Click for next page ( 14

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 13
Statewide Corridor Planning 13 require that problems associated with safety, intermodal freight movement, access to intermodal facilities, traffic operations, capacity, intelligent transportation system (ITS) opportunities, and access management be explicitly considered in the corridor studies, while implementation projects or strategies to address some of these issues might have funds available from dedicated sources with specific selection criteria. There are a variety of levels for conducting corridor analyses as part of a statewide transportation planning process, ranging from major corridor studies to lower levels of analysis. To provide additional guidance, Appendix B identifies and discusses three levels of effort of analysis. Alternatives Identification and Analysis Similar to problem identification, certain types of alternatives and analysis tools might be applied to provide consistent and comparable results among the corridor studies. Additional guidance on analysis issues and methods are included in Appendix B and Appendix C. References to documents and websites with information on different analysis tools that can be used in a corridor study are provided at the end of this Guidebook. Project and Corridor Evaluation The purpose of any evaluation process is to produce information that can be used by decision- makers to select the most feasible, most performance-effective, and/or most cost-effective set of projects and strategies. The SWCP approach to statewide planning depends on having some common evaluation measures as well as evaluation methods that can be used to compare candidate projects across studies. For example, the state DOT could require the use of benefit/cost analysis as a means of providing a dimensionless measure of the respective values of candidate projects. As another example, if highway congestion is an important issue, state guidance could require that congestion measures relating to the extent, duration, and magnitude of congestion be considered in each corridor study. Similar to the corridor performance measures, each corridor analysis could also have corridor-specific evaluation criteria that have been identified through the public participation and resource agency coordination process. During the research project, state DOTs identified some specific challenges in addressing corridor needs, impacts, and alternatives. For that reason, additional information is included in Appendices D, E, and F on the issues of public transportation, freight movement, and economic development, respectively. Identify Statewide Investment Program and System Management Strategy The final step in the SWCP approach is to use the results of individual corridor studies as input to the development of a statewide transportation plan, an STIP, and potentially a system management strategy. As in any type of planning, this final step usually considers not only technical information and public input, but also political considerations relating to such things as geographic equity, state and regional economic development needs, other statewide issues and goals, and long-standing project-specific promises. Such factors are to be expected in what is essentially a public investment decisionmaking process. However, information produced by corridor plans are often better vetted through the local political process than more global plans produced on a state-level basis. In addition, corridor plans usually provide more specific project-level information that can be used as direct input into the project prioritization and STIP process.