Chapter 2

2 Project Development
Project Development
 2006 EDITION

Chapter 2

Project Development

Project Development is the process that takes a transportation

improvement from concept through construction. There are several
goals for this process:

④ To ensure context sensitivity though an open, consensus-building

dialog among project proponents, reviewers, the public, and other
parties.
④ To foster thinking beyond the roadway pavement to achieve the
optimum accommodation for all modes.
④ To encourage early planning, public outreach, and evaluation so that
project needs, goals and objectives, issues, and impacts can be
identified before significant resources are expended.
④ To achieve consistent expectations and understanding between project
proponents and those entities who evaluate, prioritize, and fund
projects.
④ To ensure allocation of resources to projects that address local,
regional, and statewide priorities and needs.

Project delays and escalating costs are discouraging to everyone involved.

Projects that are ultimately built but do not meet expectations in
addressing needs are also frustrating. This project development
framework, and the principles that it embraces, will:

④ Help carry out projects effectively;

④ Ensure good project planning, design, and implementation; and,
④ Set the stage for long-term success.

Effective partnerships on projects are important throughout project

development and require strong commitment and action from all
Individuals involved, whether they be MassHighway or Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) staff, elected officials, local planning

January 2006 Project Development 2-1

 2006 EDITION

and public works professionals, citizens, or consultants. Real

partnerships require ongoing relationships of trust and collaboration.

The project development process is one of a set of tools needed to

achieve context-sensitive design. The process is structured to
encourage public outreach throughout planning, design, environmental
review, and construction so that those affected by transportation
projects are in general agreement regarding the project’s need, the
selected approach to meet this need, and the refinements to the
project that result as the process evolves. Section 2.9 of this chapter
overviews public outreach approaches and tools to assist in
establishing an effective project development process.

This project development process is complemented by the inclusion of

the project’s context as a basic design control. Flexibility for
determining specific design elements that satisfy the project need, and
are responsive to the context of the project, is inherent in the
subsequent chapters of this Guidebook.

Applicable Projects
Project proponents are required to follow the process described in this
chapter whenever MassHighway is involved in the decision-making
process. The project development procedures are, therefore,
applicable to any of the following situations:

④ When MassHighway is the proponent; or

④ When MassHighway is responsible for project funding (state or
federal-aid projects); or
④ When MassHighway controls the infrastructure (projects on state
highways).

In addition to MassHighway, many other agencies and organizations

may be involved in a project. These procedures are written to be a
useful resource for projects that are locally sponsored, funded, and
reviewed, as well as for those which fall under the jurisdiction of other
Massachusetts authorities. Projects with local jurisdiction and local
funding sources are not required to go though this review process
unless the project is located on the National Highway or Federal-Aid
Systems. Proponents designing projects on local roads, however, may
benefit from the project development steps outlined in this chapter
and the design guidance found in subsequent chapters.

2-2 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Project Development Process Overview

The project development process is initiated in response to an
identified need in the transportation system. It covers a range of
activities extending from identification of a project need to a finished
set of contract plans, and to construction.

The identified transportation need might include one or more of the

following: a congestion problem, a safety concern, facility condition
deterioration, a need for better multi-modal accommodation, an
environmental enhancement, or an economic improvement opportunity.
The development of solutions to address these needs often involves
input from transportation planners, community leaders, citizens,
environmental specialists, landscape architects, natural resource
agencies, local public works officials, permitting agencies, design
engineers, financial managers, and agency executives. Solutions might
target a single mode of transportation, or address the range of road
users including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit operators, automobile
drivers, and truckers moving freight and goods. It is important to
engage the right team of people on the project from the beginning.

The sequence of decisions made through the project development

process progressively narrows the project focus and, ultimately, leads
to a project that addresses the identified needs. There should be
ample opportunities for public participation throughout the process.

Transportation decision-making is complex and can be influenced by

legislative mandates, environmental regulations, financial limitations,
agency programmatic commitments, and partnering opportunities.
Decision-makers and reviewing agencies, when consulted early and
often throughout the project development process, can ensure that all
participants understand the potential impact these factors can have on
project implementation. An eight-step project development process is
defined to move a project from problem identification to completion,
as illustrated in Exhibit 2-1.

January 2006 Project Development 2-3

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-1
Overview of Project Development

PROCESS OUTCOMES

STEP I� Problem/Need/Opportunity �
1. Project Need Form (PNF)
Identification

2. Project Planning Report �

STEP II� Planning
(If necessary)

3. Project Initiation Form (PIF)

STEP III� Project Initiation 3. Identification of Appropriate Funding
3. Definition of Appropriate Next Steps
3. Project Review Committee Action

4. Plans, Specs and Estimates (PS&E)

STEP IV� Environmental/Design/ROW Process 4. Environmental Studies and Permits
4. Right-of-Way Plans
4. Permits
5. Regional and State TIP
STEP V� Programming 5. Programming of Funds

6. Construction Bids and Contractor

STEP VI� Procurement Selection

7. Built Project
STEP VII� Construction

STEP VIII Project Assessment

Source: MassHighway

These eight steps are described in detail in the subsequent sections of

this chapter.

2-4 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.1 Step I: Problem/Need/Opportunity Identification

Projects begin with the identification of a problem, need, or
opportunity. This can result from a regularly maintained asset or
performance management system, such as MassHighway’s bridge
management system, the top 1,000 intersections safety list, or a
recent corridor or area planning process. Problem, need or opportunity
identification can also occur through the regional planning initiatives of
a Metropolitan Planning Organization or arise from community,
legislative, or citizen input. Communities and state transportation
agencies are responsible for providing a wide range of transportation
services. A number of on-going system management and planning
processes are often where projects begin. These include:

④ Long-Range Transportation Plans

④ Statewide, Regional, and Metropolitan Area Plans
④ Corridor Studies and Plans
④ Asset Management Systems
⑨ Bridge
⑨ Pavement
④ Performance Management Systems
⑨ Congestion Management
⑨ Safety Management
④ Operational Plans and Initiatives
④ Road Safety Audits
④ Local/Community Plans
④ Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Program Access. (These
improvements must be incorporated in all transportation
improvement projects or may be proposed as separate barrier
removal projects.)

Road safety audits, noted above, are a relatively new activity in the
United States with more emphasis on crash prevention—designing safer
new roads and modifying existing roads before crash statistics reveal a
problem. Road safety audits foster safer road projects by promoting
elimination or mitigation of safety hazards (such as dangerous
intersection layouts) and encouraging incorporation of crash-reducing
features (such as traffic control devices, delineation, etc.) during the
planning and design stages of project development.

January 2006 Project Development 2-5

 2006 EDITION

2.1.1 Problem/Need/Opportunity Definition

As problems, needs, or opportunities for improvements arise they can be
simple and straightforward, or complex in nature without an obvious
solution at the start.

Most issues are addressed through the development of a discrete project,

specifically tailored to solve the identified need or problem. These
projects could include, as examples: geometric improvements at an
intersection, or increased parking and improved bicycle and pedestrian
access at a transit station where parking demand clearly exceeds supply,
or traffic control enhancements. These types of projects often proceed
relatively quickly from issue identification into actual design.

Other more significant needs require a robust multi-modal planning effort

to identify possible solutions and analyze various alternatives. For
example, with a corridor whose roadway network is overly congested, or
whose transit service is overcrowded, there may be a need for a corridor-
or location-specific planning study. These studies may require an
extensive public participation process to identify the problems and
examine a wide range of possible solutions through an alternatives
analysis.

As a first step in the project development process, the proponent would

lead an effort to:

④ Define the problem, need, or opportunity based on objective

criteria;
④ Establish preliminary project goals and objectives; and,
④ Define the scope of planning and public outreach needed.

2.1.2 Project Need Form

This step in the project development process leads to completion of a
Project Need Form (PNF). The problem/need/opportunity identification
and PNF process is illustrated in Exhibit 2-2. The PNF provides sufficient
material to understand the transportation need(s), and results in one of
the following three outcomes:

④ Verification of the problem, need, or opportunity to enable it to

move forward into design;
④ Determination of the level of further project planning warranted;
or,
④ Dismissal of a project from further consideration.

2-6 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-2
Step I: Problem/Need/Opportunity Identification

Problem/Need/
Project Definition
Opportunity
Project Need
Form (PNF)

Define problem,� Define goals� Identify Project� Define and�

need, or � and objectives� Constituents initiate public�
opportunity outreach for�
Define context the planning�
process

Project Need Form

(Transportation �
Evaluation Criteria)

PNF Evaluation
MassHighway District�
Suggested �
Review, Advisory �
Revisions
Opinion and Guidance

Proceed with Project Planning / No Go

Source: MassHighway

A copy of the Project Need Form is provided in Appendix 2-A-1 of this

chapter. Electronic versions of this form and instructions for completion can
be found on MassHighway’s website (www.mass.gov/mhd).

At the beginning of this process, the proponent should meet with potential
participants, such as MassHighway District staff, the MPO, regional planning
agencies, environmental agencies, local boards and officials, and community

January 2006 Project Development 2-7

 2006 EDITION

members. This proactive, informal review and consultation can help ensure
the project will develop with fewer problems in future phases.

The Project Need Form is important to define the condition, deficiency,

or situation that indicates the need for action — the project need.
The statement should be supported by facts, statistics, or even by
plans or photographs to the extent that information is available.

The project need is not a project description (such as “replace a

bridge” or “reconstruct a road”). That approach “decides” the project
outcome too early in the process. A goal of the PNF is to state, in
general terms, the deficiencies or needs related to the transportation
facility (such as “the bridge is structurally deficient” or “the pavement
is in poor condition”). The Project Need Form should document the
problems and explain why corrective action is needed. An example of a
need could be:

The intersection is hazardous. The high-crash rate at the

intersection illustrates this problem.

Other examples might be:

There is significant congestion at the intersection. During peak

periods, traffic from the side street has difficulty exiting onto the
main street and long queues develop.

Or:

There is no formal accommodation for bicycles or pedestrians

between the elementary school and the large residential
neighborhood to the north where a significant portion of the
student body live.

The purpose of a project is driven by these needs. As examples, the

purpose might be to improve safety, to enhance mobility, to enhance
commercial development, to improve structural capacity, to enhance
pedestrian and bicycle movement, etc., or some combination of these.

2.1.3 Transportation Evaluation Criteria

The MPOs and MassHighway use transportation evaluation criteria
(TEC) to assess whether proposed transportation projects should be
supported with state or federal funding. The criteria are organized by
two basic project purposes: preserving the current transportation

2-8 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

system; and improving or expanding the transportation system. A

discussion of these criteria are provided as Appendix 2-A-2 to this
chapter. These are useful in the preparation of a Project Need Form
and should be submitted as an attachment, if available.

2.1.4 Identify Project Constituents and Public Outreach Plan

When defining the project need, the proponent should also think about
public support of the project. To achieve this, the Project Need Form
should:

④ Identify interested parties;

④ Document public outreach and feedback to date (if any); and
④ Outline a public participation process for moving forward.

More information on the types of project constituents and elements of

an outreach plan are found in Section 2.9.

2.1.5 Project Planning Scope

With the preliminary elements of a project defined (need, goals and
objectives, project constituents, etc.) in the Project Need Form, the
planning scope necessary to move the project forward requires
definition.

The proponent may need to conduct planning activities appropriate to the

extent and complexity of the type of project under consideration to
ensure that all project benefits, impacts, and costs are objectively
estimated:

④ For a straightforward project (examples might include a sidewalk

project, roadway resurfacing, or a traffic signal equipment
upgrade), the proponent can seek approval to advance the project
to design from the Project Need Form. In this case, the
proponent defines the actions proposed to address the project
need(s), describes the alternatives considered (if necessary), and
documents any anticipated impacts as part of the Project Need
Form. (This may also be the best approach where detailed planning
for the project has already occurred and is documented).
④ For more complex projects (as examples, if there are several
alternatives to consider, if there are contextual constraints which
add complexity to the solution, or if there is keen public interest),
the project proponent should define the range of actions to be

January 2006 Project Development 2-9

 2006 EDITION

considered and suggest a planning scope for a Project Planning

Report. Guidance on the scope of this effort is provided in the next
section of this chapter.

2.1.6 Project Need Form Review

Once the Project Need Form is prepared, it is submitted to the
MassHighway District Office and Metropolitan Planning Organization staff
for initial review. MassHighway typically develops a multi-disciplinary team
to review project requests.

The intent of the Project Need Form review process is to allow the
proponent to propose a project at its most basic level to the MassHighway
District Office and MPO staff. Through this process, MassHighway and
MPO staff can provide guidance for project scoping and planning
considerations, in addition to suggestions for likely steps needed for
project approvals. This guidance can be very valuable, especially if given
before the proponent invests significant time and resources in the project
design. The MassHighway and MPO staff suggestions at this stage can go
a long way in ensuring the project’s success.

Through this review, the proponent may be asked to answer questions

that arise from the PNF review, to provide further documentation on
the alternatives considered, and/or to complete (additional) public
outreach.

After the Project Need Form has been reviewed and evaluated by the
MassHighway District Office, a project requiring further planning would
move into Planning (Step II). Some projects that are straightforward,
or are supported by prior planning studies, are expected to move
directly to Project Initiation (Step III).

2-10 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Step I Outcomes:
The following are potential outcomes from Step I of the development
process:

④ Agreement by the project proponent and the District

on the problem and project definition (extent and
magnitude) to enable it to move forward into design
(no further planning required); or
④ Determination that there is a problem, need, or
opportunity to address but further project planning is
warranted to better define the project; or
④ Advice on alternatives to consider and the planning
process; or
④ A recommendation that the project be dismissed from
further consideration. (For example, the proponent’s
analysis may reveal that the projected negative
impacts outweigh the expected benefits, thus reducing
the project’s likelihood for approval in the subsequent
review and programming phase).

January 2006 Project Development 2-11

 2006 EDITION

2.2 Step II: Planning

In this phase, the proponent identifies issues, impacts, and potential
approvals required so that subsequent design and permitting processes are
understood. Project planning also helps to define project responsibilities and
benefits through a simultaneous public outreach process to obtain input and
feedback on planning and design considerations. Providing public outreach
opportunities throughout the entire project development process makes
project success more likely.

The Project Need Form and its review will outline the scope of issues to be
considered in the planning phase. The level of planning needed will vary
widely based on the complexity of the project (from streamlined to more
involved and complex). A more involved alternatives analysis is integrated
as part of the planning process for all new facilities. It is also required for
improvement or expansion projects where the feasibility of achieving the
desired enhancements with acceptable impacts and reasonable investment
is unclear at the outset. During the review of the Project Need Form, the
necessary level of effort and responsibilities for planning will be
determined. Typical planning requirements for different project types are
illustrated in Exhibit 2-3.

2.2.1 Project Planning Report

Projects that require further planning will result in the preparation of a
Project Planning Report. Many traditional planning studies such as
corridor studies, functional design reports, and location studies can
serve as a project planning report if done in a fashion that is
consistent with the principles of this Guidebook and completed with
public participation.

A generalized outline for the basic project planning process is provided in

Exhibit 2-4. It is expected that this outline will be tailored for each
project. The process described is not intended to be overly prescriptive or
burdensome. Rather, the project proponent is encouraged to tailor
planning activities appropriate to the extent, complexity, and type of
project to ensure that all project benefits, impacts, and costs are
objectively estimated. As part of this process, the proponent must also
conduct a public participation program, provide information regarding the
project’s consistency with state and regional policies, and decide, based
on all the information gathered in the planning process as well as public
input, whether to continue the project development process and submit a
Project Initiation Form (PIF) under Step III. Regular check-in meetings
with the MassHighway District Office are helpful though this process.

2-12 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-3
Likely Planning Approaches for Different Types of Projects
Likely Planning Approach
Project Planning Focused on Full
Project Need a Clear and Feasible Alternatives
Form Solution and Minor Variants Analysis
System Preservation
Roadways, Sidewalks, and Multiuse Paths
Maintenance c
Resurfacing c
Reconstruction/Reconfiguration within Existing Pavement c y
Bridges
Maintenance c
Rehabilitation c
Replacement c y
System Improvement or Expansion
New Roadway or Multiuse Path c c y
Widened Roadway, Sidewalk or Addition or Multiuse Path Widening c y y
Intersection, Roundabout, or Traffic Signal Modification c y
New Interchange or Interchange Reconfiguration c c
Median, Roadside Safety, or Signage Improvements c y
Traffic Calming, Streetscape, Lighting, or Transit Enhancements c c y
New or Widened Bridge c c y
New or Expanded TDM/Park-and-Ride Lot c y
New or Expanded Traffic Management System c y
c Required
y Suggested for projects categories indicated and required for more complex projects with each category
Source: MassHighway

The detailed steps in the planning process, as outlined in Exhibit 2-4,

are further described in the following pages.

2.2.1.1 Part A: Define Existing Context, Confirm Project Need(s),

Establish Goals and Objectives
The first step is to confirm project need through an inventory of
existing conditions. Once the project need is confirmed, the proponent
should clearly articulate the goals and objectives for the project. The
level of alternatives analysis and detail necessary for developing the
Project Planning Report is directly related to the complex or
straight-forward nature of the project.

Inventory and Data Collection/Site Walk

A site visit should be the first step in project planning as it provides an
opportunity to view the project area with local project constituents and
technical specialists familiar with the features or concerns related to
the project. Information should be compiled or collected to provide the
range of data appropriate for the project.

January 2006 Project Development 2-13

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-4
Overview of Project Planning Tasks

Part A: Define Existing Context, Confirm Project Need(s)

Establish Goals and Objectives
⑨ Inventory and Data Collection/Site Walk
⑨ Definition of the Community Context
⑨ Definition of Transportation and Land Use Functions
⑨ Project Goals and Objectives

Part B: Initial Public Outreach

⑨ Early Local Issues Meeting
⑨ Environmental Agencies Coordination
⑨ Individual Outreach Meetings

Part C: Project Definition

⑨ Development of Alternatives (if necessary)
⑨ Establishment of Basic Design Controls and Evaluation Criteria
⑨ Define Future Conditions (if necessary)
⑨ Screening of Alternatives
③ Project benefits
③ Project Impacts
③ Consistency with appropriate policies and plans
③ Cost

Part D: Project Review and Refinement

⑨ Project Presentation Meeting
⑨ Resource Agencies Coordination
⑨ Alternative Refinement
⑨ Concept Engineering Plans
⑨ Evaluation Matrices

Part E: Final Recommendations

⑨ Project Definition
③ Description of the proposed project and project alternatives
considered
⑨ Project Benefits and Impacts
③ Consistent with appropriate state and regional criteria
⑨ Project Consistency with Policies and Local Plans
③ Consistency with appropriate State and Regional policies and plans
⑨ Public Participation Process
③ Documentation of planning public participation process
⑨ Final Recommendations
Source: MassHighway

2-14 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Key items to investigate during a site visit are described below:

④ Context resources (environmental, cultural, historic, and man-

made constraints) are mapped for the project area.
④ Travel demands (for all modes) and crash data are necessary to
identify any capacity and/or safety problems, or potential safety
problems.
④ Pavement and structure sufficiency and inventory information is
helpful in determining the extent of treatment necessary for these
features. A pavement management system evaluation and rating is
recommended, along with photo documentation of the site.
④ An access audit to survey accessibility elements such as: curb
ramp locations, slopes, and obstacles; location of crosswalks;
audible signals; transportation signage; sidewalk width, slope, and
obstacles; connectivity; and driveway/sidewalk intersections.
④ Hydraulic analysis to help to determine hydraulic adequacy of the
structure or the effect on the floodplain where bridges or structures
are involved.
④ Right-of-way information helps to identify property owners and
property lines.

Utility information is useful in determining any special needs required

for utility relocation(s).

A detailed survey of the project area helps to identify the location of

various features and resources potentially affected by the proposed
improvement (although it is not necessary at this point in the project
development process).

Definition of Community Context

It is important for the project proponent to understand the planning
context, land uses, and character of the project location and
surrounding community. Local knowledge or a site visit is important in
understanding surrounding land uses and community character. A
USGS topographic base map, GIS mapping information, and
orthographic photos can be used to identify and document various
aspects of the area. These guides can show surrounding land uses and
land cover (open fields, forest and forest type if known, agricultural
land, town, village, city, or commercial corridors); visually distinct
areas such as buildings, land forms, valleys, hilltops, notches, water
bodies, rivers, streams, and watercourses; prominent views and vistas

January 2006 Project Development 2-15

 2006 EDITION

along the road; public facilities or places; recreational facilities; trees;

and the relationship to intersecting roads and activity centers. Some of
this information may also be available from the previously completed
PNF and Transportation Evaluation Criteria Form. Understanding the
project context is further described in Chapter 3 of this Guidebook.

Definition of Transportation and Land Use Functions

It is important for the project proponent to understand the multi-modal
aspects of the project location. During the site visit, the project proponent
must be cognizant of bicycle and pedestrian movements, or the potential
for these movements, and public transportation availability. The
proponent should also be aware of the proximity of connection points for
other modes of freight and passenger transportation.

Any transportation solution must conform with local and regional

plans. Pertinent sections of the local and regional land use and
transportation plans should be reviewed as part of project planning.
This includes transportation and land use, local and regional policies as
they relate to the project location, the roadway involved, the city or
town, and the region. Designated growth areas, historic districts,
designated scenic roads and areas, unique natural areas, agricultural
conservation districts, and areas designated for future access
management by official city or town maps should be acknowledged in
the vicinity of the project location. It is important that future planned
land uses be understood and the city or town’s and region’s goals for
growth, protection of natural and historic resources, and future
transportation facilities be acknowledged. The relationship between
transportation facility function and land use is further described in
Chapter 3.

Project Goals and Objectives

From information obtained during data collection and the input
received at the Early Local Issues Meeting (as discussed below), the
project proponent will define goals and objectives for the project
consistent with the plans and policies of the state and local
community. This statement will be the crux of the definition and
evaluation of alternatives and the development of the Planning Report.

The project goals and objectives statement is similar in form and

function to the purpose and need statement of an environmental
document and is suitable for use in these documents if they are required
for the project. The problem must be adequately explained, identified,
and described. The needs for the project must conclusively show that

2-16 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

the project is justified. The language should be clear and

understandable to the layperson.

2.2.1.2 Part B: Initial Public Outreach

Public outreach and input in a project should begin early in project
planning and before there is a recommended course of action. This
Helpful information
process starts with an early informational meeting and continues at on public outreach
strategic milestones during the planning process. Effort should be made is provided in
to reach a broad spectrum of interested parties at this early project Section 2.9 of this
stage. Planning for larger or more complex projects might also be well chapter.
served by the establishment of an advisory Task Force or Steering
Committee at the outset.

General public outreach guidelines and tools are described in

Section 2.9 of this chapter.

Local Issues Meeting

A “Local Issues Meeting” should be held early in the planning process,
aimed primarily at gathering local and regional comments. This meeting is
not a forum to present proposals or develop solutions. (For larger projects,
or for those that cross multiple jurisdictions, more than one Local Issues
Meeting may be required.) This meeting should also serve to foster a
working relationship with local community members. This is accomplished
by listening to issues and ideas and making every attempt to incorporate
sound and cost effective suggestions into the analysis of alternatives.

Comments from the Local Issues Meeting need to be documented and

made available to all who were present, or to those who request them.
The minutes of the Local Issues Meeting should be included in the
Planning Report and kept at an accessible central location at the
municipal offices. Following the Local Issues Meeting, the project
proponent must evaluate the comments received and ensure that
appropriate details are integrated into project planning. Once the
issues have been identified, one of the project proponent’s biggest
challenges is to balance these issues with all of the other project
issues and work to incorporate community concerns in project
decision-making and design, as appropriate. It is important to give due
consideration to all comments expressed through the public process.

January 2006 Project Development 2-17

 2006 EDITION

Environmental Agencies Coordination

Regulatory agencies that have a role in protecting the state’s
resources and a responsibility to issue permits for transportation
The project proponent is projects that affect these resources, in coordination with local,
encouraged to review the regional, and state resource staff, may provide available research
process for Environmental
information for the Local Issues Meeting. Depending on the complexity
Documentation and
Permitting in Section 2.4.2 of the project and resources present in the project area, these
and details on the Federal agencies should be invited to the meeting and given an opportunity to
and State laws and present issues or concerns, either in writing before the meeting or in
requirements in Appendix
person at the meeting. The agency’s preliminary comments regarding
2-A-6.
whether resources are present in the problem area and their extent
and potential significance is valuable insight at this stage of project
development. The resource agencies should be given as much advance
notice of the meeting as possible.

Ideally, environmental issues are identified through this process and

public response to the issues is sought, as appropriate, at the meeting.
However, the formal inter-agency discussion and resolution of
regulatory issues occurs during later steps in the Project Development
Process (see Section 2.4.2).

Individual Outreach Meetings

There may be key individuals, local officials, agencies, or advocacy
groups that may not be at the Local Issues Meeting but who may be
worth seeking out for valuable input. These individuals or groups are
often identified at the local meeting by a local official or resident
saying “you should really speak to so and so…” The project team
should allow time to conduct informal outreach meetings to round out
its understanding of project issues, opportunities, and constraints. Any
significant issues that develop out of the individual meetings should be
recounted to the community as the process evolves.

2.2.1.3 Part C: Project Definition

After initial public outreach, the next steps are to refine project goals
and objectives, review alternatives, and define the project. These steps
should reflect comments received during the public and agency outreach
described above.

Development of Alternatives
Several reasonable build alternatives might need to be investigated
and considered. Alternatives should be developed using the design

2-18 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

guidance provided in subsequent chapters of this Guidebook. In some

cases, only cursory review of alternatives may be required.

Many resources are available to the designer in this Guidebook to support

the development of these alternatives. In particular, Chapter 3 presents
guidance on the basic design controls that should be considered when
establishing alternatives. Chapter 5 of this Guidebook provides insight
into the spatial requirements for different user groups and how space
might be shared or separated by user group within the right-of-way.
Chapters 6 and 7 provide detailed guidance on intersection and
interchange treatments. Initial planning concepts should be developed
in accordance with the appropriate design guidance provided in this
Guidebook to accurately reflect their spatial requirements, impacts,
and benefits.

If one or more build alignments are developed, they should include the
following information:

④ Alternative typical roadway sections addressing the needs of all

users.
④ Multi-modal accommodation and operational assumptions
regarding allocation of right-of-way, traffic controls, and
enhancements.
④ Accessibility issues, especially slope or cross-slope concerns that
may be difficult to resolve.
④ Compatibility with adjacent land uses and its associated activity.
④ Conceptual roadway or project alignment (existing and proposed),
approximate limits of impact, and approximate boundaries of
resources. A scale of 100 feet per inch is useful for these concepts.
For smaller problem areas such as urban locations, intersections,
and bridges, a smaller scale (40 or 50 feet to the inch) should be
used. (Profile sheets would only be developed for the areas with
proposed grade changes.)
④ Critical cross-sections, defined as points where structures and
resources are avoided or impacted by the typical section.
Structures are defined as buildings, bridges, walls, and culverts (48
inches or larger).
④ Cost estimate, in accordance with the MassHighway’s conceptual
cost estimate guidelines.

January 2006 Project Development 2-19

 2006 EDITION

The project proponent must take care to examine multi-modal needs

and possibilities for improvements during the alternative development
process. These possibilities are to be addressed in the planning report
and the feasibility and potential of each option discussed.
Transportation Systems Management, Travel Demand Management,
Traffic Calming, and Intelligent Transportation Systems may also be
reasonable alternatives to evaluate. If the project has any Intelligent
Accurate estimates, to
Transportation Systems (ITS) elements, it should also be confirmed at
the extent that they can
be calculated at this an early stage that the project scope and design is consistent with the
early stage of project regional ITS architecture. (Periodic checks regarding continued
development, are conformance with the regional ITS architecture should be incorporated
extremely important.
into each stage of the design process.)

Establishment of Basic Design Controls and Evaluation Criteria

Basic design controls serve as the foundation for establishing the
physical form, safety and functionality of the facility. Some design
controls are inherent characteristics of the facility (for example, its
context and the existing transportation demands placed upon it).
Other basic design controls are selected or determined by the
designer, working with the proponent, to address a project’s purpose
and need (for example, the level of service provided to pedestrians,
bicyclists, and drivers). Selecting appropriate values or characteristics
for these basic design controls is essential to achieve a safe, effective,
context sensitive design. Chapter 3 illustrates the basic design controls
and their influence on the physical characteristics of a roadway:

④ Roadway Context, including Area Type, Roadway Type, and Access

Control (Section 3.2)
④ Roadway Users (Section 3.3)
④ Transportation Demand (Section 3.4)
④ Measures of Effectiveness (Section 3.5)
④ Speed (Section 3.6)
④ Sight Distance (Section 3.7)

Each of these basic design controls should be researched and their values
established as part of the project planning process. These basic design
controls, once established, are carried forward through project design.

Transportation evaluation criteria for assessing each alternative need

to be established early in the planning process. The evaluation criteria
discussed in Appendix 2-A-2 are useful to compare the effectiveness

2-20 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

and impacts of the various alternatives considered. Appropriate criteria

for the project type should be carried through the planning process to
assess the transportation benefits, costs, and impacts of proposed
alternatives at each stage of their development. The transportation
effects of projects are not the only consideration in evaluating
projects. Other considerations, including the Commonwealth’s
sustainable development principles, community goals, and local
partnerships, should be used to evaluate projects. These criteria, as
discussed in Section 2.1.3 and provided in the Appendix to this
chapter, should be explicitly incorporated into the alternatives
evaluation process.

Define Future Conditions

Projects that are developed should serve a useful function for some time
into the future. Projects that involve significant capital investment are
generally assumed to have a 20-year life while projects of lesser
investment are generally assumed to have a five-year or ten-year life.
This assumption requires the planner to anticipate what is going to
happen to transportation demands in the future with and without the
project to assess the project’s effectiveness at meeting needs.
Chapter 3, Section 3.4, presents important considerations in forecasting
transportation demand for projects.

Screening of Alternatives
The alternatives should be fully described with concise and illustrative
graphics or plans. To the extent that project design elements (i.e.,
sidewalks, bike lanes, travel lanes, bridge types, etc.) are known, they
should be described.

Alternatives should be developed to comparable levels and presented in

an evaluation matrix. The evaluation matrix visually presents the
alternatives in a manner that facilitates comparison and helps ensure Visual depictions of
project alternatives
that the impacts of each alternative are consistently considered for the are useful to convey
purposes of screening the best option among all of the alternatives. the full extent of the
project.
The project’s effects should be described to the maximum extent
known at this point in the planning process. The analysis that is
compiled and summarized should characterize:

④ Benefits
④ Impacts
④ Consistency with local and regional plans and policies
④ Costs

January 2006 Project Development 2-21

 2006 EDITION

The matrix should quantify resource impacts of each alternative, to the

extent that they can be identified at this stage of project development.
The cost of a project is a significant portion of the transportation-
related decision making process and should be justified by
improvements in safety, public need and/or asset management,
balanced with environmental and other contextual constraints.
Therefore, the cost estimate procedure must be unbiased and
comprehensive (to include all engineering and permitting, right-of-
way, utility relocation costs, mitigation costs, and construction costs).
It must place all reasonable alternatives on the same level for fairness
in the selection process. An alternative with too high of an estimate
might be eliminated, while an alternative with a low estimate could be
selected due to misrepresentation.

At this stage of planning, it is also appropriate to start thinking about

project funding. This includes an exploration of funding sources, their
requirements and restrictions, obligations for local share of project
costs, other partnering opportunities, etc. Additional guidance on project
estimating and funding issues is provided in Section 2.4.3.1 of this
chapter.

Project review team meetings (sometimes called “planning charrettes”)

may be beneficial during this phase of the planning process to review
the alternative plans, cost estimates, and the evaluation matrix. If the
project involves a Task Force or Steering Committee, this is an
excellent opportunity to get them involved in the details of the project.

A more detailed alternatives analysis, as described in Section 2.4.2

and Appendix 2-A-3, may be necessary for complex projects, or for
locations with a wide range of competing demands and numerous
constraints. This process is similar to that required for MEPA or NEPA
review (see Section 2.4.2 for more information on these review
requirements).

2.2.1.4 Part D: Project Review and Refinement

Once alternatives have been considered and the project better defined,
the proponent needs to ensure continued public and agency
involvement in the project review and refinement process, as outlined
below.

2-22 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Project Presentation Meeting

The project proponent should hold a public meeting and invite the
constituents as previously defined to overview the alternatives
considered, the proposed project, and to solicit input.

If the project as defined is unacceptable, the project proponent should

attempt to resolve any conflicts. Failing this, the project proponent
should develop new alternatives and evaluation matrices, and schedule
a new Project Presentation Meeting. This process should continue until
a preferred alternative is determined.

During these meetings, it is helpful to provide handout materials that

present the project and its alternatives so that the participants have a
reference to review. A visual depiction of each build alternative is
beneficial. The visual representation should be prepared so that a
layperson can understand the alternative being presented. An example
of how a project might be presented is provided in Exhibit 2-5. The
project proponent should facilitate a discussion of how each alternative
addresses the needs of the project as well as its drawbacks.

Minutes of the Project Presentation Meeting need to be documented

and made available. These minutes are important to document public
comments that may be valuable input to the design process and to
ensure that there are no misunderstandings concerning overall public
consensus on the project as defined. The minutes should be sent to all
attendees, local officials, MassHighway, Federal Highway
Administration, the regional planning agency, and the regulatory
agencies that have project jurisdiction or special expertise, and made
available to the public at an accessible municipal location. The
recipients of the minutes should have a set time period from the
postmarked date to contest them and add clarifications. These minutes
will also be included in the planning report.

Resource Agencies Coordination

For projects with anticipated impacts to sensitive natural and manmade
resources, this is an appropriate time in the process to assess future
requirements for project development with affected state and federal
regulatory agencies.

The proponent should solicit comments from resource agencies regarding

their views on the various alternatives under consideration, the required
environmental permits, and the process moving forward. If there are
accessibility issues, this may be the time to request a written “Advisory

January 2006 Project Development 2-23

 2006 EDITION

Opinion” or variance from the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board,

if needed. Guidance on environmental permits, the responsible agency,
and the anticipated time required to secure is provided in the Appendix to
this chapter.

Alternative Refinement
Input received from the public or the affected environmental resource
agencies may require refinement to the preferred alternative(s). These
refinements may involve minor changes to previously developed
concepts or the development of a conceptual engineering plan for the
preferred action in greater detail. As part of this process, the
evaluation matrices should be updated to reflect the project’s
anticipated benefits and costs. (It is imperative that the agencies be
informed of any project changes that take place during the “Project
Planning” and “Project Design” phases of the development process.)

The information developed during this task should be as accurate as

possible at this stage of project development as it may be the basis for
early environmental documentation (such as an Environmental
Notification Form/ENF) or as part of an application for project funding.

2-24 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-5
Example of Visual Representation of a Project Alternative

Plan View

Cross-sectional View

Source: King Street Corridor Study, Northampton, MA 2003

January 2006 Project Development 2-25

 2006 EDITION

2.2.1.5 Part E: Final Recommendations

In this last component of the planning process, the proponent
documents the process, public outreach, and decisions made, as
described below.

Draft Planning Report

Following public, local, regional, and environmental agency review of
the alternatives and proposed project, the planning report can be
completed and made ready for review. The planning report documents
the need for the project, existing and future conditions, alternatives
considered, public outreach outcome, and the solution recommended.
It is important that, at a minimum, the Project Planning Report
summarize the:

④ Project Definition:
⑨ Description of the proposed project and project alternatives
considered

④ Project Benefits and Impacts:

⑨ Consistent with appropriate state and regional criteria

④ Project Consistency with Policies and Local Plans

④ Public Outreach Process:
⑨ Documentation of public outreach during planning process

④ Final Recommendations

The project proponent may, at their own discretion, distribute the draft
planning report to the appropriate local officials, staff, or key project
constituents for review.

The project proponent may also elect to have final public review of the
planning recommendations by holding an additional public meeting or
by notifying past project participants of the availability of the draft
planning report at an accessible municipal location for review.

Final Planning Report

Upon receipt of comments and public input (if sought on the draft
report), the project proponent will finalize the Project Planning Report.

2-26 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.2.2 Detailed Alternatives Analysis

A more complex set of needs may warrant a more detailed planning
and conceptual engineering review of alternatives, their impacts and
benefits, and implementation issues as part of the Project Planning
Report. This is particularly true when it is unclear what actions are
“feasible” to address the identified needs. In this case, the proponent
should develop base information, document resources, and complete
transportation planning analysis and conceptual engineering of the
alternatives in more depth to verify “project feasibility” and the
preferred action.

This level of alternatives analysis is appropriate for all new facilities

and for improvement or expansion projects where the feasibility of
achieving the desired enhancements with acceptable impacts and
reasonable investment is unclear at the outset. The key objectives of
this effort are to assess alternatives to determine their engineering
feasibility, environmental impacts and permitability, economic viability,
and public acceptance.

Additional details on the conduct of a Detailed Alternatives Analysis are

found in Appendix 2-A-3.

2.2.3 Review of Planning Efforts

Upon completion of the project planning effort, the project proponent
has essentially two options based on its outcome: delay or drop the
project from consideration, or submit the Project Planning Report with
a Project Initiation Form and Transportation Evaluation Criteria to the
Project Review Committee and the Metropolitan Planning Organization
for review, as discussed in the next section. The intent of this process
is to allow the proponent to present a project for review and
preliminary funding consideration.

Through this review, the PRC and the MPO can provide insight on
project design considerations in addition to likely steps needed for
project approvals. With this approach, valuable guidance can be
provided prior to the proponent investing significant time and
resources in project design.

Ideally, at this stage, the project will be well documented, locally

reviewed and endorsed, and proceed to Step III: Project Initiation, as
outlined in the following section.

January 2006 Project Development 2-27

 2006 EDITION

Step II Outcomes:

The decisions that are expected at this point in the project

development process are:

④ Consensus on project definition (or projects, where

multiple projects result from the planning process) and
decision to submit a Project Initiation Form to enable it
to move forward into environmental documentation
and/or design; or
④ A recommendation that the project be dismissed from
further consideration or delayed. (This would reflect a
case where the interest in the project may have waned
through the Project Planning Report review if, in the
sponsor’s analysis, the issues identified counterbalance
the expected benefits, thus reducing the project’s
likelihood for a favorable outcome in the subsequent
review and programming phase.)

2-28 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.3 Step III: Project Initiation

If a community or agency is seeking to have their project constructed
with state or federal funds, the project needs to be approved by the
Project Review Committee, and later programmed by the MPO. The
third step in the process formally begins the review and evaluation of
the project by the PRC and the MPO (following their own review
procedures). This step is illustrated in Exhibit 2-6.

Exhibit 2-6
Step III: Project Initiation

Source: MassHighway

January 2006 Project Development 2-29

 2006 EDITION

2.3.1 Project Initiation Form (Project Initiation Form)

The Project Need Form or Project Planning Report detail the final
recommendations for the project resulting from early project planning.
The next step in the project development process involves summarizing
the findings and direction defined in a Project Initiation Form used by the
PRC and the MPO for project review and evaluation. The PIF will include
the following information to be documented by the proponent:

④ Project Type and Description, including locus map

④ Summary of Project Planning Process
④ Preliminary identification of the Project Category for review and
programming purposes
④ Definition of the proposed project management responsibility
④ Definition of an interagency (including local boards) coordination
plan
④ Definition of a public outreach plan for the design process
④ Project Need Form or Project Planning Report as an attachment
④ Transportation Evaluation Criteria as an attachment

At this stage, the proposed project is well enough defined to be

subjected to a formal review. This review will give the project
proponent full consideration of the project’s viability as compared to
other projects competing for limited funds. It is anticipated that advice
and guidance for the next steps in the project development process
will also be offered through this review. The Project Initiation Form for
use in this process is provided in the Appendix 2-A-4 to this chapter.

The Project Initiation Form and the project planning documentation is

reviewed and evaluated to verify needs, the effectiveness of the
proposed project approach, and to provide direction on next steps. A
two-step process is generally envisioned:

④ The Project Review Committee reviews the project in terms of the

Executive Office of Transportation’s statewide priorities and
criteria, and documents its findings; and,
④ The MPO reviews the Project Review Committee findings and
makes a preliminary assessment of the project for funding and
programming within its regional priorities (the MPO programming
process is formalized under Step V: Programming). An assessment
of the time frame for the project needs to be made at this point to

2-30 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

give the proponent a sense of when funding might become

available.

The Project Review Committee, comprised of staff from

MassHighway and chaired by the Chief Engineer, meets regularly
to review proposed transportation projects that involve
MassHighway. The PRC assesses the merits of each project using
the Transportation Evaluation Criteria and within the context of
statewide needs. Ultimately, the PRC must approve all projects to
be implemented using state or federal funding.

2.3.2 MassHighway Project Review and Evaluation

2.3.2.1 MassHighway District Review

Copies of the PIF and project planning documents are provided for
MassHighway District review. The district will identify issues for
consideration by the Project Review Committee during their formal
consideration of the project.

Preliminary Project Review Committee Screening

The Project Review Committee staff will conduct an initial screening of
the Project Initiation Form, TEC, and the PNF or Project Planning
Report for the following considerations:

④ Determination of Consistency with Policy and Planning Initiatives

⑨ State Growth Management and Transportation Policies
⑨ Regional Transportation Plan
⑨ State and Regional modal plans and Regional ITS
Architecture
⑨ Local Plans, as summarized by the project proponent

④ Assessment of Transportation Evaluation Criteria (“Objective

Criteria”)
⑨ Condition
⑨ Usage
⑨ Mobility
⑨ Safety
⑨ Cost Effectiveness
⑨ Community Effects and Support
⑨ Land Use and Economic Development
⑨ Environmental Effects

January 2006 Project Development 2-31

 2006 EDITION

2.3.2.2 Project Review Committee Review and Comment

After review and recommendation by the Project Review Committee
staff, project recommendations are made for formal consideration by the
Project Review Committee with respect to project funding and
MassHighway’s PRC includes scheduling. The Project Review Committee will meet approximately
the Chief Engineer, each quarterly to review Project Initiation Forms and recommendations
District Highway Director (5), prepared by its staff.
and representatives from:
▪Project Management
▪Environmental At this point, the Project Review Committee will provide comments to the
▪Planning proponent identifying additional planning needs or provide guidance for
▪Right-of-Way the development of the environmental and design documents.
▪Traffic
▪Bridge, and Alternatively at this point in the process, the project may be determined
▪Capital Expenditure Program to be unlikely with current available funds or undesirable due to its lack of
Office (CEPO) effectiveness in addressing identified needs. The Project Review
Committee may also elect to forward the project to the MPO, with its
comments and findings, for prioritization and potential programming, or
for inclusion in its Long Range Plan. A PRC positive recommendation
denotes that a project is eligible for a specific funding category. It does
not guarantee that the project has dedicated funding. The most common
avenue to secure funding is through the MPO process. Appendix 2-A-5
summarizes the MPO and its role in transportation decision-making and
programming.

Step III Outcomes:

The outcomes that are possible at this point in Step III of the project
development process are:

④ Guidance and support to move the project forward into

design and programming review by the MPO; and
④ Definition of a Project Management Plan to define roles
and responsibilities for the subsequent design,
environmental, right-of-way and construction steps in
the process; or
④ A recommendation that the project be dismissed from
further consideration.

2-32 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.3.3 MPO Review and Comment

After approval by the Project Review Committee, projects to be
programmed by the MPO are forwarded for review and assessment for
future regional transportation resource allocations. It is expected that
the MPO (and its Regional Planning Agency) will review project planning
documentation and the Project Review Committee comments to start
their effort. The MPO will review and assess the project in comparison to
other projects under consideration in its region and determine the
potential year for funding in the TIP.
The MPO will also be able to review projects that are not approved by
the Project Review Committee and can provide additional comments to
the proponent so that future submissions can be streamlined.

At this stage in the process it is possible but unlikely that the project
would get fully programmed by the MPO. For projects given favorable
review, this most often happens later during or after the design phase
(see Step V).

Step III Outcomes:

Likely outcomes from the MPO review of the Project Initiation Form and TEC in
Step III of the project development process are:

④ Project Transportation Evaluation Criteria Score

④ Possible TIP Year
④ Tentative Project Category
④ Tentative Funding Category

January 2006 Project Development 2-33

 2006 EDITION

2.4 Step IV: Environmental, Design and ROW Process

Step IV begins the process of environmental review, project design,
and right-of-way (ROW) acquisition (if necessary) so that the project
can be constructed. As illustrated in Exhibit 2-7, the process involves
four distinct, but tightly integrated, elements:

④ Public Outreach (Section 2.4.1)

④ Environmental Documentation and Permitting (Section 2.4.2)
④ Project Design (Section 2.4.3)
④ Right-of-way confirmation/acquisition (Section 2.4.4)

Public outreach activities and requirements are integrated within each

of the technical tasks. This continual involvement will help to ensure
the project’s ultimate success.

Although the technical requirements for environmental, design, and

ROW efforts are presented sequentially in this Guidebook, these
activities are conducted concurrently and in a coordinated process to
ensure that the ultimate project is acceptable, constructible,
permittable, and addresses the customer’s needs. All these activities
are keyed to the design process schedule. The fundamental design
steps are outlined in Exhibit 2-8 and may vary somewhat depending
upon project characteristics. Ideally, this work should immediately
follow the planning effort to take advantage of both existing conditions
research and public support/consensus about the need for action.

2-34 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-7
Environmental, Design and ROW Processes

Source: MassHighway

January 2006 Project Development 2-35

 2006 EDITION

2.4.1 Public Outreach Plan and Requirements for the Environmental,

Design, and Right-of-Way Process
Continued public outreach in the design and environmental process is
essential to maintain public support for the project and to seek
meaningful input on the design elements. This public outreach is often
in the form of required public hearings, but can also include less formal
dialogues with those interested in and affected by a proposed project.

A public hearing, or opportunity for a public hearing, is required by

state law for all highway projects as part of a process that also
encourages a variety of citizen involvement techniques such as
informal public meetings, briefings, workshops, or charrettes. Public
hearings are legally recognized formal meetings held at particular
times during the project development and design phases. A Public
Hearing is required for any project that:

④ Requires additional right-of-way;

④ Substantially changes the layout or functions of connecting
roadways or of the facility being improved;
④ Has a substantial adverse impact on abutting property; or
④ Has a significant environmental, social or economic, or other effect.

An additional public hearing will be provided when there has been:

④ A significant change in the proposed project (or design details);

④ Identification of significant environmental, social, or economic
effects not considered at earlier Public Hearings;
④ Substantial unanticipated development in the project area; and,
④ An unusually long time lapse (for example, more than two years)
since the last public hearing.

2-36 Project Development January 2006

Exhibit 2-8 STEP I - Problem, Need, Opportunity Identification
Design Process Flowchart
STEP II - Planning

STEP III - Project Initiation/PRC Approval End of

Planning Phase

STEP IV - DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY PROCESSES

ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN RIGHT-OF-WAY

Review Project Planning Report/Existing Project Data

Define Project Outreach Process

Begin Early Interagency Coordination Order Necessary Survey Data

Prepare Base Plans Request/Compile Coordination with

Determine MEPA and NEPA Project Category
Necessary Traffic Data Bridge Designer

Determine Other Applicable Federal, State Develop Horizontal Develop Typical Cross-Sections Develop Preliminary Coordination with
& Local Environmental Laws & Regulation & Vertical Geometrics Pavement Design Landscape Designer Preliminary
Engineering
Determine Public Hearing Requirements Develop Preliminary Design Plans Develop Preliminary Right-of-Way Plans

Document / Map / Resources Develop Draft Traffic Signal Plan (if required) Develop Bridge Type Studies
& Sketch Plans for Bridges,
Develop Preliminary Cost Estimate Culverts and Walls (if required)
Process Environmental Documents
Develop Functional Design Report

Submit 25% Package Submit Plans to

Utilities Engineer
Conduct 25% Project Review

Hold 25% Design Public Hearing

Start Permit Process Obtain 25% Project Approval End of 25%

Design Phase

Begin of 75%
Prepare Subsurface Exploratory Plan (if required) Refine Horizontal & Vertical Geometry Begin Bridge Final Design Design Phase

Review Project Changes for MEPA Purposes Develop Cross-Sections Develop Construction Plans Develop Traffic Management Plan Develop Traffic Related Plans Refine Preliminary Right-of-Way Plans
Through Construction Zones
Interagency Coordination

Review Project Changes for NEPA Purposes Develop Pavement Design Develop Final Drainage Design Coordinate Utility Relocations

Update Cost Estimate Update Construction Plans Develop Special Provisions Transmit Preliminary R.O.W. Plans
Final
to Director of R.O.W.
Design
Submit Plans to Submit 75% Package First Structural Review
Utilities Engineer (Plans & Calculations) End of 75%
Conduct 75% Project Review Design Phase
Complete Permit Processes / Obtain Permits
Complete Constructability Review Begin of 100%
Design Phase
Finalize Construction Plans Second Structural Plans
Submission (PS & E)
Develop Traffic Control Agreement
with Municipality (if required)

Submit Construction Plans to Finalize Cost Estimates Finalize Special Provisions Prepare Layout Plans Finalize Right-of-Way Plans
Utilities Engineer and Order of Taking

100% PS & E Submittals Highway Design Complete

 2006 EDITION

In addition to the mandated published and posted legal notices of the

hearing, the project proponent should consider using other outreach
methods to attract all interested parties. If a federal Environmental
Assessment or Impact Statement or state Environmental Impact Report is
required, a public hearing should be held during the period of the public
review. The public would then have the opportunity to comment on the
impacts of the project as well as the project design.

Early coordination and public information is particularly important for

projects requiring the filing of a Coast Guard Permit. The requirement for
securing a Coast Guard Bridge Permit should be identified early in the
design process prior to the 25 Percent stage. The appropriate level of
information should be provided to the Coast Guard to allow them to
advertise the Public Notice to Mariners. The 25 Percent Design Public
Hearing can then be held as a joint hearing with the United States Coast
Guard. The Design Public Hearing Notice should also include a statement
that the project will require a Coast Guard Permit and that the Design Public
Hearing will serve as a public forum to comment on the Coast Guard Permit
process.

There are many opportunities for public meetings or hearings on the

project throughout the project development process as described in
Section 2.9 of this chapter. All meetings should be held in accessible
locations with materials relevant to the meeting made available in
alternative formats upon request. Key public meetings during the
environmental/design/ROW process are discussed below:

④ Location/Design Public Hearing — A Location/Design Public

Hearing signals a decision point for major projects and is held after
an environmental document is circulated, but before MassHighway
is committed to a specific alternative from among the reasonable
and feasible alternatives under consideration, including the No-
Build alternative. The hearing(s) is usually held during the planning
process but can also be held during preliminary engineering.

This Public Hearing provides the public the opportunity to provide

input into the determination of the need for, and the location and
design of, a proposed project. It also serves as a means of
summarizing any previous comments and concerns relative to the
alternatives under consideration, and provides a formal review of
the major points being addressed in the environmental document.

January 2006 Project Development 2-39

 2006 EDITION

④ Design Public Hearing — A Design Public Hearing is held for all

projects subsequent to the review and acceptance of the
25 Percent Design Plans by MassHighway.
④ Permit or Clearance Hearings — Many of the specific
environmental review requirements for projects have their own
public outreach requirements. These requirements must also be
satisfied to obtain the necessary environmental permits and
clearances.

Public meetings, open houses, briefings or workshops or other informal

gatherings of MassHighway officials, public officials, and local citizens
to share and discuss proposed actions are encouraged. These
alternative outreach approaches are discussed in Section 2.2 of this
chapter.

2.4.2 Environmental Documentation and Permitting

Early involvement by the project proponent to understand and develop
a plan of action to address the anticipated environmental
consequences of the project is essential. This effort can also shape a
more environmentally responsive and sustainable design. This section
describes some standard procedures which help to identify initial
project design parameters, initiate early coordination with the
community to identify issues specific to the project, and define
essential information to incorporate into the 25 Percent Design to
initiate early environmental reviews.

2.4.2.1 Early Coordination

Early coordination requirements by the project proponent are
described on the following pages (some of this may already have been
completed as part of project planning):

④ The designer must initiate early coordination with the local

environmental boards and commissions to review the project area
and identify any specific issues or concerns.
④ The designer should initiate early coordination with the appropriate
local historical commission(s) by requesting their review and
comment on the proposed scope of work and/or a locus plan
showing project limits and should copy the State Historic
Preservation Officer (a standardized letter is included in Appendix
2-A-6 of this chapter).

2-40 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

④ The designer should consult with the MassHighway Cultural

Resources Unit for early coordination with the Tribal Historical
Preservation Officer (THPO), if necessary.
④ The designer will send copies of the proposed scope of work and a
locus plan showing project limits to other environmental agencies
to initiate early coordination.

For projects affecting rivers and streams, the proponent should consult
with the Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game (Riverways
Program), Division of Marine Fisheries (marine resources, especially
diadromous fish), National Heritage and Endangered Species Program
(Biomap and Living Waters Analyses), and the National Park Service
(Wild and Scenic Rivers System).

All correspondence from the early coordination tasks should be

documented, copied to key project participants, including
MassHighway’s Project Manager, the District Office, and the
MassHighway Environmental Section, and made part of the project’s
permanent record.

2.4.2.2 Determine MEPA and NEPA Project Category

MEPA Determination
The designer, in coordination with the MassHighway Environmental
Section, will be responsible for determining the MEPA and NEPA project
category. The designer should obtain or develop the necessary
information to enable this determination to be made. The type of
information needed is discussed with the MassHighway Environmental
Section. All environmental review and permit submissions and
coordination with the agencies will be made through the MassHighway
Environmental Section. Copies of all applications, submissions, and
permits will also be sent to the District Environmental Engineer.

A determination should be made, in compliance with the MEPA

regulations, whether the project: (1) does not trigger MEPA
jurisdiction, (2) exceeds the ENF review thresholds, or (3) is a
categorical inclusion and requires an EIR. MEPA Review Thresholds are
provided as an attachment to this chapter.

Some of the ENF review thresholds are based on the amount of wetland
impact proposed. Therefore it is critical for the designer to know the

January 2006 Project Development 2-41

 2006 EDITION

square footage or number of acres of wetland alteration at the time of the

determination of MEPA project category. This information will help the
designer to determine whether (a) a variance from the Wetland
Protection Act is needed or (b) a Superseding Order of Conditions is
needed. If a variance or Superseding Order of Conditions is needed, then
MEPA review is required.

If it is determined that the project exceeds the MEPA review

thresholds, the designer should prepare an Environmental Notification
Form (ENF) and submit it to the MassHighway Environmental Section
for processing at the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (MEPA
Unit). After the consultation and scoping period, EOEA will determine
whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. If, prior to
filing, it is determined that the project is a categorical inclusion, an
ENF and an EIR are required. A mutual decision will be made at that
time if the designer or the Environmental Section will be responsible
for the preparation of the ENF and EIR. Classification of a project in
accordance with the MEPA review thresholds should be discussed with
the MassHighway Environmental Section.

NEPA Determination
If the project involves federal funds or other federal action, a
determination should also be made regarding compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act. A determination should be made in
accordance with the regulators of the lead federal agency regulations
(in most cases, FHWA) whether the project:

(1) is a categorical exclusion (CE) (Class II action) and does

not require federal agency approval,

(2) is a CE (Class II action) but requires additional

documentation and FHWA approval,

(3) requires preparation of an Environmental Assessment

(EA) (Class III action), or

(4) requires preparation of an EIS.

As indicated in the "Begin Interagency Coordination Section,” an

agreement should be reached with the appropriate federal agencies on
the NEPA project category. The MassHighway Environmental Section
will facilitate such an agreement.

2-42 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

The designer is responsible for the preparation of the necessary CE

documentation. The scope and details about CE documentation, EAs,
EISs, and the NEPA process must be coordinated with the
MassHighway Environmental Section.

2.4.2.3 Determine Other Applicable Federal, State and Local Environmental Laws
and Requirements
The proponent, or their designated designer, in coordination with the
MassHighway Environmental Section, will be responsible for identifying
and complying with all other applicable federal, state and local
environmental laws and requirements. A list of potential environmental
permits/clearances based on project funding is provided in the
Appendix to this chapter.

The project proponent should develop a checklist of the anticipated

environmental documentation and permits and schedule a coordination
meeting to review these assumptions and their requirements with the
MassHighway Environmental Section. A brief description of the Federal
and State Laws and Requirements, their common regulatory thresholds,
and environmental clearance timelines are provided in Appendix 2-A-6.

2.4.2.4 Process Environmental Documents

The project proponent is responsible for the environmental
documentation needed for the MEPA and NEPA processes and other
required permits and clearances. Preparing and processing this
environmental documentation should occur concurrent with the
development of the 25 Percent Design plans.

For the MEPA process, the environmental documentation may include

(1) an Environmental Notification Form and (2) A Draft Environmental
Impact Report and a Final Environmental Impact Report. For the NEPA
Process, the environmental documentation may be (1) documentation for
a categorical exclusion, (2) an Environmental Assessment, or (3) a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and a Final Environmental Impact
Statement. A determination of the environmental documentation required
is described above. Additional details about the MEPA and NEPA
processes can be found on the internet (for MEPA, see
www.mass.gov.envir/mepa; for NEPA, see http://environment.fhwa-
dot.gov/projdev).

January 2006 Project Development 2-43

 2006 EDITION

Interagency Coordination
Project delays can be minimized by early and on-going coordination
with Federal, state, and local agencies with jurisdiction by law or
special expertise. Proponents should consult the MassHighway
Environmental Section, or its website, regarding this effort. If, for
some reason, coordination with resource agencies did not take place in
the planning process, the early steps of the design phase offer another
key opportunity to perform necessary interagency coordination with
resource agencies to:

④ Use their technical expertise

④ Reach agreement on the determination of NEPA project category
④ Perform field investigations
④ Discuss existing environmental deficiencies
④ Determine which issues and concerns are most important
④ Discuss avoidance alternatives and minimization measures
④ Discuss need for wild life accommodation (see Chapter 14 and
Exhibit 14-1)
④ Determine which appropriate mitigation measures should be
evaluated
④ Determine the likelihood of obtaining any necessary permits

For projects involving Environmental Impact Statements, the

appropriate time to initiate interagency coordination is during scoping.
Scoping is the required process of determining the range of
alternatives and impacts that will be considered in that document.

For other projects, a consultation meeting scheduled with the MEPA

Office of EOEA is a good time to begin interagency coordination. All
interagency coordination should be documented. In all cases,
coordination with environmental resource agencies and boards should
take place before completion of the preliminary (25 Percent) design.

2.4.2.5 Environmental Requirements for the Preliminary (25 Percent)

Design Submission
Appendix 2-A-7 provides detailed information concerning
environmental elements of the project to be included with the
25 Percent Design Submission to assist in the identification of project
impacts and to expedite environmental clearances. Also included in
Appendix 2-A-7 is a 25 Percent Design Submission Checklist.

2-44 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

The designer should also consult MassHighway’s website for additional

useful information (www.mass.gov/mhd/. Copies of all correspondence
during information gathering should be made part of the project’s
permanent record.

2.4.2.6 25 Percent Submission Environmental Review

MassHighway’s Environmental Section will evaluate the data collected
during the 25 Percent Design process and the plans submitted. They
will determine whether the project can be designed to desired design
criteria, or if design changes or mitigation plans will be required to
resolve environmental issues and community concerns.

If the 25 Percent Design package is a resubmission for a project that

has already been reviewed, the designer will also distribute to the
MassHighway Environmental Section a summary of any proposed design
changes to any previous submissions for the project.

Review Project Changes for MEPA Purposes

After the initial MEPA project category determination and MEPA
processing, the designer, in coordination with the MassHighway
Environmental Section, will have responsibility to periodically review
changes to the highway project during the design phase to determine
whether future MEPA review is needed. If there have been changes to
the original project and the project was statutorily exempt or
categorically excluded from the MEPA regulations then the designer
must determine whether the changed project is still statutorily exempt
or categorically excluded. If so, then no further MEPA review is
necessary at that time. If the changes are such that the project now
exceeds the review thresholds, or is now a categorical inclusion, then
further MEPA review is necessary. The designer should refer to the
Determine MEPA and NEPA Project Category (described above),
discuss with the MassHighway Environmental Section, and take the
appropriate action.

If the original project exceeded the MEPA review thresholds or was a

categorical inclusion and the project has changed, then the designer
may need to prepare a Notice of Project Change (NPC) and submit it to
the MassHighway Environmental Section for processing. Additional
details about the Notice of Project Change are to be discussed with the
MassHighway Environmental Section. Based on information in the
Notice of Project Change, EOEA will determine whether the change in

January 2006 Project Development 2-45

 2006 EDITION

the project or change in the ambient environment significantly

increases the environmental consequences of the project and warrants
resubmission of an ENF, re-scoping, supplementary documentation, or
a further EIR.

There are cases where a project involving wetlands originally did not
exceed the MEPA review thresholds for highway projects and wetland
permits (i.e., it was a categorical exclusion) but now requires further
MEPA review because the wetland permit threshold is exceeded. This
can happen when (1) the information about wetlands at the time of the
determination of MEPA project category was unknown or incorrect (see
“Determine MEPA” and “NEPA Determine Project Category” sections) or
(2) when the project changes and the wetland impacts change.

Also, even if no changes are made to a project that requires an EIR,

further MEPA review may be necessary. If more than three years have
elapsed between the filing of a Final ENF and the filing of a Final EIR,
or if more than five years have elapsed between the filing of a Final
EIR and a substantial commencement of the project, the designer,
through the Environmental Section, must notify EOEA. EOEA will
consult with MassHighway, agencies, and persons who previously
participated in project review and will determine whether the lapse in
time or change in the ambient environment significantly increases the
environmental consequences of the project and warrants resubmission
of an ENF, re-scoping, supplementary documentation or further EIR.

The MEPA process can be time-consuming and result in design

changes to the project. It is, therefore, critical that the designer
perform this periodic review often, whenever a project change is
contemplated. At a minimum, the designer should perform this review
at the 25 Percent, 75 Percent, and 100 Percent Design phases.

Review Project Changes for NEPA Purposes

After approval of the categorical exclusion determination, FONSI, or
Final EIS, the designer, in consultation with the MassHighway
Environmental Section and FHWA, will be responsible for periodically
reviewing the highway project during the design phase to determine
whether or not the approved environmental document or categorical
exclusion determination remains valid. The periodic review should be
documented when determined necessary by FHWA. This review should
occur at the same time as the review of project changes for MEPA
purposes and also prior to requesting any major project approvals from

2-46 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

FHWA (i.e., authority to undertake final design, authority to acquire a

significant portion of the right-of-way, or approval of plans,
specifications, and estimates).

Interagency Coordination
Continual interagency coordination is imperative throughout the design
phase to address issues that may affect the processing of permit
applications. These issues can be discussed and resolved before they
cause a critical disagreement or time delays on a specific project.
Follow-up contact with resource agencies will determine whether
additional information on the project is needed.

This coordination may also alleviate the need to reopen an

environmental issue at the time the permit is applied for, which may
be well after this issue was presumed to have been resolved in an
environmental document. If interagency coordination is performed
properly, there should be no surprises during the permitting process.

2.4.2.7 Define and Initiate Permit Process

Environmental clearances and permits should be secured as early on in the
design process as is practicable. When used in this Guidebook, the term
"Permit Process" refers to any process or regulatory program that involves
obtaining a permit or some other type of sign-off from a federal, state, or
local agency. The following are examples:

④ Section 4(f) Approval

④ Section 404 Permit
④ Coast Guard Bridge Permit
④ Section 10 Permit
④ Section 106 Clearance
④ Water Quality Certification
④ Coastal Zone Management Concurrence Determination
④ Wetlands Order of Conditions/Resource Area Delineation
④ Chapter 91 License or Permit
④ NPDES Permit

Identification of applicable permits is completed prior to the 25 Percent

Design Submission. Initial coordination, data gathering continues
throughout the design process. Formal submission of applications to
regulatory agencies should be done as soon as the required information is

January 2006 Project Development 2-47

 2006 EDITION

available, but no later than the 75 Percent Design Submission. The

project proponent is responsible for obtaining all required permits.

Each permit process is unique and involves interagency coordination,

Before initiating information submission, possibly special public hearings, and specific
design, the designer forms or applications. Additional details of the permit process are
should take time to
provided as an attachment to this chapter or may be obtained from the
review all prior
planning documents MassHighway Environmental Section or on their website. It is critical that
and public input the Coast Guard Bridge Permit process start during the development of
received on the the 25 Percent Design. When a Bridge Permit is required, the Coast
project.
Guard has to publish the Public Notice to mariners and requires the
critical elements, as indicated in the Coast Guard Public Notice checklist
included in Appendix 2-A-7, be provided. (It is most useful if the Coast
Guard Permit hearing be held concurrent with the 25 Percent Design
Hearing, as discussed previously).

A good first step in this process is to develop an environmental permit

checklist that indicates all environmental permits or clearances required
and not required for the project (see also Appendix 2-A-7).

2.4.2.8 Complete Permit Processes

During the period from 25 Percent but no later than 75 Percent Design, the
designer will complete and submit all necessary forms or applications to the
appropriate agencies for the required permits. Permit applications
(including subsequent copies of all completed correspondence, etc.) and
permits will be copied to the appropriate District Environmental Engineer.

2.4.3 Project Design

The Project Design Process is fully described in Exhibit 2-8, presented
earlier in this section. There are generally three major phases of design,
including:

④ Preliminary Design (25 Percent Submission)

④ Final Design
⑨ 75 Percent Submission
⑨ 100 Percent Submission

④ Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E)

If the project is being designed by a municipality, they should consider

retaining a MassHighway qualified designer. As the project moves into
design, the project defined in the Project Planning phase is developed in

2-48 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

more detail and design documents for the project are produced. It is
imperative that the designer is knowledgeable about the context of the
project, about the issues raised during planning, and about the desires
of the community, MassHighway, and the regulatory agencies
concerning project implementation prior to initiating the design.

Title sheets to all plans (with the exception of the final stamped
mylars) should be stamped with the design stage (25, 75, 100, PS&E)
and date.

2.4.3.1 Preliminary Design Process (25 Percent)

The first step in the design process is referred to as preliminary design
and results in the submission of 25 Percent Design plans. The following
activities are necessary to develop the preliminary (25 percent) project
design.

Order Necessary Survey Data

If existing survey data is not adequate to design the project, the
project proponent must obtain additional survey data. This data may
be in the form of either a sufficiently detailed aerial or ground survey.
If the project proponent is MassHighway, the request is made to the
Survey Section, providing as much specific project location data as
possible. All survey work, whether completed by the designer or
MassHighway, must be in accordance with the MassHighway Survey
Manual.

Prepare Base Plans

This activity includes checking field notes, establishing coordinates,
determining the scale used in plotting, and plotting the survey on base
plans, base profiles, and base (original ground) cross-sections. Work
involved in plotting includes computing and adjusting the baseline,
traverses and levels. Details on base plan preparation are included in
Chapter 18 of this Guidebook.

Request/Compile Necessary Traffic Data

The designer must obtain data on the transportation operational
characteristics for the project area. These data are likely available
from the Project Planning phase. For more information, please refer to
Section 2.2 or Chapter 3, Section 3.4 of this Guidebook and the Traffic
Section of MassHighway’s 25 Percent Design phase submission
requirements provided in the Appendix to this chapter. Both existing

January 2006 Project Development 2-49

 2006 EDITION

and projected transportation data is requested for all modes of travel

using the facility.

Develop Horizontal and Vertical Geometrics

The designer must develop the basic roadway horizontal and vertical
geometry. All geometric data must be calculated at this stage
(stations, bearings, distances, horizontal and vertical curve data, etc.).
The design criteria are discussed in Chapter 4.

Develop Typical Cross-Sections

Typical cross-sections are developed based on design requirements.
Typical cross-sections show design elements that will predominate
throughout the project. For additional detail, the designer should refer
to Chapter 5. Particular attention should be paid to multimodal
accommodations in the definition of these cross-sections and work
completed during the planning phase to address user needs.

The designer should also seek to minimize impacts to utilities, to the

extent feasible and without compromising user accommodation, as
utility impacts can significantly contribute to project costs and delays.

Coordination with Bridge Design

The structural designer (if applicable) should be engaged early on in
the development of typical cross-sections and horizontal and vertical
alignments to integrate roadway and structural elements of the
project.

Coordination with Landscape Design

If landscape designers have not been previously involved in the
project, they should be consulted at this point to assist integration in
the roadside, structures, urban design and scenic consideration into
geometric design (horizontal, vertical, and cross-sectional elements).
Additional guidance on landscape design is provided in Chapter 13 of
this Guidebook.

Develop Draft Traffic Signal Plan (if required)

A Draft Traffic Signal Plan is developed based on guidelines provided in
the most current version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices. This plan shows the proposed placement of traffic control
devices and is based on traffic counts, turning movements, warrants, and
capacity analyses. This is in accordance with the "25 Percent Submission
Guidelines" prepared by the MassHighway Traffic Section.

2-50 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Develop Bridge Type Studies and Sketch Plans for Bridges, Culverts, and
Walls (if required)
Based on guidelines provided in the MassHighway Bridge Manual, bridge
type studies must be developed for bridges, culverts and/or walls which
are not included in the MassHighway Construction Standards. The Type
Studies are a preliminary presentation of the overall concept of the
proposed structure which shows all pertinent details for the preparation of
sketch plans and contract plans. The MassHighway Bridge Section has
recently streamlined this process for routine bridge replacement projects.
(See the MassHighway Bridge Manual for more information.)

The project proponent should also be familiar with the guidelines for
Wildlife Accommodation (Chapter 14), if applicable, and the regulatory
requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Coast Guard for
locations over wetlands and waterways.

Develop Preliminary Pavement Design

The pavement design anticipated for the project needs to be developed
including determination of rigid or bituminous pavement and a design
section. Chapter 9 details the appropriate pavement design to be
completed at this stage of design.

Develop Preliminary Right of Way Plans

Right-of-way requirements for the project should be estimated at this
stage in design. Preliminary 25 Percent plans should include:

④ Parcel Numbers
④ Dimensions for all proposed acquisitions
④ Areas of anticipated takings and easements

Develop Preliminary Cost Estimate

The proponent should prepare a preliminary cost estimate based on the
latest project information. It is important that this estimate be as complete
as possible based on quantity estimates and current unit prices and with
contingencies. Refinements are to be expected as the design develops, but
this estimate should reflect project costs as accurately as they can be
defined at the 25 Percent Design stage.

This cost estimate should itemize the participating (costs to be

covered by the anticipated funding source) and non-participating
(costs to be covered by the proponent) items. The determination of

January 2006 Project Development 2-51

 2006 EDITION

what work elements are eligible for funding should relate back to the
project need definition. As an example, a project to install a new traffic
signal to address a high crash location would likely not cover costs to
install new street trees, unless they replace trees that are impacted by
the signal installation. Conversely, if the project’s intent is to restore a
blighted downtown area, streetscape, ornamental lighting, and
pedestrian amenities would likely be appropriately included in the
participating items.

For transportation improvement projects that impact existing

landscape or utilities, work to restore these items is generally eligible
for state or federal funding. Typical landscape restoration activities are
discussed in Chapter 13. Utility costs generally include replacement-in-
kind. Improvements (betterments) to municipal sewer and water
systems are considered non-participating items. Relocation of
overhead utilities to underground is also a non-participating item.
Except for certain types of projects, streetscape amenities are
generally non-participating items.

Occasionally, project proponents may seek to use materials or

treatments on projects that are outside standard practices such as
block pavers vs. cement concrete sidewalks, granite vs. bituminous
curbing, or traffic signal posts and mast arms. Incremental costs are
often calculated and considered as non-participating costs in these
situations. Consideration should always be given to how, and by
whom, non-standardized items are to be maintained. Early
consultation with MassHighway for project-specific guidance on what
elements are likely to be participating or non-participating is beneficial.
The project proponent should also be aware of unique requirements or
restrictions dictated by the anticipated funding category. Information
on alternative funding sources which may be available to offset the
costs of the non-participating items can be obtained from the
Executive Office of Transportation.

Functional Design Report

A Functional Design Report (FDR) is a necessary component for all
transportation and safety improvement projects submitted to
MassHighway for 25 Percent review, including mitigation projects
developed through the Massachusetts Environmental Protection
Agency (MEPA) process. Roadway resurfacing, and maintenance
projects are generally exempt from this requirement. Guidelines for
the submission of a FDR are included on MassHighway’s website.

2-52 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Design Exceptions Report

The design guidance contained in this Guidebook is intended to provide
project proponents with sufficient flexibility to address the unique and
diverse conditions encountered on the Commonwealth’s streets and
highways; however, there may still be occasions when design
exceptions are necessary. For these circumstances, the project
proponent must complete a Design Exception Report as part of the
FDR, as discussed in Section 2.11 of this chapter, and transmit it to
MassHighway with the 25 Percent Design. Guidelines for submitting a
Design Exceptions Report are included on MassHighway’s website and
in Appendix 2-A-11 of this Chapter.

25 Percent Project Submission

Available layout and geometric data and reports developed in previous
tasks are assembled for submission and review by MassHighway. A
checklist of the 25 Percent Design submission requirements is provided
in Appendix 2-A-8 to this chapter.

Submit Plans to Utilities Engineer

Concurrent with the 25 Percent submission, the construction plans
should be submitted to the MassHighway Utilities Engineer as indicated
in the Submission Guidelines.

25 Percent Project Review

The 25 Percent package is reviewed by FHWA, municipalities, and
MassHighway design personnel, as necessary. The review is conducted
to identify problems and to ensure that the project is advancing
properly. Comments resulting from the review must be addressed prior
to proceeding with the Design Public Hearing.

Conduct 25 Percent Design Hearing

A Design Public Hearing is held for projects subsequent to the review
and acceptance of the 25 Percent Design plans by MassHighway.

Obtain 25 Percent Project Approval

The 25 Percent Design approval is the first written approval in the
highway design process by MassHighway and/or FHWA. The designer
must receive the 25 Percent project approval before proceeding with
the project into Final Design.

January 2006 Project Development 2-53

 2006 EDITION

2.4.3.2 Initiate Final Design (75 Percent)

Once the preliminary design has been reviewed and approved by
MassHighway, the designer proceeds into the final design process, as
outlined below.

Refine Horizontal and Vertical Geometry

The designer will refine the horizontal and vertical alignment, if
required.

Prepare Subsurface Exploratory Plan (if required)

After the alignment, profile, location, and structure types have been defined
and approved (25 Percent approval), a subsurface exploratory program is
developed for the required design. Before developing the program, the
designer should contact the Soils Unit of the Research and Materials Section
of MassHighway to discuss the proposed program of investigations. Plans
for the program are then developed and submitted to the Research and
Materials Section for review and/or implementation. Information required
to implement a subsurface exploratory program includes:

④ Boring locations plotted on plans, including a schedule showing

station, offset, highest bottom elevation, and a column for remarks
and boring notes. Borings for proposed structures should also be
plotted, including the footing outlines.
④ The District Offices will be furnished with a list of all property
owners with their mailing addresses so they can be notified.
④ A list of all the utilities within the project limits (as well as the
name, address, and telephone number of the appropriate utility or
public official to contact) will be made available to the
MassHighway Research and Materials Section to include in the
special provisions of the boring contract.

For additional details, the designer is referred to the MassHighway

Materials Manual and the MassHighway Bridge Manual.

Develop Construction Cross-sections

The proposed roadway cross-sections, based on the horizontal and
vertical geometry, and the typical sections, are drawn on the base
(original ground) cross-sections. These cross-sections are included as
part of the contract documents.

2-54 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Develop Construction Plans

The horizontal and vertical geometry, including the location lines,
developed in the preceding activities are refined. The plans should
include all drawings and data necessary for construction of the
proposed project. Chapter 17 of this Guidebook provides details on
construction plan requirements.

Develop Traffic Management Plan (TMP) Through Construction Zones

A Traffic Management Plan is required for any project which disrupts
existing travel patterns during construction (this includes pedestrians,
people with disabilities, bicyclists, and motor vehicles). If a project is
on a local road or uses a local road for a detour, the municipality must
review and approve the TMP. The MassHighway Traffic Engineer or
District Highway Director reviews and approves TMPs as appropriate.
Chapter 10 discusses traffic control through construction zones.

Develop Traffic-related PS&E Data

For projects involving lighting, traffic signals, signs, pavement markings,
and traffic controls for construction operations, plans, special provisions
and estimates are submitted to the Traffic Engineer for review and
approval.

Develop Pavement Design

The designer will conduct the pavement design analysis. All pavement
designs will be reviewed and approved by the MassHighway Pavement
Design Engineer. The design must conform to approved MassHighway
methods and must include the documentation of all background data
as detailed in Chapter 9 of this Guidebook.

Develop Drainage Design

The designer is responsible for developing a comprehensive drainage
plan that will adequately drain the roadway. In addition, the drainage
plan must also protect the adjacent landowners, wetlands, and public
water supplies from drainage related problems. The designer
determines the sizes, types, locations, and construction details for each
drainage appurtenance based on hydraulic calculations and
environmental considerations. When a bridge or major culvert is
involved, the MassHighway Hydraulics Section, Bridge Section and
Environmental Section should be consulted. Chapter 8 of this Guidebook
and the MassHighway Storm Water Handbook should be consulted prior
to initiating drainage design.

January 2006 Project Development 2-55

 2006 EDITION

Coordinate Utility Relocations

Although the Utilities Engineer provides direct MassHighway contact
with the utilities, the designer may be involved in the process to
ensure that the relocations are appropriate. The designer's level of
effort for this activity varies with the project, the utility involved, and
the type of relocation. In addition, the designer may also be involved
in coordinating Force Account and Betterment Agreements.

Update Construction Plans

In addition to all of the known existing details, the plans should include
the following proposed details.

■ road surface ■ water supply

■ roadway width ■ roadside barriers
■ centerline ■ demolitions
■ drives and walks ■ bridges
■ traffic control devices ■ slopes
■ edging, curbing, and berms ■ fences
■ drainage appurtenances ■ curb cut ramps
■ ditches ■ pedestrian access/accessible
route for people with disabilities
■ bicycle accommodations ■ wetland resource areas
■ landscaping ■ vernal pools
■ sub-drains

Chapter 18 discusses the content of the construction plans.

Develop Special Provisions

The designer develops special provisions for the project. Special
provisions are used to explain conditions or special construction
practices not covered in the current edition of the Massachusetts
Standard Specifications for Highways and Bridges or Supplemental
Specifications to the Standard Specifications for Highways and Bridges.
In the preparation of special provisions, refer to Standard
Nomenclature and Designation of Items. A draft copy of the special
provisions must be provided at the 75 Percent submission.

Special provisions will include but not be limited to:

④ Scope of Work (including locus map, project limits, and project

length)
④ Provisions for Travel and Prosecution of Work

2-56 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

④ Work schedule
④ List of Utility owners (with name and address, of contact person)
④ List of Items which have material options
④ Individual contract items not covered in Standard Specifications, or
if deviations to the Standard Specifications are made. The
MassHighway Standard Nomenclature booklet identifies those
items specifically requiring a Special Provision
④ Special Precautions (other facilities such as structural foundations,
ponds, streams, etc.)
④ Special permission or construction methods stipulated in the
environmental permits
④ Copies of Permits, Licenses, Certificates, or Orders of Conditions
(when available)
④ Scheduling requirements (milestones, completion dates)

The Specification Section will provide standard inserts ("boiler-plate")

into the special provisions booklet.

Update Cost Estimate

Definitive costs for some items previously uncertain (because they
depend on design features impossible to specify earlier) can now be
calculated. All costs should be consolidated so that the 75 Percent
estimate reflects total costs as accurately as the latest project data will
allow. An update of all non-participating and participating items must be
included as part of this submission.

75 Percent Project Submission

All materials developed for the project are compiled and submitted at
this time. This includes a written response to comments received on the
25 Percent submission. A checklist of the 75 Percent submission
requirements is provided in Appendix 2-A-9 to this chapter. It is also
helpful in the review process if all significant changes in the design that
have occurred since the 25 percent approval are summarized and
explained in the transmittal letter.

Submit 75 Percent Plans to Utilities Engineer

The 75 Percent plans are transmitted to MassHighway’s Utilities
Engineer for distribution to the affected utilities for their review. All
betterments and special utility considerations are noted.

January 2006 Project Development 2-57

 2006 EDITION

75 Percent Project Review

The 75 Percent Design Package is reviewed by the FHWA, various
MassHighway sections, and municipalities, as appropriate. A
coordinated on-site review with representatives of affected groups
should be considered at this time, including MassHighway District
construction personnel.

75 Percent Project Approval

The 75 Percent approval is granted when the plans are approximately
90 Percent complete, and all the steps between the 25 Percent and
75 Percent stages in the Submission Guidelines have been properly
addressed. After 75 Percent approval, the designer can proceed with
the preparation of the 100 Percent/PS&E for the project.

2.4.3.3 100 Percent and PS&E Design Package

After review of the 75 Percent Design, the designer needs to complete
the following steps to complete the design process.

Develop Traffic Control Agreement with Municipality (if required)

A Traffic Control Agreement is prepared for city or town roads, if
necessary. It is not required for state highway projects or non-Federal-
aid projects. The agreement will define the permanent traffic control,
regulations, and devices needed to ensure the system will be operated
and maintained as designed. The agreement will be signed by the
highest elected local authority, by the Town or City Council, by the
municipal legal counsel, and by MassHighway. Copies are distributed
to the FHWA, City/Town, MassHighway Commissioner, Traffic Section,
and the District Highway Director.

Finalize Construction Plans

Construction plans are finalized and assembled during this activity. Final
construction plan requirements are further discussed in Chapter 18.

Finalize Cost Estimates

Project quantity estimates are prepared based on a list of items
compiled for the project. The designer must use a computer
spreadsheet to enter the quantities and unit prices for each item. The
designer must prepare a cost summary sheet. Chapter 18 describes
MassHighway estimating procedures.

Submit Construction Plans to Utilities Engineer

The completed construction plans are transmitted to the Utilities
Engineer for distribution to the affected utilities. All betterments and

2-58 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

special utility considerations are noted. For additional information,

refer to the MassHighway Utility Accommodations Policy and the 100
Percent Submission Guidelines.

100 Percent Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (100 Percent PS&E) Submittal
The designer completes the project, checking to ensure that all information
necessary to construct the project is complete and is in the proper format.
All items in the 100 Percent Submission Guidelines must be submitted at
this time. A checklist of the 100 Percent/PS&E requirements is provided in
Appendix 2-A-10 to this chapter. Necessary copies are made and the plan is
sent to the appropriate section manager for final processing.

MassHighway’s Project Manager is responsible for forwarding the

specifications and estimate to the Capitol Expenditure Program Office
(CEPO) for processing and then to the Specifications Section for
construction advertising.

2.4.4 Right-of-Way
Layout plans, descriptions, and orders of taking are required to establish
highway right of way for all projects which involve land acquisitions. The
proposed layouts may result in changes to existing state highway layouts or
to existing county, city, or town layouts, or may revise existing limited access
provisions. All proposed layouts must be accurately computed. Where a
project involves more than one municipality, separate layouts are required
for each. Railroad baselines should be tied to the state highway layout.

The process for acquiring right of way or easements needs to be

progressed as the design progresses.

2.4.4.1 Preliminary Right-of-Way Plans (25 Percent Design)

When land acquisition or easements are involved, the designer must
identify existing and proposed layout (locations) lines, easements,
property lines, corner markings, names of property owners, access points,
and the dimensions and areas of estimated takings and easements as part
of the 25 Percent Design.

When land acquisitions are made by MassHighway, ROW plans are required.
Specific requirements for developing Preliminary Right-of-Way Plans are
provided in Chapter 18 of this Guidebook.

Preliminary ROW and/or layout plans will be prepared at 25 Percent Design

to produce legible reproductions. Each sheet will be labeled “Preliminary
Right of Way.”

January 2006 Project Development 2-59

 2006 EDITION

As required by state law, when land acquisitions are made by the state or a
municipality, the process should be followed in accordance with The
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of
1978 as amended. Certification of this layout procedure by the
MassHighway Right of Way Bureau is required (MGL Chapter 81). It is
advisable that the municipality work closely with the Right-of-Way Bureau
during the entire acquisition process to facilitate the necessary acquisition
and ensure that Federal and State requirements are met. At the initiation of
the process, the municipality must designate a coordinator/liaison to work
with the Community Compliance section of MassHighway.

Guidance documents for municipalities involved in property acquisition for

Federal-Aid and Non-Federal-Aid projects are available on MassHighway’s
website.

Preliminary Right-of-Way Plans (75 Percent Design)

The designer will confirm the acquisitions in the 25 Percent ROW
submittal are adequate for the 75 Percent Design, or provide revised
ROW Plans. ROW acquisition information will be posted on the preliminary
ROW plan by the designer when the designer obtains the information.

2.4.4.2 Final Right-of-Way Plans (100 Percent/PS&E Design)

After the Layout or Taking documents are recorded, the preliminary
ROW plan will become the final ROW plan. Each sheet of the plan will
be labeled “Final Right-of-Way Plan,” and the plan will be subject to
any additions and revisions that may be required later. Any additions
and revisions with dates will be noted. Specific requirements for the
Final Right-of-Way Plans are presented in Chapter 18 of this
Guidebook.

Finalize Layout Plans and Order of Taking

As soon as feasible after the 75 Percent project approval, Layout Plans
and the Order of Taking are finalized by the designer. This involves
checking the plans for completeness and preparing the Order of
Taking. Layout Plans are discussed in Chapter 18.

2.4.5 Completion of Environmental Permitting/Design/

Right-of-Way Process
The conditions under which the project design and environmental
permitting are complete and approved is when all documents
necessary to publish the bid documents are complete, unless
otherwise directed by the Deputy Chief Engineer of the MassHighway

2-60 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Projects Section, the Chief Engineer of MassHighway, or the

MassHighway Commissioner.

The recommended format for submitting the final Federal Aid and Non-
Federal Aid Plans, Special Provisions & Estimate are described in
Chapter 18 of the Highway Guidebook and the Standard Specifications
for Highways & Bridges.

2.4.5.1 PS&E Completeness Review

Upon receipt of a PS&E submittal, MassHighway will review the submittal
for completeness as follows:

④ Three completed copies of the PS&E.

④ Bridge Section approval of the Bridge Plans, Special Provisions &
Estimate.
④ No proprietary items in the Special Provisions & Estimate unless
they are justified as an overriding public interest. (Federal
oversight projects require FHWA approval.)
④ The PS&E satisfies all the latest Engineering Directives/Policies/
Codes/Manuals.
④ Hazardous Materials Special Provisions & Estimate are included.
④ Environmental Permits, Licenses and their conditions (if any) are
included.
④ Project ITS elements conform to the regional architecture.
④ The Right-of-Way Certificate and its conditions (if any) are
included.
④ Commitment letter from the Municipality for Non-Participating
funding is included.
④ If Federal Aid, the project is in the current year STIP and the
estimated cost is within the approved STIP amount. (For projects
under $5 million, the total cost must be within $500,000 of the
STIP amount; for projects costing more than $5 million, the total
cost must be within 10 percent of the amount programmed on the
STIP.)
④ Special provisions are provided for the asterisked items in the
Preliminary Estimate Proof Sheet. Care should be taken not to
duplicate the standard specifications.
④ Items mentioned in the Special Provisions are also in the Estimate.

January 2006 Project Development 2-61

 2006 EDITION

④ The names, addresses, and phone numbers of the utilities owners,

municipalities’ officials and other contact persons are in the
contract.

2.4.5.2 Submission of Plans, Specifications, and Estimate for Procurement

MassHighway is responsible for submitting the final PS&E package to the
Capital Expenditure Program Office (CEPO) and the Construction
Contracts Section. The final PS&E is distributed when the project design
is complete and all documents necessary to publish the project
advertisement are in order, unless otherwise directed by the Deputy
Chief Engineer of the Projects Section, the Chief Engineer of
MassHighway, or the MassHighway Commissioner.

2.4.5.3 Environmental Permit Checklist Review

In addition to ensuring completeness of the design and right-of-way
process, the proponent needs to ensure that all necessary
environmental permits and clearances are complete.

Step IV Outcomes:
A designed and permitted project ready for construction.

Depending upon whether or not a project has been programmed, the

next step in the project development process is either Step V,
Programming, or Step VI, Procurement.

2-62 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.5 Step V: Programming

The programming of transportation improvements can be a complex
and sometimes lengthy process involving local, state, and federal
agency approvals, depending on the scope of the project. Programming,
which typically begins during design, can occur at any time during the
process from planning to design. Public support for the project is critical
and can significantly alter the implementation process and schedule.

Once the proposed project is approved by the Project Review Committee,

in Step III described previously, the PRC should notify the District and the
MPO. The Metropolitan Planning Organization will consider the project’s
programming schedule during its annual Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) development process. Funding for the project can be
allocated once the project is placed on the TIP and the project is ready to
move forward.

When a new TIP is being developed, all of the communities in the

Metropolitan Planning Organization region are notified and asked to
submit those projects they would like included on the TIP. This annual
solicitation for projects takes place during the first three months of the
calendar year. The list of projects submitted by the communities is
compiled with those submitted by the MPO member agencies (the
Planning Agency, MassHighway, EOT and the Regional Transit Authority),
and projects that remain from the previous TIP. Regional TIPs are also
amended from time to time, depending upon local needs and the status
of individual projects.

The following process should be followed by the community for those

projects proposed on federal-aid eligible, locally maintained roadways:

④ The MassHighway District Office notifies the community and the

MPO in writing if the project is approved by the Project Review
Committee. (The District Office will notify the community if the
project is not considered viable as a MassHighway-sponsored
project and that it is more suitable as a Chapter 90 project.)
④ Following MassHighway project approval, the community should
contact their MPO to request that the project be placed on the TIP.
④ The MPO considers the project in terms of regional needs,
evaluation criteria and compliance with the Regional Transportation
Plan.

January 2006 Project Development 2-63

 2006 EDITION

④ The MPO votes on approving the project for inclusion in the Draft
Regional TIP, which is presented to the public for review.
④ The MPO votes on approving the project for inclusion in the Final
Regional TIP, which includes revisions based on public input.

There are several sources of funding for transportation projects. It should

be noted that many other projects compete for the same money; therefore,
the priority of the project will determine if it is assigned to a funding
category and programmed in the TIP. Typical funding categories include:

④ National Highway System (NHS) – Funds for projects on all

National Highway System roadways. NHS roadways include
Interstate routes and a large percentage of urban and rural
arterials. The funding split for this program is 80 percent federal
funds, 20 percent state funds. All projects on NHS roadways are to
be designed in conformance with the latest edition of the AASHTO’s
A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
④ Non–Federal Aid (NFA) – Funds for construction, reconstruction,
and improvement projects on roads and bridges in urban and rural
areas at the discretion of the state. The state share is 100 percent
of the project costs (Not typically included in TIP, except in the
Boston Region).
④ Surface Transportation Program (STP) – Funds for projects
chosen by states and localities on any roads that are not
functionally classified as local or as rural minor collectors. These
roads are referred to as Federal-aid roads. The funding split for this
program is 80 percent federal funds, 20 percent state funds.
④ Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) – Funds for projects
in the Clean Air Act non-attainment areas for ozone and carbon
monoxide. The funding split for this program is 80 percent federal
funds, 20 percent state funds.
④ Highway Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation – Funds the
replacement or repair of bridges based on structural adequacy,
safety and serviceability. The funding split for this program is
80 percent federal funds, 20 percent state funds.
④ Interstate Maintenance (IM) – Funds rehabilitation, restoration,
and resurfacing on the interstate highway system. Also funds the
reconstruction of bridges, interchanges, and overpasses along
existing interstate routes and the acquisition of right-of-way. The

2-64 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

funding split for this program is 90 percent federal funds, 10

percent state funds.
④ Federal Aid (FA) – Funding for projects that have specialized or
proprietary funding or projects for which the specific federal
category has not yet been identified.

There may be other applicable funding categories depending on the type

of project under consideration. The project proponent should consult the
regional planning agency for current information.

January 2006 Project Development 2-65

 2006 EDITION

2.6 Step VI: Procurement

Once a design is complete, the project is organized within a
construction contract, and an open invitation to bidders is published.
Construction contractors may review currently available bids through
Comm-PASS, the statewide procurement program maintained by the
Operational Services Section.

Bids received by MassHighway are opened and reviewed, and will be

awarded to the lowest qualified bidder. A current list of contracts
available is maintained on MassHighway’s website
(www.mass.gov/mhd.)

2-66 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.7 Step VII: Construction

After a construction contract is awarded, the proponent and the
contractor will need to develop a construction management plan. The
permitting agencies, local authorities, and affected members of the
general public need to be informed of the plan. These entities should
also be notified as changes in construction areas and activities occur
throughout the project.

2.7.1 Public Participation During Construction

Before construction activities begin, the proponent and construction
manager must determine the appropriate type of public notification
and participation needed. Different projects result in different types of
disruption to transportation and other nearby activities. For simple
projects, including resurfacing, a minimal degree of public participation
may be needed. For these types of projects, the proponent should, at
a minimum, notify abutters of the impending construction activity.

For complex projects, the proponent may need to schedule a

construction management plan meeting with abutters and other
project participants (local boards, interest groups, business
associations, etc.). At this meeting, the proponent can describe the
types of construction activity needed, construction phasing, and
durations. Issues and concerns associated with the construction period
can be identified and adjustments made to the construction
management program to minimize community impacts as a result.

2.7.2 Construction Management and Monitoring

Careful management and monitoring of construction activities is
necessary for most projects to ensure that quality standards are
maintained, environmental commitments honored, and community
expectations are met.

January 2006 Project Development 2-67

 2006 EDITION

2.8 Step VIII: Project Assessment

Project Assessment can be used as a tool to further improve the project
development and delivery processes. Although completion of this process
will depend upon the proponent, three important pieces of information
can be gathered through this brief, informal process. These include:

④ Constituent input into project development process:

⑨ Were the proponent’s expectations for guidance, review,
and feedback met?

⑨ Was the project timeline reasonable?

⑨ Was the public outreach program for the project appropriate

and effective?

⑨ Were community concerns about the project addressed and

community comments incorporated into the planning and
design processes?

⑨ Were appropriate design controls selected for determining

the design outcome?

⑨ Was the project construction effectively managed so that

community impacts were minimized?

④ Constituent review of the project design elements

⑨ Was the project need addressed?

⑨ Is the resulting project consistent with its context?

⑨ What specific design elements are judged to be successful

and recommended for future projects?

⑨ What specific design elements are judged to be

unsuccessful and should be reconsidered, and why?

④ Follow-up of Punch List items

⑨ Are there project elements that still need to be completed?

⑨ Has the project resulted in any situations requiring follow-

up or adjustment to meet the original or newly-created
project needs?

2-68 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.9 Public Outreach

Public outreach is anticipated throughout the project development
process to ensure that the project continues to meet its intended
purpose, benefits from input and feedback from interested citizens,
local and regional groups, and elected officials, and maintains strong
support. Public outreach is integrated into every step of the project
development process defined in this chapter. This active participation
will ensure a role for the public to help shape the project that emerges
from the process. It is particularly important to provide opportunities
for public outreach early in project planning.

2.9.1 Identify Project Constituents

Early in the project development process, the proponent should consider
the public support for the project and the constituency that it serves.
Project constituents are groups and individuals that are involved in,
have an interest in, or are affected by a proposed project. They can
either be formal participants in the process, or can be represented by
other participants in the process. Different types of projects involve
different constituents, and different levels of planning and review.
Project constituents include some or all of the following entities:

④ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

④ MassHighway
④ Metropolitan Planning Organizations
④ Regional Planning Agencies
④ Regional Transit Authorities
④ Transportation Providers
④ State and Federal Regulatory Agencies
④ National Park Service
④ U.S. Coast Guard
④ Other State Authorities
④ Elected Officials, Public Works Departments, Local Boards, and
Commissions, including Conservation Commission
④ Facility users (commuters, residents, visitors by all modes)
④ Neighbors and citizen groups
④ Municipal commission(s) on accessibility
④ Regional Independent Living Center(s)

January 2006 Project Development 2-69

 2006 EDITION

④ Advocacy and interest groups (such as local pedestrian or bicycling

committees, trucking associations, preservation groups, etc.)
④ Private area businesses
④ Local emergency responders
④ Utilities (including railroads)
④ Regional watershed or river management councils

At a minimum, the proponent should contact the appropriate local

planning and public works staff, planning commission chair, conservation
commission chair, select board chair, and major local property owners in
the vicinity of the project area to help determine initial concerns and
issues. The proponent should confer with municipal officials to determine
which property owners may have legitimate issues that should be
addressed by the project. This effort will help identify important local
groups such as neighborhood associations, business associations,
historical societies, recreation and open space committees, transportation
providers, and others who should be informed of the project. It is better
to be as inclusive as possible early in the Project Development Process to
allow the public to participate and be afforded an opportunity to
contribute to the decision-making process for the project. (It should also
be made clear to all those attending how comments will be treated and
how any expected follow-up will be handled).

Identifying the likely parties that may have interest in the project at
the beginning of the project development process helps the project
proponent tailor the public outreach program appropriately. The
project proponent should define a public participation plan at the
outset of each step of the project development process. Tools available
for this outreach are described in Section 2.9.3.

2.9.2 Public Outreach Approach

The level of interest and role of the public varies widely by project type
and complexity. Exhibit 2-9 provides a public outreach matrix by
project type to aid the project proponent in determining the scope of
this effort at the outset. Different types of projects are likely to elicit
different levels of community, resource agency, and local board
interest. These project types are grouped into system preservation
projects, and system improvement or expansion projects with
guidance provided on the appropriate level of public outreach, as
explained further in the following paragraphs.

2-70 Project Development January 2006

 Necessary and Recommended Public Outreach Approaches

January 2006
Notify abutters Community Early involvement Early Local Public forums at Active Form an
and utilities of notification and of Local Boards/ Issues Meeting several stages communication Advisory
construction involve abutters Commissions of Planning and about project Task Force
Design progress
Exhibit 2-9

impacts*

Source: MassHighway
System Preservation**
Roadways, Sidewalks, and Shared Use Paths
Maintenance
Resurfacing
Reconstruction/Reconfiguration within Existing Layout
Bridges
Maintenance
Rehabilitation
System Improvement or Expansion
New Roadway or Shared Use Path
Widened Roadway or Shared Use Path Widening
Intersection or Roundabout Improvements
New Interchange or Interchange Reconfiguration
Roadside Safety, Sidewalk or Signage Improvements
Traffic Calming, Streetscape, Lighting, or Transit Enhancements
New or Widened Bridge
New or Expanded TDM/Park & Ride Lot
New or Expanded Traffic Management System

Usually necessary/recommended.
Typical Public Outreach Approach for Different Types of Projects

Suggested for project types indicated and usually necessary for more complex projects within each type.
May be helpful for more complex projects for the types indicated.

* The Public Works Department and other utilities should also be consulted to determine if there are any planned improvements to subsurface utilities and infrastructure

Project Development
** Public outreach may not be needed for system preservation activities such as routine maintenance and resurfacing; however, these projects may offer opportunities to enhance the accommodation of bicyclists or pedestrians and it may be
useful to reach out to specific constituencies as projects are being planned. Examples of these types of projects include restriping, new crosswalks, ADA enhancements, or drainage improvements.
2006 EDITION

2-71
 2006 EDITION

The project proponent should carefully consider the best-suited

approach to public outreach, depending upon the complexity of the
project. Some general approaches to increase awareness of a project
and solicit input are described below:

④ Notification of Abutters — Project proponents for all projects,

other than routine maintenance, should, at a minimum, notify
abutters of the construction program anticipated and its potential
impacts to property and/or operations. This can be informally done
through neighborhood flyers or posters, through newspaper
notices, or more formally done by certified mail.
④ Notification of Utilities — Project proponents should notify
utilities of the construction program anticipated and its potential
impacts to their services or operations. It is important to notify
utilities even for routine resurfacing and rehabilitation projects to
coordinate any planned utility work. This is especially true for an
overlay, since pavement life is shortened considerably following a
utility cut.
④ Community Notification — As projects become more complex,
disruptive, and of longer duration, notification should be made to
the community as a whole using the public outreach tools
discussed in the next section. This community notification helps to
increase knowledge of the project and its potential construction-
related impacts. Beyond simple notification, the proponent should
actively involve abutters, specific local interest groups, and utilities
to get a good cross-section of people to participate.
④ Early Involvement of Local Boards and Commissions — The
proponent should consider involving local boards and commissions
at the outset of the project. This involvement can help the
proponent identify issues the project is likely to face and can help
the proponent gauge the type of additional outreach activities that
may be most appropriate if the project proceeds. Outreach to local
boards and commissions can also be helpful for complex
maintenance and resurfacing projects. It is safer to notify all
municipal departments/ boards of a project’s scope before much
design work is started to minimize later concerns or needs for
project changes.
④ Early Local Issues Meeting — An early local issues meeting is
important for projects where transportation facilities are being
substantially modified, expanded, or replaced. It is recommended
that this meeting be widely advertised, as discussed below. This

2-72 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

meeting provides a forum for project constituents to make their

concerns known before a course of action is determined. For
straightforward projects, this early local meeting, coupled with
later opportunities for public hearings during design and
permitting, may be sufficient. For more complex projects, or for
projects that cover multiple jurisdictions, several early local issues
meetings may be necessary.
④ Public Forums or Hearings at Several Stages of Planning and
Design — As project complexity continues to increase, the public
participation should include several opportunities for public
involvement during the planning and design phases in addition to
the early local issues meeting described above. Targeted mailings
can be used to generate interest and ensure that concerned parties
are contacted. Key milestones where public involvement is
especially important include alternatives analysis during the
planning process, at key design milestones, or if the project
elements change substantially due to increasing refinement of the
design. Detailed meeting minutes are recommended for each
session. These are discussed in more detail in the Section 2.2.1.2.
④ Active Communication about Project Progress — In addition
to interactive public forums, active communication about project
progress is helpful for maintaining consensus and keeping project
constituents informed about the project status. One good tool is
the ProjectInfo menu on MassHighway’s website
(www.mass.gov/mhd). Several additional tools for communicating
project progress are highlighted in the following section.
④ Formation of an Advisory Task Force — An advisory task force
of project constituents can be particularly helpful for maintaining
involvement from a consistent group of individuals, representing a
cross-section of interests in the project. This formalized type of
public outreach is generally reserved for more complex projects
with a wide range of alternatives, benefits and potential impacts.
In almost all cases, formation of an advisory task force does not
replace the need for the other public outreach approaches
described above. Citizen Advisory Committees may also be
established by the Secretary of the Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs (EOEA) as part of the Massachusetts
Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) process. The charge of an
advisory group should be defined at the outset with an
unambiguous definition of the limits of their decision-making

January 2006 Project Development 2-73

 2006 EDITION

authority. Typically, task forces are advisory bodies that offer input
to the process and suggest recommendations.

2.9.3 Public Outreach Tools

There are many aspects of public outreach associated with
transportation projects including:

④ Informing constituents of a potential project;

④ Active participation of project constituents in planning and design;
④ Formalized public meetings and hearings; and
④ Communication about the progress of a project

Within each of these aspects, there are various outreach tools

available which serve different purposes and target different
audiences. These tools are applicable throughout the project
development process.

The first stage in public outreach is to make people aware of a

potential project. Legal notices alone are ineffective at informing the
community about upcoming project meetings. The project proponent
should consider additional ways to communicate the opportunity to
participate in the transportation project development process, such as:

④ Local newspaper articles or editorial letters

④ Notices to local boards , committees, and local or statewide
advocacy groups
④ Posters at civic buildings or churches, or in neighborhoods
④ Local cable television community event calendars
④ A community website posting or community-wide mailing
④ Press releases to media outlets
④ A community-wide meeting notice or newsletter mailing (or email)
④ Flyers to project abutters

Public hearings, or opportunities for public hearings, are required by

FHWA for Federal-Aid highway projects as part of a process that also
encourages a variety of citizen involvement techniques such as
informal public meetings, briefings, and workshops. Public hearings are
legally recognized formal meetings held at particular stages of the
project development process. If a federal or state environmental
document is required, the public hearing should not be held until the

2-74 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

document is available for public review. Some environmental or

resource agency permits or clearance processes also require public
hearings.

All public meetings and hearings should be held in facilities that are
fully accessible for people with disabilities, and notices about these
meetings should use the International Symbol of Accessibility to
indicate that the location is accessible. Handout materials available in
alternative formats—Braille, large print, and/or audio cassette—as well
as other accommodations (sign language interpreters, CART reporters,
etc.) should be indicated in the meeting notices along with specifically
how to request these accommodations.

The types of public hearings or meetings that can occur during the
project development process are highlighted in Exhibit 2-10. The
schedule of these meetings is dependent on project complexity and its
permitting requirements.

Formal environmental and design hearings are sometimes ineffective

in eliciting community concerns and addressing individual issues.
Other ways to communicate with those interested in or affected by
projects include:

④ Public Meetings — informal gatherings of designers, officials, and

local citizens to share and discuss proposed actions. These
meetings provide an opportunity for informal, less structured
conversations about a project, the design elements, and its
potential benefits and impacts.
④ Open Houses —mechanisms for interested parties to gather more
detailed information on a project. Open houses facilitate the
discussion of particular details of interest to individuals more
effectively than traditional hearings or public meetings.
④ Workshops or Charrettes —smaller groups that facilitate
problem solving around design issues for which several options are
available and the best solution is unclear.

January 2006 Project Development 2-75

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-10
Typical Public Meetings during Project Development
Project Development Stage Public Meetings/Hearings
I. Problem/Need/Opportunity Identification Local Meetings (Board of Selectmen, Local Transportation
Committee, Neighborhood, etc.)

II. Planning Early Local Issues Meeting(s)

Alternatives Presentation (if needed)
Project Presentation (if needed)
III. Project Initiation

IV. Environmental, Design and ROW Process

Environmental
Conceptual to 25 Percent Design Phase
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Clearance
④ ENF Consultation Session
④ EIR Public Informational Meeting (if requested)
④ Special Review Procedure Citizen Advisory Committee Meetings (if established)
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Clearance
④ CE None
④ EA Public Informational Meeting (if requested)
④ EIS Scoping Hearing
Draft EIS Hearing
Other Federal Regulations / Permits
Section 4 (f) of 1966 US DOT Act Relies on NEPA Process
Section 106 Historic Properties and Districts Relies on NEPA Process
Section 131A Endangered Species Relies on NEPA Process
Section 404 of 1972 Clean Water Act
Category 1 and 2 ACOE PGP None
Category 3 (Individual) ACOE PGP Public Meeting (if requested)
U.S. Coast Guard Section 10 Bridge Permit Public Hearing
Other State Regulations / Permits
Conceptual to 25 Percent Design Phase
④ Chapter 91 Waterways Licensing Public Hearing for Non-Water Dependent Uses
④ Chapter 254 Historic Properties and Districts Relies on MEPA Process
75 to 100 Percent Design Phase
④ Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (WPA)
Public Hearing(s) with Local Conservation Commission

Construction Phase
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) None
Design Location Public Hearing1
Special Hearing2
Design Public Meeting (25 Percent)
Right of Way Acquisition Public Hearing and/or Town Meeting
V. Programming TIP Meetings (varies by MPO)
VI. Procurement None
VII. Construction Community Informational Meeting(s)
VIII. Project Assessment None
1 To seek public input on a major project decision or location.
2 Generally held in response to a community request or to seek additional input for decision-making.
Source: MassHighway

2-76 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

④ Other Communication Tools that are effective in providing

information to the public and soliciting their input include:
⑨ Newsletters — provide a forum for meeting notification
and periodic updates on project status and decisions.
Newsletters can either be traditionally mailed or
electronically transmitted.

⑨ Websites — allow frequent updates of project status,

enabling interested parties to review materials on their own
schedule, and facilitate correspondence of questions and
responses. Project websites should be designed to meet
access standards for electronic media as defined in the
Massachusetts Web Accessibility Standards Revision 2.0
available at
(www.mass.gov/itd/massgov/publications/workgrouprpt/acc
essibilitity_report.htm).

⑨ MassHighway’s Project Information System —

provides internet-based project status information for active
design and construction projects through links to the
ProjectInfo system.

⑨ Project Information Boards —illustrate project details

and provide contact information at the project site
facilitating involvement in other forms of outreach.

Successful public meetings require good advance communications and

coordination with community leaders, elected officials, the Regional
Planning Agencies, and MassHighway beforehand in order to set the
agenda and establish the framework for appropriate follow-up and
continued communication. The proponent should work closely with local
and regional officials on meeting logistics, including location, time, and
format.

January 2006 Project Development 2-77

 2006 EDITION

2.10 Project Development Schedule

The project development process involves a range of tasks within these
defined steps (from few to many) and extends over varying lengths of time
(from less than a year to more than ten) depending on the complexities of
the project, funding sources, and permitting requirements. A schematic
schedule of the project development process is provided as guidance in
Exhibit 2-11. Additional detail on the timelines that may be involved in the
environmental permitting aspects of project development are included as an
Appendix to this chapter.

2-78 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-11
Project Development Schematic Timetable
Steps/Description Schedule Influences Typical Duration
Step I: Problem/Need/Opportunity Identification The Project Need Form has been developed so that it 1 to 3 months
The proponent completes a Project Need Form (PNF). can be prepared quickly by the proponent, including
This form is then reviewed by the MassHighway any supporting data that is readily available. The
District office which provides guidance to the District office shall return comments to the proponent
proponent on the subsequent steps of the process. within one month of PNF submission.
Step II: Planning For some projects, no planning beyond preparation of Project Planning
Project planning can range from agreement that the the Project Need Form is required. Some projects Report: 3 to 24+
problem should be addressed through a clear solution require a planning study centered on specific project months
to a detailed analysis of alternatives and their impacts. issues associated with the proposed solution or a narrow
family of alternatives. More complex projects will likely
require a detailed alternatives analysis.

Step III: Project Initiation The PIF includes refinement of the preliminary 1 to 4 months
The proponent prepares and submits a Project information contained in the PNF. Additional
Initiation Form (PIF) and a Transportation Evaluation information summarizing the results of the planning
Criteria (TEC) form in this step. The PIF and TEC are process, such as the Project Planning Report, are
informally reviewed by the Metropolitan Planning included with the PIF and TEC. The schedule is
Organization (MPO) and MassHighway District office, determined by PRC staff review (dependent on
and formally reviewed by the PRC. project complexity) and meeting schedule.

Step IV: Design, Environmental, and Right of Way The schedule for this step is dependent upon the 3 to 48+ months
The proponent completes the project design. size of the project and the complexity of the design,
Concurrently, the proponent completes necessary permitting, and right-of-way issues. Design review by
environmental permitting analyses and files applications the MassHighway district and appropriate sections is
for permits. Any right of way needed for the project is completed in this step.
identified and the acquisition process begins.
Step V: Programming The schedule for this step is subject to each MPO’s 3 to 12+ months
The MPO considers the project in terms of its regional programming cycle and meeting schedule. It is also
priorities and determines whether or not to include the possible that the MPO will not include a project in its
project in the draft Regional Transportation Draft TIP based on its review and approval
Improvement Program (TIP) which is then made procedures.
available for public comment. The TIP includes a
project description and funding source.

Step VI: Procurement Administration of competing projects can influence 1 to 12 months

The project is advertised for construction and a the advertising schedule.
contract awarded.
Step VII: Construction The duration for this step is entirely dependent upon 3 to 60+ months
The construction process is initiated including public project complexity and phasing.
notification and any anticipated public involvement.
Construction continues to project completion.
Step VIII: Project Assessment The duration for this step is dependent upon the 1 month
The construction period is complete and project elements proponent’s approach to this step and any follow-up
and processes are evaluated on a voluntary basis. required.
Source: MassHighway

January 2006 Project Development 2-79

 2006 EDITION

2.11 Design Exceptions

The design guidance contained in this Guidebook is intended to provide
project proponents with sufficient flexibility to address the unique and
Some projects being
pursued as Footprint diverse conditions encountered on the Commonwealth’s streets and
Roads projects may highways; however, there may still be occasions when design
require design exceptions are necessary. For these circumstances, the project
exceptions. The design proponent must complete a Design Exception Report and transmit it to
exception application
will be reviewed by MassHighway as part of the Functional Design Report with the
MassHighway in this 25 Percent Design package.
context.
This Design Guidebook has incorporated AASHTO criteria for
Massachusetts’ roadway and bridge design. AASHTO criteria are the
recognized standard for design based on years of research and
empirical data for safe and efficient movement of traffic. Departure
from these guidelines requires documentation to support the decision-
making process.

The FHWA and MassHighway recognize 13 controlling criteria from

AASHTO policy which, if not met, require formal approval of design
exceptions. These criteria are:

Roadway and Bridge Criteria

④ design speed

④ lane width
④ shoulder width
④ horizontal alignment
④ vertical alignment
④ grades
④ stopping sight distance
④ cross slope
④ superelevation
④ horizontal clearance (other than “clear zone”)

Bridge (Only) Criteria

④ width

④ structural capacity
④ vertical clearance

2-80 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Desirable and minimum standards for most of these controlling criteria

are found in various parts of this Guidebook. Structural capacity criteria
is found in the MassHighway Bridge Manual. Accessible design standards
are found in 521 CMR and in the MassHighway April 2003 M/E
Construction Drawing Supplement and online directives for curb cut
ramps and sidewalks. Every reasonable effort should be made to design
projects within these ranges. When the minimum standards cannot be
achieved, documentation and approval of these as design exceptions
are required and must be provided in a Functional Design Report. Use of
less than minimum standards must be based on sound engineering
judgment, weighing relevant contextual constraints, and other relevant
factors. The safety and traffic operational goals of the project sill must
be met by the facility with the lower standards.

2.11.1 Design Exception Triggers

If minimum controlling criteria cannot be met, documentation of
design exceptions is required for all projects, regardless of functional
classification or funding, at the 25 Percent Design stage, to
demonstrate that sound engineering judgment was used to design the
improvements. Documentation for all MassHighway design exceptions
should follow the guidelines included in this manual, FHWA procedures
from the Federal-Aid Program Guide (FAPG) Transmittal 9 and 23 CFR,
Part 625 as revised, and relevant FHWA Policy and Engineering
Directives. The FHWA guidance should be followed regardless of
project funding because of its relevance to all roadway and bridge
projects, and the need for consistency in processing design exceptions.

Any exceptions to full compliance with 521 CMR, The Rules and
Regulations of the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board, should be
identified at this point so the MassHighway can either modify the design
approach, or seek the appropriate variance from the Access Board.

2.11.2 Design Exception Documentation

Documentation of the design exception should include, but not be
limited to:

④ Executive Summary:
⑨ A brief description of the proposed project

⑨ A listing of the controlling criteria for which a design

exception is requested

January 2006 Project Development 2-81

 2006 EDITION

④ Proposed Improvement:
⑨ Description of proposed project

⑨ Purpose of improvements; safety, capacity, etc.

— Type of project; reconstruction, rehabilitation, etc.

⑨ State if the improvement is a Footprint Roads project

⑨ Other existing deficiencies to be improved by the project

④ Description of the Existing Conditions include:

⑨ Functional Classification of the roadway(s)

⑨ Roadway Character and Transportation Demands by All

Modes

⑨ Description of Surrounding Area:

— Developed or undeveloped
— Scenic

⑨ Speeds:
— Posted
— 85 percentile
— Observed
— Design speed

⑨ Existing Lane and Shoulder Width (usable shoulder?)

⑨ Right-of-way Layout

⑨ Accident Data

⑨ Environmental Factors:
— Wetlands
— Trees
— Parklands

⑨ Cultural Resources
— Historic and archaeological areas

⑨ Accessibility:
— Impracticability or equivalent facilitation
④ Discussion of Design Exceptions include:
⑨ A separate discussion of each controlling criteria

⑨ MassHighway Desirable and Minimum Standards

⑨ Project proposed values and degree of reduction

⑨ Typical section(s) or other graphical description of the

existing and proposed improvement along with other
roadway elements

2-82 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

⑨ An analysis of the accident data as it relates to the

controlling criteria

⑨ Discussion of compatibility with adjacent roadway sections

and future expectations for corridor improvements

⑨ If a design speed exception is requested, a discussion of

effects on other controlling criteria

⑨ Discussion of right-of-way constraints

⑨ Discussion of environmental, cultural resource, or other

constraints

⑨ Any features that might be used to mitigate the

substandard feature such as signing and striping

⑨ Where compliance with 521 CMR is technically infeasible, or

would result in excessive costs and no substantial benefit to
a person with disabilities.

⑨ A rough cost estimate of the incremental cost to comply

with MassHighway/AASHTO minimum standards. A
benefit/cost analysis and/or a Value Engineering
assessment may also be included when appropriate data is
available.

④ Recommendation/Summary
⑨ The designer must document that reasonable engineering
judgment was used to justify the proposed design by
drawing from the above information.

Additional guidance for completing a Design Exception Request is

provided in Appendix 2-A-11.

2.11.3 Approval Process

The design exception documentation is normally
MassHighway convenes a committee to review
prepared by the design engineer and forwarded to
design exceptions. This committee typically
the District Project Development Engineer. The includes the District Project Development
District Project Development Engineer then Engineer and representatives from:
coordinates review by the Design Exceptions ④ The Chief Engineer’s Office
Committee. All design exceptions must be ④ Project Management
approved by the Chief Engineer. Design exceptions ④ Environmental
on all projects which require FHWA review are then ④ Traffic
forwarded to FHWA for approval. ④ Planning
④ Right-of-way, and the
Upon receipt of all approvals, the documentation and
④ Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodation
the approval letters must be kept in a permanent Engineer
Other representatives may be included as the
circumstances dictate.

January 2006 Project Development 2-83

 2006 EDITION

project file for future reference. The project submittal to the Capital
Expenditures Program Office (CEPO) for construction advertising should
include a statement such as “design exceptions have been approved for
this project and are on file.”

2-84 Project Development January 2006

 2006 EDITION

2.12 For Further Information

④ A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, AASHTO,
2004.
④ Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, AASHTO, 1999.
④ Guide for the Planning and Design of Pedestrian Facilities, AASHTO,
2004
④ A Guide to Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design, AASHTO, 2004.
④ Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
④ Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Federal Highway
Administration, 2003.
④ Development of the Bicycle Compatibility Index: A Level of Service
Concept, Implementation Manual, FHWA-RD-98-095,1998.
④ Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, Transportation
Research Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program.
Report 100, 2nd Edition, 2003.
④ 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C) – National Environmental Policy Act.
④ M.G.L. c.30, Section 61 to 62H and 301 CMR 11.00 –
Massachusetts Environment al Policy Act.
④ A Guide to Best Practices in Context Sensitive Solutions,
Transportation Research Board, National Cooperative Highway
Research Program. Report 480. Washington, DC, 2002.

January 2006 Project Development 2-85

 2-A

Project Development Appendix

 2-A-1 2-A-1

Project Need Form (PNF)

All new MassDOT Highway projects are now identified and initiated using the MassDOT
Project Intake Tool (MaPIT). The Project Need Form (PNF) is part of this tool. You need
a GeoDOT account to log into MaPIT.

Log into MaPIT

https://massdothpi.esriemcs.com/mapit/

Request a GeoDOT account

https://www.mass.gov/forms/request-a-geodot-account
 2-A-2 2-A-2

Transportation Evaluation Criteria

 2006 EDITION

Transportation Evaluation Criteria

Beginning in 2004, MPOs began using formal, written evaluation criteria
(“Transportation Evaluation Criteria”) to assess projects for inclusion in
the TIP. These criteria are first applied to projects during their earliest
stages to provide a broadly based overview and rating of many, often
competing, elements to assist in eventual project assessment and
prioritization by the regional MPO. These criteria are useful in the
preparation of a Project Need Form (submitted as an attachment, if
available) and required as part of the Project Initiation Form submission.

Criteria for Highway System Preservation Projects

Highway System Preservation Projects include roadway
maintenance, resurfacing, and reconstruction (should be within the
existing road footprint); bridge maintenance, rehabilitation, and
replacement; and other infrastructure preservation. For these types of
projects, both condition and usage criteria apply as described below:

Condition
④ Pavement condition (in consideration of pavement management
principles)
④ Pavement structural adequacy (as available)
④ Bridge condition
④ Condition of other bridge infrastructure elements
④ Degree and severity of deterioration of other infrastructure
④ Compliance with minimum access standards

Usage
④ Traffic volumes and truck usage
④ Pedestrian and bicycle usage and/or connectivity (as it is
sometimes difficult to provide good pedestrian and bicycle data,
connectivity to other trails, downtown areas, neighborhoods,
schools, etc., should also be considered)
④ Effect on connectivity for the closure or restriction of bridges
④ Effect on safety and congestion

Cost Effectiveness (as applicable)

④ Cost per daily traffic (average daily traffic or ADT) and/or
pedestrian/bicycle user, as available
④ Cost per lane mile
④ Cost per ADT/lane mile

January 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-2-3

 2006 EDITION

Criteria for System Improvement/Expansion Projects

Highway System Improvement/Expansion Projects include new
or improved roadways and intersections, bridges, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities, and park & ride/transportation demand
management facilities. For these types of projects four criteria
categories are applied, including: condition and service quality,
mobility, safety and security, and other effects, described below.

Condition and Service Quality

④ Condition of improvement for facility (roadways and intersections,
bridges, bicycle/pedestrian facilities and park & ride/transportation
demand management facilities)

Mobility
④ Magnitude and duration of congestion
④ Travel time and connectivity/access
④ Number of new pedestrians, bicycles, or transit riders that will use
the facility (if available) or other measure of project’s potential to
encourage non-automobile oriented travel (influenced by the
project’s proximity to activity centers and destinations--
downtowns, neighborhoods, schools, parks, etc., as well as by its
connectivity to other existing or planned bicycle and pedestrian
routes).

Safety and Security

④ Crash rate compared to state average (if crash rate is not
available, a general assessment of anticipated safety impacts can
be substituted)
④ Transportation security and evacuation routes
④ Bicycle and pedestrian safety
④ Bicycle comfort index (as described in Chapter 3)

Community Effects and Environmental Justice

④ Residential
④ Environmental justice for low income and minority neighborhoods
④ Public support

Land Use and Economic Development

④ Business
④ Sustainable development
④ Consistency with local and regional plans

2-A-2-4 Chapter 2 Appendix January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Environmental and Air Quality/Climate Effects

④ Air and water quality
④ Historical and cultural resources
④ Wildlife habitat and endangered species

Cost Effectiveness
④ Cost per ADT and/or pedestrian/bicycle user, as available
④ Cost per lane mile
④ Cost per ADT/lane mile

Appropriate criteria for the project type are used to gauge the
transportation needs and, through the planning process, to assess the
transportation benefits, costs, and impacts of proposed projects. There
may be several criteria that apply and many that do not, depending
upon the type of project under consideration. The proponent is
encouraged to tailor the criteria to the project.

The purpose of the criteria is to support the objective, transparent

review of projects across the Commonwealth for eventual
prioritization, programming, and construction. The evaluation criteria
also provide useful guidance to assist in the problem definition.

The criteria developed for Highway System Preservation Projects and

Highway System Improvement or Expansion Projects are used to support
the preparation of the Project Need Form and (if required) the Project
Planning Report, as discussed in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 of this chapter. It is
helpful to attach the Transportation Evaluation Criteria form to the PNF
for review, to the extent that it is available. Every region has adopted
their own version of the Transportation Evaluation Criteria. The project
proponent should consult with his/her regional planning agency to
ascertain the TEC criteria and form in use for that region.

Project Compatibility With Other Policies and Programs

The transportation effects of projects are not the only consideration in
evaluating projects. The project should also be integrated with local
land use policies and goals so that, in total, the desired community
objectives are achieved. Other important considerations, including the
Commonwealth’s sustainable development principles, and local
partnerships, should also be used to evaluate projects. If the project
has any Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) elements, it should
also be confirmed at an early stage that the project scope and design
is consistent with the regional ITS architecture. (Periodic checks

January 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-2-5

 2006 EDITION

regarding continued conformance with the regional ITS architecture

should be incorporated into each stage of the design process.)

Section 23 CFR Parts 655 and 940, FHWA Final Rule (and FTA Policy) –
Intelligent Transportation System Architecture and Standards —
implements section 5206(e) of TEA-21 and requires that projects funded
with highway transit trust fund moneys (highway and transit) conform
to the national ITS architecture and applicable standards. The
rulemaking directs local implementation through the development of
regional ITS architecture tailored to meet local needs. Four regional ITS
architectures have been developed and adopted for Massachusetts. If
the Project Needs Form notes an ITS component in the proposed
project, then the designer/proponent, in consultation with the
MassHighway District Projects Section staff and regional planning
agency staff, is responsible for monitoring and periodic review during
the design process to ensure consistency between project ITS elements
and the regional ITS architecture. More information is available at
http://www.eot.state.mas.us/regionalitsarchitecture/.

Sustainable Development promotes development that integrates

the energy, environmental, housing, and transportation agencies’
policies, programs and regulations to care for the built and natural
environment. Toward this mission, the U.S. Department of
Transportation and the Office of Commonwealth Development
encourage the coordination and cooperation of all agencies, the
investment of public funds wisely in smart growth and equitable
development, and give priority to investments that will deliver living
wage jobs, transit access, housing, open space, and community-
serving enterprises. Several of the sustainable development principles
are summarized in Exhibit 2A-2-1 and provide useful guidance for
proponents of transportation projects.

2-A-2-6 Chapter 2 Appendix January 2006

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-A-2-1
Commonwealth’s Transportation-related Sustainability Principles

④ Redevelop First. Support the revitalization of community centers and

neighborhoods. Encourage reuse and rehabilitation of existing infrastructure
rather than the construction of new infrastructure in undeveloped areas.

④ Concentrate Development. Support low impact development that is compact,

conserves land, integrates uses, and fosters a sense of place. Create walkable
districts by mixing commercial, civic, cultural, educational and recreational
activities with open space and housing for diverse communities.

④ Conserve Natural Resources. Construct and promote buildings and infrastructure

that use land, energy, water and materials efficiently.

④ Restore and Enhance the Environment. Protect and restore environmentally

sensitive lands, natural resources, wildlife habitats, and cultural and historic
landscapes. Preserve critical habitat and biodiversity.

④ Provide Transportation Choice. Increase access to transportation options, in all

communities, including land- and water-based public transit, bicycling, and walking.
Invest strategically in transportation infrastructure to encourage smart growth.

④ Increase Job Opportunities. Attract businesses with good jobs to locations near
housing, infrastructure, water, and transportation options. Expand access to
educational and entrepreneurial opportunities. Support the growth of new and
existing local businesses.

④ Plan Regionally. Support the development and implementation of local and

regional plans that have broad public support and are consistent with these
principles. Foster development projects, land and water conservation,
transportation and housing that have a regional or multi-community benefit.

January 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-2-7

 2-A-3 2-A-3

Detailed Alternatives Analysis

 2005 EDITION

Detailed Alternatives Analysis

A more complex set of project needs may warrant a more detailed
planning and conceptual engineering review of alternatives, their
impacts and benefits, and implementation issues as part of the Project
Planning Report. This is particularly true when it is unclear what
actions are “feasible” to address the identified needs. In this case, the
proponent should develop base information, document resources, and
complete transportation planning analysis and conceptual engineering
of the alternatives in more depth to verify “project feasibility” and the
preferred action.

This level of alternatives analysis is appropriate for all new facilities

and for improvement or expansion projects where the feasibility of
achieving the desired enhancements with acceptable impacts and
reasonable investment is unclear at the outset. The key objectives of
this effort are to assess alternatives to determine their engineering
feasibility, environmental impacts and permitability, economic viability,
and public acceptance.

MassHighway District staff and the load required planning staff can
advise project proponents when a detailed Alternatives Study is likely
to be warranted.

Project Mapping
Expectations for determining the feasibility of a project alternative
(especially one that has physical impacts) requires the development
and use of reliable base mapping.

Important factors in determining whether adequate mapping is

available for this phase of project development are:

④ The age of the mapping and whether project area features have
changed dramatically;

④ The availability of vertical elevations and details;

④ The scale and coverage of mapping as it relates to the scale of the

alternatives being considered; and,

④ How constrained the project area is (the more constrained, the

more accurate the mapping needs to be).

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-3-3

 2006 EDITION

At this stage of project development, the proponent needs to

determine whether existing project area mapping will suffice for the
alternatives analysis or whether new mapping is needed. If new
mapping is required, it should be obtained at a scale and in a format
that can be made compatible with the requirements for carrying the
alternative into design (see Chapter 18, for information on base
mapping requirements for MassHighway design projects). GIS and/or
ortho photography, depending on the level of detail available, may be
appropriate for this effort.

Environmental Resource Considerations and Documentation

This detailed alternatives analysis should, if possible, determine the
degree to which an alternative is considered preferable from an
environmental or social perspective. Typically, these studies are done
relatively early in the process of implementing a project or strategy.
Therefore, when estimating the areas of wetland disturbed or number of
residences impacted by a facility it would be appropriate to provide a
range or otherwise indicate the extent of the uncertainty in such
estimates. However, with respect to some environmental considerations,
there are specific federal and state laws which can have a great deal of
influence in planning for potential facilities. Early coordination with
MassHighway’s Environmental Division is encouraged to gain an
understanding of the actual project issues.

Generally, it would serve the project proponent well to ensure that the
alternatives analysis identifies, maps, analyzes, and documents the
environmental and social resources in the project area to an acceptable
degree of detail so that all potential “red flags” are identified with regard
to the alternative’s environmental impacts, the public’s acceptance of
these impacts, and ultimately, the permitability of the project. The project
proponent should consider incorporating some or all of the early
environmental coordination tasks defined by MassHighway, and described
in Section 2.4.2 of this Guidebook, into the scope of this analysis.

Ideally, work completed under the planning study to identify and

assess project alternatives is done in a manner that is consistent with
requirements for environmental documentation under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Massachusetts Environmental
Policy Act (MEPA) as described in Section 2.4.2 of this chapter. An
important product of the planning process directly usable in an
environmental document is a clear statement of the need for a

2-A-3-4 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 2005 EDITION

new/improved facility. Analysis of alternatives described in this section

should also be developed in a manner that is directly usable in the
environmental review process.

Development of Alternatives/Conceptual Engineering

Alternatives analysis should, at least initially, consider a wide range of
alternatives. Such alternatives, which would be selected from those
advocated by interested groups or recommended by local or State
government could include various transportation facility types for all
modes of transportation (pedestrian, bicyclist, driver, or transit
operator) and range of management strategies that may potentially
serve an important purpose and address a need for transportation of
people and goods.

The alternatives under consideration should be documented and

screened as previously discussed. As the options are screened and
refined through the analysis process, the level of detail for the
remaining alternatives is enhanced to sharpen the project proponent
and the public’s understanding of the alternative’s implementation
issues and feasibility.

For physical options, it is assumed that the concept plans will be

superimposed on base mapping (as described above) at a sufficiently
detailed scale (100 scale for unconstrained areas, 40 or 50 scale for
constrained locations). A general checklist, provided as guidance, on
what may be beneficial to show on the base mapping includes:

④ The location, widths, and names of all existing or platted streets or

other public ways within or adjacent to the project location area;

④ The location of all sidewalks, crosswalks, bus stops and amenities

within or adjacent to the project location area;

④ Existing accessible route(s), including curb-cut ramps, associated

crosswalks, and audible crossing signals;

④ The location of all bicycle facilities and amenities within or adjacent

to the project location area;

④ All buildings;

④ All property lines and property use/ownership;

④ Existing utilities;

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-3-5

 2006 EDITION

④ Trees and stonewalls;

④ All natural watercourses, wetlands, ponds, lakes, etc.

④ Private driveways or curb cuts;

④ All standard and accessible parking spaces and loading spaces; and

④ All pavement markings, signs, and traffic control.

Through this alternatives development process, public outreach

should, to the extent practicable, be collaborative and be designed to
avoid focusing attention on new facilities or strategies that are not
likely to be implemented. Rather, it should focus on those screened
alternatives that appear to be reasonably implementable projects and
educate project participants about why prior alternatives were
determined to be infeasible within the context of the study.

2-A-3-6 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 2-A-4 2-A-4

Project Initiation Form (PIF)

All new MassDOT Highway projects are now identified and initiated using the MassDOT
Project Intake Tool (MaPIT). The Project Initiation Form (PIF) is part of this tool. You
need a GeoDOT account to log into MaPIT.

Log into MaPIT

https://massdothpi.esriemcs.com/mapit/

Request a GeoDOT account

https://www.mass.gov/forms/request-a-geodot-account
2-A-5 2-A-5

Role of the MPO

 2006 EDITION

Role of the MPO

The regional Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are important
transportation decision-making entities in Massachusetts that have the
responsibility for allocating federal funding to transportation projects.
Massachusetts has thirteen planning regions, ten of which qualify as
MPOs according to federal rules:

④ Berkshire Region MPO

④ Boston Region MPO
④ Cape Cod MPO
④ Central Massachusetts MPO
④ Merrimack Valley MPO
④ Montachusett Region MPO
④ Northern Middlesex MPO
④ Old Colony MPO
④ Pioneer Valley MPO
④ Southeastern Massachusetts MPO
④ Franklin Region
④ Martha’s Vineyard
④ Nantucket

The other three planning regions – Franklin Region, Martha’s Vineyard,

and Nantucket – do not meet federal population requirements for
establishment of MPOs. However, in these regions, the Regional
Planning Agency, along with the Regional Transit Authority, EOT, and
MassHighway, cooperatively perform all the functions of an MPO. A map
of the Massachusetts planning regions is shown in Exhibit 2-A-5-1.

The MPOs include local elected officials, major transportation operators,

and appropriate state officials in transportation decision-making. The
Secretary of Transportation chairs each MPO with membership varying
from four to fourteen members, typically including MassHighway, the
Regional Planning Agency, and the Regional Transit Authority.

Local elected officials are generally selected bi-annually using an agreed

upon election process. From a transportation perspective, perhaps the
most important function of the MPOs is the development of Regional
Transportation Plans and Regional Transportation Improvement
Programs (TIPs).

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-5-3

 2006 EDITION

Exhibit 2-A-5-1
Massachusetts Metropolitan Planning Regions

Merrimack
Valley
Northern
Montachusett Middlesex
Franklin

Berksire

Boston Region
Pioneer Central Boston Region and
Old Colony
Valley Massachusetts

Old Colony

Southeastern
Massachusetts

Cape Cod

Martha’s
Vineyard
Nantucket

Federal planning regulations require MPOs to prepare long-range

regional transportation plans every four years. These plans summarize
regional transportation goals and objectives, describe the regional
transportation system and existing conditions, evaluate alternative
courses of action, and recommend short- and long-term strategies and
actions.

Regional plans are required to be fiscally constrained, meaning that

the value of projects contained in the plan cannot exceed reasonable
estimates of available funding, and must be in conformance with the
State Implementation Plan for air quality.

Every year, each MPO prepares a five-year Transportation

Improvement Program that allocates state and federal transportation
funds, both highway and transit, for the region. The TIP must be
consistent with the long-range regional transportation plan, be fiscally
constrained by year, and include an annual element of projects to be
completed in the first year of the TIP. For example, if a region is

2-A-5-4 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 2006 EDITION

expected to have $10 million in state and federal funding available, the
MPO will prepare a TIP that contains $10 million in transportation
projects.

Beginning in 2004, MPOs began using formal, written evaluation

criteria to assess projects for inclusion in the TIP. These criteria are
first applied to projects during their earliest stages to provide a
broadly based overview and rating of many, often competing,
elements to assist in eventual project assessment and prioritization by
the regional MPO. More detail on the Transportation Evaluation Criteria
are presented in Appendix 2-A-2.

Transportation agencies such as MassHighway, the MBTA, or the

Regional Transit Authorities cannot use federal funds for a project
unless it is included in the TIP of the respective MPO. The State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is, by definition, an
amalgamation of the thirteen regional TIPs.

Understanding the MPO’s role in project planning and programming is

extremely valuable to proponents seeking funding assistance for their
projects. Coordination with the MPO or the regional planning agency is
worthwhile early in the project development process.

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-5-5

 2-A-6 2-A-6

Common Environmental Laws

and Regulations, Thresholds,
and Timelines
 2006 EDITION

Common Environmental Laws and Regulations,

Thresholds, and Timelines

A brief description of the common Federal and State Laws and Requirements,
their regulatory thresholds, and environmental clearance timelines are provided
in this Appendix. Please also refer to the 259, Designs Submission Checklist for
Early Environmental Coordination items in Appendix 2-A-7.

Federal Laws and Requirements

④ Section 4(f) of 1966 U.S. D.O.T. Act — FHWA (or other Department of
Transportation agency, as applicable) approval is needed for any Federal-aid
highway project using land from a publicly-owned park, recreation area,
historic property or wildlife and waterfowl refuge. A historic property may be
a bridge, building, structure, site, district, or object. Either an individual or
programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation document must be prepared. There
must also be coordination with the public official having jurisdiction over the
Section 4(f) property.

④ Section 404 of 1972 Clean Water Act (33USC1344) — A permit is

required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for highway projects
involving discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States.
Jurisdiction under this law extends to all wetlands and waters of the United
States. There are three classes of permits issued: Programmatic General Permit
(PGP) Category I and Category II, and Individual Permit/Class III.

A PGP II and an individual permit involves consultation by the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers with the other Federal Resource agencies including U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Other federal approvals such as a water quality certification and a coastal
zone consistency statement (if applicable) is needed before the USACE will
issue the Section 404 permit.

Any design for a NEW river or stream crossing must conform with the General
Standards contained in the Massachusetts River and Stream Crossing
Standards: Technical Guidelines (as stipulated in the Massachusetts
Programmatic General Permit, dated January 20, 2005) in order to qualify for
a Category 1 (Non-Reporting) authorization. Otherwise, MassHighway or the
project management will consult with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-6-3

 2006 EDITION

(ACOE) under the Category 2 or Individual Permit review process if an open

bottom arch or bridge span is impractical.

④ Section 401 of 1972 Clean Water Act — A water quality certification is

required from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) for any federal permit (e.g., Section 404 permit, Coast Guard Bridge
Permit) to conduct an activity which may result in a discharge into waters of
the United States. Additional details about the water quality certification
process should be discussed with the MassHighway Environmental Section.

④ 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act — A coastal zone consistency review

and concurrence determination is required from the Massachusetts Coastal
Zone Management (CZM) Office for Federal-aid highway projects or projects
requiring other federal actions located within the designated coastal zone.
This review is to ensure consistency with the state coastal zone policies.

④ Section 9 of River and Harbor Act of 1899 — A permit is required from the
U.S. Coast Guard for certain highway projects involving bridges or causeways
over tidal or otherwise navigable waters. Other federal approvals such as water
quality certification and a coastal zone consistency statement (if applicable) are
needed before the U.S. Coast Guard will issue the Bridge Permit. Projects that
are funded by FHWA and are "replacement in kind" may be eligible for an
exemption from a Coast Guard Permit. The Consultant should obtain data on
boat length and size from the local harbormaster, and other knowledgeable
agencies, and consult with the MassHighway Environmental Section.

④ Section 10 of River and Harbor Act 1899 — A permit is required from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for highway projects requiring construction in
or over navigable waters, the excavation from, or dredging or disposal of
materials in such waters, or any obstruction or alteration in a navigable water
(e.g. stream channelization).

④ Section 106 of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act —

Section 106 is a process involving FHWA, MassHighway, the Massachusetts
State Historic Preservation Officer, the appropriate Tribal Historic Preservation
Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation which must be
followed for any Federal-aid highway project affecting bridges, districts,
structures, sites (including archaeological sites) or properties of religious and
cultural significance identified by Federally recognized Indian tribes that are
listed in, or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
Additional details about the Section 106 process should be discussed with the
MassHighway Environmental Section.

2-A-6-4 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 2006 EDITION

④ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

Construction General Permit — As authorized by the Clean Water Act, the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program
controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants
into waters of the United States. Point sources are discrete conveyances such
as pipes or man-made ditches. The NPDES Construction General Permit is
administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and
requires preparation of a Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for
construction activities. Additional details about the NPDES process should be
discussed with the MassHighway Environmental Section.

State Laws and Requirements

Bridge projects funded by a State Transportation Bond, which are functionally

equivalent and in a similar location, are exempt from the Wetlands Protection Act
(WPA), Chapter 91, and MEPA. The project proponent should consult with the
Environmental Section for a determination.

④ Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16USC1271) – The Act establishes the policy
that certain rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments,
possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geological, fish and
wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-
flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be
protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.
The Act both identifies specific river reaches for designation as wild or scenic,
and provides criteria to be used for classifying additional river reaches. The
National Wild and Scenic River System was established to protect the
environmental values of free-flowing streams from degradation by impacting
activities, including water resources projects. The National Park Service and
designated local Wild and Scenic River Management Council have review
project permits to ensure that the action will not adversely affect the river
system. This review function is most often through the ACOE on Section 404
permits (including section 10 of Rivers and Harbors Act) and through the
Coast Guard (Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act) for navigatable
waterways.

④ Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act MGL Chapter 131, Section 40

as administered by 310 CMR 10.00 -- This act applies to projects which
remove, fill, dredge, or alter a resource area defined in the Wetland
Regulations. Resource areas are defined as:

⑨ Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BVW) or salt marsh

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-6-5

 2006 EDITION

⑨ Any bank, or any water body or waterway or a Coastal Bank

⑨ Land under any water body (LUW), waterway, the ocean, or a

salt pond

⑨ Riverfront Area - Extends 200 feet (25 feet in municipalities

with large populations and in densely developed areas) on each
side of perennial rivers or streams

⑨ Land subject to coastal storm flowage

⑨ Isolated or bordering land subject to flooding

⑨ Coastal Beaches and tidal flats

⑨ Coastal Dunes

⑨ Designated Port

⑨ Banks or land under a Fish Pier

⑨ Barrier Beaches

⑨ Land containing shellfish

A buffer zone is defined as land within 100 feet horizontally of any
resource area listed above. Request for a Determination of
Applicability must be filed to determine if an Order of Conditions
must be obtained from the local conservation commission. If work
is proposed within a resource area, then a Notice of Intent must be
submitted to the local conservation commission. If work is
proposed in a buffer zone, then either a Notice of Intent or an
Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation needs to be filed
with the local Conservation Commission.

Appeals of Conservation Commission decisions are made to the

Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). DEP is also the
authority to whom variance requests are made. Variances are
required if the general performance standards of the WPA cannot
be met, such as if 5000 square feet or more of Bordering
Vegetated Wetland is proposed for filling. Details regarding appeals
or variances should be discussed with the MassHighway
Environmental Section.

④ Rivers Protection Act – The Rivers Protection Act, Chapter 258 of the Acts
of 1996, protects nearly 9,000 miles of Massachusetts riverbanks – helping
keep water clean, preserving wildlife habitat, and controlling flooding. The law
creates a 200-foot riverfront area that extends on both sides of rivers and

2-A-6-6 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 2006 EDITION

streams. In certain urban areas, the riverfront area is 25 feet. The riverfront
area provides the eight interests of the Wetlands Protection Act: protection of
public and private water supply, protection of groundwater supply, protection
of land containing shellfish, protection of wildlife habitat, flood control, storm
damage prevention, prevention of pollution, and protection of fisheries. The
law also establishes the policy of the state to protect the natural integrity of
rivers and to encourage and establish open space along rivers. This law is
administered through the WPA.

④ Chapter 91 — A Chapter 91 Waterways license is required from DEP for

highway projects that do not qualify for the bridge exemption and which
involve construction, dredging and filling performed in private and
Commonwealth tidelands, as well as great ponds and certain rivers and
streams. Additional details about the Chapter 91 process are to be discussed
with the MassHighway Environmental Section.

④ Chapter 254 — A process involving the Massachusetts Historical Commission

which must be followed for highway projects affecting bridges, districts,
structures, or sites (including archaeological sites) listed in the State Register
of Historic Places. All properties listed in, or formally determined by the
Keeper to be eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places are
automatically listed in the State Register. In most cases, completion of the
Section 106 process for a Federal-aid highway project will satisfy the
requirements of the Chapter 254 process. Additional details about the Chapter
254 process should be discussed with the MassHighway Environmental
Section.

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-6-7

Abbreviation Full name

4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 1 of 7

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern

ANRAD Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Determination
BLSF Bordering Land Subject to Flooding
BVW Bordering Vegetated Wetland
CE Categorical Exclusion - Prepared Under NEPA
CH 91 Chapter 91 Waterways License or Permit
CMR Code of Massachusetts Regulations
DEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
DOA Determination of Applicability
DOI Department of the Interior
EA Environmental Assessment - Prepared Under NEPA
EEA Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
EIR Environmental Impact Report - Prepared Under MEPA
EIS Environmental Impact Statement - Prepared Under NEPA
EJ Environmental Justice
ENF Environmental Notification Form - Prepared Under MEPA
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
FA Federal Aid
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact
ILSF Isolated Land Subject to Flooding
JP Joint Processing Meeting (USACE, EPA, National Marine Fisheries, MCZM, U.S. Fish & Wildlife)
LUW Land Under Water
LWCFA Land and Water Conservation Fund Act
MA SHPO Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer
MGPs Section 404 Massachusetts General Permits
MCZM Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management
MEPA Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act
MESA Massachusetts Endangered Species Act
MGL Massachusetts General Law
MHC Massachusetts Historic Commission
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NFA Non Federal Aid
NHESP Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program
NOI Notice of Intent
NPS National Park Service
NR National Register
OOC Order of Conditions
ORAD Order of Resource Area Determination
PCN Pre-Construction Notification
RDA Request for Determination of Applicability
RFA Riverfront Area
ROD Record of Decision
SOOC Superseding Order of Conditions
STURAA Surface Transportation & Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987
SV Self Verification
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USCG United States Coast Guard
WPA Wetlands Protection Act
WQC Water Quality Certificate
4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 2 of 7

FILING/PERMIT
COMMON REGULATORY THRESHOLDS
APPLICATION
Required when seeking approval of BVW boundary lines prior to proposing work or
ANRAD
designing a project.
Required for work in commercially navigable (includes historic usage) or tidal waterways
where there is a change in the hydraulic opening of the bridge.
USCG Permit STURAA Approval may be granted to coastal bridge projects with federal funds allocated
towards construction where the navigational opening remains unchanged and where
vessels 21 feet or greater do not pass under the bridge.

Categorical Actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant social, economic, or
Exclusions environmental effect are excluded from the requirement to prepare an EA or EIS.

Projects subject to the Bridge Exemption are exempt from CH 91.

Maintenance projects are exempt from CH 91. Maintenance and repair include, among
other things, the following activities: (a) replacement of old pilings, decking, or rip-rap, all
with material of the same dimensions and quality and in the same locations and
elevations as that authorized in the license; (b) repaving of road surfaces, installation of
road curbs and lighting, replacement of railroad track, stabilization of road or rail beds,
reconstruction of culverts and catch basins, and other maintenance or repair of existing
public transportation facilities and associated drainage systems, as necessary to preserve
or restore the serviceability of such facilities for the original use, provided that
maintenance and repair shall not include the substantial enlargement of such facilities,
such as roadway widening, adding shoulders, or upgrading substandard intersections;
CH 91 License
CH 91 applies to all waterways including Great Ponds (10 or more acres in size), the
Connecticut River, sections of the Westfield River, non-tidal portions of the Merrimack
River and any non-tidal river or stream on which public funds have been expended for
stream clearance, channel improvement, or any form of flood control or prevention work,
either upstream or downstream within the river basin, except for any portion of any such
river or stream which is not normally navigable during any season by any vessel including
a canoe etc. and work in all filled tidelands except landlocked tidelands and all filled lands
lying below the natural high water mark of Great Ponds.
Activities requiring a license include any construction, placement, excavation, addition,
improvement, replacement, reconstruction, demolition or removal of any fill or structures,
not previously authorized.
Activities requiring a permit include beach nourishment and dredging within jurisdictional
CH 91 Permit areas.
Lowering the water level of a Great Pond.

Environmental An EA is prepared when there is uncertainty as to the significance of the impacts of the
Assessment project. If, at any time, a significant impact is identified, an EIS must be prepared.

Bridge projects subject to the Bridge Exemption are exempt from MEPA.
Widening 4 feet or more for a half mile or more.
Cutting 5 or more mature living public shade trees (not trees within State Highway Layout)
14" or more in diameter @ breast height.
Altering bank or terrain 10 ft or more from the edge of pavement for 1/2 mile or more
except for the installation of structures such as sidewalks, drainage systems, etc.
ENF
Any Project of ½ or more acres within a designated ACEC.
Altering 5,000 SF or more of BVW or IVW.
Eliminating 300 linear feet of stone wall.
Creation of 5 or more acres of impervious area.
Direct alteration of 25 or more acres of land.
4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 3 of 7

Conversion of land in active agricultural use to nonagricultural use.

Conversion of land held for natural resources purposes in accordance with Article 97
unless the conversion will not result in a change in use or the transfer of land is less than
2,500 square feet, and the Secretary of Environmental Affairs accepts a request to waive
or modify the land requirement of An Act Preserving Open Space In the Commonwealth
(Ch. 274 of the Acts of 2022, codified at M.G.L. c. 3, §. 5A).For further information
regarding the waiver request process, see EEA’s Guidance on Public Lands Preservation
Act Implementation (February 2023)
Construction of 300 or more new parking spaces at a single location.

Projects that exceed one or more ENF thresholds and are within 1 mile of an
Environmental Justice (EJ) population.
Projects that exceed one or more ENF thresholds and will impact air quality and are within
5 miles of an EJ population.
Constructing a new road 2 or more miles in length.
Widening an existing road by 1 or more travel lanes for 2 or more miles.
EIR New interchange on a completed limited access highway.
Requiring a variance from the WPA.
Altering 1 or more acres of Salt Marsh or BVW.
Altering 10 or more acres of other wetlands.
Altering 50 or more acres of land.
Creating 10 or more acres of impervious area.

Environmental When the proposed action will have a significant impact on the environment, an EIS is
Impact Statement required.

Federal consistency review is required for most projects that are in or can reasonably be
expected to affect a use or resource of the Massachusetts coastal zone and/or require
federal licenses or permits, receive federal funds, or are a direct action of a federal
MCZM agency.
Concurrence
Work in water within the coastal zone when at least a Preconstruction Notification or a
Coast Guard Permit is required. Also, will require concurrence when MEPA thresholds are
triggered.
Projects subject to the Bridge Exemption are exempt from WPA.
NOI WPA filing is required when proposing direct activity in or impact to resource areas
subject to protection, including BVW, LUW, Bank, RFA, BLSF, ILSF, etc. or significant
alteration of buffer & Riverfront Area.
The National Pollution Discharge and Elimination Systems Program is administered by
NPDES EPA and requires the filing of an NOI and the preparation of a SWPPP for projects
involving construction project with 1 or more acres of earth disturbance.

Self-Verification Refer to USACE MA General Permits.

Notification Form
(SVNF) – Section
404
Preconstruction Refer to USACE MA General Permits.
Notification –
Section 404
Individual USACE Refer to USACE MA General Permits.
Section 404 Permit
4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 4 of 7

A de minimis impact involves the use of Section 4(f) property that is generally minor in
nature. A de minimis impact is one that, after taking into account avoidance, minimization,
De minimis 4(f) mitigation and enhancement measures, results in no adverse effect to the activities,
features, or attributes qualifying a historic property, park, recreation area, or refuge for
protection under Section 4(f).
Programmatic 4(f) Evaluations & Approvals for FHWA Projects that Necessitate the Use of
Programmatic 4(f) an Historic Bridge.

Section 6(f) of this act prohibits the conversion of property acquired or developed with
these grants uses other than public outdoor recreation without the approval of the
Department of the Interior's (DOI) National Park Service (NPS). In Massachusetts, DOI has
delegated most review, consultation and assessment of Section 6(f) impacts and
Section 6(f) of the conversions to the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EEA). When acquisition is
Land and Water required, Section 6(f) directs DOI to assure that replacement lands of at least equal fair
Conservation Fund market value and of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location are provided as a
Act (LWCFA) condition of such conversions. Consequently, where conversions of Section 6(f) lands are
proposed for highway projects, replacement lands are required. When dealing with Section
6(f) areas, it is critical to determine if the properties were acquired or improved with the
LWCFA funds, and if so, the specifics of the improvements or property acquisition.

Required when work/activity will occur within 100 feet from the edge of BVW, LUW, Bank,
RDA etc. or sometimes within Riverfront Area especially 100-200 feet from a perennial stream
or river.
The FHWA must assure that the environmental documentation for the proposed action
(CE, EA/FONSI, EIS/ROD) is still valid, prior to proceeding with major project approvals or
authorizations.

When reevaluating CEs- A written re-evaluation will be prepared when there is a change in
the Project limits, a change in the Project’s scope, or unforeseen conditions, resulting in
the potential to induce impacts that were not previously considered in the CE.
Reevaluation
A written re-evaluation will be prepared if three (3) years pass between any major steps to
advance the action (e.g. authority to undertake final design, authority to acquire a
significant portion of the right-of-way, or approval of the plans, specifications and
estimates) after the approval of a CE or a prior re-evaluation by FHWA or by MassDOT.
Typically, the scope of this type of reevaluation will address any developments in
legislative or regulatory authorities.
As of March 1, 2003, any construction project resulting in earth disturbance of 1 or more
acres must file a NOI and a SWPPP concurrently with EPA in accordance with the NPDES
SWPPP requirements. The SWPPP is generally a list of best management practices to be used
during construction in order to control erosion and sediment transport.

If under 5,000 SF of cumulative impacts, WQC is considered automatic with the issuance
of an OOC if project does not trigger an individual WQC.
Over 5,000 SF of cumulative impacts.
Over 100 c.y. of dredging.
WQC
Any 401 jurisdictional impacts associated with Bridge Projects that are exempt from the
WPA.
Fill within a wetland in an ORW.
Any work requiring an Individual USACE permit.

Non Limited projects with over 5,000 SF of impacts to BVW.

Variance from the
Direct impacts to salt marsh or work within 100 feet of a salt marsh that will directly
WPA
impact the salt marsh.
4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 5 of 7

AGENCY REVIEW TIME BEFORE

ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW/REGULATION FILING PERMIT/ACTION ACTION/ISSUING PERMIT UNLESS
AGENCY
OTHERWISE NOTED
State
Wetlands Protection Act (WPA) RDA DOA 30 to 60 days (average)*
Local Conservation
Wetlands Protection Act (MGL Ch 131 § 40) ANRAD ORAD 30 to 60 days (average)*
Commissions
Wetlands Protection Regulations (310 CMR 10.00) NOI OOC 30 to 60 days (average)*
Appeal SOOC 6 to 12 months (average)
DEP
Appeal for Variance SOOC 12 months (average)**
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Secretary's Certificate or
ENF 30 days from date published in the Monitor
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MGL Ch 30 § 61- 62h) Scope
MEPA Regulations (301 CMR 11 . 00) Secretary's
Draft & Final EIR 1+ Years from the Certificate on the ENF
Scope/Certificate
(* Projects that exceed ENF thresholds and are within 1 mile of an
Secretary's
Environmental Justice (EJ) population or that will impact air Expanded ENF 37 days from date published in the Monitor
quality and are within 5 miles of an EJ population) EEA/MEPA Unit Scope/Certificate
(EJ Populations based on certain demographic criteria set forth in
An Act Creating a Next Generation Roadmap for MA Climate Rollover EIR Secretary's Certificate 37 days from date published in the Monitor
Policy).
4 to 9 months from the Certificate on the
Single EIR Secretary's Certificate
Expanded ENF

Public Waterfront Act (Chapter 91)

Waterways License Application Waterways License 4 to 9 months (average)
Public Waterfront Act (MGL Ch 91)
Waterways Regulations (310 CMR 9 . 00) DEP Waterways License Minor Modification 2 to 4 months (average)
Waterways Permit Application Waterways Permit 3 to 4 months (average)

Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (MESA) MA Natural Heritage & Project Checklist Review 14 days
Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (321 CMR 10.00) Endangered Species
Conservation & Management
Program Review 30 days^
Permit
Federal
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) CE Concurrence 4 to 6 weeks (average)
NEPA of 1969 , as amended (Pub . L. 91-190 , 42 U . S.C. 4321-4347,
January 1, 1970, as amended by Pub. L. 94-52, July 3, 1975, Pub. L. 94-83, EA FONSI 1 to 2 years (average)
August 9, 1975, and Pub. L. 97-258, § 4(b), Sept. 13, 1982) FHWA

NEPA Regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508) , TA 6640 . 8 EIS ROD 2 to 4 years (average)
Reevaluation Reevaluation Concurrence 1 to 6 months (average)
Army Corps of Engineers Permitting (404 Permit) Project Impact Documentation SV 1 day to 1 month (average)
Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U . S . C . 1251 et Letter to USACE &
PCN 3 months (average)
seq.) USACE/JP Meeting Preconstruction Notification
Section 10 of the Rivers & Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U . S . C . 401 ,
403) Applies to Non Bridge Structures in Navigable Waters. Individual Permit Application Individual Permit 3 to 6 months (average)
4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 6 of 7

AGENCY REVIEW TIME BEFORE

ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW/REGULATION FILING PERMIT/ACTION ACTION/ISSUING PERMIT UNLESS
AGENCY
OTHERWISE NOTED
US Coast Guard USCG Project Impact Documentation Letter of Permission 30 days (average)
Coast Guard Bridge Permit (1 . 33 U . S . C . 401, 491 et seq . 511
et seq. , 525 et seq ., and 535 , and Acts of Congress authorizing USCG Bridge Permit Application Bridge Permit 9 to 12 months (average)
the construction of bridges , including international bridges)

Various Memoranda of Understanding & Guidance Documentation FHWA STURM Approval Request STURAA Approval 30 days (average)

Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act Programmatic 4(f)

FHWA Programmatic 4(f) Approval 30 days (average)
Section 4(f) (49 USC 303 ) Documentation
Section 4(f) 23 CFR ch 1 § 771.135
Lead Federal Agency Individual 4(f) Documentation Individual 4(f) Approval 4 to 6 months (average)
Various Memoranda of Understanding

Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund

FHWA,
Act (LWCFA) Individual 6(f) Individual 6(f) Approval 2 to 6 months (average)
EEA
Section 6(f) – (36 CFR 59.3)
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Contractor to File 48 Hours Prior to
(NPDES)
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (The Clean EPA NOI & SWPPP % Construction Permit
Construction
Water40Act)
Title of the CFR at Part 122, 64 CFR 68722

Federal & State

Water Quality Certification (WQC) Individual WQC Application for
WQC 120 or 150 days (minimum)
Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C 1251 et seq.) Major or Minor Projects

Massachusetts Clean Waters Act (MGL ch 21 §§ 26-53) DEP

NOI & Under 5,000 s.f. of impact
401 Water Quality Certification (314 CMR 9.00) Automatic w/OOC See WPA
(No work in ORW, etc.)
Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards (314 CMR 4.00)

Coastal Zone Consistency Review ~

Federal Coastal Zone Management Act 16 (U.S.C. 1452, Sec. Through ENF or EIR Processes Concurrence Determination See MEPA Review Times
303 (1) and (2))
Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (MGL ch
Automatic Concurrence
21A, § 4A) Through USACE SVNF Same as SV Timeline
with MCZM Policies
Coastal Zone Management Program Federal Consistency MCZM
Review Procedures (301 CMR 21.00) May Need Individual
Concurrence/Depends on
Through USACE PCN Same as PCN Timeline
Project Impacts and JP
Meeting
Individual Concurrence Letter Concurrence Determination Up to 180 Days
Historic and Archaeological Review No Historic Properties
30-60 days
Federal Section 106 Review: National Historic Preservation Act of Affected
1966, as amended (54 U.S.C. 306108) (36 CFR Part 800) No Adverse Effect to
FHWA/USACE MA SHPO 90-120 days
Historic Properties
Adverse Effect to Historic
120-180 days
Properties
4/28/2023 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TIMELINES Page 7 of 7

TABLE NOTES

NOTE 1: Add 2 to 3 months to all the above timeframes to account for internal review and preparation.
NOTE 2: All above timeframes can be extended by the permitting/review agencies if additional information is requested.
* Add 30 to 60 days if work will occur within an Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife.
** The determination resulting from appeal would be a "final decision of the Commissioner."
^ Timelines are in accordance w/ MA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife and MassDOT Interagency Service Agreement
~ MCZM thresholds are the same as MEPA, USACE and CG thresholds. MCZM reviews projects during the MEPA, USACE, and CG permitting processes and determines if the project is consistent with the Massachusetts State Coastal Policies.
Review times are dependent on the issuance of state permits. MCZM can only issue concurrence after all state permits have been issued.
% Construction Contractor is Responsible for Preparing & Filing Documents and Obtaining this Permit for Projects
# FHWA's 2004 Section 106 Programmatic Agreement authorizes MassDOT Cultural Resources Unit to review and clear projects not affecting historic properties in-house, with no resource agency review.
## Assumes documentation of consultation with local historical commission has been included in effect finding package and 30 day MA SHPO review period.
### Assumes documentation of consultation with local historical commission has been included in effect finding package. Assumes 30 day MA SHPO review period; additional time to consult with interested parties; FHWA/USACE review and
processing of documentation; and ratification of MOA amongst relevant parties.
 2-A-7 2-A-7

Environmental Requirements
for 25 Percent Design
 2006 EDITION

Environmental Requirements for

25 Percent Design

This Appendix contains information concerning environmental elements of

the project to be included with the 25 Percent Design Submission.
Inclusion of these data early in the process is intended to assist in the
identification of project impacts and expedite environmental clearances.
Also included is a 25% Design Submission Checklist. The designer should
also consult MassHighway’s website for additional useful information
(www.mass.gov/mhd/environ/publications.)

Cultural Resources
④ Show all bridges and culverts within or adjacent to the project
limits and label all those having MassHighway BDEPT numbers.

④ Provide photographs of all known historically significant

buildings/structures within or adjacent to the project limits, show
their location and label all those having numbered street
addresses.

④ Show the location of historic district boundaries.

④ Label all historical/locally significant monuments and markers and,

if possible, show their future location if they are proposed to be
moved.

④ Show a detail of the proposed type of street lighting.

④ Label and show preliminary tops and bottoms of slopes and limits
of all proposed takings and easements.

④ Label all preliminary wall locations.

④ Identify potential landscaping enhancement opportunities.

④ Show all proposed trees to be removed that have a 14” or greater

diameter at breast height (DBH).

④ Provide copies of all correspondence with the local historic

commission.

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-7-3

 2006 EDITION

Hazardous Materials
④ Identify locations of known sources of hazardous waste and
hazardous material releases within the project limits (with
appropriate tracking numbers).

Wetland and Water Resources

④ Show the location of all existing drainage structures and existing
and proposed drainage discharge locations.

④ Show the location of all wetland resource areas within 100 feet of
the project limits (e.g., bordering and isolated vegetated wetland
areas and land under water) including the ordinary high water (i.e.,
one-year flood) of waterways and water bodies.

④ Show the location of potential wetland replacement areas.

④ Show on a separate locus any storm water “critical areas” as

defined in the DEP Stormware Standards (cold water fisheries,
Zone IIs, public swimming beaches, shellfish growing areas, and
drinking water reservoir watershed).

④ Show on a separate locus any Federal Emergency Management

Administration (FEMA) floodplain.

④ Show on a separate locus any Estimated Habitat for Wildlife or

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC).

④ Provide photographs in digital format of all bridge

replacement/rehabilitation projects that include work in water or
wetlands. Photographs should clearly show riverbanks of all four
quadrants of the bridge and include any proposed wetland
replication or flood compensation storage areas. All submissions for
roadway reconstruction projects should include photos of all cross
culverts where work is proposed.

④ If a water body can be used for boating/canoeing, consider

maintaining or increasing the clearance under bridges. Any related
information should be clearly identified on the plans.

Section 4(f) Properties

④ Show and label the location of all publicly owned parks,
recreational areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges and historic
properties/sites.

2-A-7-4 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 2006 EDITION

Information Sources
The following references, databases, and information sources may be
helpful to the designer during the preparation of 25 Percent plans:

Project History
④ Local Planning/Public Works/Economic Development Departments
(Location/Feasibility Studies)

④ Regional Planning Agency (Corridor Planning Studies)

④ Major Environmental Documents (EA, EIR/EIS, 4(f)

Documentation)

④ Design Reports

④ Bridge Type Studies

Hazardous Materials Site Screening (40 CFR, 310 CMR, sec. 30)
④ Massachusetts Geographic Information System (available from MA
GIS - htpp//www.mass.gov/mgis/massgis.htm) for mapping and a
data base of certain hazardous material sites

④ Federal: Comprehensive Environmental Recovery Compensation

Liability Act (CERCLA) List (Federal Superfund Site List)

④ State: Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Bureau of

Waste Site Clean-up (21E) — also known as the Massachusetts Oil
and Hazardous Materials Release Prevention and Response Act (MA
Superfund)

④ Local: Fire Department/Fire Prevention Office, Board of Health, for

known underground tanks and/or spills

Cultural Resources (Section 106) of the National Historic Preservation Act

of 1966 as amended (36 CFR, Part 800) and M.G.L. Ch. 9 ss. 26-27C as
amended by Ch. 254 of the Acts of 1988 (950 CMR 71)
④ Local Historical Commissions

④ State/National Register of Historic Places (available on MA GIS)

④ The Inventory of Historical and Archaeological Assets of the

Commonwealth (available at Massachusetts Historical Commission
(MHC))

④ Corridor Planning Studies

January, 2006 Chapter 2 Appendix 2-A-7-5

 2006 EDITION

④ MA GIS contains mapping and a data base of certain cultural

resources

④ Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (consult with MassHighway

Cultural Resource Unit)

Wetlands and Water Resources

④ FEMA Maps

④ MA Surface Water Quality Standards (Outstanding Water Resources

(ORW))

Rare and Endangered Species and Habitat

④ MA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife (MA National Heritage Program)

④ MA Natural Heritage Atlas

④ MA GIS contains mapping and a data base of priority habitats of

rare species and estimated habitats of rare wildlife

National Environmental Policy Act and Massachusetts Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA/MEPA)
④ Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC): MA GIS, Executive
Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) (MEPA Unit)

Section 4(f) Properties (49 USC Section 303) Publicly Owned Parks,
Recreational Areas, Waterfowl Refuges, Historic Sites
④ Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR)

④ Local planning department, parks department, public works

department, historical commission

④ MA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife

④ Division of Conservation Services at EOEA

④ MA GIS contains mapping and a data base of certain publicly

owned properties.

2-A-7-6 Chapter 2 Appendix January, 2006

 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

TO:
FROM:
RE:
FILE #:

Permit Application Type:

Application Received:
Deficiency Review Date:

The following is needed prior to the review and filing of the permit application for the
above‐mentioned project. Also, attached are sample USCG application plan sheets for
your use.

Application & Narrative

Applicant
Consultant
Project Information
Authority Information
International Bridges
Proposed Clearances and Elevations
Existing Bridge Structure, clearances and Elevations at the Bridge Site
Removal of a Bridge
Construction Activity
Alternatives to the Proposed Project
Identify any Public Parks, Recreation Areas, Natural Habitats, Historic or
Cultural Sites Located Within One‐Half Mile of Project Site
Section 4(f)
Coastal Zone Consistency Certification
Wetlands
Floodplain
Water Quality Certificate (WQC)

1 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

Endangered Species
Wild and Scenic River
Prime or Unique Farmlands
Statewide Implementation Plan (SIP)
Noise Levels
Displacement of Residences or Businesses
State and Local Authorizations
Other Federal Agency Approvals
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Fill Above and Below Mean High Water
Names and Addresses of Adjacent Property Owners
Underlying Studies, Reports, and Other Information
Construction Sequence – Anticipated ‐ In the sequence, include when the
sedimentation controls, cofferdams, method of dewatering, and etc. will be
implemented.
Forward the Response letter from Mass Natural Heritage and endangered
Species Program.
Forward an electronic copy of the WQC application and project narrative with
revisions. Email – [email protected]

Construction Plans for CG application

GENERAL
Submit one original set of plans on mylar or linen size 8 ½ X 11 inches. Submit
fewest number of sheets possible, showing significant structural details. Plans
must be of good reproducible quality.
Each drawing must have simple title, date and number (e.g., sheet 1 of 2, sheet 2
of 2) in lower right hand corner.
Show graphic scale and north arrow on each individual plan sheet.
All dimensions and distances must be shown in both English and metric
measurement systems.

2 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

State government datum used in plan and elevation views and location of
datum. Datum utilized should be the same for all drawings submitted. Provide
survey notes or report showing calculations used to derive elevations and
identify referenced tidal bench mark.
VICINITY MAP
Clearly identify entire work site.
Show course of river.
Identify structures crossing waterways within ½ mile of proposed structure.
Show location of any public park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge or
any historic site in the vicinity.
PLAN VIEW
Show existing shorelines.
Show ebb and flood in tidal waters and direction of flow in non‐tidal rivers.
Show unusual current patterns if applicable.
Show mean high and low waterlines if the proposed activity is in tidal areas.
Show ordinary high water line and ordinary low water line if proposed activity
is in a lake, river or stream.
Show an existing bridge, if any is to be replaced, and whether or not it is to be
removed.
If the bridge will have a draw, show the draw in the open and closed positions.
Show principal dimensions of structure from grade to grade. Show length,
width, etc. Show location and dimensions of sidewalks, railings, pipelines, etc.
Show location of dredging, excavation, fill or rap‐rip. Give approximate number
of cubic yards and type of material.
Identify and show location of any fenders, dolphins, piles, cables, etc. existing or
to be constructed in the waterway. Identify type of material to be utilized.
Show limits of maintained navigational channel, if applicable.
Show axis of channel.
Show horizontal clearances, normal to the axis of the channel.
Show water depth at mean low or ordinary low water at various locations in the
channel, under, upstream and downstream of the bridge.

3 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

ELEVATION VIEW
Show mean high and mean low water elevations in tidal areas. Show ordinary
high and low water in non‐tidal areas.
Show horizontal clearances normal to the axis of the channel(s).
Show vertical clearances above mean high or ordinary high water. Vertical
clearances should be shown at waterward face of each pier and at center of
navigational channel.
Show proposed and existing contour of waterway bottom.
Show 100 year flood height and flood of record.
SECTION VIEW
Include location of sidewalks, fishing platforms, railings pipelines, fenders, rip‐
rap, etc.
FENDERS (if applicable)
Show fenders in plan and elevation views including detail of attachment to pier,
countersunk bolts, and relationship to mean high and low waterlines (on
elevation view).
Title Blocks ‐Show the following items in the title blocks located in the lower your
drawings:
Applicant/Agent and Owner
North Arrow
Waterway name
Mile point of bridge location, in miles and metric equivalent
City, County and State
Date of plans
Sheet number of total number of sheets in set

4 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

5 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

6 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

7 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

8 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

9 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

10 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

11 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

12 of 13
 10 Park Plaza, Rm. 4260 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 • (617) 973-7484 • FAX (617) 973-8879

USCG PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW CHECKLIST

If you have any questions regarding this Checklist, please feel free to contact me.

________________________________
Pete Martellucci, Wetlands Reviewer
MassHighway, Environmental Section
10 Park Plaza, Rm 4260
Boston, MA 02116
phone: (617) 973-8250
fax: (617) 973-8879

13 of 13
 January 2, 2006
RE: Eastfield/Rehabilitation of Bridge E-15-001, Main St. (Route 250) over Long River
(MHD Project Number 123456)
Section 106 Review
Sarah Storey, Chairperson
Eastfield Historical Commission
100 Main Street
Eastfield, MA 05555
Dear Ms. Storey:
The Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) and the Town of Eastfield propose to
rehabilitate Bridge E-15-001, which carries Main Street (Route 250) over the Long River in
Eastfield. It is anticipated that this project will be supported in part with federal funds and will
require review, therefore, under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as
amended (36 CFR 800). The enclosed project information is provided for the Eastfield
Historical Commission’s review in compliance with the regulations governing Section 106.
The existing bridge is a five-span concrete T-beam structure with an overall length of 120
feet and an overall width of 48 feet. Erected in 1937, the existing superstructure is carried
on two 1937 concrete abutments and four earlier masonry piers. The proposed project will
rehabilitate the existing substructure and replace the existing concrete T-beams with a
new, five-span steel stringer superstructure carrying a 58-foot-wide deck. It is estimated
that 180 feet of roadway approach work will be required at each end of the bridge.
MassHighway and the Town of Eastfield request that the Eastfield Historical Commission
review the enclosed materials at its earliest convenience, and solicit any comments that the
Commission wishes to make regarding this project. Written comments should be submitted to:
John Blundo, P.E., Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Highway Department, 10 Park Plaza, Boston,
MA 02116, Attn: Geoffrey Fulgione.
If you have any questions concerning the enclosed project information, please feel free to contact
John Smith (617 973-0000) of MassHighway’s Project Management Section. If you have any
questions concerning the Section 106 process, please feel free to contact Geoffrey Fulgione (617
973-8253) of MassHighway’s Cultural Resources Unit.
Sincerely,

William Johnson
ABC Consultants
atts: scope of work
locus plan

xcs: B. Simon, DSHPO, with atts.

G. Fulgione, MassHighway, with atts.
 2-A-8 2-A-8

25 Percent Checklist

The latest 25 Percent Checklist is available online at:

https://www.mass.gov/doc/pddg-checklist-and-submission-distribution-workbook/download
 2-A-9 2-A-9

75 Percent Checklist

The latest 75 Percent Checklist is available online at:

https://www.mass.gov/doc/pddg-checklist-and-submission-distribution-workbook/download
 2-A-10 2-A-10

100/PSE Percent Checklist

The latest 100/PSE Percent Checklist is available online at:

https://www.mass.gov/doc/pddg-checklist-and-submission-distribution-workbook/download
 2-A-11 2-A-11

Design Exception Process

The latest Design Exception Process is available online at:

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massdot-design-exception-reports