Project Selection Advisory Council
April 1, 2015
1
Agenda
Remarks from the Chair
Housekeeping
Finalization of Project Priority Formula
Program Balance
weMove Massachusetts
Colors of Money
Public Comment
Schedule
April 1: Program Balance (Project Mix/Funding Buckets)
April 14: Scoring process
April 15-May 30: PSA Council on MPO agendas
April 30: Joint meeting with AMAC
May 15*: Present draft report outline
May 15-May 30: Public comment period
June 1*: Present draft report and comments received
June 15*: Present revisions to final report
June: 18: Circulate final draft to Council
June 24: Deadline for Council to submit edits/feedback
June 30: Final report
* = potential meeting date (not confirmed)
Process Flow
Project Priority Formula - Weights
Primary Criteria
Objectives
Ensure preservation of
existing infrastructure, with
consideration given to
condition of the asset;
improve safety of existing
infrastructure; and consider
engineering feasibility
Cost Effectiveness
Total Cost
Cost per Lane Mile
Cost per ADT
Cost per Unit Change in
Condition
Engineering - Mobility/Access Improve reliability of the
existing system
Weight
System Preservation
Economic Impact
Engineering - Safety
Bonus
Total
40
20
10
Support economic
development goals
10
Reduce the frequency and
severity of collisions
10
Extra points for a specified
benefit not captured in the
criteria
10
100
MassDOT Highway
State of Good Repair
Scoring System
Project Priority Formula - Weights
Primary Criteria
Cost Effectiveness
Objectives
Total Cost
Cost per ADT
Cost per Lane Mile
Cost per Travel Time Savings
Engineering Mobility/Access
Economic Impact
Health/Environment
Engineering - Safety
Equity
Bonus
Regional Priority
Total
Weight
Support modal options
Improve efficiency
Support economic
development goals
Reduce GHG; furthers other
goals of the Commonwealth,
such as improving discharge,
furthering the objectives of
the Global Warming
Solutions Act, and GreenDOT
Reduce frequency and
severity of collisions for all
modes
Target underserved
communities
Extra points for a specified
benefit not captured in the
criteria
Project is a priority for the
region
30
15
10
10
10
10
10
5
100
MassDOT Highway
Capacity
Scoring System
Project Priority Formula - Weights
Primary Criteria
Objectives
Operations Impact (Includes
reliability, safety, comfort)
Improve customer
experience
Operations critical
Number of riders
affected
Operational
Sustainability
SGR Database Rating
Lifecycle Management
Reduce environmental
vulnerability
Cost/ rider
Cost/mile
Cost/minute of travel
time savings
Impact on operating
costs
Impact on operating
revenue
Reduce pollution and
consumption of natural
resources (Reduce GHG)
Promote mode shift
Extra points for a
specified benefit not
captured in the criteria
System Preservation
Cost Effectiveness/Financial
Considerations
Impact on the
Environment/Alignment to
GreenDOT objectives
Bonus
Total
Weight
35
30
20
5
10
100
MBTA/RTA
State of Good Repair
Scoring System
Project Priority Formula - Weights
Primary Criteria
Objectives
Operations Impact (Includes
reliability, safety, comfort)
Improve customer
experience
Operations critical
Number of riders
affected
Operational
Sustainability
SGR Database Rating
Lifecycle Management
Reduce environmental
vulnerability
Cost/ rider
Cost/mile
Cost/minute of travel
time savings
Impact on operating
costs
Impact on operating
revenue
Reduce pollution and
consumption of natural
resources (Reduce GHG)
Promote mode shift
Extra points for a
specified benefit not
captured in the criteria
System Preservation
Cost Effectiveness/Financial
Considerations
Impact on the
Environment/Alignment to
GreenDOT objectives
Bonus
Total
Weight
35
30
20
5
10
100
MBTA/RTA
State of Good Repair
Scoring System
Project Priority Formula - Weights
Primary Criteria
Objectives
Cost Effectiveness/
Financial Considerations
Total Cost
Equity
Mobility/Access
Economic Impact
Health/Environment
Bonus
Total
Cost/new rider
Cost/mile of new service
Cost/minute of travel time
savings (for capacity, not
expansion)
Impact on Operating Costs
Impact on Operating Revenue
Target underserved
communities
Support modal options
Improve efficiency
Support economic
development goals
Reduce pollution and
consumption of natural
resources (Reduce GHG)
Extra points for a specified
benefit not captured in the
criteria
Weight
30
20
15
15
10
10
100
MBTA
Capacity
Scoring System
Project Priority Formula - Weights
Primary Criteria
Objectives
Weight
Staff
Cost Effectiveness/
Financial Considerations
Total Cost
Cost/new rider
Cost/mile of new service
Cost/minute of travel time
savings (for capacity, not
expansion)
Impact on Operating Costs
Mobility/Access
Economic Impact
Health/Environment
Equity
Bonus
Total
Impact on Operating
Revenue
Support modal options
Improve efficiency
Support economic
development goals
Reduce pollution and
consumption of natural
resources (Reduce GHG)
Target underserved
communities
Extra points for a specified
benefit not captured in the
criteria
35
20
15
10
10
10
100
RTA
Capacity
Scoring System
Project Priority Formula
Formula Elements:
Scoring system categories
Objectives for each category
Weights for each objective
Specific metrics – in process
Data – in process
Program Balance
Balancing elements
Regional Equity
Project Mix
Others?
Purpose of Project Mix Screen
To ensure that the selected program based
on the projects that scored well in the
benefits screen can meet MassDOT, MBTA,
and MAP-21 performance targets.
Staff Recommendation:
Use weMove Massachusetts Scenario
Planning Tool
Background
The tool was used as a centerpiece for the
weMove Massachusetts Long Range
Transportation Plan.
It demonstrated that it can support decisions
on how to distribute funding between
highway and transit.
Some ideas have already been put forward
on how to improve the tool for future use.
Highway Modeling
Used HPMS data and the planning tool HERS-ST
Highway Economic Requirements System – State Version
Tool looks for the most cost-effective mix of
improvements system-wide
Performance measures used:
Pavement – % state in good repair (all federal-aid roads)
Bridges – average health index (all bridges in state)
Safety – top crash intersections
Bicycles – % of our Bay State Greenway completed
Mobility – delay in hours per 1,000 miles traveled
Transit Modeling
Used data from NTD and FTA’s TERM model
Transit Economic Requirements Model
Tool looks for the most cost-effective mix of
improvements system-wide
Performance measures used:
MBTA Bridges – % in state of good repair
MBTA Elevators/Escalators – % in state of good repair
Rolling Stock – % in state of good repair (MBTA and RTAs)
MBTA Track – daily hours of delay
MBTA Signal – annual signal failures
Asset Level Information
weMove Massachusetts Tool
Potential Improvements
New asset categories
New performance metrics
Incorporate new data sources
CIP
revenues
ABP Bond Cap
$1.7b
FY14-18
CIP
Expenditures
FY 14-18
FHWA
$2.5b
Highway Division
$6.5b
Very flexible funding:
least restrictions
Flexible funding:
some restrictions on
use or location
Tolls
$1.1b
Directed funding:
Limited options to flex funds
to other modes, uses or locations
Restricted funding:
Use of funds is directed or
location specific
Shared Services
$0.3b
Municipal Projects
$1.6b
Transportation Bond Cap
$6.4b
Registry of Motor Vehicles
$0.1b
MBTA
$3.2b
$0.6b FRA & FTA
$0.2b FAA
RTAs $0.5b April 1, 2015
Aeronautics Division $.25b
ABP Bond Cap
$1.7b
CIP
revenues
FY14-18
FHWA
$2.5b
ABP bond cap
proceeds may only
be spent on bridges
Flexible funding:
some restrictions on
use or location
Directed funding:
Limited options to flex funds
to other modes, uses or locations
FHWA funds can be
flexed to transit
Approximately 66%
of apportioned
funds are mostly
constrained to
roadways and
bridges
Tolls
$1.1b
Very flexible funding:
least restrictions
Highway Division
$6.5b
Toll revenue must
be spent on the
tolled roads and
have restrictions on
which toll road
Shared Services
$0.3b
Municipal Projects
$1.6b
Registry of Motor Vehicles
$0.1b
Transportation Bond Cap
$6.4b
Some FHWA funds
can be flexed to
transit
Bond cap funds can
support capital and
operations
MBTA
$3.2b
FRA / FTA are only
spent on transit
$0.6b FRA & FTA
$0.2b FAA
RTAs
April 1, 2015
Aeronautics Division
Restricted funding:
Use of funds is directed or
location specific
Restrictiveness of federal highway aid
Very flexible funding:
least restrictions
Flexible funding:
some restrictions on
use or location
Railway/Highway Crossings Protective Devices
$1,515,554
Railway/Highway Crossings - Hazard
Elimination
$1,515,554
Transportation Alternatives
(recreational trails)
$1,483,411
Directed funding:
Data driven, location specific,
or use specific
Planning
Bridge-Off System $25,048,096
$35,571,048
Restricted funding:
Use of funds is completely directed
Surface Transportation Program (flex)
$54,803,225
Surface Transportation Program (nonflex)
$90,273,265
Transportation Alternatives (flex)
$6,585,724
Transportation Alternatives (non-flex)
$6,585,724
Highway Safety Improvement Program
$40,272,635
Congestion Mitigation / Air Quality
$76,026,023
National Highway Performance
Program
$381,279,465
4/21/2015
23
Highway funding that can be spent on
approximately
transit
33%
Flex to transit:
Yes
Flex to transit:
Yes with location
restrictions
Railway/Highway Crossings Protective Devices
$1,515,554
Railway/Highway Crossings - Hazard
Elimination
$1,515,554
Transportation Alternatives
(recreational trails)
$1,483,411
Flex to transit:
Yes for specific
purposes
Planning
Bridge-Off System $25,048,096
$35,571,048
Flex to transit:
Not eligible
Surface Transportation Program (flex)
$54,803,225
Surface Transportation Program (nonflex)
$90,273,265
Transportation Alternatives (flex)
$6,585,724
Transportation Alternatives (non-flex)
$6,585,724
Highway Safety Improvement Program
$40,272,635
Congestion Mitigation / Air Quality
$76,026,023
National Highway Performance
Program
$381,279,465
*Under limited and prescribed
circumstances NHPP can be spent
on transit projects
4/21/2015
24