2021 Capital Investment Program Appendix A
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
V. 1. West Corridor Bus Service Study
West Bus Service Study Corridor ©Produced for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority by the Central Transportation Planning Staff. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/westcorridorbuss01metr West Corridor Bus Service Study WESTBus Authors Geoff Slater - Project Manager Erik Holst-Roness Contributing Analysts Karl H. Quackenbush Webb Sussman Graphics David B. Lewis Mary Kean Caroline Ryan The preparation of this document was supported by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation through technical study grant MA-90-0030, and by state and local matching funds. Central Transportation Planning Staff Directed by the Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which comprises: Executive Office of Transportation and Construction, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Advisory Board Massachusetts Department of Public Works Massachusetts Port Authority Metropolitan Area Planning Council April 1990 Abstract This report summarizes the results of a detailed examination of eleven bus routes that operate primarily in Newton, Waltham, and Watertown, including express service to and from downtown Boston. The study had four major objectives: (1) to ensure that service was as responsive to user needs as possible, (2) to identify changes that could attract new ridership, (3) to determine whether MBTA resources were being used as effectively as possible, and (4) to identify ridership and performance characteristics of each route. For each route, the report includes a description of the route, an assessment of the existing service, identification and evaluation of service alternatives, and conclusions and recommendations. Included in the recommendations are changes with respect to route alignments, service levels, schedules, and reliability, and other changes within the corridor that would affect ridership. -
Draft TIP Transit Programming MBTA Project
MBTA Federal Capital Program ‐ FTA Formula Funds FFY 2018‐2023 TIP Project Descriptions ‐ Provided for Informational Purposes For Presentation to the Boston MPO on 3/22/2018 TIP Project Name Project Description 5307 ‐ Revenue Vehicle Program Commuter Rail Locomotive Reliability This program will restore coaches and locomotives, beyond their useful life, to a state of Program good repair to support service and winter resilliency efforts Procurement of 60‐foot Dual Mode Articulated (DMA) buses to replace the existing fleet of DMA Bus Replacement 32 Silver Line Bus Rapid Transit buses and to provide for ridership expansion projected as a result of Silver Line service extension to Chelsea. Green Line Light Rail Fleet Replacement ‐ Development of technical specifications for the procurement of light rail vehicles to replace Design the existing fleet that is approaching the end of its service life. Overhaul of locomotives in operation on commuter rail lines systemwide in order to improve Locomotive Overhaul reliability. Replacement of major systems and refurbishment of seating and other customer facing MBTA Catamaran Overhaul components on two catamarans (Lightning and Flying Cloud). Midlife Overhaul of 25 New Flyer Allison Overhaul of 25 hybrid buses, brought into service in 2009 and 2010, to enable optimal Hybrid 60 ft Articulated Buses reliability through the end of their service life. Overhaul of 32 Neoplan 60' DMA Buses Overhaul of the Neoplan 60' Dual Mode Articulated buses that operate on the MBTA Silver (5307) Line Bus Rapid Transit routes. Overhaul of 33 Kawasaki 900 Series Bi‐Level Overhaul and upgrade of existing systems on commuter rail coaches that were brought into Coaches service in 2005 to enable optimal reliability through the end of their service life. -
NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents
Northeast Corridor One-Year Implementation Plan Fiscal Year 2017 September 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. 2| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents Introduction 6 Funding Summary 8 Baseline Capital Charge Program 10 1 - Boston South Station 12 16 - Shore to Girard 42 2 - Boston to Providence 14 17 - Girard to Philadelphia 30th Street 44 3 - Providence to Wickford Junction 16 18 - Philadelphia 30th Street - Arsenal 46 4 - Wickford Junction to New London 18 19 - Arsenal to Marcus Hook 48 5 - New London to New Haven 20 20 - Marcus Hook to Bacon 50 6 - New Haven to State Line 22 21 - Bacon to Perryville 52 7 - State Line to New Rochelle 24 22 - Perryville to WAS 54 8 - New Rochelle to Harold Interlocking 26 23 - Washington Union Terminal 56 9 - Harold Interlocking to F Interlocking 28 24 - WAS to CP Virginia 58 10 - F Interlocking to PSNY 30 25 - Springfield to New Haven 60 11 - Penn Terminal 32 27 - Spuyten Duyvil to PSNY* 62 12 - PSNY to Trenton 34 28 - 30th St. -
July 2004 Transreport Transportation News from the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
JULY 2004 TRANSREPORT TRANSPORTATION NEWS FROM THE BOSTON REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Planning for the DNC: Challenges and Solutions A World War on the use of airspace over the site and II “victory on water travel within Boston Harbor. Pase la voz!! Siguiendo con el compro- poster,” Since early March, security experts have miso que la MPO de la región de Boston prominent at been working with state planners and tiene al informar al mayor numero posi- train stations, consultants to schedule detours, restric- ble de personas, acerca de asuntos rela- proclaimed: tions, and closures of air, surface, subsur- cionados con el transporte que pudieran “Millions of face, and water travel modes extending afectarle y dar a conocer las oportu- troops are on from Braintree and Allston to Woburn nidades en todo lo relacionado con la the move . and Saugus. The restrictions, while tem- toma de decisiones, TRANSREPORT está is YOUR trip porary, are significant and numerous, and también disponible en Español. Si estu- necessary?” call upon government, business, and indi- viera interesado en pedir una subscription Sixty years later, planners, pundits, and viduals to completely rethink their travel a nuestro boletin, contacte Daniel Per- the public at large are asking the same choices. alta empleado de la MPO llamando al question as it pertains to the Democratic (671) 973-7116 o mandando un e-mail a National Convention (DNC), which will While the 190,000 vehicles that use I-93 [email protected]. be held at the FleetCenter between July north of the FleetCenter each weekday and the 24,000 weekday travelers going Además de poner a su disposición 26 and July 29. -
Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA District 1964-Present
Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA district 1964-2021 By Jonathan Belcher with thanks to Richard Barber and Thomas J. Humphrey Compilation of this data would not have been possible without the information and input provided by Mr. Barber and Mr. Humphrey. Sources of data used in compiling this information include public timetables, maps, newspaper articles, MBTA press releases, Department of Public Utilities records, and MBTA records. Thanks also to Tadd Anderson, Charles Bahne, Alan Castaline, George Chiasson, Bradley Clarke, Robert Hussey, Scott Moore, Edward Ramsdell, George Sanborn, David Sindel, James Teed, and George Zeiba for additional comments and information. Thomas J. Humphrey’s original 1974 research on the origin and development of the MBTA bus network is now available here and has been updated through August 2020: http://www.transithistory.org/roster/MBTABUSDEV.pdf August 29, 2021 Version Discussion of changes is broken down into seven sections: 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA 2) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Eastern Mass. St. Ry. Co. Norwood Area Quincy Area Lynn Area Melrose Area Lowell Area Lawrence Area Brockton Area 3) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Middlesex and Boston St. Ry. Co 4) MBTA bus routes inherited from Service Bus Lines and Brush Hill Transportation 5) MBTA bus routes initiated by the MBTA 1964-present ROLLSIGN 3 5b) Silver Line bus rapid transit service 6) Private carrier transit and commuter bus routes within or to the MBTA district 7) The Suburban Transportation (mini-bus) Program 8) Rail routes 4 ROLLSIGN Changes in MBTA Bus Routes 1964-present Section 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) succeeded the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) on August 3, 1964. -
FY20-24 Capital Investment Plan Overview of Final FY20-24 CIP
FY20-24 Capital Investment Plan Overview of Final FY20-24 CIP 6/10/2019 Final FY20-24 CIP Agenda 1. Recap of the FY20-24 CIP process and where we are today 2. Summary and analysis of public input process and comments received 3. Review overall FY20-24 CIP by funding source, priority, program and mode 4. Discuss CIP programming as compared to MBTA spend targets 5. FY20 Capital Program Key Performance Indicators 6. Next Steps Draft for Discussion & Policy Purposes Only 2 Final FY20-24 CIP FY20-24 CIP Process Recap • Develop initial estimates of capital funding sources January • Collect project proposals from MBTA Departments • Begin scoring and evaluation process • Set initial program sizes (presented to FMCB 2/4) February • Continue scoring and evaluation of new proposals • Update cash flow forecasts for existing projects • Prioritize new projects based on scoring and evaluation March • Develop initial project list – combine existing and new projects • Refine sources and sequencing for draft project list April • Present updated funding sources and draft uses to FMCB • Finalize draft FY20-24 Capital Investment Plan May • Present to FMCB on May 13, CPC May 15, Joint Bd May 20 • Post draft CIP for comment; engage public through multiple avenues • Incorporate public comment in CIP June • Present final CIP for vote: FMCB June 10, CPC June 12, Joint Bd June 17 Draft for Discussion & Policy Purposes Only 3 Final FY20-24 CIP: Public Input Public Input Process and CIP Public Meeting Schedule CIP Public Meeting Schedule (MBTA Service Area) • BOSTON -
Division Highlights
2017-2021 Capital Investment Plan Letter from the Secretary & CEO On behalf of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), I am pleased to present the 2017-2021 Capital Investment Plan (CIP). Shaped by careful planning and prioritization work as well as by public participation and comment, this plan represents a significant and sustained investment in the transportation infrastructure that serves residents and businesses across the Commonwealth. And it reflects a transformative departure from past CIPs as MassDOT and the MBTA work to reinvent capital planning for the Commonwealth’s statewide, multi-modal transportation system. This CIP contains a portfolio of strategic investments organized into three priority areas of descending importance: system reliability, asset modernization, and capacity expansion. These priorities form the foundation of not only this plan, but of a vision for MassDOT and the MBTA where all Massachusetts residents and businesses have access to safe and reliable transportation options. For the first time, formal evaluation and scoring processes were used in selecting which transportation investments to propose for construction over the next five years, with projects prioritized based on their ability to efficiently meet the strategic goals of the MassDOT agencies. The result is a higher level of confidence that capital resources are going to the most beneficial and cost-effective projects. The ultimate goal is for the Commonwealth to have a truly integrated and diversified transportation investment portfolio, not just a “capital plan.” Although the full realization of this reprioritization of capital investment will be an ongoing process and will evolve through several CIP cycles, this 2017-2021 Plan represents a major step closer to true performance-based capital planning. -
FOXBOROUGH COMMUTER RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Foxborough Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
FULLTIME FOXBOROUGH COMMUTER RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Foxborough Commuter Rail Feasibility Study FINAL REPORT September 1, 2010 Prepared For: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority With Support From: Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development Prepared By: Jacobs Engineering Group, Boston, MA With: Central Transportation Planning Staff, Boston , MA Anne S. Gailbraith, AICP Barrington, RI 1 REPORT NAME: Foxborough Commuter Rail Feasibility Study PROJECT NUMBER: A92PS03, Task Order No. 2 PREPARED FOR: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) PREPARED BY: Jacobs Engineering Group Anne S. Galbraith Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) DATE: September 1, 2010 FOXBOROUGH COMMUTER RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 1: IDENTIFY KEY ISSUES AND PROJECT APPROACH .................................................... 13 1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 14 1.2 Key Issues....................................................................................................................... 17 1.3 Approach ......................................................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER 2: ANALYZE THE CAPACITY OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM............................................. -
A Better Newburyport/Rockport Line
TRANSITMATTERS WINTER 2021 A Better Newburyport/Rockport Line Rapid, Reliable Transit For Chelsea, Lynn, and the North Shore Introduction This report analyzes potential infrastructure and service We wish to acknowledge the following TransitMatters improvements for the MBTA’s Newburyport/Rockport members who contributed to this report: Line, proposing upgrades and changes along its corridor. » Peter Brassard The FMCB’s resolution in November 2019 and recent » advocacy around improving service on the Newburyport/ Rob Cannata Rockport Line have increased interest in running » David Dimiduk frequent electrified rail service on the line. Many of the » Jay Flynn municipalities on the inner route are environmental » Jason Frost justice (EJ) communities, with residents forced to decide between infrequent, costly rail service or affordable but » David Houser slow bus service. The stations along the trunk should » Alon Levy get all-day high-frequency service, electrification, fare » Elizabeth Martin integration, and additional infill stations. These changes would provide similar frequency and station spacing as » Jackson Moore-Otto the Red Line branch to Braintree. » John Takuma Moody » Matt Robare » Asher Smith » Andrew Stephens » Jack Spence TransitMatters is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to improving transit in and around Boston by offering new perspectives, uniting transit advocates, and informing the public. We utilize a high level of critical analysis to advocate for plans and policies that promote convenient, effective, and equitable transportation for everyone. Learn more & download other Regional Rail reports at: http://regionalrail.net A BETTER NEWBURYPORT/ROCKPORT LINE 1 Current Situation The Newburyport/Rockport Line, sometimes referred to as the “Eastern Route” or “Eastern Line”, is currently the third busiest line on the commuter rail, behind the Providence and Worcester Lines, and the busiest line on the north side of the MBTA Commuter Rail system. -
41 WESTLAND AVENUE EXPANDED PROJECT NOTIFICATION FORM March 11, 2011
41 WESTLAND AVENUE EXPANDED PROJECT NOTIFICATION FORM March 11, 2011 Submitted By: Colliers International On Behalf of: Catamount Westland LLC Yanni K. Tsipis 160 Federal Street MAIN +1 617 330 8000 Senior Vice President | Boston Boston, MA 02110 DIR +1 617 330 8151 www.colliers.com FAX +1 617 330 8192 EMAIL [email protected] March 11, 2011 By Hand Delivery Mr. John F. Palmieri Director Boston Redevelopment Authority One City Hall Plaza, 9th floor Boston, MA 02201 Re: 41 Westland Avenue, Boston Dear Director Palmieri: On behalf of our client, Catamount Westland LLC (“Catamount”), we are pleased to submit herewith this expanded Project Notification Form (PNF) in connection with the project known as 41 Westland Avenue (the “Proposed Project”) in the East Fenway community. This submission is being made in accordance with Arrticle 80B (Large Project Review) of the Boston Zoning Code. The Proposed Project is intended to create innovative and highly sought-after contemporary housing prototypes in the East Fenway community, as well as increase the number, quality, and character of homeownership opportunities in the East Fenway. The Proposed Project is not anticipated to have any significant impacts on the surrounding area since it is only increasing the existing building area by approximately 10%, and is reducing the intensity of the use on the site from commercial parking garage to residential homeownership. On behalf of the entire development team, we look forward to working with you, BRA staff, the City of Boston, and the community at large in furtherance of this innovative adaptation of the existing parking garage so as to increase the number of owner-occupied homes in the East Fenway community. -
Transportation, Traffic and Parking
Chapter from DPIR/DEIR dated 2-18-20 Bunker Hill Housing Redevelopment – DEIR-NPC/DPIR 5 Transportation This chapter provides an assessment of the Project’s transportation characteristics. The chapter includes evaluations of existing conditions and projected future conditions without and with the proposed Project (i.e., No-Build and Build conditions, respectively). Transportation improvements and mitigation measures are identified to address existing transportation problems in the area in addition to minimizing potential impacts of the Project. In addition to physical multi-modal transportation infrastructure improvements, the mitigation package includes a robust Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan designed to reduce single- occupant vehicle (SOV) travel and encourage use of alternative transportation modes. The Proponent will commit to these improvements through the execution of a Transportation Access Plan Agreement (TAPA) with the City of Boston. Key Findings The key findings of the transportation analysis include the following: The Proponent seeks to obtain a Phase 1 waiver in order to start construction on the first phase of construction while the Full Build Master Plan continues through the MEPA regulatory review process: This transportation analysis has been completed for both Phase 1 and the Full Build Master Plan (inclusive of Phase 1). The Phase 1 Project is expected to generate approximately 702 net new daily vehicle trips, with approximately 58 and 82 net new vehicle trips occurring in the morning and evening peak hours, respectively; The Full Build Master Plan is expected to generate approximately 5,006 net new daily vehicle trips, with approximately 382 and 533 net new vehicle trips occurring in the morning and evening peak hours, respectively. -
Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment
Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment Final Environmental Impact Report EEA #15441 PROPONENT PREPARED BY Lynnway Associates, LLC 130 Atlantic Avenue Swampscott, MA 01907 99 High Street Boston, MA 02110 SUBMITTED TO IN ASSOCIATION WITH The Executive Office of Energy D’Angelo Engineering and Development and Environmental Affairs Commercial Construction Consulting, Inc. MEPA Office Elkus | Manfredi Architects 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Carol R. Johnson Associates Boston, MA 02114 TEC, Inc. Tech Environmental, Inc. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. Hancock Associates March 10, 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report – EEA# 15441 Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment Lynn, Massachusetts SUBMITTED TO Secretary Matthew A. Beaton Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Attn: MEPA Office 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 PROPONENT Lynnway Associates, LLC 130 Atlantic Avenue Swampscott, MA 01907 PREPARED BY VHB 99 High Street, 10th Floor Boston, MA 02110 In association with: D’Angelo Engineering and Development Commercial Construction Consulting, Inc. Elkus | Manfredi Architects Carol R. Johnson Associates TEC, Inc. Tech Environmental, Inc. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. Hancock Associates March 10, 2017 March 10, 2017 Ref: 12341.00 Matthew Beaton, Secretary Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 022114 Re: Final Environmental Impact Report, Lynn Gear Works, EEA No. 15441 Dear Secretary Beaton: On behalf of Lynnway Associates, LLC (the “Proponent”), VHB is pleased to submit the enclosed Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment Project (the “Project”). This FEIR has been prepared in accordance with the Secretary’s Certificate on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for EEA No. 15441, issued November 30, 2016.