# Presentation: 660119

## How to Succeed in Statewide and MPO Transportation Planning

**Notes:**

It is important to note that for projects, program, and strategies to be eligible to receive federal funds, they must be included in the Plan and STIP/TIP.

Plans involve regional policies for land and economic development, environment, transportation, etc. Transit can have a major influence -  advising localities on how they could best stage and target future growth in order to maximize transit's usefulness. 

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process

- More than listing of highway and transit capital investments
- Developing strategies for operating, managing, maintaining, financing area’s short and long term transportation goals
- Involves 3-C process: continuing, cooperative, comprehensive multimodal transportation planning

**Notes:**

i.e., MPOs, states, and transit operators cooperatively working together in the development of transportation plans and programs to carry out the 3-C process.

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process     

- Planning Factors:
- Support economic vitality
- Increase safety
- Increase security
- Increase accessibility and mobility options
- Protect the environment/ improve quality of life
- Enhance system integration and connectivity
- Promote efficient system management and operation
- Emphasize system preservation

**Notes:**

450.306/450.206 The metropolitan and statewide planning process shall be a continuous, cooperative, and comprehensive, and provide for consideration and implementation of projects, strategies, and services that address the planning factors. 

Safety and security factors were separated to individual factors to highlight the importance of each issue.
Safety- planners should be aware of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP); a statewide coordinated safety plan for reducing highway fatalities/serious injury on public roads.  Final Rule encourage transportation plans to include a safety element summarizing priorities/goals in SHSP.

Security- Transportation plans should include a security element summarizing priorities/goals set forth in other transit safety and security planning and review processes.   

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process 

- SAFETEA-LU encourages planning processes to promote transportation systems that maximize mobility and accessibility, foster economic growth/development and minimize transportation-related fuel consumption and air pollution

**Notes:**

450.300/ 450.200  Sets forth nation policy for MPOs including; Development of metropolitan transportation plan/ long-range statewide transportation plan and TIP/STIP that encourages and promotes the safe & efficient development, management, & operation of surface transportation systems to serve the mobility needs of people and freight.   

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process 

- Planning process produces three key documents:
- Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Long-range Statewide Transportation Plan
- Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program/ Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (TIP/STIP)
- Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process 

- Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Long-range Statewide Transportation Plan
- 20 year planning horizon
- Shall include long-range and short-range strategies/actions

**Notes:**

It is important to note that for projects, program, and strategies to be eligible to receive federal funds, they must be included in the Plan and STIP/TIP.

Plans involve regional policies for land and economic development, environment, transportation, etc. Transit can have a major influence -  advising localities on how they could best stage and target future growth in order to maximize transit's usefulness. 

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process 

- Metropolitan TIP
- Covers minimum 4 year period
- Conforms with SIP for air quality (non-attainment or maintenance area)
- Approved by MPO and Governor
- Incorporated into STIP
- Statewide TIP
- Covers minimum 4 year period
- Projects should be consistent with Statewide Plan
- Joint approval by FTA/FHWA

**Notes:**

Non TMAs – projects selected by State and /or the public transportation operators in cooperation with the MPO from the approved metropolitan TIP. 
In TMAs – projects selected by the MPO in “consultation” with the State and public transportation operators from the approved TIP. 

Important for transit operators and other stakeholders to understand the prioritization process and the criteria used by the MPO.   

Transit operators should be familiar with and participate in the entire metropolitan planning process.

## Overview of Transportation Planning Process 

- UPWP
- Lists transportation planning studies and tasks over one -to-two year period
- Reflects local priorities

**Notes:**
UPWP is where studies can be identified, scheduled and funded. Transit needs analyses and preparation of the local HHS coordination plan are 2 examples. If transit participates in the work of MPOs, they may get these kinds of studies performed. Also, if 5310/5316/5317 funds are used for planning (the local HHS coordination plan), that needs to be listed in the UPWP.

I would like to briefly mention two Federal programs that are related to the planning process.
There is a FTA program called Transit at the Table focused on identifying the experiences of transit agencies in large urban areas (population > 200,00) and in small and medium-sized metropolitan areas (population < 200,000) in working within the metropolitan transportation planning processes of their areas.  It examines the observations, perspectives, and recommendations of transit agencies participating in the metropolitan planning process.  

The other program is the Transportation Planning Capacity Building (TPCB) which is jointly sponsored by FTA and FHWA. This program is intended to support effective transportation planning in state, metropolitan, rural and tribal settings as well as to assist decision-makers, transportation officials and staff resolve complex issues they face when addressing transportation needs in their communities. 

## Final RuleKey Requirements

**Statewide Transportation Planning; Metropolitan Transportation Planning**

**Notes:**

notes

## Coordination of Planning Process Activities

**States shall coordinate data collection ****and analyses with MPOs and public transportation operators***[see 23 CFR 450.208(a)(7)]*
**States / MPOs may apply asset management principles and techniques to establish planning goals, define STIP/TIP priorities, and assess transportation investments***[see 23 CFR 450.208(e) and 450.306(e)]*
**Statewide / metropolitan transportation planning processes shall (to the maximum extent practicable) be consistent with the development of regional ITS architectures***[see 23 CFR 450.208(f) and 450.306(f)]*

**Notes:**

Based on changes in SAFETEA-LU, the Final Rule requires specific additional coordination activities in the metropolitan statewide planning processes. 

These additional coordination activities are identified on this slide. 

This is an Opportunity for transit operators to be involved in the planning process. 

notes

## Consultation

**Definitions for “Consultation,” “Coordination,” “Consideration,” and “Cooperation****”** *[23 CFR 450.104]*
**Repeats SAFETEA-LU language for consultation with State, Tribal and local agencies**** ***[23 CFR 450.214(i), 450.316(b) and 450.322(g)]*
**No change to requirements for consultation with non-metropolitan local officials** *[23 CFR 450.210(b)]*

**Notes:**
The rule, in Subpart A, clarifies the definitions of a variety of terms, including “consultation,” “coordination,” “consideration,” and “cooperation.”  Consultation requirements are enhanced in the rule.  
Consideration means that one or more parties takes into account the opinions, action, and relevant information from other parties in making a decision or determining a course of action.
Consultation means that one or more parties confer with other identified parties in accordance with an established process and, prior to taking action(s), considers the views of the other parties and periodically informs them about action(s) taken.  This definition does not apply to the ‘‘consultation’’ performed by the States and the MPOs in comparing the long-range statewide transportation plan and the metropolitan transportation plan, respectively, to State and Tribal conservation plans or maps or inventories of natural or historic resources (see 23 CFR § 450.214(i) and 23 CFR § 450.322(g)(1) and (g)(2)).
Cooperation means that the parties involved in carrying out the transportation planning and programming processes work together to achieve a common goal or objective.
Coordination means the cooperative development of plans, programs, and schedules among agencies and entities with legal standing and adjustment of such plans, programs, and schedules to achieve general consistency, as appropriate.
Note that there is no change from the regulatory requirements for consultation with non-metropolitan local elected officials, which were established in January 2003.

## Consultation

**Long-range statewide transportation plan shall be developed, as appropriate, in consultation with State, tribal, and local agencies responsible for:**
**Land Use Management;**
**Natural Resources;**
**Environmental Protection;**
**Conservation; and**
**Historic Preservation.**
**Shall involve **_**comparison**_** of transportation plans to State / Tribal conservation plans or maps, and to inventories of natural or historic resources, if available**** ***[see 23 CFR 450.214(i)]*
**Similar provisions for the development of metropolitan transportation plans**** ***[see 23 CFR 450.322(g)]*

***(continued)***

**Notes:**
SAFETEA-LU introduces a new consultation requirement for the long-range statewide transportation plan (as appropriate) and defines the ways in which this consultation can take place.  Please note that, in this particular case, the legislation defines how the consultation shall take place, which is different from the definition of “consultation” used elsewhere in this Final Rule.

MPOs have similar consultation requirements for metropolitan transportation plan development as State DOTs do for statewide transportation plans; however, MPOs are not required to consult with Tribes or compare the transportation plans to tribal conservation plans or maps, but are encouraged to do so.  

In the metropolitan transportation planning process, transportation plans shall involve, as appropriate, comparison with State conservation plans or maps, if available; or comparison of transportation plans to inventories of natural or historic resources” (23 CFR 450.322(g)).  The term “or” substitutes for the term “and” as reflected in SAFETEA-LU Section 6001.

## Interested Parties, Public Involvement, and Consultation

**List of “interested parties” now includes:  representatives of users ****of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities,  representatives of the disabled, ****freight shippers and providers of freight transportation services***[see 23 CFR 450.210(a)(1)(i) and 450.316(a)]** *
_**Documented**_** State and MPO processes on consulting with Indian Tribal governments and Federal land management agencies ****(to the extent practicable) ***[see 23 CFR 450.210(c) and 450.316(e)*
_**Documented**_** MPO processes also should reference consultation with other planning agencies and officials affected by transportation (to the extent practicable)** *[see 23 CFR 450.316(e)]*

**Notes:**
SAFETEA-LU expanded the list of interested parties identified in previous legislation.  “Interested parties” now also include: representatives of users of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities, representatives of the disabled, freight shippers and providers of freight transportation services in addition to:
Citizens, affected public agencies, representatives of public transportation employees, representatives of users of public transportation, private providers of transportation, and other interested parties (including transit operators)
The FHWA and the FTA support efforts to consult with Indian Tribal governments and find that documentation of consultation processes are essential to a party’s ability to understand when, how, and where the party can be involved.  Therefore, to strengthen the involvement of Indian Tribal governments in the statewide transportation planning process, the Final Rule requires documented State and MPO processes on consulting with Indian Tribal governments and Federal land management agencies (to the extent practicable). 

Documented statewide planning public involvement process also is required.  

MPO consultation should include agencies and officials responsible for planned growth and economic development, environmental protection, airport operations, or freight movement. 

## Participation Plan

**MPO shall develop a participation plan in consultation with interested parties***[see 23 CFR 450.316(a)]*
**Minimum 45-day comment period**
**Adequate, timely public notice and reasonable access**
**Employ visualization techniques**
**Make information available in electronic formats; **
**Hold meetings at convenient and accessible locations and times**
**Statewide public involvement process similar***[see 23 CFR 450.210]*

**Notes:**
SAFETEA-LU introduces a new requirement for MPOs to develop “Participation Plans.”  These “Participation Plans” are similar to the “public involvement plans” required under the previous regulation.  The most significant difference is that “Participation Plans” shall be developed in consultation with interested parties (can include transit operators) and that these documents outline the approaches chosen by local officials for using electronic media and visualization techniques, as stated below. The Final Rule implements a minimum public comment period of 45 calendar days before an initial or revised Participation Plan is adopted by the MPO. 
Other important public participation requirements include:
Adequate, timely public notice and reasonable access;
Employ visualization techniques;
Make information available in electronic formats; and
Hold meetings at convenient and accessible locations and times

Transit operators may use the MPOs’ public involvement process to fulfill the Section 5307 public involvement requirements. If they do this, the Participation Plan and TIP need to state this explicitly. 

The State must develop, document, and use a similar public involvement process, although the State is not required to develop a “participation plan.”  (Note: The Statewide public involvement process shall be separate and discrete from the non-metropolitan local consultation process.)

## Metropolitan Planning Agreements 

**Locally determined “rules of engagement”***[see 23 CFR 450. 314]*
**Shall provide for cooperative development and sharing of financial data used in metropolitan transportation plans, TIPs, STIPs, and Annual Listing of Obligated Projects**
**Ideally, a single Agreement among MPO, State, and transit operators**
**Describes coordination arrangements in areas with overlapping planning areas**

**Notes:**
To the extent possible, a single agreement among all responsible parties should be developed (23 CFR 450.314(a)).

If more than one MPO has been designated to serve an urbanized area, there shall be a written agreement among the MPOs, the State(s), and the public transportation operator(s) describing how the metropolitan transportation planning process will be coordinated to assure the development of consistent metropolitan transportation plans and TIPs across the metropolitan planning area boundaries (23 CFR 450.314(d))

If part of an urbanized area that has been designed as a TMA overlaps into an adjacent metropolitan planning area serving an urbanized area that is not designated as a TMA, the adjacent urbanized area shall not be treated as a TMA.  However, a written agreement shall be established between the MPOs with metropolitan planning area boundaries including a portion of the TMA, which clearly identifies the roles and responsibilities of each MPO in meeting specific TMA requirements (23 CFR 450.314(f))

The agreement shall include specific provisions for cooperatively developing and sharing information related to the development of financial plans that support the metropolitan transportation plan and TIP.  

##       Fiscal Constraint 

**Fiscal constraint required for STIPs, TIPs, and metropolitan transportation plans**
**Retains provision that projects included in the first two years of the TIP / STIP ****in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas shall be limited to those for which funds are “available or committed”***[see 23 CFR 450.324(i) and 450.216(m)]*
**“****Agreed to” list of projects required at TIP / STIP updates only**

**Notes:**
Since its introduction under the ISTEA, fiscal constraint has remained a prominent aspect of transportation plan and program development, carrying through to TEA-21 and now to SAFETEA-LU.

Fiscal constraint is required for STIPs, TIPs, and metropolitan transportation plans.

The Final Rule retains the provision from the previous rule that projects included in the first two years of the TIP/STIP in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas shall be limited to those for which funds are “available or committed.”
The TIP/STIP represents an “agreed to” list of projects that the MPO or State will implement throughout the cycle of the program.  This “agreed to” list is established only during TIP/STIP “updates.”  FHWA/FTA recognize that revisions will be made to the TIP/STIP, and, therefore, the amendments to the “agreed to” list may occur within update cycles.

## Fiscal Constraint

**“****Year of expenditure dollars” - effective December 11, 2007. *****[See 23 CFR 450.216(l), 450.322(f)(10)(iv) and 450.324 (h)]***
**Financial plan shall contain systems-level estimates of costs and revenue sources to adequately operate and maintain federally funded highway and transit facilities.  *****[See 23 CFR 450.216(m) and 450.322(f)(10)(i)***
**Optional use of “cost ranges/cost bands” beyond first 10 years of the metropolitan transportation plan. *****[See 23 CFR 450.322(f)(10)(v)]***

**Notes:**
There are three key features regarding fiscal constraint:  
“Year of expenditure dollars" in developing cost and revenue estimates. This requirement goes into effect December 11, 2007.
The financial plans supporting the metropolitan transportation plan and TIP and the financial information supporting the STIP SHALL BE be based on systems-level, as opposed to facility and service-specific, estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be available to adequately operate and maintain Federal-aid highways and public transportation. 
Beyond the first 10 years (i.e. “outer years”) of the metropolitan transportation plan, the financial plan may reflect aggregate cost ranges/cost bands, as long as the future funding source(s) is reasonably expected to be available to support the projected cost ranges/cost bands. (Note: The metropolitan transportation plan also may include “illustrative projects.”) 

## Planning Cycles 

**Metropolitan transportation plans must be updated at least every four years in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas***[see 23 CFR 450.322(c)]*
**Metropolitan transportation plans in attainment areas must be updated at least every five years***[see 23 CFR 450.322 (i)]*
**STIPs and metropolitan TIPs must be updated at least every four years***[see 23 CFR 450.216(a) and 450.324(a)]*
**STIPs and TIPs shall cover a period of no less than four years***[see 23 CFR 450.216(a) and 450.324(a)]*

**Notes:**
SAFETEA-LU changed the update cycles for metropolitan transportation plans (in air quality nonattainment areas), STIPs, and TIPs.  The new regulation reflects this change. SAFETEA-LU further changed the span of program years in TIPs and STIPs from three to four years. Any information included for years five and beyond are for information only. Project schedules may be shifted without amendment only among the first four years of the TIP and STIP.

## July 1, 2007 Compliance Date

**All State, MPO and FHWA / FTA actions on transportation plans ****and programs taken on or after July 1, 2007 (i.e., updates, amendments, STIP approvals, and conformity determinations) are subject to SAFETEA-LU provisions***[23 CFR 450.224 and 450.338)]*

**Notes:**
SAFETEA-LU requires that “Beginning July 1, 2007, State or metropolitan planning organization plan or program updates shall reflect changes made by this section. 

Amendments or updates after July 1, 2007 are subject to the provisions in the Final Rule.  However, administrative modifications may continue after July 1, 2007.

States and MPOs should coordinate closely with FHWA/FTA field offices to ensure that they are taking the appropriate actions to meet the requirements of SAFETEA-LU.

## Coordinated Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Plan

**Coordinated plan needed for funding under Elderly / Disabled, JARC and New Freedom Programs under Title 49 (transit)**
**Consistency required between preparation of the Coordinated Plan ****and applicable metropolitan or Statewide transportation planning processes***[see 23 CFR 450.306(g)]*
**Local officials to determine appropriate “lead;” does **_**not**_** have to be MPO**
**Projects reflected in applicable metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, ****and STIP**

**Notes:**
Sections 3012, 3018, and 3019 of the SAFETEA-LU require that proposed projects under three FTA formula funding programs (Special Needs of Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities; Job Access and Reverse Commute; and New Freedom must be derived from a locally developed public transit-human services transportation plan.  This plan must be developed through a process that includes representatives of public, private, and non-profit transportation and human services providers, as well as the public.  And, an areawide solicitation for applications for grants under the latter two programs above shall be made in cooperation with the appropriate MPO.
The rule defines “Coordinated public transit-human services transportation plan” as a locally developed, coordinated transportation plan that identifies the transportation needs of individuals with disabilities, older adults, and people with low incomes, provides strategies for meeting those local needs, and prioritizes transportation services for funding and implementation.
The coordinated public transit-human services transportation plan should be prepared in full coordination and be consistent with the metropolitan transportation planning process. 
This document is not the same as the MPO long range transportation plan. It is more than a project list – contains documented analysis results and the universe of  project recommendations – not fiscally constrained – from which those for implementation are selected.
These will typically be projects that may appropriately be grouped for inclusion in the in the plan, TIP and STIP (see 23 CFR 450.216(j) and 23 CFR 450.324(f)).

## Summary

**Transit Agency, MPO, and State DOT needs to have a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive relationship**
**Project must be included in Long Range Transportation Plan, TIP/STIP and planning project in UPWP**
**Coordinated Public Transit - Human Services Transportation Plan must contain required elements**

**Notes:**
Coordinated Plan required elements- 1) Service assessment, 2) needs assessment, 3) strategies and 4) prioritized strategies

## Questions

**	****Victor Austin, Community Planner, Office of Planning & Environment****, **
**	**_[victor.austin@dot.gov](mailto:victor.austin@dot.gov)__    202.366.2996_
**	****SAFETEA-LU Planning Illustrative Examples**
**	**_[http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/metro/sftluexamp.htm](http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/metro/sftluexamp.htm)__  _

**Notes:**

For more information, please contact your FTA Regional Office or FHWA Division Office.