Transportation Community Investment Program - Selection Process

Background

Each year City staff receive requests from residents, City Council, and other groups to complete transportation projects that they consider to be important. Staff also reviews the many plans the City has adopted to make transportation, safety, and other important improvements. The challenge is that there simply is not enough funding available to fulfill all these requests. So, in 2019 the City developed a set of scoring criteria (detailed below) to evaluate, rank, and prioritize all these projects. City Council approved this approach to project prioritization, and directed staff to place more emphasis on safety and equity when ranking projects.

Current Transportation Community Investment Program Projects

City staff created and regularly updates a list of all transportation community investment program (CIP) projects that are being considered for construction or implementation, their scores in each of the categories described below, and an explanation as to why the projects received those scores. The list provides City Council with suggested priorities for consideration or implementation, but it is ultimately Council's decision as to which projects will be funded.

Below are the top 20 projects on the CIP list and their updates:

CIP List (as of June 30, 2023—currently being updated & will be posted here once available)

We have also created a map showing the locations of all of the proposed projects shown on the spreadsheet:

CIP Map

Have an idea for a project? Add it to the map at the bottom of this page by answering a couple questions and dropping a pin at the location. You can also comment or ask a question.

Scoring Criteria for Selecting Projects for Construction

City maintains a list of projects and scores them according to the criteria shown below. Projects with higher scores are prioritized.

1. Plan Conformity

Project is included in adopted plans:

• Higher scores for Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) committed and high-scoring recommended projects, high priority areas in the Pedestrian Facilities Master Plan (PFMP), projects that reduce level of stress per the Bicycle Facilities Master Plan (BFMP), Missoula Urban Transportation District (MUTD) priority projects, neighborhood plans (including Downtown Master Plan), previously approved CIPs, and Complete Streets policy adherence.
• Medium scores for lower scoring recommended projects and illustrative projects in the LRTP, lower priority areas in the PFMP, higher levels of bike stress or less significant reductions in bike stress.
• Lower scores for projects not in LRTP, low priority PFMP areas.
• (0 = not included at all, 10 = committed/high priority)

2. Connectivity

Project provides connections to other facilities such as existing sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, neighborhood greenways, bus routes, AND/OR provides connections where few or none exist (isolated routes):

• Higher scores for connections to low stress bike routes, high-frequency bus routes (1, 2, 6, and 7), and multiple neighborhoods.
• Lower scores for connections to higher stress bike routes, other bus routes.
• Complete streets connections along isolated routes can add points.
• (0 = no improvement, 10 = significant improvement)

3. Access

Project provides access to key destinations:

• Higher scores for projects that connect to downtown, hospitals, elementary and middle schools, grocery stores, and regional parks.
• Medium scores for projects that connect to major employment centers, food/drink and retail establishments, multi-family residential/group living centers, local parks, and other commercial destinations.
• Lower scores for projects that connect to only lower density residential/single-family housing.
• (0 = no improvement, 10 = significant improvement)

4. Safety

Project addresses identified safety concerns:

• Higher scores for projects that improve safety on higher speed, higher volume roads, places with fatal and serious injury crashes or known crash history.
• Lower scores for projects that don’t address safety, or in locations that are relatively safe.
• Safe Routes to School and Truck Routes can add points.
• Safety is weighted 2x in project scoring, per Council direction.
• (0 = no improvement, 10 = significant improvement)

5. Equity

Project addresses underserved neighborhoods and impacts of development:

• Higher scores for Invest Health neighborhoods, projects that facilitate affordable housing (as defined in Housing Plan) and serve vulnerable populations, and areas with missing infrastructure (i.e. no sidewalks).
• Lower scores for projects in higher income and/or lower density neighborhoods, or where investment has recently taken place.
• Equity is weighted 2x in the project scoring, per Council direction.
• (0 = no equity benefit, 10 = significant equity benefit)

6. Leverage

Project builds on recent/upcoming projects, supports redevelopment, and/or brings other funding sources. (0 = no leverage, 10 = significant leverage)

7. Readiness

Project is ready for construction, planning/feasibility studies completed, engineering work completed, other jurisdictions or constraints addressed. (0 = not ready, 10 = complete construction docs)

Completed CIP Project Example:

Eaton Street — S. 7th Street W. to South Avenue

Eaton St. is a north-south collector in the Franklin to the Fort neighborhood. Having been on the list for sidewalks for years, it was elevated as a priority for funding through the CIP process, where it ranked among the top 10 projects.

Design work for this project began in 2020. Based on available funding, it was determined the project needed to be split into phases. The first phase constructed sidewalks and improved bus stops between S. 7th St. W. and S. 13th St. The sidewalk and bus stop construction was completed in 2022, and the last part of the project—planting boulevard trees—was completed in early summer 2023.

Phase II will complete sidewalk connections to South Ave. and could start in 2025, depending on funding availability.

Area along Eaton St. before changesSame area of Eaton St. after construction