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
Decision Guide
Check out the Understanding the Decision Guide page
COR-2
Approve Problem Statements and Opportunities
Description: The full range of deficiencies and opportunities within a corridor are defined at this key decision. Deficiencies and opportunities extend beyond transportation, for this reason, the key decision is integrated with other planning processes such as land use planning and natural environment planning. Input from stakeholders also informs the key decision. The problem statements and opportunities resulting from this key decision are informed by the transportation deficiencies identified in long range planning and inform the purpose and need during environmental review.
There is information developed in prior key decisions that informs this step.
Purpose
To develop a common understanding of deficiencies as well as opportunities that exist within the corridor, including transportation, community, and environment.
Outcome
Agreement on the deficiencies and potential opportunities that will be considered during the corridor planning process.
Partner Roles | ||
|---|---|---|
FHWA |
Observer |
Observes the development of problem statements and opportunities based on sound principles and process |
MPO |
Decision Maker (urban), No Role (rural) |
Ensures problem statements and opportunities consider the full range of corridor needs/goals and the adopted LRTP |
Resource Agency |
Advisor |
Advise that problem statements and opportunities are sufficiently broad to incorporate environmental considerations, opportunities and priorities. |
State DOT |
Advisor (urban), Decision Maker (rural) |
Ensures problems and opportunities are comprehensive and documented |
Process |
Integration Type |
Integration Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land Use and Smart Growth | Data | • Land use context to be included in the corridor planning process. • Validation of the consistency between the LRTP and adopted land use plan in the MPO area. | Analysis | Assessment of corridor opportunities in the land use plan that are dependent on a transportation decision If smart growth principles will be integrated, analysis demonstrating that problems and opportunities have considered: • land use patterns and growth forecasts • the performance and safety of the whole system • the need to balance mode choices • the need for greater mobility • the need for greater accessibility • the impacts of smart growth on travel demand and congestion |
| Air Quality Conformity | None. | None. |
| Natural Environment and the IEF | Analysis From IEF Step 2 - Characterize Resource Status & Integrate Natural Environment Plans or IEF Step 3 - Create Regional Ecosystem Framework or IEF Step 8 - Implement Agreements, A | The inputs from the IEF to this key decision are the identified priority opportunities to enhance the natural environment. Depending on the status of ecological planning, this data and analysis could be coming from the combined map of natural environment plans (Step 2), combined map of natural environment plans and transportation plans (Step 3), or the completed ecological plan (Step 8). The purpose is to determine what priority opportunities to enhance the natural environment could be relevant in the corridor. |
| Capital Improvement | Data | • Capital improvement context to be included in the corridor planning process. • Agreement between the LRTP and adopted capital improvement plan in the MPO area. |
| Safety and Security | Data | Safety and security context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
| Human Environment | Data | Human environment context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
| Economic Development | Data | Economic development context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
| Greenhouse Gas | Data | Corridor-specific GHG emissions data and the range of potential GHG emissions reduction solutions. |
Linkages to other Phases of Transportation Decision Making | ||
|---|---|---|
Key Decision |
What is Linked? |
Purpose of Linkage |
From Long Range Transportation Planning |
||
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. |
To Environmental Review |
||
ENV-3 - Approve Purpose and Need/Reach Consensus on Project Purpose |
Corridor deficiencies and opportunities |
To provide the foundation and understanding of transportation problems identified in corridor planning. This provides the corridor context for the development of project level deficiencies. |
Policy Questions |
|
|---|---|
Questions about purpose and roles |
No specific questions. |
Questions about stakeholders |
No specific questions. |
Questions about the transportation process supporting the decision |
Does the problem and opportunities statement reflect the full range of deficiencies/problems/issues/opportunities in the corridor? |
Have analyses been completed by the private sector participant? If so, is this consistent with the latest public sector baseline and future assumptions and estimates? | |
If there is interest in a P3, has the private developer provided any information on deficiencies and opportunities? | |
Questions about other phases |
Does the documentation incorporate, to the extent possible, the information needed to bring into NEPA? |
Have the problems and opportunities been documented sufficiently to inform the NEPA process? | |
Have the procedural requirements of NEPA for the purpose and need been followed in the development of the problems and opportunities for the corridor? | |
In MPO areas, are these problems and opportunities consistent with what has been identified in the LRTP? | |
Questions about non-transportation sectors/processes |
Are other amenities included as part of the project that could have a local economic or land use impact? |
Are the problems and opportunities consistent with what has been identified in a regional ecosystem framework? | |
Are there potential opportunities or challenges with respect to current activities in the corridor? | |
Are there potential solutions beyond traditional transportation investment and policies, such as land use or demand management? | |
Do the problems and opportunities account for land use forecasts and growth patterns? | |
Do the problems and opportunities account for the impacts of smart growth on travel demand and congestion? | |
How can solutions be combined to achieve the greatest reduction in GHG emissions while meeting other goals for the corridor? | |
How can this effect be mitigated or enhanced? | |
How is transportation performance in the corridor currently impacting GHG emission levels? | |
If a P3 project is considered in the corridor, what are the potential opportunities or challenges respect to other plans/programs in progress? | |
If developed through a P3, Has the private sector stakeholder identified the finance and revenue potential of the corridor? Has this been considered in the community's plans for development and economic investment? | |
In MPO and rural areas, are these problems and opportunities consistent with what has been identified in other local adopted plans? | |
Is the long-term vision for the corridor included in the long range transportation plan, multimodal transportation, land use or infrastructure plans, and other community and economic development policies? | |
What equity and accessibility issues might arise if a corridor project is developed through a P3 (particularly in case of toll roads). Have these been considered in determining the scope of impacts of the corridor plan? | |
Questions to Gather Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| Do you have any comment on the problems and opportunities that we have identified for the corridor? |
| Do you see a potential impact of private development options on your travel choices or costs? |
| How do you travel in the corridor? Where do you go? What problems do you encounter? |
| How would improving the corridor through working with a private developer and considering options such as tolling impact your support of the solutions? |
| What is important to you, to your neighborhood, to the local area, to the region (transportation, community, environment) in the corridor? |
Questions to Incorporate Stakeholder Interests |
|---|
| Are the stakeholders' perceptions of the problems and opportunities consistent with our technical data? If there are differences, how are we addressing or handling the differences? |
| If P3 is being considered, do stakeholders understand why this may be desirable? |
| Is there any opposition from stakeholders to P3 projects in the corridor? |
| What is the justification for each of the stakeholder identified problems and/or opportunities that were not acknowledged or included in the final statement? |
Case Study Example(s): |
|---|
None. |
Supporting Data for the Key Decision |
|
|
|---|---|---|
From other phases of transportation decision making |
Long Range Planning |
Transportation deficiencies | Related public input for the corridor from long range plan public involvement. |
Programming |
No Specific Data |
Corridor Planning |
Data gathered at scoping should be re-considered at this key decision |
Environmental Review |
No Specific Data |
From other sectors and processes |
Land Use and Smart Growth |
Zoning data | Special covenants, easements or restrictions along the corridor |
Land use context to be included in the corridor planning process |
Validation of the consistency between the LRTP and adopted land use plan in the MPO area |
Development trends and growth patterns |
Air Quality Conformity |
No Specific Data |
Natural Environment and the IEF |
Natural environment context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
Identified priority opportunities to advance the natural environment. |
Capital Improvement |
Capital improvement context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
Agreement between the LRTP and adopted capital improvement plan in the MPO area |
Safety and Security |
Safety and security context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
Human Environment |
Human environment data, community characteristics inventory. |
Human environment context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
Economic Development |
Economic development context to be included in the corridor planning process. |
Greenhouse Gas |
Applicable results from previous corridor analysis, including: corridor travel data, corridor land use data, socioeconomic and demographic data for the corridor, and/or corridor-specific GHG emissions data |
Potential GHG emissions reduction solutions identified in corridor planning process |
Method for allocating GHG emissions and attributing reductions to the corridor |
From the transportation technical process supporting this key decision |
Traffic data including traffic counts, turning movements, signal timing, travel speeds, congestion, other | |
Corridor capacity, speed limits, signal locations, intersections | ||
Base and future year traffic volumes from the travel demand model or other sub-area model, as available. Sketch planning traffic volumes where model data is not available | ||
Access points along the corridor | ||
Bridge and culvert data (weight limits, rating, geometry) | ||
Crash history for the corridor | ||
Data inputs from the private sector to inform opportunities and problems in the corridor. | ||
From stakeholder collaboration |
Related public input for the corridor from specific public involvement | |
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 graphically view spatial data such as accidents and safety issues. Can be used to identify corridor problems or trouble-spots. Tools may include software packages specifically designed to analyze car crash locations. |
Technical Analysis Tools: Used to measure the operational performance of a corridor, including capacity, delay, level of service (LOS). Several ITS tools collect facility performance data. Can be used to identify corridor deficiencies. |
|
Sketch Planning Tools: Used to quickly develop an analysis of problems and opportunities within a corridor; for example, can be used to determine which zones would be most beneficial to develop |
|
Communication |
None. |
Gathering |
Infrastructure Management Tools: Used to track the condition of infrastructure assets, and analyze the current state and future needs of these assets. Can be used to identify problem areas within the corridor and produce problem statements. |
Key Decision Relationship to Other Topics | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic | Description | ||
| Performance Measures |
|
||
| Visioning and Transportation |
|
||
| Public-Private Partnerships |
|
||