MPO Meeting Minutes
Memorandum for the Record
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Meeting
November 5, 2020, Meeting
10:00 AM–11:27 AM, Zoom Video Conferencing Platform
David Mohler and Steve Woelfel, Chairs, representing Stephanie Pollack, Secretary, and Chief Executive Officer, Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) agreed to the following:
See attendance beginning page 8.
S. Woelfel stated that MassDOT’s annual Moving Together Conference would be held virtually November 17–19, 2020.
T. Teich announced that the Boston Region MPO has become a member of the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO), a national membership organization that supports MPOs.
T. Teich provided an overview of the ongoing process to create a five-year strategic plan for the Central Transportation Planning Staff. T. Teich stated that the Strategic Planning Steering Committee will be participating in a retreat focusing on vision, mission, and goals for the agency.
T. Teich provided an overview of recent outreach conducted by MPO staff. The MPO staff hosted two TIP How-To sessions and presented at the Southern New England American Planning Association conference. T. Teich stated that in November staff will attend subregional meetings hosted by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) to speak about opportunities with the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). The next meeting of the MPO’s Transit Working Group will be on Thursday, November 12th at 2:30 PM. Staff will also host a virtual information session for the MPO’s Community Connections grant program on Monday, November 16th at 4:00 PM. T. Teich added that the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) is holding a series of public meetings for the Forging Ahead initiative throughout November and December. Detailed information about these meetings can be found at https://www.mbta.com/forging-ahead.
T. Teich noted tentative agenda items for the next MPO meeting: a UPWP Committee meeting, one MPO-funded work scope for approval, the presentation of the MPO-funded study on trip-generation rates, and the FFYs 2022–26 TIP Universe of Projects.
1. DIDB Policy Comment Letter CLF
Johannnes Epke (Conservation Law Foundation) stated that CLF is concerned about the lack of the use of negative values in the DI/DB Policy. J. Epke stated that CLF appreciates the opportunity to have a voice in the process but believes the scope of the policy is constrained and does not address existing disparities. J. Epke stated that consideration of negative values would help to lessen existing disparities over time and he strongly urged the board to consider incorporating them.
There were none
L Diggins stated that Mike Bolduc and Carrie Lavallee from MassDOT spoke at the last Advisory Council meeting about project costs and how MassDOT projects are evaluated.
Eric Bourassa (MAPC) stated that all seats in this year’s MPO elections were uncontested. Members holding the At-Large City (City of Everett), South West Advisory Planning Committee (Town of Medway), North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly) seats were reelected. The At-Large Town (Town of Lexington) did not run. The Town of Brookline was elected to the At-Large Town seat.
E. Bourassa stated that he, Brian Kane (MBTA Advisory Board), and the MPO staff will be working on a survey about municipal engagement in the MPO elections process in order to address concerns the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) highlighted in the MPO’s last Certification Review.
Daniel Amstutz (At-Large Town) (Town of Arlington) asked whether other communities expressed interest but decided not to run. E. Bourassa stated that the Town of Wakefield expressed interest but did not submit the correct materials. He added that they will work with the Town next year if the Town is still interested in running. A couple of other communities expressed interest but did not follow up.
Ken Miller (FHWA) asked how many communities voted. E. Bourassa replied that 15 municipalities voted electronically.
1. MPO Meeting Minutes September 17, 2020
A motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of September 17, 2020, was made by MAPC (E. Bourassa) and seconded by the MBTA Advisory Board (B. Kane). The At-Large Town (Town of Brookline) (Todd Kirrane) abstained. The motion carried.
MPO staff are providing support to MassDOT’s Cape Rail Study, which considers options for full-time commuter rail service to Cape Cod. The work scope is funded by MassDOT with a budget of $65,488 and is planned to last eight months. The objectives of the work scope are to support as many as three stakeholder meetings, model and analyze as many as two alternative scenarios, and provide data support and analysis to MassDOT and its consultants and partners.
Laura Gilmore (Massachusetts Port Authority) asked how MPO staff plan to work with the Cape Cod Commission, which is coordinating the public process for this work. Ben Muller (MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning) stated that the Cape Cod Commission is undertaking the public process for this study through work funded in the Cape Cod MPO’s UPWP budget and will be staffing the advisory board for the public meetings. It is through this board that build alternatives will be decided. Membership of that board includes representatives of the Towns of Wareham and Middleboro, which are in the Southeastern Massachusetts MPO. The representatives of those communities also sit on the board of the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District, which is the MPO for southeastern Massachusetts. The project will involve coordination between MPOs.
A motion to approve the work scope for the Cape Rail Study was made by the MBTA Advisory Board (B. Kane) and seconded by the At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) (D. Amstutz). The motion carried.
The budget for the MPO-funded Federal Fiscal Year 2021 UPWP Study Informing the Big Ideas Behind the MPO’s Scenario Planning Process has a budget of $20,695 and the length of the study is eight months.
The objectives of this study are to identify diverse perspectives on key regional transportation challenges, review and incorporate public outreach data on regional transportation issues collected by other originators, and identify potential strategies to address these key challenges to incorporate into scenario planning.
The Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is the MPO’s main vehicle for addressing long-term and regional transportation questions. This study will help develop the questions the LRTP scenario planning process will explore to prepare for the completion of the next LRTP in 2023.
E. Bourassa (MAPC) asked if MPO staff will coordinate with MassDOT, the MBTA, and municipalities as part of scenario development. K. White stated that MPO staff frequently coordinate with MassDOT and the MBTA, and staff will also be taking lessons from MAPC’s MetroCommon scenario planning process.
A motion to approve the work program for Informing the Big Ideas Behind the MPO’s Scenario Planning Process was made by MAPC (E. Bourassa) and seconded by the At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) (D. Amstutz). The motion carried.
B. Muller stated that MassDOT has submitted a proposed revision to the four-year non-single occupancy vehicle (non-SOV) travel target for the Boston Urbanized Area. The revised target was presented and discussed at an MPO meeting in September. The target was developed using American Community Survey (ACS) data, which considers commute trips and includes telecommuting as a mode of travel. The target data is expressed as a five-year rolling average. New ACS data shows that the proportion of non-SOV travel has increased faster than MassDOT initially projected. The revised target is 35.8 percent non-SOV trips for 2021, an increase from 35.1 percent.
K. Miller (FHWA) stated that the performance measure itself should be for all travel, not just commute trips. B. Muller stated that MassDOT does not have reliable data for all travel but is working on improving bicycle and pedestrian trip modeling. K. Miller stated that occupancy information from the model could be used to develop the relationships between work-travel and non-work travel.
A motion to approve the revised target for the percent on non-single occupancy vehicle travel in the Boston Urbanized Area was made by MAPC (E. Bourassa) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (Tom Bent). The motion carried.
1. Disparate Impact Metrics Analysis Study Memo
2. DI/DB
Policy
3. DI/DB Threshold Tool
Federal
regulations require that the MPO identify and address impacts of its
transportation investments that would disproportionately affect people because
of their race, color, or national origin. In addition, the environmental
justice (EJ) executive order requires that the MPO identify and address
disproportionately high and adverse effects of its investments on people with
low incomes and minority populations. The final draft DI/DB Policy for the LRTP
addresses both requirements by setting a series of three thresholds that must
be passed in order for an impact to be identified as a possible DI/DB in the
LRTP. The thresholds demonstrate that (1) the impact is caused by
LRTP projects in the aggregate, (2) the impact is significant enough to
affect peoples’ quality of life, and (3) the impact would disproportionately
affect the minority or low-income population more than the non-minority
or non-low-income population. The thresholds in the final proposed DI/DB policy
are as follows:
1. Baseline Uncertainty Threshold: Moderate
uncertainty, reflecting what can be expected from the model and the metrics
analyzed.
2. Practical impact threshold: 0
percent.
3. Disproportionality threshold: 0
percent, not allowing any difference between low-income and non-low income
populations or minority and non-minority populations.
The recommended policy was shaped by a stakeholder working group and additional analysis by MPO staff. The Disparate Impact Metrics study explored how to measure when an impact is significant enough to affect peoples’ quality of life, in order to help set the “Practical Impact” threshold. MPO staff did not find a compelling reason to set the value for this threshold above zero. MPO staff presented the policy to stakeholders in August for their final input before asking for endorsement. MPO staff created the DI/DB thresholds tool to help users visualize the role of each threshold.
If the DI/DB analysis results in a finding of a disparate impact for at least one metric, staff will determine whether there is a substantial, legitimate justification for implementing the program of projects as proposed and present the conclusion to the MPO board. Staff will also determine whether there are one or more alternatives that meet the same goals but that have fewer disparate impacts. If there are, staff will present the alternatives to the MPO board. Any proposed alternative(s) will be subject to the same DI/DB Policy and analysis. Similarly, if the analysis indicates that there would be a disproportionate burden for at least one metric, the MPO staff will recommend to the MPO board steps to take to avoid, minimize, or mitigate these impacts, where practicable. If there are no disparate impacts or disproportionate burdens, the MPO need not take any action.
As
written in federal regulations, the DI/DB analysis has a very narrow scope. It
requires the MPO to look only at the disproportionately high and adverse
effects of future
investments and does not refer to redressing existing inequities. It is meant
to be a final check on the project design and selection process. The project
selection process is where the MPO has the most influence in redressing existing
transportation inequities. The TIP criteria updates that the board approved in
October were also designed to address this.
Note: At this time, D. Mohler assumed the Chair’s
seat.
Steve Olanoff (Three Rivers Interlocal Council) (Town of Norwood/Neponset River Regional Chamber) asked B. Harvey to address a comment made by CLF. B. Harvey stated that a negative threshold would essentially require that minority populations receive either significantly more of a benefit than the non-minority population, or reduce burdens on them significantly. S. Olanoff asked how the negative value would be chosen. B. Harvey replied that the values are on a continuum, depending on how large the benefit is. S. Olanoff noted that when the threshold is set at zero, the MPO essentially maintains that any difference between what the minority population and the non-minority population would receive is a matter to look at. B. Harvey agreed and noted that, taking into account uncertainty in the model, any difference would identify a potential disparate impact or disproportionate burden.
L. Diggins asked what the values are for low, moderate, and high uncertainty. B. Harvey stated that the value for low uncertainty was about 10 percent, high was about 90 percent, and moderate was about 50 percent. L. Diggins noted that the moderate uncertainty seemed fairly high and recommended that the board have the ability to look at the uncertainty levels when an analysis is done.
A motion to approve the DI/DB Policy was made by the Advisory Council (L. Diggins) and seconded by the City of Boston (Boston Transportation Department) (Tom Kadzis). The motion carried.
There were none.
A motion to adjourn was made by the MBTA Advisory Board (B. Kane) and seconded by the North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly) (Darlene Wynne). The motion carried.
|
Members |
Representatives
and
Alternates |
|
At-Large City (City of Everett) |
Jay Monty |
|
At-Large City (City of Newton) |
David Koses |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) |
Daniel
Amstutz |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Brookline) |
Todd
Kirrane Heather Hamilton
|
|
City of Boston (Boston Planning &
Development Agency) |
Jim
Fitzgerald |
|
City of Boston (Boston Transportation
Department) |
Tom Kadzis |
|
Federal Highway Administration |
Ken Miller |
|
Federal Transit Administration |
|
|
Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) |
Tom Bent |
|
Massachusetts Department of Transportation |
David
Mohler Steve
Woelfel |
|
MassDOT Highway Division |
John Bechard John Romano |
|
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
(MBTA) |
Samantha
Silverberg |
|
Massachusetts Port Authority |
Laura
Gilmore |
|
MBTA Advisory Board |
Brian Kane |
|
Metropolitan Area Planning Council |
Eric
Bourassa |
|
MetroWest Regional Collaborative (City of Framingham) |
Erika
Oliver-Jerram |
|
Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal
Coordination (Town of Acton) |
|
|
North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly) |
Darlene
Wynne |
|
North Suburban Planning Council (City of
Woburn) |
|
|
Regional Transportation Advisory Council |
Lenard
Diggins |
|
South Shore Coalition (Town of Rockland) |
Jennifer
Constable |
|
South West Advisory Planning Committee
(Town of Medway) |
|
|
Three Rivers Interlocal Council (Town of
Norwood/Neponset River Regional Chamber) |
Steve
Olanoff |
|
Other Attendees |
Affiliation |
|
David Alschuler |
Town of Hingham |
|
Colette Aufranc |
Town of Wellesley |
|
Joe Blankenship |
City of Boston |
|
Sarah Bradbury |
MassDOT Highway Division District 3 |
|
Paula Doucette |
|
|
Johannnes Epke |
Conservation Law Foundation |
|
Joy Glynn |
MetroWest Regional Transit Authority |
|
John Gonzalez |
DHK Architects |
|
Michelle Ho |
MassDOT |
|
Kristina Johnson |
Town of Hudson |
|
Sarah Philbrick |
MAPC |
|
Ben Muller |
MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning |
|
Eric Papetti |
Federal Transit Administration |
|
Constance Raphael |
MassDOT Highway Division 4 |
|
Jeanette Rebecchi |
Bedford |
|
Cheryll-Ann Senior |
MassDOT |
|
Angela Servello |
MBTA |
|
Margot Schoenfelder |
VHB |
|
Elizabeth Torres |
MassDOT |
|
Frank Tramontozzi |
City of Quincy |
|
Scott Zadakis |
Regional Transportation Advisory Council |
|
Sheila Page |
Town of Lexington |
|
MPO
Staff/Central Transportation Planning Staff |
|
Tegin Teich, Executive Director |
|
Matt Archer |
|
Jonathan Church |
|
Annette Demchur |
|
Ben Dowling |
|
Sabiheh Faghih |
|
Róisín Foley |
|
Matt Genova |
|
Betsy Harvey |
|
Sandy Johnston |
|
Drashti Joshi |
|
Anne McGahan |
|
Marty Milkovits |
|
Ariel Patterson |
|
Barbara Rutman |
|
Michelle Scott |
|
Kate White |
|
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) operates its programs, services, and activities in
compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws including Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the Civil Rights Restoration Act of
1987, and related statutes and regulations. Title VI prohibits discrimination
in federally assisted programs and requires that no person in the United States
of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin
(including limited English proficiency), be excluded from participation in,
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity that receives federal assistance. Related federal
nondiscrimination laws administered by the Federal Highway Administration,
Federal Transit Administration, or both, prohibit discrimination on the basis
of age, sex, and disability. The Boston Region MPO considers these protected
populations in its Title VI Programs, consistent with federal interpretation
and administration. In addition, the Boston Region MPO provides meaningful
access to its programs, services, and activities to individuals with limited
English proficiency, in compliance with U.S. Department of Transportation
policy and guidance on federal Executive Order 13166. The Boston Region MPO also complies with the
Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law, M.G.L. c 272 sections 92a, 98, 98a,
which prohibits making any distinction, discrimination, or restriction in
admission to, or treatment in a place of public accommodation based on race,
color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability,
or ancestry. Likewise, the Boston Region MPO complies with the Governor's
Executive Order 526, section 4, which requires that all programs, activities,
and services provided, performed, licensed, chartered, funded, regulated, or
contracted for by the state shall be conducted without unlawful discrimination
based on race, color, age, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender
identity or expression, religion, creed, ancestry, national origin,
disability, veteran's status (including Vietnam-era veterans), or background. A complaint form and additional information can be
obtained by contacting the MPO or at http://www.bostonmpo.org/mpo_non_discrimination. To request this
information in a different language or in an accessible format, please contact Title VI Specialist |