Tag Archives: MBTA

Governor Patrick Leads Green Line Extension Construction Kickoff

11 Dec
The speeches are done, and the Green Line Extension construction has officially begun.

The speeches are done, and the Green Line Extension construction has officially begun.

The first phase of construction on the Green Line Extension is officially underway, bringing with it a promise of light rail service to and from a new Union Square station by 2017. Speaking at the event, Governor Patrick and Congressman Capuano emphasized that both sustainable growth and environmental justice require investment for the long term, a sentiment echoed by Mayors Curtatone, Davis, and McGlynn.

I was happy to see so many members of state and local government at the event, but the attendance of local home- and business owners showed what this project is all about. The last two people to speak weren’t politicians but the owners of CasaB, a restaurant in Union Square. The “B” in CasaB refers to one of the owner’s grandfathers, whose love of Latin cuisine inspires the menus of chef Alberto Cabré. Alberto and his co-owner Angelina Jockovich were born in Puerto Rico and Colombia respectively, but they’ve chosen to start their business in Somerville, a decision they said was influenced by the promise of the Green Line Extension.

Alberto and Angelina, along with the tireless community leaders who made today possible, reflect the best of our community. Their speech was brief—they, and we, still have work to do.

Let’s Talk About the MBTA

17 Sep

Before his election to the State Senate earlier this year, Will Brownsberger served as the State Representative for the 24th Middlesex District. I worked closely with him as a member of the Cambridge delegation to the State House, and if you’ve met Sen. Brownsberger, I’m sure you’ll agree with me that he’s a serious and thoughtful legislator. Among the priorities we share, Will and I understand the importance of public transit and we’re both committed to fully funding the MBTA.

Charlie rides the MBTA

So when Sen. Brownsberger published an op-ed regarding the MBTA’s funding challenges, all of us in the State House took notice. Before we dive into the details of Sen. Brownsberger’s op-ed, let’s review the situation:

  • 37% of people working in Boston get to work by using the T. In the communities of Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline, Everett, and Malden, at least one in ten people get to work using public transit.
  • The MBTA is facing significant long-term funding challenges. Last year, I voted with my colleagues for a one-time transfer of funds from the state to the MBTA to keep T service at its current level, but we all knew the fix was temporary.
  • The current funding streams for the MBTA have proven to be insufficient for the level of service we’ve come to expect. There are a bunch of reasons for this—notably, the decline in sales tax revenue due to the struggling economy—but to get the T back on a solid financial footing, all options need to be on the table.

This is a complex issue with a number of potential fixes: for example, a marked increase in ridership across the system would go a long way toward closing the current funding gap. Cutting services could also narrow the funding gap, but at the expense of our neighbors’ ability to get to work. Similarly, finding new sources of revenue through open-road tolling, a reapportionment of sales tax proceeds, or levying a regional tax on T riders might get us closer to a balanced budget. All of these proposals present both benefits and drawbacks for the Commonwealth’s commuters.

There are a lot of innovative ideas out there, but the one thing we can’t do going forward is maintain the status quo. Some people are calling for a maintenance of current service levels and not touching revenue and complaining about the MBTA’s fiscal situation. But the numbers simply do not add up. As Bill Clinton might say, this approach simply defies arithmetic.

So, the challenge of fixing the T’s balance sheet becomes a question of priorities. Here are mine:

  • I believe that service cuts are almost always more harmful than revenue increases. I would rather see all of us pay a little more than make public transportation more expensive and more inconvenient for working families.
  • I believe that we as a Commonwealth should encourage more people to use public transportation. More T riders means cleaner air, less traffic, downward pressure on gas prices, and a healthier MBTA.
  • I believe that if we are going to raise revenues, we should do so in the least regressive way possible. Some self-described progressives have promoted a Parking Space Tax (PST), but, again, the arithmetic doesn’t lie: a PST would force residents of densely populated Somerville to pay four to five times more than residents of less-densely populated Newton. I can’t understand how anyone who calls themselves a progressive could ever advocate for a tax that forces working families to pay more than the wealthy, but that is indeed what some people are proposing.

Ideally, fixing the MBTA will be part of a statewide, comprehensive transportation solution, one which fixes our roads, bridges, and harbors along with our buses, stations, and rails. I will advocate for this comprehensive approach, but I’d also like to point out one idea in Sen. Brownsberger’s op-ed that caught my eye.

Drawing on a piece by the Globe’s Derrick Z. Jackson, Sen. Brownsberger brought up the idea of a congestion fee for drivers entering downtown Boston. Congestion fees are already in use in major cities such as London and Stockholm, and they’ve been proven to work. The idea is simple: when you drive into Boston, you pay a small fee. If you live within the congestion-fee zone, you’re largely exempt from the fee (in London, for example, 90% of your fee is waived if you live within the zone). The effects of this fee are pretty straightforward: commuters will be encouraged to park outside the city and take the MBTA in, thus driving up ridership, cutting congestion in the city, improving air quality downtown, and reducing consumption of fossil fuels.

As I said before, all options need to be on the table. But the congestion fee proposal is both proven and innovative. We here in Massachusetts have been ahead of the curve on a number of important issues, and a congestion fee gives us another chance to lead. The devil, as always, is in the details, but I believe a congestion fee could be a key component of a long-term fix for the MBTA.

What do you think? We need lots of good ideas to meet this challenge, and I would love to hear yours in the comments below.

MBTA Fare Increase Displays Need For Lasting Reforms

30 Mar

By now, most people who ride the T have heard about the possibility that fares will be increased and service will be cut.

Let me begin by saying that nobody is happy about this. There are systemic problems with the way that the MBTA is funded that have slowly plunged its budget into crisis. After years of creative fixes by MBTA and Massachusetts Department of Transportation officials, MBTA riders are now being asked to help close the T’s budget gap.

In January, the MBTA proposed two possible plans to raise fares and cut service. Proposal 1 relied primarily upon fare increases to close the budget gap. Proposal 2 relied upon service cuts. Both proposals would have drastically cut commuter rail and ferry service.

MassDOT and the MBTA then held 25 public meetings and a handful of hearings to gather input on the proposals from residents. The public meetings that were held attracted a total of 5,800 attendees, a record according to MassDOT. Many will remember that the meeting held at Cambridge City Hall was overflowing with people. Of those who reached out to the T, 80% opposed reductions in service and 24% opposed fare increases.

Since the conclusion of the public meetings, MassDOT and the MBTA have been able to find a number of places in their finances where they will be able to reduce their budget deficit. While these are not permanent solutions, they are important short-term fixes. These include the transfer of snow and ice removal surplus to the MBTA, the reduction of debt service payments, and the decision by the Executive Office of Administration and Finance  to allow the MBTA to use its offices in 10 Park Plaza rent-free this year.

Among these deficit-reduction measures are a number of fixes that will require immediate legislative action.  These include transferring funds from the Massachusetts vehicle inspection trust fund (a fund which sets aside inspection fees for efforts to reduce air pollution), and seeking $5 million in reimbursements from Medicaid for services offered by the RIDE.

These proposed solutions will reduce the T’s deficit from $159 million to $84 million. This deficit reduction has allowed the MBTA to propose a third, alternative scenario to the two it proposed in January.

Under this proposal, which was announced on Wednesday, fares will increase 23% overall. These changes would require subway riders to pay $2 instead of $1.70, and bus riders to pay $1.50 instead of $1.25. A monthly bus pass will increase from $40 to $48, and a LinkPass (monthly bus and subway pass) will increase from $59 to $70.

While the fare increases under this plan are steep, they are less than the proposed fare increases in either of the proposals that the T released in January. The number of cuts to service has also been drastically reduced from that found in proposals 1 and 2. The MBTA estimated that were it to implement proposal 1, roughly 9.2 million trips would be lost per year. Under proposal 2, which focused on cuts to local and suburban bus service, the T estimated that 37 million trips would be lost. Under the scenario that was released yesterday, 1.2 million trips, or .3% of the total number of annual trips, would be lost.

The service reductions that this proposal includes will cut four bus routes and weekend commuter rail service on the three lines that are have the lowest ridership. There will be no cuts to service in Cambridge or Somerville.

This is clearly better than what was proposed initially, and I applaud the T for considering customer input and returning to the drawing board to find a better solution.

With that said, I understand and empathize with the thousands of people in the MBTA service area whose lives will be made harder. There will be an impact on the environment from more cars on the road. Our efforts to encourage the use of public transit will be hurt. Economic development, which is dependent on the ability of residents to traverse the region, will suffer.

And there can be no question about it: for many people who ride the T, a fare increase will be one more hardship for them in an economy that has been harsh and unforgiving for many years. Massachusetts may be recovering faster than other states, but that fact is little comfort to those who are struggling.

The next step is for the legislature to find a comprehensive, long-term funding solution for the MBTA that will be adequate and sustainable for years and decades to come.

This solution must include changes to the debts that are currently on the MBTA’s balance sheet. Among these debts is what is often referred to as the T’s “big dig debt”. This debt was incurred by the MBTA to construct various transit improvements that were required as environmental mitigation for the central artery project. These mitigation projects really don’t belong on the T’s balance sheet, and moving them off would save the T $100 million in debt service payments every year.

Any legislative solution must also include new revenue for the MBTA that does not come out of the pockets of the people who need public transit the most. I have been a long time supporter of a graduated income tax policy in Massachusetts that puts more money in the pockets of the people who need it. Working-class people will continue to struggle until everyone pays their fair share. Transitioning to a more progressive tax policy would provide more funding for not only the T, but for all of the essential state services that are being constantly scaled back in the face of budget deficits.

As the conversation continues, I will remain one of the strongest voices in the legislature for the interests of T riders. I am disappointed that the T’s budget problems have not been addressed sooner. I am saddened that it has come to raising fares in order for the T to pay its bills. The reality of the situation is that right now, raising fares is necessary. I think my colleagues in the state house would agree, however, that we can’t wait to pass legislation that will make it unnecessary to raise fares again for many years to come.

Residents Speak Out about Grand Junction

23 Mar

As many of you know, the state’s potential expansion of commuter rail service from Worcester to North Station via the Grand Junction Railroad has raised a large amount of concern in our community. I share many of the same worries that my neighbors have expressed about the potential impact of more trains coming through East Cambridge and East Somerville. While it appears that expanded use of the Grand Junction Railroad could bring additional noise, pollution, traffic, and safety problems with it, it is not clear whether the proposed expansion would bring any added benefit to the community.

With that said, I am very pleased to see that so many members of our neighborhood have spoken out about this. It sends a strong message that the residents of Cambridge and Somerville are engaged, informed, and ready to take a stand on the important issues that will directly effect their community and quality of life.


Image credit: Mike Goralski (C)2007

Two East Cambridge residents, Jai Chawla and Peter Zaroulis, have developed web-based software that they have used to create an online petition for residents to sign, comment on, and view. The petition can be accessed at petition.paperwork.pro.

In addition to Jai and Peter’s electronic petition, residents have collected dozens signatures from their neighbors on old-fashioned paper petitions, have written letters, made phone calls, and attended meetings. Thank you to everyone who has reached out with your concerns and ideas about this issue in any way.

Representing the interests of East Cambridge and East Somerville residents in this process is a top priority of mine, and I have been in close contact with senior Department of Transportation officials since the State’s initial purchase of Grand Junction. Please don’t hesitate to get in touch with me or my office (617-722-2380) if you wish to voice your concerns about this project, or if you have questions that you would like answered.

Key Green Line Extension Deal Reached

16 Mar

Somerville/Cambridge – Map

There have been some important new developments this month in the path to constructing the Green Line Extension.

Earlier this month, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation approved a landmark deal between the MBTA and Pan Am Railways that sets the stage for the construction of the Green Line Extension. This agreement brings the track, right of way, and other land that the MBTA will need to complete the Green Line Extension under its control.


The Green Line Extension will provide public transit to chronically under served areas.

Perhaps most importantly, this agreement will enable the MBTA to construct the planned new Lechmere Station. While I have been slightly apprehensive about plans to move Lechmere station to the other side of the O’Brien Highway, this is an important and necessary step in the process of constructing the Green Line Extension. It has been a priority of the MBTA, MassDOT, community groups and state and local officials to ensure that final plans for the station will include robust pedestrian safety protections. I am certain that all parties will be able to work together effectively to agree upon a plan that is not only very safe, but something that East Cambridge can be proud of.

MassDOT and the MBTA are to be commended for also extracting a significant cost savings for the overall project through the deal with Pan Am. While the state had originally planned to pay around $18 million for the railroad track and property rights, it ended up making the deal with Pan Am for $5.5 million less. While not a part of the land agreement, Pan Am has also agreed to take on the cost of improving the streets and sidewalks around the Lechmere area, saving Massachusetts an estimated $9 million.

I am pleased to see the MBTA and MassDOT making steady progress on the Green Line Extension. The vision of a safe, efficient, and clean means of public transportation running through East Cambridge, Somerville, and Medford is something that many, many people have devoted a great amount of time, energy, and hard work to. The agreement with Pan Am is a strong step forward on the path to making this vision a reality, and I am looking forward to working with transportation officials to make sure our collective efforts stay on track.

I will be continuing to update this blog with information about the Green Line Extension and other transportation-related news, so stay tuned!

Positive Steps Forward for Green Line Extension

22 Jun

East Cambridge & East Somerville - map

After years of countless meetings, public hearings, letters and tireless advocacy from so many involved community members, I’m pleased to announce that the Commonwealth has reached a major milestone in the extension of the Green Line through Cambridge, Somerville and Medford with the release of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) by the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA).

The Green Line Extension will vastly improve the state of public transportation in the City of Somerville, making our community easier to access for residents and visitors. As this project moves forward, however, we need to make sure it is done in a way that is right for the people who live near it and the people who will use it when it is completed.

Before a project of this magnitude can be undertaken, it is important that we study the potential impact on the environment, the safety of the community, and the quality of life for the Green Line Extension’s immediate neighbors. Last year, EOEEA released a Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (DEIR/EA) detailing the effects of the proposed extension.

In January, I sent a letter with my comments regarding the DEIR/EA to Secretary Ian Bowles of EOEEA. I used my comments to express many of the concerns that members of the community had voiced to me. On June 15th, the FEIR was released, and I am happy to say that many of the changes to the DEIR/EA that our community advocated for have been included in the final report.

First and foremost of these changes is the decision about the location of the new Green Line maintenance facility. In the letter that I sent to the Secretary in January, I expressed my concern that the use of Yard 8 for the maintenance facility (which was at that time the favored option) would negatively impact the residents of the Brickbottom area, and would potentially stifle future economic development within the Inner Belt. In my comments, I stressed that Option L, one of the two alternatives presented in the report, was a far better choice for the location of the maintenance facility. Thanks to the active participation among members of the community, including elected officials, the Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership (STEP) and the residents of Brickbottom, I am pleased to report that MassDOT has chosen Option L as the preferred site for the maintenance facility.

This is a victory for the residents of East Somerville and East Cambridge for a number of reasons:

• Option L will create more separation between residential areas and the maintenance yard.

• It will not preclude road construction between Brickbottom and the Inner Belt, meaning that future economic development in the area will not be hindered.

• The Brickbottom Artist Building, Hampton Inn Hotel, Glass Factory Condominiums, and future developments on Water St. will experience no more than one decibel of additional noise from the Option L maintenance yard.

• The placement of the facility in an existing industrial area will mean that the local environment will not be substantially altered.

• The yard will comply with all state and federal air quality regulations, and will reduce the amount of storm water drainage at the site.


Option L (center in blue) would produce less noise for Brickbottom residents than Yard 8 (bottom left in blue).

In my January letter, I also expressed concerns over the design of the proposed Lechmere station overhaul. These concerns were echoed by the East Cambridge Planning Team (ECPT), and I am pleased to see that the redesign includes better door access from the north and south sides of the station, as well as fare collection and other amenities that are now fully inside the station, shielded from the elements. The bus drop-off/pick-up area will now be directly connected to the station by a door, and the station will be fully handicap accessible.

One of my most pressing concerns about the Green Line Extension project is that it will move Lechmere station to the opposite side of the Monsignor O’Brien Highway, creating a potentially dangerous situation for the thousands of commuters that will now need to cross a wide, busy street to access Lechmere from East Cambridge. The layout that has been proposed since the DEIR includes accommodations for a wider pedestrian crosswalk, and the FEIR makes the recommendation that a median no less than 20 feet wide be constructed on the O’Brien Highway in order to shield pedestrians from turning traffic. Although this is not an ideal solution for the commuters travelling to the station from East Cambridge, it is a vast improvement over earlier proposals. I will continue to fight both in the State House and City Hall to make pedestrian safety a top priority as the project moves forward.


The proposed Lechmere station layout found in the June 15th FEIR.

Finally, I want to share with you my excitement at seeing the Green Line Extension moving closer to becoming a reality. The release of the Final Environmental Impact Report marks a significant step forward for a project that will be crucial to the future of East Somerville. Affordable and efficient transportation is critical to any urban area, and the latest numbers indicate that the Green Line Extension will increase daily ridership by 52,000 people by 2030. That means that each day, 25,000 fewer miles will be travelled by cars through our communities! Now that, my friends, is a breath of fresh air.

Green Line Extension Maintenance Facility – Option L is best for Brickbottom and Somerville

17 Dec

For more detail see:
Cambridge Chronicle article 12/21/09 “Proposed Green Line garage has some worried”
Somerville News Blog 12/23/09 Residents air views on Yard 8 alternatives

Over the last year one thing has become clear: of the three options currently under study by the MBTA to expand the Green Line and site a maintenance facility, Option L is the best long-term solution for Somerville.

About 18 months ago, the EOT released a study describing around a dozen alternatives for the maintenance facility in Somerville. None of the original options were acceptable, so we asked EOT to go back to the table. As the result of pressure from state and local leaders and active community members, we have been presented with the best option yet: Option L.

The extension of the Green Line has the potential to turn the Inner Belt and Washington Street into a focal point for economic vibrancy and community development in Somerville. My goal has been, and continues to be, bringing transportation officials together with economic development leaders to ensure that the siting of the maintenance facility does not have a detrimental impact on the existing neighborhood or the potential for future mixed use development.

The current preferred alternative from MassDOT, Yard 8, could actually have a negative impact on the economic development of the inner belt region. The long-term cost to the city, in lost economic development opportunities, of building at Yard 8 is likely to be greater than the short-term additional cost of Option L (see below).

MassDOT (formerly EOT) recently released a document called the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) to discuss the project and the current alternatives for a maintenance facility.

*full pdf here, options diagram on page 27

All the options, in a nutshell:

Option #1: Yard 8
Although this has been labeled the ‘preferred alternative’ by the MBTA, I believe it is the worst of the options. Put simply, it is too close to a large residential building that houses hundreds of people. The land would be better served as part of accessible mixed-use development that would serve the new riders of the T and the current residents. Locating the maintenance facility at Yard 8 would have substantial negative consequences for both the abutters (primarily the residents of Brickbottom) and the future development of the area.

Option #2: Mirror Scheme H
Initially a promising site, further examination revealed some unexpected difficulties. Mirror Scheme H has potential to become entangled in jurisdictional issues. Although the vast majority of the site is in Somerville, it is on the line between Cambridge and Somerville. This introduces a slew of zoning and regulatory concerns that threaten to complicate the discussion, increase costs, and significantly slow progress.

Option #3: Option L
Option L would place the facility adjacent to the existing Boston Engine Terminal, farther from residents and commercial property and with a similar terminal. This would be more compatible with Somerville’s vision for revitalization of the Inner Belt area. The problem here is the price: current estimates place this at about $50 million more expensive than Yard 8. I think it is more important to do this the right way and incur the extra expense now to build on the optimal site. This site factors in the long-term development and renewal plans of East Somerville and lessens the impact on the residents in the neighborhood.

The Somerville legislative delegation has voiced its opposition to Yard 8 and support for Option L. I have made my position clear to Secretary Bowles at the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, to the Governor’s office, and to MassDOT.

Thank you to all the residents who have come forward privately and at public events to share your opinion. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if you have any questions or comments about the maintenance facility or the Green Line Extension project.

We are still in the public comment listening period of the project, so I would encourage everyone who feels strongly on the issue to submit comments on the DEIR by January 8th. If you would like to contact Secretary Bowles’ office directly on this issue, please mail:

Secretary Ian Bowles
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental
Affairs
MEPA Office
Attn: Holly Johnson, MEPA Analyst
EEA #13886
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114

Lechmere Station / Green Line Extension Community Meeting

12 May
Wednesday May 20th 2009
6 – 8 PM
Kennedy-Longfellow School Auditorium
158 Spring Street Cambridge

The Executive Office of Transportation, the City of Cambridge and City Councilor and State Representative Tim Toomey are sponsoring a community meeting to discuss the relocation of Lechmere Station and the Green Line Extension Project. The meeting will feature presentations on the overall Green Line Extension as well as specifics about the new Lechmere Station and associated roadway changes including multiple new pedestrian crossings of McGrath/O’Brien Highway.

For questions, please contact:

Bill Deignan –Transportation Program Manager
Cambridge Community Development Department
344 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02139 – by e-mail at: wdeignan@cambridgema.gov
(617) 349-4632 TTY (617) 349- 4621

or

Regan Checchio
contact Regan Checchio by email at rchecchio@reginavilla.com or phone at 617-357-5772 x14.

Additional Assistance
The City of Cambridge Community Development Department does not discriminate on the basis of disability. Community Development will provide auxiliary aids and services, written materials in alternative format, and reasonable modifications in policies upon request.