Introduction

The draft project evaluation and ranking criteria presented below were developed to support transparent, consistent, and datadriven prioritization for the Countywide Transportation Master Plan (CTMP). The structure, weighting, and maximum scoring points assigned to each category and metric reflect the collective feedback and consensus reached by IPARC 2.0+ during the January 28, 2026, workshop.

At that workshop, IPARC 2.0+ members reviewed the draft CTMP goals, objectives, and associated performance measures and participated in a facilitated exercise to express the relative importance of each project goal. The resulting weights emphasize priorities identified by the committee, including safety, system reliability, multimodal connectivity, resilience, and alignment with land use and economic development objectives. These priorities are reflected in both the number of metrics assigned to each category and the maximum points available for individual criteria.

The criteria are organized into five overarching categories that align with the CTMP goals. Each metric includes a clear description, defined data sources, and objective scoring thresholds to ensure consistent application across a wide range of project types and jurisdictions. This draft framework balances technical performance measures with policy direction and stakeholder values, to provide a defensible basis for evaluating countywide projects, inform scenario development, and draft CTMP recommendations.

This draft framework will continue to be applied and refined as projects are screened and evaluated, ensuring that CTMP investment recommendations remain aligned with IPARC 2.0+ priorities and the long-term vision for a safe, efficient, resilient, and connected multimodal transportation system.

Instructions for Review and Feedback

Members of IPARC 2.0+ are invited to review the draft CTMP project evaluation and ranking criteria shown below. Each criterion has been translated into a standardized scoring framework with defined draft data sources and maximum points to support consistent application across all project types.

To provide feedback:

1. On the "CTMP Scoring Framework" tab, review each category and criterion related to the description, data sources, and scoring thresholds

2. Use the questions associated with each criterion to indicate whether you:

• Agree with the criterion and its assigned weighting, or
• Recommend changes to the scoring approach, point values, or data sources.

3. If selecting an option other than “Agree,” please provide comments in the designated feedback field to explain:

• Why a change is recommended, and
• How the criterion or weighting could be improved to better reflect CTMP goals and objectives.

4. Feedback may address:

• The relative importance of criteria within or across categories
• Clarity and applicability of scoring thresholds
• Appropriateness of data sources
• Any gaps or redundancies in the evaluation framework

All feedback submitted will be documented and reviewed by the project team to refine the final prioritization framework to align with IPARC 2.0+ priorities, technical best practices, and the long-term vision of the CTMP. Feedback is requested by Friday, February 27th.

Press the button below to review the criteria, description, data sources and thresholds for each category.

After reviewing the CTMP Scoring Framework, please feel free to give your feedback using the Form below. Your input is highly appreciated.