Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning

Organization

Federal Fiscal Years 2021 to 2025

Transportation Improvement Program

Draft Report

April 2020

Prepared by the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission

This document was prepared in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation. (under Contract #
108056 with MassDOT) The views and opinions of the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation or the U.S. Department of
Transportation.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020

Table of Contents

Endorsement Page for Federal TIP - Signatures .............................................. 1
Certification of the Merrimack Valley MPO Transportation Planning Process ... 3
310 CMR 60.05: Global Warming Solutions Act – Signatures .......................... 5
Part A. Introduction ..................................................................................... 7
Part A. 1. TIP Development Process .......................................................... 7
Part A. 2. Performance Measures.............................................................. 10
Part A. 3. Prioritization ............................................................................... 38
Part A. 4. Public Participation .................................................................... 51
Public Participation Plan Stakeholder List...................................... 52
Part A. 5. Amendment/ Adjustment Procedures ........................................ 58
Part A. 6. High Priority Projects ................................................................. 60
Part A. 7. Advance Construction................................................................ 62
Part A. 8. Transportation Funding Programs ............................................. 63
Highway Projects ........................................................................... 63
Transit Projects .............................................................................. 65
Organization of Project Listings – Transit Projects ........................ 69
Part B. Project Listings .............................................................................. 71
Highway Projects ........................................................................... 71
Transit Projects .............................................................................. 77
Summary of Highway Project Listings by Town ............................. 89
Part C. Federal Requirements ................................................................... 97
Part C.1. Highway Program Financial Plan................................................. 98
Highway Program Financial Plan Table ........................................101
Summary of Highway Funding Categories....................................102
Part C. 2. Transit Program Financial Plan .................................................107
Transit Program Financial Plan Table...........................................108
Summary of Transit Funding Categories ......................................110
MVRTA Transit Operations and Maintenance Summary Table ....114
Part C. 3. Status on Implementation of FFY 2020 TIP Projects 117
FFY 2020 Highway Project List 117
FFY 2020 Transit Project List .......................................................118
Part C. 4. Air Quality Conformity................................................................121
Part C. 5. Special Efforts - ADA .................................................................127
Part C. 6. Title VI Notice to Beneficiaries ...................................................127
Part C. 7. Environmental Justice ...............................................................130
Part C. 8. Equity Analysis ..........................................................................131
List of Appendices in Separate File ...........................................................149
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020

Endorsement Page for Federal TIP - Signatures

Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization Endorsement of the

FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program

Whereas, the Merrimack Valley MPO has completed its review in accordance with Section
176(c) (4) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 [42 U.S.C. 7251 (a)], and hereby certifies that the FFYs 2021-2025 TIP is financially constrained and that the
implementation of the Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization 2020 Regional
Transportation Plan satisfies the conformity criteria specified in both 40 CFR Part 51 and
93 (8/15/1997) and 310 CMR 60.03 (12/30/1994).
Therefore, in accordance with 23 CFR Part 450 Section 322 (Development and content of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan) of the March 16, 2007 Final Rules for Statewide and Metropolitan Planning, the MPO hereby endorses the FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program.

Signatory Certification: Date: May 27, 2020

Theresa Park
MVPC Director
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 1
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 2

Certification of the Merrimack Valley MPO Transportation Planning Process

The Merrimack Valley Region Metropolitan Planning Organization certifies that its conduct of the metropolitan transportation planning process complies with all applicable requirements, which are listed below, and that this process includes activities to support the development and implementation of the Regional Long-Range Transportation Plan and Air Quality Conformity Determination, the Transportation Improvement Program and Air Quality Conformity Determination and the Unified Planning Work Program.
1. 23 U.S.C. 134, 49 U.S.C. 5303, and this subpart.
2. Sections 174 and 176 (c) and (d) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7504, 7506 (c) and
(d)) and 40 CFR part 93.
3. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000d-1) and 49 CFR Part 21.
4. 49 U.S.C. 5332, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, creed, national origin, sex, or age in employment or business opportunity.
5. Section 1101(b) of the FAST Act (Pub. L. 1194) and 49 CFR Part 26 regarding the involvement of disadvantaged business enterprises in U. S. DOT funded projects.
6. The provisions of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) and 49
CFR Parts 27, 37, and 38.
8. The Older Americans Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6101), prohibiting discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance.
9. Section 324 of Title 23 U.S.C. regarding the prohibition of discrimination based on gender.
10. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and 49 CFR Part 27 regarding discrimination against individuals with disabilities.
11. Anti-lobbying restrictions found in 49 USC Part 20. No appropriated funds may be expended by a recipient to influence or attempt to influence an officer or employee of any agency, or a Member of Congress, in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract.

Signatory Certification: Date: May 27, 2020

Theresa Park
MVPC Director
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 3
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 4

310 CMR 60.05: Global Warming Solutions Act – Signatures

310 CMR 60.05: Global Warming Solutions Act Requirements for the Transportation Sector and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation

This will certify that the FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program for the Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization is in compliance with all applicable requirements in the State Regulation 310 CMR 60.05: Global Warming Solutions Act Requirements for the Transportation Sector and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. The regulation requires the
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to:
1. 310 CMR 60.05, 5(a)(1): Evaluate and report the aggregate transportation GHG emissions and impacts of RTPs and TIPs;
2. 310 CMR 60.05, 5(a)(2): In consultation with MassDOT, develop and utilize procedures to pri- oritize and select projects in RTPs and TIPs based on factors that include aggregate transpor- tation GHG emissions impacts;
3. 310 CMR 60.05, 5(a)(3): Quantify net transportation GHG emissions impacts resulting from the projects in RTPs and TIPs and certify in a statement included with RTPs and TIPs pursuant to
23 CFR Part 450 that the MPO has made efforts to minimize aggregate transportation GHG
emissions impacts;
4. 310 CMR 60.05, 5(a)(4): Determine in consultation with the RPA that the appropriate planning assumptions used for transportation GHG emissions modeling are consistent with local land use policies, or that local authorities have made documented and credible commitments to es- tablishing such consistency;
5. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(a)(2)(a): Develop RTPs and TIPs;
6. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(a)(2)(b): Ensure that RPAs are using appropriate planning assumptions;
7. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(a)(2)(c): Perform regional aggregate transportation GHG emissions of
RTPs and TIPs;
8. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(a)(2)(d): Calculate aggregate transportation GHG emissions for RTPs and
TIPs
9. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(a)(2)(e): Develop public consultation procedures for aggregate transporta- tion GHG reporting and related GWSA requirements consistent with current and approved re- gional public participation plans;
10. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(c): Prior to making final endorsements on the RTPs, TIPs, STIPs, and pro- jects included in these plans, MassDOT and the MPOs shall include the aggregate transporta- tion GHG emission impact assessment in RTPs, TIPs and STIPs and provide an opportunity for public review and comment on the RTPs, TIPs and STIPs.
11. 310 CMR 60.05, 8(a)(1)(c): After a final GHG assessment has been made by MassDOT and
the MPOs, MassDOT and the MPOs shall submit MPO-endorsed RTPs, TIPs or projects within
30 days of endorsement to the Department for review of the GHG assessment.

Signatory Certification: Date: May 27, 2020

Stephanie Pollack Joseph Costanzo James Fiorentini
Secretary/CEO MassDOT Administrator/CEO Mayor of Haverhill
MVRTA Advisory Board



Jonathan L. Gulliver Paul Materazzo Daniel Rivera
MassDOT Highway Town of Andover Mayor of Lawrence
Division Administrator




John Cashell Neil Harrington Robert Snow Theresa Park
Town of Georgetown Town of Salisbury Town of Rowley MVPC Director
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 5
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 6

Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program Draft Report prepared April 2020

Part A. Introduction

Part A. 1. TIP Development Process

Federal transportation authorization legislation establishes funding categories for transportation projects that may be eligible for Federal funding and sets maximum funding levels per category for each year of the legislation. Projects in this TIP are planned to be primarily funded through the federal transportation act titled “Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act)” that was signed into law December
4, 2015. The FAST Act funds $305 billion dollars for transportation for Federal Fiscal
Years (FFYs) 2016 through 2020.
The previous legislation “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21)” established planning factors known as the “MAP-21 eight planning factors”. The FAST Act adds two new planning factors (I and J in the list that follows), the FAST Act stipulates that the metropolitan planning process...
“provide for consideration of projects and strategies that will-

A) support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity and efficiency;

B) increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users;

C) increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users;

D) increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight;
E) protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns;
F) enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for
people and freight;
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 7
G) promote efficient system management and operation;
H) emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system;
I) improve the resiliency and reliability of the transportation system and reduce or mitigate stormwater impacts of surface transportation; and
J) enhance travel and tourism.”
It is the responsibility of the Federal mandated, State designated, regional Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to carry out the Federal transportation planning process in their respective urbanized areas and prepare many Federal transportation
documents, including the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). This process, and the MPOs themselves, were established with the intention to include local and regional input into the Federal transportation planning process.
Based on Federal regulations any transportation project funded through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), or the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must be listed in the appropriate region's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). MassDOT combines the 13 regional MPO TIPs with statewide projects to produce the Statewide TIP (STIP) from which Federal-aid highway and transit projects are chosen. Without such a listing, Federal Highway funds cannot be expended by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) on local or State projects. Similarly, the Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority (MVRTA) can only receive federal funds for projects listed in the TIP and STIP.

Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (MVMPO)

The MVMPO was first created by the Governor of Massachusetts in 1972. The MVMPO covers the same 15-community geographic area that defines the MVPC region and the MVRTA service area. The current MVMPO membership is as follows:

• Secretary of MassDOT –Stephanie Pollack

• MassDOT Highway Division Administrator –Jonathan L. Gulliver

• Merrimack Valley Planning Commission (MVPC) Director –Theresa Park

• Administrator/CEO Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority –Joseph Costanzo

• Mayor of Haverhill –James Fiorentini

• Mayor of Lawrence –Daniel Rivera

• Representing Region 1 (Amesbury, Newburyport, Salisbury) –Neil Harrington

• Representing Region 2 (Newbury, Rowley, West Newbury) –Robert Snow

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 8

• Representing Region 3 (Boxford, Georgetown, Groveland, Merrimac) –John Cashell

• Representing Region 4 (Andover, Methuen, North Andover) –Paul Materazzo

Ex officio, non-voting members of the MVMPO include:

• Federal Highway Administration –Massachusetts Division –Jeff McEwen

• Federal Transit Administration – Region I – Peter Butler

• Rockingham Planning Commission MPO (NH), Chairman RPC – Barbara Kravitz

• Boston MPO, President MAPC –Erin Wortman

• Northern Middlesex MPO, Chairman NMCOG –Pat Wojtas

• Nashua MPO (NH), Chairman NRPC –Karin Elmer

The TIP has been prepared in accordance with 23 CFR 450.326.
The development of the TIP starts with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The
MVMPO’s RTP is a twenty-year plan for transportation projects that can be
programmed for implementation with Federal funds. The RTP is fiscally constrained and lists potential future projects in five-year blocks. Projects were chosen for the RTP
based on MAP-21 transportation planning factors, meeting performance measure targets, existing roadway conditions, problems identified through ongoing pavement, congestion, and safety analyses conducted by the MVMPO, local and state project priorities and fiscal factors. Each year, the MVMPO programs projects from the RTP that are ‘ready-to-go’ into its five-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Only those projects that are specifically identified in the RTP, or are consistent with its recommendations, can be programmed in the TIP. The planning tasks conducted in developing the RTP and the TIP are included in the region’s Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) which is produced for public review annually. The UPWP includes additional transportation planning activities such as intersection and roadway analyses and studies.
Only projects from the RTP first two time bands of years (i.e., 2020 to 2024 and 2025 to
2029) are programmed in the TIP. An inconsistency with spending shown in the RTP is that when the MVMPO’s FFY 2020 RTP was developed, it was assumed the construc- tion of North Avenue in Haverhill would occur in the FFYs 2020 to 2024 time-band. The estimated project cost for this project and for the North Andover Route 114 project have increased significantly to the point where programming both of these projects in the
2021 to 2025 TIP is not financially feasible. Neither project would be ready to advertise until 2023 or later. The Route 114 project has a TEC score of 11.32, the Haverhill North Avenue project has a TEC score of 8.25. In addition the North Andover Route 114 pro-
ject is further along in the design process, therefore the North Andover Route 114
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 9
project is programmed to start in FFY 2023 and then consumes all the regional target funding in FFYs 2024 and 2025 and will also need a small amount of FFY 2026 funding before funding may be available for Haverhill North Avenue.
Projects that appear in the TIP were initiated and selected from a number of sources. Bridge projects have been selected and developed by MassDOT's Bridge section
largely based upon the results of their ongoing bridge maintenance program. MassDOT has made it a priority to develop projects that would correct problems in “Structurally Deficient” (SD) bridges. The region’s Congestion Management Process is used to identify intersections and roadways where significant congestion exists and measures the levels of congestion at these locations. This information has been used by local communities to develop roadway projects that are programmed in the TIP. Similarly, locations identified as having safety problems in the region’s Safety Monitoring System or identified as a "crash cluster" by MassDOT, are used by the Department and local communities to develop TIP projects. Projects that help meet Performance Measures targets are programmed in the TIP.
Bicycle and pedestrian paths and accomodations on roadways and bridges are part of the Massachusetts 2019 Statewide Pedestrian Transportation Plan and 2019 Statewide Bicycle Transportation Plan which strive to consider pedestrians and bicyclists at “the same level of importance as drivers in planning, design and maintenance” including incorporating the safety of these users in projects. These Plans also conduct analyses which locate areas with Potential for Everyday Biking, Gaps in the High Comfort Bikeway Network, Potential for Walkable Trips, Transit Route, and High Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash locations used to initiate projects as well as score projects for the Massachusetts Capital Investment Plan (CIP). All TIP projects are part of the (CIP) which has a category of Expansion Projects which include projects that “expand bicycle and pedestrian networks to provide more transportation options and address health and sustainability objectives”. Many bicycle and pedestrian projects are initiated by a municipality because the State provides funding for these projects in the Complete Streets, Shared Use Path, and the Safe Route to Schools Programs.

Part A. 2. Performance Measures

Federal legislation requires states to develop a Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) that includes Performance Measures for NHS roadways and bridges as part of the asset management process. MassDOT Highway Division submitted an initial TAMP
to FHWA on April 30, 2018, the final TAMP was submitted in June of 2019.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 10

The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and the Fixing Ameri- ca's Surface Transportation Act (FAST) require State DOTs and MPOs to establish per- formance measures, and targets for these measures, to be used in assessing the trans- portation system and programming projects for Federal funding categories provided in the Acts. The Final Rules establishing these measures have been released in three separate rule makings. PM1: "HSIP and Safety Performance Management Measures", PM2: "Pavement and Bridge Condition Performance Measures", and PM3: "System Performance/ Freight/ CMAQ Performance Measures". These Rules define the measures to be used in each of the categories.

The PM1 HSIP and Safety Performance Measures apply to all public roads. The PM2

Pavement and Bridge Performance Measures apply only to NHS (National Highway System) roads and bridges. PM3 Performance Measures apply to various facilities as defined below.

MassDOT has established targets based on these performance measures and the MPOs have worked with MassDOT in either a) choosing the same targets, b) adapting them to the specific region, or c) choosing new targets as goals for the MPO. The MVMPO has adopted all of the targets established by MassDOT. MassDOT and the MPOs will work cooperatively to exchange data and performance targets and measures as required by the legislation.

The following are the performance measures, divided into three categories, as defined by the Final Federal Rules:

HSIP and Safety Performance Management Measures to be applied to all public roads (PM1):

• Number of Fatalities

• Rate of Fatalities

• Number of Serious Injuries

• Rate of Serious Injuries

• Number of non-motorized fatalities and non-motorized serious injuries

Pavement and Bridge Condition Performance Measures (PM2):

• Percentage of Pavements of the Interstate System in Good condition

• Percentage of Pavements of the Interstate System in Poor condition

• Percentage of Pavements of the non-Interstate NHS in Good condition

• Percentage of Pavements of the non-Interstate NHS in Poor condition

• Percentage of NHS bridges by deck area classified as in Good condition

• Percentage of NHS bridges by deck area classified as in Poor condition

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 11

MassDOT has submitted a draft NHS Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP), as required by MAP-21, to address pavement and bridge conditions on the NHS sys- tem. The Final version will be submitted in June 2019.

System Performance/ Freight/ CMAQ Performance Measures (PM3):

• Percent of the Person-Miles Traveled on the Interstate that are Reliable

• Percent of the Person-Miles Traveled on the non-Interstate NHS that are Reliable

• Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) Index on the Interstate System

• Annual Hours of Peak Hour Excessive Delay Per Capita

• Percent of Non-SOV Travel on the NHS System

• Total Emission Reduction of all projects funded with CMAQ in areas designated as nonattainment or maintenance for ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), or par- ticulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5)

The MVMPO will work cooperatively with MassDOT to determine which performance measures the MPO will collect data for and measure, and which MassDOT will collect data for and measure and will exchange data and program projects for funding with con- sideration of meeting the targets established for each measure. The performance measures will be incorporated into the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Transportation Evaluation Criteria (TEC) in the scoring categories as indicated in the TEC Scoring Criteria Chart in Section A.3. of the TIP.

Targets are set by examining historic trends in the data and considering future plans for potential improvements.

Safety Performance Measures (PM1)

The Merrimack Valley MPO has chosen to adopt the statewide safety performance measure targets set by MassDOT for Calendar Year (CY) 2020. In setting these targets, MassDOT has followed FHWA guidelines by using statewide crash data and Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data for vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in order to calculate 5 year, rolling average trend lines for all FHWA-defined safety measures.

Total Fatalities: Over the last seven years, the number of fatalities in Massachusetts has been relatively stable, fluctuating less than 1 percent with the exception of 2016, when the 5-year average reached 364. That said, the most recent data shows that the five-year average for fatalities in 2018, 358, is the second lowest it has been since the

2008 – 2012 five-year average. The calendar year (CY) 2020 target of 347 was set to reflect an anticipated decrease in fatalities due to data enhancements, safety projects, and strategies and legislative proposals that were part of the 2018 Strategic Highway
Safety Plan (SHSP), such as the primary seat belt and hands-free driving laws. It should
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 12
be noted that MassDOT’s overarching goal is towards zero deaths, which will be pur- sued through the continued implementation of SHSP strategies.
Similarly, the Merrimack Valley Region number of fatalities is relatively stable with slightly lower numbers of 16 and 17 fatalities averaged over five years for the most re- cent three rolling 5-year averages ending in years 2016, 2017 and 2018 compared to 19 and 20 fatalities averaged over five years for the 5-year rolling averages ending in years
2012, 2013 and 2014.
Fatality Rate: Partly due to a 0.3% annual increase in VMT and an overarching down- ward trend in the fatality rate, it is anticipated that the fatality rate from 2013–2017 of
0.59 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled will drop to 0.56 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled between 2016–2020. (Note: Statewide VMTs used to cal- culate the Projected CY20 Target Fatality Rate were adjusted after state adoption of the

0.56 per 100 million VMT target.)

The Merrimack Valley Region has also seen a steady downward trend in fatality rate from a high of 0.57 fatalities per 100 million VMT for the 5-year period ending in 2013, down to 0.45 fatalities per 100 million VMT for the 5-year period ending in 2018.

Total Incapacitating Injuries: Although this measure is particularly prone to contextual factors, it is anticipated that there will be an overall decrease in the number of incapaci- tating injuries due to a continual downward trend line as well as the implementation of countermeasures that are being developed as part of the 2018 Strategic Highway

Safety Plan.
The Merrimack Valley number of incapacitating injuries was lowest in the 2012 to 2016
5-year average period at 131, but 2013 to 2017 and 2014 to 2018 at 139 and 141 are significantly lower than the earlier periods that were around 160.

Incapacitating Injuries Rate: Similar to the fatality rate, it is anticipated that the in- crease in VMT and a downward trend line will result in a drop in the rate of incapacitat- ing injuries from 4.84 per 100 million VMT between 2013–2017 to 4.30 between 2016–

2020. (Note: Statewide VMTs used to calculate the Projected CY20 Target Incapacitat- ing Injury Rate were adjusted after state adoption of the 4.30 per 100 million VMT tar- get.)
In the Merrimack Valley region the incapacitating injury rate has also decreased from the earlier years with a rate of 3.85 per 100 million VMT the 5-year average from 2014 to 2018 versus 4.6 from 2008 to 2012.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 13

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Incapacitating Injuries: The most re- cent data for non-motorized fatalities and incapacitating injuries indicates that the previ- ously increasing trend decreased in 2017. The CY 2020 target of 505 has been set to reflect continued projected reductions in non-motorized fatalities and injuries due to a number of implementation strategies contained within the Statewide Bike Plan, Statewide Pedestrian Plan, and Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

The total number of non-motorized fatalities and incapacitating injuries has increased slightly in the most recent 5-year periods to 18 from 2012 to 2016 and 19 from 2013 to
2017 and 2014 to 2018. The earlier 5-year periods had an average of 16 from 2009 to
2013 and 17 the remaining 3 time periods.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 14

Figure 1 Statewide Total Fatalities and Fatal Crash Rates- 5-Year Averages

Total Fatalities

(5-year Averages)

400 Projected Projected 1.00

CY19 Target CY20 Target

350

300

362 359 362 361 364 357 358

353 347 0.90

0.80

0.70

250 j::'

0.60

en -roc:

Q) 0::: .Q

200 0.50

co 0

1..1.. coo

1..1.. ....

150 0.40 Q-5

100

50

0.30

0.20

0.10

0 0.00

'08-'12 '09-'13 '10-'14 '11-'15 '12-'16 '13-'17 '14-'18 '15-'19 '16-'20

- ActualFatalities - Projected Targets • Fatality Rate Projected Targets ---- Trend Line (Fatality Rate)

Graph Source: MassDOT

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 15

Figure 2 Merrimack Valley Total Fatalities and Fatal Crash Rates- 5-Year Averages

Merrimack Valley Total Fatalities

(5-year Averages)

20 19

15

C/)

20 20

18

17 17

16

1.00

0.90

0.80

0.70 Q)

(\5c:::

0.60 .Q._

=:z-:-::::

Q) •····

nl

u.

0.50

0.40

E

nla

u"_E-,...

.....

Q)

Q

0.30

5

0.20

0.10

0

08'-12' 09'-13' 10'-14' 11'-15'

- Actual Fatalities

12'-16'

13'-17'

14'-18'

0.00

• Fatality Rate

••••••••• MV Trend Line (Fatality Rate)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 16

Figure 3 Statewide Total Incapacitating Injuries and Incapacitating Injury Crash Rates

5 Year Averages

Total Incapacitating Injuries

(5-year Averages)

4000 10

3595 Projected Projected

3500 3438 CY19 Target CY20 Target 9

3146 8

2801

3000

7

.!!l

(/) co

·2500 0:::

:J :::::.

:E .::!, c:

Ccl .Q

2000 0>

'(3 coo co 0 co '-

1500

1000

500

O.<!J

3 5

2

0 0

'08-'12 '09-'13 '10-'14 '11-'15 '12-'16 '13-'17 '14-'18 '15-'19 '16-'20

- Actual Injuries - Projected Targets • Injury Rate Injury Rate Targets - --- Trend Line (Injury Rate)

Graph Source: MassDOT

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 17

Figure 4 Merrimack Valley Total Incapacitating Injuries and Incapacitating Injury Crash Rates

5-Yr Averages

Merrimack Valley Total Incapacitating Injuries

(5-year Averages)

180

------------------------------,- 10.00

161

159

160

140

(/)

·120

·:c::::1:

C) 100

c::

:;:::;

ro

-,.....--,--i===:r----r-sr------------------r 9.00

144 141

8.00

7.00

6.00

5.00

ro

c::

80

4.00

60

3.00

40 2.00

20 1.00

. ,L_. ,&. ..._ ..._ -L. 0.00

0

08'-12'

09'-13'

10'-14' 11'-15'

12'-16' 13'-17' 14'-18'

- Actual Injuries • Injury Rate ----- Trend Line (Injury Rate)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 18

Figure 5 Statewide Total Combined Non-Motorized Injuries & Fatalities

600

550

500

480

501

Total Combined Non-Motorized

Injuries & Fatalities

(5-year Averages)

530 539 541

518

505

Projected

CY19 Target

541

Projected CY20

Target

505

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

'08-'12 '09-'13 '10-'14 '11-'15 '12-'16 '13-'17 '14-'18 '15-'19 '16-'20

Graph Source: MassDOT

Actual Injuries & Fatalities Projected Targets

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 19

Figure 6 Merrimack Valley Total Combined Non-Motorized Injuries & Fatalities

Merrimack Valley Total Combined Non-Motorized Injuries & Fatalities

(5-year Averages)

20

18 17

16

16

17 17

19 19

18

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

08'-12' 09'-13' 10'-14' 11'-15' 12'-16' 13'-17' 14'-18'

Actual Injuries & Fatalities

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 20
In recent years, MassDOT and the Merrimack Valley MPO have invested in “complete streets”, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, intersection and safety improvements in both the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) and Statewide Transportation Improvement Pro- gram (STIP) to address increasing mode share and to incorporate safety mitigation ele- ments into projects. Moving forward, Merrimack Valley MPO, alongside MassDOT, is actively seeking to improve data collection and methodology for bicycle and pedestrian VMT counts and to continue analyzing crash clusters and crash counts that include both motorized and non-motorized modes in order to address safety issues at these loca- tions.

Bridge & Pavement Performance Measures (PM 2)

The Merrimack Valley MPO has chosen to adopt the 2-year (2020) and 4-year (2022) statewide bridge and pavement performance measure targets set by MassDOT. MassDOT was required to adopt a statewide target by May 20th, 2018, with MPOs either adopting the statewide target or establishing their own by November 2018. In setting these targets, MassDOT has followed FHWA guidelines by measuring bridges and pavement condition using the 9-point National Bridge Inventory Standards (NBIS); the International Roughness Index (IRI); the presence of pavement rutting; and the pres- ence of pavement cracking. 2-year and 4-year targets were set for six individual perfor- mance measures: percent of bridges in good condition; percent of bridges in poor condi- tion; percent of Interstate pavement in good condition; percent of Interstate pavement in poor condition; percent of non-Interstate pavement in good condition; and percent of
non-Interstate pavement in poor condition. All of the above performance measures are tracked in greater detail in MassDOT’s Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP), which is due to be finalized in July 2019.
Targets for bridge-related performance measures were determined by identifying which bridge projects are programmed and projecting at what rate bridge conditions deterio- rate. The bridge-related performance measures measure the percentage of deck area, rather than the total number of bridges.
Performance targets for pavement-related performance measures were based on a sin- gle year of data collection, and thus were set to remain steady under the guidance of FHWA. These measures are to be revisited at the 2-year mark (2020), once three years of data are available, for more informed target setting.
MassDOT continues to measure pavement quality and to set statewide short-term and long-term targets in the MassDOT Performance Management Tracker using the Pave- ment Serviceability Index (PSI), which differs from IRI. These measures and targets are used in conjunction with federal measures to inform program sizing and project selec-
tion.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 21

Performance Measure

Bridges in good condition

Bridges in poor condition

Interstate Pavement in good condition

Interstate Pavement in poor condition

Non-Interstate Pavement in good condition

Non-Interstate Pavement in poor condition

Reliability, Congestion, & Emissions Performance Measures (PM3)

Merrimack Valley MPO has chosen to adopt the 2-year (2020) and 4-year (2022) statewide reliability, congestion, and emissions performance measure targets set by MassDOT. MassDOT was required to adopt a statewide target by May 20th, 2018, with MPOs either adopting the statewide target or establishing their own by November 2018. MassDOT followed FHWA regulation in measuring Level of Travel Time Reliability (LOTTR) on both the Interstate and non-Interstate NHS as well as Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) on the Interstate system using the National Performance Manage­ ment Research Dataset (NPMRDS) provided by FHWA. These performance measures aim to identify the predictability of travel times on the roadway network by comparing

the average travel time along a given segment against longer travel times. For LOTTR, the performance of all segments of the Interstate and of the non-Interstate NHS are de­ fined as either reliable or unreliable based on a comparison between the 50th percentile travel time and the 80th percentile travel time, and the proportion of reliable segments is reported. For TTTR, the ratio between the 50th percentile travel time and the 90th per­ centile travel time for trucks only along the Interstate system is reported as a statewide measure. As this data set has but one year of consistent data, FHWA guidance has been to set conservative targets and to adjust future targets once more data becomes available. To that end, MassDOT's reliability performance targets are set to remain the same.

The Merrimack Valley MPO an agency whose planning area includes communities in the Boston Urbanized Area (UZA), and as a signatory to the 2018 Boston UZA Memo­ randum of Understanding (Boston UZA MOU)-has also adopted 2-year (2020) and 4-

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April2020 22

year (2022) Boston UZA-wide congestion performance measure targets. These perfor- mance measures are the percentage of non-single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel and the Peak Hour Excessive Delay (PHED). Targets were developed in coordination with state Departments of Transportation and neighboring MPOs with planning responsibility for portions of the Boston UZA.
The percentage of non-SOV travel is approximated using the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) Journey-to-Work data. In the Boston UZA, the pro- portion of non-SOV travel has been steadily increasing and is projected to continue in- creasing at a rate of 0.32% annually.
PHED is measured by totaling the number of hours spent in excessive delay (defined as travel time at 20 miles per hour or at 60% of the posted speed limit, whichever is
greater) in peak hours (between 6:00am and 10:00, and between 3:00pm and 7:00pm) divided by the total UZA population. As of target-setting, there was only one year of data available. As such, the performance targets have been set flat until further data is avail- able.
Emissions reduction targets are measured as the sum total of all emissions reductions anticipated through CMAQ-funded projects in non-attainment or air quality maintenance areas (currently the cities of Lowell, Springfield, Waltham, and Worcester, and the town of Oak Bluffs) identified in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
This anticipated emissions reduction is calculated using the existing CMAQ processes.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 23

Measure Current (2017) 2-year 4-year (2022) (2020)

Non-Interstate LOTTR Interstate LOTIR

,TITR

PHED (Boston UZA)

% non-SOV (Boston UZA)

I

Emissions Reductions

80% 80% 80%

68% 68% 68%

1.85 1.85 1.85

18.31 18.31 18.31

33.6% (2016) 34.82% 35.46%

Baseline (FFY 14- 1,622 co TBD CO (Spring-

17) 497.9 Ozone field)

1.1 Ozone

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April2020 24

MassDOT/ Adopted by MVMPO Performance Measures/ Targets Summary Table

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 25

MassDOT/ Adopted by MVMPO Performance Measures/ Targets Summary Table (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 26

MassDOT/ Adopted by MVMPO Performance Measures/ Targets Summary Table (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 27

MassDOT/ Adopted by MVMPO Performance Measures/ Targets Summary Table (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 28

Performance Target(s) Project Will Help Meet

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 29

Performance Target(s) Project Will Help Meet

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 30

Performance Target(s) Project Will Help Meet

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds) (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 31

Performance Target(s) Project Will Help Meet

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds) (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 32

Performance Target(s) Project Will Help Meet

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds) (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 33

Performance Target(s) Project Will Help Meet

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds) (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 34

Transit Asset Management (TAM) Plan Performance Management Targets

The MVRTA just recently completed its March 2020 TAM Plan, which has yet to be adopted by the MVRTA Advisory Board. The MPO will adopt targets within 180 days of the MVRTA adopting the new targets.
The following information is from the MVRTA Transit Asset Management Plan prepared
8/20/2018.

Annual Performance Targets and Measures

As a recipient of Federal Transit Administration funds, the MVRTA is required to develop and maintain a Transit Asset Management Plan per Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Final Rule at 49 CFR Part 625. As defined by the Rule, Transit Asset Management (TAM) is the strategic and systematic practice of processing, operating, inspecting, main- taining, rehabilitating and replacing transit capital assets to manage their performance, risks and cost over their life cycles to provide safe, cost effective and reliable public trans- portation.
The preparation of the TAM is based on identifying the transit assets which the MVRTA owns and has direct Capital responsibility for and the performance measures included in the Final Rule that relate to these identified assets. A completed TAM plan is required by
September 30, 2018.

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 35

Using these Performance Measures leads to the setting of targets against the defined Use­

ful Life Benchmark (ULB). FTA defines as:

The expected lifecycle of a capital asset for a particular Transit Provider's operating environment, or the acceptable period of use in service for a particular Transit Provider's op­ erating environment.

The MYRTA has defined the ULB as presented in FTA circular C 5010.1E for buses and vans:

Minimum Service-life for Buses and Vans

For the August 2018 TAM Plan the MYRTA prepared the following targets:

Transit TAM Targets

Percent of revenue vehicles that have met or exceeded their useful life benchmark:

Bus 5% (Replace 3 model year 2007 buses FFY 2019 = 3/58) VanO%

Non-revenue vehicles - percent of service vehicles that have met or exceeded their useful life benchmark:

Maintenance Trucks 0%

SUV (Supervisory vehicle) 14% (Replace 1 model year 2013 supervisory vehicle

FFY 2019 = 1/7)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 36

Facility - percent of facilities rated below 3 on the condition scale:

Passenger/ Parking facilities 0% (McGovern Center, Gateway Surface Parking, Haverhill Intermodal Parking, Costello Center)
Administrative/ maintenance facilities 0% (85 Railroad Ave. HQ)

In January 2019 the Merrimack Valley MPO voted to adopt the transit TAM performance measure targets set by MVRTA for 2019.

MVRTA/ Adopted by MVMPO Performance Measures/ Targets Summary Table

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 37

Part A. 3. Prioritization

The FFYs 2021-2025 Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) contains Federal-aid project programming information for five years. For each year, gross estimates of project costs are listed in the federal fiscal year of the proposed advertise date. Federal fiscal years begin on October 1 and run through September 30. For example, FFY 2021 begins on October 1, 2020 and ends on September 30, 2021. The advertising dates shown for roadway projects were determined based on information provided by the Capital Expenditure and Program Office within MassDOT, the MassDOT District 4 Office, and MVMPO member communities. The MVRTA and MassDOT's Rail and Transit Division determined programming dates for transit projects.
Projects are programmed in the region’s TIP based on a number of factors. These include the project’s score based upon the MPO’s Transportation Evaluation Criteria (TEC), project cost and the availability of STBG funding in the years covered in the document.
Road and bridge project selection is also largely dependent upon the current and expected design status for each project, which can be affected by such factors as environmental permitting and Right-of-Way (ROW) status. For bridge projects, information from MassDOT's Bridge section is given primary consideration when scheduling projects.

Transportation Evaluation Criteria

In 2003, the MPOs worked with the then Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works (EOTPW) to develop objective evaluation criteria that could be applied
to transportation projects in the Commonwealth. Early in 2004, EOTPW asked planning
staff from the then MassHighway Planning, the MassHighway district offices and the regional planning agencies to apply these criteria to projects within their respective Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). Application of these criteria include not only an evaluation of the magnitude of improvement in the condition, mobility, and safety of transportation projects, but also an evaluation of their community effects and support, the land use and economic development impact, and the environmental effects. A score valued from -3 to 3 is assigned to each of the criteria. In fact, there is at least one score associated with each of the FAST Act ten planning factors. The scores within each category are averaged and then the category averages are added together to reach the total score. The following chart illustrates the data and scoring criteria for each TEC element as well as the planning factors considered in each element, and which TEC
elements will be affected by performance measures.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 38
Consideration of whether a project contributes to Climate Resiliency has been added to
the TEC process for the MVMPO 2021 to 2025 TIP in the Environmental Effects section of the evaluation form, under the Air Quality/Climate Effects scoring component. The project receives one point under this criteria if the project involves widening a culvert and the project receives one point if it raises a facility (for example a bridge, roadway or trail) in a
flood prone area.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 39

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 40

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 41

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 42

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 43

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 44

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 45

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 46

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 47

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 48

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 49

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 50
The resulting Transportation Evaluation Criteria (TEC) scores for selected projects in the Merrimack Valley region that were derived by applying these criteria are shown in Appendix C. It is the goal of the MVMPO that these criteria ratings, along with information related to the readiness of projects, will make the planning process, and more specifically, the selection and prioritization of projects, more transparent to the general public. A sample project evaluation sheet showing the various criteria is in Appendix D.
The use of these TEC scores also allows the Merrimack Valley MPO to meet FAST Act re- quirements for programming Transportation Alternatives (TA) funding (similar to TAP fund- ing from the previous legislation). TA funding is a set-aside of Surface Transportation
Block Grant Programming (STBG) through a competitive process and, in general, helps to
manage performance by focusing available funding on the highest regional priorities. It also helps to draw attention to the reader that FAST Act is a very Performance Measure - oriented piece of legislation.

Part A. 4. Public Participation

The principal objective of this document is the provision of an additional point for public access to and review of the transportation planning process. This FFYs 2021-2025
Transportation Improvement Program was developed in accordance with the Public Participation Process established for the Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (MVMPO). The MVMPO amended its current Public Involvement Process in March of 2017, it is contained in the MVMPO Public Participation Plan as Amended through March 2017 on the MVPC website under Transportation Reports. The Process applies to the development of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). The Public Involvement Process endorsed by the MVMPO is also used by the MVRTA as its public involvement process. The notice of public involvement and time established for review and comment for the development of this TIP satisfies the Program of Project requirements established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).
The Merrimack Valley MPO’s Public Participation Plan as amended through March 2017, reflects the consultation requirements identified in the FAST Act of 2015 and prior federal transportation authorizations, and the existing transportation planning regulations developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation for the develop- ment of Regional Transportation Plans and Transportation Improvement Programs. This document identifies a number of stakeholders to be consulted in developing these docu- ments. In developing the Draft FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program, all
MVMPO stakeholders were given notice that the process of developing the FFYs 2021-
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 51
2025 TIP was beginning. Stakeholders were also notified of the availability of the draft doc- ument for public review and comment.

Public Participation Plan Stakeholder List

Listed below are categories of interested individuals, organizations and other stakeholders (Interested Parties) identified by the MVMPO for inclusion in the PPP. They are defined based on the individual groups identified in the FAST Act of 2015 and prior federal trans- portation authorizations, and the existing transportation planning regulations developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation.
The MVMPO continues to add individuals, organizations or other stakeholders to this list and their addition is not considered an act requiring the formal amendment of the PPP. Similarly, any of the individuals or organizations identified below may request to be re- moved from the mailing list and such action does not necessitate a formal PPP amend- ment.

Individuals, including:

• Interested individuals, business persons
• Merrimack Valley Transportation Committee (MVTC) members
• Libraries
• City/Town Clerks
• MVMPO Region Congressional Delegation
• MVMPO Region Legislative Delegation

Affected public agencies, including:

• Boards of Selectmen / City Councils
• Chief Elected Officials
• City and Town Engineers
• Federal Emergency Management Agency
• Federal Highway Administration
• Federal Transit Administration
• Greater Derry-Salem Cooperative Alliance for Regional Transportation
(CART)
• Local Departments of Public Works
• Local Police Departments
• Local Traffic and Safety Committees
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 52
• Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
• MBTA Commuter Rail Officials
• Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development
• Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security
• MassDOT
• Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority
• Metropolitan Area Planning Council
• Nashua Regional Planning Commission
• Rockingham Planning Commission
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Representatives of public transportation employees, including:

• Truck Driver’s Union Local #170

Freight shippers, including:

• P.J. Murphy Transportation
• JB Hunt
• Estes Express
• Shaheen Brothers
• ABF Freight
• PanAm Railways
• Bonney’s Express

Providers of freight transportation services, including:

• United Parcel Service
• Federal Express
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 53

Private profit- and non-profit providers of transportation in the

region, including:

• Assist Incorporated
• C&J Transportation
• Cape Ann Transit Authority (CATA)
• Central Wheelchair and Van Transportation
• EMT Corporation
• Local Taxi Companies
• Northern Essex Elder Transportation (NEET)
• Other Transportation Providers Identified in the Regional Transportation Plan
• The Coach Company
• TransCare

Representatives of users of public transportation, including:

• American Training, Inc.
• Cambridge College
• Community Action Incorporated (CAI)
• Emmaus, Inc.
• Elder Services of the Merrimack Valley
• Local Senior Centers/Councils on Aging
• Northeast Independent Living Program
• Merrimack College
• Merrimack Valley Hospice
• Merrimack Valley Workforce Investment Board, Inc.
• Northern Essex Community College
• Office of Employment Services

Representatives of bicyclist and pedestrian advocacy organizations, including:

• Andover Trails Committee
• Bay Circuit Alliance
• Coastal Trails Coalition
• Essex National Heritage Commission
• Essex County Trail Association
• Groveland Open Space and Recreation Committee
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 54
• MassBike
• Merrimack Valley Off-Road Trails Committee

Representatives for the community of individuals with disabilities, including:

• Executive Office of Health and Human Services
• Northeast Independent Living Program
• Department of Mental Health
• Massachusetts Commission for the Blind
• Area Nursing Homes
• United Cerebral Palsy
• CLASS Inc.
• Fidelity House
• Association of Retarded Persons (ARC)

Organizations and facilities that serve low-income and minority households who traditionally have been underserved by existing transportation systems and may face challenges accessing employment and other services, includ- ing:

• MVRTA Transit Centers in Amesbury, Haverhill and Lawrence (post notices)
• Social Security Offices
• Employment Offices (post notices)
• Ethnic, Civic/Social, Faith-Based and Veterans Organizations
• Merrimack Valley Goodwill
• Area Hospitals
• Salvation Army
• Groundwork Lawrence
• Lawrence Community Works
• United Way of the Merrimack Valley
• Methuen Arlington Neighborhood, Inc.
• YMCA/YWCA
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 55

Agencies and officials responsible for other planning activities within the MPA

that are affected by transportation, including:

a. State and local planned growth:

1. Area Planning Boards
2. Mass Development
3. Merrimack Valley Transportation Management Association
4. The Junction Transportation Management Organization

b. Economic development:

1. Chambers of Commerce
2. Economic Development Administration
3. Local Community Development Directors
4. Merrimack Valley Economic Development Council

c. Environmental agencies and federal lands:

1. Andover Village Improvement Society (AVIS)
2. Essex County Greenbelt Association
3. Local Conservation Commissions
4. MassRiverways
5. Merrimack River Watershed Council
6. National Park Service
7. Powwow River Watershed Association
8. Parker River Clean Water Association
9. Shawsheen River Watershed Association
10. Trustees of Reservations
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
12. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

d. Airport operations:

1. Lawrence Airport Commission

e. Other Interested Parties

1. Conservation Law Foundation
The notices were sent directly to almost 500 email addressees representing these groups. Notices were put in newspapers and on cable community television directing the public to
the MVPC website which contained the notice and the materials for review.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 56
In addition to these direct mailings, and in accordance with this process, public notice of the Draft FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program was published in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune, Newburyport Daily News, Haverhill Gazette (Published Weekly) and Rumbo News informing the public of its right to comment on the document which would be available on the MVPC website from May 1, 2020 through May 21, 2020. It said
that comments would be received through May 21, 2020 and that two separate Virtual pub- lic hearings on the document would take place on May 13, 2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00
p.m. and from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. The meetings were held Virtually due to COVID-19
Virus restrictions. The MVMPO will summarize comments that are received during the 21- day review and comment period and will include this summary in the Final FFYs 2021-
2025 TIP.
Public input in developing the TIP was sought at the following meetings in 2019 and 2020:

• October 23, 2019, January 22, 2020, February 26, 2020, March 25, 2020 (held Virtually due to COVID-19 Virus restrictions), and April 22,2020 (held Virtually due to COVID-19 Virus restrictions) MVMPO Meetings;

• February 6, 2020, March 5, 2020 MVRTA Advisory Board meetings held at the

MVRTA Office;

• February 20, 2020 and April 16, 2020 (held Virtually due to COVID-19 Virus restrictions) Merrimack Valley Planning Commission (MVPC) meetings;

• February 12, 2020 DPW Directors/Stormwater Collaborative Meeting

The above meetings were held at the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission unless otherwise stated.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 57

Part A. 5. Amendment/ Adjustment Procedures

A few changes have been made to the TIP Amendment/ Adjustment procedures beginning with the FFYs 2021 to 2025 TIP to align with MassDOT’s Amendment procedures for the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The changes are:

• Cost change thresholds constituting a Major change requiring an Amendment will apply to decreases in cost, as well as increases, approved by MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning (OTP), and will apply to projects in any Fiscal Year, not just Fiscal Year 1;

• Moving a project between any years, not just advancement of other than a Fiscal

Year 2 project, requires an Amendment.

• Major change in project/ project phase initiation dates or design has been changed to major change in project scope large enough to necessitate an additional review by MassDOT’s Project Review Committee (PRC) typically accompanied by major project cost change.

• Adding Exceptions to these procedures and Exception to 21-day review period. (See final paragraph of the Procedures below.)

The following amendment/adjustment procedures are hereby adopted to consist of the following:
Minor adjustments to the TIP do not require formal MPO action and can be made via the administrative action of the Merrimack Valley MPO. These minor adjustments are limited to:

• Changing the scope and description of a project as long as they are minor changes;

• Changing funding amounts that are less than a ten percent increase in project cost if project cost is more than $5 million dollars;

• Changing funding amounts that are an increase of less than $500,000 if project cost is $5 million dollars or less;

• Changing funding sources.

Major changes continue to require MPO action through the formal amendment process. Major changes would require a twenty-one-day public review and comment period that includes a public hearing. These changes include, but are not limited to:

• Moving a currently programmed project earlier or later than an originally programmed year;

• MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning (OTP) approved ten percent or more increases, or decreases, in the construction cost estimate for a project costing

more than $5 million dollars;
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 58

• MassDOT OTP approved project cost increase, or decrease, of $500,000 or more, in the construction cost estimate for a project costing $5 million dollars or less;

• Adding a new project.

• Deleting a project

• Major change in project scope large enough to necessitate an additional review by MassDOT’s Project Review Committee (PRC) – typically accompanied by major project cost change.

• Exceptions

Although the MVMPO typically holds a 21-day public comment period for amendments, in the event of extenuating circumstances beyond the agency’s control, the comment period may be shortened or waived in consultation with FHWA Division Office and/or the FTA Regional Office. Additionally, MassDOT may make exceptions to the procedures outlined above and treat amendments as adjustments and/or adjustments as administrative modifications, but these exceptions will also require coordination with and concurrence by MassDOT’s
federal partners and the affected MPO.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 59

Part A. 6. High Priority Projects

SAFETEA-LU contained a number of earmarked transportation projects that were to receive federal funding. Specific funding amounts were obligated to each of these projects, but no additional funding was included in SAFETEA-LU to complete them. Consequently, states with these projects must implement them within the annual federal authorization limits established in the legislation. The Merrimack Valley region contains eleven such
projects which are shown below along with their status:

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 60

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 61

Part A. 7. Advance Construction

Advance Construction is a Federal-aid fund management tool, which as described by the
Federal Highway Administration website:
“…allows states to begin a project even in the absence of sufficient Federal-aid obligation authority to cover the Federal share of project costs. It is codified in Title 23, Section 115. Advance construction eliminates the need to set aside full obligational authority before starting projects…At some future date when the state does have sufficient obligational authority, it may convert an advance-constructed project to a Federal-aid project by obligating the permissible share of its Federal-aid funds and receiving subsequent reimbursements.”
In other words, the state pays for the project with non-Federal-aid funds to begin with and can later seek reimbursement of the Federal share of the funding category’s project cost by obligating Federal-aid funding in future years.
Projects must meet the following criteria before they can be designated to use the Advanced
Construction (AC) funding mechanism:
1. The project’s estimated Federal participating cost exceeds the total regional annual target (i.e. sum of HSIP, CMAQ, TA and Non HSIP/CMAQ/TA), and
2. Construction, based on an engineering review of the project, will take place during all the years for which federal funding is programmed.
The following projects are programmed in the FFY 2021-2025 TIP using this Advance
Construction (AC) method:
Haverhill – Bridge Replacement, H-12-039, I-495 (NB & SB) over Merrimack
River
North Andover- Corridor Improvements on Route 114, between Rt 125 (Andover St)
& Stop & Shop Driveway
Haverhill - Bridge Replacement, H-12-040, I-495 (NB & SB) over Merrimack
River
Haverhill - Bridge Replacement, H-12-007 & H-12-025, Bridge Street (SR 125) over Merrimack River and the Abandoned B&M RR (Proposed Bikeway)
Andover - Bridge Rehabilitation, A-09-036, I-495 over St 28 (SB), A-09-037, I-
495 over B&M and MBTA, A-09-041, I-495 over St 28 (NB)
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 62

Part A. 8. Transportation Funding Programs

Projects listed in the TIP must show the sources of funding that will be used to complete the project. The projects in the FFYs 2021 -2025 TIP are slated to use funding from the following Federal-aid funding programs identified in the FAST Act federal transportation funding authorization. Please note that in some cases Federal-aid funding is from older funding programs established in earlier legislation such as SAFETEA-LU and MAP-21. Projects may also receive non-Federal Aid funding which is shown in the project listings.

Highway Projects

Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation ((BR) (continued in FAST Act)) - funds replacement and repair of Structurally Deficient or unsafe bridges in urban and rural areas on any public road. Bridges can be on the federal aid system (BR ON) or off system (BR OFF).

Funding: Federal - 80%, State - 20%

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program ((CMAQ) (continued in FAST Act) – funds projects that reduce congestion and improve air quality.

Funding: Federal - 80%, State - 20%

High Priority Projects (HPP) (Carryover from SAFETEA-LU) – funds up to 80% of the costs of specific transportation projects identified in SAFETEA-LU. These projects have a separate allocation, but do not receive additional funds, and are therefore subject to the state’s federal authorization limit.

Funding: Federal- 80%, State – 20%

Highway Safety Improvement Program ((HSIP) (continued in FAST Act)) - funds safety improvement projects at high crash locations and Railway-Highway Crossings.

Funding: Federal - 90%, State – 10%

National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) (continued in FAST Act) - funds projects on all National Highway System Roadways.

Funding: Varies, generally Federal - 80%, State – 20%, but for the Interstate System, Federal - 90%, State – 10%

Non-Federal Aid (NFA) - funds construction, reconstruction, and improvement projects on roads and bridges in urban and rural areas.

Funding: State - 100% (Transportation Bond Bill), or Private - 100%
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 63

Transportation Funding Programs - Highway Projects (Continued)

Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) (STP) – (also known as the Surface Transportation Program (STP) from previous legislation) - funding for any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals.

STP Enhancements ((STP E) ((SAFETEA-LU; not continued in MAP-21)) - a portion of Surface Transportation Program funding for enhancement projects chosen by states and localities.

Funding: Federal -80%, State - 20%

Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) – (MAP-21, replaced in FAST Act with Transportation Alternatives (TA) set aside of STBG funds) - funds for projects which can be defined as transportation alternatives including bicycle and pedestrian facilities, enhanced mobility, community improvements, environmental mitigations, and various other types of transportation alternatives as defined in FAST Act.

Funding: Federal - 80%, State - 20%
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 64

Transit Projects

Projects from the following Federal-aid (FAST Act) and non-Federal-aid funding categories are shown in the FFY 2021-2025 TIP.

Section 5307 (Capital and Planning) (continued in FAST Act) - funds routine capital projects and planning assistance in urban areas. This is an urban formula grant program for MVRTA Preventative Maintenance and ADA costs.

Funding: Federal - 80%, State - 20% (Bond Issue Funds) (capital and planning
expenses)
State funding for the MVRTA's operating budget is provided through an agreement with the
Transit Division of MassDOT. Local funds are derived from community assessments based on the number of route miles and special services operated within each community.
The Merrimack Valley Planning Commission will provide the 20% match for the planning activities it will conduct for the Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority under its Section 5307 transit planning contract with the Authority.

Section 5309 (continued in FAST Act) - funds capital projects in urban areas which can be characterized as major capital investments in public transportation equipment and facilities. This is a discretionary grant program.

Funding: Federal - 80%, State - 20% (Transportation Bond Issue)

Section 5310 (continued in FAST Act))- provides capital funds, through the State, to private non-profit corporations and organizations to assist them in providing transportation services to meet the special needs of elderly and disabled persons.

Funding: Federal - 80%, Funding Applicant - 20%

Section 5339 (continued in FAST Act) - provides capital funds, through the State, for bus and bus related equipment and facilities.

Funding: Federal - 80%, Funding Applicant - 20%
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 65

Organization of Project Listings – Highway Projects

The TIP includes sections that identify the MPO’s priority road and bridge projects using a format prescribed by MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning. MassDOT is aligning the FFYs 2021 to 2025 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) with the MassDOT Capital Investment Plan (CIP). The CIP identifies three capital planning priorities: reliability, modernization and expansion investments. The STIP will now align program names with CIP investment priorities as follows:
Reliability

• Bridge program (including investments in inspections, systematic maintenance, on- system NHS bridges, on-system non-NHS bridges, and off-system bridges)

• Interstate pavement program

• Non-Interstate DOT pavement program

• Roadway improvements program

• Safety improvements program

Modernization

• ADA retrofits program

• Intersection improvements program

• Intelligent Transportation Systems program

• Roadway reconstruction program

Expansion

• Bicycles and Pedestrians program

• Capacity program

For the FFYs 2021 to 2025 TIP, the Regional Target funding amounts, distributed via statewide formula to the regions across the state, are initially programmed by the regions as STBG (also known as STP) funding category projects and MassDOT will inform regions if projects are to be partitioned by the HSIP, CMAQ and TAP categories.

Section 1A / Regionally Prioritized Projects

• Federal-Aid STBG Projects Using MVMPO Target Authority (STBG)

• Federal-Aid HSIP Projects Using MVMPO Target (HSIP)

• Federal-Aid CMAQ Projects Using MVMPO Target (CMAQ)

• Federal-Aid TAP (now set aside of STBG funding) Projects Using MVMPO Target

(TAP)
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 66

Section 1B / Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects (Provided by MassDOT)

• Federal-Aid Earmark or Discretionary Grant Funded Projects

Section 2A / State Prioritized Reliability Projects (Provided by MassDOT)

• Bridge Program / Inspections

• Bridge Program / Off-System

• Bridge Program / On-System (NHS)

• Bridge Program / On-System (Non-NHS)

• Bridge Program / Systematic Maintenance

• Interstate Pavement

• Non-Interstate Pavement

• Roadway Improvements

• Safety Improvements

Section 2B / State Prioritized Modernization Projects (Provided by MassDOT)

• ADA Retrofits

• Intersection Improvements

• Intelligent Transportation Systems

• Roadway Reconstruction

Section 2C / State Prioritized Expansion Projects (Provided by MassDOT)

• Bicycles and Pedestrians

• Capacity

Section 3 / Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs (Provided by MassDOT)

• Planning / Adjustments / Pass-throughs

Section 4 / Non-Federally Aided Projects (Provided by MassDOT)

• Non-Federal Aid

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 67
Each highway project in the TIP contains the following information:

Amendment/Adjustment Type – used to identify the type of amendment when changes are made to the document.

STIP Program – STIP program names as defined in the Organization of Highway Project

Listings section above.

MassDOT Project ID - project identification numbers given by MassDOT for each highway and bridge project.

MPO – identifies the Metropolitan Planning Organization within which the project is located.

Municipality Name – identifies the community where the project is located.

MassDOT Project Description–includes the community, or communities, in which the project is located and a brief description of work to be funded under the project. This description is exactly the same as MassDOT has input to its project information pages.

MassDOT District -MassDOT highway district number (Merrimack Valley MPO is part of

District 4);

Funding Source - abbreviation for the funding category from which funding is expected. (Funding categories and abbreviations are explained at the beginning of Part A.8.);

Total Programmed Funds- estimated cost of project in Fiscal Year in which advertising is expected; *

Federal Funds – portion of Total Programmed Funds provided by Federal Funding;

Non-Federal Funds– portion of Total Programmed Funds not provided by Federal Funding, but required as matching funds in order to receive Federal Funds;

Additional Information - a) Planning / Design / Construction; b) total project cost and funding sources used; c) advance construction status; d) MPO project score; e) name of entity receiving a transfer; f) name of entity paying the non-State Non-Federal match; g) earmark details; h) TAP project proponent; i) other information.

* Inflation increases project costs and therefore the project costs have been increased by

4% each future year of the TIP.

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 68

Organization of Project Listings – Transit Projects

Each transit project in the TIP contains the following information: Project Number – Transit Project number from MassDOT

Agency – MVRTA (Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority) is the regional transit authority;

Line Item – The FTA Line Item number

Project Description – a brief description of work to be funded under the project;

Carry Over – indicates whether Carry over funding is being used;

Federal Funds – Portion of Total Programmed Funds provided by Federal Funding;

RTACAP – Regional Transit Authority State Capital Assistance - portion of Total Programmed Funds not provided by Federal Funding, but required as matching funds in order to receive Federal Funds, coming from State source;

SCA – State Contract Assistance - portion of Total Programmed Funds not provided by Federal Funding, but required as matching funds in order to receive Federal Funds, coming from State source;

TDC –Transportation Development Credits, and

Local Funds – portion of Total Programmed Funds not provided by Federal Funding but required as matching funds in order to receive Federal Funds, coming from local funding sources other than State funding sources.

Total - estimated total cost of project.

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 69
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 70

Part B. Project Listings

Highway Projects

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 71

Merrimack Valley Region Program

* Only includes funds counting against obligation authority

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 72

Merrimack Valley Region Program

* Only includes funds counting against obligation authority

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 73

Merrimack Valley Region Program

* Only includes funds counting against obligation authority

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 74

Merrimack Valley Region Program

* Only includes funds counting against obligation authority

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 75

Merrimack Valley Region Program

Merrimack Valley Region Total Program Summary

$306,303,080 $245,279,271 $61,023,809

* Only includes funds counting against obligation authority

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 76

Part B. Project Listings (Cont.)

Transit Projects

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 77

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2021

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 78

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2021 (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 79

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2021 (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 80

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2022

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 81

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2023

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 82

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2023 (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 83

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2024

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 84

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2024 (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 85

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2025

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 86

TIP FFYs 2021 – 2025 Transit Projects

2025 (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 87
Page intentionally left blank.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 88

Summary of Highway Project Listings by Town

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 89

Summary of Highway Projects by Town

(2021 to 2025 Regional Target Funds)

* North Andover Route 114 is AC’d FFY 2023 to 2026, FFY 2026 = $ 155,262, Total Pro-
ject Cost =$27,061,794
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 90

Summary of Highway Projects by Town

(2021 to 2025 Regional Target Funds)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 91

Summary of Programmed Highway Funds by Town

(2021 to 2025 Regional Target Funds)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 92

Summary of Highway Projects by Town

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds)

* Andover (# 606522) is AC’d FFY 2024 to 2028, Total Project Cost =$131,458,071
Haverhill (# 605304) is AC’d FFY 2024 to 2028, Total Project Cost = $116,320,512
Haverhill (# 605306) is AC’d FFY 2018 to 2023, Total Project Cost = $108,833,832
Haverhill (# 609466) is AC’d FFY 2023 to 2026, Total Project Cost = $99,783,090
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 93

Summary of Highway Projects by Town

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Target Funds) (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 94

Summary of Highway Projects by Town

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Target Funds) (Cont.)

*North Andover (# 608095) is AC’d FFY 2023 to 2026, Total Project Cost =$27,061,794
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 95

Summary of Programmed Highway Funds by Town

(2021 to 2025 Statewide and Regional Target Funds)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 96

Part C. Federal Requirements

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 97

Part C.1. Highway Program Financial Plan

The TIP must be financially constrained, meaning projects included in the TIP must have
an identified funding source. Funding levels for Federal Fiscal Years 2021-2025 have been developed cooperatively between the State and the MPOs as part of the TIP development process. The following tables depict the resulting financial plan for each of the five fiscal years. FHWA provides the state with the expected Federal Funding available for each year of the TIP this estimated Title 23 Base Obligation Authority is listed first to which is added
a “Planned redistribution request” estimated to be $50,000,000 each year of the TIP. (Toward the end of the FFY any state that has not spent their Federal Obligation Authority returns that authority, and the Federal government redistributes those funds to the other states.) The Total estimated Federal Funds available to Massachusetts is estimated to be between approximately 671 million dollars and 711 million dollars for each of FFYs 2021 to
2025. The State then subtracts annual debt service payments for the Accelerated Bridge Program (ABP) Grant Application Notes (GANs) which range from 82 million dollars to almost 94 million dollars for each year over the five years of the TIP. The State generally provides the 20% match required for the Federal funds resulting in estimated funds ranging from approximately 728 million dollars to approximately 763 million dollars available Statewide for highway program funding for each of the five years of the TIP.
MassDOT Highway Division, Office of Transportation Planning (OTP), and the Federal Aid Programming and Reimbursement Office (FAPRO) then decide the amount of funding needed for Statewide items such as Interstate Maintenance, district-wide contracts, planning and transportation demand management. Those funds are subtracted from the total and the remaining is available for regional priorities, which ranges from $243,332,161 in FFY 2021 to $257,035,098 in FFY 2025.
This funding is then allocated to MPOs based upon the existing Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies (MARPA) TIP target distribution formula. This “MARPA” formula is based mainly on each MPO’s road mileage and population. The MVMPO’s share is 4.4296%, resulting in the funding available for regional priorities to be;
$10,778,653 in FFY 2021; $10,998,131 in FFY 2022; $11,238,340 in FFY 2023;
$11,385,638 in FFY 2024 and $11,119,839 in FFY 2025.
In FFY 2017 MassDOT ended funding for the regional major infrastructure program after the I-91 Viaduct in Springfield project had been completed. These funds will be reallocated to the Regional Target program for prioritization by MPOs across the state.
Inflation increases project costs and therefore project costs have been increased 4% per year.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 98

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 99

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 100
The following table shows the total federal programmed amounts in this TIP for each of the five years covered in this document. The funding summaries below show the total Operating and Maintenance costs versus Capital and Other costs, for each year of the TIP. A fiscal constraint finding for the State Transportation Improvement Program will include the cost of operating and maintaining the existing MVMPO transportation system.

Highway Program Financial Plan Table

Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization FFY 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program (FHWA - related funding categories only)

Total Costs including Federal and State Match*

Figures include Federal Aid “target” program & statewide funding

* Millions of dollars
The financial plan contained herein is financially constrained and indicates that the Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization's FFYs 2021-2025 TIP reflects an emphasis on the maintenance and operation of the current roadway and bridge system with the ability to provide additional capital improvements. Only projects for which funds can be expected have been included.
Appendix B of this document includes a list of Non-federal-aid transportation projects in the region. The projects listed in Appendix B are an integral part of the planning, programming, and priority setting process of the MVMPO but have no available funding source.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 101

Summary of Highway Funding Categories

The following tables contain a breakdown of the project cost totals and federal aid cost portions by federal aid funding categories for each fiscal year and the expected available resources to cover the cost.

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

Highway Projects Federal Fiscal Year 2021

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 102

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

Highway Projects Federal Fiscal Year 2022

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 103

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

Highway Projects Federal Fiscal Year 2023

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 104

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

Highway Projects Federal Fiscal Year 2024

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 105

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

Highway Projects Federal Fiscal Year 2025

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 106

Part C. 2. Transit Program Financial Plan

Planning Justification for Transit Projects

The Merrimack Valley region's FFYs 2021-2025 TIP federal aid transit projects are to be carried out using Sections 5307 received by the MVRTA from the FTA with the exception of the provision of operating assistance, the planning justification for the Section 5307 projects are contained in the Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority's Five-Year Capital Program for 2021-2025.

MVRTA Financial Status

The FAST Act requires that projects appearing in the TIP must have an identified source of funding that will allow them to be completed within the time period contemplated. Transit
projects appearing in the FY 2021-2025 TIP meet this criterion.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 107

Transit Program Financial Plan Table

Merrimack Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization FFYs 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program (FTA related funding categories only)

Total Costs including Federal, State and Local*

* Millions of dollars
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 108

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

2021 Transit Projects

FTA Funding Program Summaries (Federal dollars only)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 109

Summary of Transit Funding Categories

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

2022 Transit Projects

FTA Funding Program Summaries (Federal dollars only)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 110

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

2023 Transit Projects

FTA Funding Program Summaries (Federal dollars only)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 111

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

2024 Transit Projects

FTA Funding Program Summaries (Federal dollars only)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 112

Cost Estimates and Available Resources

Summary by Funding Category

2025 Transit Projects

FTA Funding Program Summaries (Federal dollars only)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 113

MVRTA Transit Operations and Maintenance Summary Table

State Fiscal Year 2019 (Actual), 2020 (Adopted Budget), and 2021 to 2025 (Projected)

The numbers below represent actual numbers for the previous year, the current year budget/forecast approved by the MVRTA Advisory Board, and Projections for the out-years. These numbers indicate that there are sufficient revenues projected to meet the operating needs of the MVRTA.

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 114

MVRTA Transit Operations and Maintenance Summary Table

State Fiscal Year 2019 (Actual), 2020 (Adopted Budget), and 2021 to 2025 (Projected) (Continued)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 115

MVRTA Transit Operations and Maintenance Summary

State Fiscal Year 2019 (Actual), 2020 (Adopted Budget), and 2021 to 2025 (Projected) (Continued)

Footnotes:

* Fully funded refers to contract work often to Human Service Agencies

** Operating assistance provided by the State
*** Description of Operating Expenses: Salaries and Wages; Fringe Benefits: Legal, Accounting and Professional Services; Promotion/Marketing; Insurance; Equipment Leases and Rentals; Real Property Leases and Rentals; Non-capitalized Maintenance/Repair; Fuel costs; Tire costs; Office Supplies and Equipment; Interest expense; Utilities; Management Fees;
Travel and Training; and Other miscellaneous expense items.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 116

Part C. 3. Status on Implementation of FFY 2020 TIP Projects

FFY 2020 Highway Project List

Regional Target Projects

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 117

Part C. 3. Status on Implementation of FFY 2020 TIP Projects

FFY 2020 Transit Project List

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 118

Part C. 3. Status on Implementation of FFY 2020 TIP Projects

FFY 2020 Transit Project List (Cont.)

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 119

Page intentionally left blank.

Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 120

Part C. 4. Air Quality Conformity

Air Quality Conformity Determination

Merrimack Valley MPO

FFY 2021-2025 Transportation Improvement Program and

2020-2040 Regional Transportation Plan

This section documents the latest air quality conformity determination for the 1997 ozone Na- tional Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the Merrimack Valley MPO Region. It co- vers the applicable conformity requirements according to the latest regulations, regional des- ignation status, legal considerations, and federal guidance. Further details and background information are provided below:

Introduction

The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) require metropolitan planning organizations within nonattainment and maintenance areas to perform air quality conformity determinations prior to the approval of Long-Range Transportation Plans (LRTPs) and Transportation Im- provement Programs (TIPs), and at such other times as required by regulation. Clean Air Act (CAA) section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) requires that federally funded or approved highway and transit activities are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the State Implementa- tion Plan (SIP). Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that means Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding and approvals are given to highway and transit activities that will not cause or contribute to new air quality viola- tions, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant NAAQS or any in- terim milestones (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)(1)). EPA’s transportation conformity rules establish the criteria and procedures for determining whether metropolitan transportation plans, transporta- tion improvement programs (TIPs), and federally supported highway and transit projects con- form to the SIP (40 CFR Parts 51.390 and 93).
A nonattainment area is one that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has desig- nated as not meeting certain air quality standards. A maintenance area is a nonattainment area that now meets the standards and has been re-designated as maintaining the standard. A conformity determination is a demonstration that plans, programs, and projects are con- sistent with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining the air quality standards. The CAAA requirement to perform a conformity determination ensures that federal approval and
funding go to transportation activities that are consistent with air quality goals.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 121

Legislative and Regulatory Background

The entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts was previously classified as nonattainment for ozone, and was divided into two nonattainment areas. The Eastern Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area included Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Nantucket, Nor- folk, Plymouth, Suffolk, and Worcester counties. Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, and Hamp- shire counties comprised the Western Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area. With these classifications, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) required the Commonwealth to reduce its emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), the two major precursors to ozone formation to achieve attainment of the ozone standard.
The 1970 Clean Air Act defined a one-hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone. The 1990 CAAA further classified degrees of nonattainment of the one- hour standard based on the severity of the monitored levels of the pollutant. The entire com- monwealth of Massachusetts was classified as being in serious nonattainment for the one- hour ozone standard, with a required attainment date of 1999.The attainment date was later extended, first to 2003 and a second time to 2007.
In 1997, the EPA proposed a new, eight-hour ozone standard that replaced the one- hour standard, effective June 15, 2005. Scientific information had shown that ozone could affect human health at lower levels, and over longer exposure times than one hour. The new stand- ard was challenged in court, and after a lengthy legal battle, the courts upheld it. It was final- ized in June 2004.The eight-hour standard is 0.08 parts per million, averaged over eight
hours and not to be exceeded more than once per year. Nonattainment areas were again fur- ther classified based on the severity of the eight-hour values. Massachusetts as a whole was classified as being in moderate nonattainment for the eight-hour standard, and was sepa- rated into two nonattainment areas—Eastern Massachusetts and Western Massachusetts.
In March 2008, EPA published revisions to the eight-hour ozone NAAQS establishing a level of 0.075 ppm, (March 27, 2008; 73 FR 16483). In 2009, EPA announced it would reconsider this standard because it fell outside of the range recommended by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. However, EPA did not take final action on the re-consideration so the standard would remain at 0.075 ppm.
After reviewing data from Massachusetts monitoring stations, EPA sent a letter on December
16, 2011 proposing that only Dukes County would be designated as nonattainment for the new proposed 0.075 ozone standard. Massachusetts concurred with these findings.
On May 21, 2012, (77 FR 30088), the final rule was published in the Federal Register, defin- ing the 2008 NAAQS at 0.075 ppm, the standard that was promulgated in March 2008. A sec- ond rule published on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30160), revoked the 1997 ozone NAAQS to oc-
cur one year after the July 20, 2012 effective date of the 2008 NAAQS.
Draft FFYs 2021-2025 MVMPO TIP April 2020 122
Also, on May 21, 2012, the air quality designations areas for the 2008 NAAQS were pub- lished in the Federal Register. In this Federal Register, the only area in Massachusetts that was designated as nonattainment is Dukes County. All other Massachusetts counties were designated as attainment/unclassified for the 2008 standard. On March 6, 2015, (80 FR
12264, effective April 6, 2015) EPA published the Final Rulemaking, “Implementation of the
2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final Rule.” This rulemaking confirmed the removal of transportation con- formity to the 1997 Ozone NAAQS.
However, on February 16, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colum- bia Circuit in South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. District v. EPA (“South Coast II,” 882 F.3d 1138) held that transportation conformity determinations must be made in areas that were either nonattainment or maintenance for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and attainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS when the 1997 ozone NAAQS was revoked. These conformity determinations are required in these areas after February 16, 2019. On November 29, 2018, EPA issued Transportation Conformity Guidance for the South Coast II Court Decision (EPA-420-B-18-
050, November 2018) that addresses how transportation conformity determinations can be made in areas. According to the guidance, both Eastern and Western Massachusetts, along with several other areas across the country, are now defined as “orphan nonattainment ar- eas” – areas that were designated as nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS at the time of its revocation (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) and were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in EPA’s original designations rule for this NAQS (77 FR 30160, May 21,
2012)