Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs
Department of Environmental Protection
One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108· 617-282-5500
DEVAL L PATRICK
Governor
RICHARD K. SULUVAN JR.
Secretary
TIMOTHY P MURRAY
lteutenant Governor
KENNETH l. KIMMELL
Commillllioner
March 15,2012
Richard A. Davey
Secretary of Transportation
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
Ten Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116-3969
Re: MassDOT Petitions to Delay the Fairmount Line Improvements Project and
1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces
Dear Secretary Davey:
By this letter, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) approves
the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) petitions to delay the Fairmount
Line Improvements Project and 1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces under the Transit
System Improvements regulation, 310 CMR 7.36. MassDOT submitted these petitions to
MassDEP on August 1, 2011 pursuant to the regulation's project delay provisions in 310 CMR
7.36 (4). MassDEP held public meetings to take comments on the petitions on September 13,
2011. Based on MassDEP's review and public comments, MassDEP requested that MassDOT
submit additional information in order for MassDEP to take final action on the petitions. (See
MassDEP letter to MassDOT dated November 3,2011 (attached).) This information was
submitted to MassDEP by MassDOT in a letter dated November 29,2011 (attached).
Fairmount Line Improvements Project Delay
In its November 3,2011 letter, MassDEP determined that the Fairmount Line Improvements
Project petition to delay was complete and generally met the requirements of 31 0 CMR 7.36 (4).
However, MassDEP required that MassDOT submit additional information and documentation
on the emissions analysis completed by the Central Transportation Planning Staff for the
proposed interim emission reduction offset measures.
In response to MassDEP's request for additional information, MassDOT's November 29,2011
letter included an attached memorandum from the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS),
which documented its emissions analysis of the Fairmount Line interim emission reduction offset
measures. In contrast to MassDOT's August 1,2011 petition to delay, which included shuttle
This Information Is available In alternate format. Call Michelle Waters-Ekanem, Diversity Director, at 617-292-5751. TDD# 1-866-539-7622 or 1·617·574·6868
MassDEP Website: www.mass.gov/dep
Printed on Recycled Paper
bus service from Andrew Square to Boston Medical Center and improved bus service on Routes
29 and 31 as proposed offset measures, MassDOT's November 29, 2011 letter indicated that the
offset measures that would be implemented would no longer include improved bus service on
Route 29. However, the CTPS analysis demonstrated that the implementation of shuttle bus
service from Andrew Square to Boston Medical Center and improved bus service on Route 31
would achieve the required emission reductions.
1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces Delay
In its November 3, 2011 letter, MassDEP determined that the 1,000 New Park and Ride Parking
Spaces petition to delay was incomplete and that it did not meet the requirements of 31 0 CMR
7.36 (4). MassDEP required MassDOT to submit the following additional information:
• An accounting of the additional parking spaces that will be provided in addition to the
612 spaces at Wonderland Station, South Garage and a breakdown of the number of
spaces that will be provided at the Savin Hill, Woodland, and Quincy Shipyard stations.
• A confirmation that the spaces at these locations are new and have been created since the
revision to 310 CMR 7.36 was promulgated on December 1, 2006.
• The reasons for the delay and the measures being taken to reduce the delay.
• Justification for its assertion that interim emission reduction offsets should not be
required for the delay of the project due to its close proximity to the Wonderland Station.
In response to MassDEP's request for additional information, MassDOT's November 28,2011
letter included an accounting of parking spaces and their completion dates as well as the causes
of delay and the specific steps to address the delay. MassDOT also has proposed additional
Saturday bus service on Route 111 to meet the interim emission reduction offset requirements of
the regulation, thereby eliminating the need to justify its earlier claim that offsets should not be
required. With the submittal of this information, MassDEP has determined that MassDOT's
petition to delay 1000 parking spaces is complete.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Commissioner
cc. U.S. EPA, Region 1
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
2
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs
.~~~------ ' - ---- '.-
...
'~.~-~----------'
..-..-'-' ....
-..__. _ - - ­
Department of Environmental Protection
One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108. 617-292-5500
RICHJ\RO K. SULUVIIN JR
. Secrotory
DEI/ilL L rllTnICK
Gllvurnl'l'
KENI\'ETH L KIMMELL
TIMOTHY P MUflMY
. U"utollilnL Gc.vllrnor
Comml~ulollcr
November 3, 2011
Mr. David J. Mohler Massachusetts Department of Transportation Office of Transportation Planning Ten Park Plaza, Suite 3170 Boston, MA 02116 Re: MassDOT Petitions to Delay the Fairmount Line Improvements Project and 1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces Dear Mr, Mohler:
The purpose of this letter is to request additional information regarding the Massachusetts
Department ofTl'ansportation (MassDOT) petitions to delay the Fairmount Line Improvements
Project and 1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces. MassDOT submitted these petitions to
the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) on August 1, 2011
pursuant to 310 CMR 7.36 (4), the Transit System Improvements regulation, project delay
provisions. MassDEP held public meetings to take comments on the petitions on September 13,
2011. Based on MassDEP's review, which considered public comments, we are requesting that
MassDOT submit additional information prior to MassDEP's final action on the petitions.
l)rojcct Dclay ll.'o"isions of 310 eMIl. 7.36 (4)
Under the regulation, projects may be delayed if the following conditions are met:
• Interim offset measures are implemented for the period of delay;
• MassDOT submits a petition to delay that includes the reasons the project is delayed, the
measures being taken to reduce the delay, the amount of time the project will be delayed,
and idellti fication of the interim offset measures that will be implemented; and
• MassDEP approves the delay or approves the delay with conditions.
This Information Is available In al\ornato formal. Call Michelle Walors·Ekanom, olvorslly Director, at 617-292-5751. Tooll1 -866 ·539-7622 or 1·617·674·6868
MassoEP Website: www.mass.gov/dep
Printed on Recycled Paper
Additional Information Required for Fairmount Line Improvements Project Dclay
MassDEP has determined that the Fairmount Line Improvements Project petition to deJay is
complete and generally meets the requirements of 31 0 CMR 7.36 (4). However, prior to iuaking
a tinal determination on the petition, MassDEP requires that MassDOT submit additional
informatio11 and docllmentation on the cmissions analysis completed by the Central
Transportation Planning Staff for the proposed interim emission reduction offset measmes.
Additional Information Rcquired for 1,000 New Park and Ride l)arJdng Spaces Delay
MassDEP has determined that the 1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces petition to delay is
incomplete and, does 110t meet the require~nents of 31 0 CMR 7.36 (4). Accordingly, MassDEP
requires MassDOT to submit the following information:
• A complete accoullting of the additional parking spaces that will be provided in addition
to the 612 spaces at Wonderland Station, South Garage. In the petition, MassDOT
indicates spaces will he located at Savin I-lill Station, Woodland Station, and Quincy
Shipyard. A breakdown of the number of spaces that will be provided at these stations
and on what schedule is required. In addition, MassDOT must confirm that the spaces at
these locations are new and have been created sinee the revision to 310 CMR 7.36 was
promulgated on December 1, 2006.
• The reasons for the delay and the measlU'CS being taken to reduce the delay.
Regarding interim emission reduction offset measures for the delay of this project, MassDOT
indicates that private parking lots in close proximity to the Wonderland Station, South Garage
will likely result ill "no measurable air quality benefits in the short term," as South Garage will
be underutilized. MassDOT requests that MassDEP not require interim emission reduction
offset measures. MassDEP rcquires that MassDOT provide a more complete analysis and
justification for its assertion that offsets 110t be required (Le., What level of parking is already
provided near the South Garage location? What is the anticipated emission benefit loss and is it
de minimis? etc.).
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Deputy Commissioner
•
Deval L. Patrick. Governor
TImothy P. Murray. Lt. Governor
Richard A. Davey. Secretary & CEO
MassachuseHs Department of Transportation
November 29, 2011
Alicia McDevitt Deputy Commissioner Department of Environmental Protection Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 Dear Deputy Commissioner McDevittThank yo~ for your recent correspondence on the MassDOT petition (dated July 27,
2011) to delay the final implementation of two of the projects required under 310 CMR 7.36:
the Fairmount Line Improvement project and the 1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces
project. As detailed in the petition1, the completion of both projects has been delayed due
to unexpected construction challenges and, in the case of the Fairmount Line Improvement
project, abutter opposition. MassDOT is nevertheless moving ahead with both projects, and
has already provided DEP with the most up-to-da~e timelines for expected completion.
Following a public meeting held on September 13, 2011, both MassDOT and DEP have
reviewe~ and considered public comments offered on the petition, and this letter addresses
issued raised by DRP and by the public.
F~hmount
Line Improve~ent Project
DRP has requested additional supporting documentation on the emissions analysis
completed by the Central Transportation Planning Staff for the interim offset mitigation
proposal associated with the Fairmount Line Improvement project. That documentation is
attached to this letter.
In addition, following review of public comments and further consultation with the
operating divisions at the MBTA, MassDOT has decided to slightly revise its proposed
interim mitigation measures for the Fairmount Line Improvement project in the following
way: Instead of increasing bus service on both Routes 29 and 31, service will only be
1 Available
at www.eot.state.ma.us/downloads/sip/SIP_AnnuaIRpt2011.pdf.
Leading the Nation In TransportatIon Excellence
Ten Park Plaza. Suite 3170. Boston. MA 021 16
Tel: 617-973-7000. TOO: 617-973-7306
www.mass.gov/massdot
increased on the more heavily used Route 31 (the proposed mitigation will continue to
include the Andrew Square to Boston Medical Center shuttle service). Based on the
analysis performed by CTPS, we believe that this package of interim offset mitigation
measures will provide the best balance of interim air quality improvements and MBTA
operational improvements during the pedod until the Fairmount Line Improvement project
is fully implemented.
1,000 New Park and Ride Parking Spaces
In response to concems and questions raised about MassDOT's initial proposal to
not provide any interim mitigation measures for the brief period of delay associated wIth
the opening of the Wonderland Garage, MassDOT has now decided that mitigation is
appropriate and will be implemented for U1e period of delay. As elucidated in U1e attached
memo, MassDOT is proposing increased Saturday bus service on Route 111-U1e highest
ridership route serving the communities to the northeast of Boston-as interim mitigation.
MassDOT would particularly like to thank the Conservation Law Foundation for its
thoughtful comments on this matter.
DEP has also requested that MassDOT provide a comprehensive accounting of the
full 1,000 spaces to be created as part of the SIP commitment. That information is provided
here:
.
Beverly Depot/Commuter Rail
102
Completed - Fall 2009
Savin Hill/Red Line
22
Completed - Fall 2009
Woodland/Green Line (Newton)
100
Completed - Winter 2007
Quincy Shfpyard/Ferry
168
Completed - Fall 2009
Total
1,004
Lastly, DEP requested additional information on the causes of the delay in the
completion of the Wonderland Garage, and any efforts that the MBTA is undertaking to
reduce the expected delay. The delay has been caused by several independent problems
related to the relocation of a major third-party utility, removal of unforeseen asbestos at the
existing Wonderland Station, an inadequate time-estimate for initial fireproofing, and the
delayed re-inspection of an interim elevator (following an initial failed inspection). The MBTA
.is working diligently with Suffolk Construction to try to compensate for the current delay and
to complete the project as early as the end of May 2012. Schedule recovery options being
reviewed include: re-sequencing of work, increasing manpower, shift changes, and an alternate
method of fireproofing the elevator shaft structural steel. This review will be completed by the
end of November 2011, and any opportunities for adqitional schedule improvement - given
that the project is in its final phases - will be adopted.
It is my hope that the information provided here ·can help to answer any remaining
outstanding questions that you and your staff may have. MassDOT and the MBTA are
prepared to implement in the period of December 31, 2011-January 3, 2012 the interim
mitigation offset measures described. By doing so, we believe that we will fully meet our
mitigation obligations under 310 CMR 7.36.
Thank you for your attention and partnership throughout this process. Please do not
hesitate to let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely yours,
~~
hler
Executiv irector
Office of Transportation
CTPS
CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION
PLANNI~CiI
STAFF
Slaff 10 Ihe ooslon Region Melropolilan Planning Organization
DRAFT MEMORANDUM
To:
Scott Hamwey
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
From:
Scott Petel'Son
Re:
Fairmount Line: SIP Mitigation Targets and Strategies
November 29, 2011
BACKGROUND
The Central Transportation Planning Stat'{ (CTPS) was asked by the Massachusetts Department
of Transportation (MassDOT) to support a ~ansportation demand and air quality analysis of the
Fainnount Line as part of a work program that was created in December of2010 and approved
on March 17, 2011. This analysis wlls used to detennine the emissions target for having a delay
in opening four new rail stations on the Fairmount Line and analyzing mitigation strategies to
offset the delays. This analysis is important because the Fairmount Line project is a legal
commitment under the State Implementation Plan (SIP), and therefore any delays in completing
the rail stations would have legal ramifications. The SIP requirements related to the Fainnount
Line are as'follows:
Before December 31, 2011, construction of the following facilities shall be
completed and opened to full publit;: use: Fainnount Line improvements
consisting of enhancements of existing stations including, without
limitation: platfonn extensionsj improved lighting and improved access; a
new station in the general location of Four Comers, and a new station in
each of the neighborhoods of Dorchester, Mattapan and Roxbury; and
bridge upgrades and other mea$ures to improve serv:ice and increase
ridership.
In the May 2010 SIP Status Update to the Federal TraDsit Administration, MassDOT
acknowledged that there would be a delay in completing the four new rail stations by the
December 2011 deadline, requiring the analysis described below. The four new rail stations are
Four Corners, Talbot Avenue, Newmarket, and Blue Hill Avenue, and their locations on the
Fainnount Line are sh9wn in Figure I. The SIP identifies emissions from three pollutants:
carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and nitrogen oxides (NOx).
APPROACH
MassDOT will need to mitigate the delay of the opening of the four new rail stations, starting in
January I, 2012, with a set ofpl'ojects and/or programs (offsets) that will result in emissions
reductions for the three key pollutants (reduction targets) equal to or greater than the reductions
that would result after opening the four new stations. The approach used in this analysis,
51010 Tronsporlallon BUilding. Tan Park PlaIa, Sullo 2150 •Doslon, MA 02116·3968. (617)973-7100. Fax (617)973·8855 •m (617)973·7089. tlpS@(lps.org
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
3
November 29, 2011
which is similar to that used in previous erps studies, consists of two steps.
The first step was to quantify the reduction targets for the three key pollutants. The targets were
developed by creating two representations of an average spring weekday transportation system
and travel flows in eastern Massachusetts for 2012 using the Metropolitan Planning
Organization's (MPO) regional travel demand model set. These two representations of the
transportation system and travel flow were identical except that one included the four ~ew
stations and a service plan that served them and the other representation excluded them. The
regional model set was used to determine the emissions reductions associated with auto
diversions from building four new stations.
The second step involved testing the potential emissions reductions of several mitigation
strategies developed in discussions with MassDOT using the regional model set. The seenados
that were tested in order to develop the targets and identify strategies that could be implemented
by January 1,2012, are listed be.low:
Scenario A: Four new Fairmount Line stations
Scenario B: No new stations, with existing conditions
Scenario C: Provide a new weekday service between Andrew Square and Boston Medical
Center
Scenario D: Reduce Fairmount and Readville commuter rail station fares to $1.70
Scenario E: Increase weekday peak-period headways on Fairmount Line
Scenario F: Implement new weekday Roxbury-Dorchester-Mattapan express bus service
Scenario G: Improve off-peak and weekend headways on the Fairmount Line
Scenario H: Initiate Youth Pass program
Scenario I: Improve weekday bus Route 31 headways
Scenario J: Extend bus Route 29 from Jackson Square to Ruggles on weekdays
Scenario K: Improve weekend bus Route 29 and Route 31 headways
Scenario L: Improve weekday Red Line headways
Scenario M: Improve weekend Red Line headways
MODEL METHOD
The regional travel demand model set useCl in this study is based on procedures and data that
have evolved over many years. The model set is used to simulate existing travel conditions and
to forecast future-year travel on the entire transportation system spanning eastern Massachusetts,
for the transit, auto, and walklbike modes.
The model set simulates the modes and routes of trips between areas in the modeled region.
Population, employment, number ofhouseholds, auto ownership, highway and transit levels of
service, downtown parking costs, auto operating costs, and transit fares are some of the most
important inputs that are used in applying the model to a real-world situation. These inputs are
constantly updated so that the model set simulates current travel patterns with as much accuracy
as possible. The MPO regional travel model set has been used in a number of recent modeling
activities, such as the Green Line Extension New Starts Study, the South Coast Rail Study, the
Casey Overpass Study, and 1-93 Tri-Town Interchange Study.
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
4
November 29, 2011
The model set is calibrated to a base year, in this case 2009. Once the model set satisfactorily
replicates existing conditions, it is used for forecasting. The future year in tlus study was 2012. ,
The reduction targets and offsets were tested using that year of analysis and the corresponding
land use and transportation system.
Some important features of the model set are listed below.
• The modeled area normally encompasses 164 cities and towns in Eastern Massachusetts.
The modeled area is divided into 2,727 internal transportation analysis zones (TAZs).
There are 146 extemalload points around the periphery of the modeled area that allow
for travel between the modeled area and adjacent areas Of Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
• The model set was estimated using data from a Household Travel Survey, External
Cordon Survey, Transit Passenger Surveys, the 2000 U.S. Census data, an employment
database for the region, and a vast database of manual counts of transit riderslup and
traffic volume data collected over the last decade. CTPS obtained the most current transit
ridership data and lughway volumes available to help calibrate the model for use in this
study.
• The transportation system is divided into three primary modes. The tmnsit mode contains
all the MBT A rail and bus lines, commuter boat services, regional transit agencies, 'and
private express bus carriers. The auto mode includes all of the express highways,
principle arterials, many minor arterials and local roadways. Walklbike trips are also
examined and are represented in the nonmotorized mode. The nonmotorize.d mode is
represented as a network of roadways with sidewalks, bike trails, and major walking
paths.
• The model is set up to examine travel on an average weekday in the spring for four time
periods. The time periods are AM (AM peak period), 3 hoursj MD (midday), 6 hoursj PM
(PM peak period), 3 hours; and NT (nighttime), 12 hours.
The model set is based on the traditional four-step urban transportation planning process of trip
generation, trip distribution, mode choice, and trip assignment. This process is used to estimate
the daily transit ridership and highway traffic volumes, based on changes to the transportation
system. The model set as it relates to transit takes into consideration data on service frequency
(how often trains and buses arrive at any given transit stop), routing, travel time, transit parking
availability, and fares for all of the transit services. The model set for the roadway system is
sensitive to roadway locations, connectivity, length, speeds, capacity, lanes, truck exclusions,
turn prohibitions, and tolls. Results from the computer model provide us with detailed
information relating to transit ridership demand and roadway travel. A schematic representation
of the modeling process is shown in Figure 2.
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
November 29,2011
5
O£MOOMPHIC AND
aOCloeCONc:JMIC bioTA
((2]
OUTPUT
J
.
---~
. . ··COCIO!!.CONOMdC]
DATA
.- - ­
..
---~
CTPIiiI
FIGURE 2
Model Set Flowchart
Fainnount UrN):
SIP MItigation
Targeto and Slrategiea
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
6
November 29,2011
The Four-Step Model
I. Trip Generation: In the first step, the total number of trips produced by the residents in
the modeled area is calculated using demographic and socio-economic data. Similarly,
the numbers of trips attracted by different types ofland uses such as employment centers,
schools, hospitals, and shopping centers, are estimated using land use data and trip
generation rates obtained from travel surveys. All of these calculations are performed at
the T AZ level.
2. Trip Distribution: In the second step, the model determines how the trips produced and
attracted would be matched throughout the region. Trips are distributed based on transit
and highway travel times between TAZs and the relative attractiveness of each TAZ. The
attractiveness of a TAZ is influenced by factors such as the number and type ofjobs
available, the size of schools, hospitals, and shopping centers.
3. Mode choice: Once the total number of trips between all combinations ofTAZs is
determined, the mode choice step of the model splits the total trips among the available
modes of travel. The modes of travel are walk, auto and transit. To determine what
proportions of trips each mode receives, the model takes into account the travel times,
number of transfers required, and costs associated with these options. Some of the other
variables used in the mode choice are auto ownership rates, household size, and income.
4. Assignment: After estimating the number of trips by mode for all possible TAZ
combinations, the model assigns them to their respective transportation networks. Reports
showing the transit and highway usage can be produced as well as the impact of these
modes on regional ail' quality.
The mobile-source emissions of alternative transportation scenarios can be forecasted and
analyzed using, the MPO's regional travel demand model set in conjunction with U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emissions rates that are developed by the EPA's
MOBILE6.2 software. The model estimates traffic volumes, average highway speeds, vehicle
miles traveled, and vehicle hours traveled. The EPA's MOBILE6.2 software develops emission
factors by pollutant and speed for different years based on,' among other things, assumptions
about fleet fuel efficiency. Using these tools, reasonable estimates of emissions from mobile
sources can be developed for various years and network conditions. The procedure described
above is used to estimate emissions from cars and trucks for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
oxides (NOx), and volatile organic compoun~s (VOC).
TRANSIT SERVICE PLANS
The background transportation projects and plans included in this analysis were based on the best
information available at the time of the study. The transit service plans for all of the transit
modes and services except the Fairmount Line were based on 2011 schedules. The Fairmount
Line was undergoing tie replacement in 2011·, which impacted headways and runtimes, so the
schedules used in the study for all scenarios except A were from 2010. Scenario A used the same
headways, but added additional run-time to account for the additional stations. Scenarios A and
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
7
November 29, 2011
B were used to develop the targets, while scenarios C through M represented various mitigation
strategies-that MassDOT requested CTPS examine.
A. Failmount commuter rail scenario with four new stations
B. Fairmount commuter rail scenario without foul' new stations
C. Provide a new service between Andrew Square and Boston Medical Center: The travel
time for the new line was assumed to be the same as the run time of the CT3 bus route
between Andrew Station and Boston Medical Center. There were no intermediate stops.
The total travel time between the two ends was assumed to be 8 minutes. The headways
_used were: AM - 20 minutes; PM --20 minutes; MD and NT - no service.
D. Reduce Fairmount and Readville commuter rail station fares: Fairmount Station is
currently in fare zone 1 and Readville is currently in fare zone 2, which results in an adult
cash fare of$4.25 and $4.75; respectively. This strategy would put both stations in fare
zone lA, an adult cash fare of$1.70.
E. Increase peak-period headways on the Fairmount Line: In the AM and PM peak periods,
headways would be improved, from every 30 minutes to every 20 minutes.
F. Implement new Roxbury-Dorchester-Mattapan express bus service (Route 29 and Route
31): Travel times and routing for both bus routes would stay the same as in the current
condition. The headways used for Route 29 are: (AM - 10 minutes, MD - 20 minutes,
PM - 10 minutes, and NT: - 20 minutes, willie bus Route 31 headways would be: AM ­
5 minutes, MD - 10 minutes, PM - 5 minutes, and NT - 10 minutes.
G. Increase off-peak-period and increase weekend headways on the Fairmount Line: Operate
service that is consistent with the MBTA's service delivery policy. .
H. Initiate Youth Pass program: A $29.50 monthly Youth Pass program was assumed; it
would be available to teenagers age 18 and under. Since the MPOs regional model set
does not divide users in the necessary age groups for this strategy, a spreadsheet analysis
was conducted using fare data provided by the MBTA.
- I. Expand service on bus Route 31 between Mattapan and Forest Hills. The headways on
Route 31 are improved from 7 minutes to 5 minutes in the AM, from 15 minutes to 10 ­
minutes in the MD. from 8 minutes to 5 minutes in the PM, and from 20 minutes to 10
minutes at NT. No changes to the run time or fares are proposed with this option.
1. Extend the bus Route 29 from Mattapan and its current terminus at Jackson Square to
Ruggles Station, on the Orange Line. The additional run time would be consistent with
bus Route 22, which traverses this same route
K. The previous analysis of bus Routes 29 and 31 focused on an average weel~day, but since this is when there is the heaviest utilization of buses and operations limit expansion, it was decided that weekend service improvements should be analyzed for this study. For Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
8
November 29, 2011
bus Route 29, this consisted of improving the MD and PM headways on Saturday, with
30-minute headways. On bus Route 31, the MD and PM headways would be improv~d
from 13 minutes to 10 minutes.
L. Both Red Line branches currently operate on headways of 14 minutes all day long on
Satw'dayand 15.5 minutes on Sunday. Saturday and Sunday would improve by 2.5
minutes, with 11.S-minute headways on Saturday and 13-minute headways on Sunday.
M. Red Line weekday MD and NT headways would improve in this scenario. The headway
would go from 13 to 11.5 minutes in the MD, and from 12 to 11.5 minutes at NT.
RESULTS
After the base year was calibrated, the next step was to identify the reduction targets associated
with the Fairmount stations for 2012 (shown in Table 1). Subtracting the air quality benefits from
the scenario having the four new stations (Scenario A) from the one without (Scenario B)
resulted in the reduction targets for an average weekday in 2012, the figures shown in the table ill
bold after Scenario B: 0.34 kg ofVOC, 0.67 kg of NOx, and 10.26 kg of CO. The air quality
benefits shown are purely a result of auto diversions-approximately 80 round-trips or 160 one­
way trips, which result in a reduction of 1,000 vehicle-miles of travel (VMT) in the region.
Based on feedback from stakeholders and an examination of II offset strategies (shown in Table
I), two were identified as collectively meeting the emisl'ion targets, being operationally feasible,
not changing a fare policy, and being implementable by January 1,2012:
• Scenario C: A new bus service between Andrew Square and Boston Medical Center
• Scenario I: Improving headways on bus Route 31
Therefore, Scenarios C and I are proposed for implementation.
The reasons for eliminating the other scenarios from consideration are described below:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Scenario D was eliminated due to a conflict with fare policies.
Scenario E was eliminated due to operational constraints.
Scenario F was eliminated due to not meeting the proposed schedule for implementation.
Scenario G was eliminated due to operational constraints.
Scenario H was eliminated due to a conflict with fare policies.
.Scenario J was eliminated due to the small emissions benefits it produced.
Scenario K was eliminated due to the small emissions benefits it produced.
Scenario L was eliminated due to not meeting the proposed schedule for implementation.
Scenario M was eliminated due to not meeting the proposed schedule for implementati~n.
Scott Hamwey, MassDOT
November 29,2011
9
TABLE 1 Results of Emission Targets and Mitigation Strategies Duscrlptlon
voe (kg)
NOx(kg)
eo (kg)
A
Four New Falrmounl Una Slalions
42,071.40
90,861.30
1,266,789.40
B
No New Slallons, wllh Exlsling Condillons
42,071.74
90,661.97
1,256,799.66
Target fA mlnys B I
~
·0,67
-10.26
Provide a Shullie Bus Service (rom Andrew Square 10 Basion Medlcel
Cenler
·0.25
-0.55
-9.21
Scenerlo
e
D.
Rsduce Falrmounl and Raadvllla Commuter Rail Fares to $1.70
(a)
(a)
(a)
E
Incressa Peak-Period Heaclways on Fairmount Une
(b)
(b)
(b)
F
Implement Proposed Roxbury-Dorchester-Roxbury Express BUB Service
(d)
(d)
(d)
(b)
(b)
(b)
G
Improve Off-Peak and Weekend Headways on Fairmount Une
H
youth Pass Program
Improve Bus Route 31 Headways
(a)
(a)
(a)
-0.17
-0.37
-6.84
(e)
J
Extend Bus Roule 29 from Jackson Square to Ruggles Sialion
(c)
(c)
K
Improve Weekend Headwaya on Bus Roule 29 and Route 31
(c)
(e)
(e)
L
Improve Weekday Red Line Headways
(d)
(d)
(d)
M
Improva Waekand Red Une Headways
(d)
(d)
Cd)
Notes:
Moblle-sourca emissions are (or passenger vehicles on an average weekday In 2012, eslimated using MOBILE 6.2
The scenarios wlth no ~mlsslon values shown: Ihe lellens In the table Indicate lhat the scenario either.
(a) waslnconslslent wtth an axlsling or proposed MBTA fare polley;
(b) could not be Implemenled due 10 operaIlonaI constraints;
(c) produced minimal emissions benefits, which would require lito be packaged wtth numerous other scenarios; or
(d) could not be Implemenled by January 1,2012.
SAP/sap
CTPS
CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN NINO STAFF
Staff to the Ooslon Region Melropolitan plannino Oroanization
DRAFT M~MORANDUM
To:
Katherine Fichter
Massachusetts Department of Transportation
From:
Scott Peterson
Re:
Supporting Material for the SIP Requirement for 1,000 Parking Spaces
Novemb,er 28, 2011
ONE THOUSAND PARIaNG SPACES
One of the Massachusetts State Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements is the construction of
1,000 new parking spaces that would be open for use by December 31, 20 II. These parking
spaces need to serve transit facilities located in communities of the Boston Region Metropolitan
Planning Organization. Table I identifies the location, completion date, and number of spaces .
being used to meet that requirement. Of these five parking facilities, the one located at
Wonderland Station on the Blue Line is the only one that will not meet the required completion
date of December 31, 2011. The Massachusetts Department ofTransportation (MassDOT)
requested that the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) conduct a two-step analysis of
the air quality benefits in 2012 of this parking project. The first step would be to develop
emission targets based on the benefits of the project in the opening year, 2012, while the second
step would be to examine what transit improvement would provide a temporary offset to meet or
exceed the air quality benefits established in the target.
WONDERLAND STATION
Wonderland Station is located at the northern terminus of the MBTA Blue Line along Route IA
and Ocean Avenue in Revere on the North Shore, as shown in Figure I (on page 4). It serves
several communities on the North Shore, and attracted over 5,400 daily boardings in 2010. The
200809 MBTA Passenger Survey found that only 25 percent of the boardings originated in
Revere, with the remaining 75 percent coming from other North Shore communities, such as
Lynn, Marblehead, Salem, Swampscott, and Peabody. Since Wonderland Station serves such a
large market area, it is not surprising that the majority of the users ofthis station drive to the
station and park there. In 2010, there were almost 2,680 parking spaces available within a half
mile ofthe station, ofwhich 1,270 were owned by the MBTA, with the remaining spaces owned
by private entities or by the City of Revere. Table 2 shows the number of spaces, parking rate,
and ownership of the existing parking that is available at and near Wonderland Station. The
MBTA lot is utilized slightly more than the private lots due to its proximity to the station and its
location on the same side of the roadway as the statioll; while the private lots are situated across
Route lA to the west and on Ocean Avenue to the east. The price difference between the MBTA
lot and the private lots is approximately $1 per day (the ~rivate lots are less expensive on
5101& Transporlatlan Building. Ten Park Pim, Suile 21 SO. BasIon, 1M 02116·396B •(617) 973·7100. Fax (617) 973·8855 •TIY (617) 973·7089 •clps@clps.arg
2
Katherine Fichter, MassDOT
November 28, 2011
average), which does not seem to be significant, given that the private lots, contain over 800
spaces, not all of which are currently used on an average weekday.
TABLE 1
Inventory of the 1,000 New SIP Parking Spaces
Locations
Date
Completed
Number of
Spaces
Woodland I Green Line (Newton)
Winter 2007
100
Quincy Shipyard I Ferry (Quincy)
Fall 2009
168
Savin Hili I Red Line (Dorchester)
Fall 2009
22
Beverly Depot I CQmmuter Rail
(Beverly)
Fall 2009
102
Wonderland I Blue LIne (Revere)
Expected In
summer 2012 ­
Total
612
1,004
WONDERLAND STATION PARKING SPACES
Wonderland Station is the location of some of the proposed SIP parking spaces, and the MBTA
is in the process of constructing a new garage on the southern portion of the iv1BTA-owned
property. The Wonderland Station parking garage project is expected to be operational by the
summer of2012. Upon its completion, this seven-story garage will add 714 spaces, of which 102
will be leased to Revere, leaving a net increase of 612 MBTA-owned spaces that can be counted
towards the 1,000 parking spaces in the SIP. The changes to the current iv1BTA-owned parking
at Wonderland are shown in Table 3. Parking at the South Garage, as the new parking facility is
called, will cost $7 per day, between $2 and $3 more than the private lots that are located nearby.
WONDERLAND STATION PARKING EMISSION TARGETS
The tool CTPS would normally employ would be the Boston Region Metropolitan
Organization's (MPO's) regional transportation travel demand model set, but given the number
of parking lots with different ownership and the differing parking rates in the vicinity of the
station, CTPS staff decided to examine the potential demand for South Garage qualitatively,
using observed data. The South Garage at Wonderland will increase capacity and provide ample
parking to the commuters on the North Shore in the short term, but it is unlikely that the new
garage will generate any new transit users or provide air quality benefits to the region in the
Katherine Fichter, MassDOT
November 28, 20 II
3
immediate future. The price differential between the MBTA and private parking lots, along with
the excess capacity of the private lot on the west side of Route lA, will not likely allow the
South Garage to be fully utilized and generate any mode shift from the auto mode to transit in the
short tenn. Based on these observations, CTPS staff estimate the emission target in 2012 for this
project to be zero for all three·pollutants. This wi11likely change in the future, as the private lots,
located on the west side of Route lA, are developed, probably by 2030, which will make parking
spaces owned by the MBTA more desirable, and the $7 parking rate will become more palatable
to transit users.
TABLE 2
Parking Lot Availability and Use at Wonderland Station
Location
MBTA North 'and
South Lot
MBTA Parcel H
Parking
Used
Spaces
Available
O~en
Utlllzatlo n
993
634
359
64%
$5.00
280
1,273
204
838
76
435
73%
66%
$5.00
Private
238
233
5
98%
$4.00
Private
457
45
412
10%
$4.00
Private
865
481
384
66%
$5.00
1,560
759
B01
49%
na
39
11
28
28%
$4.26
2,B72
1,608
1,26'4
66%
na
Owner8hl~
MBTA
Total !VIBTA
Ocean Avenue,
private I~t
Ocean Avenue,
private lot
Wonderland Dog
Track lot
Total private
Ocean Avenue,
Town of Revere
lot
Total for all lots
Town
Parking Rate na
Note: This list may not represent all perking locations In the area; street parking and smaller,
owned lots are excluded.
prlva~ely
4
Katherine Fichter, MassDOT
November 28,2011
---.....
o
South Garage Project
CTPS
Revere, MA
FIGURE 1
Wonderland Station Study Area
87.5175
1fI0
-"--~.....
M....elS
0
Katherine Fichter, MassDOT
November 28,2011
5
TABLE 3
MBTA Existing and Proposed Parking
Location
Existing
Proposed
Change
MBTA South Lot/South Garage site
424
1,465
1,041
MBTA North Lot
569
522
(47)
MBTA Parcel H
280
Total MBTA Owned Parking
1,273
Parking to be leased to City of Revere
Total MBTA spaces available for transit
users
, 1,273
(280)
1,987
714
102
102
1,885
612
Although there is no emission target to meet, MassDOT recognizes the need to provide some
transit improvements in this corridor to offset the delay of the new South Garage. so CTPS
worked with MassDOT to identify a project that could benefit the North Shore corridor.
NORTH SHORE PROPOSED OFFSET MEASURE
The Route III bus (indicated in a bold font in Table 4) provides service betwe'en Woodlawn in
Everett or Broadway and Park Avenue in Revere to Haymarket Station in Boston seven days a
week. It connects Revere and Chelsea with Boston and has the largest ridership of any route on the
North Shore. This route consistently ranks in the top 10 highest ridership routes on weekdays and
on the weekend. as Table 4 shows.
TABLE 4
Top 10 Bus Routes In 2010
Rank
Route
Weekday
Boardlngs
Route
Saturday
Boardlngs
Route
Sunday
Boardlngs
1
749 (SL5)
66
39
1
57
23
28
111
32
22
14,709
14,676
14,405
12,325
11,504
11,142
10,607
8,692
7,733
7,047
1
749 (SL5)
39
28
66
111
23
22
57
32
9,495
8,877
8,276
8,101
7,602
6,027
5,591
4,960
4,627
4,367
749 (SL5)
741 (SL1)
28
1
66
39
111
57
23
70
6,303
5,881
5,056
4,914
4,745
4,713
3,747
. 3,324
2,986
2,847
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
SL = Silver Line route
Katherine Fichter, MassDOT
6
. November 28,2011
An examination of the 2008-09 MBTA Passenger Survey shows that Route III serves a wide
range of trip activities-work, shopping, and recreational. Route 111 does not just serve Boston,
but also numerous local trips in Chelsea and Revere. Based on the survey, the current Route III
ridership consists of significant number of low-income and transit-dependent populations. This
route experiences crowding problems on weekdays and on Saturdays. The MBTA would have
difficulty improving tillS service on weekdays, given limitations on available buses and drivers,
but MBTA Operations did identify opportunities to Saturday service. The proposed Saturday
improvements consist of improving evening (PM peak period) and nighttime headways. The
Saturday PM headways would decrease from 10 minutes to 9 minutes. The nighttime headways
would decrease from 14 minutes to 12.5 minutes.
Since the travel demand model set focuses on weekdays, CTPS staff used a spreadsheet analysis
to deternline the air quality benefits of this project. These headway improvements could genemte
an additional 140 transit riders on Saturday, as Table 5 shows, which could produce 40 auto
diversions. These auto diversions produce the air quality benefits shown ill Table 5.
TABLE 5
2012 Offset Emission Benefits
Assumption
Auto
Saturday 2010 dally boardlngs
PM and Nighttime Ridership
New Saturday transit trips
Auto diversion shift rate
Auto diversions
Trip length
VMT (vehicle-miles traveled) saved
Average speed
6,000
2,700
140
voe (g/ml) factor
voe emissions (kg)
NOx (g/ml) factor
NOx emissions (kg)
CO (g/ml) factor
25%
35
6
210
22
0.45
0.09
0.97
0.20
11.55
eo emissions (kg)
2.43
CONCLUSION
CTPS examined the air quality benefits of adding 612 new parking spaces at Wonderland Station
and found that these new spaces would be unlikely to generate any air quality benefits when the
lot opens in 2012 due to price and excess supply at adjoining parking facilities. The air quality
benefits hinge on local development that would eliminate the competing parking spaces, which
will certainly not occur prior to the opening of the South Garage. However, since MassDOT
Katherine Fichter, MassDOT
7
November 28, 20 I I
wants to provide some transit improvement to mitigate for the temporary delay, MBTA
Opemtions identified Route III as a good option for increasing service on Saturdays, given its
current demand, to relieve crowding and serve low-income and transit-dependent populations
with some positive air quality improvements.
SAP/sap