Image of report cover.

Transportation Improvement Program
Federal Fiscal Year 2025-29

APPENDICES

DRAFT FOR THE MPO, June 6, 2024

Contents

Appendix A: Project Prioritization and Scoring
Appendix B: Greenhouse Gas Monitoring and Evaluation
Appendix C: Public Engagement and Public Comments
Appendix D: Geographic Distribution of TIP Funding
Appendix E: Regulatory and Policy Framework
Appendix F: Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Membership
Appendix G: Operations and Maintenance Summary

2025-29 TIP

Abbreviations

 

 

 

 

Appendix A: Project Prioritization and Scoring

INTRODUCTION

As described in Chapter 2, the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) development and project prioritization and funding process consists of numerous phases and is supported by several different funding sources. This appendix includes information about transportation projects that the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) considered for funding through the Highway Discretionary (Regional Target) Program in the federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2025–29 TIP.

 

To be considered for funding by the MPO, a project must fulfill certain basic criteria. Projects evaluated through the MPO’s Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections, Complete Streets, and Intersection Improvements investment programs must meet these criteria:

 

For projects evaluated through the MPO’s Transit Transformation Program, the following criteria apply:

 

For projects evaluated through the MPO’s Community Connections Program, the following criteria apply:

 

 

If a project meets the above criteria, it is presented to the MPO board in the Universe of Projects (Table A-1) to be considered for funding. This project list is presented to the MPO board in November and provides a snapshot of information available on projects at that stage in the TIP development. Some projects that get evaluated for funding may not appear in the Universe, as more project information may become available following the compilation of the Universe. In addition, some projects that appear on the Universe list may not be evaluated each year if these projects are not actively being advanced by municipal or state planners or if they are not at the minimum required level of design for evaluation. Community Connections projects are not typically included in the Universe because proponents of those projects apply for funding through a discrete application process, the submission deadline for which is after the presentation of the Universe to the MPO board.

 

Once a proponent provides sufficient design documentation for a project in the Universe and the municipality or state is actively prioritizing the project for funding, the project can be evaluated by MPO staff. The evaluation criteria used to score projects are based on the MPO’s goals and objectives. After the projects are evaluated, the scores are shared with project proponents, posted on the MPO’s website, and presented to the MPO board for review and discussion. The scores for projects evaluated during development of the FFYs 2025–29 TIP for programming in the MPO’s Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections, Complete Streets, and Intersection Improvements programs are summarized in Table A-3. No projects were evaluated for inclusion in the Major Infrastructure investment program during the development of the FFY 2025-29 TIP.  Scores for projects that applied for funding through the MPO’s Community Connections Program during the FFYs 2025–29 TIP cycle are summarized in Table A-4.

 

Following the adoption of Destination 2050 in July 2023, the MPO revised the TIP evaluation criteria to better align with the MPO’s updated goals, objectives, and investment programs, including a new resilience goal area. These new criteria were employed during the project selection process for the FFYs 2025-29 TIP. The final criteria were informed by robust public engagement conducted during the development of Destination 2050 and developed through an update process that engaged MPO members, staff, and external stakeholders. The most significant update to the criteria for the FFYs 2025-29 TIP was the development of new and broader resilience evaluation metrics to align with the resilience goal area in Destination 2050 and elevate resilience to equal consideration in project prioritization alongside other goal-focused TIP criteria. This update created separate criteria for different project types within the Community Connections program given the diverse array of first-and-last mile projects that can be funded through the program.

 

The project selection criteria for each investment program are shown in separate tables in this appendix as follows: Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections (Table A-5); Complete Streets (Table A-6); Intersection Improvements (Table A-7); and Transit Transformation (Table A-8).

 

Community Connections project selection criteria are shown in separate tables in this appendix as follows: Bicycle Lanes (A-9); Bicycle Racks (A-10); Bikeshare Support (A-11); Microtransit Pilots (A-12); and Wayfinding Signage (A-13).

 

Archived project evaluation criteria for all investment programs, which were discontinued in October 2023 after the FFYs 2024–28 TIP cycle, are shown in Tables A-14 and A-15.

 

In addition to project scores, several other factors are taken into consideration by the MPO when selecting projects for funding. Table A-2 describes many of these elements, including the relationships between the MPO’s FFYs 2025–29 Regional Target projects and the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), studies and technical assistance conducted by MPO staff through the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP), the federally required performance measures discussed in Chapter 4, and Massachusetts’ modal plans. These projects are listed by MPO investment program. More details about each of these projects are available in the funding tables and project descriptions included in Chapter 3. Performance-related information for the FFYs 2025–29 Regional Target projects is included in Chapter 4, and information about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for these projects is available in Appendix B.


 

 

 

Table A-1
FFYS 2025–29 TIP Universe of Projects

 

This table contains unprogrammed projects in the Boston region that may be considered for evaluation in the FFYs 2025-29 TIP cycle. Not all projects listed in this table will be evaluated for funding in the FFYs 2024-28 TIP, as projects must be approved by the Project Review Committee and proponents must submit sufficient project documentation prior to scoring. The MPO has also established a policy to prioritize projects that have reached the 25% design submission stage for funding. This list is subject to change as more project information is received.
Key
  Evaluated for FFYs 2024-28 TIP
  New project in TIP universe for FFYs 2025-29 TIP
  In 2024-28 universe, not evaluated
                           
Municipality Project Proponent Project Name PROJIS Design Status (as of 10/6/21) Year Added to Universe Cost Estimate MAPC Subregion Highway District MPO Investment Program Notes Limits MAPIT? Previous Evaluation Score
Inner Core                          
Complete Streets                        
Boston Boston Reconstruction of Albany Street N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   6   Pursuing 2022 PRC approval.     N/A
Boston MassDOT Reconstruction on Gallivan Boulevard (Route 203), from Neponset Circle to East of Morton Street Intersection 606896 PRC approved (2012)  2018 $11,500,000 ICC 6 Complete Streets Resulted from FFY 2012 Addressing Priority Corridors MPO Study     N/A
Boston MassDOT Improvements on Morton Street (Route 203), from West of Gallivan Boulevard to Shea Circle 606897 PRC approved (2012)   2018 $11,500,000 ICC 6 Complete Streets Resulted from FFY 2012 Addressing Priority Corridors MPO Study     N/A
Boston Boston Roadway Improvements along Commonwealth Avenue (Route 30), from Alcorn Street to Warren/Kelton Streets (Phase 3 & Phase 4) 608449 25% submitted (9/28/2017) 2017 or earlier $31,036,006 ICC 6 Major Infrastructure Last scored for FFYs 2020-24 TIP.     56
Boston MassDOT Intersection & Signal Improvements at VFW Parkway and Spring Street 607759 25% Package Received - R1 (3/09/2022) 2022 $4,526,907   6         N/A
Boston MassDOT Boston - Gallivan Boulevard (Route 203) Safety Improvements, From Washing  610650 PRC approved (2019)   2019 $5,750,000 ICC 6 Complete Streets Priority for District 6. Road safety audit being initiated.     N/A
Brookline Brookline Boylston Street (High Street to Brington Road) Complete Streets Improvements N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $3,500,000   6   Ped crossings, bike lanes, street trees.  Design through Toole with some facilitation from MassDOT.  Three options were pushed through and endorsed by the Select Board.  Town met with District 6 to run through this.  Should be in PRC soon.     N/A
Brookline Brookline Davis Street Path Restoration and Reconstruction of the Davis Street Path Bridge over MBTA N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $12,000,000   6   Conceptual stage.  Brookline is investigating avenues to use federal discretionary grant funding to advance this project.  Potential for bundling with Boylston Street work above.     N/A
Chelsea Chelsea Reconstruction of Spruce Street, from Everett Avenue to Williams Street 610675 PRC approved (2019)   2019 $5,408,475 ICC 6 Complete Streets       N/A
Chelsea Chelsea Reconstruction of Everett Avenue and 3rd Street, from Broadway to Ash Street N/A Pre-PRC 2020 N/A   6         N/A
Chelsea Chelsea Reconstruction of Marginal Street N/A Pre-PRC 2019 N/A ICC 6 Complete Streets       N/A
Lynn, Salem MassDOT Reconstruction of Route 107 608927 PRC approved (2017) 2020 $38,155,000   4         N/A
Malden Malden Broadway Corridor Reconstruction N/A Pre-PRC 2022 N/A   4   Malden is currently holding community meetings to discuss this project, with the most recent one being held 10.25.2022.     N/A
Melrose Melrose Reconstruction of Lebanon Street, from Lynde Street to Malden City Line 612534 PRC approved (2/10/2022) 2020 $3,742,432   4         N/A
Newton Newton Reconstruction of Washington Street, from Church Street to Chestnut Street N/A Pre-PRC 2020 N/A   6         N/A
Revere Revere Reconstruction of Ocean Ave, Revere Street, and Revere Beach Boulevard N/A Pre-PRC 2020 N/A   4   Project at conceptual stage with schematics, needs full design - investigating roundabout.  Key East/West connection.       N/A
Winthrop Winthrop Reconstruction & Improvements on Route 145 N/A PRC approved (2019) 2019 $7,565,512 ICC 6 Complete Streets       N/A
Intersection Improvements                          
Boston, Brookline Boston, Brookline Mountfort St. & Commonwealth Ave. Connection 608956 PRC approved (2017) 2018 $916,883 ICC 6 Intersection Improvements Preliminary design.       N/A
Lynn Lynn Intersection Safety Improvements at Boston Street at Hesper & Hamilton Streets N/A Pre-PRC 2023 $3,000,000   4   Based on 3/3/2023 meeting with Lynn.      
Medford Medford Intersection Improvements at Main Street and South Street 611974 PRC approved (2021) 2019 $8,498,000 ICC 4 Intersection Improvements Project location studied by CTPS. Priority for municipality.  Design is in progress, and eventually the City will work with MassDOT to fund construction.     N/A
Newton MassDOT Route 16 at Quinobequin Road 612613 PRC approved (2/10/2022) 2022 $4,350,000   6   Reconfiguration of the interchange may result in consideration of this project for the LRTP.      
Quincy MassDOT Intersection Improvements at Route 3A (Southern Artery) and Broad Street 608569 PRC approved (2016) 2020 $2,900,000   6   Priority for District 6.     N/A
Quincy Quincy Intersection Improvements at Willard Street and Ricciuti Drive 610823 25% Package Received - R1 (1/27/2023) 2020 $1,145,580   6   25% design complete.  PM is Kathy Dougherty.       N/A
Quincy Quincy Merrymount Parkway Phase II N/A Pre-PRC 2022 N/A   6   December PRC.  Intersection improvement at Merrymount Parkway and Furnace Brook Parkway.  Parks Department is leading the work - David Murphy (617-376-1251).  Will include bridge replacement.     N/A
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Belmont Belmont Belmont Community Path Phase 2 N/A Pre-PRC 2023 TBD   4   akoumoutsos@tooledesign.com reached out 3/16/2023 to discuss initiation and funding through MassDOT      
Boston Boston Fenway Multi-Use Path Phase III N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   6   Project at conceptual stage.     N/A
Brookline Brookline Beacon Street Bridle Pathway N/A Pre-PRC 2022 N/A   6   Project in conceptual design through Toole, receipt of a MassTrails grant in 2020 for feasibility study.  Limits would be Audubon Circle to Cleveland Circle.     N/A
Everett, Somerville DCR Mystic River Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing 612004 PRC approved (2021) 2021 $38,218,334   4         N/A
Malden Malden Spot Pond Brook Greenway 613088 Pre-PRC - 25% design 2022 $3,250,000   4   Application obtained for 2024-2028.      
Medford Medford Wellington Phase 4 Shared Use Path 613082 Pre-PRC 2022 $1,195,000   4   ID # is not yet in PINFO.  Initiated on 11/3/2022.  Includes an earmark and Gaming Commission money.     N/A
Medford Medford MacDonald Park Pedestrian Bridge N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $800,000   4   In DCR park, City is requesting expansion of bridge to 10-12feet in width to coordinate with shared use pathway.     N/A
Major Infrastructure                        
Boston, Chelsea Boston Bridge Rehabilitation and Fender Pier Replacement, Meridian Street Over Chelsea Creek (Andrew P. McArdle Bridge) 600637 PRC Approved (2/10/2022) 2021 $97,538,787   6         N/A
Cambridge DCR Intersection Improvements at Fresh Pond Parkway/Gerry's Landing Road, from Brattle Street to Memorial Drive 609290 PRC approved (2018) 2019 $7,000,000 ICC 6 Intersection Improvements Short-term improvements being initiated.      N/A
Revere, Malden MassDOT Improvements on Route 1 (NB) Add-A-Lane 610543 PRC approved (2019) 2019 $7,210,000 ICC 4 Major Infrastructure Project is not programmed in Destination 2040. It is located on a regionally significant roadway. If this work includes capacity-adding elements, and it is programmed in the TIP, it will need to be included in Destination 2050.     N/A
Newton MassDOT Traffic Signal and Safety Improvements at Interchange 127 (Newton Corner) 609288 PRC approved (2018) 2019 $14,000,000 ICC 6 Intersection Improvements       N/A
Medford Medford Roosevelt Circle Interchange Reconfiguration N/A Pre-PRC 2022 TBD   4   As discussed on 11.4.2022 with the City of Medford, the City is looking to reconfigure the ramps and adjacent local roadways to improve traffic safety following the results of a RSA along this corridor.  Includes improvements for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access.  Given the state of repair on the bridges, this may be coordinated with bridge rehabilitation work for these structures over I-93.     N/A
Boston Boston Cambridge Street Bridge Replacement - Charlestown 612989 PRC approved (12/21/2022) 2022 $15,400,000   6   City wants this programmed to advertise this before Rutherford Avenue enters construction.  This is a difficult bridge under I-93 and next to Sullivan Square.       N/A
Revere Revere Route 1A Improvement and Reconfiguration N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $9-12,000,000   4   Project is in conceptual design stage.  The priority is to reconfigure the loop ramps at the General Edwards Bridge to facilitate redevelopment of the area, for which there are already parcel developments planned.  The reconfiguration will entail construction of a new roundabout and improved pedestrian crossings to improve access to the riverfront and Point of Pines area along Revere.  Per the City, this reconfiguration is intended to work with the Lynnway Multimodal Corridor improvements, but will also not impact construction for the General Edwards Bridge replacement.     N/A
Revere, Saugus Revere, Saugus Roadway Widening on Route 1 North (Phase 2) 611999 PRC approved (2021) 2021 $2,397,600   4   Project is not programmed in Destination 2040. It Is on a regionally-significant roadway and would add roadway capacity. If programmed in the TIP, this project will also need to be included in Destination 2050. Robins Road to Route 99 interchange are the limits.     N/A
Community Connections                        
Belmont Belmont Belmont BlueBikes Expansion N/A N/A 2022 $250,000   4   Belmont is currently evaluating potential revenue streams to cover operational costs and match prior to submitting an application for this project.       N/A
Lynn Lynn Transit Signal Priority - Bus Upgrades for Lynn Route 107 N/A N/A 2022 TBD   4   Indicated in November 8th email to Ethan from Aaron Clausen     N/A
Waltham Waltham Waltham BlueBikes/Bikeshare Expansion N/A N/A 2022 TBD   4   Indicated in November 8th email to Ethan from Catherine Cagle.     N/A
                           
Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination                  
Complete Streets                          
Bedford Bedford Roadway Reconstruction of Route 4/225 (The Great Road) 612739 PRC approved (5/12/2022) 2022 $10,899,448   4     Limits appear to go from North Road to match line near Loomis Street.  SRTS project completed in the area under 608000.     N/A
Intersection Improvements                          
Littleton Littleton Intersection Improvements at Route 119/Beaver Brook Road 610702 PRC approved (2020) 2020 $3,120,110 ICC 3 Intersection Improvements MassDOT agreed to fund design after 25% design approved. As of October 2022, the project remains in preliminary design.     N/A
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Bedford Bedford Minuteman Bikeway Extension, From Loomis Street to Concord Road (Route 62) 607738 47 2022 $11,218,186 N/A 4 Cost increase to $11,218,186. Initial targeted advertisement date of 8/13/22. Local concerns about permitting.  Previously programmed in FY23-27, dropped due to public opposition.  Failed to achieve 2/3rds majority in town meeting on 11.14.2022.     N/A
Concord Concord Assabet River Multi-Use Trail and Bridge Construction 612870 PRC approved (8/29/2022) 2020 $8,280,000 MAGIC 4 Major Infrastructure Project was originally a new Pedestrian Bridge with a $2-3.6M price range.  Scope has increased to include improvements for a multi-use trail alongside the bridge.  Cost has increased accordingly, and is now in preliminary design. Project location runs between the West Concord MBTA Station and the Concord Meadows Corporate Center with a hookup to the Southern Terminus of the Bruce Freeman.     N/A
Stow Stow Stow - Assabet River Rail Trail Construction 613096 PRC approved, in design. 2022 TBD   3   Project Info # is being reserved for this project's construction.  Recent earmark recipient for design under FFY22 House THUD bill (Rep. Lori Trahan).  Design line item added to FFY23-27 in AM2 and is retaining a project ID # S12749.        
Major Infrastructure                        
Acton MassDOT Intersection Improvements at Route 2 and Route 27 Ramps 610553 PRC approved (2019) 2020 $3,480,000   3   Project not programmed in LRTP (meets MPO roadway classification requirement). Priority for District 3 and Town of Acton. Project has had surveying and MSA design contracts opened for it.  MassDOT appears to be tracking as a Traffic Safety improvement.     N/A
Concord Concord Reconstruction & Widening on Route 2, from Sandy Pond Road to Bridge over MBTA/B&M Railroad 608015 PRC approved (2014) 2019 $8,000,000 MAGIC 4 Major Infrastructure Project is not programmed in Destination 2040. It is on a regionally significant roadway and includes roadway widening elements. If programmed in the TIP, this project should also be included in Destination 2050.     N/A
Lexington Lexington Route 4/225 (Bedford Street) and Hartwell Avenue N/A Pre-PRC 2019 $30,557,000 MAGIC 4 Major Infrastructure Project is programmed in Destination 2040 (FFYs 2030-34). The project is expected to include work on the I-95 Interchange with Route 4/225. If this work includes capacity-adding elements, it will need to be included in Destination 2050.     N/A
Community Connections                        
Concord, Lexington, Lincoln Concord Battle Road Shuttle Pilot N/A N/A 2022 TBD   4   Erin Stevens in Concord indicated interest in two shuttle options, an extension of a 2022 Summer Pilot for local service and a more regional service that would involve operations in Lexington and Lincoln.  See email from 12/5/2022 to Ethan Lapointe.     N/A
Lexington Lexington Lexington Shuttle N/A N/A 2022 TBD   4   May be a component of the Concord project listed above.  Outreach from Lexington on 12/5/2022 was somewhat vague, but expressed an interest in service.  Lexington receives MBTA service.     N/A
                           
MetroWest Regional Collaborative                      
Complete Streets                        
Wellesley Wellesley Route 135 Reconstruction (Natick Town Line to Weston Road) N/A Pre-PRC N/A TBD TBD 6 PNF submitted.  Discussing 10.14.2022.     N/A
Holliston Holliston Reconstruction of Concord Street (Route 126) N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Added through subregional outreach. Project is municipal priority, as it's tied to necessary below-grade sewer work. 10/12/22: MaPIT is showing that a project was initiated back on 7.14.2020 for this stretch for resurfacing and related work, assuming $600K in total cost (likely lowball).       N/A
Intersection Improvements                          
Framingham MassDOT Roundabout Construction at Salem End Road, Badger Road and Gates Street 609280 PRC approved (2018) 2019 $2,520,000 MWRC 3 Intersection Improvements       N/A
Weston Weston Intersection Improvements - Signalization of Route 20 at Highland Street N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   6   Added through subregional outreach.     N/A
Holliston Holliston Route 16 Washington Street at Whitney Street N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $500,000   3   Result of 12/20/2022 phone call between Ethan Lapointe and Robert Walker (Highway Superintendent).  Looking for signal installation.      
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Weston MassDOT Weston - Shared Use Path Construction on Route 30 612602 PRC Approved (2/10/2022) 2022 $1,050,000   6   Meant to connect into Project 608954.  District 6 priority to ensure that the shared-use-path there ties in to the rest of the bicycle network and concludes at a logical terminus.     N/A
Natick Natick Cochituate Rail Trail Extension, from MBTA Station to Mechanic Street 610691 25% Design Received (11/21/2022) 2020 $6,690,043 NSPC 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Final section of Cochituate Rail Trail Extension. Imminent 25% design submittal.  Applicant applied for FFY2024-2028 TIP funding.     N/A
Major Infrastructure                        
Framingham Framingham Intersection Improvements at Route 126/135/MBTA and CSX Railroad 606109 PRC approved (2010) 2019 $115,000,000 MWRC 3 Major Infrastructure Project is programmed in Destination 2040 (FFYs 2030-34).  May need to be pushed back with LRTP rewrite.  Consultant said that depressing Route 135 may be the solution.     N/A
                           
North Suburban Planning Council                      
Complete Streets                          
Burlington Burlington Town Center Complete Streets Improvements N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   4   Complete Streets upgrades along Route 3A from Bedford Street to Arthur Woods Avenue. The scope of work would be additive to existing resurfacing planned under 610704, and would focus mostly on paint.  There is potential for widening if the town's design includes a multimodal path while maintaining the current number and width of vehicle lanes. Organized opposition to bike lanes under 610704.  Backlash against some public support.  In public hearing for 610704, appx 30 people came out against.  Likely to manifest in this project as well. D4 and MassDOT are aware of this project.  Town is working with Northeastern University to have grad students on project and review plans.  Ethan has contact info for students (one is in OPMI). Route 3A (Bedford Street to Arthur Woods Avenue)   N/A
Lynnfield Lynnfield Reconstruction of Summer Street 609381 PRC approved (2019) 2019 $21,521,921 NSPC 4 Complete Streets Not yet at 25% design.  Bayside Engineering handling design, Norman Brown (781-932-3201, nbrown@baysideengineering.com) is PM.  Culvert and turtle crossings.  Town may consider descoping and phasing the project due to cost, per 12/20/2022 conversation with PM. Summer Street (Lynnfield Town Hall to Route 129).   N/A
Reading Reading Reading Downtown Improvement Project N/A Pre-PRC 2020 $7-$8 million   4   Project at conceptual stage.     N/A
Stoneham Stoneham Reconstruction of South Main Street, from Town Center to South Street N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   4         N/A
Wakefield Wakefield Envision Wakefield - Main Street Improvements 610545 25% Design Complete 2020 $16,581,200   4   Main St (Nahant to Water) and Water Street (Main to Cyrus) removed from project and bundled in 607329. 25% design incorporates some retention of angled parking in order to appease older public, but focus is on bike parking.  Strong public input from youth during town meetings led to approval. Key sticking point in FFY 2023-2027 Scoring was project cost ~$26M.  Bundling of some bike improvements into other nearby state highway projects has reduced budget to $16.5M as of the FFY2024-2028 funding round. Main Street (Water Street to Salem Street) Yes 41.8
Winchester Winchester Town Center Complete Streets Improvements N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   4         N/A
Intersection Improvements                          
Stoneham Stoneham Intersection Improvements at Main Street (Route 28), Franklin Street, and Central Street N/A Pre-PRC 2020 N/A   4   Project at conceptual stage.     N/A
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Stoneham, Wakefield Stoneham, Wakefield Mystic Highlands Greenway Project N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   4         N/A
Community Connections                          
North Reading North Reading North Reading Human Services Transportation N/A N/A 2022     4   Significant paratransit consideration.  Losing Merrimack Valley interdistrict service as North Reading falls between the MBTA and MVRTA.       N/A
                           
North Shore Task Force                        
Complete Streets                          
Beverly, Manchester-by-the-Sea MassDOT Resurfacing and Related Work on Route 127 607707 PRC approved (2013) 2018 $2,300,000 NSTF 4 Complete Streets Still in preliminary design.       N/A
Danvers Danvers Reconstruction on Collins Street, from Sylvan Street to Centre and Holten Streets 602310 75% submitted (3/5/2010) 2017 or earlier $5,183,121 NSTF 4 Complete Streets Updated 75% design submission needed for project to move forward. Last scored for FFYs 2020-24 TIP. Collins Street (Sylvan Street to Centre Street/Holten Street) 0.7 miles.  42.5566, -70.9539 Yes 46
Ipswich Ipswich Reconstruction of County Road, from South Main Street to East Street 611975 PRC approved (2021) 2020 $5,653,500   4   On 10/7/2022, Frank Ventimiglia mentioned that a bridge within the project limits has had a lane closed by MassDOT.  Structure IDs are I01005, main concern is Ipswich - 2PN which is an 1861-built historic stone arch mill bridge.  Currently functioning as a one-way.  OFF SYSTEM BRIDGE.  MassDOT contact is Ryan Wilcox. Town had approached as a traffic safety project with the bridge as a focal point.  Pier degradation and cracking.  Structure is under evaluation for a statewide bridge preservation contract. County Road (South Main Street to East Street) Y 45.4
Ipswich Ipswich Argilla Roadway Reconstruction and Adaptation (Crane Estate to Crane Beach) 612738 PRC Approved (5/12/2022) 2021 $4,628,419   4   Municipal priority for funding.  On 10/7/2022, Frank Ventimiglia at Ipswich DPW expressed an interest in pursuing MDP funding to support this project.   Argilla Road (Crane Estate to Crane Beach) Y N/A
Marblehead Marblehead Bridge Replacement, M-04-001, Village Street over Marblehead Rail Trail (Harold B. Breare Bridge) 612947 PRC approved (9/15/2022) 2019 N/A NSTF 4 Major Infrastructure Per 10.11 email with C Quigley, the project received a PRC and a PROJIS ID in September 2022 after a PNF was submitted 8/2022.     N/A
Manchester-by-the-Sea Manchester-by-the-Sea Pine Street - Central Street (Route 127) to Rockwood Heights Road N/A Pre-PRC; PNF submitted (12/27/16) 2017 or earlier N/A NSTF 4 Complete Streets       N/A
Manchester-by-the-Sea Manchester-by-the-Sea Bridge Replacement, M-02-001 (8AM), Central Street (route 127) over Saw Mill Brook 610671 PRC approved (2019) 2019 $4,350,000 NSTF 4 Complete Streets       34.8
Rockport Rockport Roadway Reconstruction of Route 127A (Thatcher Road) 612737 PRC Approved (1/23/2023) 2023 $12,058,173   4   Added to Universe in January 2023 based on PRC results.  PM is Marie Rose.  Sea level rise risk, talk to Judy Route 127A, Thatcher Road (Red Fox Lane to Seaview Street)    
Salem MassDOT Reconstruction of Bridge Street (Route 107), from Flint Street to Washington Street 612990 PRC Approved (1/24/2023) 2017 or earlier $12,067,500   4   Project is not programmed in Destination 2040. It is on a regionally significant roadway and would add roadway capacity. If it is programmed in the TIP, it will need to be programmed in Destination 2050.     N/A
Wenham Wenham Safety Improvements on Route 1A 609388 25% Approved (9/10/2021) 2019 $3,629,036 NSTF 4 Complete Streets Dan Wilk (daniel.wilk@state.ma.us) is MassDOT PM.  Working with Bayside Engineering as design consultant. MassDOT may fund this for construction in full, and Wenham is paying for design.  Bayside currently responding to 25% comments.  Drainage for abutters is holding this up.     N/A
Wenham Wenham Roadway Reconstruction on Larch Row and Dodges Row N/A Pre-PRC 2019 $800,000 NSTF 4 Complete Streets Project at conceptual stage.     N/A
Intersection Improvements                          
Essex Essex Targeted Safety Improvements on Route 133 (John Wise Avenue) 609315 PRC approved (2019) 2019 $2,135,440 NSTF 4 Intersection Improvements       N/A
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Peabody, Salem Peabody, Salem Riverwalk Project N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   4   MVP grant issued for project design.      N/A
Marblehead Marblehead B2B Bikeway Design - Marblehead N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $140,000   4   Earmark.  May be added via amendment.      
Peabody, Salem Peabody, Salem B2B Bikeway Design - Peabody/Salem N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $600,000   4   Earmark.  May be added via amendment.      
Major Infrastructure                          
Beverly Beverly Interchange Reconstruction at Route 128/Exit 19 at Brimbal Avenue (Phase II) 607727 PRC Approved (2014) 2021 N/A NSPC 4 Intersection Improvements Project is not programmed in Destination 2040. Is on a regionally-significant roadway, and would expand the interchange. If this project is programmed in the TIP and adds roadway capacity, this project will need to be included in Destination 2050.     N/A
                           
South Shore Coalition                        
Complete Streets                          
Holbrook Holbrook Corridor Improvements and Related Work on South Franklin Street (Route 37) from Snell Street to King Road 608543 PRC approved (2017) 2018 $4,000,200 SSC 5 Complete Streets       N/A
Hull Hull Nantasket Avenue Redesign N/A Pre-PRC 2023 TBD   5   Includes redevelopment of existing gravel squares in front of Nantasket Beach for additional facilities/recreational zones/open space      
Rockland Rockland Corridor Improvements on VFW Drive/Weymouth Street 612605 PRC approved (2/10/2022) 2021 $13,047,281   5   PNF entered in Jan 2022     N/A
Weymouth MassDOT Reconstruction on Route 3A, Including Pedestrian and Traffic Signal Improvements 608231 PRC approved (2016) 2017 or earlier $10,780,100 SSC 6 Complete Streets Pre-25% package submitted in July 2021.     N/A
Weymouth MassDOT Resurfacing and Related Work on Route 3A 608483 PRC approved (2016) 2018 $2,400,000 SCC 6 Complete Streets       N/A
Intersection Improvements                        
Cohasset Cohasset Intersection Improvements at Route 3A and King Street N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   5   Added through subregional outreach.     N/A
Hull Hull Intersection Improvements at George Washington Boulevard and Barnstable Road/ Logan Avenue N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   5   Added through subregional outreach.     N/A
                           
South West Advisory Planning Committee                    
Complete Streets                        
Bellingham Bellingham South Main Street (Route 126) - Elm Street to Douglas Drive Reconstruction N/A Pre-PRC; PNF submitted (3/13/17) 2017 or earlier N/A SWAP 3 Complete Streets Project would dovetail ongoing project 608887, rehab on Route 126 from Douglas Drive to Route 140.     No N/A
Bellingham Bellingham Bellingham - Roadway Rehabilitation of Route 126 (Hartford Road), from 800 North of the I-495 NB off ramp to Medway T/L, including B-06-017 612963 PRC Approved (9/15/2022) 2022 $10,950,000   3   Applied for FFY2024-2028.  BRMPO issued a full corridor study in 2011.      
Franklin MassDOT Resurfacing and Intersection Improvements on Route 140, from Beaver Street to I-495 Ramps 607774 PRC approved (2014)   2018 $4,025,000 SWAP 3 Complete Streets     Yes N/A
Hopkinton Hopkinton West Main Street Reconstruction and Shared Use Path N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $15,000,000   3   Priority is a shared use path under I-495 along W Main Street EB to link into existing trail networks and SUP in downtown area and commercial campuses west of I-495.  Includes a large roundabout at Lumber Street/Parkwood Drive and West Main Street due to frequent crashes. West Main Street (South Street to Wood Street)  No N/A
Medway Medway Improvements on Route 109 West of Highland Street N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Project at conceptual stage. Ethan will verify.  There is a project from Richard Rd. heading WB to Highland Street, which conflicts with the name of this project.  It was initiated in Nov. 2021. TBD Maybe? N/A
Milford MassDOT Resurfacing and Related Work on Route 16 612091 PRC approved (2021) 2021 $4,192,500   3       No N/A
Millis Millis Town Center Improvements N/A Pre-PRC 2020 N/A   3   Project at conceptual stage.   No N/A
Wrentham Wrentham Resurfacing and Related Work on Route 1 608497 PRC approved (2016) 2020 N/A   5   25% design anticipated July 2022.   Yes N/A
Intersection Improvements                        
Medway Medway Traffic Signalization at Trotter Drive and Route 109 N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Project at conceptual stage.   No N/A
Sherborn Sherborn Intersection Improvements at Route 16 and Maple Street N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Project at conceptual stage.   No N/A
Wrentham Wrentham Intersection Improvements on Route 1A at North and Winter Street 610676 PRC Approved (12/19/2019) 2020 $2,649,000   5       No N/A
Wrentham Wrentham Intersection Improvements at Randall Road and Route 1A N/A Pre-PRC 2020 $2,649,000   5   Project at conceptual stage.   No N/A
Wrentham Wrentham Intersection Improvements at Route 1A and Route 140 N/A Pre-PRC 2020 N/A   5   Project at conceptual stage.   No N/A
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Franklin Franklin Southern New England Trunk Trail (SNETT) Extension, from Grove Street to Franklin Town Center N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Project at conceptual stage.   No  
Hopkinton Hopkinton Campus Trail Connector, Shared Use Trail Construction 611932 PRC approved (9/24/2020) 2020 $1,750,700 NSTF 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian     No N/A
Norfolk, Walpole, and Wrentham Norfolk Metacomet Greenway N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   5   Project at conceptual stage.  Feasibility analysis complete.  Pilot development will start with Hill to Pine Street through old rail bed ROW.  Includes bridge over Route 115 due to traffic concerns.   No N/A
Sherborn Sherborn Upper Charles River Trail Extension to Framingham City Line N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Project at conceptual stage.   No N/A
Major Infrastructure                          
Bellingham MassDOT Ramp Construction & Relocation, I-495 at Route 126 (Hartford Avenue) 604862 PRC approved (2006) 2017 or earlier $13,543,400 SWAP 3 Major Infrastructure High priority for District 3   No N/A
                           
Three Rivers Interlocal Council                      
Complete Streets                        
Canton, Milton MassDOT Roadway Improvements on Route 138 608484 PRC approved (2016) 2020 $18,467,500   6   Milton also in ICC subregion. Project a high priority for the TRIC subregion. District is working to refine scope.  Nine miles in length, may require phasing. York Street to Truman Highway. Appx 9 miles. Yes N/A
Canton Canton Lower Randolph Reconstruction (Route 138, Turnpike Avenue to Colts Crossing) N/A Pre-PRC 2023 TBD   6   Emerged in discussions following application of Randolph and York Street Signal Installation for FFY 2024-2028 STIP.  Sidewalk installation, bike lanes, crosswalks, roadway rehabilitation, signal improvements at the Route 138 and, potentially, York Street intersection.  Crosswalks near Ponkapoag Pond trailhead. Randolph Street from Route 138 to Colts Crossing. No N/A
Medfield Medfield Reconstruction of Route 109 (Millis T/L to Hartford Street) N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   3   Added through subregional outreach.  Working with Ann Sullivan and Arthur Frost at D3, BETA is design consultant. MIllis T/L to Hartford St. Maybe? N/A
Milton MassDOT Reconstruction on Granite Avenue, from Neponset River to Squantum Street 608406 25% submitted (2/10/2017) 2017 or earlier $3,665,146 TRIC 6 Complete Streets Milton also in ICC subregion.    No N/A
Milton Milton Adams Street Improvements, from Randolph Avenue to Eliot Street 610820 PRC approved (4/30/2020) 2020 $1,799,330   6   Milton also in ICC subregion.  Preliminary design. Randolph Avenue to Eliot Street at Neponset River.  Appx. 0.10 miles. -42.2703, -71.0679  No N/A
Needham Needham Reconstruction of Highland Avenue, from Webster Street to Great Plains Avenue 612536 PRC approved (10/21/2021) 2021 $10,402,402   6   Needham also in ICC subregion.   No N/A
Dover, Needham Dover, Needham Centre Street Bridge Replacement N/A Pre-PRC 2022 N/A   6   Historic-eligible, needs replacement as it is 1850's era.   No N/A
Westwood Westwood Reconstruction of Canton Street (East Street Rotary and University Avenue) 608158 25% Package Received (2/18/2022) 2017 or earlier $19,047,306 TRIC 6 Complete Streets Priority for municipality.  MassDOT expresses concerns regarding project readiness due to scope fluctuations.  PINFO includes bridge rehab work. Application submitted for FFY2024-2028.   1.9 miles Yes N/A
Intersection Improvements                          
Canton Canton Signal Installation at Randolph Street and York Street N/A Pre-PRC 2022 $500,000   6   Application submitted for FFY 2024-2028 TIP.  Municipality requested $50,000 against a total estimate of $500,000.  Significant funding in local mitigation fund for match. Randolph Street at York Street Yes N/A
Foxborough Foxborough Intersection Signalization at Route 140/Walnut Street and Route 140/I-95 (SB Ramp) 612740 PRC Approved (5/12/2022) 2021 $11,902,600   5   Added through subregional outreach. Town has advanced design outside of TIP process. District supports project.  Budget has increased from original $5M estimate in 2021.   No N/A
Medfield Medfield Intersection Improvements at Route 27 and West Street 612807 PRC Approved (5/12/2022) 2021 $3,987,500   3   Added through subregional outreach.    No N/A
Bicycle and Pedestrian                          
Canton Canton Warner Trail Extension, from Sharon to Blue Hills Reservation N/A Pre-PRC 2021 N/A   6   Added through subregional outreach. Feasibility study currently underway.   No N/A
Major Infrastructure                          
Canton, Westwood MassDOT Interchange Improvements at I-95 / I-93 / University Avenue / I-95 Widening 87790 25% submitted (7/25/14) 2017 or earlier $202,205,994 TRIC 6 Major Infrastructure Project not programmed in Destination 2040. IIt is on a regionally-significant roadway and adds roadway capacity. If programmed in the TIP, this project would also need to be included in Destination 2050. Last scored for FFYs 2020-24 TIP. Regional priority, potential discretionary grant project via MassDOT for State Highway funding.   No 47

 

 

Table A-2
FFYs 2025–29 Regional Target Projects and Their Relationships to Plans and Performance Measures

 

ID Project Name MPO Investment Program Project Description MPO Muncipalities Programming Year (FFY) Planning Relationships Relationoships to Performance Measures
610544 Peabody–Multi-Use Path Construction of Independence Greenway at Interstate 95 and Route 1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Construct a new multi-use paved path along the abandoned railbed between two existing segments of the Independence Greenway in Peabody and create a connection to the existing Border to Boston trailhead at Lowell Street. Peabody 2025 This project will extend the MassDOT Off-Street High Comfort Bike Network, as identified in the 2019 Massachusetts Bicycle Plan. This project will create nearly two miles of multi-use trail, connect other segments of the Independence Greenway, and create a link to the Border to Boston trail. By connecting these sections of the regional bike network, this project is expected to increase non-SOV travel. Improved signalization near ramps to Route 1 may help facilitate motorized and nonmotorized traffic flow and reduce PHED on this NHS corridor. This project is also expected to improve safety for bicyclists and pedestrians and to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
S12700 CATA ON DEMAND MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION – ROCKPORT AND LANESVILLE Community Connections Expand existing CATA On Demand microtransit service to Rockport and to an additional neighborhood in Gloucester, and to help customers reach a wider array of essential destinations. Gloucester, Rockport 2023–25 N/A This project may increase non-SOV travel by expanding CATA’s microtransit service to new areas and supporting its ability to serve customers beyond those commuting to transit or specific employment centers. It may reduce PHED and improve reliability on the NHS by providing an alternative to SOV travel on NHS routes in Gloucester and Rockport. This project is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
S12701 MWRTA CATCHCONNECT MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION – HUDSON AND MARLBOROUGH Community Connections Expand MWRTA’s CatchConnect microtransit service to Hudson and Marlborough, which will support connections to MWRTA’s fixed-route network. Hudson, Marlborough 2023–25 N/A This project may increase non-SOV travel by expanding microtransit service to new areas. It may reduce PHED and improve reliability on the NHS by providing an alternative to SOV travel on NHS routes in Hudson and Marlborough. This project is expected to help reduce CO2 emissions.
S12703 Montachusett Regional Transit Authority (MART) –MART Microtransit Service Community Connections Establish an on-demand microtransit service that will serve Bolton, Boxborough, Littleton, and Stow. Bolton, Boxborough, Littleton, and Stow 2023–25 N/A This project may increase non-SOV travel by providing a new transit option. It may reduce PHED and improve reliability on the NHS by providing an alternative to SOV travel on NHS routes in Boxborough, Bolton, Littleton, and Stow. It is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
S12699 STONEHAM- SHUTTLE SERVICE Community Connections Create a fixed route shuttle service to connect to job centers and MBTA bus services in Stoneham. Stoneham 2023–25 N/A This project may increase non-SOV travel by providing new transit options and creating additional connections to existing MBTA bus service.
S12697 WATERTOWN- PLEASANT STREET SHUTTLE SERVICE EXPANSION Community Connections Expand the operating period for the fixed-route Pleasant Street shuttle service from Watertown to Harvard Square Station in Cambridge. Watertown 2023–25 N/A This project may increase non-SOV travel by providing new transit options and creating additional connections to existing MBTA bus and rapid transit service at Harvard Square Station in Cambridge.
606453 Boston–Improvements on Boylston Street Complete Streets Improve the roadway cross section, signals, and bicycle and pedestrian accommodations in the project corridor. Boston 2026 N/A The project area overlaps a 2017–19 HSIP all-mode crash cluster location, a 2010–19 HSIP bicycle crash cluster location, and a 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster location. The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It will improve more than two lane miles of substandard NHS pavement, will address reliability needs on an unreliable NHS segment, and may also reduce PHED on that segment. It will improve substandard sidewalks and add bicycle lanes in the project corridor; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. The project is also expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
610932 Brookline–Rehabilitation of Washington Street Complete Streets Replace signals, reconstruct sidewalks and pavement, and provide protected bicycle facilities and dedicated bus pull-out spaces in the Washington Street corridor between Washington Square and Brookline Village. Brookline 2028 N/A The project area overlaps two 2010–19 HSIP bicycle crash cluster locations and a 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster location. The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It will improve substandard sidewalks, implement bicycle lanes, upgrade signals to include TSP, and add bus shelters to the corridor; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. The project is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
611983 Chelsea–Park and Pearl Street Reconstruction Complete Streets Improve safety and mobility on Park and Pearl Street by improving signals and roadway geometry, reconstructing sidewalks, and adding bicycle facilities. Chelsea 2027 N/A The project area overlaps a 2017–19 HSIP all-mode crash cluster location, a 2010–19 HSIP bicycle crash cluster location, and two 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster locations. The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. The project will reconstruct sidewalks, improve bicycle amenities, and implement TSP; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. The project is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
609257 Everett– Rehabilitation of Beacham Street, from Route 99 to Chelsea City Line Complete Streets Reconstruct Beacham Street to reduce vehicular collisions and improve bicycle and pedestrian travel. Everett 2027 N/A This project is expected to improve transportation safety, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It will improve substandard sidewalks and include a shared-use path—both features may encourage non-SOV travel and improve safety performance. The project is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
605168 Hingham–Intersection Improvements at Route 3A/Summer Street Rotary Complete Streets Improve multimodal access between Hingham Center, residential areas, and Hingham Harbor and make safety improvements, including by establishing a small roundabout at the intersection of Route 3A and Summer Street. Hingham 2026 This project location was studied in “Summer Street/George Washington Boulevard Subregional Priority Roadway Study in Hingham and Hull” (CTPS, 2016). The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It will improve more than a lane mile of substandard pavement on the NHS, and the geometric improvements included in the project are expected to help reduce delay and potentially PHED on the NHS. The project is expected to improve substandard sidewalks, add new sidewalks, and add bicycle accommodations, including a shared-use path. These features may support increases in non-SOV travel. The project is also expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
605743 Ipswich–Resurfacing and Related Work on Central and South Main Streets Complete Streets Reconstruct the roadway between Mineral Street and Poplar Street to improve the roadway surface. Make minor geometric improvements at intersections, include pedestrian crossings, and improve sidewalks. Ipswich 2027–28 N/A The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It will improve more than a lane mile of substandard pavement on the NHS. It will upgrade substandard sidewalks, and it is expected to add bicycle lanes; both features may encourage non-SOV travel. The project is also expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
609252 Lynn–Rehabilitation of Essex Street Complete Streets Make key bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements and operational improvements, such as signal upgrades, in the project corridor. Lynn 2026–27 N/A The project area overlaps five 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster locations and three 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster locations. The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. Planned improvements to signals and roadway geometry in the corridor may help improve reliability on nearby unreliable NHS segments and may also reduce PHED on those segments. It is expected to reconstruct substandard sidewalks and add bicycle lanes; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. This project is also expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
609246 Lynn– Reconstruction of Western Avenue Complete Streets Reconstruct Western Avenue between Centre Street and Eastern Avenue. Improve signal timing, intersection design, and bus stop locations. Implement bicycle and ADA-compliant pedestrian improvements. Lynn 2028–30 N/A The project area overlaps five 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster locations, two 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster locations and one 2010–19 HSIP bicycle crash cluster location. The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians, and it will improve nearly 4 lane miles of substandard pavement on the NHS. The signal improvements included in the project are expected reduce delay and may help reduce PHED and improve reliability on the NHS. It will reconstruct sidewalks and add bike lanes, TSP, and bus amenities; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. This project is also expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
608045 Milford–Rehabilitation on Route 16, from Route 109 to Beaver Street Complete Streets Improve vehicular safety and traffic flow through the implementation of a road diet, additional roadway reconstruction, bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, and enhanced signalization on Route 16 (East Main Street) from Route 109 (Medway Road) to Beaver Street. Milford 2026 N/A The project area overlaps a 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster location, and the project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. The project is also expected to upgrade substandard sidewalks, add new sidewalks, and add shared-use paths; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel.
609432 Salem–Peabody- Boston Street Improvements Complete Streets Incorporate complete streets elements and a separated bicycle path into the corridor. Add a new signal at Boston Street and Aborn Street and upgrade existing signals at other intersections along the corridor. Salem 2027 N/A The project area overlaps a 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster location, and the project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It is expected to improve more than a lane mile of substandard NHS pavement. The project includes signal and geometry improvements and is expected to reduce delay, which may reduce PHED and improve reliability on the NHS. It will implement sidewalks on both sides of the corridor and add separated bicycle facilities; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. This project is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
610662 Woburn–Roadway and Intersection Improvements at Woburn Common, Route 38 (Main Street), Winn Street, Pleasant Street, and Montvale Avenue Complete Streets Improve safety and congestion within the Woburn Common area by making safety and operational improvements, reconfiguring the Woburn Common rotary, and reconstructing and realigning roadways. The project will also reconstruct sidewalks, add bike lanes, and upgrade or add signals in the area. Woburn 2029 N/A The project area overlaps a 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster location and a 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster location. The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It is expected to improve nearly two lane miles of substandard pavement on the NHS. Signal and geometric improvements included in the project may improve reliability on unreliable NHS segments within the project area and potentially reduce PHED. The project will reconstruct sidewalks to support pedestrian safety and mobility. It is also expected to include bicycle accommodations and to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
608436 Ashland–Rehabilitation and Rail Crossing Improvements on Cherry Street Intersection Improvements Improve the safety features on Cherry Street and Main Street to establish a Federal Railroad Administration Quiet Zone surrounding the railroad crossings on those two roadways. Install roadway medians, enhance existing railroad crossing signals and gates, reconstruct pavement, construct sidewalks, and improve drainage in the project area. Ashland 2028 N/A The project is expected to improve safety performance at a railroad crossing location, including for bicyclists and pedestrians.
608067 Woburn–Intersection Reconstruction at Route 3 (Cambridge Road) and Bedford Road and South Bedford Street Intersection Improvements Reconstruct the intersection and all traffic signal equipment. Enhance roadway geometry to provide exclusive turn lanes for intersection approaches. Reconstruct existing sidewalks, construct new sidewalks, and add bicycle lanes and ADA-compliant bus stops, where feasible. Woburn 2025 N/A The project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. The project is expected to improve existing sidewalks and add new sidewalks at the intersection, as well as add new bike lanes; all of these features may encourage non-SOV travel. The geometric improvements included in the project are expected to help reduce delay and potentially PHED on nearby NHS routes. The project is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
605857 Norwood–Intersection Improvements at Route 1 and University Avenue/Everett Street Intersection Improvements Upgrade traffic signals and make associated geometric improvements at the intersection of Route 1, University Avenue and Everett Street. Construct an additional travel lane in each direction on Route 1, lengthen left-turn lanes, upgrade pedestrian crossings and bicycle amenities, and rehabilitate sidewalks. Norwood, Westwood 2026 The Route 1 corridor in Norwood is identified as a priority bottleneck in the Destination 2040 Needs Assessment. This location was studied in “Route 1 at Everett Street and University Avenue” (CTPS, 2014). The project area overlaps a 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster location and the project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It is expected to improve nearly three lane miles of pavement on the NHS. Signal and geometric improvements included in the project may improve reliability on unreliable NHS segments within the project area and potentially reduce PHED. The project will improve substandard sidewalks and add new sidewalks and bicycle accommodations, all of which may encourage non-SOV travel. It is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
608940 Weston–Intersection Improvements at Boston Post Road (Route 20) at Wellesley Street Intersection Improvements Address safety, congestion, and connectivity concerns at the intersection of Route 20, Boston Post Road, and Wellesley Street by installing a new signal system, implementing geometric improvements, replacing and adding sidewalks, and adding bicycle lanes. Weston 2026 This project intersects a priority bottleneck location identified in the Destination 2040 Needs Assessment. The project area overlaps a 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster location and the project is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. Signal and geometric improvements included in the project may improve reliability on unreliable NHS segments within the project area and potentially reduce PHED. The project will improve and add sidewalks and add bicycle lanes; these features may encourage non-SOV travel. It is expected to reduce CO2 and other transportation-related emissions.
607981 Somerville–McGrath Boulevard Reconstruction Major Infrastructure: Roadway Remove the existing McCarthy Viaduct and replace it with an at-grade urban boulevard. Rationalize intersections, improve signalization, and create off-street pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Improve bus operations by installing floating/in-lane bus stops, transit signal priority, and bus queue-jump lanes at key intersections. Somerville 2027–30 This project is included in Destination 2050, the MPO’s LRTP. This project changes network capacity and is considered regionally significant for air quality modeling. The project area overlaps a 2017–19 all-mode HSIP crash cluster location, a 2010–19 HSIP pedestrian crash cluster location, and a 2010–19 HSIP bicycle crash cluster location. It is expected to improve safety performance, including for bicyclists and pedestrians. It will improve one NHS bridge and improve more than four lane miles of substandard pavement on the NHS. The geometric and signal improvements included in the project may reduce PHED and improve reliability on this portion of the NHS network. The project will improve bus operations and amenities, reconstruct and reconfigure sidewalks, and add off-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities; these features are expected to increase non-SOV travel. It was analyzed as part of a set of recommended LRTP projects, and MPO staff estimate that this set will decrease CO2 emissions in the region compared to a no-build scenario.
613088 MALDEN - SPOT POND BROOK GREENWAY Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections The Spot Pond Brook Greenway is a proposed shared-use path connecting Malden's Oak Grove neighborhood with the Northern Strand Community Trail and Malden River via downtown Malden. The 1.1 mile, 11 foot wide shared-use path will replace existing sidewalk infrastructure and narrow roadway widths to accommodate the new bicycle/pedestrian facility on existing right-of-way. The project will also install wayfinding signage on existing roadway facilities to connect the northern terminus of the path at Coytemore Lea Park with the Oak Grove MBTA station. MALDEN 2028 This project includes sections of the Mystic Highlands Greenway, a regional trail connection initiative. This project includes a 2017-19 bicycle HSIP crash cluster location and will improve the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians throughout the project area.  The project will also improve connectivity to MBTA bus and rail transit facilities.
610691 NATICK- COCHITUATE RAIL TRAIL EXTENSION, FROM MBTA STATION TO MECHANIC STREET Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections Construction of a shared-use bridge to connect the Cochituate Rail Trail to Route 27. Improvements to multimodal connectivity at Natick Center commuter rail station. Project would be the final extension of the Cochituate Rail Trail. NATICK 2028 This project finalizes the Cochituate Rail Trail with a direct connection into a new MBTA Natick Center Commuter Rail Station.  The development of the project coordinated with the MBTA and with MassDOT, which at the time of project evaluation was implementing additional bicycle network enhancements as part of its Route 27 reconstruction. This project constructs a new grade-separated facility as part of the Cochituate Rail Trail to establish safe pedestriana nd bicycle connections between MBTA Commuter Rail facilities and downtown Natick into the Cochituate Rail Trail.
608158 WESTWOOD- NORWOOD- RECONSTRUCTION OF CANTON STREET TO UNIVERSITY DRIVE, INCLUDING REHAB OF N-25-032=W-31-018 Complete Streets The project will install new pedestrian sidewalks on the west side of the roadway and a shared-use path on the east side of the roadway. These facilities are being constructed where no dedicated facilities currently exist to improve multimodal accessibility to area residences, employment centers, and open space. Bridge N25032 will be replaced for improved multimodal access and freight rail clearance beneath. The project improves roadway geometry for all vehicles, including visibility improvements on five curves for stopping sight distance, the addition of truck apron turn lanes, and median installation. High-visibility crosswalks and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) will be added in seven locations. New medians will function as pedestrian refuges. New or relocated street lighting will be mounted on utility poles. Reflective signing and markers will be improved. WESTWOOD 2027–28 N/A This project replaces the deck of an NHS bridge structure and improves the clearance of the superstructure to facilitate freight movement.  The project creates safe pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Canton Street, which lacks any facilities at the time of project programming.  These multimodal facilities improve access to nearby transit facilities at the Route 128 / University Park MBTA and Amtrak station.
612989 BOSTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-16-066 (38D), CAMBRIDGE STREET OVER MBTA Complete Streets Replace superstructure of a major bridge over the MBTA Orange Line, commuter rail, Amtrak lines, and Interstate 93. Pursue state-of-good-repair investments to avoid closures and limit impacts to nearby projects (for example, projects on Mystic Avenue, Maffa Way, Rutherford Avenue, and McGrath Highway). Enhance multimodal accessibility for a key link to Sullivan Square MBTA station, including expanding bus facility access. BOSTON 2027 This project is consistent with the City of Boston's Sullivan Square Design Project. This project is also listed in the Boston Region MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan, Destination 2050. This project replaces the deck and superstructure of an NHS bridge structure over MBTA, Amtrak, and freight rail and beneath Interstate 93.  The new bridge will support a westbound bus lane to facilitate improved transit connectivity between Boston's Charlestown neighborhood and Somerville.
613145 WAKEFIELD- COMPREHENSIVE DOWNTOWN MAIN STREET RECONSTRUCTION Complete Streets Complete Streets enhancements to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety along a major local economic generator. Traffic signal upgrade at the intersection of Church and Salem Streets with geometry adjustments to improve turn radii and reduce emergency response times. Pedestrian signal upgrades, new crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, installation of a shared-use-path, and new pedestrian lighting. Partial closure of Common Street to thru-traffic to improve pedestrian accessibility for Upper and Lower Common open space. WAKEFIELD 2028 This project includes sections of the Mystic Highlands Greenway, a regional trail connection initiative. This project implements complete streets enhancements and traffic calming measures along a section of NHS roadway to complement investments in transit-oriented-development in Wakefield.  These investments are also part of a larger regional investment in trails and bicycle paths for the Mystic Highlands Greenway, and the project provides for connectivity into the future Wakefield-Lynnfield Rail Trail.
S12807 MWRTA CATCHCONNECT MICTROTRANSIT EXPANSION PHASE 2 – FRAMINGHAM AND NATICK EXTENDED HOURS Community Connections Expansion of the CatchConnect microtransit program within the municipalities of Framingham and Natick on weeknights during evening hours. CatchConnect would be available within these communities between approximately 7:30 PM and 10:30 PM Monday through Friday, providing a supplemental public transportation resource following the conclusion of traditional fixed-route service. MWRTA 2024-2026 Expansion of microtransit services in underserved transit areas is highlighted in the MPO's Coordinated Public Transit and Human Services Transportation (HST) Plan. CTPS has also conducted studies regarding MicroTransit with favorable recommendations for MWRTA in the past. This project will reduce CO2 emissions by reducing SOV travel by providing for expanded service hours and area for microtransit.
609532 CHELSEA- TARGETED SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND RELATED WORK ON BROADWAY, FROM WILLIAMS STREET TO CITY HALL AVENUE Intersection Improvements The project will include corridor wide safety improvements targeted at reducing incidents for all users. Standard safety countermeasures such as improved signage, lighting, traffic calming streetscape elements, curb extensions, signal upgrades (where applicable) and other countermeasures may be incorporated. In addition, it is expected that the corridor’s pavement, sidewalks and bus transit amenities will be improved or replaced.  MassDOT 2026 N/A This project is located at a Top 200 crash location and will implement safety improvements for all users of the roadway.  The project will reduce CO2 emissions.
S12819 JACKSON SQUARE STATION ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS Transit Transformation Includes construction of new elevator, modernization of existing elevator, lighting improvements, and various state of good repair improvements to the station. MBTA 2024-2025 This project is part of the MBTA's larger System-Wide Accessibility project portfolio. This project provides for the maintenance and modernization of existing rapid transit facilities to encourage mode shift and support system reliability for the MBTA's Orange Line.
S12974 MBTA- CENTRAL SQUARE STATION ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS (CAMBRIDGE) Transit Transformation This project will construct two redundant elevators and modernize the existing outbound elevator. The current elevator is one of the most unreliable elevators in the MBTA system. The opposite, inbound elevator was fully modernized in 2020.  MBTA 2025 This project is part of the MBTA's larger System-Wide Accessibility project portfolio. This project maintains and improves the accessibility of a rapid transit facility on the MBTA's Red Line. Improvements are focused on one of the most unreliable elevators in the transit system.
S12975 MBTA– SYSTEMWIDE PEDAL AND PARK MODERNIZATION (ALEWIFE, ASHMONT, BRAINTREE, DAVIS SQUARE, FOREST HILLS, MALDEN CENTER, NUBIAN, OAK GROVE, ROUTE 128, SALEM, SOUTH STATION, WOLLASTON, WONDERLAND) Transit Transformation This project updates 15 MBTA Pedal & Park facilities systemwide to provide a more inclusive, accessible, efficient, and user-friendly standard of bike and  micromobility parking, wayfinding, and bike maintenance equipment. The project improves Pedal and Park facilities at transit stations across nine municipalities. MBTA 2025 N/A This project improves intermodal access between persons who use bicycles for transportation and the transit system while also maintaining existing facilities.
S12976 MBTA– NUBIAN SQUARE ACCESSIBILITY AND OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS (BOSTON) Transit Transformation This project will construct accessible passenger platforms at Nubian Station to reverse direction of MBTA buses and leverage the City of Boston's street network improvements for increased service efficiency. The project improves signals, striping, and adjusts the curb. MBTA 2025 This project is consistent with the aims of the MBTA's Bus Network Redesign This project reduces travel times and improves safety for bus riders and other users of Nubian Station in Boston's Roxbury neighborhood.
S12986 RAIL TRANSFORMATION - EARLY ACTION ITEMS - READING STATION AND WILBUR INTERLOCKING Transit Transformation Addition of a turn track at Reading Station and improvements to the siding at Wilbur Interlocking on the Lowell Line to enable 30 minute headways in the short term and higher frequencies with electrified rolling stock. • Improvements would reduce conflicts with freight and the Amtrak Downeaster while facilitating bus integration. MBTA 2024–25 This project implements early term action items for a new program in the MBTA's 2024-2028 Capital Investment Plan.  This project maintains commuter rail facilities and provides for additional signal and track improvements to increase the capacity of rail infrastructure.  These capacity enhancements allow for reductions in headways and establish a foundation for future electrification efforts for the rail network.
S12985 COLUMBUS AVE BUS LANE PHASE II Transit Transformation Building on Phase 1, Phase 2 of the project includes bus-only lanes, transit signal priority, improvements to bus stops and shelters along Columbus Ave. and Tremont St., and enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections. • New project elements include green infrastructure to promote traffic calming and reduce impervious surfaces. MBTA 2021, 2024–25 This project builds upon completed Phase 1 work along Columbus Avenue that was performed by the MBTA and City of Boston. The project improves bus transit along Columbus Avenue in Boston to provide for rapid and reliable connectivity for bus routes running parralel to the MBTA's Orange Line facilities.  This project also establishes connections into those facilities for buses, and improves bicycle and pedestrian safety along the route.
S12820 BIKESHARE STATE OF GOOD REPAIR SET-ASIDE Community Connections This line item sets aside funding to support Bikeshare investments within the Community Connections program. Example uses of this set-aside include bikeshare system expansion, as well as replacement and upgrades to existing stations. CTPS 2026–29 This funding implements a recommendation that will be made in the MPO's upcoming LRTP, Destination 2050, regarding the establishment of dedicated funding to support Bikeshare investment throughout the region. This line item will ensure the maintenance and modernization of existing bikeshare infrastructure within the Boston Region while providing additional funding resources for expansion into neighboring municipalities.
613319 SUDBURY-FRAMINGHAM-BIKE PATH CONSTRUCTION OF BRUCE FREEMAN RAIL TRAIL, FROM THE SUDBURY DIAMOND RAILROAD CROSSING TO EATON ROAD WEST Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections Phase 3 of the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail (BFRT) spans approximately 1.3 miles from Eaton Road W in Framingham to the Sudbury Diamond Railroad Crossing. The proposed trail will be a 10 foot paved shared-use path along the former railroad corridor with 2 foot dense graded crushed stone shoulders. Sidewalks and pedestrian curb ramps at the at-grade intersection of the trail and Route 20 are proposed to be updated to create an ADA compliant and accessible crossing at the existing signalized intersection of Nobscot Rd/Route 20. A parking lot is also being proposed along Nobscot Road, approximately 550 feet south of Route 20. Other work includes fixing or replacing culverts and stream crossings where necessary and implementing safety fencing along the trail where necessary. This project is funded across two Federal Fiscal Years starting in FFY 2029. Sudbury 2029–30 N/A This line item will expand the regional trail network and create a linkage for further trail extensions into the City of Framingham, the first phase of which is planned for implementation in MassDOT's Statewide Highway Program.
612963 BELLINGHAM- ROADWAY REHABILITATION OF ROUTE 126 (HARTFORD ROAD), FROM 800 NORTH OF THE I-495 NB OFF RAMP TO MEDWAY TL, INCLUDING B-06-017 Complete Streets The project includes roadway rehabilitation along 1.5 miles of Route 126, improved pedestrian and bicycle accommodations with full bilateral sidewalks and a shared-use path, and improvements to the bridge over Hopping Brook (B-06-017).  An existing traffic signal at Maple Street will be upgraded and a new signal installed at Pearl Street.  The project not only improves drainage throughout the project area but will incorporate improvements for better conveyance of Stall Brook under Route 126 for riverine flood mitigation. This project is funded across two Federal Fiscal years starting in FFY 2029. Bellingham 2029–30 This project is consistent with a 2011 study and report titled "Route 126 Corridor: Transportation Improvement Study" that reviewed roadway conditions between Framingham, Ashland, Holliston, Medway, and Bellingham. This project improves the condition of roadways and bridges in the Boston Region while incorporating safe shared use path connections near to areas frequented by vulnerable roadway users, including schoolchildren. The project upgrades existing safety infrastructure and installs a new signal. The project also incorporates improvements to resiliency by expanding culverts for riverine flood mitigation.
612738 IPSWICH- ARGILLA ROAD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Complete Streets This project will reconstruct and elevate Argilla Road between the Crane Estate driveway and Crane Beach parking lot entrance in order to protect against sunny day and King Tide coastal flood conditions through 2100.  The project will widen an existing culvert and introduce new culverts in order to improve horizontal transmission of floodwaters and the marsh beneath the roadway, limiting contamination of sensitive environmental areas and further reducing the possibility for floodwaters to overtop the roadway.  The project will incorporate a stabilized shoulder and embankment using native plantings to mitigate scoring and erosion while providing a safer shoulder to improve access without damaging the nearby marsh.  The project also incorporates intersection safety and geometry improvements at the driveway to the Crane Estate. This project will be funded across two Federal Fiscal Years starting in FFY 2029. Ipswich 2029–30 N/A The primary focus of this project is in bolstering the resilience of the regional transportation system to ensure access to open space. The project also incorporates additional traffic safety improvements.
610823 QUINCY- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT WILLARD STREET AND RICCIUTI DRIVE Intersection Improvements This project will reconstruct the intersection of Willard Street and Ricciuti Drive near the Interstate 93 off ramp to provide a signalized intersection and shared use path for safer connectivity to Quincy Quarries and housing along Ricciuti Drive. The work will adjust intersection geometry including moving the curb line, reconstructing sidewalk, moving drainage structures, and updating ADA compliance for ramps in the area. Quincy 2026 N/A This project primarily focuses on improving safety for vulnerable users and mitigating hazards at locations near to limited access highways. The project incorporates expansion of safe bicycle infrastructure near to nearby trails and greenways.
S12972 MWRTA- PROCUREMENT OF THREE 29 FOOT BUSES Transit Transformation MWRTA 2025 This project is consistent with the MWRTA's Comprehensive Regional Transit Plan (2020). This line item will support improvements to the accessiblity of MWRTA's transit services and the transition of its fleet towards low-no emission vehicles.
S12971 MWRTA- BLANDIN HUB EQUITABLE REDESIGN INITIATIVE Transit Transformation This project will design and engineer improvements to the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority's Blandin Hub facility, the MWRTA's primary operations and maintenance building and a key passenger transportation hub.  The Blandin Hub may be upgraded to feature an ADA-accessible driver dispatch and driver area within the operations facility, upgrades to electrical systems and HVAC energy recovery, restrooms, and driver amenities for a new training facility and expanded vehicle bays.  The design will expand the customer waiting and transfer area to include a weather-enclosed waiting space in addition to other rider amenities. MWRTA 2025–26 This project is consistent with the MWRTA's Comprehensive Regional Transit Plan (2020). This project will design transformative improvements for passenger facility and MWRTA employee operations at its Blandin Hub. These improvements will enhance the accessibility, comfort, and efficiency of MWRTA's facility while also enabling improvements towards clean energy generation and fleet conversion goals held by the MWRTA.
S12970 CATA - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT (4 VEHICLES) Transit Transformation This project will replace four vehicles in CATAs bus fleet that have reached the end of their useful life, with two vehicles reaching the end of their lifecycle in 2022 and two in 2023.  The vehicles will be procured using an existing option for purchase of diesel electric hybrid buses.  CATA 2025-26 This project is consistent with CATA's Comprehensive Regional Transit Plan (2020). This project will facilitate the transition of vehicles in CATA's fleet towards cleaner sources of energy while also maintaing a robust state of operability.
S12969 CATA - CATA GLOUCESTER FACILITY MODERNIZATION Transit Transformation This project will modernize and weatherize CATA's operating facility in Gloucester with plumbing and HVAC upgrades, fuel system storage and hose replacements, repair or replacement of facility windows and garage doors, emergency power supply replacement, and culvert repair to ensure continued access to the facility. CATA 2025 This project is consistent with CATA's Comprehensive Regional Transit Plan (2020). This project improves the state of good repair and energy efficiency of the primary transit facility for the Cape Ann Transportation Authority.
S12968 CATA - FARE UPGRADES FOR ADA AND DIAL-A-RIDE CUSTOMERS Transit Transformation This project will incorporate cashless payment for ADA and dial-a-ride customers of CATA's services to improve accessibility for the system. CATA 2025 This project is consistent with CATA's Comprehensive Regional Transit Plan (2020) and the Boston Region MPO's Coordinated Public Transit, Human Services Transportation Plan. This line item provides funding to support access to transit services for persons with disabilities.
S12981 NORFOLK-WRENTHAM-WALPOLE- SHARED-USE PATH INSTALLATION (METACOMET GREENWAY) [DESIGN ONLY] Bicycle and Pedestrian This project will design over 3 miles of new shared use pathways in the communities of Norfolk, Walpole, and Wrentham. Construction of this project would be delivered under Project #613644, and is expected to be advertised for construction as early as FFY 2030. Depending on the findings of design development, implementation may commence under separate phases of the project over multiple years. Norfolk, Walpole, Wrentham 2025 This project is a joint effort between three municipalities to advance design for a regional greenway. The project designs improvements to the regional trails system in an area where multimodal access is currently limited. The proposed trails connect to areas of planned housing development. This project was selected in the FFYs 2025 Project Design Pilot in the FFY2025–29 TIP in an effort to bolster the readiness of projects that would eventually seek construction funding in the TIP.
S12982 FRAMINGHAM- CHRIS WALSH TRAIL PHASE 2 [DESIGN ONLY] Bicycle and Pedestrian This project will fund design of the second phase of the Chris Walsh Aqueduct Trail along Farm Pond in the City of Framingham. This second phase would bring the planned trail across a former MWRA aqueduct into Framingham MBTA Station to provide connectivity to transit modes and Framingham's downtown. The project is expected to advertise for construction as early as FFY 2030. Framingham 2025 N/A The project designs improvements to develop safe, accessible connections between existing and planned housing and the regional transit system via Framingham Station. This project was selected in the FFYs 2025 Project Design Pilot in the FFY2025–29 TIP in an effort to bolster the readiness of projects that would eventually seek construction funding in the TIP.
S12983 SHERBORN- RECONSTRUCTION OF ROUTE 27 AND ROUTE 16 [DESIGN ONLY] Intersection Improvements This project will design improvements to various intersections and a rail grade crossing in downtown Sherborn to improve safety for all roadway users. Construction for this project is expected to advertise as early as FFY 2030. Sherborn 2025 N/A This project will design complete streets and rail grade crossing improvements to improve safety for all users. This project was selected in the FFYs 2025 Project Design Pilot in the FFY2025–29 TIP in an effort to bolster the readiness of projects that would eventually seek construction funding in the TIP. The Town of Sherborn had not been programmed for a regionally prioritized project in over 15 years at the time of application to the Project Design pilot, and the programming of this project indicates advancement towards improving the accessibility of TIP funding through the Project Design Pilot.
S12984 HOLLISTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 16 AND WHITNEY STREET [DESIGN ONLY] Intersection Improvements This project will design the signalization of the intersection of Route 16 and Whitney Street in Holliston. The project will also develop improvements to safety for users of the Upper Charles River Rail Trail where it crosses Route 16 near by, and extend sidewalk along Route 16 westward to Locust Avenue. This project is expected to advertise for construction as early as FFY 2030. Holliston 2025 N/A This project will design a targeted safety improvement project at the intersection of Route 16 and Whitney Street in order to reduce conflicts between vulnerable roadway users and commercial vehicles. This project was selected in the FFYs 2025 Project Design Pilot in the FFY2025–29 TIP in an effort to bolster the readiness of projects that would eventually seek construction funding in the TIP. The Town of Holliston had not been programmed for a regionally prioritized project in over 15 years at the time of application to the Project Design pilot, and the programming of this project indicates advancement towards improving the accessibility of TIP funding through the Project Design Pilot.
S12980 MARLBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF GRANGER BOULEVARD [DESIGN ONLY] Complete Streets This line item funds design for complete streets, traffic safety, and transit improvements along Route 20, Granger Boulevard in Marlborough between Mechanic Street and Main Street. This project is expected to be advertised for construction as early as FFY 2030 under Project #612285. Marlborough 2025 N/A This project designs improvements near an area of affordable housing and directly abuts a bus stop serving three routes from the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. The proposed concept, which will be designed under this line item, improves safety for all users and overall transportation system accessibility. This project was selected in the FFYs 2025 Project Design Pilot in the FFY2025–29 TIP in an effort to bolster the readiness of projects that would eventually seek construction funding in the TIP.
S12979 ARLINGTON- BROADWAY COMPLETE STREETS DESIGN Complete Streets This project will design a reconfiguration of Broadway in Arlington between Alewife Brook Parkway and Massachusetts Avenue for improved access by persons who walk, bike, roll, or use transit. The design will also investigate methods for improving stormwater management and mitigating urban heat island impacts. This project may be ready to advertise for construction as early as FFY 2030. Arlington 2025 N/A The proposed project would design a complete street that complements improvements proposed elsewhere by neighboring municipalities and other state and regional agencies. The project incorporates resiliency measures alongside improvements to connectivity to a regional network of safe bicycle paths. The project complements bus improvements and directly abuts an adopted district for by-right multifamily zoning in the Town of Arlington. This project was selected in the FFYs 2025 Project Design Pilot in the FFY2025–29 TIP in an effort to bolster the readiness of projects that would eventually seek construction funding in the TIP.
S12977 FRAMINGHAM- PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 126/135/MBTA & CSX RAILROAD Major Infrastructure This project provides design funding for an initial stage of a major intersection improvement project at Route 126 and 135 and the MBTA and CSX Railroad tracks. Design funding will be used to develop and identify alternatives to address congestion at the location, including possibilty of grade crossing removal. This project would advance design for a separate project #606109, and is also listed in the MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan, Destination 2050. Framingham 2026 This project is also listed in the Boston Region MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan, Destination 2050. This project was programmed in FFY 2026 to support the advancement of preliminary design work by the City of Framingham in conjunction with necessary stakeholder engagement activities to account for changes in transit and land uses around the project area. The project focuses on improving transit access, reducing congestion, and improving safety for all users near a major commuter rail station.
S12978 LEXINGTON- DESIGN OF SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSTATE 95 AND ROUTE 4/225 INTERCHANGE Major Infrastructure This project provides design funding for an initial stage of improvements at the Interstate 95 and Route 4/225 Interchange in Lexington. The design will investigate and develop improvements at the interchange that, when implemented, will enable further traffic calming work to be conducted on Route 4/225, Hartwell Avenue, and Wood Street. This project is listed in the MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan, Destination 2050. Lexington 2026 This project is also listed in the Boston Region MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan, Destination 2050. This project was programmed in FFY 2026 to develop, in coordination with MassDOT, a preliminary design on the first stage of the Route 4/225 Hartwell Avenue and Wood Street Project listed in the MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan. Designing this first component would determine a potential configuration of the interchange and other nearby facilities. Once changes to user safety are implemented as part of state of good repair improvements for the bridge and ramps, additional improvements along Hartwell Avenue and Wood Street could be made.
S12965 ARLINGTON- INSTALLATION OF 123 BICYCLE RACKS AND RELATED MATERIALS Community Connections This project will install 123 bike racks (246 spaces total) at commercial centers, schools, parks, fields, and playgrounds around Arlington. Some planned locations include Arlington Center, Ed Burns Arena, Spy Pond Field, Arlington High School, and other parks, open space locations, and middle and primary schools throughout the town. Arlington 2025 N/A The project improves, expands, and replaces bicycle infrastructure at key areas in the Town of Arlington to promote usage of bicycles, including among children that may attend any of the many schools served by this project.
S12958 BOSTON- BLUEBIKES STATION REPLACEMENT AND ELECTRIFICATION, 12 STATIONS Community Connections This project will replace 10 aging bike-share stations, with two stations selected to pilot electrification to lower operational costs of battery swaps for newly adopted e-bikes. For the replacements, Boston selected five high-use stations (10,000 or more trips per year) and five stations that are in areas close to low-income housing and/or in census tracts with a high number of car-free households, and will identify two stations to pilot integration into the electrical grid. Boston 2025 N/A This project improves the state of good repair of the existing bikeshare system to ensure continued access to bikeshare and empower municipalities to utilize local resources towards supporting operating costs for the bikeshare system.
S12959 BOSTON- REPURPOSING SINGLE SPACE PARKING METER POLES FOR 1600 BICYCLE RACKS Community Connections The City of Boston proposes the installation of 1,600 bike racks (3,200 bike parking spaces). These racks are fabricated to slide over existing parking meter poles as part of an ongoing effort by the City to replace all 6,000 single-space parking meters in Boston with multi-space meter kiosks. This project would dramatically increase bicycle parking in Boston’s busiest commercial and job centers. Boston 2025 N/A This project strategically repurposes parking infrastructure in an ongoing modernization effort by the City of Boston to improve bicycle parking accomodations at a large volume of sites across the city.
S12961 BROOKLINE- BLUEBIKES STATE OF GOOD REPAIR, 3 STATIONS AND 62 PEDAL BIKES Community Connections The Town of Brookline will replace three Bluebikes stations at Beacon and Centre Streets, Beacon at Tappan Street, and Brookline Village–Station Street, as the stations have reached the end of their useful life. The stations at Coolidge Corner and Brookline Village have the greatest ridership within Brookline’s network. These sites offer connections to multiple MBTA Green Line stations and bus routes, including the C and D Branches of the Green Line and the Route 66 and 65 high-frequency bus routes. The project will also replace 62 pedal bicycles that have reached the end of their useful life. Brookline 2025 N/A This project improves the state of good repair of the existing bikeshare system to ensure continued access to bikeshare and empower municipalities to utilize local resources towards supporting operating costs for the bikeshare system.
S12960 CAMBRIDGE- BLUEBIKES STATE OF GOOD REPAIR, 8 STATIONS AND 65 PEDAL BIKES Community Connections The City of Cambridge will replace eight Bluebikes Stations that have reached the end of their useful life. These stations include Central Square at Massachusetts Avenue and Essex Street, Lafayette Square at Massachusetts Avenue and Main Street, Lower Cambridgeport at Magazine Street, One Broadway/Kendall Square at Main Street, Harvard University Housing at Peabody Terrace, Harvard University River Houses at DeWolfe Street, Linear Park at Massachusetts Avenue and Cameron Avenue, and Porter Square Station. The City further proposes the replacement of 65 pedal bicycles that have reached the end of their useful life. Cambridge 2025 N/A This project improves the state of good repair of the existing bikeshare system to ensure continued access to bikeshare and empower municipalities to utilize local resources towards supporting operating costs for the bikeshare system.
S12963 CHELSEA-REVERE- REGIONAL ON DEMAND MICROTRANSIT PILOT PROJECT Community Connections The Cities of Chelsea and Revere will implement a microtransit service that will provide regional, low-cost, on-demand transportation across a 6.5 square mile zone in Chelsea and Revere. The service will offer convenient pick-up and drop-off services that align with riders’ schedules, filling first- and last-mile gaps in the existing transit system and ensuring accessibility to critical destinations, such as grocery stores, healthcare facilities, places of employment, and educational institutions. The applicants estimate 58 passenger trips per day with electric vehicles. As a Microtransit Pilot Project, the project is proposed for funding across three years with $499,649 in FFY 2025, $450,278 in FFY 2026, and $463,807 in FFY 2027. Chelsea, Revere 2025 N/A This project provides new transit service to reduce transportation-related emissions by promoting shifts away from single occupancy vehicles.
S12966 MALDEN- CANAL STREET BICYCLE LANES Community Connections This project will implement a new separated bicycle lane along Canal Street from Medford Street to Centre Street in Malden. The on-road bicycle lanes on this moderately trafficked street will connect users to commercial sites, recreational facilities, public assets, and transit facilities. The project further expands the developing Malden Bike Network and provides connectivity to the planned Spot Pond Brook Greenway project (#613088). Malden 2025 N/A This project implements safe bicycle lanes to improve connectivity to local urban trails and mirror improvements proposed by neighboring municipalities.
S12694 REVERE- BLUEBIKES EXPANSION TO NORTHERN STRAND (SALEM STREET AT NORTH MARSHALL STREET) AND GRISWOLD PARK Community Connections The City of Revere will install new Bluebikes stations at Griswold Fields at Washington and Malden, and at North Marshall and Salem Street. The project will also procure an additional 40 pedal bicycles for the Bluebikes network. The North Marshall and Salem Street site is adjacent to the Northern Strand Community Trail, which connects Everett to Lynn with 11 miles of continuous off-road paved surface. The City of Revere has two trailheads, and its main trail head is 1/10 of a mile from the city’s second Amazon Distribution Center. Revere 2025 N/A This project expands the regional bikeshare system to promote non-single-occupancy modes of transportation, and does so near the urban trail network in Revere.
S12967 SCITUATE- INSTALLATION OF 25 BICYCLE RACKS Community Connections The Town of Scituate will procure 25 bicycle racks providing 50 spaces in North Scituate Village and Scituate Harbor, which are commercial hubs and public open-space facilities. The town centers are hubs for pedestrians and are linked by sidewalks to various areas of open space and recreation, along with shops, grocery stores, and co-working spaces. Scituate 2025 N/A This project improves bicycle parking in a community in need of additional resources to accomodate and promote bicycle use.
S12962 SOMERVILLE- BLUEBIKES STATE OF GOOD REPAIR, 13 STATIONS Community Connections The City of Somerville proposes replacing 13 Bluebikes stations that have reached the end of their useful life. These stations include Somerville City Hall, Union Square Station, Beacon Street at Washington Street, Conway Park, Wilson Square, Davis Square, Ball Square, Powder House Circle/Nathan Tufts Park, Packard Avenue, Teele Square, 191 Beacon Street, Perry Park, and Broadway at Mount Pleasant Street. Somerville 2025 N/A This project improves the state of good repair of the existing bikeshare system to ensure continued access to bikeshare and empower municipalities to utilize local resources towards supporting operating costs for the bikeshare system.
Notes: HSIP cluster locations are identified by MassDOT. Substandard pavement and sidewalk designations are based on data provided by MassDOT and project proponents and on MPO assessments conducted for TIP evaluations. The estimated lane miles of substandard NHS pavement improved is based on MPO staff’s assessment of pavement condition in the project area and their assessment of the portion of the project on the NHS. The IRI thresholds used to classify pavement are based on the TIP criteria the MPO adopted in 2020: less than 95 is good, 95 to 170 is fair, and greater than 170 is poor.
* The MPO is contributing funds to this project, which is generally funded by MassDOT or the MBTA.
AAB = Architectural Access Board. ADA = Americans with Disabilities Act. CATA = Cape Ann Transportation Authority. CO2 = carbon dioxide. CTPS = Central Transportation Planning Staff. FFY = federal fiscal year. HSIP = Highway Safety Improvement Program. IRI = International Roughness Index. MassDOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation. MBTA = Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. MCRT = Mass Central Rail Trail. MPO = metropolitan planning organization. MWRTA = MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. N/A = not applicable. NHS = National Highway System. PHED = peak hours of excessive delay. SOV = single-occupancy vehicle. TSP = transit signal priority.
Source: Boston Region MPO staff.

 

 

 

Table A-3
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Project Evaluation Results: Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections, Complete Streets, Intersection Improvements, and the Transit Transformation Investment Programs

 

Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections Program
                                     
Proponent Project Number Project Name MAPC Subregion Project Status Project Cost Total Score Total Base Score Total Scaled Equity Score Safety  Safety Equity Score Mobility and Reliability Mobility and Reliability Equity Score Access and Connectivity Access and Connectivity Equity Score Resilience Resilience Equity Score Clean Air and Healthy Communities Clean Air and Healthy Communities Equity Score
Cambridge 613568 Cambridge-New Bridge and Shared-Use Path Construction over Fitchburg Line at Danehy Park Connector [DESIGN ONLY] ICC PRC Approved (12/19/2023) Design: $3,000,000 78.1 72.5 5.6 14 3.5 14 2.5 15.5 2.5 14 2 15 3.5
Framingham N/A Framingham- Chris Walsh Trail (Phase 2) [DESIGN ONLY] MWRC Preliminary Design Design: $850,000 Construction: $14,300,000 79.9 69.5 10.4 15 8 13.5 6 15 5 13 1 13 6
Hudson N/A Hudson- Massachusetts Central Rail Trail Construction [DESIGN ONLY] MAGIC Preliminary Design Design: $909,700 62.7 57.5 5.2 11.5 3.5 10.5 2 12.5 2 10 2 13 3.5
Norfolk, Wrentham, Walpole 613644 Norfolk-Wrentham-Walpole- Shared-Use Path Installation (Metacomet Greenway) [DESIGN ONLY] SWAP, TRIC Preliminary Design Design: $1,550,000 Construction: $19,754,350 65 59.5 5.5 11 3.5 12 2.5 13.5 1.75 10 2 13 4
Sudbury 613319 Sudbury-Framingham- Bike Path Construction of Bruce Freeman Rail Trail, from the Sudbury Diamond Railroad Crossing to Eaton Road West  MAGIC PRC Approved (6/01/2023) $8,820,000 50.5 47 3.5 12 3.5 8.5 1.75 10.5 0.5 7 1 9 2
            100 80 20 16   15   17   16   16  
Complete Streets Program
                                   
Proponent Project Number Project Name MAPC Subregion Project Status Project Cost Total Score Total Base Score Total Scaled Equity Score Safety  Safety Equity Score Mobility and Reliability Mobility and Reliability Equity Score Access and Connectivity Access and Connectivity Equity Score Resilience Resilience Equity Score Clean Air and Healthy Communities Clean Air and Healthy Communities Equity Score
Acton N/A Acton- Great Road, from Harris Street to Davis Road Intersections, Complete Streets Project [DESIGN ONLY] MAGIC Preliminary Design Design: $860,000 Construction: $8,600,000 45.4 41 4.4 10 4 14 3 8 1.5 1 0 8 2.5
Arlington N/A Arlington- Broadway Complete Streets [DESIGN ONLY] ICC Preliminary Design Design: $1,395,000 80.1 72.5 7.6 16 4 16 5 10.5 2.5 13 2 17 5.5
Boston N/A Boston- Reconstruction of Bennington Street, Porter Street to Wood Island Busway [DESIGN ONLY] ICC Preliminary Design Design: $1,500,000 Construction: $15,000,000 76.2 66 10.2 9.5 4.5 17.5 6.75 11 3.75 14 3 14 7.5
Bellingham 612963 Bellingham- Roadway Rehabilitation of Route 126 (Hartford Road) from 800 Feet North of the Interstate 495 Northbound Off-Ramp to Medway Town Line, including B-06-017.   SWAP PRC Approved (9/15/2022) $13,900,000 54.3 50 4.3 7.5 2 12.5 3.25 14 2.5 7 0.5 9 2.5
Malden N/A Malden- Route 60 Improvement Project  [DESIGN ONLY] ICC Preliminary Design Design: $2,600,000 Cosntruction: $21,201,687 71.15 62 9.15 14.5 6 17 6.375 12.5 3.75 10 3 8 3.75
Malden N/A Malden- Commercial Street Reconstruction [DESIGN ONLY] ICC Preliminary Design Design: $935,000 Construction: $7,250,000 62.25 54 8.25 13 5.25 15 5.625 10 2.25 5 3 11 4.5
Marlborough 612285 Marlborough- Reconstruction of Granger Boulevard [DESIGN ONLY] MWRC PRC Approved (6/24/2021) Design: $1,215,000 Construction: $12,145,000 79.9 70 9.9 14 6 17 6.75 13 3.75 13 3 13 5.25
Ipswich 612738 Ipswich- Argilla Road Ecological Tidal Restoration Project NSTF PRC Approved (5/12/2022) $6,600,000 37.9 35.5 2.4 2.5 0.5 7 0.5 7 1.5 11 1 8 2.5
Salem N/A Salem- Broad Street and Dalton Parkway Corridor Project [DESIGN ONLY] NSTF Preliminary Design Design: $1,068,780 Construction: $2,500,000 60.1 54.5 5.6 13.5 4 16 4 12 2.5 3 0.5 10 3
Southborough 612962 Southborough- Reclamation of Marlborough Road (Route 85) and Framingham Road from Marlborough C.L to Route 30 [DESIGN ONLY] MWRC Preliminary Design Design: $1,315,000 Construction: $13,153,146 52.5 52.5 4.7 8 2 11 3.5 8.5 0.75 11 2 14 3.5
            100 80 20 16   19   15   14   16  
Intersection Improvements Program
                                   
Proponent Project Number Project Name MAPC Subregion Project Status Project Cost Total Score Total Base Score Total Scaled Equity Score Safety  Safety Equity Score Mobility and Reliability Mobility and Reliability Equity Score Access and Connectivity Access and Connectivity Equity Score Resilience Resilience Equity Score Clean Air and Healthy Communities Clean Air and Healthy Communities Equity Score
Burlington 613641 Burlington- Intersection Improvements at Route 3A/Cambridge Street and Winn Street [DESIGN ONLY] NSPC PRC Approved (12/19/2023) Design: $1,700,000 Construction: $9,557,295 71 64.5 6.5 21.5 4.5 16.5 4.25 12.5 2.5 5 1.5 9 3.5
Holliston N/A Holliston- Intersection Improvements at Route 16 and Whitney Street [DESIGN ONLY] MWRC Preliminary Design Design: $250,000 Construction: $2,500,000 42.8 39.5 3.3 19 5 9 1.5 5.5 0.75 4 1 2 0
Sherborn N/A Sherborn- Reconstruction of Route 27 and Route 16 [DESIGN ONLY] SWAP Preliminary Design Design: $900,000 Construction: $9,000,000 81.8 75 6.8 22 5 16 4 15 2.5 13 2 9 3.5
Quincy 610823 Quincy- Intersection Improvements at Willard Street and Ricciuti Drive ICC 75% Design $1,812,839 41.1 36 5.1 16.5 6 11 5.25 4.5 0.75 -1 -2.25 5 3
            100 80 20 25   18   14   12   11  
Transit Transformation Program
                                   
Proponent Project Number Project Name MAPC Subregion Project Status Project Cost Total Score Total Base Score Total Scaled Equity Score Safety  Safety Equity Score Mobility and Reliability Mobility and Reliability Equity Score Access and Connectivity Access and Connectivity Equity Score Resilience Resilience Equity Score Clean Air and Healthy Communities Clean Air and Healthy Communities Equity Score
CATA N/A CATA- Fare Upgrades for ADA and Dial-A-Ride Customers NSTF N/A $65,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
CATA N/A CATA- CATA Gloucester Facility Modernization NSTF N/A $1,293,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
CATA N/A CATA - Vehicle Replacement (4 Vehicles) NSTF N/A $2,460,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
MWRTA N/A MWRTA- Procurement of Three 29 Foot Buses MWRC N/A $1,980,000 52.2 47 5.2 9 2 14 4 12 4 6 0.5 6 2.5
MWRTA N/A MWRTA- Blandin Hub Equitable Redesign Initiative MWRC N/A $2,500,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
            100 79 21 16   16   16   16   15  
Community Connections Program
                         
Proponent Project Name MAPC Subregion Project Cost Cost/Point Total Score Connectivity Regional and Interlocal Coordination Plan Implementation Transportation Equity Climate Change Mitigation Performance Management
Arlington Arlington- Installation of 123 Bicycle Racks and Related Materials ICC $90,878 $1,220 74.5 15 9 18 9.5 13 10
Boston Boston- Bluebikes State-of-Good Repair, Twelve Stations ICC $590,348 $7,717 76.5 18 8 14 12.5 14 10
Boston Boston- Installation of 1600 Bicycle Racks ICC $379,470 $4,628 82 18 8 18 11 17 10
Brookline Brookline- Bluebikes State-of-Good Repair, Three Stations and 62 Pedal Bicycles ICC $200,000 $2,985 67 16 8 6 7 13 9
Cambridge Cambridge- Bluebikes State-of-Good Repair, Eight Stations and 65 Pedal Bicycles  ICC $385,456 $5,627 68.5 17 8 12 8.5 14 9
Chelsea, Revere Chelsea-Revere- Regional On-Demand Microtransit Pilot Project ICC $499,649 $9,296 53.75 13 11 N/A 11.25 11.5 7
Malden Malden- Canal Street Bicycle Lanes ICC $81,250 $1,585 51.25 9 7 12 8.25 8 7
Revere Revere- Bluebikes Expansion, Four Stations and 40 Pedal Bicycles ICC $169,000 $2,661 63.5 17 6 10 7.5 14 9
Scituate Scituate- Installation of 25 Bicycle Racks SSC $22,800 $501 45.5 9 8 16 4.5 2 6
Somerville Somerville- Bluebikes State-of-Good Repair, Thirteen Stations ICC $278,127 $4,120 67.5 14 8 16 7.5 13 9
                         
 
Abbreviations
ADA = Americans with Disabilities Act.  CATA = Cape Ann Transportation Authority.  MWRTA = MetroWest Regional Transit Authority. N/A = not applicable. PRC = MassDOT's Project Review Committee. 
Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) Subregions:  ICC = Inner Core Committee. MAGIC = Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination. MWRC = MetroWest Regional Collaborative. NSPC = North Suburban Planning Council. NSTF = North Shore Task Force. SSC = South Shore Coalition. SWAP = SouthWest Advisory Planning Committee. TRIC = Three Rivers Interlocal Council.

 

Table A-4
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Project Evaluation Results: Community Connections Program

 

Proponent Project Name MAPC Subregion Project Cost Cost/Monthly Passenger Trip Total Score Connectivity Coordination Plan Implementation Transportation Equity Mode Shift and Demand Projection Fiscal Sustainability
Concord Concord Workforce Shuttle** MAGIC $369,911 $155 71 13 15 6 6 21 10
MWRTA CatchConnect Microtransit Expansion Phase 2** MWRC $402,500 $93 90 17 15 15 9 24 10
North Reading North Reading Demand-Response Shuttle Pilot Program** NSPC $77,637 $348 77.25 16.25 15 9 9 18 10
Revere Revere On-Demand Shuttle Service** ICC $980,976 $30 57 17 0 3 12 15 10
Boston Boston Electric BlueBikes Adoption ICC $1,020,000 $21 84 17 15 6 12 24 10
Cambridge Cambridge Electric BlueBikes Adoption ICC $352,575 $13 81 17 15 6 9 24 10
Canton Canton Center Bicycle Racks TRIC $10,000 $12 72 14 9 12 6 21 10
Canton Canton Public Schools Bike Program TRIC $22,500 $4 38 13 0 6 6 3 10
Lynn Broad Street Corridor Transit Signal Priority ICC $297,800 $2 88 17.5 12 13.5 12 23 10
Medford Medford Bicycle Parking—Tier 1 ICC $29,600 $12 84 17 12 12 9 24 10
Medford Medford Bluebikes Expansion ICC $118,643 $53 78 17 15 3 9 24 10
Possible Points         Possible Points 100 18 15 15 18 24 10
*This project was not recommended for moving forward at TIP Readiness Days until the project is formally intiated through MassDOT's system and goes through the Project Review Committee. Staff are actively working with the project proponent and MassDOT District 6 to initiate this project.
**The proponents for these shuttle projects requested funding for FFY 2024 and additional years. Concord requested $139,749 in FFY 2024, $122,165 in FFY 2025, and $107,997 in FFY 2026. The MWRTA requested $140,000 in FFY 2024, $132,500 in FFY 2025, and $130,000 in FFY 2026. North Reading requested $41,787 in FFY 2024 and $35,850 in FFY 2025. Revere requested $356,825 in FFY 2024, $338,521 in FFY 2025, and $285,630 in FFY 2026. The figures in the Cost/Monthy Passenger Trip column only show the cost per monthly user for the first year of funding.

 

 

Table A-5
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Project Evaluation Criteria: Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections Program

 

 

 

Project Name PROJECT NAME
Municipality/Proponent PROJECT PROPONENT(S)
Project Type Bicycle Network and Pedestrian Connections
Scoring Criteria  Base Score Equity Multiplier?
Equity: Facilitate an inclusive and transparent transportation-planning process and make investments that eliminate transportation-related disparities borne by people in disadvantaged communities.
An equity multiplier (EM) is applied to criteria that the MPO has identified through public outreach and data analysis as critical transportation needs or where there exist disparities that negatively impact equity populations. These criteria are denoted by a check mark on the right side of this scorecard. Each project’s multiplier is based on the percent of the population in the project area that belongs to each of the MPO’s six equity populations in the project area relative to their region wide averages. The higher the share of equity populations in the project area, the higher the multiplier.  To calculate a final Transportation Equity score, a project's raw equity multiplier is scaled to 20 points and then added to the base score (out of 80 possible points) as shown at the bottom of this scorecard.
Safety: Achieve zero transportation-related fatalities and serious injuries and improve safety for all users of the transportation system.
The project design has a significant effect on improving safety for all users. Disqualifying - The project design does not improve safety for all users, or hinders user safety. 1 - The design of the project has a minor impact on improving safety for a limited number of potential facility users. 2 - The design of the project has a moderate effect on improving safety for all users of the facility, or improvements  are primarily directed towards either pedestrians or micromobility, not both. 3 - The design of the project has a high effect on improving safety for all potential users of the facility, including the creation of entirely new facilities.  3 Yes
The project addresses a statewide Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster or Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 0 - The project does not address a Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster or Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 2 - The project addresses a Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster and/or a Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 2 Yes
The proposed design provides for physical separation of facility users from other forms of traffic, and prevents obstruction. 0 - The proposed design either affords no physical separation for the facility, or the separation is horizontal and striped only. 1 - The proposed design has some physical separation for the facility in the form of a flexible barrier, but does not adequately prevent obstruction (ie: parking in bicycle lane). 2 - The proposed design affords full physical separation of the facility and its users from other forms of traffic, including vertical separation and fixed barriers. 2 Yes
Where vehicles and pedestrians or micromobility users share a facility, the project improves the safety of interactions between these users. 0 - The project does not take steps to reduce conflict and hazards between vulnerable users and vehicles. 1 - The project makes some steps towards reducing conflicts and hazards between vulnerable users and vehicles, such as flexible posts. 2 - The project reduces conflicts and hazards between vehicles and vulnerable users where they currently exist, or eliminates these hazards entirely. 2  
The project connects to existing pedestrian or micromobility facilities. 0 - The project does not connect to any current pedestrian or micromobility facilities, and the applicant does not provide any information as to how future connections may be made. 1 - The project does not connect to any current pedestrian or micromobility facilities, but the applicant describes how future connections will be made and any action to date towards those connections. 2 - The project connects to other micromobility or pedestrian facilities, including painted bike lanes or sidewalks.  3 - The project connects to safe micromobility and pedestrian facilities, or functions as an extension of an existing facility. 3  
The project improves safety and accessibility for people with disabilities. Disqualifying - The proposed project introduces potentially unsafe elements for people with disabilities.  Alternatively, the project does not address identifiable issues with Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance in the Project Area. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental enhancements to safety for people with disabilities. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for people with disabilities. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for people with disabilities. 2 Yes
The project effectively addresses safety for transit operations and users. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits to safety for transit operations or transit users. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for transit operations or transit users. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for transit operations or transit users. 2  
Mobility and Reliability: Support easy and reliable movement of people and freight.
The applicant thoroughly describes deficiencies in the current design of the corridor or intersection, and how the project addresses these deficiencies. 0 - The proposed project includes minor improvements to roadway mobility, or focuses primarily on the preservation of existing assets. 1 - The project primarily upgrades existing active transportation infrastructure within the current right of way and street footprint that addresses some of the deficiencies along the corridor. 2 - The project upgrades and modernizes infrastructure, including improvements that create active transportation connections where none currently exist. 3 - The project thoroughly addresses deficiencies in a corridor ofr network of assets to provide broader regional active transportation or intermodal connections. 3  
The project improves pedestrian safety near a high-utility corridor to promote walking. 0 - The project does not involve significant pedestrian safety improvements. 1 - The project improves pedestrian safety on a corridor with moderate utility. 2 - The project improves pedestrian safety on a high utility corridor. 2 Yes
The project improves safety near a high-utility corridor for other active transportation modes other than walking. 0 - The project does not involve significant safety improvements for other active transportation modes. 1 - The project improves active transportation safety for other active transportation modes on a corridor with moderate utility. 2 - The project improves active transportation safety for other active transportation modes on a high utility corridor. 2 Yes
The applicant details how the facility may be maintained and upgraded throughout its useful life, including plans to ensure accessibility of the facility year round by users (ex: snow plowing, root management). 0 - The applicant does not describe their approach towards maintaining and supporting the asset. 1 - The applicant describes the process by which the asset may be maintained, and access supported. 2 - The applicant describes the process by which the asset may be maintained and access supported, and includes a plan for future improvements to the asset or along the network. 2  
The project improves travel time reliability by investing in measures that reduce dependence on single-occupancy-vehicle trips. 0 - The project does not improve travel time reliability, or does not significantly invest in non-SOV transportation modes. 1 - The project has some impact on travel time reliability through minor investments in non-SOV transportation modes. 2 - The project has some impact on travel time reliability through moderate investments in non-SOV transportation modes. 3 - The project has a significant impact on travel time reliability through rigorous investments in non-SOV transportation modes. 3 Yes
The project invests in safe pedestrian facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in pedestrian facilities, or establishes facilities that are disconnected from other pedestrian infrastructure with no plans for connections. 1 - The project makes some investments in pedestrian facilities, such as beacons and sidewalks, but investments are limited to the immediate project area (ex: intersection). 2 - The project makes comprehensive investments in new and upgraded pedestrian facilities in the project area, and establishes safe connections to a greater pedestrian network. 2  
The project includes complementary investments from bikeshare facilities. 0 - No bikeshare facilities are present along the route or near the asset. 1 - Bikeshare facilities are present along the route or near the asset. 1  
Access and Connectivity: Provide transportation options and improve access to key destinations to support economic vitality and high quality of life.
The project serves sites targeted for future development (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project does not serve a site targeted for future development. 1 - The project serves a site for future development. 2 - The project serves a site targeted for future development that includes transit-supportive mixed-use or residential sites. 2  
The project serves sites included within a municipal Section 3A 'MBTA Communities' zoning district or other transit oriented development. (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project does not serve a TOD or MBTA Communities site. 1 - The project is near to or indirectly serves a TOD or MBTA Communities site. 2 - The project directly intersects with or serves a TOD or MBTA Communities site. 2 Yes
The project serves existing employment and population centers (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not serve an existing employment or population center. 1 - The project serves an existing employment or population center. 2 - The project serves an existing employment and population center. 3 - The project serves an existing employment and population center with significant affordable housing opportunities. 3 Yes
The project addresses safety concerns near to key public community assets. 0 - The project is not near to any key public community assets. 1 - The project addresses safety concerns near to one or more community assets. 2 - The project addresses safety concerns near key public community assets with a large population of vulnerable users, such as schools, libraries, or senior centers. 2  
The project is a product of or fulfills recommendations identified in a regional or statewide study. 0 - The project is not consistent with or the applicant does not cite a regional or statewide corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 1 - The project is thematically consistent with a regional or statewide study, such as a corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 2 - The project is explicitly called for in a regional or statewide study, such as a corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 2  
The project is listed in the Massachusetts Priority Trails Network. 0 - The project is not included in the MassDOT Priority Trails Network. 1 - The project is included in the MassDOT Priority Trails Network 2  
The project involves collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - Only one municipality is involved in the project. 1 - One or more municipalities are involved in the project. 1  
The asset can be safely accessed by non-SOV modes of transportation. 0 - Access to the asset is predominantly conducted by SOV modes. 1 - Access to the asset can be performed by walking, but facilities are either unsafe or are located in lower volume areas. 2 - Access to the asset can be performed by a variety of methods, including by transit. 2  
The project improves navigability at or along the work area through signage. 0 - No signage improvements are incorporated into the project. 1 - Signage improvements, which may include interpretive signage, are included in the proposed project. 1  
(Penalty) The project applicant is an MBTA Community not in compliance with Section 3A. 0 - The municipality is in compliance with or not subject to Section 3A. -5 - The municipality is not in compliance with Section 3A. 0  
Resilience: Provide transportation that supports sustainable environments and enables people to respond and adapt to climate change and other changing conditions.
The project reduces the risk of flooding in the project area through adaptation and resilience improvements. 0 - The project does not address flooding. 1 - The project reduces flood risk using structural adaptation/gray infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces flood risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 2 Yes
The project reduces the risk of extreme temperatures by reducing pavement cover, planting shade trees, providing shade structures, increasing green space, etc. 0 - The project does not address extreme temperatures. 1 - The project reduces extreme temperature risk using structural adaptation/gray infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces extreme temperature risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 2 Yes
The project implements recommendations or addresses needs identified in the respective municipality's Hazard Mitigation Plan, Municipal Vulnerability Plan, or Climate Adaptation Plan. 0 - The project does not address needs or recommendations. 2 - The project addresses needs or recommendations. 2  
The project improves stormwater infrastructure beyond MassDEP's MS4 standard. 0 - The project meets minimum standards. 1 - The project includes one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards (adopts stormwater BMPs, prepares pollution and/or erosion prevention plan, adopts environmentally sensitive site design practices, is expected to remove high amounts of TSS, etc.). 2 - Project adopts more than one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards. 2  
The project applicant demonstrates regional coordination or partnership on resilience improvements and project impacts with neighboring municipalities, environmental or EJ advocacy groups, local community organizations, regional or state agencies, etc. 0 - The applicant does not demonstrate regional coordination. 1 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities and/or regional or state agencies. 2 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities, regional or state agencies AND local community organizations/advocacy groups. 2  
The applicant details the expected useful life of the improvements, provides a plan for maintenance of resilience improvements, and/or references current and future climate conditions. 0 - Applicant does not reference current and future climate conditions and does not provide a plan for maintenance. 1 - Applicant references current and future climate conditions AND/OR provides a plan for maintenance. 2  
The project proposes improvements and reduces climate risk along evacuation routes and/or roadways that provide emergency access to critical facilities such as police stations, fire stations, and hospitals. 0 - The project does not propose improvements to an evacuation route or along roadways that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 1 - The project proposes improvements along an evacuation route OR along a roadway that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 2 - The project proposes improvements along an evacuation route AND along a roadway that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 2  
The project design is expected to address multiple hazards and/or provide multiple environmental benefits such as risk reduction, ecological restoration, aquatic connectivity, improved water quality, groundwater recharge, etc. 0 - Project design is not expected to address multiple hazards or provide multiple environmental benefits. 1 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards or provide multiple environmental benefits. 2 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards and provide multiple environmental benefits. 2  
(Penalty) The project is located in an existing or projected flood zone and/or the project site has flooded in the past and the applicant does not specify how the project will address flooding. 0 - Project is not located in an existing or projected flood zone and site has not flooded in the past OR project is located in a flood zone and the applicant specifies how the project will address flooding. -3 - Project is located in an existing or projected flood zone or site has flooded in the past and the project does not specify how it will address flooding. 0 Yes
(Penalty) The project is located in an area that is vulnerable to extreme heat and the applicant does not specify how the project will address heat. 0 - The project is not located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat OR project is located in a vulnerable area and the applicant specifies how the project will address heat. -3 - The project is located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat and the project does not specify how it will address heat. 0 Yes
Clean Air and Healthy Communities: Provide transportation free of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants and that supports good health.
The project includes design elements aimed at reducing the amount of Single-Occupancy-Vehicle (SOV) trips (Up to 3 points). Disqualifying - The project does not provide effective reductions in the amount of Single Occupancy Vehicle trips 1 - The project provides some reductions in Single Occupancy Vehicle trips, but the extent is unclear or the primary usage of the facility will be for recreation. 2 - The project reduces Single Occupancy Vehicle trips to a moderate or greater extent, and includes viable non-recreational uses for the facility. 3 - The project not only includes reductions in Single Occupancy Vehicle trips by improving facilities for pedestrians and micromobility users, but complementing connections for other non-car modes such as transit or other trails.. 3  
The project reduces greenhouse gas emissions (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. 1 - The project supports a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions primarily by reducing travel time delay. 3 - The project includes a variety of elements aimed at reducing emissions such as low or no emission mobility improvements, innovative technologies or methods, and travel demand management. 3  
The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities and natural areas through low impact design, pavement reduction, nature-based adaptation, and other improvements that protect air/water/soil quality, provide ecological restoration and functioning, improve aquatic connectivity, etc. -1 - The project is expected to have a negative impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 0 - The project is not expected to impact adjacent communities or natural areas. 2 - The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 3 - The project specifies native species for any added vegetation or green space. 3 Yes
The proposed project incorporates or will incorporate a meaningful community outreach and engagement process (Up to 3 points). 0 - The proposed project will incorporate all legally required community outreach and engagement necessary for the use of federal funding. 1 - The proposed project will incorporate additional community outreach and engagement as necessary, including public meetings within the served municipality or municipalities. 2 - The proposed project has already been subject toutilized community outreach and engagement, and the applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the project process as it develops. 3 - The proposed project is the result of a rigorous community engagement process, and the proposed scope of work reflects the feedback or input received by the applicant from the community.  The applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the process, and the applicant has novel or innovative strategies to improve community engagement. 3  
The project effectively engages all community members in its outreach strategy and access for the service, specifically persons with disabilities or those with limited English proficiency (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project performs all legally required measures to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. 1 - The applicant has identified a strategy to bring community members of all abilities and language proficiencies into the project outreach process and to ensure their access to services. 2 - The applicant has implemented an effective strategy to engage community members of all abilities and language proficiencies into the project engagement process and into offered services, while also identifying areas for potential improvement. 2 Yes
The project improves access to open space or sites for active recreation. 0 - The project does not improve access to open space or sites for active recreation. 2 - The project does improve access to open space or sites for active recreation. 2 Yes
BONUSES    
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat carbon emissions, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve air quality/treatment. 1  
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat contaminated water, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve water quality or treatment. 1  
Resilience: The project design is expected to address multiple hazards and/or provide multiple environmental benefits such as risk reduction, ecological restoration, aquatic connectivity, improved water quality, groundwater recharge, etc. 0 - Project design is not expected to address multiple hazards or provide multiple environmental benefits. 1 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards OR provide multiple environmental benefits. 2 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards AND provide multiple environmental benefits. 2  
Resilience: The project design includes provision of educational material for the public related to environmental improvements and aspects of the project/area. 0 - Project will not provide educational material. 1 - Project will provide educational material. 1  
Resilience: The primary purpose of the project is to improve resilience and reduce risk to climate hazards. 0 - The primary purpose of the project is not resilience. 1 - The primary purpose of the project is resilience. 1  
Resilience: The project proponents have used RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool to demonstrate the value of resilience improvements in the project area. 0 - Proponents have not shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1 - Proponents have shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1  

 

 

 

Table A-6
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Evaluation Criteria: Evaluation Criteria: Complete Streets Program

 

Project Name PROJECT NAME
Municipality/Proponent PROJECT PROPONENT(S)
Project Type Complete Streets
Scoring Criteria  Base Score Equity Score
Equity: Facilitate an inclusive and transparent transportation-planning process and make investments that eliminate transportation-related disparities borne by people in disadvantaged communities.
An equity multiplier (EM) is applied to criteria that the MPO has identified through public outreach and data analysis as critical transportation needs or where there exist disparities that negatively impact equity populations. These criteria are denoted by a check mark on the right side of this scorecard. Each project’s multiplier is based on the percent of the population in the project area that belongs to each of the MPO’s six equity populations in the project area relative to their region wide averages. The higher the share of equity populations in the project area, the higher the multiplier.  To calculate a final Transportation Equity score, a project's raw equity multiplier is scaled to 20 points and then added to the base score (out of 80 possible points) as shown at the bottom of this scorecard.
Safety: Achieve zero transportation-related fatalities and serious injuries and improve safety for all users of the transportation system.
The project addresses a location with severe crashes. +2   EPDO value of 100 or more +1   EPDO value of less than 100 +0   No EPDO value" 2 Yes
The project addresses a location with a high frequency of crashes. +2   Crash rate between 0.78 or greater +1   Crash rate between 0.20 and 0.78 +0   Crash rate below 0.20 2 Yes
The project addresses a statewide Top Crash Location. 0 - The project does not address a Top 200 Crash Cluster, Top 5% Intersection Crash Cluster, Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster, or Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 1 - The project addresses one of the following: a Top 5% Intersection Crash Cluster, a Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster, or Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 2 - The project addresses two of the following: a Top 5% Intersection Crash Cluster, a Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster, or a Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 3 - The project addresses three or more Intersection, Bicycle, and/or Pedestrian Crash Clusters, or contains a Statewide Top 200 Crash Location. 3  
The project addresses a truck-related safety issue. 0 - The project does not directly address truck safety in the project area. 1 - The project directly addresses truck safety in the project area, including improving the safety of vulnerable users navigating in mixed traffic with trucks. 1  
The project effectively addresses safety for micromobility users. -2 - The project introduces potentially unsafe elements for micromobility users. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits  to safety for micromobility users. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for micromobility users. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for micromobility users. 2  
The project effectively addresses safety for pedestrians. - 2 - The project introduces potentially unsafe elements for pedestrians. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits to safety for pedestrians. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for pedestrians. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for pedestrians. 2 Yes
The project effectively addresses safety for people with disabilities. - 5 - The proposed project introduces potentially unsafe elements for people with disabilities.  Alternatively, the project does not address identifiable issues with Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance in the Project Area. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental enhancements to safety for persons with disabilities. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for people with disabilities. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for people with disabilities. 2 Yes
The project effectively addresses safety for transit operations and users. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits to safety for transit operations or transit users. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for transit operations or transit users. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for transit operations or transit users. 2  
Mobility and Reliability: Support easy and reliable movement of people and freight.
The applicant thoroughly describes deficiencies in the current design of the corridor or intersection, and how the project addresses these deficiencies. 0 - The proposed project includes minor improvements to roadway mobility, or focuses primarily on the preservation of existing assets. 1 - The project primarily upgrades existing infrastructure within the current right of way and street footprint that addresses some of the deficiencies along the corridor. 2 - The project focuses on upgrades and modernization of infrastructure, including improvements to accessibility by non-SOV modes, both within the current street footprint or beyond existing right of way. 3 - The project thoroughly addresses deficiencies in the design of the corridor or intersection, and also addresses potential deficiencies elsewhere on a corridor. 3  
The project addresses an unreliable corridor with significant travel time delay. 0 - The project does not address an unreliable corridor.  1 - The project improves the safety along an unreliable corridor, but the benefits of the improvements are difficult to quantify. 2 - The project significantly improves the safety of travel along an unreliable corridor.  Travel time delay may be improved due to a reduced crash frequency. 3 - The project thoroughly improves the safety of travel along an unreliable corridor, and directly reduces travel time delay through the proposed street design. 3  
The project improves travel time reliability by investing in measures that reduce dependence on single-occupancy-vehicle trips. 0 - The project does not improve travel time reliability, or does not significantly invest in non-single occupancy vehicle transportation modes. 1 - The project has some impact on travel time reliability through minor investments in non-single occupancy vehicle transportation modes. 2 - The project has some impact on travel time reliability through moderate investments in non-single occupancy vehicle transportation modes. 3 - The project has a significant impact on travel time reliability through rigorous investments in non-single occupancy vehicle transportation modes. 3  
The project invests in safe pedestrian facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in pedestrian facilities, or establishes facilities that are disconnected from other pedestrian infrastructure with no plans for connections. 1 - The project makes some investments in pedestrian facilities, such as beacons and sidewalks, but investments are limited to the immediate project area (ex: intersection). 2 - The project makes comprehensive investments in new and upgraded pedestrian facilities in the project area, and establishes safe connections to a greater pedestrian network. 2 Yes
The project invests in safe micromobility facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in bicycle facilities, or proposed facilities do not offer significant levels of safety (ex: painted bicycle lanes with no separation). 2 - The project invests in safe bicycle facilities. 2 Yes
The project invests in safe transit facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in any transit facilities. 1 - The project makes some transit-supportive investments (ex: bumpouts near bus stops). 2 - The project directly invests in transit facilities (ex: transit signal priority). 2 Yes
The project improves pedestrian safety near a high-utility corridor to promote walking. 0 - The project does not involve significant pedestrian safety improvements. 1 - The project improves pedestrian safety on a corridor with moderate utility. 2 - The project improves pedestrian safety on a high utility corridor. 2 Yes
The project improves safety near a high-utility corridor for other active transportation modes other than walking. 0 - The project does not involve significant safety improvements for other active transportation modes. 1 - The project improves active transportation safety for other active transportation modes on a corridor with moderate utility. 2 - The project improves active transportation safety for other active transportation modes on a high utility corridor. 2 Yes
Access and Connectivity: Provide transportation options and improve access to key destinations to support economic vitality and high quality of life.
The project serves sites targeted for future development (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not serve a site targeted for future development. 1 - The project serves a site for future development. 2 - The project serves a site targeted for future development that includes transit-supportive mixed-use or residential sites. 3 - The project serves a site or sites targeted for future development that include transit-supportive mixed-use or residential sites, and are included as part of compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act from the community in which it is located. 3  
The project serves existing employment and population centers (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not serve an existing employment or population center. 1 - The project serves an existing employment or population center. 2 - The project serves an existing employment and population center. 3 - The project serves an existing employment and population center, or a population center that has significant affordable housing opportunities. 3 Yes
The project addresses safety concerns in multiple locations. 0 - Project improvements are concentrated at a specific site. 1 - The applicant details how the project is expected to have network improvements at other sites along the corridor. 2 - The project directly addresses multiple concerns at different locations. 2  
The project addresses safety concerns near to key public community assets. 0 - The project is not near to any key public community assets. 1 - The project is near to one or more community assets. 2 - The project addresses safety concerns near key public community assets with a large population of vulnerable users, such as schools, libraries, or senior centers. 2 Yes
The project is a product of or fulfills recommendations identified in a regional or statewide study. 0 - The project is not consistent with or the applicant does not cite a regional or statewide corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 1 - The project is thematically consistent with a regional or statewide study, such as a corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 2 - The project is explicitly called for in a regional or statewide study, such as a corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 2  
The project involves collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - Only one municipality is involved in the project. 1 - One or more municipalities are involved in the project. 1  
The project is near to or on a primary thoroughfare for regional freight travel. 0 - The project is not listed on a roadway with significant freight volumes. 1 - The project is on a roadway with significant freight volumes. 1  
The project improves navigability at or along the work area through signage. 0 - No signage improves are incorporated into the project. 1 - Signage improvements, which may include interpretive signage, are included in the proposed project. 1  
(Penalty) The project applicant is an MBTA Community not in compliance with Section 3A. 0 - The municipality is in compliance with or not subject to Section 3A. -5 - The municipality is not in compliance with Section 3A. 0  
Resilience: Provide transportation that supports sustainable environments and enables people to respond and adapt to climate change and other changing conditions.
The project reduces the risk of flooding in the project area through adaptation and resilience improvements. 0 - The project does not address flooding. 1 - The project reduces flood risk using structural adaptation/grey infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces flood risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 2 Yes
The project reduces the risk of extreme temperatures by reducing pavement cover, planting shade trees, providing shade structures, increasing green space, etc. 0 - The project does not address extreme temperatures. 1 - The project reduces extreme temperature risk using structural adaptation/grey infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces extreme temperature risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 2 Yes
The project implements recommendations or addresses needs identified in the respective municipality's Hazard Mitigation Plan, Municipal Vulnerability Plan, or Climate Adaptation Plan. 0 - The project does not address needs or recommendations. 2 - The project addresses needs or recommendations. 2  
The project improves stormwater infrastructure beyond MassDEP's MS4 standard. 0 - The project meets minimum standards. 1 - The project includes one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards (adopts stormwater BMPs, prepares pollution and/or erosion prevention plan, adopts environmentally sensitive site design practices, is expected to remove high amounts of TSS, etc.). 2 - Project adopts more than one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards. 2  
The project applicant demonstrates regional coordination or partnership on resilience improvements and project impacts with neighboring municipalities, environmental or EJ advocacy groups, local community organizations, regional or state agencies, etc. 0 - The applicant does not demonstrate regional coordination. 1 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities and/or regional or state agencies. 2 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities, regional or state agencies AND local community organizations/advocacy groups. 2  
The applicant details the expected useful life of the improvements, provides a plan for maintenance of resilience improvements, and/or references current and future climate conditions. 0 - Applicant does not reference current and future climate conditions and does not provide a plan for maintenance. 1 - Applicant references current and future climate conditions OR provides a plan for maintenance. 2 - Applicant references current and future climate conditions AND provides a plan for maintenance. 2  
The project proposes improvements and reduces climate risk along evacuation routes and/or roadways that provide emergency access to critical facilities such as police stations, fire stations, and hospitals. 0 - The project does not propose improvements to an evacuation route or along roadways that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 1 - The project proposes improvements along an evacuation route OR along a roadway that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 2 - The project proposes improvements along an evacuation route AND along a roadway that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 2  
(Penalty) The project is located in an existing or projected flood zone and/or the project site has flooded in the past and the applicant does not specify how the project will address flooding. 0 - Project is not located in an existing or projected flood zone and site has not flooded in the past OR project is located in a flood zone and the applicant specifies how the project will address flooding. -3 - Project is located in an existing or projected flood zone or site has flooded in the past and the project does not specify how it will address flooding. 0 Yes
(Penalty) The project is located in an area that is vulnerable to extreme heat and the applicant does not specify how the project will address heat. 0 - The project is not located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat OR project is located in a vulnerable area and the applicant specifies how the project will address heat. -3 - The project is located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat and the project does not specify how it will address heat. 0 Yes
Clean Air and Healthy Communities: Provide transportation free of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants and that supports good health.
The project includes design elements aimed at reducing the amount of Single-Occupancy-Vehicle (SOV) trips (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in single occupancy vehicle trips. 1 - The project provides indirect support to reductions in single occupancy vehicle trips through supportive infrastructure for transit or active transportation, such as signage, web applications, educational campaigns, or personnel improvements. 3 - The project supports a reduction in the amount of single occupancy vehicle trips by improving the condition or accessibility of existing transit or active transportation assets. 3 Yes
The project reduces greenhouse gas emissions (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. 1 - The project supports a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions primarily by reducing travel time delay. 3 - The project includes a variety of elements aimed at reducing emissions such as low or no emission mobility improvements, innovative technologies or methods, and travel demand management. 3  
The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities and natural areas through low impact design, pavement reduction, nature-based adaptation, and other improvements that protect air/water/soil quality, provide ecological restoration and functioning, improve aquatic connectivity, etc. -3 - The project is expected to have a negative impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 0 - The project is not expected to impact adjacent communities or natural areas. 2 - The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 3 - The project is expected to have a positive impact AND specifies appropriate plant species for any added vegetation or green space (native species, flood/drought tolerant, diverse range of species, etc.). 3 Yes
The proposed project incorporates or will incorporate a meaningful community outreach and engagement process (Up to 3 points). 0 - The proposed project will incorporate all legally required community outreach and engagement necessary for the use of federal funding. 1 - The proposed project will incorporate additional community outreach and engagement as necessary, including public meetings within the served municipality or municipalities. 2 - The proposed project has already been subject to community outreach and engagement, and the applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the project process as it develops. 3 - The proposed project is the result of a rigorous community engagement process, and the proposed scope of work reflects the feedback or input received by the applicant from the community.  The applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the process, and the applicant has novel or innovative strategies to improve community engagement. 3  
The project effectively engages all community members in its outreach strategy and access for the service, specifically people with disabilities or those with limited English proficiency (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project performs all legally required measures to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. 1 - The applicant has identified a strategy to bring community members of all abilities and language proficiencies into the project outreach process and to ensure their access to services. 2 - The applicant has implemented an effective strategy to engage community members of all abilities and language proficiencies into the project outreach process and into offered services, while also identifying areas for potential improvement. 2 Yes
The project improves access to open space or sites for active recreation. 0 - The project does not improve access to open space or sites for active recreation. 2 - The project does improve access to open space or sites for active recreation. 2  
BONUSES    
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat carbon emissions, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve air quality/treatment. 1  
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat contaminated water, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve water quality or treatment. 1  
Resilience: The project design is expected to address multiple hazards and/or provide multiple environmental benefits such as risk reduction, ecological restoration, aquatic connectivity, improved water quality, groundwater recharge, etc. 0 - Project design is not expected to address multiple hazards or provide multiple environmental benefits. 1 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards OR provide multiple environmental benefits. 2 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards AND provide multiple environmental benefits. 2  
Resilience: The project design includes provision of educational material for the public related to environmental improvements and aspects of the project/area. 0 - Project will not provide educational material. 1 - Project will provide educational material. 1  
Resilience: The primary purpose of the project is to improve resilience and reduce risk to climate hazards. 0 - The primary purpose of the project is not resilience. 1 - The primary purpose of the project is resilience. 1  
Resilience: The project proponents have used RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool to demonstrate the value of resilience improvements in the project area. 0 - Proponents have not shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1 - Proponents have shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1  

 

Table A-7
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Evaluation Criteria: Intersection Improvements Program

 

Project Name PROJECT NAME
Municipality/Proponent PROJECT PROPONENT(S)
Project Type Intersection Improvements
Scoring Criteria  Base Score Equity Score
Equity: Facilitate an inclusive and transparent transportation-planning process and make investments that eliminate transportation-related disparities borne by people in disadvantaged communities.
An equity multiplier (EM) is applied to criteria that the MPO has identified through public outreach and data analysis as critical transportation needs or where there exist disparities that negatively impact equity populations. These criteria are denoted by a check mark on the right side of this scorecard. Each project’s multiplier is based on the percent of the population in the project area that belongs to each of the MPO’s six equity populations in the project area relative to their region wide averages. The higher the share of equity populations in the project area, the higher the multiplier.  To calculate a final Transportation Equity score, a project's raw equity multiplier is scaled to 20 points and then added to the base score (out of 80 possible points) as shown at the bottom of this scorecard.
Safety: Achieve zero transportation-related fatalities and serious injuries and improve safety for all users of the transportation system.
The project addresses a location with severe crashes. +3   EPDO value of 300 or more +2   EPDO value of 100 to 299 +1   EPDO value of less than 100 +0   No EPDO value" 3 Yes
The project addresses a location with a high frequency of crashes. +3   Crash rate of 1.36 or greater +2   Crash rate between 0.78 and 1.36 +1   Crash rate between 0.20 and 0.78 +0   Crash rate below 0.20 3 Yes
The project addresses a statewide Top Crash Location. 0 - The project does not address a Top 200 Crash Cluster, Top 5% Intersection Crash Cluster, Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster, or Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 1 - The project addresses one of the following: a Top 5% Intersection Crash Cluster, a Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster, or Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 2 - The project addresses two of the following: a Top 5% Intersection Crash Cluster, a Top 5% Bicycle Crash Cluster, or a Top 5% Pedestrian Crash Cluster. 3 - The project addresses three or more Intersection, Bicycle, and/or Pedestrian Crash Clusters, or contains a Statewide Top 200 Crash Location. 3  
The project addresses a location identified in the Boston Region MPO Regional Safety Action Plan. 0 - The project does not address locations in the Regional Safety Action Plan. 1 - The project is located on the high injury network (HIN), but is not directly identified in the Regional Safety Action Plan. 2 - The project is located on the high injury network (HIN) and is identified in the Regional Safety Action Plan. 2  
The project addresses a truck-related safety issue. 0 - The project does not directly address truck safety in the project area. 1 - The project directly addresses truck safety in the project area, including improving the safety of vulnerable users navigating in mixed traffic with trucks. 1  
The project makes comprehensive safety improvements for all road users. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements to safety for all road users. 1 - The project makes some minor improvements to safety for automobiles. 2 - The project makes some moderate improvements to safety, but these improvements are primarily directed for automobiles. 3 - The project makes some minor improvements to the safety of vulnerable roadway users and automobiles. 4 - The project makes some moderate improvements to the safety of vulnerable roadway users, but improvements are primarily directed at automobiles. 5 - The project makes comprehensive improvements for all roadway users, such that all users may navigate through the corridor safely, including the elimination of mixed traffic between vulnerable users and automobiles where practicable.   5  
The project effectively addresses safety for micromobility users. -2 - The project introduces potentially unsafe elements for micromobility users. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits  to safety for micromobility users. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for micromobility users. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for micromobility users. 2  
The project effectively addresses safety for pedestrians. - 2 - The project introduces potentially unsafe elements for pedestrians. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits to safety for pedestrians. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for pedestrians. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for pedestrians. 2 Yes
The project effectively addresses safety for persons with disabilities. - 5 - The proposed project introduces potentially unsafe elements for persons with disabilities.  Alternatively, the project does not address identifiable issues with Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance in the Project Area. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental enhancements to safety for persons with disabilities. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for persons with disabilities. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for persons with disabilities. 2 Yes
The project effectively addresses safety for transit operations and users. 0 - The project makes no significant improvements or creates incidental benefits to safety for transit operations or transit users. 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety for transit operations or transit users. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety for transit operations or transit users. 2  
Mobility and Reliability: Support easy and reliable movement of people and freight.
The applicant thoroughly describes deficiencies in the current design of the corridor or intersection with regard to safety, and how the project addresses these deficiencies. 0 - The proposed project has minor improvements to roadway safety, or focuses primarily on the preservation of existing assets. 1 - The project primarily upgrades existing infrastructure within the current right of way and street footprint that addresses some of the deficiencies along the corridor. 2 - The project focuses on upgrades and modernization of infrastructure, including improvements to accessibility by non-SOV modes, both within the current street footprint or beyond existing right of way. 3 - The project thoroughly addresses deficiencies in the design of the corridor or intersection, and also addresses potential deficiencies elsewhere on a corridor. 3  
The project addresses an unreliable corridor with significant travel time delay. 0 - The project does not address an unreliable corridor.  1 - The project improves the safety along an unreliable corridor, but the benefits of the improvements are difficult to quantify. 2 - The project significantly improves the safety of travel along an unreliable corridor.  Travel time delay may be improved due to a reduced crash frequency. 3 - The project thoroughly improves the safety of travel along an unreliable corridor, and directly reduces travel time delay through the proposed street design. 3  
The project improves travel time reliability by investing in measures that reduce dependence on single-occupancy-vehicle trips. 0 - The project does not improve travel time reliability, or does not significantly invest in non-SOV transportation modes. 1 - The project has some impact on travel time reliability through minor investments in non-SOV transportation modes. 2 - The project has a significant impact on travel time reliability through rigorous investments in non-SOV transportation modes. 2  
The project invests in safe pedestrian facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in pedestrian facilities, or establishes facilities that are disconnected from other pedestrian infrastructure with no plans for connections. 1 - The project makes some investments in pedestrian facilities, such as beacons and sidewalks, but investments are limited to the immediate project area (ex: intersection). 2 - The project makes comprehensive investments in new and upgraded pedestrian facilities in the project area, and establishes safe connections to a greater pedestrian network. 2 Yes
The project invests in safe micromobility facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in bicycle facilities, or proposed facilities do not offer significant levels of safety (ex: painted bicycle lanes with no separation). 2 - The project invests in safe bicycle facilities. 2 Yes
The project invests in safe transit facilities. 0 - The project does not invest in any transit facilities. 1 - The project makes some transit-supportive investments (ex: bumpouts near bus stops). 2 - The project directly invests in transit facilities (ex: transit signal priority). 2 Yes
The project improves pedestrian safety near a high-utility corridor to promote walking over single occupancy vehicle trips. 0 - The project does not involve significant pedestrian safety improvements. 1 - The project improves pedestrian safety on a corridor with moderate utility. 2 - The project improves pedestrian safety on a high utility corridor. 2 Yes
The project improves safety near a high-utility corridor for other active transportation modes. 0 - The project does not involve significant safety improvements for other active transportation modes. 1 - The project improves active transportation safety on a corridor with moderate utility. 2 - The project improves active transportation safety on a high utility corridor. 2 Yes
Access and Connectivity: Provide transportation options and improve access to key destinations to support economic vitality and high quality of life.
The project serves sites targeted for future development (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not serve a site targeted for future development. 1 - The project serves a site for future development. 2 - The project serves a site targeted for future development that includes mixed-use or residential sites. 3 - The project serves a site or sites targeted for future development that includes mixed-use or residential sites, and are included as part of compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act from the community in which it is located. 3  
The project serves existing employment and population centers (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not serve an existing employment or population center. 1 - The project serves an existing employment or population center. 2 - The project serves an existing employment and population center. 3 - The project serves an existing employment and population center, or a population center that has significant affordable housing opportunities. 3 Yes
The project addresses safety concerns in multiple locations. 0 - Project improvements are concentrated at a specific site. 1 - The applicant details how the project is expected to have network improvements at other sites along the corridor. 2 - The project directly addresses multiple concerns at different locations. 2  
The project addresses safety concerns near to key public community assets. 0 - The project is not near to any key public community assets. 1 - The project addresses safety concerns near key public community assets with a large population of vulnerable users, such as schools, libraries, or senior centers. 1 Yes
The project is a product of or fulfills recommendations identified in a regional or statewide study. 0 - The project is not consistent with or the applicant does not cite a regional or statewide corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 1 - The project is thematically consistent with a regional or statewide study, such as a corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 2 - The project is explicitly called for in a regional or statewide study, such as a corridor study or Road Safety Audit. 2  
The project involves collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - Only one municipality is involved in the project. 1 - One or more municipalities are involved in the project. 1  
The project is near to or on a primary thoroughfare for regional freight travel. 0 - The project is not listed on a roadway with significant freight volumes. 1 - The project is on a roadway with significant freight volumes. 1  
The project improves navigability at or along the work area. 0 - No signage improves are incorporated into the project. 1 - Signage improvements, which may include interpretive signage, are included in the proposed project. 1  
Resilience: Provide transportation that supports sustainable environments and enables people to respond and adapt to climate change and other changing conditions.
The project reduces the risk of flooding in the project area through adaptation and resilience improvements. 0 - The project does not address flooding. 1 - The project reduces flood risk using structural adaptation/grey infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces flood risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 2 Yes
The project reduces the risk of extreme heat by reducing pavement cover, planting shade trees, providing shade structures, increasing green space, etc. 0 - The project does not address extreme heat. 1 - The project reduces extreme heat risk using structural adaptation/grey infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces extreme heat risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 2 Yes
The project implements recommendations or addresses needs identified in the respective municipality's Hazard Mitigation Plan, Municipal Vulnerability Plan, or Climate Adaptation Plan. 0 - The project does not address needs or recommendations. 2 - The project addresses needs or recommendations. 2  
The project improves stormwater infrastructure beyond MassDEP's MS4 standard. 0 - The project meets minimum standards. 1 - The project includes one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards (adopts stormwater BMPs, prepares pollution and/or erosion prevention plan, adopts environmentally sensitive site design practices, is expected to remove high amounts of TSS, etc.). 2 - Project adopts more than one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards. 2  
The project applicant demonstrates regional coordination or partnership on resilience improvements and project impacts with neighboring municipalities, environmental or EJ advocacy groups, local community organizations, regional or state agencies, etc. 0 - The applicant does not demonstrate regional coordination. 1 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities and/or regional or state agencies. 2 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities, regional or state agencies AND local community organizations/advocacy groups. 2  
The applicant details the expected useful life of the improvements, provides a plan for maintenance of resilience improvements, and/or references current and future climate conditions. 0 - Applicant does not reference current and future climate conditions and does not provide a plan for maintenance. 1 - Applicant references current and future climate conditions AND/OR provides a plan for maintenance. 1  
The project proposes improvements and reduces climate risk along evacuation routes and/or roadways that provide emergency access to critical facilities such as police stations, fire stations, and hospitals. 0 - The project does not propose improvements to an evacuation route or along roadways that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 1 - The project proposes improvements along an evacuation route OR along a roadway that provide emergency access to critical facilities. 1  
(Penalty) The project is located in an existing or projected flood zone and/or the project site has flooded in the past and the applicant does not specify how the project will address flooding. 0 - Project is not located in an existing or projected flood zone and site has not flooded in the past OR project is located in a flood zone and the applicant specifies how the project will address flooding. -3 - Project is located in an existing or projected flood zone or site has flooded in the past and the project does not specify how it will address flooding. 0 Yes
(Penalty) The project is located in an area that is vulnerable to extreme heat and the applicant does not specify how the project will address heat. 0 - The project is not located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat OR project is located in a vulnerable area and the applicant specifies how the project will address heat. -3 - The project is located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat and the project does not specify how it will address heat. 0 Yes
Clean Air and Healthy Communities: Provide transportation free of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants and that supports good health.
The project includes design elements aimed at reducing the amount of Single-Occupancy-Vehicle (SOV) trips (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in SOV trips. 1 - The project provides indirect support to reductions in SOV trips through supportive infrastructure for transit or active transportation, such as signage, web applications, educational campaigns, or personnel improvements. 2 - The project supports a reduction in the amount of SOV trips by improving the condition or accessibility of existing transit or active transportation assets. 2 Yes
The project includes design elements aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. 1 - The project supports a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions primarily by reducing travel time delay. 2 - The project includes a variety of elements aimed at reducing emissions such as low or no emission mobility improvements, innovative technologies or methods, and travel demand management. 2  
The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities and natural areas through low impact design, pavement reduction, nature-based adaptation, and other improvements that protect air/water/soil quality, provide ecological restoration and functioning, improve aquatic connectivity, etc. -3 - The project is expected to have a negative impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 0 - The project is not expected to impact adjacent communities or natural areas. 2 - The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 3 - The project is expected to have a positive impact AND specifies appropriate plant species for any added vegetation or green space (native species, flood/drought tolerant, diverse range of species, etc.). 3 Yes
The proposed project incorporates or will incorporate a meaningful community outreach and engagement process (Up to 3 points). 0 - The proposed project will incorporate all legally required community outreach and engagement necessary for the use of federal funding. 1 - The proposed project will incorporate additional community outreach and engagement as necessary, including public meetings within the served municipality or municipalities. 2 - The proposed project has already been subject to community outreach and engagement, and the applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the project process as it develops. 3 - The proposed project is the result of a rigorous community engagement process, and the proposed scope of work reflects the feedback or input received by the applicant from the community.  The applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the process, and the applicant has novel or innovative strategies to improve community engagement. 3  
The project proposes design elements aimed at improving water quality and reducing pollutant runoff to adjacent water resources. (Up to 1 point). 0 - The project does not propose any measures that address water quality, or contaminants generated by the facility or along the transit route. 1 - The project directly improves water quality through technologies or strategies that improve treatment capacity or limit contamination, including investment in expanded stormwater treatment facilities or reductions in impervious surfaces. 1 Yes
BONUSES    
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat carbon emissions, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve air quality/treatment. 1  
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat contaminated water, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve water quality or treatment. 1  
Resilience: The project design is expected to address multiple hazards and/or provide multiple environmental benefits such as risk reduction, ecological restoration, aquatic connectivity, improved water quality, groundwater recharge, etc. 0 - Project design is not expected to address multiple hazards or provide multiple environmental benefits. 1 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards OR provide multiple environmental benefits. 2 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards AND provide multiple environmental benefits. 2  
Resilience: The project design includes provision of educational material for the public related to environmental improvements and aspects of the project/area. 0 - Project will not provide educational material. 1 - Project will provide educational material. 1  
Resilience: The primary purpose of the project is to improve resilience and reduce risk to climate hazards. 0 - The primary purpose of the project is not resilience. 1 - The primary purpose of the project is resilience. 1  
Resilience: The project proponents have used RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool to demonstrate the value of resilience improvements in the project area. 0 - Proponents have not shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1 - Proponents have shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1  

 

 

Table A-8
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Evaluation Criteria: Transit Transformation Program

 

Project Name PROJECT NAME
Municipality/Proponent PROJECT PROPONENT(S)
Project Type Transit Transformation
Scoring Criteria  Base Score Equity Score
Equity: Facilitate an inclusive and transparent transportation-planning process and make investments that eliminate transportation-related disparities borne by people in disadvantaged communities.
An equity multiplier (EM) is applied to criteria that the MPO has identified through public outreach and data analysis as critical transportation needs or where there exist disparities that negatively impact equity populations. These criteria are denoted by a check mark on the right side of this scorecard. Each project’s multiplier is based on the percent of the population in the project area that belongs to each of the MPO’s six equity populations in the project area relative to their region wide averages. The higher the share of equity populations in the project area, the higher the multiplier.  To calculate a final Transportation Equity score, a project's raw equity multiplier is scaled to 20 points and then added to the base score (out of 80 possible points) as shown at the bottom of this scorecard.
Safety: Achieve zero transportation-related fatalities and serious injuries and improve safety for all users of the transportation system.
The proposed project addresses a documented operational safety issue (Up to 4 Points). -2 - The project does not incorporate improvements to operational safety at a facility with documented safety incidents. 0 - The project does not incorporate improvements to operational safety, and the involved facility or facilities do not have documented safety issues or risks. 2 - The project performs preventative maintenance on a facility to mitigate the emergence of safety hazards at the facility. 4 - The project directly addresses documented safety hazards that are already present at the facility, in addition to preventative maintenance. 5  
The proposed project improves the safety of users within the transit facility (Up to 2 Points). 0 - The project does not incorporate safety improvements for users in the design, or does not involve a rider-facing facility. 1 - In maintaining a state of good repair for the facility, the project mitigates the future emergence of safety hazards for users. 2 - The project directly addresses known user safety issues at stations through capital investment. 4 Yes
The proposed project improves the safety of users traveling to and from transit facilities (Up to 2 Points). 0 - The proposed project does not impact safety for users traveling to and from transit facilities. 1 - The proposed project makes minor safety improvements for users traveling to and from transit facilities, or improvements are not primarily directed towards vulnerable users. 2 - The proposed project makes significant improvements for users traveling to and from transit facilities, including improvements for vulnerable users. 3  
The proposed project supports dedicated rights of way for transit, or mitigates interference from other facility users (Up to 2 Points). 0 - The project does not address any shared right of way 1 - The project makes minor improvements to safety on existing rights of way used by transit operators. 2 - The project makes significant improvements to safety on existing rights of way used by transit operators, or creates new dedicated right of way for transit vehicles. 2  
The proposed project improves system responsiveness during emergency events (Up to 2 Points). 0 - The proposed project does not improve emergency response times. 1 - The proposed project makes improvements to emergency response times within the facility 2 - The proposed project makes improvements to emergency response times within and beyond the facility 2  
Mobility and Reliability: Support easy and reliable movement of people and freight.
The project reduces transit passenger delay (Up to 5 points) 5 Yes
The project invests in new transit assets or expanded service (Up to 5 points) 5 Yes
The project performs state of good repair improvements that extend the useful life of the facility (Up to 2 points) 0 - The project does not incorporate state of good repair improvements for existing facilities. 1 - The project incorporates state of good repair improvements for existing facilities. 2 - The project incorporates state of good repair improvements for existing facilities, and the proposed mobilization and construction strategy avoids closures to transit facilities or disruptions to transit operations. 2  
The project improves intermodal connections, and the ability of users to navigate those connections. 2  
The project improves conditions for personnel that support transit operations (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project does not directly incorporate improvements for personnel involved in transit operations. 1 - The project incorporates improvements for non-customer-facing transit operations personnel. 2 - The project incorporates improvements for customer-facing transit personnel. 2  
Access and Connectivity: Provide transportation options and improve access to key destinations to support economic vitality and high quality of life.
The project serves sites targeted for future development (Up to 3 points). -3 - The project does not serve a site targeted for future development due to noncompliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act from the community in which it is located. 0 - The project does not serve a site targeted for future development. 1 - The project serves a site for future development. 2 - The project serves a site targeted for future development that includes transit-supportive mixed-use or residential sites. 3 - The project serves a site or sites targeted for future development that include transit-supportive mixed-use or residential sites, and are included as part of compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act from the community in which it is located. 3  
The project serves existing employment and population centers (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not serve an existing employment or population center. 1 - The project serves an existing employment or population center. 2 - The project serves an existing employment and population center. 3 - The project serves an existing employment and population center, or a population center that has significant affordable housing opportunities. 3 Yes
The project invests in pedestrian connections to transit facilities or routes (Up to 4 points). -1 - The project does not invest in pedestrian connections to transit facilities, and no pedestrian connections are present.  The applicant has sufficient jurisdiction or authority to provide such improvements. 0 - The project does not invest in pedestrian connections to transit facilities or routes, but connections to the facilities and routes exist and are in fair or better condition.  Or, if a lack of connectivity exists, it is due to a lack of jurisdiction on the behalf of the applicant to improve. 1 - The project improves the condition of an existing pedestrian facility in the project area. 3 - The project adds a new, safe pedestrian connection for transit access in the project area. 3 Yes
The project invests in bicycle connections to transit facilities or routes (Up to 4 points). -1 - The project does not invest in bicycle connections to transit facilities, and no pedestrian connections are present.  The applicant has sufficient jurisdiction or authority to provide such improvements. 0 - The project does not invest in bicycle connections to transit facilities or routes, but connections to the facilities and routes exist and are in fair or better condition.  Or, if a lack of connectivity exists, it is due to a lack of jurisdiction on the behalf of the applicant to improve. 2 - The project improves the condition of an existing bicycle facility in the project area. 3 - The project improves the condition and user safety of an existing bicycle facility in the project area. 4 - The project adds a new, safe bicycle connection for transit access in the project area. 3  
The project improves ADA accessibility for transit facilities or routes (Up to 4 points). -2 - The project does not invest in ADA accessibility upgrades for a facility where deficiencies can be identified. 0 - The project does not invest in ADA accessibility upgrades for a facility or route. 2 - The project invests in ADA accessibility upgrades for a transit facility. 4 - The project invests in ADA accessibility upgrades for a transit facility or routes and improves ADA accessibility for connecting features (ie: sidewalks). 4 Yes
Resilience: Provide transportation that supports sustainable environments and enables people to respond and adapt to climate change and other changing conditions.
The project reduces the risk of flooding in the project area through adaptation and resilience improvements. 0 - The project does not address flooding. 1 - The project reduces flood risk using structural adaptation/grey infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces flood risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 3 - The project adopts green infrastructure and specifies appropriate plant types for any added vegetation (native species, flood/drought tolerant, diverse range of species, etc.) 3 Yes
The project reduces the risk of extreme heat by reducing pavement cover, planting shade trees, providing shade structures, increasing green space, etc. 0 - The project does not address extreme heat. 1 - The project reduces extreme heat risk using structural adaptation/grey infrastructure. 2 - The project reduces extreme heat risk using nature-based adaptation/green infrastructure, or a combination of green and gray infrastructure. 3 - The project adopts green infrastructure and specifies appropriate plant types for any added vegetation (native species, flood/drought tolerant, diverse range of species, etc.) 3 Yes
The project implements recommendations or addresses needs identified in the respective municipality's Hazard Mitigation Plan, Municipal Vulnerability Plan, or Climate Adaptation Plan. 0 - The project does not address needs or recommendations. 2 - The project addresses needs or recommendations. 2  
The project improves stormwater infrastructure beyond MassDEP's MS4 standard. 0 - The project meets minimum standards. 1 - The project includes one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards (adopts stormwater BMPs, prepares pollution and/or erosion prevention plan, adopts environmentally sensitive site design practices, is expected to remove high amounts of TSS, etc.). 2 - Project adopts more than one design element to go above minimum stormwater improvement standards. 2  
The project applicant demonstrates regional coordination or partnership on resilience improvements and project impacts with neighboring municipalities, environmental or EJ advocacy groups, local community organizations, regional or state agencies, etc. 0 - The applicant does not demonstrate regional coordination. 1 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities and/or regional or state agencies. 2 - The applicant demonstrates regional coordination with neighboring municipalities, regional or state agencies AND local community organizations/advocacy groups. 2  
The project addresses risk to rider health and safety posed by climate hazards. 0 - The project does not address risk to rider health and safety posed by climate hazards. 3 - The project proposes improvements that will reduce risk to rider health and safety posed by climate hazards. 3  
The applicant details the expected useful life of the improvements and provides a plan for maintenance of resilience improvements beyond the construction phase. 0 - The applicant does not provide a maintenance plan and/or clear information as to the expected useful life of the asset. 1 - The applicant does provide a maintenance plan and/or clear information as to the expected useful life of the asset. 1 Yes
(Penalty) The project is located in an existing or projected flood zone and/or the project site has flooded in the past and the applicant does not specify how the project will address flooding. 0 - Project is not located in an existing or projected flood zone and site has not flooded in the past OR project is located in a flood zone and the applicant specifies how the project will address flooding. -3 - Project is located in an existing or projected flood zone or site has flooded in the past and the project does not specify how it will address flooding. 0 Yes
(Penalty) The project is located in an area that is vulnerable to extreme heat and the applicant does not specify how the project will address heat. 0 - The project is not located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat OR project is located in a vulnerable area and the applicant specifies how the project will address heat. -3 - The project is located in an area vulnerable to extreme heat and the project does not specify how it will address heat. 0 Yes
Clean Air and Healthy Communities: Provide transportation free of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants and that supports good health.
The project supports a reduction in the amount of Single-Occupancy-Vehicle (SOV) trips for a given area (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in SOV trips. 1 - The project provides indirect support to reductions in SOV trips through the implementation of transit-supportive infrastructure, such as signage, web applications, education campaigns, or personnel improvements. 2 - The project supports a reduction in the amount of SOV trips by improving the condition or accessibility of existing transit assets, or reliability of existing service. 3 - The project supports a reduction in the amount of SOV trips by improving the accessibility or capacity of existing transit assets, making investments that improve the frequency or capacity of service, or expand service area or hours of operation for transit. 3 Yes
The project directly supports a reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from transit operations or facilities (Up to 3 points). 0 - The project does not support a reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from transit operations or facilities, or the support is indirect. 1 - The project supports reductions in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from transit operations or facilities through an investment in low emission technologies. 2 - The project supports reductions in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from transit operations or facilities through investments in both low emission technologies and no emission technologies. 3 - The project invests exclusively in the adoption and installation of zero-emission technologies or facility electrification. 3 Yes
The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities and natural areas through low impact design, pavement reduction, nature-based adaptation, and other improvements that protect air/water/soil quality, provide ecological restoration and functioning, improve aquatic connectivity, etc. -1 - The project is expected to have a negative impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 0 - The project is not expected to impact adjacent communities or natural areas. 1.5 - The project is expected to have a positive impact on adjacent communities or natural areas. 3 - The project specifies native species for any added vegetation or green space. 3  
The project proposes design elements aimed at removing air pollutants and improving air quality. (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project does not propose any measures that address air quality. 2 - The project proposes design elements that remove air pollutants and improve air quality. 2  
The project proposes design elements aimed at improving water quality and reducing pollutant runoff to adjacent water resources. (Up to 2 points). 0 - The project does not propose any measures that address water quality, or contaminants generated by the facility or along the transit route. 2 - The project directly improves water quality through technologies or strategies that improve treatment capacity or limit contamination, including investment in expanded stormwater treatment facilities or reductions in impervious surfaces. 2  
The proposed project incorporates or will incorporate a meaningful community outreach and engagement process (Up to 3 points). 0 - The proposed project will incorporate all legally required community outreach and engagement necessary for the use of federal funding. 1 - The proposed project will incorporate additional community outreach and engagement as necessary, including public meetings within the served municipality or municipalities. 2 - The proposed project has already been subject to community outreach and engagement, and the applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the project process as it develops. 3 - The proposed project is the result of a rigorous community engagement process, and the proposed scope of work reflects the feedback or input received by the applicant from the community.  The applicant will continue to engage stakeholders in the process, and the applicant has novel or innovative strategies to improve community engagement. 3 Yes
BONUSES    
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat carbon emissions, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve air quality/treatment. 1  
CAHQ: Pursuant to the improvement of the capacity of the transit asset or supportive facilities to capture/process/treat contaminated water, the project utilizes nature-based solutions to improve water quality or treatment. 1  
Resilience: The project design is expected to address multiple hazards and/or provide multiple environmental benefits such as risk reduction, ecological restoration, aquatic connectivity, improved water quality, groundwater recharge, etc. 0 - Project design is not expected to address multiple hazards or provide multiple environmental benefits. 1 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards OR provide multiple environmental benefits. 2 - Project design is expected to address multiple hazards AND provide multiple environmental benefits. 2  
Resilience: The project design includes provision of educational material for the public related to environmental improvements and aspects of the project/area. 0 - Project will not provide educational material. 1 - Project will provide educational material. 1  
Resilience: The primary purpose of the project is to improve resilience and reduce risk to climate hazards. 0 - The primary purpose of the project is not resilience. 1 - The primary purpose of the project is resilience. 1  
Resilience: The project proponents have used RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool to demonstrate the value of resilience improvements in the project area. 0 - Proponents have not shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1 - Proponents have shared results from RMAT's Climate Resilience Design Standards Tool. 1  

 

 

Table A-9
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Community Connections Program Project Evaluation Criteria: Bicycle Lanes

 

Evaluation Criteria for the FFYs 2025 Community Connections Program: Bicycle Racks Applications
Scoring Criteria   Max Points
Connectivity: Improve first- and last-mile connections to key destinations.
Work locations are near to existing areas of concentrated development or public spaces. 0 - The proposed work locations are not near to a moderate density of residential housing, commercial businesses, or public facilities. 1 - The proposed work locations are near to some mid-density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 2 - The proposed work locations are near to mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 3 - The proposed work locations are near to a combination of mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments and public facilities and open space. 3
Work locations are near to planned developments or public spaces. 0 - No planned developments or public realm improvements are sited near the work locations. 1 - Proposed developments in the project area are limited. 2 - Numerous developments are proposed at or near work locations for the project, and include enabling land uses. 3 - All work locations are near to areas of planned development, and the types of development are supportive to demand for cycling.  Alternatively, full credit may also be earned if some of the work locations are near designated areas for Transit Oriented Development, including zones for compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act. 3
Work locations for the project are situated near to transit facilities. 0 - Proposed work locations are not located near transit stations. 1 - At least one of the proposed work locations is within 300 feet of a transit facility. 2 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility.  3 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility, and the RTA/owner of the facility has provided written support for the project. 3
Work locations for the project complement transit operating routes. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near transit routes. 1 - Only one work location in the project is located near a transit route with limited accessibility or utility to and from that point. 2 - One work location in the project is located near a major transit route, but the location provides some utility to and from that point.  Or, more than one work location is near a transit route, but the locations are not well connected to one another. 3 - The proposed work locations effectively mirror one or more transit routes, and improve accessibility to and from that route. 3
The work location or locations are safely accessible by walking. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe pedestrian infrastructure, such as sidewalks and crosswalks. 1 - Less than half of proposed work locations are near safe pedestrian infrastructure. 2 - More than half of proposed work locations are near safe pedestrian infrastructure. 3 - All work locations are near safe, pedestrian-accessible sites that include signalized crosswalks and continuous sidewalks. 3
The work location or locations are near to safe bicycle-supportive infrastructure. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe bicycle infrastructure. 1 - Most proposed work locations are near bicycle infrastructure that does not provide physical separation for users. 2 - Most proposed work locations are near bicycle infrastructure that provides some on-road separation for users. 3 - Most or all work locations are near bicycle infrastructure that provides full physical separation, including vertical or horizontal separation, for users. 3
Connectivity Score   18
Regional and Interlocal Coordination    
The project includes a substantial public engagement process. 0 - The municipality or municipalities applying for the project are the primary stakeholders in the project development process. 1 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged their communities for the purpose of implementing the proposed improvements, specifically entities responsible for ensuring the continuing operations of the project (ROW, local operating costs, etc.) 2 - The municipality or municipalities have held public meetings on the proposed project, in addition to the above. 3 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged stakeholders in their communities for the purpose of soliciting feedback to improve the planning and prioritization of the project, in addition to the above. 4 - The project involves a rigorous public engagement process that addresses multiple public and private groups at the local level.  The public engagement process specifically led to the identification of sites included in the project. 4
The project demonstrates collaboration between different components of the municipality for site prioritization. 0 - The applicant is not working with other business units within the municipality as part of the project. 1 - The applicant has received support from elected officials within the municipality for the project beyond the budget process. 2 - In addition to the above, the selection of sites as part of the project was performed in consultation with other municipal units, including for example school committees, Councils on Aging, Parks Departments, etc. 2
The project demonstrates collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - No direct support from other municipalities is provided. 1 - The applicant is a regional organization providing bicycle parking for one or more municipalities. 2 - The project involves collaboration between one or more municipalities. 2
The project demonstrates collaboration with other state or federal agencies. 0 - The project does not involve any direct coordination with state or federal agencies in a manner unrelated to the TIP process. 1 - The project involves a state or federal facility, and support for the applicant to improve that facility has been provided by the facility owner.  The owner is not otherwise involved in the project. 2 - The project is a direct partnership between a municipality and a state or federal agency, which may be demonstrated through providing bicycle racks at State/National Parks, publicly-accessible state/federal buildings (including universities), or other facilities. 2
Project demonstrates collaboration across multiple sectors 0 - No direct support from private entities is listed. 2 - The project proponent coordinated with the private sector in the development of the project as part of selecting site areas. 4 - The project includes extensive support between the public and private sectors, including private funding contributions. 4
Project collaborators submit letters of support to MPO 0 - The applicant has not attached letters of support. 2 - Letters of support are attached to demonstrate fulfillment of the above criteria. 2
Coordination Score   16
Plan Implementation: Support local, regional, and statewide planning efforts.  
Project is included in local plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in any local plans or studies. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 4 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, and those documents are cited by the applicant. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a local plan or study. 6
Project is included in regional plans or studies, including those created by the Boston Region MPO and Metropolitan Area Planning Council 0 - The project is not included in any regional plans or studies. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 4 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, and the applicant cites those documents.  Alternatively, the applicant developed this project or identified the need being addressed by the project through direct consultation with MAPC or a similar body. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a regional plan or study, or is located at a regionally significant junction for the Bluebikes network as identified by MAPC or a similar entity. 6
Project is included in statewide plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in any statewide plans or studies. 2 - The project is included in a statewide planning document, but is not cited by the applicant. 4 - The project is included in a statewide planning document cited by the applicant. 4
Project acts as an 'anchor' for development of a sustainable bicycle network. 0 - The project does not add racks to an area of at least low-moderate utility. 1 - The project expands into an area of low-moderate utility, or add racks where none currently exist to an area of low utility. 2 - The project expands into an area of moderate or greater utility. 2
Plan Implementation Score   18
Transportation Equity: Ensure that all people receive comparable benefits from, and are not disproportionately burdened by, MPO investments, regardless of race, color, national origin, age, income, ability, or sex.
Project serves one or more transportation equity populations, as identified by the Boston Region MPO Each population's index scores are based on the percent of the population group within the service area relative to the MPO regional average. For example, the higher percentage, the higher the index.                                                             Equity Score Look-up Table                 If the sum of the Indices Greater than…        …And Less Than…        The Project Score is… 0                                                                          1                                        0 0.99                                                                     6                                        3 5.99                                                                    11                                       6 10.99                                                                  16                                       9 15.99                                                                  21                                      12 20.99                                                                  27                                      18 18
The project expands or maintains direct access to a safe bicycle facility.   0 - Work locations for the project are not near to a safe bicycle facility. 1 - Work locations for the project are near to a safe bicycle facility. 1
The project serves a community with a low rate of automobile ownership. 0 - The project does not install bicycle racks in an area with low rates of automobile ownership. 1 - The project installs bicycle racks in an area with a low rate of automobile ownership. 1
Transportation Equity Score   20
Climate Change Mitigation    
For new racks, does the project further promote mode shift? For repair/replacement projects, how many users utilize the facility? 0 - The extent to which the project creates new trips is unclear or lacks sufficient supporting information.  For rack repair/replacement projects, the applicant does not provide data for existing ridership at the involved stations. 2 - The project creates a moderate number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile.  For rack repair/replacement projects, the stations being replaced are of moderate utility and consistent ridership levels. 3 - The project creates a large number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile, or increases the accessibility of an alternative transportation mode/route (ex: existing trails, routes parallel to transit operations).  For rack repair/replacement projects, the stations being replaced are of significant utility with strong ridership levels, and are first priority investments. 4 - Pursuant to 3 above, but does so in area with disproportionate air quality burden. 4
Estimates for project demand are realistic and grounded in thorough analysis. 0 - Future demand projections do not seem realistic, or the methodology as to how they were calculated is not explained. 2 - Future demand projections seem reasonable and support the above argument for substituting single occupancy vehicle trips. 4 - The applicant has provided realistic demand projections and accounted for possible variations in demand (seasonal variation, new enabling infrastructure, etc.) in their estimate. 4
The rack investment is complementary to an ongoing or planned surface transportation investment. 0 - The investment does not complement any planned or nearby projects.  2 - The investment is somewhat related to a planned or nearby project, but the connection between the two is limited. 4 - The investment is related to a planned or nearby project that offers some bike-supportive infrastructure. 6 - The investment is directly and deliberately related to a planned or nearby project that offers safe and accessible bike-supportive infrastructure, such as a shared-use-path. 6
The rack investment reinforces access to an existing surface transportation facility. 0 - The investment does not complement any nearby bicycle facilities. 2 - The investment complements an existing low to moderate utility link for biking. 4 - The investment complements an existing moderate to high utility link for biking, or a physically separated and safe pathway for all users (ex: shared use path, rail trail). 4
Climate Change Mitigation   18
Performance Management    
The project application includes a budget worksheet that outlines the sources and uses of the project. Disqualifying - No budget worksheet is attached. 0 - A budget sheet is included, but the costs associated are unrealistic. 3 - The budget sheet is attached, and the applicant describes the expenses, including the rationale behind the selected unit type. 3
The project proponent broadly outlines expected activities necessary for asset maintenance. 0 - No description of maintenance activities are provided. 3 - An anticipated maintenance schedule is provided. 3
The estimates for the usage rates on the bicycle racks are sound. 0 - The applicant does not describe how demand was estimated. 2 - The process for estimating demand for the bicycle racks is vague. 4 - The demand estimates for the bicycle racks are sound. 4
Performance Management   10
 
Total Score   100

 

Table A-10
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Community Connections Program Project Evaluation Criteria: Bicycle Racks

 

Evaluation Criteria for the FFYs 2025 Community Connections Program: Bicycle Lanes Applications
Scoring Criteria   Max Points
Connectivity: Improve first- and last-mile connections to key destinations.
Work locations are near to existing areas of concentrated development or public spaces. 0 - The proposed work locations are not near to a moderate density of residential housing, commercial businesses, or public facilities. 1 - The proposed work locations are near to some mid-density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 2 - The proposed work locations are near to mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 3 - The proposed work locations are near to a combination of mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments and public facilities and open space. 3
Work locations are near to planned developments or public spaces. 0 - No planned developments or public realm improvements are sited near the work locations. 1 - Proposed developments in the project area are limited. 2 - Numerous developments are proposed at or near work locations for the project, and include enabling land uses. 3 - All work locations are near to areas of planned development, and the types of development are supportive to demand for micromobility.  Alternatively, full credit may also be earned if some of the work locations are near designated areas for Transit Oriented Development, including zones for compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act. 3
Work locations for the project are situated near to transit facilities. 0 - Proposed work locations are not located near transit stations. 1 - At least one of the proposed work locations is within 300 feet of a transit facility. 2 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility.  3 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility, and the RTA/owner of the facility has provided written support for the project. 3
Work locations for the project complement transit operating routes. 0 - The proposed project is not near transit routes. 1 - A transit route is located in the project area, but with limited accessibility or utility to and from that point. 2 - A major transit route is present, and the proposed facility provides some utility to and from that point.  3 - The proposed facility effectively mirrors or complements transit routes, and improves accessibility to and from that route. 3
The work location or locations are safely accessible by walking. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe pedestrian infrastructure, such as sidewalks and crosswalks. 1 - Less than half of the project area contains safe pedestrian infrastructure. 2 - Most of the project limits are near to safe, pedestrian-accessible facilities that include signalized crosswalks and continuous sidewalks. 2
The proposed lanes are not placed in areas that could be potentially hazardous to users. -5  - Proposed work locations could be hazardous to users due to high speeds along the roadway, and additional mitigations besides lane striping are not planned for implementation. 0 - The proposed lanes are placed in areas that lack connectivity with other bicycle facilities, leading to 'drop offs' at the ends of the lanes. 1 - The lanes are located in areas with no current bicycle facilities and create a safer outcome, but speeds for vehicles along the roadway are high. 2 - The bicycle lanes create safe connections between other network assets, and the proposed implementation of the lanes is not hazardous to users. 2
The proposed lanes are near to other bicycle-supportive assets, such as racks, signage, or other trails and paths. 0 - No other bicycle supportive assets are near to the facility. 1 - A low amount of bicycle supportive assets are near to the facility, such as occasional bicycle lanes or signs. 2 - The bicycle lanes connect into other micromobility facilities, and/or the lanes are near to both current and planned supportive assets such as racks or signs. 2
Connectivity Score   18
Regional and Interlocal Coordination    
The project includes a substantial public engagement process. 0 - The municipality or municipalities applying for the project are the primary stakeholders in the project development process. 1 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged their communities for the purpose of implementing the proposed improvements, specifically entities responsible for ensuring the continuing operations of the project (ROW, local operating costs, etc.) 2 - The municipality or municipalities have held public meetings on the proposed project, in addition to the above. 3 - The project involves a rigorous public engagement process that addresses multiple public and private groups at the local level.  The public engagement process specifically led to the identification of sites included in the project. 4
The project demonstrates collaboration between different components of the municipality for site prioritization. 0 - The applicant is not working with other business units within the municipality as part of the project. 1 - The applicant has received support from elected officials within the municipality for the project beyond the budget process. 2 - In addition to the above, the selection of sites as part of the project was performed in consultation with other municipal units, including for example school committees, Councils on Aging, Parks Departments, etc. 2
The project demonstrates collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - No direct support from other municipalities is provided. 1 - The applicant is a regional organization providing a bicycle network for one or more municipalities. 2 - The project involves collaboration between one or more municipalities. 2
The project demonstrates collaboration with other state or federal agencies. 0 - The project does not involve any direct coordination with state or federal agencies beyond that related to the TIP process. 1 - The project involves a state or federal facility, and support for the applicant to improve that facility has been provided by the facility owner.  The owner is not otherwise involved in the project. 2 - The project is a direct partnership between a municipality and a state or federal agency, which may be demonstrated through providing lanes near to State/National Parks, publicly-accessible state/federal buildings (including universities), or other facilities. 2
Project demonstrates collaboration across multiple sectors 0 - No direct support from private entities is listed. 2 - The project proponent coordinated with the private sector in the development of the project as part of selecting site areas. 2
Project collaborators submit letters of support to MPO 0 - The applicant has not attached letters of support. 2 - Letters of support are attached to demonstrate fulfillment of the above criteria. 2
Coordination Score   14
Plan Implementation: Support local, regional, and statewide planning efforts.  
Project is included in local plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in any local plans or studies. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 4 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, and those documents are cited by the applicant. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a local plan or study. 6
Project is included in regional plans or studies, including those created by the Boston Region MPO and Metropolitan Area Planning Council 0 - The project is not included in any regional plans or studies. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 4 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, and the applicant cites those documents.  Alternatively, the applicant developed this project or identified the need being addressed by the project through direct consultation with MAPC or a similar body. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a regional plan or study, or is located at a regionally significant junction for the Bluebikes network as identified by MAPC or a similar entity. 6
Project is included in statewide plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in any statewide plans or studies. 2 - The project is included in a statewide planning document, but is not cited by the applicant. 4 - The project is included in a statewide planning document cited by the applicant. 4
Project acts as an 'anchor' for development of a sustainable bicycle network. 0 - The project does not add lanes to an area of at least low-moderate utility. 1 - The project expands into an area of low-moderate utility, or adds lanes where none currently exist to an area of low utility. 2 - The project expands into an area of moderate or greater utility. 2
Plan Implementation Score   18
Transportation Equity: Ensure that all people receive comparable benefits from, and are not disproportionately burdened by, MPO investments, regardless of race, color, national origin, age, income, ability, or sex.
Project serves one or more transportation equity populations, as identified by the Boston Region MPO Each population's index scores are based on the percent of the population group within the service area relative to the MPO regional average. For example, the higher percentage, the higher the index.                                                             Equity Score Look-up Table                 If the sum of the Indices Greater than…        …And Less Than…        The Project Score is… 0                                                                          1                                        0 0.99                                                                     6                                        3 5.99                                                                    11                                       6 10.99                                                                  16                                       9 15.99                                                                  21                                      12 20.99                                                                  27                                      18 19
The project serves a community with a low rate of automobile ownership. 0 - The project does not install bicycle lanes in an area with low rates of automobile ownership. 1 - The project installs bicycle lanes in an area with a low rate of automobile ownership. 1
Transportation Equity Score   20
Climate Change Mitigation    
To what extent do these lanes encourage new trips, or shift existing trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile? 0 - The extent to which the project creates new trips is unclear or lacks sufficient supporting information.  2 - The project creates a moderate number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile.  3 - The project creates a large number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile, or increases the accessibility of an alternative transportation mode/route (ex: existing trails, routes parallel to transit operations).  4 - Pursuant to 3 above, but does so in area with disproportionate air quality burden. 4
Estimates for project demand are realistic and grounded in thorough analysis. 0 - Future demand projections do not seem realistic, or the methodology as to how they were calculated is not explained. 2 - Future demand projections seem reasonable and support the above argument for substituting single occupancy vehicle trips. 4 - The applicant has provided realistic demand projections and accounted for possible variations in demand (seasonal variation, new enabling infrastructure, etc.) in their estimate. 4
The lanes are near to planned or underway bike supportive capital projects. 0 - The investment does not complement any planned or nearby projects.  2 - The investment is somewhat related to a planned or nearby project, but the connection between the two is limited. 4 - The investment is related to a planned or nearby project that offers some bike-supportive infrastructure. 6 - The investment is directly and deliberately related to a planned or nearby project that offers safe and accessible bike-supportive infrastructure, such as a shared-use-path. 6
The planned bike lanes reinforce connections to existing micromobility facilities. 0 - The investment does not complement any nearby bicycle facilities. 2 - The investment complements an existing low to moderate utility link for biking. 4 - The investment complements an existing moderate to high utility link for biking, or a physically separated and safe pathway for all users (ex: shared use path, rail trail). 4
Climate Change Mitigation   18
Performance Management    
The project application includes a budget worksheet that outlines the sources and uses of the project. Disqualifying - No budget worksheet is attached. 0 - A budget sheet is included, but the costs associated are unrealistic. 3 - The budget sheet is attached, and the applicant describes the sources of expenses. 3
The project proponent broadly outlines expected activities necessary for asset maintenance, including year round use of the facility. 0 - No description of maintenance activities are provided. 1 - The applicant describes how the facility may be maintained over time. 2 - The applicant describes how the facility may be maintained, and may remain accessible during times of inclement weather (ie: snow removal). 2
The project proponent describes interest in or the potential for future upgrades to the bicycle facility 0 - No further upgrades are planned for the bike lanes after installation. 1 - The applicant describes an interest in future upgrades to the bicycle lanes. 2 - The applicant describes interest in and a plan for implementing upgrades to bicycle lanes in the future. 3 - The applicant provides a descriptive plan for implementing further upgrades to the facility, including additional actions to date. 3
The projected volumes for the bicycle lanes are sound. 0 - The applicant does not describe how demand was estimated. 2 - The process for estimating demand for the bicycle lanes is vague. 4 - The demand estimates for the bicycle lanes are sound. 4
Performance Management   12
 
Total Score   100

 

 

Table A-11
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Community Connections Program Project Evaluation Criteria: Bikeshare Support

 

Evaluation Criteria for the FFYs 2025 Community Connections Program: Bikeshare Support and Expansion Applications
Scoring Criteria   Max Points
Connectivity: Improve first- and last-mile connections to key destinations.
Work locations are near to existing areas of concentrated development or public spaces. 0 - The proposed work locations are not near to a moderate density of residential housing, commercial businesses, or public facilities. 1 - The proposed work locations are near to some mid-density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 2 - The proposed work locations are near to mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 3 - The proposed work locations are near to a combination of mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments and public facilities and open space. 3
Work locations are near to planned developments or public spaces. 0 - No planned developments or public realm improvements are sited near the work locations. 1 - Proposed developments in the project area are limited. 2 - Numerous developments are proposed at or near work locations for the project, and include enabling land uses. 3 - All work locations are near to areas of planned development, and the types of development are supportive to demand for bikeshare.  Alternatively, full credit may also be earned if some of the work locations are near designated areas for Transit Oriented Development, including zones for compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act. 3
Work locations for the project are situated near to transit facilities. 0 - Proposed work locations are not located near transit stations. 1 - At least one of the proposed work locations is within 300 feet of a transit facility. 2 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility.  3 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility, and the RTA/owner of the facility has provided written support for the project. 3
Work locations for the project complement transit operating routes. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near transit routes. 1 - Only one work location in the project is located near a transit route with limited accessibility or utility to and from that point. 2 - One work location in the project is located near a major transit route, but the location provides some utility to and from that point.  Or, more than one work location is near a transit route, but the locations are not well connected to one another. 3 - The proposed work locations effectively mirror one or more transit routes, and improve accessibility to and from that route. 3
The work location or locations are safely accessible by walking. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe pedestrian infrastructure, such as sidewalks and crosswalks. 1 - Less than half of proposed work locations are near safe pedestrian infrastructure. 2 - More than half of proposed work locations are near safe pedestrian infrastructure. 3 - All work locations are near safe, pedestrian-accessible sites that include signalized crosswalks and continuous sidewalks. 3
The work location or locations are near to safe bicycle-supportive infrastructure. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe bicycle infrastructure. 1 - Most proposed work locations are near bicycle infrastructure that does not provide physical separation for users. 2 - Most proposed work locations are near bicycle infrastructure that provides some on-road separation for users. 3 - Most or all work locations are near bicycle infrastructure that provides full physical separation, including vertical or horizontal separation, for users. 3
Connectivity Score   18
Regional and Interlocal Coordination      
Project demonstrates collaboration between multiple entities within the municipality or municipalities. 0 - The municipality or municipalities applying for the project are the primary stakeholders in the project development process. 2 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged entities within their communities for the purpose of implementing the proposed improvements, specifically entities responsible for ensuring the continuing operations of the project (ROW, local operating costs, etc.) 3 - The project is a joint effort between one or more municipalities (minimum score for joint applications). 4 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged stakeholders in their communities for the purpose of soliciting feedback to improve the planning and prioritization of the project, in addition to securing any local support for ROW. 6 - The project involves a rigorous public engagement process that addresses multiple public and private groups at the local level, including direct involvement from community based organizations to help shape the scope of the project. 6
Project demonstrates collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - No direct support from other municipalities is provided. 2 - The application refers to the Bluebikes Council as providing support, but there is no written documentation. 4 - The project has the written approval of the Bluebikes Council, or letters of support from neighboring communities, or involves work spread across multiple municipalities. 4
Project demonstrates collaboration across multiple sectors 0 - No direct support from private entities is listed, or the applicant refers to private collaboration that is within the existing scope of the Bluebikes contract (ex: vendor, sponsorships) 2 - The project proponent coordinated with the private sector in the development of the project beyond the private stakeholders already involved in the Bluebikes contract. 4 - The project includes extensive cooperation with the private sector, including the direct contribution of local, private funding from local businesses, fundraising, etc. 4
Project collaborators submit letters of support to MPO 0 - The applicant has not attached letters of support. 2 - Letters of support are attached to demonstrate fulfillment of the above criteria. 2
Coordination Score   16
Plan Implementation: Support local, regional, and statewide planning efforts.  
Project is included in local plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in any local plans or studies. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 4 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, and those documents are cited by the applicant. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a local plan or study. 6
Project is included in regional plans or studies, including those created by the Boston Region MPO and Metropolitan Area Planning Council 0 - The project is not included in any regional plans or studies. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 4 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, and the applicant cites those documents.  Alternatively, the applicant developed this project or identified the need being addressed by the project through direct consultation with MAPC or a similar body. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a regional plan or study, or is located at a regionally significant junction for the Bluebikes network as identified by MAPC or a similar entity. 6
Project is included in statewide plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in any statewide plans or studies. 2 - The project is included in a statewide planning document, but is not cited by the applicant. 4 - The project is included in a statewide planning document cited by the applicant. 4
Project acts as an 'anchor' for development of a sustainable bikeshare network. 0 - For expansion projects, the project does not expand into an area of at least low-moderate utility, or is located in an area saturated with bikeshare.  For repair projects, the project does not address an asset nearing the end of its useful life in a priority location, or in a location of at least moderate utility. 1 - For expansion projects, the project expands into an area of low-moderate utility.  For repair projects, the project addresses an asset nearing the end of its useful life in a location of at least moderate utility. 2 - For expansion projects, the project expands into an entirely new part of the Boston Region, or expands into an area ranging from moderate to high utility.  Alternatively, the proposed expansion seeks to link together more 'disconnected' nexuses of stations back into the larger regional system  For repair projects, the project addresses an asset nearing the end of its useful life in a high utility or critical area. 2
Plan Implementation Score   18
Transportation Equity: Ensure that all people receive comparable benefits from, and are not disproportionately burdened by, MPO investments, regardless of race, color, national origin, age, income, ability, or sex.
Project serves one or more transportation equity populations, as identified by the Boston Region MPO Each population's index scores are based on the percent of the population group within the service area relative to the MPO regional average. For example, the higher percentage, the higher the index.                                                             Equity Score Look-up Table                 If the sum of the Indices Greater than…        …And Less Than…        The Project Score is… 0                                                                          1                                        0 0.99                                                                     6                                        3 5.99                                                                    11                                       6 10.99                                                                  16                                       9 15.99                                                                  21                                      12 20.99                                                                  27                                      18 18
The project expands or maintains direct access to a safe bicycle facility.  The bikeshare model supports access to these facilities for individuals who do not own a private bicycle. 0 - Work locations for the project are not near to a safe bicycle facility. 1 - Work locations for the project are near to a safe bicycle facility. 1
The project incorporates pedal-assist or fully electric bikes in an area with a high share of older adults. 0 - The project does not incorporate any pedal-assist or fully electric bikes. 1 - The project incorporates pedal-assist or fully electric bikes. 1
Transportation Equity Score   20
Climate Change Mitigation      
For expansion projects, to what extent does the expanded service encourage new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile? For repair/replacement projects, how many trips does the existing service support? 0 - The extent to which the project creates new trips is unclear or lacks sufficient supporting information.  For station repair/replacement projects, the applicant does not provide data for existing ridership at the involved stations. 2 - The project creates a moderate number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile.  For station repair/replacement projects, the stations being replaced are of moderate utility and consistent ridership levels. 3 - The project creates a large number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile, or increases the accessibility of an alternative transportation mode/route (ex: existing trails, routes parallel to transit operations).  For station repair/replacement projects, the stations being replaced are of significant utility with strong ridership levels, and are first priority investments. 4 - The project performs all work necessary for 3 above, and does so in an area with disproportionate air quality burden. 4
Estimates for project demand are realistic and grounded in thorough analysis. 0 - Future demand projections do not seem realistic, or the methodology as to how they were calculated is not explained. 2 - Future demand projections seem reasonable and support the above argument for substituting single occupancy vehicle trips. 4 - The applicant has provided realistic demand projections and accounted for possible variations in demand (seasonal variation, new enabling infrastructure, etc.) in their estimate. 4
The bikeshare investment is complementary to an ongoing or planned surface transportation investment. 0 - The investment does not complement any planned or nearby projects.  2 - The investment is somewhat related to a planned or nearby project, but the connection between the two is limited. 4 - The investment is related to a planned or nearby project that offers some bike-supportive infrastructure. 6 - The investment is directly and deliberately related to a planned or nearby project that offers safe and accessible bike-supportive infrastructure, such as a shared-use-path. 6
The bikeshare investment expands access to an existing surface transportation facility. 0 - The investment does not complement any nearby bicycle facilities. 1 - The investment complements an existing low to moderate utility link for biking. 2 - The investment complements an existing moderate to high utility link for biking, or a physically separated and safe pathway for all users (ex: shared use path, rail trail). 2
The investment incorporates improvements for bikeshare electrification. 0 - The investment does not incorporate or support current and future electrification of the bikeshare facility (or facilities). 1 - The investment incorporates electrification of the bikeshare fleet, but not for the facility itself. 2 - The investment incorporates electrification for the bikeshare facility.   2
Climate Change Mitigation   18
Performance Management      
The project proponent outlines expected sources of funding to support the costs of operation associated with the project. -3 - No sources of potential operating costs are provided. 0 - Sources of funding for operating costs are indicated, but are vague. 2 - Sources of funding for operating costs are indicated and seem secure. 3 - The proponent identifies sources of funding for operating costs that are secure and innovative in some manner. 3
The project proponent outlines expected sources of funding to support the maintenance or replacement of the asset. In the case of Bikeshare projects seeking capital support for station repair or replacement, the project proponent outlines their plan for keeping the asset in a state of good repair. 0 - The applicant does not describe the sources of funding necessary for long term maintenance of the asset, or describe any plan to maintain the asset. 1 - The applicant describes how they intend to maintain the asset, but does not indicate sources of funding for maintenance.  Alternatively, the source of maintenance funding described is from other state or Boston Region MPO programs that have a local match requirement (which is not indicated). 2 - The applicant describes a plan to maintain the asset and identifies sources of funding to do so to some detail. 3 - The applicant thoroughly details a plan to maintain and continue to fund the maintenance of assets included in the proposed project. 3
Project application includes completed budget worksheet that demonstrates financial viability of project Disqualifying - No budget worksheet is attached. 0 - The project application includes a budget worksheet, but it is missing information or does not demonstrate the financial viability of the project. 2 - The project application includes a complete budget worksheet, but some concerns around the financial viability and sustainability of the project remain. 4 - Pursuant to the above criteria, the budget worksheet demonstrates the near term and long term fiscal viability and sustainability of the project. 4
Performance Management   10
 
Total Score   100

 

 

Table A-12
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Community Connections Program Project Evaluation Criteria: Microtransit Pilots

 

Evaluation Criteria for the FFYs 2025 Community Connections Program: Microtransit Pilot Applications
Scoring Criteria   Max Points
Connectivity: Improve first- and last-mile connections to key destinations.  
The project connects to existing residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 0 - The project does not connect to any current residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 1 - The project primarily connects to low to medium density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 2 - The project primarily connects to high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 3 - The project primarily connects to high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, and better integrates those developments into other non-SOV infrastructure options such as commuter rail stations, bike paths, etc. 3
The project connects to planned residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 0 - The project does not connect to any planned or permitted residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 1 - The project connects to some planned or permitted commercial or residential development, but the developments are limited in scope or low density. 2 - The project connects to numerous planned or permitted high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 3 - The project connects to numerous planned or permitted high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, including zones included as part of compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act or 40B developments. 3
The project provides a connection to other transit facilities or routes, including but not limited to train stations, bus hubs and stops, or other shuttle services. 0 - The project does not primarily provide connections to other transit facilities or routes. 1 - The project provides some connections to low-frequency transit facilities or routes. 2 - The project provides some connections to moderate or high frequency transit facilities or routes. 3 - The project provides significant connections to moderate or high frequent transit facilities or routes, and the design or schedule of the project complements the schedules of those alternate transit services.  The project proponent is directly collaborating with other transit providers as part of this effort. 3
The project deliberately creates connections to safe and accessible facilities for walking and biking. 0 - The project does not provide for connections to safe and accessible facilities for walking and biking. 1 - The project provides for connections to facilities for walking and biking, but these connections are either incidental (included in the service area for a demand-response service) or are not high-utility corridors. 2 - The project deliberately provides for connections to facilities for walking and biking, and some of the included facilities are on high-utility corridors. 3 - The project deliberately provides for numerous connections to safe and accessible walking and biking facilities, many of which are on high utility corridors.  Recreational trails may also be included in the project area. 3
The project increases access to open space or other natural / recreation sites. 0 - The project does not provide for any access to open space or natural sites. 1 - The project is a demand response service that provides for access to open space or natural sites within the service area. 2 - The project is a fixed route service with connections near to open space or other recreation / natural sites. 3 - The project is a demand response or fixed route service with deliberate, priority connections to and from open space and other natural or recreation sites, with the service model intentionally aiming to increase access to those areas. 3
The proposed hours of and times of service support a variety of potential use cases.  0 - The applicant does not provide an explanation as to why their times of service were selected. 1 - The applicant provides hours and times of service, but their explanation regarding why these times were selected are vague or largely relate to fiscal and personnel constraints. 2 - The applicant provides hours and times of service with an explanation as to how the model suits the needs of a diverse array of potential users. 3 - The applicant provides an explanation of why the hours and times of service were selected, how its operations supports the needs of a diverse array of potential users, and explains the conditions under which they may expand service offerings. 3
The project expands upon an existing service or service delivery model within the Commonwealth. 0 - The project is entirely novel, and does not build upon an existing service or leverage a service delivery model implemented within the Commonwealth. 1 - The project expands the hours of service or area of service within a single municipality. 2 - The project expands the hours of service or area of service across multiple municipalities, including adding a new municipality to the service area. 2
Connectivity Score   20
Regional and Interlocal Coordination    
Project demonstrates collaboration between multiple entities 0 - The project applicant is the sole entity involved in the project. 1 - The project applicant and the operator are the only entities involved in the project. 2 - The project applicant and operator are the only entities involved in the project, but the project includes robust public outreach. 3 - The project applicant is partnering with one or more municipalities in administering the service, including providing service to adjacent municipalities, but the applicant performs most of the work. 4 - Multiple municipalities are involved in overseeing the project in tandem with the operator. 5 - The project has multiple municipalities taking an active role in administering the service in addition to a diverse array of other project partners. 5
Project demonstrates collaboration across multiple sectors 0 - The project does not demonstrate collaboration across multiple sectors. 1 - The project demonstrates some collaboration between the public and private sector in the form of letters of support, or connections to private employers. 2 - The project demonstrates moderate collaboration between the public and private sector, with private sector stakeholders involved in some supporting functions. 3 - The project demonstrates significant collaboration between the public and private sector, with private sector stakeholders making a significant financial or in-kind contribution to support the financial sustainability of the project. 3
Project collaborators submit letters of support to MPO 0 - No letters of support have been provided by the applicant. 1 - The applicant provides letters of support, but the letters only include support from municipal entities. 2 - The applicant provides letters of support, including letters from a variety of non-governmental and/or community based organizations. 2
The Regional Transit Authority (RTA), including the MBTA, that provides service to or near the municipality or municipalities involved in the proposed service has been made aware of the application by the applicant. 0 - The applicant has not discussed their proposed service with their local RTA or RTAs. 1 - The applicant has discussed their proposed service with their local RTA or RTAs.  If the applicant is an RTA, it has discussed the proposed service with MassDOT's Rail and Transit Division (RTD). 2 - The applicant has discussed their proposed service with their local RTA or RTAs, and the RTA has provided written support for the project.  If the applicant is an RTA, MassDOT Rail and Transit Division (RTD) is aware of and has provided written support for the project. 2
The project is included in statewide or regional plans and/or studies, including the Boston Region MPO's Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan (CPTHST) 0 - The applicant does not cite, or the project is not consistent with the themes or explicit needs identified in any statewide or regional planning documents or studies. 3 - The project is consistent with the broad themes or recommendations laid out for the municipality or region in the CPTHST. 6 - The project is explicitly called for in a statewide, regional, or municipal planning document, or is the direct result of a study conducted by an independent federal, state, or regional entity. 6
Coordination Score   18
Transportation Equity: Ensure that all people receive comparable benefits from, and are not disproportionately burdened by, MPO investments, regardless of race, color, national origin, age, income, ability, or sex.    
Project serves one or more transportation equity populations, as identified by the Boston Region MPO Each population's index scores are based on the percent of the population group within the service area relative to the MPO regional average. For example, the higher percentage, the higher the index.                                                             Equity Score Look-up Table                 If the sum of the Indices Greater than…        …And Less Than…        The Project Score is… 0                                                                          1                                        0 0.99                                                                     6                                        3 5.99                                                                    11                                       6 10.99                                                                  16                                       9 15.99                                                                  21                                      12 20.99                                                                  27                                      18 20
The project supports a fare structure that does not hinder access from disadvantaged groups. 0 - The proposed service operates on a uniform fare structure. 1 - The proposed service subsidizes fares for disadvantaged groups, including means-based fares and fare-free service for seniors and persons with disabilities. 2 - The proposed service is entirely fare-free. 1
The project prioritizes service to disadvantaged groups or areas. 0 - The project does not prioritize service to disadvantaged groups or areas, and the applicant does not offer any information as to how they would provide services to a person with disabilities. 1 - The project serves all individuals regardless of ability, but there are restrictions in terms of eligibility (ex: residence) 2 - The project effectively prioritizes service for disadvantaged groups or areas and balances the needs of other users as well.  The service is accessible to and may be used by all. 1
Transportation Equity Score   24
Climate Change Mitigation    
Is the proposed service an effective substitute for current trips conducted by private single occupancy vehicles? Disqualifying: The project is not anticipated to have any significant impact on encouraging shifts from single occupancy vehicles to the proposed service. 1 - According to the figures provided by the applicant, the project is anticipated to have a small impact on encouraging shifts from single occupancy vehicles. 2- The project is anticipated to have a small impact on directly encouraging shifts from single occupancy vehicle, but is also complementary to other alternative modes of transportation (transit facilities, active transportation, etc.) 3 - The project is expected to have an at least moderate impact in encouraging shifts from single occupancy vehicle trips. 4 - The project is expected to have a moderate impact in encouraging shifts from single occupancy vehicles, and reinforces or expands access to additional alternative modes of transportation (transit facilities, active transportation, etc.) 4
Does the proposed service create new connections or trips that could not otherwise be fulfilled without an automobile? 0 - The project is redundant to existing transit services in the project area, and the applicant has not sufficiently detailed how their service is meant to be complementary to it. 1 - The service creates new connections, but the efficacy of the service in substituting automobile trips is unclear. 2 - The project is complementary to existing transit services in the project area, specifically services that may have gaps in times of service, capacity to serve, or headways. 3 - The project creates entirely new connections in areas not otherwise served by a regional transit authority or other transit operator with a moderate likelihood of substitution. 4 - The project creates entirely new connections in areas not otherwise directly served by a regional transit authority or other transit operator, and these connections include other intermodal facilities (Commuter Rail stations, trails, etc.) 4
Does the proposed service operate with low or no emission vehicles? 0 - The project utilizes standard internal combustion engine vehicles for its fleet. 4 - The project utilizes low emission fuel source vehicles, including diesel electric hybrids or compressed natural gas (CNG). 5 - The project utilizes fully electric vehicles. 6 - The project utilizes fully electric vehicles, and planned or existing charging facilities utilize renewable energy sources. 6
What is the expected amount of time spent operating the vehicle for non-revenue hours, or "dead-heading" between trips in the case of demand response service? 0 - The applicant does not estimate the amount of non-revenue hours of operation for the service or provide dead-head estimates.  Dead-head estimates, if provided, represent a sizable component of operating time and the vehicles used are not low/no emission vehicles. 2 - The proposed project has minimal dead-head zones.  For fixed-route service, minimal time is spent moving vehicles between motor pools or staging areas towards the route.  For demand response services, ridership levels and operating strategies or technologies minimize downtime between trips. 4 - The proposed project has minimal dead-head zones.  For fixed-route service, minimal time is spent moving vehicles between motor pools or staging areas towards the route, and the vehicles involved are low/no emission.  For demand response services, ridership levels and operating strategies or technologies minimize downtime between trips while also operating electric vehicles. 4
Is the average driving miles per passenger trip significantly different than if the trip was conducted with a single-occupancy vehicle?   Disqualifying - The average driving miles per passenger trip with a non low/zero emission vehicle are equal to or greater than the mileage for a typical SOV trip.  0 - The average driving miles per passenger trip  are not significantly different from conducting the trip with a SOV, but the vehicle used is a low/no emissions vehicle. 2 - The average driving miles per passenger trip are significantly different from conducting the trip with an SOV. 2
Climate Change Mitigation   20
Performance Management    
The project application includes a budget sheet that lays out the anticipated sources and uses of operating funding for at least the first three years of the project.   Disqualifying: no budget sheet is provided. 0: A budget sheet is provided, but the funding requests are not broken out by year or the estimates provided are unrealistic/flawed. 2: A budget sheet is provided with funding sources and uses laid out for each year in the period of performance.  The expected expenditures and revenues are reasonable. 4: A budget sheet is provided with funding sources and uses laid out for each year in the period of performance, in addition to potential alternative sources of funding.  The applicant has identified how they may pursue funding to continue the operations of the shuttle(s), if successful, following the three-year pilot period.  The expected revenues and expenditures laid out in the sheet are thoroughly defensible. 4
Project demand estimate is realistic and grounded in thorough analysis Disqualified: The applicant does not provide a project demand estimate, or an estimate is provided but lacks any explanation of the methodology used to achieve that estimate. 0: The applicant provides a demand estimate and means of estimation, but the estimate lacks sufficient supporting information to justify the estimate. If the applicant does not provide a follow-up response with sufficient information, they may be disqualified. 5: The applicant provides a demand estimate, a means of estimation, and supporting information that justifies the estimate to an acceptable extent. 10: The applicant provides a comprehensive analysis of their estimated demand, explains their methodology, and/or has utilized technical assistance from the Boston Region MPO, MassDOT, or a similar third-party to set their ridership targets. 10
The applicant lists their performance measures and the intervals at which they evaluate their success against those metrics. 0 - The applicant does not provide any performance measures, or is vague in their description of how those measures are to be evaluated. 2 - The performance of the proposed shuttle is evaluated against the minimum necessary parameters for the shuttle service, including average daily passenger trips, number of unique riders, total number of trips, and spending to date at monthly intervals.  The monthly reporting also includes the aforementioned information at a total level for the month.  Demand response services provide passenger trip time for a given month.  4 - The monthly reporting listed above will be utilized to evaluate, in a qualitative fashion, whether or not the data gathered is expected to remain steady or change in the future.  The project proponent also  intends to survey riders with questions including how riders would have made their trip without the service, the number of times a given rider uses the service at a weekly or monthly interval, the number of passengers that have a private vehicle available, and the purposes of that passenger trip. 6 -  The project proponent exceeds the minimum requirements set in the previous thresholds for performance evaluation, reporting, and passenger surveys, and is proposing the employment of innovative strategies or technologies to gather and analyze this data.  The proponent may also achieve this parameter if they are pursuing a robust community engagement strategy that emphasizes regional connections, including engaging adjacent municipalities. 6
Performance Management Score   20
Total Score   100

 

 

Table A-13
FFYs 2025–29 TIP Community Connections Program Project Evaluation Criteria: Wayfinding Signage

 

Evaluation Criteria for the FFYs 2025 Community Connections Program: Wayfinding Signage Applications
Scoring Criteria   Max Points
Connectivity: Improve first- and last-mile connections to key destinations.
Project sites serve areas of concentrated development. 0 - The proposed work locations are not near to a moderate density of residential housing, commercial businesses, or public facilities. 2 - The proposed work locations are near to mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments, or public facilities/open space. 4 - The proposed work locations are near to a combination of mid-high density residential, commercial, or mixed use developments. 4
Project sites are near to planned developments. 0 - No planned developments or public realm improvements are sited near the work locations. 2 - Developments are proposed at or near work locations for the project, and include enabling land uses. 4 - Project sites are near to areas of planned development.  Alternatively, full credit may also be earned if some of the work locations are near designated areas for Transit Oriented Development, including zones for compliance with Section 3A of the Massachusetts Zoning Act. 4
Project sites support navigation towards public facilities or community assets, including open space. 0 - The project does not support navigation to and from public facilities or open spaces. 1 - The project indirectly supports navigation to and from public facilities or open spaces. 2 - The signage explicitly highlights public points of interest and provides information on how to access the area. 2
Project sites are situated near to transit facilities. 0 - Proposed work locations are not located near transit stations. 1 - At least one of the proposed work locations is within 300 feet of a transit facility. 2 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility.  3 - At least one of the proposed work locations is sited directly at or on a transit facility, and the transit operator has provided a letter of support for the project. 3
Project sites support the identification of and navigation towards transit facilities. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near transit routes. 1 - The signage indirectly supports access near transit routes or facilities, but these are not highlighted on the signs. 2 - The proposed signage highlights locations of transit facilities. 3 - The proposed signage highlights the presence of transit service in the area, and provides detail on other service features such as headways, hours of operation, etc. 3
Project sites support the identification of and navigation towards safe facilities for pedestrians. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe pedestrian infrastructure, such as sidewalks and crosswalks. 1 - Less than half of proposed work locations are near safe pedestrian infrastructure. 2 - More than half of proposed work locations are near safe pedestrian infrastructure. 3 - All work locations are near safe, pedestrian-accessible sites that include signalized crosswalks and continuous sidewalks. 3
Project sites support the identification of and navigation towards safe facilities for bicycles. 0 - Proposed work locations are not near safe bicycle infrastructure. 1 - The proposed signage provides indirect benefits for cyclists, but does not highlight any specific routes. 2 - The signage highlights and supports a single bicycle facility. 3 - The proposed signage supports a connected bicycle network, including the identification of connecting routes and trails. 3
Connectivity Score   22
Regional and Interlocal Coordination    
Project includes a substantial public engagement process. 0 - The municipality or municipalities applying for the project are the primary stakeholders in the project development process. 1 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged their communities for the purpose of implementing the proposed improvements (ROW, local operating costs, etc.) 2 - The municipality or municipalities have held public meetings on the proposed project, in addition to the above. 3 - The municipality or municipalities have engaged stakeholders in their communities for the purpose of soliciting feedback to improve the planning and prioritization of the project, in addition to the above. 4 - The project involves a rigorous public engagement process that addresses multiple public and private groups at the local level.  The public engagement process specifically led to the identification of sites included in the project. 4
Project demonstrates collaboration between different components of the municipality for site prioritization. 0 - The applicant is not working with other business units within the municipality as part of the project. 1 - The applicant has received support from elected officials within the municipality for the project beyond the budget process. 2 - In addition to the above, the selection of sites as part of the project was performed in consultation with other municipal units, including for example school committees, Councils on Aging, Parks Departments, etc. 2
Project demonstrates collaboration between multiple municipalities. 0 - No direct support from other municipalities is provided. 1 - The applicant is a regional organization providing bicycle parking for one or more municipalities. 2 - The project involves collaboration between one or more municipalities. 2
Project demonstrates collaboration with other state or federal agencies. 0 - The project does not involve any direct coordination with state or federal agencies beyond that related to the TIP process. 1 - The project involves a state or federal facility, and support for the applicant to improve that facility has been provided by the facility owner.  The owner is not otherwise involved in the project. 2 - The project is a direct partnership between a municipality and a state or federal agency, which may be demonstrated through providing signage to and from State/National Parks, publicly-accessible state/federal buildings (including universities), or other facilities. 2
Project demonstrates collaboration across multiple sectors. 0 - No direct support from private entities is listed. 2 - The project proponent coordinated with the private sector in the development of the project as part of selecting site areas. 4 - The project includes extensive support between the public and private sectors, including private funding contributions. 4
Project collaborators submit letters of support to MPO. 0 - The applicant has not attached letters of support. 2 - Letters of support are attached to demonstrate fulfillment of the above criteria. 2
Coordination Score   16
Plan Implementation: Support local, regional, and statewide planning efforts.  
Project is included in local transportation plans or studies. 0 - The project is not included in any local plans or studies. 1 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a local plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 2 - The project is thematically consist with the contents of a local plan or study, as cited by the applicant. 3 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a local plan or study. 3
Project is included in local economic development plans or strategies. 0 - The project does not support any local economic developments. 1 - The project indirectly supports local economic development strategies. 2 - The project directly supports local economic development strategies, including improving access to specific planned sites or destinations. 3 - The project highlights key areas and destinations for travel, and is consistent with a broader strategy for economic development in the community. 3
Project is included in regional plans or studies, including those created by the Boston Region MPO and Metropolitan Area Planning Council 0 - The project is not included in any regional plans or studies. 1 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, but the applicant does not cite those documents. 2 - The project is thematically consistent with the contents of a regional plan or study, and the applicant cites those documents.  Alternatively, the applicant developed this project or identified the need being addressed by the project through direct consultation with MAPC or a similar body. 3 - The project is explicitly called for in the contents of a regional plan or study, or is located at a regionally significant junction for the Bluebikes network as identified by MAPC or a similar entity. 3
Project is included in statewide plans or studies 0 - The project is not included in or consistent with any statewide plans or studies. 1 - The project is supportive of a statewide study, such as a vulnerable road user safety assessment, but this is not cited by the applicant. 2 - The project is supportive of a statewide study, but locations are not in priority corridors highlighted by that study. 3 - The applicant is leveraging a state study or plan to guide this investment, and investments are being made in key priority areas as determined by the study. 3
Project supports the development of a connected multimodal transportation network. 0 - The project primarily installs signage in seemingly disconnected areas for a single mode. 1 - The project installs signage to support connections for a single mode. 2 - The project installs signage that supports connections to and from multiple transportation modes. 2
Plan Implementation Score   14
Transportation Equity: Ensure that all people receive comparable benefits from, and are not disproportionately burdened by, MPO investments, regardless of race, color, national origin, age, income, ability, or sex.
Project serves one or more transportation equity populations, as identified by the Boston Region MPO Each population's index scores are based on the percent of the population group within the service area relative to the MPO regional average. For example, the higher percentage, the higher the index.                                                             Equity Score Look-up Table                 If the sum of the Indices Greater than…        …And Less Than…        The Project Score is… 0                                                                          1                                        0 0.99                                                                     6                                        3 5.99                                                                    11                                       6 10.99                                                                  16                                       9 15.99                                                                  21                                      12 20.99                                                                  27                                      18 20
Transportation Equity Score   20
Climate Change Mitigation    
To what extent do these lanes encourage new trips, or shift existing trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile? 0 - The extent to which the project creates new trips is unclear or lacks sufficient supporting information.  2 - The project creates a moderate number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile.  3 - The project creates a large number of new trips that would otherwise be taken by an automobile, or increases the accessibility of an alternative transportation mode/route (ex: existing trails, routes parallel to transit operations).  4 - Pursuant to 3 above, but does so in area with disproportionate air quality burden. 4
Estimates for traffic volumes through the corridor are realistic and grounded in thorough analysis. 0 - Future demand projections do not seem realistic, or the methodology as to how they were calculated is not explained. 2 - Future demand projections seem reasonable and support the above argument for substituting single occupancy vehicle trips. 4 - The applicant has provided realistic demand projections and accounted for possible variations in demand (seasonal variation, new enabling infrastructure, etc.) in their estimate. 4
The wayfinding signage is complementary to an ongoing or planned surface transportation investment. 0 - The investment does not complement any planned or nearby projects.  2 - The investment is somewhat related to a planned or nearby project, but the connection between the two is limited. 4 - The investment is related to a planned or nearby project that offers some bike-supportive infrastructure. 6 - The investment is directly and deliberately related to a planned or nearby project that offers safe and accessible bike-supportive infrastructure, such as a shared-use-path. 6
The wayfinding signage reinforces access to or informs users about an existing surface transportation facility. 0 - The investment does not complement any nearby active transportation or transit facilities. 2 - The investment complements an existing low to moderate utility link for active transportation or transit. 4 - The investment complements an existing moderate to high utility link for active transportation, including physically separated and safe pathway for all users (ex: shared use path, rail trail).  Or, the investment directly highlights a transit route. 4
Climate Change Mitigation   18
Performance Management    
The project application includes a budget worksheet that outlines the sources and uses of the project. Disqualifying - No budget worksheet is attached. 0 - A budget sheet is included, but the costs associated are unrealistic. 3 - The budget sheet is attached, and the applicant describes the expenses, including the rationale behind the selected unit type. 3
The project proponent broadly outlines expected activities necessary for asset maintenance. 0 - No description of maintenance activities are provided. 3 - An anticipated maintenance schedule is provided. 3
The estimates for average daily users for the facilities are grounded in thorough analysis. 0 - The applicant does not describe how demand was estimated. 2 - The process for estimating traffic counts is vague. 4 - The estimates of traffic counts are sound. 4
Performance Management   10
 
Total Score   100

 

Back to top

 

Appendix B: Greenhouse Gas Monitoring and Evaluation

BACKGROUND

 

The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008 (GWSA) required statewide reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 25 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2020, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. As part of the GWSA, the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA) released the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2025 and 2030 (CECP) in June 2022, which outlines programs to attain GHG emissions reduction goals—including an 18 percent reduction attributed to the transportation sector by 2025 and a 34 percent reduction by 2030. EOEEA released an updated CECP in December 2022, which specified an emissions reduction target of 86 percent by 2050 for the transportation sector.

 

The Commonwealth’s 13 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) are integrally involved in achieving GHG emissions reductions mandated by the GWSA. MPOs work closely with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) to develop common transportation goals, policies, and projects that will help to reduce GHG emissions levels statewide and meet the specific requirements of the GWSA and its requirements for the transportation sector, defined in state regulation 310 CMR 60.05. The purpose of this regulation is to assist the Commonwealth in achieving its adopted GHG emissions reduction goals by requiring the following:

 

  • MassDOT must demonstrate that its GHG emissions reduction commitments and targets are being achieved.
  • Each MPO must evaluate and track the GHG emissions and impacts of both its Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
  • Each MPO, in consultation with MassDOT, must develop and use procedures to prioritize and select projects for its LRTP and TIP based on factors that include GHG emissions and impacts.
    •

     

    The Commonwealth’s MPOs are meeting the requirements of this regulation through the transportation goals and policies contained in their LRTPs, the major projects planned in their LRTPs, and the mix of new transportation projects that are programmed and implemented through their TIPs.

     

    The GHG tracking and evaluation processes enable the MPOs and MassDOT to identify the anticipated GHG impacts of the planned and programmed projects, and to use GHG impacts as criteria to prioritize transportation projects. This approach is consistent with the GHG emissions reduction policies that promote healthy transportation modes through prioritizing and programming an appropriate balance of roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian investments, as well as policies that support smart growth development patterns by creating a balanced multimodal transportation system.

     

    REGIONAL TRACKING AND EVALUATING LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANS

     

    MassDOT coordinated with the Boston Region MPO and other regional planning agencies to implement GHG tracking and to evaluate projects during the development of LRTPs starting in 2011. Working together, MassDOT and the MPOs have attained the following milestones:

     

     

    TRACKING AND EVALUATING THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

     

    In addition to monitoring the GHG impacts of larger-scale projects in the LRTP, it also is important to monitor and evaluate the GHG impacts of all transportation projects that are programmed in the TIP. The TIP includes both the larger, capacity-adding projects from the LRTP and smaller projects, which are not included in the LRTP but that may affect GHG emissions. The principal objective of this tracking is to enable the MPOs to evaluate the expected GHG impacts of different projects and to use this information as criteria to prioritize and program projects in future TIPs.

     

    In order to monitor and evaluate the GHG impacts of TIP projects, MassDOT and the MPOs have developed approaches for identifying anticipated GHG emissions impacts of different types of projects. Since carbon dioxide (CO2) is the largest component of GHG emissions overall and is the focus of regulation 310 CMR 60.05, CO2 has been used to measure the GHG emissions impacts of transportation projects in the TIP and LRTP.

     

    All TIP projects have been sorted into two categories for analysis: 1) projects with quantified CO2 impacts, and 2) projects with assumed CO2 impacts. Projects with quantified impacts consist of capacity-adding projects from the LRTP and projects from the TIP that underwent a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program spreadsheet analysis. Projects with assumed impacts are those that would be expected to produce a minor decrease or increase in emissions, and those that would be assumed to have no CO2 impact.

     

    Travel Demand Model

     

    Projects with quantified impacts include capacity-adding projects in the LRTP that were analyzed using the Boston Region MPO’s travel demand model set. No independent calculations were done for these projects during the development of the TIP.

     

    Off-Model Methods

     

    MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning provided spreadsheets that are used to determine projects’ eligibility for funding through the CMAQ program. These spreadsheets contain emissions factors produced by the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) MOtor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) model that are used to calculate emissions reduction as a result of mode shift to active or public transportation and/or reduction of single-occupancy vehicle trips. Typically, MPO staff uses data from projects’ functional design reports, which are prepared at the 25-percent design phase, to conduct these calculations. Staff used these spreadsheets to calculate estimated projections of CO2 for each project, in compliance with GWSA regulations. These estimates are shown in Tables B-1 and B-2. A note of “to be determined” is shown for those projects for which a functional design report was not yet available.

     

     

    Table B-1
    Greenhouse Gas Regional Highway Project Tracking: FFYs 2025-29 Programmed Projects

     

    Project ID Number Project Name GHG Analysis Type GHG CO2 Impact (kg/yr) GHG Impact Description
    Federal Fiscal Year 2025        
    606901 BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-16-109, RIVER STREET BRIDGE OVER MBTA/AMTRAK Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    607342 MILTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 28 (RANDOLPH AVENUE) & CHICKATAWBUT ROAD Quantified 1,148,459 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    608051 WILMINGTON- RECONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 38 (MAIN STREET), FROM ROUTE 62 TO THE WOBURN C.L. Quantified 492,167 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    608067 WOBURN- BURLINGTON- INTERSECTION RECONSTRUCTION AT ROUTE 3 (CAMBRIDGE ROAD) & BEDFORD ROAD AND SOUTH BEDFORD STREET Quantified 168,263 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    608522 MIDDLETON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, M-20-003, ROUTE 62 (MAPLE STREET) OVER IPSWICH RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608703 WILMINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, W-38-029 (2KV), ST 129 LOWELL STREET OVER I 93 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608865 STONEHAM- WINCHESTER- DECK REPLACEMENT, S-27-008=W-40-030 (2M5), MARBLE STREET OVER I-93 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    609516 BURLINGTON- IMPROVEMENTS AT I-95 (ROUTE 128)/ROUTE 3 INTERCHANGE Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    609531 ARLINGTON- STRATTON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610544 PEABODY- MULTI-USE PATH CONSTRUCTION OF INDEPENDENCE GREENWAY AT I-95 AND ROUTE 1 Quantified 24,423 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    610776 CAMBRIDGE- SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, C-01-031, US ROUTE 3/ROUTE 16/ROUTE 2 OVER MBTA REDLINE Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612044 BROOKLINE- NEWTON- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 9 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612073 SHARON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION OF S-09-015 AND S-09-016 ALONG THE I-95 CORRIDOR Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612094 CANTON- DEDHAM- WESTWOOD- INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE AND RELATED WORK ON I-95 AND I-93 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612173 BELLINGHAM- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-06-022, MAPLE STREET OVER I-495 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613178 LEXINGTON- DECK REPLACEMENT, L-10-019 (2DW, 2DX), STATE ROUTE 2/CONCORD TURNPIKE OVER PLEASANT STREET Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613181 BOSTON- NEWTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION OF 3 BRIDGES ALONG STATE ROUTE 9/BOYLSTON STREET Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613209 BOSTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-16-236 (39M, 39P, 39U, 39W, 39Y), 5 BRIDGES CARRYING STATE ROUTE 1A (EAST BOSTON EXPRESSWAY NB/SB) AND RAMPS Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613216 MARLBOROUGH- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, M-06-010, ELM STREET OVER I-495 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613357 CAMBRIDGE- SEPARATED BICYCLE LANE ON STEEL PLACE (MA272) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613638 BOSTON- CLEANING & PAINTING, B-16-259, I-93 OVER MBTA/COLUMBIA ROAD/RED LINE/RELIEF Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    86461 LINCOLN- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-12-002, CONCORD ROAD (ROUTE 126) OVER MBTA Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12697 PLEASANT STREET SHUTTLE SERVICE EXPANSION Quantified 183,575 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12699 STONEHAM SHUTTLE SERVICE Quantified 41,707 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12700 CATA ON DEMAND MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION – ROCKPORT AND LANESVILLE Quantified 33,400 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12701 MWRTA CATCHCONNECT MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION - HUDSON AND MARLBOROUGH Quantified 11,936 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12703 MONTACHUSETT RTA MICROTRANSIT SERVICE – ON-DEMAND SERVICE FOR BOLTON, BOXBOROUGH, LITTLETON, STOW Quantified 24,602 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12819 JACKSON SQUARE STATION ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12907 FRAMINGHAM - CHRIS WALSH AQUEDUCT TRAIL CONNECTIVITY PROJECT (DESIGN EARMARK MA275) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12908 P# 611940: SOMERVILLE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-17-016 (3GF), WEBSTER AVENUE OVER MBTA & BMRR Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12958 BOSTON- BLUEBIKES STATION REPLACEMENT AND ELECTRIFICATION, 12 STATIONS Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12959 BOSTON- REPURPOSING SINGLE SPACE PARKING METER POLES FOR 1600 BICYCLE RACKS Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12960 CAMBRIDGE- BLUEBIKES STATE OF GOOD REPAIR, 8 STATIONS AND 65 PEDAL BIKES Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12961 BROOKLINE- BLUEBIKES STATE OF GOOD REPAIR, 3 STATIONS AND 62 PEDAL BIKES Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12962 SOMERVILLE- BLUEBIKES STATE OF GOOD REPAIR, 3 STATIONS AND 62 PEDAL BIKES Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12964 REVERE- BLUEBIKES EXPANSION TO NORTHERN STRAND (SALEM STREET AT NORTH MARSHALL STREET) AND GRISWOLD PARK Quantified 1,518 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12965 ARLINGTON- INSTALLATION OF 123 BICYCLE RACKS AND RELATED MATERIALS Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12966 MALDEN- CANAL STREET BICYCLE LANES Quantified 33,312 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12967 SCITUATE- INSTALLATION OF 25 BICYCLE RACKS Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2026        
    604564 MAYNARD- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, M-10-004, ROUTE 62 (MAIN STREET) OVER THE ASSABET RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    605168 HINGHAM- IMPROVEMENTS ON ROUTE 3A, FROM OTIS STREET/COLE ROAD INCLUDING SUMMER STREET AND ROTARY, ROCKLAND STREET TO GEORGE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD Quantified 284,736 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    605857 NORWOOD- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS @ ROUTE 1 & UNIVERSITY AVENUE/EVERETT STREET Quantified 1,092,131 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    606449 CAMBRIDGE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, C-01-008, FIRST STREET BRIDGE & C-01-040, LAND BOULEVARD/BROAD CANAL BRIDGE Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    606453 BOSTON- IMPROVEMENTS ON BOYLSTON STREET, FROM INTERSECTION OF BROOKLINE AVENUE & PARK DRIVE TO IPSWICH STREET Quantified 1,920,790 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    607684 BRAINTREE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-21-017, WASHINGTON STREET (ST 37) OVER MBTA/CSX RAILROAD Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608045 MILFORD- REHABILITATION ON ROUTE 16, FROM ROUTE 109 TO BEAVER STREET Quantified -38,500 Qualitative Increase in Emissions
    608197 BOSTON- BRIDGE REHABILITATION, B-16-107, CANTERBURY STREET OVER AMTRAK RAILROAD Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608940 WESTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS BOSTON POST ROAD (ROUTE 20) AT WELLESLEY STREET Quantified 102,453 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    608952 CHELSEA- BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT C-09-013, WASHINGTON AVENUE, CARTER STREET & COUNTY ROAD/ROUTE 1 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    609399 RANDOLPH- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 28 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    609467 HAMILTON- IPSWICH- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, H-03-002=I-01-006, WINTHROP STREET OVER IPSWICH RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    609532 CHELSEA- TARGETED SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND RELATED WORK ON BROADWAY, FROM WILLIAMS STREET TO CITY HALL AVENUE Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610537 BOSTON- ELLIS ELEMENTARY TRAFFIC CALMING (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610680 NATICK- LAKE COCHITUATE PATH Quantified 2,844 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    610782 DANVERS- MIDDLETON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, D-03-009=M-20-005, ANDOVER STREET (SR 114) OVER IPSWICH RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    610823 QUINCY- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT WILLARD STREET AND RICCIUTI DRIVE Quantified 288,400 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    611954 BOSTON- GUIDE AND TRAFFIC SIGN REPLACEMENT ON I-90/I-93 WITHIN CENTRAL ARTERY/TUNNEL SYSTEM Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    611974 MEDFORD- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT MAIN STREET/SOUTH STREET, MAIN STREET/MYSTIC VALLEY PARKWAY RAMPS, AND MAIN STREET/MYSTIC AVENUE Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    611982 MEDFORD- SHARED USE PATH CONNECTION AT THE ROUTE 28/WELLINGTON UNDERPASS Quantified 4,309 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    611997 NEWTON- HORACE MANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612001 MEDFORD- MILTON FULLER ROBERTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612050 BRAINTREE- WEYMOUTH- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 3 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612075 SALEM- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-01-024, JEFFERSON AVENUE OVER PARALLEL STREET Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612178 NATICK- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, N-03-010, SPEEN STREET OVER RR MBTA/CSX Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612182 NEWTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, N-12-040, BOYLSTON STREET OVER GREEN LINE D Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612184 REVERE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, R-05-015, REVERE BEACH PARKWAY OVER BROADWAY Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612496 SOMERVILLE- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, S-17-031, I-93 (NB & SB) FROM ROUTE 28 TO TEMPLE STREET (PHASE 2) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612599 LYNN- TARGETED SAFETY AND MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS (PLAYBOOK PRIORITY CORRIDORS) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612804 DEDHAM- IMPROVEMENTS AT AVERY ELEMENTARY (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612884 CHELSEA- IMPROVEMENTS AT MARY C. BURKE ELEMENTARY (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613099 BOSTON- SLOPE STABILIZATION AND RELATED WORK ON I-93 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613182 MILFORD- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, M-21-022 (1UD, 1UE), I-495 OVER STATE ROUTE 109/MEDWAY ROAD Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613184 GLOUCESTER- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, G-05-017 (2U8), STATE ROUTE 128/YANKEE DIVISION HIGHWAY OVER ANNISQUAM RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613274 FOXBORO- BRIDGE PRESERVATION AT 6 BRIDGES ALONG THE I-95 CORRIDOR Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613649 BRAINTREE- QUINCY- RANDOLPH- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-21-029, Q-01-046, AND R-01-009, BRIDGES OVER I-93 & STATE ROUTE 28 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613650 DEDHAM- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, D-05-002, GREENDALE AVENUE OVER CHARLES RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12807 MWRTA CATCHCONNECT MICROTRANSIT EXPANSION PHASE 2 Quantified 102,845 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12904 FRAMINGHAM- CULVERT REPLACEMENT ON ROUTE 126 (HOLLIS STREET) OVER WAUSHAKUM POND BROOK Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2027        
    605276 BEVERLY- SALEM- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-11-005=S-01-013, KERNWOOD AVENUE OVER DANVERS RIVER AND B-11-001, BRIDGE STREET OVER BASS RIVER (HALL-WHITAKER DRAWBRIDGE) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    607420 NATICK- SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, N-03-012, BODEN LANE OVER CSX/MBTA Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    607977 HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE Quantified   RTP project included in the statewide model
    608954 WESTON- RECONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 30 Quantified 357,681 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    609204 BELMONT- COMMUNITY PATH, BELMONT COMPONENT OF THE MCRT (PHASE I) Quantified 26,347 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    609252 LYNN- REHABILITATION OF ESSEX STREET Quantified 411,006 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    609257 EVERETT- RECONSTRUCTION OF BEACHAM STREET Quantified 4,038 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    609437 SALEM- PEABODY- BOSTON STREET IMPROVEMENTS Quantified 58,773 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    609527 READING- IMPROVEMENTS ON I-95 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610660 SUDBURY- WAYLAND- MASS CENTRAL RAIL TRAIL (MCRT) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610662 WOBURN- ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT WOBURN COMMON, ROUTE 38 (MAIN STREET), WINN STREET, PLEASANT STREET AND MONTVALE AVENUE Quantified 736,275 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    611983 CHELSEA- PARK STREET & PEARL STREET RECONSTRUCTION Quantified 10,214 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    612076 TOPSFIELD- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, T-06-013, PERKINS ROW OVER MILE BROOK Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612099 ASHLAND- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, A-14-006, CORDAVILLE ROAD OVER SUDBURY RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612100 REVERE- IMPROVEMENTS AT BEACHMONT VETERANS ELEMENTARY (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612196 BRAINTREE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-21-067, JW MAHER HIGHWAY OVER MONATIQUOT RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612499 MEDFORD- SOUTH MEDFORD CONNECTOR BIKE PATH Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612523 REVERE- STATE ROAD BEACHMONT CONNECTOR Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612613 NEWTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 16 AND QUINOBEQUIN ROAD Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612816 BROOKLINE- IMPROVEMENTS AT WILLIAM H. LINCOLN SCHOOL (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612889 SHARON- COTTAGE STREET SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612894 FRAMINGHAM- IMPROVEMENTS AT HARMONY GROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612989 BOSTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-16-066 (38D), CAMBRIDGE STREET OVER MBTA Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613082 MEDFORD- WELLINGTON GREENWAY CONSTRUCTION (PHASE IV) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613121 EVERETT- TARGETED MULTI-MODAL AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ON ROUTE 16 (DESIGN ONLY) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613154 WELLESLEY- DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG ROUTE 9 AND CULVERT REPLACEMENTS OVER BOULDER BROOK FOR FLOOD MITIGATION Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613275 BEVERLY- DANVERS- GLOUCESTER- BRIDGE PRESERVATION AT 5 BRIDGES CARRYING STATE ROUTE 128 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613318 BURLINGTON- WOBURN- INTERSTATE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON I-95 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613343 FOXBOROUGH - INTERSTATE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON I-95 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613382 DEDHAM- NEEDHAM- INTERSTATE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON I-95 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613468 NEWTON- IMPROVEMENTS AT PARKER STREET FOR THE OAK HILL MIDDLE SCHOOL (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613477 HOLLISTON- LINDEN STREET IMPROVEMENTS AT ROBERT ADAMS MIDDLE SCHOOL (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613564 READING- OAKLAND ROAD AT READING MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL AND COOLIDGE MIDDLE SCHOOL (SRTS) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613646 WATERTOWN- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, W-10-003, STATE ROUTE 16/GALEN STREET OVER CHARLES RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12963 CHELSEA-REVERE- REGIONAL ON-DEMAND MICROTRANSIT PILOT PROJECT Quantified 4,055 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    Federal Fiscal Year 2028        
    605091 NATICK- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, N-03-032, N-03-033, N-03-034, N-03-035, RAMP A & B OVER ROUTE 9 & SPEEN STREET OVER RAMPS G & D Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    605743 IPSWICH- RESURFACING & RELATED WORK ON CENTRAL & SOUTH MAIN STREETS Quantified 4,356 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    606728 BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT B-16-365, STORROW DRIVE OVER BOWKER RAMPS Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608052 NORWOOD- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT US 1 (PROVIDENCE HIGHWAY) & MORSE STREET Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    608397 GLOUCESTER- BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION, G-05-002, WESTERN AVENUE OVER BLYNMAN CANAL Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608436 ASHLAND- REHABILITATION AND RAIL CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS ON CHERRY STREET Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    610650 BOSTON- SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ON GALLIVAN BOULEVARD (ROUTE 203), FROM WASHINGTON STREET TO GRANITE AVENUE Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610665 STONEHAM- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 28 (MAIN STREET), NORTH BORDER ROAD AND SOUTH STREET Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610666 SWAMPSCOTT- RAIL TRAIL CONSTRUCTION Quantified 138,430 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    610691 NATICK- COCHITUATE RAIL TRAIL EXTENSION, FROM MBTA STATION TO MECHANIC STREET Quantified 13 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    611987 CAMBRIDGE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, C-01-026, MEMORIAL DRIVE OVER BROOKLINE STREET Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612519 BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-16-165, BLUE HILL AVENUE OVER RAILROAD Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612607 DANVERS- RAIL TRAIL WEST EXTENSION (PHASE 3) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612616 MILTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 138 AND BRADLEE ROAD Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613088 MALDEN- SPOT POND BROOK GREENWAY Quantified 77,012 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    613125 BOSTON- DECK/SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE B-16-051 (4T5), MASS AVENUE OVER I-90 & MBTA (STRUCTURE 54, MILE 132.84) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613145 WAKEFIELD- COMPRHENSIVE DOWNTOWN TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Quantified 3,506 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    613164 BOSTON- MILTON- NEW BRIDGE AND SHARED-USE PATH CONSTRUCTION OVER NEPONSET RIVER AT OSCEOLA STREET Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613166 ACTON- SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 2A/119 (GREAT ROAD) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613276 READING- WILMINGTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, W-38-028 (2HR, 2HT) AND R-03-011 (2HK), I-93 (NB/SB) OVER MBTA/B&M RAILROAD AND I-95/STATE ROUTE 128 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613383 LYNNFIELD- WAKEFIELD- INTERSTATE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON I-95 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613639 FRAMINGHAM- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 9 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613656 CAMBRIDGE- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, C-01-038, MEMORIAL DRIVE (EB) OVER CHARLES RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2029        
    606226 BOSTON- RECONSTRUCTION OF RUTHERFORD AVENUE, FROM CITY SQUARE TO SULLIVAN SQUARE Quantified   RTP project included in the statewide model
    607748 ACTON- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS ON SR 2 & SR 111 (MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE) AT PIPER ROAD & TAYLOR ROAD Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    607981 SOMERVILLE- MCGRATH BOULEVARD CONSTRUCTION Quantified 136,345 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    608158 WESTWOOD- NORWOOD- RECONSTRUCTION OF CANTON STREET TO UNIVERSITY DRIVE, INCLUDING REHAB OF N-25-032=W-31-018 Quantified 5,693 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    608396 LYNN- REVERE- BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION, L-18-015=R-05-008, ROUTE 1A OVER SAUGUS RIVER Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608495 CONCORD- LEXINGTON- LINCOLN- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 2A Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    609246 LYNN- REHABILITATION OF WESTERN AVENUE (ROUTE 107) Quantified 902,708 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    610543 REVERE- MALDEN- IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 1 (NB) (PHASE 1) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610675 CHELSEA- RECONSTRUCTION OF SPRUCE STREET, FROM EVERETT AVENUE TO WILLIAMS STREET Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610932 BROOKLINE- REHABILITATION OF WASHINGTON STREET Quantified 36,431 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    612046 GLOUCESTER- RESURFACING ON ROUTE 128 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612615 CANTON- MILTON- ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 138, FROM ROYALL STREET TO DOLLAR LANE Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612634 SOMERVILLE- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-17-024, ROUTE 28/MCGRATH HWY OVER SOMERVILLE AVE EXT & MBTA Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612738 IPSWICH- ARGILLA ROAD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Quantified 306 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    612963 BELLINGHAM- ROADWAY REHABILITATION OF ROUTE 126 (HARTFORD ROAD), FROM 800 NORTH OF THE I-495 NB OFF RAMP TO MEDWAY TL, INCLUDING B-06-017 Quantified 2,558 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    613108 QUINCY- SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, Q-01-038 (3FG), STEDMAN STREET OVER I-93/US-1/STATE ROUTE 3 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613124 BOSTON- DECK/SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, B-16-054 (4T2), BEACON STREET OVER I-90 (STRUCTURE 50, MILE 132.2) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613130 BOSTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-16-033, MORRISSEY BOULEVARD OVER DORCHESTER BAY Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613162 LITTLETON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-13-008, ROUTE 119 OVER BEAVER BROOK AND CAUSEWAY IMPROVEMENT FOR WILDLIFE Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    613163 LYNNFIELD- WAKEFIELD- RAIL TRAIL CONSTRUCTION Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613319 SUDBURY- FRAMINGHAM- BIKE PATH CONSTRUCTION OF BRUCE FREEMAN RAIL TRAIL, FROM THE SUDBURY DIAMOND RAILROAD CROSSING TO EATON ROAD WEST Quantified 18,348 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    613356 SHARON- INTERSTATE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION AND RELATED WORK ON I-95 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613640 NATICK- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 9 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    613654 FRAMINGHAM- BIKE PATH CONSTRUCTION OF BRUCE FREEMAN RAIL TRAIL, FROM EATON ROAD WEST TO FROST STREET Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12113 BOSTON REGION - TRANSIT TRANSFORMATION PROGRAM Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12124 BOSTON REGION - COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS PROGRAM Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12820 BOSTON REGION - BIKESHARE SUPPORT SET ASIDE Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions

     

     

    Table B-2
    Greenhouse Gas Regional Transit Project Tracking: FFYs 2025-29 Programmed Projects

    Regional Transit Authority Project ID Number Project Name GHG Analysis Type GHG CO2 Impact (kg/yr) GHG Impact Description
    Federal Fiscal Year 2025        
    CATA CATA011692 CATA-repave admin/ops facility parking lot Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA CATA011694 Cape Ann TA-rehab/renovate of existing facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA CATA011695 Cape Ann TA-APC, AVL Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010579 CATA - -Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010583 CATA - -buy misc small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010584 CATA - -acquire shop equip/small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010591 CATA - -Revenue Vehicle Replacement. Quantified 47,684 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    CATA T00073 CATA-Rehab/Renovation Administration & Operations Facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011699 5307 FORMULA- ACQUIRE REVENUE VEHICLE- TROLLEY CNG QTY 4 Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011700 METROWEST RTA 5307 CARBON REDUCTION- ACQUIRE EV REVENUE TROLLEY Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011701 METROWEST RTA- DISCRETIONARY SMART EV SOLAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011709 METROWEST RTA- ACQUIRE HEAVY DUTY CNG 29FT TRANSIT BUS Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011814 MetroWest RTA - Procurement of 3 29 Foot Buses Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011815 MetroWest RTA - Blandin Hub Equitable Redesign Initiative Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011109 MetroWest RTA - ACQUISITION OF BUS SUPPORT EQUIP/FACILITIES Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011110 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT/CAPITAL OUTREACH Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011111 MetroWest RTA - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011121 MetroWest RTA - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - Framingham Commuter Rail Station (FCRS) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011124 MetroWest RTA - 5307 FORMULA 2025 ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) ADDTL ELECTRIFICATION INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS - DISCRETIONARY Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011134 MetroWest RTA - PUBLIC RESTROOMS AT BLANDIN & FCRS HUBS - 5307 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011137 MetroWest RTA - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS 6 Type D with CNG Quantified 432,335 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011195 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - OPERATING ASSISTANCE NON FIXED ROUTE ADA PARA SERV Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011474 Jackson Sq. Station Access Impr. (CMAQ) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011819 5307 Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011820 5337 Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011821 Columbus Ave. Bus Lane Ph. II (CMAQ) Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MBTA MBTA011822 Rail Transformation - Early Action CMAQ) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011823 Central Station Accessibility Project Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011824 Nubian Square Bus Circulation Improv. Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011825 Pedal & Park System Modernization Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA027 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA028 5307 Revenue Vehicle Program Quantified 4,386,686 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MBTA MBTA029 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA030 5307 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA031 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA033 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA034 5337 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA035 5339 Bus Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA036 RRIF Financing - PTC/ATC/Fiber Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA037 RRIF/TIFIA Financing Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2026        
    CATA CATA011694 Cape Ann TA-rehab/renovate of existing facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA CATA011695 Cape Ann TA-APC, AVL Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010579 CATA - -Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010583 CATA - -buy misc small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010584 CATA - -acquire shop equip/small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010591 CATA - -Revenue Vehicle Replacement. Quantified 47,684 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    CATA T00073 CATA-Rehab/Renovation Administration & Operations Facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011701 METROWEST RTA- DISCRETIONARY SMART EV SOLAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011707 METROWEST RTA- DISCRETIONARY 5339 BACK ENTRANCE PROJECT BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011815 MetroWest RTA - Blandin Hub Equitable Redesign Initiative Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011117 MetroWest RTA - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011118 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT/CAPITAL OUTREACH Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011119 MetroWest RTA - ACQUISITION OF BUS SUPPORT EQUIP/FACILITIES Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011120 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - Framingham Commuter Rail Station Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011125 MetroWest RTA - 2026 ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) ADDTL ELECTRIFICATION COSTS Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011134 MetroWest RTA - PUBLIC RESTROOMS AT BLANDIN & FCRS HUBS - 5307 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011137 MetroWest RTA - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS 6 Type D with CNG Quantified 432,335 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011138 MetroWest RTA - 5339 DISCRETIONARY VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS TYPE D CNG Quantified 518,802 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011195 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - OPERATING ASSISTANCE NON FIXED ROUTE ADA PARA SERV Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA040 5307 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA041 5307 Revenue Vehicle Program Quantified 4,386,686 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MBTA MBTA042 5307 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA043 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA044 5337 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA045 5337 Revenue Vehicle Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA046 5337 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA047 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA048 5339 Bus Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA050 RRIF/TIFIA Financing Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2027        
    CATA CATA011695 Cape Ann TA-APC, AVL Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010579 CATA - -Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010583 CATA - -buy misc small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010584 CATA - -acquire shop equip/small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010591 CATA - -Revenue Vehicle Replacement. Quantified 47,684 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    CATA T00073 CATA-Rehab/Renovation Administration & Operations Facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011701 METROWEST RTA- DISCRETIONARY SMART EV SOLAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011707 METROWEST RTA- DISCRETIONARY 5339 BACK ENTRANCE PROJECT BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011708 METROWEST RTA- TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE HYDROGEN DEPLOYMENT Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011137 MetroWest RTA - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS 6 Type D with CNG Quantified 432,335 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011138 MetroWest RTA - 5339 DISCRETIONARY VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS TYPE D CNG Quantified 518,802 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011195 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - OPERATING ASSISTANCE NON FIXED ROUTE ADA PARA SERV Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011196 MetroWest RTA - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011197 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT/CAPITAL OUTREACH Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011198 MetroWest RTA - ACQUISITION OF BUS SUPPORT EQUIP/FACILITIES Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011199 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - Framingham Commuter Rail Station Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011200 MetroWest RTA - 5339 COMPETITIVE REVENUE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - DISCRETIONARY Quantified 504,391 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011201 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - 2027 ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) ADDTL ELECTRIFICATION COSTS Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011267 MetroWest RTA - 2027 EV - Additional Electrification for Vehicles Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA053 5307 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA054 5307 Revenue Vehicle Program Quantified 4,386,686 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MBTA MBTA055 5307 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA056 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA057 5337 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA058 5337 Revenue Vehicle Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA059 5337 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA060 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA061 5339 Bus Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA063 RRIF/TIFIA Financing Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2028        
    CATA RTD0010579 CATA - -Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010583 CATA - -buy misc small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010584 CATA - -acquire shop equip/small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA T00073 CATA-Rehab/Renovation Administration & Operations Facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011705 METROWEST RTA - PASSENGER TRANSFER STATION Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011708 METROWEST RTA- TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE HYDROGEN DEPLOYMENT Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011137 MetroWest RTA - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS 6 Type D with CNG Quantified 432,335 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011138 MetroWest RTA - 5339 DISCRETIONARY VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS TYPE D CNG Quantified 518,802 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011195 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - OPERATING ASSISTANCE NON FIXED ROUTE ADA PARA SERV Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011196 MetroWest RTA - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011197 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT/CAPITAL OUTREACH Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011198 MetroWest RTA - ACQUISITION OF BUS SUPPORT EQUIP/FACILITIES Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011199 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - Framingham Commuter Rail Station Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011475 5307 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011476 5307 Revenue Vehicle Program Quantified 4,386,686 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MBTA MBTA011478 5307 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011481 5337 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011484 5307 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011486 5337 Revenue Vehicle Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011487 5337 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011488 5337 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011489 5339 Bus Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011490 RRIF/TIFIA Financing Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    Federal Fiscal Year 2029        
    CATA RTD0010579 CATA - -Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010583 CATA - -buy misc small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010584 CATA - -acquire shop equip/small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010591 CATA - -Revenue Vehicle Replacement. Quantified 47,684 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    CATA T00073 CATA-Rehab/Renovation Administration & Operations Facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011706 METROWEST RTA- Hydrogen Fuel Generation and Dispensing Depot Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011137 MetroWest RTA - VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS 6 Type D with CNG Quantified 432,335 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011138 MetroWest RTA - 5339 DISCRETIONARY VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - CUTAWAYS TYPE D CNG Quantified 518,802 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011195 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - OPERATING ASSISTANCE NON FIXED ROUTE ADA PARA SERV Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011196 MetroWest RTA - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - BLANDIN Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011197 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT/CAPITAL OUTREACH Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011198 MetroWest RTA - ACQUISITION OF BUS SUPPORT EQUIP/FACILITIES Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011199 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority - TERMINAL, INTERMODAL (TRANSIT) - Framingham Commuter Rail Station Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011826 5307 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011827 5307 Revenue Vehicle Program Quantified 4,386,686 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MBTA MBTA011828 5307 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011829 5307 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011830 5337 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011831 5337 Revenue Vehicle Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011832 5337 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011834 5339 Bus Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011836 5337 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011837 RRIF/TIFIA Financing Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions

     

     

     

    Table B-3
    Greenhouse Gas Regional Highway Project Tracking: Completed Projects

     

    Project ID Number Project Name GHG Analysis Type GHG CO2 Impact (kg/yr) GHG Impact Description
    Federal Fiscal Year 2023      
    603722 LEXINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, L-10-010, ROUTE 2A (MARRETT ROAD) OVER I-95/ROUTE 128 Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    606130 NORWOOD- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 1A & UPLAND ROAD/WASHINGTON STREET & PROSPECT STREET/FULTON STREET Quantified 131,840 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    606476 BOSTON- ROADWAY, CEILING, ARCH & WALL RECONSTRUCTION AND OTHER CONTROL SYSTEMS IN SUMNER TUNNEL Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    607244 WINTHROP- RECONSTRUCTION & RELATED WORK ALONG WINTHROP STREET & REVERE STREET CORRIDOR Quantified 252,816 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    607327 WILMINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, W-38-002, ROUTE 38 (MAIN STREET) OVER THE B&M RAILROAD Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    607342 MILTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT ROUTE 28 (RANDOLPH AVENUE) & CHICKATAWBUT ROAD Qualitative Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    607777 WATERTOWN- REHABILITATION OF MOUNT AUBURN STREET (ROUTE 16) Quantified 536,769 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    607899 DEDHAM- PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS ALONG BUSSEY STREET, INCLUDING SUPERSTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT, D-05-010, BUSSEY STREET OVER MOTHER BROOK Quantified 3,331 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    607977 HOPKINTON- WESTBOROUGH- RECONSTRUCTION OF I-90/I-495 INTERCHANGE Quantified RTP project included in the statewide model
    608009 BOXBOROUGH- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, B-18-002, ROUTE 111 OVER I-495 Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608208 QUINCY- MILTON- BOSTON- INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE & RELATED WORK ON I-93 Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608255 STOW- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-29-011, BOX MILL ROAD OVER ELIZABETH BROOK Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608348 BEVERLY- RECONSTRUCTION OF BRIDGE STREET Quantified 387,153 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    608480 FOXBOROUGH- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 1 Qualitative Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    608609 BOSTON- WESTWOOD- STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE CLEANING (FULL REMOVAL) AND PAINTING OF 2 BRIDGES: B-16-118 & W-31-006 Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608707 QUINCY- RECONSTRUCTION OF SEA STREET Quantified -30,437 Quantified Increase in Emissions
    608818 DANVERS- MIDDLETON- RESURFACING AND RELATED WORK ON ROUTE 114 Qualitative Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    608889 FRAMINGHAM- TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION AT EDGELL ROAD AT CENTRAL STREET Quantified 232,860 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    608929 WILMINGTON- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, W-38-003, BUTTERS ROW OVER MBTA Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    608933 PEABODY- REHABILITATION OF CENTRAL STREET Quantified 150,913 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    609053 CANTON- DEDHAM- NORWOOD- HIGHWAY LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AT I-93 & I-95/128 Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    609253 WILMINGTON- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT LOWELL STREET (ROUTE 129) AND WOBURN STREET Quantified 494,211 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    609254 LYNN- INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT TWO INTERSECTIONS ON BROADWAY Quantified 73,291 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Traffic Operational Improvement
    610552 MARLBOROUGH- HUDSON- RAMP IMPROVEMENTS AND RELATED WORK AT I-495 (SB) TO I-290 (WB) Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    610674 NEWTON- RECONSTRUCTION OF COMMONWEALTH AVENUE (ROUTE 30), FROM EAST OF AUBURN STREET TO ASH STREET Quantified 16,846 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Complete Streets Project
    610726 MEDFORD- READING- SOMERVILLE- STONEHAM- WINCHESTER- WOBURN- INTERSTATE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION ON I-93 Qualitative Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    610919 LYNN- NAHANT- NORTHERN STRAND EXTENSION Qualitative Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    612662 BOSTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-16-235 (39T & 3A0), ROUTE 1A OVER CHELSEA STREET/BREMEN STREET & RAILROAD Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612663 BOSTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-16-053 (4T3), BROOKLINE AVENUE OVER I-90 & RAILROAD Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    612664 BOSTON- BRIDGE PRESERVATION, B-16-179, AUSTIN STREET OVER I-93 AND B-16-281, I-93 UPPER/LOWER DECK Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12114 ROYALL STREET SHUTTLE Quantified 409,583 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12125 NEWTON MICROTRANSIT SERVICE Quantified 33,103 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12694 NEWMO MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION Quantified 91,800 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12695 BLUEBIKES STATION REPLACEMENT AND SYSTEM EXPANSION Quantified 20,484 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12696 BLUEBIKES SYSTEM EXPANSION Quantified 2,637 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12697 PLEASANT STREET SHUTTLE SERVICE EXPANSION Quantified 183,575 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12698 BLUEBIKES SYSTEM EXPANSION Quantified 460 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12699 STONEHAM SHUTTLE SERVICE Quantified 41,707 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12700 CATA ON DEMAND MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION Quantified 33,400 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12701 MWRTA CATCHCONNECT MICROTRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION Quantified 11,936 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12702 BICYCLE PARKING ALONG THE BRUCE FREEMAN RAIL TRAIL Quantified 1,024 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12703 MONTACHUSETT RTA MICROTRANSIT SERVICE Quantified 24,602 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    S12704 CHENERY MIDDLE SCHOOL BICYCLE PARKING Quantified 771 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
    S12705 LYNN STATION IMPROVEMENTS PHASE II Qualitative Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    S12749 STOW - ASSABET RIVER RAIL TRAIL EXTENSION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    S12752 DOVER-NEEDHAM - CENTRE STREET / CENTRAL AVENUE BRIDGE ENGINEERING AND DESIGN Qualitative No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions

     

    Table B-4
    Greenhouse Gas Regional Transit Project Tracking: Completed Projects

    Regional Transit Authority Project ID Number Project Name GHG Analysis Type GHG CO2 Impact (kg/yr) GHG Impact Description
    Federal Fiscal Year 2024        
    CATA CATA011593 CATA - Replacement Vans Quantified 35,559 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    CATA CATA011616 CATA - Two Trolleys that reached its UL Quantified 530 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    CATA CATA011660 Cape Ann Transportation Authority - CATA dialysis & med van Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010579 CATA - -Preventive Maintenance Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010583 CATA - -buy misc small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    CATA RTD0010584 CATA - -acquire shop equip/small capital Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011619 MWRTA - FY23 MAP Replacement Vehicles (3 Type E) Quantified 2,412 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA MWRTA011674 MWRTA - MWRTA Transitions & Outreach Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA MWRTA011675 MWRTA - MWRTA Weekend Catch Connect Framingham and Natick Quantified 1,566 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    MWRTA MWRTA011676 Town of Sudbury - GoSudbury Catch Catch Connect Shuttle Quantified 374 Quantified Increase in Emissions from New/Additional Transit Service
    MWRTA MWRTA011685 Mass211, Inc. - MassDOT Access Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011103 MetroWest RTA - Operating Assistance - Non Fixed Route ADA Paratransit Service Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011104 MetroWest RTA - Acquisition of Bus Support / Facilities Equipment Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011105 MetroWest RTA - Technology Support/Capital Outreach Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011106 MetroWest RTA - Blandin Intermodal Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011107 MetroWest RTA - FCRS Intermodal - Framingham Commuter Rail Station (FCRS) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA RTD0011114 MetroWest RTA - 5307 Formula Funds - Vehicle Replacements (6 Da w/CNG) Quantified 807,026 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MWRTA RTD0011123 MetroWest RTA - 5339 STATEWIDE - 2024 EV (Electric Vehicle) Migration Qualitative   Qualitative Decrease in Emissions
    MWRTA T00037 MetroWest RTA - CNG Dispensers (2) at the Compressed Natural Gas Fueling Facility Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MWRTA T00038 MetroWest RTA - Electronic Sign Board Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011468 Columbus Ave. Bus Lane Ph. II (CMAQ) Quantified 98,855 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Other Improvements
    MBTA MBTA011470 Jackson Sq. Station Access Impr. (CMAQ) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011472 Rail Transformation - Early Action CMAQ) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011610 MBTA - City of Revere - Buy Replacement Van (5310 Carryover) Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011611 MBTA - Hull COA- Buy Replacement Van Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011612 MBTA - Town of Randolph - Buy Replacement Van Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011758 Newton Senior Transportation Operating FY24 Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011759 Move Safe/Mobility Links Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011760 Improving Access for Low-Income Seniors and Others in Greater Boston Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011761 Virtual tool development for travel training & information Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011762 MVES Mobility Management Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011763 MBTA - Quincy Bus Facility Modernization Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011764 Needham Transportation Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011765 Senior and Disabled person’s transportation Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011766 SCES Transportation Hub Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011767 Brookline Senior Transportation Service Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011768 Dedham Council on Aging Ride Services Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011769 Navigating with Ease, Convenience and Confidence Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011770 Lexpress Bus Operating Support Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011771 Access to Medical care in surrounding Towns as well as access to low cost grocery and dept. stores. Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011772 Acton Mobility Management Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011773 CrossTown Connect Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011774 North Reading Public Transit Pilot Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA011775 North Reading Transportation Hotline Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA015 5307 Revenue Vehicle Program Quantified 5,958,346 Quantified Decrease in Emissions from Bus Replacement
    MBTA MBTA016 5307 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA017 5307 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA018 5337 Bridge & Tunnel Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA019 5337 Revenue Vehicle Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA020 5337 Signals/Systems Upgrade Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA021 5337 Stations and Facilities Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA022 5339 Bus Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA024 RRIF/TIFIA Financing Program Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions
    MBTA MBTA025 Lynn Station Improvements Qualitative   No assumed impact/negligible impact on emissions

     

     

     

     

     

    As part of the development of the FFYs 2025–29 TIP, analyses were done for the types of projects described below. A summary of steps performed in the analyses is provided.

     

    Traffic Operational Improvement

     

    For an intersection reconstruction or signalization project that typically reduces delay and, therefore, idling, the following steps are taken: