Draft Memorandum for the Record
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
Unified Planning Work Program Committee Meeting Summary
March 7, 2024, Meeting
1:00 PM-2:00 PM, Zoom Video Conferencing Platform
Derek Krevat, Chair, representing Monica Tibbits-Nutt, Secretary
of Transportation and Chief Executive Officer of the Massachusetts Department
of Transportation (MassDOT)
Decisions
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO)
Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Committee agreed to the following:
- Approval of the January 11, 2024,
meeting minutes
Materials
Materials for this meeting included the following:
1.
Meeting summary of the January 11, 2024, meeting (pdf)
(html)
2.
Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2025 UPWP Universe of Proposed Discrete and
Program-Based Studies
Meeting Agenda and Summary of
Discussion
1. Introductions
See page 5 for attendance.
2. Public
Comments
There were none.
3. Meeting
Summary of January 11, 2024—Approval of this summary
A motion to approve the summary of the January 11, 2024,
meeting was made by the Three Rivers Interlocal Council
(Town of Norwood/Tom O’Rourke) and seconded by the Metrowest Regional Collaborative
(Dennis Giombetti). The motion carried.
4. Transportation
Policy Analysis—Abby
Cutrumbes, MPO Staff
A. Cutrumbes summarized the scope of work for the
Transportation Policy Analysis position. The position has a few main
priorities. One priority is keeping the MPO apprised of regional, state, and
federal transportation policy development. Another part of A. Cutrumbes’ work
is analyzing how current and proposed policies could align with the MPO’s goals
for the region. And other priorities include conducting independent research
projects that support MPO goals, facilitating policy dialogues with MPO board
members, and using their feedback to move forward research questions.
A. Cutrumbes provided an in-depth example of a research
project by describing the production of a memo on roadway pricing in
conjunction with Seth Asante and Ryan Hicks of Central Transportation Planning
Staff’s (CTPS) Multimodal Planning and Design group. Future research topics
could include the Commonwealth’s Chapter 90 Program funding, and potential
options for transportation revenue generation.
Discussion
David Koses (At-Large City of Newton) asked whether the roadway
pricing research was part of explicit UPWP study funding. A. Cutrumbes replied
that this work is part of ongoing programmatic work, and CTPS Executive
Director Tegin Teich elaborated that the Transportation Policy Analysis
position is set up to help programs across the agency.
Julia Wallerce (MAPC) asked about a calculation made on
transportation opportunity costs of congestion as part of the roadway pricing
memo. A. Cutrumbes replied that opportunity costs of congestion involve
economic losses to individuals during time spent in traffic. Jen Rowe (City of
Boston) asked a related question about the denominator of the opportunity cost
calculation. A. Cutrumbes replied that she was unsure of the number of drivers
in the denominator and that CTPS staff can follow up with more information.
D. Krevat (MassDOT) asked about what specifically in the
Chapter 90 Program CTPS staff would like to research. A. Cutrumbes stated that
one possibility for Chapter 90 Program research is to survey to find which
municipalities funds are distributed to and for which purposes. J. Wallerce
offered that MAPC is also considering research on the Chapter 90 Program given
its importance to funding in the region.
Lenard Diggins (Regional Transportation Advisory Council)
suggested that roadway pricing research go beyond measuring vehicle-miles traveled
(VMT) and include other measures about how much of a burden roadway users are
putting on the roadway system. J. Rowe suggested using CTPS’s transportation demand
model as well as parking data to inform roadway pricing research.
D. Koses offered a suggestion about studying strategies for
funding successful municipal shuttle programs, particularly after MPO funding
expires.
J. Rowe suggested researching more on micromobility,
including topics related to electric bicycles and considerations around battery
usage.
5. FFY
2025 UPWP Universe of Proposed Studies—Srilekha Murthy, MPO Staff
S. Murthy opened her presentation by summarizing highlights
about the UPWP study submissions, as well as the criteria by which study
submissions will be measured. CTPS staff recommended that 23 of the 121 study
submissions be considered as discrete studies or be incorporated within ongoing
program work. Murthy stated that future UPWP meetings will be used to solidify
committee priorities, develop a committee-recommended list of studies, and for
ranking studies via survey.
Discussion
Casey Cooper (MPO staff) summarized studies regarding active
transportation that are being considered, in particular, a staff-submitted
proposal about improving the MPO’s database of pedestrian facilities. D. Krevat
made a statement in support of such work. L. Diggins asked how the study would
be conducted. C. Cooper responded that staff would work with TILE2NET, an
external vendor, to develop the database. Rose McCarron (MPO staff) added that
TILE2NET can use aerial imagery to update pedestrian facility data.
C. Cooper pointed out another particular study proposal from
Iolando Spinola that recommended analysis of sidewalk infrastructure and
offered that updating the aforementioned proposal to update MPO’s database of
pedestrian facilities may assist with I. Spinola’s study. Steve Olanoff (Three
Rivers Interlocal Council) asked whether MAPC keeps records about sidewalk
infrastructure. J. Wallerce recommended that CTPS review the work being done as
part of staff’s Safe Streets and Roads for All efforts to check for updates to
pedestrian infrastructure. L. Diggins made a statement in support of research
of pedestrian infrastructure. D. Koses suggested that pedestrian infrastructure
studies take an inventory of pedestrian beacons in the region. T. Bent voiced support
for studying the pedestrian infrastructure inventory, but raised a question about
where money may be obtained to improve such infrastructure. T. Bent also
recommended coordination with municipalities to obtain pedestrian
infrastructure data, and he clarified that the City of Somerville updates its
sidewalk inventory on a rolling three-year basis. J. Rowe mentioned that the
City of Boston recently had an external vendor survey pedestrian
infrastructure, and that information could be shared with MPO staff.
C. Cooper introduced the study proposal submitted on
micromobility. L Diggins asked for clarification on the definition of
micromobility.
C. Cooper introduced the study proposal on Level of Traffic
Stress (LTS). L. Diggins made a statement supporting the study of LTS. J. Rowe mentioned
that the City of Boston recently developed a score on LTS that may be useful to
MPO staff. J. Wallerce suggested that the study proposal be reframed to make
this proposal more feasible for smaller municipalities looking to improve
bicycle infrastructure.
C. Cooper also introduced the study proposal on enhancing
the bicycle-and-pedestrian-count data application.
D. Krevat asked about the quantity of studies that will be
selected as part of the FFY 2025 UPWP. S. Murthy responded that the number of
studies will depend on the final budget determination, MPO priorities, and the
level of interest in study proposals.
6. Members
Items
There were none.
7. Next
Meeting
The next meeting will be on April 11, 2024.
8. Adjourn
A motion to adjourn was made by the Metropolitan Area
Planning Council (Julia Wallerce) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (Tom
Bent). The motion carried.
