Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Corridor Planning
Process Guide
DI
VISION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
February 2020
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 2 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Disclaimer: The inf
ormation and data contained in this document are for planning
purposes only and should not be relied upon for final design of any project. Any
information in the Caltrans Corridor Planning Process Guide is subject to modification as
conditions change and new information is obtained. Although planning information is
dynamic and continually changing, the Division of Transportation Planning Office of
Multimodal System Planning makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and timeliness
of the information contained in the Corridor Planning Process Guide. The information in
the Corridor Planning Process Guide does not constitute a standard, specification, or
regulation, nor is it intended to address design policies and procedures.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 3 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Contents
Foreword ........................................................................................................................................ 4
Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 4
Scope ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Caltrans Corridor Planning Process Guide ................................................................................ 5
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5
Background and Purpose ........................................................................................................ 8
Eight-Step Corridor Planning Process ................................................................................... 14
Scope Effort .......................................................................................................................... 17
Gather Information ............................................................................................................. 27
Conduct Performance Assessment .................................................................................. 34
Identify Potential Projects and Strategies ........................................................................ 40
Analyze Improvement Strategies ...................................................................................... 43
Select and Prioritize Solutions ............................................................................................. 50
Publish and Implement Corridor Plan ............................................................................... 53
Monitor and Evaluate Progress ......................................................................................... 54
Appendix A – Laws, Regulation and Policies Pertaining to Corridor Planning .................. 56
Federal Law or Regulation ..................................................................................................... 56
State Law or Regulation ......................................................................................................... 57
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 4 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Foreword
Purpose
The Caltrans Corridor Planning Process Guide (Guide) was prepared for the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) by the Division of Transportation Planning for
use on preparing corridor planning documents. This Guide establishes a
comprehensive planning approach through desired protocols and procedures to
identify and implement multimodal transportation needs. It is neither intended as, nor
does it establish, a legal standard for these functions.
Th
e protocols and procedures discussed herein are for the information and guidance of
the officers and employees of Caltrans.
So
me of the guidance given herein is subject to an amendment as conditions, needs
and experience warrant. Special situations may call for innovative solutions and
consultation with other Caltrans divisions may be necessary and appropriate.
It
is not intended that any standard of conduct or duty toward the public shall be
created or imposed by the publication of this Guide. Statements as to the duties and
responsibilities of any given classification of officers or employees mentioned herein
refer solely to duties or responsibilities owed by these in such classification to their
superiors. However, in their official contacts, each employee should recognize the
necessity for good relations with the public and stakeholders.
Scope
This Guide may involve, either directly or indirectly, engineering and operational issues.
It is not a substitute for engineering knowledge, experience of judgment in terms of
addressing Caltrans design standards or otherwise engineer approved designs.
No
warranty is made regarding the results of use of the Guide. In no event, shall
Caltrans be liable for costs of procurement of substitute goods, loss of profits, or for any
indirect, special, consequential, or incidental damages, however caused, by use of the
Guide. Caltrans shall not be liable for any claims in connection with the use of the
Guide, including without limitation, liability arising from third-party claims, liability related
to the implementation, or non-implementation of any concepts developed based on
the protocols and procedures outlined in the Guide.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 5 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Caltrans Corridor Planning Process Guide
Introduction
The transportation system in California moves people and goods between home, work,
school, shopping, recreation, and other destinations, and connects ports, industry,
residential communities, commercial centers, educational facilities, and natural
wonders. California’s vast transportation system includes roads and highways, public-
use airports, major ports, freight systems, and transit systems including the nation’s first
High-Speed Rail (HSR) system, currently under construction. Transportation has a
profound and varied impact on individuals, business, and communities, with benefits
such as economic growth, greater accessibility, and transport-related physical activity,
as well as consequences such as pollution, traffic congestion, and sedentary behaviors.
Regional variation, including the different conditions between rural and urban areas,
shape the character of the transportation system, the planning documents, and
potential improvements to address needs. Transportation systems and the mobility they
provide are also affected by changing transportation technologies, evolving land use
patterns, and system disruptions from climate change impacts.
Corridor Planning is a multimodal transportation planning approach that recognizes
that transportation needs are based on the complex geographic, demographic,
economic, and social characteristics of communities. These locations are tied together
by a complex system of streets, roads, highways, trails, paths, rail lines, bus corridors, and
other elements that affect the convenience, safety, and accessibility of transportation
choices. Increasingly, technologies such as real-time, web- and mobile-enabled trip
planning and ride-sourcing services are changing how people travel. Soon,
automated and connected vehicles, and unmanned aerial systems (e.g., drones) are
expected to be part of our transportation landscape and will transform the way that
people and freight are transported.
A corridor can be defined as a linear geographic area with one or more modes of
transportation that facilitates the movement of people and goods, supports the
economy, and connects communities. Origins and destinations, land use, place types,
and existing and future development that surround the transportation infrastructure
influences how the corridor and its limits are defined.
While there may be multiple routes to get from one place to another, key predominant
routes within corridors connect the origins and destinations. Most travel is focused on
the shortest or fastest routes. These routes become more evident when measured in
terms of total volume along the route or the number of origins and destinations served.
Land use often predicts travel demand and conversely high capacity routes often
determine land uses. The relationship between land use and transportation is
manifested by the volume of travel demand. This demand is an indicator that people
have chosen certain routes connecting the origins and destinations of greatest interest.
When land use and transportation have been well coordinated, travel times are reliable
and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is low.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 6 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Corridor definitio
ns vary and are typically context specific. A good example is the
definition prepared for the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Transit Agency (FTA). A corridor is a
largely linear geographic band defined by existing and forecasted travel patterns
involving both people and goods. The corridor serves a particular market or markets
that are affected by similar transportation needs and mobility issues. The corridor
includes various networks (e.g., limited access facility, surface arterial(s), transit, bicycle,
pedestrian pathway, waterway) that provide similar or complementary transportation
functions. Additionally, the corridor includes cross-network connections that [may]
permit the individual networks to be readily accessible from each other. The term
“network” is used to denote a specific combination of facility and mode (L. Neudorff)
1
.
The final determination of the corridor study area will depend on policies, location, and
need and will ultimately be made by the corridor team, which should be comprised of
Caltrans, regional and local planning agencies, Tribal Governments, advocates, and
other stakeholders as applicable.
Objectives of compreh
ensive multimodal corridor planning may well include the
following:
• Encourage effective communication with partners, stakeholders, Tribal
Governments, advocacy groups, and the public by providing a transparent
planning process with clear corridor objectives.
• Identify the corridors by considering origin and destination, along with land-use
and place-types, to address multimodal transportation opportunities through a
comprehensive, cooperative, and continuing planning process.
• Task a multi-disciplinary, multi-organizational corridor team to look at State and
local transportation systems, while including community, local, and regional
transportation systems.
• Identify opportunities to employ cooperative, multimodal, and systematic
improvements by leveraging federal, state, and local funding programs such as
self-help county sales tax programs.
• Underscore the importance of corridors identified in the Interregional
Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP) and other statewide plans.
• Support Caltrans' asset management program and emphasize the importance
of utilizing maintenance and operational improvements to strengthen the
mobility and accessibility options of the community.
• Identify and prioritize projects and strategies to meet future corridor
opportunities.
• Analyze multimodal transportation issues and opportunities for optimizing system
operations and support a safe and reliable system.
1
L. Neudorff, J. Harding, and L Englisher, Integrated Corridor Management Concept
Development and Foundational Research, Task 3.2 Develop Criteria for Delineating a
Corridor, United States Department of Transportation, ITS Joint Program Office, FHWA,
FTA, Washington DC. https://connected-
corridors.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/fhwa_develop_criteria_for_delineating_a_
corridor.pdf
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 7 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
• Further federal and State ambient air standards and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions reduction standards pursuant to the California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006 (Division 25.5, commencing with Section 38550, of the
Health and Safety Code) and Senate Bill (SB) 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008).
• Preserve the character of local communities, create opportunities for
neighborhood enhancement, and improve multimodal accessibility including
complete streets.
• Consider climate change adaptation and resiliency of the transportation system
to reduce disruptions.
• Identify opportunities that achieve a balanced set of transportation,
environmental, and community access improvements.
Ideally corridor planning culminates in a clear vision for identified improvements, while
recognizing both the positive and negative impacts of changes over time. Currently,
California is seeing tremendous population growth and has a critical housing shortage.
While the economy is doing well, the transportation system is strained in many places.
The state of repair is a key priority within the entire system. Many facilities are
overloaded with demand, disruptions would therefore place significant burdens on
users and on the larger regional economy. Travel choices are limited in many
communities. Air and noise pollution and GHG emissions are negative externalities that
often disproportionally affect underserved communities. Corridor improvement
concepts should strive for travel equity, economic opportunity, access to jobs and
housing, and consider the environment and users of the system. By thinking in holistic
terms about what success looks like, corridor planners can fully weigh all options that
reflect the desires of the local community as well as the State.
Tribal, local, regional, and statewide goals must be considered and incorporated into
the corridor planning process where relevant. Statewide goals draw from documents
including the California Transportation Plan (CTP), the Caltrans Strategic Management
Plan (SMP), California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, the California Freight Mobility
Plan (CFMP), the California State Rail Plan (CSRP), Statewide Transit Strategic Plan, and
from stakeholders. This planning context, where applicable, must be integrated into the
corridor planning process and into the final corridor plans.
Corridor Planning within California should address quality of life, access to destinations,
environmental factors including GHG, and transportation system performance. The
impacts of the benefits and the burdens on different groups and communities should
also be considered in the system analysis and improvement discussions. Although,
Caltrans is the owner operator of the State Highway System (SHS), planning for
tomorrow is not bound by the State’s right of way or jurisdictional boundaries. The
State’s transportation system should be integrated, seamless, resilient, multimodal, and
accessible. Examples of statewide policies include Executive Order N-19-19 and the
Regions Rise Initiative.
• Executive Order N-19-19 – California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive
Order N-19-19 on September 20, 2019 to require the redoubling of the state’s
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 8 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
“efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate
change while building a sustainable, inclusive economy.”
• Regions Rise Initiative – Regions Rise Together is a vision for inclusive and resilient
economic development and sustainable land use and transportation planning
across California and regions. Key Pillars:
1. Promoting Regions Up Planning and Partnerships
2. Changing our Mental Map of California
3. Improving Connections Across Regions to Link California
This Guidebook provides direction to Caltrans staff regarding the transportation
planning process, but it can be used by other agencies. It does not focus on a specific
fund source but should consider all available funding sources. It is basically a
comprehensive analysis of a transportation corridor and should address multiple needs.
The Guidebook was developed in collaboration with the California Transportation
Commission’s (CTC) Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan Guidelines approved in
December of 2018. The CTC’s Guidelines were developed to provide guidance to
eligible program applicants regarding the statutory requirements for comprehensive
corridor plans utilized by agencies to apply for funding through the Solutions to
Congested Corridors Program. In other words, the CTC Guidelines provide direction for
one funding program and the Caltrans Guidebook provides guidance for corridor
planning irrespective of fund source.
Background and Purpose
Caltrans Commitment to Corridor Plans
Caltrans is committed to developing transportation corridor plans (or Corridor Plans)
that identify and recommend transportation strategies and improvements in
coordination with our planning partners, resulting in a range of pre-Project Initiation
Document (PID) project candidates and non-project strategies that achieve Caltrans
goals and objectives. These project candidates and strategies are advanced to
implementation through regional planning, system planning and programming
processes. The corridor plans and recommended projects should strive to meet local,
regional, statewide goals for a safe, sustainable, integrated, and effective
transportation system that positively impacts all Californians. They should also outline a
corridor vision for improving and operating the system in a manner that achieves these
goals.
Replacement of Transportation Concept Report (TCR) Guidelines
This Guide supersedes the Transportation Concept Report (TCR) Guidelines from
September 2012. Previously, the TCR was Caltrans’ main System Planning product that
described SHS routes and identified transportation options along those routes. Caltrans
System Planning to Programming (SP2P) Study
2
was released in May 2017 and endorsed
2
(Kittelson & Associates, Inc., Emergent Transportation Concepts, and System Metrics
Group, 2017)
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 9 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
by Caltrans. The Guide implements many of the SP2P recommendations, including
shifting Caltrans System Planning program towards more partnership and performance-
based Corridor Plans.
Purpose of Corridor Planning Process Guide
The purpose of the Guide is to clearly state Caltrans expectations on conducting the
corridor planning process steps as outlined in Figure 1. The outcome will be
recommended projects and strategies compiled by the district and its partners,
documented in Corridor Plans, and advanced in the planning process for future
funding and programming opportunities and programming process. This Guide
presents a flexible methodology and approach that is intended to be helpful to districts
in corridor planning. The scope and work activities related to this process can and
should be tailored to the district and its partners based on available, time, resources,
and expertise.
Figure 1. Steps of the Corridor Planning Process
Scope
Effort,
Identify
Partners,
Assemble
Team
Gather
Information:
Criteria,
Data, and
Emphasis
Areas
Conduct
Baseline
Performance
Assessment
Identify
Potential
Projects
and
Strategies
Analyze
Improvement
Strategies
Select
and
Prioritize
Solutions
Publish/
Implement
Corridor
Plan
Who is Involved and What is Covered
The Guide is intended for Caltrans’ System Planning staff assigned to lead or participate
in corridor planning efforts and is also intended to inform and encourage broader
Caltrans staff participation in corridor planning efforts led by partner agencies. The
Guide covers System Planning activities for any transportation corridor as delineated by
a corridor team with Caltrans involvement, typically (but not necessarily) focused on
one or more segments of the SHS. Appendix A provides a more comprehensive listing
of relevant federal laws and regulations, State laws and policies, and Caltrans
Directives and Policies related to corridor planning.
Purpose of System Planning and Corridor Planning at Caltrans
The purpose of System Planning at Caltrans is to identify and recommend projects and
strategies that achieve Caltrans goals and objectives in a collaborative manner.
In
response to federal law, System Planning supports and adheres to a continuing,
cooperative and comprehensive statewide transportation planning process.
3
4
Furthermore, federal law states that a congestion management process shall be
3
California Government Code Section 65086
4
Title 23 United States Code Section 135.
Monitor
and
Evaluate
Progress
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 10 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
developed, established and implemented as part of the planning process.
5
The
Congestion Management Process (CMP) is a systematic approach, collaboratively
developed and implemented throughout a region, providing for the safe and effective
management and operation of new and existing transportation facilities through the
use of demand reduction and operational management strategies. Caltrans’ System
Planning process is necessary for the CMP approach to be successful, which includes
development of performance measures, assessment/evaluation of potential projects
and improvement strategies, and performance monitoring. Corridor planning is one of
the ways in which Caltrans System Planning achieves its purpose (in cooperation with
other Caltrans functions) and complies with federal law and State policy.
A corridor planning approach relies on collaboration between Caltrans districts and
their regional partners to identify their key transportation corridors, and develop
individual corridor plans to identify and address a corridor’s opportunities. The
identification of high priority travel corridors in a district occurs through discussions with
partners, which helps to inform development of the District System Management Plan
(DSMP). In this context, corridor prioritization refers to the relative level of urgency to
devoting staff time and resources to planning activities on specific travel corridors.
Guidance related to corridor prioritization will be incorporated into separate Caltrans
DSMP Guidelines.
Role of Corridor Plans in Statewide and District System Planning Process
A corridor plan defines how a corridor is performing (and estimates for the future), why it
is performing that way, and recommends projects and strategies that achieve corridor
goals and objectives. The recommended strategies, opportunities, or projects may
become candidates for funding programs. Corridor Planning is one way in which
district transportation candidate projects get identified and compiled for inclusion into
a district’s project list and Headquarters’ Multimodal Operations non-State Highway
Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) Transportation Equity Report (MONSTER)
project list. Other ways include asset management planning, safety program planning,
district-wide modal plans, and other collaborative methods. One such collaborative
method are district-led project nomination teams related to specific transportation
investment programs. The process begins when the team analyzes multiple needs and
selects anchor or satellite projects. An “anchor” is the main purpose of the project and
the “satellite” is a secondary goal. Anchor and satellite projects may be grouped
together as one, also known as bundling, then selected for PID development and
potentially recommended for programming. Figure 2 below, illustrates the District
System Planning process within Caltrans and its key products.
5
Title 23 CFR Part 450.322 (d)
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 11 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Figure 2. Caltrans District System Planning Process
District System Planning and Corridor Plan Development Approaches
Development of a Corridor Plan can be approached in three distinct ways: Creating a
new Corridor Plan, update of an existing Corridor Plan, or a hybrid approach combining
existing studies that result in a single more comprehensive Corridor Plan. The process
outlined in this Guide applies to these approaches.
Governance
Corridor Planning is conducted through partnerships with a variety of agencies and
groups leading to the development of a comprehensive corridor plan that includes
roles, responsibilities, and implementation steps. The roles and responsibilities of each
agency should be outlined during the initiation and development of the corridor plan
and can vary depending on level of interest and legal responsibility.
For example, Caltrans as the owner and operator of the SHS has specific responsibilities
related to the highway system, along with varying levels of responsibility for statewide
rail services, while local and regional agencies have responsibilities for other systems
including local street networks, transit services, local trails, and regional rail lines.
Responsibilities also extend to funding sources with Caltrans controlling certain fund
sources, such as the SHOPP and the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program
(ITIP), and local and regional agencies controlling their own funding, such as Regional
Transportation Improvement Programs (RTIPs).
During the project scopi
ng, it is important to identify roles, responsibilities, and establish
a process/strategy to develop and accept the final corridor plan. The process could
include the input of a combination of technical experts, policy leads, and ultimately the
approving management group. For example, the following teams or committees could
be formed to develop a corridor plan: a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of
knowledgeable staff of the representative agencies to conduct the technical work; a
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 12 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) to provide higher level planning direction; and a
steering committee to ultimately recommend the final plan for approval.
One of the key elements
of the planning process, beyond the final plan, is an
implementation strategy. This strategy should outline who is responsible for what
elements of the corridor plan and how they are expected to implement those identified
activities. Governance responsibilities should be included in this strategy. Agencies
that are the owner and operator of transportation infrastructure and systems, along with
control over identified funding sources, should have greater responsibility over their
specific assets and activities. Partner agencies that do not control the major resources
but are willing and able to provide support should have identified and committed
activities outlined in the implementation plan.
Implementation Plan
As previously identified in the scoping step of this process, an implementation plan is
necessary to outline roles and responsibilities of the key elements, strategies, and
projects in the final corridor plan. The roles and responsibilities should be shaped by an
agency’s ability to control the appropriate resources (transportation infrastructure, staff,
and funding) and willingness to partner. During the corridor planning process, the
implementation plan should be developed and agreed upon by the TAC, PAC, and
management team. The implementation plan should outline a series of activities and
projects that once completed should achieve the overall vision and benefits targeted
by the corridor planning team and identified in the final plan. A key element is the
monitoring of the plan to ensure implementation is successful which should be
conducted by representatives of the partner agencies. Another important element is
the continuous reassessment of performance measures and assumptions to determine if
an update of the plan is needed due to unforeseen changing conditions regarding the
infrastructure, funding availability, and policies. Roles and responsibilities for
implementation can be identified in an agreement between the agencies such as a
Memo of Understanding (MOU).
Key Elements of a Corridor Plan
When participating as either the lead or as a partner agency, Caltrans expects Corridor
Plans contain to contain certain important elements as part of its approach.
Caltrans expects the foll
owing key elements to be considered within a Corridor Plan, no
matter the lead or sponsoring agency. Elements of a plan should include, but are not
limited to, the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Short, medium, and long-term planning horiz
on
Specific corridor objectives
Multimodal considerations for and approaches to address transportation system
issues
Identification and evaluation of performance measures for recommended
projects and strategies
Clear demonstration of State, regional, and local collaboration
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 13 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
• Consideration and application of a range of performance metrics (such as those
outlined in Chapter 7 of the 2017 Regional Transportation Plans (RTP) Guidelines,
6
project specific performance measures as outlined in the Statewide
Transportation Improvement (STIP) Guidelines,
7
and other plans such as the Rail
Plan or Asset Management plan, etc.) for the set of recommended project and
strategies.
• Recommendations and prioritization of multimodal improvements that feed into
transportation funding programs and regional transportation planning
• Consistent with the principles of the federal Congestion Management Process
8
and incorporation of the State Congestion Management Program goals for
designated Congestion Management Agencies
• Consistency with the principles of the CTP
9
and including the ITSP, the Caltrans’
Smart Mobility Framework
10
, California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, and
climate adaption plans
• Consistency with the goals and objectives of the regional transportation plan
including the forecasted development pattern identified in the Sustainable
Communities Strategy (SCS) and, when applicable, areas identified as high-
priority for growth
• Consistency with other applicable regional or local planning frameworks such as
local jurisdiction land use plans including transit supportive land use plans, freight
and goods movement plans, local climate action plans, and policies
Demonstrating and documenting that these key Corridor Plan elements were
addressed along with the outcomes of the corridor planning process will exhibit the use
of best corridor planning practice in identifying projects and strategies to achieve
corridor goals and objectives.
6
7
8
9
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/regional-planning
https://catc.ca.gov/programs/state-transportation-improvement-program
https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/focus_areas/cmp.htm; 23 CFR 450.320(a) and (b).
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/state-planning/california-
transportation-plan
10
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-
climate-change/smart-mobility-active-transportation/smart-mobility-framework
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Eight-Step Corridor Planning Process
There are eight main steps of the corridor planning process, illustrated in Figure 1. This
process should include:
• Internal and External Partners
• Stakeholders
• Tribal Governments
• Advocacy Groups
The eight steps are briefly described below then followed by a more complete
description of each.
1. SCOPE EFFORT
The Corridor Plan’s scope frames the overall corridor planning effort, defines th
e
corridor partnership, and helps to determine appropriate analysis tools. This step wil
l
result in a defined corridor team, agreement on the issues and potential opportuniti
es
that will be considered, and a comprehensive set of goals, objectives, and
performance measures for the corridor.
2. GATHER
INFORMATION
Corri
dor information is collected and organized to inform an understanding of the
corridor context, identification of different operational conditions in the corridor, current
and future conditions, and the defining factors that would drive alternative investment
scenarios. This information outlines the corridor description, basic system characteristic s
of the corridor and its unique elements within a larger national, State, and regional
context. The assessment of current conditions may require new data collection to fill
identified data gaps and may require a data collection.
3. CONDUCT
BASELINE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
A perf
ormance assessment is conducted to clearly outline system performance and
trends. The results are then interpreted to highlight the relationship between identifie d
issues and their causes. For the assessment of existing conditions and for the most
frequent/impactful operational conditions corridor performance issues are identifi ed
then their causes are diagnosed. At a minimum, corridor profiles are developed for
mobility, safety, travel time reliability and sustainability. This task also includes
performance assessment for the future baseline (do nothing or no build). A
reassessment/adjustment of the performance measures from the scoping effort step
may be necessary based on the study of the current conditions and future potential
scenarios.
4. IDENTIF
Y POTENTIAL PROJECTS AND STRATEGIES
Potent
ial projects and strategies are identified at sufficient levels of detail for analysis
and evaluation based on existing plans and studies, as well as the performanc e
assessment, gaps identification, and diagnosing the causes of congestion, safety, an
d
reliability issues.
Page 14 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 15 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
5. ANA
LYZE IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES
Possible improvement projects and strategies may be grouped into scenarios to be
evaluated. An Analysis Plan may also be developed to scope the analysis effort and to
identify resources required for the analysis. The Analysis Plan should be consistent with
planning horizons, analysis tools, and performance measures previously identified. A
corridor analysis is then conducted to evaluate the effect of potential investments on
corridor performance. During the analysis, assumptions made in the scoping step may
be reassessed and modified if necessary.
6. SELEC
T AND PRIORITIZE SOLUTIONS
Decisions are made on which corridor projects and strategies are promising for
addressing the identified goals, objectives, and performance measures for the corridor.
then the recommended are given an expected implementation timeframe of either
short-, medium-, or long-term horizons. The outcome is a recommended set of
multimodal solutions for the corridor that addresses the identified issues and
opportunities, along with and may include estimated implementation timeframes. The
combination of promising projects and strategies are summarized in a statement or
document outlining how the corridor is expected to operate, including any
recommended technical, organizational, and institutional arrangements necessary for
the corridor improvements to realize their expected benefits. In some instances, it may
be difficult for all agencies involved to agree on a prioritized list of projects
recommended for the corridor. In addition, determining short-, medium-, or long-term
timeframes will be speculative and also greatly depend on the outcome of competitive
discretionary programs, availability of funds, and year of programming.
7. PUBLISH / IMPLEMENT CORRIDOR PLAN
The corridor planning process is documented with the publication of the Corridor Plan.
The adopted corridor plan documents how a corridor is performing today (and
estimates for the future), why it is performing that way, and recommends projects and
strategies that support the corridor goals and objectives agreed upon by its partners.
The Corridor Plan may include an implementation schedule, as well as the identification
of responsibilities of the various partner agencies; however, prioritizing projects may be
difficult to achieve without knowing when funding will be approved. In addition,
specific project selection criteria will dictate the type of projects funding programs will
consider. In parallel, formal technical, institutional, and organizational arrangements
may be initiated among the corridor partners, including use cases about how the
corridor is expected to operate under different conditions. Therefore, project
Recommendations are ready to can be advanced toward implementation by the
corridor partnership upon approved funding.
The
Corridor Plan is not expected to require its own coverage under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) but will typically serve as project and program input
to the next update of the pertinent Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which will undergo its own programmatic
environmental compliance under CEQA. Adoption of Corridor Plans do not supersede
the adoption of the RTP/SCS by the respective Metropolitan Planning Organizations.
The adoption of Corridor Plans represent a consensus on candidate projects for future
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 16 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
programming and funding opportunities and may become the basis for input to the
RTP/SCS.
8. MONI
TOR AND EVALUATE PROGRESS
Ongoing reporting on corridor performance is conducted for Corridor Plans should be
updated to evaluate the effectiveness of recommended projects and strategies on
corridor performance over time. Corridor objectives may also be re-assessed and
refined by the corridor team. The Corridor Plan may also identify triggers or events that
may necessitate an update of the Plan. Corridor Plans should be updated every five
years or at the discretion of the lead and/or partner agencies.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 17 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Scope Effort
Outcomes: A clearly defined scope and team to guide the corridor planning process.
Agreement on the issues and potential opportunities that will be considered during the
corridor planning process. A comprehensive set of goals, objectives and performance
measures for the corridor that will guide the selection of solutions that address the
corridor's issues and opportunities.
The Corridor Plan’s scope frames the overall corridor planning effort, defines the
corridor partnership, identifies corridor planning horizons (short-, medium-, and long-
term), and helps determine appropriate analysis tools. This step will result in a defined
corridor team (including Caltrans, partner agencies and stakeholders with interests in
the corridor), agreement on the issues and potential opportunities that will be
considered, and a comprehensive set of goals, objectives, and performance measures
for the corridor. The assessment of current conditions may require new data collection
to fill identified data gaps. Coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organizations
or Regional Transportation Planning Agencies are vital to a successful corridor plan.
Assemble corridor planning team
Assembling the corridor team marks the beginning of stakeholder outreach, which
should remain an on-going effort during the study. The main objective for this step is for
the lead agency to determine who should be involved with a potential study, who will
be involved as partners and stakeholders, and discussing the resources and expertise
that team members could devote to a corridor planning effort. Depending on the
anticipated size of the effort, development of a Project Management Plan (PMP)
should be considered to document and monitor the plan scope, schedule, cost,
communications, and risk.
The
team should do its corridor planning work within a collaborative organizational
structure. This can be outlined and described with a charter, mandate, or
Memorandum of Agreement. Alternatively, the team could build on an existing
collaborative group and formalize the corridor planning effort in the form of a
resolution. Either approach should be the basis for securing support from agency
leadership, which provides critically important high-level commitment to the Corridor
Plan and its process.
Define corridor area
Once the corridor team is assembled, the corridor area to be addressed by the Plan
should be defined in general terms. Agreement on the corridor area and its limits
should be documented in the team’s charter or agreement. This Guide defines a
corridor as a geographic area defined by existing and forecasted travel patterns for
people and goods. Travel in the corridor may be multimodal, is context specific,
relative in scale to the region wherein it exists, with its limits defined by travel or modal
decision points.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 18 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Draft issue statements and opportunities
An important early step for the corridor team is to develop a common understanding of
issues and opportunities within the corridor at a high level, including the blend of
transportation, community, economic, advanced mitigation, and environmental issues.
This will form the basis for identifying goals and objectives later in the process and
provide early indication of the focus areas for the corridor’s performance assessment.
The result should be an issue and opportunity statement that can be later aligned to
corridor objectives.
Determine timeframe and available resources
In the scoping process, it is important to consider the time-period within which the
Corridor Plan is expected to be completed. This is also helpful when determining the
analysis approach for the Corridor Plan, and when choosing the appropriate analysis
method. For instance, decision makers may need quick answers regarding a specific
issue or alternately may be seeking comprehensive solutions to input into a long-range
plan.
Gett
ing a clear picture of the resources available is a particularly important part of
determining the scope of the Corridor Plan. Awareness of available data for such a
corridor planning effort is critical. This not only includes knowing the data inventory,
collection, and processing capabilities of the lead agency, but as well as of partner
agencies. The level and type of pubic and stakeholder outreach to be conducted is
another important factor. The team should consider developing an outreach plan or
strategy at this stage of the Corridor Plan scoping. Figure 3 shows the key components
that helps to define the level of available resources for a corridor planning effort.
Figure 3. Key Components Determining Level of Available Resources to Construct Corridor Plan
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 19 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Existing Plans, Policies, and Architectures
The existing planning and policy settings in which the Corridor Plan is taking place
should be considered from the beginning of the scoping process. Applicable planning
goals and objectives, relevant policies, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS)
architectures should all be explored. A review of existing studies, reports, and plans
provides information about the broader planning context, and offers insight into how
current partners have recently defined elements of a big-picture vision for the corridor
and/or the surrounding study area. There are many planning documents which will be
useful in identifying applicable goals and policies, as well as potential stakeholders.
They should include but are not limited to the following:
• The California Transportation Plan is California’s long-range transportation
plan
providing a 20-year vision for the State’s transportation system and a set of
supporting goals, policies, and recommendations.
• Caltrans Strategic Management Plan is a roadmap of how Caltrans will meet its
mission, vision, and goals and identifies specific performance measures tied to
each of five goals.
• Caltrans modal plans including: Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan,
California State Rail Plan, California Freight Mobility Plan, California State Transit
Plan, Toward an Active California: State Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, California
Aviation System Plan.
• A Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) – (sometimes called a Metropolitan
Transportation Plan) is required by federal and State regulations and Federal law
to set a region’s long-term transportation goals and objectives.
• Regional, county, and local level transportation plans are often produced to
feed into the RTP. County plans often include multimodal goals, objectives, and
strategies.
• Transit agencies prepare short-range transit plans to identify desired transit
projects and services within their service areas.
• Regional ITS Architectures can play an important role in decision making for
regional-level ITS plan
ning activities, and like RTPs are required by federal
regulation.
11 12
• Regional ITS Architectures are sometimes supported by regional ITS strategic
plans.
Goals and objectives identified in these documents should be highlighted by the
corridor team to help inform corridor-specific goals and objectives, used later to align
with performance measures to gauge corridor performance, and inform selection of
short, medium, and long-term strategies to address objectives.
11
FHWA Final Rule. Part 940 – Intelligent Transportation Systems Architecture and
Standards. 23 CFR 940. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/its_arch_imp/policy_1.htm
12
California Department of Transportation. 2018. White Paper: Federal Policy, Rule
Making and Guidelines Related to ITS Architecture Activities.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/switsa/assessment.html
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 20 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Develop Corridor Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures
A goal is a broad statement that reflects a desired end state. Corridor goals are
developed by the corridor team and should be adopted by consensus. Objectives
should align with the adopted goals and reflect how the goals are meant to be
achieved. While objectives can start out as broad statements, the corridor team should
strive to make them as Specific, Measurable, Agreed-upon, Realistic, and Time-bound
(SMART) as possible.
Building on exi
sting planning efforts and discussions within the corridor team on current
issues and opportunities, the corridor team needs to define a clear and relevant set of
corridor goals and objectives. These goals and objectives will later be linked to
performance measures. The development of these goals should be a collaborative
effort with the various partners in the corridor planning process.
There are a wide range of performance measures (PMs) that can be considered for use
in a Corridor Plan within any category of goal or objective. PMs may be quantitative,
qualitative, or a combination of both. Caltrans’ Smart Mobility Framework
13
points
toward transportation goals, objectives and performance metrics beyond the
traditional auto-centric delay measures. This is particularly important in the context of
sustainability goals and policies unique to California such as SB 375 which sets regional
targets called Sustainable Communities Strategies for reducing GHG reductions from
cars and light trucks integrating planning processes for transportation, land use, and
housing; and SB 743 which changed the transportation impact analysis for CEQA from
level of serves to VMT. Also, funding sources will have their own performance measures
and those should be considered for inclusion as appropriate.
A range of federal and State transportation planning performance goals aligned to
performance metrics are outlined in Chapter 7 of the 2017 RTP Guidelines
14
. While they
are meant to inform regional analysis, many could be applied to Corridor Plans. The
Solutions for Congested Corridors Program project evaluation criteria from the Road
Repair and Recovery Act of 2017 (SB 1) can also help inform the development of
corridor goals, objectives, and performance measures.
The feasibility of any given measure will depend on data availability and level of
analysis to be conducted. Chosen performance measures should also support any
related regional performance measures, while being able to be tailored to identify
corridor-level issue areas. Table 1 and Table 2 provide examples of corridor goals linked
to objectives and performance measures for consideration by corridor planning teams.
13
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-
climate-change/smart-mobility-active-transportation
14
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/regional-planning/
federal-
state-planning-program
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 21 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
GOAL PERFORMANCE MEASURE
Improve Travel Safety Reduce accident rate for collisions,
injuries, and fatalities
• Number of fatal and injury
crashes compared to facility
type average
• Rate of fatal and injury
crashes – Fatal and injury
crashes per 100 million VMT
• Number of bicycle and
pedestrian collisions
• Rate of bicycle and
pedestrian collisions per
number of bicycle and
pedestrian trips
Improve Mobility -
System Efficiency
Reduce Recurrent
Congestion/hours
excessive delay
of peak hour
• Hours of peak hour excessive
delay
• Person throughput – Corridor
total (multimodal) person
throughput
• Person hours of delay –
number of person hours of
delay in the corridor
• Travel Time Reliability –Level
of Travel Time Reliability
(LOTTR) or Travel Time Buffer
Index
Improve Mobility -
System Reliability
Reduce Non-Recurrent
Congestion/Improve LOTTR/
Reduce non-recurrent person hours
delay
• LOTTR
• on-recurrent person hours
delay
Reduce GHG and
pollutant emissions in
support of State goals
and standards
Reduce peak hours excessive
delay/Improve travel time
reliability/Reduce VMT per capita.
• GHG and pollutant
emissions, peak hour delay,
travel time reliability, VMT per
capita
OBJECTIVE
Table 1. Example Set of Corridor Goals and Objectives (continues next page)
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 22 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Table 2. Example Set of Corridor Goals and Objectives (continued)
GOAL OBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE MEASURE
Improve
Multimodal
Access
Reduce Single Occupancy Vehicle
travel demand in peak period /
Increase alternative mode share
• Mode share
• Availability or existence of High-
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
infrastructure connecting major
residence and employment centers
Improved access to multimodal
choices system connectivity, or gap
closure
• Availability of connections
between modes, convenience of
multiple transportation choices
• Number of households within 45-
minute transit ride of major
employment center or college
Improved Transit Service Frequency
/Decrease average wait time for
transit service
• Transit service wait time/frequency
Increased bicycle and pedestrian
accessibility/Increase number of
Complete Streets features on primary
bike/pedestrian network in corridor
• Number of complete street
features on primary bike/pedestrian
network
Support
Economic
Opportunity
Improve Freight Travel Time
Reliability/Increase access to jobs
• Truck Travel Time Reliability
• Access to jobs – Change in
cumulative jobs accessibility within
30 minutes (45 minutes for transit)
• Access to jobs for disadvantaged
populations – Change in cumulative
jobs accessibility for disadvantaged
populations within 30 minutes (45
minutes for transit)
Analysis Methods
There are a range of factors to be considered by the corridor team when determining
the level and type of analysis desired in a corridor planning effort. Table 3, on the next
page, identifies factors that should be considered in the selection of an appropriate
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final Draft
Page 23 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Caltrans 2018
Table 3. Factors to Consider When Selecting an Analysis Method(s)/Tool(s)
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final Draft
Page 24 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Left intentionally Blank
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 25 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
travel analysis tool. The first step is to identify the analysis context for the Corridor Plan
(including study type, analysis horizon, and analysis timeframe).
Additional analysis characteristics help identify the analysis tool(s) that are most
appropriate for a corridor planning effort. Depending on the analysis goals, objectives,
and context, the relevance of each analysis characteristic may differ. Generally, the
more characteristics that need to be considered increases the complexity of the
analysis tools necessary for detailed results or reduces the level of detail of results using
simpler analysis methods. Analysis characteristics to consider include:
• Geographic Scope–Is the corridor located in an urban/suburban or rural area
and is the tool capable of analyzing the identified study area whether it is an
isolated location, segment, corridor, or region?
• Facility Type–Is the tool able to analyze the various facility types for the Corridor
Plan, such as freeways, express lanes, ramps, arterials, truck lanes, bus lanes, bike
and pedestrian facilities, transit and rail, etc.?
• Travel Mode–Can the tool analyze necessary travel modes such as single-
occupancy vehicles (SOV), high-occupancy vehicles (HOV), no and low
emission vehicles, bus, train, truck, bicycle, pedestrians, etc.?
• Improvement Strategy–Is the tool able to analyze the potential projects and
strategies identified for the Corridor Plan?
• Traveler Response and Response Timeframe–Does the analysis tool have the
capability of estimating traveler responses to the potential projects and
strategies including route diversion, departure time choice, mode shift,
destination choice, and induced demand and the response timeframe whether
it’s a real-time response or longer term?
• Performance Measure–Can the tool output the desired performance measures
for the Corridor Plan?
The appropriate analysis tool(s) should be identified based on the analysis context and
analysis characteristics. Several resource considerations must also be considered to
select the analysis method and tool(s) to be used by the corridor team. These resource
considerations include the time available to conduct the analysis, data availability, staff
availability and skills, and analysis tool features. One specific analysis tool may not
address all the Corridor Plan’s analysis considerations; multiple tools may be necessary
to conduct the analysis.
The corridor team should consider developing an Analysis Plan for corridors of
moderate or high complexity. The analysis plan clarifies the analytical approach and
methodology, as well as project objectives, the study area conditions, performance
measures, strategies being implemented, and the tools and data to be used in the
analysis. The Analysis Plan needs to be sufficiently detailed to provide practical
guidance on the actual conduct of analysis, yet it should also retain some flexibility to
adapt to project contingencies as they are encountered. Iterative updates to the
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 26 Califo
rnia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
assumptions, scope, and agreements should take place as the analysis moves forward.
The Analysis Plan can also help maintain clear and mutual understanding among
stakeholders of the analysis’ expectations and assumptions, as well as help identify
potential flaws or technical issues in the evaluation of corridor improvements. The
FHWA guide on Scoping and Conducting Data-Driven 21st Century Transportation
System Analyses (2017) is an excellent resource for developing and implementing
transportation analyses.
15
Approaches and appropriate tools for different analysis methods are further discussed
in the Corridor Analysis and Outputs area of the Analyze Improvements section.
15
https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16072/fhwahop16072.pdf
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 27 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Gather Information
Outcome: Corridor information is collected and organized to inform an understanding
of the corridor context, as well as current and future conditions.
Corridor information is collected and organized to inform an understanding of the
corridor context, identification of different operational conditions in the corridor
(incident days, high-demand days, etc.), current and future conditions, and
identification of the likely disruptions that would drive alternative scenarios (such as
economic changes, technological innovation, etc.) This information outlines the
corridor description, basic system characteristics of the corridor and its unique elements
within a larger national, state, and regional context. In addition to gathering
information on travel times, volumes, delays, and bottlenecks and their extents, market
analysis should be conducted which determines travel patterns (origins-destinations,
time of day, day of the week, different transportation modes and mode choice in the
corridor, trip purposes, socioeconomic characteristics, industry concentrations,
employment, etc.) The assessment of current conditions may require new data
collection to fill identified data gaps. Table 4 outlines important topics to include when
describing the corridor, but others can be considered for inclusion.
• Corridor Context
Current context (population, employment, travel demand)
Future context (population, employment, travel demand)
Location, purpose, and users
Network and Corridor Designations
Issues of Regiona
l Significance
Existing planning efforts and studies (State, regional, local)
Operational conditions in the corridor (bottlenecks, travel times, demand and delay
trends, etc.)
Travel patterns (origins-destinations, time-of-day, day of the week, differen
t
transportation modes and mode choice in the corridor, trip purposes, socioeconom
ic
characteristics, industry concentrations, employment, etc.)
Community Characteristics
Land Use and Place Types (current and future)
System Characteristics (freeway/highway, arterial, transit, freight, complete streets)
Demand Managemen
t Programs and Partnerships
Transportation System Management & Operations Assets, Agreements, Partnerships
Environmental Scan
Climate change vulnerabilities
Table 4. Elements of Corridor Description section within Corridor Plan.
Depending on the level of effort, development of a data collection plan will ensure
that gaps and any costs for acquiring data (e.g., turning movement counts, cell phone,
commercial vehicle Global Positioning Service tracking traffic counts, real estate
transactions, business characteristics, etc.) are identified and the time needed for
collection is incorporated into the study schedule. Basic data on the corridor
description to be collected and documented includes geographic location,
population, employment, and travel demand figures. Many other elements of the
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 28 Califo
rnia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
corridor description section of a Corridor Plan are qualitative in nature, providing
important planning and operational context for the Plan. This includes describing the
primary purposes and network designations of the corridor, along with describing the
corridor’s main users. Issues of regional significance related to the corridor also provide
important context, as well as major trip generators and attractors. Existing planning
efforts and studies should also be identified.
Expected
future changes to population, employment and travel demand are included
here to illustrate regional or statewide trends based on current forecasts. The California
Department of Finance is an important source of population and employment
forecasts. Regional travel demand models and the Statewide Travel Demand Model
can provide high-level forecasts of expected travel demand based on the population
and employment forecasts.
Community Characteristics
Community characteristics, demographics, economic base, and land use plans are
likely to influence the future transportation options for the corridor in terms of trip
generation and accessibility and are an important part of the corridor’s context. This
should include identifying sensitive populations (e.g. children, elderly, tribes, etc.) and
communities of concern related to Title VI/Environmental Justice. The Corridor Plan
should develop a brief community profile, summarizing the social and economic
characteristics of the area served by the corridor.
Land Use, Demographics, and Place Types
Existing and expected land use and demographics should be summarized at the
corridor level. This includes a brief description of the Place Types within the corridor
area, as well as a general description of local and regional land use, demographic
characteristics, broadband, environmental, and development plans. A range of Place
Types appropriate for description in Corridor Plans are listed within Caltrans Smart
Mobility Framework.
16
System Characteristics
The major elements of a corridor’s transportation network are described in this section.
They include the highway and arterial network, transit network, active
transportation/complete streets network, and freight network. The complexity of the
information gathered can vary depending on the nature of the corridor; however, a
broad scope and level of detail is generally acceptable.
Demand Management Programs and Partnerships
This section describes major programs and partnerships within the corridor area that
serve to reduce travel demand by promoting a range of trip reduction strategies that
reduce trips or shift trips to different times, locations, routes, or modes. Such programs
are often regional in nature or tied to major employers but can have important
influence on travel demand within a corridor. Examples include regional ridesharing or
16
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-
climate-change/smart-mobility-active-transportation
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Califor
nia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
shared mobility services, traveler information systems, congestion pricing, or
telecommuting.
Transportation System Management & Operations Assets, Agreements, and
Partnerships
Gathered information should also include existing operational assets, partnerships,
relationships, and programs that affect system management and operations and
collectively referred to as Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO).
Examples include ITS components, ramp metering, traveler information systems, incident
management programs, and Transit Signal Priority, among others.
Environmental Scan
An environmental scan should be conducted to identify important environmental
issues, advanced mitigation, and other factors. For instance, wetlands and other
sensitive habitats aren’t a factor to be modeled for travel demand but can influence
corridor development in terms of the location and type of improvement scenarios that
might be considered feasible. As a result, sensitive habitats and landforms need to be
identified. Other factors that should be identified include hazardous materials sites, and
other sensitive land uses related to air quality and noise. High-level outreach and
consultation to resource agencies and organizations may be helpful in conducting this
activity. In addition, in areas that are likely susceptible to future changes in
environmental conditions due to climate change (e.g., sea level rise, storm surges,
coastal erosion, landslides and wildfires) along with identifying the portions of the
corridor that potentially face future climate change-related threats.
Data Sources
Important data sources for the corridor planning effort include existing studies, reports,
plans and forecasts, including:
• Regional Transportation Plans and General Plans
• Bike Master Plans, Local Transit Agency Plans
• Congestion Management Plans
• Prior corridor studies and planned and programmed projects from existing plans,
studies, and reports
• Proposed project CEQA/National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA)
environmental documents
• For current and forecasted population and employment, the US Census
Bureau
17
, California Department of Finance forecasts
18
, and local sources (such
as chambers of commerce)
17
https://www.census.gov/
18
http://www.dof.ca.gov/
Page 29
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 30 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
• Caltrans system information, sources include the Division of Research, Innovation,
and System Information
19
, Division of Operations
20
and Division of Transportation
Planning
21
, and Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS)
22
data
• Caltrans Geographical Information System (GIS) Data Library
23
and local sources
such as MPOs and RTPAs
Members
of the stakeholder team are typically an excellent resource in identifying and
providing the most relevant and current information sources.
Identify Data Needs and Sources for Corridor Performance Indicators
Core data necessary to assess corridor performance includes traffic volumes (average
daily traffic and peak hour volumes), mode split and travel patterns. Additional data
on actual travel speeds and delay in a corridor can be critical to understanding existing
conditions. Level of service (LOS), which is a function of traffic volumes, traffic
composition, roadway geometry, and the traffic control at intersections, remains a
widely used performance indicator in traffic studies and reports. However, it does not
capture the source or extent of congestion, nor does it account for non-recurring
congestion (due to traffic incidents, work zones, bad weather, special events, etc.) or
factors beyond automobile travel. Therefore, LOS should never be used as a sole
indicator of corridor performance; if used it should be in combination with other
performance indicators.
Archived operations data form the basis for understanding a wide variety of
performance metrics. Sources such as PeMS can be used to assess operational
conditions for many freeway corridors and make findings on the effects of recurrent
traffic congestion on overall system reliability, transit, and freight performance for such
corridors.
The necessary data collection activities for a Corridor Plan could be data intensive or
relatively simple depending on the method of performance assessment and evaluation
chosen. For example, for complex, congested urban corridors, a large amount of data
could be needed by the corridor team, especially if micro-simulation is chosen as the
operations analysis method. Stakeholders may also contribute significant data such as
signal timing details. Systems that are currently in place to provide transportation
system data can significantly reduce the corridor team’s efforts for data collection and
reduce data collection costs. The corridor team should consider developing a Data
Collection Plan to organize and coordinate necessary data collection activities.
There are a wide range of performance measures to consider for use in a Corridor Plan
for any category of goal or objective. The feasibility of any given measure will depend
on data availability and level of analysis to be conducted. Chosen performance
19
http://www.dot.ca.gov/drisi/
20
http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/
21
http://www.dot.ca.gov/transplanning/index.html
22
http://pems.dot.ca.gov/
23
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/geospatial-data
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 31 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
measures should also support any related regional performance measures and be able
to be tailored to identify corridor-level issue areas.
Corridor performance measures must be discussed and agreed upon by the corridor
team and should link back to the overall corridor goals and objectives. Tables 5
through 8 outline examples of corridor performance measures for Freeway/Highway/
Arterial, Transit, Freight, and Complete Streets/Active Transportation performance
assessments. These are examples of performance measures, others should be
considered and included as appropriate.
Measurements
Data Needs
Sources
Bottleneck Location, Delay,
Speed, Productivity
Volume, Speeds
PeMS, big data sources,
Caltrans field collection
Peak Hour Excessive Delay
Volume, Speeds
PeMS, big data sources
Travel Time Reliability
Travel time, speeds
PeMS, big data sources
Safety
Incident/Accident reports
Traffic Accident Surveillance
and Analysis System, CA
Highway Patrol, PeMS
Pavement Condition
Pavement condition
Highway Performance
Management System,
National Bridge Inventory
Database, Caltrans State of
Pavement Report, and/or
Pavement Condition Index
Table 5. Example Performance Measures for Freeway-Highway Corridor Assessment
Transit ridership
Ridership by route, line, or
service
Transit Operator data
Measurements
Data Needs
Sources
Service on-time percentage
On-time percentage by
route, line, or service
Transit Operator data
Service hours and frequency
Route, line, or service
schedules
Transit Operator data
Number and type of transit-
supportive infrastructure in
corridor
Infrastructure inventory
and description
Transit Operator data,
Caltrans, local govt.
Table 6. Example Performance Measures for Transit Corridor Assessment
Measurements
Data Needs
Sources
Productivity
Equivalent Lost Lane Miles;
Volume/ Capacity
PeMS
Truck VMT
Truck Volume
Caltrans, HPMS, field
collection, big data sources
Truck Travel Time Reliability
Truck Travel Time
Caltrans, big data sources
Container Transfers (Truck)
Number of containers
transferred
Port / Intermodal facility
operator
Container Transfers (Rail)
Number of containers
transferred
Port / Intermodal facility
operator
Table 7. Example Performance Measures for Corridor-Based Freight Assessment
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 32 Califor
nia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Measurements
Data Needs
Sources
Table 8. Example Performance Measures for Complete Streets Corridor Assessment.
Refer to Toward an Active California: State Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan’
s Measuring Success section [Page
81] for further information.
24
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/multimodal_
connectivity/
Active
Transportation Asset
Inventory:
• Number and type
of complete
streets features
within corridor
• -Gap analysis
• Pedestrian crossings
• Sidewalk continuity and gaps
• Bicycle facility continuity and
gaps
• Sidewalk and shoulder widths
• Field Review
• Google Maps/Streetview
• Postmile Query Tool
• Geospatial data inventory
Active
Transportation
Travel Demand
• Trip data- collected via counter
or collected via GPS-tracking big
data platforms.
• Travel demand for active
transportation- walking trips,
bicycling trips, or short-distance
automobile.
• Trip generators- schools, parks,
residential, etc.
• Collected trip data
•Travel demand model
• Big Data Platforms
• Land use maps
Active
Transportation Level
of Traffic Stress
• Roadway geometrics such as
number of lanes, presence of
crossings, etc.
• Traffic Data & Databases
• Traffic Volumes from Traffic
Census
• Traffic Speeds
• Refer to Pedestrian and
Bicycle Info for more
information.
Active
Transportation
Safety
• Collision Data
• Systemic Safety Analysis
• SWITRS/TASAS
First-mile and Last-
mile access to
transit
• Transit Routes
• Transit trips- boardings and
alightings
• Transit stop access shed analysis
• Transit Operator data
• Geo-spatial
walkable/bikeable
catchment analysis.
Multimodal
Network
Connectivity
• Refer to FHWA’s
Guidebook for Measuring
Multimodal Network
Connectivity for analytical
methods.
24
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 33 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Field Visit
Finally, conduct field visits to observe facilities and conditions previously identified as
having issues to validate the current conditions findings and to help identify expected
and unexpected causes of the issues.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 34 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Conduct Performance Assessment
Outcome: Identified performance issues and trends.
A corridor performance assessment is necessary to identify and quantify performance
issues, which assists the corridor team in identifying potential solutions for analysis and
evaluation. First the type and sources of quantitative data related to corridor
performance must be identified and organized, after which the performance
assessment can be conducted. Following the assessment and preliminary analysis the
corridor team identifies a range of projects and strategies to test.
A performance assessment is conducted to clearly outline system performance and
trends, and the results interpreted to highlight the relationship between identified issues
and their causes. For the assessment of existing conditions, the most frequent/impactful
operational conditions corridor performance issues are identified, and their causes are
diagnosed. At a minimum, corridor profiles should be developed for mobility, safety,
travel time reliability and sustainability. This task also includes performance assessment
for the future baseline (do nothing or no build). A reassessment/adjustment of the
performance measures from the scoping effort step may be necessary based on the
study of the current conditions and future potential scenarios.
Corridor Performance Assessment
With corridor performance indicators agreed upon and data sources identified, the
corridor performance assessment can take place. The results of the performance
assessment should clearly outline current system performance, and the results
interpreted to highlight the relationship between identified issues and their causes.
Agreed upon corridor performance indicators and measures should be grouped by the
related goal or key corridor objectives to ensure a clear linkage between objectives
and measurable performance. Different types of performance assessments are
necessary depending on the range of multimodal and intermodal issues present in the
corridor. Four common types of multimodal performance assessments are noted
below.
Freeway, Highway, and Arterial Network Performance Assessment
The performance assessment for a freeway, highway and arterial network involves
collecting and documenting a range of corridor-wide performance measures that
illustrate existing conditions. Identification of traffic bottlenecks and measures related
to mobility, travel time reliability, safety and pavement conditions are important
indicators of network performance. These indicators serve to illustrate and quantify the
magnitude of corridor issues noted in the team’s initial scoping.
Transit and Rail Network Performance Assessment
Using data on transit ridership, service frequency and measures such as on-time
percentage, the corridor team assesses type and frequency of transit services within the
corridor and makes connections between the mobility options of corridor users and the
availability and accessibility of transit modes to accommodate that movement. The
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 35 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
corridor team should also assess the existence of supporting infrastructure for transit
centers and major transit routes as well.
Freight Assessment
Using data on truck VMT, truck travel time reliability, commodity flows, trip schedules
and trip frequency the corridor team assesses the main types and frequency of freight
and goods movement services within the corridor and makes connections between the
mobility options of freight services and the availability and accessibility of necessary
infrastructure or intermodal connections to accommodate that movement. Barriers
and gaps to freight services are identified. The FHWA Freight Analysis Framework
25
is an
excellent resource in conducting a freight assessment.
Complete Streets/Active Transportation Assessment
The performance assessment for complete streets and active transportation needs can
leverage many forms of data and analysis. These can include:
• Conduct Existing Conditions and Asset Inventory: Using the inventory of
existing active transportation/complete street elements as a basis, the
corridor team can analyze the necessary connections between important
origins and destinations within the corridor and the existence of complete
streets features to facilitate movement between those areas. Gaps in
system continuity should be identified, with strategies to connect these
gaps proposed within the Corridor Plan. The corridor teams should also
take note of locations where pedestrian and bicycle access is prohibited
or allowed on the State Highway system, to determine whether parallel
facilities are needed. The adequacy of existing features in meeting
demand and relevant corridor objectives should also be assessed if data
on the type and volume of active transportation trips can be ascertained
by the corridor team. Further, the condition of assets can provide
meaningful information for needs to maintain current systems. This analysis
can leverage geo-spatial or tabular inventories for complete streets and
active transportation assets. It is encouraged that corridor planning teams
conduct field review of these assets and select strategic locations to
conduct walk and bicycle audits. These audits can provide qualitative
data and recommendations to improve the condition of active
transportation assets and connect disparate facilities.
• Local input and Local or regional planning documents: Robust complete
streets and active transportation planning occurs at the local and/or
regional level. Corridor teams should refer to locally- and regionally-
adopted complete streets and active transportation plans and include
existing and proposed facilities from those plans. Coordination with local
and regional agencies can provide valuable input into the selection and
prioritization of proposed facilities in these plans. Finally, conducting public
25
https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/faf/
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 36 Calif
ornia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
outreach and engagement activities is best practice for complete streets
planning.
• Pedestrian and bicycle volume data (collected or inferred using big data
platforms): Many local and regional agencies, as well as local community
groups, collect permanent, short-term, or manual counts of pedestrian
and bicycle activity. Others are leveraging proprietary ‘big data’
platforms that use GPS-enabled smart phone apps to estimate walking
and bicycling demand and activity. These data can be used to
determine locations of highest priority to increase walking and bicycling,
or improve the conditions of locations with high levels of pedestrian and
bicycle activity. In the absence of data, consideration of travel demand
modeling concepts that would suggest locations of high walking and
bicycle activity can occur, such as trip generators, connecting nearby
communities, schools and employment areas, areas of high population
density, and areas with short car trips (0-3 miles) can suggest areas of high
demand for walking and bicycling.
• Pedestrian and bicycle safety data: Many local agencies that operate
and maintain pedestrian and bicycle facilities utilize safety-related data
to inform needs assessments, including consideration of pedestrian and
bicycle exposure. Several agencies within the state of California have
developed “Vision Zero Plans” that identify and prioritize corridors for
improvement.
• Level of
Traffic Stress: There is an emphasis within the active transportation
field to consider the level of traffic stress of roadway facilities to propose
improvements for people walking and bicycling. This concept is
connected to the “Four Types of Cyclists” analytical framework, that
shows that a large proportion of survey respondents are often “Interested,
Yet Concerned” to bicycle in their community on facilities that place
them in close proximity to high vehicle volumes and/or speeds. The
Mineta Transportation Institute
26
developed a Level of Traffic Stress
framework for bicyclists that takes into account automobile daily travel
(ADT), Vehicle speeds, and other roadway characteristics to determine
the level of stress these factors cause for people bicycling. It also
recommends methods to improve the roadway to reduce the traffic stress
on that roadway.
For further information, refer to Caltrans’ Complete Streets Program webpage
27
, which
provides additional resources in conducting Complete Streets/Active Transportation
Assessment and field review within a corridor.
26
https://transweb.sjsu.edu/research/low-stress-bicycling-and-network-connectivity
27
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-
climate-change/smart-mobility-active-transportation/complete-streets
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 37 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Forecasted Future Performance
While the corridor performance assessment is meant to identify existing issues, it is also
important to identify the scale and scope of performance issues in the future if no
action is taken or if only already approved investments move forward. This is called the
future no build and is one of the bases upon which the benefits of alternative
investment scenarios are tested against in the evaluation step of the Corridor Plan.
Only certain performance measures can be forecasted at a corridor level using
available tools and expertise, however, meaning only certain performance measures
can be used to define a future no build. While most performance measures should be
the same as used in the existing performance assessment, travel demand model
limitations may not support some existing measures, such as truck delay, truck reliability,
mode split, access to jobs, jobs/housing split, VMT, etc.
The Travel Demand Model is one of the primary tools to forecast future performance of
a transportation network. Other tools and approaches include Highway Capacity
Manual analysis tools and a range of simulation models. Table 9 illustrates some
examples of performance measures able to be forecast for purposes of developing a
future no build, along with some of the tools used to develop those forecasts.
Table 9. Example Performance Measures and Methodologies for Forecasting Future Performance
System Profiles
Visualizing the results of the performance assessments conducted is important and can
be done by developing system profiles for the different types of corridor performance
assessed. The purpose of building system profiles is to characterize corridor
performance and to help the team identify issues to address. This section describes
examples of system profiles for mobility, reliability, safety, and sustainability. The corridor
team can choose to develop additional or different system profiles that align with
unique corridor issues and objectives.
Measurements
Data Needs
Sources/Tools
Bottleneck Location, Delay,
Speed
Forecasted Volumes,
Speeds
Highway Capacity Manual
analysis tools, simulation models.
Peak Hour Excessive Delay
Travel Time Reliability
Truck Trips
Forecasted truck
volumes
Travel Demand Model
Transit Trips
Transit Ridership
Travel Demand Model
Active Transportation Trips
Active Transportation
trip volumes
Travel Demand Model; sketch
planning models; collected
pedestrian and bicycle trips;
travel analysis platforms utilizing
big data to determine pedestrian
and bicycle travel.
% trips by Travel Mode
(Mode Split)
Trips by travel mode
Travel Demand Model
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 38 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Mobility Profile
For highway corridors, a common mobility profile would contain delay and congestion
measures for travel time, vehicle delay, bottleneck throughput, queue length and other
attributes including induced demand depending on the nature of the issue and the
system features. For example, to create a freeway corridor congestion profile, travel
time and bottleneck throughput may be selected as performance measures; to
analyze an intersection performance, queue length and vehicle delay may be used
throughout the study. Mobility profiles may also be generated for managed lanes or
alternative mode choices.
Reliability Profile
Non-recurrent congestion, or the extent of unexpected delay can be profiled by
measuring and displaying travel time reliability, typically for highway corridors. A within-
day time-variant travel time chart is an effective way to convey travel-time reliability for
a travel corridor. The FHWA Travel Time Reliability Measures Guidance
28
suggests a set
of performance measures to quantify travel time reliability: 90
th
or 95
th
percentile travel
time, buffer index, planning time index, and frequency that congestion exceeds some
expected threshold. As with traditional mobility profiles, reliability profiles may also be
generated for managed lanes or alternative mode choices. It is difficult to forecast
system resilience (which affects travel time reliability) given the uncertainty with the
timing, magnitude, and duration of disruptions. However, for climate change, Caltrans
has developed district vulnerability assessments including exposure maps to different
types of future threats that can be used as part of the reliability profile.
Safety Profile
Common measures for a safety profile include accident rates and number of collisions,
injuries, and fatalities, which can be collected directly from Caltrans or local agency
databases. Safety data is useful for identifying potential issues within the corridor that
may be addressed by operations strategies. It is important for corridor planners to
understand that while reporting safety data at a corridor level is important as part of an
overall awareness of corridor issues, it does not take the place of safety investigations
and analyses performed by Traffic Operations staff. While reporting of corridor-level
safety data in a Corridor Plan is appropriate, planners should not make their own
conclusions about safety project options or issues within that corridor. Making such
conclusions is the responsibility of traffic safety staff within Caltrans’ Traffic Operations
function. A district’s Office of Traffic Safety should always be consulted when reporting
and documenting safety data within a safety profile.
Sustainability Profile
A sustainability profile should focus on reporting corridor performance related to
policies that practice environmental stewardship and the fostering of livable, healthy,
and equitable communities. Examples of such measures include criteria pollutant and
GHG emission estimates, VMT per capita in areas served by the corridor, and measures
of multimodal accessibility and connectivity for households and employers. Caltrans
28
Travel Time Reliability Measures Guidance,
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/tt_reliability/
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 39 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Smart Mobility Framework lists Smart Mobility Principles linked to examples performance
measures that could help inform development of a sustainability profile; these measures
should link to sustainability-related corridor objectives previously identified by the
corridor team.
Operational Conditions
Assessment of operational conditions should go beyond describing a single “normal”
operational condition derived from the average of different attributes. An important
part of the corridor’s performance assessment is to outline the range of operational
conditions present within the corridor, the level and type of operational factors, and
their variability. For example, weather, special events and incidents are key factors that
affect system management and operations and should be identified and described in
the context of how it affects system management. Identifying a set of operational
conditions and its effect on the corridor provides helpful context for any analysis aimed
at improving system performance. The availability of data improves the ability to
characterize system performance in this way.
Identifying the range of operational impacts for multiple distinct operational conditions
will better characterize the transportation system dynamics of the corridor. If adequate
data is available, the corridor team should describe and identify operational conditions
within the corridor in the following situations:
• Extreme Weather (identify type of weather, frequency, and range of operational
impact)
• Special Events (identify type of event, frequency, and range of operational
impact)
• Major Incidents (identify most frequent incident type(s) and range of operational
impact)
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 40 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Identify Potential Projects and Strategies
Outcome: Potential projects and strategies identified for analysis and evaluation.
Identify Projects and Strategies for Corridor Analysis
The corridor team will discuss and utilize the results of the current and future
performance assessment, as well as the list of previously planned and programmed
projects, to identify project and strategy ideas to be carried forward into the corridor
analysis. The corridor team will approach how to identify those projects and strategies
depending on the causes of the identified issue and their potential to address
multimodal corridor objectives. The team will discuss a range of multimodal projects or
strategies, consider their ability to address specific corridor objectives, and to make a
determination whether to include that project or strategy as part of the corridor
analysis.
The number of projects and strategies to be considered for analysis and level of project
detail necessary to conduct that analysis will be decided by the corridor team and will
depend greatly on the analysis method chosen in the scoping step of the Corridor Plan.
Projects and strategies identified for evaluation should clearly identify the corridor
objectives they are meant to address.
Freeway/Highway/Arterial Projects and Strategies:
If the corridor team identifies freeway, highway or arterial improvement opportunities as
having potential to address corridor objectives, those opportunities need to be refined
into project ideas for the corridor analysis and evaluation. The team will discuss the
extent to which specific project ideas address identified issues compared to other
corridor objectives and will advance project ideas to be evaluated on that basis. A
range of qualitative and quantitative analysis tools can assess the project-level impacts
of individual highway projects and strategies if desired. Sketch planning tools that can
assess high-level project impacts for highway projects and strategies can often be
appropriate here; see the Role of Analysis Tools area in the Analyze Improvement
Strategies section for more information.
Transit Projects and Strategies:
The corridor team may wish to consider new or improved transit services in a corridor to
address certain corridor objectives. Revisiting corridor goals and objectives and
comparing them to identified gaps and issues can help identify a range of transit
services that could address those issues. For exploring transit service options, the
Transportation Research Board’s Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual is a
comprehensive resource.
29
Issues and opportunities may also be identified in local and
regional transit plans.
New or improved transit services along with associated infrastructure such as park and
ride lots may also be promoted as mitigations for current and future highway
congestion, to increase person trips through the corridor, to provide additional mobility
29
TCRP Report 165. Transportation Research Board, 2013.
http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/169437.aspx
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 41 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
options beyond driving and carpooling, to reduce VMT, and to augment highway
system investments (such as operating highway-based bus rapid transit on new Express
Lanes).
Transit improvement opportunities identified by the corridor team need to be refined
into project ideas for the corridor analysis and evaluation. The team will discuss the
extent to which specific project ideas address identified issues compared to other
corridor objectives and will advance transit projects to be evaluated on that basis.
One or more transit improvement opportunities are then packaged to define projects
for evaluation.
Complete Streets Projects and Strategies:
The corridor team may wish to consider Complete Streets projects to address certain
corridor objectives related to increasing walking and bicycling trips; improving
connectivity, accessibility, or comfort; or reducing risks for people walking and
bicycling. If so, the team will review the applicable performance assessment results
along with a review of gaps in walking and bicycling networks to identify Complete
Streets opportunities. Caltrans’ Complete Streets Elements Toolbox
30
and Complete
Streets Project Planning Guide are excellent resources in providing Complete Streets
elements to consider in projects and provide selection guidance appropriate to
specific facility types and Place Types noted in Caltrans Smart Mobility Framework
31
.
Complete Streets improvement opportunities identified by the corridor team need to
be refined into project ideas for the corridor analysis and evaluation. The team should
discuss the extent to which specific project ideas address identified issues compared to
other corridor objectives and should choose Complete Streets projects to be evaluated
on that basis.
Freight Projects and Strategies:
The corridor team may wish to consider freight projects and strategies to address
certain corridor objectives. With the basic freight inventory and assessment as
background, an analysis of freight system issues can be conducted, beginning with a
review of gaps and other issues to identify improvement opportunities. Any freight
projects or strategies should address issues identified in the freight assessment, as well as
linking back to corridor goals and objectives. Once the corridor team identifies freight
improvement opportunities and other options, they are refined into project ideas for the
corridor analysis and evaluation. The team will discuss the extent to which specific
project ideas address identified issues compared to other corridor objectives, and
advance freight projects to be evaluated on that basis.
30
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-
climate-change/smart-mobility-active-transportation/complete-streets
31
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-
climate-change/smart-mobility-active-transportation
Page 42 California Dep
artment of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Climate Change Adaptation and Resiliency Projects and Strategies:
The corridor team should consider climate change in all its projects and strategies.
Climate change treatments can be identified and implemented in stand-alone projects
or as an element of projects in which it is a complimentary feature. Simply put, climate
change and it impacts must be carefully considered in all projects to ensure
appropriate treatments are integrated into the overall system. The importance of these
considerations is emphasized in Executive Order N-19-19, signed by California Governor
Gavin Newsom on September 20, 2019 requiring the redoubling of the state’s “efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change while
building a sustainable, inclusive economy.”
Define Improvement Projects
Individual improvement opportunities and options must be translated into defined
projects for the corridor team to carry forward into the corridor analysis and evaluation.
This requires that the team refine improvement opportunities and options into defined
projects. This refinement is done by ensuring there is sufficient description and
information to define the projects to be evaluated.
For the purposes of identifying transportation projects for evaluation, a project is
defined as follows: having sufficient scope details to describe specific physical or
operational changes to effect desired results, where costs can be estimated, timeline
projected, and major limitations anticipated. This would typically be far less detail than
would be necessary for a Caltrans PID. If the potential project does not meet this
definition, then there may not be sufficient information to perform a qualitative or
quantitative analysis. A rough scope and cost estimate needs to be a part of defining
the project for evaluation. Table 10 outlines the minimum information required of a
potential project candidate or strategy for evaluation.
Table 10. Minimum Project Candidate Information Required for Evaluation
Consider Corridor Integration Options
Once a set of projects and strategies are identified to be evaluated, it is important to
consider how certain projects and strategies might need to be integrated or otherwise
work together for the benefits of those projects and strategies to be realized. This
encourages the corridor team to consider “system” solutions rather than a collection of
stand-alone activities. Examples of integration opportunities include:
• Technical integration among different Intelligent Transportation System deployments
to support data sharing, multimodal connectivity, or transportation management
systems
• Institutional partnership among agencies to support services such as integrated
corridor operations, extreme weather response, emergency services, or
maintenance
• Project Name
• Project Loc
ation
• Project Type
• Short Project Description/Scope
• Short Purpose and Need
• Estimated Total Cost (Capital +
Support)
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 43 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
• Interagency transit service agreements
• Regional travel demand management initiatives or programs
• Public/Private partnerships for intermodal freight connectivity
Analyze Improvement Strategies
Outcome: Evaluation of a broad set of solutions for the corridor that can address the
identified issues and opportunities.
In this step, possible improvement projects and strategies are grouped into scenarios to
be evaluated. A corridor analysis is then conducted to evaluate the impact of
potential investments on corridor performance. As the analysis is being conducted,
assumptions made in earlier steps can be reassessed and modified if necessary. The
analysis can be high-level for broader corridor areas or detailed for more focused
corridor study areas.
The analysis of possible improvement strategies begins with defining a set of
investment/improvement scenarios to be analyzed, then populating those scenarios
with potential projects. The corridor analysis is then conducted to evaluate the impact
of those scenarios on corridor performance.
Scenario Development - Baseline, Future Baseline, and Additional Scenarios
A base analysis year and future base year(s) are set by the corridor team. The team
then defines and develops a set of “options packages,” or investment/improvement
scenarios that build on each other. Corridor team input and acceptance of the
scenarios being tested is important to make sure that all desired scenarios have been
discussed and consensus achieved on a finite set. Table 11 provides an example set of
Corridor Plan scenarios.
Base Year: from travel demand model and existing conditions data with no
programmed/planned scenario projects included.
Future Horizon Year: from travel demand model with no programmed/planned
scenario projects.
S1: Most near-term (≤ 5 years), fully funded, programmed mobility-related projects on
or near corridor
S2: Tests ramp metering and other Operational projects to isolate their impacts.
S3: Other programmed or fully committed projects to be delivered ≥5 years.
S4: Other project/strategy ideas not presented in previous scenarios.
S5: Trip-making or other demand factors reduced due to other changes in travel
demand.
S6+: Combinations of the above
Table 11. Example Set of Corridor Plan Scenarios
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 44 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
The corridor team has the option of developing and examining different scenarios as
an iterative process, changing the composition of project groups within scenarios and
evaluating them again to change or to improve overall performance. The results of the
scenario testing should be consistent with performance metrics employed for initial
corridor performance assessment to compare the impacts on the corridor.
Corridor Analysis and Output
The analysis and evaluation of performance effects for proposed projects within
different investment scenarios can be conducted using a range of approaches
requiring different levels of analysis and expertise. Depending on the analysis method
chosen for the corridor by the corridor team, coordination of highway performance
with assessment of arterial or transit performance increases the complexity of the study
as the desired level of network detail and complexity increases. The level of analysis for
the corridor planning effort must relate to the relative level of transportation system
complexity for the corridor and the investment scenarios and to the level of resources
and expertise available to conduct the work. The level of analysis that the corridor
team determined back in the scoping step is applied here in the analysis step. Analysis
should consider non-automobile methodology including Level of Traffic Stress, transit
connectivity, and pedestrian travel time.
A level and type of system analysis for corridors is described here for three levels of
relative effort (low, medium, and high). Regardless of method, the approach needs to
be able to compare solutions that address the corridor's issues and approved
goals/objectives. The type of analysis conducted (see the Analysis Context section
within the Scope Effort section) will determine whether low, medium, or high-detail
analysis is required.
Low: Qualitative analysis of performance impact in a matrix format,
supplemented by travel demand model screening and/or sketch-planning tools
(such as Cal B/C). Outputs are typically order-of-magnitude impact estimates of
performance indicators based on highly aggregated data or averages
generated from research, case studies and/or professional judgement. A travel
demand model can produce rough outputs for mobility, travel time reliability
and emissions that can be compared among groups of projects. Cal B/C
provides rough estimates of travel time savings, vehicle cost savings, accident
cost savings and emissions reductions. This level of relatively simple assessment
and analysis can be conducted for a wide range of modal strategies or
performance objectives where detail is not possible or warranted. Technical
expertise required is relatively low.
Medium: Deterministic or Macrosimulation operational analysis tool (such as the
HCM tool FREEVAL, FREQ or OPT), supplemented with sketch-planning tools (such
as Cal B/C). For highway corridors, outputs are typically metrics related to delay
and other operational characteristics (bottleneck locations, queue length,
duration, and variation). From these metrics, travel time reliability and other
impacts can be surmised for a limited range of facility types, modes,
management strategies and performance measures. The output isn’t as
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 45 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
detailed as more advanced simulation tools, and a moderate level of technical
expertise is necessary to operate the tools.
High: Meso- or Micro-simulation operational analysis tool (such as AIMSUN or
VISSIM), supplemented with sketch-planning tools (such as Cal B/C). For highway
corridors, outputs are more detailed metrics related to delay and other
operational characteristics (bottleneck locations, queue length, duration, and
variation). From these metrics, travel time reliability and a wider range of
performance impacts can be surmised. A wider variety of facility types,
management strategies and traveler responses can be analyzed as well. The
technical expertise needed to run these tools is high.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 46 Californi
a Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
ROLE OF ANALYSIS TOOLS
To better inform the decision-making process, transportation analysis tools are meant to
assist planners and other professionals in evaluating projects and strategies by providing
estimates of benefits or impacts. The following are examples of analysis tools often used
in corridor-based transportation planning.
Sketch-Planning
Analysis tools in this category provide general order-of-magnitude estimates of
performance impacts for individual projects or groups of projects. They are relatively
simple and limited in their scope and analytic capability. An example is the California
Life-Cycle Benefit-Cost Model (Cal B/C) tool.
Travel Demand Models
These analytical tools model and forecast both current and future travel demand
(among other travel characteristics) based on current conditions and future projections
of population, employment, and travel behavior. They are typically used to gauge
regional impacts of major transportation investments. State DOTs, MPOs, RTPAs, and
County-level transportation planning agencies typically operate Travel Demand Models.
Deterministic/Macroscopic Simulation
These traffic operations analysis tools predict basic traffic factors such as capacity,
density, speed, delay, and queueing on roadway networks for a range of different
projects and operational strategies. They often implement traffic analysis procedures
outlined in the HCM. They have fewer data and processing demands than more
complex simulation models, but less detailed output. Examples include FREEVAL and
FREQ12.
Meso- and Microsimulation
Microsimulation analysis tools simulate the movement of individual vehicles on a
roadway network to provide detailed operational analyses. The data and processing
requirements are quite large, as well as the level of expertise required to operate and
interpret detailed results. The size of microsimulation networks is typically limited as a
result. Meso-simulation tools combine features of microsimulation with some of the
simpler, aggregated approaches of macrosimulation. Where expertise is available, this
can result in more detailed results in larger networks than simpler analysis methods.
Examples of microsimulation are AIMSUN, CORSIM, PARAMICS and VISSIM; examples of
meso-simulation are AIMSUN, Dynameq and DYNASMART.
Optimization
These tools are meant to optimize the efficiency of transportation management systems,
typically networks of traffic signals and/or ramp metering. The most common tool of this
type is Synchro.
Other Tools
Many other tools are available to inform the analysis and evaluation of transportation
improvements within a Corridor Plan beyond impacts to traffic operations. Tools that
evaluate projects and strategies on sustainability metrics include the INVEST (FHWA) and
Mosaic (Oregon DOT) tools.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 47 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
As with all analysis tools, limitations in their use include data availability, inconsistency of
data quality, limited expertise, resources, or training to operate the tool, and limits in the
understanding of available tools and their capabilities. For example, Highway Capacity
Manual results are not reliable for conditions where the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio
exceeds 1.0; in those cases, other methods will be necessary. It is important to
understand the data analysis capabilities present within the agencies represented in
the corridor team and if necessary, have a plan to develop or acquire those
capacities.
Corridor Evaluation Results
The output of analysis and evaluation tools are displayed to compare their results. The
main output of the corridor analysis should be a matrix that outlines the evaluation
results of the projects and strategies tested, grouped by scenario or project type. If the
method of corridor analysis allows for it, include the expected corridor performance
results for each grouped scenario.
The potential improvements are evaluated using factors that tie back to the corridor
goals and objectives. The corridor analysis provides a range of information to the
corridor team, helping them evaluate the relative costs and benefits of different
projects and strategies. No matter the level of detail the performance and evaluation
tools provide, the project team should summarize those results qualitatively (by
scenario, investment package or project group) into relative levels of benefit (high,
medium, low or none), along with any basic quantitative information (such as CAL B/C).
The following tables provide a sample corridor scenario evaluation matrix, as well as a
sample corridor project evaluation matrix.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 48 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
SAMPLE CORRIDOR SCENARIO EVALUATION MATRIX
Scenario
#
Scenario Name Scenario Projects
SAFETY
(Non-
Recurrent
PHD)
MOBILITY
(PHD, TTI)
ACCESSIBIL
ITY
(Transit
Ridership)
ECON
DEVELOPME
NT
(Eq. Truck
Travel Time
Reliability)
IMPROVE
AQ /
REDUCE
GHG
(Ave.
Tons)
SAMPLE
CAL B/C
RATING
Base
Year
Base Year Model
No programmed/
Planned scenario
projects
# # # # # N/A
Future
Base
Year
Future Base Year
Model
No programmed/
Planned scenario
projects
# # # # # N/A
S1
Fully Funded,
Programmed
Projects (≤ 5 years)
• Project A
• Project B
• Project C
#
LOW
#
MEDIUM
#
MEDIUM
#
MEDIUM
#
LOW
5.5
S2 TSMO Projects
• Project D
• Project E
• Project F
#
HIGH
#
MEDIUM
#
LOW
#
HIGH
#
MEDIUM
10.0
S3
Other programmed
or fully committed
projects to be
delivered ≥5 years.
• Project G
• Project H
• Project I
#
LOW
#
MEDIUM
#
LOW
#
LOW
#
LOW
1.5
S4
Other project/
strategy ideas
• Project X
• Project Y
• Project Z
#
LOW
#
LOW
#
HIGH
#
LOW
#
HIGH
4.5
S5
Trip-making or other
demand factors
reduced due to
other changes in
travel demand
• Strategy J
• Strategy K
• Strategy L
#
MEDIUM
#
MEDIUM
#
LOW
#
MEDIUM
#
MEDIUM
7.0
PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS:
Level of Benefit: High - Medium - Low
High
Medium
Low
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 49 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
SAMPLE CORRIDOR PROJECT EVALUATION MATRIX
P
roj.
#
Project
Name
SAFETY
MOBILITY
ACCESSIBILITY
ECON
DEVELOPMENT
IMPROVE
AQ /
REDUCE
GHG
EST.
COST
SAMPLE
CAL
B/C
RATING
Existing
Fund
Source(s)
Project
Readiness
1
Project A
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
4.5
CMAQ
HIGH
2
Project B
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
1.2
MEDIUM
3
Project C
LOW
MEDIUM
NONE
MEDIUM
NONE
5.5
RM1
LOW
4
Project D
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
2.5
HIGH
5
Project E
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
6
Toll
MEDIUM
6
Project F
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
0.5
LOW
7
Project G
NONE
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
NONE
1.5
STIP
LOW
8
Project H
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
3.7
MEDIUM
9
Project I
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
22
Dev. Fee
LOW
10
Project J
HIGH
NONE
LOW
LOW
NONE
4.6
LOW
11
Project K
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
10.1
SHOPP
MEDIUM
SAFETY:
Impact on Safety: High - Medium - Low
High
Medium
Low
MOBILITY:
Impact on Reducing Person-Hours of Delay: High - Medium - Low
ACCESSIBILITY:
Impact on Accessibility to transportation network: High - Medium -
Low
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:
Impact on Freight Mobility and Access to Jobs: High - Medium - Low
IMPROVE AQ / REDUCE GHG:
Impact on AQ improvement/GHG reduction: High - Medium - Low
CRITERIA RATING:
Total of criteria ratings. High - 5 pts. Medium - 3 pts. Low - 1 pt. None/Negative - 0 pts.
CAL B/C:
CAL B/C tool rating
Existing Fund
Source:
Name/Amount of Existing Funds (federal, state, regional, local, or private)
Project Readiness:
High - Active construction within one year. Medium - Construction within 1-3 years. Low - Construction
within 3+ years.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 50 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Select and Prioritize Solutions
Outcome: A recommended set of solutions for the corridor that can address the
identified issues and opportunities.
Decisions are made on which corridor projects and strategies are promising for
addressing the identified issues; those recommended are given an expected
implementation timeframe in the short-, medium, and long-term horizons. The outcome
is a recommended set of multimodal solutions for the corridor that address the
identified issues and opportunities, along with estimated implementation timeframes.
The combination of promising projects and strategies should be summarized in a
statement or document outlining how the corridor is expected to operate, including the
recommended technical, organizational, and institutional arrangements necessary for
the corridor improvements to realize their expected benefits.
The corridor team meets to make decisions on which corridor projects and strategies to
recommend and prioritizes those recommended by assigning an expected
implementation timeframe goal: Short (1-4 years), Medium (5-10 years) or Long Term
(11+ Years). If the project team recommends any scenario package, project, or
strategy, will be the outcome of a selection process that starts with reviewing the results
of the project evaluation from the previous step.
The corridor project selection and prioritization process are conducted using the
following steps, illustrated as Figure 4.
Figure 4. Corridor Project Selection and Prioritization Process
Review
Evaluation
Results
of projects and
strategies
evaluated
Select and
Group Projects
to be
recommended
based on
selection factors
and expected
timeframe
(short, medium
or long-term)
Adjust
Recommend-
ations
and
implementation
timeframe
collaboratively
Develop Final
Recommend-
ations
and
implementation
timeframe
Identify
Corridor
Integration
Needs
identifying
integration
needs required
to realize full
benefits
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 51 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Project Selection and Implementation Timeframe Factors
The process to select projects and assign an implementation timeframe goal is a
qualitative valuation, utilizing the results of the corridor project analysis/evaluation from
the previous step. The main factors for consideration are those linked to the primary
corridor goals and objectives, although they are not the only factors for the corridor
team to consider. After deciding which projects to recommend within performance
groups, an expected implementation timeframe goal is assigned.
Primary Evaluation Factors
The main factors in selecting projects to recommend are those linked to the primary
corridor goals and objectives. To assist in making project recommendation decisions,
the corridor team may wish to develop a scoring and weighting system linked to
corridor objectives or set a performance threshold among the primary evaluation
factors to warrant recommendation of an investment/improvement scenario or
individual projects. The corridor team may also find it useful to categorize projects into
three performance benefit categories: high-, medium- and lower-performing (or Tier 1,
Tier 2, and Tier 3). The lowest performing projects or those that don’t meaningfully
address any corridor issues may be dropped from further consideration, with high and
medium performing projects retained. Some lower-performing projects may be
retained under special circumstances. Figure 5 provides an example of a decision-
making framework for project selection.
Figure 5. Sample Project Selection Framework
Additional Selection Factors
After evaluating the primary factors, additional factors need to be considered when
selecting projects to recommend and their timeframe goal to implement. The corridor
team will discuss and decide upon what those additional factors to utilize in their
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 52 Californi
a Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
decision-making. Among the additional factors to inform corridor project
recommendations are suggestions illustrated in Table 12.
Benefit/Cost Results
• Estimated total projec
t benefits and lifecycle costs (capital plus support,
maintenance, and operating costs)
• Environmental concerns
Project Deliverability or Feasibility
• Reasonableness of schedule
• Committed vs. uncommitted funds
• Unusual construction or Op
eration and Maintenance costs or methods required
Project Sequencing
• Steps or prerequisites
Matching Funds / Funding Leverage
• Can be from federal, state, regional, local, or private sources
Regional or Statewide Significance
• Equity/regional concerns
• Multi-jurisdictional improvement
• VMT generation
• Evacuation routes/emergency access
Other
• System continuity
• Unusual technical or institutional integration options
• Politics
• Interregional travel
Table 12. Examples of Additional Project Selection Factors
Collaboratively Adjust Recommendations
After reviewing the initial scenario evaluation results, the project selections and
implementation timeframe goals, the team meets to collaboratively adjust those
project recommendations and implementation timeframe goals. This discussion is
based on group discussion of the full range of selection factors, with the goal being to
achieve consensus on final recommendations.
Develop Final Recommendations and Implementation Timeframes
Once accepted by the corridor team, the selected and prioritized projects are
considered recommendations of the Corridor Plan and are meant to feed into Caltrans
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 53 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
District System Planning process and regional transportation planning process. This
recommended set of multimodal solutions for the corridor address the identified issues
and opportunities along estimated implementation timeframes. Project
recommendations fed into these processes become eligible for consideration as pre-
PID project candidates when funding programs are open. Calls for projects at the
federal, state, regional or local level draw from these pre-PID project candidates for
possible funding and implementation. Funding will also be a metric for implementation
timeframes, especially when the funding sources are competitive programs that do not
have guarantees.
Identify Corridor Integration Opportunities
While the output of the corridor analysis is a recommended set of projects and
strategies, it is also important to identify overall corridor integration options of those
recommended projects and strategies. This section of the Corridor Plan should clearly
identify any project and strategy integration options necessary for the benefits of the
recommended corridor projects and strategies to be realized. The combination of
promising strategies can be summarized in a Corridor Integration Opportunities section
of the Plan outlining how the corridor is expected to operate, including recommended
technical, organizational, and institutional arrangements necessary for the benefits of
the corridor improvements to be fully realized.
Publish and Implement Corridor Plan
Outcome: An adopted and published Corridor Plan that defines how a corridor is
performing, why it is performing that way, and recommends projects and strategies that
achieve corridor goals and objectives. Documented consensus around
recommendations, priorities, performance measures, and responsibilities.
Recommendations made ready to be implemented by the corridor partnership.
The corridor planning process is documented with the publication of the Corridor Plan,
which can be in any appropriate format (printed plan, electronic document, or any
other format that is appropriate for the specific circumstances). The adopted Corridor
Plan documents how a corridor is performing today (and estimates for the future), why
it is performing that way, and recommends projects and strategies that achieve the
corridor goals and objectives agreed upon by its partners. The Corridor Plan includes
an implementation schedule, as well as the identification of responsibilities by different
partner agencies. In parallel, formal technical, institutional, and organizational
arrangements can be initiated among the corridor partners, including use cases about
how the corridor is expected to operate under different conditions.
Publication of the Corridor Plan does not represent the end of the corridor planning
process but is an important milestone that will be revisited by the corridor team in future
review cycles. It should be officially adopted by the lead agency and core partners.
After its adoption, it can be officially used to identify project candidates for funding
programs or planning efforts that identify future investment opportunities. Figure 6 is a
suggested outline for a published Corridor Plan.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 54 California Department of Trans
portation
Division of Transportation Planning
Corridor Plan Overview /
Executive Summary
• A summary of the Corridor Plan’s key messages, performance assessment, analysis
results and recommendations.
•Letters of commitment, MOUs, or other agreements from the partner agencies
Corridor Partnership and
Scope
A clearly defined scope and team to guide the corridor planning process. Agreement
on the issues and potential opportunities that will be considered during the corridor
planning process. A comprehensive set of goals, objectives and performance measures
for the corridor that will guide the selection of solutions that address the corridor's
issues and opportunities.
Corridor Description &
Performance
• Corridor information collected and organized to inform an understanding of the
corridor context, as well as current and future conditions.
•Identified performance issues and trends, existing and future.
Corridor Performance
Analysis and Evaluation
•Baseline and future performance assessment
• Analysis approach
•Evaluation of a broad set of solutions for the corridor that can address the identified
issues and opportunities. Includes corr
idor analysis results.
Recommended Corridor
Improvements
• A recommended set of solutions for the corridor that can address the identified issues
and opportunities.
Figure 6. Outline for a Corridor Plan
Monitor and Evaluate Progress
Outcome: Ongoing reporting on corridor performance.
Ongoing reporting on corridor performance is conducted to evaluate the effectiveness
of recommended projects and strategies on corridor performance over time. Corridor
objectives may also be re-assessed and refined by the corridor team. The Corridor Plan
may also identify triggers and events that may necessitate the update of the Plan and
a reassessment of strategies. Examples of conditions that may warrant revisiting the
Corridor Plan include: technological disruptions or advancements, major new
economic, population or environmental changes in the corridor, or significant new
regional or statewide planning initiatives.
The results of the corridor planning process are revisited over time by monitoring corridor
performance indicators and evaluating the effect of implemented projects and
strategies on those indicators. The lead agency and corridor team need to ensure
mechanisms are in place for ongoing monitoring and evaluation. The mechanisms
should include a plan for monitoring of corridor performance indicators, regular
updates of the corridor performance assessment and publication of results. When the
corridor team meets to review updated performance assessment results, it is also a
good time to reassess the corridor objectives and other approaches to the Corridor
Plan to ensure the right issues are still being addressed.
•
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 55 California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Develop Corridor Performance Monitoring Plan
Developing a Corridor Performance Monitoring Plan ensures a process is in place to
regularly conduct corridor performance assessments and report on corridor
performance indicators.
Evaluate Corridor Performance Effectiveness
Determine the ongoing effectiveness of implemented strategies by regularly updating
the corridor performance assessment initially done earlier in the corridor planning
process.
Assess Impacts on Other Plans
Assess the impacts that implementation the Corridor Plan has on other plans such as the
CTP, Caltrans SMP and modal plans, RTPs and other planning efforts.
Assess and Refine Corridor Objectives
Following the latest results of the corridor performance assessment, the corridor team
should meet to discuss the results and determine if any refinements or adjustments
should be made to the corridor objectives, performance assessment or evaluation
approach.
Publish Corridor Performance Assessment Results
The results of regular corridor performance assessments should be published to monitor
progress over time and help keep corridor partners engaged in the outcome of the
corridor planning process.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 56 California De
partment of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Appendix A – Laws, Regulation and Policies
Pertaining to Corridor Planning
The following
is an incomplete listing federal and state laws and regulations that relate
to corridor planning.
Federal Law or Regulation
Title 23 United States Code Section 135 (Statewide Transportation Planning)
Defines required statewide transportation planning practices and processes.
Title 23 CFR Part 450.322 (d) (Congestion Management Process)
Defines the CMP, a systematic approach based on the principles of objectives-driven,
performance-based planning. A CMP is required to be used in Transportation
Management Areas (TMAs) - urbanized areas with a population over 200,000 and
should be considered in non-TMA areas. Federal law also states that a congestion
management process shall be developed, established, and implemented as part of
the planning process (Title 23 CFR Part 450.322(d) and
https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/focus_areas/cmp.htm).
Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act
Current funding and authorization bill to govern United States federal surface
transportation spending.
Performance Measure 3 (PM3) - Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
(MAP-21)
On January 18, 2017, the FHWA published a final rule in the Federal Register (82 FR 5970)
that established performance measures State DOTs and MPOs will use to report on the
performance of the Interstate and Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) to
carry out the National Highway Performance Program; freight movement on the
Interstate system to carry out the National Highway Freight Program; and traffic
congestion and on-road mobile source emissions for the purpose of carrying out the
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program. The rule
addressed requirements established by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act (MAP-21), and included six national performance measures related to
System Performance, as follows:
• Percent of Reli
able Person-Miles Traveled on the Interstate.
• Percent of Reliable Person-Miles Traveled on the Non-Interstate NHS.
• Percentage of Interstate System Mileage Providing Reliable Truck Travel Time
(Truck Travel Time Reliability Index).
• Total Emissions Reductions by Applicable Pollutants under the CMAQ Program.
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 57 Cali
fornia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
• Annual Hours of Peak-Hour Excessive Delay Per Capita (PHED).
• Percent of Non SOV Travel.
Federal regulations require State DOTs to establish and report annual targets related to
each of these six performance measures by May 20
th
of each year. MPOs shall establish
a target six-months after state DOTs establish targets (November 16
th
) by either: 1)
Agreeing to plan and program projects so that they contribute toward the
accomplishment of the state DOT system performance target for that performance
measure; or 2) Committing to a quantifiable target for that performance measure for
their metropolitan planning area. In addition, state DOTs and MPOs with NHS mileage in
applicable urbanized areas must agree to single, unified PM3 targets for the PHED and
Non-SOV performance measures.
State Law or Regulation
California Government Code Section 65086 (Transportation Planning and
Programming).
Directs Caltrans, in consultation with partner agencies and jurisdictions, to carry out
long-term SHS planning.
The 2
017 Road Repair and Accountability Act (SB 1) - http://rebuildingca.ca.gov/
;
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB1 ;
http://www.catc.ca.gov/) is a statewide transportation investment program to rebuild
California by fixing streets, highways and bridges across California and targeting funds
toward transit and congested trade and commute corridor improvements. These
investments are primarily funded by an increase in the state fuel tax. This program is
active and already funding projects. One of the main funding programs within SB 1 is
the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program
(
http://www.catc.ca.gov/programs/sb1/sccp/ ;
http://www.catc.ca.gov/programs/sb1/sccp/docs/sb1-sccp-final-adopted-guidelines-
and-resolution-120617.pdf), which requires that all projects nominated for this funding
program must be in a multimodal corridor plan.
California Transportation Commission “Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan
Guidelines.”
These guidelines are being developed pursuant to California Streets and Highways
Code Section 2396 for the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program.
California Government Code Section 14522
Requires the California Transportation Commission adopt guidelines for the
development of RTPs; the most recent guidelines were released in 2017
(http://www.catc.ca.gov/programs/rtp/. Chapter 2.7 of the 2017 RTP Guidelines state
that RTPs should be prepared within the context of corridor planning efforts and other
planning processes. Chapter 6.23 of the RTP Guidelines state that the RTP should
identify priority corridors related to the federally required congestion management
process (Title 23 CFR Part 450.322(d)).
Caltrans’ Corridor Planning Process Guide Final
Page 58 C
alifornia Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
State planning priorities and policy on containing growth in vehicle travel and reducing
GHGs are enshrined in law (e.g. AB 32, SB 32, SB 375, and SB 743). These laws place a
focus on containing growth in vehicle travel to achieve an array of state objectives,
including greenhouse gas emissions reduction, improvement in air quality,
environmental protection, improvement of public health, and fiscal soundness. Key
metrics for measuring and modeling these outcomes include VMT and GHGs.
Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375)
Supports the State's climate action goals to reduce GHG emissions through
coordinated transportation and land use planning.
California Transportation Plan (SB 391)
Expanded the scope of the CTP by requiring that the plan address how the State will
achieve maximum feasible emission reductions to attain a statewide reduction of GHG
emissions.
Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act (SB 743)
Created a process that changed the way that transportation impacts are analyzed
under the CEQA.
California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32)
Established statewide GHG emissions targets and requirements.
Executive Order N-19-19 (2019)
Governor signed executive order requiring every aspect of state government redouble
its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate
change while building a sustainable, inclusive economy.
