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
LRP-1
Approve Scope of LRTP Process
Description: 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. Decisions made at the scoping key decision in long range planning inform both corridor planning and environmental review by establishing the baseline information that will dictate those subsequent processes. This is a key point to form new or acknowledge existing relationships with partners in transportation decision-making and other decision-making processes such as land use, natural environment, human environment, capital improvement and safety and security.
Purpose
To develop a common understanding and reach agreement on the LRTP process, including all information relevant to transportation, community, and the environment. This includes stakeholders to engage; roles and responsibilities; tools and data sources to be used; timeframes; and public involvement plan.
Outcome
• Documented agreement on the LRTP process and its elements. This agreement can be used as a foundation when starting the corridor planning and environmental review processes.
• Confirmation that the transportation process is in agreement with the larger community plans and programs.
Partner Roles | ||
|---|---|---|
FHWA |
Advisor |
Ensures the process is inclusive and meets federal requirements |
MPO |
Decision Maker |
Ensures LRTP development that is broadly inclusive and considers both the human and natural environment of the region |
Resource Agency |
Advisor |
Agree to collaborate in long range planning and ensure appropriate information is brought forward and used, including the ecological planning region, ecological goals and priorities. |
State DOT |
Advisor |
Ensures that LRTP development meets federal requirements and incorporates the state's interests as appropriate |
Process |
Integration Type |
Integration Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land Use and Smart Growth | Process | Adoption of a land use plan that captures the underlying land planning and development philosophy. • Purpose - Identify priority land use philosophies to move forward. • Outcome - Land use context to be included in the long range plan. |
| Data | Information about land use relevant to scoping: partners that should be included, politics/organizational will to implement the land use plan, enablers and constraints to implementation of the land use plan, reconfirmation of the roles of partners from the land planning process. | |
| Decision | • By transportation decision-makers to invite land use partners to the long range transportation planning process. • By land use partners to participate in the long range transportation planning process. | |
| Air Quality Conformity | Data | Information about conformity deadline and emissions budget. Technical inputs related to conformity |
| Natural Environment and the IEF | Data Between IEF Step 1 - Build & Strengthen Collaborative Partnerships and Vision | Any relationships formed between resource agencies, conservation NGOs and transportation agencies as part of either LRP-1 or IEF Step 1 are recognized, reinforced and strengthened. At IEF Sub-step 1a a preliminary ecological planning region is developed. This region may take into consideration the transportation planning region and informs transportation decision making. Information from IEF Sub-step 1c around high-level, broad ecological goals is gathered here, for consideration at LRP-2. 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 long range planning process and should be identified and considered at LRP-1. IEF Sub-step 1e is to "Initially explore funding and long-term management options to support conservation and restoration actions and long-term management." The data collected here can inform the decision making question at LRP-1, "Have potential funding partners been identified?" Data is identified & shared here. It will inform LRP-5 and PRO-1. |
| Decision Between IEF Step 1 - Build & Strengthen Collaborative Partnerships and Vision | A joint decision is made between the decision makers in long range planning and the partners from the ecological planning process to work together to maximize the ecological benefit and regulatory process efficiencies that can be achieved. Using the IEF approach, this would include identifying where DOT conservation or restoration investments could make the greatest difference for watershed, species or ecoregional health and sustainability. | |
| 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 are gathered here and become an important part of the vision and goals in LRP-2. | |
| 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 long range planning process. | |
| Capital Improvement | Data | Information about what capital improvement projects have been planned. |
| Decision | • By transportation decision-makers to invite capital improvement partners to participate in long range transportation planning. • By capital improvement partners to participate in long range transportation planning. | |
| Safety and Security | Decision | • By transportation decision-makers to invite safety and security partners to participate in long range transportation planning. • By safety and security partners (e.g., freight shippers, transit, homeland security, FEMA, emergency evacuation, and others) to participate in long range transportation planning. |
| Data | Any Safety and Security plans partners have to contribute. | |
| Human Environment | Decision | • By transportation decision-makers to invite human environment partners to participate in long range transportation planning. • By human environment partners to participate in long range transportation planning. |
| Data | Information that partners can provide about the human environment. | |
| Economic Development | Data | Information about: • Existing economic development data and performance indicators. • Economic data needs. • Area's economic development philosophy. • Potential economic development challenges and opportunities. |
| Analysis | High level economic inventory, assessment or analysis conducted as part of an adopted land use or economic development plan. | |
| Greenhouse Gas | Data | Information about regional support for GHG through plans, policies, relevant rules and regulations. The availability of data and tools to support analysis. |
Linkages to other Phases of Transportation Decision Making | ||
|---|---|---|
Key Decision |
What is Linked? |
Purpose of Linkage |
To Corridor Planning Studies |
||
COR-1 - Approve Scope of Corridor Planning Process |
The background information on initial identification of partners and data |
To inform the scope of the corridor planning process |
To Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint |
||
PRO-1 - Approve Revenue Sources |
The identification of potential partnerships |
To provide information about revenue sources. |
To Environmental Review |
||
ENV-1 - Reach Consensus on Scope of Environmental Review |
Information about the scope of the LRTP |
To inform the scope of the environmental review process |
Policy Questions |
|
|---|---|
Questions about purpose and roles |
Is a P3 being considered to fund one or more LRP projects? |
Is there a formal interagency conservation and transportation partnership agreement? | |
Is there a state or regional agency/department that assists with P3 projects? | |
Who ought to be at the table? What do they bring to the table? | |
Questions about stakeholders |
What is the public involvement plan? Does it meet legal requirements? |
What stakeholders should be included? Have individual contacts been identified? | |
Who are our proponents and opponents? | |
Questions about the transportation process supporting the decision |
Are our tools up to date and sufficient for this process? |
Are there emerging issues? | |
Do we have any visions or goals to consider? What is the preferred vision? | |
For P3 projects or those involving innovative financing and revenue sources, should a P3 expert be engaged? | |
Have potential funding partners been identified? | |
Is supporting information from the last LRTP update available? | |
Is the scope of the planning process sufficient to meet legal requirements? | |
Is the scope set up to consider both people and freight movement? | |
Is there existing legislation that supports the use of P3? If not, are decision makers considering such legislation? | |
Is there public and political support for P3 in the region? | |
What is our planning horizon? | |
What is the experience with P3 projects in this and other regions that can be considered? | |
What is the schedule for long range transportation planning? | |
What major changes have occurred since the last plan? | |
Questions about other phases |
Are there active projects to provide information to or receive information from? |
Questions about non-transportation sectors/processes |
Are existing tools and data resources sufficient to support the proposed method of GHG analysis? If not, what additional data/resources will be needed to support the desired method of GHG analysis? |
Are there requirements that will influence how GHG emissions will be considered, (for example, state climate action plan and/or Federal GHG inventory or reduction requirements)? | |
Do we have any visions or goals to consider? | |
Does the consideration of GHG emissions have bearing on other objectives - (energy, congestion, smart growth, others)? | |
Has a need for additional funding and revenue sources been identified in economic plans/policies? | |
Have all public/private sources of economic data and information on performance indicators been identified? | |
Have land use patterns and growth forecasts been considered in defining the planning region? | |
Is there agreement on the planning region with respect to assessing economic impacts? | |
Is there agreement on the planning region with respect to ecological assessment? | |
What are the potential opportunities or challenges that might come up with respect to other plans/programs in progress? | |
What is the scope of GHG emissions analysis as part of the long range planning process (emissions sources, boundaries, methods, data, feasible strategies, other)? | |
What plans and programs are available as resources? | |
Will GHG considerations be treated in a qualitative or quantitative manner? | |
Questions to Gather Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
None. |
Questions to Incorporate Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
None. |
Case Study Example(s): |
|---|
Supporting Data for the Key Decision |
|
|
|---|---|---|
From other phases of transportation decision making |
Long Range Planning |
Previous long range transportation plan | Innovative financing mechanisms to fund projects in the LRP |
Programming |
Current Transportation Improvement Program |
Corridor Planning |
Small area and corridor plans |
Transportation planning (MPO, city, county, corridor) boundaries |
Environmental Review |
No Specific Data |
From other sectors and processes |
Land Use and Smart Growth |
Land use plans and policies (both local area and from land management agencies) | Partners from land use planning |
Stakeholders from land use planning |
Information around the politics and organizational will to implement land use plans |
Enablers and constraints to implementation of land use plans |
Land planning and development philosophies |
Visions and goals |
Land use planning boundaries |
Air Quality Conformity |
Information about conformity deadline and emissions budget |
Technical inputs related to conformity |
Natural Environment and the IEF |
Ecological partnerships that exist or are willing to initiate partnership, relationships with resource agencies and conservation NGOs |
Information about how any memoranda of understanding with resource agency partners affects the long range planning process |
Ecological plans that exist or are in planning |
Ecological planning region/boundaries |
Combined map of conservation, restoration and enhancement priorities |
Ecological goals |
Any funding sources or partners identified through ecological planning |
Capital Improvement |
Capital improvement or development plans |
Memorandum of agreement for capital improvement decision makers to participate in LRTP development |
Information about what capital improvement projects have been planned |
Safety and Security |
Safety and security plans (i.e., freight, emergency management, State Homeland Security Program) |
Safety and security partners and stakeholders |
Human Environment |
Special populations to consider (environmental justice) |
Employment data |
Population data from census and projections available from other sources |
Understanding of the processes used in the human environment sector (e.g., processes used by the State Historic Preservation Office) |
Information that partners can provide about the human environment |
Economic Development |
Economic development visions or plans |
Greenhouse Gas |
Plans in the region that address GHG |
Public or political support for GHG reduction |
Relevant rules and regulations |
Availability of data and tools to support analysis |
From the transportation technical process supporting this key decision |
Multimodal data such as transit operating plans and schedules, bicycle and greenway plans | |
Freight data | ||
Traffic count data, crash data, bridge data, and other engineering support data | ||
Enablers and constraints on the planning process | ||
Risks and potential risk mitigation strategies | ||
Funding available for LRTP development | ||
Potential funding sources/partners | ||
Consultant support needed | ||
Public involvement plan or policy | ||
Federal requirements for LRTP update and schedule required to meet deadlines | ||
Project detail information from those projects currently in development or construction | ||
GHG emissions source data | ||
Analysis years of interest to GHG and other considerations | ||
Availability of tools and resources to support GHG analysis | ||
Plans in the region that address GHG | ||
Relevant rules and regulations that apply to GHG emissions | ||
Rules and regulations relevant to P3, including necessary authorization | ||
Expert perspectives on issues related to project development through P3 | ||
From stakeholder collaboration |
Identified stakeholders to include in the process (full range of transportation, land use, environmental, community, and advocacy stakeholders, special needs or special interests) | |
Stakeholder perspectives coming into the planning process | ||
From public private partnership |
No Specific Data | |
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 display and overlap demographic data on a map in order to compare and analyze spatial and geographic distributions. Can also be used to analyze the geographic extent and overlap of pas plans and programs (see Database Tools above). |
Synthesis Tools: Used to combine information from related plans and programs into one consolidated source, for comprehensive analysis. |
|
Communication |
Visualization Tools: Used to display results of GIS analysis in graphical form so the results can be better communicated to stakeholders. |
Communication Tools: Used to quickly share information among stakeholders and with the public. Examples include websites, email lists, blogs. |
|
Gathering |
Demographic Tools: Used to gather census data and other demographics in order to identify key stakeholders in the community. |
Survey Tools: Used to survey local residents to gather data on types of groups, resident preferences, and market segments. Also used to solicit inputs and comments on the approved scope. Tools are varied: telephone surveys, internet surveys, mail-in questionnaires, in-person feedback. |
|
Database Tools: Used to search through databases (on-line or local) for information on past plans and programs. |
|
Commenting Tools: Used to track and aggregate incoming public comments, to identify proponents and opponents. |
|
Census Tools: to identify data sources and provide a means of monitoring and tracking agreements over time |
|
Key Decision Relationship to Other Topics | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic | Description | ||
| Streamlining a Bottleneck Project |
|
||
| Visioning and Transportation |
|
||
| Public-Private Partnerships |
|
||