B. Prioritize transit and transportation alternatives
MetroFuture recommends compact development in smart growth locations: around city and town centers, on reused commercial and industrial land, and near transit. These sustainable growth patterns lend themselves to transportation alternatives such as transit, walking, bicycling. Greater use of these alternatives will result in fewer vehicle miles traveled, fewer greenhouse gas emissions, increased mobility, and better health outcomes. These benefits will be realized only if the region invests in new transit projects, creates new transit services in suburban areas, improves the efficiency and experience of transit, and builds an integrated network of sidewalks and bike paths. Throughout all these improvements, it will be critical to consider and address the needs of transit-dependent residents and neighborhoods.
Continuation of the region’s auto-oriented approach to transportation will result in more congestion and will fail to capitalize on the opportunities of compact growth. The region’s current situation demonstrates that highway projects ultimately fail to improve mobility or congestion regionwide. Adding roadway capacity may temporarily relieve congestion at the site of the improvement, but it also attracts new development and additional drivers that create more congestion on nearby roadways or even the road that was improved.
A new paradigm of transportation priorities are necessary to create the comprehensive transportation alternatives that the region needs. Regional investments to strengthen the framework of the existing transit system are necessary to create the capacity to support significant new ridership. Strategic extensions of the system (accompanied by transit-oriented land use plans) and creation of new suburban transit services will increase access and connectivity. Transit providers also need to provide high-quality station design and customer service in order to compete with the private auto.
Transit and non-motorized travel can be made safer and more efficient by implementing roadway design best practices that accommodate all modes and establishing priority for transit through dedicated lanes in congested locations. Ultimately, walking and biking should not be considered “alternative” modes but essential components of the transportation system, by the engineers and public works officials charged with designing and maintaining bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Opportunities to create new bicycle, pedestrian, and transit connections can be preserved by protecting existing rights of way.
Pay-as-you-drive automobile insurance, while not a transportation alternative per se, is an important and complementary strategy that can provide strong incentives to chose transportation alternatives instead of the auto.
8) Invest in projects that expand and add capacity to the existing transit system
The existing mass transit system provides the framework around which future growth and transit services can be organized. The region needs to make investments that will increase the capacity of the existing system, improve its operations, and expand the network to serve more of the region. These capital investments will create opportunities for more frequent service, more “reverse commute” service from the Inner Core to suburban stations, fewer transfers, and direct access to the system for more people and locations.
Currently, the MBTA’s core system provides robust service, but is limited in many ways. The lack of any circumferential service in the Inner Core requires all transfers to occur at a limited number of downtown stations, resulting in less-convenient trips and overloading those stations. The Blue and Silver Lines lack key connections, forcing riders to make multiple connections. Limited station capacity at North and South Stations and limited track capacity leading to those stations reduces the potential for reverse commute service, express service, or more frequent service. Recent improvements have been made to improve operations of the core system, including new 6-car trains and stations for the Blue Line, and low-floor Green Line vehicles.
Improvements to the core system will improve the existing network as the framework for regional growth and will ensure that the system has the capacity to serve significant new growth in the Inner Core. Examples of such improvements include
- Extension of the Green Line to Medford
- Extension of the Blue Line to Lynn
- Urban Ring
- Silver Line Phase III (connection of Washington Street and Seaport lines)
The region should also take steps to enhance the commuter rail system, which links the Inner Core with more suburban areas. Example of such improvements include:
- Expansion of commuter rail capacity at South Station
- North-South rail link to fully integrate services which now terminate at North and South station
- Electrification of the commuter rail system
Furthermore, the region must expand and improve the suburban transit system, both rail and bus. Potential transit locations in suburban areas often lack the focused planning and implementation resources available in the urban core. Consequently, suburban areas that now have population and employment densities to merit consideration for transit delivery do not have the means available to plan or provide it. Other critical suburban transportation issues, such as at-grade crossings which can tie up traffic in suburban downtowns and along secondary roadways, must also be tackled.
Some of these projects are closer to fruition than others. It is likely that all of them will be expensive. They cannot be accomplished without additional revenues from the Commonwealth, and without federal participation. (See Sub-strategy C in this chapter.) Nevertheless, they are critical projects – critical to the region’s economic competitiveness, and critical to residents’ quality of life. State agencies, the MPO, municipalities, neighborhood stakeholders, and institutional advocates must all collaborate to advance these projects and find ways to implement them cost-effectively.
9) Establish “first mile/last mile” services around commuter rail stations
In order to make the existing commuter rail network more useful, the region needs to develop local transit services that connect employment and housing to commuter rail stations. These connections would serve local residents, employees, shoppers, visitors, and tourists. Such services could also connect destinations to each other, increasing transportation options even for those users who are not riding the train. Employers and businesses have strong incentives to support transit services because they can provide transit access to their location for a much larger population—a suburban employment location with reliable shuttle service to the commuter rail station will be much more attractive to workers living in the Inner Core than one which requires those workers to drive.
Currently, many commuter rail stations work well for residents who can drive or be dropped off at the station, but are difficult to access for residents without a car. Meanwhile, many employment locations lack connections to nearby rail stations, making it impossible for workers to use transit. Some major employers currently provide shuttle services for their employees, but do not serve the general public.
Creation of new connecting services will require a variety of different approaches and strategies. In some cases, it may be appropriate for the MBTA or a regional transit authority to create or expand service. In other situations, community-based transit service may be most feasible, either operated by a municipality or through public-private partnerships with employers and institutions. Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) can help to provide the organizational structure for such public-private partnerships.
The Boston MPO’s Suburban Mobility program provides three years of matching funds for new local transit services. The program is likely to be oversubscribed in the coming year and should be increased to meet demand. Furthermore, the region must develop a means to provide longer term support for successful transit projects started with Suburban Mobility funding, either through expansion of MBTA or RTA suburban transit programs or other new delivery mechanisms.
9.a The MPO should increase funding for the Suburban Mobility program
9.b The MBTA should evaluate a “First Mile” shuttle program
9.c Municipalities should offer developers incentives to provide shuttle connections
9.d Employers should join or create Transportation Management Associations (TMA) and provide shuttles
10) Improve the transit experience through high quality stations, stops, and customer service
High quality customer service, transit stations, and bus stops can make transit more attractive, increasing transit ridership and supporting transit oriented development. Stations and stops should be clean, safe, well-lighted, and protected from the weather. Signage and information should clearly indicate transit route, schedule, and fare, as well as real-time vehicle arrival information. Stations should be integrated into the surrounding area, with entrances and exits located near key destinations; and nearby development also oriented toward the station. Customer service and service quality are critical to the ridership growth necessary for increased farebox revenues. More importantly, the provision of reliable, convenient, and respectful service to transit-dependent residents is an important component of regional equity.
One component of the year 2000 Forward Funding legislation called on the MBTA to establish standards for the effectiveness and quality of each transit mode and to measure and report on comfort, communication, convenience, rider satisfaction, reliability, security and environmental benefits. These standards were either never established or are not readily or consistently available to the public. Consistently reported service quality standards and ridership targets would identify opportunities for improvement, demonstrate progress, and provide a mechanism for accountability Benchmarks should be regularly presented to the public and reviewed by the MBTA Advisory Board. Similar requirements should apply to RTAs serving the region.
10.a The MBTA should develop station access guidelines and plan
10.b The MBTA and RTAs should establish regular performance evaluation and benchmarking program
11) Create dedicated lane capacity for transit and alternative modes
Bus, pedestrian, and bicycle service need dedicated corridors and networks if they are to compete with the single occupancy vehicle as an efficient transportation option. “Road space reallocation” involves dedicating road space to transportation alternatives such as transit or bicycle, and managing roadways to encourage more efficient and equitable transportation.
Road space reallocation can be particularly appropriate on congested roadways. Automobile transportation requires several times as much road space per passenger-mile than other modes, so motorists impose far more congestion on other road users than people who travel by other modes. For this reason, it tends to be both more equitable and efficient to give priority to more space efficient modes on congested roads, so travelers who require less road space are not delayed by congestion as much as travelers who require less road space.
Municipalities should seek opportunities to create high occupancy vehicle lanes in critical congested corridors. HOV lanes could serve both transit vehicles as well as multiple-occupant automobiles. Such lanes could be continuous, or they could be “queue jumper” lanes, which allow buses and multiple-occupant autos to bypass congestion at intersections, improving transit travel time and creating incentives for carpooling and ride-sharing.
The MBTA and regional transit authorities should work with communities that have existing transit corridors with intensive ridership to convert roadway lanes to dedicated lanes for buses. Dedicated lanes will allow for faster and more predictable travel times, enabling transit agencies to achieve more frequent headways with a fixed number of buses. Improved service will attract more customers, taking pressure off the remaining roadway lanes.
To reduce delay and improve service and customer satisfaction, the MBTA, RTAs, state transportation agencies, and member municipalities should implement signal priority on transit corridors. Although this is a more modest step than full lane conversion, it can have some of the same benefits.
11.a MBTA should establish a policy requiring analysis of dedicated lanes and signal priority as a condition of increased service frequency along existing routes
11.b The Boston MPO should allocate funds for a study to identify corridors that are top candidates for transit signal priority
12) Incorporate “complete street” best practices in roadway development and design efforts
The region needs to implement roadway design best practices that will foster bicycling and walking, improve safety, and enhance community character. From the heart of Boston to the region’s most low-density suburbs, roadways should be designed and operated to enable safe access for all users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders. This does not mean that all roadways in the region should be built the same, but that the needs of diverse users should be considered and accommodated in the design process. The outcome will be roadways that include features such as sidewalks, bike lanes, transit stops, safe crosswalks, and median islands.
Like most regions, Metro Boston has a long history of constructing or reconstructing roadways using designs that prioritize high-speed auto travel, ignore the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists, and degrade community character. Fortunately, this history is changing: the MassHighway Department Project Development & Design Guidebook is the culmination of a comprehensive planning effort that included state, regional, and local representatives. It represents state-of-the-practice updates to outdated automobile-dominated engineering guidelines.
The new guidebook allows for significantly more flexibility in design requirements, particularly lane and shoulder widths; reflects the latest methods for accommodating the needs of all users, including pedestrians and bicyclists; emphasizes context sensitive design to ensure compatibility with community surroundings; and provides much needed guidance on the project development process. The guide must be used for all projects built with state funds or on state highways. As with any guide, however, the complete application best practices depends on the judgment of designers and the commitment of project proponents.
To ensure that the guidebook is integrated into all levels of project development and planning, municipalities should incorporate the principles of the guidebook into all local roadway projects, even those built with local funds. EOTPW also needs to make efforts to improve the capacity of engineers in public agencies and the private sector to implement the guidebook, through training and certification. The MPO should also establish adherence to the guiding principles of the guidebook as a criteria for TIP evaluation. Because best practices for roadway design are a rapidly evolving field, EOTPW should establish a program to measure application and effectiveness of the guidebook, in order to inform regular updates and revisions.
12.a Municipalities should incorporate principles of the new Highway Project Development & Design Guidebook in all state and locally funded projects.
12.b EOTPW should strengthen the prequalification process for consultants to include principles of the Guidebook
12.c MPO should establish adherence to the guidebook as a criteria for TIP evaluation
12.d EOTPW should establish a project evaluation and benchmarking program to support periodic updates to the guidebook
13) Stabilize and coordinate funding sources for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and programs
The region needs to bolster support for pedestrian and bicycle programs, both to create physical facilities and to create the “professional infrastructure” necessary to develop high quality projects. Consistency of funding, more efficient funding programs, and technical support are needed to guide and encourage cities and towns to pursue more bicycle and pedestrian projects.
The significant and consistent funding for roadways and highways in Metro Boston has created a professional engineering and design culture (both public and private) oriented toward promoting, designing, and building roadway projects. Similarly, most municipalities are well-acquainted with roadway funding programs and contracting, but are unfamiliar with the funding, design, and operation of pedestrian and bike facilities. Funding streams for non-motorized programs are frequently fragmented and not guaranteed from one development stage to the next.
Limitations on funding are partly due to the fact that Massachusetts has not full accessed the federal funds available for non-motorized modes, opting instead to access more funding for road and highway projects. In fact, Massachusetts regularly ranks near (or at) the bottom in national survey of states, in obligating Congestion Mitigation funds (41st) and Transportation Enhancement funds (52nd—ranking includes DC and Puerto Rico). The funding that is available can only be used for certain purposes and projects. Smaller projects are rarely funded, and municipalities received little technical support and no funding for project design. With limited support available to address the complicated design, environmental, and right-of-way issues faced by bicycle and pedestrian projects, municipalities are often reticent to initiate these projects.
Greater funding and continuity of funding programs for non-motorized transport will help support the development of institutional and industrial capacity to design and build non-auto projects effectively. A strong regional commitment to fully accessing available federal funding (even at the expense of available roadway funding) is key to this continuity. With a commitment to stable funding, the MPO should also establish stronger evaluation criteria for non-motorized programs to drive innovation and creativity on the part of project proponents and designers. This innovation can be supported by technical assistance to cities and towns as well as direct support for the design of selected projects. Increased funding can also be directed to new programs that would fund small projects with a big impact (such as bike lane striping or crosswalk marking) or for a new municipal funding program dedicated to pedestrian and bicycle improvements, as a supplement to Chapter 90.
13.a The Boston MPO should establish a policy to fully access all available Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds
13.b The MPO should develop a well-defined program for selecting CMAQ projects
13.c EOTPW and the MPO should provide Transportation Enhancements proponents with active technical assistance.
13.d MassHighway should allow initial project design to be funded with Transportation Enhancement grants
13.e MassHighway should set aside some portion of the CMAQ and TE grants to fund smaller-scale bicycle and pedestrian projects
13.f MAPC should develop a proposal for a new funding program comparable to Chapter 90, for transit and alternative modes
14) Maintain and manage bicycle and pedestrian facilities and traffic as full-fledged transportation linkages
Like all other transportation infrastructure, pedestrian and bicycle facilities must be maintained and managed so that they operate safely and efficiently. Bike lanes, multi-use paths, and sidewalks (both publicly and privately owned) need to be kept in a state of good repair, cleared of snow, and made safe through the enforcement of traffic laws. Greater safety can also be achieved through education and enforcement of traffic laws, as they apply to both motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Better monitoring and reporting of pedestrian and bicycle crashes and injuries will also help cities, towns, and regional agencies take action to resolve problems.
Snowy and icy sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bike lanes disrupt travel for all users, especially those in a wheelchair or people with strollers and carts. When sidewalks are not cleared, pedestrians are forced onto the street where pedestrian-automobile crashes are far more likely to occur. Even in good weather, pedestrians and bicyclists are at risk from motorists who do not share the road. However, it is difficult to identify problem areas or to target improvements or enforcement due to the poor quality of state data on pedestrian and bicycle crashes and injuries, (including frequency, number, location, and cause.)
Municipalities can ensure the safety and function of pedestrian and bicycle facilities by developing maintenance and operations plans for sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bike lanes. These plans should also establish and enforce requirements for maintenance of privately-owned sidewalks, in order to ensure access along the public right of way and onto public accessible property such as shopping centers. Bicycle parking facilities are also an important part of bicycle infrastructure and should be widely available; municipalities should require bike parking facilities in all new development and should take advantage of MAPC’s regional bike parking program to purchase discounted parking equipment.
Under Massachusetts law, bicyclists are considered drivers of vehicles with rights to use the public roads and the responsibilities to follow the same traffic laws as motorists. In 2005, the Municipal Police Training Committee voted to incorporate training on bicycle laws into their “In-Service Legal Update” program, which provides professional development training for veteran officers. A proposed “Bicyclist’s Bill of Rights” would clarifying the rules and responsibilities for bicyclists and requiring bicycle law training for all police officers. Improved reporting forms and strong financial incentives for complete reporting by municipalities would increase the quality and availability of data on pedestrian and bicycle crashes.
14.a Municipalities and transportation agencies should develop and require maintenance and operation plans for paths, sidewalks, shoulders, and bicycle lanes
14.b All municipalities should participate in the Regional Bike Parking Program
14.c The Legislature should adopt a Bicyclist’s Bill of Rights and Responsibilities
14.d The Registry of Motor Vehicles and MassHighway should establish stronger requirements and an improved reporting system for pedestrian and bicycle crash data
15) Preserve and fully utilize existing rights of way
Rail rights of way are a valuable and increasingly rare resource that should be preserved and utilized. Rights of way constantly face encroachment from development and other competing uses. Once rights of way are fragmented, it is nearly impossible to return to viable track use.
The Commonwealth needs to establish strong policies and resources to preserve these rights of way. The region should also seek opportunities to create new bus ways along trail/rail rights of way. Trail design and development should consider incorporating a wide enough right of way to include a dedicated bus service lane. Regional and state transportation planning should evaluate existing and former railroad right of way for its potential to include dedicated bus routes.
15.a EOTPW should develop a stronger rail right of way preservation policy and funding plan
15.b The MBTA should develop a policy directive that allows and promotes transit-with-trail design
16) Provide pay-as-you-drive insurance
Pay-as-you-drive automobile insurance provides discounts based on actual vehicle mileage, with the highest discounts for those who drive the least. Pay-As-You-Drive pricing can help achieve several public policy goals including fairness, affordability, road safety, consumer savings and choice, and reduced traffic problems. It helps reduce traffic congestion, road and parking facility costs, and environmental impacts. It reduces the need for cross-subsidies currently required to provide “affordable” unlimited-mileage coverage to high-risk drivers. It can particularly benefit lower-income communities that currently pay excessive premiums.
Vehicle insurance is a significant portion of total vehicle costs, averaging about $800 per vehicle-year in the U.S. A typical motorist spends almost as much on insurance as on fuel. It is the largest vehicle cost for many lower-income motorists. Insurance is currently considered a fixed cost with respect to vehicle use; a reduction in mileage does not usually provide a comparable reduction in insurance premiums. As a result, current insurance pricing overcharges motorists who drive less than average and undercharge those who drive more than average each year in a price category. Since lower-income motorists tend to drive less than average, current insurance pricing is regressive. It forces lower-income motorists on average to subsidize the insurance costs of higher-income motorists.
Pay-As-You-Drive insurance reflects the market principle that prices should be based on the cost of providing a good or service. Research indicates that within existing price categories, annual claims increase with annual vehicle mileage. Mileage is just one of several factors that affect crash rates. It would not improve actuarial accuracy (i.e., how well premiums reflect insurance costs for a particular vehicle) to use mileage instead of other rating factors, for example, to charge all motorists the same per-mile insurance fee, but accuracy improves significantly if annual mileage is incorporated in addition to existing rating factors. Any other price structure overcharges low-mileage motorists and undercharges high-mileage motorists within a rate class. An EPA study found that pay-as-you-drive insurance applied throughout a region could reduce congestion delays by 10%-25%.
16.a The Commonwealth should begin a pilot program that encourages insurance carriers to offer a pay-as-you-drive insurance options to motorists
Post new comment