Click for next page ( 12


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 11
Statewide Corridor Planning 11 How can the relationship among SWCP and planning efforts by all appropriate agencies be coordinated, such as local governments, rural planning organizations (RPOs), MPOs, transit agencies, tribal governments, and federal land management agencies? How can the SWCP process help stakeholders and decisionmakers think in terms of corridors (which is somewhat conceptual) instead of focusing on individual projects? How does one ensure that the information and findings from individual corridor studies are consistent, replicable, and comparable? How does one distinguish between intra-state, interstate, and international corridors? Assuming that all of the corridor studies do not start and end at the same time, how can an internally consistent and comprehensive statewide transportation plan be developed? Are legislative, regulatory, or policy initiatives needed to enable, support, or enhance plan development? Providing answers to these questions is important for the development of a successful SWCP process. Establish A Corridor Network The SWCP framework begins with an effort to identify candidate corridors that will serve as the source for potential investment opportunities. This process will likely be based on both quan- titative and subjective criteria--that is, crucial corridors will be defined by the periodic collec- tion and analysis of condition and performance data, the estimation of travel flows and expected future travel demands, or the function the corridors serve in broader policy perspective. In many cases, a statewide strategic transportation network is identified as the target of state investment, so being on this network constitutes one of the most important criteria for a potential corridor study. Identify Study Corridors In the examples of corridor-based planning found in practice, the approach toward corridor identification has been based largely on geographical significance, transportation classification or function, thresholds of volume or throughput, and sometimes a higher-level analysis of key performance measures. Performance measures are related to such things as safety; travel delay or other measures of corridor performance (both today and in the future); physical condition; operations efficiency; and traffic volumes or trips, such as average daily traffic, commodity flows, or passenger volumes. One of the more interesting aspects of this step in the SWCP framework is the degree to which corridors are focused on intercity travel and corridors in metropolitan areas. The "best practice" examples of a statewide corridor-based planning process combine both intercity and metropolitan corridors into a comprehensive statewide perspective of transportation needs. In California, for example, Caltrans has identified intercity corridors and has also worked with metropolitan and regional planning organizations to identify the most crucial corridor needs within the metropolitan area. The best example is the corridor-based planning approach in the Bay Area where both Caltrans and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission have partnered to examine several transportation corridors that are potential candidates for state and regional investment. If the corridor identification process is to include corridors in metro- politan areas, it requires close coordination and collaboration among the state DOT and the respective MPOs. The more sophisticated corridor-based planning processes will incorporate periodic or real-time monitoring capabilities into the data collection efforts of the relevant agencies. For example, the Bay Area example mentioned above has relied on real-time monitoring of facility speeds, a