ID Number: The MassDOT Highway Division Project Information System (PROJIS) number assigned to the project. If the project does not have a PROJIS number, an identification number will be assigned to the project by the MPO for internal tracking purposes. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division &/or MPO database)

Municipality(ies): The municipality(ies) in which the project is located. (Source: MPO database)

Project Name: The name of the project. (Source: MPO database &/or MassDOT Highway Division)

Project Category (determined by MPO staff):

• Arterial and Intersection – Arterial roadway and intersection projects
• Major Highway – Limited-access roadway projects
• Bridge – Bridge projects
• Bicycle/Pedestrian – Such projects as walkways, paths, and trails
• Enhancement – Streetscape and other types of enhancements
• Regional Mobility – Transportation demand management programs, including the MPO’s Clean Air and Mobility Program, and park-and-ride facilities

MassDOT Highway Division District: The MassDOT Highway Division district in which the project is located. (Source: MPO database)

MAPC Subregion: The MAPC subregion in which the project is located (Source: MPO database)

Estimated Cost: The estimated total cost of the project. (Source: MPO database &/or MassDOT Highway Division)

Earmark Funds: The estimated total available federally earmarked funds for the project. (Source: MPO database)

Description: A description of the project, including its major elements and its geographic limits. Maps, diagrams, and pictures will be provided by MPO agencies or staff when available but may be provided by the proponent. (Source: MPO database &/or MassDOT Highway Division)

Project Length (Miles): Length of project in miles. GIS information based on the project description. (Source: MPO database)

Project Lane-Miles: Lane–miles of project. GIS information based on the project description. (Source: MPO database)

Additional Lane-Miles: Additional lane–miles to be constructed by the project. GIS information based on the project description. (Source: MPO database)

P1 Community Priority: Priority of the project as determined by the community. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

Indicates if the project has additional conditions or approvals. (Source: MPO database)

ITS Conformity: Conforms with the Regional Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Architecture for Metropolitan Boston. (Source: MPO database)

Approved CMAQ: Approved by the Congestion Management and Air Quality Mitigation Committee for the use of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funds. (Source: MPO database)

Approved Enhancement: Approved by the Regional Enhancement Committee or Statewide Enhancement Steering Committee. (Source: MPO database)

TIP Status (Source: MPO database):

• Advertised Projects have been advertised by the implementation agency for bids.
• Programmed Projects have been identified for funds in the current Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
• Pre-TIP Projects have received Project Review Committee (PRC) approval from MassDOT Highway Division and have an “active” PROJIS number, but do not have funds identified in the TIP.
• Conceptual projects are project concepts or ideas that are not yet under design.

Design Status: The project’s design status. Dates are provided where available. (Source: MPO database and MassDOT Highway Division ProjectInfo)

MassDOT Highway Division's Project Review Committee has approvied the project to be considered for potential funding. The PRC reviews projects, makes recommendations, and selectively approves projects for potential funding. It meets approximately quarterly to review Project Initiation Forms and recommendations prepared by its staff. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Divsion Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The 25% design plans for the project have been submitted to and logged by the implementing agency. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The 25% design plans for the project have been approved and logged by the implementing agency. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The 75% design plans for th project have been submitted to and logged by the implementing agency. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The 75% design plans for the project have been approved and logged by the implementing agency. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The 100% design plans for the project have been submitted to and logged by the implementing agency. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The 100% design plans for the project have been approved and logged by the implementing agency. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

The Plans, Specifications and Estimates for the project have been submitted and logged by the implementing agency, which has submitted them to CEPO. Please refer to the MassDOT Highway Division Design Guide (http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_GuideBook.asp) for more information.

Right-of-Way Requirement: Right-of-way action is required for completion of the project. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division ProjectInfo)

Right-of-Way Responsibility: The right-of-way status of the project. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division Project Info)

MassDOT Highway Division Responsibility: Providing the required right-of-way is the responsibility of MassDOT Highway Division.

Municipal Responsibility: Providing the required right-of-way is the responsibility of the municipality.

Municipal Approval: Municipal approval has been given to the right-of-way plan (with date of approval).

Right-of-Way Certification: After the implementation agency has successfully led the municipality through the process, a Right-of-Way Certificate is issued to the municipality, which allows it to advertise and construct the project.

Date Certification Expected: Expected date of right-of-way plan and order of taking. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division)

Date Certification Received: Date the right-of-way plan and order of taking were received at MassDOT Highway Division. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division)

Certification Recorded: Right-of-way plan and order of taking have been recorded at the Registry of Deeds. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division)

Date Certification Expires: Expiration date of the rights of entry, easements, or order of taking. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division)

Required Permits: Permits required by the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act. (Source: MPO database and MassDOT Highway Division ProjectInfo.) Possible required permits include:

• Environmental Impact Statement
• Construction Engineering Checklist
• Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit
• Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Section 10 Permit
• MEPA Environmental Notification Form
• MEPA Environmental Impact Report
• Massachusetts Historical Commission Approval
• M.G.L. Ch. 131 Wetlands Order of Conditions
• Conservation Commission Order of Conditions

Pavement Roughness (IRI): Value reflects calibrated value in inches of roughness per mile.

• Values of 0–190 are classified as good
• Values of 191–320 are classified as fair
• Any value above 320 is classified as poor.

(Source: MassDOT Highway Division Roadway Inventory File)

Bridge ID: Bridge identification number. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division)

AASHTO Rating: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials rating of bridge deficiency. The lower the score, the more deficient the bridge.

Deficiency: The deficiency of the bridge: either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.

Double Stack: Is the bridge located on a planned double-stack freight route?

Year Built: The year the bridge was built.

Year Rebuilt: The last year the bridge was rebuilt.

Degree of Bicycle/Pedestrian Provisions (Source: MassDOT Highway Division Roadway Inventory File and MPO bicycle GIS coverage):

Sidewalks: Indicates if sidewalks are present on one side or on both sides of the roadway. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division Roadway Inventory File)

Four-Foot Shoulder: Identifies if the shoulder can accommodate bicycling by providing at least a four-foot shoulder and is designated for bicycle use in the project (Source: MassDOT Highway Division Roadway Inventory File)

Signed Bicycle Route: The roadway is designated and signed as a bicycle route. (Source: MassDOT Highway Division Roadway Inventory File)

Bicycle Trail: A bicycle trail is near or alongside a roadway. (Source: MPO bicycle GIS coverage)

Striped Bicycle Lane: A striped bicycle lane greater than or equal to 4 feet in width. (Source: MPO bicycle GIS coverage)

P2 What are the infrastructure condition needs or issues of the project area?: What are the existing or anticipated conditions or problems the project is designed to address? Please include additional pavement information from municipal pavement management programs. In addition, qualitative descriptions of problems or anticipated needs can be provided. Please see the Explanation of Project Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for an explanation of how these existing conditions are evaluated. (When applicable, this information should be consistent with project need information provided in the MassDOT Highway Division Project Need Form.) (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P3 How does this project address the infrastructure condition needs or issues in the project area?: Please see The Explanation of Project Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for specific examples and an explanation of project evaluation. For all projects, provide details of any pavement management system the community or agency employs and of how this system will maximize the useful life of any pavement repaired or replaced by the project. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

Improves substandard pavement (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +6 IRI rating greater than 320: Poor and pavement improvements are included in the project
• +4 IRI rating between 320 and 191: Fair and pavement improvements are included in the project
•  0 IRI rating less than 190: Good or better

Improves substandard signal equipment condition (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +6 Poor condition and all equipment will be replaced
• +4 Mediocre condition, replacement of majority of equipment will occur
• +2 Fair condition, partial replacement will occur
•  0 All other values

Improves traffic signal operations (signal equipment upgrades, including for adaptive signal controls and coordination with adjacent signals (ITS) (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +6 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +4 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +2 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

In a Congestion Management Process Identified Area (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +6 CMP data indicates project area is in one of the most highly congested project areas monitored
• +4 CMP data indicates project area is in one of the most congested project areas monitored
• +2 CMP data indicates project area is in a congested project areas monitored
•  0 CMP data indicates project area is in the top 80 to 51 % of the most congested project areas monitored

Improves intermodal accommodations/connections to transit (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +6 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +4 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +2 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Implements ITS strategies other than traffic signal operations (improve traffic flow as identified by an identified ITS strategy for the municipality or state (e.g. variable message signs) (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +6 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +4 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +2 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Top 200 Rank: Ranks of highest-crash intersection clusters in the project area that are included in MassDOT Highway Division’s listing of top-200 crash sites. (Sources: MassDOT Highway Division's Top 200 High Crash Intersection Location Report: 2008–2010, September 2012; proponent-submitted Functional Design Reports; and 25% design submissions)

EPDO/Injury Value: An estimated value of property damage. Please see the Safety Need Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for an explanation of project scoring. (Sources: MassDOT Highway Division’s Top 200 High Crash Intersection Location Report: 2008–2010, September 2012; proponent-submitted Functional Design Reports; and 25% design submissions)

Crash Rate/Crashes per Mile: Intersection projects will have the project intersection’s crash rate. Arterial projects will have crashes per mile. (Sources: MassDOT Highway Division's Top 200 High Crash Intersection Location Report: 2008–2010, September 2012; proponent-submitted Functional Design Reports; and 25% design submissions)

Bicycle-Involved Crashes: Total bicycle-involved crashes. (Sources: MassDOT Highway Division's Top 200 High Crash Intersection Location Report: 2008–2010, September 2012; proponent-submitted Functional Design Reports; and 25% design submissions)

Pedestrian-Involved Crashes: Total pedestrian-involved crashes. (Sources: MassDOT Highway Division's Top 200 High Crash Intersection Location Report: 2008–2010, September 2012; proponent-submitted Functional Design Reports; and 25% design submissions)

P13 What is the primary safety need associated with this project, and how does it address that need? Describe the need for the project from a local and a regional perspective. What are the existing safety needs/improvements the project is designed to address? How will this design accomplish those needed improvements? Please be as specific as possible. (Sources: Proponent-Provided-Information Form, Functional Design Report)

Improves emergency response (up to 2 points)

Scoring:

• +1 Project improves an evacuation route, diversion route, or alternate diversion route
• +1 Project improves an access route to or in proximity to an emergency support location

Design effect ability to respond to extreme conditions (up to 6 points)

Scoring:

• +2 Project addresses flooding problem and/or sea level rise and enables facility to function in such a condition
• +1 Project addresses facility that serves as a route out of a hurricane zone
• +1 Project brings facility up to current seismic design standards
• +1 Project improves access to an emergency support location
• +1 Project addresses critical transportation infrastructure

EPDO/Injury Value Using the Commonwealth´s listing for Estimated Property Damage Only (EPDO) or Injury Value information (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 If the value is in the top 20% of most assessed value
• +2 If the value is in the top 49 to 21% of most assessed value
• +1 If the value is in the top 50 to 100% of the most assessed value
•  0 If there is no loss

Design addresses proponent identified primary safety need (Project design will address the primary safety need identified by the proponent in the question P4) (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Design addresses MPO identified primary safety need (Project design will address the primary MPO identified safety need) (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Improves freight related safety issue (Project design will be effective at improving freight related safety issues including truck crashes) (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Improves bicycle safety (Project design will be effective at improving bicycle related safety issues including crashes) (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Improves pedestrian safety (Project design will be effective at improving pedestrian related safety issues including crashes) (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Improves safety or removes an at grade railroad crossing (up to 3 points)

Scoring:

• +3 Project removes an at grade railroad crossing
• +2 Project significantly improves safety at an at grade railroad crossing
• +1 Project improves safety at an at grade railroad crossing
•  0 Project does not include a railroad crossing

Level of Service: Peak-hour level of service. (Source: Boston Region MPO's MPO's MPO’s MPO′s Congestion Management Process (CMP) data, calculations from Functional Design Reports, Environmental Impact Reports, and/or staff field work)

Transit Vehicles Using Roadway: Identifies the fixed-route transit vehicles using the roadway.

CMP Congested Area: Identifies a project that is located within a Boston Region MPO Congestion Management Process (CMP) area. For more information on these areas, please visit the MPO website at: http://www.bostonmpo.org/bostonmpo/3_programs/6_mms/mms.html

Average Speed: The average peak-period through-vehicle travel speed along a corridor, for both directions of travel. Information provided is determined using the Boston Region MPO’s Congestion Management Process (CMP). If a Project Information Form (PIF) does not have any CMP data listed, this does not mean that the roadway or intersection does not experience congestion problems; this simply means that data from the CMP are not available.

Average Speed Index: The level of service (LOS) based on the average peak-period through-vehicle travel speed index along a corridor, for both directions of travel. The speed index is the ratio of the average observed peak-period travel speed to the posted speed limit. The LOS associated with the speed index is loosely based on the definition provided by the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) for urban streets:

• LOS A > 0.9
• LOS B > 0.7
• LOS C > 0.5
• LOS D > 0.4
• LOS E > 0.33
• LOS F < 0.33

LOS A indicates traffic conditions at primarily free-flow or speed limit values, and LOS F indicates the worst traffic conditions, characterized by extremely low speeds and likely congestion at critical signalized locations. Information provided is determined using the Boston Region MPO’s Congestion Management Process (CMP). If a Project Information Form (PIF) does not have any CMP data listed, this does not necessarily mean that the roadway or intersection does not experience congestion problems; this simply means that data from the CMP are not available.

Equipment Condition: Existing signal equipment condition. (Source: CMP, Massachusetts permitted signal information, municipal signal information, submitted design).

P8 What is the primary mobility need for this project, and how does it address that need? Describe the need for the project from a local and a regional perspective. What are the existing or anticipated mobility needs the project is designed to address? Please be as specific as possible. Please include information on how the project improves level of service and reduces congestion, provides multimodal elements (for example, access to transit stations or parking, or access to bicycle or pedestrian connections), enhances freight mobility, or closes gaps in the existing transportation system. For roadway projects, it is MPO and MassDOT Highway Division policy that auto congestion reductions not occur at the expense of pedestrians, bicyclists, or transit users. Please explain the mobility benefits of the project for all modes. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P9 What intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements does this project include? Examples are new signal systems or emergency vehicle override applications. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

Existing peak hour level of service (LOS) (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Source data indicates project area has an LOS value of F at peak travel times
• +2 Source data indicates project area has an LOS value of E at peak travel times
• +1 Source data indicates project area has an LOS value of D at peak travel times
•  0 All other values

Improves or completes an MPO or State identified freight movement issue (Identified in MPO or State published freight plan) (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Project implements a solution to an MPO or State identified freight movement issue
• +2 Project supports significant improvements or removes barriers to an existing MPO or State identified freight movement issue
• +1 Project supports improvements to an existing MPO or State identified freight movement issue
•  0 All other results

Address proponent identified primary mobility need (Project design will address the primary mobility need identified by the proponent in the question P7 and evaluated by staff) (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Address MPO identified primary mobility need (Project design will address the primary mobility need identified by MPO staff) (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Project reduces congestion (up to 6 points):

Scoring:

• +6 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +4 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +2 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Improves transit reliability (up to 7 points):

Scoring:

• +2 Implements queue jumping ability for transit
• +2 Project prioritizes signals for transit vehicles (ITS)
• +2 Project provides for a dedicated busway
• +1 Project provides for a bus bump out

Check box indicates whether project is located within 1/2 mile of an Environmental Justice Area.

Environmental Justice Area:

• Low Income – For an environmental justice area, a low-income TAZ was defined as having a median household income at or below $42,497 (60% of the 2010 MPO median household income, which was approximately $70,828 [source: U.S. Census]).
• Minority – Sor an environmental justice area, a minority TAZ was defined as having a percentage of minority population greater than 50% and a minimum minority population of 200 people (source: 2010 U.S. Census).

Check box indicates whether project is located within 1/2 mile of an Environmental Justice Population Zone.

Environmental Justice Population Zone:

• Low Income – For an environmental justice population zone, a low-income TAZ was defined as having a median household income at or below $42,497 (60% of the 2010 MPO median household income, which was approximately $70828 [source: U.S. Census]).
• Minority – For an environmental justice population zone, a minority TAZ was defined as having a percentage of minority population greater than 27.8% (source: 2010 U.S. Census). Title VI guidelines suggest that a minority community be defined as one with a minority population which is greater than the regional percentage of minority residents.

Explain how this project would provide needed or additional access to a transit facility. Please see the Explanation of Project Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for explication of scoring criteria. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

Explain how this project would provide needed or additional safety improvements to the facility identified. Please see the Explanation of Project Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for explication of scoring criteria. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

Explain how this project would provide needed or additional air quality improvements to the area. Please see the Explanation of Project Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for explication of scoring criteria. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

The MPO conducts outreach to the environmental justice communities and compiles a list of identified needs. Is this project addressing one of these needs? Please refer to the MPO website for a listing of these needs. Please see the Explanation of Project Evaluation section of the “TIP Handbook” for explication of scoring criteria. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P12 Are there any other environmental justice issues being addressed by this project?: This answer should only be addressed by those projects in an environmental justice area or population zone that address an environmental justice need. Please be specific.

Improves transit for an EJ population (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Project is located within a half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and will provide new transit access
• +1 Project is located within a half-mile buffer of or MPO environmental justice area or population zone and will provide improved access
•  0 Project provides no improvement in transit access or is not in an MPO environmental justice area or population zone

Design is consistent with complete streets policies in an EJ area (up to 4 points):

Scoring:

• +1 Project is located within half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and is a complete street
• +1 Project is located within half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and provides for transit service
• +1 Project is located within half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and provides for bicycle facilities
• +1 Project is located within half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and provides for pedestrian facilities
•  0 Does not provide any complete streets components

Addresses an MPO identified EJ transportation issue (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Project located within half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and the project will provide for substantial improvement to an MPO identified EJ transportation issue
• +2 Project located within half-mile buffer of or affects an MPO environmental justice area or population zone and the project will provide for improvement to an MPO identified EJ transportation issue
•  0 Project provides no additional benefit and/or is not in an MPO environmental justice area or population zone
• –10 Creates a burden in an EJ area

Areas designated as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern by the Massachusetts Secretary of Environmental Affairs. (Source: data from MassGIS)

Hydrographic (water-related) features, including surface water (lakes, ponds, reservoirs), flats, rivers, streams, and others, from MassGIS. Two hundred feet from the hydrographic feature is the distance protected by the Massachusetts Rivers Protection Act. (Source: data from MassGIS)

P10 How does the project relate to community character? Is the project located in an existing community or neighborhood center or in another kind of other pedestrian-oriented area? Explain the community context (cultural, historical, other) in which the project will occur and indicate the positive or negative effect this project will have on community character. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P11 What are the environmental impacts of the project? Will this project improve air quality, improve water quality, or reduce noise levels in the project area or in the region? Air quality improvements can come from reductions in the number or length of vehicle trips or from reductions in vehicle cold starts. Water quality improvements can result from reductions in runoff from impervious surfaces, water supply protection, and habitat protection. Noise barriers can reduce noise impacts. (Source: Proponent-Provided Information-Form)

Air Quality (improves or degrades) (up to 5 points):

Scoring:

• +5 Project significant improves air quality
• +3 Project includes major elements improving air quality
• +1 Project includes minor elements improving air quality
•  0 Project has no significant air quality impacts

CO₂ reduction (up to 5 points):

Scoring:

• +5 Project will provide for significant movement towards the goals of the Global Warming Solutions act
• +3 Project will provide for movement towards the goals of the Global Warming Solutions act
• +1 Project will provide a minor air quality benefit
•  0 Project will no additional benefit to air quality

Project is in an Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA) certified Green Community (up to 4 points):

Scoring:

• +4 Project is in a Green Community
•  0 Project is not in a Green Community

Project reduces VMT/VHT (up to 7 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Project provides for a new transit service
• +1 Project provides for improved transit access
• +1 Project provides for a new bicycle facility
• +1 Project provides for a new pedestrian facility
• +1 Project implements a transportation demand management strategy
•  0 Does not provide for any of the above measures

Addresses identified environmental impacts (Project design will address the environmental impacts identified by the proponent in the question P9 and/or identified by MPO staff) (up to 4 points):

Scoring:

• +4 Meets or addresses criteria to a high degree
• +2 Meets or addresses criteria to a medium degree
• +1 Meets or address criteria to a low degree
•  0 Does not meet or address criteria

Residential areas are zoned for at least 7 dwelling units (DU)/acre (suburban) to 15 DU/acre (urban) as an average for the entire developable residentially zoned area within one-half mile of the project. For all residentially zoned, developable land within one-half mile of the project (for all land that is either currently used or currently undeveloped), the average density, in DU/acre allowed by the current zoning, will be calculated. In existing built-out areas where there are no plans for large-scale redevelopment, actual developed densities can be substituted for zoned density.

A commercial floor-area-ratio (FAR) that results in an estimated 50 employees/acre (suburban) or 150 employees/acre (urban) as an average for the entire developable, commercially zoned area within one-half mile of the project. For all commercially zoned, developable land within one-half mile of the project (for all land that is either currently used or currently undeveloped), the average density, in building square feet per acre allowed by the current zoning, will be calculated. In existing built-out areas where there are no plans for large-scale redevelopment, actual developed densities can be substituted for zoned densities.

Dwelling units will be converted to population based on the average population per household for the community from the 2000 census. The total population within one-half mile of the project will be divided by the total employment calculated within that area to produce a population/employment ratio. If a project allows a community to move towards the ratio range or mixed-use zoning (allowing both residential and commercial development) has been adopted in a substantial portion of the area within one-half mile of the project, MAPC may exercise professional judgment in allocating points.

Mixed-use zoning districts embody the traditional compact development of land, buildings, and structures by integrating a variety of complementary uses, such as residential, retail, office, civic, and entertainment. This criterion is intended to encourage communities to redevelop first and to give priority to transportation projects that support the concentration of development in new or existing mixed-use districts that include residential, commercial, and civic uses.

≤ 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space in in the corridor in suburban communities; ≤ 1 space in urban communities.

For all new development, a TDM program is required that implements at least four of the following typical components:

• Ridesharing program
• Parking restrictions or pricing policies
• Alternative work hours
• Telecommuting options
• Subsidized transit use and other financial incentives to use transit
• Areawide strategies such as membership in Transportation Management Associations
• Subsidies for local transit service
• Multioccupant-vehicle access: Provide access to site and turnaround space for multioccupant vehicles up to 25 feet in length

In addition, if the community is taking steps as part of this project or in the project area to significantly reduce single-occupant travel, then this criteria will be met.

The redevelopment of brownfield sites, downtown districts, abandoned shopping centers, historic mill buildings, or otherwise decadent, substandard, or blighted areas serves as a critical strategy in expanding economic development, creating new housing opportunities, and building livable, vibrant communities. By redeveloping such areas, sites, and buildings, fewer “greenfield” sites are developed, compact and often historic centers are revitalized, and underutilized properties are returned to productive use. By cleaning up brownfield sites, environmental contamination is mitigated, improving ecological and human health as well as economic opportunity. This criterion rewards planning actions in the project corridor that contribute to successful redevelopment.

The proponent should provide information showing that the community has developed regulatory or financial incentives for redevelopment of the sites served by the corridor under question 28 above.

Supports Regional Freight Infrastructure:

• Supports infrastructure improvements on a designated or known truck route
• Supports infrastructure improvement to a known or proposed industrial center
• Supports infrastructure improvement to a major port or airport or intermodal transfer facility

P4 How does the project improve access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and users of public transportation? Describe what improvements are in the project for pedestrians, bicyclists, and users of public transportation, and what level of improvement will be achieved over existing conditions. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P5 How is the project consistent with local land use policies? Explain how this project will support existing or proposed local land use policies. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P6 How does the zoning within one-half mile of this project support transit-oriented development and preserve any new roadway capacity? Will the project have an impact on adjacent land uses? Please review the land use information on this form if the project is expected to have an impact on land use. Provide any information you have that is different from that reported. Is there a local project currently under development that would provide a better balance between housing and jobs in this corridor? If so, please provide details on the project status. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

P7 How is the project consistent with state, regional, and local economic development priorities? Explain how this project will support economic development in the community or in the project area. (Source: Proponent-Provided-Information Form)

Design is consistent with complete streets policies (up to 4 points):

Scoring:

• +1 Project is a complete street
• +1 Project provides for transit service
• +1 Project provides for bicycle facilities
• +1 Project provides for pedestrian facilities
•  0 Does not provide any complete streets components

Provides multimodal access to an activity center (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +1 Project provides transit access (within a quarter mile) to an activity center
• +1 Project provides bicycle access to an activity center
• +1 Project provides pedestrian access to an activity center
•  0 Does not provide multimodal access

Reduces auto dependency (up to 8 points):

Scoring:

• +3 Project provides for a new transit service
• +1 Project is identified in MassDOT's Bay State Greenway Priority 100
• +1 Project completes a known gap in the bicycle or pedestrian network
• +1 Project provides for a new bicycle facility
• +1 Project provides for a new pedestrian facility
• +1 Project implements a transportation demand management strategy
•  0 Does not provide for any of the above measures

Project serves a targeted development site (40R, 43D, 43E, Regionally Significant Priority Development Area, Growth District Initiative or eligible MBTA transit station) (up to 6 points):

Scoring:

• +2 Project provides new transit access to or within site
• +1 Project improves transit access to or within site
• +1 Project provides for bicycle access to or within site
• +1 Project provides for pedestrian access to or within site
• +1 Project provides for improved road access to or within site

Provides for development consistent with the compact growth strategies of MetroFuture (up to 5 points):

Scoring:

• +2 Project mostly serves an existing area of concentrated dvelopment
• +1 Project partly serves an existing area of concentrated development
• +1 Project supports local zoning or other regulations that are supportive of smart growth development
• +1 Project complements other local financial or regulatory support that fosters economic revitalization in a manner consistent with smart growth development principles
•  0 Does not provide for any of the above measures

Project improves Quality of Life (up to 3 points):

Scoring:

• +1 Reduces cut through within the project area
• +1 Implements traffic calming measures
• +1 Improves the character of the project area

$ per ADT: (ADT [for roadway projects] or other user estimate [for nonroadway projects] minus Cost [question 7]) divided by ADT

$ per Lane-Mile: (ADT [for roadway projects] or other user estimate [for nonroadway projects] minus Cost [question 7]) divided by Project Lane-Miles [question 11]

MPO/CTPS Study: Study of this project/project area has been completed by MPO staff and accepted by the MPO board.

Air Quality Status: A project is either exempt from Air Quality Status (is non–capacity adding) or nonexempt (capacity–adding). Please refer to the Boston Region MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan, JOURNEY TO 2030, Chapter 15, for more information on air quality status (http://www.bostonmpo.org/bostonmpo/3_programs/1_transportation_plan/2030Tranplan_ch15.pdf).

TIP Contact: Each of the 101 municipalities in the Boston Region MPO area has a TIP Contact. That contact is appointed by the municipality.