BETA

This draft website and its contents were developed by ICF International; TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind (see disclaimer).

Transportation for Communities - Advancing Projects Through Partnerships


Applications - Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint

Reference Links

Programming is the process through which the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is developed and adopted. The TIP is a list of prioritized projects drawn from the long range transportation plan that are approved for funding over a period of at least four years. TIPs are developed by MPOs for urban areas and by state DOTs for rural areas. Federal regulations require that MPO long range plans be fiscally constrained; meaning that the projects in the plan are supported by reasonable revenue forecasts. By linking fiscal constraint with project programming, information and decisions can be shared and coordinated to avoid re-do loops. Integration ensures that projects in the TIP remain connected to the long range plan.

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 Practical Application or topic area but are still accessible from this graphic.

Dg-darkgrey-titlebar-corner-left LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

LRP-1

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.

LRP-1 Approve Scope of LRTP Process
LRP-2

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.

LRP-2 Approve Vision and Goals
LRP-3

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.

LRP-3 Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures
LRP-4

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.

LRP-4 Approve Transportation Deficiencies
LRP-5

At this key decision information from the Programming / Fiscal Constraint Phase is introduced into the LRTP decision making process.

LRP-5 Approve Financial Assumptions
LRP-6

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.

LRP-6 Approve Strategies
LRP-7

Scenarios are based on approved strategies and are compared using the evaluation criteria, methodology and performance measures.

LRP-7 Approve Plan Scenarios
LRP-8

At this key decision, a preferred plan scenario is adopted for inclusion in the Draft LRTP.

LRP-8 Adopt Preferred Plan Scenario
LRP-9

Air Quality conformity analysis is done within the air quality process in order to validate that the preferred scenario meets current conformity requirements.

LRP-9 Adopt Finding of Conformity by MPO
LRP-10

At this key decision a final plan is adopted by the MPO board.

LRP-10 Adopt LRTP by MPO
LRP-11

This is a legally required decision consisting of the federal approval of conformity of the LRTP.

LRP-11 Approve Conformity Analysis

Dg-darkgrey-titlebar-corner-left PROGRAMMING

PRO-1

Establishes the revenue basis for both the fiscal constraint of the long-range plan and the funding sources for the TIP, ensuring consistency between the plan and the funding program.

PRO-1 Approve Revenue Sources
PRO-2

Establishes a consistent methodology for estimating project costs for both the long-range transportation plan and the TIP. It also documents the specific requirements and restrictions associated with each funding source.

PRO-2 Approve Methodology for Identifying Project Costs and Criteria for Allocating Revenue
PRO-3

Establishes the list of projects drawn from the long-range plan or corridor planning process that will be considered for funding in the TIP.

PRO-3 Approve Project List Drawn from Adopted Plan Scenario or Solution Set
PRO-4

The approved project list is prioritized using the methodology previously developed. This ensures that the projects going into the TIP are consistent with projects from the planning phases.

PRO-4 Approve Project Prioritization
PRO-5

Project priorities are compared to available funding within program restrictions to select those projects to be included in the TIP, reflecting all projects that are to be incorporated.

PRO-5 Reach Consensus on Draft TIP
PRO-6

The MPO adopts the TIP, after addressing comments received on the draft TIP and developing a final version. By adopting the TIP, the MPO and partner agencies agree that projects are prioritized appropriately.

PRO-6 Adopt TIP by MPO
PRO-7

The governor or designee should ensure that the TIP meets state and federal requirements, so the TIP can be incorporated into the STIP.

PRO-7 Approve TIP by Governor and Incorporate into Draft STIP
PRO-8

The draft STIP is developed and released for public comment.

PRO-8 Reach Consensus on Draft STIP
PRO-9

In order to meet federal requirements, the air quality conformity and fiscal constraint of the STIP must be verified, where required.

PRO-9 Approve STIP with respect to Conformity and Fiscal Constraint

Dg-darkgrey-titlebar-corner-left CORRIDOR PLANNING

COR-1

This is a crucial first step of corridor planning.

COR-1 Approve Scope of Corridor Planning Process
COR-2

The full range of deficiencies and opportunities within a corridor are defined at this key decision.

COR-2 Approve Problem Statements and Opportunities
COR-3

At this key decision a broad range of transportation, community, and environmental goals are considered which are specific to the corridor.

COR-3 Approve Goals for the Corridor
COR-4

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.

COR-4 Reach Consensus on Scope of Environmental Review and Analysis
COR-5

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.

COR-5 Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures
COR-6

A range of approved solution sets for the corridor results from this key decision.

COR-6 Approve Range of Solution Sets
COR-7

At this key decision, a preferred solution set is adopted for inclusion in the Corridor Plan.

COR-7 Adopt Preferred Solution Set
COR-8

At this key decision priorities for implementation of the individual solutions are established.

COR-8 Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures for Prioritization of Projects
COR-9

Individual projects within the adopted preferred solution set are ranked in order to identify the appropriate sequencing for implementation.

COR-9 Adopt Priorities for Implementation

Dg-darkgrey-titlebar-corner-left ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/NEPA MERGED WITH PERMITTING

ENV-1

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.

ENV-1 Reach Consensus on Scope of Environmental Review
ENV-2

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.

ENV-2 Approve Notice of Intent
ENV-3

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.

ENV-3 Approve Purpose and Need/Reach Consensus on Project Purpose
ENV-4

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.

ENV-4 Reach Consensus on Study Area
ENV-5

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.

ENV-5 Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures
ENV-6

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.

ENV-6 Approve Full Range of Alternatives
ENV-7

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.

ENV-7 Approve Alternatives to be Carried Forward
ENV-8

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.

ENV-8 Approve Draft EIS with Conceptual Mitigation
ENV-9

This key decision is required to satisfy the regulatory requirement for Section 404 permitting that the public receive notice of a permit application.

ENV-9 Approve Resource Agency Public Notice
ENV-10

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.

ENV-10 Approve Preferred Alternative/
LEDPA
ENV-11

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.

ENV-11 Approve Final Jurisdictional Determination
ENV-12

Following selection of the preferred alternative/LEDPA, partners reach consensus on additional avoidance and minimization measures not included in the preliminary design.

ENV-12 Reach Consensus on Avoidance and Minimization for the LEDPA
ENV-13

A final EIS is approved that meets all legal requirements and addresses comments received on the Draft EIS.

ENV-13 Approve Final EIS
ENV-14

At this step in the environmental review phase, the Record of Decision is issued.

ENV-14 Approve the Record of Decision
ENV-15

At this final step in the environmental review phase, the final permit decision is rendered.

ENV-15 Render Permit Decision and Approve Avoidance and Minimization

The Transportation for Communities Approach
The Transportation for Communities approach focuses on incorporating collaborative practices in the standard programming process driven by federal regulations. The Decision Guide serves as the foundation of the approach by providing information practitioners need to compare the current way of doing business to a highly collaborative one. Read more...

At each key decision in the Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint phase practitioners will find information concerning:

  • Links between programming and other phases of transportation decision-making;
  • Integration with non-transportation processes, such as land use planning and air quality analysis;
  • Roles of partner agencies;
  • Collaboration with community stakeholders; and
  • Case studies of successful practices.

For more about this approach, see Decision Guide Basics: The Decision Guide.

How can Transportation for Communities help me...

Consistency between Long-range Planning and Programming
Transportation for Communities establishes the full range of key decisions necessary for a successful collaborative process integrating programming and fiscal constraint. The first four key decisions in the Decision Guide-approve revenue sources, approve methodology for identifying project costs and criteria for allocating revenue, approve project list drawn from adopted plan scenario, and approve project prioritization-are specifically designed to tie these two processes together. The later key decisions draw project-level information from the adopted plan scenario to inform the prioritization and programming of individual projects.

Consistency between Programming and Other Planning Processes
Other planning processes are often considered in long-range and corridor planning, but are not often routinely considered in project programming. Through the Decision Guide, Transportation for Communities highlights ways that these outside processes can be integrated. For example:

  • Project prioritization and sequencing (PRO-4) allows the consideration of land use changes that support the preferred solution along with funding for implementation of a transportation improvement; and
  • Available revenue for capital improvements from non-traditional sources, including local governments and public-private partnerships, is supported at PRO-1.

We invite your comments/concerns about this website and its contents. Please send us an email at transportationforcommunities@gmail.com.