Board of Directors Meeting

Informal discussion: Barry Steinberg/APT letter to Quincy Mayor William Phelan about his proposal to take T buses off Hancock St., Quincy’s main street.

1. Call to order at 6:06 p.m.

2. Minutes of the previous meeting (10 Nov. 2004) were accepted as corrected.

3. Officers’ Reports for Possible Action by Directors:

A. Fred Moore:

Presentation at the Malden session of the MBTA Capital Investment Program meeting:

Points made:

Why does the T have capital funding only for the South Shore? We seem to run out of money after these projects.

We believe the automatic fare collection system is a top priority.

The Silver Line Phase III should be dumped. The supposed cost advantage of bus technology over light rail will disappear with cost overruns.

We advocate bus shelter in the suburbs where the service is less frequent.

B. Barry Andelman, Liaison to the T: Washington Street: Barry pressured Bob Terrell of the Washington Street Corridor Coalition for hard statistics. Bob hand delivered Gov. Dukakis the information. Bob had very good information, more than I expected. [Editor’s note: This report has been posted to the APT web site.]

C. Richard Arena: We have to push the concept that ‘bus rapid transit’ as applied in Boston is an oxymoron. It doesn’t work.

D. Ernest Loewenstein: What are the criteria for stages of ‘bus rapid transit’? [Editor’s note: Check http://www.fta.gov/CBRT.pdf CAUTION: This is 301 pages long!]

4. Old Business.

A. Framework of Advocacy.

Fred: APT recognizes the term ‘bus rapid transit’, but the T’s application of this term is used for any improvement of bus service.

B. Annual Meeting.

It was agreed that we would have a limited time by which the preferred speakers would be contacted and reserved.

5. New Business.

A. Action on item 2 above.

Gardner Auditorium, State House, Hearing on Re-evaluation Process for the Central Artery Mitigation Commitments.

Fred made the following APT major points:

• Arborway
• Red/Blue Connection
• Green Line to Medford Hillside—but NOT a busway.

These items are overdue. We should not be arguing about them. We should be doing them—Rick Arena. In other words, why are we at this meeting? The Blue Line has poor distribution characteristics downtown.

6. Other Items:

Motion by Fred Moore (seconded by Richard Arena) to accept Mr. Arena’s NSRL statement with specified modifications as an APT policy statement. This was passed:

NORTH-SOUTH RAIL LINK

It is clearly understood that at this time there is neither the funding nor the political consensus to move forward on the construction of the North-South Rail Link. Nevertheless it is vital to protect the alignment (right-of-way) to preserve the option to build the North-South Rail Link by filing the DEIS/DEIR on the project.

The North-South Rail Link is the only way to deal with the looming capacity problems at North and South stations, as well as crowding issues on the Green Line. Claims that other projects (e.g. Urban Ring Bus) will have a similar impact are erroneous.

The North-South Rail Link is compatible with transit-oriented initiatives. Additionally, the major beneficiaries of the Rail Link are commuters in the suburbs. Commuters from the north [will] have a one-stop ride to Back Bay. Commuters from the south will have access to technology centers in Metro Northwest.

The North-South Rail Link will be able to garner significant New England regional support for funding. Not only will north suburban commuters be able to catch the Amtrak Acela in Woburn (at Anderson RTC), intercity rail commuters from other states will likewise see their access improved.

To repeat, the request is not to fund or start construction on the North-South Rail Link. The request is to preserve the right-of-way by filing the nearly complete DEIS/DEIR for the project.

7. The meeting adjourned 8:08 p.m.