Project Selection Advisory Council Meeting Notes of January 28, 2014
Draft Memorandum for the Record
Project Selection Advisory Council Meeting
January 28, 2014 Meeting
9:30 AM – 11:30 AM, State Transportation Building, Conference Rooms 2&3, 10 Park
Plaza, Boston
Richard Davey, Chair, Secretary and Chief Executive Officer, Massachusetts
Department of Transportation (MassDOT)
1. Safety Briefing
Safety Briefing was provided by Sheri Warrington, Manager of MPO Activities Group,
MassDOT- Office of Transportation Planning
2. Introductions
Secretary Davey introduced himself followed by the other members in the room. John
Pourbaix, Construction Industries of Massachusetts, Steve Silveira, MLS Strategies,
Jeff Mullan, Foley Hoag LLP, Frank DePaola, MassDOT Highway Administrator, David
Mohler, Deputy Secretary of Policy and Executive Director of Office of Transportation
Planning - MassDOT, Jim Lovejoy, Chairman of Board of Selectman, Town of Mt.
Washington representing Mass. Municipal Association and Berkshire MPO, Linda
Dunleavy, Gubernatorial Appointment representing the planning agencies, and Franklin
Regional Council of Governments
3. Objectives of the Council
Secretary Davey said the objective of the council is to bring more transparency to the
project selection process. In the past, projects were outlined/ ranked through the MPO
process, TIP process, litigation to some extent, and negotiations. He said given new
resources and revenues provided by the legislature to transportation, it’s time to think
more strategically as to how we invest into the system now and into the future.
He said the deliverables from the council will be; 1) one is to go across the state for the
next ten months and listen to folks, solicit feedback from average customer/ consumer,
from MPOs, regional planning agencies, consumer groups, and constituent groups, 2)
draft a report which will delineate how state should be selecting transportation projects
into the future. The Council will be looking at the MassDOT initiatives such as
GreenDOT, complete streets, mode shift goal, healthy transportation in selecting the
projects. The final report will be due to the legislature at the end of the 2014 calendar
year. As part of the statute, the council will be looking at the best practices from other
states around the country to develop the metrics and establish project selection criteria.
Project Selection Advisory Council Meeting Notes of January 28, 2014
Ned Codd, Director of Project Oriented Planning, MassDOT- Office of Transportation
Planning talked about the mission of the council. He said the Chapter 46 of the 2013
Transportation Revenue Law calls on the Project Selection Advisory Council to develop
uniform project selection criteria to be used in the development of a comprehensive
state transportation plan. He talked about the MassDOT’s WeMove Massachusetts
statewide strategic transportation plan and the five year Capital Investment plan. He
added, Section11 of the Transportation Revenue Law, Chapter 46 talks about the
project selection advisory council and the criteria. Council may divide projects into
categories such as preservation and maintenance, modernization, expansion and Local
construction.
4. Explanation of Metropolitan Planning Regulations
Sheri Warrington, Manager of MPO Activities, MassDOT- Office of Transportation
Planning described the requirements of the MPO process. All federal funds need to be
programmed through the MPO process which includes regional target funding, and
regionally significant statewide projects. Requirements of MPO process should be
fulfilled in the prioritization of projects. She talked about the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), and the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process.
The four year TIP and STIP must be fiscally constrained and at each step they should
comply with Title VI and public participation plans that the regions have in place. MPOs
currently have their MPO approved evaluation criteria that is used to grade projects.
There is an overlap between some of the criteria the regions use in evaluating their
projects. The way the projects are scored and weighted is not consistent across the
regions. The council might want to standardize the scoring system for the state.
Ms. Warrington said, MAP-21 performance measures should be considered by the
council when selecting the projects. MAP-21 identifies specific performance measures
that the state DOT’s and MPOs should follow. MAP-21 is a two year transportation act
that extends through September 2014. Federal Government will be releasing the final
rule making in spring 2014. There are seven national goals defined by MAP-21. They
are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Safety
Infrastructure
Congestion Reduction
System Reliability
Freight Movement and Economic Vitality
Environmental Sustainability
Reduced Project Delivery Delay
Project Selection Advisory Council Meeting Notes of January 28, 2014
There are six public meetings scheduled for the draft WeMove Massachusetts and
Capital Investment Plan documents. She suggested that the project selection advisory
council hearings could follow those meetings. It will be an opportunity for people to
understand all the components that come together in the state transportation plan.
For the council, the legislation specifically requires six public hearings held one in each
of the highway district of the state. These hearings will be subject to open meeting laws,
and notification should be posted 14 days in advance.
5. Council Members Discussion:
Jeff Mullen said the presentations seem to suggest that there are some mandatory
criteria established by federal and state law and that it is important the council know the
difference between the two. He suggested that it would be helpful to represent this
difference in a Venn or in an inverted pyramid diagram. He said it is ok to have nonuniform evaluation criteria for the selection of projects but it is necessary to have one
uniform dataset or one way to measure the data. He mentioned about looking at a table
of contents of deliverables.
Following-up on Mr. Mullen’s comments, Frank DePaola, MassDOT Highway
Administrator said that it will be helpful for the highway division to make a presentation
on bridge, and pavement data, and on crash locations collected by the division
throughout the state. It might be helpful for the council to know what’s available already.
Linda Dunleavy had suggested that she will find out about the data that regions are
collecting in this direction. She said a comparison can be made between the two sets of
data.
Secretary Davey said that it is important that the council clearly outline the specific
must-haves like safety criteria, and some nice-to-haves criteria such as reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions, and promoting economic development. He said that this
discussion of what is required to define the selection criteria will be on the agenda for
the next council meeting.
David Mohler, Deputy Secretary of Policy, and Executive Director of Office of
Transportation Planning-MassDOT added that it should be relatively easy to prioritize a
particular program given that the MassDOT highway division has a good way to
prioritize bridge projects.
Secretary Davey asked the staff to collect best practices from other states around the
country and focus on states that have a combination of rural, urban, and suburban
areas. He also talked about looking into Mass works process.
Project Selection Advisory Council Meeting Notes of January 28, 2014
Jim Lovejoy said that along with performance measures, prioritization of projects should
also be based on cost effectiveness.
Mr. Mullen said that MARPA should be informed about the council and he also wanted
to know what they felt should be the outcome of this process. He said it will be helpful to
hear from each of the MPOs about their views of some of these issues. This should be
reflected in the final report as a statement of purpose or goal. The council should set up
a process that will survive for a long time and one that can be easily understood by the
average citizen.
Secretary Davey suggested that the council meet on the same day the MPOs meet in
their regions so that the MPO members and other members of public can participate
and share their views. The Office of Transportation Planning will coordinate and
communicate about the council questions, research aspects etc. It might be a good idea
to schedule public hearings on the same day as the MPO meeting in the regions to
have good participation from the MPOs. Timelines for the council including the final
report should be defined by the next meeting. A draft calendar of the council meetings
and public hearings will be circulated to the council.
Items on the next meeting agenda
Best Practices from other states
MPOs in other states with urban/rural economy
MassDOT Highway Division presentation
Inverted Pyramid or Venn diagram with must-haves Vs. Nice-to-haves criteria
Council meeting/ public hearing schedule
Table of Contents of Deliverable