1. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 1

2. Transportation Planning Monitor existing conditions Forecast future population and employment growth; projected land uses Identify transportation problems and needs; strategies to address those needs Develop long-range plans and short-range programs 2

3. Transportation Planning Estimate the impact of recommended future improvements on environmental features, including air quality Develop a financial plan for securing sufficient revenues to cover the costs 3

4. Transportation Planning Process 4

5. Metropolitan Planning Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) Urbanized areas with population > 50,000 Federal Planning Regulations 3-C Planning Process ◦ Continuing ◦ Cooperative ◦ Comprehensive 5

6. Ohio’s MPOs 6

7. MPO Role and Members Members include local governments, DOT officials, transit agencies Board is responsible for transportation decision-making Staff provide analyses and recommendations 7

8. Metropolitan Planning MPO Long-Range Plan (LRP) ◦ 20-year planning horizon ◦ Includes all major/capacity adding projects ◦ Includes all modes ◦ Fiscally constrained ◦ Air Quality conformity ◦ Approved by MPO Board 8

9. Metropolitan Planning Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) ◦ 4-year duration, adopted every 2 years, can be amended ◦ Comprehensive listing of projects and phase of implementation ◦ Consistent with Long-Range Plan ◦ All federally-funded projects ◦ Air Quality conformity 9

10. Statewide Planning ODOT is lead agency Statewide assessment Coordination with Metropolitan Planning Organizations Rural Planning Organizations and other stakeholders 10

11. Statewide Planning ODOT’s rural consultation process ◦ Local government coordination ◦ Public outreach for statewide planning ◦ Transit planning coordination ◦ Locally-developed, coordinated transit-human services transportation plans ◦ TRAC process Rural Planning Organizations 11

12. Statewide Planning ODOT’s Long-range Transportation Plan is Access Ohio 2040 Statewide evaluation of transportation networks Trends impacting transportation and impacted by transportation No fiscal constraint requirement 12

13. Statewide Planning Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 4-year duration Consistent with statewide long-range plan All federally-funded projects All other regionally significant projects Fiscally constrained 13

14. Linking Planning and NEPA 14

15. Purpose & Need Planning Phase of Project Development Process

16. Policy & Guidance  FHWA Technical Advisory (T6640.8a)  10/3/87  Purpose & Need in Environmental Documents  9/18/1990  FHWA/FTA Joint Guidance on Purpose & Need  7/23/2003  Development of Logical Termini  11/5/1993  FHWA Guidance-Linking Planning and NEPA  2/22/2005  CEQ 40 Most Asked Questions  ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/40/40p3.htm 16

17. Federal Law & Regulations National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 The purpose of this Act are: To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation  Established a systematic, interdisciplinary approach for decision-making  Study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended courses of action 17

18. CEQ Regulations  40 CFR 1500.1 (c) - Purpose  Ultimately…it is not better documents but better decisions that count. NEPA’s purpose is not to generate paperwork - even excellent paperwork - but to foster excellent action.  40 CFR 1502.13 - Purpose and Need  The statement shall briefly specify the underlying purpose and need to which the agency is responding in proposing the alternatives including the proposed action 18

19. CEQ Regulations  40 CFR 1502.14 - Alternatives  Heart of the environmental document  Agencies shall: “…evaluate all reasonable alternatives, and for alternatives which were eliminated from detailed study, briefly discuss the reasons for their having been eliminated.” 19

20. FHWA Regulations  23 CFR 771.111(f) …the action evaluated in each EIS or finding of no significant impact (FONSI) shall:  Connect logical termini  Have independent utility  Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements  Guidance and Policy for preparation of P&N based upon 40 CFR 1500 and 23 CFR 771 20

21. FHWA Definition Purpose  States concisely and clearly why the undertaking is being proposed  Articulates intended positive outcomes Need  Transportation problem(s) to be addressed  Defines causes of existing problems  Factual, quantifiable data 21

22. FHWA Guidance FHWA Technical Advisory (T6640.8A) (10/30/1987) Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/impTA6640.asp Section II - Part B Purpose & Need for Action  Describe location, length, termini, proposed improvements, etc.  Identify and describe the transportation or other needs which the proposed action is intended to satisfy (e.g., provide system continuity, alleviate traffic congestion, and correct safety or roadway deficiencies) 22

23. FHWA Guidance FHWA Technical Advisory (T6640.8A) Section V - Part D  Clearly demonstrate that a "need" exists and define the "need" in terms understandable to the public  Forms the basis for the “No Build" discussion in the Alternatives section and assist with the identification of reasonable alternatives and selection of the preferred 23

24. FHWA Guidance FHWA Technical Advisory (T6640.8A)  On projects where a law, Executive Order, or regulation mandates an evaluation of avoidance alternatives, explanation of the project need should be more specific so that avoidance alternatives that do not meet the stated project need can be readily dismissed 24

25. FHWA Guidance Purpose & Need in Environmental Documents  A clear and well-justified P&N explains to the public and decision-makers why expenditure of funds is necessary and worthwhile  Priority being given to the action relative to other needed highway projects is warranted  Although significant environmental impacts may be expected, P&N should justify why impacts are acceptable 25

26. FHWA Guidance FHWA/FTA Joint Guidance on P&N (7/23/2003) www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guidebook/Gjoint.asp  Lead agency has the authority and responsibility to define 'purpose and need' for NEPA analysis  For Federal-Aid (FHWA Title 23 US Code funded) projects, lead federal agency is FHWA 26

27. FHWA Guidance  Joint-lead or cooperating agencies should afford substantial deference to the lead agency's articulation of a project’s P&N  P&N is the cornerstone for the alternatives analysis, but should not discuss solutions  Care should be taken to ensure P&N is not so narrow as to unreasonably point to a single solution 27

28. FHWA Guidance  Logical Termini  Rational end points for a transportation improvement  Rational end points for review of environmental impacts 28

29. FHWA Guidance Guidance on the Development of Logical Project Termini (11/5/1993) www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/tdmtermini.asp  In developing a project which can be advanced through stages of planning, environmental, design, and construction, the project sponsor needs to consider a “whole” or integrated project  Should satisfy an identified need and consider the context of the local area’s socioeconomics and topography, future travel demand, and other planned infrastructure improvements 29

30. FHWA Guidance  Proposed improvements may miss the mark by only peripherally satisfying the need or by causing unexpected side effects which require additional corrective action  “Segmentation" may occur where a transportation need extends throughout an entire corridor but environmental issues and needs are discussed for only a segment of the corridor 30

31. FHWA Guidance  Three general principles at 23 CFR 771.111(f) used to frame a highway project:  Logical termini connection should be of sufficient length to address environmental matters on a broad scope  Independent utility or significance Reasonable expenditure even if no additional transportation improvements in the area are made  Consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements is not restricted 31

32. FHWA Guidance LINKING PLANNING & NEPA (2/22/2005) www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/plannepalegal050222.htm  A sound transportation planning process is the primary source of an undertaking’s P&N  P&N is where planning and NEPA intersect 32

33. FHWA Guidance LINKING PLANNING & NEPA  The following information from planning studies can be used in the P&N:  Goals and objectives from the transportation planning process  Results of analyses from management systems (e.g., congestion, pavement, bridge, and/or safety) 33

34. FHWA Guidance LINKING PLANNING & NEPA  With proper documentation and public involvement, a P&N derived from the planning process can legitimately narrow the alternatives analyzed for NEPA 34

35. FHWA Guidance LINKING PLANNING & NEPA  Alternatives eliminated during the planning process because they do not meet P&N, can be omitted from the detailed analysis of alternatives in the NEPA document  Explain the rationale for elimination of alternatives in the NEPA document 35

36. FHWA Guidance  A statement of the transportation problem  Not solution-based  Based on articulated planning factors and developed through a certified planning process 36

37. FHWA Guidance  Specific enough so range of alternatives developed offer solutions to the transportation problem  Not so specific as to "reverse engineer” a solution  May reflect other priorities and limitations in the area (i.e. environmental resources, growth management, land use, and economic development) 37

38. Logical Termini  Transportation problem begins and ends  Federal Actions shall not be segmented Does not preclude phasing of construction under a single NEPA action  State/Municipal boundaries are not end points 38

39. Independent Utility  Establishes independent significance  May be implied by logical termini  May need to be specifically addressed  Distinct from project construction phasing  Demonstrates that the project is not dependent on any other action 39

40. Problems vs. Symptoms

41. Typical Problem  Lack of transportation options  Demand that exceeds system capacity  Through traffic on residential streets  Lack of system or route continuity  Safety  Infrastructure in disrepair  Need for access to developing land Transportation Solutions  Transit improvements  Bicycle and pedestrian facilities  Traffic control improvements  Law Enforcement  Access management  Transportation demand management strategies  Traffic calming  Increased capacity along existing facility  Reconstructed roads, bridges  Construction of new roads Alternatives should align solutions to the underlying problems

42. Transportation Solutions  Transit improvements  Bicycle and pedestrian facilities  Traffic control improvements  Law Enforcement  Access management  Transportation demand management strategies  Traffic calming  Increased capacity along existing facility  Reconstructed roads, bridges  Construction of new roads Typical Problem  Lack of Transportation options  Demand that exceeds system capacity  Through traffic on residential streets  Lack of system or route continuity  Safety  Infrastructure in disrepair  Need for access to developing land Alternatives should align solutions to the underlying problems