Memorandum
Date June 15, 2017
TO Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
FROM Karl H. Quackenbush, Executive Director
RE Work Program for Union Point Redevelopment Modeling Support
Review and approval
That the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), upon the recommendation of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Office of Transportation Planning, vote to approve the work program for the Union Point Redevelopment Modeling Support project presented in this memorandum
Agency and Other Client Transportation Planning Studies and Technical Analyses
23328
Southfield Redevelopment Authority (SRA)
Project Supervisor: Lyndsey Kruzer
Principal: Scott Peterson
Manager: Florence Ngai
SRA Contract # TBD
The MPO staff has sufficient resources to complete this work in a capable and timely manner. By undertaking this work, the MPO staff will neither delay the completion of nor reduce the quality of any work in the Unified Planning Work Program.
The South Weymouth Naval Air Station, located in Weymouth, Abington, and Rockland, was closed in 1997 on the recommendation of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission. In 1998, the Massachusetts Legislature created the South Shore Tri-Town Development Corporation, which was subsequently reconstituted in 2014 as the Southfield Redevelopment Authority. The Southfield Redevelopment Authority is charged with reinforcing municipal control over the land use and redevelopment of the former base.
The 1,400 acre site was recently purchased by a development company, LStar, which has an ambitious redevelopment plan, known as Union Point, for eight million square feet of commercial development and approximately 4,000 housing units. The Union Point redevelopment plan was previously named Southfield. A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was filed and a Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) certificate was issued on July 18, 2007. LStar submitted a Notice of Project Change in the spring of 2017 and received feedback from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs in May stating that further analysis of the transportation impacts would be required as significant transportation impacts associated with the new development are anticipated.
The site is immediately north of State Route 139 and approximately one mile south of State Route 3. State Routes 18 and 58 are to the east. An east-west parkway was constructed through the site as a result of a prior redevelopment effort. Much of the traffic generated from the site is expected to use State Route 3 via interchanges at State Route 18 and Derby Street in Hingham. Funds are programmed to widen State Route 18 in the near future and this improvement, along with other programmed improvements, will be represented in the Boston Region MPO’s regional travel demand model.
The South Weymouth Station on the Kingston/Plymouth MBTA commuter rail line is immediately west of the site. There are 543 parking spaces at that station. Project proponents anticipate that proposed commercial and residential uses on the site will increase use of this station.
The proposed Union Point development is anticipated to occur in phases. The phases and their timing will be determined in consultation with the client, MassDOT, and key stakeholders. The Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) will work with the project team—which consists of MassDOT and Howard Stein Hudson, as the primary consultant, with other sub-consultants—to define the appropriate study area and acquire updated traffic counts for a selection of intersections in the study area. CTPS will produce forecasts of travel demand for the 2017 base year and two horizon years—2040 and an interim year between 2017 and 2040 to be determined by the project team.
The objectives of this work program are as follows:
The study area will consist of the immediate area surrounding the development site, roughly defined by State Routes 18, 139, and 3. The exact boundaries will be defined in cooperation with the project team after work has commenced.
CTPS will use the MPO’s travel demand model and will incorporate land-use data that are consistent with the most recently adopted LRTP, Charting Progress to 2040. The specific land-use assumptions for the development phases will be reflected in the intermediate year and horizon year model assumptions, which will be developed in collaboration with MassDOT and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC). MassDOT and MAPC will provide guidance on how to maintain control totals of population and employment. The salient features of the model are as follows:
The processes for developing the traffic-volume forecasts are as follows:
The tasks associated with completing this work are detailed below.
CTPS will work with the project team to identify the study area and the locations for which observed traffic data will be available.
Weekday traffic data are required for validating and adjusting the Boston Region MPO’s model. The project team will provide CTPS with observed traffic data as well as base-year balanced count data. The balanced counts should be consistent from intersection to intersection and balanced by vehicle type within the study area. The data will include AM and PM turning movement counts and Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) counts. If the turning movement count data do not cover a full three-hour period, CTPS will expand the data to reflect the peak-period traffic. In addition, CTPS will exploit the INRIX dataset for travel-time data and tap into other data, such as geometry data, provided by MassDOT or the project team. Transit data will be examined for all public transportation modes in the study area.
Construction of the full-build development scenario at Union Point will constitute a substantial intensification of the land use on the site, more than the existing background growth projected for the site by regional planners. With this additional, and not necessarily anticipated, amount of development on the site, it will be necessary to review the land-use assumptions for the TAZs comprising the actual development site and also for the TAZs that surround Union Point in Weymouth, Rockland, and Abington.
The methodology proposed would link the development to the land-use assumptions in the LRTP. After examining these land-use assumptions, any deficiency in households or employment data for the Union Point redevelopment site would be supplemented with anticipated growth in the surrounding communities of Weymouth, Rockland, and Abington where feasible. MassDOT’s control totals of population and employment for the MPO area would be maintained. Any proposed development in excess of the development that will be represented in the model will need to be considered in an additional Notice of Project Change or a supplement to this work at the appropriate time.
The actual full-build development scenario will be considered as a land use scenario and will be evaluated with the 2040 transportation networks as one of the eight alternatives.
CTPS will use the most current and calibrated regional model set available for incorporating the land-use assumptions from the LRTP. This model has been used extensively to study other major projects in the region such as the Lower Mystic Project. This task focuses on validating the AM and PM model results in the study area, with particular attention paid to the count locations identified and the transit ridership at the West Weymouth Station of the Kingston/Plymouth commuter rail line under Task 1. CTPS will adjust the model if needed.
A validated base-year transportation network for the study area
CTPS will model up to eight alternatives for each of the horizon years. The alternatives will include the no-build, build scenarios for testing highway mitigation measures and/or transit improvements, and the full-build land-use scenario. It must be noted that the full-build land-use scenario does not reflect the state’s latest adopted planning assumptions. The model run result can be used for assessing impacts, but any associated analysis results are not suitable for updating any environmental document.
The no-build alternative will be modeled first, followed by the build alternatives and the build scenarios with mitigation measures and/or transit improvements. This order of modeling alternatives will be followed for each development phase. For any alternative that combines highway and transit improvements, it is highly recommended that individual improvements shall be evaluated separately in individual model runs. Improvements that are deemed to be effective will then be packaged into a single alternative.
The regional model will be used for high-level assessments at the regional level, for evaluating transit impacts, and for establishing the travel demand input to the subarea model (see Task 5).
CTPS will develop a subarea model, which is a highway assignment module focused on the study area. The subarea model area will include the development site as well as its immediate surroundings. The area will be large enough to capture potential trip diversions resulting from the new development and mitigation measures. Roadway geometry data collected under Task 1 will be used to verify the network. TAZs will be reserved as place holders for implemented developments in the horizon years. TAZs in the immediate area will be refined for better assignment results. The subarea network will be detailed enough to provide sufficient traffic data for performing a level-of-service analysis; however, the network will not include minor roads or driveways.
The input trip tables will be extracted from the regional model and disaggregated. The base-year subarea model will be calibrated using the traffic data collected under Task 1. CTPS will adjust the trip table, if needed. Any adjustment to the trip table will be carried to the future years.
CTPS will develop subarea models for future-year traffic projections. Future land use at the site will be estimated based on proposed site development plans, and links will be added to the model to reflect major internal circulation roads. CTPS will coordinate with the consultant team for incorporating the internal circulation roads. Resulting traffic volumes at selected locations will be provided to the project team for further traffic analyses. CTPS will also develop adjustment factors based on MassDOT traffic data for computing Saturday traffic volumes.
Future-year traffic data to be provided to project teams for further traffic analyses
CTPS will examine transit use in the study area and conduct a crowding analysis for the Plymouth/Kingston commuter rail line. The analysis will identify the trains operating during the peak period that have volume-to-capacity ratios that exceed MBTA service standards, and calculate the volume of passengers and standees at the peak point along the route.
Tabular summaries of the crowding analysis
CTPS will work with the project team to verify demographics and the infrastructure project mix for the interim and forecast years. The consultant will provide traffic counts. CTPS will attend coordination meetings as directed by MassDOT. CTPS may also help prepare presentation materials for these and other meetings as directed by MassDOT.
Coordination with the project team, attendance at meetings, and other assistance as needed
CTPS will produce a technical memorandum documenting all of the model methodology, assumptions, results, and analysis findings. The memorandum will be provided to MassDOT and the project team.
A technical memorandum documenting the project
It is estimated that this project will be completed in eight months after work commences. The proposed schedule, by task, is shown in Exhibit 1.
The total cost of this project is estimated to be $245,200. This includes the cost of 81.0 person-weeks of staff time, overhead at the rate of 102.7 percent, printing, travel, equipment, consultants, and other direct costs. A detailed breakdown of estimated costs is presented in Exhibit 2.
KQ/BD/SAP/fn
Task |
Month | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
|
1.
Define Study Area and Collect Transportation Data |
From month 1 to 1.7.
| ||||||||
|
2.
Review Land-Use Assumptions |
From month 1 to 1.9.
Deliverable A, Demographics delivered by Month 1.9
| ||||||||
|
3.
Validate Base-Year Model |
From month 1.5 to 2.4.
Deliverable B, Calibrated and Validated Base-Year Model delivered by Month 2.4
| ||||||||
|
4.
Perform No-Build and Build Alternatives Analysis |
Deliverable , delivered by Month 1
From month 1.7 to 4.5.
| ||||||||
|
5.
Develop Subarea Models for Base Year and Horizon Years |
From month 1.9 to 3.5.
Deliverable C, Subarea model delivered by Month 3.5
| ||||||||
|
6.
Perform No-Build and Build Alternative Analysis Using the Subarea Model |
From month 3.1 to 6.8.
| ||||||||
|
7.
Conduct a Transit Analysis |
From month 4 to 7.2.
| ||||||||
|
8.
Project Coordination |
From month 1 to 9.1.
| ||||||||
|
9.
Documentation |
From month 6.8 to 9.1.
Deliverable D, Final analysis and documentation delivered by Month 9.1
| ||||||||
Task |
Person-Weeks | Direct Salary |
Overhead (102.70%) |
Total Cost |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M-1 | P-5 | P-4 | P-3 | Total | ||||
|
1.
Define Study Area and Collect Transportation Data
|
0.5 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 3.5 | 5.0 | $6,431 | $6,604 | $13,035 |
|
2.
Review Land-Use Assumptions
|
1.0 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 5.0 | $7,819 | $8,030 | $15,850 |
|
3.
Validate Base-Year Model
|
1.0 | 0.0 | 2.5 | 1.5 | 5.0 | $6,981 | $7,169 | $14,150 |
|
4.
Perform No-Build and Build Alternatives Analysis
|
1.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.5 | 13.5 | $20,025 | $20,565 | $40,590 |
|
5.
Develop Subarea Models for Base Year and Horizon Years
|
2.5 | 5.5 | 10.0 | 5.5 | 23.5 | $34,840 | $35,781 | $70,621 |
|
6.
Perform No-Build and Build Alternative Analysis Using the Subarea Model
|
0.5 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 9.0 | $13,523 | $13,888 | $27,412 |
|
7.
Conduct a Transit Analysis
|
0.5 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 4.5 | $6,176 | $6,343 | $12,519 |
|
8.
Project Coordination
|
3.0 | 1.5 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 8.5 | $13,627 | $13,995 | $27,622 |
|
9.
Documentation
|
1.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 7.0 | $11,446 | $11,755 | $23,202 |
|
Total
|
11.0 | 18.5 | 32.0 | 19.5 | 81.0 | $120,868 | $124,132 | $245,000 |