I thought I would offer some more background information about the current bus contract, bid process and why NPS and the School Committee are even considering parking buses on city property.
We are at the end of our current contract. We put an RFP/RFQ out to vendors for bids. We received only 1 bid at a significant increase over our existing contract (I want to say about 22% more, but I don’t have the info in front of me). Transportation costs are one of the biggest cost drivers in our projected FY18 budget deficit of $2.8 million.
One of the reasons we only received one bid is because we do not house the buses in Newton. As this was explored further, the possibility of reducing the overall bus contract amount emerged as a possibility if we were to park the buses in the city. The savings would be about $300,000 per year or $1.5 million over 5 years.
The city and School Department began exploring locations throughout the city. The two that emerged were Newton South High School (approx.. 20-25 buses) and the Aquinas property (approx. 15-20 buses). Neither solution is good and the hope is to mitigate as much as possible the challenges that both of these locations pose.
Nearby residents and parents are concerned about the noise, traffic, air pollution, and loss of playground space at the north end of the Aquinas lot that appears to be involved. I don’t even live there, and I would be upset to see playground space lost, and trees lost if a new curb cut and driveway are created from Jackson Road.
A further update from Ellen indicates that Scott Lennon and Cheryl Lappin are working hard to find a solution that does not involve Aquinas or Newton South. So what next, on to the sites that were considered and rejected? And I don’t know what they were. Perhaps someone on the School Committee can provide the list, so councilors from other wards can be prepared?
Isn’t Aquinas already intended to be the offsite parking for the Austin Street construction project, with shuttle buses to Newtonville? How much more must this neighborhood be burdened?
And speaking of Austin Street, “who knew” how valuable a parking lot could be? Is any city property really “surplus”?
Tomorrow night’s School Committee (Monday, March 13, 7pm) includes a public forum on the proposal to park school buses in Newton.
Julia: Do you really propose to park a fleet of buses on the Austin Street lot? Wasn’t the whole kerfluffle about losing some spaces?
So maybe you’re just doing a rhetorical shake of the head (look how important a parking lot can be…(slowing shaking head in disbelief)) but since the folks that opposed Austin Street had a sky is falling due to lack of parking motif for the businesses in Newtonville/daily parking, let me shake my head in return and say…(look how inconsistent some folks can be).
Also, for the record, spent most of the day in Newtonville. Shaw’s lot almost completely full due to snowmaggedon preppers. Austin Street lot….half empty. Who knew how underutilized a parking lot can be…
The notion of parking busses locally rather than in West Roxbury only came up recently, as we’re trying to identify ways to lower the cost of the new 5-year bus contract before we sign it.
Key advantages to local overnight parking on City property are:
• Annual contract cost will be $300,000 lower
• Elimination of morning bus traffic “caravan” from West Roxbury through Newton streets to get to their first pickups
• Staging busses close to where they are needed reduces emissions
• Newton will reap $80,000/year +/- in excise taxes based upon the value of the busses
Key disadvantage:
• The most readily available locations are not ideal due to site preparation costs, neighborhood traffic logistics, and aesthetics.
There will be a public forum tomorrow night to lead off a regularly scheduled school committee meeting. The school department will present the details of the concept including the process that brought us to this point. This will be followed by a public comments and I’m guessing a discussion by school committee members too. There will not be a vote tomorrow night.
I know that members of the City Council, Mayor’s office and School Committee have been working this topic hard during the past week to try to fully reap the advantages and mitigate the disadvantages of this scheme. I honestly don’t know what is going to be presented tomorrow night so we’ll all find out together!
Is there a reason why all the busses need to be parked in one or two lots? We have 21 school parking lots in the city, not to mention several other suitable places. Unless I’m missing something, this seems like a issue with a relatively easy solution.
I think Julia’s point is that public property is really valuable, and you may need it in unforeseen ways. Like to park school buses as a way to save millions of dollars and prevent having to lay off teachers.
We’ve got all the buses we can handle every day over here are 210 Webster Street, so no more for us, thanks. We’ve reached our maximum daily requirement as recommended by the FDA.
Yes, Emily gets my point. Land can be valuable in unforeseen ways.
And while parking the whole fleet at Austin Street would have eaten up too many public parking spaces, remember that the spaces will be shrunk in size so as to have the same number after the project is built. Could have relocated the Goodwill truck, kicked out the student parking, and shrunk spaces as we’re doing for the building, and got some buses in there for a better cash flow than is forecast from the building.
Mark M, that’s where I got my bus photo! :-) Do you know what school they’re used for?
How about asking the state if we can park the buses where the Pillar House once stood, inside the exit loop from Rte 128 South to Rte 16 East? In this photo, I’ve superimposed the actual buses in question (exactly as they are currently parked in West Roxbury) on that Pillar House site. Plenty of room.
Why do we need school buses ? Wasn’t this all worked out75 -100 years ago when we built walkable schools ? This ain’t farm land any more!
Julia, you think the buses would fit in new shrunken spaces in the Austin Street lot? You and others opposed to the development there complain saying the new sized spaces are too small for cars and SUVs. Now they will fit a bus?
In addition, buses would take away parking spaces that are being preserved under the current plan. How does that fit the NVA narrative that losing even 1 parking space would be disastrous for Newtonville?
Bruce, sounds like a great idea. Hope it’s up for consideration.
Blueprintbill – The concept of walkable schools was lost when multiple school properties were sold 35 years ago.
Yes, public land is too valuable. Too valuable to be wasted parking buses (or cars) Perhaps that’s the takeaway? Hopefully there’s surplus to be found, but paying more for busing likely makes more sense than parking a bus fleet in a village center.
For surplus: I like Bruce’s idea. Beacon Yards (Allston) is empty for a while, too. Also, how about the parking lot BC just purchased at Mishkan Tefila (only partially used by commuters) BC still ought to be doing more for the city. Or how about at the Mall during the day where there’s a huge surplus in parking? (public/private partnerships) How long will Northland be idle before something is built?
How about parking 2 in my front parking area on Watertown St.? – after the storm drive them away and I won’t have to clear the snow from the lot. When was the last time you saw the bus driver’s clear the snow from their roofs? Why do all 40 need to be in one location like Pearl Harbor? What if the city or private property owner’s parked them on the sidewalks, driving them away would take the snow with them. Creative solutions are not the hallmark of municipal government.
@Julie – I’m getting two different answers, related to two different companies. Working on it…
Sorry Julia M! Typo and hitting submit too soon!
As I was saying, there seems to be two different companies listed for that address, one of which has gotten some pretty bad review on their site. When they took over from the construction company there, the lot became closed. I will follow-up.
Has there been any thought given to storing a portion of the buses at the DPW locations on Eliot and/or on Rumford Avenue? Both are city owned land and see high amounts of truck traffic. I have to imagine this has been discussed but if not, there may be an opportunity to explore these sites as options.
I think Adam makes a good point about not using city property if at all possible and that Bruce Henderson (as he often does) just bowled a 10 strike with his proposal with map overlay of the old Pillar House lot just off Route 128. The Allston yards are fine, but there is often heavy traffic between there and Newton, even early in the morning before rush hour. Do the Pillar House lot if that checks out with the State.
The bus yard on Webster St. is (or at least, was) First Student – they had the contract with Newton prior to the current one with Eastern Bus in West Rox.
Mark & Tricia, I didn’t look at every bus, but the sides I could see said Eastern Bus Co. I think there were eight buses total, a couple of them shorter length ones.
Marti, we all know you’re too smart to really think that I think that buses would fit in car parking spaces, shrunken or non-shrunken, so don’t pretend. ;-) I’m really just pointing out the lengths that the city went to to accommodate one use (building) that a lot of people objected to, whose projected net cash flow to the city is relatively small. As opposed to a different use (buses) that a lot of people would object to, that would have a more defined positive cash flow.
I do think Bruce has the most inspired idea (and that his creative thinking is needed in city government). It’s other people’s land, but it’s other people’s land that does not have an any foreseeable opportunity cost to it’s owner, unless you worry about the field mice and opossums and deer and whatnot that have presumably settled in.
The problem with “the Mall during the day when there’s a huge surplus in parking” is that these buses appear to need a home on weekends as well, and during Christmas shopping season and every other day of the year. Similarly, Mishkan Tefila may be only partially used, but we haven’t even got BC to agree not to develop the non-wetlands part of Webster Woods yet; BC probably wants to develop at least that parking lot area, so how long will that be available even for the parking its used for now? And any private property owner with space available, like Northland, would likely want the city to share some of our savings.
It occurs to me that the city has already implicitly been paying for the convenience of having school buses park elsewhere, in that it’s built into the contract. It’s showing up now because there’s only one bidder. We can keep paying for offsite parking, but as more and more private land gets developed generally, not just in Newton, the options for seemingly mundane uses like bus parking on private land will shrink, and the cost will rise over the years. Something to keep in mind.
Another random idea:
Instead of the buses sitting idle during the school hours, could the buses be used for commercial purposes? Could there be demand for low cost fares between Newton and downtown, Cambridge and local universities, airport for the general public? Could this pay for itself?
This just in, for all of those who are spinning your wheels:
Greetings:
Good news to share from the Mayor today. He has agreed to pay for the additional costs to park the Newton Public School busses. Instead of parking on school property, the plan is to park busses outside of Newton.
We will continue to work on reducing the overall parking costs for the busses with the goal of additional savings.
We are planning to cancel the Public Forum since we have found an alternate solution – please spread the word!
Many thanks to everyone who worked so hard on this issue.
Ruth
Ruth Goldman
Newton School Committee, Ward 6
[email protected]
(617)719-5048
I am confused. Is that really good news? Where did the Mayor take that funding from to pay for off-site parking? The Newton Public Schools budget for FY 2018 is facing a $2.875 million deficit. I hope that the Mayor has more money coming for the schools to help minimize the deficit.
Ted, thanks for sharing that news! It is very welcome.
There is no way that neighbors should have to be next to a brand new pop up bus yard! I would be furious! Health concerns and environmental concerns. Imagine having a pop up bus yard next to any of our homes and schools. Thank you!
Ruth Goldman further informed the City Council that the projected savings over the life of the 5 year contract was $1.5 Million ($500,000/year), and that the School Committee will continue to work on this issue. She emphasized that no one wants to leave money on the table.
Obviously, there is still a budget gap which needs to be addressed during the School Committee’s budget deliberations and the upcoming budget deliberations in the City Council.
Typo: $1.5 million over five years is equal to $300,000 per year.
Jo-Louise, I share your confusion, find Ruth Goldman’s wording “He has agreed to pay for the additional costs…” a bit odd. It’s not like it’s the mayors own money. It’s taxpayer money, and if it’s not coming out of elsewhere in the school budget, it’s coming from elsewhere in the city budget, even if it’s something less visible, like lower payments toward unfunded OPEB for retirees.
I think Bruce’s idea is terrific. Let me add icing to the cake – build a solar canopy on the lot!
abuse of busses:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/plural-of-bus
Here is an update from last night’s SC meeting, along with some additional thoughts:
There is no longer a plan to park busses at Aquinas or NSHS. Instead the busses will be parked at a rental lot in Newton which saves $300 thousand annually from our bus contract and reduces cross-town traffic. It also allows the City to reap $80 thousand in excise taxes in the first year and a reduced amount in subsequent years.
However the $300 thousand in savings and the excise tax gain is offset by the cost of renting a non-municipal lot here in Newton. Netting out from the figures shared last night, I think the lot rental is $400 thousand annually. The Mayor has committed to pay this cost for 5 years as an increase to our annual allocation, and says that we can create a memorandum of understanding that will inform the new administration of this deal.
This arrangement is incrementally better than what we have had for a number of years – the cost to Newton taxpayers is about even while there is a reduction in cross-town traffic (busses will no longer have to caravan from and to West Roxbury every morning and afternoon) and exhaust emissions.
As a school committee member seeking to close this next year’s projected budget gap I am pleased that the rent payment won’t come out of the school department’s budget.
But as a citizen I hope to see aggressive efforts by the Mayor and City Council to prepare locally-owned parking such as the Rumford landfill and the Eliot DPW Yard for the busses. Deb Crossley has been taking a leadership advocacy role about doing this. I love Bruce Henderson’s idea too of parking busses at the former Pillar House site if the state will make this available to us at low or no-rent.
Ultimately, the idea that the school department allocation is being increased for bus parking leaves me uncomfortable. Rather, with a municipal-owned free parking lot, the increased allocation could directly support our students – for example I’d like to see it go to later high school start time, full-day kindergarten, funding our SEL programming once our grant runs out, and other important initiatives.
As a few other posters have already suggested, the money from the City solves a school budget issue but it takes away from municipal needs. The faster we create local municipally-owned bus parking, the sooner all Newton taxpayers will reap the benefit.
Just to be sure I’m reading this correctly….we’ve decided to spend $400,000 to rent space to park the busses while there are some good/possibly free ideas posted above — Mishkan Tefila (Adam), Pillar House (Bruce) — that we aren’t even going to explore?
I confess, I got suckered by the Austin Street comments. I’m sure there are plenty of issues with every potential site, including the ones I mentioned. Clearly, it’s complicated. Steve mentions some trade offs that may not have been obvious (excise tax being one) But in addition to the significant disadvantages Steve listed for using city land for parking are ones debated endlessly for sites in village centers: rising real estate values, tax revenue and opportunity cost.
There are vacant private property parking lots thruout the city, why is there not a coordinator approaching these owners with a plan? Why can there not be logistically friendly sites to the schools these buses serve? Where is Green Newton for reduced exhaust emissions related to to siting?
Wait, now we’re paying $400,000 to rent space, when it was $300,000 through the bus contract? That’s a lot of money to avoid a caravan.
Where is this lot, exactly? Will all the buses be in one location? Is the price and location locked in for the duration of the bus contract? (Which will be what, five years?)
I doubt that the Elliot Street yards would have been available for bus storage since the Mayor is about to propose Parks and Recreation/ Police substation for the site which is already crowded with excavate from city construction projects and is the site of the Solar Energy devices that generate energy to supplement Fuel Assistance for low-income city residents. (By the way, the lights on these things are on late into the night, if not all night-I haven’t checked. Doesn’t this diminish the profits from the site.”
Another question (I guess for Steve — and I appreciate you being about the only School Committee member who deigns to answer questions), in addition to the questions I already asked: Why does the $80,000 excise tax revenue, a nice bonus, go down over time? Do the bus companies start a new contract with all new buses, and they all get older and lower in value at the same time? As opposed to always having a mix of ages in the fleet?
The School Department will pay $300 thousand less per year on average to the bus contractor since the busses will be parked locally at no cost to the contractor. Based upon how the Mayor worded his statement I believe that the School Department is paying for the local rental and the City is increasing the allocation to NPS to cover the rental payment.
I don’t know the terms of the rental agreement. But our Chair and the CFO said that we are all working to get the cost down for the benefit of the whole City, suggesting that NPS is not committed for all five years. I’ll see what else I can find out.
NPS CFO Liam Hurley has estimated the excise tax based upon new busses at the start of the new contract. The value of the busses drop each year but I was told that our contract stipulates an average fleet age of no more than three years. This means that as busses “age out” they will be replaced with new(er) ones so the tax yield will drop a bit from year-one but soon should hold steady.
@Steve – Or, if the contract only specifies average age of buses, not necessarily starting with new buses, the excise tax benefit could start at less than $80K and just stay fairly steady.
And sorry to be Jake Tapper, but what is the location? Is there a location? Or does a $400K/year expenditure have to go out to bid?