MAPC Winter Council Meeting Parker House Hotel

February 25, 2015

Karl Quackenbush Executive Director

Central Transportation Planning Staff

Tim Reardon Assistant Director of Data Services

Metropolitan Area Planning Council

What’s been your favorite part of Winter 2015?

4

25%

9%

28%

17%

17%

5%

1. Sledding

2. Excellent ski conditions

3. Sitting by the fire watching it snow

4. Admiring your neighbor’s ice dams

5. Your Caribbean vacation

6. Still waiting for something to enjoy

What is your age?

5

12%

20%

21%

15%

19%

12%

0%

1. 0 – 19

2. 20 – 29

3. 30 – 39

4. 40 – 49

5. 50 - 59

6. 60 – 69

7. 70 or better

MAPC

Region

24%

16%

13%

15%

14%

9%

10%

Shifting Demographics, 2000 - 2030

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

Under 10 10 - 19 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 - 69 70 - 79 Over 80

Age Group

Population by Age, MAPC Region 2000 - 2030, Stronger Region Scenario

2000

2010

2020

2030

Source: MAPC Population Projections 2014

What is your annual household income?

7

29%

29%

24%

9%

5%

4%

14%

10%

16%

20%

20%

19%

MAPC

Region

1. $0 - $19,999

2. $20,000 – $34,999

3. $35,000 - $59,999

4. $60,000 - $99,999

5. $99,000 - $149,999

6. $150,000 or more

How do you identify yourself?

8

3%

0%

4%

3%

4%

85%

MAPC

Region 72%

8%

9%

8%

1%

2%

1. White (non-Hispanic)

2. Black or African American (non-Hispanic)

3. Hispanic or Latino

4. Asian (non-Hispanic)

5. Other

6. Two or more

What’s your home Community Type?

9

0%

5%

23%

7%

65%

1. Inner Core

2. Regional Urban Centers

3. Maturing Suburbs

4. Developing Suburbs

5. Not Applicable

44% 48%

64%

17% 14%

17% 28% 24%

15% 10% 14%

4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Current Share (2010)

Share of growth, 2000 - 2010

Projected Share of Growth,

2010 - 2030

Share

of

regio

n's

tota

l po

pu

lation

/chan

ge

Population by Community Type, MAPC Region, 2000 - 2030,

Recent Trends and Stronger Region Scenario

Developing Suburbs

Maturing Suburbs

Regional Urban Centers

Inner Core

Source: MAPC Population Projections 2014

Do you own a home or rent?

11

2%

27%

13%

9%

50%

1. I own a single family home

2. I own a multi-family home (e.g. triple-decker)

3. I own a condominium or townhouse

4. I rent my home

5. Other (none)

45%

13%

42%

0.3%

MAPC

Region

21% 39%

58% 62%

24%

20%

18%

18%

56%

41%

24%

20%

-

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Inner Core Regional Urban Centers

Maturing Suburbs

Developing Suburbs

Housi

ng U

nit D

em

and

, 20

10

- 2

03

0

Housing Unit Demand by Type, MAPC Region Community Types,

2010 - 2030, Stronger Region Scenario

Single Family Multifamily Own Multifamily Rent

Source: MAPC Population Projections 2014

110,700

38,100

54,000

21,800

What’s your work Community Type?

13

6%

6%

11%

8%

68%

MAPC

Region

51%

16%

25%

8%

1. Inner Core

2. Regional Urban Centers

3. Maturing Suburbs

4. Developing Suburbs

5. Not Applicable

In the pipeline: enough space for 345,000 jobs

80% of total is in Inner Core

Suburban development reconcentrating

How many vehicles in your household?

15

0%

3%

8%

37%

31%

13%

9%

MAPC

Region

16%

37%

35%

9%

3%

1. None (not even car-sharing)

2. Car-share only (Zipcar, etc.)

3. One vehicle

4. Two vehicles

5. Three vehicles

6. Four or more vehicles

7. Not Applicable

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Urban Suburban Urban Suburban Urban Suburban Urban Suburban

Extremely low Income (Below 30%

AMI)

Very low Income (Between 30% and

50% AMI)

Low Income (Between 50% and 80% AMI)

Not Low Income (Above 80% AMI)

Vehicle ownership by Income and Community Type; Metro Boston, 2010

4+

3

2

1

0

Vehicles owned

Your typical commute: how, and how long?

17

15%

0%

3%

9%

2%

7%

20%

15%

9%

22%

1. Auto commuter, less than 30 minutes

2. Auto commuter, more than 30 minutes

3. Transit commuter, less than 30 minutes

4. Transit commuter, more than 30 minutes

5. Walking commuter, less than 30 minutes

6. Walking commuter, more than 30 minutes

7. Biking commuter, less than 30 minutes

8. Biking commuter, more than 30 minutes

9. Other mode, any time

10. Not Working / Work at home / Not Applicable

41%

33%

3% 14%

6% 1%

1%

1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Less than 30 Minutes More than 30 Minutes

Perc

ent

of

Tota

l C

om

mut

ers

Typical Commute Time

Commuters by Mode and Commute Time MAPC Region, 2008 - 2012

Bike, Taxi, Motorcycle, Other

Walk

Public Transit

Drive

Source: American Community Survey

225

340 322

235

368 392

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Car Subway Bus

Ann

ual C

om

mu

te H

ours

Hours Spent Commuting, Per Year

by Mode and Race, Metro Boston, 2011

White Black Source: Dukakis Center for

Urban & Regional Policy

Travel time penalty:

167 hours

per year

Have any household members been in a

crash in the past year?

20

0%

81%

2%

6%

0%

11%

Crashes with

injuries, 2012

17,500

850

550

1. Yes, as a driver or passenger

2. Yes, as a person walking

3. Yes, as a person riding a bicycle

4. Other type of accident

5. None

6. Not Applicable

Top Crash Locations

2010 - 2012

On a typical weekday, how many trips can

you make by walking or biking?

22 1%

42%

8%

8%

16%

10%

16%

1. None

2. One

3. Two

4. Three

5. Four

6. Five or more

7. Not Applicable

Walking Trips in the Region

7 8

10 10

4.2 1.2

1.1 0.7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Inner Core Regional Urban Centers

Maturing Suburbs

Developing Suburbs

Avera

ge T

rips

per

Day, per

Hou

seho

ld

Daily Walking Trips, per Household MAPC Region, 2011

Auto, transit, & other trips Walking & Biking Trips

Source: Massachusetts Household Travel Survey

Prioritizing Transportation Funds

Eric Bourassa

MAPC Director of Transportation

Charting Progress to 2040

Goals

Safety

System Preservation

Capacity Management/Mobility

Clean Air/Clean Communities

Transportation Equity

Economic Vitality

Challenge

Not enough transportation funding

Need to prioritize limited funds

We need your input into what the priorities

should be

Feedback gathered today will be shared

with MPO members

INTERSECTION

IMPROVEMENTS

Adding turning lanes

Shortening crossings

Signal operations

Sidewalk improvements

Geometric changes for safety

COMPLETE STREETS

Continuous sidewalks

Adding bike lanes

Improved pedestrian crossings

Coordinated signals along a

corridor

Resurfacing and restriping

BICYCLE NETWORK

AND PEDESTRIAN

CONNECTIONS

Off-road multi-use paths

Bike and pedestrian crossings

Building new sidewalks

On-road cycle-tracks

MAJOR

INFRASTRUCTURE

Highway interchanges

Adding travel lanes

Adding or removing grade

separations

Fixing major bottlenecks

COMMUNITY

TRANSPORTATION

AND PARKING

Local transit service

First/last mile connections

Adding parking at transit

stations

Bike sharing programs

FLEX TO TRANSIT

New transit stations

New rail, bus, or ferry service

Upgrading transit vehicles

New maintenance facilities

Table Activity: 35 Minutes

Work to prioritize discretionary funding

8 participants at a table plus a facilitator

Each participant has 25 colored chips

Each chip worth $10 Million

Table of eight as a group has $2 Billion

Place chips on the programs in centerpiece

Work with facilitator to reach consensus

Report back each table’s funding strategy

Materials

Goals and Objectives at each table

Worksheet describing activity and programs

Back of the worksheet has info on funding

Centerpiece

Colored Chips

Comment cards

Table Activity: 35 Minutes

Work to prioritize discretionary funding

8 participants at a table plus a facilitator

Each participant has 25 colored chips

Each chip worth $10 Million

Table of eight as a group has $2 Billion

Place chips on the programs in centerpiece

Work with facilitator to reach consensus

Report back each table’s funding strategy

Which type of scenario do you favor most?

37

1. Cluster A

2. Cluster B

3. Cluster C

4. Cluster D

5. Cluster E

6. None of the above

How informative was the

data presentation?

38 3%

0%

9%

7%

2%

78%

1. Definitely helped me understand regional trends

and transportation needs

2. Interesting but too much information

3. Interesting but not enough information

4. Already familiar with most of the data

5. Made me more confused than I was before

6. Other

Did the table exercise help you better

understand the MPO’s funding options and

constraints?

39

1%

0%

0%

18%

60%

21%1. Yes – I’m ready to join the MPO!

2. I understand much more than I did, but still have

some questions

3. Moderately informative; brought up more

questions than answers

4. I found the exercise frustrating and unhelpful

5. I did not gain any new knowledge

6. Other

Did the table exercise give you an opportunity

to share your opinion and learn from others?

40

1%

3%

9%

5%

82%

1. Both shared my opinion and learned from others

2. Expressed my opinion but didn’t learn much from others

3. Learned a lot from others but didn’t feel that I was heard

4. Lackluster conversation

5. Other

MAPC Winter Council Meeting Parker House Hotel

February 25, 2015

Thank You!