Secondary and Cumulative Impacts Master Management Plan - 2014

introduction FY2014

P ROJECT E VALUATION C RI TERI A – C RI TCAL T HINKI NG M ODEL

Project Name Project Lead Person

Criteria Last Updated

Staff Rating (select most appropriate point)

Criteria Weighted based on

Council Scoring of Criteria

Points Scale

Rating Criteria

Criteria Statement

Council Scoring

#1 Goals/objectives

Extent to which project aligns with Town Goals and Initiatives

27.6

8.7%

1 2 3 4 5

Low

Aligns to no Goal of Town

0 0 0 0 0

Aligns to at least 2 Goals of Town Aligns to at least 3 to 4 Goals of Town Aligns to at least 5 Goals of Town

Medium

High

Aligns to 6 to 9 Goals of Town

Extent to which project eliminates, prevents, or reduces an immediate hazard to safety.

#2 Safety

32

10.1%

1

Low

Project has no relation to a hazardous condition

0

Project reduces a perceived minor hazardous condition which is not life threatening Project eliminates an existing minor hazardous condition which is not life threatening Project eliminates an existing hazardous condition that may be life threatening if left unchecked Project eliminates an immediate hazardous condition that is life threatening Extent to which project helps town meet federal/state/local mandates policies and plans. Project indirectly supports a local mandate, policy or adopted plan Project supports a local mandate, policy or adopted plan but does not significantly accomplish (will require future project phases or steps to meet 100% of mandate, policy, or adopted plan) Project significantly accomplishes a local mandate, policy or adopted plan (will likely not require future project phases or steps to meet 100% of mandate, policy or adopted plans) Project has a state and/or federal legal compulsory mandate Project is not shovel ready but is a continuation of an existing approved plan Project is a continuation of an existing approved plan and shovel ready Project is shovel ready and rates high for safety or mandates Project is shovel ready and rates high for safety and high for mandates Extent to which project enhances economic development in town, or directly or indirectly adds to the tax base. has no impact to tax base or no enhancement to economic development has little impact to tax base or economic development Indirectly adds to tax base and contributes to economic development directly contributes to economic development, but indirectly adds to tax base directly contributes to economic development and adds to tax base Project has no local or other legal mandates Extent to which project is shovel ready. Project is not ready

2

0

3

Medium

0

4

0

5

High

0

#3 Mandates

27.7

8.8%

1 2

Low

0 0

3

Medium

0

4

0

5

High

0

#4 Project Readiness

23.9

7.6%

1

Low

0

2

0

3 4 5

Medium

0 0 0

High

#5 Economic impact

24.2

7.7%

1

Low

0

2 3

0 0

Medium

4

0

5

High

0

58