DRAFT

Draft Memorandum for the Record

Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Meeting

June 21, 2012 Meeting

10:00 AM – 12:00 PM, State Transportation Building, Conference Rooms 2 & 3, 10 Park Plaza, Boston

David Mohler, Chair, representing Richard Davey, Secretary and Chief Executive Officer, Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)

Decisions

The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) agreed to the following:

· release draft Amendment Two of the federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2012-15 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for a 30-day public review period

· approve the FFY 2013 Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) budget

· approve the minutes of the meeting of June 7

· authorize staff to study four proposed transit stations in the Safe Access to Transit for Bicycles and Pedestrians study

Meeting Agenda

1. Public Comments

Jonah Petri, Friends of the Community Path, thanked the MPO for programming funds for the Community Path in the FFY 2012 element of the TIP and urged them to keep those dollars programmed for this project which dovetails with the Green Line Extension project. He then expressed support for the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail and Assabet River Rail Trail projects, and asked that the MPO increase their funding of multi-use trails. He also expressed support for the allocations of funds in the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) for the Green Line Extension to College Avenue and Union Square, and the funds for planning to extend the Green Line to Route 16.

He also discussed the design of the Community Path, which will provide access to four Green Line stations, and the need to design three more station connections. He noted that the benefits of the Community Path and Green Line Extension will be even greater if the projects are designed together. He urged the MPO to include full funding for the Community Path as part of the Green Line Extension phasing. He also expressed the Friends’ support of the following bicycle and pedestrian projects in the FFY 2012 UPWP, now in effect: Impacts of Walking Radius/Transit Frequency and Reliability; Safe Access to Transit for Pedestrians and Bicyclists; Bicycle Network Evaluation; Green Line Extension FEIR; Green Line Extension SIP Mitigation Strategies; and Bicycle-Pedestrian Support Activity.

2. Chair’s Report – David Mohler, MassDOT

The MPO will meet once in July. After discussion with members, the meeting date was set for July 12.

MassDOT has released its GreenDOT Implementation Plan for a public review period that closes on August 2. Four public meetings will be held around the state.

3. Committee Chairs’ Reports – Karl Quackenbush, Executive Director, Central Transportation Planning Staff

The Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Committee met this morning to review public comments on the draft FFY 2013 UPWP. The committee voted to recommend that the MPO endorse the draft UPWP. The MPO will vote on the document at the meeting of June 28.

4. Regional Transportation Advisory Council Report – Steve Olanoff, Chair, Regional Transportation Advisory Council

The Advisory Council met on June 13. In the morning, the group took a tour of the Green Line Extension project area. The project was discussed at the meeting in the afternoon, in addition to discussions about the TIP and LRTP. Two committees met that day as well. The Council is working on changes to its bylaws.

5. Executive Director’s Report – Karl Quackenbush, Executive Director, Central Transportation Planning Staff

MassDOT has reviewed the MPO’s recommendations for projects to be funded through the federal Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Program and the New Freedom Program. The MPO recommended four projects for JARC funding; all were accepted by MassDOT. The MPO recommended eleven New Freedom projects; 7 of those were accepted by MassDOT. Awardees have been notified.

The following are the JARC projects that won funding:

· 128 Business Council: Alewife A3 Route 128 Corridor Plan/Reverse Commute Program

· 128 Business Council: Waltham Innovation – Route 128 Corridor Plan/Reverse Commute Program

· MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MetroWest RTA): JARC Route 9 Extended Service

· Salem North Shore Career Center (NSCC): Mobility Management and Employment Express

The following are the New Freedom projects that won funding:

· Greater Lynn Senior Services (GLSS): Reaching Beyond Borders: The GLSS Mobility Links Projects (two projects)

· Friendship Home: Wheels to Work

· MBTA: Taxi Vouchers for Paratranist Customers Program

· Town of Acton: LRTA Road Runner

· Salem North Shore Career Center (NSCC): Mobility Management and Employment Express

· New England Paralyzed Veterans of America (NEPVA): NEPVA Transportation Program

The following New Freedom applications did not receive funding:

· Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA): Enhanced Medical Travel

· MetroWest Regional Transit Authority: Mobility Management and Training Support

· Town of Acton: MinuteVan Dial-a-Ride and Mobility Manager

6. FFYs 2012-15 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment – Sean Pfalzer, TIP Manager, MPO Staff

S. Pfalzer gave an overview of proposed changes in project programming for the draft amendment to the FFYs 2012-15 TIP. These changes were detailed in a spreadsheet and table showing proposed changes to target funding for the FFY 2012 element of the TIP and the impacts of the changes on the FFY 2013 element.

Proposed Changes to the FFY 2012 Element

The proposed changes to the FFY 2012 element are as follows:

· transfer $108,000 of Clean Air and Mobility Program funds, which are no longer needed in FFY 2012 for the Brookline Bike Share project, to the Somerville Multi-use Path project, which has increased in cost, and program an additional $76,971 of target funds for the Path

· transfer $6 million, which are no longer needed to complete the Dedham/Needham – Route 128 Add-a-lane (Contract 4) project, to the Concord/Lincoln – Crosby’s Corner project

· program nearly $1.2 million of additional target funds for the Belmont – Trapelo Road project, which has increased in cost to nearly $1.9 million, and apply nearly $713,946 from the Crosby’s Corner project to the Trapelo Road project

These proposed actions would result in the FFY 2013 element exceeding fiscal constraint. The change in cash flows for the Crosby’s Corner project in FFY 2012 would require an additional $713,946 to be programmed for the project in FFY 2013. Also, the Danvers – Liberty Street project, which is programmed in FFY 2013, has increased in cost by a $567,440. As a result, the FFY 2013 element would be over-programmed by $714,509.

Members discussed the proposed changes to the FFY 2012 element. (Impacts to the FFY 2013 element will be addressed at the next meeting when the MPO discusses the FFYs 2013-16 TIP.)

Dennis Crowley, South West Advisory Planning Committee (Town of Medway), asked for confirmation that the figures shown in the spreadsheet represent the completion of the Route 128 Add-a-lane (Contract 4) project in FFY 2012. S. Pfalzer confirmed that Contract 4 would be complete.

In response to a question from David Koses, At-Large City (City of Newton), D. Mohler explained that the $6 million from the Route 128 Add-a-lane (Contract 4) project became available because MassDOT pre-paid some of its Advance Construction balances last year.

D. Crowley asked if there were any changes to funding for the Natick – Route 9/Oak Street project. D. Mohler replied no.

Jim Gillooly, City of Boston (Boston Transportation Department), asked about the schedule for completion of the full Route 128 Add-a-lane project. David Anderson, MassDOT Highway Division, stated that there is one more contract for the project and that it will probably be complete in two or three years.

Richard Reed, Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination, asked for information at the next meeting as to whether the $26 million cost estimate for Contract 5 of the Route 128 Add-a-lane project is still accurate

Staff will provide a recommendation next week of how to solve the problem of fiscal constraint in the FFY 2013 element. Eric Bourassa, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), recommended that staff contact project proponents whose projects may be affected by a staff recommendation.

Accelerated Bridge Program Updates

S. Pfalzer provided an update on projects funded through the Accelerated Bridge Program (ABP). The changes were detailed on a spreadsheet that showed amounts programmed in FFYs 2012-13 and total construction costs.

The updated information and proposed changes include the following:

· the amount programmed for the Boston/Cambridge – Longfellow Bridge project has increased by $20.5 million due to the inclusion of a pedestrian bridge and streetscape improvements in the design; the amount programmed in FFY 2012 would be $280 million

· the Boston – Morton Street Bridge project would be moved from the FFY 2012 element to FFY 2013 to allow time for the demolition of a building in the project area; nearly $10.6 million would be programmed in FFY 2013

· the cost of the Quincy/Weymouth – Route 3A over the Fore River project increased in cost; $326 million would be programmed in FFY 2013

· the revised cost estimate in the 25% design of the Everett/Medford – Revere Beach Parkway over the Malden River project increased the cost estimate by $17 million; $63.9 million would be programmed in FFY13

Members discussed these changes.

Christine Stickney, South Shore Coalition (Town of Braintree), asked if the cost changes to the Quincy/Weymouth – Route 3A over the Fore River project are reflected in the TIP. S. Pfalzer replied that the additional funding is non-federal aid and therefore is not reflected in the TIP.

Paul Regan, MBTA Advisory Board, asked if funds are identified in an existing state bond bill to cover the $20.5 million cost increase of the Boston/Cambridge – Longfellow Bridge project. D. Mohler stated that those funds were spent through an early action contract and were reflected in an earlier TIP.

Dennis Giombetti, MetroWest Regional Collaborative (Town of Framingham), inquired about the reason for the cost increase for the Everett/Medford – Revere Beach Parkway over the Malden River project. D. Mohler replied that the scope of the project expanded to include a second bridge.

S. Olanoff raised a question about whether all the ABP costs will be paid with non-federal aid. D. Mohler explained that some of the projects in the ABP are federal-aid eligible for the use of Grant Anticipation Notes (GANs). The commonwealth will be funding the projects now, but after FFY 2015, when the state pays off its GANs debt for the Central Artery/Tunnel project, the commonwealth can begin converting ABP funds to GANs, which will be used to reimburse the state.

JARC and New Freedom Grant Updates

S. Pfalzer reported on the programming of JARC and New Freedom projects in the TIP, and provided information regarding the operating and capital costs for each project.

The following awardees would like to begin accessing their funds in FFY 2012, which would require these projects to be programmed in the amendment:

· 128 Business Council: Alewife A3 Route 128 Corridor Plan/Reverse Commute Program and Waltham Innovation – Route 128 Corridor Plan/Reverse Commute Program

· Greater Lynn Senior Services (GLSS): Reaching Beyond Borders: The GLSS Mobility Links Projects

· MBTA: Taxi Vouchers for Paratransit Customers Program

· New England Paralyzed Veterans of America (NEPVA): NEPVA Transportation Program

The following awardees plan to access their funds starting in FFY 2013:

· Friendship Home: Wheels to Work (FFY 2013-15)

· MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MetroWest RTA): JARC Route 9 Extended Service (FFY 2013-14)

· Town of Acton: LRTA Road Runner

· Salem North Shore Career Center (NSCC): Mobility Management and Employment Express

D. Mohler asked if staff coordinated with the MassDOT Rail and Transit Division regarding the FFY 2012 contracts. S. Pfalzer replied yes.

Transit Carryover Funding

S. Pfalzer then gave an overview of proposed changes to the programming of MBTA carryover funding in the transit element of the TIP. He provided a table that highlighted those projects for which funds would be moved from the FFY 2012 element to FFY 2013 because the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) would not be able to approve the funds in this fiscal year.

Members discussed the transit element.

D. Mohler asked why FTA was not able to approve the funds for this fiscal year. Joe Cosgrove, MBTA, explained that the reason is due to the situation with Congressional appropriations, and he noted that the MBTA has applications pending with FTA.

J. Cosgove noted that the Section 5307 projects should be characterized as an Urban Formula Program and Section 5309 as a Rail Modernization Program.

D. Mohler asked staff to record matching Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant funds in the table.

Release of TIP Amendment

A motion to release draft Amendment Two of the FFYs 2012-15 TIP for a 30-day public review period was made by the MBTA Advisory Board (P. Regan), and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent). The motion carried.

D. Crowley asked if any projects programmed in the FFY 2012 element are at risk of not being advertised by September, the end of this fiscal year. D. Anderson noted that two projects – Belmont – Trapelo Road and Natick – Route 9/Oak Street – are at 100% design and will be ready pending right-of-way acquisitions. D. Mohler added that the project proponents do not expect those acquisitions to be problematic.

7. Central Transportation Planning Staff Operating Budget – Paul Regan, Chair, Administration and Finance Committee, and Karl Quackenbush, Executive Director, Central Transportation Planning Staff

The MPO’s Administration and Finance Committee voted at their meeting of June 7 to advance CTPS’s draft FFY 2013 operating budget to the MPO for approval. Members were provided with a copy of the proposed budget.

P. Regan gave an overview of the budget request, which totals $5.9 million. The budget would support 61 professional staff positions, four interns, and 5 part-time staff positions. The amount requested is approximately $40,000 more than the FFY 2012 budget, nearly a level-funded budget. CTPS will have spent approximately $5.6 million at the close of FFY 2012, which is lower than originally expected due to staff vacancies.

Members discussed the proposed budget:

Laura Wiener, At-Large Town (Town of Arlington), asked if CTPS plans to fill vacant positions. K. Quackenbush replied that CTPS is currently recruiting for three positions: a generalist planner, a modeler, and a bicycle/pedestrian coordinator.

D. Mohler asked for details about several line items in the budget that increased from the previous year: Travel and Transportation, Recruitment, and Transit Subsidy. K. Quackenbush explained that the line item for Travel and Transportation covers travel costs associated with specific projects (such as the cost for rental cars used for HOV lane monitoring) and for staff to travel to conferences. The line item for Recruitment covers the costs of recruiting out-of-state job candidates and their travel expenses to interview, and some of their relocation costs if hired. The increase in the Transit Subsidy line item is reflective of the projected increase in transit fares.

A motion to approve the FFY 2013 CTPS budget was made the MBTA Advisory Board (P. Regan), and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent). The motion carried.

8. Meeting Minutes – Maureen Kelly, MPO Staff

A motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of June 7 was made by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent), and seconded by MAPC (E. Bourassa). The motion carried.

9. Station Selection for the Safe Access to Transit for Bicycles and Pedestrians – Mark Abbott, Project Manager, MPO Staff

In March, the MPO approved the work program for Safe Access to Transit for Bicycles and Pedestrians, which would examine selected transit stations and identify low-cost solutions to improve access to stations for pedestrians and bicyclists. At that time, members asked staff to submit a list of proposed study locations for their review.

M. Abbott provided members a proposal that identified four stations for study: Braintree Station on the Red Line; Morton Street Station on the Fairmount commuter rail line; Oak Grove Station on the Orange Line; and Riverside Station on the D Branch of the Green Line.

Staff conducted a two-step process for identifying stations for study. Starting with 260 possible stations, they narrowed the candidate stations down by eliminating very large stations. Then staff examined population and employment densities around the remaining stations. Twenty-one stations were identified for further review. Data on parking utilization, daily boardings, and walk/bicycle share were used to narrow the list further. Staff also obtained input from MAPC, and gauged community interest in implementing study recommendations.

M. Abbott then discussed the four candidate stations. The Braintree, Oak Grove, and Riverside stations all have high parking utilization rates and low rates of bicycle and pedestrian access. The municipalities of Braintree, Melrose, and Newton have all expressed interest in improving bicycle and pedestrian access to the stations. The Morton Street station has no parking and most people access the station by other MBTA services. It has poor pedestrian access from the neighborhood.

Members discussed the staff recommendation.

D. Koses noted that the City of Newton is working on a redevelopment project in the Riverside Station area. He asked if staff would have recommendations in time to incorporate them into that project by the fall. M. Abbott replied yes, and noted that staff plans to complete the study by the end of September.

D. Giombetti asked for more detail about the station selection process. M. Abbott provided more detail about how staff used population and employment density data to identify stations with the highest and lowest surrounding density levels, and how staff applied criteria to both commuter rail and rapid transit stations.

S. Olanoff remarked that the Morton Street Station was recently rebuilt and asked why it should have poor pedestrian access. J. Cosgrove added that the Morton Street Bridge is scheduled for reconstruction, which will change access to the station. D. Anderson noted that the bridge reconstruction is scheduled for the spring of 2014. He suggested that staff review the current project design. M. Abbott noted that the intent of the study is to examine the areas outside of the stations (within a half-mile for pedestrian access and 2 miles for bicycle access).

S. Olanoff noted that the Morton Street Station is poorly utilized – perhaps due to infrequency of service or fare structures – and questioned whether addressing bicycle and pedestrian access issues there would be meaningful. M. Abbott noted that the City of Boston expressed interest in studying the location. J. Gillooly added that there is significant investment underway along the Fairmount Line and that the city hopes that pedestrian and bicycle improvements would help grow ridership at that station. E. Bourassa noted that the area is densely settled and that the point of the study is to identify why people may not be accessing the station.

D. Crowley raised the issue that the municipalities may experience “sticker shock” when they learn the cost of implementing study recommendations. He expressed concern that the MPO may pay for a study whose recommendations may not be implemented. D. Mohler noted that historically the MPO has had no guarantee that their study recommendations would be implemented by municipalities.

M. Abbott noted that the four municipalities expressed interest in implementing recommendations from the study. He also noted that recommendations would be low-cost and could be implemented piecemeal as municipalities have funding.

J. Gillooly expressed optimism that the study recommendations would be implemented in Boston. The city could implement the recommendations through programs that address bicycle lane stripping, signage, and pedestrian signals.

A motion to authorize staff to study the four proposed transit stations in the Safe Access to Transit for Bicycles and Pedestrians study was made by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent), and seconded by the South Shore Coalition (Town of Braintree) (C. Stickney). The motion carried.

10. Update on FFYs 2013-16 Transportation Improvement Program – Sean Pfalzer, TIP Manager, MPO Staff

S. Pfalzer provided an update on the development of the draft FFYs 2013 –16 TIP. The document will include a new appendix that contains information regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) tracking and monitoring for TIP projects. Members were provided with copies of the draft Appendix C.

MassDOT has been coordinating with MPOs to begin incorporating GHG tracking and monitoring in the TIP project evaluation process so that estimates of the potential for a project to increase or decrease emissions can inform project selection. Two approaches have been taken to estimate these impacts: quantifying emissions reductions or increases, and making assumptions about them.

Projects for which emissions can be quantified include high cost or capacity adding projects that are included in the LRTP. These projects were modeled collectively in 2011 to assess overall emission impacts from the set of LRTP projects; therefore the individual impact of each project has not been quantified. For quantifying the impacts of lower cost projects, staff used MassDOT’s Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) spreadsheets, which allow for estimating the impact of traffic and operational improvements that reduce traffic delays and idling, and bicycle and pedestrian projects that reduce auto trips and vehicle miles traveled. Data is not available to quantify all projects at this time, so staff has made assumptions about the GHG impacts for some projects.

S. Pfalzer provided examples from Table C-1 in Appendix C, which lists TIP projects along with notes on their GHG impact. For projects that have quantifiable impacts the number of tons per year of carbon dioxide reduction are indicated. He also noted that transit programs are listed in Table C-2; this table does not include quantified impacts because specific transit projects have not yet been identified for the programs listed.

Members discussed the topic.

P. Regan expressed concern that the air quality benefits of transit projects have not been quantified. He noted that transit constitutes a very large mode share in the region, much higher than trails which do have quantified impacts. He asked how staff determined the carbon dioxide reduction figure for the trail projects, and whether an assumption was made that all bicycle trips would be replacing auto trips. S. Pfalzer explained that staff used MassDOT’s CMAQ spreadsheets to perform the calculation; the process of making the estimates incorporates Journey to Work census data, employment data, and mode share data. D. Mohler added that an assumption has been made that a certain percentage of bicycle trips would replace auto trips.

P. Regan expressed concern that this tracking system would give disproportionate weight to trail projects in the TIP evaluation process, to the detriment of transit projects.

D. Mohler noted that the difficulty with making the calculations for transit projects at this time has to do with the definition of transit funding categories, which do not enable staff to know specifically what the project features are that will reduce GHG emissions.

D. Mohler also noted that it will be important also to be able to measure the air quality impacts of not implementing specific transit projects and to find a way to determine impacts of individual highway projects that were modeled for the LRTP.

S. Olanoff asked about which elements of roadway reconstruction projects would be considered as having air quality benefits. D. Mohler replied that projects that turn a roadway into a “Complete Street” with bicycle and pedestrian accessibility features could provide nominal air quality improvements. Also projects that include signal improvements could provide benefits.

D. Giombetti asked staff to provide members with some information that would provide a sense of scale when looking at the carbon dioxide reduction figures.

T. Bent suggested that the MBTA capture data on air quality impacts from emergency projects that are implemented, such as replacement bus service for example. J. Cosgrove noted that such an idea has been in the Universe of UPWP projects in the past.

Members then heard comments from the public.

Wig Zamore, Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership and Mystic View Task Force, asked staff to hold workshops on the air quality topic. He suggested using data on BTUs per passenger mile in the analysis, and using a carbon dioxide equivalency analysis. He noted that it will be important to focus on transit and the impacts of lost transit capacity that could result from lack of maintenance of the transit system. He also noted that the MBTA is the largest consumer of energy in Massachusetts and that switching to a greener power source would have a large impact on air quality.

Jenifer Rushlow, Conservation Law Foundation, expressed support for the idea of an MPO hosted workshop on air quality. She also agreed with the comments regarding the need to quantify impacts of transit projects.

11. Update on Draft Amendment to the Long Range Transportation Plan – Anne McGahan, LRTP Manager, MPO Staff

A. McGahan provided a summary of the public comments received to date on the draft Amendment to the LRTP. The public review period began on May 24 and will end on June 22. A summary of the comments received to date was provided to members.

As of noon on June 20, the MPO received comments expressing the following:

· support for the Woburn – New Boston Street Bridge project from an alderman of the City of Woburn

· support for the Green Line Extension to Route 16 project as programmed in the LRTP from Congressman Michael Capuano, State Representative Carl Sciortino, Jr., and Medford and Somerville residents (45 comments)

· support for extending the Green Line to Arlington

· support for the I-93/I-95 Interchange, Bruce Freeman Rail Trail, and Assabet River Rail Trail projects from a Medford resident

· opposition to extending the Green Line beyond College Avenue from a Medford resident

· support for a number of projects from A Better City: reconstruction of Causeway Street; reconstruction of Rutherford Avenue from City Square to Sullivan Square; improvements at Audubon Circle; and improvements on Boylston Street at Brookline Avenue and Park Drive; improvements in the Urban Ring Corridor; Silver Line, Phase 3; design of the Red/Blue Line Connector; and projects that improve transit capacity at the core of the MBTA system

· support for full funding of the Community Path project (6 comments)

The MPO held three public meetings on the amendment: one in Woburn on June 6 and two in Boston on June 12. Attendees at the Woburn meeting included Mayor Scott Galvin, State Representative James Dwyer, four Woburn aldermen, and other members of the public. Attendees expressed support for the Woburn – Montvale Avenue and New Boston Street Bridge projects. An Arlington resident also asked the MPO to fund intersection and arterial improvements instead of multi-use trails.

At the Boston meetings, staff answered questions regarding the programming of dollars for the Green Line Extension project. Somerville residents also voiced their desire to have a different design for the McCarthy Overpass project.

Staff will provide a complete summary of all comments after the close of the public review period.

12. Members Items

J. Gillooly remarked on observations by staff of the Boston Traffic Center that congestion appears to be increasing on city streets on some evenings. Members discussed possible reasons including the possibility that the increase in traffic represents more people back to work and an improving economy.

J. Cosgrove announced that Wonderland Garage will be opening on June 30. D. Mohler remarked on the need for traffic enforcement on the bus lane to the garage.

13. Adjourn

A motion to adjourn was made by the MBTA Advisory Board (P. Regan) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent). The motion carried.

Decisions

Meeting Agenda

Members Representatives and Alternates

City of Boston (Boston Redevelopment Authority) Lara Mérida

City of Boston (Boston Transportation Department) Jim Gillooly

Tom Kadzis

Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) Tom Bent

Massachusetts Department of Transportation David Mohler

MassDOT Highway Division Ned Codd

MBTA Advisory Board Paul Regan

Metropolitan Area Planning Council Eric Bourassa

MetroWest Regional Collaborative Dennis Giombetti

(Town of Framingham)

Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination Richard Reed

North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly) Denise Deschamps

North Suburban Planning Council (City of Woburn) Ed Tarallo

Regional Transportation Advisory Council Steve Olanoff

South Shore Coalition (Town of Braintree) Christine Stickney

MPO Staff/Central Transportation Planning Staff

Karl Quackenbush, Executive Director

Daniel Amstutz

David Fargen

Maureen Kelly

Robin Mannion

Elizabeth Moore

Scott Peterson

Sean Pfalzer