Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 73
73
A P P E N D I X A
Case Studies
Web Tool Case Studies were identified later. As specific projects are programmed, the
regional assessment can provide the overall context and impact
The supporting case studies included in the web tool are listed analysis. Finally, this RTP process was designed to increase the
in Table A.1, organized by agency. Additional descriptions and public participation significantly. The scenario planning and
links to the agencies will be available on the web tool when it visual representation provided an engaging tool for use in
is released. gathering public comment and ideas.
Using the PIP process, MCAG developed five development
Partnership for scenarios: Current Policy, Some Changes, More Changes, Alter-
Integrated Planning native Modes, and Alternative Modes and Roads (1).
Each scenario was evaluated using the measures in Table A.2.
The Partnership for Integrated Planning was a pilot program in Combined, the analysis of these measures helped MCAG
California launched in 2001 through collaboration between the select the preferred alternative for the RTP, which was unani-
Merced CountyAssociationofGovernments(MCAG), USEPA, mously adopted by the agency's governing board.
FHWA, and Caltrans. The partnership was formed to utilize
an alternative process in the development of MCAG's 2004
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update. The new process Cumulative Impacts
focused on environmental concerns and the inclusion of the As part of the PIP process, a Cumulative Impacts Panel was
public using a number of strategies, including: established. The panel's purpose was to develop guidelines
and a methodology for identifying mitigation responsibility
· Incorporating environmental concerns into the RTP update;
and strategies for the anticipated impacts at the scenario plan-
· Conducting an Environmental Impact Report for the RTP;
ning stages during the RTP development process. Since these
· Streamlining the project delivery process; and
activities have typically been conducted at the project level
· Using GIS tools to model land use with transportation
during the environmental review process, this differed signif-
projects and environmental data layers.
icantly from the standard approach. The cumulative impacts
This focus meant that the 2004 RTP update differed from of each scenario were compared to a no-plan alternative in
the traditional long-range planning process in a number of five areas: agriculture (acres), wetland (acres), potential habitat
ways. First, using GIS and modeling tools allowed MCAG to (acres), cultural (acres), historic sites (number of sites).
explore the cumulative impacts analysis of land use and trans-
portation decisions within the RTP's 26-year horizon, and on a Tools
regional scale. Bringing the land use, transportation, and envi-
ronmental data layers together required cooperation among MCAG utilized two tools to evaluate the effects of new facil-
agencies that had not collaborated previously. Second, the ities on land use, and the subsequent impact on habitats and
analysis tools provided a picture of how a selected group of proj- environmentally sensitive areas:
ects will collectively impact habitats, wetlands, and prime agri-
cultural land. Third, the final version of the RTP allowed · UPlan a scenario-based GIS modeling tool. This model
enough flexibility so that transportation projects could be can project land development patterns based on a set of
modified in the planning stage if significant cumulative impacts (text continues on page 79)
OCR for page 74
74
Ecosystem, biodiversity, habitat
Historic, cultural, archeological
Economic Development
Environmental Justice
Environmental Health
Economic Impact
Climate Change
Cost Effective
Water Quality
Accessibility
Air Quality
Reliability
Land Use
Wetlands
Mobility
Safety
Social
Cost
Agency Name Case Study Name
American Lung Association Sacramento/?Interstate-5
of Sacramento-Emigrant Aerosol Transect Study X X X
Trails Health Effects Winter Months
Task Force 2003-2005
Arizona DOT Comprehensive Approach
to Wildlife Protection X X
on State Route 260
Arizona DOT Arizona's Wildlife Linkages
X X
Assessment
Arizona DOT ADOT MoveAZ
X X X
Transportation Plan
Atlanta Regional Commission Atlanta Regional
Commission Envision6 X X X X X X X
RTP, FY 08-13 TIP
Breathe California of Vehicular Exposures and
Sacramento-Emigrant Potential Mitigations
Trails Downwind of Watt X X
Avenue, Sacramento,
CA
California Department of Transportation Project-
Transportation Level Carbon Monoxide X
Protocol (CO Protocol)
California Department of Estimating Mobile Source
Transportation (Caltrans) Air Toxics Emissions:
and UC Davis Institute of A Step-By-Step X
Transportation Studies Project Analysis
Methodology
California Department of EMFAC Model for Air Toxics
Transportation (Caltrans)
X
and UC Davis Institute of
Transportation Studies
OCR for page 75
California Department of Proposed State Route
Transportation (Caltrans) 125 South Air Emissions
and UC Davis Institute of and the Sweetwater
Transportation Studies Reservoir: A Review X X
of Recent Reports
Sponsored by the
Sweetwater Authority
Capital District Albany, NY New Visions
Transportation 2030 (Regional X
Committee Transportation Plan)
Capital District Albany, NY Congestion
Transportation Management Process X X X X X X
Committee
Colorado DOT Colorado I-70 Mountain
X X X X X X X X X
Corridor Tier 1 EIS
Colorado DOT, FHWA, The Linking Colorado's Land-
Nature Conservancy, scapes and the Southern
Colorado State University Rockies Ecosystem
through the Southern Project X X
Rockies Ecosystem
Project
Denver Regional Council of DRCOG FY 08-13 TIP
X X X X X
Governments
EPA National Air Toxics
X
Assessment (NATA)
EPA EPA Storm Water
Management Model X X X
(SWMM)
EPA National Air Toxics Trends
X
Stations (NATTS)
EPA EPA EnviroMapper for Water X X X
EPA EPA MOBILE model and Motor
Vehicle Emissions X
Simulator (MOVES)
EPA EPA WATERS Expert Query
X
Tool
EPA; FHWA; Maryland State Green Highways Partnership
X X X
Highway Administration
Table A.1. SHRP 2 C02 Performance Measures Case Studies
(continued on next page)
75
OCR for page 76
76
Ecosystem, biodiversity, habitat
Historic, cultural, archeological
Economic Development
Environmental Justice
Environmental Health
Economic Impact
Climate Change
Cost Effective
Water Quality
Accessibility
Air Quality
Reliability
Land Use
Wetlands
Mobility
Safety
Social
Cost
Agency Name Case Study Name
FHWA, Nevada DOT U.S. 95 in Nevada:
Transportation-Related X
Air Toxics
Florida DOT Florida's Wildlife Species
X
Ranking Process
Florida DOT Environmental Screening Tool X X X X X X
Florida DOT Strategic Intermodal System
X X X X X X X X X X
Plan
Florida DOT Florida's Sociocultural Effects
X X X X X X X
Evaluation
Indiana DOT Indiana Planning Oversight
X
Committee
Low-Impact Development Low-Impact Development
X
Center Urban Design Tools
Maryland State Highway Green Highway U.S. X X X X X X
Association Route 301
Merced County Association Partnership for Integrated
X X X X
of Governments Planning
Metropolitan Transportation San Francisco Bay Area
Commission Regional Transportation X X X
Plan Equity Analysis
Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Columbus, Ohio Regional
Commission Transportation Plan EJ X X X
Analysis
Ministry of Transport, Public Citizens Value Assessment
Works, and Water X
Management
Minnesota DOT Mn/Model X
OCR for page 77
Minnesota DOT MnDOT 2003 Statewide
X X X X X X X X
Transportation Plan
Minnesota DOT MnDOT Metro Area Ramp
X X
Meter Study
Montana Department of Wildlife Vehicle Collision and
Transportation Crossing Mitigation
Measures: A Toolbox for X X
the Montana Department
of Transportation
National Oceanic and Nonpoint Source Pollution
Atmospheric and Erosion Comparison X X X X
Administration Tool (N-SPECT)
National Oceanic and Impervious Surface Analysis
Atmospheric Tool
X X X
Administration;
University of Connecticut
New Hampshire Fish and New Hampshire Wildlife
X
Game Department Action Plan
North Carolina DOT and North Carolina Ecosystem
North Carolina Department Enhancement Program
of Environment and X X X
Natural Resources
(NCDENR)
North Carolina DOT Highway 311 Corridor Study X
Oregon DOT Collaborative Environmental
and Transportation
Agreement on X X X
Streamlining (CETAS)
Pennsylvania DOT PennDOT Cultural
X
Resources GIS
Puget Sound Regional Seattle Destination 2030
X X X X X X X X X
Council and Vision 2040
South Coast Air Quality Multiple Air Toxics Exposure
X
Management District Study (MATES-II)
Southern California SCAG Long-Range
Association of Transportation Plan X
Governments
Tahoe Regional Planning TRPA Scenic Shoreline
Agency (TRPA) Assessment System X
(SSAS)
Table A.1. (Continued).
(continued on next page)
77
OCR for page 78
78
Ecosystem, biodiversity, habitat
Historic, cultural, archeological
Economic Development
Environmental Justice
Environmental Health
Economic Impact
Climate Change
Cost Effective
Water Quality
Accessibility
Air Quality
Reliability
Land Use
Wetlands
Mobility
Safety
Social
Cost
Agency Name Case Study Name
USGS USGS National Hydrography
X X X
Dataset
Washington State DOT Transportation Project
Mitigation Cost X X X X X X
Screening Matrix
Washington State DOT Interstate 405 Corridor
X X
Remote Sensing Study
Washington State DOT WSDOT Reliability Measures X X
World Resources Institute Climate Analysis Indicators X
Tool
Table A.1. (Continued).
OCR for page 79
79
Factor Area Measurement Unit High or Low?
Mobility Lane-miles of congestion in 2030 Lane-miles Lower is better
Accessibility Transit ridership in 2030 Millions riders/year Higher is better
Funding for bike paths and sidewalks Millions of dollars Higher is better
Safety Accidents reduced in the next 25 years Accidents Higher is better
Air Quality Emissions (pollution) in 2030 Tons per day Lower is better
Land Use Land Converted to urban uses Square miles Lower is better
Acres of farmlands directly impacted Acres Lower is better
Cost Environmental Mitigation Cost Millions of dollars Lower is better
Total regional cost per scenario Millions of dollars Lower is better
Source: http://www.mcagov.org/?PROJECTS/?TRANS/?1460.htm
Table A.2. MCAG Scenario Evaluation Measures
assumptions about densities, environmental constraints, expansion projects (Transit Capital, Roadway Capacity, and
and local land use plans. The program enabled PIP partic- HOV Lanes) that incorporated the Georgia Governor's Con-
ipants and stakeholders to understand the implications of gestion Mitigation Task Force and ARC Board recommenda-
different plans and evaluated scenarios. This tool can be tion to increase weighting of congestion reduction in project
used at the city, county, or watershed scale (2). selection to 70 percent. ARC staff prepared a technical frame-
· HePlan a habitat evaluation and planning model that pre- work to accommodate this recommendation, while also
dicts the occurrence of habitat areas based on environmen- respecting additional Board guidance to develop a project selec-
tal data layers. This tool allows users to scale conservation tion process that is consistent with Envision6 development and
preferences or goals based on potentially affected habitats. growth policies and the Regional Strategic Transportation Sys-
Like UPlan, it can be used at city, county, or watershed scale. tem (RSTS a roadway system of predefined facilities eligible to
receive federal transportation funding).
MCAG identified some significant accomplishments as a All system expansion projects were first screened against
result of the PIP process. From the partnership and collabo- the RSTS. Those capacity-adding projects that fell on the
ration perspective, they found that this process provided a RSTS were evaluated using a technical analysis to quantify
good platform for establishing a new level of mutual under- how well each project performs in relation to four evaluation
standing with the relevant resource agencies about regula- criteria defined below. The technical analysis was not used to
tions, policies, and cumulative impact analysis. This served to provide an assessment of the type of treatment needed for a
achieve a more thorough analysis of environmental impacts. facility. It was an evaluation used to compare existing project
The process also initiated the effort to begin compiling envi- proposals relative to one another to aid in project selection.
ronmental data layers into a format usable for all partners. Projects received up to 100 points based on an assessment of:
The process lent itself well to public participation, and MCAG
noted that it resulted in a 30 percent increase in the number of · Recurring delay, which occurs as routine traffic volume
county residents aware of the RTP process. Finally, the RTP exceeds available roadway capacity;
was unanimously approved by the MCAG governing board · Nonrecurring (incident) delay, which occurs as a result of
on the first round. traffic incidents;
· Environmental impact, which measures a project's prox-
imity to six environmentally sensitive areas; and
Atlanta Regional Commission Envision6/
· Regional Development Plan (RDP) policy support, which
FY 08-13 TIP Project Evaluation System
measures how well a project supports ARC's growth poli-
Expansion Projects
cies based on project location and scope.
For the latest update to the long-range transportation plan
(LRTP) and short-range transportation improvement pro- A benefit/cost calculation was used to determine the project's
gram (TIP), referred to as Envision6, the Atlanta Regional placement within different years of the TIP and LRTP. Project
Commission (ARC) staff developed and implemented a benefits reflect the dollar value of time-travel savings (delay
detailed project prioritization methodology to evaluate system reduction) for commercial vehicle and person time as well as
OCR for page 80
80
fuel-cost savings. Project costs reflect funding allocations for technology for a particular project, and then applying this dif-
preliminary engineering, R/W, and construction. ference to the passenger mileage for the project in question.
Transit crash rates by transit technology (e.g., BRT, heavy-rail,
light-rail) were acquired from national and local statistics. Pri-
Evaluation Process
vate vehicle crash rates were acquired from the Georgia CARE
Recurring Congestion (50 points). Points were awarded crash database.
based on the level of (recurring) delay reduction each project Environmental Impact (15 points). For both roadway capac-
provides. For roadway capacity-adding projects (to include ity and transit capacity projects, points were assigned based on
HOV lane projects), points were allocated based on how well each project's geographic proximity to six environmentally sen-
each project scored in relation to three congestion metrics sitive areas: Historic Resources, Wetlands, Floodplains, Parks,
intensity, duration, and extent. A travel demand model post- Water Bodies, and Small Area Supply Watersheds. This was
processor was used to compare network performance of the done using a raster-based (grid-based) GIS analysis that
2030 Build scenario to a 2030 No-Build scenario, in terms of applies more points with greater cumulative environmental
each project's impact on the intensity, duration, and extent of impact. Transportation capacity projects were mapped to the
congestion. environmental areas and the cumulative environmental
impact was calculated based on the number and type of sen-
· Congestion Intensity Total delay the project corridor sitive areas that the project impacts (i.e., touches). Points
experiences during the most congested period of the day. were assigned based on the aggregate environmental impact
· Congestion Duration Average total hours during the day and then inverted to avoid rewarding projects (i.e., higher
that a facility exhibits congested conditions. score) with greater environmental impact. This work was
· Congestion Extent Total daily delay experienced by all done in ESRI's ArcGIS desktop software with the Spatial Ana-
vehicles using the project corridor. lyst extension.
Growth Policy Support (15 points): For both roadway and
For transit capacity projects, recurring delay benefits were transit capacity projects, points were awarded based on
estimated using FTA's SUMMIT software. The SUMMIT each project's ability to support "place-based" transportation
software produces several outputs, including but not limited objectives, as defined by the appropriate land use place type
to: number of person and transit trips for a no-build scenario; (e.g., CBD, suburban neighborhood, rural area, etc.). Place-
change in person and transit trips resulting from the Build based transportation objectives were developed through ARC
scenario; and the transportation system User Benefit Hours staff and planning partner discussions on transportation ele-
that result from the Build scenario. The absolute value of each ments that should be included as part of a project's scope to
project's User Benefit Hours total was translated to a final support regional development growth policies. Examples of
score ranging from 0 to 50. these elements used for scoring included: transit amenities,
Nonrecurring Congestion (20 points). For roadway capac- bike/pedestrian amenities, ITS elements, demand manage-
ity projects, points were awarded based on a comparison of ment elements, and connectivity between centers, context-
the project crash rate at a particular road segment (the seg- sensitive elements, and local land use commitment. Points
ment within a project's limits) to a regionwide crash rate on were assigned based on the number and type of objectives that
roadways of similar functional classification. Projects that were met as part of the project proposal. A unique distribution
exceeded the regional crash rate average by the most were of points was determined for each of the eight land use place
awarded the most points, up to 20 points. Crash data used in types, with the various objectives weighted differently based
the analysis was extracted from the statewide Georgia CARE on their relative importance in the context of the specific place
crash database. Crash rates were calculated for a five-year type. All projects were first mapped to the ARC Unified
average, 2000-2004. Growth Policy Map to define the appropriate land use place
To determine the impact of transit projects on incident- type. Up to 15 points were then assigned based on the num-
based roadway congestion, an original formula was devised to ber and type of transportation objectives that each project
estimate the number of crashes prevented from occurring on supported.
the roadway system as the result of a specific transit investment. Total Project Scores (100 points): Total project scores were
This effective reduction in crashes, which in turn leads to a calculated by summing points over each of the four evaluation
commensurate reduction in incident-based congestion, was criteria. Total scores were used to place projects into one of
used as an indicator of how well the transit project mitigates three tiers with Tier 1 representing the top third (best perform-
nonrecurring roadway congestion resulting from crashes. ing projects), Tier 2 representing the middle third of projects
Points were awarded by calculating the difference between the (average overall score), and Tier 3 the bottom third (worst
respective crash rates for private vehicle travel and the transit performing projects). Tier rankings were used as the primary
OCR for page 81
81
criteria for determining which projects were ultimately selected The general methodology used for evaluating each of the
for funding. performance measures in Cal-B/C are described below. These
are obtained directly from the California Life-Cycle Benefit/
Cost Analysis Model (Cal-B/C) Technical Supplement to User's
California Benefit/Cost
Guide, September 1999.
for Project Evaluation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) cur- TRAVEL-TIME SAVINGS
rently uses economic analyses to evaluate and prioritize the The model follows these steps to calculate estimates of annual
state's investments to assess which provide the most benefits. and 20-year delay savings on highways:
One such tool is the California Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analy-
sis Model (Cal-B/C). Caltrans has been using Cal-B/C for more 1. Based on the base and future-year ADT projections, the
than 10 years for a variety of evaluation efforts, some ongoing, model estimates future annual ADTs, without and with
and some one-time activities. These include: the improvement project, assuming straight-line growth;
2. Annual ADTs are multiplied by the affected length and
· The conduct of investment analyses of improvement proj- then divided by the traffic speed to find the total travel
ects (highway and transit) proposed for the interregional time, without and with the improvement project;
portion of the State Transportation Improvement Pro- 3. Annual travel-time savings (the difference between total
gram (STIP); travel time without and with project) are multiplied by the
· Evaluation and programming for projects included in the value of time and average vehicle occupancy for each mode
State Highway Operation and Protection Program; and to convert travel-time savings into dollar values; and
· Evaluation of projects for a $4.5 billion bond measure, the 4. The dollar values of travel-time savings are discounted to
Corridor Mobility Improvement Account. estimate their present value.
Cal-B/C measures four primary categories of benefits: Cal-B/C also can accept analysis results from a travel
demand model or other traffic analysis models to use as inputs
·
if available.
Travel-time savings;
The process for transit travel-time savings is similar except
· Vehicle operating costs;
that annual person trips and total travel time are provided by
· Safety benefits (accident cost savings); and
the user.
· Emission reductions.
VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS (VOC)
Evaluation Process The change in highway vehicle operating costs (increased fuel
use, vehicle wear and tear, etc. due to improved speed) is esti-
Cal-B/C is a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet tool that provides mated as follows:
economic benefit and cost analyses for the evaluation of a
range of capacity-expansion transportation projects. It can be 1. Estimated future annual ADTs are multiplied by the affected
used to compare similar types of projects, prioritize or rank segment length to find annual VMT, with and without the
projects, allocate resources, and test project phasing. Cal-B/C project as well as the difference (VMT savings).
is capable of analyzing: 2. For each mode, annual VMT savings are multiplied by the
fuel consumption (from look-up table based on average
· Highway Capacity Expansion: speed) and the unit fuel cost to find the dollar value for
Lane additions, HOV lanes, passing/truck climbing lanes; fuel VOC savings. Annual VMT savings are multiplied by
and unit nonfuel VOC to find the dollar value of nonfuel VOC
Interchanges, bypasses. savings.
· Transit Capacity Expansion: 3. Future annual VOC savings are summed across modes
Passenger rail, light rail, bus projects. and discounted to obtain their present value.
· Operational Improvements:
Auxiliary lanes, freeway and HOV connectors; and SAFETY BENEFITS (ACCIDENT-COST SAVINGS)
Off- and on-ramp widening. Accident-cost savings on the highway are determined as
· Transportation Management Systems: follows:
Ramp metering, signal coordination, incident manage-
ment; and 1. The aggregated accident cost (per million miles) is calcu-
Traveler information, arterial signal management. lated by multiplying the accident rate by accident cost for
OCR for page 82
82
each type of accident and summing the result. Transit Ontario Ministry of Transportation
accident-cost savings are calculated similarly, except that the Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
aggregated accident cost is calculated by accident event (i.e.,
In order to support development of corridor investment
fatality, injury, property damage) rather than accident type.
plans, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation developed the
2. Annual VMT (in million miles) is multiplied by aggregate
Priority Economic Analysis Tool (PEAT) which is used to
accident cost (per mile). The result is the annual cost of
perform a life-cycle cost analysis of highway and bridge proj-
accidents, without and with the projects.
ects. It estimates initial agency costs, future agency costs, and
3. The difference (change in accident cost) is discounted to
road user costs, including vehicle operation costs, travel-time
find the present value of future safety benefits.
costs, accident costs, and the cost of delay due to work zones.
The tool is designed to help prioritize competing invest-
EMISSION REDUCTIONS
ment alternatives. PEAT enables agencies to analyze preser-
The values of highway emissions reductions are calculated as vation and improvement projects for highways, bridges, and
follows: intersections using an economic approach that considers
both agency and road user costs. PEAT helps answer two fun-
1. The aggregate emissions cost (per mile) is calculated by damental questions:
multiplying the emissions rate by the emissions cost for
each type of criteria pollutant and summing the results. 1. Is a project a good investment; and
2. Annual VMT (in miles) is multiplied by the aggregate 2. If so, when should it be implemented?
emissions cost. The result is the annual emissions cost,
with and without the project. The life-cycle cost analysis has been successfully adapted by
3. The difference (change in emissions cost) is discounted to the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario. It enables the
find the present value of future emissions benefits. agency to make effective investment decisions based on a full
life-cycle cost evaluation, helps agencies justify projects based
Value of transit emissions reductions are calculated sim- on objective measures of economic benefit net present value
ilarly, except that vehicle-miles (train-miles in the case of and benefit/cost ratio, enables the direct comparison of proj-
passenger trains) are used in place of VMT. Note that the ects involving different asset types (pavements, bridges, and
emission rates used in Cal-B/C are based on the California intersections) and different work types (preservation and
Air Resource Board's (CARB) Emission Factors (EMFAC) improvement), and promotes consistent project estimates
model. across an agency.
Cal-B/C requires relatively few inputs with volume (exist-
ing and future) being the main input. The model is set up MTC Change in Motion
such that required inputs are colored green (e.g., project type,
As part of its long-range transportation plan update, Trans-
length of construction period, number of lanes, free flow
portation Update 2035 Change in Motion, the Metropolitan
speed, length, current and forecast ADT volumes, and acci-
Transportation Commission (MTC) has included greenhouse
dent data), red cells represent default values that can be mod-
gas emission reduction as one of its key performance measures
ified by the user (e.g., percent trucks, length of peak-period),
for transportation scenario analysis. The MTC serves as the
and blue cells reflect data items calculated by the model but
MPO for the Bay Area in California. This area encompasses
that can be modified by the user (e.g., with improvement free nine counties with more than seven million people. To aid in
flow speed and ADT values). Separate sheets are used to enter the development the new 2035 RTP for the Bay Area, the MTC
project costs (project support, right-of-way, construction, staff was authorized to proceed with a performance-based
maintenance and operations, rehab, mitigation, and agency approach for assessing investment scenarios relative to specific
cost savings) or mode-specific speed and volume inputs from performance targets. The performance targets are used to help
a travel model or other analysis method. inform policy and investment strategies for the transportation
The Cal-B/C model has been made available for other vision. They focus on three principles: Economy, Environ-
agencies and staff to understand how funding decisions are ment, and Equity.
made and to consider the benefits of their proposed proj- The MTC scenario analysis was used to test how different
ects. Regional agencies within California have begun to assess system expansion strategies contribute to achieving perfor-
the use of Cal-B/C or methods or parameters from Cal-B/C mance targets. Environmental Performance Targets include
for their Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) project eval- the following:
uation and prioritization processes. Caltrans recognizes this
and has made the Cal-B/C model available for use on their · Carbon dioxide (CO2): 40 percent below 1990 levels.
web site (3). Source: Governor's Executive Order, S-3-05 (2005)
OCR for page 83
83
· Fine particulate matter (PM2.5): 10 percent below 2006 levels. To begin, SREP conducted a study to identify focal species,
Source: State air quality standards key habitat areas, and priority environmental connectors. The
· Coarse particulate matter (PM10): 45 percent below 2006 focus was on identifying large-scale landscape connections
levels. that facilitate movements to meet biological requirements for
Source: State air quality standards daily, seasonal, or natal dispersal movements for native wildlife
· VMT per capita: 10 percent below 2006 levels. across a variety of habitat types and spatial scales.
Source: State legislation under consideration in 2007 (SB 375) To achieve the goals of the project, SREP utilized a two-
track approach that involved local and regional expertise, as
Multiple combinations of a land use and pricing policy well as computer modeling. The first track engaged experts
approach were conducted against several investment scenar- through a series of interagency workshops held across the
ios, including: state to identify both functioning and degraded wildlife link-
ages vital to wildlife populations. The workshop participants
· Land Use Sensitivity Analysis considerable shifts in then evaluated the characteristics and existing condition of
regional growth to existing employment and housing cen- each identified linkage.
ters, areas projected to have either household or employ- The second track considered the same questions within the
ment growth, and areas with existing and/or planned transit. framework of a geographic information system (GIS). This
· Pricing Sensitivity Analysis user-based pricing strategies track combined layers of spatial data about landscape charac-
inducing changes in travel behavior by increasing the cost teristics (e.g., topography, rivers, and streams) with wildlife
of driving through a carbon tax or tax on vehicle miles habitat preferences and movement patterns to model areas of
driven, congestion fee for using congested freeways during the landscape that are important for wildlife movement. The
peak-periods, and increased parking charges for all trips. highest priority linkages identified by each of these tracks
were then combined with CDOT animal-vehicle collision
Performance measure results and conclusions of the sce- data and transportation planning data to select a subset of
nario analysis are available on-line. (4) The 2035 transporta- high-priority wildlife linkages for further assessment.
tion plan is still under development. Individual project Having identified important wildlife linkages, the next phase
analysis is one of the next steps to occur. of the project was to conduct in-depth analysis for each of
these linkages and develop preliminary recommendations for
improving highway permeability for wildlife. SREP visited and
Linking Colorado's Landscapes
inventoried each of these linkage areas where they are tran-
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the sected by highways, compiling information on existing struc-
Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project (SREP) is responsible tures, and determining how and where animals are traversing
for the Linking Colorado's Landscapes program. This pro- from one side of the roadway to the other. These inventory data
gram is designed to identify and prioritize wildlife linkages were combined with other layers of information, such as land
across the state of Colorado to promote safe passage for ownership and management adjacent to the highway, traffic
wildlife. Habitat fragmentation is one of the greatest threats densities, and zoning. To complete the linkage assessments,
to biodiversity and the decline of species. This program SREP partnered with transportation engineers to develop guide-
was initiated in 2003 out of increasing recognition of the lines and recommendations for improving safe passages for
impacts that transportation infrastructure has on wildlife wildlife across these critical stretches of highway. These recom-
movement and an interest in integrating wildlife and envi- mendations, combined with information on future highway
ronmental considerations into transportation planning and projects, helped to discern appropriate mitigation measures and
development. funding opportunities.
The program is a partnership between Colorado Depart-
ment of Transportation (CDOT) and the Southern Rockies
Measures
Ecosystem Project (SREP), and operates in close collaboration
with the Federal Highway Administration, The Nature Con- Habitat connectivity was the primary landscape attribute of
servancy, and Colorado State University. The goal of the pro- concern, and focal species were chosen to capture the full
gram is to provide transportation planners, state and federal spectrum of habitat requirements across spatial scales, taxo-
agencies, community leaders, engineers, and conservationists nomic groups, and compositional attributes of wide-ranging
with a statewide vision for reconnecting habitats that are vital species, area-sensitive species, species at-risk, and species reliant
for maintaining healthy populations of native species. In 2006 on critical resources. Barriers are perceived differently by dif-
the FHWA awarded Linking Colorado's Landscapes with their ferent species, so species with the most stringent requirements
Exemplary Ecosystem Award. were selected as focal species so that linkage designs would
OCR for page 85
85
Mitigation Measure Concern
Traditional yellow diamond-shaped wildlife crossing signs Ineffective
Other permanent static wildlife crossing signs Ineffective
Wildlife reflectors and mirrors Ineffective
Ultrasonic deer whistles Ineffective
Culverts and tunnels without associated guide fencing Ineffective
Warning systems triggered by radio-collared animals Requires extensive collaring
Animal decoys in ROW Safety concern
Animal carcasses left in ROW s Attract scavengers, causing additional AVC
Scent repellents along ROW May attract some animals
Artificial lighting of roadsides Some animals avoid lighted areas
Source: Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project, 2006, Linkage Assessment Methodology, Linking Colorado's Landscapes
Phase II Report, Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project, Denver, Colorado. http://www.restoretherockies.org/?pdfs/
?methodology.pdf
Table A.3. Colorado Evaluation of Mitigation Measures
The report also highlighted mitigation measures that could pitals, nursing homes, and housing units within 300 meters of
be more effective. These include: a major roadway.
To assess the ambient air concentrations of vehicle emissions,
· Variable message sign; the Breathe California Health Effects Task Force sponsored a
· Night time speed limit sign; three-phase study to evaluate vehicular exposures and potential
· Seasonal speed limit sign; mitigations for atmospheric particulate matter in Sacramento,
· Wildlife detection system; California. The studies were led by Professor Thomas A. Cahill
· Wildlife fencing; of the DELTA Group at University of California, Davis. This
· Cattle fence setbacks; case study provides an overview of the methodology and major
· Double cattle guard; findings, including an assessment of potential mitigation mea-
· Escape ramp; sures that may be relevant for consideration in conjunction with
· Ungulate crosswalk; capacity expansion projects in other areas.
· Cement box culvert; A significant finding from the study suggests that very fine
· Arch culvert; and ultrafine toxic particles from cars can be higher on sec-
· Vegetated overpass; ondary streets than downwind of heavily traveled freeways
· Bridge extension; and like I-5 in Sacramento. Also, burning oil in car exhaust may
· Retaining wall. be a more significant health threat than earlier believed.
The first phase of the study measured air pollution levels
every three hours at nine sites upwind and downwind of
Vehicular Exposures and Potential
Highway I-5 and east to the foothills. Highway I-5 carries
Mitigations Downwind of Watt Avenue,
approximately 170,000 vehicles per day, including 10 per-
Sacramento, California
cent trucks, and is in part a depressed freeway with sound
Breathe California of Sacramento-Emigrant Trails; The Health walls and mature large trees between the roadway and down-
Effects Task Force conducted the Watt Avenue case study. wind receptors. The study found that the level of diesel/
There is increasing scientific evidence suggesting that mobile smoking gasoline vehicle impacts was larger at a site located
source air toxics are harmful to human health. For more infor- downwind of Watt Avenue at the corner of Watt Avenue and
mation on the literature addressing exposure and health effects Arden way (Arden Middle School), than at a site directly
related to mobile source air toxics, see the Health Effects Insti- downwind of Highway I-5 (Crocker Art Museum), despite
tute's November 2007 report, Mobile-Source Air Toxics: A Crit- lower traffic flows on Watt Avenue. Very fine particulates
ical Review of the Literature on Exposure and Health Effects (6). traveled well away from freeways and filled large areas of
Those most at risk for exposure include people at schools, hos- downtown Sacramento.
OCR for page 86
86
The second phase examined the impacts from Watt Avenue, Adjust signal timing to reduce vehicle congestion and
a secondary roadway carrying predominantly car traffic with idling cars;
an average of 66,000 vehicles per day. Diesel trucks con- Encourage alternative transportation;
tributed about one-third of all the very fine and ultrafine par- Redesign the intersection so that there are no stop
ticulates, although they represented only about 1.5 percent lights, materially decreasing the pollution from the
of the vehicles. Cars contributed two-thirds of the very fine stopped and accelerating cars and trucks;
and ultrafine particulates. Particulates from Watt Avenue sub- Close the road to heavy trucks during school hours.
stantially impacted Arden Middle School. This would provide a modest improvement, as diesels
The third and final phase of the study confirmed the findings are an established source of toxic air contaminants; and
from the previous two phases and assessed mitigation options Build a parallel road of improved design that would
to reduce exposures. Two DELTA 8 DRUM samplers with reduce traffic on Watt Avenue without adding pollution
ultrafine after filters were placed at Arden Middle School. One to another site.
was placed indoors roughly 12 meters from the right-of-way 2. Roadway design improvements, including:
fence and 15 meters from the nearest road edge; the other was Vehicles on a highway create a mixed zone due to the
placed outdoors on a roof about 15 meters from the edge of the turbulence of the vehicles, which is roughly 1.5 times the
nearest traffic lane. In addition, the study evaluated two mod- height of the mean vehicle at freeway speeds, less at low
eling methods tracer and mass balance. Both the theoretically speeds. This mixed zone contains emissions from the
modeled results and the actual data showed that high levels of vehicles, including waste heat, which tends to make the
vehicular particulate pollution in very fine and ultrafine partic- road pollution slightly buoyant. This buoyant lift can be
ulate modes exist directly downwind (east) of Watt Avenue. enhanced by placing a barrier to direct lateral motion
According to the California Air Resources Board Almanac from the roadway, slowing the lateral velocity and allow-
(2006), these particles are responsible for (at least) 70 percent of
ing the lift to raise the pollution level and entraining
all the impact of toxic air contaminants in California, deposit
cleaner higher altitude air. Thus, roadways should be
deep into the lung, and possess significant risk to human health.
designed to hinder easy lateral transport of pollution and
The data establish that vehicular particulate matter directly
to enhance the upward motion the excess heat delivers.
downwind of Watt Avenue is at unhealthy levels for subjects
Planting vegetation in the median strip will slow transport
that have to bear long-term exposure, even though aerosol
of pollution from the upwind lane into the downwind
mass does not violate any state or federal particulate matter
lane, further encouraging vertical motion. The additional
standards. The study identified several factors that exacerbated
advantage of vegetation is that it acts as a deposition sur-
high exposure levels:
face for the very fine and especially ultrafine particles.
· The expansion of Watt Avenue into a major north-south
Design or redesign the roadway or intersection by plac-
ing the entire roadway in a cut section as part of an elim-
connector, with an average of 66,000 vehicles per day, typ-
ically 1.5 percent trucks; ination of the intersections.
· The relatively narrow right-of-way; Barriers between the right-of-way and the receptor can
· The stoplights, including that at Watt Avenue and Arden force air up and generate mixing, lowering concentrations
Way; by dilution, or removing the particles from the air by pro-
· The flat at-grade roadway, without sound walls or major viding surfaces for deposition, impaction, and settling. The
vegetation; literature is weak in this area, but one article (Kim et al,
· The lack of barriers between the roadway and downwind 2005) found that sound walls were not very effective bar-
areas; and riers to pollution. Urban street canyons and the effect of
· The proximity of receptor sites (schools, houses) to the tall buildings seem to encourage a mixing of the polluted
edge of the right-of-way. ground level air with (presumably) cleaner elevated levels,
reducing concentrations by dilution. With a line source
Phase 3 of the study also examined four categories of mit- like a highway, lateral diffusion is little help; therefore the
igation alternatives which could be valuable for highway mixing must be vertical. Turbulence is induced by a
capacity planning. Some of these would be applicable only to pierced barrier, which allows air to pass at some spots but
new development and need additional regulations, while some not others, and this would favor an irregular barrier, not a
could be applied on existing roadways: smooth wall with laminar flow of air (and pollutants).
3. Increased distance from the right-of-way fence to recep-
1. Source reduction on the roadway, including: tors (homes, schools, etc.).
Repair or eliminate the roughly 10 percent of oil-burning The most effective mitigation is distance, with many
gross emitting cars through enhanced smog checks; studies showing a 160 meter to 240 meter distance as
OCR for page 87
87
adequate to achieving pollution concentrations only many DOTs throughout the United States. These included a
10 percent greater than upwind values. large number of transportation and development projects
4. Indoor air filtering improvements. stemming from increased growth; permitting delays due to
Upgrade indoor filters for homes and schools to electro- mitigation requirements; recognition of the high cost of mit-
static filters. Indoor mitigation is both the most immedi- igation; and a large magnitude of impacts to aquatic resources
ate and most effective mitigation available, supported by from new road and development projects.
models and data, with the potential of effectively elimi- Prior to the EEP program, mitigation was ad hoc and the
nating the impact of Watt Avenue (to a few percent) in success rate (or return on investment) was uncertain. The EEP
indoor air at modest cost. The HETF UC Davis studies program addressed these problems by conducting statewide
of 2006 showed a 75 percent reduction on very fine/ultra- watershed assessments resulting in geospatial identification of
fine pollution at the Arden Middle School indoor site with watershed conditions, locations for environmental protection
a standard (non-HEPA) upgrade to an electrostatic filter. or restoration, and a conceptual understanding of how each
project contributes to the state's broader environmental goals.
Now, mitigation is directed to high-value areas and is imple-
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
mented before transportation projects begin. This has removed
Program Case Study
delays due to mitigation permitting and improved the value of
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program is a mitigation investments. The program also allows the state to
joint effort of North Carolina DOT, North Carolina Depart- shift mitigation from areas near the site of transportation proj-
ment of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and ects to protecting potentially more valuable areas in the same
the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The Ecosystem watershed although nearby areas are still preferred so that
Enhancement Program (EEP) is designed to address North local losses of ecosystem functions are minimized.
Carolina DOT's compensatory mitigation needs statewide Using information from statewide watershed planning
through a cooperative multiagency effort. The program is a efforts and GIS analysis, the program identifies high-value
partnership between NCDOT, NC DENR, and the U.S. Army ecosystems and habitat areas based on quality of assets and
Corps of Engineers. It was established in 2003 and is located degree of problems. EEP tends to focus restoration on water-
within the NC DENR. sheds where there are both functioning assets that can be pro-
The EEP provides an alternative to typical environmental tected and degraded areas that can be improved. This presents
planning around transportation projects by integrating nat- an opportunity to move moderately functioning watersheds
ural resource issues into the transportation planning process. in a positive direction.
The program employs a proactive, long-range planning The program then overlays DOT's seven-year let list of
approach that involves identifying priority watersheds for transportation projects. These are projects with a high prob-
protection and then assessing the impact of potential trans- ability of being implemented. This list triggers EEP planning
portation projects in those watersheds. The program helps for restoration in 8-digit watershed catalogue units.
steer projects away from sensitive watersheds or parts of The overall watershed needs assessment process includes
watersheds far in advance of project selection and design. If two types of analyses at two scales. EEP staff first conduct a
impacts are unavoidable, the program helps to proactively high-level watershed screening analysis that allows them to
direct mitigation funds to high-value environmental projects make informed selections of watersheds that will be the sub-
ahead of the date when the impact will occur. ject of more detailed work. The approach is applied to 14-digit
The goals of the program include: HUCs within 8-digit catalog units and relies heavily on GIS
assessment. Once a short list of watersheds has been devel-
· Satisfy compensatory mitigation requirements for author- oped based on the GIS analysis, EEP staff conduct a more
ized impacts on a programmatic, watershed-level basis; detailed analysis of the candidates to further refine the selec-
· Provide in-ground, functioning compensatory mitigation tions and focus in on key functions: water quality, habitat,
for authorized impacts in advance of the actual impacts; and hydrology. This additional analysis includes a field review
· Satisfy the compensatory wetland, stream, and buffer mit- of the watershed and discussions with local governments,
igation needs of the NCDOT Transportation Program; and resource professionals, and interested parties. The future
· Provide a means for organizing, steering, funding, and potential threats and other attributes also are investigated.
implementing ecosystem enhancement efforts in North The goal of this step is to gauge local interest in a watershed
Carolina. planning effort and to evaluate whether it appears that the
watershed of interest will yield restoration opportunities.
The program was created to address a range of challenges This allows for the development of comprehensive recom-
around transportation projects and mitigation familiar to mendations to address watershed needs.
OCR for page 88
88
EEP staff apply five broad categories of information to requirements associated with Section 401 and 404 permits and
evaluate each 14-digit watershed within an 8-digit catalog Coastal Area Management Act permits issued by the N.C.
unit. These are: baseline watershed descriptors, watershed Division of Water Quality, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
resources or assets, watershed problems, potential threats and and the N.C. Division of Coastal Management. By consolidat-
stressors, and other factors of interest. The statistics associ- ing the mitigation requirements of multiple small projects,
ated with baseline descriptors, assets, and problems are com- EEP is able to implement large-scale watershed restoration
piled and presented in a watershed attribute matrix which efforts that restore or enhance water quality, habitat, and
provides these data for all 14-digit watersheds within the hydrology ultimately increasing the ecological effectiveness
8-digit watershed catalogue units. Table A.4 lists the specific of these projects.
data used to screen watersheds. EEP offers four In-Lieu Fee (ILF) mitigation programs: the
One objective of the EEP is to provide a consistent and Stream and Wetland ILF Program; the Riparian Buffer Miti-
streamlined approach to address compensatory-mitigation gation ILF Program; the Nutrient Offset ILF Program; and
Category Attribute
Baseline · Area square miles
Watershed · 14-digit HU number
Descriptors · River Basin
· Linear feet of stream
· Population density and distribution
· General land cover information
· Presence of Transportation Improvement Project (TIP)
Resource · Percent of streams buffered within 100'
Measures/Assets · Percent Rare, Threatened or Endangered species (RTE) and Critical Habitat in the HU
· Percent of stream miles with special designation (HQW, ORW, WS-I, WS-II, Tr, SA)
· Percent of watershed (acres) in conservation management
· Percent of stream miles designated WS-III, IV or V
· Amount of fully functioning wetlands (will rely on product of the Wetlands Functional Assessment Team to gauge this)
· Amount of fully functioning streams (will rely on product of the Streams Functional Assessment Team to gauge this)
Existing Problems · Percent of stream miles not buffered (100')
· Percent of stream miles impaired
· Percent streams 303(d) listed waters
· Percent impervious surface
· Amount of functional wetland loss (will rely on product of the Wetlands Functional Assessment Team to gauge this)
· Amount of functional stream loss (will rely on product of the Streams Functional Assessment Team to gauge this)
Future potential · Significant anticipated growth residential, commercial, industrial
threats/impacts
Other factors · Presence of restoration projects (represents and opportunity to build on existing efforts)
· Previous Local Watershed Plan (LWP) study area? (If study was recent, it may be too early to return to that specific
watershed.)
· Data rich area? (Areas with significant data are favorable.)
· Local interest?
· TMDL (total maximum daily load) study planned or under way? (Potential to partner with NC Division of Water Quality
on development and implementation of a TMDL.)
Table A.4. Watershed Attributes Evaluated During Screening Analysis
OCR for page 89
89
the NCDOT Stream and Wetland ILF Program. Applicants Florida also is a leader in the use of environmental per-
make payments to EEP in lieu of providing mitigation them- formance measures. The Efficient Transportation Decision
selves or by other means. Upon payment, EEP assumes the Making (ETDM) process offers an excellent example of col-
full legal responsibility for planning, developing, and imple- laborative, data-driven decision making, supported by per-
menting the required types and amounts of mitigation. After formance measures that are designed to evaluate and streamline
successful payment, applicants are no longer liable for the the implementation process.
mitigation associated with their payment.
ETDM Florida's Streamlined Project
Accomplishments Implementation Framework
As of EEP's fourth anniversary in July 2007, the program had ETDM was established by the Florida Department of Trans-
achieved some significant accomplishments. portation (FDOT) in response to Section 1309 of the Trans-
portation Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) to "improve
· EEP had collaborated with public- and private-sector part- transportation decision-making in a way that protects the
ners to acquire nearly 40,000 acres of natural areas, with human and the natural environment." What began as a stream-
24 tracts being managed as public recreation areas such as lined NEPA review framework quickly grew into a comprehen-
parks or game lands. The tracts include about 164 miles of sive interagency planning and project review process. ETDM
streams and more than 7,800 acres of wetlands in high- links land use, transportation, and environmental resource
quality riparian and wetland areas throughout the state. planning in order to identify critical issues early on in the plan-
· EEP increased implementation of projects based on local ning and programming phases, with the goal of avoiding delays
watershed planning. Between January and September 2007, and minimizing unexpected conflicts throughout the process.
76.5 percent of EEP-initiated design-bid-build projects were It is designed to expedite the process, while providing decision
located in Targeted Local Watershed. makers and planners with additional information at key points
· EEP has saved the state money and has been successful in throughout project design and development. The ETDM pro-
addressing NCDOT permit delays. Not a single transporta- gram is viewed throughout the United States as one of the
tion-project delay from the lack of mitigation has occurred leading initiatives in environmental management. Key to the
since the initiative became operational in 2003. EEP's mit- program's success was FDOT establishing cooperative agree-
igation efforts have helped to move forward more than ments with 18 different regional, state, and federal permitting
$3.7 billion in road building in North Carolina, with an and resource agencies (as of April 2007), wherein FDOT and
investment of less than five percent of the construction cost the agencies negotiate the necessary funding for those agencies
of those projects. to perform ETDM-related work. These agreements are in addi-
tion to FDOT's close cooperation with the state's MPOs, as well
as two tribal governments.
Florida Department of Transportation's
Under the former transportation planning process, permit-
Environmental Transportation
ting agencies would typically wait until a project was at 60 per-
Decision-Making Process
cent design before beginning the Project Development and
Florida is one of the pioneering states in the development Environment (PD&E) process. This created a number of
and use of general performance-based planning. The 2025 problems, including making the process long and drawn out,
Florida Transportation Plan sets the long-range goals and limiting the ability of project designers to consider commu-
objectives that guide investment decisions. An annual Short- nity concerns, and identifying major issues after significant
Range Component of the 2025 Plan specifies how the goals resources already had been dedicated to the project. To elim-
and objectives are being measured and provides the policy inate these problems, FDOT created two points of interven-
framework for the department's budget and work program. tion where agencies are able to provide input, using a range of
Key performance measures are monitored monthly by the measures and input functions prior to significant engineering
Department's Executive Board which has established proce- work: the Planning Screen and the Programming Screen. The
dures for the review, maintenance, and enhancement of all Planning Screen occurs as cost-feasible plans are being devel-
measures used by the department. Performance measures oped. The Programming Screen occurs before projects are
are an integral part of Florida's Strategic Intermodal System identified for the FDOT work program. The screening process
(SIS) which was established by law in 2003. SIS "represents occurs using the Environmental Screening Tool (EST), a web-
a fundamental shift in the way Florida views the develop- based application that offers GIS mapping of over 350 data
ment of and makes investments in transportation facilities layers and several complementary data analysis functions such
and services." as querying, buffering, clipping, and summarizing of geo-
OCR for page 90
90
graphic data. During each screening stage, the various regional, line to view project information, perform customized GIS-
state, and federal permitting and resource agencies have the based analysis, offer alternatives, and present comments. All
opportunity to review a project using the EST. In the event that of the GIS data that forms the backbone of the EST comes
a conflict or adverse impact is identified, it can be addressed from a single clearinghouse: The Florida Geographic Data
and/or corrected before a particular alternative gains signifi- Library (FGDL). Hosted by the University of Florida through
cant momentum. Conversely, if a project is found to have little extensive collaboration with FDOT, FGDL is not a primary
or no adverse impacts, subsequent reviews may be significantly data source, but rather a single source where data from many
scaled back, further expediting the process and often resulting sources are compiled and standardized for ease of use in GIS
in substantial cost savings. software. According to the FGDL on-line acknowledgments
The same ETDM web site that these agencies use to inter- page, the library currently hosts spatial data from 33 different
act with FDOT also provides project information and updates organizations, including federal, state, and regional govern-
to the public (see example, Figure A.1). While interactive pub- ment agencies; nonprofit organizations; and the private sec-
lic participation still takes place through traditional venues tor. FGDL's over 350 data layers include such diverse topics as
(letters, telephone calls, public meetings/workshops, etc.), the topography, endangered bird nesting areas, EPA toxic release
ETDM public web site provides a convenient one-stop loca- sites, blood banks, prisons, transit routes, and so on (7).
tion for advocates and interested parties to collect information FDOT's EST system links directly to the data stored in the
on the status of an FDOT project. FGDL, while the agencies that contribute to the library are
individually responsible for ensuring that their contribution
to the library remains up-to-date. FGDL's development was
Data Collection The Florida Geographic
largely the result of ambitious interagency projects like
Data Library
ETDM. As GIS data was compiled for several such projects,
The ETDM process is entirely web-based, relying on the Envi- the effort was eventually combined into a single comprehen-
ronmental Screening Tool, which resource agencies access on- sive source.
Figure A.1. Screenshot from the ETDM public web site.
OCR for page 91
91
For other users interested in gathering a wealth of GIS data measures): green indicates it is effective, yellow indicates
for the state of Florida, FGDL also offers both a metadata nav- potential problems, and red indicates that a problem exists
igator and an FTP site for directly accessing data of interest. with a specific measure. The third component is information
Data layers are sorted between those that cover the entire state gathered through the EST, providing geographically based
or coastal areas, and those that are county-specific. environmental data in GIS layers. The fourth component
includes information gathered through Quarterly Reports,
and the last component is the Annual Report. All of these
The ETDM Performance Management Plan
sources of information and analysis are utilized to determine
In order to understand the impact of this approach, FDOT how effective the ETDM process is working to protect the
established a performance measures system, the ETDM Per- human and natural environment.
formance Management Plan, for the ETDM process. The
Performance Management Plan is designed to continuously
Florida Department of Transportation's
monitor program area performance, identify problems early,
Future Corridors Program
develop efficient and effective solutions, and recognize and
promote successes. The goal of the Performance Management In 2006, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
Plan is to create a more efficient and enhanced ETDM process. released Florida's Future Corridors Action Plan, which laid
FDOT began the ETDM performance measures project by out the state's ambitious comprehensive and collaborative
creating a baseline database of existing transportation improve- corridor planning initiative, currently under development.
ment projects. The database includes process information Future Corridors is unique because it seeks to initiate a plan-
(such as permit review time and schedules met), and data ning process that will reach as far as 2050 and beyond. The
pertaining to environmental conditions (such as wetlands intent of the program is to identify corridors in all modes
removed and/or replaced, habitats created, noise, and air "that will be significantly improved, transformed in function
quality). This baseline database is compared with projects or design, or newly developed over the next 50 years." The
that go through the ETDM process to determine whether it is 2006 Action Plan presents the need for such a program, lays
meeting its objectives of better decision making for the out the goals and policy objectives for the program, and
human and natural environment. identifies the next steps required in getting the program run-
FDOT's ETDM Performance Measures Task Work Group ning. The overall approach to Future Corridors planning
also established specific performance measures and stated emphasizes the following five principles (from page 12 of the
that the performance measures should be continually moni- Action Plan): 1) Long-term planning instead of addressing
tored for effectiveness and streamlining. The Performance short-term needs; 2) Proactive instead of reactive investments;
Management Plan has three main objectives, each supported 3) Large-scale investment instead of incremental improve-
by a set of activities, performance indicators (or measures), ment; 4) Better integration of the planning process; and 5) A
and targets. The three objectives are: integrate ETDM into unified, policy-oriented planning process. This final point is
project delivery, improve interagency coordination and dis- well illustrated by the many overlapping transportation plan-
pute resolution, and develop environmental stewardship ning initiatives currently taking place in Florida. Examples of
through protection of environmental resources. The activi- other programs that are connected to Future Corridors include
ties, indicators, and targets are listed in Table A.5. the Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) pro-
The ETDM Performance Measures System has five com- gram, and the Rural Areas of Critical Economic Concern desig-
ponents to provide detailed and extensive information on the nation process.
effectiveness of the process. The first component is the base- Like many of FDOT's current planning programs, Future
line database of historical projects that will enable analysis of Corridors places a high level of emphasis on collaboration, as
the ETDM system in terms of time savings, cost savings, well as on informed, data-driven decision-making. To illus-
improved project delivery, and enhanced protection of envi- trate FDOT's commitment to an inclusive and collaborative
ronmental resources. The second component is the list of process, the agency released Ongoing Partner and Public Involve-
performance measures found in Table A.5. A summary page, ment in Florida's Future Corridors Planning Process, which
or "Dashboard" screens designed to look like the indicators describes the cooperative process that led to the Action Plan as
on a vehicle's dashboard, provide an overview of the process well as the role that the public and other government agencies
status in terms of project delivery, interagency coordination, will play in the Future Corridor planning process. FDOT also
and dispute resolution, and protection of environmental has completed significant work in developing detailed screen-
resources through environmental stewardship. A color- ing criteria for evaluating potential statewide corridors for
coded system indicates how effectively the measure is work- inclusion in Future Corridors planning, discussed in greater
ing (i.e., a performance measurement of the performance detail in the following section.
OCR for page 92
92
Targets (Percent, Number,
Objectives Activities Performance Indicators (Measures) Score, Timeframe, etc.)
Integrate ETDM into (1) Implement Planning Phase 1(a) Percentage of major capacity transportation 1(a) 90 percent
Project Delivery (projects moving into LRTP/ improvement projects screened
Florida Intrastate Highway
1(b) Percentage of ETAT agencies participating 1(b) 100 percent
System (FIHS) Plans)
who have signed Agency Agreements
1(c) Percentage of projects with potential dispute 1(c) For reporting purposes
issue(s) only
1(d) Percentage of projects concept and scope 1(d) For reporting purposes
revised due to ETAT review only
1(e) Percentage of Planning Summary Reports 1(e) 90 percent
completed within 90 days
1 f ) Number of projects withdrawn due to ETAT 1(f ) For reporting purposes
review only
(2) Implement Programming 2(a) Percentage of Major Capacity transportation 2(a) 90 percent
Phase (projects moving into improvement projects screened
FDOT Five-Year Work Plan)
2(b) Percentage of ETAT agencies participating 2(b) 100 percent
who have signed Agency Agreements
2(c) Percentage of projects eligible for Work 2(c) 95 percent
Program (i.e., No Dispute Issues)
2(d) Percentage of Final Programming Summary 2(d) 90 percent
Reports completed within 60 days
2(e) Percentage of projects withdrawn due to 2(e) For reporting purposes
ETAT review only
2(f ) Percentage of projects concept and scope 2(f ) For reporting purposes
revised due to ETAT review only
2(g) Percentage and number of projects in formal 2(g) Less than 1 percent
dispute
(3) Implement Project 3(a) Number of screened PD&Es (Project Devel- 3(a) At least two per district
Development Phase opment and Environment report) (based on by July 2006
focused scope of work) completed in FY
2006
3(b) Average duration of screened Categorical 3(b) 12 months or less
Exclusions
3© Percentage of screened PD&Es that obtain 3(c) 50 percent or more
permits concurrent with Location and Design
Concept Acceptance (LCDA)
3(d) Percentage of screened PD&Es that meet 3(d) 90 percent
proposed schedule
(4) Identify Funding 4(a) Compare traditional PD&E study 4(a) Cost savings of up to
Requirements and 20 percent
Efficiencies
4(b) Compare traditional PD&E schedule versus 4(b) Cost savings of up to
screened PD&E schedule 25 percent
(5) Develop Training 5(a) Publication of Annual Central Environmental 5(a) By July 1 of each year
Management Office (CEMO) Training Plan
based on Incidental Take Permits (ITP)
5(b) At least one statewide
5(b) Number and type of statewide workshops workshop each year
and conferences (CEMO and ETAT)
Table A.5. Florida DOT ETDM Activities, Indicators, and Targets
OCR for page 93
93
Targets (Percent, Number,
Objectives Activities Performance Indicators (Measures) Score, Timeframe, etc.)
Improve Interagency (1) Implement Agency Dispute 1(a) Percentage of ETAT that have a dispute and 1(a) 100 percent participation
Coordination and Resolution Process (DRP) participate in a DRP
Dispute Resolution
1(b) Environmental issue that initiated dispute 1(b) For reporting purposes
only
1(c) Percentage of formal dispute resolutions
completed within 120 days 1(c) 70 percent or more
(2) Support Agency GIS data- 2(a) Provide technical support to ETAT agencies 2(a) Satisfaction surveys
base development on GIS database development from ETAT agencies in
FY 2006
2(b) Ensure quality of the interactive ETDM 2(b) Annual review and
database information acceptance of ETAT
databases in FY 2006
(3) Improve interagency (3) Enhanced application of EST for functionality 3(a) Annual survey of users
communication and and communication on EST its application,
coordination via the innovation, and need for
Environmental Screening improvement
Tool (EST)
(4) Development and signature 4(a) Execution of agency agreements 4(a) 100 percent completion
of agency agreements and of all agency agreements
tribal agreements by July 2005
4(b) Reevaluate agency resource needs 4(b) Update agency agree-
ments, as required, and
support through budget
request
(5) Response/review timeframes 5(a) Percentage of ETAT reviews completed 5(a) 90 percent
for ETAT and FDOT within 45 days
5(b) Percentage of ETAT reviews requesting time 5(b) 10 percent
extensions
5(c) Percentage of ETAT reviews of environmen- 5(c) 90 percent
tal documents completed within 30 days
5(d) Percentage of projects without Requests for 5(d) 50 percent
Additional Information (RAI)
Develop Environmental (1) Environmental Compliance 1(a) Commitment compliance 1(a) 100 percent
Stewardship through
Protection of Environ- 1(b) Percentage of projects in construction that 1(b) 5 percent
mental Resources had a noncompliance citation
(2) System Level Mitigation 2(a) Earlier regional mitigation planning 2(a) Resource agency
reports annually on
regional mitigation
plans identifying
projects considered
2(b) Earlier regional acquisition 2(b) Resource agency
reports annually on proj-
ects that have approved
mitigation plans prior to
project development
(3) Protection of Natural 3(a) Total number of wetlands impacted (acres) 3(a) Establish baseline
Resources
3(b) Total number of wetlands mitigated 3(b) Establish baseline
(no net loss)
3(c) Total amount spent on mitigation 3(c) For reporting purposes
only
3(d) Total amount spent on Endangered Species 3(d) For reporting purposes
Act (per unit) only
Table A.5. (Continued).
(continued on next page)
OCR for page 94
94
Targets (Percent, Number,
Objectives Activities Performance Indicators (Measures) Score, Timeframe, etc.)
(4) Protection of Cultural 4(a) Total number of other findings of "effect" on 4(a) Establish baseline
Resources which opinions are provided need SHPO
input
4(b) Total number of MOAs signed 4(b) Establish baseline
4(c) Total amount spent on mitigation 4(c) For reporting purposes
only
(5) Protection of the Physical 5(a) Contamination 5(a) TBD
Environment
(6) Protection of the Socio- 6(a) Enhance customer and stakeholder 6(a) Customer Satisfaction
cultural Environment relationships Survey (80 percent
satisfied)
Table A.5. (Continued).
The Future Corridors process in Florida is not yet up and destination flows, and statewide and regional travel demand
running. The Action Plan identifies 14 potential corridor models. While the screening criteria do not yet include specific
"study areas": five existing corridors that may be candidates targets, they are linked to currently available data sources.
for major transformation, and nine areas that may be candi- Similarly, the Economic Competitiveness goal area consists
dates for the development of new corridors over the coming primarily of criteria that are quantifiable and measurable
decades. The Action Plan contains a general summary of the based on available data sources.
next steps in the process, which include the creation of a The third goal area, Community Livability, presents a far
statewide advisory group, initiation of prototype corridor trickier challenge to planners attempting to evaluate poten-
studies, development of corridor plans, and development of tial future corridors. Many of the objectives of Community
financing policies. Livability amount to avoiding physical barriers such as
existing urban development, Native American reservations,
or coastal areas. These "binary" criteria will be applied
Future Corridors Screening Criteria
through the use of the Florida Geographic Data Library
Once implemented, the Future Corridors planning pro- (FGDL), a comprehensive statewide GIS database. The
gram will use extensive and diverse screening criteria in the remainder of the livability criteria involve qualitative eval-
identification of new corridors. These criteria, described in uations related to compatibility with local planning, the
detail in a document entitled Future Corridors Action Plan comprehensive planning process, and community support.
Implementation Guidance: Detailed Screening Criteria, are For example, the "Comprehensive Planning" criterion is
divided into four broad goal areas: 1) Mobility and Con- divided into two parts: Degree of Regional Visioning and
nectivity; 2) Economic Competitiveness; 3) Community Compatibility with Regional Visions/Plans. The first part,
Livability; and 4) Environmental Stewardship. For each Degree of Regional Visioning, lays out six guidelines for
goal area there is a table consisting of a number of narrower evaluating the strength of the regional planning process
policy objectives, and within each of these are one or more and the quality of the plan itself, and is to be applied dur-
performance measures, ranging from very specific (i.e., ing the Future Corridors project concept phase. The second
total person-hours of delay) to entirely qualitative (i.e., a part, Compatibility with Regional Visions/Plans, calls for
well defined vision in the regional comprehensive plan). a review of growth strategies, policy plans, and city plans
The tables also identify the likely data sources to be used for (if necessary) for potential conflicts with the proposed cor-
each of the criteria (8). ridor. This part is to be applied during the feasibility and
The first two goal areas might be considered more tradi- environmental review phases of the Future Corridors
tional venues for the use of performance measures and data- process.
driven decision making. The first, Mobility and Connectivity, The final Future Corridors goal area, Environmental
consists mainly of measures that currently are in use at vari- Stewardship, is directly linked to another recent FDOT pro-
ous levels of transportation planning, and depend on data gram: Efficient Transportation Decision Making. ETDM
sources that are readily available, such as traffic counts, origin- is FDOT's collaborative, GIS-based environmental review
OCR for page 95
95
process. It occurs through cooperative agreements with many Appendix A References
other federal, state, and regional agencies and governments,
1. Specifics about these scenarios can be found here: http://www.
and seeks to streamline and standardize environmental transportation.org/sites/environment/docs/Jay%20Norvell%20
reviews of all transportation projects in Florida. Under the Marjorie%20Kirn%20and%20Suzanne%20Marr.pdf
new ETDM program, resource agencies whose input is nec- 2. http://ice.ucdavis.edu/node/367
essary for environmental review will now be involved earlier 3. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ote/benefit.html.
4. http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/2035_plan/tech_report.htm.
and more thoroughly. As projects progress through the plan-
5. Schrupp, D.L., W.A. Reiners, T.G. Thompson et al. 2000. Colorado
ning, programming, and implementation stages, each ETDM Gap Analysis Program: A Geographic Approach to Planning for Biolog-
agency, through interaction with regional liaisons, uses the ical DiversityFinal Report, USGS Biological Resources Division, Gap
web-based Environmental Screening Tool to examine, ana- Analysis Program and Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, CO.
lyze, and comment on transportation projects. The Future 6. Health Effects Institute. Mobile-Source Air Toxics: A Critical Review
of the Literature on Exposure and Health Effects. Special Report 16.
Corridors goal area of Environmental Stewardship has the
November 2007. http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=282.
greatest number of individual criteria, all of which fall under 7. http://www.fgdl.org/metadataexplorer/explorer.jsp.
the umbrella of ETDM. Thus, the two FDOT programs are 8. http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/corridor/workshop113006/
inextricably linked. screencriteria.pdf
