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 - Visioning and Transportation
Check out the Understanding the Decision Guide page
COR-7
Adopt Preferred Solution Set
Description: At this key decision, a preferred solution set is adopted for inclusion in the Corridor Plan. An evaluation of the preferred solution set using the approved evaluation criteria, methods and measures is the basis for selection. The preferred solution set is influenced by the preferred plan scenario adopted in the LRTP and informs the range of alternatives considered in environmental review. This key decision is a shared decision-point with the Eco-Logical process: Eco-Logical and corridor planning are done together.
There is information developed in prior key decisions that informs this step. In order to effectively execute this key decision there is essential information created at COR-5 related to evaluation criteria, methods, and measures and COR-6 providing the full range of solution sets for the corridor.
Purpose
To select a preferred solution set from the full range of solutions.
Outcome
Formal adoption of the preferred solution set and documentation of the reasons for eliminating the solutions that were not selected.
Partner Roles | ||
|---|---|---|
FHWA |
Advisor |
Ensures the adopted solution set is consistent with accepted plans |
MPO |
Decision Maker (urban), No Role (rural) |
Adopts a preferred solution set that addresses the identified problems and opportunities of the corridor and supports the LRTP |
Resource Agency |
Advisor |
Support the selection of a preferred solution set that is consistent with environmental priorities in the region. Inform transportation partners about potential mitigation options, cumulative effects and preferred solutions from an ecological perspective. Advise appropriate documentation of all decisions for transfer to the environmental review process. |
State DOT |
Advisor (urban), Decision Maker (rural) |
Ensures the adopted preferred solution set is compatible with state interests and the adopted LRTP |
Process |
Integration Type |
Integration Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land Use and Smart Growth | Decision | Commitments from the land use decision makers to make changes in support of the adopted solution set, if needed. | Analysis | To identify how smart growth principles impact transportation solution sets (and vice versa), if applicable. |
| Air Quality Conformity | Analysis | To validate that the air quality conformity for the LRTP has not been impacted. |
| Natural Environment and the IEF | Analysis Between IEF Step 4 - Assess Effects on Conservation Objectives and COR-7 | Analysis that takes place at IEF Sub-step 4c-4e require the input of the solution sets and inform the selection of a preferred solution set. The analysis that takes place is the determination of the amount and relative degree of potential impacts of solution sets in relation to resource conservation priorities and the identification of plan level ecological cumulative effects, based on conservation and transportation development scenarios. | Data From IEF Step 4 - Assess Effects on Conservation Objectives | IEF Sub-step 4e - A decision is made about the preferred solution set from an ecological perspective. IEF Sub-step 4f - Through the IEF process, preferences are identified regarding avoidance, minimization, potential conservation and restoration investments, as well as identification and quantification of mitigation needs. The preferred solution set from an ecological perspective and data around mitigation needs should be provided to transportation partners. | Data To IEF Step 5 - Establish & Prioritize Ecological Actions | The preferred transportation solution set from corridor planning informs ecological planning in order to inform the mitigation strategy selected by the resource agencies. | Analysis Between IEF Step 5 - Establish and Prioritize Ecological Actions and COR-7 | Mitigation options and priorities for the preferred transportation solution set. | Decision Between IEF Step 5 - Establish & Prioritize Ecological Actions and COR-7 | Conservation and mitigation strategy for preferred transportation solution set. |
| Capital Improvement | Decision | Decision to adjust capital improvement plans in support of the adopted solution set, as needed. |
| Safety and Security | None. | None. |
| Human Environment | None. | None. |
| Economic Development | Data | Information about the potential negative economic impacts on particular populations and businesses. | Analysis | Evaluate a range of mitigation strategies. |
| Greenhouse Gas | Data | Impact of various corridor solutions on GHG emissions. | Analysis | Evaluate a range of GHG reduction strategies by looking at GHG reduction levels, comparisons of potential reduction to baseline and targets, costs associated with solutions, and other actions necessary to mitigate potential negative impacts, as applicable. |
Linkages to other Phases of Transportation Decision Making | ||
|---|---|---|
Key Decision |
What is Linked? |
Purpose of Linkage |
From Long Range Transportation Planning |
||
LRP-10 - Adopt LRTP by MPO |
Corridor improvements included in the LRTP and air quality conformity analysis |
To evaluate the impact of the adopted preferred solution set on the LRTP including air quality conformity and fiscal constraint. |
To Integrated Programming and Fiscal Constraint |
||
PRO-3 - Approve Project List Drawn from Adopted Plan Scenario or Solution Set |
Improvement projects identified in the adopted solution set with their anticipated costs |
To inform the project list in the programming/fiscal constraint phase. |
To Environmental Review |
||
ENV-6 - Approve Full Range of Alternatives |
Information on the preferred solution set from the corridor planning process |
To inform the development of the full range of alternatives for environmental review/permitting |
ENV-7 - Approve Alternatives to be Carried Forward |
The preferred solution set from the corridor plan |
To ensure that the preferred solution set is included in range of alternatives carried forward |
Policy Questions |
|
|---|---|
Questions about purpose and roles |
For P3 projects, have public and private sector partners provided all data on project risks, costs, financing, revenue potential, and other pertinent information? |
Questions about stakeholders |
How did the public inform or influence this decision? How did we use the public information? |
Questions about the transportation process supporting the decision |
Are there hybrids among these solution sets that we want to evaluate? |
Has input from private sector partners been sought in determining priorities for implementation of P3 projects in the corridor? | |
How did the various solution sets compare rank across the evaluation criteria? | |
How does the solution address the problem statements and opportunities? | |
What are the primary differences between the solution sets? | |
What was the basis for eliminating solution sets? | |
Why is this solution set recommended? | |
Questions about other phases |
Is the documentation for eliminated scenarios and solution sets sufficient for NEPA? |
Questions about non-transportation sectors/processes |
Are direct or cumulative impacts to identified priority areas for conservation/restoration/mitigation anticipated? |
For solution sets involving P3 projects, have all potential adverse impacts been considered and a mitigation strategy identified for unavoidable impacts from the preferred solution set? | |
Have all potential adverse economic impacts been considered and a mitigation strategy adopted for unavoidable impacts from the preferred solution set? | |
How did GHG emissions impact the outcome of the corridor scenario/solution set analysis? | |
Is this the preferred solution set from an ecological perspective? | |
What are the anticipated direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on land use? | |
Will congestion be reduced? | |
Will smart growth goals be met? | |
Will smart growth patterns be encouraged? | |
Questions to Gather Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| Are any of the remaining solution sets fatally flawed and how? |
| Are there remaining unresolved issues associated with the preferred solution set? |
| Which of these solution sets do you prefer and why? |
Questions to Incorporate Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| What stakeholder issues remain to be addressed? |
Case Study Example(s): |
|---|
Supporting Data for the Key Decision |
|
|
|---|---|---|
From other phases of transportation decision making |
Long Range Planning |
Corridor improvements included in the LRTP and air quality conformity analysis | Programming |
P3 project costs, financing, and revenue potential |
Corridor Planning |
COR-5: Approved evaluation criteria, methods and measures |
COR-6: The full range of solution sets for the corridor |
Environmental Review |
No Specific Data |
From other sectors and processes |
Land Use and Smart Growth |
Data from any integrated land use and transportation modeling | Data from any sketch planning to account for smart growth |
Data capturing site specific evaluations, as applicable |
Air Quality Conformity |
No Specific Data |
Natural Environment and the IEF |
The preferred solution set from an ecological perspective |
Preferences regarding avoidance, minimization, potential conservation and restoration investments |
Capital Improvement |
No Specific Data |
Safety and Security |
No Specific Data |
Human Environment |
No Specific Data |
Economic Development |
Potential negative economic impacts on particular populations and businesses |
Greenhouse Gas |
Cost / benefit analysis for individual or groups of solutions |
From the transportation technical process supporting this key decision |
Analysis from individual solutions considered to address the approved problems and opportunities for the corridor | |
Documentation of all analysis | ||
Assessment of risks associated with each solution set particularly when P3 projects are included | ||
From stakeholder collaboration |
Stakeholder and public involvement data | |
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 |
Technical Analysis Tools: Used to model or simulate the impacts of proposed solution sets at the corridor level. |
Communication |
Visualization Tools: Used to create visual models of completed projects at the corridor level. Can be used by stakeholders to make aesthetic judgments about the appearance of different scenarios. |
Simulation Tools: To demonstrate traffic impacts. |
|
Gathering |
Database Tools: Used to search through databases for information on past plans and programs. |
Commenting Tools: To gather stakeholder information. Get more info. |
|
Technical Analysis Tools: Used to access and aggregate input data from a variety of sources to aid in analysis. |
|
Key Decision Relationship to Other Topics | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic | Description | ||
| Performance Measures |
|
||
| Visioning and Transportation |
|
||
| Public-Private Partnerships |
|
||