Memorandum
Date October 15, 2015
TO Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
FROM Karl H. Quackenbush
CTPS Executive Director
RE Work Program for: Priority Corridors for LRTP Needs Assessment: FFY 2016
Review and approval
That the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization vote to approve the work program for Priority Corridors for LRTP Needs Assessment: FFY 2016, presented in this memorandum
Planning Studies
13271
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
Principal: Mark Abbott
Manager: Seth Asante
MPO Planning Contract #89787
MPO §5303 Contract #84080 and subsequent MPO §5303 Contract
This is MPO work and will be carried out in conformance with the priorities established by the MPO.
The Boston Region MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), Charting Progress to 2040, identifies existing needs for all modes of transportation in the MPO region.1 These needs guide decisions about which projects to include in future Transportation Improvement Plans (TIPs).2 Among the region’s current mobility needs are maintaining and modernizing the roadways that have high congestion levels and safety problems; improving the quantity and quality of venues for walking and bicycling; improving adherence to schedules of transit service; and advancing the efficiency, and modernization of transit service.
For roadways, the LRTP identified several priority arterial segments that need maintenance, modernization, and safety and mobility improvements. These arterial segments were identified based on previous and ongoing transportation-planning work, including the MPO’s Congestion Management Process (CMP), the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s (MBTA) Program for Mass Transportation (PMT), and MPO planning studies. To help identify solutions to address the mobility and safety concerns in some of the identified arterial segments, a roadway corridor study was included in the federal fiscal year (FFY) 2016 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP).3 In FFYs 2012 through 2015, MPO staff studied Route 203 in Boston, Route 114 in Danvers, Route 2 in Concord, Route 30 in Framingham, Route 140 in Franklin, and Route 1A/Lynnway in Lynn; several of the recommendations from those studies are already are being considered.
Studying a roadway corridor or corridor segment is a logical way to address regional multimodal transportation needs, as it allows the corridor to be evaluated comprehensively: pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and public-transportation users use a holistic approach to analyzing the issues and recommending improvements. The result is an improved roadway corridor, where it is safe to cross the street, walk or cycle to shops or schools, or for recreation; where buses run on time; and where it is safe for people to walk to and from train stations. Typically, a roadway corridor or corridor segment study is multimodal and addresses issues, analyzes services, makes short- and long-term recommendations for areas within the roadway’s right-of-way, and takes into account the needs of abutters.
In this document, an arterial segment is defined broadly as either a portion of a roadway corridor that spans multiple towns, or a segment that includes just a few intersections in a town or shopping center. For an arterial segment that spans multiple towns or an entire town, the problem locations usually are in subsegments of the arterial segment. The arterial segments that will be considered for study are identified in the current LRTP.
The objectives of this study are to:
MPO staff will perform the following tasks:
In addition to municipal officials and members of the MPO subregional groups whose jurisdictions include areas in which the arterial segments are located, MPO staff will invite representatives from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Office of Transportation Planning, the MassDOT Highway Division, and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) to participate in the study, in order to give MPO staff advice about the areas being studied and input on the data to be used; to help identify transportation-related problems; and to help develop multimodal transportation solutions and recommendations. The recommendations from this study will be fulfilled by the municipalities or the Highway Division; therefore, it is important that the recommendations reflect those entities’ experience and design standards.
Notes on stakeholder input on data, selection of study locations, and input on possible study products
First, MPO staff will rank the arterial segments using available CMP data, such as traffic volumes, crashes, speeds, bus crowding and/or schedule adherence, traffic signal coordination, and pedestrian and bicycle needs. The arterial segments selected for study will be segments that could benefit from improvements related to sidewalks and crosswalks, access management, traffic control and operations (including traffic signal upgrades and coordination), and changes in land use. In addition, the selected segments would need to have the support and interest of the communities through which they pass, and the communities would need to be committed to implementing the recommendations of the study. The selection criteria for potential locations are:
Then, based on the rankings of the arterial segments and the support of the stakeholders for implementing the study’s recommendations, MPO staff will select as many as two arterial segments for this study—only one if the roadway is particularly long or challenging to study. Both the list of segments from the LRTP and the staff recommendations of which a segment or segments to study will be presented to the MPO for discussion. For the arterial segments selected for this study, MPO staff, working in conjunction with transportation agency and municipal officials, will identify the problem locations (subsegments) within each arterial segment that this study should focus on for developing multimodal transportation improvements.
To this end, staff will identify the safety and mobility problems facing pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit users, as well as transit service deficiencies, connectivity problems, and linkage problems. Staff also will identify truck traffic issues, such as crash locations with unusually high truck involvement, possible turning-radius issues at intersections along the corridor, heavy truck volumes adding to congestion along the corridor, and points where trucks conflict with cars, pedestrians, or bicyclists. In addition, MPO staff will review the Highway Division’s and MPO’s TIP project information databases and contact municipalities to identify projects and studies that have already been planned or conducted for each arterial segment selected for study. This information will guide the selection of problem locations on which the study should focus.
A technical memorandum that will include documentation of:
Once the problem locations have been identified, recent and historical data will be gathered from existing sources, including studies performed by municipalities or by proponents of private development projects, and databases maintained by the MPO and the Highway Division, as well as by MPO staff. Unavoidably, some data will need to be collected in the field for the type of analysis anticipated for these studies. The following data likely will be gathered for the selected study segments:
Based on analyses performed in similar past studies and the need to provide “complete streets”—where pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities can move along and across a street safely—staff anticipate performing the following tasks:
Crash analysis tables, intersection crash diagrams, delay and queue calculations, tables of bus performance statistics, and maps and other graphics showing pedestrians’ and bicyclists’ needs
Based on the results of consultations with agency and municipal officials and the analyses described above, staff will recommend geometric, traffic control, pavement rehabilitation, roadway enhancement, and other changes to improve traffic operations, with an emphasis on the effective, safe accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists. Additional recommendations will include improvements to allow buses to run on time, and to make it safe for people to walk to and from bus stops and train stations.
Recommendations for addressing pedestrian, bicyclist, and motorist safety; accommodation of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users; other traffic operations issues, including trucks; and bus-service issues
Documentation will be in the form of a report or a technical memorandum on the following subjects: background of the study, agency and municipal input, identification of problems, data collection, analyses, and recommendations. The document will follow the MassDOT Highway Division’s guidelines for preparation of functional design reports as much as possible, taking into consideration the study’s budget. The document will be available for review by municipal officials, members of the MPO’s subregional groups for the areas in which the arterial segments are located, and MassDOT’s Highway Division and Office of Transportation Planning. After their comments have been addressed, the final document will be presented to the MPO.
A final report or memorandum documenting all of the project’s tasks and products, including recommendations
Staff estimate that this project will be completed 12 months after work commences. The proposed schedule, by task, is shown in Exhibit 1.
The total cost of this project is estimated to be $110,000. This includes the cost of 38.4 person-weeks of staff time, overhead at the rate of 98.88 percent, and travel. A detailed breakdown of estimated costs is presented in Exhibit 2.
KQ/SA/sa
1 Charting Progress to 2040, the Long-Range Transportation Plan of the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization, July 30, 2015.
2 Transportation Improvement Program and Air Quality Conformity Determination, Federal Fiscal Years 2016–20, endorsed by the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization on July 30, 2015.
3 Federal Fiscal Year 2016 Unified Planning Work Program, Endorsed by the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization on July 30, 2015.
Task |
Month | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | |
1.
Solicit Input from Agencies and Municipalities |
From month 1 to 2.
Deliverable A, Notes on stakeholder input delivered by Month 2
| |||||||||||
2.
Select Study Locations |
From month 1 to 2.5.
Deliverable B, Technical memorandum delivered by Month 2.5
| |||||||||||
3.
Collect and Gather Data |
From month 2.5 to 7.1.
Deliverable C, List and files of data and information collected delivered by Month 7.1
| |||||||||||
4.
Analyze Data |
From month 2.5 to 8.6.
Deliverable D, Documentation of analysis delivered by Month 8.6
| |||||||||||
5.
Recommend Improvements |
From month 6.1 to 11.1.
Deliverable E, Study recommendations delivered by Month 11.1
| |||||||||||
6.
Document Results |
From month 1.1 to 13.
Deliverable F, Final report or memorandum delivered by Month 13
|
Task |
Person-Weeks | Direct Salary |
Overhead (98.88%) |
Total Cost |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M-1 | P-5 | P-4 | P-2 | Temp | Total | ||||
1.
Solicit Input from Agencies and Municipalities
|
0.2 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 2.8 | $4,162 | $4,115 | $8,277 |
2.
Select Study Locations
|
1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.5 | 0.0 | 4.5 | $5,992 | $5,925 | $11,918 |
3.
Collect and Gather Data
|
0.1 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 7.6 | $7,463 | $7,379 | $14,842 |
4.
Analyze Data
|
0.5 | 3.5 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 8.0 | $11,866 | $11,733 | $23,600 |
5.
Recommend Improvements
|
0.5 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 8.0 | $12,289 | $12,152 | $24,441 |
6.
Document Results
|
3.0 | 4.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 7.5 | $13,362 | $13,212 | $26,573 |
Total
|
5.3 | 15.5 | 5.5 | 9.1 | 3.0 | 38.4 | $55,134 | $54,517 | $109,651 |