Transit Working Group
A documentation of existing issues, barriers and recommendations
A collaborative document release by MassDOT - Rail & Transit Division
& Regional Transit Authorities
1
May 18, 2012 | Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
This page left intentionally blank
Transit Working Group
The Transit Working Group (TWG) was established by MassDOT Secretary Richard
Davey (Rail & Transit Administrator Davey at the time) in June 2011 as a means to begin an
effort to catalog existing issues and barriers among Regional Transit Authorities (RTA),
MassDOT – Rail & Transit Division (RTD), and other parties involved in the regional transit
system. The TWG listed issues and barriers based on completion priority and ability to
implement solutions. Four specialized committees were established and tasked to meet,
document, and provide recommendations to solve the listed issues and barriers. This white
paper represents the outcome of the completed work by the committees established as part
of the TWG.
As outlined during the TWG kick-off meeting, each committee had the following
responsibilities:

Catalog existing barriers, either organizational, legislative or past practice, that
detract from the MassDOT common goal and mission;

Recognize and respect the many cultures and differences;

Identify which issues and barriers are actionable, either by changing business
process, policy or legislation;

Review the barriers and recommend specific and detailed remedies;

Work together to develop and implement a detailed, realistic action plan and provide
regular joint updates to stakeholders during development.
Background & Moving Forward
The TWG can become an important tool to address the many obstacles and issues
that have materialized between the RTAs and RTD. Many of the obstacles and issues that
have developed over the years can be attributed to both parties. Previous problems and
conflicts continue to have an effect on communication, trust, and the ability to give and take
to find mutually agreed upon solutions. This lack of trust has led to a stalemate in promoting
regional transportation improvement strategies. This stalemate can be remedied only by
optimizing RTD & RTA resources, increasing collaboration, and communicating effectively.
Both parties share a common goal of improving regional transportation, and the
establishment of this working group is a great first step in achieving this common goal.
Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence
Ten Park Plaza, Suite 3910, Boston, MA 02116
Tel: 877-623-6846, TTY: 617-973-7306
www.mass.gov/massdot
This page left intentionally blank
Committee Recommendations, Data & Action
Calendar/SOP Committee
The calendar and standard operating procedure (SOP) committee was established to
address several problems related to issues resulting from a lack of timeliness and noncommunication between RTD and the RTAs. The problems arising from these issues include
last minute contract changes, lack of clarity in funding levels and disbursement timeframe,
lack of awareness of internal MassDOT processes, non-conforming and confusing grant
application processes, excessive number of contracts, and a lack of standardized service data
submissions. Many of these issues are directly attributable to a lack of clear and concise
internal processes utilized by RTD as well as inadequate external communication. By
addressing the inherent problems in the internal processes and external communication
procedures used by RTD, many of these undesirable outcomes can be remedied. The
committee has identified two major problems that relate to the issues of a lack of timeliness
and inadequate communication:
Problem #1: The first problem is the lack of a consistent and regular schedule for the
disbursement of funding, contract letting, and project application submittal &
change requests.
Recommendations:
1. Synchronize state and federal funding periods by introducing a 15-month
contract that will eliminate the need for last minute changes;
What are the benefits?
RTD will develop annual contracts for a period of 15 months instead of the
standard 12 months. This will allow contract funds to easily “roll-over” into the
next fiscal year. This change will save valuable personnel hours that are now
required to make many complex, last-minute contract changes. However, any
goods and services delivered after June 29 will be reduced from the capital
allocation for the following fiscal year for that particular RTA.
2. Implement (to the extent feasible) a single grant application for all federal and
state funding requests and a single contract for each type of federal and state
program funding awards;
What are the benefits?
RTD will develop a single grant application for all federal and state funding
programs and a single contract for each funding program.* This single
application will standardize forms and minimize the time spent submitting
applications. A single contract will minimize the number of contracts and lessen
RTA and RTD workloads.
* Inconsistent funding may not always allow for a single program contract.
2
3. Implement an annual program to track and predict current and future fiscal
year capital spending, operating costs, and service data. This program will be
known as the Regional Transit Outlook (RTO).
What are the benefits?
RTD will develop the RTO to collect service data and capital & operating funding
requirements. RTAs can use service data to determine best practices at each
authority and help coordinate capital needs. This will also provide a uniform way
of tracking individual and cumulative service data. Most importantly, this will help
RTD tell the RTA story to MassDOT and the public by highlighting both issues and
successes.
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
Development Status
Action
Complete
RTD implemented with RTACAP contract amendments
Complete
RTD released for FY13 competitive grant process
In Development
RTD will brief RTAs and release with completion deadline
1.
2.
3.
Problem #2: The second problem is the lack of standardized procedures and predictability in
process. This problem has arisen from the need for a clear understanding of the
internal Rail & Transit Division process for annual budgetary recommendations,
capital funding decisions, and the application and contract approval process.
Recommendations:
1. Develop a Rail & Transit Division standard operating procedure (SOP) for all
internal processes;
What are the benefits?
RTD will develop and SOP that can be used by both internal RTD employees and
external stakeholders. This SOP will allow for more effective turnover between
RTD staff by documenting common processes and problems. This document will
also assist external entities in understanding the processes involved to apply for
funding, how projects are approved, and expected deadlines to name a few.
3
2. Create annual calendar so all parties involved will have a clear and concise
process timeline to follow. Calendar can be found in Appendix A.
What are the benefits?
The committee has developed a calendar that will document dates of importance
relating to fund disbursement, application deadlines, MPO processes, award letter
release, capital and service planning, contracting, project reviews, financial
statement due dates, program guidance release dates, and important budgetary
dates. This will provide clear month by month information for all processes and
deadlines and will reduce the confusion associated with general state fiscal year
processes.
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
1.
2.
Development Status
Action
In Development
Release upon completion
Complete
Attached in Appendix A
4
This page left intentionally blank
Service Committee
The service committee was established to address several problems relating to issues of
previous service reductions, current service levels, and future transit needs. The results that
stem from these issues include limited or non-existent night service (past 7-8 p.m.), Sunday
service, and holiday service, as well as service frequency of 1 hour on the majority of RTA
routes. The limited level of service that is currently provided makes public transit use difficult
for those who wish to drive less, stop driving altogether, and is extremely problematic for
those that are transit dependent. In many cases, morning service begins too late in the
morning and ends too early in the evening to provide service for those who have a job that
requires shift work. Public transit should be an affordable, efficient, and effective option for
the traveling public; the current RTA service levels do not meet these goals. The majority of
these results are caused by insufficient service funding levels. Operating assistance (State
Contract Assistance) from the Commonwealth covers 40% of RTA operating costs and is in
the top 20% nationally. 1 Even so, state funding should be increased in conjunction with
local assessments and fare increases to provide a minimum base of service that includes
nights, weekends, holidays, and increased frequency, especially during peak hours. These
service levels can be achieved if the state, local municipalities, and RTAs all work together to
increase the level of funding for regional transit. The committee has identified three
problems that relate to the issues of service reductions, service levels, and transit needs. Full
committee report can be found in Appendix B.
Problem #1: The first problem is the need to restore and normalize transit funding to address
previous service reductions, and much needed service increases during peak
hours, nights and weekends.
Recommendations:
1. Provide the top three service improvements for each RTA for FY13 and the
predicted operating cost.
What are the benefits?
Each RTA has provided a list of their respective top three service improvements.
This list shows a direct cost to implement service improvements for each RTA. By
providing this list, any increase in funding will be directly connected to the service
provided and provide for a clear understanding of what can be expected for
service in the coming fiscal year.
1
National Transit Database, 2010.
5
RTA
Improvement #1
BRTA
Extend and
increase
frequency of
weekday service
for all routes
Service Expansion Data
Net Cost
Rolling
Improvement #2
(SCA only)
Stock
$1,603,347
$2,100,000
Extend weekend
service for all
routes
Continue
funding for Sat.
evening & Sun.
Service
Increase
frequency of 1
route
Net Cost
(SCA only)
Rolling
Stock
$568,501
N/A
$226,000
N/A
UNK
N/A
BAT
Continue funding
for 1 route
$50,000
N/A
CATA
1 New route
UNK
N/A
CCRTA
2 New routes
$0
N/A
Expand service
on 1 route
$6,715
N/A
FRTA
Increase
frequency for 6
routes
$265,530
$850,000
Create travel
training program
$5,000
N/A
GATRA
Add Sun. service
on several routes
UNK
N/A
Add peak hour
service in 2 cities
UNK
N/A
LRTA
Increase Sat.
service frequency
N/A
Extend evening
service for 5
routes
$95,951
N/A
$167,395
N/A
UNK
N/A
N/A (FY14)
N/A (FY14)
$201,295
VTA
MVRTA
MWRTA
MART
NRTA
PVTA
SRTA
WRTA
No Data Submitted
Holiday & Boston
Commute Service
Increase
frequency on all
routes
Increase
frequency of 5
lines
2 New routes,
extend service on
2 routes
Increase
frequency on
main line routes
Extend service
hours on all
routes
Extend evening
service hours
30 Min. weekday
service for 3
routes
Add Saturday
service to 6
routes
Increase
frequency for 1
route
$64,070
N/A
UNK
N/A
$158.802
N/A
$371,364
$320,000
Extend evening
service hours
$110,400
N/A
$1,125,000
$5,040,000
2 new routes
$600,000
$2,160,000
UNK
N/A
Add Sunday
service to all
routes
UNK
N/A
$500,000
N/A
Increase service
frequency
$150,000
N/A
6
Service Expansion Data (cont.)
Net Cost
Rolling
Net Cost
(SCA only)
Stock
(SCA only)
Rolling Stock
Cost
Total Cost
$2,473,233
$2,370,000
$4,843,233
N/A
$303,000
$0
$303,000
UNK
N/A
UNK
N/A
UNK
1 New route
$45,741
N/A
$52,456
$0
$52,456
FRTA
Extend weekday &
Sat. service hours
$166,686
N/A
$437,216
$850,000
$1,287,216
GATRA
Extend weekday &
weekend evening
service hours
UNK
N/A
UNK
N/A
UNK
LRTA
Not Requested
N/A
N/A
$297,246
$0
$297,246
UNK
N/A
UNK
RTA
Improvement #3
BRTA
Increase frequency
of 1 route
$301,385
$270,000
BAT
Continue funding
of 2 para-transit
routes
$27,000
CATA
Increase frequency
of 1 route
CCRTA
VTA
No Data Submitted
MVRTA
Add 2-hours of
peak service to 11
routes
$126,520
N/A
$357,985
$0
$357,985
MWRTA
Not requested
N/A
N/A
UNK
N/A
UNK
MART
Expand service for
1 route
N/A (FY14)
N/A (FY14)
$159
$0
$159
NRTA
Not requested
N/A
N/A
$481,764
$320,000
$801,764
PVTA
Increase frequency
of evening &
weekend service
$400,000
$1,800,000
$2,125,000
$9,000,000
$11,125,000
SRTA
Add new routes
UNK
N/A
UNK
N/A
UNK
WRTA
1 New route
$200,000
N/A
$850,000
$0
$850,000
$7.38M
$12.54M
$19.92M
Totals:
7
2. Provide a list of previously implemented fare increases, service improvement
delays and service reductions for each RTA.
What are the benefits?
Each RTA has provided a list of fare increases, service improvements, and service
reductions that they implemented over the past several years due to shortfalls in
service funding. This list is helpful in providing specific examples of service
reductions and actions that had to be taken that had an impact on already
minimal service levels.
Service Reduction Data
Route Reductions
Fare Increases
RTA
Route(s)
Eliminated
Route(s) Altered,
Consolidated or
Reduced
Year
BRTA
0
Changes made to
several routes
2011
BAT
1
1
2009
CATA
1
FRTA
2
GATRA
2
LRTA
2
5
2
Changes made to
several routes
Changes made to
most routes
1
4
3
4
3
0
VTA
MWRTA
MART
NRTA
PVTA
$1.05 - $1.25
2008
None
N/A
.55 - $1.05
2005
None
N/A
$1.00 - $1.25
2011
$2.00 - $2.50
2009
2008
$1.00 - $2.00
Increased on
two routes
2008
$2.00 - $2.50
2008
2009
2009
None
N/A
2008
None
N/A
None
N/A
N/A
None
N/A
2009
$1.00 - $3.00
2002
2007
.35 - .50
2007
2008
$2.00 - $2.50
2008
N/A
None
N/A
Since
None
2006
No Data Submitted
‘08-‘09
$1.00 - $1.25
2002
No Data Submitted
2008
.75 - $1.00
No Data Submitted
3
Changes made to
most routes
SRTA
WRTA
Year
No Data Submitted
CCRTA
MVRTA
Year
Fare Increase
(Demand
Response)
Fare Increase
(Fixed route)
9
Changes made to
several routes
’03-‘05
$1.00 - $1.25
No Data Submitted
Since
None
2006
8
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
Development Status
Action
1.
Data collected from
14 of 15 RTAs
Data collected from
10 of 15 RTAs
Request: $7.38M for increased service
Request: $12.54M for new rolling stock
2.
None Required
Problem #2: The second problem is the lack of service data. The lack of accurate and
consistent service data can be attributed to many different issues including a
shortage of personnel, a lack of clear and concise reporting requirements, and
unnecessary duplication of work.
What are the benefits?
As outlined in the Calendar/SOP Committee, Problem #1 – Recommendation #3,
RTD will develop the RTO to collect service data and capital & operating funding
requirements. RTD plans to use this data to uniformly track individual and
cumulative service data, and publish data that highlights service improvements.
Recommendation:
1. Collect data from RTAs through the RTO as recommended in the Calendar/SOP
Committee.
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
1.
Development Status
Action
In Development
RTD will brief RTAs and release with completion deadline
Problem #3: The third problem is elder service needs. This problem is related to the
increasing number of elderly individuals who will require public transit services
currently and in the near future. Creative methods need to be developed to
address both the need for increased para-transit service and to ensure elderly
individuals are made aware of the existing fixed route transit system that
already operates. This problem coincides with the work of the ADA/Paratransit/HST Committee.
9
Recommendation:
1. Work with ADA/Para-transit committee to create elder service pilot programs.
What are the benefits?
The committee will develop individual pilot programs for each RTA that will seek
to address elder transit needs, while creating efficiencies in the delivery of
ADA/Para-transit service. The goals of the pilot program are to educate, inform
and make fixed route service easier to use for elderly individuals. The transition
from driving to requiring public transit for mobility can be sudden and these pilot
programs will attempt to address these sudden mobility changes.
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
1.
Development Status
Action
In Development
TBD
10
Finance Committee
The finance committee was established to address the many issues associated with the
lack of timeliness of funding including: the inability to effectively plan service for the
upcoming fiscal year; difficulty in implementing a competitive application process for annual
service funding; difficulty in promoting annual budgetary discipline (higher cost of service
requires additional state funding); inability to promote best practices for service delivery;
perpetuating the necessity for each RTA to borrow for current service year operations. The
majority of these results are caused by funding service costs retroactively rather than the
current year. By addressing the retroactive payment issue, these unwanted results can be
remedied. The committee has identified one major problem that relates to the issue of lack
of timeliness of funding.
Problem #1: The problem that was identified for the finance committee is funding in arrears.
Recommendations:
1. Establish figure to provide forward funding, to include Revenue Anticipation
Note (RAN) repayment and closing-out remaining RAN payments from previous
fiscal years. This figure would include only the portion of RANs that covered
State Contract Assistance (SCA);
What are the benefits?
This figure represents the total cost to retire FY12 RANs and other prior year SCA
related unfunded deficits. By paying off this figure in full, RTAs will no longer be
required to borrow in anticipation of future revenues for SCA.
11
Forward Funding Data:
RTA
RAN – FY12
RAN
Repayment
by 06/30/12
(including
interest)
BRTA
$5,900,000
$5,988,500
$88,500
$1,822,305
$27,335
$371,809
BAT
$9,800,000
$9,909,435
$109,435
$4,946,664
$55,239
$142,279
CATA
$3,200,000
$3,248,000
$48,000
$1,019,708
$15,296
$0
CCRTA
$10,500,000
$10,659,615
$159,615
$3,232,358
$49,136
$0
FRTA
$3,100,000
$3,136,769
$36,769
$731,982
$8,682
$251,912
GATRA
$10,000,000
$10,149,589
$149,589
$2,681,180
$40,108
$89,488
LRTA
$7,720,000
$7,850,000
$130,000
$2,609,224
$43,938
$609,289
VTA
$4,250,000
$4,294,625
$44,625
$1,125,375
$11,816
$180,867
MVRTA
$12,530,000
$12,685,755
$155,755
$5,211,126
$64,777
$923,923
MWRTA
$7,150,000
$7,230,217
$80,217
$2,034,363
$22,824
$0
MART
$19,500,000
$19,727,698
$227,698
$4,149,741
$48,456
$1,723,243
NRTA
$1.900,000
$1,930,400
$30,400
$372,634
$5,962
$21,595
PVTA
$35,300,000
$35,826,558
$526,558
$16,216,342
$241,894
$5,975,759
SRTA
$8,700,000
$8,789.979
$89,979
$4,383,507
$45,336
$0
WRTA
$17,750,000
$17,970,642
$220,642
$8,698,546
$108,128
$1,095,147
Totals
$157,300,000 $159,397,782 $2,097,782 $59,235,055
$788,925
$11,385,311
All RAN
Interest
SCA – FY12
RAN
Interest
(SCA Only)
Previous SCA
Unfunded
Deficits
RTA Forward Funding Options
FY12 RAN
Interest
Option #
SCA (FY12)
*SCA (FY13)
Option 1
$59,235,055
$59,235,055
Option #
SCA (FY12)
*SCA (FY13)
Option 2
$59,235,055
$59,235,055
$2,097,782
FY12 RAN
Interest
(SCA Only)
$788,925
Option #
SCA (FY12)
^SCA (FY13)
(4% Inflation)
FY12 RAN
Interest
Option 3
$59,235,055
$61,604,457
Option #
SCA (FY12)
^SCA (FY13)
(4% Inflation)
$2,097,782
FY12 RAN
Interest
(SCA Only)
$788,925
Option 4 $59,235,055 $61,604,457
*Assumes level-funding.
^Includes 4% inflationary increase over FY11 SCA.
12
Previous SCA
Unfunded
Deficits
$11,385,311
Previous SCA
Unfunded
Deficits
$11,385,311
Previous SCA
Unfunded
Deficits
$11,385,311
Previous SCA
Unfunded
Deficits
$11,385,311
Total
$131,953,203
Total
$130,644,346
Total
$134,322,605
Total
$133,013,748
Actual New
Funding
Required
$72,718,148
Actual New
Funding
Required
$71,409,291
Actual New
Funding
Required
$75,087,550
Actual New
Funding
Required
$73,778,693
2. Establish individual RTA Enterprise Funds to retain revenue collected through
RTA owned facilities;
Argument for RTA Enterprise Funds:
This would allow RTAs to retain revenue from facilities which the RTAs own,
examples include parking revenue and leases. This revenue could be used to
maintain and improve existing facilities. This revenue would be separate from the
formula that calculates the annual Net Cost of Service. As of FY10, the RTAs
collected $37.8M in directly generated revenue. By retaining this revenue, RTAs
would be able to improve the upkeep of existing facilities.
Argument against RTA Enterprise Funds:
RTAs currently have two options to retain revenue from facilities. 1. RTAs are
allowed to establish individual reserve accounts and retain any facilities amount
(with board approval) collected in excess of the cost of operations, 2. RTAs are
allowed to establish a pooled Stabilization Fund and retain up to 15% of facility
revenues collected in excess of the cost of operations. These two options make an
Enterprise Fund unnecessary. In addition, the creation of an enterprise fund would
increase the Net Cost of Service by $37.8M, significantly increasing the demand for
State Contract Assistance and MassDOT funding requirements by the same amount.
3. Ensure accurate local assessment figures are in RTA audits, and timely local
assessment payments are made to RTAs for the purpose of reducing the lag
between payment and year of service.
What are the benefits?
This would eliminate problems that have arisen between expected and actual local
assessment payments. This would also eliminate the lag between payment of local
assessments to the RTAs and the actual date of service provided. Local assessment
payments are made by the Department of Revenue to RTAs (through MassDOT) on
a quarterly basis. Currently there is a 24 month delay between service and payment.
Local Assessment Data:
1. Audits for four RTAs have in the past provided either inaccurate or incorrectly
labeled local assessment data.
2. Local assessment payments are made to RTAs on a quarterly basis and cannot
be changed to lump-sum payments, based on state treasurer policy.
3. To reduce lag between payment and service, local assessments would have to
be increased and phased in over a period of several years to reduce the
increased assessment burden on municipalities.
13
4. Recommend several forward funding options and provide pros and cons of
each option. With forward funding, State Contract Assistance would pay for the
current year of service rather than the previous year of service.
What are the options?
Option 1: Direct appropriation to retire RANs and interest payments;
Option 2: A&F bond for amount to retire RANs and interest payments and repay
debt from the Commonwealth Transportation Fund (CTF);
Option 3: A&F bond for amount to retire RANs and interest payments and repay
debt from a portion of $15M in dedicated sales tax to RTAs; municipalities
could option to cover shortfall in service funding;
Option 4: Retire RANs and interest payments as part of larger package that
addresses statewide transportation funding;
Option 5: RTAs bond for amount to retire RANs and repay debt through increased
SCA.
Option #
Pro
Con
Option 1:
- Does not requiring bonding
- Easiest to implement
- Requires large up-front payment
Option 2:
- Uses transportation revenue to
pay for transportation funding
Option 3:
- Uses dedicated revenue source
to repay bond
- Provides sound fiscal justification
for small increase in bond cap
- May lead to tighter link between
local assessments and local
service levels
- Requires increase to bond cap
- May reduce operating transfer to
MassDOT
- Requires increase to bond cap
- Reduces annual RTA operating
assistance
- May lead to increased local
assessments to make up shortfall
Option 4:
- Does not require additional
bonding or large up-front
payment
- Can be part of entire
transportation funding debate
- Lumps RTA forward funding
together with RTA service
funding increases
- Does not address the issue in a
timely manner, “kicks the can
down the road”
- Lumps RTA forward funding
together with RTA service funding
increases
Option 5:
- Does not require
commonwealth bonding
- Bond repaid by commonwealth
on annual basis, not by RTAs
- Approves bonding authority for an
additional 15 independent
authorities
14
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
1.
2.
Development Status
Action
Complete
Request selection of one of the recommended forward
funding options
Unable to
Reach Agreement
1. Being Addressed
3.
2. Complete
3. Not Pursued
4.
Complete
No action to be taken
1. RTAs will address with auditors. DOR will send an annual
local assessment payment letter to RTAs to clarify expected
payments.
2. No action to be taken
3. No action to be taken
Request selection of one of the recommended options for
FY13
15
This page left intentionally blank
ADA/Para-transit/HST Committee
The ADA/Para-transit/HST committee was established to address ways to find
efficiencies, identify creative solutions and establish service requirements for ADA/Paratransit/HST service. In coordination with the service committee, the pilot programs that are
developed will help test and refine methods of cost reduction and creative solutions to
service delivery. Demand for elderly, ADA, Para-transit, and HST service continues to grow
and must be addressed. The majority of these results may be achieved by increasing funding
for demand response transit service. However, looking for ways to increase fixed route use,
providing public transit outreach to the community, and streamlining demand response
delivery are a few of the ways transit service can be improved. The committee has identified
one major problem that relates to the issue of ADA/Para-transit/HST service
Problem #1: The problem that was identified for the committee is cost control and lack of
ADA/Para-transit/HST service.
Recommendation:
1. Develop coordinated plan and funding options to address ADA/Paratransit/HST service needs including measures to restrain costs.
Coordinated Plan Data:
Committee has yet to submit data.
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
1.
Development Status
Action
UNK
TBD
16
This page left intentionally blank
Committee Staff
Calenar / SOP Committee
Lynn Ahlgren – CCRTA/MWRTA
Matt Bamonte – MassDOT
Noah Berger – FTA
Mary Ellen Blunt – CMRPC
Sue Bristol – MassDOT
Joe Costanzo – MVRTA (Chair)
Tina Cote – FRTA
Sue Gallien – MART
Angela Grant – VTA
Mohammed Khan – MART
Paula Leary – NRTA
Ray Ledoux – BAT
Mary MacInness – PVTA
Bonnie Mahoney – MART
Charles Planck – MBTA
Service Committee
Joe Costanzo – MVRTA (Chair)
Frank Gay – GATRA
Mohammed Khan – MART
Ray Ledoux – BAT
Mary MacInness – PVTA
Jim Scanlan – LRTA
Finance Committee
Lynn Ahlgren – CCRTA/MWRTA
Matt Bamonte – MassDOT
Noah Berger – FTA
Sue Bristol – MassDOT
Tom Coyne – WRTA
Angela Grant – VTA
Stephen O’Neil – WRTA (Chair)
Linda Sacchetti – BAT
Patti Robitaille – PVTA
ADA / Para-Transit / HST Committee
Noah Berger – FTA
Tina Cote – FRTA
Bruno Fisher – MART
Frank Gay – GATRA (Chair)
Paula George – CCRTA
Michael Perreault – FRTA
Nicole Rohan – PVTA
Paul Talbot – CATA
RTD – Community Transit Programs Unit
Joanne Champa – Program Coordinator
Kyle Emge – Manager of FTA Programs
Lauren Richmond – Capital & Finance Coordinator
17
This page left intentionally blank
RTA Program Development Calendar
5311 Rural
Operating
JARC/New Freedom
Capital or Operating
MPO Process
Planning
Appendix A
SCA
MPOs vote to release
FFY TIPs for 30 day
public review.
Operating
MAP
Contracts in place;
projects active for
current SFY
Capital
RTACAP
ITCCAP
Contracts in place;
projects active for
current SFY
MassDOT
incorporates TIPS into
STIP and FTA/FHWA
approves by October
1st.
MPOs vote to approve
4 year FFY TIP
7/15: 90% SCA
contracts released
and executed for
RTA previous SFY
funding
8/15: DOT makes
budget request to
ANF-based on
adopted budgets
for next SFY
Contracts in
place; projects
active for
current SFY
Q4 Program
Update
(previous
SFY): Including
spending
projections and
Regional
Transit Outlook
submittal
Purchase Order
executed with
vendor
Contracts in
place; projects
active for
current SFY
General State Fiscal Year Process
Month
July
August
September
MPO adopts
four-year TIP;
MassDOT
prepares fouryear STIP
A-1
November
October
Q1 Program
Update: FTA
program
guidance
released for
current FFY,
including
Regional
Transit Outlook
submittal
RTD releases
capital figures
for next SFY
MPO Split
Letters and
FTA
allocations
issued
December
January
RTAs begin
update of
Project Lists
for next SFY
Q2 Program
Update:
Including
Regional
Transit Outlook
submittal
RTD releases
capital figures
for next SFY
MassDOT
Community
Transit Grant
Program
Application
Released
Vehicles begin
delivery to
grantees
10/1: RTA Financial
Statement due to
MassDOT
12/15: MassDOT
releases remaining
SCA balance for
previous SFY
funding
RTD releases SCA
figures for next
SFY
1/28: Governor's
budget released for
next SFY
Rural Applications
due from eligible
RTAs
RTD releases expected
FTA funding levels
FTA: 5316/5317
Program funding
guidance issued
RTD releases
expected FTA
funding levels
MassDOT Community
Transit Grant Program
Application Released
Consolidated
applications
submitted to FTA
MassDOT
Community Transit
Grant Program
Application
Released
A-2
MPOs meet at varying
intervals throughout
the year.
Adminstrative
modification (Minor
adjustments) to the
TIP can be made at a
publically advertised
meeting.
Amendments (Major
changes) require a
vote for 30 day
review, a public
meeting, and a vote to
approve.
MPOs solicit for
5316/5317
applications
JARC/New Freedom
application cycles
vary for PVTA,
WRTA, CCRTA &
Boston Region
February
March
April
May
RPAs work with DOT
and RTAs to ensure
fiscal constraint &
accountablity for
matching funds
RTD provides
Community Transit
Grant Program
Application Training
through MPOs
RTD reviews
and approves
Project Lists
for next SFY
and sends to
OTP
MassDOT works with
RPAs to develop
financial forecasts.
RTA's begin
adoption of
Capital Plans
. Inter-agency
committee
meets and
reviews all
applications.
Comments on
all applications
due back to
RTD by May 4
Q3 Program
Update:
Including
Regional
Transit Outlook
submittal
MassDOT
provides final
capital figures
to RTAs for
next SFY
RPAs provide
5316/5317 project
rank & prioritization to
RTD
Based on draft
capital plans,
RTA's consider
joint
procurement
opportunities
A-3
June
Program
Federal and
State budget
guidance due
5/15
Awards letters
issued for next
SFY
Contracts sent for
next SFY
Executed contracts
returned to
MassDOT
Contracts sent for
next SFY
Approved
applications
inserted in Project
List for RTAs &
forwarded to OTP
Awards letters
issued for next
SFY
Executed contracts
returned to MassDOT
Contracts sent for next
SFY
Approved applications
inserted in Project List
for RTAs & forwarded
to OTP
Awards letters issued
for next SFY
RPAs work with DOT
and RTAs to ensure
fiscal constraint &
accountablity for
matching funds
RTD & RPAs meet for
Weeks of Review
Awards letters
issued for next
SFY
Contracts sent
for next SFY
Executed contracts
returned to
MassDOT
Vehicle
escalation and
final pricing set
with vendor
Approved
applications
inserted in
Project List for
RTAs &
forwarded to
OTP
Contracts sent
for next SFY
Executed
contracts
returned to
MassDOT
RTAs provide final
draft capital plan for
next 4 year FFY TIP
to RPAs
Executed
contracts
returned to
MassDOT
RTA's
complete
adoption of
Capital Plans
for TIP/STIP
A-4
Program Development Calendar Comments
NOTES: RTACAP/ITCCAP
Problem:
1. State RTACAP/ITCCAP funds are available in the 7/1-6/30 timeframe. For example,
7/1/2011 - 6/30/2012
2. RTA's receive Federal Transit Funds on the 10/1 - 9/30 timeframe. For example,
10/1/2011 - 9/30/2012
3. MPO's adopt multi-year TIP/STIP based on Federal Fiscal Year. For example 2012-2015
before 9/30/2011
Fix:
1. RTACAP/ITCCAP must be expended within State Fiscal Year and cannot straddle two
State Fiscal Years without separate RTACAP/ITCCAP contracts for each year.
NOTES: SECTION 5311
Problem:
1. 5311 funds for the Fiscal Year ending 6/30 are not received until 6-12 months after
Fiscal Year end.
Fix:
1. Accelerate process of application submittal by RTA's and submittal of 5311 application
by MassDOT to FTA in order that 5311 funds are received with the Fiscal Year
applicable.
NOTES: SCA
Problem:
1. RTA audits due 10/1 and disbursement of 10% SCA balance by 12/15; RTA's with
completed audits must wait 75 days for release of SCA balance.
Fix:
1. RTA's with completed audits receive 10% SCA balance within 45 days of completed
audit.
A-5
This page left intentionally blank
Appendix B
SERVICE COMMITTEE REPORT
PART I: Documentation of Service Reductions and Impacts
Each Regional Transit Authority was requested to provide information regarding any service
reductions and fare increases that have been implemented since FY 2006. The actions taken
by each RTA are attached to this narrative. It’s clear that the RTAs have taken positive steps to
improve fixed route service efficiencies by eliminating unproductive service and to manage
budgets and funding levels. However, over this timeframe, the basic components of service,
span, frequency and coverage, have been severely compromised to where essential local and
regional mobility has either been restricted or eliminated. Given the actions taken to date by
the RTAs, any suggestion that RTAs can add or restore service by simply eliminating
unproductive service is highly suspect and should be discarded from any present or future
discussions regarding RTA service.
A. MERRIMACK VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
1. Fixed Route Service Reductions since FY 2006
Action Taken
Date
Communities Affected
Route
Combined with
Lawrence Route
7/1/08 Lawrence
36
38 Hampshire Street
19 Summer Street
Lawrence-based Routes
Haverhill- based Routes
Deleted
Reduce Peak
Hour Service by
2 Hours
Adjust Wkday/Sat
from 60
min.frequency to
90 min.
7/1/09 Haverhill
7/1/09 Lawrence
7/1/09 Haverhill
2. Fare Increase
Fares increased on all routes from $1.00 to $1.25; Senior and Disabled from .50 cents to
.60 cents plus all passes increased. Fare increase effective 7/1/2009
B-1
3. Fixed Route Service Reductions between FY 2002 and FY 2004.
A. Bus Service
Route
76 & 76A River Road
Employment
Action Taken
52 Amesbury/Newburyport
42 West Methuen
22 Ballardvale
22 Ballardvale
84 Liberty Tree Mall
29 Lawrence Intown
Communities Affected
Deleted
7/1/02 Andover, Lawrence
Deleted
1/7/02 Amesbury,
Newburyport
Converted to
Ring & Ride
Combined with
Rte. 21
Converted to
Ring & Ride
Deleted
Combined with
34 Prospect Hill
53 Newburyport Shuttle
Date
Deleted
1/7/02 Methuen
7/1/02 Andover
10/1/02 Andover
7/1/02 Lawrence
7/1/02 Lawrence
7/1/03 Newburyport
4. Fare increase for Non-ADA Elderly Transportation Effective 7/1/02, $1.00 - $3.00
B.
FRANKLIN REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service cuts, service improvement delays, and fare increases since 2006:
In August 2006 FRTA consolidated Fixed Route, ADA, and Demand Response services
with the former Greenfield Montague Transportation Area. With the consolidation there
was no increase FRTA administrative staff and two operations management staff positions
were laid off. In December 2008 the Department of Transitional Assistance terminated its
contract with FRTA to provide transportation to employment and employment training
programs. In February 2009 FRTA discontinued its Veteran’s Transportation Shuttle to VA
facilities across the Commonwealth. In September 2009 FRTA ended its fixed route service
to the North Route (Greenfield to Northfield). Also in September 2009 FRTA implemented
system-wide fixed route fare, schedule, and route changes increasing fares on two routes
and eliminating zone fares on four others. In addition, since 1999 we have been relying
on JARC funds to help sustain operation of our Route 32 (Greenfield to Athol), which has
delayed other service improvements.
C.
LOWELL REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service Cuts since 2006:
a. The LRTA Downtown Circulator Route (#09)-scheduled trips reduced by two (2) hours
per weekday or 520 hours per year.
B-2
b. Route #12 -Tewksbury via Rte.38- reduced by 3 trips per weekday or 1,170 hours per
year.
c. Saturday service to Route #3, #4, #6 and # 9 reduced through the combination of
routes. The effect was to eliminate two routes in total and weaken the service offered
along all four routes.
d. No general fare increases: Free transfers eliminated. College Semester pass
discontinued.
D.
MONTACHUSETT REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
I.
Since 2006 MART has made the following cuts, delays and fare increases:
a. Leominster Loop (Routes 8, 9 & 10) – the frequency was reduced from 60
minutes to 90 minutes in September 2008. The demand for an increase in
geography on this frequently late loop meant either add 1 additional bus or a
longer headway. Due to fiscal constraints MART was forced to go with the
longer headway. The result was lower ridership.
b. In March 2007 MART increased all our fares (fixed route and paratransit
services) by 1/3 (.33%) - see attached.
c. MART has also continued to postpone service expansion of nights and
weekends. MART hopes, with increased funding, to expand service on
weeknights to 10pm, do full days on Saturday instead of partial, and limited
Sunday service (of which there is currently none)
E.
BERKSHIRE REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Cost Efficiency Efforts
FY 09 – FY 11
1. Increase base fare 49.33% on 8/15/05
2. Increase base fare 13.63% on 9/2/08
FY 12 Cost Savings Initiatives
3. Fixed route schedule efficiencies implemented on September 2011 projected
annualized savings $159,000.
B-3
F.
WORCESTER REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service Cuts/Improvement Delays/Fare Increases since 2006
 Elimination of two (2) suburban routes (Routes 32 & 110)
 Elimination of Flexible Shuttle route
 Elimination of five (5) city routes (Routes 20, 8, 9, 10, 21)
 Reduction of frequency of service on most routes
 Reduction of service to specific locations on routes (Mill Pond Apts;
Chandler/May St; Main Circle; Plantation St, Auburn Ind. Park)
 Elimination of afternoon specials
 Significant reduction in Elder Shopper Special grocery store service
 Elimination of AVCOA demand response service.
G.
PIONEER VALLEY TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service Reduction
21% of PVTA’s service was eliminated from 2003 to 2005 as follows:
 Sunday service eliminated on most routes - Span of service reduced on few
remaining routes
 Evening service - span of service reduced on most routes
 Holiday service - Reduced or eliminated on all routes
 Downtown Trolley Service - Eliminated
 East Longmeadow Route - Eliminated
 Industrial Park Service - Eliminated
 Saturday Service - Eliminated on three routes and reduced on two routes
 Day Time Service Levels - Reduced on ten routes
Fare Increases
July 2008 $1.00 to $1.25 Fixed Route
$2.00 to $ 2.50 Paratransit
July 2012 Fare increase will be recommended to Advisory Board
$1.25 to $1.50 Fixed Route
$2.50 to $3.00 Paratransit
Less of an increase for Smart Cards
H.
CAPE COD REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service cuts effective March 1, 2008:
Eliminate Hyannis Villager
Reduce FLEX from 9 round trips to 6; Saturday service reduced.
Boston Hospital Transportation (BHT) reduced from 5 to 4 days per week (Thursday
service eliminated).
Fare Increases effective March 1, 2008:
Fixed route fares: all types (regular, senior, disabled, day pass, transit pass) of fares doubled
(100% increase in price); monthly pass discontinued.
B-Bus fares: 20% increase except monthly frequent rider ticket (both regular and people
with disabilities and seniors over 60)
ADA: 20% increase
BHT: 20% increase
B-4
I. BROCKTON AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
FARE INCREASES
Fixed route:
Base adult fare:
Ashmont adult fare:
Paratransit/ADA
Local one-way:
Out of town one-way:
Boston round trip:
Amount
$2.00 to $2.50
$3.00 to $3.50
$7.50 to $15.00
Parking:
All day:
$2.00 to $3.00
$1.00 to $1.25
$2.00 to $2.50
Date
March 28, 2011
September 21, 2009
August 29, 2009
SERVICE CUTS
Brockton Route 2A eliminated.
July 12, 2009
3,000 rev. hours/ yr., 2.5% of total fixed route.
Eliminated Boston paratransit medical trips on Monday. September 21, 2009
J. GREATER ATTLEBORO-TAUNTON REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
In response to funding cuts GATRA has undertaken the following steps:
 In July of 2008 GATRA cut service system wide. Most routes saw changes in timing
and length. Some routes were cut entirely including bus service between the Cities of
Taunton and Providence, RI and the North Attleboro Senior Shuttle. Total service
eliminated amounted to $340,000.

In November 2008 Sunday service was eliminated from the Plymouth routes. The
Plymouth Area Link was the only route GATRA operated that had Sunday service,
which was in response to the high tourist concentration in that area.
B-5
PART II: FY 2013 Service Improvements
The second task of the Service Committee was to request of each RTA their top three service
improvements which would be implemented in upcoming Fiscal Year 2013 (7/1/2012 –
6/30/2013). Each RTA was given wide latitude to determine what their priorities would be
and how best to implement each improvement. From the submitted information, each RTA
seeks to improve fixed route bus service. These actions either restore service that was
eliminated in the past and/or improve bus line service with a combination of span,
frequency, and coverage improvements. Several RTAs do require the acquisition of rolling
stock to actually implement some of these improvements. This requirement underscores the
importance of developing and implementing a coordinated and aggressive five-year
operating and capital program. The RTAs would take the lead in preparing their operating
and capital plans and work with various partners to implement these plans. The end
product at the end of this five-year time period would be improved local and regional
mobility.
A. MERRIMACK VALLEY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
1. Provide bus service on the following holidays on a Saturday Service Schedule:
Veteran’s Day – Martin Luther King Day – Patriot’s Day and add Boston Commuter
Service on present weekday schedule
Estimated Cost:
$152,270
Estimated Revenue $ 22,840
Estimate Net Cost $129, 430
Federal:
$32, 615
Local:
$32, 745
SCA:
$64, 070
2. Provide 30-minute service for the entire service weekday on the following routes: 01
– 41 – 39B
Estimated Cost:
$397,840
Estimated Revenue $ 59,675
Estimate Net Cost $338,165
Federal:
Local:
SCA:
6
$ 85, 215
$ 85, 555
$167,395
3. Restore two hours of peak hour service in eleven Lawrence-based routes eliminated in
FY 2010.
Estimated Cost:
$300,700
Estimated Revenue $ 45,105
Estimate Net Cost $255,595
B.
Federal:
Local:
SCA:
$ 64, 410
$ 64, 665
$126, 520
FRANKLIN REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Top three service improvements or service restorations:
1. Increased fixed route frequencies to average 30 minute headways on Route 21
and Route 22, 60 minute headways on Route 31 and Route 32, and 120 minute
headways on Route 23 and Route 41 (first bus departing at 5:00am and last bus
retuning at 7:15pm).
Currently the total number of actual fixed route operating hours is 56.92 per day and
the proposed increase to fixed route frequencies would be approximately 118.33
hours per day. The additional cost equates to approximately $1,219,425 per year.
Current fixed route revenues are approximately 12.90% of the total cost of operation.
This would require an additional increase in assistance of approximately $1,062,119,
which we would anticipate would come from 5311 (50%), SCA (25%), and Local
Assessments (25%). With this there would be a need to purchase additional buses
and onboard fixed route equipment (fare box, cameras, AVL, etc.), in which we
would use approximately $850,000 for 3 30-35ft transit buses and onboard
equipment with RTACAP. This would not only improve service options to our existing
customer base, but would also allow for us to appeal to commuters travelling to
Northampton and Amherst, college students to UMass and GCC, more freedom for
seniors to travel around the region without having to rely on more costly paratransit
services, as well as zero-car households and the general public having reasonable
public transit access to local shopping, medical, and other services.
2. Create travel training program to help transition paratransit riders onto the fixed
route system. After implementing service improvement #1 above, we could train our
current ADA Coordinator to become a travel trainer. This would be used to help
transition paratranist riders, both ADA and Demand Response, to learn to use the
fixed route for some or all of their trips. The cost would be minimal, probably less
than $5000 to send staff to the training, cover travel and lodging expenses, and for
marketing and promotion of this new program. The expenses, most of which would
be one-time expenses, could potentially be covered within our operating budget.
Having increased fixed route service and a travel training program would help get
current paratransit riders onto the fixed route thereby allowing us to expand our
B-7
paratransit services to seniors, disabled, and low income people in towns that do not
have fixed route service.
3. Expand fixed route service hours during the week and implement Saturday fixed
route service. Currently we do not operate fixed route service after 7:15pm during
the week or on the weekends. Extending fixed route service to cover 2nd and 3rd shift
times would add an additional 32.25 hours per day, and operating hourly fixed route
service on Saturdays from 8:00am to 2:30pm would add an additional 31.50 hours
per day. This additional cost equates to approximately $765,491 per year. Assuming
revenues following current trends as stated above, this would require an additional
increase in assistance of approximately $666,743, which we would anticipate would
come from 5311 (50%), SCA (25%), and Local Assessments (25%). There is no
anticipated need for additional capital purchases with this service enhancement. This
would allow for people working during the day to access shopping and other
services after work, allow for access to employment for people working 2nd and 3rd
shifts, and allow riders access to public transportation on the weekends for shopping,
medical, and other social events.
C.
LOWELL REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service Improvements Proposed:
1. Saturday Service trip schedule would be changed to add better trip frequency
along all operated routes. The schedule now operates 3/4 of the weekday
routes at about half the weekday service frequency. Also, the LRTA's existing
Saturday service operates 183 less vehicle hours than the normal weekday
service. The added cost to implement this Saturday service upgrade would be
approximately $623,203 per service year.
The funding sources normally needed to offset this additional cost would
be Federal (21.5%) or $ 133,989; State Contract Assistance (32.3%)
or $ 201,295; Farebox recovery (14%) or $ 87,248 and Local Assessments
(32.2%) or $ 200,671.
2. Evening Service added to five existing key routes. These routes would
service the main shopping malls; downtown Lowell ; UMass and Middlesex
Community College activities; MBTA commuter rail connections;Tsongas
Arena and Lelacheur Park for all major events. The added cost to
implement this would be approximately $ 297,063 per service year.
The funding sources breakdown normally needed is detailed in Section 1. above.
B-8
D.
MONTACHUSETT REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
I.
The Top 3 Service Improvements or Restoration MART hopes to implement with an
increased SCA are as follows:
a. Restore the Leominster Loop back to a maximum 60 minute frequency.
Adding an additional bus will allow MART to reduce the headway of Routes 2
(Main line) and 9 (Monument Sq-Wal-Mart) to a 45 minutes headway – two
buses headed in opposite direction. This will also allow 8 & 10 to return to a
60 minute loop and add the Senior Center (just north of the Square) as a Bus
stop. MART needs to restore as soon as possible (current fiscal year).
b. Increase current Fitchburg in-town route to include the new Commuter Rail
Station (Wachusett) in West Fitchburg.
c. Service expansion of the Commuter Bus route from Gardner to Wachusett
Station.
No capital is needed at this time. However an additional coach will be needed in FY14
(October 2013) when Wachusett Station opens in order to accommodate the service
expansion mentioned above.
The operational costs for one additional fixed route bus and one ADA van for one year is
$390,456 with a net cost of service (NCOS) or $271,445 after federal assistance (17.56%)
and farebox revenue (12.92%) are deducted. This NCOS would require an SCA increase
or $158,802 just for point (a.) above.
E.
BERKSHIRE REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service improvements BRTA would implement:
1. Increase service to 11PM on weekdays with 30 minute headways. Projected
additional operational cost of $6,413,387 with additional capital costs for vehicles of
$2,100,000.
2. Increase Saturday service to 10 PM and Sunday service 9 AM – 9PM for additional
operational cost of $568,501.
3. Increase service along Route 7 from Williamstown to Pittsfield for additional
operational cost of $1,205,538 and capital cost of $270,000
B-9
F.
PIONEER VALLEY TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Service Improvement Priorities
1. Increased Frequency on main line routes:
 Total SCA & Local Assessment Cost: $2,250,000
 Capital Cost: eight 40 ft. buses and 4 articulated
 Revenue Projection: $187,500
 Service Benefit: required to attract “Choice Riders, seniors and people with
disabilities. Would eliminate the current issue of over-capacity leaving
people behind and that’s for transit dependent rider.
2. Two new cross-town Routes in Springfield (as opposed to the current hub and
spoke)
 Total SCA & Local Assessment Cost: $1,200,000
 Capital Cost: 6 40 ft. buses
 Revenue Projection: $112,500
 Service Benefit: required to attract “Choice Riders, seniors and people with
disabilities. Reduce transfers and better access for current transit
dependent riders. Target large employers and shopping centers. Would
allow riders to avoid going through Springfield bus terminal which is in
disrepair and minimal security.
3. Increased Evening & Weekend Service
 Total SCA & Local Assessment Cost: $800,000
 Capital Cost: five 40 ft. buses
 Revenue Projection: $95,000
 Service Benefit: Improved access for 2nd, 3rd shift and weekend workers.
Much needed service for Springfield area Colleges.
G.
WORCESTER REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Late Night Service
o Total Cost: $500,000
o Capital Cost: None
o Revenue Projection: $56,000
o Service Benefit: Tremendous service benefit for 2nd and 3rd shift workers,
particularly service workers in Worcester’s 3 hospitals, as well as retail and
manufacturing workers (est.75,000 trips/year)
B - 10
H.

Increased Frequency of Service
o Total Cost: $150,000
o Capital Cost: One additional vehicle; Already available
o Revenue Projection: $50,000
o Service Benefit: Increase in ridership due to increased service and increased
ability to make transfers to other buses and commuter rail (est. 66,000
trips/yr)

New Route: Union Station/Hospital/College/YMCA/Greendale Mall
o Total Cost: $200,000
o Capital Cost: One additional vehicle; Already available
o Revenue Projection: $28,000
o Service Benefit: New route would complement new downtown
development area at Union Station, including hospital and pharmacy
college, as well as provide direct service for high demand-response
destination for disabled to rehabilitation services & shopping (est. 37,000
trips/yr)
NANTUCKET REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
New Service: $373,640 – 4 additional vehicles, includes vehicles and ITS equipped $920,000 – service areas no currently serviced would benefit residents and visitors; direct
employee bus – would benefit downtown workers and reduce traffic congestion and
provide parking opportunities; extended Jetties Beach service would provide downtown
parking opportunities in the evening hours benefiting restaurants and downtown
businesses, residents and visitors; extended hours – would benefit 2nd shift workers,
businesses and restaurants.
Extended Hours: $110,400 – no additional capital required
Total operating costs $530,520 - SCA @ 70% - $371,364 Local Assessment at 30% $159,156
I.
CAPE ANN TRANSIT AUTHORITY
1. A direct fixed route service from Rockport to Gloucester Crossing, a new shopping
center located on Route 128.
2. Expanded business express from downtown Gloucester to the 5 elderly housing
projects, hospitals, Community Health Center and Gloucester Crossing. Frequency
would be increased from one hour to every half hour.
3. Increased frequency service from downtown Gloucester to downtown Rockport via
Thatcher
Road.
B - 11
J.
METROWEST REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Three Service Improvements:
1. Provide service at 30-minute headways on all routes. (Currently, with the exception of
commuter shuttles, our routes have headways of one hour or greater)
2. Provide Saturday service to all of our towns. (Presently, the MWRTA provides Saturday
service on 4 of 10 routes)
K.
SOUTHEASTERN REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Three Service Improvements:
1. Provide longer span of service after 6 p.m.
2. Provide Sunday service.
3. Expand services for areas that are presently underserved.
L.
CAPE COD REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
The service improvements we have planned include the creation of two new Upper
Cape fixed route services, and additional day of service for our Boston Hospital Bus and a
new Hyannis Villager fixed route service.
Bourne/Falmouth:
(CMAQ)
Total: $139,989
Bourne/Sandwich
(CMAQ)
Total: $141,068
Fare revenue: $17,500
Fed. $122,489
SCA $0
LA $0
Fare revenue: $17,500
Fed. $123,568
SCA $0
LA $0
B - 12
Additional day of service for our Boston Hospital Transportation (BRT)
Total: $28,484
Fare revenue: $9,500
Fed. $8,994
SCA $6,715
LA $3,275
Hyannis Villager:
Total: $170,000
Fare revenue: $40,684
Fed. $61,267
SCA $45,741
LA $22,308
Capital cost for startup should be minimal if current rolling stock is used.
M. BROCKTON AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Rockland deviated fixed route service.
JARC funding expires 9/30/2012. Cost: $50,000/yr.
Sunday fixed route and ADA service:
JARC funding expires 8/31/2013. Cost: $190,000/yr.
Saturday evening fixed route and ADA service:
JARC & New Freedom expires 8/31/2013. Cost: $36,000/yr.
Avon/Stoughton paratransit service:
New Freedom expires 6/30/2013. Cost: $12,000/yr.
Easton paratransit service:
New Freedom expires 12/31/2014. Cost: $15,000/yr.
Continuation of MAP vehicle replacement for paratransit services, BAT and
communities. Seven vehicles per year, $450,000/yr.
B - 13
N. GREATER ATTLEBORO-TAUNTON REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
GATRA would like to see the following improvements/restorations:

Restoration of Sunday service during the tourist season in the Towns of Plymouth,
Marshfield and Wareham.

There is currently no peak hour service in the two larger urban areas, Taunton and
Attleboro. This limits opportunities for individuals to use public transportation to get
to and from work, school or training. Funding to add peak hour service on special
routes would provide more opportunities for such individuals to use public
transportation.

In regard to longer hours of operation, most of our service currently ends by 5:30 pm
or 6 pm during the week and even earlier on Saturday. Providing longer hours of
operation give individuals the opportunity to use public transportation to and from
employment opportunities. Limited Sunday service in core areas should also be
considered. There is no Sunday service anywhere in the GATRA region. This would
provide many opportunities again for work or other social recreation type purposes.

GATRA has several summer tourist areas, especially in the Town of Plymouth. GATRA
has wanted to work with the town and operate more service for both Plymouth
residents and the tourist communities. This could be undertaken not only in
Plymouth but Wareham and other tourist based communities.

Restoration of night service for employment purposes in the two Cities’ service.
B - 14
PART III: The Service Committee will coordinate with the ADA Paratransit Committee to
empower each RTA to develop pilot programs to address Senior Citizen Mobility. These pilot
programs will be “right-sized” for each RTA and developed in consultation with local
organizations representing senior citizens
B - 15
1