Memorandum for the Record
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Meeting
August 7, 2014 Meeting
10:10 AM – 12:47 PM, State Transportation Building, Conference Rooms 2&3, 10 Park Plaza, Boston
Clinton Bench, Chair, representing Richard Davey, Secretary and Chief Executive Officer, Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization agreed to the following:
• Defer action on a proposed draft amendment to the federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2014-17 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) until the meeting of August 21
• Approve two work programs:
o McGrath Boulevard Area Traffic Analysis: Modeling Support
o Route 3 South Express Toll Lanes – Public-Private Partnership Study: Modeling Support
• Approve the minutes of the meetings of June 19, June 26, and July 10
C. Bench reported that MassDOT has released the FFYs 2015-18 State Transportation Improvement Program for a 30-day public review period that begins on August 7 and ends on September 7. Comments may be emailed to Sreelatha Allam at Allam.Sreelatha@state.ma.us.
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT, spoke about the work of the Project Selection Advisory Council, which was created by the state legislature to recommend a uniform set of project selection criteria and a project prioritization tool. These products must be developed by the end of the calendar year. A public hearing was held last week. MassDOT is preparing an initial set of metrics to present at the council’s meeting on September 16 in Springfield. There is no intention of using the new criteria to replace or contradict existing criteria used by the MPOs. MPO staff are giving input into this process. S. Hamwey encouraged MPO members to provide comments.
Eric Bourassa, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), provided an update on the MPO election process. Four MPO seats are up for election this year: the South West Advisory Planning Committee subregion; the North Shore Task Force subregion; the At-Large City seat currently held by the City of Everett; and the At-Large Town seat currently held by the Town of Lexington. A memorandum was distributed detailing the election process. Nominations must be received by October 3. The election will occur at MAPC’s Fall Council meeting, which will be held on October 29.
Lee Auspitz, Somerville resident, provided an update on an issue he has been raising about the geographical references used in the TIP to describe the terminus of the Green Line Extension project. L. Auspitz contends that the reference to Medford Hillside as the project’s terminus is inconsistent with federal geospatial/mapping standards. L. Auspitz reported that the MBTA has received a Letter of No Prejudice from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) that authorizes federal reimbursement for expenditures incurred on the Green Line Extension project in advance of the signing of a Full-Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA). He noted that when the FFGA is signed, MassDOT and the MBTA will be subject to the provisions of the federal Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Circular No. A-16 retroactively. Unless they have received an exemption, the agencies could be subject to penalty if not in compliance, he said. He recommended that the MPO make an administrative correction to the TIP to insert the correct geographical references. (L. Auspitz provided a copy of a public records request that he submitted to MassDOT and the MBTA asking for any correspondence relating to a federal exemption from these requirements.)
C. Bench stated that MassDOT and the MBTA have conducted further research into this issue. FTA has advised the agencies in writing that the name of Medford Hillside is appropriate for describing the Green Line terminus. He also reported that the process for naming Green Line stations will occur soon.
L. Auspitz then noted that OMB regulations take precedence over the opinions of the federal agencies. He noted that FTA is under federal audit and referenced a report of the Government Accountability Office that addresses the U.S. Department of Transportation’s compliance on such issues.
Sreelatha Allam, MassDOT, reported that the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Committee met this morning to discuss the third quarter spending reports and fourth quarter staff assignments and schedules. The committee also discussed and approved a budget adjustment.
Lourenço Dantas, Massachusetts Port Authority, announced that the Congestion Management Committee is tentatively scheduled to meet on August 21. The agenda items are expected to include an update on the Intersection Improvement Program, the arterial performance dashboard, and the upcoming work program for the Congestion Management Program.
D. Montgomery announced that the Advisory Council will not be meeting in August. The Council’s Election Committee will meet this afternoon. The Council’s next meeting, on September 10, will feature a Community Transportation Panel and an update on the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
There was none.
C. Bench reported that an amendment to the FFYs 2014-17 TIP is necessary in order to make adjustments to the programming of projects that are to receive grants from FTA and to make changes to the programming of some bridge projects. The amendment may also address a cost increase to the Beverly – Reconstruction and Signal Improvements on Rantoul and Cabot Streets project, which has become apparent from the recent submission of the 100% design plans. MassDOT is exploring other funding options for the Beverly project that could limit impacts on the MPO’s target funding. Because MassDOT staff are exploring the other funding options now, C. Bench recommended that the MPO defer this agenda item until the MPO’s next meeting.
M. Scott discussed options for addressing the amendment to allow sufficient time to hold a public review period before the close of the FFY 2014, when projects receiving FFY 2014 funds must be advertised. Members could address the amendment at a special meeting on August 14 or at their regularly scheduled meeting on August 21. The latter option would require the MPO to hold an abbreviated public review period.
Marie Rose, MassDOT, noted that September 20 is the last day that MassDOT may advertise projects – such as the Beverly project – that are to receive FFY 2014 federal aid. However, FHWA’s schedule calls for MassDOT to submit the year’s last projects for FHWA approval for advertisement by September 17. Because of this tight schedule, C. Bench asked the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) representatives to check whether FHWA would accommodate the MPO in this case, so that the MPO may vote on the amendment at its September 18 meeting and submit its final projects afterward.
Members agreed to address the amendment at the meeting of August 21 and vote then to hold an abbreviated public review period.
Two new work programs were presented and members discussed them.
K. Quackenbush reported that the work program for the McGrath Boulevard Area Traffic Analysis: Modeling Support builds off the Grounding McGrath study, which examined the possibility of redesigning Route 28 in Somerville as a boulevard. MassDOT has asked CTPS to provide traffic modeling support for the next phase of this effort. CTPS’s traffic forecasting will inform MassDOT and its study team about the potential traffic consequences of a four- or six-lane boulevard (two or three lanes in each direction), and about the potential impacts on surrounding roadways, particularly Rutherford Avenue. A micro-simulation model will be used also to identify the potential for delays.
The project supervisor, Michael Trepanier, MassDOT, provided additional details. He noted that the Grounding McGrath study resulted in a recommendation to pursue a six lane boulevard design alternative. He noted that the community in Somerville has a strong desire for a design that incorporates a “road diet.” This CTPS study will examine four build scenarios, which were not investigated in the Grounding McGrath study. MassDOT will be continuing its public involvement work and reconstituting its working group after the model results are in.
Richard Canale, At-Large Town of Lexington, asked whether the future build scenarios would include traffic impacts from a potential casino development in Everett. M. Trepanier discussed how MassDOT is beginning to coordinate with surrounding cities and that it recognizes various development projects, including the casino, that may need to be taken into account.
Marilyn Wellons, Regional Transportation Advisory Council, suggested that MassDOT incorporate into its planning the potential traffic impacts from the planned conversion of the Sullivan courthouse in Cambridge into a mixed-use development. She noted that the MEPA filing by the developer included an estimate that the project would generate over 4,600 daily trips. She also noted that an environmental review for the Grounding McGrath project excluded Cambridge intersections, such as Third Street, as beyond the scope of review. M. Trepanier responded that this issue about the courthouse conversion was raised at a recent public meeting. He assured M. Wellons that the study area will be expanded to include intersections – including Third Street – in surrounding neighborhoods and municipalities. Approximately 21 intersections have been identified so far, but work is continuing to define the project limits.
M. Wellons also suggested that Edwin H. Land Boulevard be part of the study area.
C. Bench noted that permitted development projects will be taken into consideration as the design advances. He also asked people to keep in mind that this is a corridor study and is not intended to be a broad citywide transportation study.
E. Bourassa asked when the new McGrath facility is expected to be opened, and he noted that this facility could have implications relating to the Green Line Extension. M. Trepanier replied that the date is not known yet. He explained that the McGrath Highway will be used as diversion/detour route when the Green Line Extension is being built to Washington Station and Union Square. C. Bench added that MassDOT does not intend to implement the McGrath project prior to the construction of the Green Line Extension.
A motion to approve the work program for the McGrath Boulevard Area Traffic Analysis: Modeling Support was made by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (Tom Bent), and seconded by MAPC (E. Bourassa). The motion carried.
K. Quackenbush reported that, through the work program for the Route 3 South Express Toll Lanes – Public-Private Partnership Study: Modeling Support, CTPS will provide travel modeling support to MassDOT in support of a larger study that will examine options to reduce congestion on Route 3 South, from the Braintree Split toward Duxbury. Express tolling is an option that will be considered in MassDOT’s study. CTPS will provide traffic forecasts of alternative toll lane configurations; these alternatives will be determined by the MassDOT study team. MassDOT will also be exploring whether a public-private partnership would be an effective means of implementing tolling on this roadway.
The project supervisor, Diane Madden, MassDOT, added that MassDOT is in a preliminary stage of the study. She noted that the Route 3 project is among the projects that are being evaluated by the Massachusetts Public-Private Partnership Oversight Commission. MassDOT is exploring design concepts, project limits, possible costs, and toll levels to be considered. Under the oversight of the commission, MassDOT will determine if the Route 3 project is viable for private funding.
A motion to approve the work program for the Route 3 South Express Toll Lanes – Public-Private Partnership Study: Modeling Support was made by the City of Boston (Tom Kadzis), and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent).
T. Kadzis inquired about the status of a $1 million project referenced in a previous work program that would have reconfigured Route 3 South at the lane drop to improve the bottleneck there. MassDOT staff offer to look further into this matter.
Dennis Crowley, South West Advisory Planning Committee (Town of Medway), asked for clarification about the geographic limits of the project. D. Madden replied that the project limits are still under discussion.
D. Crowley asked whether the legislators and local officials representing South Shore towns have been informed that tolling is being considered for Route 3. He expressed concern that it could be premature to fund this study without first engaging them, considering that the tolling issue could be controversial. D. Madden replied that MassDOT intends to conduct outreach to those officials and the public as soon as a project design concept is prepared. C. Bench noted that the state legislature required that the Public-Private Partnership Oversight Commission be formed so that there has been discussion of this project.
Rafael Mares, Conservation Law Foundation, asked if CTPS would be modeling induced demand, (i.e. demand resulting from highway capacity improvements that may attract more people to use the roadway or to use the roadway at different times of the day, that may promote sprawling development, and that may result in traffic congestion). K. Quackenbush explained that the travel demand model can capture the aspect of induced demand relating to mode shifts and shifts between the use of particular roadways. The model is not yet capable of reflecting the aspect related to time of travel, though it is possible that MassDOT’s consultant team may have a tool to accommodate that facet of induced demand. CTPS does not yet have the capability to model land use impacts, but it will when its land use and transportation model is completed. That model will be employed in the preparation of the Long-Range Transportation Plan.
R. Canale addressed T. Kadzis’ previous question by noting that there was a CTPS study in June 2011 that addressed two bottleneck locations: the Route 3 northbound ramp merger in Braintree and the southbound lane drop near the Hingham and Weymouth town line.
Christine Stickney, South Shore Coalition (Town of Braintree), raised the issue of the need to address the Braintree Split. She noted that the projects discussed have focused on fixes around that location, but they do not address the major problem.
Members then voted on the motion to approve the work program for the Route 3 South Express Toll Lanes – Public-Private Partnership Study: Modeling Support. The motion carried.
A motion to approve the minutes of the meetings of June 19, June 26, and July 10 – with a correction to the attendance sheet for the June 19 meeting – was made by MAPC (E. Bourassa), and seconded by the Three Rivers Interlocal Council (Town of Norwood/NVCC) (Tom O’Rourke). The motion carried.
K. Quackenbush introduced the discussion of the LRTP. He discussed the importance of the LRTP as the core document that MPO decisions are based upon and its relation to the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). He also discussed improvements to the planning process that will be incorporated in this update to the LRTP.
The MPO will be taking a performance-based planning approach, using new planning tools – a travel demand model that reflects contemporary travel choices, a new land use model, and an economic model – as well as engaging in scenario planning, and conducting a robust public engagement process. The MPO staff will be collaborating with MAPC on the scenario planning and performance measures process.
K. Quackenbush noted that at today’s meeting, staff is asking members to approve the proposed vision statement, goals, and objectives for the LRTP. He also asked members to be aware that agenda item #10 of this meeting deals with the demographics that will be used in the LRTP. Members will be asked to accept MAPC’s demographics as the underpinning of the LRTP.
A. McGahan then gave a PowerPoint presentation on how performance-based planning is being used in the development of the LRTP and detailing the next steps in the development of the LRTP. (A memorandum was distributed.)
First, she provided an update on the performance-based planning process that has been underway since last year. In February, staff presented draft goals and policies. (Goals in this new LRTP correlate with visions in the currently-active LRTP – Paths to a Sustainable Region – and objectives correlate with policies.) Since that time staff has refined the information and developed a revised central vision from that which was included in the previous LRTP, Paths to a Sustainable Region. A. McGahan explained the changes.
The proposed draft revised central vision reads as follows:
“The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization is committed to a transportation system that fosters sustainable cities and towns – where all people can access safe, healthy, efficient, and varied transportation options, and find jobs and services within easy reach of affordable housing. To this end, the MPO invests strategically in projects that maintain existing infrastructure and improve or expand the transportation system, where needed, in an equitable and effective manner. In addition to providing increased mobility and economic opportunities, these endeavors also benefit the environment, allow residents and visitors to enjoy improved air quality, and help transform the MPO’s vision into the region’s reality.”
Next, A. McGahan gave an overview of the proposed goals and objectives, which were distributed in a spreadsheet. There are seven goals focusing on the following topic areas: safety; system preservation; congestion reduction; greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution reduction; transportation options and mode share; transportation equity; and economic vitality and freight. For each topic area, she provided examples of objectives, performance measures, targets, and strategies the MPO could employ to help achieve the goals and objectives.
Staff is asking MPO members to review the draft central vision statement and the goals and objectives so that they may be released for public review in September, along with the MPO’s Public Participation Plan.
As next steps, staff will begin to refine the performance measures, review data that will be used to measure progress, and set reasonable targets. The MPO’s performance measures will be coordinated with MassDOT’s performance measures, and staff will ensure that the MPO’s performance measures are compliant with federal guidance. The performance-based planning process will be ongoing over the coming year and is being incorporated into the MPO’s overall planning process.
R. Canale remarked that there needs to be a balance between the goals. He noted that more emphasis is given to economic development in the vision while less emphasis is put on quality of life and health issues. He suggested including a reference to activities that are not jobs or service related. E. Bourassa then noted that in Paths to a Sustainable Region those types of health and quality of life issues were included under the topic of “livability.” As this topic was further discussed, it was noted that those issues are referenced under other topic areas in the materials distributed today. Staff will check further to make sure that those livability issues are still referenced.
D. Montgomery suggested that the vision make reference to the concept of project implementation.
C. Bench recommended that staff make the text of the vision more succinct and make several goals more aspirational. The goal for mode share, for example, could be strengthened to emphasize that transit, bicycling, and walking modes will be a priority. And the goal for congestion reduction could focus on reducing highway demand, rather than on reducing congestion and delays on all modes. He discussed the ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals set by the Global Warming Solutions Act and expressed concern about setting goals in the LRTP that could inadvertently move the Commonwealth away from meeting GHG reduction goals. He also noted that regulations are forthcoming that will require a MEPA authorization for all TIPs to ensure that GHG reductions are being met.
Laura Wiener, At-Large Town of Arlington, also commented on the congestion reduction goal. She suggested that a reference be made under the objectives to expanding capacity for the transit, bicycling, and walking options where needed. As an example she pointed out that Alewife Station is already at capacity for bicycles and vehicles at peak travel hours.
K. Quackenbush noted that buses are included in the discussion of roadway congestion. C. Bench then raised the idea of providing dedicated lanes for buses.
David Koses, At-Large City of Newton, suggested putting more emphasis on providing access to transit for seniors and people with disabilities under the system preservation goal. He suggested rewording one of the objectives to read, “improve transit access and reliability for all customers…” Or, the goal could be reworded to read, “the existing transportation system will be improved and well maintained.”
D. Koses also suggested that the economic vitality/freight goal could be divided into two separate goals. A. McGahan noted that the combined goal was suggested in MAP-21 guidance, but that the MPO could revise it.
Micha Gensler, MBTA Advisory Board, noted that the MBTA is updating its service delivery policy, which includes data on vehicle loads. He suggested that the data could be used for the performance measures for congestion reduction. He also remarked upon the MBTA’s existing capacity constraints.
Mike Gowing, Town of Acton, asked if the MPO’s vision statement is aligned with MAPC’s vision statement. E. Bourassa stated that they do align and that the MPO staff looked at the goals of MAPC’s MetroFuture plan when preparing the goals for the LRTP.
M. Wellons expressed support for R. Canale’s comments regarding incorporating the idea of quality of life into the vision statement. She also stated that noise and light pollution are known health hazards that are inadequately addressed at both the federal and state level. She expressed support for bicycle paths and expressed concern about the inadequate consideration that is given to bicycle path connectivity.
Mary Ann Murray, Regional Transportation Advisory Committee and Access Advisory Committee to the MBTA, discussed the need for improving access for people who use wheelchairs, particularly since the population is aging. She pointed out that bicycle paths often have barriers at entrances that prevent access by wheelchair users and that some paths are too narrow for wheelchairs. D. Koses agreed and suggested that a statement about access could be included under the transportation equity goal. Lourenço Dantas, Massachusetts Port Authority, added that the term “pedestrian” could be broadened to be more inclusive.
A. McGahan continued the presentation, discussing how the LRTP fits into the on-going performance-based planning process.
After the MPO reviews the vision, goals, and objectives, these will be released for public review in September. Staff is currently working on the Needs Assessment for the LRTP, which will be completed by the end of September. The Needs Assessment will provide the baseline of information that will be used for tracking progress toward the goals. This Needs Assessment will be a web-based document.
Scenario planning will be conducted in the fall and early winter. Different packages of transportation projects and programs will be analyzed using the travel demand model, the land use model (Cubeland), and the economic development model (TREDIS). The results will be made available for the public to provide input. The memorandum that was distributed lists examples of possible scenarios. They could include a focus on state of good repair, transit, or greenhouse gas reduction, for example.
The memorandum also includes the schedule of steps that will culminate in the adopted LRTP in June 2015.
T. Kadzis cautioned about deviating too much from Paths to a Sustainable Region, given the resources at hand and the need for continuity in planning. He noted that there needs to be utility to the past plan, though it should be updated to reflect federal and state objectives.
A. McGahan stated that because the Canton Interchange project will be funded with state monies, the MPO has new funding opportunity in the new LRTP.
T. Reardon presented information about a set of employment projections, which will be part of the demographic projections that will be used in the LRTP and will serve as data inputs to the land use and transportation model that CTPS and MAPC are developing. (Population and housing demand projections were presented to the MPO earlier in the year.)
He discussed that labor force availability will be a constraint to job growth in Massachusetts over the next three decades if current trends continue. With Baby Boomers making up nearly half of the labor force now, the “Current Trends” projections show that by 2030, two out of every five workers will be retiring from the labor force. The projected population of younger workers will be insufficient to fill those vacancies.
In contrast to the “Current Trends” scenario, a “Stronger Region/State” scenario assumes that the state will be able to attract workers at a higher rate, so that there will be a positive in-migration of workers. While the labor force is forecast to decline in many parts of the state, the Metro Boston region is projected to out-perform the rest of the state in job growth, and is projected to gain 184,000 jobs between 2010 and 2040. Since the most recent recession, two-thirds of the economic recovery has been in the Urban Core and Regional Urban Centers.
T. Reardon further discussed that in a future economy constrained by labor force availability, the proximity of workers will be an increasingly important consideration for employers looking to locate in the region. Maps were shown depicting the current distribution of the labor force and drive access to medium- and high- income households, as an example of an accessibility metric.
For LRTP planning, the new integrated land use and transportation model that CTPS and MAPC are developing will be used to understand how transportation investments can improve accessibility to certain parts of the region and make those areas more attractive to households and employers. An input to the model will be the data from MAPC’s development database, which is an inventory of planned residential and commercial developments in the region.
The scenarios for the LRTP will allow for consideration of how congestion and accessibility affects employers’ and householder’s decisions about where to locate, and will project future land uses and travel demand. They could also inform discussions about where land use regulations may facilitate or constrain growth, how zoning could be changed to accommodate housing demand, and how current parking policies may be limiting housing development.
The next steps for MAPC are to elicit input to the development database from municipalities in the region and neighboring regional planning agencies, refine land use constraints associated with current zoning (where forecasted land use is at odds with currently permitted land uses), and develop land use-based indicators to complement CTPS’s transportation-based indicators.
C. Bench asked whether the data presented could be used for Title VI analyses to help determine why low income and minority neighborhoods may not have good access to jobs. Scott Peterson, Director of Technical Services at CTPS, replied that the accessibility metric presented is the same that is used in CTPS’s environmental justice analyses. T. Reardon added that the model will have the capability to give results about accessibility to specific job sectors and detailed accessibility information, such as distance, journey time, and travel costs.
T. Kadzis asked whether the projections of labor shortages take into account that, since the recession, the economy seems to have shed about 20 percent of the workforce. T. Reardon replied that, during the recession, people who dropped out of the work force were not counted in unemployment figures. MAPC’s projections, however, account for a return to a normal labor rate (an unemployment rate of 6.1%). This issue could be revisited in the future, he said.
There were none.
A motion to adjourn was made by the MAPC (E. Bourassa) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (T. Bent). The motion carried.
|
Members |
Representatives
and
Alternates |
|
At-Large City (City of Everett) |
Tony Sousa |
|
At-Large City (City of Newton) |
David Koses |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) |
Laura Wiener |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Lexington) |
Richard Canale |
|
City of Boston (Boston Redevelopment
Authority) |
Patrick Hoey |
|
City of Boston (Boston Transportation
Department) |
Tom Kadzis |
|
Federal Highway Administration |
Leah Sirmin |
|
Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) |
Tom Bent |
|
Massachusetts Department of Transportation |
Clinton Bench Sreelatha Allam |
|
MassDOT Highway Division |
Marie Rose |
|
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
(MBTA) |
Ron Morgan |
|
Massachusetts Port Authority |
Lourenço Dantas |
|
MBTA Advisory Board |
Micha Gensler |
|
Metropolitan Area Planning Council |
Eric Bourassa |
|
Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal
Coordination (Town of Bedford) |
Roy Sorenson |
|
North Suburban Planning Council (City of
Woburn) |
Tina Cassidy |
|
Regional Transportation Advisory Council |
David Montgomery |
|
South Shore Coalition (Town of Braintree) |
Christine Stickney |
|
South West Advisory Planning Committee
(Town of Medway) |
Dennis Crowley |
|
Three Rivers Interlocal Council (Town of
Norwood/NVCC) |
Tom O’Rourke |
|
Other
Attendees |
Affiliation |
|
Karen Adelman |
Metropolitan Area Planning Council |
|
Lynn Ahlgren |
MetroWest Regional Transit Authority |
|
Lee Auspitz |
Somerville resident |
|
Sarah Bradbury |
MassDOT District 3 |
|
James Freas |
City of Newton |
|
Mike Gowing |
Town of Acton |
|
Scott Hamwey |
MassDOT |
|
Diane Madden |
MassDOT |
|
Eric Halvorsen |
Metropolitan Area Planning Council |
|
Rafael Mares |
Conservation Law Foundation |
|
Barry McNaughton |
McMahon Associates |
|
Mary Ann Murray |
Access Advisory Committee to the MBTA and Regional Transportation
Advisory Council |
|
Steve Olanoff |
Three Rivers Interlocal Council |
|
Joe Onorato |
MassDOT District 4 |
|
Barry Steinberg |
Association for Public Transportation |
|
Michael Trepanier |
MassDOT Environmental |
|
Felicia Webb |
Cape Ann Transportation Authority |
|
Marilyn Wellons |
Regional Transportation Advisory Council |
|
Brandon Wilcox |
Federal Highway Administration |
|
MPO
Staff/Central Transportation Planning Staff |
|
Karl Quackenbush, Executive Director |
|
Robin Mannion, Deputy Executive Director |
|
Elizabeth Irvin |
|
Bruce Kaplan |
|
Maureen Kelly |
|
Robin Mannion |
|
Anne McGahan |
|
Elizabeth Moore |
|
Scott Peterson |
|
Michelle Scott |
|
Alicia Wilson |
|
Pam Wolfe |