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
Check out the Understanding the Decision Guide page
COR-1
Approve Scope of Corridor Planning Process
Description: This is a crucial first step of corridor planning. It involves a process of assessing what data, decisions and relationships need to be considered, acquired or made throughout corridor planning. The corridor planning scope is informed by long range transportation planning and informs environmental review. This is a key point to form or acknowledge existing relationships with partners in transportation decision-making and other decision-making processes.
Purpose
To initiate a corridor planning process, either in a rural or metropolitan area. Issues considered should inclusive of transportation, environment, and community in order to agree on a comprehensive scope and overall direction of the process.
Outcome
A clearly defined scope to guide the corridor planning process.
Partner Roles | ||
|---|---|---|
FHWA |
Advisor |
Ensures the process of developing the corridor or sub-area plan is inclusive of appropriate federal and state agencies and considers other accepted plans |
MPO |
Decision Maker (urban), No Role (rural) |
Ensures the scope of the corridor planning study is sufficiently broad and inclusive to consider all potential solutions and opportunities |
Resource Agency |
Advisor |
Agree to collaborate in the corridor planning process and ensure appropriate information is brought forward and used. Bring forward the ecological planning region, ecological goals and priorities or ensure information carried forward from LRP is up-to-date. |
State DOT |
Advisor (urban), Decision Maker (rural) |
Provides an understanding of state needs and plans with respect to the corridor |
Process |
Integration Type |
Integration Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land Use and Smart Growth | Decision | Approve land use issues to be a part of the scope. • Purpose - Identify priority land use philosophies to move forward. • Outcome - Land use context to be included in the corridor plan. | Agreement between transportation decision-makers and land use partners to collaborate in corridor planning. | Data | • Confirmation that the land use information brought from the LRTP is current. Identification of the priority land planning issues for the corridor should be identified. • Land use data and land planning data • Greenways, easements, set-backs within the corridor • Parcel information • Land Use Plans (local and public land management agencies) |
| Air Quality Conformity | Data | Air quality data including SIP budget where appropriate |
| Natural Environment and the IEF | Data Between IEF Step 1 - Build & Strengthen Collaborative Partnerships & Vision and COR-1 | Any relationships formed between resource agencies, conservation NGOs and transportation agencies as part of either long range planning or IEF Step 1 are recognized, reinforced and strengthened. Relationships formed as part of corridor planning can also strengthen ecological planning. The ecological planning region is identified at IEF Sub-step 1a and should inform transportation decisions. If the long range planning process and IEF were integrated, this data was collected and considered in LRP-1 and would be carried forward. At the corridor and site level, some additional considerations could enter the picture if particular populations were known to be present. The ecological goal data from IEF Sub-step 1d is collected here. This data should be collected and considered in LRP-1, but a confirmation of that link can be made here and consideration should be made as to whether the data has been updated or if there is more specific information relevant to the corridor. A shared decision around goals occurs at COR-3. At IEF Sub-step 1d, memoranda of understanding are developed around potential new processes for increasing conservation efficiency and predictability. These MOUs could affect the corridor planning process and should be identified and considered at COR-1. | Decision Between IEF Step 1 - Build & Strengthen Collaborative Partnerships & Vision and COR-1 | A joint decision is made between the decision makers in corridor planning and the partners from ecological planning to work together to maximize the ecological benefit and regulatory process efficiencies that can be achieved. | Data From IEF Step 2 - Characterize Resource Status & Integrate Natural Environment Plans | A combined map of conservation, restoration and enhancement priorities is a key output of IEF Step 2 and should be considered at the earliest stages of the transportation planning process. These priorities become an important part of the problem statement and opportunities (COR-2) and goals for the corridor (COR-3). | Data From IEF Step 8 - Implement Agreements, Adaptive Management & Deliver Projects | Documentation and agreements from the integrated ecological process, if completed. Relationships, planning region, information about goals, REFregional ecosystem framework, conservation opportunities, mitigation strategy. | Data From IEF Step 9 - Update Regional Ecosystem Framework & Plan | Information from the ecological plan is continually updated and should be an input into any ongoing or upcoming corridor planning process. |
| Capital Improvement | Decision | Agreement between transportation decision makers and capital improvement partners to participate in corridor planning, where appropriate. | Data | Capital improvement plans or development plans. |
| Safety and Security | Decision | Agreement between transportation decision makers and safety and security partners to participate in corridor planning, where appropriate. | Data | Any plans or other information safety and security partners can contribute. |
| Human Environment | Decision | Agreement between transportation decision makers and human environment agencies/staff to participate in corridor planning, where appropriate. | Data | • Goals from the human environment perspective. • Any data elements or plans about the human environment that partners can provide. • Special populations to consider (EJ) • Population and employment information for the area |
| Economic Development | Data | • Inventory of current economic environment and key businesses or industries • Economic development planning stakeholders • Economic development philosophy of the region and/or state. | Analysis | Any economic development related analysis completed during the long range planning, programming, or an adopted land use or economic development plan. |
| Greenhouse Gas | Data | Tools and data to support incorporating GHG analysis into corridor planning, public or political support for GHG reduction, and relevant rules and regulations. |
Linkages to other Phases of Transportation Decision Making | ||
|---|---|---|
Key Decision |
What is Linked? |
Purpose of Linkage |
From Long Range Transportation Planning |
||
LRP-1 - Approve Scope of LRTP Process |
Background information on initial identification of partners and data |
To inform the scope of the corridor planning process |
LRP-4 - Approve Transportation Deficiencies |
Transportation deficiencies |
To provide the foundation and understanding of transportation problems identified in the corridor during long range planning. This provides the regional context for the development of corridor deficiencies. |
LRP-6 - Approve Strategies |
The approved range of strategies |
To provide a regional context for the range of strategies identified in long range planning for the corridor |
LRP-7 - Approve Plan Scenarios |
All scenarios considered in the long range planning process and reasons for eliminating scenarios |
To provide the regional context for the corridor included in the scenarios included and eliminated. |
LRP-10 - Adopt LRTP by MPO |
The adopted LRTP including information related to recommended improvements to the corridor. To help define the scope of the corridor planning process. |
To help define the scope of the corridor planning process. |
To Environmental Review |
||
ENV-1 - Reach Consensus on Scope of Environmental Review |
Background information on initial identification of partners and data To inform the scope of the corridor planning process. |
To inform the scope of the corridor planning process |
Policy Questions |
|
|---|---|
Questions about purpose and roles |
How, when, and by whom will decisions within the corridor planning process be made? |
Is private sector participation in the corridor planning process under consideration? If so, what is the purpose and scope of private participation? | |
Who should be involved in the corridor planning process? (Partners) | |
Questions about stakeholders |
How will the public be involved? |
Who are the proponents and opponents? | |
Who should be involved in the corridor planning process? (modes, stakeholders, etc.) | |
Questions about the transportation process supporting the decision |
Are the tools up to date and sufficient for this process? |
Are there emerging issues that affect this corridor? | |
If there is potential for a P3 project, does the required legislative authority exist? | |
Is a P3 being considered for projects in the corridor? If so, has a pre-development agreement (PDA) been established or is it under consideration? | |
Is the identified geographic area sufficient? How were the termini identified? | |
Is the scope set up to consider both people and freight movement? | |
What additional information outside of plans and programs is available to complete the corridor planning process? | |
What are the potential risks to a timely completion of this corridor planning process? | |
What is the anticipated cost/funding available? | |
What is the geographic scope of the plan? | |
What is the time frame? | |
Questions about other phases |
Are any existing analyses available from the LRP phase? |
Are existing tools sufficient to support revenue and risk analyses in case of private sector investment? | |
Do we anticipate that any projects coming from this corridor study have the potential to be funded with federal money (NEPA analysis)? | |
Is the scope set up in a manner that will enable information to be carried forward into environmental review? | |
Were the advantages and disadvantages of doing this study as a NEPA tier 1 process considered? | |
What major changes have occurred since the LRTP? | |
What plans and programs are available as tools and data sources (e.g., LRTP, land use plans) | |
Questions about non-transportation sectors/processes |
Are existing tools and data resources sufficient to support the proposed method of GHG analysis? |
Are there established economic development visions or goals to consider? | |
Are there public/private sources of data and information on performance indicators pertaining to the corridor? | |
Are there requirements that will influence how GHG emissions will be considered? For example, is there a state, regional, or local climate action plan or state/federal GHG inventory or reduction requirements? | |
Have land use patterns and growth forecasts been considered in defining the planning region? | |
Is there a formal interagency conservation and transportation partnership agreement? | |
Is there agreement on the planning area with respect to assessing economic impacts? | |
Is there agreement on the planning region with respect to ecological assessment? | |
Is there local interest in estimating the GHG emissions impact of the corridor plan in the absence of a formal requirement? Is the corridor plan part of a larger GHG reduction or climate action plan? | |
What additional coordination efforts, such as data or resources, will be needed to support the desired method of GHG analysis in corridor planning? | |
What is the scope of GHG emissions analysis as part of the corridor planning process? | |
What plans and programs are available as tools and data sources (e.g., land use plans, conservation plans, a regional ecosystem framework, or economic development plans)? | |
Will GHG considerations be treated in a qualitative or quantitative manner? | |
Questions to Gather Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| What are the views of stakeholders regarding private sector participation on projects in the corridor? |
Questions to Incorporate Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| What is the stakeholder perspective with respect to private sector participation? |
Case Study Example(s): |
|---|
None. |
Supporting Data for the Key Decision |
|
|
|---|---|---|
From other phases of transportation decision making |
Long Range Planning |
Background information on the initial identification of partners | Long range planning boundary |
Transportation deficiencies |
The approved range of strategies |
All scenarios considered in the long range planning process and reasons for eliminating scenarios |
The adopted LRTP including information related to recommended improvements to the corridor |
Programming |
Information about potential funding sources |
Current projects selected for programming |
Corridor Planning |
Planning boundaries from corridor and small area plans |
Multi-modal plans or facilities |
Environmental Review |
No Specific Data |
From other sectors and processes |
Land Use and Smart Growth |
Land use data and land planning data | Any adopted plans or covenants within the area |
Greenways, easements, set-backs within the corridor |
Parcel information |
Land use plans (local and public land management agencies) |
Access commitments or restrictions |
Applications for development or access |
Priority land planning issues for the corridor |
Land use and smart growth vision and goals |
Land use planning boundaries |
Air Quality Conformity |
Air quality data including SIP budget where appropriate |
Natural Environment and the IEF |
Ecological planning region |
Relationships formed between resource agencies, conservation NGOs and transportation agencies |
Ecological goal data |
Map of conservation, restoration and enhancement priorities |
Documentation and agreements from the integrated ecological process |
Capital Improvement |
Other capital improvement plans or development plans |
Safety and Security |
Safety and security data/issues for the corridor |
Human Environment |
Special populations to consider (EJ) |
Population and employment information for the area |
Human environment data |
Goals from the human environment perspective |
Economic Development |
Inventory of current economic environment and key businesses or industries, stakeholders, economic development philosophy. |
Data used in economic planning in the state, region or local area as well as performance indicators, if available. For example, comprehensive planning data. |
Greenhouse Gas |
Review of existing resources to support incorporating GHG analysis into corridor process |
Emissions sources |
Analysis years |
An estimate of travel activity and network performance using macro, micro, and sketch analyses |
An estimate of applicable emissions rates |
Data availability by emissions source, travel mode, and data format |
From the transportation technical process supporting this key decision |
Bridges and culverts | |
Traffic count data | ||
Transportation modes to consider | ||
From stakeholder collaboration |
Public involvement plan, list of stakeholders | |
From public private partnership |
Experience with P3 projects | |
Public/political support for P3 | ||
Rules and regulations relevant to P3 | ||
Authority to move forward with P3 | ||
Pre-development agreement (PDA) | ||
The following is a list of data needed to support the key decision. Practitioners collect this information for decision makers to consider. You may add to this list using the comment box at the bottom of the page. Supporting Tools and Technology | |
|---|---|
Category |
Detail |
Analysis |
GIS Tools: Used to analyze and draw conclusions from the data gathered above. May include remote imaging tools such as aerial imagery and LIDAR. |
Technical Analysis Tools: Used to determine corridor transportation usage, especially related to freight data: commodity flows, activity, etc. |
|
Financial Planning Tools: Used to estimate scope of project costs, link costs with potential funding sources. |
|
Communication |
None. |
Gathering |
GIS Tools: Used to gather and overlay geographic data on the corridor scope. May include remote imaging tools such as aerial imagery and LIDAR. GIS tools are broadly applicable |
Synthesis Tools: Used to combine information from related plans and programs into one consolidated source, for comprehensive analysis. |
|
Assurance Tools: Assurance tools to identify data sources and provide a means of monitoring and tracking agreements over time |
|
Key Decision Relationship to Other Topics | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic | Description | ||
| Visioning and Transportation |
|
||
| Public-Private Partnerships |
|
||