Image of report cover.

Unified Planning Work Program
Federal Fiscal Year 2024


UPWP logo


Appendix A: Other Boston Region Transportation Planning Studies
Appendix B: Public Engagement and Public Comments
Appendix C: Universe of Proposed New Studies for Federal Fiscal Year 2024 UPWP
Appendix D: Geographic Distribution of UPWP Studies and Technical Analysis
Appendix E: Regulatory and Policy Framework
Appendix F: Boston Reigon Metropolitan Planning Organization Membership

2024 UPWP






Appendix A: Other Boston Region Transportation Planning Studies

This appendix consists of transportation studies and technical analysis work that MPO staff will conduct to support the work of various transportation agencies in the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) area, as well as brief descriptions of planning studies that will be conducted in the Boston Region MPO area by individual agencies, such as the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), during federal fiscal year (FFY) 2024. This appendix is divided into two sections. The first describes contract-based work that MPO staff will undertake to support the planning work of other agencies, while the second describes studies supported by federal planning (but not MPO) funds and/or studies that MPO and partner agency staff have determined to be of regional significance.


The project listings in Section 1 are organized by funding agency and include studies and technical analyses for MassDOT, the MBTA, and other agencies in the Boston region. The project listings in Section 2 indicate whether components of the projects will be conducted by CTPS, and are organized hierarchically: first by type of study, then by geography, then by the entity organizing or leading the study effort.

Section 1: Agency and Client-Funded Transportation Studies

The transportation studies and technical analysis work described in this section will be conducted to support the work of various transportation agencies in the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) area.


Some of the contracts described in this section are issued to the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) every year and generally coincide with either the federal fiscal year (FFY) or the state fiscal year (SFY). Examples include MassDOT PL and MassDOT Statewide Planning and Research (SPR) contracts. Other contracts are issued for tasks and technical support to be conducted over a multiyear period, and they might be renewed with the agencies after several years. A third contract type covers the work for discrete studies or technical analyses intended to be completed within a specified timeframe. These may either be one-time contracts in which CTPS conducts analysis or technical support to further a specific agency project, such as MassDOT’s Interstate 90 (I-90) Allston Multimodal Modeling Support project, or they can be contracts in which CTPS provides technical support to an agency for data collection and analysis that is undertaken annually, such as the MBTA National Transit Database (NTD): Data Collection and Analysis contract.


The work conducted on behalf of the agencies includes data collection and analyses covering a broad range of topics, including travel demand modeling, air quality, traffic engineering, Title VI, and environmental justice. The products of this work are vital to support compliance with federal and state regulations such as the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. CTPS also enhances regional understanding of critical transportation issues through the preparation of graphics, maps, and other materials for agency studies and presentations. The work described in this section is organized by agency and includes studies and technical analyses for MassDOT, the MBTA, and other agencies in the Boston region.



Table A-1
Unified Planning Work Program Budget—New and Continuing Agency Transportation Planning Studies and Technical Analyses for FFY 2024


Project ID Name Total Contract Funding Source
Varies by project MassDOT SPR Program Support $500,000 SPR
13155 MassDOT Title VI Program $95,000 MassDOT
Varies by project MassDOT-Directed Planning Assistancea n/a MassDOT 3C PL
TBD Allston $400,000 MassDOT
TBD McCormack $60,000 MassDOT
MassDOT Projects blank $995,000 blank
11415 AFC 2.0 Equity Analysis $76,972 MBTA
11497 MBTA 2023 Triennial Title VI Report $145,800 MBTA
11429 MBTA 2022 Title VI Program Monitoring $79,700 MBTA
11496 MBTA Mapping Support $18,000 MBTA
11500 MBTA Map and Signage Support to Bus Network Redesign $31,755 MBTA
14376 MBTA Rider Oversight Committee Support IV $31,342 MBTA
14374 MBTA SFY 2022 National Transit Database (NTD) Support $127,288 MBTA
14375 MBTA SFY 2023 National Transit Database (NTD) Support $165,145 MBTA
TBD MBTA North Shore Busway $108,819 MBTA
TBD MBTA Bus Tool Ongoing Support $60,000 MBTA
14378 MBTA SFY 2024 National Transit Database (NTD) Support   MBTA
11422 MBTA Transit Service Data Collection X $540,000 MBTA
11430 MBTA Transit Service Data Collection XI $590,000 MBTA
14358 Service Equity Analysis Support to the MBTA $115,000 MBTA
MBTA Projects blank $2,098,821 blank
blank Other (SS4A, Municipalities, etc.) $95,000 Other
Other Projects blank $95,000 blank
Agency-Funded and Client-Funded Subtotal blank $3,239,821 blank




The contracts and technical analyses in this section are being undertaken for MassDOT.


MassDOT Statewide Planning and Research Program Support

Project ID Number


Funding Source


FFY 2024 Total Budget




CTPS provides support to MassDOT’s SPR program as requested. These contracts will include multiple individual projects or tasks throughout the federal fiscal year.



CTPS will conduct studies and analyses and provide technical assistance upon request. Two projects that are either underway or expected to begin in FFY 2024 are the Roadway Inventory and Related Support Maintenance and the Statewide Model Assistance Project. Other projects may be added throughout FFY 2024.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

Activities and work products will depend on tasks requested by MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning.


MassDOT Title VI Program

Project ID Number


Funding Source

MassDOT Other

Total Contract Amount


FFY 2024 Total Budget




Under this contract, CTPS will continue to provide technical support to MassDOT for developing and implementing its Title VI Program for both the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).



MassDOT, as a recipient of federal funds from both FHWA and the FTA, is required to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and with protections enacted through several other laws and executive orders that prohibit discrimination based on gender, age, income, and disability. Through this technical support work, CTPS will assist MassDOT in complying with these nondiscrimination laws.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

Staff will provide technical support to MassDOT as described above.



MassDOT-Directed Planning

Project ID Number


Funding Source

MassDOT-Direct PL

FFY 2024 Total Budget




CTPS will provide transit-planning assistance to MassDOT and the MBTA by conducting various studies under MassDOT’s FHWA-funded PL Program. This task will include multiple individual projects or tasks throughout the federal fiscal year.



In FFY 2024, CTPS will continue to assist the MBTA with the MBTA Sources of Community Value study. The focus of this study is to identify, quantify, and propose mechanisms to accrue incremental sources of value and revenue for the MBTA outside of the existing developer mitigation framework. The results of the study would inform state leadership about funding options to support transit. Other projects may be added throughout FFY 2024 to support transit-related research, planning, data collection, and analysis.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

For the MBTA Sources of Community Value Study, staff will provide estimates of revenues and other value from potential sources of revenue and a technical memo documenting study findings. Additional activities and work products will depend on tasks requested by MassDOT and the MBTA.


I-90 Allston Multimodal Modeling

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




MassDOT and its project team are currently developing a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Allston Multimodal project. CTPS will produce travel-demand forecasts in support of this environmental filing.



CTPS will support MassDOT by using the CTPS regional travel demand model set to estimate highway volumes, transit volumes, and mode splits for opening-year (2030) and horizon-year (2040) scenarios of the Allston Multimodal project. In addition, CTPS will assist the project team with an economic impact analysis.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

In FFY 2024 staff will finalize the analysis and study documentation and support the environmental filing preparation and engagement as needed.



Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

The contracts and technical analyses in this section are being undertaken for the MBTA.


MBTA National Transit Database: Data Collection and Analysis

Project ID Number


14375 (SFY 2023)

14378 (SFY 2024)
TBD (SFY 2025)

Funding Source


Total Contract*


FFY 2024 Total Budget

$7,649 (SFY 2023) 

$147,340 (SFY 2024)

$50,276 (SFY 2025)

*Multiple contract years are represented.



For many years, in support of the MBTA’s NTD submittals to the FTA, CTPS has produced passenger-miles traveled and unlinked trip estimates for MBTA services. This project will develop these estimates for the following modes:



CTPS will use the following methods to collect the data on which these estimates will be based:


The MBTA will submit its SFY 2023 NTD passenger-miles traveled and unlinked trip estimates for various transit modes to the FTA with the aid of CTPS during FFY 2024. The final technical memoranda for SFY 2024 NTD will be completed in FFY 2025.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will complete the final technical memoranda and auditing process for SFY 2023 NTD reporting and will complete data collection begun in FFY 2023 for SFY 2024. Field staff will begin collecting data for SFY 2025 NTD reporting.



MBTA Title VI Program Monitoring

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




Under this contract, CTPS provides the MBTA with technical assistance by collecting and analyzing MBTA service data to compare service provided to minority riders with service provided to nonminority riders. This work supports the MBTA’s compliance with Title VI requirements.



Staff will collect and analyze data on the following service indicators:


The data-collection and analysis activities will help to fulfill monitoring required as part of the MBTA’s ongoing Title VI Program. The results of the data collection efforts and analyses will be reported in a memorandum to the MBTA for internal review and follow up and will be included in the next triennial program.


CTPS will incorporate relevant demographic data from the MBTA’s 2022 passenger survey and subsequent updates where appropriate as they become available.



FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will provide documentation about selected service monitoring evaluations for SFY 2023 MBTA service and amenities.


MBTA Transit Service Data Collection

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The work conducted under this contract will help the MBTA to assess bus and rapid transit service changes.



The MBTA requires ongoing data collection regarding its transit system to assess service changes. As part of this project, CTPS collects ridership and performance data to support future MBTA service changes. Work may also include support for improving the ridecheck database so that it will be compatible with new software and data sources. CTPS also may provide analytical assistance to the MBTA as requested.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes


MBTA Rider Oversight Committee Support

Project ID Number

14376 (SFY 2022–25)

Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The MBTA established a Rider Oversight Committee (ROC) in 2004 to provide ongoing public input on a number of different issues, including strategies for increasing ridership, developing new fare structures, and prioritizing capital improvements. Through this contract, CTPS supports the MBTA by providing ongoing technical assistance to the ROC.



Assistance provided by CTPS has included offering insights into the MBTA’s planning processes, providing data analysis, and attending committee meetings, at which staff may respond directly to ROC members’ questions.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will continue to provide technical assistance to the MBTA ROC and attend committee and subcommittee meetings.



Service Equity Analysis Support to the MBTA II

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




CTPS will support the MBTA in conducting the required Title VI service equity analyses for major service changes that take place during the duration of this contract.



CTPS will conduct service equity analyses for MBTA major service changes. CTPS will follow the new Service and Fare Equity policy in conducting its analyses.


CTPS will incorporate relevant demographic data from the MBTA’s 2022 passenger survey and subsequent updates where appropriate as they become available.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will prepare technical memoranda documenting service equity analyses for each major service change.


MBTA Mapping Support

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The objective of this work is to provide map-making support upon request from the MBTA. At the time of each request, CTPS will provide the MBTA with an estimate of the specific cost and schedule for completing the map(s).



CTPS will update MBTA maps, upon request from the MBTA, within the budget provided for this project.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

Updated district maps to reflect changes in bus routes and bus route garage assignments. Upon request from the MBTA, CTPS staff will update other existing CTPS-created MBTA maps within the budget provided for this project.


Map and Signage Support to the MBTA Bus Network Redesign

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The objective of this work is to provide map-making support, upon request from the MBTA.



CTPS will update MBTA maps, upon request from the MBTA, within the budget provided for this project.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

Updated rapid transit system, bus, and neighborhood maps to reflect changes to bus routes in accordance with the MBTA Bus Network Redesign. Upon request from the MBTA, CTPS staff will update other existing CTPS-created MBTA maps within the budget provided for this project.


Red Blue Connector Study

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




CTPS is supporting the MBTA in preparation for environmental filings for the proposed connection between the Red and Blue Lines at the Charles/MGH Station. CTPS will continue to be engaged in developing traffic and transit projections for this work in FFY 2024.



CTPS will use the Boston Region MPO’s travel demand model to analyze the traffic and transit impact of the proposed connection between the Red and Blue Lines and the closure of Bowdoin Station.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

Some of the analysis for this study will be completed in FFY 2023. In FFY 2024, staff will finalize the analysis, prepare study documentation, and support the environmental filing preparation and engagement as needed.


North Shore Busway Study

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The MBTA has proposed a center-running bus lane facility linking Wonderland Station in Revere to Lynn (at the intersection of Broad and Chestnut Street/Atlantic Street) via North Shore Road, General Edwards Bridge, the Lynnway, and Broad Street. This bus rapid transit facility would produce a two-seat rapid-transit service between downtown Lynn and Boston.



Using the Boston Region MPO’s regional travel demand model set and other tools, CTPS will support MBTA and its project team by assessing the existing traffic conditions and travel patterns, and by providing modeling results and analyses for use in the evaluation of the proposed reconstruction scenario.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

A technical memorandum summarizing the general modeling methodology and the results of the analysis will be provided to the MBTA and the project team.


AFC 2.0 Equity Analysis

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




As part of the Fare Transformation initiative, the MBTA is developing a new AFC system, known as AFC 2.0, to supplant its existing fare payment system. In late 2017, the contract for the design, integration, and implementation of AFC 2.0 was awarded to Cubic | John Laing. This change in the MBTA’s fare payment system will also lead to changes that may negatively affect some riders. The MBTA has requested that CTPS analyze the equity of the impacts of the following components of AFC 2.0: elimination of cash on board, fee for specific fare media, and potential changes in fare structure.



CTPS will evaluate the distribution of fare vending machines and other fare media sales locations, the equity impacts of charging for a fare card, and a package of various fare structure changes that may be implemented with AFC 2.0. Tasks in this project include



CTPS will follow the new Service and Fare Equity policy in conducting its analyses.


CTPS will incorporate relevant demographic data from the MBTA’s 2022 passenger survey and subsequent updates where appropriate as they become available.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will produce technical memoranda documenting the equity analysis of the proposed fare structure changes, the equity analysis of the fare card fee, and the equity analysis of proposed fare sales locations.


MBTA Fare Equity Analysis For Low-Income Fares and Ancillary Changes

Project ID Number


Funding Source


Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The MBTA requested that CTPS analyze the equity impacts of potential changes in fare structure and tariffs, including a low-income fare program and other potential changes. CTPS has provided technical assistance to the MBTA related to fare structure and tariff changes for more than 25 years, most recently in SFY 2021–23. This project will analyze equity impacts of a low-income fare program and other potential changes in the MBTA’s fare structure and tariffs.



CTPS will assess how to incorporate new 2022 MBTA passenger survey data into its agent-based model. CTPS will also update the base-year fare revenue and ridership to the most recent available and appropriate year. CTPS will use a model to analyze the potential effects of changes in fare structure, tariffs, and policy on different socioeconomic groups in accordance with the requirements of FTA Circular 4702.1B Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for FTA Recipients and the MBTA’s Service and Fare Change Equity Policy. This work will be closely related to ongoing Title VI work conducted by CTPS.


CTPS will follow the new Service and Fare Equity policy in conducting its analyses.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will produce a memorandum documenting the equity analysis of the set of proposed fare structure changes.



Other Agencies in the Boston Region

The contracts and technical analyses in this section are being undertaken for other agencies in the Boston region.


Bluebikes Fare Equity Analysis

Project ID Number


Funding Source

City of Boston

City of Cambridge

City of Somerville

Total Contract


FFY 2024 Total Budget




The Cities of Boston, Somerville, and Cambridge are contracting with CTPS to examine the equity implications of potential changes to the Bluebikes fare structure including fare product changes and the impacts of adding e-bikes to the Bluebikes fleet. The Bluebikes bikeshare system currently charges riders using a pass-based or a per-ride based fee, where users pay a set cost to access the bikeshare system regardless of travel distance. Many bikeshare systems across the United States, including Washington, DC’s Capital Bikeshare, Philadelphia’s Indego, and Chicago’s Divvy, incorporate a per-minute fee structure for electric bike (e-bike) trips. This study will identify how potential fare changes could affect riders of underserved population groups, including people of color, people with low incomes, and people with limited English proficiency.



CTPS will coordinate with the Cities of Boston, Somerville, and Cambridge to analyze how potential changes to the Bluebikes fare structure and bike fleet composition will impact riders of underserved population groups. Tasks in this project include estimating demographics of riders, conducting a demographic survey, estimating fare elasticity impacts, modeling equity impacts from e-bikes, modeling fare change scenarios, developing an interactive report, and documenting results.


FFY 2024 Anticipated Outcomes

CTPS will produce a memorandum documenting the equity analysis of the set of fare change scenarios and an interactive report that recalculates metrics based on updated ridership inputs and potential fare price changes.


Section 2: Other Boston Regional Transportation Planning Studies

This section consists of brief descriptions of planning studies that will be conducted in the Boston Region MPO area by individual agencies, such MassDOT and the MBTA, during FFY 2024. This section describes studies supported by federal planning (but not MPO) funds, and/or studies that MPO and partner agency staff have determined to be of regional significance. The project listings in this indicate whether components of the projects will be conducted by CTPS, and are organized hierarchically: first by type of study, then by geography, then by the entity organizing or leading the study effort.


The projects in this section are not subject to the MPO’s public participation process. Rather, they follow their own public processes, parts of which may be required by the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act. They are included here to provide a more complete picture of the surface-transportation-planning projects occurring in the region. The listings contained in this section were provided to CTPS prior to July 1, 2023.


Safe Streets and Roads for All Discretionary Grant Program (SS4A)

In 2023, the Boston Region MPO received funding through the Safe Streets and Roads for All Grant Program in the amount of $2,160,435 to develop a Safety Action Plan. MassDOT is providing the required 20 percent match of $540,109, which brings the total budget for this work to $2,700,544. The MPO will adopt the Safe System approach in developing the Action Plan. Recommendations will focus on high-risk corridors and include low-cost, high-impact countermeasures that can be widely implemented, new processes and policies, continuous monitoring of crash data, innovative technologies, and collaborative conceptual plans for multi-jurisdictional corridors. A Task Force responsible for Action Plan oversight will be established and include diverse representation from municipalities, advocacy and community groups, underserved communities, public health organizations, and vulnerable roadway users. The MPO will work with a variety of stakeholders to develop a Safety Action Plan for the region and facilitate collaboration across jurisdictions to meet the region’s Vision Zero goal.

Other municipalities that received this grant in the Boston region are listed below:


Multimodal or Roadway Studies

Statewide Studies


Beyond Mobility: Massachusetts 2050 Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan

Beyond Mobility, the Massachusetts 2050 Long-Range Transportation Plan, is a planning process that will result in a blueprint for guiding transportation decision-making and investments in Massachusetts in a way that advances MassDOT’s goals and maximizes the equity and resiliency of the transportation system. The Plan will serve as a strategic plan for MassDOT and document the most pressing transportation priorities for MassDOT to address between now and 2050, relying heavily on input from the public.


Impact of Teleworking

The Impact of Teleworking Study is developing plausible future scenarios for teleworking in Massachusetts and will use a modeling approach to understand the effects that teleworking changes may have on the Commonwealth’s transportation system. This study will examine how anticipated increases and/or decreases in teleworking could change household and aggregate travel behavior through measures that include overall vehicle-miles traveled, trip attributes, and mode share. The potential macroeconomics impact of these changes in travel behavior will also be analyzed. The modeled projections for each scenario could assist MassDOT in future decision-making by providing information about how the demands on the transportation system will change and how the mix of transportation investment may need to respond.


MassDOT National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Plan

MassDOT has developed an Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Deployment Plan for Massachusetts as required by the NEVI Program. Key activities during the initial plan development process included modeling EV charging demand on highway corridors in Massachusetts, analyzing economic factors associated with direct current fast charging technology, prioritizing highway corridor segments for investment of NEVI funds, and seeking stakeholder input on key questions. The MassDOT NEVI Plan has been approved. MassDOT is now proceeding with a planning process to determine the role of MassDOT-owned sites in the NEVI network buildout and to develop a model solicitation and contracting approach for partnering with a private entity to install fast charging infrastructure on EV Alternative Fuel Corridors in Massachusetts, which may help to ease range anxiety for drivers on long-distance trips.



Regional or Subregional Studies


Newton Corner Long-Term Planning Study

MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning is conducting a study to determine long-term multimodal transportation and safety improvements to the Newton Corner I-90: Exit 127 (formerly Exit 17) Interchange in Newton, Massachusetts, bordering Brighton and Watertown.


This conceptual planning study will examine ways to improve mobility, system reliability, safety, connectivity, equity, economic opportunity, accessibility, efficiency, and climate resiliency in the study area.


Morrissey Boulevard/Kosciuszko Circle Study

MassDOT, the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs/Department of Conservation and Recreation, and the City of Boston have partnered to conduct a multimodal transportation study, and engage a recently created legislative (Morrissey) commission dedicated to long-term comprehensive planning for Morrissey Boulevard and the surrounding area in Dorchester, Massachusetts. This effort will build on past designs for the study area and contribute to preliminary, conceptual designs to improve the public realm, mobility, connectivity, safety, and climate resiliency in the corridor. This effort will also incorporate ongoing and future developments in the area to balance these projects with the local community. The resulting transportation alternatives will be presented as part of a public involvement process.



Transit Studies

MBTA Transit Analysis Methodology and Mitigation Strategies Study

MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning is conducting a study to develop a framework, methodology, and web-based tool for estimating the impacts of land use developments, including public and private developments, on the delivery and performance of transit services in Massachusetts. The deliverables from this project will inform MassDOT, MBTA, and regional transit authority decision-making and help these agencies take a more proactive approach to development mitigation.


Program for Mass Transportation

The Program for Mass Transportation (PMT) is the MBTA’s long-range capital planning document; it defines a 25-year vision for public transportation in eastern Massachusetts. The MBTA’s enabling legislation requires the MBTA to update the PMT every five years and to implement the policies and priorities outlined in it through the annual Capital Investment Program. MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning will lead the process for updating the 2024 PMT.


Regional or Subregional Studies


Gilmore Bridge Mobility Improvements Study

MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning is conducting a study regarding opportunities to implement and improve transit priority and multimodal travel over the Gilmore Bridge in Boston and Cambridge, as well as explore the feasibility of building a new bridge between Charlestown and Cambridge to serve transit, walking, and biking trips.


The Gilmore Bridge Mobility Improvements Study will establish existing mobility and other travel conditions within the study area and evaluate short-, medium-, and long-term recommendations intended to address the needs of current and anticipated future travelers along the corridor, with a particular emphasis on providing dedicated bus lanes. In addition to exploring opportunities for transit priority measures and active transportation improvements on the Gilmore Bridge, the study will assess the feasibility of constructing a new bridge between Charlestown and Cambridge to serve transit, walking, and biking trips.


Areas of Persistent Poverty—Ashmont Station Study

In March 2023, the MBTA submitted a grant application to the Federal Transit Administration’s Areas of Persistent Poverty Program (APP). The APP Program is focused on providing funds for projects to assist areas of persistent poverty or historically disadvantaged communities. Eligible projects include things such as improvements to transit facilities, planning for low- or no-emission buses, and funding for coordinated public transit human service transportation plans. The MBTA submitted an application requesting $470,000 to design on-route battery electric bus (BEB) charging at Forest Hills and Ashmont stations. In July 2023, the MBTA received notice of an award under the APP Program for $127,366 to design electric bus charging at Ashmont Station.

Ashmont Station is a pivotal MBTA station in terms of its mobility benefits facilitating transfers to numerous local bus routes as well as to subway and commuter rail. Ensuring BEBs operate efficiently and continuously throughout the service area is paramount to guaranteeing access to employment opportunities for new and existing riders alike. In addition, a majority of the bus ridership on routes serving the station originate from areas designated by the United States Department of Transportation as Areas of Persistent Poverty and Historically Disadvantaged Communities. The funding to design on-route BEB charging at Ashmont Station is an important step in improving the reliability of bus service and decreasing the air quality impacts of diesel buses in and around the routes that serve the station. The MBTA’s full transition to BEBs relies on the design and construction of on-route BEB charging throughout the bus network.


FTA requires that any grants related to planning work (such as this one) be amended into the appropriate regional Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). As such, this proposed UPWP amendment will add this project to the Appendix of the Boston Region MPO’s Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2024 UPWP. Since the study will be grant-funded, it will not impact funding for any other studies programmed in the FFY 2024 UPWP.


Corridor, Area, or General Studies

Regional or Subregional Studies

Municipal Studies

City of Boston
Rutherford Avenue—Sullivan Square Design Project

The City of Boston is progressing with the redesign of the Rutherford Avenue corridor in Charlestown, which extends approximately 1.5 miles from the North Washington Street Bridge to Sullivan Square and provides a critical connection between Everett, Somerville, suburbs north and east of Boston, and Boston’s downtown business area. Reconstruction of this corridor is currently programmed in the Transportation Improvement Program beginning in 2022. The corridor’s highway-like design is inconsistent with present-day design preferences and local circumstances, and the function and design of the Sullivan Square rotary is problematic. Pedestrian mobility is limited, and bicycle travel is not compatible with the high-speed road. The corridor is eight- to 10-lanes wide (120 to 140 feet), presenting a significant barrier between areas on either side of the roadway, such as the Bunker Hill Community College, Paul Revere Park, the Hood Business Park employment area, and MBTA rapid transit stations.


There are significant transit-oriented development opportunities along the corridor, and public investment in new infrastructure will support development of commercial and residential uses, whose tenants otherwise probably would not, or could not, locate to the area. A number of major structural elements in the corridor were constructed more than 60 years ago; they are approaching the end of their life cycle and will need to be replaced. With the Central Artery/Tunnel project now complete, more traffic remains on facilities such as Interstate 93 and US Route 1; therefore, reduced traffic volumes along Rutherford Avenue present a unique opportunity to transform the corridor’s character from a 1950s-era, automobile-oriented facility to a twenty-first century, multimodal, urban boulevard corridor that will accommodate private development.


City of Boston
Reconnecting Chinatown


RCP Award: $1,800,000

The project will develop a plan to connect across the open-cut highway by building an open space for the community and prepare design guidelines to reconnect the Chinatown neighborhood separated by the construction of Interstate 90 in the 1960s. Construction of I-90 displaced hundreds of Chinese American families through land seizure and demolition, including removal of the thriving Hudson Street neighborhood, for the installation of a ramp and retaining wall. In the Leather District, another thriving and historically Chinese-American community, roughly 20 percent of Chinese American family homes were impacted by the construction. As a result, Boston’s Chinatown now lacks access to safe and open greenspace, affordable housing, and is disproportionately impacted by traffic and unclean air.

This project is intended to directly address the longstanding physical division in Boston’s historic Chinatown and to repair and enrich the area located between Shawmut Avenue and Washington Street, a disadvantaged community that has been marginalized, underserved, and overburdened by pollution. This project would also increase greenery and safe and accessible walking routes, improve safety, and decrease the use of motorized vehicles. The City of Boston proposes to create a steering committee of city and community members in the planning process. The application suggests that the air rights created by the connection could be used to create housing and job opportunities for the neighborhood.


Miscellaneous Studies and Planning Activities

Statewide Studies


Flood Risk Assessment

The Climate Adaptation Vulnerability Assessment is a planning-level analysis of which transportation assets are at risk of flooding over the coming century. This study identifies flood exposure for in-state National Highway System roads, bridges, and large culverts; MassDOT- and MBTA-owned rail; MassDOT facilities; and many public-use airports. It assesses damage and repair costs, time estimates for repairs, and considers the consequences from loss of service. Specifically, this study will estimate “do nothing” costs and qualitative consequences of at-risk transportation assets under future conditions assuming no intervention. This information can be used during the capital planning process to prioritize investments that avoid or reduce long-term climatic impacts associated with flooding.


Shared Travel Network

This study will develop recommendations about where and how to leverage existing facilities and resources that could contribute to the development of a shared travel network, as well as where these existing facilities could be expanded and where new facilities and assets could be introduced.


Regional or Subregional Studies

Colleges and Universities

New England University Transportation Center (Region One)

The New England University Transportation Center (Region One) is a research consortium that includes the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (lead university), Harvard University, and the state universities of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Maine. It is funded by the US Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers (UTC) Program. The New England UTC conducts multiyear research programs that seek to assess and make improvements for transportation safety as well as develop a systems-level understanding of livable communities. For more information, visit the New England University Transportation Center’s website at



Back to top


Appendix B: Public Engagement and Public Comments

The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff followed the procedures set forth in the MPO’s adopted Public Engagement Plan while developing the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). These procedures are designed to ensure early, active, and continuous public involvement in the transportation-planning process.


The Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2024 UPWP development process began in October 2022. Staff solicited topics for study through the following engagement activities:



The document development process, described in Chapter 2, culminated in the MPO UPWP Committee’s recommendation for the FFY 2024 UPWP, including a set of new discrete studies. On June 15, 2023, the MPO approved a draft document for public circulation.


After receiving the MPO’s approval to circulate the public-review draft FFY 2024 UPWP, staff posted the document on the MPO’s website ( and used the MPO’s contact list (MPOinfo) and social media accounts to notify the public of the document’s availability and the opening of the 21-day period for public review and comment.

During the review period, staff presented the draft UPWP and this set of new studies at virtual open houses and made themselves available to interested parties who wanted to discuss the draft FFY 2024 UPWP.

The following pages contain the comments received about the UPWP during the public comment period, along with a table summarizing the text of each comment. All correspondents have received a response from the UPWP Manager, and responses have been included within the table.

Topic Name Support / Oppose / Request / Concern Comment Response
FFY 2024 UPWP: Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Program; Climate Resilience Program Cole Rainey-Slavick, Somerville resident Support, Request / Suggest Hello, Reading through the Unified Planning Work Program I am pleased to see a Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Program established, although I would encourage you to consider increasing its budget as it is currently dwarfed by the scale of ongoing work and need in the bicycle network. I would also suggest you include bike parking within this committee’s mandate and integrate that planning into all discussions and decisions around parking more broadly (including in the Lab and Municipal Parking study). I am also pleased to see continued funding of the Climate Resilience Program. I would, however, urge you to consider refocusing the committee away from simply protecting existing infrastructure from vulnerabilities to climate change to also considering how existing infrastructure contributes to exacerbating those vulnerabilities and developing strategies for mitigation or transformation. This should include factors such as the contribution of vehicle emissions to climate change and local air quality issues, the way excessive road space and lack of tree cover magnify urban heat island effect, the way impermeable surfaces contribute to flooding and a lack of ability to replenish groundwater, the risk of highways in creating forest and brushfires, etc. True climate resilience must go beyond protecting what currently exists; it should focus instead on developing regenerative infrastructure. Thank you for your time and consideration, Cole Rainey-Slavick

Letter available on page B-7
Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful comments on our Bicycle and Pedestrian and Climate Resilience Programs. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Program is unique in that it is just one program through which bicycle and pedestrian transportation issues are addressed. For example, the FFYs 2024-28 Transportation Improvement Program funded the Malden-Spot Pond Brook Greenway project in FFY 2027, the Natick- Cochituate Rail Trail Extension in FFY 2028, and the Canton Center Bicycle Racks project in FFY 2024, to name a few. Additionally, the Community Connections program sets aside $7,500,000 between FFYs 2024-28 to support Bikeshare investments across the region. Beyond the TIP, bicycle planning work additionally takes place within the MPO’s Multimodal Mobility Infrastructure Program and its Complete Streets work. The MPO is also in the process of establishing a Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Committee, and I would be happy to connect you with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Manager.

Regarding your comment on the Climate Resilience Program, these are valid concerns that we are addressing through the Resilience Program as we evaluate adaptation and mitigation strategies to reduce the impacts of transportation projects, but we can certainly be more clear in our dialogue about the role of transportation infrastructure in both creating and mitigating climate change concerns. 
FFY 2024 UPWP: James White, Request Can you accelerate you work plan schedules if need be as they are doing on the Green Line section of tracks?
Letter available on page B-8
Thank you for your comment on the Draft FFY 2024 Unified Planning Work Program. At this time, the UPWP does not directly fund the MBTA’s work on the Green Line Extension. Comments or questions regarding the Green Line Extension can be directed to the MBTA at
FFY 2024 UPWP:
EV Charging
Ross Bloom, Wellesley resident Request / Suggest The Program should incorporate some planning studies and gather community input on the possibility of having publicly available Level 1 EV charging on public street curbsides, for residents of city neighborhoods that rely on street parking. This is a potential way to unlock resources and access for currently underserved communities wherever residents rely on street parking. Since Americans do 80+% of their EV charging at home, we need to figure out a way to provide equitable access to an experience that feels like home charging, to those that live in cities and/or rely on street parking and can’t set up a charger in a driveway or garage. Current public charging projects are focused on Level 2 and Supercharging but these are very expensive solutions, difficult to implement in urban neighborhoods, and add immense stress to electrical grids. Just focusing on Level 2 and Supercharging is leaving residents of many city neighborhoods behind and causing delays in building out this critical infrastructure. Many cities and towns in the MPO could benefit from this type of infrastructure. If you work with the right stakeholders and connect Level 1 chargers directly onto utility poles, then you can deploy hundreds of these kinds of chargers for much less than any Level 2 or Supercharger out there. Urban dwellers tend to drive less than suburbanites for whom the current EV infrastructure is being disproportionately designed (for example, the average resident of Washington DC drives only ~20 miles a day). Level 1 can charge 30+ miles overnight while the driver sleeps, and can be part of a solution if placed near enough to people’s homes (i.e. within a 5 min walk) and paired with other available fast charging. Many urban dwellers that want to adopt EV but are worried about charging access are also opting for plug-in hybrids for which Level 1 is a more than sufficient solution. This area of opportunity isn’t being given enough attention or serious consideration and we are missing a chance to quickly address a significant gap in access and equity in electric vehicle infrastructure. I hope that the Program can dedicate some resources to considering the option of Level 1 Public Charging. Full disclosure, my passion for this topic is partly related to a startup business I founded here in Massachusetts to address this Public Level 1 EV charging need. I am happy to discuss further with the Program team as I have some additional research input I can provide on the topic. Public Level 1 Charging accessibility on curbsides in inner city neighborhoods can address the following stated goals of the Program: --Eliminate harmful environmental, health, and safety effects of the transportation system on people in disadvantaged communities. --Prioritize investments that address air pollution and environmental burdens experienced by disadvantaged and vulnerable communities. --Support transit vehicle electrification and use of electric vehicles throughout the transportation system to reduce greenhouse gases and other air pollutants. Thank you, Ross Bloom

Letter available on page B-9
Thank you for your comments on the FFY 2024 UPWP regarding EV charging. Your comment will be shared with the MPO Board and the Climate Resilience Program manager.
FFY 2024 UPWP: Process, Studies, Programs Regional Transportation Advisory Council (Advisory Council) Support, Request, Concern Advisory Council comment letter on draft FFY 2024 UPWP: process, selected studies, programs that support the 3C process
Letter available on page B-11
FFY 2024 UPWP: Programs, Studies Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Support MBTA comment letter on draft FFY 2024 UPWP: graphics, programs, studies, technical assistance

Letter available on page B-15
FFY 2024 Massachusetts Department of Transportation Office of Transportation Planning Suggest OTP checklist on FFY 2024 UPWP

Letter available on page B-16

All comment letters


Back to top



Appendix C: Universe of Proposed New Studies for Federal Fiscal Year 2024 UPWP

This appendix describes the Universe of Proposed New Studies, a key step in the evolution of the federal fiscal year (FFY) Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). The Universe documents the study concepts that the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff collected or suggested for the development of the FFY 2024 UPWP. Study suggestions are collected through email, a public survey, and presentations at Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) subregional committee meetings and Regional Transportation Advisory Council meetings. Each entry includes a summary of the purpose of the proposed study.


Studies in the Universe, shown in Table C-1, are organized into the following categories:


Table C-2 tracks the breakdown of studies chosen for funding in the UPWP from FFY 2017 to the present by category.


Staff and the UPWP Committee evaluate each proposed study in the Universe based on the extent to which a study concept addresses each of the six Long-Range Transportation Plan goal areas:


The process of developing a final list of studies to be funded also includes consideration of staff capacity in relevant areas and work that is occurring in other agencies to avoid redundancy.


In addition to evaluating the proposed new studies in the Universe, MPO staff define general scopes and estimated costs for the proposed studies and consider potential feasibility issues. These various factors, along with the availability of funds for new studies, were considered as staff identified a recommended set of new proposed planning studies for review by the UPWP Committee. For more information about the process of developing and evaluating the Universe, please see Chapter 2.


Table C-1
Universe of Proposed Studies for FFY 2024



Study Information      
ID Project Name Project Purpose and Outcome Estimated Budget Source Staff Comments
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION blank blank blank blank blank
A-1 Parking in Bike Lane: Strategies for Safety and Prevention Purpose: The purpose of this study is to address the issue of vehicles parked in bike lanes in the Boston region. This poses a safety hazard for cyclists and pedestrians and creates a need for them to switch lanes. The study aims to research successful strategies and practices employed in other cities and municipalities to address the problem and recommend strategies that can be implemented in the Boston region.

Approach/Methodology: The study will begin with a comprehensive research phase that will analyze the approaches adopted by other cities (such as a New York proposal to pay people who report cars parked in bike lanes) in addressing the issue of vehicles parked in bike lanes. The research will include a review of existing policies and programs, as well as interviews with peers to better understand their approach and challenges. In addition, the study will engage with municipalities in the Boston region to understand existing policies, gather data on the problem in the region through data collection and surveys, and identify municipalities most interested in piloting the recommended approaches. The study will work with the selected municipalities to develop potential concepts and pilot the most promising one, ensuring the program is tailored to the needs of the region.

Anticipated Outcome: The anticipated outcome of the study is a report that summarizes the research findings, including successful strategies employed by other cities to address the issue of parked vehicles in bike lanes, and recommendations for potential approaches that can be piloted in the Boston region. The report will also include details on the piloted program and its feasibility and effectiveness, along with recommendations for scaling the program beyond the pilot phase.
  Ilana Strauss, Staff Survey  
A-2    Separated bike/pedestrian paths are starting to come together on the north side of Boston, between the Minuteman Bikeway to the Northern Strand Trail.  It would be great to see a comprehensive plan that identifies what is needed to provide safe non-motorized travel throughout as much of this region as possible, including connections with public transit stations and blue bikes.   Julie Wormser (Mystic River Watershed Association), Public Survey  
A-3   Pedestrian Safety:  Inventory, survey, and assess Inner Core and Suburban roadway and street Intersection and mid-block crosswalks for
existing conditions and identify pedestrian safety deficiencies/threats needing remedial actions and/or facilities.
Locations of pedestrian crossings (i.e., formal and informal “desire lines”) are frequent sites of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, crashes, and injuries/fatalities. Such problem areas persist, despite attention given to pavement markings, traffic control lights, and other measures. Sometimes the situation is an uneven implementation of Complete Street design guidance; sometimes it is due to lack of context-sensitive common sense; other times vehicle speed or curb enforcement is not applied. Other times, pedestrians themselves act irresponsibly, are distracted from awareness of surroundings.

A too-frequent problem occurs in (often retail) areas with dense curbside parking available to mixed sizes and types of vehicles. The common situation is with a crosswalk (even a marked one) that permits vehicle parking too close to a pedestrian’s entry point to the crosswalk. In these cases, the view of the pedestrian to oncoming/upstream traffic is severely diminished or totally obstructed until the pedestrian is already walking perhaps 10 feet into the crosswalk, often too late for a driver to adjust. This situation is a pedestrian threat with any vehicle parked too close to the crosswalk, but is especially dangerous when a vehicle is large, such as SUVs, mini vans, delivery vans/vehicles, trucks. Consistent and enforced remedy is needed in all such (municipal) crosswalk locations. To avoid unsafe perpetuation from debate or confusion, a suggestion is there should be a universal ban on any vehicle parking within 15 feet upstream from a crosswalk, mid-block, or intersection. To rely on each of the Commonwealth’s 351 municipalities to adhere  to implementing such a policy almost falls into the realm of fantasy. Once the type and degree of the problem situations are identified by CTPS, ultimately, this pedestrian safety measure would best come in the form of a statewide law from the State House.
  John McQueen, Email  
LAND USE, ENVIRONMENT, AND ECONOMY blank blank blank blank blank
L-1 Opportunities for the MPO to Support TOD

This study will analyze and identify ways for the MPO to support TOD in the Boston region, through policy and/or investment. The FFY 2022 TDM study surfaced the idea of the MPO helping the Commonwealth enforce the MBTA Communities TOD zoning through TIP criteria revisions or similar policy options. This study would engage MPO members, policy experts, and others about the feasibility of this and other ways for the MPO to support TOD throughout the region.

This would be primarily a policy study, with intensive engagement work among the MPO board, planning professionals, and other policy specialists. There may be some public engagement work as well. The study would likely involve interviews and focus groups and culminate in a series of MPO Board discussions.

Staff will prepare a report and lead discussions at the MPO board.

$40,000–$60,000 Staff Survey  
ROADWAY AND MULTIMODAL MOBILITY blank blank blank blank blank
M-1 Lab and Municipal Parking Phase II This year's UPWP includes a discrete study that focuses on Lab and Municipal Parking. The objective of this work is to expand upon MAPC's Perfect Fit Parking study, which focused on residential parking, to develop a methodology to study supply of and demand for parking at lab and life science facilities. The methodology will be defined during Phase I of this study. On-site data collection for a number of sites will be required. Phase II of the study would employ this methodology to study parking supply and utilization at lab and life science facilities across the region.

A data set of parking supply and utilization at lab and life science facilities; recommendations for municipal planners regarding provision of parking at these facilities.
$60,000–$80,000 Staff Survey  
M-2 Exploring Roadway Pricing: Engagement with Local Stakeholders Context of the underlying problem
While many roadway-pricing projects have been successful in reducing congestion, fund transportation projects, and address air quality, others have not been implemented for a variety of reasons. Concerns such as impacts on transportation equity populations, suburban and rural drivers, and business activities have been raised for some projects. Ongoing, substantive, and sincere public engagement and education efforts have meaningfully influenced roadway-pricing program design. Although roadway pricing has been implemented in many cities in the United States, studies have found that the public and many policymakers still have difficulty understanding the purpose and benefits of the concept. However, once projects open, there are few complaints and positive feedback.

Potential solutions to explore
• MPO staff will identify key stakeholders in Massachusetts to communicate and build consensus on the benefits from roadway pricing.
• The engagement efforts will include advocates or interest groups, business chambers of commerce, municipal officials, planners, and the public.
• MPO staff will survey, host forums, and develop brochures on several topics such as pricing styles, benefits, transportation equity, business activities, air quality, etc.

Anticipated outcomes
Staff will prepare a memorandum documenting the communications and engagement efforts. The findings will provide the MPO valuable public feedback on how to implement a future roadway-pricing scheme.  
  Seth Asante, Staff Survey  
TRANSIT blank blank blank blank blank
T-1 Effective ways to reduce school-related vehicle trips 

Over the last several decades, there has been a noticeable shift from parents allowing children to commute to school independently. Modes such as walking, biking, and taking the bus to school have been used less frequently, compared to  dropping their children off at school. The effects of this shift have resulted in an increase of SOV travel; an increase in vehicle emissions; an increase of stress on commuting parents; potentially a decline in personal heath (both parents and children spend more time sitting in a vehicle instead of walking and biking).

The purpose of this project is to analyze ways to reverse the trend of parents driving their children to school. This a travel demand management study that has solutions, which will be analyzed in this study. These solutions could include

  • bringing back robust school bus systems (large school bus systems were common in many communities in the 1970s and 1980s and have since been decimated due to budget cuts and negative stigmas);
  • the encouragement of biking and walking to school by conducting outreach, and improving infrastructure such as bike trails, sidewalks, and bike racks located near schools; and
  • the implementation of congestion pricing strategies, such as charging a curb access fee for dropping off children at or near school, in order to encourage parents to consider alternative means of transportation to commute their kids to school.

This study would look at several funding mechanisms such as taxes, sponsorships, or congestion pricing to provide funding for the solutions listed above. This study will analyze different strategies that will look at ways to alleviate congestion near schools. First, a literature review will be written to show studies that have previously been completed on this topic. Then, a brief analysis would be conducted to see what strategies best fit the Boston region. A memorandum will be written that would summarize each of the final strategies. The memorandum can then be presented to specific communities that have congested roadway locations near schools.

$60,000–$80,000 Staff Survey  
T-2 Review and Analysis of Community Connections Shuttles This study would consist of a review of shuttle services funded through the MPO Community Connections program to gain a better understanding of the various successes and challenges of the MPO’s shuttle programs. Further, the study could pull data from all available shuttles to break down cost per rider, usage rates, GHG reductions, and other interesting/useful data points. The study is intended for MPO members and municipalities to enable decision-making regarding the long-term viability of the Community Connections shuttle program.

Literature review and data analysis of current and past funded shuttle programs by the MPO; types of services offered; technology used by service; mapping of current shuttle service areas; data analysis of ridership, air quality, and equity impacts of the services; financial analysis of shuttle services; implementation, startup, and funding of shuttle services; long-term funding and successes; current needs and issues; interviews with current shuttle operators.

This study would be used to evaluate the current success of funding shuttle services through the Community Connections program and could enable further discussion on the future viability of the program and whether the program is good in terms of cost/benefit.
$40,000–$60,000 Staff Survey  
T-3 Toward Regional Transit Fare and Service Integration This study would be an extension of the current MBTA Mobility Integrations study. Other regions have found success unifying multiple transit operators under a single fare schedule and enhancing interagency coordination on service, scheduling, and infrastructure. Such integrations make transit more user friendly by simplifying payment and provide a more cohesive transit network that encourages connections across a greater geographic area. These integrations may also make the transit system more equitable by enhancing service options for workers in transit-critical communities, who often have longer commutes that cross geographic, agency, and modal boundaries. This study would seek to determine best practices for initiating and implementing these integrations, and potentially identify specific considerations, concerns, and opportunities relevant to Greater Boston.

This study would primarily involve identifying and researching regions where these kinds of intermodal and interagency integrations have been successful. This would include researching policy documentation, studying which integrations were implemented and how, and identifying challenges or missteps to avoid if such integrations are to take place in Greater Boston. If time and budget allow, this could also involve interviewing individuals from these regions/agencies (similar to the Mobility Integrations interviews). Current fare policies and service integrations among Greater Boston RTAs would also be examined. Interviews might also be applicable to this portion of the project to identify potential venues for this collaboration to take place and any specific concerns that agencies may have.
$40,000–$60,000 Staff Survey  
T-4   In our Boston Metro region (and our state), we do not have an overarching comprehensive transportation plan that notes where we believe there should be fixed route service, where there should be demand services, where there should be point-to-point services, and who should run these. The result is an array of disparate services that are urged to regionalize themselves and collaborate themselves, though often times so many separate town borders and agency differences make this challenging. In addition, this plethora of diverse transportation options still leave us with many gaps and inefficiencies. We should map out the most ideal transportation network, including its frequencies and also map out the most ideal plan for how we deal with the inevitable gaps in the network. This work should also lead to a better CPT—HST plan and enhance so many other planning efforts. Even MBTA Bus Network Redesign does not really indicate the most ideal network, rather it just seems to be based on what can they most easily achieve within limited resources. In addition to better planning processes, we can then best identify the funding mechanisms to carry out this plan and identify when we may be able to pool resources, blend and braid funds, and consider any legislative changes, if necessary.

This is for the entire Boston MPO region, which includes many transit authorities and also an array of services in between. Such planning would also help us identify how we would deal with overlap in these areas and also gaps in services.

I would also recommend that in this process, we look at the integration of paratransit with other demand response services. 
  Susan Barrett, Public Survey  
T-5   Context:
For a variety of reasons with which we are all familiar, increasing the use of transit is a goal of the BRMPO; but which parameters have larger impact on transit use? The new TDM contains many parameters, with some being new and some being different versions of parameters that were used in the previous TDM.

Proposed Study:
This would be a basic research study to explore which parameters and combinations of parameters have larger effects on transit usage (with a focus on EJ communities and/or communities with large populations of minorities and/or those with low incomes). The study would explore parameters that easily come to mind but it would also explore combinations of parameters that would not ordinarily come to mind.

Anticipated Outcomes:
Discovery/confirmation of the parameters and combination of parameters that have larger impacts on transit use could help in the design and selection of projects that increase the use of transit. It could also provide insight as to how to design projects that minimize the negative effects on the use of transit.
  Len Diggins, Email  
T-6 Demographic Change and Transit Propensity in Eastern MA Planners often use demographic data, among other tools, to project how people will travel around our area of responsibility. Typically, we expect that people in wealthier areas will use transit less, and that there is a significant difference in both demographics and land use between cities and suburbs. And while it is true that the Boston area is highly segregated, it is also true that American suburbs are changing and diversifying rapidly.

In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic forced transit agencies to reconsider who their core markets are and who best to serve them. This study would seek to contextualize the pandemic-era shifts within a broader story of demographic change, and push planners to question (or reconfirm!) longstanding assumptions about who lives where and what they need.

This study partially follows up on the work done in the FFY 2022 UPWP study “An Exploration of Destination Access and Transportation Cost Analyses.” Among other things, that study examined demographic change from the 2010 Census to the 2020 Census, and used 2020 Census data to examine destination access for protected populations. We propose expanding the analysis to include the 2000 Census, giving a longer-term view of demographic change over time, and exploring the ability to use destination access tools and past transit schedule data to examine change in destination access over time. In turn, this analysis would be used to analyze the impact those changes might have on demand for transit. More details can be requested from MBTA staff.
  Sandy Johnston, MBTA  
T-7 Review of and Lessons From Transit Capital Construction Costs Research In recent years there has been significant examination in the transit world of the problem of rising capital construction costs. This is particularly significant in light of investments being made as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), as well as the need to rehab significant parts of the MBTA’s legacy infrastructure; invest in resiliency; and prepare for fleet electrification. We propose a study focused on examining recent research and findings on this topic and making high-level recommendations to the MBTA and other relevant stakeholders for how to streamline construction and lower costs. Sources could include the NYU Transit Costs Project and Eno Center report on the same topic. The study could also include interviews with experts in the field and people working on capital construction at the MBTA and other agencies.   Sandy Johnston, MBTA  
RESILIENCE blank blank blank blank blank
R-1 Modeling Evacuation Routes Use flood risk data to determine what infrastructure might fail at a given risk level; model transportation flows when that infrastructure is unavailable. The Massachusetts Coastal Flood Risk Model would be used to identify infrastructure at risk of flooding. The Travel Demand Model networks would be updated to reflect the infrastructure unavailable during floods to examine how travel patterns would change in response. Anticipated outcomes include a report of findings and potential identification of key evacuation routes. $80,000–$100,000 Staff Survey  
R-2 Strategies for Environmental Outreach and Engagement

The MPO is well-positioned to connect different types of stakeholders around shared interests and facilitate collaboration throughout the region on transportation planning topics, including the key goal areas of climate resiliency and equity. To bring more representation of environmental, EJ, and resiliency topics and perspectives into our work, it is important to understand the various efforts and interests currently operating in this space, and to build relationships with practitioners and other interested parties. A first step to building these connections and expanding collaboration on environmental and resiliency themes is to determine the most effective engagement strategies for the MPO to pursue. Doing so would support the current UPWP's themes of resiliency, equity, and uncertainty by bringing environmental practitioners to the table who have not historically been engaged in MPO work. This study would support and advance both the resiliency and engagement programs, which currently lack capacity to build in this work at the program level. Surveys and interviews to connect with local environmental advocacy and environmental justice groups as well as municipal-level environmental departments to understand how resiliency practitioners would like to be engaged in MPO work.

  • Literature review and interview methodology to evaluate environmental engagement strategies employed by other MPOs in Massachusetts and elsewhere.
  • Invite environmental stakeholders to existing MPO events such as Regional Transportation Advisory Council or Transit Working Group meetings to assess different engagement platforms.
  • Equitable engagement approaches such as compensation in order to reach a more diverse range of stakeholders.

Report outlining the benefits and obstacles associated with different approaches to environmental engagement, a list of Boston Region groups and departments interested in engaging with the MPO, and recommendations on environmental engagement best practices, strategies, and platforms to be utilized by MPO staff in future work.

$20,000–$40,000 Judy Taylor and Stella Jordan, Staff Survey  
R-3 MPO Support for Transportation Network Electrification

This would be a research project to inform the MPO and its partners (municipalities, transportation agencies, and others) about the challenges and opportunities related to electrifying various aspects of the region’s transportation system (electric automobiles, trucks, bikes, and transit vehicles). The goal would be to guide the MPO as it makes investments to meet objectives in its Clean Air and Healthy Communities Goal area. This research could cover

  • Processes involved in investing in and maintaining charging stations or e-bike locks
  • Roles that municipalities, transit agencies, state or federal agencies, and the private sector play in electrifying the transportation system (particularly in Massachusetts)
  • Ways that MPOs around the United States have supported the electrification of the transportation systems (use of federal funds, projects and programs implemented, etc.) 
  • Equity considerations related to electrifying the transportation system
  • Commonwealth plans for supporting electrification of the transportation system, and how the MPO could be involved in implementing these plans.
  • Explore existing charging facilities for distribution, availability, methods used to themselves (websites, Google search), types of plugs, charging speed, cost, and other rules of service.
  • Analysis to identify current gaps in access to charging infrastructure
  • Implications of electrification for utilities/impacts to the grid
  • Review of the air quality benefits of electrification

The output of this study could be a report similar to “Connected and Autonomous Vehicles and the Boston MPO—A First Look” (2017) and “Promising Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies for the Boston Region" (2018). This report would be geared towards helping MPO members understand key issues related to transportation system electrification. Depending on the results of this research, future studies could support the development of guidebooks. 

$50,000 Michelle Scott, Judy Taylor  
TECHNICAL SUPPORT and OTHER blank blank blank blank blank
TRANSIT EQUITY blank blank blank blank blank
TE-1 Applying Conveyal to TIP Project Scoring

This study would create a process and a baseline set of resources that could be used to score TIP projects using the Conveyal destination access analysis application. It would be geared towards helping the MPO select projects that will help it achieve objectives in its Access and Connectivity goal area.

Staff would build on experiences using Conveyal for the Identifying Transportation Inequities in the Boston Region Baseline Inequities Study while exploring new ways to use this tool, particularly to represent projects and how they might affect the destinations people in the region can access within a given time frame. Staff could conduct a literature review to understand how other planning agencies have used Conveyal to assess project benefits and impacts. Staff would then use lessons and ideas from this review to set up a Conveyal deployment that reflects assumptions about the roadway and transit network for a specific timeframe (e.g., a five-year TIP development cycle). Next, staff would explore ways to reflect projects of various types (complete streets, intersection improvements, etc.) in Conveyal and run analyses to show how destination access outcomes metrics would change if a project or a group of projects were implemented. Staff would document approaches for representing projects in Conveyal and identify destination access metrics and parameters that could be helpful to incorporate into updates to the MPO’s TIP criteria and scoring processes. Staff would also develop methodology adapted from the Identifying Transportation Inequities study to analyze access for different demographic groups. Throughout this project, staff could consult with MassDOT OTP staff, the Conveyal development team, and other RTAs in Massachusetts about how to use Conveyal to assess project benefits and impacts.

Outcomes could include

  • A deployment of Conveyal that includes Open Street Map and GTFS inputs to represent the transportation network
  • Test results from Conveyal analyses that reflect candidate TIP projects
  • Documentation of a methodology to analyze proposed TIP projects in Conveyal
  • Potentially a short memo describing lessons learned during the process and considerations of how to use these tools as part of project scoring.
  • A presentation for the MPO describing the study process and the kinds of Conveyal outputs that can be used in project scoring. 
$70,000 Michelle Scott, Betsy Harvey, Logan Casey, Ethan Lapointe  
TE-2 Identify transit options that match transportation-underserved workers with transportation-underserved employers in transportation-underserved areas.   Objective 
The goal of this proposed study is to ensure that Massachusetts offers transportation services that provide (1) environmental/energy/congestion benefits, (2) livability benefits (social and economic justice), (3) mobility equity, and (4) improved public and economic health. To achieve these, staff are recommending that UPWP conduct a study of transit options designed to match transportation-underserved workers with transportation-underserved employers, in transportation-underserved areas.  The desired outcome is a set of models: well-researched, evidence-based, practicable examples for municipalities to use according to their unique circumstances.

Transportation-underserved areas include rural and suburban communities with weak links to commuter rail and public transit (MBTA and/or RTAs). Also, in these communities, Chapter 40B and 40R requirements have resulted in substantial affordable developments, where those who need to work may have to rely on their own cars. Adding to residents who are financially vulnerable (especially single parents) are those students who are working while seeking credentials for secure employment, and retirees, whose pensions/Social Security may not be sufficient (e.g., the housing-cost burdened).  Such residents are actually or potentially transportation-underserved workers.

Operating in transportation-underserved areas are transportation-underserved employers.  Not only in-town retail businesses but also large corporations in rural/suburban areas have difficulty finding and keeping employees.[1] In Massachusetts, entry-level jobs in the healthcare sector are an example:  personal care aides, homecare aides, nurses/aides.  Other entry-level jobs that are hard to fill include support staff and workers in food preparation and service.  The goal is not simply to provide transportation to low-level workers but to assure that growth can occur because transportation nodes include education/training sites, dependent care sites (child care and adult day), and other sites that help workers not only keep jobs but gain skills.

Proposed Study Details
The UPWP study would be guided by the fundamental transportation principle of coverage,  i.e., the study would incorporate coverage goals to ensure equity in the target region(s) and, hence, in the Commonwealth.[2] The study would focus on the transportation-underserved, across residents, businesses, and geographic areas; that is, transportation-underserved workers, employers, and municipalities (see details below).
TE-2 (cont.)  

Transportation-underserved workers are those

  • already engaged in job-designed education/training/apprenticeships;
  • seeking a job (may include the prior group);
  • seeking transition from part- to full-time employment (e.g., students);
  • working second, third, and/or weekend shifts; and
  • returning/needing to work (e.g., single heads of household, retirees).

The goal of the proposed transit network is to help fill high demand jobs such as personal care aides, home health aides, nursing assistants, school support staff, and food prep and serving.  Illustrations from data on MA employment include examples of certificate and/or entry-level jobs. NOTE:  health services and education are the two biggest employers in the state (see details below).

Transportation-underserved employers include

  • healthcare and related institutions (support staff, nursing assistants, home health aides);
  • major education/community/social service institutions (support and para-staff [e.g., substance abuse, behavioral, mental health counselors]; social and human service
    assistants; teacher aides and administrative support);
  • major food preparation and serving-related institutions (food prep and serving, including fast food; wait staff; support staff);
  • major building/grounds cleaning and maintenance businesses (janitors/cleaners; landscaping/groundskeeping); and
  • major personal care and service businesses (personal care aides; cosmetologist).

Transportation-underserved geographic areas

In many municipalities—rural towns and certain areas of suburban communities outside dense cities—transportation planning and service operations face variable and generally sparse population density. Commuting for non-drivers and access to jobs in evenings and on weekends are difficult. A number of rural towns offer no public transportation; in other towns, parking for commuter rail is constrained; and in most municipalities there are few walking/biking routes from residences to likely employment destinations.  The MAGIC region of the state, for example, has been defined as a transportation desert. That appellation applies to a number of other similar regions.

TE-2 (cont.)   Potential Solutions

By incorporating the guiding principle of coverage in the study of transportation underserved (above), the UPWP study should provide the following innovative design solutions:

a. Primary design innovation:  inclusion of employment-supporting nodes in an origin-employment-destination transit model.
b. Secondary design innovation:  transit providers chosen to be predominantly hybrid or EVs (environmental/energy benefits); fares/subsidies encourage predominance of shared rides (reduction of congestion); integration with MBTA and RTAs (increase energy/congestion reduction benefits.
c. Tertiary design innovation:  Financial sustainability by multiple means of funding.

Each potential solution is described in more detail below.

The primary innovation is design of an Origin-Support-(Employment) Destination transit network model.  There is compelling evidence  that the workers who are this study's focus cannot succeed only with transportation to and from their jobs.[3]  For instance, single-parent heads of household, workers such as students at second/third/weekend shift jobs, individuals returning to work, and retirees may also need dependent-care (child care, adult day care) sites, in order to hold a job or move from part-time to full-time employment with benefits.  Thus, UPWP's primary innovation is creation of a transit network that enlarges the origin-destination model to include support nodes. In addition to dependent care sites, such nodes might include "layover stops" on certain days at grocery stores, pharmacies, banks for brief errands on the way home.  They could also include designated education/training sites, at specific times, so that workers could gain/improve skills and students would have reliable transportation from school to work.

The secondary innovation is design of environmental/energy/congestion benefits model.  Participation as transit providers would require vendors to use hybrid/EV fleets as much as possible.  Rider fees and subsidies would be designed to ensure predominance of shared rides.  And, reliable integration with MBTA, commuter rail, and RTA fixed route schedules would further increase these benefits.
TE-2 (cont.)  

The tertiary innovation is design of financial sustainability via multiple means of funding. Innovative transit systems like the one proposed require innovative financial support.  Coverage goals, because they seek to assure equity as well as efficiency, will require subsidies.  The origin-support-destination transit network can become financially sustainable by a variety of means:

Employer contributions (a stable, reliable workforce reduces the organizational costs of turnover, hiring, training)

  • Carbon offsets (by use of hybrid/EV)
  • Municipal contributions (town and cities with visible mobility for all are attractive to residents as well as businesses [4] )
  • Sliding scale rider fees
  • Transportation gift cards, coupons, etc.
  • Mass transit assessments
  • Grants

Anticipated Outcomes

The proposed UPWP study will produce models—well-researched, evidence-based, practicable examples for numerous municipalities to use and modify according to their unique circumstances.  Because the principle of coverage informs the models, operationalizing them should help cities and towns to close systemic gaps in service, improving social and economic justice and providing greater mobility equity.  Because the models are well-researched and evidence-based, operationalizing them should begin to improve data on public and economic health of the cities and towns.  And, because the models are practicable, operationalizing them should show immediate environmental energy/congestion benefits.

 1. Transit Means Business, Metropolitan Planning Council, Chicago, 2019. 
 2. "Public transport faces an increasingly intense conflict between patronage goals and coverage goals. Broadly speaking, patronage goals seek to maximize patronage of all types, while coverage goals lead to the provision of service despite low patronage, for example, to achieve social inclusion objectives. The conflict between these goals follows inevitably from the underlying structure of the public transport product, including both its costs and geometry. The tradeoff between patronage and coverage is [a value judgment] and the decision about how to balance social versus patronage goals [must be] made consciously rather than inadvertently, with a clear understanding of the consequences of the choice." By Jarrett Walker, McCormick Rankin Cag-ney, Level 13, 167 Macquarie Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia © 2008 Elsevier Ltd.
 3. See:
 4. World Health Organization, Global age-friendly cities: a guide. 2007.



18 Total study concepts


Table C-2
Studies Funded in the UPWP, by Category, FFYs 2017–24


blank FFY 2017 FFY 2018 FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFY 2023 FFY 2024
Active Transportation 1 1 1 1 1 1 3  
Land Use, Environment, and Economy 1 1 0 0 1 3 0 0
Roadway and Multimodal Mobility 4 5 6 4 5 5 1  
Transit 1 2 1 3 2 1 4  
Transportation Equity 0 0 0 1 0 1 4  
Resilience 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
Other 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 0
Total 8 10 9 11 13 12 12 12




Back to top



Appendix D: Geographic Distribution of UPWP Studies and Technical Analysis


This Appendix summarizes the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)-funded work products produced by MPO staff (the Central Transportation Planning Staff) and the staff of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) during federal fiscal years (FFY) 2019 through 2023, as well as work products expected to be completed by the end of FFY 2023. The narrative below describes the methodology used to compile this information, as well as potential use cases for these data to inform and guide public involvement and regional equity considerations.

Purpose and methodology


The purpose of this data collection is to better understand the geographic spread of Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) work products (that is, reports and technical memoranda) throughout the Boston region. This analysis provides an initial glimpse at which communities and areas of the metropolitan region have benefited from transportation studies and analyses (or have received technical support) conducted by the MPO staff with continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative (3C) planning funds.


In addition, this Appendix includes a preliminary analysis of the distribution of MPO work products to minority populations, low-income populations, and people with limited English proficiency (LEP) based on their share of the population in each municipality. This is an initial approach to assess how MPO studies may benefit these populations. To further analyze this work, a pair of maps were developed that display the geographic spread of the 2023 work products. In the future, the development of the UPWP Study Recommendations Tracking Database, which will include these visualizations and the creation of an interactive online interface, will allow a more precise analysis of where and how study and analysis funds are spent.


Table D-1 presents a summary of UPWP tasks completed from FFY 2019 through FFY 2023 that resulted in benefits to specific municipalities, aggregated to the subregional level. Figure D-1 is a map that displays the 2023 results geographically. Table D-2 presents the information from Table D-1 disaggregated by municipality, and Figure D-2 maps these results. Studies that had a regional focus are presented in Table D-3.


The geographic distribution of UPWP studies (those benefiting specific communities and those benefiting a wider portion of the region) can inform the UPWP funding decisions made for each FFY. When considered in combination with other information, the geographic distribution of MPO-funded UPWP studies can help guide the MPO’s public outreach to ensure that, over time, we are meeting needs throughout the region.


Table D-1
Summary of Distribution of Work Products by FFY and Subregion


Subregion Number of Work Products Demographics
Name FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFY 2023 FFYs 2019–23 Total Total Population Percent Minority Percentage of Residents in Poverty Percentage of Residents with LEP
ICC 26 17 14 20 46 123 1,759,970 48.2% 25.7% 16.2%
MAGIC 16 9 6 4 13 48 181,858 26.8% 9.0% 5.5%
MWRC 2 0 9 3 4 18 250,783 33.8% 14.8% 10.9%
NSPC 3 1 1 1 2 8 217,978 19.8% 10.5% 4.8%
NSTF 7 4 1 6 4 22 297,068 16.9% 17.4% 5.6%
SSC 3 3 1 9 2 18 224,764 17.5% 13.0% 4.3%
SWAP 0 0 3 1 1 5 149,159 19.6% 10.9% 5.2%
TRIC 15 14 10 10 7 56 275,614 29.1% 12.0% 6.9%
Regionwide Total 72 48 45 54 79 298 3,357,194 36.5% 19.7% 11.5%




LEP is tabulated for the population aged five years and older, the minority population and population in poverty are for the entire region.

People who identify as minority are those who identify as a race other than White or as Hispanic or Latino/a/x.



Minority population: U.S. Census Bureau; Decennial Census, Table P2 (Race); generated by CTPS; using (2023-03-27).

Low-income population: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table C17002 (Income Level), generated by CTPS; using; (2023-03-27).

People with LEP: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B16004 (Limited English Proficiency), generated by CTPS; using; (2023-03-27).

Median Household Income: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B19013 (Median Household Income), generated by CTPS; using; (2023-03-27).



Figure D-1
Map of 2023 Work Products by Subregion




As noted above, this analysis examined FFYs 2019 through 2023. To generate information on the number of UPWP studies during these FFYs that benefitted specific cities and towns in the Boston region, MPO staff performed the following tasks:

Planning Studies and Technical Analyses by Community


Table D-2 shows the number of completed MPO-funded UPWP work products from FFY 2019 through FFY 2023 that are determined to provide benefits to specific municipalities. Studies and technical analyses are grouped by the year in which they were completed, rather than the year in which they were first programmed in the UPWP. Examples of the types of studies and work in the table include the following:


Figure D-2 maps these results for FFY 2023.



Table D-2
Number of UPWP Tasks by FFY and Municipality, Grouped by Subregion


Municipality Number of Work Products Demographics  
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2019–23 Total Total Population Percent Minority Percentage of Residents in Poverty Percentage of Residents with LEP Median Income
Arlington 2 1 0 0 3 6 46,308 24.80% 10.60% 6.60% $125,701
Belmont 0 0 0 1 0 1 27,295 30.40% 9.40% 8.50% $151,502
Boston 9 3 5 11 8 36 675,647 55.40% 31.60% 16.70% $81,744
Brookline 1 3 0 1 2 7 63,191 34.70% 17.30% 9.10% $122,356
Cambridge 1 1 0 0 2 4 118,403 44.60% 19.50% 7.90% $112,565
Chelsea 1 2 1 0 3 7 40,787 79.80% 41.90% 41.30% $64,782
Everett 1 2 0 0 3 6 49,075 65.90% 33.70% 31.40% $71,510
Lynn 1 0 1 1 2 5 101,253 65.90% 33.90% 26.00% $63,922
Malden 1 0 1 0 3 5 66,263 60.00% 31.80% 26.90% $77,119
Medford 0 1 0 0 1 2 59,659 33.20% 18.10% 9.70% $107,853
Melrose 0 0 1 0 2 3 29,817 20.40% 11.20% 5.50% $125,229
Newton 0 1 0 1 2 4 88,923 29.90% 9.20% 6.40% $164,607
Quincy 2 1 2 3 3 11 101,636 45.80% 23.80% 20.60% $85,041
Revere 2 1 1 0 3 7 62,186 55.10% 32.10% 29.30% $73,041
Saugus 0 0 0 0 0 0 28,619 24.90% 17.60% 6.70% $93,737
Somerville 3 0 2 0 5 10 81,045 34.80% 20.80% 11.00% $108,896
Waltham 1 0 0 1 0 2 65,218 39.60% 19.10% 10.20% $103,498
Watertown 0 1 0 1 2 4 35,329 26.90% 14.30% 10.00% $101,402
Winthrop 1 0 0 0 2 3 19,316 21.10% 16.10% 7.00% $86,780
ICC Subtotals 26 17 14 20 46 123 1,759,970 48.20% 25.70% 16.20% N/A
Acton 3 3 0 0 1 7 24,021 36.90% 11.40% 8.90% $138,163
Bedford 2 0 0 1 2 5 14,383 26.50% 8.40% 4.60% $140,647
Bolton 1 0 0 0 0 1 5,665 13.50% 7.90% 2.00% $167,132
Boxborough 1 0 0 0 0 1 5,506 32.90% 10.00% 5.40% $136,875
Carlisle 1 0 0 0 0 1 5,237 21.20% 5.70% 1.60% $216,000
Concord 1 1 2 1 3 8 18,491 18.20% 8.10% 3.30% $169,335
Hudson 1 0 1 0 0 2 20,092 21.40% 14.80% 10.60% $94,191
Lexington 1 1 1 1 1 5 34,454 43.30% 6.10% 7.00% $202,852
Lincoln 1 1 1 0 1 4 7,014 23.80% 15.50% 2.10% $145,833
Littleton 1 1 0 0 1 3 10,141 16.90% 11.30% 2.00% $140,511
Maynard 1 1 0 0 1 3 10,746 17.00% 10.90% 5.00% $112,432
Stow 1 0 0 0 0 1 7,174 14.30% 6.50% 2.20% $147,841
Sudbury 1 1 1 1 3 7 18,934 19.10% 3.70% 2.30% $217,847
MAGIC Subtotals 16 9 6 4 13 48 181,858 26.80% 9.00% 5.50% N/A
Ashland 0 0 1 0 1 2 18,832 31.50% 11.50% 9.20% $115,959
Framingham 2 0 1 1 2 6 72,362 46.30% 21.10% 17.90% $90,638
Holliston 0 0 1 0 0 1 14,996 15.80% 8.30% 4.30% $142,348
Marlborough 0 0 1 0 0 1 41,793 40.90% 22.10% 14.90% $86,230
Natick 0 0 1 1 0 2 37,006 24.40% 10.80% 7.80% $122,914
Southborough 0 0 1 0 0 1 10,450 24.50% 8.50% 5.40% $170,223
Wayland 0 0 1 1 0 2 13,943 23.20% 5.60% 4.40% $203,789
Wellesley 0 0 1 0 0 1 29,550 26.70% 7.40% 4.40% $226,250
Weston 0 0 1 0 1 2 11,851 26.00% 12.30% 4.60% $220,815
MWRC Subtotals 2 0 9 3 4 18 250,783 33.80% 14.80% 10.90% N/A
Burlington 1 0 0 0 0 1 26,377 30.00% 11.70% 5.20% $124,755
Lynnfield 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,000 13.50% 10.00% 2.90% $147,237
North Reading 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,554 11.50% 7.00% 2.60% $123,813
Reading 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,518 12.80% 8.10% 2.60% $145,552
Stoneham 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,244 18.60% 12.10% 6.00% $105,541
Wakefield 0 0 1 1 2 4 27,090 14.30% 11.20% 3.10% $110,372
Wilmington 1 1 0 0 0 2 23,349 13.80% 8.50% 2.20% $146,250
Winchester 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,970 25.40% 7.20% 5.70% $184,844
Woburn 1 0 0 0 0 1 40,876 27.20% 14.60% 8.80% $95,184
NSPC Subtotals 3 1 1 1 2 8 217,978 19.80% 10.50% 4.80% N/A
Beverly 1 1 0 1 1 4 42,670 15.40% 19.60% 4.50% $89,882
Danvers 1 0 0 1 0 2 28,087 12.70% 12.50% 3.60% $105,654
Essex 1 0 0 0 0 1 3,675 7.50% 18.80% 1.00% $116,027
Gloucester 0 0 0 0 0 0 29,729 11.70% 20.30% 4.30% $82,984
Hamilton 1 0 0 0 0 1 7,561 11.10% 12.60% 2.00% $116,699
Ipswich 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,785 9.00% 14.40% 1.70% $111,701
Manchester-by-the-Sea 1 0 0 1 1 3 5,395 6.70% 5.60% 1.20% $193,279
Marblehead 0 0 0 0 0 0 20,441 9.20% 9.20% 2.60% $154,049
Middleton 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,779 15.70% 9.30% 5.00% $155,482
Nahant 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,334 9.00% 12.80% 2.10% $99,456
Peabody 1 1 0 1 0 3 54,481 22.70% 18.20% 9.60% $83,570
Rockport 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,992 6.90% 13.40% 0.40% $88,377
Salem 1 1 1 2 2 7 44,480 31.50% 28.90% 8.70% $72,884
Swampscott 0 1 0 0 0 1 15,111 14.20% 12.80% 9.40% $114,086
Topsfield 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,569 10.00% 9.90% 1.40% $155,208
Wenham 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,979 12.60% 6.90% 2.70% $154,375
NSTF Subtotals 7 4 1 6 4 22 297,068 16.90% 17.40% 5.60% N/A
Braintree 0 1 0 1 1 3 39,143 29.90% 11.90% 9.60% $114,916
Cohasset 0 0 0 1 0 1 8,381 7.20% 8.50% 0.00% $156,689
Hingham 2 1 1 2 0 6 24,284 8.50% 8.30% 2.10% $154,300
Holbrook 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,405 34.40% 14.10% 3.60% $89,763
Hull 0 0 0 1 1 2 10,072 8.30% 10.30% 0.70% $117,120
Marshfield 0 0 0 1 0 1 25,825 6.80% 14.40% 0.40% $109,841
Norwell 1 1 1 1 0 4 11,351 8.80% 5.30% 1.60% $172,022
Rockland 0 0 0 0 0 0 17,803 17.50% 18.40% 4.00% $90,315
Scituate 0 0 0 1 0 1 19,063 6.60% 8.20% 2.40% $129,132
Weymouth 0 0 0 1 0 1 57,437 22.60% 17.60% 6.20% $91,592
SSC Subtotals 3 3 1 9 2 18 224,764 17.50% 13.00% 4.30% N/A
Bellingham 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,945 14.60% 13.50% 3.90% $109,042
Franklin 0 0 0 0 0 0 33,261 14.90% 10.10% 2.70% $127,608
Hopkinton 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,758 26.80% 7.00% 2.40% $179,192
Medway 0 0 0 1 1 2 13,115 11.70% 9.30% 1.50% $147,257
Milford 0 0 1 0 0 1 30,379 34.00% 18.30% 15.80% $89,332
Millis 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,460 12.00% 11.80% 6.70% $131,138
Norfolk 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,662 15.90% 3.40% 0.90% $168,281
Sherborn 0 0 1 0 0 1 4,401 18.30% 3.60% 1.20% $218,906
Wrentham 0 0 1 0 0 1 12,178 10.40% 8.20% 0.80% $147,201
SWAP Subtotals 0 0 3 1 1 5 149,159 19.60% 10.90% 5.20% N/A
Canton 1 3 0 1 1 6 24,370 27.10% 7.70% 5.10% $118,814
Dedham 1 2 1 1 0 5 25,364 22.00% 14.30% 5.60% $108,047
Dover 1 0 1 0 0 2 5,923 19.20% 2.40% 3.20% $250,001
Foxborough 1 2 1 0 0 4 18,618 16.40% 17.50% 3.90% $95,410
Medfield 1 0 1 0 0 2 12,799 12.50% 7.50% 1.10% $196,820
Milton 2 1 3 2 1 9 28,630 29.00% 12.70% 4.60% $153,971
Needham 2 0 0 1 1 4 32,091 18.90% 6.60% 4.70% $182,813
Norwood 2 2 1 2 2 9 31,611 27.50% 16.30% 10.50% $96,414
Randolph 1 0 0 1 1 3 34,984 73.40% 22.50% 18.90% $87,869
Sharon 1 0 0 0 1 2 18,575 33.20% 3.70% 5.80% $157,928
Walpole 1 2 1 1 0 5 26,383 17.10% 10.40% 3.00% $138,821
Westwood 1 2 1 1 0 5 16,266 17.20% 6.30% 3.80% $171,071
TRIC Subtotals 15 14 10 10 7 56 275,614 29.10% 12.00% 6.90% N/A
Grand Total 72 48 45 54 79 298 3,357,194 36.50% 19.70% 11.50% N/A






Limited English proficiency is tabulated for the population aged five and older, the minority population and population in poverty are for the entire region.

People who identify as minority are those who identify as a race other than White or as Hispanic or Latino/a/x.



Minority population: U.S. Census Bureau; Decennial Census, Table P2 (Race); generated by CTPS; using (2023-03-27).
Low-income population: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table C17002 (Income Level), generated by CTPS; using; (2023-03-27).
People with LEP: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B16004 (Limited English Proficiency), generated by CTPS; using; (2023-03-27).

Median Household Income: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B19013 (Median Household Income), generated by CTPS; using; (2023-03-27).




Figure D-2
Map of 2023 UPWP Tasks by Municipality


Regionwide Planning Studies and Technical Analyses


In addition to work that benefits specific municipalities, many projects funded by the MPO through the UPWP have a regional focus. Table D-3 lists MPO-funded UPWP studies completed from 2019 through 2023 that were regional in focus, meaning that they provided benefit to multiple communities and types of municipalities. Some regionally focused studies may have work products that overlap with those analyzed in the tables above.


More information on these studies and other work can be found on the MPO’s website ( or by contacting Srilekha Murthy, UPWP Manager, at


Table D-3
Regionally Focused MPO-Funded UPWP Studies


FFY 2023



  • Update Bicycle/Pedestrian Count Database
  • Flexible Fixed-Route Bus Service
  • Transit Modernization Program
  • Lab and Municipal Parking Study
  • Learning from Roadway Pricing Experiences

FFY 2022



  • Trip Generation Follow-up
  • Travel Demand Management Follow-up
  • The Future of the Curb Phase 3
  • Identifying Transportation Inequities in the Boston Region
  • Staff-Generated Research Topics
  • MetroCommon 2050: Greater Boston’s Next Regional Vision

FFY 2021



  • Improving Pedestrian Variables in the Travel Demand Model
  • Regional TDM Strategies
  • Trip Generation Rate Research
  • Access to CBDs Phase 2
  • The Future of the Curb Phase 2
  • Multimodal Resilience and Emergency Planning
  • MPO Staff-Generated Research Topics
  • Mapping Major Transportation Infrastructure Projects in the Boston Region
  • Exploring Resilience in MPO-Funded Corridor and Intersection Studies
  • Rideshare Electrification Working Group
  • Impacts of E-commerce in Massachusetts
  • Planning Successful Bus Priority
  • Projects in Greater Boston
  • MetroCommon Regional Plan Development

FFY 2020



  • Operating a Successful Shuttle Program
  • Further Development of the MPOs Community Transportation Program
  • Disparate Impact Metrics Analysis
  • Pedestrian Report Card Assessment Dashboard
  • Innovations in Estimating Trip Generation Rates
  • Review of Vision Zero Strategies
  • Participation in Rail Vision Study
  • Participation in East-West Rail Study
  • MetroCommon Regional Plan Development
  • Review of Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Estimates
  • Inventory of National TNC Fee Structures
  • Analysis of How Local and State Governments in North America Use TNC Data for Regulation
  • Literature Review of Initiatives to Incentivize Zero Emission TNC Vehicles

FFY 2019



  • Pedestrian Report Card Assessment Dashboard
  • New and Emerging Metrics for Roadway Usage
  • The Future of the Curb
  • Updates to Express-Highway Volumes Charts
  • Coordination and convening of municipalities to implement recommendations of water transportation study
  • MetroCommon Regional Plan for smart growth and regional prosperity, including extensive stakeholder outreach and public engagement
  • Support for Bluebike bikeshare system, Lime dockless bikeshare system, and support for coordinated regulation of electric scooters
  • Analysis of Transportation Network Company trips from varying data sources


Uses for the Data

MPO staff collects these data annually. These data can potentially be used to inform UPWP funding decisions and could be used in concert with other data in the following future analyses:

Analyses such as these would provide the MPO with a clearer understanding of how the work programmed through the UPWP addresses the needs of the region.


Back to top



Appendix E: Regulatory and Policy Framework


This appendix contains detailed background on the regulatory documents, legislation, and guidance that shape the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) transportation planning process.


The Boston Region MPO is charged with executing its planning activities in line with federal and state regulatory guidance. Maintaining compliance with these regulations allows the MPO to directly support the work of these critical partners and ensures its continued role in helping the region move closer to achieving federal, state, and regional transportation goals. This appendix describes all of the regulations, policies, and guidance taken into consideration by the MPO during development of the certification documents and other core work the MPO will undertake during federal fiscal year (FFY) 2024.


Federal Regulations and Guidance

The MPO’s planning processes are guided by provisions in federal transportation authorization bills, which are codified in federal statutes and supported by guidance from federal agencies. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), signed into law on November 15, 2021, replaced the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act as the nation’s five-year surface transportation bill, and covers FFYs 2022–26. This section describes new provisions established in the BIL as well as items established under previous bills, such as the FAST Act.


Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act: National Goals

The purpose of the national transportation goals, outlined in Title 23, section 150, of the United States Code (23 USC § 150), is to increase the accountability and transparency of the Federal-Aid Highway Program and to improve decision-making through performance-based planning and programming. The national transportation goals include the following:


  1. Safety: Achieve significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads
  2. Infrastructure condition: Maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good repair
  3. Congestion reduction: Achieve significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway System
  4. System reliability: Improve efficiency of the surface transportation system
  5. Freight movement and economic vitality: Improve the national freight network, strengthen the ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support regional economic development
  6. Environmental sustainability: Enhance performance of the transportation system while protecting and enhancing the natural environment
  7. Reduced project delivery delays: Reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, and expedite movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion by eliminating delays in the project development and delivery process, including by reducing regulatory burdens and improving agencies’ work practices


The Boston Region MPO has incorporated these national goals, where practicable, into its vision, goals, and objectives, which provide a framework for the MPO’s planning processes. More information about the MPO’s vision, goals, and objectives is included in Chapter 1.


FAST Act: Planning Factors

The MPO gives specific consideration to the federal planning factors, described in Title 23, section 134, of the US Code (23 USC § 134), when developing all documents that program federal transportation funds. In accordance with the legislation, studies and strategies undertaken by the MPO shall


  1. Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competition, productivity, and efficiency 
  2. Increase the safety of the transportation system for all motorized and nonmotorized users
  3. Increase the ability of the transportation system to support homeland security and to safeguard the personal security of all motorized and nonmotorized users
  4. Increase accessibility and mobility of people and freight
  5. Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and state and local planned growth and economic development patterns
  6. Enhance integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight
  7. Promote efficient system management and operation
  8. Emphasize preservation of the existing transportation system
  9. Improve the resiliency and reliability of the transportation system and reduce or mitigate stormwater impacts of surface transportation
  10. Enhance travel and tourism


The Boston Region MPO has also incorporated these federal planning factors into its vision, goals, and objectives. Table E-1 shows the relationships between FFY 2023 MPO studies and activities and these federal planning factors.


Table E-1
FFY 2024 3C-Funded UPWP Studies and Programs—Relationship to Federal Planning Factors


    3C-funded Certification Activities Ongoing Technical Assistance New and Recurring 3C-funded Planning Studies* Administration and Resource Management MAPC Activities
  Federal Planning Factor Support to the MPO and its Committees General Editorial General Graphics Public Engagement Program Long-Range Transportation Plan Transportation Improvement Program Performance-Based Planning and Programming Air Quality Conformity and Support Activities Unified Planning Work Program Transportation Equity Program Congestion Management Process Multimodal Mobility Infrastructure Program Freight Planning Support Data Program Transit Working Group Support Bicycle and Pedestrian Support Activities Climate Resiliency Program Roadway Safety Audits Community Transportation Technical Assistance (CTPS and MAPC) Regional Transit Service Planning Technical Support Strategies for Environmental Outreach and Engagement Parking in Bike Lanes: Strategies for Safety and Prevention Lab and Municipal Parking Phase II Applying Conveyal to TIP Project Scoring Computer Resource Management Professional Development Corridor/Subarea Planning Studies Alternative Mode Planning and Coordination MetroCommon 2050 Land-Use Development Project Reviews MPO/MAPC Liaison Activities  UPWP Support Land-use Data and Forecasts for Transportation Modeling  Subregional Support Activities 
1 Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.                    
2 Increase the safety of the transportation system for all motorized and nonmotorized users.                              
3 Increase the ability of the transportation system to support homeland security and to safeguard the personal security of all motorized and nonmotorized users.                                                      
4 Increase accessibility and mobility of people and freight.        
5 Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and state and local planned growth and economic development patterns.              
6 Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight.                    
7 Promote efficient system management and operation.                        
8 Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.                                    
9 Improve the resiliency and reliability of the transportation system and reduce or mitigate storm water impacts of surface transportation.                            
10 Enhance travel and tourism.                                              



* For ongoing FFY 2023 3C-funded studies, see FFY 2023 UPWP

** Includes Support to the MPO and its Committees, Public Participation Process, and Regional Transportation Advisory Council Support

FFY = Federal Fiscal Year. UPWP = Unified Planning Work Program.



FAST Act: Performance-Based Planning and Programming

The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), in consultation with states, MPOs, and other stakeholders, established performance measures relevant to the national goals established in the FAST Act. These performance topic areas include roadway safety, transit system safety, National Highway System (NHS) bridge and pavement condition, transit asset condition, NHS reliability for both passenger and freight travel, traffic congestion, and on-road mobile source emissions. The FAST Act and related federal rulemakings require states, MPOs, and public transportation operators to follow performance-based planning and programming practices—such as setting targets—to ensure that transportation investments support progress towards these goals. See Chapter 3 for more information about how the MPO has and will continue to conduct performance-based planning and programming.


Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL): Planning Emphasis Areas

On December 30, 2021, the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration jointly issued updated planning emphasis areas for use in MPOs’ transportation planning process, following the enactment of the BIL. Those planning emphasis areas include the following:


  1. Tackling the Climate Crisis—Transition to a Clean Energy, Resilient Future: Ensure that transportation plans and infrastructure investments help achieve the national greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals of 50–52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, and net-zero emissions by 2050, and increase resilience to extreme weather events and other disasters resulting from the increasing effects of climate change.
  2. Equity and Justice40 in Transportation Planning: Ensure public involvement in the planning process and that plans and strategies reflect various perspectives, concerns, and priorities from impacted areas.
  3. Complete Streets: Review current policies, rules, and procedures to determine their impact on safety for all road users. This effort should work to include provisions for safety in future transportation infrastructure, particularly for those outside automobiles.
  4. Public Involvement: Increase meaningful public involvement in transportation planning by integrating virtual public involvement tools into the overall public involvement approach while ensuring continued public participation by individuals without access to computers and mobile devices.
  5. Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET)/US Department of Defense (DOD) Coordination: Coordinate with representatives from DOD in the transportation planning and project programming process on infrastructure needs for STRAHNET routes and other public roads that connect to DOD facilities.
  6. Federal Land Management Agency (FLMA) Coordination: Coordinate with FLMAs in the transportation planning and project programming process on infrastructure and connectivity needs related to access routes and other public roads and transportation services that connect to Federal lands.
  7. Planning and Environment Linkages: Use a collaborative and integrated approach to transportation decision-making that considers environmental, community, and economic goals early in the transportation planning process, and use the information, analysis, and products developed during planning to inform the environmental review process.
  8. Data in Transportation Planning: Incorporate data sharing and consideration into the transportation planning process.


1990 Clean Air Act Amendments

The Clean Air Act, most recently amended in 1990, forms the basis of the United States’ air pollution control policy. The act identifies air quality standards, and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designates geographic areas as attainment (in compliance) or nonattainment (not in compliance) areas with respect to these standards. If air quality in a nonattainment area improves such that it meets EPA standards, the EPA may redesignate that area as being a maintenance area for a 20-year period to ensure that the standard is maintained in that area.


The conformity provisions of the Clean Air Act “require that those areas that have poor air quality, or had it in the past, should examine the long-term air quality impacts of their transportation system and ensure its compatibility with the area’s clean air goals.” Agencies responsible for Clean Air Act requirements for nonattainment and maintenance areas must conduct air quality conformity determinations, which are demonstrations that transportation plans, programs, and projects addressing that area are consistent with a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining air quality standards.


Air quality conformity determinations must be performed for capital improvement projects that receive federal funding and for those that are considered regionally significant, regardless of the funding source. These determinations must show that projects in the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) will not cause or contribute to any new air quality violations; will not increase the frequency or severity of any existing air quality violations in any area; and will not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards in any area. The policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating air quality conformity in the Boston region were established in Title 40, parts 51 and 53, of the Code of Federal Regulations (40. C.F.R. 51, 40 C.F.R. 53).


On April 1, 1996, the EPA classified the cities of Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Malden, Medford, Quincy, Revere, and Somerville as in attainment for carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. Subsequently, the Commonwealth established a CO maintenance plan through the Massachusetts SIP process 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, the 20-year maintenance period for this maintenance area expired and transportation conformity is no longer required for carbon monoxide in these communities. This ruling is documented in a letter from the EPA dated May 12, 2016.


On April 22, 2002, the EPA classified the City of Waltham 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 conformity test. The MPO is not required to perform a modeling analysis for a conformity determination for carbon monoxide, but it has been required to provide a status report on the timely implementation of projects and programs that will reduce emissions from transportation sources—so-called transportation control measures—which are included in the Massachusetts SIP. In April 2022, the EPA issued a letter explaining that the carbon monoxide limited maintenance area in Waltham has expired. Therefore, the MPO is no longer required to demonstrate transportation conformity for this area, but the rest of the maintenance plan requirements, however, continue to apply, in accordance with the SIP.


On February 16, 2018, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit issued a decision in South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, which struck down portions of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) SIP Requirements Rule concerning the ozone NAAQS. Those portions of the SIP Requirements Rule included transportation conformity requirements associated with the EPA’s revocation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Massachusetts was designated as an attainment area in accord with the 2008 ozone NAAQS but as a nonattainment or maintenance area as relates to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. As a result of this court ruling, MPOs in Massachusetts must once again demonstrate conformity for ozone when developing LRTPs and TIPs.


MPOs must also perform conformity determinations if transportation control measures (TCM) are in effect in the region. TCMs are strategies that reduce transportation-related air pollution and fuel use by reducing vehicle-miles traveled and improving roadway operations. The Massachusetts SIP identifies TCMs in the Boston region. SIP-identified TCMs are federally enforceable and projects that address the identified air quality issues must be given first priority when federal transportation dollars are spent. Examples of TCMs that were programmed in previous TIPs include rapid-transit and commuter-rail extension programs (such as the Green Line Extension in Cambridge, Medford, and Somerville, and the Fairmount Line improvements in Boston), parking-freeze programs in Boston and Cambridge, statewide rideshare programs, park-and-ride facilities, residential parking-sticker programs, and the operation of high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lanes.


In addition to reporting on the pollutants identified in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, the MPOs in Massachusetts are also required to perform air quality analyses for carbon dioxide as part of the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) (see below).


Nondiscrimination Mandates

The Boston Region MPO complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Executive Order 12898—Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-income Populations (EJ EO), and other federal and state nondiscrimination statutes and regulations in all programs and activities it conducts. Per federal and state law, the MPO does not discriminate on the basis of 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, or background. The MPO strives to provide meaningful opportunities for participation of all persons in the region, including those protected by Title VI, the ADA, the EJ EO, and other nondiscrimination mandates.


The MPO also assesses the likely benefits and adverse effects of transportation projects on equity populations (populations covered by federal regulations, as identified in the MPO’s Transportation Equity program) when deciding which projects to fund. This is done through the MPO’s project selection criteria. MPO staff also evaluate the projects that are selected for funding, in the aggregate, to determine their overall impacts and whether they improve transportation outcomes for equity populations. The major federal requirements pertaining to nondiscrimination are discussed below.


Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that no person be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, under any program or activity provided by an agency receiving federal financial assistance. Executive Order 13166—Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency, dated August 11, 2000, extends Title VI protections to people who, as a result of their nationality, have limited English proficiency. Specifically, it calls for improved access to federally assisted programs and activities, and it requires MPOs to develop and implement a system through which people with limited English proficiency can meaningfully participate in the transportation planning process. This requirement includes the development of a Language Assistance Plan that documents the organization’s process for providing meaningful language access to people with limited English proficiency who access their services and programs.


Environmental Justice Executive Order

Executive Order 12898, dated February 11, 1994, requires each federal agency to advance environmental justice by identifying and addressing any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects, including interrelated social and economic effects, of its programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations.


On April 15, 1997, the USDOT issued its Final Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Among other provisions, this order requires programming and planning activities to


The 1997 Final Order was updated in 2012 with USDOT Order 5610.2(a), which provided clarification while maintaining the original framework and procedures.


Americans with Disabilities Act

Title III of the ADA “prohibits states, MPOs, and other public entities from discriminating on the basis of disability in the entities’ services, programs, or activities,” and requires all transportation projects, plans, and programs to be accessible to people with disabilities. Therefore, MPOs must consider the mobility needs of people with disabilities when programming federal funding for studies and capital projects. MPO-sponsored meetings must also be held in accessible venues and be conducted in a manner that provides for accessibility. Also, MPO materials must be made available in accessible formats.


Other Nondiscrimination Mandates

The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. In addition, the Rehabilitation Act of 1975, and Title 23, section 324, of the US Code (23 USC § 324) prohibit discrimination based on sex.


State Guidance and Priorities

Much of the MPO’s work focuses on encouraging mode shift and diminishing GHG emissions through improving transit service, enhancing bicycle and pedestrian networks, and studying emerging transportation technologies. All of this work helps the Boston region contribute to statewide progress towards the priorities discussed in this section.


Beyond Mobility

Beyond Mobility, the Massachusetts 2050 Transportation Plan, is a planning process that will result in a blueprint for guiding transportation decision-making and investments in Massachusetts in a way that advances MassDOT’s goals and maximizes the equity and resiliency of the transportation system. MPO staff continue to coordinate with MassDOT staff so that Destination 2050, the MPO’s next Long-Range Transportation Plan, is aligned with the Beyond Mobility plan. 


Choices for Stewardship: Recommendations to Meet the Transportation Future

The Commission on the Future of Transportation in the Commonwealth—established by Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker’s Executive Order 579—published Choices for Stewardship in 2019. This report makes 18 recommendations across the following five thematic categories to adapt the transportation system in the Commonwealth to emerging needs:


  1. Modernize existing transportation assets to move more people
  2. Create a mobility infrastructure to capitalize on emerging transportation technology and behavior trends
  3. Reduce transportation-related GHG emissions and improve the climate resiliency of the transportation network
  4. Coordinate land use, housing, economic development, and transportation policy
  5. Alter current governance structures to better manage emerging and anticipated transportation trends


Beyond Mobility will build upon the Commission report’s recommendations. The Boston Region MPO supports these statewide goals by conducting planning work and making investment decisions that complement MassDOT’s efforts and reflect the evolving needs of the transportation system in the region.


Massachusetts Strategic Highway Safety Plan

The Massachusetts 2023 Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) identifies the state’s key safety needs and guides investment decisions to achieve significant reductions in highway fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The SHSP establishes statewide safety goals and objectives and key safety emphasis areas, and it draws on the strengths of all highway safety partners in the Commonwealth to align and leverage resources to address the state’s safety challenges collectively. The Boston Region MPO considers SHSP goals, emphasis areas, and strategies when developing its plans, programs, and activities.


Massachusetts Transportation Asset Management Plan

The Massachusetts Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) is a risk-based asset management plan for the bridges and pavement that are in the NHS inventory. The plan describes the condition of these assets, identifies assets that are particularly vulnerable following declared emergencies such as extreme weather, and discusses MassDOT’s financial plan and risk management strategy for these assets. The Boston Region MPO considers MassDOT TAMP goals, targets, and strategies when developing its plans, programs, and activities.


MassDOT Modal Plans

In 2017, MassDOT finalized the Massachusetts Freight Plan, which defines the short- and long-term vision for the Commonwealth’s freight transportation system. In 2018, MassDOT released the related Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Rail Plan, which outlines short- and long-term investment strategies for Massachusetts’ freight and passenger rail systems (excluding the commuter rail system). In 2019, MassDOT released the Massachusetts Bicycle Transportation Plan and the Massachusetts Pedestrian Transportation Plan, both of which define roadmaps, initiatives, and action plans to improve bicycle and pedestrian transportation in the Commonwealth. These plans were updated in 2021 to reflect new investments in bicycle and pedestrian projects made by MassDOT since their release. The MPO considers the findings and strategies of MassDOT’s modal plans when conducting its planning, including through its Freight Planning Support and Bicycle/Pedestrian Support Activities programs.


Global Warming Solutions Act

The GWSA makes Massachusetts a leader in setting aggressive and enforceable GHG reduction targets and implementing policies and initiatives to achieve these targets. In keeping with this law, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA), in consultation with other state agencies and the public, developed the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020. This implementation plan, released on December 29, 2010 (and updated in 2015), establishes the following targets for overall statewide GHG emission reductions:



In 2018, EEA published its GWSA 10-year Progress Report and the GHG Inventory estimated that 2018 GHG emissions were 22 percent below the 1990 baseline level.


MassDOT fulfills its responsibilities, defined in the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2020, through a policy directive that sets three principal objectives:


  1. To reduce GHG emissions by reducing emissions from construction and operations, using more efficient fleets, implementing travel demand management programs, encouraging eco-driving, and providing mitigation for development projects
  2. To promote healthy transportation modes by improving pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit infrastructure and operations
  3. To support smart growth development by making transportation investments that enable denser, smart growth development patterns that can support reduced GHG emissions


In January 2015, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection amended Title 310, section 7.00, of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations (310 CMR 60.05), Global Warming Solutions Act Requirements for the Transportation Sector and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, which was subsequently amended in August 2017. This regulation places a range of obligations on MassDOT and MPOs to support achievement of the Commonwealth’s climate change goals through the programming of transportation funds. For example, MPOs must use GHG impact as a selection criterion when they review projects to be programmed in their TIPs, and they must evaluate and report the GHG emissions impacts of transportation projects in LRTPs and TIPs.


The Commonwealth’s 10 MPOs (and three non-metropolitan planning regions) are integrally involved in supporting the GHG reductions mandated under the GWSA. The MPOs seek to realize these objectives by prioritizing projects in the LRTP and TIP that will help reduce emissions from the transportation sector. The Boston Region MPO uses its TIP project evaluation criteria to score projects based on their GHG emissions impacts, multimodal Complete Streets accommodations, and ability to support smart growth development. Tracking and evaluating GHG emissions by project will enable the MPOs to anticipate GHG impacts of planned and programmed projects. See Chapter 3 for more details related to how the MPO conducts GHG monitoring and evaluation.


Healthy Transportation Policy Initiatives

On September 9, 2013, MassDOT passed the Healthy Transportation Policy Directive to formalize its commitment to implementing and maintaining transportation networks that allow for various mode choices. This directive will ensure that all MassDOT projects are designed and implemented in ways that provide all customers with access to safe and comfortable walking, bicycling, and transit options.


In November 2015, MassDOT released the Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide. This guide represents the next step in MassDOT’s continuing commitment to Complete Streets, sustainable transportation, and the creation of more safe and convenient transportation options for Massachusetts’ residents. This guide may be used by project planners and designers as a resource for considering, evaluating, and designing separated bike lanes as part of a Complete Streets approach.


In the current LRTP, Destination 2040, the Boston Region MPO has continued to use investment programs—particularly its Complete Streets and Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections programs—that support the implementation of Complete Streets projects. The next LRTP, Destination 2050, is being developed in tandem with the FFY 2024–28 TIP and will continue to provide similar support. In the Unified Planning Work Program, the MPO budgets to support these projects, such as the MPO’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Support Activities program, corridor studies undertaken by MPO staff to make conceptual recommendations for Complete Streets treatments, and various discrete studies aimed at improving pedestrian and bicycle accommodations.


Congestion in the Commonwealth 2019

MassDOT developed the Congestion in the Commonwealth 2019 report to identify specific causes of and impacts from traffic congestion on the NHS. The report also made recommendations for reducing congestion, including addressing local and regional bottlenecks, redesigning bus networks within the systems operated by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) and the other regional transit authorities, increasing MBTA capacity, and investigating congestion pricing mechanisms such as managed lanes. These recommendations guide multiple new efforts within MassDOT and the MBTA and are actively considered by the Boston Region MPO when making planning and investment decisions.


Regional Guidance and Priorities


Focus40, The MBTA’s Program for Mass Transportation

On March 18, 2019, MassDOT and the MBTA released Focus40, the MBTA’s Program for Mass Transportation, which is the 25-year investment plan that aims to position the MBTA to meet the transit needs of the Greater Boston region through 2040. Complemented by the MBTA’s Strategic Plan and other internal and external policy and planning initiatives, Focus40 serves as a comprehensive plan guiding all capital planning initiatives at the MBTA. These initiatives include the Rail Vision plan, which will inform the vision for the future of the MBTA’s commuter rail system; the Bus Network Redesign (formerly the Better Bus Project), the plan to re-envision and improve the MBTA’s bus network; and other plans. The Boston Region MPO continues to monitor the status of Focus40 and related MBTA modal plans to inform its decision-making about transit capital investments, which are incorporated to the TIP and LRTP.


MetroCommon 2050

MetroCommon 2050, which was developed by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) and adopted in 2021, is Greater Boston’s regional land use and policy plan. MetroCommon 2050 builds off of MAPC’s previous plan, MetroFuture (adopted in 2008), and includes an updated set of strategies for achieving sustainable growth and equitable prosperity in the region. The MPO considers MetroCommon 2050’s goals, objectives, and strategies in its planning and activities. See Chapter 7 for more information about MetroCommon 2050 development activities.


MetroCommon 2050 will serve as the foundation for land use projections in the MPO’s next LRTP, Destination 2050. The MPO’s next LRTP is currently in development and is anticipated to be adopted by the MPO board in the summer of 2023


The Boston Region MPO’s Congestion Management Process

The purpose of the Congestion Management Process (CMP) is to monitor and analyze the mobility of people using transportation facilities and services, develop strategies for managing congestion based on the results of traffic monitoring, and move those strategies into the implementation stage by providing decision-makers in the region with information and recommendations for improving the transportation system’s performance. The CMP monitors roadways, transit, and park-and-ride facilities in the Boston region for safety, congestion, and mobility, and identifies problem locations. See Chapter 3 for more information about the MPO’s CMP.


Coordinated Public Transit–Human Services Transportation Plan

Every four years, the Boston Region MPO completes a Coordinated Public Transit–Human Services Transportation Plan (CPT–HST), in coordination with the development of the LRTP. The CPT–HST supports improved coordination of transportation for seniors and people with disabilities in the Boston region. This plan also guides transportation providers in the Boston region who are developing proposals to request funding from the Federal Transit Administration’s Section 5310 Program. To be eligible for funding, a proposal must meet a need identified in the CPT–HST. The CPT–HST contains information about


The MPO adopted its current CPT–HST in 2019 and is currently developing its next CPT–HST, which is expected to be adopted in 2023.


MBTA and Regional Transit Authority (RTA) Transit Asset Management Plans

The MBTA and the region’s RTAs—the Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA) and the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA)—are responsible for producing transit asset management plans that describe their asset inventories and the condition of these assets, strategies, and priorities for improving the state of good repair of these assets. The Boston Region MPO considers goals and priorities established in these plans when developing its plans, programs, and activities.


MBTA and RTA Public Transit Agency Safety Plans

The MBTA, CATA, and MWRTA are required to create and annually update Public Transit Agency Safety Plans that describe their approaches for implementing Safety Management Systems on their transit systems. The Boston Region MPO considers goals, targets, and priorities established in these plans when developing its plans, programs, and activities.


State and Regional COVID-19 Adaptations

The COVID-19 pandemic has radically shifted the way many people in the Boston region interact with the regional transportation system. The pandemic’s effect on everyday life has had short-term impacts on the system and how people travel, and it may have lasting effects. State and regional partners have advanced immediate changes in the transportation network in response to the situation brought about by the pandemic. Some of the changes may become permanent, such as the expansion of bicycle, bus, sidewalk, and plaza networks, and a reduced emphasis on traditional work trips. As the region recovers from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the long-term effects become apparent, state and regional partners’ guidance and priorities are likely to be adjusted.


Back to top



Appendix F: Boston Reigon Metropolitan Planning Organization Membership



The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) includes both permanent members and municipal members who are elected for three-year terms. Details about the MPO’s members are listed below.


The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) was established under Chapter 25 (An Act Modernizing the Transportation Systems of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) of the Acts of 2009. MassDOT has four divisions: Highway, Rail and Transit, Aeronautics, and the Registry of Motor Vehicles. The MassDOT Board of Directors, composed of 11 members appointed by the governor, oversees all four divisions and MassDOT operations and works closely with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Board of Directors. The MassDOT Board of Directors was expanded to 11 members by the Legislature in 2015, a group of transportation leaders assembled to review structural problems with the MBTA and deliver recommendations for improvements. MassDOT has three seats on the MPO board, including seats for the Highway Division.


The MassDOT Highway Division has jurisdiction over the roadways, bridges, and tunnels that were overseen by the former Massachusetts Highway Department and Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. The Highway Division also has jurisdiction over many bridges and parkways that previously were under the authority of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The Highway Division is responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of the Commonwealth’s state highways and bridges. It is also responsible for overseeing traffic safety and engineering activities for the state highway system. These activities include operating the Highway Operations Control Center to ensure safe road and travel conditions.


The MBTA, created in 1964, is a body politic and corporate, and a political subdivision of the Commonwealth. Under the provisions of Chapter 161A of the Massachusetts General Laws, it has the statutory responsibility within its district of operating the public transportation system in the Boston region, preparing the engineering and architectural designs for transit development projects, and constructing and operating transit development projects. The MBTA district comprises 175 communities, including all of the 97 cities and towns of the Boston Region MPO area.


In April 2015, as a result of a plan of action to improve the MBTA, a five-member Fiscal and Management Control Board (FMCB) was created. The FMCB was created to oversee and improve the finances, management, and operations of the MBTA. The FMCB’s authorizing statute called for an initial three-year term, with the option for the board to request that the governor approve a single two-year extension. In 2017, the FMCB’s initial mandate, which would have expired in June 2018, was extended for two years, through June 30, 2020. In 2020, the FMCB’s mandate was extended a second time for an additional period of one year, through June 30, 2021.


Following the expiration of the FMCB’s extended mandate, the MBTA Board of Directors was formed as a permanent replacement to provide oversight for the agency. By statute, the board consists of seven members, including the Secretary of Transportation as an ex-officio member. The MBTA Advisory Board appoints one member who has municipal government experience in the MBTA’s service area and experience in transportation operations, transportation planning, housing policy, urban planning, or public or private finance. The Governor appoints the remaining five board members, which include an MBTA rider and member of an environmental justice population, and a person recommended by the President of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations.


The MBTA Advisory Board was created by the Massachusetts Legislature in 1964 through the same legislation that created the MBTA. The Advisory Board consists of representatives of the 175 cities and towns that compose the MBTA’s service area. Cities are represented by either the city manager or mayor, and towns are represented by the chairperson of the board of selectmen. Specific responsibilities of the Advisory Board include reviewing and commenting on the MBTA’s long-range plan, the Program for Mass Transportation; proposed fare increases; the annual MBTA Capital Investment Program; the MBTA’s documentation of net operating investment per passenger; and the MBTA’s operating budget. The MBTA Advisory Board advocates for the transit needs of its member communities and the riding public.


The Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport) has the statutory responsibility under Chapter 465 of the Acts of 1956, as amended, for planning, constructing, owning, and operating such transportation and related facilities as may be necessary for developing and improving commerce in Boston and the surrounding metropolitan area. Massport owns and operates Boston Logan International Airport, the Port of Boston’s Conley Terminal, Flynn Cruiseport Boston, Hanscom Field, Worcester Regional Airport, and various maritime and waterfront properties, including parks in the Boston neighborhoods of East Boston, South Boston, and Charlestown.


The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) is the regional planning agency for the Boston region. It is composed of the chief executive officer (or a designee) of each of the cities and towns in the MAPC’s planning region, 21 gubernatorial appointees, and 12 ex-officio members. It has statutory responsibility for comprehensive regional planning in its region under Chapter 40B of the Massachusetts General Laws. It is the Boston Metropolitan Clearinghouse under Section 204 of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 and Title VI of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968. Also, its region has been designated an economic development district under Title IV of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended. MAPC’s responsibilities for comprehensive planning encompass the areas of technical assistance to communities, transportation planning, and development of zoning, land use, demographic, and environmental studies. MAPC activities that are funded with federal metropolitan transportation planning dollars are documented in the Boston Region MPO’s Unified Planning Work Program.


The City of Boston, six elected cities (currently Beverly, Everett, Framingham, Newton, Somerville, and Burlington), and six elected towns (currently Acton, Arlington, Brookline, Hull, Medway, and Norwood,) represent the 97 municipalities in the Boston Region MPO area. The City of Boston is a permanent MPO member and has two seats. There is one elected municipal seat for each of the eight MAPC subregions and four seats for at-large elected municipalities (two cities and two towns). The elected at-large municipalities serve staggered three-year terms, as do the eight municipalities representing the MAPC subregions.


The Regional Transportation Advisory Council, the MPO’s citizen advisory group, provides the opportunity for transportation-related organizations, non-MPO member agencies, and municipal representatives to become actively involved in the decision-making processes of the MPO as it develops plans and prioritizes the implementation of transportation projects in the region. The Advisory Council reviews, comments on, and makes recommendations regarding certification documents. It also serves as a forum for providing information on transportation topics in the region, identifying issues, advocating for ways to address the region’s transportation needs, and generating interest among members of the general public in the work of the MPO.


The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) participate in the Boston Region MPO in an advisory (nonvoting) capacity, reviewing the Long-Range Transportation Plan, Transportation Improvement Program, and Unified Planning Work Program, and other facets of the MPO’s planning process to ensure compliance with federal planning and programming requirements. These two agencies oversee the highway and transit programs, respectively, of the United States Department of Transportation under pertinent legislation and the provisions of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL).



Back to top