Thread by @garrett_wollman

And once again it's Monday, and I'm recapping today's @MBTA board meeting rather than riding my bike trainer like I should be doing, because I can't do both and still get to bed at a reasonable hour. This meeting started at the usual time of 12 noon.

Today's meeting agenda was clearly made available to electeds before the public, since word that the Red-Blue Connector would be discussed was out days before the agenda was released to us plebes. Unusually for the first Monday of a month, there was a public comment period.

There were two separate signup sheets, one for "Focus 40" and one for the rest of the agenda. I was the second attendee to sign up to speak, and nearly all public speakers were there to discuss Red-Blue, including eight public officials or their representatives.

Given the large number of officials and commenters interested in the Red-Blue Connector, the meeting agenda was rearranged slightly. First, Transportation Secretary @Steph_Pollack pre-announced the adoption of Red-Blue as a Focus 40 "we're planning" work item (still unfunded).

This took the air out of a lot of the public commenters, who came prepared to beg the board for this much-needed regional connectivity. The board took all of the public comment, then proceeded directly to the discussion so that RBC-only attendees could leave before the end.

Public officials commenting in support of RBC (I won't go into the specifics) included the mayor of Revere, BTD commissioner Gina Fiandaca, Boston councillors @wutrain and Lydia Edwards, a state senator from Lynn and a rep from senator Joe Boncore's office,

A state rep from East Boston read a letter from House Speaker Bob DeLeo of Winthrop supporting Red-Blue, and a local official from Winthrop also spoke in favor. A couple of the public officials said that they viewed this as a down payment on a future Blue Line extension to Lynn.

First up of the non-political speakers was Tom O'Brien, representing the Suffolk Downs development project, where 10,000 new housing units are projected to be built in the next ten years, which was also mentioned by the East Boston state rep.

I was up next, and made a specific technical point about the inclusion of power and signals modernization for the whole Blue Line in the RBC cost estimates. I emphasized that these should be funded independently, on their own merits, and can/should be put to bid sooner.

The next speaker passed. He was followed by Fred Salvucci, who emphasized the urgency of starting RBC work immediately, in FY2020, and not letting the state's broken promises fester until 2030. Fred notes that the Big Dig mitigation agreement called for RBC to be open by 2001.

Salvucci said "'Focus 40' ought to be 'Focus 25'" and urged that the agency move immediately into a design-build procurement process, so that the construction on Cambridge St. can proceed in parallel with Mass General Hospital's expansion program announced last month.

Salvucci also noted that building Red-Blue early advances the SGR program on the other parts of the rail network, by providing a relief valve when parts of the Red and Green Lines need to be closed for tunnel rehabilitation.

Finally, Salvucci noted that Red-Blue is necessary to support development *already in the pipeline*, at MGH, Logan Airport expansion, Wonderland, Suffolk Downs, the Necco factory, Volpe Center, and continued CRE build in Kendall Square.

Next speaker was Jack Spence, representing the transportation working group of 360 Mass. He emphasized the urgency of starting RBC, and also asked for Blue Line to Lynn. Following him was @ofsevit, one of two speakers from @transitmatters.

Ari spoke about the need to prioritize RBC, presented a petition with 1200 signatures to the board, and said it was imperative to attain construction synergies with the MGH expansion and needed roadway surface reconstruction of Cambridge St.

Ari referenced the Patriots' Tom Brady, who won the Super Bowl last night (again), noting that Red-Blue has been "promised since Tom Brady was in middle school". Stacy Rubin, senior attorney for @CLF spoke next, again supporting RBC, asking for a five-year construction timeline.

Rubin also spoke about other matters before the board, including the Better Bus Project and the Allston Multimodal project, for which she specifically urged "senior @MassDOT officials" to attend task force meetings in addition to junior staffers and design consultants.

Julia Wallace of the Winthrop Transportation Advisory Committee spoke in favor of Red-Blue, says it would give Winthrop residents a stronger sense of connection to the region, and get them out of their cars. Notes 2000+ Winthrop residents take MBTA buses to the Blue Line already.

Tom Evans, representing Cambridge Redevelopment Authority and the Kendall Square Association, spoke in favor of Red-Blue and the Better Bus Project, which he says is "Rethinking the bus network to new employment opportunities." He notes proposed bus route extensions to Kendall.

East Boston resident Elena O'Malley supports Red-Blue and made some comments on Better Bus. Evan Costiglione (?) supports RBC and former secretary Salvucci's comments in general. Zachary Nadeau (must be a relative!) supports RBC.

Louise Baxter then got up to support Red-Blue, raised some issues with Better Bus service proposals, and complimented the staff on the Better Bus web site. John Kuyper of MA Sierra Club talked about having read the original RBC plans in the State Transportation Library.

(The Transportation Board Room, where the FMCB and many other public meetings take place, is located where the Transportation Library used to be. I only visited once; I have no idea if there even still is a Transportation Library any more, or where you'd go to read those docs.)

Board member Brian Lang has to leave the meeting, so the public comment period is paused for a bit to allow him to comment on Red-Blue, which he says "should never have been abandoned". He asks that engineering and environmental work be included in the [FY2020] budget.

Next speaker is Alan Liu, again in favor of RBC. He asks that the design provide for the possibility of a future extension to Cambridge. He also comments on West Station and North-South Rail Link, which are not on today's agenda, and talks about value recovery.

Ethan Finlan, the second speaker from @transitmatters, reinforces Fred Salvucci's comments about making Red-Blue a priority for 2025, not 2040, given the development pipeline at Kendall Square, MGH, Logan Airport, and in East Boston and Revere.

Kannan Lastnameunknown gave a statement for a colleague at Airport Impact Relief, Inc., an advocacy group for the community around Logan Airport, and urged expedited engineering and environmental processing for Red-Blue.

He also noted that his own regular trips to work in Watertown can take 90 minutes or more, in part due to the inefficient multi-transfer (or outdoor pedestrian) connection between Blue and Red. Then a group from the Mass. AFL-CIO rose to speak about Transit Equity.

The first speaker discussed Rosa Parks. The second speaker talked about equity issues relating to meeting schedules (i.e., working people are working when these midday meetings are being held) and transparency in bidding and contracting.

They had a complaint I wasn't clear on about the selection of Cubic as the AFC2.0 contractor -- which is now some years ago and long past the point at which it would have been possible to object, assuming continued satisfactory contract performance.

That was the last of the commenters on the signup list, but two more people asked to speak. East Boston resident Matthew B. asked whether Bowdoin Station could be preserved in RBC, and advocated for Freeing The Ramp.

Bella from the Fairmount-Indigo Transit Coalition spoke about commuter rail pollution impacts in Dorchester, the planned opening of the Blue Hill Ave./Mattapan station on the Fairmount Line, and the fare increase announced last week.

She was particularly concerned that the fare at Readville is excessive, and wants the entire Fairmount Line to be priced at parity with rapid transit. That was (finally!) the end of the public comment period. Chairman Aiello used his prerogative to move up the Focus 40 agendum.

Before the official presentation, Sec. Pollack threw a bucket of cold water over the whole proceeding, emphasizing that Focus 40 has a 20-year time horizon, and nothing is actually committed to until it's funded in the rolling 5-year Capital Investment Plan.

(There are several more steps involved in anything that depends on federal funding, which Pollack referenced but did not go into.) Jen Schlesinger gave the presentation on proposed changes to the Focus 40 draft, to get board feedback so the staff can do the wordsmithing.

Schlesinger reports that 705 people responded to the Focus 40 online survey, and a further 90 letters and emails were received from interest groups and politicians. The staff wants the plan to include some policy statements to be drafted and approved by the board.

These policy statements will cover ownership and maintenance of bus street infrastructure (e.g., bus lane markings and signage, level boarding bus stops); the criteria for funding expansion projects; and resiliency. There is an extended colloquy.

Director @BrianShortsleev asks about the financial framework for expansion projects: how much work and money goes into "conceptual design" vs. "engineering and environmental" segments. GM @spoftak asks for specific feedback on bus infrastructure policy.

Shortsleeve notes that municipalities may be better equipped and more efficient at street infrastructure for buses. @MonicaTibbitsN talks about a need for partnership with municipalities. A full discussion of these policies is added to the schedule for the 2/25 meeting.

Schlesinger continues with changes to program priorities, starting with Red-Blue (about which there's nothing more to say). There's some clarification regarding zero-emissions buses, and chair Aiello asks for a discussion of garages. Deputy GM Gonneville says already in prep.

The bus garage discussion is also scheduled for the 2/25 meeting. The final project change is to commit to doing the FEIR for the full Green Line extension to Mystic Valley Parkway (U-Haul property/Whole Foods), but no commitment to actually building the project.

Schlesinger moves on to changes to the "priority places" element of Focus 40. The original draft considered only places that had MBTA bus service; they are now adding cities that have RTA bus service and MBTA commuter rail, specifically Brockton, Lowell, Lawrence, and Framingham.

The priority places element also adds dense urban areas with no rapid transit, specifically parts of Allston, and areas with problematic road congestion. Schlesinger says it's intended for these designations to be reassessed over the life of the plan.

Finally, the last proposed change to the draft plan is to identify the next step required to advance each proposed investment.

Director Tibbits-Nutt commends the staff for the changes made in this long-term planning cycle compared to the previous one, and makes particular note of desegregation as a goal that the plan helps to achieve. Aiello asks about the schedule for consultation and final approval.

The board then returned to the normal agenda order, starting with approving minutes and then taking the reports of General Manager Poftak and Deputy GM Jeff Gonneville. The GM's report opened with preparations for the Patriots victory parade on Tuesday 2/5.

Poftak said that the Emergency Operations Centers would be opened at 6 AM, and Bowdoin station (which is hazardous in crowding situations) would be closed from 10 AM until the end of the parade. There would be a new special-event queueing system for North Station commuter rail.

GM Poftak spoke about commuter rail safety awards, a meeting of the Boston chapter of the Women's Transportation Seminar(?) that he attended, and Rosa Parks stickers being applied to every MBTA bus in response to some state law.

It's not clear to me what's being commemorated, as Parks died in 2005 and the Montgomery Bus Boycott was in 1955 and 1956 -- those don't give any obvious major anniversaries for 2019.

Poftak reports the first of ten F40 diesel locomotives has been returned from its overhaul in Boise, and is currently at the T's Rochester shops having Positive Train Control equipment installed. Also on the PTC front, the FRA granted conditional approval for the Lowell Line.

This approval, granted 1/29, allows the Lowell Line to enter Revenue Service Demonstration, which is the next phase of testing; once the Lowell Line passes, PTC can be rolled out on the other North Side lines one by one. (South Side is already in the extended RSD period.)

Finally, Poftak concludes with an overview of the timeline for board consideration of the FY20 MBTA operating budget. Deputy GM Gonneville had only one item to present: the new workforce management software platform is now live at all bus garages, with rail to follow in summer.

The next agenda item is a review of future agendas. I don't normally recap this item but this time there was a substantial colloquy around getting all of the board's desired presentations into the right schedule for consideration as part of the operating and capital budgets.

Next up, a staffer named "Cat" gives an update on the Better Bus Project. This is basically a review of the material presented two weeks ago, with a bit more of a walk-through of proposals now that official public engagement has begun and the draft proposals have been published.

Cat then presents a slide deck for another staffer named Steve who had a conflicting meeting, about the introduction of "Lean" productivity improvements. They had a productivity improvement target of 5% year-over-year ($30m in savings) and they think they're on target with that.

There's an involved bit about cost trends; it's all in the slides. The most notable improvement is a cost per mile decrease of $0.54 at Southampton St. bus garage, year-over-year, as of last December.

Finally, Samantha Silverberg started the discusssion of the FY20-24 Capital Investment Plan process. Not a lot to report here as it was really a preliminaty process-and-schedule presentation.

One particular risk that she noted which attracted the board's attention was the current federal surface transportation bill expires next year. They have assumed for planning that Congress will enact a new program and transit funding will maintain historic rates of increase.

But especially after the shutdown, nobody really has any idea what a Republican Senate and a Democratic House of Representatives will come up with or whether the president will sign it.

The Highway Trust Fund is insolvent and Congress has been making up deficits with annual transfers from the General Fund. Nobody knows if this will continue.

That's all for Monday's meeting. See you next Monday at the joint MassDOT/MBTA board meeting, I hope.

@threadreaderapp please unroll