safety Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Safety Improvements | 609058 | Boston Region | Multiple | PEABODY TO GLOUCESTER- GUIDE AND TRAFFIC SIGN REPLACEMENT ON ROUTE 128 | 4 | HSIP | $ 1,903,664 | $ 1,713,298 | $ 190,366 | |||
| Safety Improvements | Boston Region | Safety Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Safety Improvements subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2B / State Prioritized Modernization Projects | ||||||||||||
| ► ADA Retrofits | ||||||||||||
| ADA Retrofits | Boston Region | ADA Retrofits | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| ADA Retrofits subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Intersection Improvements | ||||||||||||
| Intersection Improvements | 609254 | Boston Region | Lynn | LYNN- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT TWO INTERSECTIONS ON BROADWAY | 4 | HSIP | $ 6,809,548 | $ 6,128,593 | $ 680,955 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | 607759 | Boston Region | Boston | BOSTON- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT THE VFW PARKWAY & SPRING STREET | 6 | HSIP | $ 1,075,772 | $ 968,194 | $ 107,577 | |||
| Intersection Improvements | Boston Region | Intersection Improvements | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intersection Improvements subtotal ► | $ 7,885,320 | $ 7,096,788 | $ 788,532 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Intelligent Transportation Systems | ||||||||||||
| Intelligent Transportation Systems | Boston Region | Intelligent Transportation Systems | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Intelligent Transportation System subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Roadway Reconstruction | ||||||||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NHPP | $ 50,000,000 | $ 40,000,000 | $ 10,000,000 | a) Construction; Total Federal Participating Cost (TFPC) = $189,451,000; AC Yr 3 of 5 | ||
| Roadway Reconstruction | Boston Region | Roadway Reconstruction | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Roadway Reconstruction subtotal ► | $ 50,000,000 | $ 40,000,000 | $ 10,000,000 | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 2C / State Prioritized Expansion Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Bicycles and Pedestrians | ||||||||||||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | 608948 | Boston Region | Multiple | BELLINGHAM- FRANKLIN- SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TRUNK TRAIL (SNETT) CONSTRUCTION | 3 | CMAQ | $ 3,201,600 | $ 2,561,280 | $ 640,320 | |||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | 608995 | Boston Region | Multiple | SUDBURY- STOW- HUDSON- MASS CENTRAL RAIL TRAIL WAYSIDE | 3 | CMAQ | $ 6,670,000 | $ 5,336,000 | $ 1,334,000 | |||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians | 607329 | Boston Region | Multiple | WAKEFIELD- LYNNFIELD- RAIL TRAIL EXTENSION, FROM THE GALVIN MIDDLE SCHOOL TO LYNNFIELD/PEABODY T.L. | 4 | CMAQ | $ 11,080,749 | $ 8,864,599 | $ 2,216,150 | |||
| Bicycles and Pedestrians subtotal ► | $ 20,952,349 | $ 16,761,879 | $ 4,190,470 | ◄ 80% Federal + 20% Non-Federal | ||||||||
| ►Capacity | ||||||||||||
| Capacity | Boston Region | Capacity | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Capacity subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 3 / Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| ►Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs | ||||||||||||
| Boston Region | ABP GANS Repayment | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Award adjustments, change orders, etc. | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Metropolitan Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | State Planning and Research Work Program I, (SPR I), Planning | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Railroad Crossings | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Boston Region | Recreational Trails | Multiple | $ - | $ - | $ - | |||||||
| Other Statewide Items subtotal ► | $ - | $ - | $ - | ◄ Funding Split Varies by Funding Source | ||||||||
| ►Section 4 / Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| ►Non-Federally Aided Projects | ||||||||||||
| Non Federal Aid | 607977 | Boston Region | Multiple | HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE | 3 | NFA | $ - | $ - | ||||
| Non-Federally Aided Projects | Boston Region | Non-Federal Aid | $ - | $ - | ||||||||
| Non-Federal Aid subtotal► | $ - | $ - | ◄100% Non-Federal | |||||||||
| 2019 Summary | TIP Section 1 - 3: ▼ | TIP Section 4: ▼ | Total of All Projects ▼ | |||||||||
| Total ► | $ 150,259,159 | $ - | $ 150,259,159 | ◄ Total Spending in Region | ||||||||
| Federal Funds ► | $ 120,995,859 | $ 120,995,859 | ◄ Total Federal Spending in Region | |||||||||
| Non-Federal Funds ► | $ 29,263,300 | $ - | $ 29,263,300 | ◄ Total Non-Federal Spending in Region | ||||||||
| 701 CMR 7.00 Use of Road Flaggers and Police Details on Public Works Projects / 701 CMR 7.00 (the Regulation) was promulgated and became law on October 3, 2008. Under this Regulation, the CMR is applicable to any Public works Project that is performed within the limits of, or that impact traffic on, any Public Road. The Municipal Limitation referenced in this Regulation is applicable only to projects where the Municipality is the Awarding Authority. For all projects contained in the TIP, the Commonwealth is the Awarding Authority. Therefore, all projects must be considered and implemented in accordance with 701 CMR 7.00, and the Road Flagger and Police Detail Guidelines. By placing a project on the TIP, the Municipality acknowledges that 701 CMR 7.00 is applicable to its project and design and construction will be fully compliant with this Regulation. This information, and additional information relative to guidance and implementation of the Regulation can be found at the following link on the MassDOT Highway Division website: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Highway/flaggers/main.aspx | ||||||||||||
The transit TIP tables will be included in the public review draft TIP. For now, a summary of MBTA and RTA programming for the FFYs 2020-24 TIP is included in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5.
Table 3-3
Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program
MBTA Federal Capital Program
FFY 2019 and FFY 2020-2024 TIP - Project List and Descriptions (80% Federal Share)
| Source |
TIP Program |
Project Name |
FFY19 (Fed $) |
FFY 20-24 (Fed $) |
Total (Fed $) |
Project Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5307 - Revenue Vehicles |
||||||
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Delivery of 460 40 ft Buses - FY 2021 to FY 2025 |
|
$178,351,548 |
$178,351,548 |
Procurement of 40-foot electric and hybrid buses for replacement of diesel bus fleet. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
DMA Replacement |
|
$82,690,000 |
$82,690,000 |
Procurement of 60-foot Dual Mode Articulated (DMA) buses to replace the existing fleet of 32 Silver Line Bus Rapid Transit buses and to provide for ridership expansion projected as a result of Silver Line service extension to Chelsea. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Green Line Type 10 Light Rail Fleet Replacement |
|
$165,599,999 |
$165,599,999 |
Replacement of Light Rail Vehicles to replace the existing Green Line Type 7 and 8 Fleets. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Locomotive Overhaul |
$43,907,679 |
|
$43,907,679 |
Overhaul of commuter rail locomotives to improve fleet availability and service reliability systemwide. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
LoNo Bus Procurement Project |
$2,187,991 |
|
$2,187,991 |
Supplemental funding for the procurement of Battery Electric 60 ft Articulated Buses for operation on the Silver Line. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
MBTA Catamaran Overhauls |
$7,782,681 |
|
$7,782,681 |
Replacement of major systems and refurbishment of seating and other customer facing components on two catamarans (Lightning and Flying Cloud). |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Midlife Overhaul of New Flyer Allison Hybrid 60ft Articulated Buses |
|
$12,702,054 |
$12,702,054 |
Overhaul of 25 hybrid buses, brought into service in 2009 and 2010, to enable optimal reliability through the end of their service life. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Option Order Procurement of 194 New Flyer Hybrid 40 ft Buses (5307) |
$96,329,062 |
|
$96,329,062 |
Procurement of 40-foot buses with hybrid propulsion to replace Emission Controlled Diesel (ECD) buses that have reached the end of their service life. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Overhaul of Kawasaki 900 Series Bi-Level Coaches |
|
$35,360,000 |
$35,360,000 |
Overhaul and upgrade of existing systems on commuter rail coaches that were brought into service in 2005 to enable optimal reliability through the end of their service life. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Procurement of Battery Electric 40 ft Buses and Related infrastructure (5307) |
|
$24,559,232 |
$24,559,232 |
Procurement of Battery Electric 40-ft. buses and supporting infrastructure to serve as a pilot for determining bus propulsion technologies for future procurements. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Procurement of Bi-Level Commuter Rail Coaches |
|
$127,680,000 |
$127,680,000 |
Procurement of bi-level commuter rail coaches to replace existing cars that have exceeded their service life. |
5307 |
Revenue Vehicles |
Red Line No. 3 Car - Targeted Reliability Improv. |
$35,226,739 |
|
$35,226,739 |
Overhaul and upgrade of selected systems on Red Line fleet vehicles to extend service life until planned replacement. |
|
|
|
$185,434,152 |
$626,942,833 |
$812,376,985 |
|
5307 - Signals and Systems |
||||||
5307 |
Signals and Systems |
ATC Implementation on the MBTA North Side Commuter Rail Lines (5307) |
$28,384,529 |
$58,937,468 |
$87,321,997 |
Design and install automatic train control systems on all MBTA Commuter Rail North Side Lines. Improvements will include increased train traffic capacity and operational reliability on all lines. |
5307 |
Signals and Systems |
Green Line Track Upgrade |
|
$73,179,263 |
$73,179,263 |
Replacement of select track components on the Green Line to bring them to a state of good repair. |
5307 |
Signals and Systems |
Signal Program - Red/Orange Line (5307) |
$35,738,496 |
|
$35,738,496 |
Various signal upgrades and improvements along both the Red and Orange Lines. |
5307 |
Signals and Systems |
Signals and Systems - Program Allowance |
$2 |
$1,999,999 |
$2,000,001 |
TIP program allowance for future cost adjustments |
|
|
|
$64,123,027 |
$134,116,730 |
$198,239,757 |
|
5307 - Stations and Facilities |
||||||
5307 |
Stations and Facilities |
Charlestown Bus - Seawall Rehab |
|
$11,228,382 |
$11,228,382 |
Rehabilitation of existing seawall to protect bus maintenance facility from future storm and flooding events. |
5307 |
Stations and Facilities |
Elevator Program |
$26,886,141 |
|
$26,886,141 |
Installation of new redundant elevators and the replacement of existing elevators at various stations, in order to mitigate degradation of station elevators and to maintain station accessibility during elevator maintenance. |
5307 |
Stations and Facilities |
Harvard Square Busway Repairs |
$14,992,676 |
|
$14,992,676 |
Rehabilitation of roadway, drainage and catenary infrastructure at the Harvard Square Busway. |
5307 |
Stations and Facilities |
Hingham Ferry Dock Modification |
|
$1,200,000 |
$1,200,000 |
Capital improvements and modifications to the existing ferry dock in Hingham. |
|
|
|
$41,878,817 |
$12,428,382 |
$54,307,199 |
|
5337 - Signals and Systems |
||||||
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Alewife Crossing Improvements |
|
$10,073,531 |
$10,073,531 |
As part of the Red/Orange Line Infrastructure Improvement Program, this project will involve the upgrade of track switches at Alewife Station and associated retrofits to accomodate these new components. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
ATC Implementation on the MBTA North Side Commuter Rail Lines (5337) |
$51,357,042 |
$47,320,968 |
$98,678,010 |
Design and install automatic train control systems on all MBTA Commuter Rail North Side Lines. Improvements will include increased train traffic capacity and operational reliability on all lines. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Green Line Central Tunnel Track and Signal Replacement |
|
$96,000,000 |
$96,000,000 |
Replacement of the existing 25 cycle signal system and associated wayside equipment at Government Center, Copley and Park Street Interlockings, and related track work. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Green Line D Branch Track and Signal Replacement |
$40,400,000 |
$40,880,362 |
$81,280,362 |
Replacement of track and signal system components on the Highland Branch of the Green Line from Reservoir to Riverside Stations, including replacement of obsolete 25 Hz track circuits with modern solid-state 100 Hz track circuits. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Infrastructure Asset Management Program Phase 1 |
|
$17,129,196 |
$17,129,196 |
Collection of infrastructure based asset data in order to update MBTA asset management databases, and manage asset and life cycle/risk management practices. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
MCRS2 v17 and Business Process Update |
$4,160,000 |
|
$4,160,000 |
Updates and improvements to MBTA asset management systems and business processes. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
North Station Terminal Signal |
$34,275,127 |
|
$34,275,127 |
Upgrades to the commuter rail signal/communication system in the North Station area required for more efficient phasing of future track alignments, including support for the future Draw1 Bridge Replacement Project. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Power Systems Resiliency Program |
|
$17,600,000 |
$17,600,000 |
Installation of nine new duct bank systems to replace damaged power infrastructure at West Fourth Street, Dudley Square, Arlington Street, Causeway Street, two locations on Commonwealth Ave and three locations on Beacon Street. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Red Line Interlock Upgrades |
$9,600,000 |
|
$9,600,000 |
Replacement of existing interlocking signal components on the Red Line to bring the assets to a state of good repair. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Signal Program - Red/Orange Line (5337) |
$47,283,331 |
$109,962,428 |
$157,245,759 |
Various signal upgrades and improvements along both the Red and Orange Lines. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
System-Wide Radio |
|
$55,439,999 |
$55,439,999 |
Replacement of existing radio system for MBTA Police to support critical two-way communication for MBTA Transit Police and to support a secure and Interoperable Radio System. |
5337 |
Signals and Systems |
Worcester Line Track Improvements Incl. 3rd Track Feasibility Study |
$1,001,643 |
|
$1,001,643 |
Design Phase Services for the proposed Framingham/Worcester Line third track. It will include assessments of proposed operation, alternatives analysis and design plans. |
|
|
|
$188,077,143 |
$394,406,484 |
$582,483,627 |
|
5337 - Stations and Facilities |
||||||
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Codman Yard Expansion and Improvements |
|
$26,280,432 |
$26,280,432 |
Infrastructure improvements to Codman Yard, an additional Red Line storage facility, to accommodate the new vehicle fleet. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Commonwealth Ave Stations Access |
|
$23,463,054 |
$23,463,054 |
Addressing accessibility issues along the B branch of the Green Line along Commonwealth Avenue. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Downtown Crossing Vertical Transportation Improvements Phase 2 |
|
$5,926,390 |
$5,926,390 |
Construction of two new redundant elevators, in order to improve accessibility and to provide for future elevator maintenance without rendering the station temporarily inaccessible. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Elevator Program Multiple Location Design |
|
$38,978,268 |
$38,978,268 |
Design for the installation of new redundant elevators and the replacement of existing elevators system wide. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Feasibility Study of Remaining Inaccessible Stations - Green Line |
|
$9,120,000 |
$9,120,000 |
Feasibility study and preliminary design for inaccessible Green Line stations |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Forest Hills Improvement Project |
|
$26,089,763 |
$26,089,763 |
Improvements at Forest Hills Station on the Orange Line and Needham Commuter Rail Line to comply with ADA accessibility standards. Work will also include infrastructure and other improvements. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Lynn Station & Parking Garage Improvements Phase II |
|
$26,461,132 |
$26,461,132 |
Extensive rehabilitation efforts include reconstruction of the existing commuter rail platform, upgrade of mechanical and electrical systems at the station, and structural repairs and code compliance retrofits to the garage. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Natick Center Station Accessibility Project |
|
$33,822,690 |
$33,822,690 |
Accessibility improvements at the Natick Center commuter rail station on the Framingham/Worcester Line. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Newton Commuter Rail Stations |
|
$16,511,946 |
$16,511,946 |
For a conceptual design and operational analysis study of the Newton commuter rail stations, with additional funding for various accessibility and infrastructure improvements. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Newton Highlands Green Line Station Accessibility Project |
|
$18,375,283 |
$18,375,283 |
Improvements at Newton Highlands station on the D branch of the Green Line to comply with ADA accessibility standards. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Oak Grove Station Vertical Transportation Improvements |
$28,232,566 |
|
$28,232,566 |
Retrofit of the existing Oak Grove station on the Orange Line to bring it into full compliance with ADA standards, including the replacement of existing elevators, construction of two new elevators, various parking and path of travel upgrades. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Park Street Station Wayfinding Improvements Construction |
$14,903,909 |
|
$14,903,909 |
Replacement of existing signage with updated ADA-compliant standard graphics at the lobby, Green Line platform, Red Line platform and Winter Street concourse as well as related architecture improvements such as lighting and illuminated exit signs. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Ruggles Station Upgrade |
|
$2,599,003 |
$2,599,003 |
Design for state of good repair improvements to Ruggles Station on the Orange Line. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Silver Line Gateway - Phase 2 |
$27,856,962 |
|
$27,856,962 |
Includes the building of a new commuter rail station adjacent to the new Chelsea Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Station located at the Mystic Mall, as well as decommissioning of the existing Chelsea Commuter Rail Station and signal prioritization. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
South Attleboro Station Improvements |
|
$3,580,654 |
$3,580,654 |
Needs assessment and design services associated with accessibility, structural, parking and multi-modal facility improvements for the South Attleboro commuter rail station. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Symphony Station Improvements |
|
$33,416,159 |
$33,416,159 |
Upgrades to the existing Symphony Station on the Green Line in order to provide a modern, accessible, code-compliant facility. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Winchester Center Station |
|
$32,196,320 |
$32,196,320 |
Renovation and accessibility improvements to Winchester Center Station on the Lowell and Haverhill commuter rail lines. |
5337 |
Stations and Facilities |
Stations and Facilities - Program Allowance |
|
$1,083,733 |
$1,083,733 |
TIP program allowance for future cost adjustments |
|
|
|
$70,993,437 |
$297,904,827 |
$368,898,264 |
|
5337 - Bridge and Tunnel |
||||||
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Bridge Bundling Contract (Rehabilitation of 6 Bridges) |
$58,362,436 |
$27,252,649 |
$85,615,085 |
Replacement of 6 commuter rail bridges: Lynn Fells Parkway in Melrose (Haverhill Line); Parker Street in Lawrence (Haverhill Line); Commercial Street in Lynn (Newburyport/Rockport Line); Bacon Street in Wellesley (Worcester Line); Intervale Road in Weston (Worcester Line); and High Line Bridge in Somerville (Lowell Line). |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Bridges - Design |
|
$7,999,999 |
$7,999,999 |
Design for high priority bridge repairs system wide. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
East Cottage Street Bridge |
|
$12,687,557 |
$12,687,557 |
Replacement of East Cottage Street bridge with a new superstructure and substructure to meet design code/standards, as well as MBTA and FTA State of Good Repair requirements. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Emergency Bridge Design / Inspection & Rating |
$8,000,000 |
|
$8,000,000 |
Inspection of bridge assets system wide for determination of asset condition ratings and subsequent prioritization and scoping for repairs to select bridges. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Emergency Bridge Repair |
$6,399,999 |
|
$6,399,999 |
Repairs to bridges system wide, based on asset condition as determined by system wide inspections. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Inspection and Rating of MBTA Systemwide Bridges |
|
$4,000,000 |
$4,000,000 |
Inspection of bridge assets system wide for determination of asset condition ratings and subsequent prioritization and scoping for repairs to select bridges. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Longfellow Approach |
|
$44,000,000 |
$44,000,000 |
Rehabilitation of the Longfellow Approach Viaduct, Charles/MGH Station platforms, and Span 1 of the Longfellow Bridge. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Norfolk Avenue Bridge |
|
$11,240,000 |
$11,240,000 |
Replacement of bridge carrying the Fairmont (Dorchester) Line Commuter Rail service over Norfolk Avenue in Boston. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Robert Street Bridge |
|
$12,928,771 |
$12,928,771 |
Replacement of bridge carrying the Needham Line Commuter Rail service over Robert Street in Roslindale. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Structural Repairs Systemwide |
|
$4,000,000 |
$4,000,000 |
Repairs to bridge or other structures system wide on an emergency or planned basis. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Tunnel Inspection Systemwide |
|
$8,600,000 |
$8,600,000 |
Inspection to assess condition of transit tunnels system wide. |
5337 |
Bridge and Tunnel |
Tunnel Rehab |
|
$6,075,791 |
$6,075,791 |
Repair and rehabilitation of transit tunnels system wide. |
|
|
|
$72,762,435 |
$138,784,767 |
$211,547,202 |
|
5339 - Bus and Bus Facility |
||||||
5339 |
Bus and Bus Facilities |
60' New Flyer Bus Overhaul |
|
$22,938,000 |
$22,938,000 |
Midlife overhaul of 60 forty-foot BAE Hybrid buses delivered in 2014 - 2015 from New Flyer to ensure continued reliable operations and to meet expected useful life. |
5339 |
Bus and Bus Facilities |
Option Order Procurement of 194 New Flyer Hybrid 40 ft Buses (5339) |
$6,537,703 |
|
$6,537,703 |
Procurement of 40-foot buses with hybrid propulsion to replace Emission Controlled Diesel (ECD) buses that have reached the end of their service life. |
5339 |
Bus and Bus Facilities |
Procurement of Battery Electric 40ft Buses and Related infrastructure (5339) |
$6,500,678 |
$11,271,325 |
$17,772,003 |
Procurement of Battery Electric 40-ft. buses and supporting infrastructure to serve as a pilot for determining bus propulsion technologies for future procurements. |
5339 |
Bus and Bus Facilities |
Bus and Bus Facilities - Program Allowance |
$749,402 |
|
$749,402 |
TIP program allowance for future cost adjustments |
|
|
|
$13,787,783 |
$34,209,325 |
$47,997,108 |
|
Table 3-4
Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program
MPO Transit List - CATA
Table 3-5
Federal Fiscal Years 2020-24 Transportation Improvement Program
MPO Transit List - MWRTA
Proponent: This field lists the primary advocate for each project, who is responsible for seeing the project through to completion.
ID Number: This number references the project’s identification number in the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s (MassDOT) project-tracking system.
Project Type: This field provides the type of project programmed. For those projects programmed using Regional Target funds (projects listed in section 1A of the TIP tables), the MPO’s four project categories are used (Bicycle/Pedestrian, Complete Streets, Intersection Improvements, and Major Infrastructure). For those projects programmed directly by MassDOT (projects listed in sections 1B, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3, and 4), MassDOT’s STIP Program categories are used.
Cost: This is the total project cost as programmed in the TIP.
Scoring Summary: This table shows the number of points awarded to the project across each of the MPO’s project evaluation categories. MPO staff has not evaluated all projects in the TIP; staff only evaluates projects that are being considered for funding with the MPO’s Regional Target funding. The field definitions for the tables are as follows:
Safety: Safety (30 possible points)
Sys Pres: System Preservation and Maintenance (29 possible points)
CM/M: Capacity Management/Mobility (29 possible points)
CA/SC: Clean Air/Sustainable Communities (16 possible points)
TE: Transportation Equity (12 possible points)
EV: Economic Vitality (18 possible points)
Total: This is the summation of the project’s scores across the above six categories (134 possible points)
Project Description: The description of the project is based, in part, on the written description of the project on MassDOT’s Project Information website. In some cases, these descriptions have been modified to clarify the details of the projects. Projects evaluated by the MPO tend to have more detailed descriptions, as more complete project documentation was provided to MPO staff for these projects.
Funding Summary: Funding tables are included for each project and show the following information:
Year: This field provides the federal fiscal year(s) during which the project is programmed for funding.
Federal and Non-Federal Funds: These fields show a breakdown of project funding from federal and non-federal sources. Typically, these fields will show an 80/20 split, with federal funds accounting for 80 percent of project funding and a 20 percent state match accounting for the remaining funds.
Total Funds Programmed: This field shows the total funding programmed for the project based on the year of expenditure.
Proponent: Acton
ID Number: 608229
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $ 15,141,463
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
15 out of 30 |
8 out of 29 |
10 out of 29 |
8 out of 16 |
0 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
45 out of 134 |
Project Description
The objective of the project is to make the area safer for pedestrians and bicyclists; reduce congestion; increase safety for residents, students, and patrons of local businesses; and improve vehicle access to and from businesses and private developments.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$12,113,170 |
--- |
--- |
$12,113,170 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$3,028,293 |
--- |
--- |
$3,028,293 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$15,141,463 |
--- |
--- |
$15,141,463 |
Proponent: Acton
ID Number: 607748
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $5,657,725
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will make upgrades at the intersection to improve safety. The upgrades will include signs, pavement markings, and traffic signals as identified through a Road Safety Audit process in the Town of Acton.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$5,091,952 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,091,952 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$565,772 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$565,772 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$5,657,725 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,657,725 |
Arlington: Spy Pond Sediment Removal
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609222
Project Type: Roadway Improvements
Cost: $950,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Spy Pond sediment removal
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$760,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$760,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$190,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$190,000 |
Total Funds |
$950,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$950,000 |
Proponent: Ashland
ID Number: 604123
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $16,304,925
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
12 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
15 out of 29 |
8 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
57 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project limits are from the Framingham town line to the Holliston town line, a distance of 1.7 miles. The project consists of milling and resurfacing with minor box widening. Traffic improvements at the intersection of Route 126 and Elliot Street entail signalization, stone masonry retaining wall construction, minor drainage improvements, installation of granite curbing and edging, construction of sidewalks and the resetting of guardrail.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$13,043,940 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$13,043,940 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$3,260,985 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,260,985 |
Total Funds |
$16,304,925 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$16,304,925 |
Proponent: Ashland
ID Number: 608436
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,148,400
Scoring Summary
| Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Score |
12 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
5 out of 29 |
2 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
8 out of 18 |
38 out of 134 |
Project Description
The primary purpose of the project is to improve the safety features for the roadway corridors of Cherry Street and Main Street in order to establish a Federal Railroad Administration Quiet Zone surrounding the railroad crossings on those two roadways. This goal will primarily be accomplished through the installation of roadway medians and the enhancement of existing railroad crossing signals and gates. In addition, the project addresses a critical gap in the pedestrian sidewalk network through the construction of new sidewalks. The project’s other goals include improving the existing roadway condition through pavement reconstruction and enhancing stormwater drainage in the project area.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$918,720 |
$918,720 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$229,680 |
$229,680 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,148,400 |
$1,148,400 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608443
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $2,589,272
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
17 out of 30 |
4 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
1 out of 18 |
36 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project involves intersection improvements, including geometric modifications, widening and signalization. Additional improvements involve updated signage and pavement markings.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,171,418 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,171,418 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$417,854 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$417,854 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$2,589,272 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,589,272 |
Proponent: Bedford
ID Number: 607738
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $8,234,946
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
7 out of 30 |
13 out of 29 |
15 out of 29 |
7 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
47 out of 134 |
Project Description
The Minuteman Bikeway currently ends at Depot Park, in Bedford, near the intersection of South Road and Loomis Street. This project would extend the bikeway by making a 1,665 foot portion of Railroad Avenue accessible to bikes and by constructing 8,800 feet of bikeway on the Reformatory Branch Trail, from Railroad Avenue past Concord Road to Wheeler Drive, near the Bedford/Concord town line. As a part of the Railroad Avenue reconstruction, sidewalks, bike accommodations, new drainage, pavement markings and signs, and defined curb cuts will be constructed.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$6,587,957 |
--- |
--- |
$6,587,957 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,646,989 |
--- |
--- |
$1,646,989 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$8,234,946 |
--- |
--- |
$8,234,946 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608443
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $2,589,272
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
17 out of 30 |
4 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
1 out of 18 |
36 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project involves intersection improvements, including geometric modifications, widening and signalization. Additional improvements involve updated signage and pavement markings.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,171,418 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,171,418 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$417,854 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$417,854 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$2,589,272 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,589,272 |
Proponent: Bedford
ID Number: 607738
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $8,234,946
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
7 out of 30 |
13 out of 29 |
15 out of 29 |
7 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
47 out of 134 |
Project Description
The Minuteman Bikeway currently ends at Depot Park, in Bedford, near the intersection of South Road and Loomis Street. This project would extend the bikeway by making a 1,665 foot portion of Railroad Avenue accessible to bikes and by constructing 8,800 feet of bikeway on the Reformatory Branch Trail, from Railroad Avenue past Concord Road to Wheeler Drive, near the Bedford/Concord town line. As a part of the Railroad Avenue reconstruction, sidewalks, bike accommodations, new drainage, pavement markings and signs, and defined curb cuts will be constructed.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$6,587,957 |
--- |
--- |
$6,587,957 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,646,989 |
--- |
--- |
$1,646,989 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$8,234,946 |
--- |
--- |
$8,234,946 |
Proponent: Bellingham
ID Number: 608887
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $4,380,828
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
12 out of 30 |
12 out of 29 |
12 out of 29 |
5 out of 16 |
0 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
45 out of 134 |
Project Description
Road reconstruction with enhancements to existing curb reveal, sidewalks, and storm drainage systems,
and widening to accommodate improved walk width and bike paths.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$3,504,662 |
--- |
--- |
$3,504,662 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$876,166 |
--- |
--- |
$876,166 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$4,380,828 |
--- |
--- |
$4,380,828 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608948
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $3,201,600
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Southern New England Trunk Trail (SNETT) Construction
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,561,280 |
$2,561,280 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$640,320 |
$640,320 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,201,600 |
$3,201,600 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608911
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $1,614,288
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Safe Routes to School improvements at Wellington Elementary School
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,291,430 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,291,430 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$322,858 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$322,858 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$1,614,288 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,614,288 |
Proponent: Beverly
ID Number: 608347
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $4,394,886
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
15 out of 30 |
12 out of 29 |
13 out of 29 |
11 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
63 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project involves updating and modernizing traffic signal equipment at the intersections of Cabot Street at Dodge Street/County Way/Longmeadow Road and Cabot Street at Rantoul Street/Front Street/Water Street/Goat Hill Lane; signalizing or installing a modern roundabout at the intersection of McKay Street at Balch Street; and providing onstreet bicycle accommodations and ADA compliant wheelchair ramps at sidewalks at each intersection. Pavement milling and overlay at each intersection is also included in this work.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$3,803,370 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,803,370 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$591,516 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$591,516 |
Total Funds |
$4,394,886 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,394,886 |
Proponent: Beverly
ID Number: 608348
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $8,504,923
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
13 out of 30 |
14 out of 29 |
16 out of 29 |
9 out of 16 |
4 out of 12 |
10 out of 18 |
66 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project involves rehabilitation of pavement and sidewalks along the Bridge Street corridor from the Danvers town line to River Street, excluding the Hall Whitaker drawbridge. The project includes cross section improvements to accommodate on-street parking and on-street bicycle accommodations. Existing traffic signal equipment at the intersection of Bridge Street at Livingstone Avenue will be upgraded, and new traffic signals will be installed at the intersection of Bridge Street with Kernwood Avenue and the intersection of Bridge Street with River Street. Under the proposed project, continuous cement concrete sidewalks with vertical granite curb will be provided along both sides of the roadway for the full length of the project. As part of the proposed project, a 7 foot wide parking shoulder will be provided on the eastbound side of the roadway to prevent vehicles from parking on the sidewalk. Additionally, 5 foot wide bicycle lanes shoulder will be provided along the corridor. Minor realignments will be performed at the intersections of Bridge Street with Cressy Street, County Way/Bates Park Avenue, and Eastern Avenue/Dolloff Avenue.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,803,938 |
--- |
$6,803,938 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,700,985 |
--- |
$1,700,985 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,504,923 |
--- |
$8,504,923 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609058
Project Type: Safety Improvements
Cost: $1,903,664
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Guide and traffic sign replacement on Route 128
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,713,298 |
$1,713,298 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$190,366 |
$190,366 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,903,664 |
$1,903,664 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 606902
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $6,900,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project will involve the reconstruction of this bridge which is currently rated at 5, 5, and 4.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,520,000 |
--- |
$5,520,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,380,000 |
--- |
$1,380,000 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,900,000 |
--- |
$6,900,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 604173
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $85,507,337
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The North Washington Street Bridge is a historic structure constructed in 1898. The bridge consists of ten approach spans and a swing span, which is not operational. The bridge is structurally deficient and is posted as weight restricted. There have been extensive emergency repairs done to the bridge in the past few years. Currently the two center lanes on the swing span are closed due to steel deterioration. The City of Boston proposes to replace the bridge. The existing granite/concrete bridge piers on the approach spans will be replaced with reinforced concrete V piers and continuous trapezoidal steel box girders. The proposed deck will provide for increased bicycle and pedestrian accommodations between Kearney Square and Rutherford Avenue. This project is funded over five federal fiscal years (FFYs 2017-21). The total estimated cost of the project is $144,066,616. Of that amount, $6,400,000 was funded in FFY 2017 and the remaining $137,666,616 is funded in FFYs 2018-21.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$21,033,563 |
$24,311,724 |
$23,060,582 |
--- |
--- |
$68,405,869 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$5,258,391 |
$6,077,931 |
$5,765,146 |
--- |
--- |
$17,101,468 |
Total Funds |
$26,291,954 |
$30,389,655 |
$28,825,728 |
--- |
--- |
$85,507,337 |
Proponent: Boston
ID Number: 606453
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $8,852,517
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
7 out of 30 |
6 out of 29 |
15 out of 29 |
12 out of 16 |
8 out of 12 |
12 out of 18 |
60 out of 134 |
Project Description
This roadway improvement project will improve pedestrian mobility, encourage local and regional bicycle travel, and reduce vehicular congestion.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$7,082,014 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,082,014 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,770,503 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,770,503 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$8,852,517 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,852,517 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 607759
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,075,772
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will make upgrades at the intersection to improve safety. The upgrades will include signs, pavement markings, and traffic signals as identified through a Road Safety Audit process.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$968,194 |
$968,194 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$107,577 |
$107,577 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,075,772 |
$1,075,772 |
Boston: Neponset River Greenway (Phase 3)
Proponent: Boston
ID Number: 608943
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $6,067,404
Scoring Summary
| Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Score |
11 out of 30 |
4 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
10 out of 16 |
7 out of 12 |
1 out of 18 |
42 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project is funded by MassDOT, but was originally considered for receiving Regional Target funding, which is why it was evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,853,923 |
--- |
$4,853,923 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,213,481 |
--- |
$1,213,481 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,067,404 |
--- |
$6,067,404 |
Proponent: Boston
ID Number: 606226
Project Type: Major Infrastructure
Cost: $152,000,000
Scoring Summary
This project is funded using Regional Target funds, but was not evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The reconstruction of Rutherford Avenue from Sullivan Square to the North Washington Street Bridge will make the road a multi-modal urban boulevard corridor. This project will be funded over five years, starting in FFY 2022. The total project cost is estimated to be $152,000,000, and the total funding in the FFYs 2020-24 is $111,685,278. Earmark discretionary funding of $8,578,930 is intended to be used for design of the project. Funding in future TIP years (FFYs 2025-26) will be approximately $40,314,722 in order to make up the entire estimated construction cost (total federal participating cost).
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$18,845,091 |
$27,414,738 |
$43,088,394 |
$89,348,223 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$4,711,273 |
$6,853,684 |
$10,772,098 |
$22,337,055 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$23,556,364 |
$34,268,422 |
$53,860,492 |
$111,685,278 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 606728
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $24,009,700
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of bridge deck, parapet, expansion joint, and substructure repairs to B-16-365(4FK), the Bowker Overpass over Storrow Drive eastbound.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$19,207,760 |
--- |
$19,207,760 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,801,940 |
--- |
$4,801,940 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$24,009,700 |
--- |
$24,009,700 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608197
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $4,678,280
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Superstructure Replacement, B-16-107, Canterbury Street over AMTRAK/MBTA
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,742,624 |
--- |
$3,742,624 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$935,656 |
--- |
$935,656 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,678,280 |
--- |
$4,678,280 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608208
Project Type: Interstate Pavement
Cost: $27,371,469
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project is an interstate maintenance resurfacing project on the Southeast Expressway. A preservation treatment or thin-bonded overlay is proposed to extend the pavement service life and improve safety.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$24,634,322 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$24,634,322 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,737,147 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,737,147 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$27,371,469 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$27,371,469 |
Proponent: Boston, Brookline
ID Number: 607888
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $3,345,372
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project will construct a new 1,700 foot long multi-use bike/pedestrian pathway from the Muddy River in Brookline to Maitland Street in Boston. The project will improve access to the Fenway MBTA Station and the Yawkey commuter rail station and provide a non-motorized transportation link to key job centers and new mixed-use developments planned for the Fenway area.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,676,298 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,676,298 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$669,074 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$669,074 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$3,345,372 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,345,372 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608614
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $5,000,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will replace the superstructure of bridge B-16-179, which carries Austin Street over the Interstate 93 ramps and the MBTA commuter rail and Orange Line tracks in Boston.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$4,000,000 |
--- |
--- |
$4,000,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,000,000 |
--- |
--- |
$1,000,000 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$5,000,000 |
--- |
--- |
$5,000,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609090
Project Type: Safety Improvements
Cost: $9,568,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Highway Lighting System Replacement on Interstate 93, from Neponset Avenue to the Braintree Split
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$7,654,400 |
--- |
--- |
$7,654,400 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,913,600 |
--- |
--- |
$1,913,600 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$9,568,000 |
--- |
--- |
$9,568,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608498
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $8,458,240
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Resurfacing and related work on Route 53
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,766,592 |
--- |
$6,766,592 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,691,648 |
--- |
$1,691,648 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,458,240 |
--- |
$8,458,240 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608608
Project Type: Safety Improvements
Cost: $2,688,726
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of highway lighting improvements at the interchange of Interstate 93 and Route 3 in Braintree.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$2,419,853 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,419,853 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$268,873 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$268,873 |
Total Funds |
$2,688,726 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,688,726 |
Proponent: MBTA
ID Number: 1570
Project Type: Major Infrastructure
Cost: $190,000,000
Scoring Summary
This prject is partially funded using Regional Target funds, but was not evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The purpose of this project is to improve corridor mobility, boost transit ridership, improve regional air quality, ensure equitable distribution of transit services, and support opportunities for sustainable development. The project will extend the MBTA Green Line from a relocated Lechmere Station in East Cambridge to College Avenue in Medford, with a branch to Union Square in Somerville.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$14,729,654 |
$24,575,306 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$39,304,960 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$3,682,414 |
$6,143,826 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$9,826,240 |
Total Funds |
$18,412,068 |
$30,719,132 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$49,131,200 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608482
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $7,080,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing on Route 28 in Cambridge and Somerville.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$5,664,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,664,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$1,416,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,416,000 |
Total Funds |
$7,080,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,080,000 |
Proponent: Other
ID Number: 1931
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $2,721,360
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Bridge replacement, C-02-042, 33V, Revere Court over east branch of the Neponset River
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,177,088 |
$2,177,088 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$544,272 |
$544,272 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,721,360 |
$2,721,360 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609053
Project Type: Safety Improvements
Cost: $5,432,056
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Highway lighting improvements at Interstate 93 and Interstate 95/Route 128
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,345,645 |
--- |
$4,345,645 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,086,411 |
--- |
$1,086,411 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,432,056 |
--- |
$5,432,056 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608599
Project Type: Roadway Improvements
Cost: $526,235
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of stormwater drainage improvements along Route 1, Route 1A, and Interstate 95.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$420,988 |
--- |
--- |
$420,988 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$105,247 |
--- |
--- |
$105,247 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$526,235 |
--- |
--- |
$526,235 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608484
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $18,639,846
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing on Route 138 in Canton and Milton.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$14,911,877 |
--- |
$14,911,877 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,727,969 |
--- |
$3,727,969 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$18,639,846 |
--- |
$18,639,846 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608611
Project Type: Safety Improvements
Cost: $8,735,250
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project involves of replacement and rehabilitation of the highway lighting system at the interchange of Route 24, Route 1, and Interstate 93 in Canton, Milton, and Randolph.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$6,988,200 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,988,200 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$1,747,050 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,747,050 |
Total Funds |
$8,735,250 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,735,250 |
Proponent: Chelsea
ID Number: 608078
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $9,669,765
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
17 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
5 out of 29 |
8 out of 16 |
12 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
61 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project will reconstruct of one mile of Broadway. Improvements to the roadway will include surface and subsurface work, including replacement of utilities; construction of a dedicated bike lane along Broadway; and upgrades to the existing sidewalk network, including the installation of ADA compliant ramps at all intersections.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$7,735,812 |
--- |
--- |
$7,735,812 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,933,953 |
--- |
--- |
$1,933,953 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$9,669,765 |
--- |
--- |
$9,669,765 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 605287
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $69,145,821
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Bridge betterment, Route 1 over Arlington and 5th Street/MBTA Railroad/Spruce Street
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$31,322,265 |
$23,994,392 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$55,316,657 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$7,830,566 |
$5,998,598 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$13,829,164 |
Total Funds |
$39,152,831 |
$29,992,990 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$69,145,821 |
Proponent: Cohasset
ID Number: 608007
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $8,971,636
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
16 out of 30 |
4 out of 29 |
8 out of 29 |
5 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
3 out of 18 |
37 out of 134 |
Project Description
Work on this project includes corridor improvements from the Beechwood Street intersection to the Cohasset/Scituate Town Line. The Route 3A/Beechwood Street intersection will be upgraded with new traffic signal equipment as well as minor geometric improvements. The Route 3A/Henry Turner Bailey Road intersect will be reviewed for meeting requirements for traffic signals as well as geometric improvements. Pedestrian and bicycle accommodation will be included along the corridor.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,327,309 |
--- |
$7,327,309 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,644,327 |
--- |
$1,644,327 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,971,636 |
--- |
$8,971,636 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608495
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $3,262,500
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing and related work on Route 2A.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,610,000 |
$2,610,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$652,500 |
$652,500 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,262,500 |
$3,262,500 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608818
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $1,003,590
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing and related work on Route 114.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$802,872 |
--- |
--- |
$802,872 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$200,718 |
--- |
--- |
$200,718 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,003,590 |
--- |
--- |
$1,003,590 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608495
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $3,262,500
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing and related work on Route 2A.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,610,000 |
$2,610,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$652,500 |
$652,500 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,262,500 |
$3,262,500 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608818
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $1,003,590
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing and related work on Route 114.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$802,872 |
--- |
--- |
$802,872 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$200,718 |
--- |
--- |
$200,718 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,003,590 |
--- |
--- |
$1,003,590 |
Dedham: Pedestrian Improvements along Elm Street and Rustcraft Road Corridors
Proponent: Dedham
ID Number: 607901
Project Type: Roadway Reconstruction
Cost: $3,019,061
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Improvements along the Elm Street and Rustcraft Road corridor will primarily consist of the installation of new curbing, sidewalks, and ramps on both sides of the corridor. This area will also require drainage improvements to modify stormwater management from sheet flow to catch basins, which is necessary with the installation of new curbs and sidewalks. Minor roadway widening is anticipated to achieve a minimum roadway width to accommodate a five-foot bicycle lane. An off-road area for drop off and pick up at the Dedham Corporate Center Station on the MBTA commuter rail has already been constructed by the Town of Dedham.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,415,249 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,415,249 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$603,812 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$603,812 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$3,019,061 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,019,061 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608596
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $4,511,360
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This bridge preservation project will address the bridge that carries Route 133 (Main Street) over the Essex River in Essex.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$3,609,088 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,609,088 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$902,272 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$902,272 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$4,511,360 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,511,360 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609102
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $13,083,840
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Pavement preservation and related work on Route 128
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$10,467,072 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$10,467,072 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$2,616,768 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,616,768 |
Total Funds |
$13,083,840 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$13,083,840 |
Proponent: Everett
ID Number: 607652
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $16,119,557
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
14 out of 30 |
15 out of 29 |
15 out of 29 |
10 out of 16 |
12 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
75 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project will reconstruct Ferry Street from the Malden city line (Belmont Street) to Route 16 and Elm Street between Ferry Street and Woodlawn Street. The work will include resurfacing and construction of new sidewalks, wheelchair ramps, and curb extensions. The traffic signals at five locations and the fire station will be upgraded. The signalized intersection at Chelsea Street will be replaced by a roundabout.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$13,000,675 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$13,000,675 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$3,118,882 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,118,882 |
Total Funds |
$16,119,557 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$16,119,557 |
Proponent: Everett
ID Number: 609257
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $10,648,800
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
19 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
13 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
7 out of 12 |
1 out of 18 |
54 out of 134 |
Project Description
Rehabilitation of Beacham Street, from Route 99 to Chelsea city line.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,619,040 |
$8,619,040 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,029,760 |
$2,029,760 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$10,648,800 |
$10,648,800 |
Foxborough, Sharon, and Walpole: Resurfacing and Related Work on Route 1
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608480
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $7,072,920
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing on Route 1 in Foxborough, Sharon, and Walpole.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$5,658,336 |
--- |
--- |
$5,658,336 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,414,584 |
--- |
--- |
$1,414,584 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$7,072,920 |
--- |
--- |
$7,072,920 |
Proponent: Framingham
ID Number: 608006
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $1,028,024
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
11 out of 30 |
6 out of 29 |
2 out of 29 |
2 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
26 out of 134 |
Project Description
The proposed project will construct an at-grade pedestrian crossing across Route 9 in the vicinity of Maynard Road and the Framingham Fire Station. The crossing will be controlled by a pedestrian hybrid beacon (HAWK signal). The project also includes the reconstruction of the existing emergency signal for the Framingham Fire Station on Route 9.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$822,419 |
$822,419 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$205,605 |
$205,605 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,028,024 |
$1,028,024 |
Proponent: Framingham
ID Number: 608228
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $8,504,804
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
19 out of 30 |
16 out of 22 |
6 out of 29 |
0 out of 16 |
10 out of 12 |
13 out of 18 |
60 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project involves improvements to Union Avenue from Proctor Street to Main Street, with limited work on intersecting local roadways. Specifically, the proposed improvements include full-depth pavement reconstruction, sidewalk reconstruction, traffic signal improvements, streetscape improvements, bicycle accommodation, warning and regulatory signing, and pavement markings. The existing traffic signal at Mt. Wayte Avenue will be reconstructed and new traffic signals will be erected at the intersections of Union Avenue with Lincoln Street and Walnut Street. Streetscape and ornamental lighting improvements will be made from the south end of the project area to the intersection of Union Avenue and Lincoln Street. Minor roadway widening of less than two feet is proposed between Proctor Street and Lexington Street in order to provide a sufficient cross section for travel lanes, bike lanes, and on-street parking. The Town of Framingham is constructing significant stormwater improvements as part of a separate utility project to be completed prior to the roadway improvements.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$6,903,843 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,903,843 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,600,961 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,600,961 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$8,504,804 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,504,804 |
Proponent: Framingham
ID Number: 608889
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,814,400
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
9 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
7 out of 29 |
9 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
41 out of 134 |
Project Description
Traffic signal installation at Edgell Road at Central Street.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,451,520 |
--- |
--- |
$1,451,520 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$362,880 |
--- |
--- |
$362,880 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,814,400 |
--- |
--- |
$1,814,400 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609402
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $25,711,400
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Resurfacing and related work on Route 9
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$20,569,120 |
$20,569,120 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,142,280 |
$5,142,280 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$25,711,400 |
$25,711,400 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 1932
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $3,698,544
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Bridge replacement, Winthrop Street over Ipswich River, H-03-002 (2R5)
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,958,835 |
$2,958,835 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$739,709 |
$739,709 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,698,544 |
$3,698,544 |
Proponent: Hingham
ID Number: 605168
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $8,700,001
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
10 out of 30 |
16 out of 29 |
17 out of 29 |
10 out of 16 |
0 out of 12 |
2 out of 18 |
55 out of 134 |
Project Description
Work on this project includes improvements to the intersection of Route 3A with Summer Street. The project will provide improved pedestrian accommodation as well as drainage upgrades.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,960,001 |
$6,960,001 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,740,000 |
$1,740,000 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,700,001 |
$8,700,001 |
Proponent: Holbrook
ID Number: 606501
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $4,270,631
Scoring Summary
This project was evaluated by MPO staff in FFY 2015 using a prior version of the TIP scoring criteria. Under those criteria, this project received the following scores: System Preservation, Modernization, and Efficiency (10 out of 36 points); Livability and Economic Benefit (13 out of 29 points); Mobility (7 out of 25 points); Environment and Climate Change (5 out of 25 points); Environmental Justice (0 out of 10 points); and Safety and Security (13 out of 29 points). This project’s total score is 48 points out of a possible 154 points.
Project Description
The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate a segment of Union Street from Linfield Street to Centre Street and Water Street. The proposed improvements will address poor roadway pavement conditions, deteriorating sidewalks, a lack of curbing, and needed drainage improvements. The project will also address the need for upgraded pavement markings, signage, and guard rails. This project is funded using a combination of MPO Regional Target funds ($2,743,381) and Federal High-Priority Project (HPP) funds ($1,527,250)
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$3,416,504 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,416,504 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$854,127 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$854,127 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$4,270,631 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,270,631 |
Proponent: Hopkinton
ID Number: 606043
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $7,946,749
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
16 out of 30 |
14 out of 29 |
12 out of 29 |
13 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
65 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project involves improvements at the intersections of Route 135 with Route 85, Pleasant Street, and Wood Street. The improvements include signal equipment upgrades, geometric modifications, and the addition of lanes at the Route 85 intersection; possible signalization at Pleasant Street; and minor widening, geometric modifications, and equipment upgrades at Wood Street. The project includes pavement rehabilitation from Ash Street to Wood Street, drainage improvements as needed, reconstruction of sidewalks and wheelchair ramps, and streetscape enhancements in the town center.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$6,357,399 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,357,399 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$1,589,350 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,589,350 |
Total Funds |
$7,946,749 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,946,749 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 607977
Project Type: Roadway Reconstruction
Cost: $189,451,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project would improve the interchange of Interstate 90 and Interstate 495. A number of alternatives are being developed and evaluated in a feasibility study. This project is funded over five federal fiscal years (FFYs 2022-26) for a total cost of $189,451,000.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$31,787,151 |
$24,000,000 |
$40,000,000 |
$95,787,151 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$7,946,788 |
$6,000,000 |
$10,000,000 |
$23,946,788 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$39,733,939 |
$30,000,000 |
$50,000,000 |
$119,733,939 |
Proponent: DCR
ID Number: 608995
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $6,670,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Mass Central Rail Trail Wayside in Hudson, Stow, and Sudbury
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,336,000 |
$5,336,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,334,000 |
$1,334,000 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,670,000 |
$6,670,000 |
Proponent: Hull
ID Number: 601607
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $7,263,401
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
11 out of 30 |
13 out of 29 |
8 out of 29 |
6 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
44 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project involves the reconstruction of Atlantic Avenue from Nantasket Avenue to the Cohasset town line. Minor widening of the roadway is also planned. Related work includes drainage improvements and reconstruction of sidewalks.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$5,810,721 |
--- |
--- |
$5,810,721 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,452,680 |
--- |
--- |
$1,452,680 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$7,263,401 |
--- |
--- |
$7,263,401 |
Proponent: Ipswich
ID Number: 605743
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $2,939,052
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
11 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
10 out of 29 |
6 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
8 out of 18 |
47 out of 134 |
Project Description
In Ipswich, the project will reconstruct the roadway between Mineral Street and Poplar Street (3200 feet) to improve the roadway surface. Minor geometric improvements at intersection and pedestrian crossings will be included. Sidewalks and wheelchair ramps will be improved in selected areas for ADA compliance. The drainage system is undersized and will be upgraded.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,351,242 |
--- |
$2,351,242 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$587,810 |
--- |
$587,810 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,939,052 |
--- |
$2,939,052 |
Proponent: Littleton
ID Number: 609054
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $4,086,153
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
12 out of 30 |
3 out of 29 |
11 out of 29 |
5 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
6 out of 18 |
38 out of 134 |
Project Description
Reconstruction of Foster Street
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,268,922 |
$3,268,922 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$817,231 |
$817,231 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,086,153 |
$4,086,153 |
Lynn: Reconstruction on Route 129 (Lynnfield Street), from Great Woods Road to Wyoma Square
Proponent: Lynn
ID Number: 602077
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $4,980,392
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
12 out of 30 |
9 out of 29 |
8 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
4 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
41 out of 134 |
Project Description
This roadway and safety improvement project on Route 129 in Lynn includes drainage improvements, curbing, new sidewalks, wheelchair ramps, intersection improvements, pavement markings, signing, landscaping, and other incidental work. The project limits are from Colonial Avenue to about 150 feet south of Floyd Avenue (between Floyd and Cowdrey Road) for a total of 0.72 miles.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$3,984,314 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,984,314 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$996,078 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$996,078 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$4,980,392 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,980,392 |
Proponent: Lynn
ID Number: 609252
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $19,664,320
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
19 out of 30 |
17 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
8 out of 16 |
10 out of 12 |
3 out of 18 |
66 out of 134 |
Project Description
Rehabilitation of Essex Street
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$16,131,456 |
$16,131,456 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,532,864 |
$3,532,864 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$19,664,320 |
$19,664,320 |
Proponent: Lynn
ID Number: 609254
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $6,809,548
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
13 out of 30 |
13 out of 29 |
7 out of 29 |
2 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
3 out of 18 |
39 out of 134 |
Project Description
Traffic and safety improvements at two locations on Broadway. This project was evaluated using the MPO’s scoring criteria because it was considered for funding using Regional Target funds. MassDOT may fund the project.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,128,593 |
$6,128,593 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$680,955 |
$680,955 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,809,548 |
$6,809,548 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608817
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $2,278,125
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Resurfacing and related work on Route 107
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,822,500 |
--- |
--- |
$1,822,500 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$455,625 |
--- |
--- |
$455,625 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$2,278,125 |
--- |
--- |
$2,278,125 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 604952
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $84,253,135
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project consists of the construction of the Route 107 (Fox Hill Bridge), which spans the Saugus River. The new bridge will serve as the permanent replacement for the proposed temporary drawbridge. The new bridge (a.k.a. Belden G. Bly Bridge) will be a single leaf bascule drawbridge. This project is funded over five years (FFYs 2019-23) for a total cost of $84,253,135.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$11,755,297 |
$10,375,831 |
$17,845,656 |
$14,727,781 |
--- |
$54,704,565 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$2,938,824 |
$2,593,958 |
$4,461,414 |
$3,681,945 |
--- |
$13,676,141 |
Total Funds |
$14,694,121 |
$12,969,789 |
$22,307,071 |
$18,409,727 |
--- |
$68,380,708 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 607477
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $7,721,542
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will resurface 2.7 miles of Route 1 in Lynnfield and Peabody from milepoint 58.8 to 61.5.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$6,177,234 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,177,234 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,544,308 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,544,308 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$7,721,542 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,721,542 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608205
Project Type: Safety Improvements
Cost: $4,500,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project consists of replacing guide and traffic signs, and supports, on Interstate 95 (Route 128) between Route 28 (Exit 38) in Reading and Route 1 (Exit 44) in Lynnfield, including applicable signs on intersecting secondary roads. To ensure driver safety, new signs and supports will meet current retro-reflectivity and design standards.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$4,050,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,050,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$450,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$450,000 |
Total Funds |
$4,500,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,500,000 |
Proponent: Lynnfield, Wakefield
ID Number: 607329
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $11,080,749
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The proposed Wakefield/Lynnfield Rail Trail extends from the Galvin Middle School in Wakefield north to the Lynnfield/Peabody town line, a distance of approximately 4.4 miles. Approximately 1.9 miles of the trail is located within Wakefield and 2.5 miles in Lynnfield. The corridor is the southern section of the former Newburyport Railroad and will connect to Peabody and the regional Border to Boston Trail.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,864,599 |
$8,864,599 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,216,150 |
$2,216,150 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$11,080,749 |
$11,080,749 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608275
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $1,988,532
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
10 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
12 out of 29 |
5 out of 16 |
10 out of 12 |
12 out of 18 |
59 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project will replace street lighting along Exchange Street from Abbott Street to just east of Middlesex Street. The project will provide new LED street lights to improve access and amenities in the Downtown Malden Business District. Sidewalks and ramps will be reconstructed in the area.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$1,590,826 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,590,826 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$397,706 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$397,706 |
Total Funds |
$1,988,532 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,988,532 |
Proponent: Marblehead
ID Number: 608146
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $786,568
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
8 out of 30 |
10 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
3 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
40 out of 134 |
Project Description
The intersection improvements will include realignment of Vine Street to form a T intersection; narrowing and realigning Pleasant Street to minimize crossing distance; the installation of new sidewalks and signs; enhanced lighting; modest drainage modifications; ADA/AAB crossing enhancements; and shared bicycle accommodations. The project area is approximately 800 linear feet: 400 linear feet on Pleasant Street (200 feet east and west of the intersection), 150 linear feet on Village Street, 150 linear feet on Vine Street, and 100 linear feet on Cross Street. Drainage and utility adjustments will be made as needed to accommodate the proposed intersection channelization modifications.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$629,254 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$629,254 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$157,314 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$157,314 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$786,568 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$786,568 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608566
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $2,688,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Improvements at Route 20 (East Main Street) at Curtis Avenue
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,419,200 |
--- |
$2,419,200 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$268,800 |
--- |
$268,800 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,688,000 |
--- |
$2,688,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608467
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $14,358,240
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project consists of resurfacing on Route 20 in Sudbury and Marlborough.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$11,486,592 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$11,486,592 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,871,648 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,871,648 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$14,358,240 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$14,358,240 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608637
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $1,646,400
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will replace the bridge that carries Florida Road over the Assabet River in Maynard.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,317,120 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,317,120 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$329,280 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$329,280 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$1,646,400 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,646,400 |
Proponent: MBTA
ID Number: 9999
Project Type: Transit
Cost: $22,115,687
Scoring Summary
This program is being funded using Regional Target funds, but was not evaluated with the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria because specific projects will be evaluated for funding at a later date.
Project Description
This program proposes to flex Regional Target highway funding to the MBTA to support the Authority’s ongoing efforts to modernize transit infrastructure systemwide.
| Source |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$17,692,550 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$17,692,550 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$4,423,137 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,423,137 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$22,115,687 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$22,115,687 |
Proponent: Medford
ID Number: 608835
Project Type: Roadway Reconstruction
Cost: $989,895
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Safe Routes to School improvements at Brooks Elementary
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$791,916 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$791,916 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$197,979 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$197,979 |
Total Funds |
$989,895 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$989,895 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608522
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $4,073,920
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will replace the bridge that carries Route 62 (Maple Street) over the Ipswich River in Middleton.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,259,136 |
$3,259,136 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$814,784 |
$814,784 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,073,920 |
$4,073,920 |
Proponent: Milford
ID Number: 608045
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $3,132,000
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
20 out of 30 |
7 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
-1 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
5 out of 18 |
43 out of 134 |
Project Description
The proposed project involves roadway rehabilitation, from Route 109 to Beaver Street, including sidewalk reconstruction.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,605,600 |
$2,605,600 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$526,400 |
$526,400 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,132,000 |
$3,132,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 607342
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,478,849
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This intersection ranked second in the 2008-10 Statewide Top 200 Intersection Crash List. This project addresses the high number and severity of crashes that occur at this intersection.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,330,964 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,330,964 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$147,885 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$147,885 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$1,478,849 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,478,849 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609396
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $7,407,946
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Resurfacing and related work on Route 28
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,926,357 |
$5,926,357 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,481,589 |
$1,481,589 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,407,946 |
$7,407,946 |
Proponent: Needham and Newton
ID Number: 606635
Project Type: Major Infrastructure
Cost: $17,405,937
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
18 out of 30 |
16 out of 29 |
14 out of 29 |
13 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
13 out of 18 |
77 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project replaces project numbers 601827 and 604344. The project will reconstruct Highland Avenue, from Webster Street in Needham to Needham Street in Newton. The project also includes the rehabilitation of the Charles River Bridge (N-04-002).(Replaces #601827 & #604344). Work will consist of reconstruction on Highland Avenue starting at Webster Street in Needham and continue onto Needham Street and in Newton. Also includes the rehabilitation of the bridge, N-04-002.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$14,374,750 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$14,374,750 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$3,031,187 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,031,187 |
Total Funds |
$17,405,937 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$17,405,937 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608610
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $2,304,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Work consists of bridge cleaning and painting of structural steel in Newton.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,843,200 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,843,200 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$460,800 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$460,800 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$2,304,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,304,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608609
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $2,142,857
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Work consists of bridge cleaning and painting of structural steel in Newton and Westwood.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,714,285 |
--- |
$1,714,285 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$428,571 |
--- |
$428,571 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,142,857 |
--- |
$2,142,857 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608866
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $2,349,900
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Steel superstructure cleaning (full removal) and painting of two bridges: N-12-056 and W-31-006
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,879,920 |
--- |
--- |
$1,879,920 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$469,980 |
--- |
--- |
$469,980 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$2,349,900 |
--- |
--- |
$2,349,900 |
Proponent: Norwood
ID Number: 608052
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,668,001
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will improve the intersection and signals at US Route 1 (Providence Highway) and Morse Street.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,501,201 |
--- |
$1,501,201 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$166,800 |
--- |
$166,800 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,668,001 |
--- |
$1,668,001 |
Proponent: Norwood
ID Number: 605857
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $10,166,526
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
11 out of 30 |
12 out of 29 |
15 out of 29 |
11 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
55 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project includes traffic signal upgrades and associated geometric improvements at the intersection of Route 1 with University Avenue and Everett Street. Related improvements include constructing an additional travel lane in each direction on Route 1, upgrading of traffic signals, lengthening of left-turn lanes on Route 1, upgrading of pedestrian crossings at each leg of the intersection, and upgrading of bicycle amenities (loop detectors) at the intersection. Rehabilitation of sidewalks, curbing, median structures, lighting, and guard rails are also proposed.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$8,196,393 |
--- |
--- |
$8,196,393 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,970,133 |
--- |
--- |
$1,970,133 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$10,166,526 |
--- |
--- |
$10,166,526 |
Proponent: Norwood
ID Number: 606130
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $4,028,045
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
13 out of 30 |
7 out of 29 |
14 out of 29 |
3 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
7 out of 18 |
47 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project includes traffic signal installation and associated geometric improvements at the intersections of Route 1A with Upland Road and Washington Street, and with Prospect Street and Fulton Street in Norwood.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$3,222,436 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,222,436 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$805,609 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$805,609 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$4,028,045 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,028,045 |
Proponent: Peabody
ID Number: 608933
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $10,819,200
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
21 out of 30 |
17 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
3 out of 16 |
7 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
61 out of 134 |
Project Description
Given the condition of the existing pavement based on a visual inspection, as well as the number of utility trenches that have exhibited signs of differential settlement, the project is currently proposed to reconstruct the pavement via full depth pavement reclamation. The project will also include the reconstruction of cement concrete sidewalks and crossings with curb extensions and new granite curbing, addition of dedicated bicycle accommodations (bike lane and/or sharrows), installation of new signage and pavement markings, streetscape enhancements and amenities, and drainage system improvements corridor-wide. For the reconstructed intersections noted, new signal equipment will be provided at all locations. All signal equipment proposed will be NEMA TS2 Type 1, with countdown pedestrian heads, vibrotactile pedestrian push buttons with audible speech messages, optical emergency vehicles preemption, and video vehicle detection.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$8,805,360 |
--- |
$8,805,360 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,013,840 |
--- |
$2,013,840 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$10,819,200 |
--- |
$10,819,200 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608567
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,815,480
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Improvements at Route 114 at Sylvan Street, Cross Street, Northshore Mall, Loris Road, Route 128 Interchange, and Esquire Drive.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,633,932 |
--- |
--- |
$1,633,932 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$181,548 |
--- |
--- |
$181,548 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,815,480 |
--- |
--- |
$1,815,480 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609211
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $2,228,447
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
9 out of 30 |
4 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
4 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
34 out of 134 |
Project Description
Independence Greenway Extension
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,782,758 |
$1,782,758 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$445,689 |
$445,689 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,228,447 |
$2,228,447 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609101
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $5,025,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Pavement preservation and related work on Route 128
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$4,020,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,020,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$1,005,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,005,000 |
Total Funds |
$5,025,000 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,025,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608569
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $3,132,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Intersection improvements at Route 3A (Southern Artery) and Broad Street
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$2,818,800 |
--- |
--- |
$2,818,800 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$313,200 |
--- |
--- |
$313,200 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$3,132,000 |
--- |
--- |
$3,132,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608707
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $6,292,937
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
10 out of 30 |
16 out of 29 |
7 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
1 out of 18 |
40 out of 134 |
Project Description
Reconstruction of Sea Street
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,034,350 |
--- |
$5,034,350 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,258,587 |
--- |
$1,258,587 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,292,937 |
--- |
$6,292,937 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609399
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $7,407,946
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project involves the resurfacing of 13.2 lane miles of Route 28 in Randolph. The project includes two sections of Route 28, from mile marker 105.8-107.4 and mile marker and 107.6-109.3.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,926,357 |
$5,926,357 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,481,589 |
$1,481,589 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,407,946 |
$7,407,946 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609396
Project Type: Non-Interstate Pavement
Cost: $7,407,946
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project involves the resurfacing of 13.2 lane miles of Route 28 in Randolph and Milton. The project includes two sections of Route 28, from mile marker 110.0-111.6 and mile marker and 111.7-114.0.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,926,357 |
$5,926,357 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,481,589 |
$1,481,589 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$7,407,946 |
$7,407,946 |
Proponent: Reading
ID Number: 607305
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,750,419
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
10 out of 30 |
12 out of 29 |
5 out of 29 |
2 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
7 out of 18 |
55 out of 13438 |
Project Description
The project will install traffic control signals at this high crash location and interconnect the new signals with the existing signals at Main Street and Summer Street and at Main Street and South Street. The project will also include construction of AAB/ADA compliant sidewalks and wheelchair ramps and geometric improvements.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,475,377 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,475,377 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$275,042 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$275,042 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$1,750,419 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,750,419 |
Proponent: Regional
ID Number: BN0009
Project Type: Community Transportation
Cost: $8,000,000
Scoring Summary
This program is being funded using Regional Target funds, but was not evaluated with the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria because specific projects will be evaluated for funding at a later date.
Project Description
Community Transportation Program projects will be identified by the MPO through a competitive process.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,600,000 |
$1,600,000 |
$1,600,000 |
$1,600,000 |
$6,400,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$400,000 |
$400,000 |
$400,000 |
$400,000 |
$1,600,000 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$2,000,000 |
$2,000,000 |
$2,000,000 |
$2,000,000 |
$8,000,000 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608743
Project Type: Roadway Reconstruction
Cost: $384,658
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Safe Routes to School improvements at Bates Elementary School
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$307,726 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$307,726 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$76,932 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$76,932 |
Total Funds |
$384,658 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$384,658 |
Proponent: Sharon
ID Number: 608079
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $5,755,240
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
This project will replace the bridge that carrries Maskwonicut Street over the Amtrak and MBTA tracks. The bridge is currently closed due to deterioration.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$4,604,192 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,604,192 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,151,048 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,151,048 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$5,755,240 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,755,240 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608562
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $5,181,613
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project includes traffic signal upgrades and safety improvements at the following locations: Mystic Avenue northbound and Route 28 (Fellsway); Route 38 (Mystic Avenue) southbound and Route 28 (McGrath Avenue) southbound; Route 38 (Mystic Avenue) southbound and Route 28 (McGrath Avenue) northbound; and Route 38 southbound at Wheatland Street.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$4,663,452 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,663,452 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$518,161 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$518,161 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$5,181,613 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,181,613 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 605342
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $6,706,560
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will replace bridge S-29-001, which carries Route 62 (Gleasondale Road) over the Assabet River.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$5,365,248 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,365,248 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$1,341,312 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,341,312 |
Total Funds |
$6,706,560 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$6,706,560 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608255
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $3,612,223
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Bridge S-29-11, which carries Box Mill Road over Elizabeth Brook, is a structurally deficient bridge. The full replacement will include new substructure, steel beams, and concrete deck. One sidewalk will be added to the structure.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$2,889,779 |
--- |
--- |
$2,889,779 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$722,445 |
--- |
--- |
$722,445 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$3,612,223 |
--- |
--- |
$3,612,223 |
Proponent: Sudbury
ID Number: 608164
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $9,334,137
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
7 out of 30 |
3 out of 29 |
16 out of 29 |
9 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
4 out of 18 |
40 out of 134 |
Project Description
The proposed project involves construction of a 4.6 mile trail in Sudbury, from the Concord town line to Station Road. The proposed work includes improvements to two structures and upgrades to several at-grade crossings, including Route 117 (North Road), Pantry Road, and Route 27 (Hudson Road). Related work includes pavement markings, installation of guardrails, and landscaping.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$7,467,310 |
--- |
--- |
$7,467,310 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,866,827 |
--- |
--- |
$1,866,827 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$9,334,137 |
--- |
--- |
$9,334,137 |
Proponent: Swampscott
ID Number: 607761
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $1,157,036
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
The project will make safety upgrades to the intersection of Route 1A (Paradise Road) at Swampscott Mall. The upgrades will include signs, pavement markings, and traffic signals as identified through a Road Safety Audit process.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$1,041,333 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,041,333 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$115,704 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$115,704 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$1,157,036 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,157,036 |
Proponent: Walpole
ID Number: 602261
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $19,906,002
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
13 out of 30 |
11 out of 29 |
10 out of 29 |
6 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
9 out of 18 |
52 out of 134 |
Project Description
The proposed project consists of reconstructing 8,000 feet of Route 1A and includes improvements to the intersection and approaches at Fisher, Gould, North, Bullard/Willet Streets, and the Stop and Shop Plaza. The Route 1A bridge over the Neponset River, near the intersection with North Street, will be analyzed to determine if it can be rehabilitated or if it requires replacement. The limits of work are from approximately 2,000 feet north of Route 27 north to the Norwood town line.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$15,924,802 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$15,924,802 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$3,981,200 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,981,200 |
Total Funds |
$19,906,002 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$19,906,002 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608564
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $2,688,000
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Intersection improvements at Route 16 and Galen Street
Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,419,200 |
--- |
$2,419,200 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$268,800 |
--- |
$268,800 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,688,000 |
--- |
$2,688,000 |
Proponent: Watertown
ID Number: 607777
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $15,120,000
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
18 out of 30 |
14 out of 29 |
18 out of 29 |
12 out of 16 |
3 out of 12 |
10 out of 18 |
75 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project will reconstruct approximately 9,300 feet of Mount Auburn Street, from the Cambridge city line to the intersection with Summer Street, just east of Watertown Square. The project involves revisions to the roadway geometry, including a roadway diet to reduce the number of lanes; safety improvements; multi-modal accommodations, including shared or exclusive bike lanes; improvements to the existing traffic signal equipment; and improved ADA amenities at intersections.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$12,296,000 |
--- |
--- |
$12,296,000 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$2,824,000 |
--- |
--- |
$2,824,000 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$15,120,000 |
--- |
--- |
$15,120,000 |
Weston: Multi-Use Trail Connection, from Recreation Road to Upper Charles River Greenway including Reconstruction of Pedestrian Bridge N-12-078=W-29-062
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 609066
Project Type: Bicycle and Pedestrian
Cost: $2,767,958
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
6 out of 30 |
3 out of 29 |
9 out of 29 |
4 out of 16 |
2 out of 12 |
0 out of 18 |
24 out of 134 |
.
Project Description
This project would create a multi-use trail connection, from Recreation Road to Upper Charles River Greenway including reconstruction of pedestrian bridge N-12-078=W-29-062. This project was evaluated using the MPO’s scoring criteria because it was considered for funding using Regional Target funds. MassDOT funded the project, however.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$2,214,367 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,214,367 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$553,592 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$553,592 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$2,767,958 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,767,958 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 607327
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $10,760,960
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
A three-day weekend closure is recommended for this project since this route is used by school bus and emergency vehicles.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$8,608,768 |
--- |
--- |
$8,608,768 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$2,152,192 |
--- |
--- |
$2,152,192 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$10,760,960 |
--- |
--- |
$10,760,960 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608703
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $17,137,875
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Bridge replacement, W-38-029 (2KV), Route 129 (Lowell Street) over Interstate 93.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$13,710,300 |
$13,710,300 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,427,575 |
$3,427,575 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$17,137,875 |
$17,137,875 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 608929
Project Type: Bridge
Cost: $5,183,360
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Bridge replacement, W-38-003, Butters Row over MBTA.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$4,146,688 |
--- |
--- |
$4,146,688 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
$1,036,672 |
--- |
--- |
$1,036,672 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
$5,183,360 |
--- |
--- |
$5,183,360 |
Proponent: Wilmington
ID Number: 609253
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $3,944,000
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
13 out of 30 |
12 out of 29 |
16 out of 29 |
9 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
2 out of 18 |
53 out of 134 |
Project Description
Safety and Operations Analyses at Lowell Street (Route 129) at Woburn Street in Wilmington
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,209,600 |
$3,209,600 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$734,400 |
$734,400 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,944,000 |
$3,944,000 |
Proponent: Wilmington
ID Number: 608051
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $12,098,594
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
15 out of 30 |
12 out of 29 |
13 out of 29 |
10 out of 16 |
1 out of 12 |
8 out of 18 |
59 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project will reconstruct Route 38 from Route 62 to the Woburn City line. The roadway will consist of two 11 foot lanes, two 5 foot bike lanes and a 6 foot sidewalk. Turn lanes and upgraded traffic signals will be installed at Route 62.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$9,778,875 |
--- |
$9,778,875 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,319,719 |
--- |
$2,319,719 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$12,098,594 |
--- |
$12,098,594 |
Proponent: Winchester
ID Number: 608791
Project Type: Roadway Reconstruction
Cost: $1,671,716
Scoring Summary
This is a MassDOT-prioritized project and is therefore not directly evaluated using the MPO’s TIP scoring criteria.
Project Description
Safe Routes to School Improvements at Vinson-Owen Elementary
| Source |
2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
$1,337,373 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,337,373 |
Non-Federal Funds |
$334,343 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$334,343 |
Total Funds |
$1,671,716 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,671,716 |
Proponent: Winthrop
ID Number: 607244
Project Type: Complete Streets
Cost: $5,644,800
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
11 out of 30 |
14 out of 29 |
12 out of 29 |
8 out of 16 |
4 out of 12 |
5 out of 18 |
54 out of 134 |
Project Description
This project will include a complete street which will include pavement reconstruction and reclamation, sidewalk reconstruction and intersection improvements at key locations along the corridor. Improvements to the bicycle and pedestrian conditions will be implemented.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$4,515,840 |
--- |
$4,515,840 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$1,128,960 |
--- |
$1,128,960 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$5,644,800 |
--- |
$5,644,800 |
Proponent: Woburn
ID Number: 604996
Project Type: Major Infrastructure
Cost: $15,482,660
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
9 out of 30 |
1 out of 29 |
21 out of 29 |
12 out of 16 |
0 out of 12 |
12 out of 18 |
55 out of 134 |
Project Description
The project will construct a new bridge over the NH main line of the MBTA commuter rail and reconstruct approximately 1,850 feet of New Boston Street.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
$12,386,128 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$12,386,128 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
$3,096,532 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$3,096,532 |
Total Funds |
--- |
$15,482,660 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$15,482,660 |
Proponent: MassDOT
ID Number: 603739
Project Type: Intersection Improvements
Cost: $13,103,505
Scoring Summary
Category |
Safety |
Sys Pres |
CM/M |
CA/SC |
TE |
EV |
Total |
Score |
23 out of 30 |
11 out of 29 |
12 out of 29 |
9 out of 16 |
0 out of 12 |
0 out of 18 |
55 out of 134 |
Project Description
Project consists of the construction of ramps at the interchange of Route 1A and I-495 to accommodate increased volumes resulting from development at the interchange. Design may proceed by developers and, depending on cost and scale of development proposals, MassHighway may incorporate ramp construction into a highway project. Future mitigation packages for future developers may involve a median island to meet MHD s and Town of Wrentham long range plan for interchange.
| Source |
(FFY) 2020 |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$10,732,804 |
--- |
$10,732,804 |
Non-Federal Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$2,370,701 |
--- |
$2,370,701 |
Total Funds |
--- |
--- |
--- |
$13,103,505 |
--- |
$13,103,505 |
Chapter 4—Performance Analysis
Over the past few decades, transportation agencies have been expanding the role of performance management—a strategic approach that uses data to help achieve desired outcomes—in their decision-making processes. Performance management is credited with improving project and program delivery, informing investment decision-making, focusing staff on leadership priorities, and providing greater transparency and accountability to the public.
Performance-based planning and programming (PBPP) applies data and performance management principles to inform decision-making. For the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), these decisions focus on achieving desired outcomes for the Boston region’s multimodal transportation system. The purpose of PBPP is to ensure that transportation investment decisions—both for long-term planning and short-term funding—are oriented toward meeting established goals. Performance-based planning and programming activities include the following:
The MPO’s PBPP process is shaped by both federal transportation performance management requirements and the MPO’s goals and objectives, which were established as part of the MPO’s current Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), Charting Progress to 2040. This chapter discusses how these two frameworks shape the MPO’s PBPP process; describes the MPO’s current set of performance measures and targets; and explains how the MPO anticipates the projects included in this TIP will help achieve performance targets.
The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) directed states, MPOs, and public transportation providers to carry out a performance-and outcome-based surface transportation program, and these requirements have been continued under the current federal transportation funding law, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). MAP-21 identified seven national goals for the nation’s highway system:
Table 4-1 shows the relationship between these national goal areas and the MPO’s goal areas. The MPO’s goals and related objectives, as approved by the MPO during the planning process for the next LRTP, Destination 2040, are described in more detail in Chapter 1 of this document.
Table 4-1
National and Boston Region MPO Goal Areas
National Goal Area |
Boston Region MPO Goal Area |
Safety |
Safety |
Infrastructure Condition |
System Preservation and Modernization |
System Reliability |
Capacity Management/Mobility |
Congestion Reduction |
Capacity Management/Mobility |
Environmental Sustainability |
Clean Air/Clean Communities |
Freight Movement/Economic Vitality |
Capacity Management/Mobility and Economic Vitality |
Environmental Sustainability |
Clean Air/Sustainable Communities |
Reduced Project Delivery Delays |
Not applicable |
Not applicable |
Transportation Equity |
Source: Boston Region MPO.
MAP-21 and the FAST Act’s federal PBPP mandate is also designed to help the nation’s public transportation systems provide high-quality service to all users, including people with disabilities, seniors, and individuals who depend on public transportation.
The US Department of Transportation (USDOT), in consultation with states, MPOs, and other stakeholders, has established measures in performance areas relevant to the aforementioned national goals through a series of federal rulemakings. Table 4-2 lists federally required performance measures for the transit system and Table 4-3 lists federally required performance measures for the highway system.
Table 4-2
Federally Required Transit Performance Measures
National Goal Area |
Transit Performance Area or Asset Category |
Performance Measures |
Relevant MPO Goal Area |
Safety |
Fatalities |
Total number of reportable fatalities and rate per total vehicle revenue-miles by mode |
Safety |
Safety |
Injuries |
Total number of reportable injuries and rate per total vehicle revenue-miles by mode |
Safety |
Safety |
Safety Events |
Total number of reportable events and rate per total vehicle revenue-miles by mode |
Safety |
Safety |
System Reliability |
Mean distance between major mechanical failures by mode |
Safety |
Infrastructure Condition |
Equipment |
Percent of vehicles that have met or exceeded their Useful Life Benchmark (ULB) |
System Preservation |
Infrastructure Condition |
Rolling Stock |
Percent of revenue vehicles within a particular asset class that have met or exceeded their ULB |
System Preservation |
Infrastructure Condition |
Infrastructure |
Percent of track segments with performance restrictions |
System Preservation |
Infrastructure Condition |
Facilities |
Percent of facilities within an asset class rated below 3.0 on the Federal Transit Administration’s Transit Economic Requirements Model scale |
System Preservation |
Sources: National Public Transportation Safety Plan (January 2017), the proposed Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan Rule (Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 673), and the final Transit Asset Management Rule (49 CFR Part 625).
Table 4-3
Federally Required Roadway Performance Measures
National Goal Area |
Highway |
Performance Measures |
Relevant MPO Goal Area |
Safety |
Injuries and Fatalities |
• Number of fatalities |
Safety |
Infrastructure Condition |
Pavement Condition |
• Percent of pavements on the Interstate System in good condition |
System Preservation |
Infrastructure Condition |
Bridge Condition |
• Percent of NHS bridges by deck area classified as in good condition |
System Preservation |
System Reliability |
Performance of the National Highway System |
• Percent of the person-miles traveled on the Interstate System that are reliable |
Capacity Management/Mobility |
System Reliability, Freight Movement and Economic Vitality |
Freight Movement on the Interstate System |
• Truck Travel Time Reliability Index (for truck travel on Interstate highways) |
Capacity Management/Mobility, Economic Vitality |
Congestion Reduction |
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) |
• Annual hours of peak hour excessive delay per capita (for travel on NHS roadways) |
Capacity Management/Mobility |
Environmental Sustainability |
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality |
• Total emissions reduction for applicable pollutants and precursors for CMAQ-funded projects in designated nonattainment and maintenance areas1 |
Clean Air/ Clean Communities |
1 As of the Federal Highway Administration’s 2017 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program performance requirements applicability determination, the Boston Region MPO area contains an area designated as in maintenance for carbon monoxide, so the MPO is currently required to comply with this performance measure requirement.
NHS = National Highway System.
Sources: Highway Safety Improvement Program Rule (23 CFR 924), National Performance Management Measures Rule (23 CFR 490).
These performance measures and relevant performance targets are discussed in more detail later in this chapter.
These applicable federal rulemakings also identify key activities that agencies receiving federal transportation dollars must complete in order to integrate these federally required performance measures into their planning processes:
The MPO’s PBPP process must respond to the federal performance management requirements established under MAP-21 and the FAST Act, but it can also address other areas that pertain to its 3C responsibilities or relate to the MPO’s goals and objectives. For example, MAP-21 and the FAST Act do not specify transportation equity performance measures for states and MPOs to monitor. However, the MPO has established a transportation equity goal to provide comparable transportation access and service quality among communities, regardless of their income level or minority population.
This goal and its associated objectives are rooted in several federal regulations and presidential executive orders, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 12898 (addressing environmental justice), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and other USDOT orders. (For more information on these laws and orders, see Appendix F.) To comply with these regulations, the MPO systematically addresses the concerns of populations that these regulations protect—referred to here as transportation equity populations—throughout the MPO planning process, including when selecting projects through the TIP. Regular equity performance monitoring enables the MPO to better understand how transportation equity populations in the region may be affected by transportation investment decisions, so that it can decide whether and how to adjust its investment approach.
To build a comprehensive PBPP practice, the MPO can also choose to monitor or set targets for additional performance measures, which are not federally required, that apply to its goal areas. For example, while the federally required reliability measures discussed in Table 4-3 apply to the MPO’s Capacity Management and Mobility goal, the MPO may wish to examine measures that account for non-NHS roadways or other travel modes. Over the coming years, the MPO will examine whether and how to incorporate other performance measures and practices into its PBPP process.
States, MPOs, and public transportation providers integrate federally required performance measures—and other measures, as desired—into their respective PBPP processes, which involve three key phases focused on 1) planning, 2) investing, and 3) monitoring and evaluating.
In the planning phase, agencies set goals and objectives for the transportation system, identify performance measures, and set performance targets that will guide their decision-making. They identify and acquire data and conduct analyses necessary to support these processes. They also outline the frameworks they will use in key planning documents.
Meanwhile, the Commonwealth creates performance-based plans for Massachusetts, such as the SHSP and TAMP. Similarly, transit agencies—including the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA), and Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA)—create TAM plans and PSTAPs that describe the data and processes these agencies will use to address transit state of good repair and safety needs. The Commonwealth is responsible for setting performance targets for the federally required roadway performance measures described in Table 4-3, while transit agencies must set targets for the measures described in Table 4-2.
Boston Region MPO activities in the planning phase include creating a goals-and-objectives framework in its LRTP and establishing targets for federally required performance measures according to defined cycles. To establish these targets, the MPO may elect to support performance targets set by the Commonwealth or public transit providers (depending on the measure), or it may set separate targets for the MPO area.
In the investing phase, agencies use the PBPP framework established in the planning phase to create strategies for investing transportation funding. The MPO selects programs and projects that it will fund using its Regional Target funds and documents those decisions in the LRTP and/or TIP. Similarly. MassDOT, the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA follow their processes to select projects and programs for inclusion in the MassDOT Capital Investment Program (CIP). The federally funded investments they include in the CIP are also documented in the STIP.
After making plans and investments, agencies take stock of their progress by reviewing and reporting on their outputs and performance outcomes. Activities in the monitoring and evaluating phase include tracking trends, collecting data to understand the results of investment decisions, and comparing targets to actual performance. At the statewide level, MassDOT reports performance to USDOT through the STIP and other required reports, and on the MassDOT Performance Management Tracker website. Transit agencies report progress on TAM measures to the National Transit Database each year. The MPO reports on performance in the LRTP and through its Congestion Management Process (CMP), as well as through other tools, such as the MPO’s Performance Dashboards.
To support the activities discussed above, states, public transit operators, and MPOs must coordinate with one another and share information and data to ensure consistency across processes. In Massachusetts, these coordination responsibilities will be outlined in the 2019 Performance-Based Planning and Programming Agreement between MassDOT, Massachusetts MPOs, transportation planning organizations, the MBTA, and regional transit authorities (RTAs) operating in Massachusetts.
Staff from Massachusetts MPOs coordinate with MassDOT staff, and other stakeholders coordinate on PBPP implementation through the Transportation Program Managers Group’s subcommittee on performance measures. For performance measures that states and MPOs track at the Boston Urbanized Area level, coordination responsibilities are documented in the 2018 Boston Urbanized Area Memorandum of Understanding.1
1 Urbanized Areas (UZAs) are defined by the US Census Bureau to represent the urban cores of metropolitan areas. The Boston Urbanized Area includes the 97 municipalities in the Boston Region MPO and includes portions of neighboring MPOs in eastern Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
MAP-21 and the FAST Act direct MPOs to develop LRTPs and TIPs “through a performance-driven, outcome-based approach to planning.”2 The LRTP sets the MPO’s PBPP framework, which is made up of the MPO’s goals and objectives; performance measures and targets; and investment programs, policies, and guidelines. Each year, the MPO puts that framework into action when it creates the TIP. Several aspects of TIP development support performance-based planning and programming:
Once the MPO board allocates its Regional Target dollars to specific investments and considers capital programs submitted by MassDOT, MBTA, and the region’s RTAs, it documents the full set of investments for the Boston region in the TIP. The TIP describes links between these short-term capital investment priorities and performances measures and targets, and discusses, to the extent practicable, how the MPO anticipates these investments will help the MPO achieve its targets. The LRTP complements this analysis by describing performance outcomes and changes in performance in key areas over time and evaluating how current performance compares to baselines or past targets. The MPO board can use both sets of information to determine if its investments are making progress towards its goals, objectives, and performance targets and to make necessary trade-offs or adjustments.
2 Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 450.306.
This section discusses investments in the FFYs 2020−24 TIP and how they may relate to elements of the MPO’s PBPP framework, including the MPO’s goals aAnalysisnd performance measures and targets. For each goal area, existing performance targets are identified and information on relevant trends, performance measures, TIP investments, and related planning activities are provided. These descriptions generally focus on investments of the MPO’s Regional Target funds, although they may also make reference to MassDOT or transit agency-funded investments, where applicable.
Chapter 3 of this TIP document describes the investments made with the MPO’s Regional Target funds and MassDOT and transit agency-funded investments in detail. This section summarizes these FFYs 2020−24 TIP investments to provide context for the MPO-goal area discussions to follow.
Table 4-4 shows the Boston Region MPO’s investments with its Regional Target funding—including both the number of projects and the dollar amount—by investment program. The majority of the projects that the MPO will fund in FFYs 2020–24 are Complete Streets projects. The MPO will also be flexing approximately $71 million of its federal-aid highway dollars to MBTA modernization programs and the Green Line Extension.
Table 4-4
Boston Region MPO Investment Summary
Investment Program |
Number of Projects |
Regional Target Dollars Programmeda |
Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections |
4 |
$20,825,554 |
Community Transportation / Parking / Clean Air and Mobilityb |
TBD |
$8,000,000 |
Complete Streetsc |
26 |
$229,652,049 |
Intersection Improvements |
11 |
$58,867,483 |
Major Infrastructure—Transitd |
1 |
$49,131,200 |
Major Infrastructure—Roadway |
3 |
$144,573,875 |
MBTA Modernizatione |
TBD |
$22,115,687 |
Boston Region MPO Total |
45 |
$533,165,848 |
a The Regional Target dollars shown in this table include both federal funds and state matching funds.
b The MPO has allocated $8 million for the Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility Program in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP, but has not yet allocated it to specific projects.
c Project 606501, Reconstruction of Union Street (Route 139) in Holbrook, is also supported by $1,527,250 in earmark funds, which are not shown in this table.
d The MPO will flex federal highway improvement dollars to support the Green Line Extension, Phase 1.
e In FFY 2021, the MPO will flex federal highway improvement dollars to support transit modernization activities. These funds have not yet been allocated to specific projects.
TBD = to be determined.
Source: Boston Region MPO.
Table 4-5 shows MassDOT’s FFYs 2020–24 TIP investments —including both the number of projects or programs and the dollar amount—by MassDOT program. MassDOT’s investments are distributed across a variety of programs and will support bridge and pavement improvements, roadway improvements and reconstruction, new bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and safety improvements.
Table 4-5
MassDOT Investment Summary
Investment Program |
Number of Projects or Programs |
MassDOT Dollars Programmeda |
Bicycles and Pedestrians |
6 |
$33,133,083 |
Bridge Program |
21 |
$336,226,404 |
Intersection Improvements |
11 |
$33,352,024 |
Interstate Pavement |
1 |
$27,371,469 |
Non-Interstate Pavement |
13 |
$120,052,895 |
Roadway Improvements |
2 |
$1,476,235 |
Roadway Reconstruction |
6 |
$127,413,557 |
Safety Improvements |
7 |
$33,323,556 |
MassDOT Total |
67 |
$712,349,223 |
a The dollar amounts shown in this table include federal and state funds.
Sources: MassDOT and the Boston Region MPO.
Table 4-6 shows the MBTA’s programs and associated TIP funding amounts.
Table 4-6
MBTA Investment Summary
FTA Program |
MBTA Program |
MBTA Dollars Programmeda |
Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Funds |
Revenue Vehicle Program |
TBD |
Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Funds |
Signals/Systems Upgrade Program |
TBD |
Section 5337 Fixed Guideway/Bus Funds |
Bridge and Tunnel Program |
TBD |
Section 5337 Fixed Guideway/Bus Funds |
Signals/Systems Upgrade Program |
TBD |
Section 5337 Fixed Guideway/Bus Funds |
Stations and Facilities Program |
TBD |
Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities Funds |
Bus Program |
TBD |
Green Line Extension Funding (FFGA) |
Green Line Extension ‐ New Starts (FFGA) |
TBD |
Other Federal Funding |
Positive Train Controlb |
TBD |
MBTA Total |
n/a |
TBD |
Note: FTA formula funds (Sections 5307, 5337 and 5339) are based on estimated apportionments. TIP programs and projects are based on a preliminary draft Capital Investment Program as of March 27, 2019. Adjustments will be made to federal projects and budgets as the CIP process is finalized.
a The dollar amounts shown in this table include federal and state funds.
b Positive Train Control investments are funded with Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) and Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) funds.
FFGA = Full Funding Grant Agreement. FTA = Federal Transit Administration. MBTA = Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.
Sources: MBTA and the Boston Region MPO.
Table 4-7 summarizes MWRTA, CATA and other transit provider investments included in the FFYs 2020-24 TIP.
Table 4-7
CATA and MWRTA Investment Summary
Transit Agency |
Program |
RTA Dollars Programmeda |
CATA |
Regional Transit Authority Capital Assistance Program |
$595,000 |
CATA |
Section 5307: Urbanized Area Formula Funding |
$1,873,750 |
MWRTA |
Section 5307: Urbanized Area Formula Funding |
$5,788,310 |
CATA and MWRTA Total |
n/a |
$8,257,060 |
a The dollar amounts shown in this table include federal and state funds.
CATA = Cape Ann Transportation Authority. MWRTA = MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. RTA = regional transit authority.
Sources: CATA, MWRTA, and the Boston Region MPO.
One of the MPO’s goals is that transportation by all modes will be safe. The MPO has committed to investing in projects and programs that aim to reduce the number and severity of crashes for all modes, and to reducing serious injuries and fatalities occurring on the transportation system. Similarly, the Massachusetts SHSP includes a long-term goal to move “towards zero deaths” by eliminating fatalities and serious injuries on the Commonwealth’s roadways.3 In future years the MPO will work more closely with the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA to make safety-oriented investments and implement related initiatives as identified in their PTASPs.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the MPO track traffic incidents, fatalities, and injuries involving motor vehicles using information from the Massachusetts Crash Data System and the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Fatality Analysis and Reporting System (FARS). These data inform the targets the Commonwealth and the MPO must set each calendar year (CY) for five federally required roadway safety performance measures, which are also listed in Table 4-3:
These measures pertain to fatalities and serious injuries from traffic incidents and apply to all public roads. Values for these measures are expressed as five-year rolling annual averages. When establishing targets for these measures, the MPO can elect to support statewide targets set by the Commonwealth or set separate targets for the MPO region. The Commonwealth set its current set of roadway safety performance targets to reflect a 2015–19 rolling annual average, as required by FHWA. When setting these targets, the Commonwealth considered the following:
3 Massachusetts Strategic Highway Safety Plan, 2018, pg. I, available at https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2019/01/18/dot_SHSP_2018.pdf
Figures 4-1 to 4-5 show statewide level trends for each performance measure along with the Commonwealth’s prior year (CY 2018) and current (CY 2019) performance targets. In February 2019, the MPO elected to support the Commonwealth’s CY 2019 roadway safety performance targets. For context, the figures also show Boston region-specific values for each measure, including projected values for future years.
Figure 4-1 shows historic and projected values for the number of fatalities resulting from motor vehicle crashes, while Figure 4-2 shows the fatality rate per 100 million VMT. Actual fatalities and fatality rates have declined slightly for Massachusetts and for the Boston region specifically, based on recent five-year rolling annual averages, and while CY 2016 fatality data showed an increase at both geographic scales, draft data for CY 2017 shows values closer to the lower CY 2015 values. The Commonwealth considered this information when setting targets for lowering the number of fatalities. Meanwhile, VMT has been gradually increasing for both the Boston region and Massachusetts as a whole, which also supports historic and projected decreases in the fatality rate.
Figure 4-1
Fatalities from Motor Vehicle Crashes
Notes: Values reflect five-year rolling annual averages and have been rounded to the nearest integer.
MPO staff developed projections for the Boston region using a linear trend line and a draft estimate of 103 fatalities for CY 2017.
CY = calendar year. MPO = metropolitan planning organization.
Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis and Reporting System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
Figure 4-2
Fatality Rate per 100 Million Vehicle-Miles Traveled
Values reflect five-year rolling annual averages and have been rounded to the hundredth decimal place. MPO staff developed projections for the Boston region using a linear trend line, a draft estimate of 103 fatalities for CY 2017, and an estimate of CY 2017 VMT from MassDOT (approximately 25.5 billion VMT).
CY = calendar year. MassDOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation. VMT = vehicle-miles traveled.
Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis and Reporting System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
Figure 4-3 shows historic and projected values for the number of serious injuries resulting from motor vehicle crashes, and Figure 4-4 shows the serious injury rate per 100 million VMT.4 For both the Boston region and Massachusetts as a whole, serious injuries and serious injury rates have been decreasing over time and are projected to continue to decrease.
Figure 4-3
Serious Injuries from Motor Vehicle Crashes
Notes: Values reflect five-year rolling annual averages and have been rounded to the nearest integer. MPO staff developed projections for the Boston region using a linear trend line and a draft estimate of 938 serious injuries for CY 2017.
CY = calendar year. MPO = metropolitan planning organization.
Sources: Massachusetts Crash Data System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
Figure 4-4
Serious Injury Rate per 100 Million Vehicle-Miles Traveled
Notes: Values reflect five-year rolling annual averages and have been rounded to the hundredth decimal place. MPO staff developed projections for the Boston region using a linear trend line, a draft estimate of 938 serious injuries for CY 2017, and an estimate of CY 2017 VMT from MassDOT (approximately 25.5 billion VMT).
CY = calendar year. MassDOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation. MPO = metropolitan planning organization. VMT = vehicle-miles traveled.
Sources: Massachusetts Crash Data System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
4 MassDOT defines serious injuries as incapacitating injuries, which it identifies through incident reporting by police and vehicle operators using the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Crash Operator Report.
Figure 4-5 shows historic and projected values for the number of fatalities and serious injuries experienced by people traveling by nonmotorized means for the Boston region and Massachusetts as a whole. This category reflects bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries, as well as those experienced by others traveling by nonmotorized modes (such as skateboarders). Unlike the prior measures, values for this measure have been increasing over time for both the Boston region and Massachusetts overall.
Figure 4-5
Nonmotorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries
Notes: Values reflect five-year rolling annual averages and have been rounded to the nearest integer. MPO staff developed projections for the Boston region using a linear trend line, a draft estimate of 32 nonmotorized fatalities for CY 2017, and a draft estimate of 220 nonmotorized serious injuries for CY 2017.
CY = calendar year. MPO = metropolitan planning organization.
Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis and Reporting System, Massachusetts Crash Data System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
Figures 4-6 and 4-7 provide insight about motorized bicyclist, pedestrian, and other nonmotorized traveler fatalities and serious injuries. For both the Boston region and Massachusetts overall, pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries comprise most nonmotorized fatalities and serious injuries.
Figure 4-6
Nonmotorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries in Massachusetts
Note: All values have been rounded to nearest integer.
MassDOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis Reporting System, Massachusetts Crash Data System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
Figure 4-7
Nonmotorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries in the Boston Region
Note: All values have been rounded to nearest integer.
MassDOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis Reporting System, Massachusetts Crash Data System, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
MassDOT recognizes that its initiatives to increase nonmotorized travel throughout the Commonwealth have posed a challenge to concurrent activities to reduce nonmotorized fatalities and injuries. Rather than adopt a target that reflects an increased amount of nonmotorized fatalities and serious injuries, MassDOT has kept its nonmotorized performance targets to date approximately level with recent baselines. It plans to counter increasing trends in nonmotorized fatalities and serious injuries through investments and other initiatives that address safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and others who travel by nonmotorized means.
Table 4-8 lists the Commonwealths’ 2012–16 rolling average values for the fatality and serious injury performance measures and summarizes CY 2019 targets for the federally required roadway safety performance measures.
Table 4-8
Massachusetts Statewide Highway Safety Performance Baselines and CY 2019 Targets
Highway Safety Performance Measure |
2016 Safety Measure Value (2012–16 Rolling Average) |
2019 Safety Measure Target (Expected 2015–19 Rolling Average) |
Number of fatalities |
363.80 |
353.00 |
Rate of fatalities per 100 million vehicle-miles traveled |
0.61 |
0.58 |
Number of serious injuries |
3145.80 |
2801.00 |
Rate of serious injuries per 100 million vehicle-miles traveled |
5.24 |
4.37 |
Number of non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized serious injuries |
540.80 |
541.00 |
Note: All values have been rounded to the hundredth place.
CY = calendar year. MassDOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis Reporting System, Massachusetts Crash Data System, and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
By electing to support the Commonwealth’s roadway safety targets, the MPO agreed to plan and program projects so that they contribute to achieving those targets. Anticipating the ability of transportation projects to reduce fatalities and serious injuries from motor vehicle crashes is a challenge, as these crashes may be a consequence of many factors other than infrastructure condition, such as driver behavior—including seatbelt use and driver distraction or intoxication—and weather conditions.
When investing its Regional Target funds, the MPO aims to identify projects likely to have maximum safety benefits by using its TIP project selection criteria, which account for crash activity within the project area and the types of safety countermeasures included in the proposed project. (For more detail on these criteria, see Appendix A). When conducting project evaluations, the MPO considers crash rates within the vicinity of projects and the Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) value associated with those crashes. The EPDO index is used to assess the severity of crashes by assigning weighted values to crashes involving fatalities or injuries higher than those that only involve property damage.
All of the roadway projects included in the MPO’s Regional Target Program include safety countermeasures that the MPO expects will improve safety for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. The MPO’s investments in the Intersection Improvement, Complete Streets, and Major Infrastructure programs are expected to support safety improvements on roadways supporting multiple travel modes, while its Bicycle and Pedestrian projects will support safety for those traveling by nonmotorized means by providing pedestrian signals and separated facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians.
The MPO also examines whether projects would improve safety at MassDOT-identified Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) crash cluster locations. MassDOT identifies crash clusters using a procedure for processing, standardizing, matching, and aggregating crash locations and data.5 MassDOT’s HSIP clusters are those that rank in the top five percent of crash clusters within each regional planning agency area based on their EPDO value. MassDOT creates a set of HSIP clusters that include all motor vehicle crashes involving motor vehicles, as well as sets of clusters that reflect motor vehicle crashes that involved bicyclists or pedestrians. Locations with HSIP clusters are eligible for funding through MassDOT’s HSIP program.
Table 4-9 shows that many of these roadway projects are located in areas that overlap with HSIP clusters, and several are located in places that overlap HSIP Bicycle or Pedestrian clusters or where fatal or serious injury crashes have occurred between CY 2014 and 2016. The MPO expects that this combination of safety countermeasures and improvements focused in priority locations will help the MPO and the Commonwealth progress towards reducing fatalities and serious injuries on the roadway network.
Table 4-9
Regional Target Roadway Projects at Safety-Relevant Locations
Metric |
Value |
Regional Target projects that address all-mode HSIP clustersa |
20 projects |
All-mode HSIP cluster locations addressed by Regional Target projectsa |
35 locations |
Regional Target projects that address HSIP Pedestrian clustersb |
4 projects |
HSIP pedestrian cluster locations addressed by Regional Target projectsb |
8 locations |
Regional Target projects that address HSIP bicycle clustersb |
3 projects |
HSIP bicycle cluster locations addressed by Regional Target projectsb |
3 locations |
Project areas where fatal crashes have occurredc |
3 areas |
Project areas where crashes involving injuries have occurredc |
41 areas |
Project areas where crashes involving pedestrians have occurredc |
18 areas |
Project areas where crashes involving bicyclists have occurredc |
19 areas |
Note: The group of projects reflected in this table does not include the Green Line Extension, Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investments, or MBTA modernization investments.
a All-mode HSIP clusters are based on crash data from 2013 to 2015.
b HSIP bicycle clusters and HSIP pedestrian clusters are based on data from 2006 to 2015.
c Analyses of crashes in locations with projects funded by Regional Targets are based on crash data from 2014 to 2016.
Sources: Massachusetts Crash Data System, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and the Boston Region MPO.
The FFYs 2020–24 TIP projects programmed by MassDOT, described in Table 4-5, will also support safety and are expected to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on the region’s roadways. The Reliability and Modernization programs included in MassDOT’s CIP are geared toward maintaining and upgrading infrastructure, which will help make travel safer on the region’s roadways. MassDOT’s Intersection Improvements, Roadway Improvements, Roadway Reconstruction, and Safety Improvements programs most directly address safety considerations, although its Bridge and Pavement Improvement programs may also support safety by supporting asset maintenance and state of good repair. Moreover, MassDOT’s Bicycle and Pedestrian projects may reduce non-motorized fatalities and injuries by proving separated facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians.
While they do not specifically address the roadway safety targets listed in Table 4-8, the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA reliability and modernization investments are likely to help improve safety by bringing vehicles, facilities, and track systems into a state of good repair, which in turn enhances safety for transit customers and employees and members of the public. The System Preservation and Modernization Performance section discusses these transit state-of-good-repair investments in more detail. The MPO will also contribute to these transit asset improvements by allocating some of its Regional Target funds to MBTA modernization initiatives.
Under FTA’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan Rule—which goes into effect in July 2019—transit agencies will be responsible for developing Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans, which they must review and update annually. These plans will include targets for transit safety performance measures that are defined in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. These measures, also listed in Table 4-2, include the following:
Once transit agencies develop their safety plans and performance targets, they must share them with state DOTs and MPOs, which will set targets for their states and MPO regions, respectively. Future MPO TIP documents will include information on transit safety performance targets and their relationship to TIP investments.
Going forward, the MPO will work with its planning partners and other stakeholders to better understand and measure safety performance and to invest in projects that will reduce roadway fatalities and serious injuries as much as possible. Future activities include, but are not limited to, the following:
The MPO’s goal for this area is to maintain and modernize the transportation system and plan for its resiliency. System preservation policies for the region must encompass bridges, pavement, sidewalks, and transit system assets. They must address existing maintenance and state-of-good-repair needs, necessary updates to infrastructure to meet customer needs, and prepare for existing or future extreme conditions, such as sea level rise and flooding. The MPO’s Regional Target projects support asset condition improvements, which complement MassDOT and transit agencies’ more extensive state-of-good-repair and modernization projects. MassDOT uses information from its internal asset management systems to guide decisions about asset maintenance and modernization and considers investment priorities from its Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP).6 The TAMP is a federally required risk-based asset management plan that includes asset inventories, condition assessments, and investment strategies to improve the condition and performance of the National Highway System, particularly its bridges and pavements. Similarly, transit agencies that receive FTA funding must produce Transit Asset Management (TAM) plans that describe transit system assets and condition and the tools and investment strategies these agencies will use to improve them.
As of 2018, Massachusetts includes approximately 5,218 bridge structures, of which 1,613 (31 percent) are located within the Boston region.7 MassDOT bridge inspectors regularly review bridge condition and deem some bridges to be in substandard condition. These include structurally deficient bridges, which are those that are not necessarily unsafe, but that have deteriorated in ways that reduce the load-carrying capacity of the bridge, and bridges that are posted as weight restricted ensure traveler safety. As of 2018, the Boston region included 151 bridge structures deemed structurally deficient (about nine percent of all bridge structures in the Boston region). Eighty-two bridge structures were posted as weight restricted (about five percent of all bridge structures in the Boston region). By comparison, Massachusetts had 470 bridge structures deemed structurally deficient and 438 bridge structures posted as weight restricted (nine percent and eight percent of the state’s bridge structures, respectively).
To meet federal performance monitoring requirements, states and MPOs must track and set performance targets for the condition of bridges on the National Highway System (NHS), a network that includes the Interstate Highway System and other roadways of importance to the nation’s economy, defense, and mobility. As noted in Table 4-3, FHWA bridge condition performance measures include
These performance measures classify NHS bridge condition as good, fair, or poor based on the condition ratings of three bridge components: the deck, the superstructure, and the substructure.8 The lowest rating of the three components determines the overall bridge condition.9 The measures express the share of NHS bridges in a certain condition by deck area, divided by the total deck area of NHS bridges in the applicable geographic area (state or MPO).
Table 4-10 shows performance baselines for Massachusetts NHS bridge condition and Boston Region NHS bridge condition. As of 2017, Massachusetts had 2,246 NHS bridges, which MassDOT analyzed to understand their current condition with respect to the federal bridge condition performance measures. The Boston Region MPO performed a similar analysis on its 859 NHS bridges in 2018. According to these baseline values, the Boston region has a larger share of NHS bridge deck area considered to be in good condition, and a slightly smaller share of NHS bridge deck area considered to be in poor condition, compared to Massachusetts overall.
Table 4-10
Massachusetts and Boston Region NHS Bridge Condition Baselines
Geographic Area |
Federally Required Bridge Condition Performance Measure |
Total NHS Bridges |
Total NHS Bridge Deck Area (square feet) |
Percent of NHS Bridges in Good Condition |
Percent of NHS Bridges in Poor Condition |
Massachusettsa |
Percent of NHS Bridges [by deck area] that are in good condition |
2,246 |
29,457,351 |
15.2% |
12.4% |
Boston Regionb |
Percent of NHS Bridges [by deck area] that are in poor condition |
859 |
14,131,094 |
19.2% |
11.8% |
a Massachusetts baseline data is based on a MassDOT analysis conducted in 2018.
b Boston region comparison data is based on a Boston Region MPO analysis conducted in 2018.
NHS = National Highway System.
Sources: MassDOT and Boston Region MPO.
5 For more information, see MassDOT, 2015 Top Crash Location Report, March 2018,
https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/05/31/15TopCrashLocationsRpt.pdf, pg. 4-5.
6 MassDOT’s TAMP is scheduled to be finalized in July 2019.
7 These 2018 values are based on bridge inventory data provided by MassDOT on December 31, 2018. Multiple bridge structures may serve a particular crossing.
8 National Bridge Inventory data is used to rate these components on a scale of zero (worst) to nine (best). The FHWA has classified these bridge ratings into good (seven, eight, or nine on the scale), fair (five or six), or poor (four or less).
9 Culverts are assigned an overall condition rating.
Federal regulation has established 10 percent as a threshold for bridges in poor condition, above which states must obligate a minimum amount of National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) funds to on-system bridges. USDOT has established 10 percent as a threshold for NHS bridge deck area that is in poor condition, and departments of transportation for states that exceed that threshold must direct a defined minimum amount of NHPP funding toward improving NHS bridges. Because more than 10 percent of Massachusetts NHS bridge deck area is in poor condition, MassDOT programs this minimum amount.
States must set performance targets for these measures at two-year and four-year intervals. Table 4-11 shows MassDOT’s NHS bridge performance targets, which it established in 2018. The two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021. These targets reflect MassDOT’s anticipated NHS bridge condition based on historic trends, as well as planned bridge investments. As shown in the table, MassDOT expects there will be a small increase in the share of NHS bridge deck area in good condition by the end of CY 2021, while it expects that the share of NHS bridge deck area in poor condition in CY 2021 will be slightly lower than the baseline.
Table 4-11
MassDOT NHS Bridge Condition Targets
Federally Required Bridge Condition Performance Measure |
2018 Measure Value (Baseline) |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Percent of NHS Bridges [by deck area] that are in good condition |
15.2% |
15.0% |
16.0% |
Percent of NHS Bridges [by deck area] that are in poor condition |
12.4% |
13.0% |
12.0% |
CY = calendar year. NHS = National Highway System.
Source: MassDOT.
MPOs are required to set four-year bridge performance targets by either electing to support state targets or setting separate quantitative targets for the MPO area. The Boston Region MPO elected to support MassDOT’s four-year targets for these measures in November 2018. The MPO will work with MassDOT to meet these targets through its Regional Target investments.
As with NHS Bridges, USDOT’s performance management framework requires states and MPOs to monitor and set targets for the condition of pavement on NHS roadways. Massachusetts has 3,202 lane miles of Interstate roadways, 1,152 lane miles (or 36 percent) of which are in the Boston region.10 The state’s non-Interstate NHS network is made up of 7,319 lane-miles of roadways, and the Boston region contains 2,252 (or 35 percent) of those lane miles. Applicable federal performance measures, which are also listed in Table 4-3, include the following:
The Interstate performance measures classify Interstate pavements as in good, fair, or poor condition based on the pavements’ International Roughness Index (IRI) value and one or more pavement distress metrics (cracking and/or rutting and faulting) depending on the pavement type (asphalt, jointed concrete, or continuous concrete). FHWA sets thresholds for each metric that determine whether the metric value is good, fair, or poor, along with thresholds that determine whether the pavement segment as a whole is considered to be in good, fair, or poor condition. Non-Interstate NHS pavements are subject to the same thresholds for IRI values. States will be required to collect data for the complementary distress metrics starting in 2020, which will be incorporated into future performance monitoring.
MassDOT tracks the condition of Massachusetts’ roadways, including all of the Commonwealth’s NHS network, through its Pavement Management Program. In 2018, MassDOT established performance targets for these NHS pavement condition performance measures, which are shown along with baseline data in Table 4-12. As with the NHS bridge condition performance targets, the two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021. While MassDOT has collected IRI data in past years, these federally required performance measures also require other types of distress data that have not previously been required as part of pavement monitoring programs.11 MassDOT notes that setting targets for these pavement condition measures is challenging given the lack of complete historic data. MassDOT’s approach when setting target was to use past pavement indicators to identify trends and to set conservative targets, and to revisit its four-year target in in 2020, when more data is
available.
Table 4-12
Massachusetts NHS Pavement Condition Baselines and MassDOT NHS Pavement Condition Performance Targets
Federally Required Pavement Condition Performance Measure |
2017 Measure Value (Baseline) |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Percent of Interstate Highway System pavements that are in good conditiona |
74.2% |
70.0% |
70.0% |
Percent of Interstate Highway System pavements that are in poor conditiona |
0.1% |
4.0% |
4.0% |
Percent of non-Interstate NHS pavements that are in good condition |
32.9% |
30.0% |
30.0% |
Percent of non-Interstate NHS pavements that are in poor condition |
31.4% |
30.0% |
30.0% |
a For the first federal performance monitoring period (2018–21), the Federal Highway Administration has only required states to report four-year targets for pavement condition on the Interstate Highway System. MassDOT has developed both two-year and four-year targets for internal consistency.
CY = calendar year. NHS = National Highway System.
Source: MassDOT.
As with NHS bridge condition performance measures, MPOs are required to set four-year Interstate pavement condition and non-Interstate NHS pavement condition performance targets by either supporting state targets or setting separate quantitative targets the MPO area. The Boston Region MPO elected to support MassDOT’s four-year targets for these NHS pavement condition measures in November 2018. The MPO will work with MassDOT to meet these targets through its Regional Target investments.
10 This data is based on city-or-town-accepted lane mileage as reflected in the 2017 MassDOT Roadway Inventory file.
11 MassDOT continues to measure pavement quality and to set statewide short-term and long-term targets in the MassDOT Performance Management Tracker using the Pavement Serviceability Index (PSI), which is a different index than IRI.
When prioritizing capital investments for the TIP, the MPO uses its project evaluation criteria to assess how well each project funded with Regional Target dollars may help maintain or modernize the MPO’s roadway infrastructure. The MPO’s policy has been to not use Regional Target funds for projects that only resurface pavement. However, the MPO does fund roadway reconstruction projects that include pavement improvements in addition to other design elements. The MPO uses IRI information and data provided by project proponents to identify substandard pavement and awards points to projects that will improve these pavements.12 Similarly, the MassDOT Bridge Program remains the primary funding source for replacement or rehabilitation of substandard bridges, but the MPO’s Regional Target investments also contribute modestly to bridge improvements. The MPO awards points to candidate TIP projects that include improvements for bridges that are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Projects funded with Regional Target dollars also improve traffic signal equipment or sidewalk infrastructure; enable improved emergency response; or improve the resiliency of the transportation system to extreme weather conditions.
12 According to the MPO’s TIP criteria, pavement is considered to be in good condition if its IRI rating is 190 or less, in fair condition if its IRI rating is 190 to 320, and in poor condition if its IRI rating is greater than 320. These thresholds differ from the IRI thresholds that FHWA has set for National Highway System pavement performance monitoring (good if IRI is 95 or less, fair if IRI is 95 to 170, and poor if IRI is greater than 170).
Table 4-13 displays metrics describing how the MPO’s FFYs 2020–24 Regional Target projects are expected to improve infrastructure on the region’s roadways. Materials supporting the MPO’s project selection process included information on projects that address parts of the NHS system, and Table 4-13 includes measures specific to NHS pavement and bridges. The MPO expects that these FFYs 2020–24 investments will help MassDOT make progress towards its NHS bridge and pavement condition targets and will also help improve the overall condition of the region’s roadways and bridges.
Table 4-13
Regional Target Projects Addressing Roadway System Preservation and Modernization Performance
Metric |
Value |
Bridge structures improved |
7 structures |
NHS bridge structures improved |
4 structures |
New bridge structures to be constructed |
4 structures |
Lane miles of substandard pavement improveda |
84 lane miles |
Lane miles of substandard NHS pavement improveda |
48 lane miles |
Miles of substandard sidewalk improved |
46 miles |
Projects that improve emergency response |
7 projects |
Projects that improve the ability to respond to extreme conditionsb |
5 projects |
Note: The group of projects reflected in this table does not include the Green Line Extension, Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investments, or MBTA modernization investments.
a Substandard pavement designations are based on data provided by MassDOT and project proponents and on MPO assessments conducted for TIP evaluations. The estimated lane miles of substandard NHS improved is based on the pavement condition assessment for the project and the MPO’s assessment of the portion of the project on the NHS.
NHS = National Highway System.
Source: MassDOT and Boston Region MPO.
Many of MassDOT’s FFYs 2020–24 TIP investments address bridge and pavement condition. MassDOT’s Bridge programs include 21 projects that will improve or replace 40 structures, 30 of which are NHS bridge structures. Its Interstate Pavement program will improve pavements on Interstate 93 in Boston, Milton, and Quincy, while its non-Interstate pavement program includes 13 projects that will improve pavements on MassDOT-owned NHS roadways in 21 Boston region municipalities. These projects are expected to help MassDOT make progress toward its NHS bridge and pavement performance targets. Projects in MassDOT’s other Reliability and Modernization programs—including its Intersection Improvements, Roadway Improvements, Roadway Reconstruction, and Safety Improvements programs—include elements that will improve pavement and roadway infrastructure condition in the Boston region.
The Boston region includes three transit agencies that regularly receive FTA funds to provide service—the MBTA, CATA and MWRTA. These agencies are responsible for meeting planning and performance-monitoring requirements under FTA’s TAM rule, which is focuses on achieving and maintaining a state of good repair for the nation’s transit systems. Each year, they must submit progress reports and updated performance targets for TAM performance measures, which relate to transit rolling stock, nonrevenue service vehicles, facilities, and rail fixed guideway infrastructure. Transit agencies develop these performance targets based on their most recent asset inventories and condition assessments, along with their capital investment and procurement expectations, which are informed by their TAM Plans. MBTA, MWRTA, and CATA share their asset inventory and condition data and their performance targets with the Boston Region MPO, so that the MPO can monitor and set TAM targets for the Boston region.
The following subsections discuss the MPO’s current performance targets (adopted in March 2019) for each of the TAM performance measures, which are listed in Table 4-2. These performance targets reflect MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA state fiscal year (SFY) 2019 TAM performance targets (for July 2018 through June 2019). MPO staff has aggregated some information for asset subgroups. These tables highlight whether transit agencies expect to see performance for specific asset subgroups get better or worse compared to the SFY 2018 baseline (June 30, 2018).
FTA’s TAM performance measure for the state of good repair for rolling stock and equipment vehicles (service support, maintenance, and other nonrevenue vehicles) is the percent of vehicles that meet or exceed their useful life benchmark (ULB). This performance measure uses vehicle age as a proxy for state of good repair (which may not necessarily reflect condition or performance), with the goal being to bring this value as close to zero as possible. FTA defines ULB as “the expected lifecycle of a capital asset for a particular transit provider’s operating environment, or the acceptable period of use in service for a particular transit provider’s operating environment.” For example, FTA’s default ULB value for a bus is 14 years. When setting targets, each agency has discretion to use FTA-identified default ULBs for vehicles or to adjust ULBs with approval from FTA. The MBTA has used FTA default ULBs for its rolling stock targets and uses MBTA-defined ULBs, which are based on agency-specific usage and experience, for its equipment targets. CATA and MWRTA have selected ULBs from other sources.13
13 CATA used useful life criteria as defined in FTA Circular 5010.1E (Award Management Requirements) for ULB values. MWRTA used useful life criteria as defined in MassDOT’s Fully Accessible Vehicle Guide and in FTA Circular 5010.1E for ULB values.
Table 4-14 describes SFY 2018 baselines and the MPO’s SFY 2019 targets for rolling stock, which refers to vehicles that carry passengers. As shown below, the MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA are improving performance for a number of rolling stock vehicle classes. Transit agencies can make improvements on this measure by expanding their rolling stock fleets or replacing vehicles within those fleets.
Table 4-14
SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets
for Transit Rolling Stock
SFY 2018 Baseline |
SFY 2019 Targets |
|||||
Agency |
Asset Type |
Number of Vehicles |
Percent of Vehicles ≥ ULB |
Number of Vehicles |
Percent of Vehicles ≥ ULB |
Target Compared to Baseline |
MBTA |
Buses |
1,022 |
25% |
1,028 |
25% |
Same |
MBTA |
Light Rail Vehicles |
205 |
46% |
229 |
41% |
Better |
MBTA |
Heavy Rail Vehicles |
432 |
58% |
450 |
56% |
Better |
MBTA |
Commuter Rail Locomotives |
94 |
27% |
104 |
24% |
Better |
MBTA |
Commuter Rail Coaches |
426 |
0% |
429 |
0% |
Same |
MBTA |
Ferry Boats |
4 |
0% |
4 |
0% |
Same |
MBTA |
THE RIDE Paratransit Vehiclesa |
763 |
35% |
763 |
9% |
Better |
CATA |
Buses |
9 |
11% |
8 |
0% |
Better |
CATA |
Cutaway Vehiclesb |
23 |
13% |
23 |
0% |
Better |
CATA |
Trolleys (simulated)c |
2 |
100% |
2 |
100% |
Same |
MWRTA |
Cutaway Vehiclesb,d |
89 |
6% |
93 |
0% |
Better |
MWRTA |
Automobilesd |
9 |
0% |
9 |
0% |
Same |
a The MBTA’s THE RIDE paratransit vehicles data and targets reflect automobiles, vans, and minivans.
b The National Transit Database defines a cutaway vehicle as a vehicle in which a bus body is mounted on a van or light-duty truck chassis, which may be reinforced or extended. CATA uses nine of these vehicles to provide fixed-route services, and 14 of these vehicles to provide demand-response service.
c Simulated trolleys, also known as trolley-replica buses, have rubber tires and internal combustion engines, as opposed to steel-wheeled trolley vehicles or rubber-tire trolley buses that draw power from overhead wires.
d MWRTA uses cutaway vehicles to provide fixed-route and demand-response service, and uses autos to provide demand response service.
CATA = Cape Ann Transportation Authority. MBTA = Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.
MWRTA = MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. SFY = State Fiscal Year. ULB = Useful Life Benchmark.
In SFY 2019, the MBTA is making revenue vehicle improvements by incorporating new Orange Line (heavy rail) cars, Green Line (light rail) cars, and LoNo (low emissions) pilot buses into its vehicle fleets, overhauling commuter rail vehicles, continuing to purchase for replacement vehicles for its paratransit fleet. During FFY 2019, MWRTA will receive FTA Section 5310 funds, which are administered by MassDOT, to purchase replacement vehicles, and CATA will receive two fixed-route replacement vehicles.
Table 4-15 shows SFY 2018 baselines and the MPO’s SFY 2019 targets for transit equipment vehicles. MPO staff has aggregated targets for nonrevenue vehicle subtypes for each of the three transit agencies. Similar to transit rolling stock, transit agencies can make improvements on these measures by expanding their fleets or replacing vehicles within those fleets.
Table 4-15
SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for Transit Equipment Vehicles
SFY 2018 Baseline |
SFY 2018 Targets |
||||
Agency |
Number of Vehicles |
Percent of Vehicles ≥ ULB |
Number of Vehicles |
Percent of Vehicles ≥ ULB |
Target Compared to Baseline |
MBTAa |
1,676 |
20% |
1,676 |
22% |
Worse |
CATA |
4 |
25% |
3 |
0% |
Better |
MWRTA |
12 |
50% |
12 |
50% |
Same |
a MBTA equipment includes both commuter rail and transit system nonrevenue service vehicles.
CATA = Cape Ann Transportation Authority. MBTA = Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.
MWRTA = MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. SFY = State Fiscal Year. ULB = Useful Life Benchmark.
In SFY 2019, the MBTA continued to make investments in nonrevenue vehicles—including transit police replacement vehicles—to improve asset state of good repair.
FTA assesses the state-of-good-repair condition for passenger stations, parking facilities, and administrative and maintenance facilities using the FTA Transit Economic Requirements Model (TERM) scale, which generates a composite score based on assessments of facility components. Facilities with scores below three are considered to be in marginal or poor condition (though this score is not a measure of facility safety or performance). The goal is to bring the share of facilities that meet this criterion to zero. Infrastructure projects focused on individual systems may improve performance gradually, while more extensive facility improvement projects may have a more dramatic effect on a facility’s TERM scale score.
Table 4-16 shows SFY 2018 measures and the MPO’s SFY 2019 targets for MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA facilities. The MBTA measures and targets only reflect those facilities that have undergone a recent on-site condition assessment. The number of facilities that the MBTA has not yet assessed is shown to provide a more comprehensive count of the MBTA’s assets.
Table 4-16
SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for Transit Facilities
SFY 2018 Baseline |
SFY 2019 Targets |
|||||
Agency |
Facility Type |
Number of Facilities |
Percent of Facilities < 3 |
Number of Facilities |
Percent of Facilities < 3 |
Target Compared to Baseline |
MBTA |
Passenger–Assesseda |
96 |
13% |
96 |
11% |
Better |
MBTA |
Passenger–Not Assesseda |
285 |
In progress |
286 |
TBD |
N/A |
MBTA |
Administrative/ |
156 |
68% |
156 |
63% |
Better |
MBTA |
Administrative/ |
38 |
In progress |
38 |
TBD |
N/A |
CATA |
Administrative/ |
1 |
0% |
1 |
0% |
Same |
MWRTA |
Administrative/ |
1 |
0% |
1 |
0% |
Same |
a Passenger facilities include stations and parking facilities.
CATA = Cape Ann Transportation Authority. MBTA = Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.
MWRTA = MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. N/A = Not applicable. TBD = To be determined.
During SFY 2019, the MBTA continued to improve facility conditions by opening the Blue Hill Avenue Station on the Fairmount commuter rail line and making roof replacements on maintenance facilities, among other activities.
Table 4-17 describes SFY 2018 baselines and SFY 2019 targets for infrastructure condition, specifically rail fixed guideway condition. The MBTA is the only transit agency in the Boston region with this asset type. The performance measure that applies to these assets is the percentage of track that is subject to performance, or speed, restrictions. The MBTA samples the share of track segments with speed restrictions throughout the year. These performance restrictions may reflect not only the condition of track, signal, and other supporting systems, which the MBTA can improve through maintenance, upgrade, and replacement and renewal projects. Again, the goal is to bring the share of MBTA track systems subject to performance restrictions to zero.
Table 4-17
SFY 2018 Measures and SFY 2019 Targets for MBTA Transit Fixed Guideway Infrastructure
SFY 2018 Baseline |
SFY 2018 Targets |
|||||
Agency |
Track Type |
Directional Route Miles |
Percent of Miles with Speed Restrictions |
Directional Route Miles |
Percent of Miles with Speed Restrictions |
Target Compared to Baseline |
MBTA |
Transit Fixed Guidewaya |
130.23 |
11% |
130.23 |
10% |
Better |
MBTA |
Commuter Rail Fixed Guideway |
663.84 |
1% |
663.84 |
1% |
Same |
Note: The term “directional track miles” represents the miles managed and maintained by the MBTA with respect to each direction of travel (for example, northbound and southbound), and excludes nonrevenue tracks such as yards, turnarounds, and storage tracks. The baseline and target percentages represent the annual average number of miles meeting this criterion over the 12-month reporting period.
a The MBTA’s Transit Fixed Guideway information reflects light rail and heavy rail fixed guideway networks.
MBTA = Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. SFY = State Fiscal Year.
During SFY 2019, the MBTA continued the Green Line D Branch Track and Signal Program, Orange Line Direct Fixation track improvements, and improvements to commuter rail track, ties, and switches. These track system-oriented improvements are expected to ultimately help reduce performance restrictions on MBTA fixed guideways.
Many different types of transit investments may affect the TAM vehicles, facilities, or fixed guideway performance measures described in the previous section, because these investments may either improve or replace assets already included in transit agency inventories, or because they may expand those inventories. These investments may improve assets gradually over time by upgrading specific asset subsystems, or they may generate more dramatic changes in performance by overhauling or replacing assets.
The FFYs 2020–24 TIP includes a variety of transit infrastructure improvement initiatives, funded both by MPO’s Regional Targets and dollars that the MBTA, MWRTA, and CATA program in coordination with MassDOT. Because of the timing of these investments, they are not expected to affect the MPO’s current (SFY 2019) TAM performance targets; however, they are expected to help improve TAM performance on the measures in general.
During FFYs 2020–24, the MBTA will be investing in vehicles to replace or expand its fleets. These investments will help improve the state-of-good-repair condition of the fleets and make progress with respect to the TAM rolling stock performance measure. Procurements will include the following:
The MBTA will also be funding bus, commuter rail coach and locomotive, catamaran, and Red Line vehicle overhauls to improve the state-of-good-repair of these fleets. Additional details about these investments are included in Chapter 3. Meanwhile, CATA will be purchasing two buses and two simulated trolleys to replace vehicles that have reached the end of their useful life.
During FFYs 2020–24, the MBTA will invest in a number of its transit stations and parking facilities, either by improving specific subsystems or components—such as busways or elevators—or by making more extensive repairs or upgrades to address state of good repair, ADA accessibility or other needs. Chapter 3 describes these investments in more detail. This set of investments includes the construction of a new Chelsea commuter rail station (and the decommissioning of the existing station), and design work to address accessibility needs at Green Line stations and at commuter rail stations in Newton. The MBTA will also be improving infrastructure improvements at its Codman Yard facility, in part to accommodate new Red Line vehicles. Over time, these investments will improve the state of good repair of MBTA facilities and also enhance accessibility and customer experience.
While MWRTA and CATA’s facilities are currently in a state of good repair, these agencies will continue to maintain and upgrade them. As part of the FFYs 2020–24 TIP, CATA will be repaving its parking lot. MWRTA plans to improve its Blandin Hub facility by replacing its roof and generator; upgrading heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems; completing path improvements and solar photovoltaic projects; and improving customer amenities, including by making ADA enhancements. MWRTA will also be funding elevator improvements at the Framingham commuter rail station, which it manages and maintains under contract with the MBTA.
The MBTA’s FFYs 2020–24 investments in track signals and systems will, over time, help reduce the need for performance restrictions on fixed guideways. These investments include Green Line track upgrades, upgrades and improvements to Red Line, Orange Line, and Green Line signals, and specific signal upgrades at Alewife and North Stations. Chapter 3 describes these investments in more detail.
The MBTA will be funding other improvements that will enhance the performance of fixed guideway systems, including the implementation of Automatic Train Control systems for the commuter rail network and power infrastructure upgrades at various locations. It will also advance the design and operations planning for track improvements on the Worcester commuter rail line.
Other MBTA investments in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP include those in its Bridge and Tunnel Program, which include bridge and tunnel repair and rehabilitation and replacement of several bridges, including eight that support the commuter rail network. The MBTA will also be rehabilitating the seawall that protects the Charlestown bus maintenance facility and replacing its radio system to support MBTA police communication. Chapter 3 provides more information on these projects. Meanwhile, CATA will invest in shop equipment, software, and other capital maintenance items, and MWRTA will invest in bus support equipment and IT infrastructure.
Additional refinements may be made to MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA programming after MassDOT’s CIP is finalized in summer 2019. Also,
CATA and MWRTA coordinate with MassDOT’s Rail and Transit Division to maintain vehicle state of good repair through competitive grant applications, including to the Commonwealth’s Community Transit Grant Program. The Rail and Transit Division awards funding, including FTA 5310 funds, through this program on an annual basis with award announcements typically made in the third quarter of the calendar year. Vehicle purchases and other investments supported by this program may support transit state of good repair in the Boston region.
The MPO will continue to work with MassDOT, the MBTA, MWRTA, and CATA, on the following activities to improve the links between transportation investments and system preservation and modernization:
The MPO’s capacity management and mobility goal focuses on using existing facility capacity more efficiently and increasing transportation options. The MPO’s objectives in this area encompass a variety of modes and aspects of mobility, including access to and the accessibility of different transportation modes, connectivity between modes and systems, and support for reliable travel and congestion mitigation. Much of the Boston region is densely developed, which creates challenges to addressing these types access, reliability, and congestion mitigation needs.
A number of different planning processes come together to address capacity management and mobility performance, issues, and needs. Through its Congestion Management Process, the MPO does extensive analysis of congestion and mobility constraints in the region, and it also produces periodic Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program performance plans that describe other congestion-oriented measures and targets. The MPO combines this work with ongoing system-level analyses that support its long-range planning, which are documented in its Long-Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment.
MassDOT conducts its own analyses of mobility performance and needs, which it documents in modal plans such as its Freight Plan, Bicycle Plan, and Pedestrian Plan, its own CMAQ Performance Plan, and its MassDOT Performance Management Tracker tool. Meanwhile, the MBTA tracks and analyzes mobility metrics and uses these to support planning processes, such as Focus40, its current long-term investment plan. The exchange and integration of these plans help agencies in the Boston region coordinate to improve mobility across modes.
The MPO examines a number of different metrics to understand congestion and mobility issues, several of which are discussed below.
As part of its CMP, the MPO examines congestion patterns on the Boston region’s express highways (a 1,654 lane-mile system) and arterial roadways (a 3,320 lane-mile system). One of the measures the MPO uses is the Travel Time Index, which compares the average peak period travel time to free flow travel time on a roadway segment. When the average peak-period travel time equals free flow travel time, the TTI value equals one (1), and higher TTI values indicate more congestion. The MPO uses the following TTI-based thresholds to measure congestion:
MPO staff compared TTI-based congestion levels on express highways and arterial roadways using INRIX travel time data for 2012 and 2015, and found that congestion worsened on the region’s roadways over that time period. Table 4-18 displays highlights of this analysis. More information is available on the MPO’s CMP Express Highway and Arterial Performance Dashboards, which can be
viewed at bostonmpo.org/applications.
Table 4-18
Travel Time Index Analysis for the Boston Region: 2012 to 2015
2012 |
2015 |
||||||
Network |
Time Period |
Share of Roadways Experiencing Some Congestion |
Number of Lane Miles Experiencing Moderate Congestion |
Number of Lane Miles Experiencing Severe Congestion |
Share of Roadways Experiencing Some Congestion |
Number of Lane Miles Experiencing Moderate Congestion |
Number of Lane Miles Experiencing Severe Congestion |
Boston Region CMP Express Highways |
AM Peak (6:00 AM to 10:00 AM) |
28% |
255 |
79 |
37% |
308 |
126 |
Boston Region CMP Express Highways |
PM Peak (3:00 PM to 7:00 PM) |
30% |
296 |
32 |
41% |
393 |
115 |
Boston Region CMP Arterial Roadways |
AM Peak (6:30 AM to 9:30 AM) |
51% |
601 |
41 |
79% |
1,342 |
158 |
Boston Region CMP Arterial Roadways |
PM Peak (3:30 PM to 6:30 PM) |
49% |
567 |
22 |
81% |
1,583 |
246 |
CMP = Congestion Management Process.
Source: Boston Region MPO.
Table 4-3 highlights several federally required performance measures pertaining to the NHS system, including not only infrastructure condition but also travel reliability. FHWA requires states and MPOs to monitor and set targets for two performance measures that pertain to all travelers on NHS roadways:
These measure captures 1) whether travel times on an NHS segment are consistent (reliability); and 2) the extent to which NHS users’ travel may be affected by those conditions (percent of person miles). Several component metrics make up this measure:
States or MPOs identify the person-miles of travel for each NHS segment and divide the total person-miles on the relevant NHS network that are reliable by the total person-miles on the relevant NHS network. To support this analysis, FHWA provides travel-time and traffic-volume data as part of the National Performance Management Research Data Set (NPRMDS), in which travel time data is reported by traffic messaging channel (TMC) segments.
States are required to set two-year and four-year targets for these measures. In 2018, MassDOT calculated baselines and established targets for these measures for the Massachusetts Interstate and non-Interstate NHS networks. When establishing baseline values, MassDOT only examined NPMRDS travel-time data from CY 2017 because the NPMRDS from prior years was assembled using different data collection methods and has some different features. Because historic data was limited, MassDOT considered FHWA guidance and recommendations for establishing initial targets with this limited historic data, and set its initial targets equal to CY 2017 baseline values.15
14 States and MPOs must calculate LOTTR values for four time periods: weekdays from 6:00 AM to 10:00 AM, weekdays from 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM, weekdays from 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM, and weekend days from 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM.
15 FHWA, “Frequently Asked Questions: Target Setting,” https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/faq.cfm#targ, accessed September 14, 2018.
Table 4-19 shows MassDOT’s CY 2017 baselines and two-year and four-year targets for these measures. The Boston Region MPO, like all MPOs, was required to establish four-year targets for these measures by either supporting state targets or setting its own quantitative targets for the Boston region. In 2018, the MPO board voted to support the state’s four-year targets. Table 4-19 also shows CY 2017 baselines for the Boston region’s Interstate and non-Interstate NHS networks as a basis for comparison. As the table shows, the Boston region’s share of reliable person-miles traveled on its Interstate and non-Interstate NHS networks is lower than those values for Massachusetts as a whole.
Table 4-19
Travel Time Reliability Performance Targets
Network |
Measure |
Cumulative Traffic |
2017 Measure |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Massachusetts—Interstate Highway System |
Percent of person-miles on the |
1,150 |
68.0% |
68.0% |
68.0% |
Massachusetts—Non-Interstate NHS System |
Percent of person-miles on the |
5,257 |
80.0% |
80.0% |
80.0% |
Boston Region—Interstate Highway System |
Percent of person-miles on the |
354 |
47.2% |
n/a |
n/a |
Boston Region—Non-Interstate NHS System |
Percent of person-miles on the |
1,799 |
69.0% |
n/a |
n/a |
aThe two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021.
CY = calendar year. NHS = National Highway System.
Sources: National Performance Management Research Data Set, Cambridge Systematics, MassDOT, and the Boston Region MPO.
FHWA requires states and MPOs to track truck travel reliability on the Interstate system to better understand performance of the nation’s freight system. The applicable measure in this case is the Truck Travel Time Reliability Index (TTTR). Like the LOTTR, this measure compares longer (95th percentile) truck travel times to average (50th percentile) truck travel times. The greater the difference between these two travel times is on an Interstate segment the less reliable truck travel on that segment is considered to be. For each Interstate segment, states and MPOs calculate TTTR values for different day-and-time periods and weight the segment length by the maximum applicable TTTR value.16 They then sum these weighted segment lengths for all Interstate segments and divide that total value by length of the full Interstate network for the applicable geographic area. Like segment-specific TTTR values, the greater this aggregate value is, the more unreliable the network is with respect to truck travel.
16 States and MPOs must calculate TTTR Index Values for five time periods: weekdays from 6:00 AM to 10:00 AM, weekdays from 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM, weekdays from 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM, and weekend days from 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM, and all days from 8:00 PM to 6:00 AM.
In 2018, MassDOT has calculated baseline TTTR Index values and established performance targets using CY 2017 truck travel time data included in the NPMRDS. As with the all-passenger travel time reliability targets, MassDOT set its two-year and four-year targets equal to the CY 2017 baseline. Table 4-20 displays these values. The MPO board voted to support MassDOT’s four-year TTTR Index target in 2018. Table 4-20 also includes the Boston region’s CY 2017 baseline index value. As the table shows, the Boston region’s TTTR baseline value is higher than the one for Massachusetts, indicating that truck travel on the region’s Interstate network is generally less reliable than on Massachusetts’s Interstates as a whole.
Table 4-20
Truck Travel Time Reliability Performance Targets
Network |
Measure |
Cumulative Traffic |
2017 Measure |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Massachusetts—Interstate Highway System |
Truck Travel Time Reliability Index |
1,150 |
1.85 |
1.85 |
1.85 |
Boston Region—Interstate Highway System |
Truck Travel Time Reliability Index |
354 |
2.55 |
n/a |
n/a |
aThe two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021.
CY = calendar year. NHS = National Highway System.
Sources: National Performance Management Research Data Set, Cambridge Systematics, MassDOT, and the Boston Region MPO.
MassDOT and the Boston Region MPO examine mobility using measures they must monitor to meet Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program requirements. These measures are designed to help FHWA, states, and MPOs better understand the impacts of CMAQ investments, which
are intended to contribute to air quality improvements and provide congestion relief. CMAQ traffic-congestion-related performance measures apply to urbanized areas (UZAs) that contain geographic areas designated as not attaining US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards for criteria air pollutants and precursors from mobile sources (also known as nonattainment areas). The measures also apply to geographic areas that have a history of being in nonattainment and are thus required to maintain air quality monitoring and standard conformity processes (also known as maintenance areas) 17
States must be involved in setting targets for CMAQ traffic performance measures if 1) they have mainline highways on the NHS that cross part of a UZA with a population of more than one million; and 2) that UZA contains part of a nonattainment or maintenance area for relevant criteria pollutants. Similarly, MPOs must participate in target setting for the traffic congestion measures if 1) the region contains mainline highways on the NHS that cross part of a UZA with a population of more than one million; and 2) the part of the MPO area that overlaps the UZA contains part of a nonattainment or maintenance area for relevant criteria pollutants. Massachusetts and the Boston Region MPO each meet these respective criteria and, therefore, must be involved in monitoring and setting targets for traffic congestion performance measures for the Boston UZA, which encompasses several MPO areas in eastern Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
The first of these CMAQ traffic congestion measures is annual hours of peak hour excessive delay (PHED) per capita, which estimates the excessive delay
experienced by a UZA’s population from travel on the NHS during peak periods. States and MPOs calculate this measure using several component metrics:
The PHED per capita measure is calculated at the Boston UZA level by multiplying the hours of excessive delay during peak periods by the number of travelers during peak periods, and then dividing that total by the UZA population.
To understand baseline performance and set targets for this measure, MassDOT and NH DOT worked with analysts at Cambridge Systematics and, using 2017 NPMRDS data, calculated annual hours of PHED per capita for travel on the NHS in their respective portions of the Boston UZA.20 In 2018, the agencies in the Boston UZA that are subject to CMAQ performance monitoring requirements—MassDOT, the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NH DOT), the Boston Region MPO, and the Northern Middlesex Council of Governments (NMCOG)—established two-year and four-year targets that maintain this 2017 baseline value for the annual hours of PHED per capita measure, as shown in Table 4-21.
Table 4-21
Performance Targets for Annual Hours of Peak Hour Excessive Delay Per Capita for the Boston UZA
Geographic Area |
Massachusetts and New |
Boston UZA Population (MA and NH only)a |
2017 Measure Value (Baseline) |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Boston Urbanized Area |
80,053,183 |
4,371,476 |
18.30 |
18.30 |
18.30 |
a Cambridge Systematics aggregated 2012-16 American Community Survey population estimates from the US Census Bureau at the block group level to estimate the population for the portion of the UZA in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and then inflated this estimate for 2017 by applying information on expected population growth in the Boston Metropolitan Statistical area between 2016 and 2017.
b The two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021.
CY =calendar year. MA = Massachusetts. NH = New Hampshire. PHED = peak hours of excessive delay. UZA = urbanized area.
Sources: National Performance Management Research Data Set, US Census Bureau, Federal Highway Administration, MassDOT, the New Hampshire Department of Transportation, and Cambridge Systematics.
17 A precursor is a chemical compound that reacts with other chemical compounds in the presence of solar radiation to form pollutants.
18 FHWA requires state DOTs and MPOs to use 60 percent of the posted speed limit for the segment or 20 miles per hour, whichever is greater.
19 FHWA requires states and MPOs to use the period from 6:00 AM to 10:00 AM to represent the morning peak period, but allows these agencies to choose either 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM or 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM to represent the evening peak period. MassDOT and NH DOT selected the period from 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM to represent the evening peak period for the Boston UZA.
20 Rhode Island was not included in the calculation of this measure because it does not include
any portion of the Boston UZA’s NHS network. See FHWA’s Applicability Determination:
CMAQ Traffic Congestion and CMAQ On-Road Mobile Source Emissions Measures (23 CFR
490.707 and 490.807), and Change Log: Applicability Determination for CMAQ Measures,” May 22, 2018.
States and MPOs that meet applicability criteria for CMAQ performance requirements must also monitor and set targets for the share of non-single-occupant-vehicle (non-SOV) travel in their respective states or regions. This measure is calculated at the UZA level. The percent of non-SOV travel performance measure describes the extent to which people are using alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles to travel and, thus, helping to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution from mobile sources.
Collectively, MassDOT, NH DOT, the Boston Region MPO, and NMCOG used American Community Survey (ACS) data from the US Census Bureau to estimate the percent of workers age 16 and older who commuted to work using an option other than driving alone.21 These ACS five-year period estimates are rolling annual averages. Figure 4-8 shows how the percentage of workers using non-SOV commuting options in the Boston UZA has increased between 2012 (2008–12 ACS estimate) and 2016 (2012-16 ACS estimate). MassDOT calculated a linear trend line using these values for the Boston UZA and used that trend line to project expected values as of the end of CY 2019 (the expected 2015–19 ACS estimate) and CY 2021 (the expected 2017–21 ACS estimate). The agencies established these projected values as the Boston UZA targets for the percent of non-SOV travel. As Figure 4-8 shows, the share of non-SOV travel in the Boston region has been increasing steadily over time.
Figure 4-8
Historic Values and Performance Targets
for the Percent of Non-SOV Travel in the Boston UZA
Note: The two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021.
ACS = US American Community Survey. SOV = single-occupant vehicle. UZA = urbanized area.
Sources: US Census Bureau, 2012-16 American Community Survey Five-Year Estimates; MassDOT; and NH DOT.
21 US American Community Survey, “Commuting Characteristics by Sex,” American Community Survey Five-Year Estimates, https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_16_5YR_S0801&prodType=table, accessed September 2, 2018.
FHWA allows States and MPOs to measure non-SOV travel using US Census American Community Survey (ACS) estimates of the percentage of workers who commute to work using modes other than driving alone (such as taking a carpool, vanpool, or public transit; bicycling; walking; or telecommuting); travel surveys that reveal mode choices; or
sample or continuous counts of travelers using different modes.
Table 4-22 lists the recent baseline and performance target for this measure. It also includes a baseline value for non-SOV travel that is specific to the Boston region, which is a larger percentage than for the Boston UZA.
Table 4-22
Performance Targets
for Percent of Non-SOV Travel for the Boston UZA
Geographic Area |
2012-16 Measure Value (Baseline) |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Boston UZA |
33.6% |
34.5% |
35.1% |
Boston region (97 municipalities) |
38.4% |
n/a |
n/a |
aThe two-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2019, and the four-year target reflects conditions as of the end of CY 2021.
CY = calendar year. SOV = single-occupancy vehicle. UZA = urbanized area.
Sources: MassDOT, NH DOT, and the US Census American Community Survey.The MPO seeks to make investments that help manage capacity on the transportation network and improve mobility for travelers in a variety of ways, including the following:
When prioritizing projects funded with Regional Target dollars, the MPO uses evaluation criteria to assess how well each project expands transportation options (and mode choice) by enhancing bicycle and pedestrian accommodations and connections to transit, and how well each project helps reduce congestion and delay for passenger vehicles (including transit vehicles) and trucks. For more information on the MPO’s capacity management and mobility-oriented TIP criteria, see Appendix A. During the FFYs 2020–24 TIP, MPO staff also gathered information about the relationship between TIP projects and the NHS, including unreliable segments on the NHS, based on 2017 NPMRDS data and federal travel time reliability performance thresholds.
By electing to support the Commonwealth’s targets for federally required reliability measures and agreeing to the UZA targets for the federally required annual hours of PHED per capita and non-SOV travel, the MPO agrees to plan and program projects so that they contribute to achieving those targets. It can be challenging to anticipate how transportation projects may affect these performance measures, as they track outcomes that are not only affected by transportation investments but also traveler choices and demand, among other factors. The MPO developed estimates for project-related metrics to see how its Regional Target roadway projects could improve the transportation system in ways that contribute to more reliable, less congested travel on the NHS or encourage more non-SOV travel:
Table 4-23 summarizes these estimates for Regional Target Roadway projects.
Table 4-23
Regional Target-Funded Roadway Projects
Addressing Capacity Management and Mobility Performance
Metric |
Value |
Projects that overlap unreliable NHS segments and that will improve roadway signalization or geometrya |
9 projects |
Projects that overlap any NHS segments and that will improve roadway signalization or geometrya |
20 projects |
Net reduction in vehicle hours of delay per dayb |
11,900 hours reduced per day |
Net reduction in vehicle hours of delay per day for projects that overlap the NHSb |
10,400 hours reduced per day |
Miles of new sidewalks added |
20 miles |
Lane miles of new bicycle accommodations and shared-use paths |
70 lane miles |
Projects that improve intermodal connections or access to transit |
31 projects |
Note: The group of projects reflected in this table does not include the Green Line Extension, Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investments, or MBTA modernization investments.
a The MPO identified reliable and unreliable segments on the NHS using the 2017 NPMRDS federal travel time reliability performance thresholds.
b Calculations for reduced daily vehicle delay were conducted for a set of projects that exclude the three Major Infrastructure roadway projects; these were included in the air quality modeling results in Charting Progress to 2040. This aggregate estimate is based on projected future conditions for project locations and has been rounded to the nearest hundred.
NHS = National Highway System.
Source: Boston Region MPO.
Other Regional Target investments not mentioned in Table 4-23 will also support the availability of non-SOV options. By contributing to the Green Line Extension project, the MPO supports the expansion of light-rail service to more areas within the Boston region. By funding MBTA modernization activities, the MPO will help make the MBTA a more up-to-date and user-friendly travel alternative. Finally, through its Community Transportation program, the MPO expects to support projects that will enhance first- and last-mile connections to transit or address needs not covered by existing transit service. If these investments encourage people to take transit or non-motorized alternatives instead of traveling alone in their cars, those on the region’s roadways may in turn experience less congestion and better reliability.
MassDOT, MBTA, and RTA projects, described in Chapter 3, also address capacity management and mobility in the Boston region and may also support improvements on federally required reliability, congestion, and non-SOV travel measures. In particular, MassDOT’s Bicycle and Pedestrian projects expand the region’s bicycle and pedestrian networks, which support non-SOV travel. Its Intersection Improvements program includes nine projects on the NHS, which may address delay and congestion. One of its Roadway Reconstruction projects addresses a freight bottleneck identified in the state’s Freight Plan: the Interstate 90/Interstate 495 interchange in Hopkinton and Westborough—which will likely improve and truck travel time reliability. Meanwhile, MBTA and RTA investments enhance the region’s transit system to make it an attractive alternative to SOV travel.
The MPO will continue to work with MassDOT, the MBTA, the region’s RTAs and other transit service providers, and other stakeholders in the region to improve capacity management and mobility performance. These activities may include the following:
The MPO aims to support clean air and sustainable communities in the Boston region by creating an environmentally friendly transportation system, which it pursues by investing in projects that reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other transportation-related pollutants, and otherwise minimize negative environmental impacts.
The MPO agrees that GHG emissions contribute to climate change. If climate change trends continue as projected, the conditions in the Boston region will include a rise in sea level coupled with storm-induced flooding, and warmer temperatures that would affect the region’s infrastructure, economy, human health, and natural resources. Massachusetts is responding to this challenge by taking action to reduce the GHGs produced in the state, including those generated by the transportation sector. To that end, Massachusetts passed its Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA), which requires reductions of GHGs by 2020, and further reductions by 2050, relative to 1990 baseline conditions. To meet GWSA requirements, the MPO works with MassDOT and other stakeholders to anticipate the GHG impacts of projects included in the TIP, specifically by examining additions or reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2). More details on the MPO’s GHG tracking and evaluation processes are included in Appendix B.
Transportation projects may also help reduce other air quality pollutants and precursors and can support reductions in CO2, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO) by improving traffic flow and bicycle and pedestrian travel. The Boston Region MPO contains a maintenance area for CO in Waltham, and also is required to track VOCs and NOx to meet EPA requirements. (More detailed information about the MPO’s air quality status and related requirements is available in Chapter 5). The MPO tracks the air quality benefits of transportation projects to identify projects that may be eligible for CMAQ funds. FHWA also requires the Boston Region MPO to produce a CMAQ Performance Plan, which includes performance targets for both the annual PHED per capita and share of non-SOV travel measures described in the previous section. This plan includes targets for the amount of emissions the MPO expects will be reduced because of CMAQ-funded projects in the region. As part of its CMAQ Performance Plans, the MPO must note how it expects its CMAQ-funded projects to support improvements in these performance measures, which reinforces the connection between planning, investments, and expected performance outcomes.
The federally required CMAQ emissions reduction measure, identified in Table 4-3, is the total emissions reduction for applicable pollutants and precursors for CMAQ-funded projects in designated nonattainment and maintenance areas. FHWA requires states and MPOs subject to these CMAQ performance management requirements to establish a baseline for this measure by identifying emissions reductions associated with any CMAQ-funded projects programmed in air quality nonattainment or maintenance areas between FFY 2014 and FFY 2017. These states and MPOs were also required to set two-year and four-year targets for the emissions reductions expected from CMAQ-funded projects programmed in nonattainment or maintenance areas.
In the Boston Region MPO’s case, this CMAQ emissions performance measure would capture the anticipated carbon monoxide emissions reductions from any CMAQ-funded projects that the MPO has programmed specifically in the carbon monoxide maintenance area in Waltham.22 Table 4-24 shows the Boston Region MPO’s baseline and target values for this measure. Neither the MPO nor MassDOT programmed any CMAQ-funded projects in Waltham during FFYs 2014 to 2017, and at the time of target setting the MPO’s TIP did not reflect any CMAQ-funded projects programmed in Waltham from FFY 2018 to 2021. The FFYs 2020–24 TIP does not include any CMAQ-funded projects in Waltham.
Table 4-24
CMAQ Emissions Reduction
Targets for the Boston Region
Performance Measure |
FFYs 2014–17 Measure Value (Baseline) |
Two-Year Target |
Four-Year Target |
Daily kilograms of CO emissions reduction from CMAQ projects in Boston region nonattainment or maintenance areas |
0 |
0 |
0 |
CMAQ = Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality. CO = carbon monoxide. FFY = federal fiscal year.
Source: Boston Region MPO.
22 FHWA assesses the CMAQ performance management requirements that apply to states and MPOs every two years. FHWA conducted its most recent assessment in August 2017, at which time the MPO was only subject to emissions performance management requirements for its carbon monoxide maintenance area in Waltham. FHWA will conduct its next assessment by October 1, 2019, after which the MPO may be subject to requirements for other pollutants or precursors.
The MPO uses evaluation criteria to assess the projected transportation-related emissions of each project that is a candidate for Regional Target funding, both for CO2 and other air quality pollutants and precursors, among other environmental considerations. Table 4-25 displays the CO2 and other emissions reductions the MPO expects from projects it has programmed using its Regional Target funds.
Table 4-25
Regional Target-Funded Roadway Projects
Addressing Clean Air and Sustainable Communities Performance
Metric |
Value |
Annual kilograms of CO2 reduced |
11,820,100 kilograms |
Annual kilograms of other emissions (VOCs, NOx, and CO) reduced |
20,100 kilograms |
Note: The group of projects reflected in this table does not include the Green Line Extension, Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investments or MBTA modernization investments. It also excludes the three Major Infrastructure roadway projects; these were included in the air quality modeling results in Charting Progress to 2040. This aggregate estimate is based on projected future conditions for project locations and has been rounded to the nearest hundred.
CO = carbon monoxide. CO2 = carbon dioxide. NOx = nitrogen oxide. VOCs = Volatile organic compounds.
Source: Boston Region MPO.
MassDOT, MBTA, and RTA projects and programs also support improvements to air quality and the environment. Appendix B provides more detailed information and assessments of the GHG impacts of MassDOT, MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA projects and programs. MassDOT maintains an independent statewide CMAQ Performance Plan and tracks the relationship between its projects and its CMAQ emissions reduction performance targets.
The GWSA and FHWA’s CMAQ performance management requirements create frameworks that reinforce coordination between the MPO, MassDOT, and the region’s transit providers as they make investments to support clean air and sustainable communities. Future performance activities in this area may include the following:
The MPO’s seeks to ensure that the Boston region’s transportation network provides a strong foundation for economic vitality. Transportation investments can support economic vitality in a variety of ways, such as by supporting freight movement, improving connections to key freight and economic development sites, and supporting compact development. The MPO’s approach to addressing freight needs is guided in large part by MassDOT’s Freight Plan, which identifies key freight facilities and needs, strategies to improve freight movement, and priority projects.
The Metropolitan Area Planning Council’s regional land-use plan also identifies economic vitality goals and strategies that influence MPO investments. For example, a strategy in MAPC’s current regional land-use plan, MetroFuture, is to coordinate transportation investments to guide economic growth in the region. MAPC worked with its state-level partners at the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development (EOHED) and the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA), as well as municipalities, to identify locations throughout the region appropriate for building housing stock and siting employers. These agencies identified the infrastructure improvements required to support the outcomes planned for these local, regional, and state-level priority development areas, which help MAPC, the MPO, and state agencies to respond with their investments and technical assistance.
States and MPOs track the federally required truck travel time reliability measure for the Interstate Highway System, listed in Table 4-3, by using the Truck Travel Time Reliability Index. This measure has the most direct implications for the MPO’s Capacity Management and Mobility goal; however, this measure is also relevant to the Boston region’s economic vitality. The MPO has not yet established other performance measures specific to freight or economic vitality, such as measures that could be used to track the coordination of land-use development and transportation investments.
.
When evaluating TIP projects using its TIP criteria, the MPO assesses how well each project may advance MetroFuture’s land-use planning objectives. This includes, but is not limited to supporting areas identified for economic development by state, regional, and local planning and areas with a relatively high density of existing development. Table 4-26 provides some highlights of how Regional Target-funded projects in this TIP address economic vitality.
Table 4-26
Regional Target-Funded Roadway Projects Addressing Economic Vitality Performance
Metric |
Value |
Projects that improve access to |
23 projects |
Projects that serve areas of |
40 projects |
Note: The group of projects reflected in this table does not include the Green Line Extension, Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investments or MBTA modernization investments.
Source: Boston Region MPO.
MAPC’s regional land-use plan and economic vitality initiatives, USDOT’s freight directives, and MassDOT’s freight planning will all influence strategies that the MPO uses to monitor economic vitality performance going forward. The MPO’s ongoing freight planning work will also play an important role in this process. Future activities may include the following:
The MPO’s goal with respect to transportation equity is to ensure that all people receive comparable benefits from, and are not disproportionately burdened by, MPO investments, regardless of race, color, national origin, age, income, ability, or sex. The MPO aims to ensure that all residents fairly share in the benefits and burdens of its transportation planning investments, have opportunities to participate in the transportation planning process, and have a voice in the selection of transportation investments in their communities. The MPO’s practices in this area are shaped by various federal nondiscrimination and environmental justice (EJ) laws, regulations, and directives, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Americans with Disabilities Act; Executive Order 13166—Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP); and Executive Order 12898—Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-income Populations. More information on these mandates can be found in Appendix F.
To this end, the MPO systematically integrates the transportation needs and interests of specific traditionally underserved populations—which are identified as transportation equity (TE) populations—into its planning process and strives to address their concerns through the selection of transportation projects. TE populations include people who identify as minorities, have limited English proficiency (LEP), are 75 years of age or older, or have a disability; or who are members of low-income households or transit-dependent households.23 These populations include those protected by federal laws and regulations—such as minorities and people with disabilities—as well as those not protected by federal laws or regulations but of interest to the MPO from an equity standpoint because they have specific transportation needs (such as members of transit-dependent households).24
23 People who identify as minorities are those who identify as Hispanic or Latino/a/x and/or a race other than “white.”
24 MPO staff identifies transportation equity populations using US Census and American Community Survey data. Staff tabulates LEP status for the population age five and older, and tabulates disability status for the noninstitutionalized population. The low-income threshold for the Boston region is set using the region’s median household income, which is $75,654 according to the 2010–14 American Community Survey data. The Boston region’s low-income threshold is 60 percent of this value, which is $45,392.
As noted in Table 4-1, FHWA and FTA do not require states, MPOs, or transit agencies to monitor specific performance measures related to transportation equity. However, as part of complying with federal nondiscrimination and EJ mandates, they require that these agencies monitor how their investments—which are funded with federal transportation dollars—are distributed relative to TE populations. This monitoring helps ensure that these populations equitably benefit from MPO investments and are not unduly burdened by any potential adverse effects. This section provides such an analysis for projects in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP.
The analyses that follow apply only to projects that the MPO has programmed with its Regional Target funds. Most of the MPO’s FFYs 2020–24 Regional Target funds have been invested in highway projects, except for funds that have been flexed to the Transit Program to support the MBTA’s Green Line Extension project, modernization of MBTA transit infrastructure, and the MPO’s Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investment program. Because the specific projects have not yet been identified for funding for the modernization of MBTA transit infrastructure, and the MPO’s Community Transportation/Parking/ Clean Air and Mobility investment program, these investments are not reflected in most of the following analyses. This analysis will be updated once this information becomes available.
Additionally, these analyses do not reflect other highway projects in the region that are funded by MassDOT or transit projects funded by public transit agencies, including the MBTA, MWRTA, and CATA. As a result, these analyses only partially reflect the distribution of funds in the Boston region, and may not fully capture the number of people served or the shares of funding directed to transportation equity populations. The MPO completes a full analysis of all federally funded transit investments in the MPO’s region in a given federal fiscal year once that information is available in the following federal fiscal year. The MPO documents these analyses in the MPO’s Triennial Title VI Report.
Table 4-27 shows the total number of people or households in each TE population in the Boston region, as well as their share of the Boston region’s total population or households.
Table 4-27
Transportation Equity Populations in the Boston Region
Transportation Equity Category |
Transportation Equity Population |
Boston Region Total Population |
Share of Boston Region Total Population |
Minority |
870,459 |
3,087,796 |
28.20% |
People with LEPa |
308,770 |
2,915,559 |
10.60% |
Elderly (age 75 or older) |
206,578 |
3,087,796 |
6.70% |
People with disabilitiesa |
306,776 |
3,056,697 |
10.00% |
Low-income householdsa |
393,192 |
1,216,550 |
32.30% |
Transit-dependent households |
196,460 |
1,216,550 |
16.10% |
Note: For the minority population, people with limited English proficiency, elderly population, and people with disabilities categories, the amounts in the “Transportation Equity Population” and “Boston Region Total Population” columns reflect numbers of people. For the low-income and transit-dependent household categories, the amounts in these columns reflect numbers of households.
a Footnote 24 in this chapter describes the methods MPO staff uses to tabulate these transportation equity populations.
Source: Data from 2010 US Census and 2010–14 American Community Survey.
During project evaluation, the MPO identifies projects that would benefit TE populations by giving points to projects that are likely to serve those populations. A project is considered to serve people who live within one-half mile of the project’s limits. A project receives points if the share of the transportation equity population served meets or exceeds the population's share of the region’s total population, or threshold, as shown in Table 4-30.The number of points awarded to each qualifying project is based on the total number of people or households in the TE population. Appendix A shows the scores for projects evaluated during the FFYs 2020–24 development cycle.
While the TIP project criteria are designed to evaluate individual projects, MPO staff also analyzes the TE population that is served by the full set of projects funded with Regional Target dollars. Table 4-28 shows the size of the TE populations that are served by these projects and the share of the total number of people or households that would be served by them (based on proximity to the project, as defined above). The results show that the share of each TE population that would be served by the Regional Target projects approaches or exceeds the share that each group comprises of the total Boston region population.
Table 4-28
Transportation Equity Populations within
One-Half Mile of Regional Target-Funded Projects
Transportation Equity Category |
Transportation Equity Population in Project Area |
Total Population in Project Area |
Share of Transportation Equity Population in Project Area |
Share of Boston Region Total Population |
Minority |
150,920 |
450,916 |
33.5% |
28.2% |
People with LEPa |
65,052 |
426,102 |
15.3% |
10.6% |
Elderly (age 75 or older) |
32,492 |
450,916 |
7.2% |
6.7% |
People with disabilitiesa |
44,659 |
446,955 |
10.0% |
10.0% |
Low-income householdsa |
70,582 |
182,837 |
38.6% |
32.2% |
Transit-dependent households |
40,215 |
182,837 |
22.0% |
16.1% |
Note: For the minority population, people with LEP, elderly population, and people with disabilities categories, the numbers in the “Transportation Equity Population in Project Area” and “Share of Population in Project Area” columns reflect numbers of people. For the low-income and transit-dependent household categories, the numbers in these columns reflect the number of households. This analysis examines populations located within a one-half mile buffer of projects programmed in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP with Regional Target dollars. The table does not include the Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investment program or funds that are being flexed to transit modernization because specific projects have not yet been identified.
a Footnote 24 in this chapter describes the methods MPO staff uses to tabulate these transportation equity populations.
Sources: 2010 U S Census, 2010–14 American Community Survey, and the Boston Region MPO.
Table 4-29 shows the number of households or people in each TE population served by the projects funded with Regional Target dollars, sorted by MPO investment program. The share of people or households served varies across investment programs. Overall, TE populations are well-served by most MPO investment programs. In particular, the share of people or households served by the Complete Streets investment program exceeds the regional share for every TE population. The share of TE populations served by the other investment programs is generally close to their respective regional shares.
As noted in the table, the number of projects within each MPO investment program varies. The number of projects in an investment program affects the extent to which the overall program is able to serve TE populations. For example, there are only four projects each in the Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections and Major Infrastructure investment programs, which is in part a product of the number of projects in these investment programs that municipalities and other entities submitted to the MPO for funding.
Table 4-29
MPO Investment Programs Serving Transportation Equity Populations
MPO Investment Program |
Number of Projects Receiving Regional Target Funding |
Minority Population in Project Area |
People with Limited English Proficiency in Project Areaa |
Elderly (age 75 or older) Population in Project Area |
People with Disabilities in Project Areaa |
Low-Income Households in Project Areaa |
Transit-dependent Households in Project Area |
||||||
Population |
Share |
Population |
Share |
Population |
Share |
Population |
Share |
Population |
Share |
Population |
Share |
||
Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections |
4 |
3,070 |
15.5% |
1,064 |
5.6% |
1,738 |
8.8% |
2,104 |
10.7% |
2,421 |
31.6% |
570 |
7.4% |
Complete Streets |
26 |
114,013 |
38.8% |
52,027 |
18.8% |
21,486 |
7.3% |
31,148 |
10.7% |
49,539 |
42.8% |
27,479 |
23.7% |
Intersection Improvements |
11 |
3,669 |
12.0% |
745 |
2.6% |
3,632 |
11.9% |
2,858 |
9.6% |
4,110 |
31.4% |
1,250 |
9.6% |
Major Infrastructureb |
4 |
7,536 |
23.0% |
2,665 |
8.6% |
2,133 |
6.5% |
2,681 |
8.5% |
4,199 |
28.1% |
3,470 |
23.2% |
Total |
45 |
128,288 |
28.5% |
56,501 |
13.3% |
28,989 |
6.4% |
38,791 |
8.7% |
60,269 |
33.0% |
32,769 |
17.9% |
Share of Total Transportation Equity Population |
|
14.7% |
|
18.3% |
|
14.0% |
|
12.6% |
|
15.3% |
|
16.7% |
|
Note: For the minority population, people with LEP, elderly population, and people with disabilities, the numbers in the “Population” columns for each transportation equity population reflect numbers of people. For low-income and transit-dependent households the numbers in these columns reflect the number of households. This analysis examines populations located within a one-half mile buffer of projects programmed in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP with Regional Target dollars. The table does not include the Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investment program and funds flexed to transit modernization because specific projects have not yet been identified.
a Footnote 24 in this chapter describes the methods MPO staff uses to tabulate these transportation equity populations.
b Includes federal highway improvement dollars flexed to transit to support the Green Line Extension. .
Sources: 2010 U S Census; 2010–14 American Community Survey; Boston Region MPO.
Table 4-30 shows the total funding allocated to TE populations, by MPO investment program, based on the number of people or households the MPO estimates would be served by the set of Regional Target projects. As shown in Table 4-4, the MPO has programmed approximately $533 million in Regional Target funding in the FFYs 2020–24 TIP. Some TE populations will receive slightly less funding when compared to non-TE populations, including people who identify as minority, people with LEP, people with disabilities, and low-income households. The elderly population and transit-dependent households receive slightly more funding. These differences do not necessarily indicate differences in service or access to these transportation improvements. Further analysis will be necessary to identify specific benefits and burdens that may result from the TIP program of projects. In future TIPs, the MPO may make appropriate programming adjustments to ensure the equitable distribution of funds.
Table 4-30
Funding per Person or Household for Transportation Equity Populations within One-Half Mile of Regional Target-Funded Projects
Transportation Equity Population |
Funding per Person or Household |
Minority Population |
$140 |
Nonminority Population |
$172 |
People with LEPa |
$169 |
People Fluent in English |
$173 |
Elderly Population (age 75 or older) |
$175 |
People under the age of 75 |
$162 |
People with disabilities |
$151 |
People without disabilities |
$166 |
Low-income households |
$400 |
Non-low-income households |
$420 |
Transit-dependent households |
$436 |
Non-transit-dependent households |
$409 |
Note: For the minority population, people with LEP, elderly population, and people with disabilities the numbers in the “Funding per Person or Household” column for each equity population reflect funding per person. For the low-income and transit-dependent household categories, the numbers in this column reflect the funding per household.
The table does not include the Community Transportation/Parking/Clean Air and Mobility investment program and funds flexed to transit modernization because specific projects have not yet been identified.
a Footnote 24 in this chapter describes the methods MPO staff uses to tabulate these transportation equity populations.
Sources: 2010 U S Census; 2010–14 American Community Survey; Boston Region MPO.
The analyses in this section are basic approaches to understanding whether TE populations would benefit from projects programmed in the TIP. The assumption is that projects only provide benefits to the people who live nearby, which is not always the case. Also, burdens that a project may impose are not explicitly identified. Recognizing these limitations, the MPO will revise the equity-related TIP project selection criteria in FFY 2020 to allow for better identification of the potential benefits and burdens each project may confer. The MPO will also continue to explore more sophisticated methods of identifying the specific benefits and burdens of the entire collection of Regional Target projects on transportation equity populations. By conducting this work in tandem, MPO staff hopes to link these analyses with the new equity-related TIP project selection criteria in order to achieve a better understanding of whether the MPO’s project selection process is enabling the MPO to meet its equity goals. Staff anticipates tracking the results over time and enhancing these analyses each year.
The three key phases in the MPO’s PBPP process—planning, investing, and monitoring and evaluating—were discussed earlier in this chapter. Within this framework, the MPO’s TIP relates primarily to the first two phases, focusing on the relationship between the goals and objectives and performance requirements in the MPO’s planning framework and ways the MPO will invest its capital dollars in upcoming federal fiscal years. Other MPO activities relate more directly to the monitoring and evaluation phase of PBPP:
The Commonwealth and the region’s transit agencies also have reporting and evaluation responsibilities. MassDOT and the Commonwealth’s Executive Office of Public Safety and Security reports roadway safety target information annually to FHWA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. MassDOT reports other statewide performance targets and related information to FHWA on a biennial basis via FHWA’s Performance Management Form. The MBTA, MWRTA and CATA must report their TAM targets to the National Transit Database, and in future years these agencies will need to create and regularly submit PTASPs that discuss their targets for transit safety performance measures. These reports generally include information about the progress that has been made with respect to performance measures and targets as compared to previous reports.
Going forward, the MPO will need to put the results of these reports and evaluations to use in its future planning and investment activities. This may include identifying new ways to bring information about performance into the MPO’s LRTP and TIP development processes, such as by updating project selection criteria or providing information through other means. This would support the MPO in developing scenarios to explore how various transportation investments made through the LRTP would support various goals and performance areas. Over time, the MPO expects that these actions will help it ensure that its investments are helping to meet its vision and goals for the region’s transportation system.
Chapter 5—Determination of Air Quality Conformity
This chapter documents the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) air quality conformity determination for the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS in the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). It covers the applicable conformity requirements according to the latest regulations, regional designation status, legal considerations, and federal guidance.
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) require MPOs within nonattainment and maintenance areas to perform air quality conformity determinations prior to the approval of Long-Range Transportation Plans (LRTPs) and TIPs, and at such other times as required by regulation. CAAA Section 176(c) (Title 42, United States Code [USC], Section 7506 [c]) requires that federally funded or approved highway and transit activities are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding and approvals are awarded to highway and transit activities that
The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) transportation conformity rules establish the criteria and procedures for determining whether metropolitan transportation plans, TIPs, and federally supported highway and transit projects conform to the SIP (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 51.390 and 93).
A nonattainment area is one that the EPA has designated as not meeting certain air quality standards. A maintenance area is a nonattainment area that now meets the standards and has been redesignated as maintaining the standard. A conformity determination is a demonstration that plans, programs, and projects are consistent with the SIP for attaining the air quality standards. The CAAA requirement to perform a conformity determination ensures that federal approval and funding go to transportation activities that are consistent with air quality goals.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was previously classified as a nonattainment area for ozone, and was divided into two nonattainment areas. The Eastern Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area included Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Nantucket, Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk, and Worcester counties. The Western Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area included Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, and Hampshire counties. With these classifications, the 1990 CAAA required the Commonwealth to reduce its emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), the two major precursors to ozone formation to achieve attainment of the ozone standard.
The 1970 Clean Air Act defined a one-hour NAAQS for ground-level ozone. The 1990 CAAA further classified degrees of nonattainment of the one-hour standard based on the severity of the monitored levels of the pollutant. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was classified as being in serious nonattainment for the one-hour ozone standard, with a required attainment date of 1999. The attainment date was later extended, first to 2003 and a second time to 2007.
In 1997, the EPA proposed a new, eight-hour ozone standard that replaced the one-hour standard, effective June 15, 2005. Scientific research had shown that ozone could affect human health at lower levels and over longer exposure times than one hour. The new standard was challenged in court, and after a lengthy legal battle, the courts upheld it. The new standard was finalized in June 2004. The new eight-hour standard is 0.08 parts per million (ppm), averaged over eight hours, and not to be exceeded more than once per year. Nonattainment areas were again further classified based on the severity of the eight-hour values. Massachusetts was classified as being in moderate nonattainment for the eight-hour standard, and was separated into two nonattainment areas—Eastern Massachusetts and Western Massachusetts.
In March 2008, the EPA published revisions to the eight-hour ozone NAAQS establishing a level of 0.075 ppm, ((Volume 73, Federal Register [FR], page 16438; March 27, 2008). In 2009, EPA announced it would reconsider this standard because it fell outside of the range recommended by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. However, EPA did not take final action on the reconsideration, keeping the standard at 0.075 ppm.
After reviewing data from Massachusetts monitoring stations, EPA sent a letter on December 16, 2011, proposing that only Dukes County be designated as nonattainment for the new proposed 0.075 ozone standard. Massachusetts concurred with these findings.
On May 21, 2012, the final rule (77 FR 30088) was published in the Federal Register, defining the 2008 NAAQS at 0.075 ppm, the standard that was promulgated in March 2008. A second rule (77 FR 30160) published on May 21, 2012, revoked the 1997 ozone NAAQS to occur one year after the July 20, 2012, effective date of the 2008 NAAQS.
Also on May 21, 2012, the Federal Register published the air quality designations areas for the 2008 NAAQS. In this Federal Register, Dukes County is the only area in Massachusetts designated as nonattainment. All other Massachusetts counties were designated as attainment/unclassified for the 2008 standard. On March 6, 2015, EPA published the Final Rulemaking, “Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final Rule” (80 FR 12264, effective April 6, 2015). This rulemaking confirmed the removal of transportation conformity to the 1997 Ozone NAAQS.
However, on February 16, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. District v. EPA (“South Coast II,” 882 F.3d 1138) held that transportation conformity determinations must be made in areas that were either nonattainment or maintenance for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS when the 1997 ozone NAAQS was revoked.
On November 29, 2018, EPA issued Transportation Conformity Guidance for the South Coast II Court Decision (EPA-420-B-18-050, November 2018) that addresses how transportation conformity determinations can be made in these areas. According to the guidance, both Eastern and Western Massachusetts, along with several other areas across the country, are now defined as orphan nonattainment areas—areas that were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS at the time of its revocation (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) and were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in EPA’s original designations rule for this NAAQS (77 FR 30160, May 21, 2012). Conformity determinations are now required in these areas after February 16, 2019.
As a result of the court ruling and the subsequent federal guidance, transportation conformity for the 1997 NAAQS is required after February 16, 2019, for both Massachusetts’ orphan areas. This is intended as an “anti-backsliding” measure to ensure that areas do not revert to nonattainment. Therefore, this conformity determination is being made for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on the Boston Region MPO FFY 2020–24 TIP.
The transportation conformity regulation in 40 CFR 93.109 sets forth the criteria and procedures for determining conformity. The conformity criteria for TIPs and LRTPs include fiscal constraint (93.108), latest planning assumptions (93.110), latest emissions model (93.111), consultation (93.112), transportation control measures (93.113(b) and (c)), and emissions budget and/or interim emissions (93.118 and/or 93.119).
Transportation conformity for TIPs and LRTPs for the 1997 ozone NAAQS can be demonstrated without a regional emissions analysis, per 40 CFR 93.109(c). This provision states that the regional emissions analysis requirement applies one year after the effective date of EPA’s nonattainment designation for a NAAQS and until the effective date of revocation of such NAAQS for an area. The 1997 ozone NAAQS revocation was effective on April 6, 2015, and the court for South Coast II upheld the revocation. As no regional emission analysis is required for this conformity determination, there is no requirement to use the latest emissions model, budget, or interim emissions tests.
Therefore, transportation conformity for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the Boston Region MPO’s FFY 2020–24 TIP can be demonstrated by showing that the remaining requirements in 40 CFR 93.109 have been met. The following requirements are laid out in Section 2.4 of EPA’s guidance and are addressed below:
The use of latest planning assumptions in 40 CFR 93.110 of the conformity rule generally applies to regional emissions analysis. In the 1997 ozone NAAQS areas, the use of latest planning assumptions requirement applies to assumptions about transportation control measures (TCM) in an approved SIP (see Timely Implementation of TCMs below).
The consultation requirements in 40 CFR 93.112 were addressed for interagency consultation and public consultation. Interagency consultation was conducted with FHWA, FTA, US EPA Region 1, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), and the other Massachusetts MPOs, with the most recent conformity consultation meeting held on March 6, 2019, which focused on understanding the latest conformity-related court rulings and resulting federal guidance. This ongoing consultation is conducted in accordance with the following items:
Public consultation was conducted consistent with planning rule requirements in 23 CFR 450. Title 23 CFR Section 450.324 and 310 CMR 60.03(6)(h) requires that the development of the TIP, LRTP, and related certification documents provide an adequate opportunity for public review and comment. Section 450.316(b) also establishes the outline for MPO public participation programs. The Boston Region MPO's Public Participation Plan was formally adopted in October 2014 and is available at https://www.ctps.org/public_involvement. The Public Participation Plan ensures that the public will have access to the TIP and LRTP and all supporting documentation, provides for public notification of the availability of the TIP and LRTP and the public's right to review the document and comment thereon, and provides a 21-day public review and comment period prior to the adoption of the TIP and LRTP and related certification documents.
The public comment period for this conformity determination commenced on April 30, 2019. During the 21-day public comment period, any comments received were incorporated into this TIP. This allowed sufficient opportunity for public comment and MPO review of the draft document. The public comment period will close on May ? 2019 and the Boston Region MPO is expected to endorse this air quality conformity determination before June 1, 2019. These procedures comply with the associated federal requirements.
TCMs were submitted to EPA as SIP revisions in 1979 and 1982, and as part of the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) project. The TCMs in the 1979 and 1982 submissions were accomplished through construction of ongoing projects or implementation of ongoing programs.
The TCMs submitted as part of the mitigation for the CA/T project have been documented in the LRTP as recommended or completed projects, except for the Fairmount Line Improvement Project and the Green Line Extension.
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) works with the DEP to implement TCMs documented in the SIP. The Boston Region MPO will continue to include relevant projects in the LRTP and TIP, including those projects implemented to provide equal or better emissions outcomes when the primary TCMs do not meet deadlines, until the process for completing all active TCMs has concluded. When the process has been completed, the MPO will amend the LRTP and future TIPs and their conformity determinations to document any changes (including any interim projects or programs).
The status of the TCMs has been updated in the SIP Transit Commitments Status Report, which was submitted to DEP by MassDOT in July 2018. Highlights from the report are presented below. For a detailed description of the status of these projects, please visit the MassDOT website at https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/08/02/SIP18ComStatReport.pdf
The Four Corners and Newmarket stations on the Fairmount commuter rail line opened for service on July 1, 2013. All change orders have been paid and the project is officially closed out. The Talbot Avenue Station opened in November 2012.
The station at Blue Hill Avenue had been the subject of significant community controversy over the past seven years. Redesign of the station reached the 100 percent design phase, and those plans were submitted to MassDOT in March 2016. In October 2016, MassDOT updated the public on the design plans and the next steps toward implementing the project. The project team advanced the project with the understanding that continued coordination with the community was paramount. Construction began in spring 2017, and the station opened in March 2019.
MassDOT and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) prepared a Petition to Delay and an Interim Emission Offset Plan to be implemented for the duration of the delay of the Fairmount Line Improvement Project. MassDOT estimated the amount of emission reduction that would be expected from the implementation of the new Fairmount Line stations. With input from Fairmount Line stakeholders, MassDOT proposed offset measures that would meet emission reduction targets while the project remains under construction. The measures include providing shuttle bus service in Boston connecting Andrew Square to Boston Medical Center and increasing service on MBTA bus Route 31, which serves the Boston neighborhoods of Dorchester and Mattapan. These measures were implemented on January 2, 2012, and are currently in place.
Funding Source: The Commonwealth
The Green Line Extension project is a top transportation priority of the Commonwealth and the largest expansion of the MBTA rapid transit system in decades. This project will extend the MBTA Green Line from a relocated Lechmere Station in East Cambridge to College Avenue in Medford, with a branch to Union Square in Somerville. The project is a collaborative effort of MassDOT and the MBTA, with the MBTA taking the lead in design, engineering, construction, and project management.
The project includes the relocation of the existing commuter rail tracks, the construction of 4.7 miles of new Green Line tracks and systems, one relocated station (Lechmere) and six new stations (Union Square, College Avenue, Ball Square, Magoun Square, Gilman Square, and East Somerville), and a new vehicle maintenance facility.
Construction of the project has been phased. Initial construction started in 2013. The first phase was funded entirely by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The FTA then approved funding for the project through the New Starts Program of its Capital Investment Grants Program; a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA), which committed nearly $1 billion in federal funds to the project, was announced in January 2015.
Late in 2015, MassDOT launched a review and decided that the project should be redesigned. The revised total program cost was estimated at nearly $2.3 billion. (This total value includes monies that have already been spent.) There was a difference of approximately $300 million between the last official program cost of $1.992 billion, as stated in the FFGA, and the revised estimate of $2.289 billion. To make up the difference, the Boston Region MPO committed $157 million in federal highway funding to the project, the cities of Cambridge and Somerville committed a total of $75 million ($50 million from Somerville and $25 million from Cambridge), and MassDOT committed approximately $64 million. In June 2017, the MassDOT Board of Directors voted to transfer the latter funds to the MBTA for the project. The FTA found that the redesigned project is consistent with the FFGA and this determination allows MassDOT and the MBTA to use federal monies to fund the project.
The 2016 redesign of the Green Line Extension project modified many design elements and proposed changes to the project implementation methods, but the redesign maintains the core functionality of the project and provides the same benefits. As with the original project design, the revised design consists of a 4.7-mile extension of the existing Green Line light rail service to College Avenue in Medford and Union Square in Somerville. It includes the relocation of existing commuter/freight rail track, construction of light rail track and systems, construction or rehabilitation of viaduct structures, and implementation of new power systems, signals, and communications equipment. The revised design includes the same stations in the same locations as originally planned.
Factors that affect the potential number of transit trips that would be generated and the air quality benefits that would be achieved because of this new light rail extension are the same for the redesign concept as originally proposed. These factors include the number and location of stations, platform size, hours of service, and frequency of service. (The Community Path was not considered in determining the number of transit trips the new rail line would generate.)
The Green Line Extension, as redesigned, will still provide trains travelling on six-minute headways in the weekday peak period, eight to 11 minutes in the weekday off-peak period, 13-14 minutes on weekday evenings, and eight to 10 minutes on weekends.
The project, as described in its environmental documents, included planning, design, and engineering for the proposed extension of the Somerville Community Path between Lowell Street and Inner Belt Road near East Somerville Station; however, there was no commitment to construct the path. After the completion of the state and federal environmental review processes, the MBTA decided to incorporate the construction of the path into the Green Line Extension project. However, the MBTA did not commit to build the Community Path as part of its mitigation for delays in the construction time line for the extension.
While the elimination of the Community Path would result in the greatest savings, MassDOT and the MBTA believe the path is an important element of the project and a commitment to the communities along the Green Line corridor. Therefore, the Community Path was redesigned so that it will cost less while still maintaining its core functionality. In December 2017, the MBTA issued a notice to proceed to the selected contractor to build the Green Line Extension project, including the Community Path to Lechmere Station. That element is now part of the project under contract.
MassDOT has committed substantial resources to the Green Line Extension project and has transitioned the project from the planning and environmental review phases to design, engineering, and eventual construction, while completing the tasks associated with applying for federal New Starts funding.
By filing an Expanded Environmental Notification Form, procuring multiple design consultants, and publishing Draft Environmental Impact Reports and Final Environmental Impact Reports (FEIR), MassDOT met the first four interim milestones established by the Massachusetts SIP for the Green Line Extension project.
By completing the design, securing all permits and approvals, executing the FFGA, and acquiring the necessary property for the project, MassDOT met the fifth interim milestone, which states, “On or before 18 months after MEPA’s issuance of a certificate on an FEIR or an SEIR, MassDOT must complete final design, apply for all necessary permits, funds and grants, file any required legislation, and initiate all public and private land acquisition.”
Milestones for project completion have been established and made part of the design-build contract. The milestones will be incorporated into that contract. By establishing these milestones, MassDOT has met the sixth and final interim milestone found in the SIP regulation, which states, “Upon completion of all of the above milestones, DEP and MassDOT shall establish a schedule for project construction and deadlines for project completion.”
In the 2011 SIP Status Report, MassDOT reported that the Green Line Extension project would not be completed by the legal deadline of December 31, 2014.
The time line for overall project completion represents a substantial delay beyond the current SIP deadline of December 31, 2014. This delay triggered the need to provide interim emission reduction offset measures for the period of the delay (beginning January 1, 2015). These offset measures would have to bring about emission reductions equal to or greater than those projected for the Green Line Extension, as specified in the SIP regulation, for the period of the delay.
Working with the Central Transportation Planning Staff, MassDOT and the MBTA calculated the reductions of non-methane hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxide required as mitigation for the delay.
In June 2012, MassDOT released a list of potential mitigation ideas received from the public that could be used as offset measures. In the summer and fall of 2012, MassDOT elicited public comments on these potential measures. The MBTA created an internal working group to determine a final portfolio of interim mitigation measures to implement by December 31, 2014, the legal deadline for implementation of the Green Line Extension.
This work resulted in a recommendation to implement the following three interim mitigation measures, which collectively would meet the emission reduction targets for the project:
MassDOT submitted a Petition to Delay to DEP on July 22, 2014. The petition further expands on the analysis and determination of the interim offset measures. DEP conditionally approved MassDOT’s request to delay the project and the implementation of the above mitigation measures. Both the Petition to Delay and the Conditional Approval are available on MassDOT’s website. These measures went into effect at the beginning of 2015 and will remain in place for as long as necessary.
Funding Source: The Commonwealth, Federal Transit Administration via the FFGA, the Boston Region MPO, the City of Cambridge, and the City of Somerville
Former MassDOT Secretary Richard Davey approved construction of the permitted Russia Wharf Ferry Terminal in South Boston and a $460,000 ferry-service startup subsidy in October 2012. The 2005 facility plans and specifications were revised to meet the latest MassDOT Highway Division standards. The bid package was issued in the fall of 2013. A contractor was selected and the notice to proceed was issued in April 2014. Pre-construction activities progressed, but contractual issues associated with the project design led MassDOT to decide to rebid the contract.
There is no regularly scheduled passenger water transportation service in this area, nor are there any plans to provide such a service. The City of Boston, however, is undertaking design and engineering work to address the Old Northern Avenue Bridge and will consider ferry vessel clearance. The city received a grant in 2012 to purchase two ferry vessels for use in Boston’s inner harbor, and these vessels could serve the Russia Wharf Ferry Terminal. The Massachusetts Convention Center Authority (MCCA) is working with the City of Boston, MassDOT, and other agencies to develop a business plan for potential ferry service from Lovejoy Wharf to the South Boston waterfront, as recommended in the 2015 South Boston Waterfront Sustainable Transportation Plan. This business plan will include current and future demand projections for ferry ridership, the number and size of ferries needed to satisfy the demand, and the cost for this service. Once the business plan is completed, the MCCA could take over the City of Boston’s grant to help with future costs.
Funding Source: The Commonwealth
Transportation conformity requirements in 40 CFR 93.108 state that TIPs and transportation plans must be fiscally constrained consistent with United States Department of Transportation’s metropolitan planning regulations at 23 CFR part 450. The Boston Region MPO 2020–24 TIP is consistent with the required fiscal constraints, as demonstrated in Chapter 3.
In addition to ozone, the requirement to perform a conformity determination for CO for several cities in the Boston region has expired. On April 1, 1996, the EPA classified the cities of Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Malden, Medford, Quincy, Revere, and Somerville as in attainment (in compliance) for CO emissions. Subsequently, a CO maintenance plan was set up through the Massachusetts SIP to ensure that emission levels did not increase. While the maintenance plan was in effect, past TIPs and LRTPs included an air quality conformity analysis for these communities. As of April 1, 2016, however, the 20-year maintenance period for this CO maintenance area expired and transportation conformity is no longer required for this pollutant in these communities. This ruling is documented in a letter from the EPA dated May 12, 2016.
On April 22, 2002, the City of Waltham was redesignated as being in attainment for CO emissions with an EPA-approved limited-maintenance plan. In areas that have approved limited-maintenance plans, federal actions requiring conformity determinations under the EPA’s transportation conformity rule are considered to satisfy the budget test (as budgets are not treated as being constraining in these areas for the length of the initial maintenance period). Any requirements for future project-level conformity determinations for projects located within this community will continue to use a hot-spot analysis to ensure that any new transportation projects in this area do not cause or contribute to violations of the NAAQS for CO.
In summary and based on the entire process described above, the Boston Region MPO has prepared this conformity determination for the 1997 Ozone NAAQS in accordance with EPA’s and Massachusetts’ latest conformity regulations and guidance. This conformity determination process demonstrates that the FFY 2020–24 TIP meets the Clean Air Act and Transportation Conformity Rule requirements for the 1997 Ozone NAAQS, and has been prepared following all the guidelines and requirements of these rules during this period.
Therefore, the implementation of the Boston Region MPO’s FFY 2020–24 TIP is consistent with the air quality goals of, and in conformity with, the Massachusetts SIP.