2008-05-14 Cities for Climate Protection Minutes

Home Browse Search

May 14, 2008 Reading Advisory Committee on Cities for Climate Protection Program Committee Notes for May 14, 2008 (Next Meeting - May 281h at Town Hall) Committee Meeting 7:00 PM, present were Gina Snyder, Tracy.Sopchak, Joan Boegel and Stephanie Anderberg. Minutes - No action was taken on minutes from the previous meeting as not enough people in attendance tonight were also in attendance at that meeting. MassRIDES - Ron, Michele and Gina met with Eliot from MassRIDES to discuss the possibility of setting up TMA-like services in Reading - especially ridematching. Options include a town-wide service area, or starting with a target area such as the RMHS/YMCA/CoolidgeBirch Meadow area. As MassRIDES is also the Safe Routes to School program provider for Massachusetts, it makes this area a logical first target. In addition to carpool matching and Safe Routes to School, the proposed target area could also allow coordinated efforts to include no-idling campaigns and GoLoco service. GoLoco is also a ridematching service, but while MassRIDES tends to work best for recurring trips (specifically, to work or to school), GoLoco can also help with single trips such as to a store, a beach, or a concert. GoLoco uses FaceBook to help users set up networks of friends and to expand networks through friends and to others, by reading reviews of others' experiences with a particular passenger or driver. GoLoco is also useul for groups such as a soccer team, to identify a set of users for a particular series of trips (e.g. to soccer games). GoLoco users have the option of sharing rides at no cost, or of charging a market rate per mile, paid through internet transactions. Given the number of teams using the Birch Meadow Fields, as well as extracurricular groups and teams within the schools, GoLoco might be of interest to folks traveling within the proposed target area. For regular, repetitive trips such as commutes, MassRIDES can take ridematching requests online or on paper. It is possible to limit ridematching within a closed group - for example, families with students at a particular school can request that their rideshare request be shared only with other families from the same school. While this limits the matching potential, it provides a level of reassurance for new users. While the MassRIDES services are free of charge, they do require a partner entity to sign up, making a few small commitments such as holding annual transportation information fairs and appointing an Employee Transportation Coordinator. It seems logical that the town would be the entity to enter into such a partnership, however, perhaps the Chamber of Commerce is also a logical option. The committee needs a plan for implementing transportation programs within the town or a target area. MPO/M 3TA Grants - In our recent grant request to the MPO, we had included in the funding plan, receiving additional grants such as an MBTA grant, beginning in year 3. Barbara Lucas of the MPO has suggested to Carol that Reading should put in a letter of intent now for the current round of MBTA suburban transit grants. There is some confusion as to whether a grant application now would result in funding in year 3 of the shuttle program, or sooner than that. After a brief discussion, the committee decided that it was most likely that the MBTA is using FY08 or FY09 funding for these grants, which would be too early for our shuttle program, especially as we don't yet know if we'll get the larger MPO grant needed to launch shuttle service. Also, the due date for the MBTA grant is only 2 days away and we can't meet that deadline. RCAP Priorities - Phase one items from the Action Plan had been further broken into Phases IA and 1B for tonight's discussion. Each IA item will have two point persons, with the exception of "looped bus service" which involves all committee members. Each 1 B item will have one point person. A motion was made to consider the Phase IA action items to be the committee's top priority. The motion was seconded and discussion ensued. The idea was that if some Phase IA items didn't pan out, or if new opportunities arose, we could still elevate Phase 1B items to top priorities. Also, having point persons gives some authority to speak to potential partnering departments/agencies with some authority. On the other hand, many Phase IA and 1B items are linked. It may be easier to work on linked items with a single effort or overlapping efforts. The motion was withdrawn and a new motion was proposed: Phase 1 items will be the committee's top priority, and the point persons for each action item will report on updates and progress at committee meetings. This motion was seconded and passed. The committee reviewed assignments w for the key people for each item. An email will follow with more direction and next steps for subgroups. Town Day - The committee has been signed up for a space at this event. We will discuss specific plans at the next meeting.