DOCSLIB.ORG

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Contract Specifications For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Contract Specifications for Green Line Security Upgrades Green Line D Branch Fiber Optic Cable Installation IFB CAP XX-14 Volume 1 of 2 May, 2014 Jacobs Engineering 343 Congress Street Boston, MA 02210 Green Line Security Upgrades CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION NO. OF PAGES DIVISION 1: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 01010 Summary of Work 16 DIVISION 2: SITE WORK 02100 Site Preparation 4 02221 Demolition 7 02298 Temporary Pedestrian Facilities 3 02300 Earthwork 15 02513 Bituminous Concrete Pavement 16 02650 Existing Site Utilities 5 DIVISION 3: CONCRETE 03300 Cast-In-Place Concrete 19 DIVISION 4: MASONRY 04800 Masonry 17 DIVISION 5: METALS 05500 Miscellaneous Metals 12 DIVISION 9: FINISHES 09900 Painting 16 DIVISION 16: ELECTRICAL 16050 Basic Materials and Methods for Electrical Work 11 16195 Electrical Indentification 5 16450 Grounding 4 16749 Fiber Optic Cable Systems 8 16826 Communications Cable Routing Systems 7 16844 Communications System Junction Boxes 2 16876 Communications Grounding of Equipment 2 16898 Communications Systems Tests 20 GREEN LINE SECURITY CS-ii UPGRADES 2014 APPENDIX A Green Line - Pictures of Existing Conditions 12 GREEN LINE SECURITY CS-iii UPGRADES 2014 SECTION 01010 SUMMARY OF WORK PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. This Section specifies the procurement, installation, testing, and certification of a 72-strand and a 12-strand singlemode outside plant fiber optic cable system, including all ancillary equipment for a complete and functional installation, on the MBTA Green Line D Branch. As shown on the Contract Drawings, and as required herein, the 72-strand fiber optic cable shall be properly routed to, and terminate in, each of the following stations: Kenmore, Fenway, Longwood, Brookline Village, Brookline Hills, Beaconsfield, Reservoir, Chestnut Hill, Newton Centre, Newton Highlands, Eliot, Waban, Woodland, and Riverside. As shown on the Contract Drawings, and as required herein, the 12-strand singlemode outside plant fiber optic cable shall be installed from the applicable Communication Room/Shelter to the Kenmore, Aspinwall, Cook’s Junction, Hammond Pond, Reservoir, and Riverside Traction Power Substations. B. The Contractor shall field verify all distances and fiber optic cable lengths, and submit to the MBTA prior to ordering fiber optic cable. C. All work shall be closely coordinated with the respective MBTA departments prior to conducting any onsite activities. The Contractor shall take extra precautions when working in proximity to the high voltage equipment in the Traction Power Substations. D. All Contractor employees working on site during this project shall have on their person a current MBTA Right-of-Way license. The costs associated with Right-of-Way training, certification, and recertification shall be included as part of the Contractor’s bid. E. The fiber optic cables shall be installed as shown on the Contract Drawings using means and methods in compliance with all MBTA and industry standards identified herein. All material and workmanship shall be of the highest quality assuring durability for a minimum life expectancy of twenty (20) years. All materials shall be manufactured under an established Quality Assurance Program, proof of which shall be submitted to the MBTA for approval. F. The existing aerial messenger cable has an existing sixteen (16) strand outside plant fiber optic cable attached to it by various means, the majority of which is a spiral lashing. This cable is in service, and must remain in service throughout the project. The Contractor is responsible for maintaining the integrity of the existing fiber optic cable, messenger, junction boxes, raceways, penetrations, splice enclosures, patch panels, terminations, etc. Should any portion of the existing system be compromised by the Contractor, it shall be fully and permanently restored at no additional cost to the MBTA within two (2) hours of notification by the MBTA. G. The existing aerial messenger cable, at some locations, is within close proximity to active signal and power cables. As such, over lashing may not be possible. At such locations, the Contractor shall submit for MBTA approval an alternate means (i.e. lashing straps) of attaching the new fiber optic cable(s). H. The existing aerial messenger cable, at some locations, has additional cables attached to it with plastic cable ties. As such, over lashing may not be possible. At such locations, the GREEN LINE SECURITY SUMMARY OF WORK UPGRADES 2014 01010 - 1 Contractor shall submit for MBTA approval their proposed means (i.e. utilizing lashing straps, or removing cable ties before over lashing) of attaching the new fiber optic cable(s). I. Should the Contractor’s means and methods, or work, cause damage to any cables or infrastructure, the Contractor shall be responsible for the immediate repair within two (2) hours, and eventual permanent replacement of the damaged cable, infrastructure or element, in accordance with the standards for the supported system, using staff qualified and approved by the MBTA on the affected system, and at no additional cost to the MBTA. J. After reviewing the Contract Documents, and the existing field conditions, the Contractor, at their option, may submit as part of their bid, the installation of a new self-supporting fiber optic cable, including all associated hardware and appurtenances for a complete and functional system, in lieu of utilizing the existing messenger system. The Contractor shall submit a proposed cable route and installation with all necessary detail for review and approval by the MBTA. K. The Contractor shall test each strand of each fiber optic cable in accordance with Specification Section 16898, and all other requirements contained herein. Tests shall include, but not be limited to, polarization mode dispersion, chromatic dispersion, power metering, and OTDR analysis. Any strands not successfully meeting manufacturer recommendations and the requirements of these specifications shall be replaced and/or re-terminated at no additional cost to the MBTA. A location shall not be accepted until it has been completely and successfully tested as required in Section 16898 of these specifications. All test results and documentation shall be provided to the MBTA in both electronic format and hard copy format. The electronic format shall be in a text searchable PDF format, the native document format, and in Telcordia SR-4731 “.SOR” format. The hardcopy format shall be produced directly from the electronic PDF documents. The Contractor shall provide any software required to view the test results in their native format. L. The Fiber Optic Link Loss (at 1310 and 1550 nm) shall be less than, or equal to: 1. Kenmore to Riverside express: 15.848 dB 13.311 dB 2. Kenmore to Reservoir express: 8.576 dB 8.007 dB 3. Reservoir to Riverside express: 10.924 dB 9.804 dB 4. Adjacent Stations: 6.064 dB 5.823 dB 5. Transit Stations to Traction Power Substations: 5.5 dB 5.4 dB 6. Losses at fusion splices shall be less than 0.01 dB M. The Contractor shall remove all trash, packing materials, spools, obsolete items, etc. from all work locations. N. For the purposes of bidding, the approximate work hours on this project shall be as follows: 1. Right of Way work, work that would foul the right-of-way, and work that would affect passenger commuting will be allowed from 1:30 AM to 4:30 AM with the proper flagging. 2. Platform work, that will not foul the right-of-way, will be allowed from 10 AM to 2 PM and 11:00 PM to 5:00 AM with the proper flagging. 3. Non-platform work in the public areas will be allowed from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM and 8:00 PM to 5:00 AM. GREEN LINE SECURITY SUMMARY OF WORK UPGRADES 2014 01010 - 2 4. Work in non-public areas, if the work does not affect the public areas, train service, bus service, or cause a safety issue, will be allowed on an as-needed basis, with proper notice to the MBTA, and provided a representative of the affected MBTA department, or other designated person, is available to oversee work. 5. Work within the Traction Power Substations shall be coordinated with the MBTA Power Systems and Equipment Division. Work within the Traction Power Substations requires a five (5) business day advanced notice. MBTA Power Systems and Equipment Division Personnel are required on site when work is in progress within the Traction Power Substations. 6. The Contractor may not perform work on the MBTA, or its supporting systems, without proper notice, and prior and specific written approval from the MBTA. 7. The Contractor shall, at no additional cost to the project, make allowances for MBTA published holidays, special events, weather related events, availability of MBTA support personnel, operational needs, safety factors, other adjacent work activities, and other minor changes in the hours of work. 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK BY TYPE AND LOCATION A. Right-of-Way 1. From the Kenmore Station Communication Room to the Riverside Communication Shelter, install outside plant fiber optic cables as shown on the Contract Drawings, and as described herein. 2. Attach the cables to the existing messenger by means of over lashing. The lashing wire shall be sized to fully support all cables on the messenger. The lashing tension shall not compromise the cables, jackets, or fibers of either the existing cables, or the new fiber optic cables. Where over lashing is not possible or practical (as agreed to by the MBTA), the Contractor shall propose an alternate method for MBTA approval. 3. Wherever the cable passes a suspension clamp, part of the catenary system, guy wire, or any other structure, the Contractor shall install a split polyethylene chafing tube to protect the cable sheath from abrasion. The split polyethylene chafing tube shall be installed in such a manner that it remains permanently in place and protects all cables mounted to the messenger at that location.
Recommended publications
  • V. 1. West Corridor Bus Service Study

    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.
  • SMFA Employees Receive a 25% Discount on Bus, Train, Or Commuter Rail MBTA Passes (Up to $40 Per Month)

    SMFA Employees Receive a 25% Discount on Bus, Train, Or Commuter Rail MBTA Passes (Up to $40 Per Month)

    Employee Commuter MBTA Discounts Benefit Programs Faculty & Staff Sustainable SMFA employees receive a 25% discount on bus, train, or commuter rail MBTA passes (up to $40 per month). Save Tufts is a member of A Better City cash by using pre-tax money to buy your train, bus, and Transportation Management subway tickets. For more details, visit Commuting Association (ABC TMA), which provides incentives and go.tufts.edu/commuterbenefits. programs for encouraging commuters to take public transit, carpool, vanpool, bike, and/or walk to work. For more Students information or to sign up for any ABC TMA programs, visit SMFA students are eligible to purchase an MBTA semester abctma.com/commuters. Employees on the SMFA campus or monthly pass at a 25% discount over regular “T” SMFA Campus are eligible to participate in the following programs: prices. Each student is entitled to one pass. You must bring your Tufts ID to pick up your pass. For details and Guaranteed Ride Home the reimbursement period schedule, visit If you use public transit, car/vanpool, bike, finance.tufts.edu/controller/bursar/mbta-passes or call or walk to work at least twice a week, the Bursar’s Office at 617-626-6551. you can receive up to six free rides home each year for emergencies, unscheduled overtime, or illness. Guaranteed rides home are provided through Metro Cab. Transit Tip: You can book a cab through the Boston Metro Cab app or by Use a Charlie Card to avoid a calling 617-782-5500. surcharge for paper tickets. Learn more at mbta.com.
  • Directions to the Joseph B. Martin Conference Center Centennial Medal and Next Generation Award Ceremony Thursday, October 24

    Directions to the Joseph B. Martin Conference Center Centennial Medal and Next Generation Award Ceremony Thursday, October 24

    Directions to the Joseph B. Martin Conference Center Centennial Medal and Next Generation Award Ceremony Thursday, October 24th, 2013 77 Avenue Louis Pasteur Boston, MA From South of Boston Take I-93 North to exit 26 (Cambridge/Storrow Drive). Keep left at the end of ramp and take underpass to Storrow Drive. Follow Storrow Drive approximately 2.5 miles to Kenmore Square exit (on left). Bear right at end of exit ramp into Kenmore Square. Take leftmost fork at intersection onto Brookline Avenue. Follow Brookline Avenue approximately 1 mile (Beth Israel Hospital will be on the left) until Longwood Avenue. Take left on to Longwood Avenue and follow approximately ¼ mile. Turn left onto Avenue Louis Pasteur. Glass building on left. From West of Boston Take I-90 East (Massachusetts Turnpike) to exit 18 (Cambridge/Allston). Bear right after toll booth at end of exit ramp. Turn right after lights (before the bridge) onto Storrow Drive. Follow Storrow Drive (about one mile) to Kenmore Square exit. Bear right at end of exit ramp into Kenmore Square. Take leftmost fork at intersection onto Brookline Avenue. Follow Brookline Avenue approximately 1 mile (Beth Israel Hospital will be on the left) until Longwood Avenue. Take left on Longwood Avenue and follow approximately ¼ mile. Turn left onto Avenue Louis Pasteur. Glass building on left. From North of Boston Take I-93 South to exit 26 (Storrow Drive/North Station). Keep left at end of ramp and take underpass to Storrow Drive. Follow Storrow Drive approximately 2.5 miles to Kenmore Square exit (on left). Bear right at end of exit ramp into Kenmore Square.
  • The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay Jennifer Folz Clemson University, Jenny.Folz@Gmail.Com

    The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay Jennifer Folz Clemson University, [email protected]

    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 5-2013 The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay Jennifer Folz Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Part of the Transportation Commons Recommended Citation Folz, Jennifer, "The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts aB y" (2013). All Theses. 1597. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/1597 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay _______________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University _______________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of City and Regional Planning _______________________________________________________ by Jennifer Anne Folz May 2013 _______________________________________________________ Accepted by: Dr. Eric Morris, Committee Chair Dr. Barry Nocks Dr. Tim Green ABSTRACT Throughout the last several decades a growing emphasis has been placed on creating sustainable places through innovative planning practices. Urban designers, researchers, planners, and policy makers have continuously examined the land use transportation nexus in order to develop methods to efficiently guide transit funding to encourage alternate modes of travel. The United States is in the middle of a paradigm shift in generational behaviors. Baby boomers are downsizing and according to the Urban Land Institute are looking for more location-efficient residences. Similarly, Generation Y’s attitudes are focused on living and working in close proximity.
  • Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA District 1964-Present

    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.
  • Tft¥;P. Z.C. .J..~ .' S(?!Is{O

    Tft¥;P. Z.C. .J..~ .' S(?!Is{O

    -=t£..4 ~c tft¥;P. z.c._ .J..~ .' S(?!is{o. ~.... A:£!..~: s(a'( (o~ DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA NO. 71 LONGWOOD CENTER BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS .TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Development Plan ................................................................................................................ I II. Proponent ............................................................................................................................. 1 III. Site Description .................................................................................................................... 2 N. Background of Project ......................................................................................................... 2 V. Compliance with Planning and Development Criteria ....................................................... .3 VI. General Description ofProject. ............................................................................................ 4 VII. Location and Appearance of Structures .............................................................................. .4 VIII. Open Space and Landscaping ............................................................................................. .5 IX. Uses ...................................................................................................................................... 5 X. Dimensions and Densities .................................................................................................... 6 XI. Vehicular Circulation and Pedestrian Circulation ..............................................................
  • City of Newton, Massachusetts

    City of Newton, Massachusetts

    #425-18 & #426-18 Telephone (617) 796-1120 Telefax (617) 796-1142 City of Newton, Massachusetts TDD/TTY (617) 796-1089 www.newtonma.gov Department of Planning and Development Ruthanne Fuller 1000 Commonwealth Avenue Newton, Massachusetts 02459 Barney Heath Mayor Director ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ PUBLIC HEARING/ WORKING SESSION V MEMORANDUM DATE: April 5, 2019 MEETING DATE: April 9, 2019 TO: Land Use Committee of the City Council FROM: Barney Heath, Director of Planning and Development Jennifer Caira, Chief Planner for Current Planning Michael Gleba, Senior Planner CC: Petitioner In response to questions raised at the City Council public hearing, the Planning Department is providing the following information for the upcoming public hearing/working session. This information is supplemental to staff analysis previously provided at the Land Use Committee public hearing. PETITIONS #425-18 & #426-18 156 Oak St., 275-281 Needham St. &., 55 Tower Rd. Petition #425-18- for a change of zone to BUSINESS USE 4 for land located at 156 Oak Street (Section 51 Block 28 Lot 5A), 275-281 Needham Street (Section 51, Block 28, Lot 6) and 55 Tower Road (Section 51 Block 28 Lot 5), currently zoned MU1 Petition #426-18- for SPECIAL PERMIT/SITE PLAN APPROVAL to allow a mixed-use development greater than 20,000 sq. ft. with building heights of up to 96’ consisting of 822 residential units, with ground floor residential units, with restaurants with more than 50 seats, for-profit
  • 2021 Capital Investment Program Appendix A

    2021 Capital Investment Program Appendix A

    2021 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN APPENDIX A: INVESTMENT DETAILS Appendix A: Investment Details This section provides the lists of investments contained within this CIP. The information within each column is described below: • Location – where the investment is located • Project ID – the Division specific ID that uniquely identifies each investment • Project name – the name of the investment and a brief description • Priority – the capital priority that the investment addresses • Program – the program from which the investment is made • Score – the score of the investment (reliability investments are not scored) • Total cost – the total cost of the investment • Prior years – the spending on the investment that pre-dates the plan update • FY 2021 – the spending estimated to occur in fiscal year 2021 • Post FY 2021 – the estimated spending to occur post fiscal year 2021 for the project APPENDIX A: INVESTMENT DETAILS 2021 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN ii Aeronautics 2021 Capital Investment Plan Total Prior Years 2021 After 2021 Location Division ID Priority Program Project Description Score $M $M $M $M Barnstable Municipal Aeronautics | Airport AE21000002 1 | Reliability SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS 1 $0.72 $0.00 $0.72 $0.00 Airport capital improvement Aeronautics | Airport MEPA/NEPA/CCC FOR MASTER PLAN AE21000003 1 | Reliability 1 $0.80 $0.53 $0.28 $0.00 capital improvement IMPROVEMENTS Aeronautics | Airport AE21000023 1 | Reliability AIRPORT MASTER PLAN UPDATE 1 $1.12 $0.00 $0.05 $1.07 capital improvement Aeronautics | Airport PURCHASE SNOW REMOVAL EQUIPMENT
  • Division Highlights

    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.
  • 1975 Charles River Pathway Plan

    1975 Charles River Pathway Plan

    CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN COVER: Artist’s view of the Charles River c. 1900 1 Mayor Theodore D. Mann City Hall Newton, Massachusetts Dear Mayor Mann: We, the Chairman of the Newton Conservation Commission and the City of Newton Planning Director, submit herewith the "CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN" as prepared by Planning Consultant, William D. Giezentanner. We are most grateful to you and James M. Salter, Chief Administrative Officer, for the interest you have shown in the project's funding, and we value your assistance with the plan's presentation to Newton residents. We are indebted to the following agencies and groups for their contributions to and interest in the completed planning study: the Ford Foundation, the Newton Planning Department staff, members of the Conservation Commission, the Metropolitan District Commission, Aldermanic City Planning Committee, the Aldermanic Finance Committee and the entire membership of the Board of Aldermen; Charles River Watershed Association, Inc., Newton Conservators, Inc., Newton Historic District Study Committee, Newton Upper Falls Improvement Association, American Legion Nonantum Post 440, Chestnut Hill Garden Club, Woman's Club of Newton Highlands, Upper Falls Senior Citizens Group; the News-Tribune, Newton Graphic, Newton Times, Newton Villager and Transcript. We believe that with the substantial citizen interest and participation in this planning venture, in terms of both time and money, the forecast is excellent that the CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS will be accomplished. 2 CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN Prepared for: NEWTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION By William D. Giezentanner with a Grant from the Ford Foundation July 1975 The studies for this project were carried out under the general supervision of the Newton Conservation Commission and the Newton Planning Department and were financed by a grant from the Ford Foundation matched with an appropriation by the City of Newton Board of Aldermen.
  • Comparative Analysis of Coffee Franchises in the Cambridge-Boston Area

    Comparative Analysis of Coffee Franchises in the Cambridge-Boston Area

    Comparative Analysis of Coffee Franchises in the Cambridge-Boston Area May 10, 2010 ESD.86: Models, Data, and Inference for Socio-Technical Systems Paul T. Grogan [email protected] Massachusetts Institute of Technology Introduction The placement of storefronts is a difficult question on which many corporations spend a great amount of time, effort, and money. There is a careful interplay between environment, potential customers, other storefronts from the same franchise, and other storefronts for competing franchises. From the customer’s perspective, the convenience of storefronts, especially for “discretionary” products or services, is of the utmost importance. In fact, some franchises develop mobile phone applications to provide their customers with an easy way to find the nearest storefront.1 This project takes an in-depth view of the storefront placements of Dunkin’ Donuts and Starbucks, two competing franchises with strong presences in the Cambridge-Boston area. Both franchises purvey coffee, coffee drinks, light meals, and pastries and cater especially well to sleep-deprived graduate students. However, Dunkin’ Donuts typically puts more emphasis on take-out (convenience) customers looking to grab a quick coffee before class whereas Starbucks provides an environment conducive to socializing, meetings, writing theses, or studying over a longer duration. These differences in target customers may drive differences in the distribution of storefronts in the area. The goal of this project is to apply some of the concepts learned in ESD.86 on probabilistic modeling and to the real-world system of franchise storefronts and customers. The focus of the analysis is directed on the “convenience” of accessing storefronts, determined by the distance to the nearest location from a random customer.
  • Division Highlights

    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.