Meeting of the
Project Selection Advisory Council
March 3, 2015
1
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Agenda
Remarks from the Chair
Housekeeping
Bucketing Options
Metrics Discussion
Regional Equity Definition
Next Steps
Public Comment
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Definitions
Categories:
Broad classes of projects within which we would
create distinct approaches to scoring (different sets
of metrics and weights)
Buckets:
More specific asset categories or project types
across which budget allocation decisions will be
made (i.e. bridge vs pavement)
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Option 1
MassDOT
MBTA
State of
Good Repair
State of
Good Repair
Capacity
Capacity
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Option 2
MassDOT
State of Good
Repair
State of
Good
Repair
Capacity
RTAs
Other
Modes
Bridges
Stations
Bridges
Rolling Stock
Pavement
Track & Signal
RTA Rolling
Stock
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Capacity
Bucketing Discussion
Key Questions:
Which approach will help us best
achieve the goal of a transparent, datadriven process that helps MassDOT
achieve its goals?
Are there buckets we did not address
that you think should be considered?
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Metrics Discussion
Key Questions:
Do these metrics reflect a full universe of
appropriate metrics?
Should some be combined or eliminated
altogether?
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Regional Equity
Resolved:
Regional equity will be addressed at the
end of the scoring process
Chapter 90 will be used to screen regional
equity (at least for Highway)
Key Question:
What are our regions?
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Regions: Option 1 - MPOs
Pros
•
MPOs are how the public currently
interfaces with regional
transportation planning.
•
MPOs are more directly related to
how highway and transit funding is
distributed.
Cons
•The existence of very small MPOs
increases sensitivity to large projects.
•The MPO is not directly responsible for
state funded projects, which may cause
confusion.
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015
Regions: Option 2 – Highway Districts
Pros:
• Using MassDOT operational
boundaries would be logical for
regionally assessing state funded
projects.
• The larger geographic size reduces
sensitivity of equity analysis to large
projects.
• Closer to the general understanding
of regions in the state.
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
Cons:
• There is little existing interface
between the public and the districts.
• Transit spending may not be easily
translatable to district boundaries.
3/3/2015
Next Steps
Next Meeting
Action Items
| Leading the Nation in Transportation Excellence | www.mass.gov/massdot
3/3/2015