The region needs to bolster support for pedestrian and bicycle programs, both to create physical facilities and to create the “professional infrastructure” necessary to develop high quality projects.  Consistency of funding, more efficient funding programs, and technical support are needed to guide and encourage cities and towns to pursue more bicycle and pedestrian projects.

The significant and consistent funding for roadways and highways in Metro Boston has created a professional engineering and design culture (both public and private) oriented toward promoting, designing, and building roadway projects.  Similarly, most municipalities are well-acquainted with roadway funding programs and contracting, but are unfamiliar with the funding, design, and operation of pedestrian and bike facilities.  Funding streams for non-motorized programs are frequently fragmented and not guaranteed from one development stage to the next.  

Limitations on funding are partly due to the fact that Massachusetts has not full accessed the federal funds available for non-motorized modes, opting instead to access more funding for road and highway projects.  In fact, Massachusetts regularly ranks near (or at) the bottom in national survey of states, in obligating Congestion Mitigation funds (41st) and Transportation Enhancement funds (52nd—ranking includes DC and Puerto Rico).  The funding that is available can only be used for certain purposes and projects.  Smaller projects are rarely funded, and municipalities received little technical support and no funding for project design.  With limited support available to address the complicated design, environmental, and right-of-way issues faced by bicycle and pedestrian projects, municipalities are often reticent to initiate these projects.

Greater funding and continuity of funding programs for non-motorized transport will help support the development of institutional and industrial capacity to design and build non-auto projects effectively.  A strong regional commitment to fully accessing available federal funding (even at the expense of available roadway funding) is key to this continuity.  With a commitment to stable funding, the MPO should also establish stronger evaluation criteria for non-motorized programs to drive innovation and creativity on the part of project proponents and designers.  This innovation can be supported by technical assistance to cities and towns as well as direct support for the design of selected projects.  Increased funding can also be directed to new programs that would fund small projects with a big impact (such as bike lane striping or crosswalk marking) or for a new municipal funding program dedicated to pedestrian and bicycle improvements, as a supplement to Chapter 90.   

13.a    The Boston MPO should establish a policy to fully access all available Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds

13.b    The MPO should develop a well-defined program for selecting CMAQ projects

13.c    EOTPW and the MPO should provide Transportation Enhancements proponents with active technical assistance.

13.d    MassHighway should allow initial project design to be funded with Transportation Enhancement grants

13.e    MassHighway should set aside some portion of the CMAQ and TE grants to fund smaller-scale bicycle and pedestrian projects

13.f    MAPC should develop a proposal for a new funding program comparable to Chapter 90, for transit and alternative modes

Add Comment