Pilot Testing of the TCAPP Decision Guide and Related Capacity Products: Southeast Portland, Oregon (2014) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 1-56
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters.
|
From page 2... ...
Acknowledgments This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration in cooperation with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2)
|
From page 3... ...
Contents 1 Executive Summary 5 CHAPTER 1 Background: Project Purpose and Planning Challenge 5 Overview of the Project Purpose and Study 5 Planning Challenge: Moving from Corridor Study to Project Development 12 CHAPTER 2 Evaluating TCAPP 12 Introduction 15 ENV-3: Approve Purpose and Need/Reach Consensus on Project Purpose 17 ENV-4: Reach Consensus on Study Area 19 ENV-5: Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods, and Measures 22 ENV-6: Approve Full Range of Alternatives 25 ENV-7: Approve Alternatives to be Carried Forward 27 TCAPP Assessments 33 TCAPP Applications 36 CHAPTER 3 Conclusions and Recommendations 36 General Observations on Applying TCAPP 37 Decision Guide Elements 39 TCAPP Assessments 39 TCAPP Applications 41 Using TCAPP Led to Better Outcomes; What Metro Can Do Better in the Future 43 APPENDIX A Suggestions for Improvements to Decision Guide Elements ii
|
From page 4... ...
Executive Summary Purpose This pilot project tested the effectiveness of applying the beta version of Transportation for Communities -- Advancing Projects through Partnerships (TCAPP) in regional collaborative decision making through its application in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan region.
|
From page 5... ...
• Applications. This report recommends enhancements to the applications section, including the special topics Linking MPO Planning and NEPA and Streamlining a Bottleneck Project.
|
From page 6... ...
o Environmental Review/NEPA Merged with Permitting is primarily focused on projects that will prepare an environmental impacts statement (EIS)
|
From page 7... ...
partner team, identifying stakeholders, and providing common understanding of the current situation. The team recommends creating an additional assessment or questionnaire at the beginning of this module that would document the responses to these questions: o Who makes up the team?
|
From page 8... ...
CHAPTER 1 Background: Project Purpose and Planning Challenge Overview of the Project Purpose and Study This pilot project tested the effectiveness of applying the beta version of Transportation for Communities -- Advancing Projects through Partnerships (TCAPP) in regional collaborative decision making through its application in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan region.
|
From page 9... ...
corridor is owned and operated by and within the City of Gresham. The arterial changes from 238th Drive in the north, to 242nd Drive in the middle section, and to Hogan Road in the south.
|
From page 10... ...
Source: Metro. Figure 1.1.
|
From page 11... ...
Source: Metro. Figure 1.2.
|
From page 12... ...
Previous Planning Studies: Past Conflicts and Recent Decisions There has been a long-standing desire to improve connections from Portland's central city to Mount Hood and central Oregon. The region has undertaken three major planning efforts, spanning more than 50 years.
|
From page 13... ...
Source: Metro. Figure 1.3.
|
From page 14... ...
Moving from Corridor Study to Project Development This pilot project looked at the process of moving from the corridor planning stage and developing a preferred alternative for NEPA environmental review. Despite a high degree of support to date, many milestones and challenges remain before construction can begin.
|
From page 15... ...
CHAPTER 2 Evaluating TCAPP Introduction The pilot team included planners at Metro who managed most aspects of the EMCP. The team worked closely with city and county partners: City of Gresham and Multnomah County transportation planners, engineers, and elected officials.
|
From page 16... ...
great extent, prescribed by ODOT. Local jurisdictions coordinate with ODOT through local agency liaisons, and guidance is provided in two documents available online: • Local Agency Guidelines Manual (http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/LGS/pages/lag_manual.aspx#Overview)
|
From page 17... ...
Source: Metro. Note: TSP = transportation systems plans, CIP = capital improvement plan, MTIP = metropolitan transportation improvement program, IGA = intergovernmental agreement, PE = preliminary engineering.
|
From page 18... ...
Planning • Adoption into planning and funding documents, including the RTP, transportation system plans, and capital improvement program. Project initiation • City/County completes a project prospectus with ODOT.
|
From page 19... ...
Applying ENV-3: Approve Purpose and Need/Reach Consensus on Project Purpose Although not explicitly stated, the ENV-3 section of the Decision Guide focuses on an EIS process and the need for Section 404 permitting. TCAPP does not address determining whether a project would be classified as a categorical exclusion or environmental assessment.
|
From page 20... ...
• Consider rewording Question 5 to read, "How was stakeholder input incorporated into the planning and decision-making process? How has this been communicated to stakeholders?
|
From page 21... ...
segmenting the project to advance for different funding opportunities. TCAPP questions reinforced the full consideration of the study area and its comprehensive effects and benefits.
|
From page 22... ...
and environmental justice analysis and engagement. This question could also ask how people use and get to the significant community resources.
|
From page 23... ...
• Floodplains; • Environmentally based zoning restrictions; • Land use permit requirements; • Safety; • Traffic; • Public perception and concerns about safety, traffic, and access; • Construction impacts; and • Continuing political support. In addition, ODOT-required documentation influences how design alternatives might be compared.
|
From page 24... ...
environmental justice, risk, and costs, which are also all very important considerations in making this key decision. Applying ENV-5: Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures According to TCAPP, the evaluation criteria, methods, and measures are used to compare alternatives to determine how measures meet the purpose and need.
|
From page 25... ...
• The case study example is not helpful. Links to text in a case study are not helpful.
|
From page 26... ...
• Added to the RTP with a project description and a project concept map with a design if available, but the minimum is a project area map with start and end points and a cost estimate based on standard regional cost-estimate methods. • Added for funding to the state transportation improvement plan (STIP)
|
From page 27... ...
During the course of the pilot study, the pilot team met with stakeholders, including elected officials in the respective cities, to discuss refinements of the proposed design for the 238th/242nd area. A public engagement plan was also developed for ongoing engagement over the next several years.
|
From page 28... ...
• While the elements to make the key decisions were included in TCAPP, there is a need to further define the data elements in the Decision Guide more specifically. See the recommendations that follow.
|
From page 29... ...
• Complete a matrix of information comparing the alternatives against the screening and evaluation measures. This information is typically shared with a recommendation on alternatives that are most promising.
|
From page 30... ...
Recommendations ENV-7 was useful in comparing the alternatives developed in ENV-6 with the criteria developed in ENV-5. Recommendations for refinements to TCAPP are particularly focused on the data needs.
|
From page 31... ...
Applying the TCAPP Assessments Partner Collaboration The Partner Collaboration module was useful in evaluating the pilot team's process working with its jurisdictional partners. The results provided by the assessment confirmed much of what the team had thought about the issues it would confront and identified others, but most important, provided concrete ideas for addressing them.
|
From page 33... ...
• The results are the same whether you answer strongly agree or strongly disagree for every question (I took the assessment three times to test that theory)
|
From page 34... ...
Before using this assessment consider Who makes up the team? Individuals from your agency or partner agencies who participate in decision making.
|
From page 35... ...
Disagreeing with these statements results in confusing double negatives. Reframing these as questions such as "Does project staff feel informed?
|
From page 36... ...
Expediting Project Delivery Many of the issues discussed previously apply to this module. Again, this module should be usable to prevent rather than fix or manage crises when things go awry; yet it should remain available and relevant when they do.
|
From page 37... ...
application or topic area." All of the programming and corridor planning decisions are grayed out. Corridor planning is not a legally required process.
|
From page 38... ...
Recommendations The pilot team recommends the following improvement to the TCAPP applications: • While the Special Topics and Integrated Planning sections were useful, it was not clear that the "Transportation Phases" column referred specifically to Decision Guide elements. It may be helpful to move this content into the Decision Guide tab, as opposed to its current location under the Applications tab.
|
From page 39... ...
CHAPTER 3 Conclusions and Recommendations General Observations on Applying TCAPP Perhaps the most important finding from the pilot is that TCAPP helped increase internal-agency and cross-agency coordination. Metro, the regional MPO and lead on the pilot, is typically involved in long-range planning and corridor studies but is not involved in local project development.
|
From page 40... ...
Linking MPO Planning and NEPA Application There are several findings identified for improvements to this application. Most important is the opportunity to make more explicit the connection of MPO plans for the RTP and when corridor plans are appropriate to be used before initiating a more detailed environmental review.
|
From page 41... ...
was often not enough context to find the most relevant example without reading a lot of information. Consider simplifying the Decision Guide by consolidating the tabs.
|
From page 42... ...
revised to be called "From other elements of the Decision Guide." It is not immediately clear that the former is meant to explicitly reference the Decision Guide. This is also true with the "from other sectors and processes"; this could be more aptly renamed "From Integrated Planning Applications." The pilot team found the data in the "from other sectors and processes" difficult to find.
|
From page 43... ...
a more explicit connection between MPO planning, corridor planning, and the environmental process. One example to consider is shown in Figure 3.1 from the Metro 2035 RTP.
|
From page 44... ...
Application: Streamlining a Bottleneck Project It was only after the pilot team had a fair amount of experience with TCAPP that it found the Streamlining a Bottleneck Project Application. At first glance it appeared that it should provide specific guidance for these projects.
|
From page 45... ...
pilot created the opportunity to better understand how local agency partners move environmental review and project development forward. This has improved collaboration among the MPO, county, and cities, and in turn, provided guidance on how Metro can better direct future longrange plans and corridor studies to meet the needs of local partner project development.
|
From page 46... ...
APPENDIX A Suggestions for Improvements to Decision Guide Elements This appendix provides specific recommendations for tables found within the Decision Guide key decision points. Section A provides recommendations for the Basics tab -- primarily addressing the partners.
|
From page 47... ...
Key Decision Partner to Add Role Type to Add Role Description to Add Local Jurisdictions Advisor Provide input on project study area, including any necessary permits or approvals based on study area ENV-5 Approve Evaluation Criteria, Methods and Measures MPO Advisor Ensure consistency with Regional Transportation Plan Facility Owner/Operator Decision Maker Develop evaluation criteria that allow for full consideration of all reasonable alternatives Local Jurisdictions Advisor Contribute to the development of evaluation criteria B Suggested Improvements to the Stakeholder Inputs Tab Identifying input needed from stakeholders is a fundamental part of creating a public engagement plan.
|
From page 48... ...
TCAPP Content Partner Observations Suggested Improvements you think the outcome of the project should be? against as the project moves forward.
|
From page 49... ...
TCAPP Content Partner Observations Suggested Improvements What is the rationale for how we handled information from the stakeholders? How has this been communicated to the stakeholders?
|
From page 50... ...
TCAPP Content Partner Observations Suggested Improvements inconsistencies? What is the rationale for how we handled information from the stakeholders?
|
From page 51... ...
TCAPP Content Partner Observations Suggested Improvements from a project developed by the private sector that is different from your usual expectations? Questions to Incorporate Stakeholder Interests How was private sector input sought to create the evaluation criteria and measures?
|
From page 52... ...
TCAPP Content Partner Observations Suggested Improvements feasible and rational? stakeholder input?
|
From page 53... ...
TCAPP Content Partner Observations Suggested Improvements incorporated into the planning and decision-making process? How has this been communicated to stakeholders?
|
From page 54... ...
Supporting Data for the Key Decision Suggested Improvements Air Quality Conformity No Specific Data This section should reference the air quality conformity required to amend the LRTP and STIP. Natural Environment and the IEF Map of conservation, restoration, and enhancement priorities This section is helpful.
|
From page 55... ...
Note: LRTP = long-range transportation planning, (S) TIP = (state)
|
From page 56... ...
Supporting Data for the Key Decision Suggested Improvements development plans and any specific alternative ENV-5. Greenhouse Gas Data and tools necessary to support GHG analysis of alternatives This should be removed or reference measures developed in ENV-5.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.