Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-01-11-TGC-draft-rptReport of the Transportation Ad Hoc Study Committee (DRAFT) The Ad Hoc Study Committee was tasked to • Review and make recommendations to the BOS for a new committee(s) structure to streamline the oversight of transportation and safety related policies • Specifically identify redundancies and overlap of responsibilities and recommend an improved organizational oversight model. Members represented the following boards and committees Selectmen: Hank Manz and Norman Cohen Planning Board: Michelle Ciccolo and Richard Canale Transportation Advisory Committee: Bill Levison, alternate Sara Arnold Traffic Safety Advisory Committee: Dave Cannon Bicycle Advisory Committee: Peggy Enders Sidewalk Advisory Committee: Jerry Van Hook At Large: Jeanne Krieger, Chair Staff: Linda Vine and Maryann McCall - Taylor Background and Problem Statement Transportation issues are difficult and contentious. Everybody experiences traffic and thus everyone believes they are an expert. Our traffic problems can not all be solved locally. We endure the impacts of overcapacity highways, cut - through commuter traffic and inadequate public transportation. Neither Lexington nor the State invests adequately in solutions. Lexington has failed to keep pace with increasing automobile traffic. It is a time honored Lexington tradition to form a committee when confronted with a thorny issue. There are at least 17 committees involved in addressing transportation and safety issues (Appendix i). Some of these Committees have been existence for 30 years; most for nearly a decade and one was launched during the tenure of the ad hoc Study Committee. The charges of the Committees have not changed during this period, but there have been important changes in the Town's capacity to deal with traffic related issues. • New staff alignment- cf Transportation Program Recommendations, September 6, 2011 (Appendix ii) • Enhanced staff expertise, relieving committees of day -to day operations involvement, • Increased awareness of traffic issues due to the advocacy of the many committees, but nonetheless o Ever increasing congestion on Lexington streets. There appears to be a lack of a cohesive, coordinated policy on transportation for the Town. If there is a strategic plan, it is not clear how decisions are made or by whom. The committees tend to be advocates for a portion of transportation and are often left to operate on their own with little apparent input given, or sought, from the Board of Selectmen or the Planning Board. In general, it is unclear how decisions are made and by whom, what the guidelines are for making decisions, and what committee has jurisdiction over what. Communication and coordination among the committees is lacking with the exception of information provided by liaisons who are affiliated with one or more committees. The State administered federal transportation funding process, the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) process, is not well understood and the Town may be missing opportunities. All of these factors underscore the necessity of streamlining our approach to traffic issues to ensure that resources are deployed effectively and focused on commonly accepted objectives. Resources and Tools Staff Involvement and the Role of Liaisons Transportation Committees, simply due to their number, are demanding of staff and liaisons. Of the ten committee memberships analyzed (Appendix iii), 20 of the 83 members are liaisons; five are staff. Several liaisons are affiliated with more than one committee. The significance of these observations is open to interpretation when one considers that this ad hoc committee of 12 has two assigned staff. Committee members value their liaisons and staff, who keep them informed and advise how to get things done. Regular attendance by liaisons and staff is preferred over sporadic attendance. Those serving as liaisons are constrained by time limitations and cannot attend all meetings. They view themselves as committee resources, rather than participants. A more comprehensive review of liaison roles is being conducted by Selectmen Deb Mauger. The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan " The Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Planning Board in 2003, was forward thinking and includes items yet to be done. It should be consulted. The values espoused in the Plan are as valid now as they were nearly a decade ago. If consulted, this is a document that can provide direction and assure focus on commonly accepted objectives. Recommendations Dissolve the Traffic Mitigation Group (TMG) The TMG was intended to fulfill two functions: a) Coordinate review of traffic related issues resulting from new development and b) Recommend and administer traffic mitigation projects. The TMG never functioned as intended, largely because as a committee of volunteers it lacked the expertise to fulfill the charge and was set up with more responsibility than authority. TMG did attempt to address broad issues, those beyond the scope of the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee. Establish a Quarterly Transportation Review Conduct four meetings of all the Boards, committees and staff, including public safety, involved in transportation planning and implementation to review programs and match objectives against the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Improved communication from these sessions should reduce redundancy, identify synergies among the committees and align priorities. By sharing information broadly, pressure on liaisons and staff to serve as conduits will be relieved and the need to attend regularly scheduled meetings reduced. A suggested schedule of reporting is attached (Appendix iv). Given the volume of information, each group will be asked to present their programs twice during the year. Timing of these presentations should be planned to coincide with the budgeting and funding cycle, to assure that initiatives are aligned with available resources. Reporting data at these sessions will measure progress and support prioritizations. At a minimum these sessions should improve communication among the various committees and Boards, serve to align priorities, focus resources and may even lead to more opportunities for consolidation of committees. At the end of the first year, review the effectiveness of the Transportation Review process. Dissolve this Committee 1) http: / /www.lexingtonma.gov/ planning /FinalTransportationElement.pdf