EVERETT TRANSIT ACTION PLAN
Market Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Background
A recurring theme in City of Everett planning studies is an understanding that existing public transit
services fail to meet the needs of current residents and are hindering the City’s growth. Everett is served
by nine MBTA bus routes, which primarily operate on Broadway and Main Street. Each route begins
and/or ends at the Orange Line, rather than providing direct service to major destinations. Everett transit
riders must regularly transfer to other services in order to complete their trips. Buses in Everett are also
frequently overcrowded and unreliable, despite high frequency during peak periods.
As part of the Everett Transit Action Plan, recommendations for transportation infrastructure and service
improvements will be developed to enhance the mobility of Everett residents and facilitate residential and
economic growth. Transit investment(s) will influence where and to what extent new development occurs,
as well as how employment and population growth are dispersed. This memorandum will attempt to
understand, define, and represent existing transit demand in Everett, as well as the challenges of meeting
it.
Everett in Context
The City of Everett is one of 21 communities that form the Inner Core of the Greater Boston region. Like
many cities directly north of Boston, Everett consists primarily of dense residential neighborhoods with a
steadily growing population. Much of this growth has been fueled by the city’s relatively affordable
housing, which has attracted families, young professionals, and a substantial immigrant population.
Today, Everett has a population of approximately 42,000 people living in an area of less than 3.5 square
miles. The City has the 17th highest population in the MBTA service area and is among the most densely
populated communities in Massachusetts.
Everett is also home to an active industrial sector, several large retail complexes, and a thriving local
business district. Around 13,500 people work in Everett, making the City the 6th densest employment
center in Greater Boston in terms of jobs per acre. In terms of total jobs, however, Everett falls far behind
neighboring communities, including Medford (19,000 jobs), Somerville (25,000 jobs), and Cambridge
(100,000 jobs).
While Everett shares many characteristics with its neighbors, the City faces unique transportation
challenges, especially in regards to public transportation. Everett is the largest and densest city in the
MBTA service area that lacks a widely accessible, direct transit connection to either Downtown Boston or
Cambridge. Apart from Route 111, which has a single stop on the edge of the City, all Everett
transportation lines terminate east of Interstate 93. Many Everett residents must therefore rely on multiseat transit rides to reach their jobs. Despite this relatively high burden to accessing jobs via transit,
around 24% of Everett workers use transit for commuting trips (see Figure 1). This rate is comparable to
several communities with subway service, including Revere and Quincy.
Market Analysis | 1
Figure 1 | Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA
Service Area for Taking Transit to Work
Municipality
Transit Mode Share
Boston
34%
Somerville
32%
Malden
30%
Cambridge
29%
Brookline
27%
Revere
25%
Quincy
24%
Chelsea
24%
Everett
24%
Melrose
20%
MBTA Service Area
18.4%
Inner Core
25.2%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
Purpose
As the City of Everett, the MBTA, and MassDOT prioritize long-term transit investments, service changes
and capital investments must be made in support of and response to current and future market
conditions. The purpose of the market analysis is to understand existing market conditions as they relate
to the need for transit service. This market analysis provides an assessment of potential demand for
transit service based on such factors as development patterns, location of major employment centers,
population and employment, socio-economic characteristics, and travel flows. All of these factors are
primary drivers of transit demand, and as such, help explain the magnitude and composition of existing
transit usage, as well as help identify potential transit demand that is not being met by today’s services.
help explain the magnitude and composition of existing transit usage, as well as help identify potential
transit demand that is not being met by today’s services.
This Market Analysis memorandum provides an extensive overview of the factors driving transit demand.
The first section of this memo analyzes the City’s land uses and development patterns to determine
existing and potential transit demand. Data for this analysis was obtained through the City’s Planning
Department and from the 2005 Sanborn Massachusetts statewide land use dataset. The second section
delves into the specifics of how existing population, employment, socio-economic, and demographic
characteristics influence Everett’s transit market. The primary resource for these conditions was data
published by the U.S. Census Bureau. The last section of this analysis focuses on travel flows and uses
travel demand modeling information provided by the Boston region MPO staff, CTPS. This travel flow
analysis provides insight on where people regularly travel what mode they use to make their trips and can
be ultimately be used to identify major travel markets, as well as markets that may be underserved by
transit.
This analysis serves as a complimentary document to the Existing Conditions memorandum, which
summarizes the characteristics of Everett’s transit system. The Existing Conditions memo includes an
overview of existing transit service, existing multimodal infrastructure characteristics, an assessment and
Market Analysis | 2
audit of the top ten bus stops, in-depth analyses of each individual MBTA bus route within Everett, and a
high level review of background planning documents in Everett.
Market Analysis | 3
Factors Influencing Transit Demand
Demand for public transportation is most heavily influenced by the characteristics of a local community,
as well as the region at-large. Understanding local demographic characteristics and urban form is
essential to understanding existing transit demand, and provides insight into potential unmet transit
needs. This section focuses on Everett’s demographic and physical characteristics, especially as they
relate to factors that influence transit demand, and comparing these characteristics to that of neighboring
communities. Factors that influence transit demand include:

Development Patterns: The density, nature and layout of Everett’s land use and physical
environment

The Location of Major Employment Centers: The location and clustering of major employers,
and the accessibility of these employment sites to existing transit services

Population and Employment: The location and density of population and employment centers,
especially neighborhoods that are both dense and have a mix of uses. Densely populated
communities can best support high frequency services, which increases the attractiveness of
transit and can further stimulate transit demand

Socio-Economic Characteristics: Demographic characteristics such as age, income, minority
status, which may indicate an increased likelihood to rely on transit services

Travel Flows: Data from CTPS’s travel demand model provides insight on where people
regularly travel and what modes they use to make their trips, helping to identify major travel
markets as well as markets that may be underserved by transit
In addition to these factors, transit demand is also affected by the convenience and price of other
alternatives, which are influenced by both the physical design of a community and local and regional
policy decisions.
Market Analysis | 4
Figure 2 | City of Everett Existing Land Use
Market Analysis | 5
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Transit demand is strongly related to development patterns, and in particular, development
density.
Description: The market for transit is strongest in areas with greater numbers of people living and
working in close proximity. Areas with denser development and a mix of uses, along with a strong
pedestrian environment, typically generate higher transit demand and can therefore support higher
frequency service. High frequency service makes transit more convenient, and can in turn increase transit
demand among residents who may otherwise rely on other means of travel.
Methodology: This analysis includes a review of existing land uses and future planned developments
within Everett. Existing land use data was obtained from the 2005 Sanborn Massachusetts statewide land
use dataset. Planned developments were cataloged through an extensive review of citywide planning and
development studies. Analyzing Everett’s land use and development patterns provides insight into
potential transit demand generated by future developments, and underlying transit demand within the
City’s existing neighborhoods.
Current Land Use
KEY FINDINGS
•
Everett has a dense street network supported by mixed use and compact development north of Route 16, which
supports direct and walkable connections to local destinations and transit service.

South of Route 16, land use is mostly comprised of industrial, warehouse, and commercial activities.
The City of Everett’s existing built environment is relatively compact due to the City’s physical
infrastructure. Everett’s population is densest north of Route 16, where the majority of the City’s
residential population is housed. These neighborhoods are primarily comprised of single, two, and three
family houses. Mixed use and commercial retail areas are concentrated along major arterials such as
Broadway, Main Street, Ferry Street, and Chelsea Street. Multiple local bus routes provide overlapping,
high frequency service on these corridors, which are within ¼ mile walking distance to a majority of
households in Everett.
Small pockets of residential housing also exist south of Route 16 in Lower Broadway; however, this area
is primarily comprised of industrial, warehouse, and commercial uses. Lower Broadway hosts regional
produce markets, manufacturing centers, power plants, and warehouses. Similarly, uses along the
western fringes of the City’s waterfront are dedicated to commercial and waterfront activity. Large scale
and big box commercial and retail is primarily concentrated along major thoroughfares such as, Route 16
and within the Gateway Shopping Center. Despite these key attractors, these areas are less well served
by transit than the rest of the City.
Market Analysis | 6
Future Land Use
KEY FINDINGS

Planned development within Everett is proposed to be concentrated around the City’s western and southern waterfront,
sites, near the existing MBTA commuter line, within Everett Square and along Ferry Street.

With the exception of the Wynn Casino, plans for new development within Everett lean toward mixed use and residential
infill development.
Everett has several areas that are the focus of substantive redevelopment efforts. In these areas, along
Everett’s waterfront, near the MBTA commuter line, in Everett Square and along Ferry Street, land use
patterns are likely to change substantially. Taken together, the projects in these areas will change the
nature of Everett’s historically industrial waterfront, to include residential and commercial land uses, while
promoting new types of employment.

The Wynn Casino in Everett promises to be a transformative redevelopment project for Everett’s
Lower Broadway District, bringing visitors and substantive employment opportunities.

North of the casino site, the River’s Edge Redevelopment Area has over 40 acres of vacant land
along the Malden River. The area is envisioned as a mixed-use district, potentially including
residential, commercial and research/development uses.

The Commercial Triangle Redevelopment Area borders the MBTA commuter rail tracks and
marks a transitional zone between the industrial waterfront area in the southern section of Everett
and the residential areas to the north. Given its proximity to the MBTA tracks, there is potential for
transit-oriented, mixed-use development.

The City has also prioritized the redevelopment of Everett Square. Unlike the previous areas,
Everett Square is largely built-out and has already seen significant revitalization in recent years.
As envisioned by the city, the area will continue to serve as a vital commercial center with
complementary residential development.
Future developments will likely accelerate Lower Broadway’s transition from a working waterfront to a
mixed use district. Nevertheless, the City is taking steps to maintain existing waterfront jobs, while also
having successfully attracted new employers such as BNY Mellon, Amazon and Wynn. A more extensive
review of past planning efforts and other background documents is available in the appendix of the
Existing Conditions memorandum.
Market Analysis | 7
Major Employment Centers in Everett
Individual major employers can be significant drivers of transit demand, even in areas that may
not otherwise support transit services.
Description: Many workers rely on transit for commuting to their jobs, including individuals that otherwise
use a car for most trips. Major employers are often located in buildings or campus environments with
extremely high workforce concentrations. These sites are major drivers of transit demand, attracting both
local and regional travelers. Workers at major employment areas may have similar work hours, allowing
for shift-specific transit services in areas that otherwise have low transit demand. Some major employers
may be willing to subsidize service to their facilities, opening up new opportunities for workplace shuttles
and other unconventional transit modes.
Methodology: A list of Everett’s top employers in 2008 was compiled and analyzed based on employee
size, employment type, and location within the City. Areas of employment growth since 2008 were
identified in consultation with City of Everett staff. This data was then used to identify locations within
Everett with high workforce concentrations, and assess their accessibility for both local residents and the
regional workforce.
KEY FINDINGS

Many of Everett’s largest employers and emerging developments are located west of Main Street. This area has limited
transit access and a very poor pedestrian environment.
Although Everett is largely perceived as a residential community, there are several local and regional
employers located throughout the City. As shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4, most of the major employers
are located west of Main Street and Lower Broadway. Major retail employers are primarily concentrated in
Everett’s Gateway Center, a regional big box shopping destination, while food and wholesale
warehousing centers are located off Lower Broadway. Several large employers are also located in the
River’s Edge area of West Everett, a former industrial site that has transitioned into an office park and
small scale manufacturing zone. Larger institutions such as banks, government facilities, and hospitals
are scattered throughout Everett, especially along the Broadway corridor.
Although the largest employers are located within about a half-mile of transit service, there are significant
barriers that impede easy access to transit. For example, employees of Teddie Peanut Butter must walk
through an uncomfortable and sometimes dangerous pedestrian environment to reach either the bus
stops along Route 16 or at Wellington Station. Workers at Gateway Center cannot access the high
frequency bus services on Lower Broadway due to the lack of a pedestrian crossing over the railroad
tracks. Furthermore, some major employers, such as Whidden Hospital, are far from any transit service.
Market Analysis | 8
Figure 3 | Major Employers in Everett (2008)
Name
Product/ Function
Number of Employees
Mellon Bank
Banking/ Financial Institution
1,500
City of Everett
Government
1,300
Gateway Center
Retail/Restaurants
1,000+
Target
Retail
260
Home Depot
Retail
250
Costco
Wholesale
170
TGI Fridays
Restaurant
100
Texas Roadhouse
Restaurant
84
Whidden Hospital Hospital
Hospital
716
Boston Coach
Transportation
600
Bond Brothers
Construction
200
Alliance Detection Services
Security
175
Stop and Shop
Retail/ Food
130
Schnitzer N.E.
Metal
115
Eagle Bank
Banking
100
Duncan Galvanizing
Metal Fabrication
90
Best Buy
Retail
80
Teddie Peanut Butter
Food Production
64
Source: City of Everett Department of Planning and Community Development
Market Analysis | 9
Figure 4 | City of Everett – Major Employers
Market Analysis | 10
POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
Population and employment density is the most significant factor in an area’s ability to support
frequent, high-quality transit service.
Description: The market for transit is strongest in areas with a high concentration of people and
businesses. A composite of population and employment density shows an area’s transit potential, or its
general ability to support different transit service levels. A higher composite density indicates a higher
likelihood of generating substantial transit ridership in a particular area.
Methodology: Everett population data was obtained from the 2010 US Census, and analyzed at the
block level to provide a detailed profile represented as density per acre. Studies suggest that areas with
greater population density have a greater demand for transit and can support more frequent services.
Generally, neighborhoods with 8 to 12 residents per acre can support hourly transit service.
Neighborhoods with greater than 31 residents per acre generate demand for high frequency transit
service (every 15 minutes or less). These neighborhoods could also support higher capacity service, such
as light rail.
As of 2015, Massachusetts is the only state that does not provide Longitudinal Employer-Household
Dynamics (LODES) data to the US Census. Therefore, due to the lack of available employment Census
data for Massachusetts, the employment density analysis utilizes the most recent list of top employers in
Everett. These top employment centers were mapped to illustrate the location of job clusters within the
City and were placed in the context of existing transit services and overall access to transit within Everett.
Findings from the residential and employment density were used to develop a transit potential index. This
index shows where the conditions are most suitable for transit service based on the number of people
and jobs per acre. Areas with higher Transit Potential Index scores are more likely to support fixed-route
transit services and points to a higher likelihood of generating substantial transit ridership in a particular
area.
Market Analysis | 11
Population Density (2010)
KEY FINDINGS

Most neighborhoods north of Route 16 support very high levels of transit service based on population density. The
highest density is concentrated around the city squares.

Everett’s population density is similar to that of neighboring Malden, and is higher than many communities that have
direct access to subway service
The City of Everett’s population in 2010 was slightly more than 41,600. Since 2010, the American
Community Survey estimates the City’s population has grown to at least 43,000 residents. Everett’s
residential population is primarily concentrated north of the Revere Beach Parkway (Route 16). Most land
south of Route 16 is filled by commercial and industrial developments, though some residents live along
Lower Broadway (see Figure 5). Development parcels west of the former Saugus Branch railroad are
currently vacant.
Other key findings include:
Regional Comparison

Everett has the fifth highest population density of any municipality in the MBTA service area with
over 19 residents per acre.

Everett has greater overall population density than many communities with direct access to rail
services, including Revere and Quincy.

Despite its high density ranking relative to the entire MBTA service area, some neighboring
communities are significantly denser than Everett. Somerville, for example, has significantly more
neighborhoods with over 50 residents per acre and is over 50% more dense overall.
Local Context

Most of Everett’s residential neighborhoods have at least 31 residents per acre, with pockets of
greater density. This level of density can support very high levels of transit service (10 to 15
minutes).

Several large apartment complexes are located near Everett’s major squares, making these mixed
use neighborhoods among the densest in the City.

Everett’s current bus routes, which operate every 10 to 15 minutes on both Broadway and Main
Street, should be meeting the transit demand indicated by population density alone. However,
findings from the service analysis indicate that Everett’s bus routes are not adequately meeting the
needs of current residents.
Market Analysis | 12
Figure 5 | Population Density
Market Analysis | 13
Employment Density (2008)
KEY FINDINGS

With the exception of two major employers in Everett Square, a majority of employers are located in the southern and
western peripheries of the city.

About 50% of the major employers located in Everett are located within the Gateway Center and Village Business
District, yet there is a lack of frequent service and transit access to and from these job centers is difficult.
Unlike population, large employment centers in the Everett generally cluster in certain sections of the
City, rather than along corridors.

With the exception of two major employers in Everett Square, a majority of employers are located
in the southern and western peripheries of the City.

Fewer job centers are located within the residential fabric of Everett, north of Route 16.

About 50% of the major employers located in Everett (2008) are located within the Gateway
Center and Village Business District.

There is a lack of frequent service and transit access to and from these job centers is difficult.

Most major employers are within a half mile walking distance of a bus stop or transit station.
However, the presence of transit does not speak to the quality of the service, including how
frequent the bus runs and how easily someone can travel from their residence to employment
centers.

Small to mid-sized businesses are generally clustered around Everett Square, Glendale Square,
and along the City’s major thoroughfares, which have the highest quality transit in the City in
terms of frequency, pedestrian access, and number of route options.

No significant major employers have begun operations in Everett since 2008. Most new
employment growth will likely occur in planned development areas, which are located primarily
near existing major employers.
Market Analysis | 14
Transit Service Supported by Density
KEY FINDINGS

Based on population and employment density, most of Everett’s residential neighborhoods can support transit services
operating at least every 15 minutes.

Transit potential within Everett is comparable to other cities served with more frequent transit services, such as Malden.

Areas with a high concentration of residential employment density (Downtown Boston, Cambridge) show extremely high
transit potential, and are also destinations for Everett residents.
A composite of population and employment density show an area’s transit potential, or the ability to
support different transit service levels. Figure 6 shows the transit potential for Everett and neighboring
cities at the TAZ 1 level, the only level at which employment data was available for this study.
Overall, the frequency of existing transit service appears to match well with the expected transit potential
in Everett based on the composite population and employment density (see Figure 12). Everett’s most
densely populated mixed-use corridors and squares have more frequent transit service than less densely
populated neighborhoods and business districts. Major employment centers remain on the edges of the
City; however, the lack of density appears to warrant less frequent direct transit options. Other key
findings include:
Regional Comparison

Nearly all of Boston, Cambridge, parts of Somerville and a large portion of Chelsea indicate
transit potential for frequent service (roughly every 10 minutes or less).

Everett has somewhat less potential to support that highest frequency transit services compared
to Cambridge, Somerville, and Chelsea. However, Everett can support a similar or greater level of
service as several communities with more frequent transit options, such as Malden and Revere.
Combined population and employment density, and thus transit potential, diminishes the further
one travels away from Downtown Boston.
Local Context

Most of Everett’s residential neighborhoods can support transit service that operates at least
every 15 minutes.

Less densely populated neighborhoods surrounding Woodlawn Cemetery can support somewhat
less frequent transit service.

Everett’s commercial and industrial neighborhoods south of Route 16 can support transit
operating every 30 minutes. It is likely, however, that individual large employers, such as the
Gateway Center, could support more frequent service.

Everett’s major transit streets, including Broadway and Main Street, are already served at
frequencies that meet the demand indicated by combined population and employment density. As
these services struggle to meet actual current demand, it is likely that other factors, such as the
demographic composition of Everett residents or the design of the transit services themselves,
are affecting overall demand.
Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) are a unit of geography typically used in travel analysis. TAZs are currently the smallest unit of
geography for which Massachusetts population and employment data is available.
1
Market Analysis | 15
Figure 6 | Potential Transit Frequencies Supported by Population and Employment Density
Market Analysis | 16
Socio-Economic Characteristics
Demographic characteristics such as age, income, minority status, and disability status provide
indications of demand among populations that have a high propensity toward transit use.
Description: Certain population groups have a higher propensity for transit use than the overall
population. When significant numbers of these individuals cluster together, they can increase the
underlying demand for transit beyond that generated by population and employment density alone.
Integrating the effects of these demographic groups can provide important insight into why transit is under
or over performing in a given market.
Methodology: Data from the most recent American Community Survey was used to analyze the
population distribution of demographic groups that are traditionally associated with high transit use
including:

Older Adults (ages 65+), who often become less comfortable or less able to operate a vehicle
as they age.

Millennials (ages 15-25), who in general have a significantly higher interest in using a range of
transportation options, including transit, walking, and biking, rather than relying exclusively on
driving.

Individual with Disabilities, who may not be able to drive or have difficultly driving.

Individuals in Poverty, who often rely on transit as a less expensive alternative to owning a car.

Individuals Living in a Zero-Vehicle Household, who often regularly or exclusively rely on
transit for mobility.

Minority Individuals, who tend to have more limited resources for transportation and locate in
denser neighborhoods closer to the urban core

Foreign-Born Individuals, who generally much more familiar and comfortable with transit and
may also have limited resources for transportation

Females, who make up a larger share of transit ridership than men do across the U.S. and globe.
Findings from this analysis are also used to supplement and inform conclusions gathered from the
population transit propensity index created for the Everett region. Identifying areas with relatively high
concentrations of these groups can help indicate which neighborhoods and corridors have the greatest
need for transit service, and help to frame the existing transit use and overall potential need.
KEY FINDINGS

Most neighborhoods in Everett have higher than typical densities of minority, zero-vehicle household, low-income,
foreign-born, and disabled populations.

For each of the sub-populations evaluated due to likely higher transit use, Everett ranks no lower than 6th for each group,
consistently with Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Malden and Chelsea

Everett’s relatively high density of these populations indicates that transit demand may be even greater than the already
high levels of demand indicated by population density alone.
Market Analysis | 17
Older Adults (ages 65+) often become less comfortable or less able to operate a vehicle as they age.
Transit offers older adults the ability to remain active and independent, as well as the freedom to “age in
place” by staying in their homes as they transition away from their vehicles. Additional transit services
(The RIDE, Senior Shuttles) are often available only for seniors

There is a high variation in older adult population among communities in the MBTA service area.
Older adults comprise over 16% of the population of some cities and towns, while representing
less than 8% of the population of others.

Older adults comprise a lower than average proportion of Everett’s overall population compared
to the MBTA service area; however, due to the City’s high population density, Everett has the 5th
highest concentration of older adults in the region.

Unlike many neighboring communities, Everett’s older adult population is relatively consistently
distributed throughout the City.

The highest concentrations of older adults live along the Main Street corridor and near Everett
Square.
Figure 7 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Older Adult Population Density
Municipality
Older Adult Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Cambridge
2.7
10.3%
Somerville
2.7
9.1%
Winthrop
2.3
16.4%
Chelsea
2.3
8.9%
Everett
2.2
11.6%
Malden
2.1
11.3%
Boston
2.1
10.3%
Arlington
2.0
15.0%
Watertown
2.0
15.6%
Brookline
2.0
14.4%
MBTA Service Area*
0.7
13.5%
Inner Core**
1.6
12.1%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 18
Figure 8 Older Adult Population
Market Analysis | 19
Millennials (ages 15-25) generally have a significantly higher interest in using many transportation
options such as transit, walking, and biking and a lower interest in driving. In many cases, the availability
of good transit is an important factor in where they choose to live.

In the MBTA service area, millennial population density is generally lower in communities north of
the Mystic River than those to the south and west.

Consistent with neighboring communities, millennials represent a lower proportion of the city
population than the MBTA service area overall.

Despite representing a relatively low proportion of its population, Everett has among the highest
density of millennials in the region.

Everett’s millennial population is scattered throughout the city, and is most heavily concentrated
in the neighborhood surrounding Glendale Square.
Figure 9 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Millennial Population Density
Municipality
Millenial Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Cambridge
5.4
21.0%
Somerville
4.8
16.5%
Boston
4.3
21.0%
Chelsea
3.4
13.1%
Malden
2.7
14.8%
Everett
2.5
13.2%
Brookline
2.0
14.8%
Lynn
2.0
15.1%
Medford
1.7
15.7%
Revere
1.6
10.9%
MBTA Service Area*
0.8
15.0%
Inner Core**
2.2
16.9%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 20
Figure 10 Millennial Population
Market Analysis | 21
Individuals with Disabilities are also more likely to use transit than the general population, as many
cannot drive or have difficulty driving. Public transportation, including regular fixed-route bus service as
well as specialized paratransit services, is an essential resource to ensure people with disabilities are
able to remain active, independent, and part of the community.

There is high variation in the disabled population within the MBTA service area, as well as the
communities within the Inner Core. The disabled population comprises less than 8% of the
population in some communities, and more than 15% of others.

The disabled population comprises a larger proportion of Everett’s overall population than most
other neighboring communities. As a result, Everett has the 2nd most dense disabled population in
the MBTA service area.

Everett has a significant denser disabled population than expected compared to both the Inner
Core and the MBTA service area.

The highest concentration of disabled populations are scattered along Broadway, Hancock, and
Ferry Street
Figure 11 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Disabled Population Density
Municipality
Disabled Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Chelsea
2.8
11.2%
Everett
2.6
13.3%
Boston
2.3
11.7%
Somerville
2.3
8.0%
Revere
2.1
14.8%
Cambridge
1.9
7.4%
Malden
1.8
10.0%
Lynn
1.8
13.3%
Salem
1.1
13.7%
Brockton
1.1
15.6%
MBTA Service Area*
0.6
10.4%
Inner Core**
0.8
10.8%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 22
Figure 12 Population with Disabilities
Market Analysis | 23
Low-Income Individuals tend to use transit to a greater extent than those with higher income because
transit provides significant cost savings over automobile ownership and use.

Densities of low-income residents within the region are generally lower across neighboring
communities to the west such as Medford

Despite representing a relatively low proportion of its population, Everett has among the top 6th
highest density of low-income individuals in the region.

Everett has a denser low income population than expected compared to both Inner Core
communities and many areas are among those with the highest density of low-income residents
in the MBTA service area.

The City’s low-income population is relatively consistently distributed throughout the City, with the
exception of the north western half, which consists of stable one and two family owner occupied
housing
Figure 13 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Low-Income Population Density
Municipality
Low-Income Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Chelsea
6.0
23.6%
Boston
5.4
26.6%
Somerville
4.9
16.7%
Cambridge
4.8
18.5%
Malden
3.7
20.0%
Everett
3.1
16.1%
Revere
2.8
19.1%
Brookline
2.4
16.1%
Winthrop
2.0
14.6%
Salem
1.7
21.2%
MBTA Service Area*
0.6
11.3%
Inner Core**
1.8
14.2%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 24
Figure 14 Low Income Population
Market Analysis | 25
Zero-Vehicle Households have limited transportation options other than transit. In large cities, many
residents do not have an automobile by choice because transit is available, car ownership is a hassle,
and there are plentiful options such as taxis, car sharing, and car rentals for times when a car is desired
or needed.

There is a high variation in zero-vehicle household populations among communities in the MBTA
service area. This demographic comprises over 30% of the population of some cities and towns,
while representing less than 2% of the population of others.

Apart from Chelsea, densities of zero-vehicle household populations are generally lower in
communities north of the Mystic River than those to the south and west.

Everett has a lower rate of zero-vehicle households than many neighboring communities, as well
as the Inner Core as a whole. Due to the City’s high overall population density, however, Everett
has one of the densest populations of zero vehicle households overall.
Figure 15 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Density of Individuals Living in a
Zero Vehicle
Municipality
Zero-Vehicle Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Cambridge
8.0
31.1%
Chelsea
7.7
30.2%
Boston
7.3
35.9%
Somerville
7.1
24.5%
Malden
3.9
21.0%
Everett
3.6
18.7%
Brookline
3.2
23.2%
Revere
2.9
20.3%
Lynn
2.9
21.8%
Winthrop
1.7
11.9%
MBTA Service Area*
1.0
17.6%
Inner Core**
3.1
23.9%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 26
Figure 16 Zero Vehicle Population
Market Analysis | 27
Minority Individuals (defined here as non-white, Hispanic or non-Hispanic) may use transit more often
than non-minorities because they tend to have more limited resources for transportation and locate in
denser neighborhoods closer to the urban core. This means that there is a large amount of overlap
between minority populations and low-income households; however, the presence of high numbers of
minority residents still provides an additional strong indicator of transit demand. The provision of effective
transit service to minority populations is also particularly important to the Federal Transit Administration,
and a requirement under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Overall there is a high variation in minority population among communities in the MBTA service
area. Minorities comprise up to almost 75% in communities like Chelsea, and about 25% in
places like Brookline

Everett has a similar minority population density as Somerville, a city has 52% greater overall
population density.

Everett has a denser minority population than expected compared to the rest of the MBTA service
area and Inner Core as a whole.
Figure 17 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Minority Population Density
Municipality
Minority Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Chelsea
19.1
74.6%
Boston
10.9
53.4%
Malden
9.7
52.2%
Cambridge
9.5
36.9%
Somerville
8.4
28.8%
Everett
8.3
43.4%
Lynn
7.1
54.0%
Revere
5.4
37.5%
Brockton
3.9
56.1%
Brookline
3.5
26.0%
MBTA Service Area*
1.8
33%
Inner Core**
5.2
40%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 28
Figure 18 Minority Resident Population
Market Analysis | 29
Foreign-born individuals are generally much more familiar and comfortable with transit. They may also
have limited resources for transportation, may have difficulty obtaining a driver's license, and also tend to
locate in denser neighborhoods closer to the urban core. Even after many years in the U.S., foreign-born
individuals are more likely to use transit than those who are native-born, so public transportation remains
a long-term essential resource for these communities.

Densities of foreign-born individuals are generally high in communities north of the Mystic River,
especially as compared to other population groups.

With the exception of Chelsea, Everett, and Malden, the percentage of foreign born population
are consistent among neighboring communities and the MBTA service area and Inner Core
regions.

Foreign-born individuals comprise a higher than average proportion of Everett’s overall
population, compared to the MBTA service area, which makes Everett the 2nd highest
concentration of foreign-born population in the region.

Everett has a significantly denser foreign born population than expected compared to the Inner
Core and the MBTA service area communities.
Figure 19 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Foreign-born Population Density
Municipality
Foreign-born Population Per Acre
% of City Population
Chelsea
11.2
43.7%
Everett
7.9
41.2%
Malden
7.9
42.4%
Somerville
7.3
25.1%
Cambridge
7.2
27.7%
Boston
5.4
26.5%
Revere
4.5
31.2%
Lynn
4.0
30.1%
Brookline
3.3
24.6%
Watertown
3.2
25.1%
MBTA Service Area*
1.2
21.6%
Inner Core**
3.4
26.2%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 30
Figure 20 Foreign Born Population
Market Analysis | 31
Females make up a larger share of transit ridership than men do across the U.S. and globe. Various
reasons exist, but research suggests the predominant reasons include that women are more often
responsible for child care and household errands, the largest employers in many areas are industries that
attract female workers, and wage inequality.

There is a consistent percentage of females populations within the MBTA Service Area and Inner
Core communities

Female population density is significantly higher in Everett than in the MBTA Service Area and
Inner Core areas overall.
Figure 21 Top 10 Municipalities in MBTA Service Area by Female Population Density
Municipality
Female Population Per Acre
% of City Popuiation
Somerville
14.9
50.9%
Cambridge
13.4
51.7%
Chelsea
12.5
48.8%
Boston
10.6
52.2%
Everett
9.7
50.3%
Malden
9.6
52.3%
Brookline
7.7
56.9%
Winthrop
7.1
51.2%
Revere
7.1
49.3%
Lynn
6.9
51.9%
MBTA Service Area*
2.8
51.9%
Inner Core**
6.7
52.0%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey
* The MBTA service area includes all 65 municipalities that comprise the “fourteen cities and towns” and “51 cities and towns” as defined in the MA General
Laws, plus Avon. These 66 municipalities include all communities receiving MBTA fixed-route bus service, RIDE service, as well as Framingham, Natick, Norfolk,
Hamilton, and Manchester-by-the-Sea.
**The Inner Core is defined by the Boston MPO, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), as twenty-one of the metropolitan area’s innermost communities
including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Lynn, Malden, Medford, Melrose, Milton, Needham, Newton, Quincy, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Waltham, Watertown and Winthrop.
Market Analysis | 32
Figure 22 Female Population
Market Analysis | 33
TRAVEL PATTERNS
Travel flows provide information on the places that people travel between, helping to identify
service gaps and opportunities to make better use of existing resources.
Description: Travel flows data provides insights on where people regularly travel and what mode they
use to make their trips. This data can be used to identify major travel markets, as well as markets that
may be underserved by transit.
Methodology: This analysis utilizes the CTPS Travel Demand Model, a tool that helps predict the
number, origin, destination, and mode of trips made by people in the Greater Boston area on a typical
day. The output geography, known as travel analysis zones (TAZs), were aggregated into larger travel
market analysis districts based on existing neighborhood and travel market characteristics. This study
analyzed four travel scenarios to understand existing patterns of trips originating in Everett, including:

All Trip Purposes (All Modes) from Everett, all trips made on all modes for any purpose.

Home-Based Work Trips (All Modes) from Everett, also known as commute trips, which
includes all trips made on all modes between a residence and a workplace. Twenty-one percent
of all trips originating from Everett are Home-Based Work Trips.

Other Trip Types (All Modes) from Everett, which includes all non-commute trips made on all
modes, including shopping, medical, and school trips.

All Transit Trips (All Purposes) from Everett, including all transit trips made for any purpose.
Developing Travel Market Districts
Travel analysis zones (TAZs) are small geographic units, similar to a Census block, that vary in size
depending on the geography, layout and use of a given area. Some TAZs are as small as a city block,
and therefore cannot be used individually to develop broader insights into the travel market of a given
neighborhood or area. To better understand the Everett travel market, TAZs in the Greater Boston area
were grouped using three methods:

Neighborhood Travel Markets: The three largest travel markets in the Boston area (Boston,
Cambridge, and Somerville), as well as a limited number of municipalities directly surrounding
Everett, were divided into neighborhood travel markets. In Boston, these markets were roughly
defined by official neighborhood boundaries. The other large travel markets were divided based
on physical boundaries, official neighborhood designations, and the design of existing transit
services.

Municipal Travel Markets: Other municipalities within the Inner Core were divided primarily
based on municipal boundaries. TAZs in one municipality were grouped with another if a clear
physical barrier divided two travel markets.

Regional Travel Markets: Municipalities outside of the Inner Core were grouped into regional
travel markets. These markets were primarily designed to provide insight into the direction of
travel outside of the Route 128/Interstate 95 belt, rather than highlight a specific travel market.
The aggregation process resulted in 66 distinct travel market districts in the Greater Boston area. These
districts provide insight into broad travel markets, rather than pinpointing travel demands to a specific
destination. This level of detail helps facilitate the development of project goals and potential transit
improvement strategies. As specific projects are selected for analysis, the CTPS data will be further
refined to estimate their effects on travel patterns and demands.
Market Analysis | 34
Everett – All Trip Purposes (All Modes)
KEY FINDINGS

Over half of all trips originating in Everett are to destinations within Everett, Chelsea, Malden, and Revere.

About 30% of all Everett-originating trips are to destinations south and west of the Mystic River.

Over 40% of transit trips are to destinations south of the Mystic River, including downtown Boston.
The CTPS travel model estimates that approximately 101,000 trips originate in Everett each day.

The majority of Everett trips are local. Just over 20% of all trips occur entirely within the city
limits. A further 32% of trips end in communities directly adjacent to Everett north of the Mystic
River, including Chelsea, Malden, and Revere. MBTA bus lines serve most major corridors in
Everett and its neighboring communities. These local bus services, however, are primarily
oriented towards the Orange Line, rather than designed to facilitate direct trips to local
destinations. Therefore, many local trips likely require at least one transfer.

Everett travel patterns point North. About 70% of all trips originating in Everett are to
communities to the north and northeast of the Mystic River. In addition to the communities directly
adjacent to Everett, other major destinations to the north include Melrose, Saugus, and Lynn.

Cambridge, Somerville, and Downtown Boston are also major destinations. Approximately
18% of trips originating in Everett end in Cambridge, Somerville, or Downtown Boston, as well as
the Boston neighborhoods directly adjacent to Downtown. Apart from these communities, only
11% of Everett-originating trips end in destinations south or west of the Mystic River.
Figure 23 shows the distribution of all Everett-originating trips across the Greater Boston region. Figure
24 details the top ten trip destinations for all trips from Everett, as well as the typical transit route from
Everett. Figure 25 highlights the magnitude of trips to the top ten destinations.
Market Analysis | 35
Figure 23 | All Trips from Everett (Trip Distribution)
Market Analysis | 36
Figure 24 | Top 10 Everett Travel Destinations (All Trips)
Destination
Total
(All Trips)
% of
All Trips
Transit Access
Notes (on Transit Access)
Everett
21,110
21%
All Everett Bus Routes
Some trips may require a transfer, which most frequently take place
at Everett Square.
Chelsea
9,675
10%
112
Route 112 provides circuitous, infrequent, and slow service between
Everett Square and downtown Chelsea.
Revere
7,820
8%
110
Route 110 serves the Park Ave/Central Ave corridor in Revere. Trips
to points north or south of this corridor require at least one transfer.
Malden Center
7,375
7%
Malden Center Bus Routes
Everett residents east of Broadway may have to transfer to reach
Malden Center.
East Malden
5,993
6%
106/109
Route 106 and 109 do not serve the same part of East Malden.
Many trips from Everett will therefore require at least one transfer.
Downtown Boston
3,620
4%
Bus to Orange Line Station +
Orange Line
Some Everett residents may also use 111 for a one-seat ride to
Downtown Boston.
Saugus
3,209
3%
Malden Center Bus Routes + 430
or 426/428/429
-
Medford
2,719
3%
Bus to Orange Line +
95/100/101/134/710
Medford Square is accessible from all three Everett-serving Orange
Line Stations with shorter trip times from Wellington and Malden
Center.
Melrose
2,703
3%
Malden Center Bus Routes +
131/136/137/Haverhill Line
Depending on Melrose destination, additional transfer may be
required.
North Cambridge
2,626
3%
Wellington or Sullivan Square Bus
Routes + 89 or 90
Trips to destinations west of Davis Square, including to Alewife and
Fresh Pond, require at least one additional transfer.
Malden Center Bus Routes: 97/ 99/104/105/106
Wellington Bus Routes: 97/99/106/110/112
Sullivan Square Bus Routes: 104/105/109
Bus to Orange Line Station: 97/99/104/105/106/110/109/112
Market Analysis | 37
Figure 25 | Top 10 Destinations of All Trips from Everett (Trip Magnitude)
Market Analysis | 38
Everett – Home-Based Work Trips Only (All Modes)
The CTPS travel model estimates that 21% of all trips originating from Everett are Home-Based Work
Trips, more commonly known as commute trips. While commute trips do not represent the majority of
travel within the region, they are widely viewed as the most consequential trip type for transit planning.
Most commuters make the same trip each work day, often to destinations with a high density of
employers, such as Downtown Boston. These trips are also concentrated on weekday mornings and late
afternoons, or ‘rush hour’. Commute trips are therefore among the easiest to serve with fixed-route public
transit, and attract many riders that would otherwise rely primarily on their car.

Everett residents are less likely to commute to directly adjacent communities. Only 15% of
Everett commute trips are to directly adjacent communities north of the Mystic River, compared to
nearly one-third of trips overall. Everett residents are also somewhat less likely to commute to
destinations within the City itself than for other trip purposes.

Everett commute trips are more dispersed than trips made for other purposes. Nearly 70%
of Everett commute trips are to destinations beyond the City and its adjacent communities.
Everett residents are more likely to commute to Cambridge, Somerville, and Downtown Boston
than for other trip purposes. Additionally, just under one-quarter of Everett commute trips are to
other destinations west and south of the Mystic River, such as Newton, Woburn, Watertown, and
Waltham.

Everett residents commute to destinations they do not travel to for other purposes.
Commuting trips account for more than half of total trips to several of the top commuter
destinations, including communities in the Northwest, North Central, and North Coast districts.
Many of these destinations are located along or north of Route 128.
Figure 26 shows the distribution of all Everett-originating commute trips across the Greater Boston
region. Figure 27 details the top ten trip destinations for all commute trips from Everett, as well as the
typical transit route from Everett. Figure 28 highlights the magnitude of commute trips to the top ten
destinations.
Market Analysis | 39
Figure 26 | Home-based Work Trips from Everett (Trip Distribution)
Market Analysis | 40
Figure 27 | Top 10 Everett Travel Destinations (All Home-Based Work Trips)
Destination
Total
HBW Trips
% of
HBW Trips
Typical Transit Route
Notes
Everett
3,606
17%
All Everett Bus Routes
Some trips may require a transfer, which most frequently take place
at Everett Square.
Downtown Boston
1,919
8%
Bus to Orange Line Station +
Orange Line
Some Everett residents may also use 111 for a one-seat ride to
Downtown Boston.
Northwest
931
4%
Bus to Orange Line Station +
Orange Line + Commuter Rail
Many major employment centers in this region are not accessible by
transit. Some destinations are accessible via connecting RTA local
services.
Malden Center
856
4%
Malden Center Bus Routes
Everett residents east of Broadway may have to transfer to reach
Malden Center.
Revere
743
4%
110
Route 110 serves the Park Ave/Central Ave corridor in Revere. Trips
to points north or south of this corridor require at least one transfer.
North Central
737
4%
111/112 + Newburyport Line
Some destinations in this region are also accessible by MBTA
commuter express bus or via connecting RTA local services.
Chelsea
716
3%
112
Route 112 provides circuitous, infrequent, and slow service between
Everett Square and downtown Chelsea.
North Cambridge
610
3%
Wellington or Sullivan Square Bus
Routes + 89 or 90
Trips to destinations west of Davis Square, including to Alewife and
Fresh Pond, require at least one additional transfer.
East Malden
577
3%
106/109
Route 106 and 109 do not serve the same part of East Malden.
Many trips from Everett will therefore require at least one transfer.
North Coast
559
3%
111/112 + Rockport Line
Some destinations in this region are also accessible by MBTA
commuter express bus or via connecting RTA local services.
Northwest: Lowell, Framingham, etc.
Sullivan Square Bus Routes: 104/105/109
North Central: Lynnfield, Reading, North Reading, Middleton, Andover, Haverhill, Methuen, etc.
Bus to Orange Line: 97/99/104/105/106/110/109/112
North Coast: Peabody, Danvers, Beverly, Manchester, Gloucester, Rockport
Malden Center Bus Routes: 97/99/104/105/106
Wellington Bus Routes: 97/99/106/110/112
Market Analysis | 41
Figure 28 | Top 10 Destinations of Home-based Work Trips from Everett (Trip Distribution)
Market Analysis | 42
Everett – Other Trips Only (All Modes)
The CTPS travel model estimates that 79% of all trips originating from Everett are made for purposes
other than commuting, such as shopping, medical, or school trips. Trips made for these purposes are
typically dispersed across a wider range of destinations and time periods. Many non-commuting trips are
to destinations far from transit services or occur at times when transit routes operate less frequently. Noncommuting trips are also less consistent, making it difficult to plan trips around a set transit schedule. As a
result, many people who rely on transit for commuting utilize a car for other trip types.

Trips made for other purposes are more likely to be to destinations within or adjacent to
Everett than commuting trips. Around 58% of trips made for purposes other than commuting
are made to destinations within Everett or directly adjacent communities north of the Mystic River.

Everett residents are less likely to cross the Mystic River for non-commute trips. Only 16%
of Everett-originating trips are to Cambridge, Somerville, and Downtown Boston and Boston
neighborhoods adjacent to Downtown, compared to 26% of commute trips. Over 75% of noncommute trips occur within communities north of the Mystic River.
Figure 29 shows the distribution of all Everett-originating non-commute trips across the Greater Boston
region. Figure 30 details the top ten trip destinations for all non-commute trips from Everett, as well as the
typical transit route from Everett. Figure 31 highlights the magnitude of non-commute trips to the top ten
destinations.
Market Analysis | 43
Figure 29 | Other Trips from Everett (Trip Distribution)
Market Analysis | 44
Figure 30 | Top 10 Everett Travel Destinations (Other Trips)
Destination
Total
Other Trips
% of
Other Trips
Typical Transit Route
Notes
Everett
17,504
22%
Local Everett Bus Routes
Some trips may require a transfer, which most frequently take place
at Everett Square.
Chelsea
8,959
11%
112
Route 112 provides circuitous, infrequent, and slow service between
Everett Square and downtown Chelsea.
Revere
7,077
9%
110
Route 110 serves the Park Ave/Central Ave corridor in Revere. Trips
to points north or south of this corridor require at least one transfer.
Malden Center
6,519
8%
Malden Center Bus Routes
Everett residents east of Broadway may have to transfer to reach
Malden Center.
East Malden
5,416
7%
106/109
Route 106 and 109 do not serve the same part of East Malden.
Many trips from Everett will therefore require at least one transfer.
Saugus
2,801
3%
Malden Center Bus Routes + 430
or 426/428/429
-
Melrose
2,485
3%
Malden Center Bus Routes +
131/136/137/Haverhill Line
Depending on Melrose destination, additional transfer may be
required.
Medford
2,368
3%
Bus to Orange Line +
95/100/101/134/710
Medford Square is accessible from all three Everett-serving Orange
Line Stations with shorter trip times from Wellington and Malden
Center.
Medford South
2,057
3%
Wellington or Sullivan Square Bus
Routes + 89/95/101 or 101
-
North Cambridge
2,016
2%
Wellington or Sullivan Square Bus
Routes + 89 or 90
Trips to destinations west of Davis Square, including to Alewife and
Fresh Pond, require at least one additional transfer.
Malden Center Bus Routes: 97/99/104/105/106
Wellington Bus Routes: 97/99/106/110/112
Sullivan Square Bus Routes: 104/105/109
Bus to Orange Line: 97/99/104/105/106/110/109/112
Market Analysis | 45
Figure 31 | Top 10 Destinations of Other Trips from Everett (Trip Magnitude)
Market Analysis | 46
Everett – Transit Trips (All Purposes)
The CTPS travel demand model uses a wide variety of data inputs to estimate the total number and mode
of trips between two given points. CTPS administered a statewide household survey to determine transit
mode share. The survey sample size was not large enough to precisely determine mode share at the
municipal level. The CTPS travel model estimates that 8% of all trips originating from Everett, as well as
14% of commuting trips, are made using public transportation. The latest journey-to-work data collected
by the US Census found that transit was used for 24% of Everett commute trips. Therefore, it is possible
that magnitude of transit trips is greater than described below.

Everett residents are more likely to use transit for commuting than for other trip purposes.
Everett residents use transit for approximately 14% of commuting trips compared to just over 6%
of trips made for other purposes. Around 36% of all transit trips from Everett are commuting trips,
while commuting represents just 20% of all trips made by car. The disproportionately higher use
of transit for commuting is consistent with findings in other communities in Greater Boston.

Everett-originating trips to Cambridge, Somerville, and Downtown Boston have the
highest transit mode share of all destinations. Around 18% of trips to Cambridge, Somerville,
and Downtown Boston are made using public transit. These trips represent over 40% of all transit
trips originating in Everett. This high proportion of trips is expected, as these communities have
the highest quality transit service in the Greater Boston region.

Everett residents are more likely to use transit for trips within the City than for trips to
directly adjacent communities. Approximately 11% of all trips that occur entirely within Everett
are made using transit. Less than 5% of trips between Everett and directly adjacent communities
north of the Mystic River are made using public transportation.

Few Everett residents use transit to access suburban destinations. Less than 5% of trips
from Everett to destinations north of Malden, west of Cambridge, and south of Back Bay are
made using transit. It is likely that most residents using transit to travel to less dense suburban
locations north, south, and west of Everett lack consistent access to an automobile.
Figure 32 shows the distribution of all Everett-originating commute trips across the Greater Boston region.
Figure 33 details the top ten trip destinations for all commute trips from Everett, as well as the typical
transit route from Everett. Figure 34 highlights the magnitude of commute trips to the top ten destinations.
Market Analysis | 47
Figure 32 | All Transit Trips from Everett (Trip Distribution)
Market Analysis | 48
Figure 33 | Top 10 Everett Travel Destinations (All Transit Trips)
Destination
Total
Transit Trips
% of
Transit Trips
Typical Transit Route
Notes
Everett
2,289
29%
Local Everett Bus Routes
Some trips may require a transfer, which most frequently take place
at Everett Square.
Downtown Boston
1,549
19%
Bus to Orange Line + Orange Line
Some Everett residents may also use 111 for a one-seat ride to
Downtown Boston.
Malden Center
625
8%
Malden Center Bus Routes
Everett residents east of Broadway may have to transfer to reach
Malden Center.
Back Bay
308
4%
Bus to Orange Line + Orange Line
-
Chelsea
291
4%
112
Route 112 provides circuitous, infrequent, and slow service between
Everett Square and downtown Chelsea.
Fenway
285
4%
Sullivan Square Bus Routes + CT2
CT2 does not operate on nights or weekends. Alternative travel
pattern: Bus to Orange Line + Orange Line + Green Line
East Malden
270
3%
106 or 109
Route 106 and 109 do not serve the same part of East Malden.
Many trips from Everett will therefore require at least one transfer.
Revere
208
3%
110
Route 110 serves the Park Ave/Central Ave corridor in Revere. Trips
to points north or south of this corridor require at least one transfer.
Sullivan/Assembly
200
3%
Local Everett Bus Routes (+ 90 or
Orange Line)
Trips to major destinations (Assembly Square, Schraffs) typically
require a transfer.
Harvard Square
162
2%
Bus to Sullivan Square + 86
-
Malden Center Bus Routes: 97/99/104/105/106
Wellington Bus Routes: 97/99/106/110/112
Sullivan Square Bus Routes: 104/105/109
Bus to Orange Line: 97/99/104/105/106/110/109/112
Market Analysis | 49
Figure 34 | All Transit Trips from Everett (Trip Magnitude)
Market Analysis | 50
Market Analysis | 51