Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-11-30-TAC-minTransportation Advisory Committee Town of Lexington Minutes for the meeting held November 30, 2023, 6-9 pm at the Community Center Members present: Vinita Verma (Chair), Pamela Lyons (Co-Chair), Sally Castleman, Elaine Dratch, Kunal Botla, Mark Anderson, Jonathan Schwarz Liaisons present: Susan Barrett, Transportation Manager; Sudhir Jain, COA; Nishanth Veerangandham, LHS; Lispeth Tibbits-Nutt, 128 Business Council Public present: Conan Hom The sole agenda item is for TAC to provide feedback on direction Lexpress service should take in the FY24-FY27 period as this is the period for which the MBTA RFP due December 16 is for. This MBTA RFP is the grant application that leads to MBTA funding, which Lexpress has received since 1979. Lately, that amount has been in the range of $52-65K per year. The TAC also needed to discuss FY24 in particular due to the budget shortfall the Town is facing due to rising energy and trash prices which has led to the Town Manager wanting Lexpress to only have a level- funded budget (not a level service budget), which would mean service cuts. TAC members started the meeting by discussing needs and wants of the community in regards to transportation services. NEEDS  Accessible transit, beyond ADA requirements  School pick-ups/drop-offs  Last mile  Access to Boston, Longwood, Cambridge  All hospitals/medical  Access to Burlington:, Lahey, LRTA, employment  Late night/weekend services for restaurant workers, employment, etc.  Park & ride  Regional cross-town connections WANTS  Mall (recreation)  Late night/weekend services for recreation  Lower fares  Mobile payment  Congestion reduction  Don’t want 24 hour requirement for booking Other ideas that came up; parked for later discussion  Creation of Transportation Hub  MassDOT D4 Park & Ride lot (underutilized & operationally challenging)  School bus fares  Student passes for the MBTA / M7 pass. (Students can already get Student MBTA passes, which provide 50% off fares, but students report that it’s hard to get the cards.) Discussion of Lexpress ridership and costs from 2000 to present, referencing spreadsheet provided by Susan. Talked about the effect vehicles being cut and then added again, the effects of school bus usage/promotion. Especially touched on the reduction of youth riders. TAC debated if Lexpress should have any level of on-demand transportation. On-demand transportation, due to logistics, serves approximately 3 people per vehicle hour. Current ridership on Lexpress is low since COVID, but TAC discussed that switching to on-demand limits the service and more vehicles would have to be added to serve more people. While ridership is low, Lexpress also has full buses and groups whose needs would not be met with on-demand only. TAC discussed staying the course, as not out of COVID mentality yet. Right now is perhaps not the time to transition to microtransit (on-demand). It increases costs and cannot scale, so increased demand leads to a need for additional vehicles/costs. Lexpress historically has served more rides per vehicle hour than on-demand can. TAC discussed that the next year should be about building ridership, perhaps with a cheap yearly pass. TAC sentiment was that you can’t cut your way into success with public transportation. Focus on shoring up what we have, and give us another year to rebuild. The two fixed routes that are working should remain. But what about that third route? Could we redesign it to be more successful? Discussion was had on whether this one bus should be on-demand. There was a discussion on fares. LHS liaison states that it is extremely hard to get money from youth as they do not carry cash. Discussion about payment of Lexpress through schools. Past challenges with this was lack of communication with riders who purchased through schools. General consensus was that we should actually be lowering OR simplifying fares to build ridership. There was a discussion on technology upgrades. Current GPS provider has been bought and merged many times and customer service has gone downhill. Technology upgrades will not only continue GPS service, but make deviations off-route (that are done for those with mobility issues) easier and allow for on-demand, if we consider this, and mobile payments, if we move that direction. Service model options under vote: A. Level service budget, with no technology upgrades (“as is”) - 3 buses (36 hours), all fixed- route. 2 votes: Mark, Pam B. Level service budget, with technology updates (but no on-demand service) - 3 buses (36 hours), all fixed-route. 4 votes: Sally, Mark, Pam, Kunal C. Level service budget, with technology upgrades (with the possibility of exploring on-demand) - 3 buses (36 hours), one possible on-demand vehicle. 3 votes: Jonathan, Vinita, Elaine “I move for the Transportation Advisory Committee to send a letter to the Select Board & Town Manager to recommend that the Town retain a level service budget with additional technology updates and alert the Board that the Transportation Advisory Committee is reviewing the Lexpress fare structure.” Motion passes.