Archives for January 2021

Transportation Planning Process

Kristen Z, Transportation Planner

[<2 Minute Read]

At its core, the transportation planning process is a PROCESS. It is a process that strives to delicately and appropriately combine three inputs:

  1. Data
  2. Public and Stakeholder Will
  3. Political Forces

State Departments of Transportation (DOT), Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), Councils of Governments (COGs), and Regional Council (RC) planners and administrators are charged with combining these three inputs into a transportation improvement program that must be carried out. The outcomes are then presented to the decision-makers – usually their own Board of Directors.

The decision-makers care about the outcomes and need to be assured that a process is in place. Meanwhile, transportation planners must focus on the nuances and mechanics of the process. (Politically savvy planners often have the known political factions in mind when developing and executing the process). Some folks call it, “making sausage”.

While the three components are necessary for all transportation improvement programs (data, public + stakeholder will, and political forces) – finding the “right” proportions is the trick, and often varies. Some organizations manage to balance all three while some emphasize one or two components over the others. The following are questions that agencies should consider when analyzing the three components in their transportation planning process:

1. Data

  • Is summary data available about existing infrastructure, travel patterns / preferences, costs, and trade-offs?
  • Are the costs and benefits of the projects in the current transportation plan or (state) transportation improvement program (TIP) well understood?
  • Are performance measures in place and linked to the likely outcomes of potential transportation infrastructure projects, programs, and strategies?

2. Public + Stakeholder Will

  • Has there been a large show of support (or opposition) from the public over the proposed projects?
  • What mix and relative proportion of modes are valued among highways, arterials, transit, bike / ped, planning studies, and data or outreach activities?
  • What means are used to obtain regionally representative inputs?

3. Political Forces

  • How are engrained values incorporated into the process?
  • What types of projects or benefits are popular among the decision-makers?
  • Has geographic equity been incorporated into the process?
  • Have decision-makers had a chance to guide the process development and vote on key milestones along the way?

After all is said and done, what are some tangible things we can point to as evidence that we carried out a “good” transportation planning process? We asked a professional planner for her take!

Q: What do you consider evidence of a good transportation planning process?

Shelby Powell, Deputy Director – North Carolina Capital Area MPO (CAMPO)

A planning process has been successful if the result is a plan that is implementable. In order to be considered implementable, a plan must have:

  1. Broad community support (evidence of a meaningful public engagement process)
  2. Financial feasibility (the outcome is a recommendation for a specific project or a set of projects that have applicability to specific funding sources)
  3. Technical merit (recommendations are grounded in proper analysis that shows feasibility for putting the recommendations in place on the ground)

A prior supervisor once told me: ‘if you don’t have a plan to pay for it, then you don’t have a plan!’. While knowing how you will pay for implementation is important, I think the other two elements I mentioned are equally important – why would you pay to implement something that the community does not support or is not well-thought-out enough to be able to build? A planning process must consider all of these in order to be truly successful.

What do you consider evidence of a good transportation planning process? As we ring in the new year, we challenge you to consider how your organization can make its transportation improvement program even better!

Loved this post and want to learn more? Check out our cloud-based transportation planning SaaS solution here!

How Will Buttigieg Impact Transportation Policy?

[10 minute read]

Former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg was nominated to be Secretary of Transportation on December 15, 2020. From recent public statements and prior policy vision expressed during his presidential campaign – there is much we can learn about Buttigieg’s expected policy directions should his confirmation be successful. 

As head of the USDOT, and Biden’s leading advocate for infrastructure spending bills on Capitol Hill – Buttigieg’s policy agenda can have a significant impact on future investment priorities for transportation improvement programs (TIP).

We conclude key takeaways for transportation planners at DOTs, MPOs and other transportation agencies on what policy changes may come under Buttigieg. 

Four Pillars of Transportation Infrastructure Policy

Since his nomination on December 15, Buttigieg has repeatedly stated four key pillars of transportation policy: jobs, climate change, equity and safety: 

  • Expand Transportation Infrastructure Spending to Support Job Creation

Buttigieg sees infrastructure spending as an economic enabler for immediate employment relief to millions of people facing distress from the pandemic. 

He has recently discussed with Senator Schumer an extensive $1 trillion transportation infrastructure proposal that includes aid for state and local governments, and federal relief to hard-hit aviation and public transit agencies. Just last year, he called for fortification of the underfunded Highway Trust Fund, which provides significant federal funding to transportation improvement programs across every state in the country. 

We expect the transportation secretary nominee to be a strong proponent of expanding federal infrastructure spending as an investment in job growth. 

  • Demonstrate Projects’ Role in Expanding Access to Jobs 

In his presidential campaign, Buttigieg advocated for requiring states, MPOs and other federal grant recipients to demonstrate how their transportation projects improve access to jobs and services. The former South Bend mayor previously led a Complete Streets project in downtown South Bend that combined infrastructure changes with economic development by introducing new anchor office tenants who’d bring new jobs to downtown South Bend. 

Public transportation improvement projects that can connect communities to new/existing centers of employment clusters may find greater priority or opportunities for federal funding. 

Planners may see an additional category of Performance Measures on promoting job access through infrastructure improvement projects if they seek federal funding. 

  • Green Infrastructure and Social Justice

If Buttigieg’s past comments are indications of what’s to come, social and environmental justice will feature highly as priorities of federally-sponsored projects under his leadership:

Buttigieg has been critical of transportation infrastructure examples that disproportionately disempowered minority communities. He championed greater investments in alternative transportation modal options such as public transit, bike and pedestrian paths to promote more equitable access to transportation and job opportunities, as well as tools for reducing carbon emissions. During his presidential campaign, Buttigieg proposed significantly increasing funding for the Federal Transit Administration to fund public transit projects. 

He also proposed switching to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax vs. the current gas use tax as a means to fund the perennially troubled Highway Trust Fund account. Experts believe a VMT tax would be successful in disincentivizing driving if properly priced, and steer transportation choices towards greener options such as public transit vs. driving. 

In addition to the greater importance of meeting Title VI requirements, transportation improvement plans with projects seeking federal funding may be expected to demonstrate greater social justice commitments, greater public engagement with potentially impacted communities, and greater reductions in carbon emissions. 

  • Prioritize Maintenance Over New Roads

The former South Bend mayor publicly endorsed prioritizing infrastructure maintenance in transportation improvement program funding. In his presidential campaign, Buttigieg outlined a proposed requirement for states to demonstrate planning on preventative maintenance projects – before they’re allowed to build new or wider highways with federal funding. 

Expect greater federal emphasis and scrutiny on adequate planning for preventative maintenance projects in transportation improvement plans seeking federal funding.

  • Safety and Vision Zero 

Buttigieg has repeatedly stated a need to eliminate traffic deaths and pedestrian fatalities in the country. During the pandemic, rates of car crashes have unfortunately increased due to higher driving speeds on emptier roads. 

Buttigieg proposed a policy goal of Vision Zero during his presidential campaign – setting a goal of zero traffic fatalities. Currently, states are able to set fatality goals at a target that demonstrates progress – but not necessarily at zero. 

Through his ability to control allocations of discretionary grant funding as head of USDOT – Buttigieg may seek to implement more strict requirements on demonstrating progress on safety records or safer project designs in order to receive federal funding for certain federal programs. 

Safety is one of the federal Performance Measures that transportation planners are required to incorporate in transportation improvement plans. It is possible for FHWA to accelerate the timeline states have to achieve zero traffic deaths under Buttigieg. It is also possible that additional discretionary federal funding will be made available to specifically support projects prioritizing aggressive safety targets. 

Looking Ahead

While Buttigieg’s policy agenda will be shaped by viewpoints from the Biden-Harris administration – it is clear from his nomination illustrates that he shares similar beliefs with Biden in the role and direction of federal policy in advancing our critical infrastructure. 

Transportation planners would benefit from taking early notes on potential changes to future federal policies when evaluating how best to maximize federal funding for transportation improvement programs.

How can we
HELP?