HomeMy Public PortalAbout2016-06-22 and 07-05 TranspoComm_REPORT_TMA_TDM3_201607191235324065Committee on Transportation
Report on meetings on Tuesday, June 22 and July 5, 2016
Reported: July 12, 2016
Meeting 1: June 22 - 7 PM - Lower Hearing Room, Town Administration Building
The committee met to hear a progress report on the Transportation Management Association (TMA) formation
and continue discussion on a town -wide Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance. Detailed
meeting minutes and an attendees list were compiled by Andrea Adams of the Department of Community
Development and Planning and are attached to this report (Attachment A). The full meeting was also video -
recorded by WCATV and is available for streaming online at http://wcatv.org/vod/transportation-meeting/
The discussion is summarized by the chair below.
On TMA Planning...
The 128 Business Council is a consultant working for the town to plan and implement the Transportation
Management Association (TMA). Mr. Patrick Sullivan of the 128 Business Council made a presentation on the
progress of this planning. Mr. Sullivan's PowerPoint slideshow is available on the town website
(http://www.watertown-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/19473).
At the time of the meeting, the consultant's vision for the shuttle program included the following highlights,
1. Based on surveys conducted at some of Watertown's largest employers, the first shuttle will serve a
primary route from Watertown Square, down Arsenal Street, up Coolidge Ave to Mt. Auburn Street and
then to the Red Line MBTA station at Harvard Square. The shuttle would return via Soldiers Field Road
to Arsenal Street.
2. Another shuttle could extend this service from Watertown Square, down Pleasant Street all the way to
Repton Place.
3. Adding any other routes would detract from the financial viability of the association running these 2
routes at 30 -minute, peak -hour service.
4. Other town -owned vehicles such as the Senior Center shuttle and the new School Department bus could
be integrated more efficiently to serve the entire town at times when these departments weren't using
them. Also, as use of the TMA shuttles grew in the future, new routes could be considered.
5. The Watertown TMA could be incorporated as a subsidiary organization within the 128 Business Council.
This would save costs and give access to the 128 BC staff and resources when needed. It would also
make the overall roll -out of services happen faster.
6. An oversight Board would be formed comprised of member institutions as well as representation from
the town. An executive director would be hired to manage day-to-day operations.
7. All shuttles would be 'wrapped' with lettering and logos of the TMA and its member institutions. This
would be part of a branding and marketing program essential for its success. These would be leased
vehicles and they would include bike racks and WiFi capability for riders from the member institutions
and town residents.
8. The shuttles will only stop at stops if a rider asks to be dropped there.
Mr. Magoon said there is a policy decision about whether to use a stand-alone model, or a subsidiary model.
And, there needs to be more outreach to the business community members.
The two attending committee members each felt that the subsidiary model and the two draft routes made
sense. Councilor Palomba said he wanted to see more detail about the subsidiary approach and who would be
on the management board. He added that the next presentation needed to be more fleshed out in terms of
ways to serve the current residents of Watertown. Director Magoon suggested a more robust presentation
could be developed based on those assumptions and that it could be made to the general public, as well.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 1 of 15
Councilor Palomba moved to direct DCDP staff to move forward, based on the two conceptual routes, and using
a subsidiary approach, and create a more robust presentation, and a timeline to roll this out to the public.
Councilor Piccirilli seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously.
On progress towards a town -wide TDM...
The Committee also discussed briefly how to proceed with developing a town -wide Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) policy. Director of Community Development and Planning Steve Magoon presented a
second staff report on TDM. This report is available on the town website (http://www.watertown-
ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/19560).
After some brief discussion, the Committee agreed that it was a good idea to move ahead with a new town
ordinance that would state the general goals and purposes of a transportation demand program as outlined in
the staff report. The details of the implementation of such a program would be contained in a separate Rules
and Regulations document to be developed. This is a similar model to the recently -adopted Stormwater
Ordinance and could include a similar clause that required council notification of changes to the regulations.
Given the complexity of emerging technologies, schools of thought and comparable legislation in other
jurisdictions, building policy this way seems to offer more flexibility for staff. The DCDP offered to have this new
ordinance drafted by the next meeting (see below). Mr. Magoon also noted athenahealth has a robust TDM
program in development, and that the Arsenal Project would be coming forward in July with a similar
requirement in the zoning language of the RMUD.
The meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm. Summary report compiled by Councilor Dushku.
Meeting 2: July 5, 2016 - 6 PM - Richard E. Mastrangelo Council Chamber, Town Administration Building
The committee met to continue discussion on a town -wide TDM ordinance and the TMA planning. Attendees
included Chair Aaron Dushku, Vice -chair Vincent Piccirilli, Secretary Tony Palomba, DCDP Director/Asst. Town
Manager Steve Magoon, DCDP Sr. Planner Gideon Schreiber, DCDP Sr. Planner Andrea Adams, Councilors
Feltner, Falkoff and Woodland, Council President Sideris, community members Mark Peterson, Jonathan
Bockian, Judy Kohler, Nancy Hammett and Charlie Breitrose. State Representative Jonathan Hecht also
attended.
Town -wide TDM policy...
Mr. Magoon presented a draft ordinance for consideration (Attachment B).
The matter was again discussed about the benefits of having a slimmed -down and general ordinance that
referred to a more robust and detailed set of regulations. There was some concern about passing and ordinance
before the regulations existed, though.
Committee members and attendees engaged in a long discussion over the draft. Below is a summary:
1. There is a challenge of applying the a TDM to large commercial/retail developments that rely on
customers for their financial success.
2. We should consider incentives if an employer or residential development surpasses their TDM goals.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 2 of 15
3. Consider the inclusion of a fine structure in the Rules and Regulations for not achieving the TDM goals
and a penalty structure for not implementing the initial TDM program or adjusted TDM steps requested
by DCDP.
4. Affirm the purpose of the Ordinance is, in part, to enable the Rules and Regulations which would allow
DCDP to respond to technology changes that occur in TDM planning and implementation. (Councilor
Piccirilli)
All in attendance agreed that the ordinance was not ready to move forward to the full council, yet. There was
consensus that the following elements should be considered in a future version,
1. Include in Section I (A) Purpose, "to reduction of SOVs, to improve air quality, and to encourage other
modes of transportation.
2. Include in Section I (A) Purpose, a specific, quantitative Town -wide goal for reducing SOVs.
3. Include in Section I II "An annual review of the progress toward achieving the Town -wide goal for
reducing SOVs" and "A periodic review of the Rules and Regulations".
4. Include in Section I II "Any proposed changes in the Rules and Regulations will be presented to the Town
Council for review and comment".
5. Clarify and expand on the issue of evaluating success in achieving a percent reduction in SOVs when
there is a significant increase in SOV overall when large developments, commercial and residential come
on line.
Committee members and attendees all expressed a desire to have some sort of draft regulations ready to
present to the public when this ordinance is voted on at the full council and Mr. Magoon said that such a draft
might be available as soon as 3 weeks (July 26).
The Committee asked Mr. Magoon to consider for the comments received and produce an updated version of
the Ordinance for discussion at the next meeting tentatively set for July 26 at 6 pm. Even if the draft regulations
are not ready by then, they should be ready by the time the council takes its final vote on adoption.
TMA Planning, continued...
Councilor Dushku made a brief comment about the TMA planning that had occurred at the last meeting. He
asked Mr. Magoon to consider that town funds spent on the TMA shuttles could more easily be justified if there
was a more direct benefit to riders already living in Watertown. He pointed to the West End of town as having a
high density of residents in housing developments on Waverly Ave, Lexington and Warren Streets as well as the
multi -family housing stock and zoning. He also mentioned the Commuter Rail station in Waverly Square as an
underutilized resource for commuters and that nearby McLean Hospital already ran a shuttle to the station and
it employed 2000 people. Ms. Kohler suggested that the riders of that train are limited to walkers because the
site offers such limited parking but that the opportunity to get downtown in 20 minutes by rail was one that
should be tapped by Watertown commuters more often. Councilor Palomba raised the concern about the
potential for the shuttle to have a limited impact on reducing SOVs given that the shuttle is only a 24 passenger
vehicle and that it may be used by residents and employees who traditional take the MTBA. He suggested that
DCDP and the 128 Business Council consider using shuttles with greater seating capacity.
Mr. Magoon offered to bring this consideration to the consultants before the next meeting. He also mentioned
that the consultants had forgotten to mention that their vision was for the shuttle service to be free for all
riders.
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 pm. Report compiled by Councilors Dushku and Palomba.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 3 of 15
ATTACHMENT A. Detailed meeting meeting minutes compiled by DCDP staff. ADushku additions
are IN CAPS.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Vincent J. Piccirilli, District C Councilor (Vice Chair), and Tony Palomba, Councilor at Large (Secretary)
OTHERS PRESENT
Steve Magoon, Director, Department of Community Development & Planning, and Assistant Town Manager
Gideon Schreiber, Senior Planner
Andrea Adams, Senior Planner
John Hecht, State Representative, 159 Russell Street
Susan Falkoff, Councilor at Large
Lisa Feltner, District B Councilor
Charlie Breitrose, Watertown News
Monica Tibbits-Nutt, Executive Director, 128 Business Council
Patrick Sullivan, 128 Business Council
Bridger McGraw, athenahealth
John Bockian, 165 Irving Street
Paul L. Dombzowsh
Shawn Kelly
Judy R. Kohler, 61 Emerson Road
Andrew Mazzella
Mark Peterson, 277 School Street
Adam Sennott
Harvey Steiner, Marshall Street
Abby Yarrow, Washburn Street
Councilor Piccirilli opened the meeting at 7:00 PM noting that the Chair, Councilor Dushku, was unable to
attend. He said the Subcommittee would discuss an update to the Transportation Management Association
(TMA) formation, and discussion of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs.
Director Magoon noted the Town had been working with the 128 Business Council. He said the work was
coming to decision points. Want direction from the Subcommittee on policy, and next steps for the TMA.
Two primary items to get direction on is the TMA organization structure, and looking at preliminary routes
for shuttles. He acknowledged the need to also get more public input.
TMA PRESENTATION BY 128 BUSINESS COUNCIL
Mr. Sullivan, Route 128 Business Council (Business Council), used a PowerPoint as part of his presentation.
He said the Business Council has been working since fall 2015 on stakeholder meetings, surveys. Solicit
feedback from the Subcommittee moving forward. Last update to Subcommittee was in February. Options
for TMA structure, and shuttle routes. Business Council has surveyed over 1,000 commuters, and home zip
code data from almost 4,000 commuters. Identify shuttle connections. Monthly meetings with DCDP staff.
Investigate options for using transit vehicles owned by the Town. Attended Arsenal Corridor project
meeting. Investigated funding options based on other local programs such as Lexpress in Lexington.
Consulted with Attorney on non-profit formation. Started website for Watertown commuters. Developed
draft shuttle routs. Developed draft budget for TMA.
Question is what does Watertown want? A TMA? Shuttles? Both? Can have either one without the other.
If both, should one come before the other? What are the budget implications?
Need to establish priorities. Showed a slide indicating how it much it would cost to operate a shuttle bus.
Factors included typical commuter shuttle hours of operation, vehicle hourly rates, vehicle amenities (WIFI,
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 4 of 15
GPS, etc.). Total estimated annual costs range from 196,822 per vehicle (at $70/hour) to $223,215 per
vehicle (at $80/hour).
Mr. Sullivan also covered the estimated costs for operating a TMA. Costs included marketing, TMA
programs, and salary/overhead for a total of $188,000 per year. Estimating the cost to run a
shuttle/vehicle at approximately $200,000 per year, this results in a total estimate of approximately
$588,000 operating two (2) shuttles.
Mr. Sullivan also addressed the formational structure of a TMA. It can be a separate corporation, or a
subsidiary of the 128 Business Council. He noted that by law, as a subsidiary, it cannot have a board with
authority that supersedes the board of the parent organization. He said this limits the fiscal oversight the
Watertown TMA board could have over the Watertown TMA if it was structured as a subsidiary of the 128
Business Council.
If the Watertown TMA was a subsidiary of the 128 Business Council, the Watertown TMA can tap into the
staff and resources of the 128 Business Council. This would eliminate administrative costs associated with
forming a new organization from scratch - TMA can start operation almost immediately. He also noted
being a subsidiary would reduce overhead expenses (payroll, bookkeeping, audit & tax prep, office
equipment). In terms of TMA governance, TMA members would each have a vote on the TMA's Steering
Committee, and the Steering Committee would meet to approve annual work plan and receive quarterly
updates from the Watertown TMA's Executive Director. He said the Steering Committee would also
approve the Watertown TMA membership pricing structure.
Mr. Sullivan said the other option was to form the Watertown TMA as an independent 501(c) 4 Non -Profit.
He said this would mean that the Watertown TMA would have autonomy from 128 Business Council. He
said this would mean that the TMA would have a Board of Directors that would have complete control over
the organization's mission and finances. However, the process for forming the organization would become
more complicated, costly, and take longer. He said a legal process would have to be undertaken to form the
Non -Profit. As an independent organization, the Watertown TMA would not have access to 128 Business
Council resources, and would have to fund all its own operating and overhead costs and legal fees.
Mr. Sullivan also addressed the possible shuttles and routes. He said the 128 Business Council staff met
with local employers. They want efficient shuttle service with a limited number of stops and short
headways (departures every 30 minutes). He noted that a connection to Harvard Square makes the most
sense, in that during peak the Red Lines has departures/Arrivals from Harvard Square Station every 4-5
minutes. The Red Line accounts for 22% of MBTA's overall ridership - 6 of top 10 weekday rapid transit
stations on Red Line. The Red Line also offers connections to other MBTA services. He said the zip code
analysis and distance in time and miles from key Watertown corridors makes a connection to the Red Line
logical. He then showed slides of two proposed shuttle Routes, based on two shuttles.
COUNCILOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Councilor Piccirilli and Councilor at Large Palomba asked about the shuttle routes, and where the end of
the Pleasant Street proposed route would end?
Mr. Sullivan said the key was to find dense pockets on Pleasant Street, or projects that have expressed an
interest in participating in the TMA. He suggested a stop at Bell, Watertown could potentially be the last
stop before the shuttle would return to Watertown Square.
Councilor Piccirilli said a key point was how people living on Pleasant Street were commuting to other
places in Watertown?
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 5 of 15
Mr. Sullivan said employees will provide zip code data, but are typically uncomfortable providing street
address, so usage of residents on Pleasant Street is hard to gauge.
Councilor Piccirilli suggested this could be data that athenahealth could collect.
Councilor Palomba asked about the shuttle on Pleasant Street?
Mr. Sullivan said he'd started looking at refined routing, and it would potentially make 4-5 stops instead of
six, because of the time needed to travel down the whole road and return to Watertown Square.
Director Magoon asked Mr. Sullivan to speak to how many TMA's the Business Council works with that are
independent, versus subsidiary organizations?
Mr. Sullivan said there are approximately 5-6 that are subsidiaries of other organizations, such as A Better
City. Formed in the late 1990's. Formed the Allston -Brighton TMA, which started in 2012. CommuteWorks
is also an extension of MASSCO. He said the 128 Business Council works with both types. 5-6 are stand-
alone TMAs. Seaport TMA, for example. All TMA in Massachusetts collaborate together. Meetings every
other month. No subsidiaries of the 128 Business Council. Watertown would be first.
Director Magoon said a key focus going forward is reaching out to the businesses that will be the nucleus of
the Watertown TMA, and also do general public outreach. Routes at this stage are initial, with the potential
to grow as time passes. More projects may wish to participate. Incorporate the Senior Shuttle into the
TMA, for times when it is sitting idle? More opportunities to operate within the Town, including the School
Committee shuttle.
Councilor Palomba said his focus was on the proposed routes. He asked to see the side with the proposed
schedule. Asked for an explanation of the time slots. He said his confusion was on Pleasant Street.
Mr. Sullivan explained that getting to the Square would take up to 7:10 AM. As the morning progresses, the
time gaps get a bit larger, to factor in traffic. He said the timing on the schedule is from WAYS, so it's time
adjusted. He also said there is some flexibility on the Pleasant Street route, to divert to Arsenal Street, if
there is demand there. Depends on the TMA membership, employer mix, and need for stops.
Director Magoon said the key difference with a proposed Pleasant Street shuttle is that it would skip most
of the stops, going from Harvard Square to Pleasant Street.
Councilor Palomba said the proposed routing seems to be looking primarily at large residential
developments and employers. Need to include residents' needs in the routing scenarios, for example living
at the MEWS, and want to shop at the Arsenal Project.
Mr. Sullivan said there could be a public stop, but need to be mindful of not adding too many stops, as this
would dis-incentivize usage those who are paying for the shuttle.
Councilor Palomba sent a letter with a route that went from Mt. Auburn Street to Schools Street. North -
South route?
Mr. Sullivan said the 128 Business Council has looked at several different routes, but with the first shuttle,
must make sure it is successful. Need to serve Arsenal Street, because has a density of residential and
commercial passengers, based on the density of development. This is an ideal place to launch the shuttle.
Also primarily funded by the large employers and residential developments. A North -South route would
double headways out of Harvard Square. This could discourage people from using the shuttle, and won't
provide the level of service that the funders would expect.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 6 of 15
Director Magoon said some projects have said that they would maintain their own shuttles. Use the TMA to
operate the system, but also operate their own shuttles. Believe that it is important not to have duplicative
service, particularly if the shuttles are not operating full. This could create more congestion on the
roadways. Think of this as something to aspire to.
Councilor Palomba asked what the benefit for all? Should be a reduction in congestion in Watertown, or a
part of Watertown. Residents and employers on the routes benefit most directly. Rest of the Watertown
seems to receive an indirect benefit. Understand the dilemma of the need to involve businesses for funding,
but need to continue to have an important priority to serve Watertown residents not on the routes.
Councilor Piccirilli said there are overarching benefits to a shuttle. For example, fewer vehicles traveling
through Watertown Square. Harvard Square to Watertown Square - If everyone takes the shuttle instead
of the 71 MBTA Bus is not productive. Want to incentivize more drivers to relinquish the car, and use the
shuttle instead. Need a Pleasant Street route in the initial roll -out, because there is no public transit on
Pleasant Street. Approximately 1,000 residents on the corridor in apartments. Interested in the data of
how many residents of Pleasant Street work at athenahealth. Get intra-Town traffic patterns to change.
Will create the largest impact for residents generally: Some will take the shuttle, and congestion in
Watertown Square will be reduced. Appreciate the cross-town routes, but the reality is that commuter
congestion is along Arsenal Street and through Watertown Square.
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Johnathon Bockian, several questions. Data collection a key. Has the 128 Business Council been able to
collect data from the large residential developments? He asked if it was a concern that the commuters to
Watertown were being captured as employees, but not residents commuting inside Watertown, or
commuting out of Town? He noted the new commuter station at New Balance. Mr. Bockian also asked
about the projected cost for a TMA with overhead and shuttles - five stops on Arsenal Street. Divide annual
expense by stops and ridership. What would TMA members have to pay in order for their employees to
ride for free? How does the cost compare with what other TMAs are paying for shuttles? Could a
Watertown TMA get the benefit of the Business Council's expertise as an independent?
Mr. Sullivan said he'd met with several of the large developments, and created surveys, although only one
followed through with a survey of residents, Bell Watertown. He noted this is something that can be
augmented. He said one of the assumptions is that the people living in the Pleasant Street Corridor are
probably working on Arsenal Street, or at Tufts Health on Mt. Auburn Street. So, having a shuttle in both
corridors will help get those people out of their cars.
Director Magoon said many residents in Watertown commute to Harvard Square. He said this is partly the
reason why the 71 MBTA bus is so congested. He noted the shuttle would serve both directions from
Harvard Square.
Mr. Schreiber, Senior Planner, noted that Watertown Square is a key hub, and getting people to there and
the Watertown Yard is key in terms of them being able to continue their trips. He said an additional
connection creates new options.
Mr. Sullivan said the Business Council had done a new survey of its Waltham Center service, and few riders
are now using the Express Bus to make that connection. He said the cost figure per employer is the most
difficult. Need to recruit more employers and larger residential projects to drive down the per -member
cost. Also discussion of Watertown being a member.
Director Magoon noted that if the TMA was open to the general public, it would make sense for the Town to
be a TMA contributing member.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 7 of 15
Mr. Sullivan said the cost of the shuttle service is on the higher end of the scale, because there is a small
pool of members.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said for the Business Council's most popular shuttle, in the Waltham -
Lexington area, which connects to Alewife, and has been operating for about 25 year, it provides service to
15 -employee businesses, who pay around $1,000 to larger employers who pay around $200,000 to
$400,000. She said $120,000 is definitely larger, but this speaks to the smaller pool.
Mr. Sullivan noted he'd described the financials as a subsidiary of the Business Council, or as an
independent organization. He said the hope is to continue to assist Watertown, as a part of the Business
Council. He said the Business Council felt this could be done quickly, and in a transparent manner. While
there are some limitations, in terms of the Board of Directors, the subsidiary would still have autonomy.
Councilor at Large Falkoff asked for further discussion of the potential timetable. She said this timetable
does not shows stops on the return trip from Harvard Square. She said LINX stop #2 is a delay.
Mr. Sullivan said this is a quirk of how routes operate now. As other places come on line, there would be
stops going both ways. He said as people get on the shuttle, the shuttle can determine how to schedule the
stops, to expedite the trips. He said the LINX stop would be figured out as users were getting on the shuttle.
Director Magoon said the stops would be in effect both ways, to and from Harvard Square.
Representative Hecht asked how much additional capacity the TMA would add on Arsenal Street. There is
not capacity now on Pleasant Street. 24 person van making six trips in the peak commute periods. What
does this add in capacity relative to what is there now? How does this compare to the 70 and 70A MBTA
Bus?
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said one of the major services that the Business Council offers is a
connection to Waltham, which replicates part of the route of the 70 MBTA Bus. Don't prefer to duplicate
service. However, the shuttle significantly reduces a number of stops. Shifts users from a car to the shuttle
bus. Mode shift out of cars. This is the basis of the Business Council's planning. Do operate on corridors
where there is no MBTA bus service.
Councilor Piccirilli said the shuttle is carrying the approximate amount of 150 car trips in a shuttle based
on its capacity and trips. Noted some of these people may take the Red Line.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the TMA is targeting people not using transit now. Focus is on the
single occupancy vehicle trips, and shifting them to shuttles. Data shows this.
Councilor at Large Palomba said it is not clear the Business Council had the data to show this for
Watertown?
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said no, there is no way that at this point, there would be enough data to
show this. She noted, however, the Business Council can historically show that with similar income
brackets, similar commutes that this is how people behave. She acknowledged that behavior can change,
but until the MBTA changes its service, she doubts this behavior would change.
Mr. Sullivan said that Business Council survey data shows the majority of the riders (70%) have a car at
their disposal, but they choose to ride a shuttle every day.
Councilor Piccirilli noted that the Pleasant Street Corridor has no service now.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 8 of 15
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the proposed Pleasant Street Corridor service is similar to what the
Business Council provides on Hartwell Avenue in Lexington. Serves a corridor with no MBTA service.
Seeing ridership numbers go up, and allows Lexington to add stops that serve the Town Center, and also
connect to the Lexpress bus.
Elliott Friedman asked Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt to describe the TMA revenues from year one to year
five.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the Business Council started out with a 15 -passenger van. She said it
only served Cambridge and the Polaroid site. Startup in 1997 was approximately $150,000. Ridership
grew enough in the first six months to increase service to a second, 24 -passenger van. This then grew to 8
members in about 6 months, with an even split of costs. Business Council doubled revenues in about three
years. But, this was in an area of very bad MBTA service. With Watertown, it depends on how fast
members join. She suggested the Watertown TMA could get to 20 members by the end of year three. This is
largely dependent on business cycles, and how quickly residential and commercial buildings come on line.
Mr. Sullivan said the Business Council signs 5 year contracts for shuttles, with a 3% CPI increase. He said
the cost increases are predictable.
Mr. Peterson asked about ridership numbers versus costs. Suggested that ridership costs might be up to
$1,000 per commuter based on a $600,000 budget for two vehicles. He noted this is what members would
have to carry to provide the full service. Is this comparable to a T -Pass? How would members be charged?
Mr. Schreiber, Senior Planner, noted the comparison to the MBTA is not valid, because the T is heavily
subsidized.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the MBTA is always going to be cheaper. She said a T -Pass is about
$80 a month.
Mr. Sullivan suggested the actual cost per MBTA can be as much as $20 per rider.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the members look at the costs per square foot. Looked at this way, it's
pennies per square foot. They look at it as an amenity, to attract tenants and employees. Smaller members
pay a smaller bill per year. She said members are typically charged a rate per overall employees or per
square foot, as using actual ridership would mean billing at the end of a year. Depends on the type of the
member: Commercial, retail, office, small, large, residential, etc.
Councilor at Large Palomba suggested the discussion to date tends to indicate that Watertown residents
are not necessary to the formation of a TMA. He suggested that the demographic selected are primarily
employees along the Arsenal Street corridor, or will stay at the Marriott Hotel. Suggested that relationships
could be developed with these large employers, which might result in a less congested Watertown Square,
and provide some service to Pleasant Street. Not enough in this proposal to benefit the residents of
Watertown. Acknowledged the benefit to the reduced congestion in Watertown Square. Residents may
just want to be able to get from one place to another, and may not need WIFI to do business work. Hoping
that as the TMA unfolds, that there is a greater consideration for the residents of Watertown. Reducing
congestion is a laudable goal, but that's not enough.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said she very clearly understands Councilor Palomba's concerns. The
exemplar routes are proposed, but more data is needed to refine the actual routes. She said the Route 128
Business Council is not a corporate shuttle provider. Not in the business of just providing connections for
corporations to just get their employees out of their cars. 30 -year mission of the Business Council has been
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 9 of 15
to reduce congestion by finding a batter way to do transit. Find better ways to provide transit that is not
closed to the public. See corporate shuttles daily moving about empty or partially full, while they pass by a
person waiting for an MBTA bus to go to the same destination, like in the Seaport District. Business Council
provides a private service that is open to the public. Not trying to avoid the residents, but have to get the
initial private investment to provide that better service to the residents. Only other choice is for residents
to purchase a car, or wait for the MBTA to provide service, which is not realistic, as the buses are full or
don't stop at that location. Waiting on the data because Watertown is a new case. This is not a corporate
shuttle designed only to serve Millennials. Care about all people, such as the janitor at the facility who
wants to get to work, or the resident that wants to go to the Library. Need to make sure the service is
reliable and long-term. Business Council itself is a non-profit. Need that initial funding to make the service
viable.
Councilor at Large Palomba thanked the Executive Director for explaining the situation perfectly. Hopes
that in the next presentation, this will be laid out. Presentation does provide the data on the cost and who
the initial payers are. But, what's next? Lay out the vision, as this will be more attractive to the residents.
Mr. Bockian asked that the PowerPoint be put up on line. He suggested the congestion reduction is a
general benefit, such as the Senior Center, in that not all Watertown residents use it. Incentives to
businesses to join the TMA? How to best spread the costs? Also a balance of where the shuttle stops
should be?
Mr. Sullivan noted the shuttles tend to sell themselves. Get outreach from people who what to use the
Business Council's services. Suggest that once the shuttle and TMA is maturing, it will sell itself. He also
noted the TMA staff will do a significant amount of outreach to the business community.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the Business Council also has members who don't use shuttles, and
only pay for other services, such as transportation planning, carpool scheduling, bike shares, parking
analysis, wayfinding signage, in-house map making, and flexible scheduling. She said communities that are
members can also use these additional or non -shuttle services and expertise. She said it varies by the
members' needs.
Councilor Piccirilli said athenahealth to the Back Bay and Harvard Square, resulting in around 500 trips.
Intra-Watertown traffic should not be ignored. Also need to incorporate the athenahealth shuttle and/or
other services into the larger TMA. Create a hybrid.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said the Business Council has been working with athenahealth's equipment
provider in Waltham. Similar situation in Waltham. Work with athenahealth in other areas beyond
providing a shuttle. This gives Watertown a jump-start and a case study.
Director Magoon said expects that athenahealth will be a full participant in the TMA. Robust TDM program
including the shuttle that they have. Building services is important, to serve other parts of Watertown. This
TMA will serve other people, general public, along the corridor, and beyond, who can ride the shuttle.
Another example area is Coolidge Square where there are a number of employers. May make sense in the
future to reach out to those businesses. TMA could market to this area, or areas like this in Watertown.
Confluence of smaller businesses could joint, and allow for an expansion of services, or use of the Senior
Shuttle. Run a service that is not necessarily commuter -driven, but more tailored to the needs of the
businesses in that area. Continue to look at these opportunities.
Councilor at Large Palomba asked about the two costs for a subsidiary and an independent organization.
Noted the estimates are for two shuttles, and other costs. How many staff for the salary and overhead? He
asked about the two different models?
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 10 of 15
Mr. Sullivan said there would be one dedicated staff person, and Executive Director, just for the Watertown
TMA. The Watertown TMA would also be able to tap into the staff of the larger Business Council, if it was a
subsidiary.
Council Member Piccirilli asked if the stand-alone model would be more costly?
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said yes, a stand-alone TMA would be more costly to create and operate.
Mr. Bockian said one persuasive factor in the stand-alone model is an independent control board. At the
same time, there would be costs for building rent, etc. that would not be the case if there was a subsidiary
TMA.
Councilor Feltner said she understood the questions about initial feasibility. Need to be very sensitive in
terms of the roll -out. Community is angry and stressed at the level of development, and traffic congestion.
Need to set realistic expectations. Subsidiary option is attractive, because can be rolled out more quickly,
and at less cost. Need to also clearly articulate public benefits. Less congestion is a laudable goal. Excited
at the progress, and how to incorporate athenahealth into the TMA.
Mr. Sullivan said there are many creative ways to work with the community. Have offered service in
Lexington Center to Boston, daily. Annual bike tune-ups and safety clinics. Designed an informational card
with the scheduling, and did a stuffer in all of the March tax bills. Assist with mapping of Lexpress bus and
the design of the bus wrapper.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said need to clearly map out how to work with residents, and offer services.
Residents call the Business Council for transportation services. Help make information available to
residents about options to facilitate transportation, or improving sidewalks, or more bus shelters.
Councilor at Large Palomba noted that Watertown, if it agreed, would be the first subsidiary of the Business
Council. Is the Business Council comfortable with this model? What about the Steering Committee - needs
to include residents, community organizations, etc. Key feature of the TMA. Need to carefully work out the
relationship between the TMA Executive Director and the Steering Committee.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said these relationships would have to be clearly spelled out, and clearly
set in legal documents. Met with other TMAs. Also looked at the Business Council's own Board. Steering
Committee will be guiding the work plan for Watertown's TMA. The Memorandum of Understanding
would clearly spell out what occurs if there is a conflict, etc.
Council Member Piccirilli noted the schedule developed in February by the Subcommittee had been largely
met. He acknowledged the need for more surveys, but the other items had been addressed. When could
the Subcommittee see the first draft of some of the documents?
Director Magoon said the Business Council has been working on these documents. But, there is a policy
decision about whether to use a stand-alone model, or a subsidiary model. And, there needs to be more
outreach to the business community members. Flesh out more of the products for the next Subcommittee
meeting.
Council Member Piccirilli said the two big questions were the organizational structure, and the potential
routes. He said the subsidiary model and the two draft routes seem to make sense. He asked Councilor at
Large Palomba his thoughts?
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 11 of 15
Councilor at Large Palomba said he agreed with Councilor Palomba. Need more detail about the subsidiary
approach, and who is on board, and who could be on board with these two routes. Next presentation needs
to be more fleshed out in terms of the ways to serve the residents of Watertown.
Councilor Feltner said a resident's survey was also key.
Director Magoon suggested a more robust presentation could be developed based on those assumptions,
and a more robust presentation to the community as well.
Council Member Piccirilli said a Community Meeting was also needed, and should include a relatively well
fleshed out scenario, so people can comment on defined ideas.
Council Member Motion
Councilor at Large Palomba moved to direct DCDP staff to move forward, based on two conceptual routes,
and using a subsidiary approach, and create a more robust presentation, and a timeline to roll this out to
the public.
Councilor Piccirilli seconded the motion, which was approved unanimously.
Executive Director Tibbits-Nutt said getting direction on the stand-alone versus subsidiary model was key,
as it impacts the amount of community outreach that can be done, going forward. Next presentation can
include an updated timeline and a community outreach plan. This will allow Mr. Sullivan to tap into the
Business Council's resources.
Councilor Piccirilli said things were coalescing around a direction, but it needed to be fleshed out at a full
Community Meeting. Need to find a way to reduce rush-hour congestion.
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
Executive Director Magoon suggested the discussion of TDM would be very brief. He said DCDP staff had
followed up on the Subcommittee's last meeting about TDM. How to incorporate methods to reduce single -
occupancy vehicle trips in development projects. He suggested a TDM program could apply to non-
residential projects of 10,000 square feet or more, or ten (10) or more units of housing. Director Magoon
noted this is the same threshold for formal Design Review and Community Meetings. He noted a key
important TDM component is a target trip reduction goal for each project. Can also discuss specific
numerical goal. He noted that TDM programs have a particular set of measures to achieve the target trip
reduction goal, but not all projects, particularly smaller projects, might not do all of these measures.
Director Magoon noted that post -occupancy monitoring is also key, to cross-check the project's "actual" trip
generation and the effectiveness of the TDM program. He said reporting to the Town could include
employee surveys, license plate surveys, or car counts data at entrance/egress points for certain projects.
Finally, Director Magoon noted that Town staff may enforce additional trip reduction measures to reduce
trips, and achieve the reduction goals. These steps could include an expansion of the TDM Program to
provide additional measures, additional incentives, or potential penalties. He said another question was
how to implement the TDM programs, such as a Zoning Ordinance, or a General Ordinance, or a Town
policy. Director Magoon suggested that the transportation field is rapidly changing, that would be a
General Ordinance, supplemented by a more detailed set of regulations. This would allow the regulations
to be more quickly updated.
Councilor Piccirilli said that it appeared that Director Magoon was recommending crafting a General
Ordinance, with a more detailed set of regulations, to be drafted by the Department?
Director Magoon said yes, this was his recommendation.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 12 of 15
Councilor at Large Palomba appreciated the staff doing this quickly. He said the material was produced at
least a week ahead of time. Great work in such a short timeframe. Support a General Ordinance that gets
out there soon, with more detailed regulations. Similar to the Town's Stormwater Ordinance. Noted that
transportation is an evolving field, and this setup respects the powers of the Town Council, and the
expertise of the Department.
Councilor Piccirilli said the planned June 27, 2016 Subcommittee meeting had to be rescheduled, to
accommodate a meeting on the Schools Master Plan. Did the Department have a sense of a draft
Ordinance?
Director Magoon said the draft Ordinance would be fairly short, and make clear what the regulations would
apply to, and which projects would be subject to it, and lay out basics similar to the five elements in the
DCDP Memo. The Ordinance could be relatively straightforward, and provide specificity to reflect the
Council's interest, with the specifics in the regulations.
Councilor Piccirilli said the Subcommittee would like to see a draft of the proposed Ordinance.
Councilor at Large Palomba was comfortable moving forward AS LONG AS THE ORDINANCE INCLUDED A
PROVISION FOR THE COUNCIL TO BE NOTIFIED OF ANY REGULATION CHANGES, and asked if there was
time to take it to the next full Council meeting?
The two Councilors discussed timing for another Subcommittee meeting and bringing it forward to the full
Council. Councilor Palomba suggested that the Subcommittee report should have a draft of an Ordinance.
He suggested a meeting in the first part of the first week in July, perhaps July 7, 2016?
Director Magoon suggested his staff was comfortable moving forward in a way where Councilor Dushku
could weigh in on this draft Ordinance. He noted athenahealth has a robust TDM program, and that the
Arsenal Project would be coming forward in July. He said he would do his best to draft the Ordinance in a
timely manner.
Councilor Piccirilli asked for public comments on this proposal?
Councilor Feltner suggested the draft Ordinance would go to Rules Subcommittee for discussion.
Mr. Bockian suggested non-compliance with the TDM program should be a Zoning non -conformity.
Director Magoon suggested enforcement issues would be discussed as the draft Ordinance and regulations
developed, including feedback from the Town Attorney.
Councilor Piccirilli suggested it would be important for the regulations to keep pace with technology, so
making them part of Zoning may not be advisable. HE ALSO STATED THAT THE COUNCIL MAY DECIDE TO
SEND THE MATTER TO THE RULES & ORDINANCES COMMITTEE BUT HE THOUGHT THAT THIS
COMMITTEE NEEDED TO IRON OUT THE TECHNICAL DETAILS FIRST.
Councilor at Large Palomba asked Mr. Sullivan to forward his presentation to him.
ADJOURN
Councilor at Large Palomba motioned to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 PM. Councilor Piccirilli seconded the
motion, which was unanimously approved.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 13 of 15
ATTACHMENT B. Draft ordinance text from DCDP.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TOWN'S GENERAL ORDIANCES
CHAPTER 72: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
(A) Purpose
The purpose of this Ordinance is to create a framework by which Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) programs apply to private development and re -development projects.
This Ordinance establishes the legal authority to ensure compliance with the provisions of this
Ordinance through permitting, inspections, monitoring and enforcement.
(B) Applicability
1. Any new development or redevelopment project in excess of ten thousand (10,000) square feet or
more, or ten (10) or more units of housing shall be required to prepare and implement a Transportation
Demand Management program, or
2. Any project that will generate more than one hundred and fifty (150) average daily trips, or more
than fifteen (15) peak hour trips.
(C) Exemptions
The following are exempt from the requirements of this Ordinance:
1. Land or structures for religious or non-profit educational purposes;
2. Land or structures for the primary, accessory or incidental purpose of operating a child care facility;
and
3. Land or structures owned or leased by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, its agencies,
subdivisions or bodies politic.
II. AUTHORITY AND ADMINISTRATION
(A) Authority
This Ordinance is adopted under authority granted by the Horne Rule Amendment of the
Massachusetts Constitution, and the Home Rule Statutes.
(B) Administration
The Watertown Department of Community Development and Planning (DCDP) shall administer,
implement, and enforce this Ordinance. Any powers granted to or duties imposed upon the DCDP may
be delegated to the Depot tnient's employees or agents.
(C) Rules and Regulations
The Town Manager may adopt, and periodically amend, Rules and Regulations relating to the detailed
requirements, procedures, and administration of this Ordinance, including application and inspection
fees.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 14 of 15
Failure by the Town Manager to promulgate such Rules and Regulations, or a declaration of their
invalidity by a court of law, shall not have the effect of suspending or invalidating the provisions of
this Ordinance or any permit issued hereunder.
Such Rules and Regulations (or amendments thereto) shall become effective five (5) days after being
filed with the Town Clerk.
(D) Appeals
A decision of the DCDP with respect to the Rules and Regulations promulgated under this Ordinance
shall be final. A request for relief of a decision of the DCDP shall be reviewable in a court of
competent jurisdiction.
III. COMPONENTS OF THE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
REGULATIONS
No development or redevelopment project which is subject to this Ordinance may be granted a
Building Permit unless that project provides the DCDP a written Transportation Demand Management
Program that meets the criteria specified below, at a minimum, and as further specified in the Rules
and Regulations promulgated as part of Section II(C), above.
1. Includes program goals and target(s) for trip reduction based on the project's proposed new trips and
baseline transportation impacts.
2. Provides a comprehensive list of TDM measures that will be used to guide the project's TDM
program and achieve the program goals and trip reductions target(s).
3. Provides a description of post -occupancy TDM monitoring measures, to determine the project's
effectiveness in implementing the TDM program and achieving the program's goals and trip reduction
target(s).
4. Provides a schedule for post -occupancy TDM monitoring and reporting to the DCDP.
5. Provides a list of corrective measures, including but not limited to additional TDM measures,
additional incentives, or potential penalties to be applied by the Petitioner of the
development/redevelopment to achieve the program goals and trip reduction target(s).
IV. SEVERABILITY
Any finding of the invalidity of any section, provision, paragraph, sentence, or clause of this Ordinance
shall not invalidate any other section, provision, sentence, or clause thereof, nor shall it invalidate any
permit or determination that has been previously issued under this Ordinance.
REPORT - Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee
6/22/16
Discussion of TMA and TDM
Page 15 of 15