Transportation for Communities - Advancing Projects Through Partnerships
- User Portals
- Applications
Transportation Phases
- Long Range Transportation Planning
- Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint
- Corridor Planning
- Environmental Review Merged with Permitting
Applications - Corridor Planning Studies
Washington State DOT (WSDOT) used the TCAPP Corridor Planning application to support the SR 509 Corridor Completion Project, reducing initial project implementation cost by ~$400 million while preserving most project benefits. Learn more about how TCAPP helped.
Corridor planning builds on the foundation of long range planning by studying concepts and solutions for individual corridors or small areas within a region, leading to the selection of a preferred concept. Corridor planning is not a legally-required process; therefore, the purpose and conduct of corridor planning studies can vary considerably. In general, corridor planning involves a more focused examination of problems and potential solutions for a smaller geographic area than a long-range plan, but does not require the level of detail that is analyzed in the environmental review process. In some urban areas corridor plans are done concurrently with the development of the long range plan. In rural areas, corridor plans are sometimes used as a substitute for long range plans. In whatever way it is used, corridor planning has implications for the transfer of information between the other phases of transportation decision making.
In TCAPP, information about key decisions in corridor planning is presented in the Decision Guide. The Decision Guide also includes links to relevant case studies as well as links between the key decisions in Corridor Planning and those in the long-range planning, programming, and environmental review phases.
Corridor Planning using the Decision Guide can be done in an urban or rural area and is assumed to precede the programming process. The final key decisions in corridor planning specifically address the need to prioritize solutions so that funding and other actions needed for support are identified.
To get a snapshot of each Key Decision, roll over the Decision Guide graphic below. Click on any individual Key Decision to access detailed information including: purpose and anticipated outcomes; partner roles; integration with external planning processes; linkages across phases; questions to assist decision makers; and data, tools, technologies that support the decision.
Key Decisions that are grayed-out have no specific relevance to the individual application or topic area but are still accessible from this graphic.
LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
The scoping key decision involves a broad assessment of the data, decisions, and relationships to consider, acquire, or make throughout the entire long range transportation plan (LRTP) process.
At this key decision, the community's values, whether stated as a vision and goals or simply agreed upon by the stakeholders for the planning area, are used to guide the transportation-specific vision and goals.
At this key decision the evaluation criteria, methodology and performance measures are approved that will allow decision-makers to compare scenarios to the vision and goals and to one another.
The approved list of specific corridors, roads and areas which are deficient identified at this key decision serves as a basis for problems and opportunities addressed in both the corridor planning and environmental review processes.
At this key decision information from the Programming / Fiscal Constraint Phase is introduced into the LRTP decision making process.
Strategies are developed to address the deficiencies identified in LRP-4. A strategy is a specific tactic or policy employed or recommended by an organization.
Scenarios are based on approved strategies and are compared using the evaluation criteria, methodology and performance measures.
At this key decision, a preferred plan scenario is adopted for inclusion in the Draft LRTP.
Air Quality conformity analysis is done within the air quality process in order to validate that the preferred scenario meets current conformity requirements.
This is a legally required decision consisting of the federal approval of conformity of the LRTP.
PROGRAMMING
This key decision establishes the revenue basis for both the fiscal constraint of the long range plan as well as the funding sources for the TIP.
This key decision establishes a consistent methodology for estimating project costs for both the long range transportation plan and the TIP.
This key decision establishes the list of projects drawn from the long range plan or corridor planning process that will be considered for funding in the TIP.
At this key decision, the approved project list is prioritized using the methodology previously developed.
At this key decision project priorities are compared to available funding within program restrictions to select those projects to be included in the TIP.
At this key decision, the MPO adopts the TIP. Before the MPO can do this, comments on the draft TIP must be addressed and a final TIP must be produced.
The Governor or designee should ensure that the TIP meets other state and federal requirements so that the TIP can be incorporated into the STIP and be in agreement with the state document.
At this key decision the draft STIP is developed to release for public comment.
In order to meet federal requirements, the STIP must meet conformity and fiscal constraint, where required.
CORRIDOR PLANNING
This is a crucial first step of corridor planning.
The full range of deficiencies and opportunities within a corridor are defined at this key decision.
At this key decision a broad range of transportation, community, and environmental goals are considered which are specific to the corridor.
In order to provide a clear linkage to the environmental review process, this key decision defines the acceptable level of detail for the corridor study analysis.
At this key decision, evaluation criteria, methodology and performance measures are approved that will allow decision-makers to compare solutions that address the corridor's opportunities and problems and are consistent with the approved corridor goals.
A range of approved solution sets for the corridor results from this key decision.
At this key decision, a preferred solution set is adopted for inclusion in the Corridor Plan.
At this key decision priorities for implementation of the individual solutions are established.
Individual projects within the adopted preferred solution set are ranked in order to identify the appropriate sequencing for implementation.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/NEPA MERGED WITH PERMITTING
Consensus is reached on the data, decisions and relationships that need to be considered, acquired or made throughout environmental review and permitting. The scope is informed by the adopted plans and current information from plans in process. Relationships with planning partners are formed.
This key decision is required to satisfy the legal requirement of publishing a Notice of Intent (NOI) to inform partners and the public of the commencement of the environmental review phase.
Document the agreed to purpose and need for both NEPA and the Section 404 permitting process. Integration with land use partners and stakeholder input are important at this step, to substantiate and refine the project purpose and need. There is a strong relationship between this key decision and the planning processes.
Consensus on an initial geographic area of study (the area within which any alternatives will fall) is reached. The study area is closely linked to the purpose and need and is informed by transportation and other planning processes.
Evaluation criteria, methods and measures are used to compare how alternatives meet the purpose and need. The criteria used in long range and corridor planning as well as land use, ecological planning and capital improvement data are considered.
A full range of possible project alternatives to meet the purpose and need is identified. Information about both selected and eliminated scenarios and solution sets from long range transportation planning and corridor planning inform the range of alternatives approved at this step.
This shared step between the NEPA and permitting processes involves the approval of the alternatives that are suggested to be carried forward. There is essential information created in long range planning and corridor planning that informs this decision.
This is a formal approval point at which the Draft EIS with conceptual mitigation is approved and circulated for public review. Land use partners indicate their support of any land use policy changes that would be required to implement the recommendations in the Draft EIS.
This key decision is required to satisfy the regulatory requirement for Section 404 permitting that the public receive notice of a permit application.
Decision makers approve a preferred project alternative/LEDPA using input from stakeholders, planning partners, and detailed information about potential impacts, and validate that the preferred alternative is consistent with the LRTP and TIP/STIP.
LEDPA
This decision is a required procedural step in the Section 404 permitting process. At this step, a final determination of jurisdictional waters of the United States in the project area is made.
Following selection of the preferred alternative/LEDPA, partners reach consensus on additional avoidance and minimization measures not included in the preliminary design.
A final EIS is approved that meets all legal requirements and addresses comments received on the Draft EIS.
At this step in the environmental review phase, the Record of Decision is issued.
At this final step in the environmental review phase, the final permit decision is rendered.
The TCAPP approach to corridor planning places great emphasis on the potential for broad collaboration. It is intended to lead to results that are more realistic and better reflect the numerous forces and interests that impact the planning process: transportation, community, and environmental.
Collaborative practices incorporated into corridor planning include:
- Reaching consensus on the problems and opportunities in the corridor and establishing goals to guide the corridor planning process;
- Identifying what success means by establishing evaluation criteria and performance measures, both for solutions screening and project prioritization, and ensuring that these metrics are coordinated with long-range planning and project development;
- Including resource agencies and other interested and appropriate partners early in the process as a decision making partner; and
- Ongoing and inclusive stakeholder involvement.
HOW CAN TRANSPORTATION FOR COMMUNITIES HELP ME...
- Ensure consistency between decisions made in the planning phase and those made in the environmental review phase?
- Determine how improvements should be prioritized for funding?
- Develop a plan that anticipates and incorporates public and political issues and concerns?
Consistency between long range planning and environmental review
The Decision Guide provides a standardized approach for conducting corridor planning, which can be customized to meet the needs of particular users. The Decision Guide consists of a series of key decisions, of which three are of particular importance in coordinating between corridor planning and environmental review:
- Scope of the corridor plan
- Scope of environmental review
- Evaluation criteria, methodology, and performance measures
The Decision Guide also provides information about long-range planning and environmental review merged with permitting processes, and several key decision points from those processes are closely related to corridor planning.
TCAPP provides case studies of planning processes that have successfully incorporated collaboration and other innovative practices. In particular, the US 285 Corridor Study provides a good example of a situation where the corridor and environmental review processes were integrated. The specific roles and interests of MPOs, State DOTs, FHWA, and resource agencies (such as EPA, Corps of Engineers, USFWS, and state agencies) with regard to the corridor planning process are available for each phase of decision making (see How Does My Agency Fit In).
Prioritizing improvements for funding
Corridor plans often result in a combination of solutions. The individual recommended actions can be very comprehensive including, for example, road improvements, multi-modal improvements, land use changes, access management, aesthetic or environmental enhancements. Sometimes the sequence of implementation of the corridor improvements can be very important to the functioning of the corridor or to commitments made to partners or stakeholders. This detailed information is often not available to the team that is making decisions about funding during the programming process. For this reason the Decision Guide approach for Corridor Planning identifies two key decisions designed to facilitate the transfer of information to the programming process - approve evaluation criteria, methodology, and performance measures for prioritization and adopt priorities for implementation. These two decision points provide the corridor plan collaborative partnership the opportunity to establish the preferred implementation sequencing as well as to indentify any dependencies between the individual solutions recommended in the corridor plan.
Several special topic area applications have been identified as part of the Transportation for Communities site, containing more detailed information. The Programming Phase application shows the linkage between the prioritization information from corridor planning in order to support funding for preferred solutions during the programming.
Planning that anticipates and incorporates public and political issues and concerns
TCAPP provides case studies of planning processes that have successfully incorporated collaboration and other innovative practices. Some of the case studies that address public and political issues and concerns include:
- Interstate 710 Corridor Study - officials were able to turn around a study facing opposition, by reframing the process to better incorporate community concerns
- Kelly Parkway Corridor Study - planners were able to build rapport and support within a community with historic distrust of the government through a public outreach campaign
- Route 31 Corridor Plan - an example of an integrated land use and corridor plan with extensive public involvement
- US 24 Corridor Study - local grass-roots activists were able to lead the way in developing a corridor study for a multi-state corridor
This application can guide practitioners through a corridor planning process that is collaborative, integrated with other planning processes, and supportive of tiered decision making.