Post on 16-Apr-2018
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
prepared for
Vermont Agency of Transportation
prepared by
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140
July 2005
i
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook ..... 1 Purpose of the Handbook .......................................................................... 1 Best Practices for Corridor Planning ........................................................... 2 Definitions ................................................................................................. 3 Relationship to Other Planning Activities..................................................... 4 Process, Products, and Outcomes of a Corridor Management Study ........... 6 Resources................................................................................................. 6
Getting Organized................................................... 1-1 Overview................................................................................................ 1-1 Form Advisory Group.............................................................................. 1-1 Establish Study Goals ............................................................................ 1-3 Define Corridor Boundaries.................................................................... 1-4 Develop Work Plan ................................................................................ 1-5 Hold Public Meeting ............................................................................... 1-8 Line Up Resources................................................................................. 1-8
Analyze Existing and Future Conditions.............. 2-1 Overview................................................................................................ 2-1 Collect Information on Existing Conditions ............................................... 2-1 Analyze Future Conditions and Performance ........................................... 2-4 Present Findings to Stakeholders............................................................ 2-5
Develop Vision and Strategies .............................. 3-1 Overview................................................................................................ 3-1 Establish a Vision and Goals for the Corridor ........................................... 3-1 Develop Objectives and Performance Measures...................................... 3-3 Identify Strategies................................................................................... 3-4 Develop Screening Criteria ..................................................................... 3-8 Define and Analyze Strategies in More Detail .......................................... 3-9 Select and Prioritize Strategies.............................................................. 3-10
Develop Implementation Plan................................ 4-1 Overview................................................................................................ 4-1 Identify Thresholds/Triggers to Undertake Specific Strategies................... 4-1 Identify Implementation Tools, Next Steps, and Responsibilities ............... 4-2 Identify Relationships or Agreements to Implement and Monitor Plan ....... 4-5 Establish Incentives and Contingencies................................................... 4-5 Identify Monitoring Activities.................................................................... 4-6
Finalize Corridor Plan Document .......................... 5-1 Overview................................................................................................ 5-1 Assemble Materials into a Corridor Plan Document.................................. 5-1 Obtain Plan Endorsements ..................................................................... 5-1 Distribute Plan and Make it Available to the Public ................................... 5-2
Implement and Monitor Corridor Plan .................. 6-1 Overview................................................................................................ 6-1 Establish Institutional Relationships and Agreements............................... 6-1 Undertake Implementation Steps............................................................. 6-1 Monitor Corridor Conditions and Status of Actions.................................... 6-1 Periodically Update Plan......................................................................... 6-1
Background
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 5
Step 6
Table of Contents
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
ii
Appendix A Data Sources Inventory
Appendix B Analysis Methods
Appendix C Funding Sources
Appendix D Municipal Planning Tools
Appendix E Land Use Strategies for Transportation Corridors: Examples from Other States
Appendix F Additional Resources
Appendix G Glossary
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
prepared for
Vermont Agency of Transportation
prepared by
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 100 CambridgePark Drive, Suite 400 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140
July 2005
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1
This Corridor Management Handbook (CMH) was developed to provide a technical resource for state and regional agency planners and their consult-ants who are undertaking development of a transportation corridor man-agement plan. The handbook also may be helpful to a broader set of people who are involved in corridor planning efforts – local officials; planning, zoning, and public works staff; transit service providers; corridor residents and businesspeople; and other interests.
Purpose of the Handbook The idea for this handbook grew out of the recognition that many of Vermont’s transportation needs can be most effectively addressed at the corridor level rather than on a piecemeal basis. Limited resources for transportation improvements at all levels of government are dictating more creative and collaborative approaches to solving – and preventing transpor-tation problems. A corridor approach offers the opportunity for communities to collectively plot a future strategy which makes the best possible use of available resources, takes advantage of synergies to produce the best outcomes, and has a greater chance of becoming a reality – than would otherwise be the case if each community acted on its own.
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook – What’s Included?
OBJECTIVES Purpose, scope, and intended outcomes of a corridor plan.
PROCESS Steps involved in developing a corridor plan.
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS Data sources and analysis methods.
PARTICIPATION Methods for involving stakeholders and the public.
SOLUTIONS Approaches to selecting appropriate corridor management strategies, including both transportation and land use strategies.
IMPLEMENTATION Mechanisms for implementation of corridor study recommen-dations and monitoring performance of the corridor over time.
Background
Transportation needs are most effectively addressed at the corridor level rather than
on a piecemeal basis.
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 2
Best Practices for Corridor Planning This handbook lays out a set of best practices for corridor planning. Agen-cies embarking on a corridor planning effort are encouraged to follow these best practices and produce corridor management plans that are:
• Comprehensive, based on a full understanding of the dynamics of transportation and all interacting influences within the corridor;
• Proactive, seeking to identify and address transportation-related problems before they arise, rather than after they have grown to the point of being intolerable;
• Visionary in nature, meaning that the recommended strategies for the corridor arise from a shared vision for the corridor established by local communities and state agencies with jurisdiction over the corridor; and
• Collaborative, meaning that transportation agencies, local govern-ments, stakeholders and the public at large all participate in the development, implementation and monitoring of the corridor plan.
A successful corridor management plan is one that state and regional planning agencies, municipalities, and other stakeholders in the corridor use as a blueprint for future action. The plan should be a living document that is updated periodically in response to changing conditions and needs. An effective corridor management plan is not a wish list of projects that may never be funded, but rather a balanced set of realistic transportation and land use strategies. Some of these strategies may be pursued immedi-ately; others may need to wait for an appropriate or opportune time. The critical ingredient for success is a shared commitment to take responsibility for seeing that the strategies in the plan are implemented.
The Benefits of Corridor Management
Why undertake a corridor management plan effort?
• To identify and address transportation deficiencies before they turn into critical problems that can affect quality of life and limit economic development;
• To allow for development of coordinated transportation and land use solutions along a corridor – a far more effective approach than individual piecemeal initiatives that may act at cross-purposes;
• To bring diverse stakeholders together (local, regional, and state agencies, property owners, and others) and agree on mutually beneficial strategies as well as ongoing mechanisms for cooperatively pursuing these strategies;
• To save money by implementing non-capital intensive strategies (such as operational improvements, access management, or land use policies) as an alternative to expensive transportation capital investments;
• To develop creative strategies for supporting sustainable economic development in corridor communities; and
• To ensure that transportation needs are addressed in a manner that preserves and enhances Vermont’s natural environment and the unique character of its communities.
Corridor Planning is:
Comprehensive Proactive Visionary
Collaborative
A successful corridor management plan is a living
document that provides a blueprint for action.
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3
RoadwayCapacity
EconomicDevelopment
RoadwayOperations
NaturalResources
AccessManagement
Zoning/Land Use
PublicTransportation
Pedestrian/Bicycle
Rail
AirportAccess
Definitions A corridor is defined as:
“A broad geographic band …
connecting population and employment centers…
served by various transportation modes…
within which passenger and freight travel, land use, topography, environment and other characteristics are evaluated for transportation purposes.”
A corridor can vary in length from one mile to over 100 miles. In Vermont, most corridor studies will be defined to include a stretch of roadway, its right-of-way (including utilities, drainage, traffic control devices, and parallel sidewalks or pathways), adjacent land use development, and elements that compose the scenic view. In many cases, it will be appropriate to also include one or more parallel roadways and/or rail lines.
The definition of a corridor study area includes the corridor itself as well as nearby land areas and transportation facilities (e.g., airports, freight ter-minals) that influence travel demand in the corridor. The geographic boundaries of the study area typically coincide with geographic units used for reporting population, employment and travel demand data, such as cities, towns, or census tracts. This allows for use of readily available infor-mation on likely future growth patterns and transportation needs. However, the study area definition should be based on an understanding of travel patterns and needs rather than on data availability considerations.
The term corridor management refers to the practice of identifying and implementing a mutually supportive set of strategies to maintain and
enhance access, mobility, safety, economic develop-ment, and environmental quality along the transportation corridor. A corridor management study or corridor study is a comprehensive assessment of issues, needs, and potential solutions to address these objectives. A corridor study should consider all modes, including tran-sit, bicycling, and walking, as well as automobile and commercial vehicle travel along the corridor. It should consider operational improvements and maintenance as lower-cost, lower-impact alternatives to capital invest-ment strategies. It also should consider land use strategies that address the impacts of growth patterns and local land use decisions on traffic conditions and travel demand.
A corridor management study has a long-term focus, addressing land use and transportation strategies to be undertaken over a 20-year or greater time horizon. It is conceptual and strategic in nature, and will typically not focus on development of specific projects. However, one possible outcome is that one or more capital improvements may be recommended for more detailed planning and design work. A corridor management study does not involve the development of detailed engineering designs, or produce formal environmental documentation of project impacts.
What is a Corridor?
What is Corridor Management?
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4
The corridor management study should result in a corridor management plan that includes a package of recommended land use and transportation strategies that comprehensively address present and future transportation needs. Types of strategies included in the plan may include:
• Transportation improvements;
• Land use strategies such as zoning, land conservation, or access management;
• Landscaping, and preservation of right-of-way;
• Management tools and processes such as development guidelines, design guidelines, and plan oversight and monitoring; and
• Mechanisms for interjurisdictional cooperation.
A corridor management plan will ideally provide a mix of these strategies that are mutually reinforcing and consistent with an agreed-upon vision for the corridor. It also will provide a set of well-defined, prioritized actions, and define clear responsibilities to carry the strategies forward into implementation.
Must a Corridor Management Study be Comprehensive?
Studies are often performed that focus more narrowly on a specific topic within a corridor, such as access management or short-term solutions to traffic problems. These types of studies can be appropriate in many situations: to implement specific recommendations from a corridor management study, when funding is not available for a more comprehensive study, or when immediate, short-term needs and opportunities exist. This handbook can be used as a resource for these more narrowly focused studies. However, many of the intended benefits of a comprehensive corridor management study process – a synergistic approach that avoids conflicting, piecemeal actions, and an emphasis on broad participation, buy-in, and ongoing implementation – may not be realized with a more limited effort.
Relationship to Other Planning Activities VTrans, the Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization (CCMPO), the regional planning commissions (RPC), and local governments engage in a variety of other transportation and land use planning activities. The purpose of a corridor study is to support and complement these activities, rather than to duplicate them. Some of these other activities, and their relationship to corridor planning, are described in the following table.
What is a Corridor Management Plan?
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 5
Relationship between Corridor Planning and Other Planning Activities VTrans Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Modal Policy Plans [VTrans Policy and Planning Division]
• Define goals, objectives, and strategies for consideration in corridor studies – covering highways rail, public transit, and airports.
• Define corridors of statewide significance, such as the 16 origin-destination pairs identified in the Vermont Highway System Policy Plan (HSPP).
Regional Plans and Regional Transportation Plans (RTP) [CCMPO and Regional Planning Commissions]
• Define goals, objectives, and strategies for consideration in corridor studies. • Recommendations of corridor management plans should be consistent with
the Regional Plan and the RTP. • Regional Plan and RTP updates should incorporate findings and
recommendations of completed corridor studies. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) [VTrans Policy and Planning Division]
• Official list of state-programmed transportation projects to be initiated over the next three years, identifying costs, funding sources and schedules.
• A corridor study may result in specific project recommendations, which may be included in the STIP after going through the project development process.
Project Development Process [VTrans Program Development Division]
• A corridor study may recommend project concepts that then proceed through the project development process.
• The corridor study can provide the basis for alternatives analysis and pro-ject definition, and also can be the process for establishing a Purpose and Need Statement.
• The corridor study can provide inputs to the project development process (e.g., existing conditions, analysis of secondary and cumulative impacts), and should be scoped to minimize redundancy with planning analysis required for project development.
Design Standards [VTrans Program Development Division]
• State design standards for roadways and pedestrian/bicycle design should be used as a reference for developing corridor study recommendations.
• The Level of Improvement (LOI) policy suggests the scope of improvements that may be considered in the corridor study.
Access Management Policies and Plans [VTrans, CCMPO and RPCs, see also: http://www.vtaccessmanagement. info/AM_Vermont.htm]
• Corridor plans should include consideration of access management strategies. • Strategies developed through corridor studies should be consistent with
VTrans’ classification of roadway segments by access management cate-gory, and with existing access management plans for the corridor.
Asset Management Policies and Programs [VTrans Policy and Planning Division]
• VTrans’ asset management systems can help to identify the condition and deficiencies of pavement, bridges, and other roadway elements along a corridor. Asset management systems also can assist in estimating the costs of ongoing maintenance and preservation work.
• A corridor study may result in recommendations regarding prioritization and coordination of projects in corridor.
Local Comprehensive Planning, Zoning Bylaws, and Capital Improvement Programs [Individual Jurisdictions]
• The corridor study should address relevant corridor land use issues, including impacts of transportation improvements on development, and impacts of future land use changes on transportation needs.
• Local governments should incorporate recommendations emerging from corridor studies into comprehensive plan updates, bylaws (zoning and subdivision regulations) that implement these plans, and municipal capital improvement programs.
State Land Use Policies [Vermont Statutes and State Agencies]
• The scope, procedures, and recommendations of corridor studies should be compatible with statewide land use and development policies, including: the Vermont Land Use and Development Law (Act 250); Growth Management Act (Act 200, Title 24 VSA Chapter 117); Interstate Executive Order, Development Cabinet Law (Act 112); and Downtown Development Act.
The Vermont Corridor Management Handbook
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 6
Process, Products, and Outcomes of a Corridor Management Study The corridor management study process involves six basic steps, which are described in the remaining sections of this handbook:
• Step 1 – Get Organized;
• Step 2 – Analyze Existing and Future Conditions;
• Step 3 – Develop Vision and Strategies;
• Step 4 – Develop Implementation Plan;
• Step 5 – Finalize Document; and
• Step 6 – Monitor Progress.
The outcome of the corridor management study process is the corridor management plan. The plan should be developed through consultation with corridor stakeholders and should have the support of VTrans, the RPCs and/or MPO, local jurisdictions, residents, and other key stakeholders with interests in the corridor.
While each corridor planning effort must be adapted to study area needs and available resources, a comprehensive corridor management plan should include the following elements:
• An assessment of existing and future transportation, land use, and environmental conditions and operations in the corridor;
• A package of recommended strategies and actions that comprehensively address future transportation needs;
• A list of implementation steps and responsibilities, including a rec-ommended timeline for implementation, and any threshold condi-tions that should trigger particular improvements; and
• Documentation of the process by which the corridor plan was developed and recommendations selected.
Resources The appendices to this handbook provide additional resources that may be helpful for corridor planning, including:
• Appendix A – Data Resources Inventory;
• Appendix B – Analysis Methods;
• Appendix C – Funding Sources;
• Appendix D – Municipal Planning Tools;
• Appendix E – Land Use Strategies for Transportation Corridors: Examples from Other States;
• Appendix F – Additional Resources (example plans, other useful reference documents); and
• Appendix G – Glossary of terms and acronyms.
Get Organized
Existing and Future Conditions
Implementation Plan
Vision and Strategies
Corridor Plan Document
Monitoring
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-1
Overview Getting organized to begin a corridor management study involves forming an Advisory Group to direct the effort, identifying key concerns to be addressed, drafting a set of goals to provide a common understanding of the purpose of the study, defining the corridor boundaries, developing a work plan, and lining up resources to carry out the work program. A single individual or a small group can be designated to lead these startup activi-ties. Under some circumstances, it may be desirable to obtain consultant support for front-end planning activities as well.
Getting Organized – Major Activities Form Advisory Group • Identify key stakeholders
• Recruit Advisory Group members
Establish Study Goals • Review previous studies
• Identify issues and concerns
• Identify goals of corridor management study
Define Corridor Boundaries • Identify transportation facilities included
• Identify corridor endpoints
• Identify area of influence
Develop Work Plan • Develop public involvement plan
• Develop work plan
Hold Public Meeting • Review study goals, corridor boundaries, and work plan
Line Up Resources • Define roles and responsibilities
• Hire consultant(s) as needed
• Obtain staff resource commitments
Form Advisory Group The initial step in pursuing a corridor management study is to form an Advisory Group. This group will provide both policy and technical direction throughout the study, and ideally will play a key role in building and maintaining support for implementation of the resulting corridor management plan.
The corridor management study typically will be initiated by VTrans, Regional Planning Commissions (RPC) and/or the Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization (CCMPO) in order to address one or more issues of concern. The study initiator (or lead agency) should make a list of important corridor stakeholders and then identify from these stake-holders a set of candidates for the Advisory Group. At a minimum, the Advisory Group should include representatives of the local jurisdictions in the corridor study area, the RPCs and/or CCMPO, Transportation Advisory Committee(s), and VTrans. Inclusion of at least one citizen representative is strongly encouraged.
Step 1 Getting Organized
The Advisory Group provides study
oversight and will also ideally play a key role
in implementation.
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-2
It is not necessary to include representation of the full set of stakeholders in the Advisory Group – the public involvement component of the study can be designed to provide broad opportunities for input. However, it is impor-tant that the agencies and organizations who will likely have responsibility for implementing study recommendations are represented on the commit-tee, and are actively involved in the decision-making process.
Advisory Group members should be able to effectively and fairly represent the viewpoints within their agency or the concerns of their constituents, and should be expected to discuss study issues and communicate findings with others in their agency or jurisdiction.
The size of the Advisory Group can vary depending on the scale of the study, but it is best to keep the group to a manageable size (e.g., 10 to 20 people). Large scale corridor management studies can consider forming two advisory bodies – one which focuses on high-level policy direction and another that focuses on technical review and comment. The activities of these bodies should be closely coordinated.
Key Stakeholders for Corridor Studies Federal and State Agencies • Vermont Agency of Transportation – District Transportation
Administrator, Policy and Planning Division, Program Development Division
• Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
• Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development (Departments of Economic Development, Tourism and Marketing, Housing and Community Affairs)
• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Division Office
Transportation Providers • Railroad Owners and Operators
• Trucking Interests
• Transit Service Providers
Regional Planning Agencies and Advisory Bodies
• Regional Planning Commissions (RPC) and/or the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
• Regional Transportation Advisory Committees (TAC)
• Local and Regional Economic Development Agencies
Local Jurisdictions • Elected Officials (Select Board Members, City Council Members, Trustees, Planning Commissioners)
• Planning, Community Development, Zoning, and Public Works Staff
Nonprofit Agencies • Economic Development Organizations
• Environmental/Smart Growth Advocacy Groups
• Transportation Advocacy Groups
Businesses and Residents • Abutting Property and Business Owners
• Chambers of Commerce
• Developers and Builders
• Industries Relying on the Corridor for Goods Movement
• Tourism Industry Representatives
• Community and Neighborhood Groups
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-3
Establish Study Goals Once the Advisory Group is formed, its first order of business is to develop a statement of goals for the corridor management study. This statement should describe what the existing or expected concerns are for the corridor, and how the corridor management plan is expected to help address these concerns.
This statement can be used as the basis for defining the corridor bounda-ries and developing the work plan.
Example Issues and Concerns
Typical issues and concerns that have been identified in other Vermont corridor studies include:
• Intersections or segments with unacceptable levels of congestion/delay;
• Intersections or segments with actual or perceived safety hazards (for motor vehicles, pedestrians, or other road users);
• Geometric deficiencies that create problems for trucks;
• Inadequate lane or shoulder widths for bicyclists;
• Areas with high existing or potential pedestrian usage that lack pedestrian facilities or crossings;
• Areas with unacceptable traffic noise or vibration impacts;
• Village areas with high levels of truck traffic;
• Substandard pavement or bridge conditions;
• Inadequate access to specific properties or establishments;
• Inconsistencies between access management classification guidelines and current design;
• Land use and growth patterns that exacerbate transportation deficiencies; and
• Lack of alternative transportation choices.
Development of the study goals should reflect the issues motivating the study and the perspectives of the Advisory Group members. Lead agency staff and the Advisory Group should review relevant existing studies and plans relating to the corridor. Such studies and plans may include previous corridor studies; town plans and local economic development plans; regional plans, including the regional transportation plan, TIP, and economic development plans; statewide transportation plans, including modal policy plans, the long-range transportation plan, and the STIP; Act 250 documents; and other plans such as watershed plans and wildlife corridor plans.
Early review of past efforts can help to define an appropriate focus for the cur-rent corridor study, by identifying issues and needs as well as solutions already recommended (or rejected). The goals and scope of the current corridor man-agement study can be crafted with the benefit of this experience.
Advisory Group members also should be encouraged to discuss issues of concern with others in their organizations and other key stakeholders in their communities. This will help them to ensure the study is scoped with the full benefit of existing information and that its stated objectives reflect a wide range of perspectives.
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-4
It is quite possible that there will be conflicting objectives – for example, encouraging economic development and preserving scenic views. The challenge to be undertaken in the corridor management study is to acknowledge each objective and work out a balanced set of strategies that achieves the best possible compromise across them.
Sample Corridor Management Study Goals
• Ensure that future land use decisions across multiple jurisdictions are compatible with the likely future capacity of the roadway(s) in the corridor
• Address congestion problems during tourist seasons
• Reduce noise and safety concerns associated with heavy truck traffic in village areas
• Support continued development while managing impacts of additional truck traffic
• Address deterioration of bridge before load posting is required
• Address safety “hotspots”
• Minimize environmental impacts and support resource restoration
• Improve intermodal connections
The identified issues and concerns, as well as the established goals, should be revisited in Step 2 to determine if any revisions should be made based on what was learned from the data collection, analysis, and public outreach activities. They can be used as a reference point at each stage of the study to make sure that technical analysis, strategy development, and implementation planning activities are addressing the primary concerns that motivated the study. They also can be used to bring activities back into focus when and if “scope creep” starts to occur.
Define Corridor Boundaries The initiation of a corridor study assumes a general geographic scope for the study. One of the first tasks of the Advisory Group, though, should be to more clearly define the corridor’s boundaries – including the transporta-tion facilities included, the endpoints, and the broader study area to be covered.
Defining the transportation facilities to be included will limit the scope of transportation data collection and strategy analysis. It is likely that the cor-ridor study has been initiated in response to particular transportation-related needs and concerns. Therefore, the primary facility of concern (e.g., a roadway and its associated facilities such as pedestrian and bicycle paths) as well as intersecting and parallel transportation facilities (e.g., road, railroad, or non-motorized trail) should be included if they could make a significant contribution to reducing transportation problems in the corridor. Similarly, impacts from airports, transit hubs, and intermodal terminals should be addressed if they are either significant sources of corridor traffic, or influence the utilization of the primary facility.
The corridor endpoints should be set broadly enough to include the identified locations of primary transportation-related need or concern, corri-dor transportation facilities as identified above, and any adjacent areas with a significant influence on transportation conditions in the corridor. For
Learn from past experience.
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-5
example, if the study was initiated to address high levels of congestion in a series of towns along a particular state highway route, the endpoints should be set to include the towns of concern. In the towns at each end of the cor-ridor, the endpoint should be established far enough outside the town cen-ter to encompass all problems and potential solutions for that particular town (e.g., access management, land use, alternate routes). If a neighboring community includes traffic generators that make a significant contribution to traffic in the corridor (such as a ski resort), it should be included as well.
The corridor study area defines the scope of land use-related data collec-tion (e.g., population and employment trends, major trip generators) and strategies, as well as municipal participation in the corridor study. It should be established to include the geographic area with the most significant influence on transportation conditions in the corridor. The corridor study area commonly includes the cities and towns that are traversed by the transportation facility or facilities being studied. It also may include adja-cent towns that significantly contribute to corridor traffic (e.g., the corridor “travelshed”). Additional considerations may include viewsheds as well as environmental resources (e.g., watersheds, wetlands, wildlife habitat) impacted by the transportation facilities and related development. The boundaries should not be set so broadly that the study becomes unman-ageable in scope, and should not include areas with only a minor and indi-rect influence on corridor conditions.
Once the exact corridor boundaries are established, the composition of the Advisory Group should be adjusted to ensure representation from all included communities.
Develop Work Plan A work plan for the corridor study should include the following:
• Study goals;
• Map showing the definition of the corridor and study area boundaries;
• Study tasks, including data collection, future conditions analysis, analysis of options, and public involvement;
• Definition of major products; and
• Tentative schedule of milestones and key decision points, including who should be involved at each point.
The work plan should be in line with available resources. The major factors affecting the cost and duration of a corridor study are:
• Size of the corridor and complexity of issues;
• Data availability and additional data collection needs (see Step 2 and Appendix A for recommended corridor planning data and resources);
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-6
• Transportation model availability and extent of future conditions analysis needs (see Step 2 and Appendix B for analysis require-ments and options); and
• Extent of public involvement activities (see below for a discussion of developing a public involvement plan).
A straightforward and noncontroversial plan will average 12 to 18 months from start to finish. More controversial or complex corridor management plans are likely to take longer.
It is important to set a realistic time schedule but also to keep the study process moving forward, in order to sustain the interest and active involve-ment of stakeholders. At the same time, if unexpected issues arise during the study process, it is important to maintain flexibility in order to ensure that these issues can be adequately addressed. For example, the study partners may discover sensitive community issues in a particular location that may require more extensive public outreach than originally anticipated. If doing so will have a significant impact on the study budget, either addi-tional resources must be found, or more detailed planning should be deferred as a recommended follow-on activity to the current corridor study.
The Advisory Group should be relied upon to provide input into develop-ment of the work plan and detailed review of drafts. This ensures that their concerns are reflected early on in the process, and that they have the opportunity to weigh in on how to best focus the limited resources that are available. The members also can help to identify existing data sources or other resources that are available to help with the study.
Innovative Approaches to Public Involvement – Community Workshop in Suffield, Connecticut
The Town of Suffield, population 12,000, is located about 25 miles north of Hartford, Connecticut. As part of a regional growth visioning project, the town initiated a public planning process to develop a vision for future growth and transportation in the community. A key component of this process was a community visioning workshop, at which participants reviewed the results of a Visual Preference Survey taken by town staff and citizens; reviewed existing land use, zoning, and transportation patterns; mapped desired land uses; and identified transportation concerns and potential improvements.
About 40 elected officials, town staff, and citizens attended the three-hour workshop, held in summer 2001. Participants were then divided into small groups to undertake a series of visioning exercises. In these groups, participants were given base maps of the Suffield region and the town center, along with tracing paper and markers, and asked to draw on the maps and make recommendations.
After hearing final comments from participants, the project consultants synthesized the results of the workshops into a set of recommendations for the town, which were provided to town staff, elected offi-cials, and workshop participants. As an outcome of the workshop and associated activities, the town undertook specific implementation steps, including zoning changes, land preservation, and streetscape improvements.
Public involvement is a critical component of the corridor planning process, serving two fundamental purposes. First, it ensures that the issues and needs of residents, businesses, travelers, and other interests in the corridor are adequately addressed through the study process and recommenda-tions. Second, it helps ensure that people are aware of the study and understand the justification for its recommendations, which should lead to broader support for implementation activities. The public should be given
Public Involvement Plan
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-7
opportunities for input at all stages of the process, beginning with the establishment of goals for the study corridor.
A Vermont Public Participation Success Story: The Danville Project
The preliminary design process used for the Vermont Danville project showcases techniques for com-munity participation and consensus building that also can be applied within the context of a corridor planning effort. This project includes the reconstruction of U.S. Route 2 through the village of Danville, reconstruction of town roads around the Danville town green, new underground utilities in the area of the green, a new traffic signal, lighting, landscaping, and artistic enhancements.
The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) entered into a unique partnership with the Vermont Arts Council (VAC) to ensure that the project would enhance the historic section of the village it traverses. In April of 2000, a Local Review Committee (LRC) was formed and consisted of a group of interested resi-dents. Members include a school teacher, a local business owner, the town administrator, and others. In June of 2000, under the guidance of the LRC, VTrans and VAC hired an artist and a landscape architect to assist with the design and facilitate community involvement with the proposed aesthetic treatments on the project. The public was involved over a two-year process, through the LRC. Public involvement activities included a series of public meetings, workshops, school events, property owner visits, site walks and focus groups.
The resulting design was widely accepted within the community, because people saw that their ideas and concerns were being heard. At the same time, the public process provided an opportunity for peo-ple to better understand the function of the roadway, design issues, and other concerns of agency engi-neers. This allowed for development of a consensus on design tradeoffs that would have been much more difficult if this process had not occurred. The two-year consensus-building process allowed the project to move forward without public opposition, and produced a design that addresses important safety concerns while enhancing the historic character of the community.
The appropriate extent and type of public involvement activities will depend upon the nature of issues being addressed as well as the resources avail-able for the corridor study. At a minimum, public involvement should include communication of corridor study issues through newsletters and media coverage, as well as opportunities for public comment at public meetings and through telephone, e-mail, or written channels. More in-depth public involvement may be conducted using methods such as sur-veys, focus groups, and interactive workshops. Advisory Group members (particularly elected officials) represent the public by the nature of their position and should be selected with the goal of representing the range of interests in the corridor.
Innovative Approaches to Public Involvement – Community Fair
The Rutland Regional Planning Commission, in association with town planners in Castleton, Vermont held a community fair to involve the public in the 2002 updates of the Castleton Town Plan. The fair provided a mechanism to share progress on the plan update and to learn about residents’ views on topics of concern for the future of the town. The fair venue has allowed people to participate who might not otherwise have the time or interest to attend a standard public meeting, or who might have con-straints such as child care. It also allows planners to establish an informal yet productive dialogue with residents.
The public involvement plan should specify the number, format, and timing of meetings to be held. It also should describe other communication and outreach activities (e.g., number of newsletters produced, extent of mailing list, groups to target in survey). While the study budget will constrain the extent of public involvement, the public involvement process should not be shortchanged. Failing to identify and address issues of community concern could limit support for the study’s recommendations, and jeopardize the
Getting Organized
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 1-8
success of implementation efforts. Input should be solicited from the early stages of the process – overlooking key issues until late in the study proc-ess may potentially require additional planning work to address these issues. In the long run, a good public involvement plan can actually save the stakeholder agencies money and lead to more feasible and beneficial study recommendations.
Hold Public Meeting A public meeting should be held during the initial stages of the corridor planning study. The purpose of the meeting is to introduce people to the goals, scope, and timeline of the study, and to obtain feedback on these top-ics before they are finalized. The public should be asked to review the list of issues and concerns generated by the Advisory Group and confirm the goals that were established. Any additional issues that need to be considered can then be identified, and the study goals may be revised or expanded to encompass these issues, if necessary. Public input also can confirm the appropriate geographic scope of the corridor.
Line Up Resources A mixture of agency staff and consultants is typically used for corridor stud-ies. If resources for consultants are limited, a corridor study can be conducted using pooled agency staff resources, supplemented with consultants as needed for specialized tasks such as data collection and modeling.
Once the scope, timeline, funding and public agency roles and responsibili-ties have been defined, a consultant or consultant team can be recruited through a Request for Proposals (RFP). The lead agency for the Corridor Management Study (with input from the Advisory Group) should write an RFP that clearly defines the scope of services expected and establishes the study’s timeframe and budget.
The involvement of agency technical staff experienced in the types of ser-vices expected will help ensure that expectations are consistent with avail-able resources. Even when consultants are used, it is necessary to plan for and secure commitments of internal agency resources to work closely with the consultants and provide the necessary direction and oversight. Staff should be identified and managers contacted to ensure that the proposed staff will have adequate availability during the proposed timeframe of the study. Where staff from multiple agencies is involved, it may be helpful to draft a memorandum of understanding to document each agency’s agreed-upon roles, responsibilities, and commitments of resources.
Hire consultants as needed.
Document agency responsibilities and
commitments in a memorandum of
understanding.
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 2-1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
JERIC
HO
UNDERHILL
WESTFORD
CAMBRIDGE
JOHNSON
HYDE PARK
MORRISTOWN
WOLCOTT
HARDWIC
K
OtherHomeTransitBikeWalkCar-PoolSOV
Overview The second step in undertaking a corridor management study is to research, document and analyze existing and expected future conditions, issues, and needs in the corridor. This step will provide a foundation for identifying, evaluating, and selecting corridor management and improve-ment strategies.
Research and Document Existing and Future Conditions – Major Activities
• Collect information on existing conditions;
• Analyze future conditions and performance; and
• Present findings to stakeholders.
Collect Information on Existing Conditions Data collection can be one of the most costly elements of a corridor study. It is important to tailor the data collection activities to the concerns expressed by stakeholders, and to those identified in the statement of study goals. Wherever possible, already existing data should be used. Some new data collection may be required, but the costs of obtaining this data should be carefully weighed against the value that this information will provide.
The data gathering effort should answer the following questions:
• What types of travel is the corridor now serving?
- Travel composition: local, regional, interregional, or a mixture?
- Trip purposes: commuter, recreational, other?
- Traffic volumes, including both passenger and truck/freight movement.
• What transportation facilities and options now exist, what roles are they playing in the corridor and how are they performing?
- Highways/roadways: functionality, capacity, safety, speed, access management category (if designated), and current spacing of access points;
- Intersections/interchanges: capacity, traffic control in place;
- Bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
- Transit service (fixed route and paratransit);
- Airports; and
- Parallel rail facilities.
Step 2 Analyze Existing and Future Conditions
Weigh the costs of collecting data against its value.
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Jeric
ho
Under
hill
Westfo
rd
Cambri
dge
John
son
Hyde P
ark
Morris
town
Wolcot
t
Hardw
ick
Workers Place of Residence
Perc
ent o
f Wor
k Pl
ace
Des
tinat
ion
Internal Trips Chittenden County Washington County Caledonia County Lamoille County
Analyze Existing and Future Conditions
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 2-2
• Where and when are transportation problems occurring?
- Congestion/bottlenecks (data collection may need to be targeted to certain times of the day or seasons);
- Operational issues (e.g., signal timing);
- Traffic safety (accident rates, enforcement issues, identified hazards);
- Railroad crossings; and
- Vehicle/pedestrian conflicts.
• What characteristics of the corridor influence the range of solutions that could be considered?
- Natural environment (e.g., topography, wetlands);
- Built environment (e.g., location of buildings in relation to the right-of-way);
- Land use and ownership; and
- Environmental justice issues.
• What are possible and likely future development patterns that will affect transportation demand in the corridor?
- Current, and allowable land uses in the corridor study area;
- Permitted developments; and
- Growth trends.
Recommended specific types of information to be considered for any corri-dor study are presented below. Information on state highway characteris-tics can be obtained from the VTrans route log system. Appendix A provides information about this and a variety of other data sources. While the primary data collection focus should be on the roadway corridor being studied, it also may be desirable to collect and map data such as functional classification, ownership, and traffic volumes for other major roads in the study area, especially those that serve as parallel or relief routes.
While much of the information will be quantitative (e.g., traffic volumes, crash rates), some information will be qualitative or descriptive in nature. Examples of qualitative information include roadside aesthetics and the historic character of communities served by the corridor. Information will typically include or be presented as a combination of maps, narrative text, tables, and graphs. Aerial photographs also can be a very effective way to present information on the corridor. Information should include relevant historical information (e.g., 10-year population or traffic trends) in addition to a “current year” snapshot.
The information assembled and collected should be used to describe the primary roles and functions of the transportation corridor (e.g., local travel, interregional travel, truck travel, tourism, bicycle touring route). The roles and functions of the corridor also can be determined based on discussions with stakeholders and public input. Key issues should continue to be addressed in the study process, even if quantitative data are not available to document these issues (e.g., pedestrian and bicycle travel).
Describe the roles and functions of the
transportation corridor.
Analyze Existing and Future Conditions
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 2-3
Minimum Data Requirements Transportation Supply, Demand, and Performance
• Maps showing location of transportation facilities in the corridor, including major intersections or crossings;
• Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) on roadway segments of the corridor being studied, including historical (trend) data from the past 10 years if available;
• Volume and percentage of truck traffic;
• Characterization of freight movements in the corridor (e.g., types of commodities, tonnage if available);
• Turning movement volumes at major intersections (if available);
• Crash data – Locations of crashes, total number of crashes by severity (fatality, injury, property damage), and information on crash causes (to the extent available);
• Posted speed limits by roadway segment;
• Roadway functional class, ownership, and route designations (e.g., National Highway System, truck route, scenic byway);
• Roadway access control and existing access management classifications by segment;
• Roadway geometry by segment (number and width of lanes, shoulder widths);
• State Highway System sufficiency ratings;
• Type of intersection controls at major intersections (signalized, four-way stop, two-way stop, roundabout) and presence of turning lanes;
• Locations where sidewalks or parallel pathways exist;
• Locations of marked or signalized pedestrian crossings;
• Locations of railroads and railroad crossings;
• Public transportation services provided; and
• Locations of intermodal facilities (park-and-ride lots, rail terminals, airports, bus and train stations, ports) and description of size and/or services provided.
Additional Data from Analysis
Based on the above primary data items, analysis is required to produce the following measures of transportation system function and performance:
• Level of service*, volume-to-capacity ratios, and/or delay at major intersections;
• Level of service* and/or volume-to-capacity ratio along corridor roadway segments; and
• Crash rates (number of crashes per 100 million VMT) for intersections and roadway segments, and comparison to “critical” crash rates to identify high-accident locations.
*Level of service is a qualitative measure of traffic flow conditions, and is measured on a scale from A to F. Level of Service “A” represents free-flow traffic, “F” represents highly congested, stop-and-go conditions.
Analyze Existing and Future Conditions
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 2-4
Minimum Data Requirements Land Use, Socioeconomic, and Environmental
• Jurisdictional boundaries;
• Existing land use in the corridor study area (e.g., land use and zoning maps as available; allowable uses and densities; locations of buildings, orthophotographs);
• Existing policies regarding development and inventory of town plans, zoning, and subdivision regulations;
• Most recently available population, household, and employment estimates by town (including 10- or 20-year history/trends);
• Land use policy areas (designated growth centers, downtowns, historic districts);
• Key environmental features (rivers and streams, wetlands, farmland, conservation lands);
• Locations of major trip generators (e.g., ski resort, industrial park or plant), along with a description of size and demand characteristics;
• Identification of existing development patterns along the roadway corridor (rural, urban/village, transition);
• Description of the character of development along the roadway corridor (patterns; visual and aesthetic qualities; historic, cultural, and natural qualities); and
• Description of roadway terrain (flat, rolling, mountainous).
Analyze Future Conditions and Performance The purpose of this task is to assess how land use and transportation condi-tions might be expected to change in the future, if additional corridor man-agement or improvement strategies are not implemented. This work will help to develop a vision for the corridor (as discussed below in Step 3). To meet the long-term objectives of corridor planning, conditions should be evaluated over a 20-year time horizon. Key factors influencing these changes include the amount and nature of growth in population, employment, and special generators within the corridor; the characteristics of trips generated by this development; growth in background traffic levels (i.e., through traffic passing through the corridor); and any currently programmed transportation man-agement or improvement projects.
Given the considerable uncertainty inherent in forecasting both future land use changes and traffic growth, it is recommended that “high” and “low” growth forecasts be developed and evaluated, rather than simply relying on a single forecast of future conditions. Evaluating a range of potential future conditions will be very helpful for development of strategies. For example, some strategies like signal retiming might be beneficial under both the “high” and “low” forecasts and therefore should be pursued regardless of conditions. On the other hand, other strategies like intersection redesign may become warranted only if “high” growth forecasts are realized. In such cases, the corridor study should define performance thresholds that trigger more detailed evaluation and/or implementation of the strategy. (See Step 4 for a discussion of thresholds and triggers.)
Recognize uncertainty in future conditions.
Analyze Existing and Future Conditions
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 2-5
Appendix B provides a list of some available methods for forecasting future conditions, along with their applicability, advantages, disadvantages, and examples of their application in Vermont and other areas. Appendix A lists data sources that can be used in conjunction with these forecasting methods.
Present Findings to Stakeholders This final task of Step 2 pulls together all of the information gathered so far, providing a resource base for identification of strategies.
The existing and future conditions and needs analysis should be documented in an interim report, including issues identified, methods used, and findings. Once the analysis and documentation of existing and future conditions is completed, the findings should be presented to corridor stake-holders and to the public for comment and validation. This second round of outreach will help ensure that key issues are not overlooked, and also will inform people on the findings of the existing and future conditions analysis.
After obtaining feedback from stakeholders and the public, the technical committee may consider revisions to the report as needed.
Future Conditions Data
At a minimum, the following data on future conditions should be evaluated:
• Twenty-year growth in corridor study area population, households, and employment;
• Land use and development patterns along the roadway in particular, as well as throughout the corridor study area;
• Future traffic volumes;
• Performance (level of service, volume-to-capacity ratios, delay, and/or queuing) at major intersections; and
• Performance (level of service, volume-to-capacity ratios, and/or travel speeds) along corridor road-way segments or for the corridor as a whole.
Supplemental data items that may be helpful include:
• Projected future truck volumes, especially if a truck route;
• Projected corridor travel times;
• Projected growth in visitor trip generation; and
• Projected changes in crash rates and total crashes.
Have stakeholders and the public validate
findings.
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-1
Overview The third step in undertaking the corridor study is to develop a common vision for the corridor and a set of corridor management and improvement strategies. These strategies should be specifically designed to address the issues and needs identified. The outcome of this step will be a limited set of prioritized strategies for the corridor that will move forward to implemen-tation planning.
Develop Vision and Strategies – Major Activities
• Establish vision and goals for the corridor;
• Develop objectives and performance measures;
• Identify and screen potential strategies;
• Define and analyze strategies in more detail; and
• Select and prioritize strategies.
Establish a Vision and Goals for the Corridor Before developing strategies for the corridor, stakeholders should work to identify a common vision and goals for the corridor.
The vision is a concise statement that paints a picture of the desired future for the corridor – from both a land use and a transportation perspective.
The goals support the vision, and lay out desired long-range outcomes to be achieved by the corridor plan.
The initial set of goals for the corridor management study that were established by the Advisory Group prior to the study scoping (in Step 1) should serve as the starting point for this activity, which will involve developing a consensus across a broader set of stakeholders.
The process of establishing a vision and goals creates an opportunity for stakeholders to discuss the core function(s) of the corridor. For example, should the primary roadway in the corridor serve as a high-speed facility providing efficient access between different regions of the State? Or is it a “main street” of historic communities where speed for through traffic is traded off against creating a quality pedestrian environment? What type of development should occur along the corridor, and how should access be provided?
In many cases, corridors serve multiple functions. The vision and goals may acknowledge the need to balance competing desires, and that differ-ent strategies may be appropriate according to the roadway context (e.g., rural versus urban/village).
Step 3 Develop Vision and Strategies
The vision identifies the key values in an ideal corridor.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-2
The corridor vision and goals should:
• Establish a unified vision across jurisdictional boundaries, even while recognizing different corridor development contexts (e.g., urban versus rural);
• Consider the range of social, economic, and environmental issues;
• Reflect existing roadway designations (e.g., functional class, access management category, NHS, truck route, scenic byway);
• Reflect existing policy documents such as local comprehensive plans and statewide and regional transportation plans;
• Incorporate and reflect current public input about how local resi-dents view their communities and the transportation corridor; and
• Recognize the needs of those who may not be well-represented within the corridor planning process, such as through travelers from outside the study corridor or visitors from other states.
If possible, the vision and goals statements should be supplemented by graphics such as maps showing the roadway context (urban, transitional, rural) and growth policy areas (e.g., village conservation areas, designated growth centers, rural conservation areas), as well as by illustrations of typical development patterns and roadway cross-sections specific to these areas.
Example of Corridor Vision Statements and Goals
Vision Statement
The U.S. Route 7 transportation corridor between Burlington and Georgia Exit 18 provides an increas-ingly important link in the economic and social lives of the communities it serves. The parts of the trans-portation system within this corridor are closely interwoven with each other and with the economic and social life of the communities. This system should be enhanced to effectively serve person travel and goods movement within and through the study corridor, support municipal and regional land use visions and plans, preserve or enhance the quality of life for those living within the corridor, and should resolve the numerous identified site-specific problems. Although alternatives to private motor vehicle transpor-tation should be fostered within the corridor, private autos and trucks using public roads and highways will remain the principal means of transport over the 20-year planning horizon of this study.
Goals
• Provide a safe highway and transport environment for highway users and abutters;
• Provide meaningful alternative means of transportation;
• Use transportation service and facilities to support, further, and enhance community land use and development strategies;
• Balance growth and economic development with environmental protection and community preservation;
• Design transportation facilities to complement the areas in which they are located; and
• Provide for sound and effective long-term fiscal management of necessary improvements within the corridor.
(Adopted from the U.S. Route 7 Winooski – Georgia Corridor Study.)
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-3
Develop Objectives and Performance Measures For some small-scale corridor planning efforts, having a statement of vision and goals will be sufficient to move ahead with defining strategies. For larger efforts, it may be helpful to develop a set of more specific objectives and quantitative performance measures that back up the vision and goals. This will provide a useful framework for identifying strategies. It also will provide a framework for future monitoring to see if the actions taken were effective, and
if additional actions are needed to achieve the desired outcomes.
For example, the goal of a safer road might be backed up with specific objectives for improving pedestrian safety at three key intersections. A performance measure could be defined based on the number of crashes involving pedestrians at the intersec-tions. Strategies to achieve the objectives might include inter-section redesign, stepped-up enforcement, or improved signage. The performance measure could be used in the future to determine how effective these strategies were, and if additional strategies are needed.
The following table lists some of the key impacts for considera-tion in corridor studies. It can be used as a resource for developing corridor goals and objectives.
Impacts to Consider in Corridor Studies
Mobility and Accessibility • Travel time and delay for roadway corridor users; • Access to jobs, services, other activities for transportation-disadvantaged; and • Access for recreation and tourism uses.
Safety • Motor vehicle safety; and • Bicycle and pedestrian safety.
Economic Development • Impacts on local property values and business sales; • Local and regional business attraction and expansion; and • Local, regional, and statewide freight mobility.
Environment • Loss of productive agricultural and forest land; • Loss of important habitats (wetlands, forests, prime wildlife habitat, endangered species habitat); • Habitat connectivity and wildlife movement (land and water); • Stream alteration and water quality; and • Watershed impacts – runoff and Total Maximum Discharge Limits (TMDL).
Quality of Life • Noise and vibration; • Air pollution; • Aesthetic and visual impacts; • Impacts on recreational areas and open space; and • Historic and archeological resources.
Secondary and Cumulative Impacts • Transportation-induced growth patterns and related secondary impacts; and • Cumulative impacts of past, present, and future transportation, land use, and other actions.
Performance measures can be used to clearly
define specific desired outcomes to be achieved.
Goal
Safer Road
Objectives
Improve Pedestrian Safetyat Intersections
Performance Measures
Number of CrashesInvolving Pedestrians
Strategies
• Audible Walk Signal• Restriping• Enforcement
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-4
Some examples of commonly used quantitative measures of performance are shown below. These may be helpful for those corridor management efforts wishing to pursue a quantitative approach to analyzing strategies and monitoring future performance.
Examples of Performance Measures and Targets Objective Performance Measure Target
• Number of major crashes per year • Five percent reduction from 1998 to 2008
• Number of high-crash locations • Eliminate all those with identified cost-effective fix
• Number of crashes involving pedestrians or bicyclists
• Reduce
Safety
• Percent of corridor with adequate shoul-ders for bicyclists
• 100%
• Average travel time between major cities • No decline in average travel time from current levels
• Intersection delay • < 5% increase over 10 years
• Maximum volume-to-capacity ratio • 0.7
• Number of geometric roadway deficien-cies for large trucks
• Eliminate all those with cost-effective fix
Mobility
• Modal diversion (truck to rail) • Increase in rail traffic on parallel facility
• Passengers per hour on established route
• 100% at acceptable levels (locally defined)
Transit Performance
• Cost per passenger on established route • 100% at acceptable levels (locally defined)
• Loss of critical environmental habitat • No net loss
• Percent of growth occurring in designated growth centers
• 90%
Resource Protection
• Resident perception of community impact
• No target
For corridor plans that involve state highways, the performance measures established in the Vermont Highway System Policy Plan and subsequently adopted or updated in the VTrans Performance Measures Report (February 2005) should be considered. The Performance Measures Report also establishes measures that should be taken into consideration for other transportation modes, programs and facilities (e.g., bicycle and pedestrian, public transit, aviation, park-and-ride facilities).
Identify Strategies The first step in identifying strategies is to compile a list of transportation improvement projects that currently are underway, or which are programmed and have a high probability of moving forward. The Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) can be a good source of information for this. This set of projects should serve as a baseline for the development of additional transportation strategies. In addition, other planned programs or initiatives impacting the corridor that are not capital in
Identify transportation improvements already in
the works.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-5
nature should be identified. These might include pending modifications to zoning codes, or bus service changes.
After identifying what is likely to happen, the next step is to see what other strategies already have been recommended in existing planning docu-ments. The statewide Capital Program and Project Development Plan (CPPDP) should be reviewed to identify projects affecting the corridor that have not yet been programmed in the STIP. All of these projects should be evaluated within the corridor management study for consistency with the established vision and goals for the corridor. A valuable result of the study will be a determination as to whether these projects should be eliminated from the CPPDP, move forward as is, or move forward with modification.
In addition to the Capital Program and Project Development Plan, other documents that may have recommended strategies for the corridor include previous corridor studies, local comprehensive plans, and statewide and regional transportation plans. The corridor management plan development process is a valuable opportunity to bring all of these proposed strategies together, rationalize them, and build consensus on what the priorities for the corridor should be over the next 20 years – given realistic funding scenarios.
Ideas also should be gathered from stakeholder and public input collected during the assessment of current conditions, issues, and needs. Initially, a full range of potential strategy types should be considered. Individual strategies (e.g., improve intersection at Main and Elm Streets) should be listed according to strategy type in order to facilitate further screening and analysis. At this stage, strategies may be conceptual in nature (e.g., initiate bus service between Cityland and Villageville) without specifying details (e.g., service frequencies, specific routing, and hours of operation).
Types of Corridor Management and Improvement Strategies Strategy Type Examples
Minor Roadway and Operational Improvements
• Improved signage and markings; • Signals and other intersection controls; • Bulbouts and pedestrian signals; • Off-road safety improvements (e.g., guardrails, vegetation clearance); • Drainage systems and maintenance practices to reduce environ-
mental impacts, improve water quality, etc.; • On-street parking restrictions; • Designated truck routes; • Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) strategies such as traveler
information and incident response; and • Seasonal and special event controls (e.g., traffic officer).
Major Roadway Improvements
• Lane additions at intersections; • Roundabouts; • Medians and channelization; • Shoulder widening; • Horizontal and vertical curve realignment; • Climbing lanes; • Passing lanes; and • New general-purpose lanes.
Review existing plans to see what has already been recommended.
Gather ideas from the stakeholder community.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-6
Types of Corridor Management and Improvement Strategies (continued) Strategy Type Examples
Zoning and Land Use • Land use and zoning provisions to encourage concentrated development;
• Designation of specific planning areas within town plans with guide-lines for development, resource protection, and access management;
• Designation of scenic view corridor; • Site plan review requirements for developments along the corridor; • Subdivision regulations that encourage pedestrian connectivity and
internal street connections to reduce traffic volumes on main roads; • Provisions to allow for shared parking among adjacent uses; • Growth management tools, such as development phasing and infra-
structure concurrency requirements; • Overlay districts to protect critical resources; and • Performance standards for new developments.
Access Management • Driveway consolidation; • Turn restrictions and medians; • Intersection spacing; and • Local street infrastructure.
New Facilities • New/expanded interchanges; • Bypasses; and • Intermodal facilities.
Alternative Mode Improvements and Travel Demand Management
• Signs and markings (pedestrian crossings, bicycle lanes); • Sidewalk improvements; • Off-road bicycle/pedestrian paths; • Transit service improvements; • Travel demand management programs, such as rideshare programs
and employer transit subsidies; • Rail capacity and service improvements; and • Intermodal facility and access improvements (passenger, freight).
Modal Connectivity Improvements
• Park-and-ride lots; • Bike racks on buses; and • Shuttle services.
Some corridor planning efforts may find it useful to develop separate “packages” of strategies. Packages can be used for a variety of purposes:
• To group together synergistic or complementary strategies with a common purpose (e.g., alternative modes including new park-and-ride lot and transit service changes; land use strategies including zoning to promote infill, incentives for rehabilitation of existing buildings, and driveway consolidation for access management).
• To define different sets of strategies to be pursued under varying future funding scenarios (e.g., one package with a major capacity improvement and an alternative package with a set of lower-cost
Consider organizing strategies into packages.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-7
traffic management strategies). This can help to ensure that a realistic set of strategies is produced.
• To define different sets of strategies to be pursued under varying future growth patterns. If future growth patterns in the corridor are highly uncertain, developing packages of strategies for “high” and “low” growth scenarios can contribute to a better understanding among stakeholders of the interplay between transportation needs and land use in the corridor.
Strategies for Main Streets
In many Vermont communities, Main Street also is a state highway, serving significant volumes of both car and truck traffic. While this traffic often benefits the community by generating sales for local busi-nesses, it also may adversely affect quality of life in the community because of noise, aesthetic, conges-tion, and safety impacts. Balancing the needs of through traffic with the needs of Vermont’s urban and village communities is a common challenge in developing a corridor management plan.
One traditional solution to this problem has been the construction of a bypass to route traffic around the town. Yet this solution has become increasingly unacceptable in Vermont due to concerns that bypasses promote suburban “sprawl” development while draining vitality from the historic community centers, as well as to environmental and cost constraints. Communities in Vermont as well as other states are increasingly looking to less capital-intensive alternative strategies to improve community liv-ability while still accommodating through traffic. Examples of these strategies include:
• The use of “gateway” treatments, such as splitter islands, neck-downs, signage, and other physi-cal strategies, to slow traffic as it enters the town or village.
• Traffic calming treatments within the town or village to slow traffic and improve pedestrian safety, such as reduced lane and/or shoulder widths, marked or textured crosswalks, curb extensions, and median refuges.
• Driveway consolidation, signalization, turn restrictions, and other access management techniques to improve traffic flow and reduce crashes in congested areas.
• Low-cost intersection improvements, such as removing or relocating parking to create space for a turn lane.
• Signage and improvement of existing alternate routes that bypass the town center.
• Completion and/or improvement of sidewalks to make pedestrian travel easier for short trips.
• Pavement strategies, including maintenance and the use of low-noise pavements, to reduce noise and vibration from truck traffic.
• Building and site design guidelines to ensure that development in village centers supports pedestrian travel and is consistent with aesthetic and historic character.
Source: Dufresne-Henry and Vermont Agency of Transportation.
Computer simulation of proposed U.S. 2 redesign in Danville.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-8
Develop Screening Criteria Study partners should then work to develop a set of screening criteria that can be used to select a smaller number of strategies from the initial brain-stormed list for more detailed definition and analysis. Criteria should con-sider feasibility; likely effectiveness in achieving the desired outcomes for the corridor; and consistency with established policy, plans and programs. Financial feasibility will be a key consideration in most corridor studies, both at the screening stage and later when strategies are prioritized and when implementation steps are defined. At each of these points, it is advisable to be aware of the full range of potential funding sources – including conven-tional Federal and state transportation resources, as well as potential innovative sources of funding such as Federal grant programs or local self-assessment (e.g., through a business improvement district). Some potential funding sources are described in Appendix C.
Study partners should use the screening criteria to eliminate those strate-gies that are not worth investing additional effort in analyzing. To a large extent, the screening process at this stage will be qualitative and will rely upon the judgment of study partners. It also may include simple quantita-tive measures, such as number of problem intersections addressed. A “checklist” approach may be taken, whereby the strategy is assigned a pass/fail assessment for each criterion.
Sample Screening Criteria Criterion Considerations
Feasibility
• Cost (initial capital and ongoing maintenance) is in line with likely
availability of funding from Federal, state, local, and private sources. Necessary legal authority established and implementa-tion mechanism exists or could be established.
• Precedent exists for similar strategies. • Strategy would be likely to obtain needed degree of public and
political support. • Strategy would not face insurmountable opposition.
Effectiveness • Strategy would likely be an effective way to address goals and objectives (use these criteria to screen out clearly inferior options for achieving the same goal).
Consistency with Vision, Established Policies, Plans and Programs
• Corridor Vision and Goals; • State Transportation Plan and Modal Policy Plans; • Regional Plans; • State and Regional Growth Management Policies; • Local Comprehensive Plans; and
• State Transportation Improvement Program.
The results of the initial screening will be a systematic analysis that can be communicated to the public, documenting the strategies that were considered, and the rationale for selecting strategies for further analysis.
Use a screening process to identify strategies for
detailed evaluation.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-9
Define and Analyze Strategies in More Detail Strategies that have passed the initial screening may need to be defined in greater detail so that they can be evaluated in a meaningful way. For example, if the strategy “intersection improvements” was suggested, more specific options for intersection improvements (install traffic signals, add turning lanes, construct roundabouts) should be identified. It is not neces-sary to produce detailed designs or operating plans during the corridor study process. This kind of work can be left to the implementation process for strategies that are recommended.
Each strategy or package of strategies should be evaluated in order to pro-vide the basis for setting priorities and making recommendations. The evaluation can involve quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis based on expert judgment or a mixture of the two – depending on the scale of the corridor study, the nature of the identified strategies and the level of resources available. Regardless of the level of sophistication, the evalua-tion should seek to answer the following questions:
• How well would these strategies address the goals established for the corridor?
• What other impacts would they have – both positive and negative?
• If resources are limited, which strategies should be undertaken first?
Use of quantitative methods for strategy evaluation can be of great value in helping stakeholders to understand likely impacts of alternative strategies. If used skillfully and appropriately, they can lend considerable credibility to the corridor study results.
Appendix B provides a list of some available analysis tools and methods, along with their applicability, advantages, disadvantages, and examples of their application in Vermont and other areas. In general, as the sophistica-tion of the tool increases, so do the data requirements. Prior to selecting a tool or method, it is always helpful to talk with others who have used it to get a solid understanding of what value it brings, what is required to use it (data, assumptions, skills) and what pitfalls to avoid. Analysis methods that are selected should be clearly explained and acceptable to stakeholders.
Qualitative evaluation will suffice for many types of strategies, and also can be used to provide a valuable supplement to quantitative analysis. For example, the evaluation of community impacts may involve interviews and meetings culminating in a statement of the positive and negative impacts of each strategy on corridor communities.
The results of the strategy analysis may be presented in different formats, including:
• A text description of findings (both quantitative and qualitative) of how each strategy performs on each of the evaluation criteria;
• Tables or matrices summarizing quantitative findings (e.g., travel time savings, crash reductions); and
• Graphics conveying impacts in visual terms (e.g., maps showing the degree of congestion by road segment/intersection, build-out development locations).
Use Appendix B as a resource for
investigating alternative analysis approaches.
Present the results of the strategy
analysis in an easily digestible format.
Strategies should be sufficiently well-defined to
permit meaningful evaluation; detailed
design is not needed.
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-10
An evaluation matrix is commonly used to summarize all of the findings on a single page and to provide a clearly displayed comparison between strategies and their relative impacts. Columns of the impact matrix correspond to each strategy or strategy package. Rows correspond to each evaluation criterion or performance measure. A symbol is used to show how strongly (positively or negatively) each strategy rates on the specific criterion. In the example below, different packages of strategies for improving a corridor are compared based on six criteria. For each criterion, an assessment is shown as to whether the alternative would be better or worse than the existing conditions. An all-white circle indicates that the alternative would be the same as the existing condition; all green means “much better”; all red means “much worse.” Partially filled-in circles represent points in between. Note that these strategy packages are not necessarily mutually exclusive; for example, spot improvements (traffic signalization, pedestrian crossings, etc.) could be combined with land use and access management strategies.
Sample Evaluation Matrix
Select and Prioritize Strategies The qualitative and quantitative information provided through the analysis process should be used to place strategies into priority categories. Strate-gies should be prioritized as “high,” “medium,” “low,” or “not recommended,” based on considerations such as:
• Magnitude of problem/need to be addressed (major, moderate, minor);
• Certainty of need (existing/immediate, forecast and likely to occur, forecast but speculative);
• Cost-effectiveness of proposed solutions (high, medium, low);
• Level of support for strategy (widespread, mixed, weak);
• Potential availability of adequate funding (likely, uncertain, unlikely); and
• Negative impacts associated with strategy (minimal/none, moderate, high).
Environmental Impacts
Cost
Travel Time and Delay
Safety
Aesthetic Character
= Much Better than Existing = Much Worse than Existing
Transitand TDM Bypass
Bike/Pedestrian Access
SpotImprovements
Road Reconstruction/
Realignment
Land Use/Access
Management
Develop Vision and Strategies
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 3-11
If separate strategy packages were developed for different funding scenar-ios or growth scenarios, prioritization should be performed within each sce-nario. If this is done, there also should be a clear definition of which is considered to be the most likely scenario, and what future conditions would trigger moving to an alternative set of strategies.
Strategies may be classified as “not recommended” after either an initial screening or a more detailed evaluation. Strategies should receive a “not recommended” rating if they do not effectively or cost-effectively address corridor needs; are inconsistent with the corridor vision or other policies; or if funding or other supporting actions are unlikely to be achieved in any rea-sonable timeframe.
A consideration related to strategy priority is the potential implementation timeframe for each strategy. Strategies may be classified into “short-term” (less than five years), “medium-term” (five to 10 years), or “long-term” (more than 10 years) categories depending upon considerations such as:
• Priority level;
• Timeframe over which need is likely to occur;
• Expected availability of funding;
• Length of study process required to design and implement the strategy;
• Coordination with other relevant processes (e.g., local comprehen-sive plan updates, statewide transportation planning process); and
• Other considerations, such as expected time required to gather adequate support for the project.
While short-term strategies also may tend to be high-priority strategies, timeframe and priority level are not directly correlated. For example, some high-priority strategies may be classified as “long-term” because they require more funding than is likely to be available in the immediate future, or because they require a lengthy planning and development process.
The criteria and process for selecting strategies, as well as the results of analysis conducted, should be documented. Documentation should address the rationale behind the prioritization of strategies and any thresh-olds or triggers established. Documentation also should address the reasons why other strategies were rejected or eliminated from considera-tion. This will provide an important record to inform future updates of the corridor plan and help to keep people from “reinventing the wheel.”
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-1
Overview The fourth step in undertaking the corridor study is to develop an imple-mentation plan for the prioritized strategies. The implementation plan will serve as a guide for the corridor study lead agency and for other corridor study stakeholders in carrying out the recommendations of the plan. This step involves the following tasks:
• Identify thresholds/triggers to undertake specific strategies, if they are not immediate priorities;
• Identify implementation steps and responsibilities for each recommended strategy;
• Identify interagency/intergovernmental relationships or agreements necessary to implement and monitor plan (e.g., monitoring com-mittee, permit review procedures);
• Establish incentives and contingencies (e.g., state actions contin-gent upon local agency actions); and
• Identify monitoring activities and data sources.
Identify Thresholds/Triggers to Undertake Specific Strategies Mid- and long-term strategies may include those that address an immediate need, but for which funding and/or supporting actions are not realistically achievable in the short term. Alternatively, they may address needs that are projected to exist in the future, but which currently do not warrant action. For these strategies, the implementation plan should specify threshold conditions that should trigger further action. Examples of thresholds may include:
• Intersection delay exceeds X seconds per vehicle;
• Traffic volumes exceed Y vehicles per day; and
• Truck traffic exceeds Z percent of total traffic volume.
Thresholds should be set to encourage proactive rather than reactive action – so that a problem can be addressed before it becomes critical.
VTrans Performance Targets Criterion Performance Threshold – Policy Level Source
LOS to maintain for design period of roadway improvements
LOS C (normally) LOS D or E (allowed in built-up/urban areas or on case-by-case basis)
Traffic Impact Evaluation: Study and Review Guide, January 2003.
Maximum volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio on state highways
0.9: Urban area downtowns 0.7: Rural corridors 0.8: Other (small towns/villages, suburban corridors, growth areas)
Vermont Highway System Policy Plan, 2004.
Minimum crash rate to define High-Crash Location
More than five crashes in a five-year period and crash rate (number of crashes per 100 million VMT) significantly greater than the average for that class of roadway
Vermont Agency of Transportation
Step 4 Develop Implementation Plan
Develop Implementation Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-2
Identify Implementation Tools, Next Steps, and Responsibilities All the steps necessary to implement the plan should be identified. Some of these steps may pertain to the plan as a whole (e.g., communication); others will be specific to each recommended strategy. Examples of imple-mentation steps may include:
• Communicate the plan’s findings and recommendations to a broad audience to build public awareness and support.
• Encourage each jurisdiction to pass a formal resolution endorsing the corridor plan.
• Revise municipal comprehensive plans and/or bylaws consistent with corridor plan.
• Pursue development of specific projects consistent with the plan’s strategies: Conduct more detailed project development and envi-ronmental documentation; or initiate addition to municipal capital improvement program.
• Pursue changes to the state Capital Program and Project Development Plan – to ensure that this document is updated based on the prioritized strategies for the corridor.
• Review recommendations through the Transportation Planning Initiative (TPI) process, and consider specific projects for inclusion in the regional and statewide transportation plan and state trans-portation improvement program (STIP).
• Pursue funding from existing programs such as Transportation Enhancements, Bicycle and Pedestrian, Highway Safety Improvement, Vermont Downtown Program, etc.
• Adopt other municipal implementation tools, such as transfer of development rights mechanism, zoning incentives, or expedited permitting for development consistent with corridor plan.
• Conduct outreach to property owners along the roadway corridor regarding access management benefits and techniques.
• Establish infrastructure impact fees or negotiate commitments from developers (e.g., to fund sidewalks, signals, transit improvements).
• Establish other private funding mechanisms (such as a business improvement district) or public-private partnerships to fund trans-portation improvements that support business expansion or otherwise enhance a community’s economic climate.
• Study strategy in more detail once implementation threshold criteria have been met.
For each implementation step, the responsible agency and department(s) should be identified, as well as any implementation partners (e.g., state working with local government). An approximate time horizon should be identified that is consistent with implementation of the overall strategy within its defined category. The approximate funding required also should be listed, along with the proposed funding source (if known) or potential sources.
Appendix C lists some funding mechanisms that can be applied to imple-ment recommendations from the corridor study. Appendix D contains a list
Develop Implementation Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-3
and description of municipal regulatory and non-regulatory tools for implementing development policies.1
Appendix E provides examples of land use implementation strategies in the context of transportation corridor studies, as applied in other states.
Sample Implementation Recommendations (from VT 15 Corridor Management Plan)
Area Purpose Need Recommendations Comments/Next Steps
Jericho Village Improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists, connect village residential and commercial origins and destina-tions, enhance community character.
Traffic volumes expected to increase from 10,900 to between 15,000 and 20,000 vehicles per day; will have negative impact on pedes-trian travel and quality of life.
Short-Term • New sidewalk in front of
Keith Agency and Village Cup, extending from new VT 15 crosswalk from bridge.
Medium-Term • Traffic calming devices
along VT 15; • Signage indicating historic
district; • Extension of historic light
polices; • Bury utility lines; and • Improved access
management. Long-Term
• Sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of VT 15; and
• Additional crosswalks.
• Endorsed by Jericho Transportation Subcommittee;
• Evaluate possibility of reducing posted speed to 25 mph when meas-ures implemented; and
• Conduct feasibility study of extending sidewalks; identify appropriate crosswalk locations.
Jericho, intersection VT 5/Lee River Road
Improve intersection safety and efficiency for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.
LOS F currently exists on Lee River Road; will worsen as traffic on VT 15 increases. Future conditions satisfy warrants for left- and right-turn lane on VT 15 and traffic signal.
Short-Term • Reconfigure intersection to
include one-way exit along north side of Flat Iron with a simple T intersection on south side.
Medium-Term • Evaluate right and left turns
on VT and/or traffic signal. Incorporate proposed streetscape designs.
• Conduct scoping study to evaluate long-term intersection design alternatives.
Jericho, rural- suburban road segment (Cilley Hill to River Road)
Maintain a reason-able level of mobility for through traffic and improve local circulation options.
Projected traffic volumes will approach 11,500-15,000 vpd. Exiting from side streets and driveways will become more diffi-cult. Vehicles turning from VT 15 will reduce speeds on VT 15.
Short-Term • Manage access for parcels
directly adjacent to VT 15 by following VTrans guidelines.
Medium-Term • Provide new street connec-
tions between adjacent subdivisions to create a local network accommodating vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
• Include access man-agement guidelines in Jericho zoning and subdivision regulations consistent with VTrans Access Management Category 6; and
• Town of Jericho should map easements to explore possible con-nections. Evaluate traffic impacts of providing connections.
1 Vermont Department of Housing and Community Affairs. Vermont Interstate Interchange Planning and Development Design Guidelines. June 2004. Internet: http://www.dhca.state. vt.us/Planning/InterstateInterchange.htm.
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Develop Implementation Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-4
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Sample Land Use Recommendations (from Draft VT 15 Corridor Management Plan) Town Recommendations Jericho • Consider site plan review as a requirement for all development along
VT 15 corridor; and • Include provisions for shared access and driveways in subdivision regulations.
Westford • Consider establishing an overlay district along VT 15 to establish zoning guidelines to implement existing town plan objectives of protecting scenic, historic, and natural resources.
Johnson Town/Village
• Adopt regulatory documents (such as zoning) to implement and enforce town/village Master Plan goals, or delineate VT 15 as a specific planning area and include development guidelines in the Master Plan.
Morristown/ Morrisville
• Establish minimum distance between curb cuts, consistent with VTrans Access Management Standards; and
• Establish design guidelines and/or a landscape plan for the commercial district.
Wolcott • Delineate areas of compact, mixed-use development at major intersections, and minimize development between these areas;
• Establish other zoning districts (e.g., residential, agricultural, conservation) and lot requirements/densities;
• Encourage sharing of access and parking for commercial developments; and • Allow Planned Residential Developments to promote concentrated development.
Source: Resource Systems Group, Inc.
Develop Implementation Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-5
Identify Relationships or Agreements to Implement and Monitor Plan Implementation of many of the recommended strategies may involve part-nerships or working relationships among different government agencies – e.g., between VTrans and local jurisdictions, or among local jurisdictions in the corridor. For example, implementation of an access management strategy may involve local zoning and subdivision changes, state and local permitting decisions, and state and local capital improvements. Specific processes or institutional relationships may need to be established. Some examples of interagency review and coordination include:
• Local jurisdictions and VTrans may establish Intergovernmental Agreements, inviting VTrans to review locally issued development permits and comment on consistency with established access management policies.
• VTrans, the RPC, and adjacent local jurisdictions may agree to review each jurisdiction’s comprehensive plan, design guidelines, and/or zoning, to comment on consistency with the corridor plan and on potential impacts to corridor transportation conditions. Interagency review is not necessary for every plan or zoning change in corridor communities, but should be conducted for plan updates that could significantly affect development patterns in the community, or for land directly fronting on the corridor roadway.
• Local jurisdictions involved in regional and statewide transportation planning through the TPI initiative may comment on the inclusion of recommended corridor plan elements in regional and statewide plans and the statewide transportation improvement program.
Collaborative plan or permit review process is not meant to allow one agency to usurp another’s legal authority, but rather to establish a process by which agencies can comment on the actions of other agencies with respect to consistency with agreed-upon plans and policies.
An institutional structure to ensure that the plan is implemented also is needed. The lead agency in the corridor planning effort bears primary responsibility for implementation. However, it also is important to ensure that all key stakeholders are involved in the implementation and monitoring process. One example of such a structure is the establishment of a com-mittee that meets regularly (e.g., once or twice a year) to review imple-mentation activities, their status, monitoring results, and actions needed. The implementation committee may be a continuation of the corridor Advisory Group, or it may be reconstituted to include other key stake-holders with implementation responsibilities.
Establish Incentives and Contingencies The art of developing a successful and effective corridor plan involves packaging complementary strategies and spreading implementation responsibilities across multiple agencies. For example, access manage-ment can work in conjunction with intersection improvements to keep traffic moving and reduce conflict points and potential crashes. In cases where multiple parties are responsible for mutually supportive implementation actions, it may be desirable to make certain activities contingent upon other activities. For example, VTrans may specify that improvements to particular
Develop Implementation Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-6
intersections are contingent upon the local jurisdiction enforcing access management policies for new development. In this way, state funding can be used as an incentive for local jurisdictions to take ownership of their elements of the corridor plan.
Identify Monitoring Activities The final aspect of the implementation plan is an approach to monitoring corridor conditions. Monitoring has two purposes: first, to indicate to corri-dor stakeholders the effectiveness of strategies that have been implemented; and second, to indicate when further improvements or actions might be needed.
At a minimum, monitoring should be conducted using available data on cor-ridor population and employment growth, development along or near the roadway, traffic volumes, and crashes. Some data sources already may be established (e.g., traffic counts); others may need to be established (e.g., a mechanism for tracking development permits). The agency/division/section responsible for specific monitoring activities should be identified and the type, frequency of data needed, as well as analysis methods specified. Performance thresholds also should be specified that indicate the need for further action or implementation of specific strategies. If a corridor imple-mentation committee has been established, this committee should be briefed annually on monitoring results.
Delaware Route 40 Corridor Plan – Monitoring Activities
The Route 40 Corridor 20-Year Transportation Plan, adopted in June 2000, is a community-supported long-range management plan for a 10-mile segment of U.S. 40 between the Delaware-Maryland state line and suburban Wilmington. Initiated by the Delaware Department of Transportation in partnership with New Castle County and the Wilmington Area Planning Commission, the plan was prepared under the direction of a Steering Committee composed of civic leaders, elected officials, and business interests. The Plan includes an implementation strategy consisting of five components: corridor preservation, monitoring, triggering, citi-zen involvement, and project implementation.
For more information, see: http://www.deldot.net/static/projects/rt40/index.htm.
Source: Delaware Department of Transportation.
A Corridor Monitoring and Triggering Report is prepared annually by the project team, comprised of staff from the participating agencies. Citizen involvement in implementation is accomplished through a Corridor Monitoring Committee. This com-mittee meets quarterly with the pro-ject team to review conditions in the corridor and provide input into the timing and implementation of pro-jects. Committee members also serve as advocates for the imple-mentation of projects within their agencies and communities.
Develop Implementation Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 4-7
Delaware Route 40 Corridor Plan – Monitoring and Triggering Elements Monitoring Element Trigger Resulting Actions
Land development Major land development activity
Review transportation needs:
• Level of service implications and strategy;
• Transit service needs or opportunities; • Safety concerns; and • Pedestrian and bicycle needs.
Traffic Deteriorating level of service (“D” or worse)
Implement strategies to:
• Stabilize/reduce demand; or • Increase capacity.
Highway safety Safety improvements recommended by the Highway Safety Improvements Program review team
Evaluate the compatibility of the proposed improvements with the Plan and the need to make adjustments to the Plan.
Transit service Transit service changes proposed by Delaware Transit Corp.
Evaluate any ancillary improvements needed to complement the service changes, such as sidewalks or shelters that should be advanced in the Plan’s implementation.
Status of projects in design, implemented, or other projects in the region
Transportation improvements not part of the Plan but affect the corridor and are proposed for implementation
Evaluate the compatibility of the proposed improvements with the Plan and the need to make adjustments to the Plan.
Any of the above Assessment of potential changes may trig-ger one of the following options to best respond to the new conditions: • Continue project(s) as currently
scheduled;
• Move project(s) forward; or
• Move project(s) back.
Source: Delaware Department of Transportation.
The monitoring process needs to be sustained over an extended period of time, realizing that individual staff and even agency structures may change over this time period. Techniques need to be established to ensure conti-nuity and sustainability in implementation and monitoring efforts. One such technique is to ensure that the knowledge of the various tasks that need to be monitored is shared across multiple individuals, so that if one leaves, others can identify work gaps that need to be covered. An implementation committee that meets regularly can fulfill this role. Another technique is to include specific responsibilities in job descriptions or work assignments by managers (e.g., “monitor corridor plan implementation for Route 75”).
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 5-1
Overview The fifth step in undertaking the corridor study is to assemble the materials and information prepared for Steps 1 through 4 into a corridor plan docu-ment, and to obtain approval and endorsements from partner agencies.
Finalize Corridor Plan Document – Major Activities • Assemble materials into a corridor plan document;
• Obtain plan endorsements from stakeholder agencies; and
• Distribute plan and make it available to the public.
Assemble Materials into a Corridor Plan Document The corridor plan document should include the following sections:
• Description of the corridor: existing transportation, land use, and environmental conditions;
• Corridor issues and needs identified as well as study objectives and process for conducting the study;
• Summary of previous studies conducted in the corridor;
• Expected future conditions in the corridor;
• Vision and goals established for the corridor;
• Strategies evaluated, methods used, and evaluation results;
• Recommended strategies and prioritization;
• Implementation and monitoring plan; and
• Any supporting materials such as detailed data, technical documentation, public involvement activities, etc.
Obtain Plan Endorsements The corridor plan is meant to be a document that is accepted by all of the stakeholders in the planning process. In addition to the corridor Advisory Group and the sponsoring agency or agencies approving the plan docu-ment, the study partners should seek the endorsement of other agencies and jurisdictions participating in the study process. Ideally, the plan should be endorsed by the governing bodies of every local jurisdiction in the corri-dor through a formal city council or Town Select Board resolution. In addi-tion, state or Federal resource agencies that have a significant interest in the corridor should be aware of the plan and supportive of its recommendations.
Step 5 Finalize Corridor Plan Document
Implement and Monitor Corridor Plan
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 5-2
Local endorsement helps to ensure that local jurisdictions will “take owner-ship” of plan recommendations rather than viewing it as something that is being imposed upon them. As noted in Step 4, not just endorsing the plan, but also adopting it or incorporating its principles into existing agency and municipal policies and plans (and where relevant, zoning bylaws), is an important implementation step.
Distribute Plan and Make it Available to the Public The plan should be distributed as widely as possible, especially to those who may have an interest or role to play in implementing the plan and monitoring its implementation progress. This includes making the plan publicly available through the Internet, libraries, and town halls; and publicizing the release of the plan. Publicity of the final plan should follow naturally from a good public involvement process. The more widespread the awareness and under-standing of the plan, the more likely its recommendations are to be implemented.
Vermont Corridor Management Handbook 6-1
Overview The final step in the corridor planning process, which continues indefinitely, is to implement and monitor the corridor plan.
Implement and Monitor Corridor Plan – Major Activities • Establish institutional relationships and agreements for implementation and monitoring;
• Undertake implementation steps;
• Monitor corridor conditions and status of actions; and
• Periodically update plan.
Establish Institutional Relationships and Agreements Institutional working relationships, implementation committee, process flow changes, and agreements as recommended in Step 4 (Develop Implementation Plan) should be established. This is critical to make the corridor management plan a living document, and ensure that the neces-sary monitoring and implementation steps are taken. See Appendix E for examples of interagency agreements for coordinated corridor transportation and land use strategies.
Undertake Implementation Steps Implementation steps should be undertaken per the corridor plan and time-line, including any steps that are triggered by performance monitoring.
Monitor Corridor Conditions and Status of Actions The implementation committee or responsible agency staff should monitor corridor conditions at regular intervals, per the monitoring plan established in Step 4. The status of implementation actions also should be monitored. If recommended actions have not been taken, the reasons should be discussed with the responsible entities. These entities should work together to identify and overcome implementation barriers (e.g., lack of funding, political will) or agree that the strategy or action should be postponed to a later date.
Periodically Update Plan The lead agency and corridor stakeholders should conduct periodic updates of the plan, every five to 10 years, to revise it in response to changing condi-tions and/or needs. Minor updates may include the addition or deletion of recommended actions. Major updates may include significant reprioritization of corridor strategies, for example, based on rapidly changing conditions in the corridor, an evolving vision of the corridor, or changes in funding avail-ability. Corridor stakeholders and the public should be informed of updates and be given opportunities to provide input to updates that will directly affect them or for which they are an implementation partner.
Step 6 Implement and Monitor Corridor Plan
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Traffic Volume
Intersection Delay
Year
Strategy #1 Implemented
Strategy #2 Implemented
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
A-1
App
endi
x A
D
ata
Sour
ces
Inve
ntor
y D
ata
A
genc
y/So
urce
D
escr
iptio
n W
here
to O
btai
n
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Prog
ram
med
Pro
ject
s V
Tran
s •
Hig
hway
and
brid
ge c
onst
ruct
ion
proj
ects
sch
edul
ed
for i
mpl
emen
tatio
n V
Tran
s P
rogr
am D
evel
opm
ent
Traf
fic C
ount
s V
Tran
s •
AA
DT
by s
egm
ent w
ith R
oute
Log
info
rmat
ion
(tabl
es
or in
tera
ctiv
e m
aps)
• V
ehic
le c
lass
ifica
tion
coun
ts b
y se
gmen
t
• Tu
rnin
g m
ovem
ents
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
tech
serv
ices
/Doc
umen
ts/T
rafR
esea
rch/
P
ublic
atio
ns/p
ub.h
tm
Traf
fic G
row
th F
acto
rs
VTr
ans
• G
row
th fa
ctor
s (5
and
20
year
) bas
ed o
n re
gres
sion
an
alys
is
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
tech
serv
ices
/Doc
umen
ts/T
rafR
esea
rch/
P
ublic
atio
ns/p
ub.h
tm
Sea
sona
l Tra
ffic
Cou
nts
an
d A
djus
tmen
t Fac
tors
V
Tran
s •
Hig
hest
hou
rly c
ount
s at
eac
h si
te
• D
aily
and
mon
thly
adj
ustm
ent f
acto
rs fo
r sea
sona
lity
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
tech
serv
ices
/Doc
umen
ts/T
rafR
esea
rch/
P
ublic
atio
ns/p
ub.h
tm
Sta
te H
ighw
ay In
vent
ory
–
Rou
te L
ogs
VTr
ans
• In
vent
ory
(wid
th, c
urve
s/gr
ades
, cla
ssific
atio
n, e
tc.)
• A
DT
and
cras
h hi
stor
y
• S
uffic
ienc
y ra
tings
• P
ast p
roje
cts
• S
truct
ures
VTr
ans
Map
ping
and
GIS
Uni
t
Trav
eler
Cha
ract
eris
tics
•
Orig
ins
and
Des
tinat
ions
• Tr
ip P
urpo
ses
Prim
ary
data
col
lect
ion
– S
ever
al te
chni
ques
ava
ilabl
e (li
cens
e pl
ate
vide
o m
atch
ing,
road
side
inte
rvie
w, p
ostc
ard,
etc
.)
Onl
ine
Map
Cen
ter
VTr
ans
• To
wn
high
way
map
s ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/te
chse
rvic
es/P
lanS
uppo
rt/M
apG
IS/T
own_
Map
s1.h
tm
Sta
tew
ide
Trav
el D
eman
d M
odel
V
Tran
s •
Pro
ject
ions
of t
raffi
c vo
lum
es o
n hi
ghw
ays
of s
tate
wid
e si
gnifi
canc
e V
Tran
s P
olic
y an
d P
lann
ing
– M
odel
ing
sect
ion
Sta
tew
ide
Acc
iden
t Dat
abas
e V
Tran
s •
Acc
iden
t loc
atio
ns, s
ever
ity, a
nd c
ause
s V
Tran
s P
rogr
am D
evel
opm
ent –
Hig
hway
Res
earc
h se
ctio
n A
ccid
ent l
ocat
ions
in G
IS fo
rmat
at:
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/
Ver
mon
t Cra
sh D
ata
Res
ourc
e B
ook
VT D
ept.
of P
ublic
S
afet
y •
Sum
mar
izes
cra
shes
by
seve
rity
(fat
al, i
njur
y, to
tal)
by
tow
n ht
tp://
ww
w.v
thig
hway
safe
ty.c
om/r
esou
rces
.htm
l
Pav
emen
t Man
agem
ent S
yste
m
VTr
ans
• P
avem
ent c
ondi
tion
VTr
ans
Pro
gram
Dev
elop
men
t – P
avem
ent M
anag
emen
t sec
tion
Som
e in
form
atio
n at
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/
Brid
ge M
anag
emen
t Sys
tem
V
Tran
s •
Brid
ge c
ondi
tion,
loca
tion
of p
oste
d an
d w
eigh
t-re
stric
ted
stru
ctur
es
VTr
ans
Pro
gram
Dev
elop
men
t – B
ridge
sec
tion
Bur
lingt
on A
rea
Traf
fic D
ata
(inte
ract
ive
map
s an
d da
taba
se)
CC
MP
O
• AA
DT
by lo
catio
n
• Tu
rnin
g m
ovem
ents
• B
icyc
le/p
edes
trian
cou
nts
http
://w
ww
.ccm
po.o
rg/d
ata/
coun
ts.h
tml
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
A-2
App
endi
x A
D
ata
Sour
ces
Inve
ntor
y (c
ontin
ued)
Dat
a A
genc
y/So
urce
D
escr
iptio
n W
here
to O
btai
n
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Tran
spor
tatio
n N
etw
ork
Spat
ial D
ata
Verm
ont C
ente
r fo
r Geo
grap
hic
Info
rmat
ion
GIS
dat
a fil
es a
ssem
bled
from
var
ious
prim
ary
sour
ces,
incl
udin
g:
• R
oad
cent
erlin
e fil
es
• Fu
nctio
nal c
lass
ifica
tion
of ro
ads
• R
ailro
ad c
ente
rline
file
s •
Rai
lroad
cro
ssin
gs
• Au
tom
atic
traf
fic re
cord
er lo
catio
ns
• Ai
rpor
t, pa
rk-a
nd-ri
de lo
catio
ns
• U
rban
are
as a
s de
fined
by
VTra
ns
• Pa
vem
ent t
ype
and
cond
ition
, roa
dway
bas
e m
ater
ials
•
Roa
dway
wid
ths
• D
esig
nate
d sp
eed
zone
s •
AAD
T •
Acci
dent
loca
tions
, hig
h-ac
cide
nt lo
catio
ns
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/
Dig
ital O
rthop
hoto
s
VT D
epar
tmen
t of
Tax
es –
VT
Map
ping
Pr
ogra
m
• 1:
5000
orth
opho
togr
aphi
c co
vera
ge o
f sta
te
(1/2
met
er p
ixel
s) p
rovi
des
visu
al in
form
atio
n on
ro
ad g
eom
etry
, dev
elop
men
t, ac
cess
, lan
d us
e
• 1:
1250
ava
ilabl
e fo
r urb
an a
reas
Avai
labl
e on
CD
-RO
M –
See
ht
tp://
ww
w.s
tate
.vt.u
s/ta
x/m
appi
ng.s
htm
l
Stat
ewid
e Tr
avel
Dem
and
Mod
el
VTra
ns
• St
atew
ide
proj
ectio
ns o
f hou
seho
lds
thro
ugh
2020
by
TAZ.
1 VT
rans
Pol
icy
and
Plan
ning
– M
odel
ing
sect
ion
U.S
. Cen
sus
Dat
a
U.S
. Cen
sus
Verm
ont S
tate
D
ata
Cen
ter
• Po
pula
tion
and
hous
ehol
d ch
arac
teris
tics
by
tow
n (1
990,
200
0)
• C
urre
nt p
opul
atio
n es
timat
es
• Em
ploy
men
t and
jour
ney-
to-w
ork
char
acte
ris-
tics
by to
wn
(CTP
P)
• O
rigin
s/de
stin
atio
ns o
f com
mut
ers
(CTP
P)
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov
http
://cr
s.uv
m.e
du/c
ensu
s/
1 Em
ploy
men
t pro
ject
ions
may
be
rele
ased
upo
n ex
ecut
ion
of a
non
disc
losu
re a
gree
men
t.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
A-3
App
endi
x A
D
ata
Sour
ces
Inve
ntor
y (c
ontin
ued)
Dat
a A
genc
y/So
urce
D
escr
iptio
n W
here
to O
btai
n
Soci
oeco
nom
ic
Burli
ngto
n Ar
ea C
ensu
s D
ata
– To
wn
Prof
iles
from
C
TPP
CC
MPO
•
Hou
seho
ld s
ize,
veh
icle
ava
ilabi
lity,
and
jour
ney
to w
ork
data
ht
tp://
ww
w.c
cmpo
.org
/dat
a/ct
pp/
Cen
ter f
or P
ublic
Hea
lth
Stat
istic
s Ve
rmon
t Dep
artm
ent
of H
ealth
•
His
toric
al p
opul
atio
n da
ta b
y to
wn
http
://w
ww
.hea
lthyv
erm
onte
rs.in
fo/p
ubs.
shtm
l
Labo
r Mar
ket I
nfor
mat
ion
Verm
ont D
epar
tmen
t of
Em
ploy
men
t and
Tr
aini
ng
• H
isto
rical
em
ploy
men
t dat
a by
tow
n ht
tp://
ww
w.v
tlmi.i
nfo/
Verm
ont C
omm
unity
Pro
file
Rep
orts
Ve
rmon
t Age
ncy
of
Hum
an S
ervi
ces
• R
ecen
t dat
a an
d tre
nds
on v
ario
us s
ocia
l ind
icat
ors
(hea
lth, e
mpl
oym
ent,
crim
e, e
tc.)
http
://w
ww
.ahs
.sta
te.v
t.us/
publ
s.cf
m
Verm
ont S
praw
l Dat
abas
e U
VM –
Cen
ter f
or
Rur
al S
tudi
es
Sum
mar
y to
wn-
leve
l dat
a (p
rovi
ded
in s
prea
dshe
ets)
in
clud
ing:
• Po
pula
tion
and
soci
oeco
nom
ic fr
om c
ensu
s an
d D
OH
•
Empl
oym
ent f
rom
cen
sus
and
DET
•
Land
cov
er fr
om U
VM a
naly
sis
• Tr
ansp
orta
tion
data
(VM
T, A
ADT,
road
way
mile
age
by
clas
s, to
tal c
rash
es, e
tc.)
from
VTr
ans
• H
ouse
hold
tran
spor
tatio
n an
d jo
urne
y-to
-wor
k fro
m U
.S.
Cen
sus
• Ta
x da
ta (t
otal
par
cels
, val
uatio
n) fr
om V
T D
ept.
of
Taxe
s •
Link
s to
regi
onal
, sta
te, a
nd n
atio
nal d
ata,
incl
udin
g C
ensu
s (o
ffici
al s
tate
dat
a ce
nter
for U
.S. C
ensu
s)
http
://cr
s.uv
m.e
du/
Land
Use
and
Env
ironm
enta
l
E911
Dat
a
• St
atew
ide
GIS
add
ress
dat
abas
e fo
r 911
sys
tem
(r
esid
entia
l and
com
mer
cial
driv
eway
s)
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/
Gra
nd L
ist D
ata
•
Tow
n-le
vel l
ist o
f tax
able
and
non
taxa
ble
prop
ertie
s Fr
om in
divi
dual
tow
ns o
r citi
es
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
A-4
App
endi
x A
D
ata
Sour
ces
Inve
ntor
y (c
ontin
ued)
Dat
a A
genc
y/So
urce
D
escr
iptio
n W
here
to O
btai
n
Land
Use
and
Env
ironm
enta
l (co
ntin
ued)
Parc
el D
ata
• Si
ze, s
hape
, use
, stru
ctur
es, a
sses
sed
valu
e, o
ther
in
form
atio
n on
par
cels
• G
IS p
arce
l dat
a is
pub
licly
ava
ilabl
e fo
r abo
ut tw
o-th
irds
of V
erm
ont t
owns
and
citi
es
From
indi
vidu
al to
wns
, citi
es, o
r RPC
s
See
also
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/ (in
form
atio
n on
av
aila
bilit
y)
Verm
ont G
IS D
ata
(var
ious
) Ve
rmon
t Cen
ter f
or
Geo
grap
hic
Info
rmat
ion
GIS
dat
a fil
es a
ssem
bled
from
var
ious
prim
ary
sour
ces,
in
clud
ing:
• Po
litic
al b
ound
arie
s
• La
nd c
over
/land
use
• La
kes,
pon
ds, w
ater
shed
bou
ndar
ies
• W
etla
nds
inve
ntor
y
• R
are,
thre
aten
ed, a
nd e
ndan
gere
d sp
ecie
s
• C
ore
habi
tats
• C
emet
erie
s
• C
onse
rved
land
s
• El
evat
ion
data
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/
Verm
ont C
onse
rved
Lan
ds
Dat
abas
e U
VM –
Cen
ter f
or
Spat
ial A
naly
sis
• G
IS d
atab
ase
of p
ublic
and
priv
ate
cons
erve
d la
nds
http
://w
ww
.uvm
.edu
/~en
vnr/s
al/v
tcon
s.ht
ml
http
://w
ww
.vcg
i.org
/
Dig
ital O
rthop
hoto
s
VT D
epar
tmen
t of
Taxe
s –V
T M
appi
ng
Prog
ram
• 1:
5000
orth
opho
togr
aphi
c co
vera
ge o
f sta
te (1
/2 m
eter
pi
xels
) pro
vide
s vi
sual
info
rmat
ion
on ro
ad g
eom
etry
, de
velo
pmen
t, ac
cess
, lan
d us
e
• 1:
1250
ava
ilabl
e fo
r urb
an a
reas
Avai
labl
e on
CD
-RO
M –
See
ht
tp://
ww
w.s
tate
.vt.u
s/ta
x/m
appi
ng.s
htm
l
Dig
ital E
leva
tion
Mod
els
VT D
epar
tmen
t of
Taxe
s –V
T M
appi
ng
Prog
ram
• Fi
les
that
allo
w g
ener
atio
n of
slo
pe, a
spec
t, pe
rspe
ctiv
e vi
ew, a
nd c
onto
ur d
ata
usin
g sp
ecifi
c so
ftwar
e Av
aila
ble
on C
D-R
OM
– S
ee
http
://w
ww
.sta
te.v
t.us/
tax/
map
ping
.sht
ml
Win
dshi
eld
Surv
ey
•
Visu
al in
form
atio
n on
road
geo
met
ry, d
evel
opm
ent,
acce
ss
Prim
ary
data
col
lect
ion
Com
mun
ity P
lann
ing
(var
ious
) VT
Pla
nnin
g In
form
atio
n C
ente
r •
Varie
ty o
f com
mun
ity p
lann
ing
reso
urce
s –
GIS
dat
a,
land
dat
a, d
emog
raph
ics,
his
toric
reso
urce
s, a
ir qu
ality
ht
tp://
ww
w.v
pic.
info
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
B-1
App
endi
x B
A
naly
sis
Met
hods
Ty
pe o
f For
ecas
t A
vaila
ble
Met
hods
A
pplic
abili
ty
Key
Dat
a R
equi
rem
ents
A
dvan
tage
s D
isad
vant
ages
Futu
re y
ear p
opul
a-tio
n an
d em
ploy
men
t in
the
corri
dor s
tudy
ar
ea
Stat
ewid
e tra
vel d
eman
d m
odel
Ap
prop
riate
“ba
selin
e”
fore
cast
(E
xist
ing
data
) Ex
istin
g, c
onsi
sten
t st
atew
ide
fore
cast
of
popu
latio
n an
d em
ploy
-m
ent b
y to
wn
Assu
mpt
ions
und
erly
ing
fore
cast
s m
ay n
ot fu
lly
refle
ct lo
cal c
ondi
tions
Tr
end
anal
ysis
Ap
prop
riate
in a
bsen
ce o
f ot
her d
ata
Can
be
tem
pere
d w
ith
judg
men
t on
expe
cted
fu
ture
tren
ds
His
toric
al tr
ends
in s
tudy
ar
ea p
opul
atio
n, e
mpl
oy-
men
t, de
velo
pmen
t pe
rmits
Ref
lect
s pa
st/c
urre
nt
trend
s As
sum
es p
ast/c
urre
nt
trend
s w
ill re
mai
n co
n-si
sten
t in
the
futu
re
Bu
ild-o
ut a
naly
sis
Appr
opria
te fo
r tow
ns w
ith
rapi
d gr
owth
/app
roac
hing
bu
ild-o
ut in
ana
lysi
s pe
riod,
or
for s
tudi
es ta
king
long
-te
rm (>
20 y
ear)
pers
pect
ive
Stud
y ar
ea z
onin
g (a
llow
able
den
sitie
s,
type
s of
use
s)
Loca
tions
of e
xist
ing
deve
lopm
ent
Loca
tions
with
env
iron-
men
tal c
onst
rain
ts to
de
velo
pmen
t
Ref
lect
s cu
rrent
loca
l pl
ans
and
polic
ies
Supp
orts
a “
wor
st-c
ase”
sc
enar
io o
f gro
wth
Not
pos
sibl
e in
tow
ns
with
out z
onin
g; d
iffic
ult
with
out e
lect
roni
c zo
ning
m
ap
Fore
cast
yea
r dev
elop
-m
ent m
ay b
e m
uch
less
th
an b
uild
-out
Es
timat
e fu
ture
dev
el-
opm
ent b
ased
on
know
n pl
ans
Best
for s
hort-
term
stu
dies
, or
are
as w
ith s
low
cha
nge
Can
be
com
bine
d w
ith
long
er-te
rm e
stim
atio
n m
etho
ds
Perm
itted
or p
lann
ed
deve
lopm
ents
(ind
ustri
al
park
exp
ansi
on, s
ub-
divi
sion
app
licat
ions
)
Rea
listic
pic
ture
of n
ear-
term
futu
re d
evel
opm
ent
Like
ly to
und
eres
timat
e 20
-yea
r dev
elop
men
t
Ex
pert
judg
men
t (e.
g.,
Del
phi/e
xper
t pan
el
met
hod)
Pa
st tr
ends
Perm
itted
/pla
nned
de
velo
pmen
ts
Know
ledg
e of
cor
ridor
ec
onom
ic a
nd p
lann
ing
envi
ronm
ent
Can
com
bine
oth
er m
eth-
ods
and
data
to a
rrive
at a
co
nsen
sus
fore
cast
Subj
ectiv
e –
Diff
eren
t “e
xper
ts”
are
likel
y to
di
sagr
ee
Sc
enar
io p
lann
ing
Best
for r
egio
ns th
at w
ant
to c
ondu
ct p
roac
tive
and
long
-term
pla
nnin
g fo
r fu
ture
gro
wth
Varie
s; m
ay u
tiliz
e ot
her
plan
ning
and
fore
cast
ing
tool
s
Invo
lves
pub
lic a
nd
stak
ehol
ders
in d
iscu
ssin
g al
tern
ativ
e fu
ture
s an
d th
eir p
oten
tial i
mpa
cts
Proc
ess
invo
lvin
g si
gnifi
cant
effo
rt
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
B-2
App
endi
x B
A
naly
sis
Met
hods
(con
tinue
d)
Type
of F
orec
ast
Ava
ilabl
e M
etho
ds
App
licab
ility
K
ey D
ata
Req
uire
men
tsA
dvan
tage
s D
isad
vant
ages
Spec
ific
loca
tions
of
futu
re y
ear d
evel
opm
ent
Know
n pl
ans
met
hod
(See
abo
ve)
Bu
ild-o
ut a
naly
sis
(See
abo
ve)
G
IS-b
ased
fore
cast
ing
tool
s Ex
amin
e ch
ange
s in
de
velo
pmen
t pat
tern
s ba
sed
on m
ajor
tran
s.
inve
stm
ents
and
land
us
e po
licie
s
Prov
ides
inpu
ts to
de
taile
d tra
ns. m
odel
, G
IS-b
ased
env
iron-
men
tal a
naly
sis
Area
wid
e po
pula
tion
and
empl
oym
ent c
ontro
l fo
reca
sts
Plan
ned
land
use
/zon
ing
Dev
elop
men
tal
cons
train
ts
Tran
spor
tatio
n ac
cess
i-bi
lity
mea
sure
s
Rat
iona
l/con
sist
ent
met
hod
for a
lloca
ting
deve
lopm
ent
Dat
a an
d re
sour
ce-
inte
nsiv
e to
dev
elop
and
ap
ply
Futu
re tr
affic
vol
umes
on
stud
y ar
ea ro
adw
ays
VTra
ns s
tate
wid
e tra
vel
dem
and
mod
el
Base
line
traffi
c gr
owth
pr
ojec
tions
on
maj
or
road
s
(Exi
stin
g da
ta)
Acco
unts
for f
orec
ast
stat
ewid
e de
velo
pmen
t pa
ttern
s an
d tra
nspo
rta-
tion
netw
ork
impr
ovem
ents
Not
ava
ilabl
e fo
r roa
ds
not i
nclu
ded
in s
tate
wid
e m
odel
VT
rans
gro
wth
fact
ors
Base
line
traffi
c gr
owth
pr
ojec
tions
(E
xist
ing
data
) Ba
sed
on h
isto
ric tr
ends
on
road
way
As
sum
es h
isto
ric g
row
th
trend
s w
ill co
ntin
ue in
fu
ture
Tr
affic
impa
ct s
tudy
As
sess
impa
cts
of
grow
th p
olic
ies
rega
rdin
g sp
ecifi
c m
ajor
de
velo
pmen
ts, o
r gen
-er
al lo
catio
n of
dev
el-
opm
ent i
n co
rrido
r
Loca
tions
, typ
e, a
nd s
ize
of n
ew h
igh-
trip
gene
rato
rs
Trip
gen
erat
ion
rate
s (IT
E m
anua
l or o
ther
so
urce
)
Acco
unts
for t
raffi
c im
pact
s sp
ecifi
cally
from
st
udy
area
dev
elop
men
t C
an a
ccou
nt fo
r sea
-so
nal t
rip g
ener
atio
n,
e.g.
, fro
m re
crea
tiona
l so
urce
s
Nee
ds to
be
adde
d to
ba
ckgr
ound
traf
fic le
vels
C
autio
n re
quire
d to
av
oid
doub
le-c
ount
ing
R
ural
Tra
ffic
Shed
Mod
el2
Fore
cast
traf
fic v
olum
es
from
dev
elop
men
t in
a “t
raffi
c sh
ed”
area
ser
ved
by a
sin
gle
maj
or ro
ad
Futu
re la
nd u
se a
nd
deve
lopm
ent b
y “t
raffi
c sh
ed”
Trip
gen
erat
ion
rate
s as
soci
ated
with
var
ious
la
nd u
ses
Sim
ilar t
o an
are
awid
e tri
p ge
nera
tion
stud
y N
ot te
sted
in V
erm
ont
2 See
: Fe
dera
l Hig
hway
Adm
inis
tratio
n. T
ool K
it fo
r Int
egra
ting
Tran
spor
tatio
n an
d La
nd U
se D
ecis
ion-
Mak
ing.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
B-3
App
endi
x B
A
naly
sis
Met
hods
(con
tinue
d)
Type
of F
orec
ast
Ava
ilabl
e M
etho
ds
App
licab
ility
K
ey D
ata
Req
uire
men
tsA
dvan
tage
s D
isad
vant
ages
In
ters
ectio
n pe
rform
ance
(d
elay
, LO
S) g
iven
futu
re
traffi
c vo
lum
es
Hig
hway
Cap
acity
M
anua
l (H
CM
) C
hapt
ers
16 a
nd 1
73
Estim
ate
dela
y, L
OS,
V/
C, q
ueue
leng
ths
at
cont
rolle
d in
ters
ectio
ns
Traf
fic v
olum
es (i
nclu
ding
tu
rnin
g m
ovem
ents
), co
ntro
l typ
e, th
roug
h an
d tu
rn la
nes
Stan
dard
, wid
ely
appl
ied
met
hodo
logy
R
equi
res
deta
iled
traffi
c an
d ge
omet
ric d
ata
for
each
inte
rsec
tion
anal
yzed
R
oad
segm
ent p
erfo
rm-
ance
(spe
ed, L
OS)
giv
en
futu
re tr
affic
vol
umes
HC
M C
hapt
er 2
0 Es
timat
e sp
eeds
, LO
S fo
r ro
adw
ay s
egm
ents
Tr
affic
vol
umes
, lan
e an
d sh
ould
er w
idth
s, tr
ucks
, di
rect
iona
l spl
it, p
assi
ng
zone
s, fr
ee fl
ow s
peed
Stan
dard
, wid
ely
appl
ied
met
hodo
logy
R
equi
res
traffi
c an
d ge
omet
ric d
ata
for e
ach
road
seg
men
t ana
lyze
d LO
S is
sub
ject
ive
depe
ndin
g up
on e
xpec
-ta
tions
for r
oad
Cor
ridor
per
form
ance
an
d de
lay
HC
M C
hapt
er 2
9 C
ombi
nes
inte
rsec
tion
and
segm
ent l
evel
tech
-ni
ques
; mos
t app
licab
le
for u
rban
, mul
timod
al
corri
dors
See
abov
e C
an a
ccou
nt fo
r dem
and-
shift
ing
betw
een
mod
es
(e.g
., hi
ghw
ay a
nd tr
an-
sit)
and
para
llel f
acilit
ies
Anal
ysis
pro
cedu
res
can
be s
omew
hat c
ompl
ex
Ove
rall
corri
dor t
rave
l tim
e gi
ven
futu
re tr
affic
vo
lum
es
Ski C
orrid
or T
rave
l Tim
e M
odel
(com
bine
s in
ter-
sect
ion
and
road
seg
-m
ent m
etho
ds)4
Best
for a
naly
zing
: in
ter-
sect
ion
impr
ovem
ents
, ro
adw
ay s
egm
ent
impr
ovem
ents
, cha
nges
in
stu
dy a
rea
trip
gene
ratio
n
Sam
e da
ta re
quire
men
ts
as fo
r HC
M a
naly
sis
Req
uire
s co
rrido
r tra
vel
time
data
for v
alid
atio
n
Prov
en o
vera
ll co
rrido
r-le
vel m
easu
re o
f tra
vel
time
perfo
rman
ce
Sens
itive
to d
evel
opm
ent
traffi
c an
d m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s
Doe
s no
t pro
vide
relia
ble
estim
ate
unde
r sev
erel
y co
nges
ted
cond
ition
s
St
atew
ide
trave
l dem
and
mod
el
Prim
ary
use
is
fore
cast
ing
traffi
c vo
l-um
es s
tate
wid
e –
Not
ro
adw
ay-s
peci
fic tr
avel
tim
es
Cha
nge
in c
apac
ity fo
r ro
adw
ay c
orrid
or
Ref
lect
s st
atew
ide
trave
l pa
ttern
s N
ot s
ensi
tive
to
inte
rsec
tion
or s
mal
l-sc
ale
impr
ovem
ents
Li
mite
d ac
cura
cy o
f sp
eed
estim
atio
n M
ay re
quire
cal
ibra
tion
for c
orrid
or-s
peci
fic
appl
icat
ion
St
atew
ide
trave
l dem
and
mod
el –
Enh
ance
d fo
r co
rrido
r stu
dy a
rea
Best
for a
naly
zing
: sh
iftin
g gr
owth
with
in
stud
y ar
ea lo
catio
ns,
addi
ng li
nks
to ro
adw
ay
netw
ork,
maj
or c
apac
ity
upgr
ades
Ref
ined
leve
l of d
etai
l on
road
net
wor
k, s
tudy
are
a po
pula
tion
and
empl
oym
ent
Can
acc
ount
for s
hifti
ng
of g
row
th o
r trip
gen
era-
tion
with
in s
tudy
are
a,
traffi
c di
vers
ion
to
alte
rnat
e fa
cilit
ies
May
invo
lve
cons
ider
able
ef
fort
N
ot s
ensi
tive
to
inte
rsec
tion
or s
mal
l-sc
ale
impr
ovem
ents
3 Tra
nspo
rtatio
n R
esea
rch
Boar
d. H
ighw
ay C
apac
ity M
anua
l 200
0. N
atio
nal R
esea
rch
Cou
ncil,
Was
hing
ton,
D.C
., 20
00.
4 Dev
elop
ed fo
r the
Sou
ther
n W
inds
or C
ount
y R
egio
nal P
lann
ing
Com
mis
sion
by
Res
ourc
e Sy
stem
s G
roup
, Inc
.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
B-4
App
endi
x B
A
naly
sis
Met
hods
(con
tinue
d)
Type
of F
orec
ast
Ava
ilabl
e M
etho
ds
App
licab
ility
K
ey D
ata
Req
uire
men
tsA
dvan
tage
s D
isad
vant
ages
Cra
sh re
duct
ions
from
sa
fety
and
ope
ratio
nal
impr
ovem
ents
NC
HR
P R
epor
t 500
5 –
Info
rmat
ion
on e
ffect
ive-
ness
of s
trate
gies
Anal
yze
pote
ntia
l saf
ety
bene
fits
of v
ario
us ro
ad-
way
and
ope
ratio
nal
impr
ovem
ents
Exis
ting
cond
ition
s
Impr
ovem
ent b
eing
pr
opos
ed
Traf
fic v
olum
es
Low
cos
t/eas
y to
app
ly
Res
ults
repo
rted
from
ot
her s
tudi
es –
Act
ual
bene
fits
may
var
y w
idel
y de
pend
ing
upon
con
text
Traf
fic re
duct
ions
from
al
tern
ativ
e m
ode
stra
tegi
es
Sket
ch-p
lan
asse
ssm
ent
of m
ode
shift
s An
alyz
e ve
hicl
e tra
ffic
redu
ctio
n or
non
mot
or-
ized
traf
fic in
crea
se fr
om
trans
it se
rvic
e, b
icyc
le/
pede
stria
n fa
cilit
ies,
TD
M
stra
tegi
es, p
edes
trian
-fri
endl
y de
velo
pmen
t
Obs
erve
d or
mod
eled
tra
vel b
ehav
ior c
hang
es
from
sim
ilar s
trate
gies
in
othe
r are
as
Can
pro
vide
qua
ntita
tive
estim
ate
for t
his
fact
or
May
be
diffi
cult
to fi
nd
rese
arch
from
com
para
-bl
e si
tuat
ions
St
ated
-pre
fere
nce
surv
eys
Ask
peop
le to
sta
te
choi
ces
for a
ltern
ativ
e m
odes
und
er d
iffer
ent
scen
ario
s
Surv
ey –
Orig
inal
dat
a co
llect
ion
Can
refle
ct s
peci
fic
faci
lity/
serv
ice
impr
ove-
men
t bei
ng p
ropo
sed
Can
be
expe
nsiv
e to
ad
min
iste
r
Surv
ey m
ust b
e ca
refu
lly
desi
gned
, oth
erw
ise
peop
le m
ay o
vers
tate
ch
oice
s
Con
gest
ion
and
safe
ty
bene
fits
of a
cces
s m
an-
agem
ent s
trate
gies
NC
HR
P R
epor
t 420
6 Pr
edic
t cha
nges
in c
rash
ra
tes
base
d on
add
ition
of
driv
eway
s, in
ters
ectio
n sp
acin
g, m
edia
n tre
atm
ents
Num
ber o
f uns
igna
lized
an
d si
gnal
ized
inte
rsec
-tio
ns p
er m
ile
Type
of m
edia
n
Estim
ates
bas
ed o
n em
piric
al d
ata
Cra
sh ra
tes
and
stra
tegy
im
pact
s lik
ely
to v
ary
depe
ndin
g up
on c
onte
xt
H
CM
Cha
pter
s 16
, 17
Anal
yze
dela
y at
ne
w/im
prov
ed c
ontro
lled
inte
rsec
tions
(See
abo
ve)
5 Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Res
earc
h Bo
ard.
Gui
danc
e fo
r Im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e AA
SHTO
Stra
tegi
c H
ighw
ay S
afet
y Pl
an T
rans
porta
tion
Res
earc
h. N
atio
nal C
oope
rativ
e H
ighw
ay R
esea
rch
Prog
ram
(NC
HR
P) R
epor
t 500
, Vol
umes
1–1
3. N
atio
nal A
cade
my
Pres
s,
Was
hing
ton,
D.C
., 20
03-2
004.
6 G
luck
, Jer
ome
S., H
erbe
rt S.
Lev
inso
n, a
nd V
ergi
l G. S
tove
r. Im
pact
s of
Acc
ess
Man
agem
ent T
echn
ique
s. N
atio
nal
Coo
pera
tive
Hig
hway
Res
earc
h Pr
ogra
m (N
CH
RP)
Rep
ort 4
20, N
atio
nal A
cade
my
Pres
s, W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.,
1999
.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
B-5
App
endi
x B
A
naly
sis
Met
hods
(con
tinue
d)
Type
of F
orec
ast
Ava
ilabl
e M
etho
ds
App
licab
ility
K
ey D
ata
Req
uire
men
tsA
dvan
tage
s D
isad
vant
ages
Envi
ronm
enta
l and
co
mm
unity
impa
cts
of
trans
porta
tion
and
deve
l-op
men
t pat
tern
s
Qua
litat
ive
asse
ssm
ent
Con
duct
ske
tch-
leve
l as
sess
men
t of i
mpa
cts
of
corri
dor s
trate
gies
, bas
ed
on p
rofe
ssio
nal a
nd
stak
ehol
der k
now
ledg
e
Vario
us b
ackg
roun
d da
ta
on e
xist
ing
cond
ition
s
Prop
osed
tran
spor
tatio
n an
d la
nd u
se s
trate
gies
Low
cos
t/eas
y to
app
ly
Subj
ectiv
e –
Will
vary
by
pers
on; n
on-q
uant
ifiab
le
G
IS-b
ased
com
mun
ity
impa
ct a
sses
smen
t too
ls
Scen
ario
ana
lysi
s of
al
tern
ativ
e tra
nspo
rtatio
n an
d de
velo
pmen
t pat
-te
rns
prod
ucin
g in
dica
-to
rs s
uch
as la
nd
deve
lope
d, im
perm
eabl
e su
rface
are
a, tr
ansi
t ac
cess
, wal
kabi
lity,
en
ergy
con
sum
ptio
n
Exis
ting
and
futu
re la
nd
use/
deve
lopm
ent p
at-
tern
s (G
IS-b
ased
)
Tran
spor
tatio
n ne
twor
k da
ta
Oth
er la
nd u
se, e
nviro
n-m
enta
l dat
a
Can
ass
ess
a w
ide
rang
e of
com
mun
ity im
pact
s re
late
d to
futu
re d
evel
-op
men
t pat
tern
s
Dat
a an
d re
sour
ce-
inte
nsiv
e
Hav
e pr
imar
ily b
een
appl
ied
in m
etro
polit
an
area
app
licat
ions
, not
for
rura
l are
as
D
etai
led
anal
ysis
m
etho
ds
Mos
t app
ropr
iate
for
spec
ific
proj
ects
, typ
ical
ly
cond
ucte
d as
par
t of t
he
NEP
A pr
oces
s
Varie
s de
pend
ing
upon
im
pact
and
met
hod
Prov
ides
in-d
epth
in
form
atio
n on
impa
cts
Ofte
n da
ta/re
sour
ce
inte
nsiv
e
Visu
al/a
esth
etic
impa
cts
Visu
al p
refe
renc
e su
rvey
s As
sess
vis
ual/a
esth
etic
pr
efer
ence
s Im
ages
of d
iffer
ent t
ypes
of
dev
elop
men
t or r
oad-
way
des
ign
alte
rnat
ives
Low
cos
t – C
an u
se
exis
ting
imag
es/
exam
ples
from
oth
er
area
s
Doe
s no
t sho
w w
hat
actu
al p
roje
ct o
r dev
el-
opm
ent w
ould
look
like
C
ompu
ter v
isua
lizat
ion
tech
niqu
es –
Lan
d us
e D
evel
op c
ompu
teriz
ed
repr
esen
tatio
ns o
f alte
r-na
tive
deve
lopm
ent
scen
ario
s
Plan
ned
land
use
, in
clud
ing
loca
tion
of
deve
lopm
ent,
dens
ity,
othe
r phy
sica
l des
ign
para
met
ers
Pow
erfu
l too
l to
com
mu-
nica
te v
isua
l/aes
thet
ic
impa
cts
rela
ted
to
deve
lopm
ent s
cena
rios/
alte
rnat
ives
Req
uire
s de
taile
d da
ta
Build
ing
desi
gn/
arch
itect
ure
may
not
re
sem
ble
actu
al
deve
lopm
ent
C
ompu
ter v
isua
lizat
ion
tech
niqu
es –
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s
Dev
elop
com
pute
rized
re
pres
enta
tions
of a
lter-
nativ
e tra
nspo
rtatio
n fa
cilit
y de
sign
s
Land
scap
e/ba
ckgr
ound
Tran
spor
tatio
n fa
cilit
y de
sign
Pow
erfu
l too
l to
com
mu-
nica
te v
isua
l/aes
thet
ic
impa
cts
rela
ted
to d
evel
-op
men
t sce
nario
s/al
tern
ativ
es
Req
uire
s de
taile
d da
ta
Mos
t app
ropr
iate
for
deta
iled
proj
ect a
naly
sis,
no
t cor
ridor
pla
nnin
g
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
C-1
App
endi
x C
Fu
ndin
g So
urce
s
Sour
ce1
Des
crip
tion
How
to A
pply
/Obt
ain
Furt
her I
nfor
mat
ion
Surfa
ce T
rans
porta
tion
Prog
ram
Fede
ral t
rans
porta
tion
fund
ing
sour
ce
that
can
be
used
for a
var
iety
of t
rans
-po
rtatio
n pr
ojec
ts, i
nclu
ding
hig
hway
pr
eser
vatio
n an
d ca
paci
ty im
prov
e-m
ents
, tra
nsit
capi
tal i
mpr
ovem
ents
, an
d pe
dest
rian/
bicy
cle
impr
ovem
ents
.
Reg
iona
l and
sta
tew
ide
prog
ram
de
velo
pmen
t is
done
by
VTra
ns, t
he
Reg
iona
l Pla
nnin
g C
omm
issi
ons,
and
th
e C
hitte
nden
Cou
nty
MPO
und
er th
e Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Plan
ning
Initi
ativ
e.
VTra
ns P
olic
y an
d Pl
anni
ng D
ivis
ion
Tran
spor
tatio
n En
hanc
emen
ts (T
E)
Fede
ral t
rans
porta
tion
fund
ing
sour
ce
for t
rans
porta
tion-
rela
ted
impr
ove-
men
ts, i
nclu
ding
sid
ewal
ks, c
urbs
, tra
ils, a
nd re
stor
atio
n of
his
toric
stru
c-tu
res.
Est
imat
ed $
4 m
illion
to b
e av
aila
ble
in 2
005
for V
erm
ont.
TE g
rant
s ar
e aw
arde
d th
roug
h a
com
-pe
titiv
e pr
oces
s by
VTr
ans.
ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/pr
ogde
v/
Sect
ions
/LTF
/Enh
ance
men
ts%
20
Prog
ram
/Enh
ance
men
tsH
omeP
age.
htm
Rec
reat
iona
l Tra
ils
FHW
A fu
ndin
g so
urce
for d
evel
opm
ent
and
mai
nten
ance
of r
ecre
atio
nal t
rails
an
d tra
il-re
late
d fa
cilit
ies
for b
oth
non-
mot
oriz
ed a
nd m
otor
ized
recr
eatio
nal
trail
uses
. Es
timat
ed $
300,
000
to b
e av
aila
ble
in 2
005
for V
erm
ont.
Fund
s ar
e av
aila
ble
to m
unic
ipal
ities
, sc
hool
s, n
onpr
ofit
orga
niza
tions
, and
in
term
unic
ipal
dis
trict
s th
roug
h a
com
-pe
titiv
e pr
oces
s ad
min
iste
red
by th
e Ve
rmon
t Dep
artm
ent o
f For
ests
, Par
ks,
and
Rec
reat
ion.
http
://w
ww
.vtfp
r.org
/recg
rant
/inde
x.cf
m
Tran
spor
tatio
n an
d C
omm
unity
and
Sy
stem
Pre
serv
atio
n Pr
ogra
m (T
CSP
) FH
WA
fund
ing
sour
ce fo
r inn
ovat
ive
prog
ram
s to
link
tran
spor
tatio
n an
d la
nd u
se.
Fund
ing
leve
ls in
200
6 an
d su
bseq
uent
yea
rs h
ave
not b
een
dete
rmin
ed.
Det
ails
of t
he fu
ndin
g al
loca
tion
proc
e-du
re in
200
6 an
d su
bseq
uent
yea
rs
rem
ain
to b
e de
term
ined
.
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/tcsp
/
Verm
ont D
ownt
own
Prog
ram
D
ownt
own
Tran
spor
tatio
n Fu
nd p
ro-
vide
s fu
ndin
g fo
r cer
tain
tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d pr
ojec
ts, i
nclu
ding
stre
etsc
ape
and
pede
stria
n im
prov
emen
ts, i
n de
sign
ated
dow
ntow
n ar
eas.
$80
0,00
0 an
nual
ly d
esig
nate
d fo
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n im
prov
emen
ts.
Gra
nts
awar
ded
annu
ally
by
stat
e co
mm
ittee
coo
rdin
ated
by
DH
CA.
R
equi
res
50%
loca
l mat
ch.
http
://w
ww
.dhc
a.st
ate.
vt.u
s/D
HP/
pr
ogra
ms/
dow
ntow
n.ht
ml
Urb
an F
ores
try G
rant
s Pa
y fo
r pla
ntin
g of
tree
s in
tow
ns a
nd
villa
ges.
Up
to $
65,0
00 to
be
prov
ided
in
200
5.
Div
isio
n of
For
ests
, Par
ks, a
nd
Rec
reat
ion
http
://w
ww
.vtc
omm
unity
fore
stry
.org
/ an
nbro
chur
e.pd
f
Mun
icip
al C
apita
l Bud
get
Com
mon
sou
rce
of fu
ndin
g fo
r min
or
capi
tal i
mpr
ovem
ent p
roje
cts.
To
wn
mus
t ado
pt in
ann
ual b
udge
t.
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k C
-2
App
endi
x C
Fu
ndin
g So
urce
s (c
ontin
ued)
Sour
ce1
Des
crip
tion
How
to A
pply
/Obt
ain
Furt
her I
nfor
mat
ion
Tran
spor
tatio
n Im
prov
emen
t Dis
trict
Sp
ecia
l ass
essm
ent d
istri
ct w
here
a
spec
ial t
ax is
levi
ed o
n pr
oper
ty o
wne
rs
who
will
bene
fit fr
om s
peci
fic tr
ansp
or-
tatio
n im
prov
emen
ts.
Req
uire
s pe
titio
n si
gned
by
certa
in
perc
enta
ge o
f pro
perty
ow
ners
in
dist
rict.
Title
24
VSA
Cha
pter
26A
§ 2
793
Impa
ct F
ees
Rai
se m
oney
to fu
nd d
efic
its c
ause
d by
de
terio
ratio
n of
sys
tem
resu
lting
from
in
crea
sed
grow
th.
Req
uire
s ad
optio
n of
cap
ital b
udge
t an
d lo
cal i
mpa
ct fe
e or
dina
nce.
Pe
rmitt
ed b
y Ti
tle 2
4 VS
A C
hapt
er 1
31
Dev
elop
er A
gree
men
ts
Priv
ate
fund
s to
miti
gate
dev
elop
men
t im
pact
s as
det
erm
ined
thro
ugh
Act 2
50
revi
ew p
roce
dure
s or
oth
er
nego
tiatio
ns.
Req
uire
s Ac
t 250
hea
ring
or n
egot
ia-
tions
with
dev
elop
er
Com
mun
ity D
evel
opm
ent B
lock
Gra
nts
Fede
ral (
HU
D) f
unds
to s
uppo
rt co
m-
mun
ity re
deve
lopm
ent a
ctiv
ities
. M
ay
incl
ude
trans
porta
tion-
rela
ted
proj
ects
su
ch a
s st
reet
scap
ing,
ligh
ting,
si
dew
alk/
pede
stria
n am
eniti
es.
Mus
t be
appl
ied
in n
eigh
borh
oods
m
eetin
g ce
rtain
eco
nom
ic c
riter
ia.
Verm
ont C
omm
unity
Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
m in
the
Dep
artm
ent o
f Hou
sing
an
d C
omm
unity
Affa
irs
http
://w
ww
.dhc
a.st
ate.
vt.u
s/VC
DP/
in
dex.
htm
Mun
icip
al P
lann
ing
Gra
nt P
rogr
am
Stat
e pr
ogra
m th
at fu
nds
tech
nica
l as
sist
ance
for t
own
plan
ning
, im
ple-
men
tatio
n of
pla
ns a
nd o
rdin
ance
s,
enco
urag
emen
t of c
itize
n pa
rtici
patio
n an
d ed
ucat
ion,
and
inno
vativ
e de
mon
-st
ratio
n pl
anni
ng p
roje
cts.
Elig
ible
app
lican
ts a
re m
unic
ipal
ities
th
at h
ave
been
con
firm
ed b
y th
eir
regi
onal
pla
nnin
g co
mm
issi
on
(incl
udin
g R
PC a
ppro
val o
f the
tow
n’s
adop
ted
plan
).
Verm
ont C
omm
unity
Dev
elop
men
t Pr
ogra
m in
the
Dep
artm
ent o
f Hou
sing
an
d C
omm
unity
Affa
irs
http
://w
ww
.dhc
a.st
ate.
vt.u
s/Pl
anni
ng/
MPG
.htm
1 The
se a
re e
xam
ples
of c
urre
nt p
rogr
ams;
oth
er s
ourc
es m
ay b
e av
aila
ble,
and
pro
gram
s m
ay c
hang
e.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
D-1
App
endi
x D
M
unic
ipal
Pla
nnin
g To
ols
Mun
icip
al D
evel
opm
ent T
ools
(Reg
ulat
ory)
Zoni
ng B
ylaw
s
Reg
ulat
e th
e ty
pe a
nd d
ensi
ty o
f dev
elop
men
t. A
dmin
iste
red
by th
e ZA
, PC
, and
ZBA
, or D
RB.
Zoni
ng D
istri
cts
St
anda
rds
defin
ing
allo
wed
use
s an
d de
nsiti
es o
f dev
elop
men
t (lo
t, se
tbac
k, fr
onta
ge, c
over
age
requ
irem
ents
). E
xam
ples
: M
ixed
Use
, In
dust
rial/O
ffice
, Tra
vele
r Ser
vice
, Con
serv
atio
n di
stric
ts.
Ove
rlay
Dis
trict
s
Des
igna
ted
area
s in
whi
ch a
dditi
onal
sta
ndar
ds (e
.g.,
desi
gn s
tand
ards
) will
be a
pplie
d to
sup
plem
ent o
r sub
stitu
te fo
r the
sta
ndar
ds o
f th
e un
derly
ing
zoni
ng d
istri
ct.
May
ove
rlay
one
or m
ore
unde
rlyin
g zo
ning
dis
trict
s. E
xam
ples
: D
esig
n R
evie
w, S
ceni
c, G
atew
ay,
Cor
ridor
dis
trict
s.
Site
Pla
n R
evie
w
Stan
dard
s th
at m
ay a
pply
to a
ll al
low
ed u
ses
exce
pt fo
r sin
gle-
and
two-
fam
ily d
wel
lings
, inc
ludi
ng s
ite la
yout
and
des
ign,
acc
ess,
traf
fic
and
pede
stria
n ci
rcul
atio
n, la
ndsc
apin
g an
d sc
reen
ing,
and
oth
er s
tand
ards
as
spec
ified
in th
e by
law
s (e
.g.,
build
ing
orie
ntat
ion,
par
king
ar
eas,
and
ligh
ting)
. Ad
min
iste
red
by th
e PC
or D
RB;
no
war
ned
publ
ic h
earin
g is
requ
ired.
Con
ditio
nal U
se
Rev
iew
St
anda
rds
appl
ying
to li
sted
“co
nditi
onal
use
s,”
to e
valu
ate
and
avoi
d or
miti
gate
pro
ject
impa
cts
on th
e ca
paci
ty o
f exi
stin
g or
pla
nned
co
mm
unity
faci
litie
s, th
e ch
arac
ter o
f the
are
a, tr
affic
on
road
s an
d hi
ghw
ays
in th
e vi
cini
ty, o
ther
mun
icip
al re
gula
tions
, the
use
of r
enew
-ab
le e
nerg
y re
sour
ces,
and
oth
er re
sour
ces
or fa
cilit
ies
as s
peci
fied
in th
e by
law
s (e
.g.,
the
desi
gn a
nd lo
catio
n of
stru
ctur
es a
nd s
ervi
ce
area
s, s
igns
, lan
dsca
ping
). A
dmin
iste
red
by th
e ZB
A or
DR
B; a
war
ned
publ
ic h
earin
g is
requ
ired.
Des
ign
Rev
iew
St
anda
rds
appl
ying
to s
ite la
yout
and
bui
ldin
g de
sign
(typ
ical
ly w
ithin
a d
esig
n re
view
dis
trict
); pl
anni
ng s
tudy
requ
ired
to id
entif
y de
sign
is
sues
and
crit
eria
. Ad
min
iste
red
by th
e PC
or D
RB;
a d
esig
n re
view
boa
rd m
ay s
erve
in a
n ad
viso
ry c
apac
ity to
the
PC, D
RB.
and
ap
plic
ants
.
Park
ing
Stan
dard
s
Stan
dard
s fo
r the
num
ber o
f req
uire
d pa
rkin
g sp
aces
by
dist
rict a
nd/o
r use
type
; als
o m
ay in
clud
e st
anda
rds
for p
arki
ng a
rea
desi
gn,
layo
ut a
nd s
cree
ning
, loa
ding
and
ser
vice
are
as.
May
be
adm
inis
tere
d by
the
ZA, a
nd/o
r in
asso
ciat
ion
with
site
pla
n or
con
ditio
nal u
se
revi
ew.
Acce
ss
Man
agem
ent
Stan
dard
s
Stan
dard
s fo
r lim
iting
the
num
ber o
f acc
ess
poin
ts p
er lo
t, fro
ntag
e di
stan
ce o
r use
by
dist
rict o
r roa
d ty
pe; a
lso
may
incl
ude
acce
ss lo
ca-
tion
and
desi
gn s
tand
ards
, and
refe
renc
e ot
her s
tate
and
tow
n ac
cess
per
mits
.
Sign
Sta
ndar
ds
Stan
dard
s fo
r the
loca
tion,
hei
ght,
sign
are
a, d
esig
n, a
nd il
lum
inat
ion
of o
n-pr
emis
e si
gns.
Als
o m
ay b
e ad
opte
d as
a s
epar
ate
ordi
nanc
e.
Use
Sta
ndar
ds
Stan
dard
s th
at a
pply
to s
peci
fic ty
pes
of u
se, t
o m
ore
spec
ifica
lly re
gula
te th
eir s
ittin
g, la
yout
, and
des
ign
(e.g
., ga
s st
atio
ns,
indu
stria
l/offi
ce p
arks
).
Subd
ivis
ion
Byla
ws
R
egul
ate
the
patte
rn o
f dev
elop
men
t and
sup
porti
ng in
frast
ruct
ure.
Adm
inis
tere
d by
the
PC o
r DR
B; h
earin
g re
quire
d fo
r fin
al p
lat
appr
oval
.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
D-2
App
endi
x D
M
unic
ipal
Pla
nnin
g To
ols
(con
tinue
d)
Mun
icip
al D
evel
opm
ent T
ools
(Reg
ulat
ory)
(con
tinue
d)
Res
ourc
e Pr
otec
tion
Stan
dard
s
Stan
dard
s th
at li
mit
the
subd
ivis
ion
of, o
r oth
erw
ise
prot
ect,
sign
ifica
nt n
atur
al, c
ultu
ral a
nd/o
r sce
nic
feat
ures
(e.g
., th
roug
h th
e de
sign
a-tio
n an
d si
tting
of b
uild
ing
enve
lope
s on
lots
).
Settl
emen
t Pat
tern
St
anda
rds
St
anda
rds
that
enc
oura
ge o
r req
uire
com
patib
le lo
t and
road
layo
uts.
Exa
mpl
es:
tradi
tiona
l nei
ghbo
rhoo
d, tr
ansi
t-orie
nted
, or
cons
erva
tion/
open
spa
ce s
ubdi
visi
on d
esig
ns.
Infra
stru
ctur
e St
anda
rds
St
anda
rds
for t
he p
rovi
sion
and
des
ign
of s
uppo
rting
infra
stru
ctur
e an
d ut
ilitie
s (e
.g.,
cont
ext s
ensi
tive
road
and
ped
estri
an d
esig
n,
wat
er/s
ewer
line
ext
ensi
ons)
. Sh
ould
be
cons
iste
nt w
ith o
ther
mun
icip
al in
frast
ruct
ure
stan
dard
s, o
ffici
al m
ap.
Mas
ter P
lann
ing
M
ay in
clud
e m
aste
r pla
n, p
hasi
ng re
quire
men
ts fo
r lar
ger p
roje
cts,
esp
ecia
lly in
rela
tion
to a
n ad
opte
d m
unic
ipal
cap
ital b
udge
t and
im
prov
emen
t pro
gram
.
Plan
ned
Dev
elop
men
t [PU
D,
PRD
]
Stan
dard
s fo
r pla
nned
uni
t dev
elop
men
t (PU
D) o
r pla
nned
resi
dent
ial d
evel
opm
ent (
PRD
), ad
opte
d un
der z
onin
g an
d ad
min
iste
red
in
asso
ciat
ion
with
sub
divi
sion
revi
ew, w
hich
allo
w d
ensi
ty m
odifi
catio
ns to
pro
mot
e cl
uste
red
deve
lopm
ent a
nd p
rote
ct o
pen
spac
e.
Adm
inis
tere
d by
the
PC o
r DR
B.
Key:
ZA
– Z
onin
g Ad
min
istra
tor
PC –
Pla
nnin
g C
omm
issi
on
ZB
A –
Zoni
ng B
oard
of A
djus
tmen
t D
RB
– D
evel
opm
ent R
evie
w B
oard
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
D-3
App
endi
x D
M
unic
ipal
Pla
nnin
g To
ols
(con
tinue
d)
Mun
icip
al D
evel
opm
ent T
ools
(Non
-Reg
ulat
ory)
A
mun
icip
ality
may
use
the
follo
win
g no
n-re
gula
tory
tool
s, a
lone
or i
n co
njun
ctio
n w
ith lo
cal b
ylaw
s,
with
the
purp
ose
of im
plem
entin
g a
mun
icip
al p
lan
and
the
stat
e la
nd u
se g
oals
.
Cap
ital B
udge
t and
Pr
ogra
m
A m
unic
ipal
ity m
ay a
dopt
a fi
ve-y
ear c
apita
l pro
gram
, upd
ated
ann
ually
and
div
ided
into
ann
ual c
apita
l bud
gets
, to
prov
ide
for
mai
ntai
ning
cur
rent
and
acq
uirin
g fu
ture
cap
ital i
mpr
ovem
ents
.
Tax
Incr
emen
t Fi
nanc
ing
Pu
rsua
nt to
24
VSA
53, s
ubch
apte
r 5 (§
1891
-190
0), a
mun
icip
ality
may
issu
e bo
nds
to p
ay fo
r new
infra
stru
ctur
e, s
uch
as ro
ads,
wat
er
and
sew
er li
nes,
in a
def
ined
gro
wth
cen
ter,
and
appl
y th
e in
crem
enta
l tax
reve
nues
to p
ay o
ff th
ose
bond
s fo
r up
to 1
0 ye
ars.
Dev
elop
men
t Ag
reem
ents
W
hen
it fu
rther
s th
e ob
ject
ives
of t
he m
unic
ipal
pla
n an
d is
not
pos
sibl
e un
der c
urre
nt re
gula
tions
, a m
unic
ipal
ity m
ay a
dopt
a p
roce
ss,
with
sta
ndar
ds a
nd c
riter
ia fo
r its
app
licat
ion,
to n
egot
iate
an
agre
emen
t for
revi
ew o
f a p
artic
ular
par
cel t
hat e
stab
lishe
s th
e rig
hts
and
oblig
atio
ns o
f all
parti
es.
Tran
sfer
, Pur
chas
e or
Acc
epta
nce
of
Dev
elop
men
t R
ight
s
A m
unic
ipal
ity m
ay s
peci
fy s
endi
ng a
nd re
ceiv
ing
area
s in
ord
er to
tran
sfer
, pur
chas
e, o
r acc
ept t
he d
onat
ion
of d
evel
opm
ent r
ight
s, to
fu
rther
the
cons
erva
tion
or d
evel
opm
ent o
bjec
tives
of a
pla
n.
Supp
lem
enta
l Pl
ans
to th
e to
wn
plan
, whi
ch m
ay
ultim
atel
y be
com
e in
corp
orat
ed in
to
the
tow
n pl
an m
ay
incl
ude:
Offi
cial
Map
– A
mun
icip
ality
may
ado
pt a
n of
ficia
l map
whi
ch id
entif
ies
futu
re m
unic
ipal
util
ity a
nd fa
cilit
y im
prov
emen
ts, s
uch
as ro
ad
or p
ath
right
s-of
-way
s, p
arkl
and,
util
ity ri
ghts
-of-w
ay a
nd o
ther
pub
lic im
prov
emen
ts to
pro
vide
the
oppo
rtuni
ty fo
r the
com
mun
ity to
pur
-ch
ase
land
iden
tifie
d fo
r pub
lic im
prov
emen
ts p
rior t
o de
velo
pmen
t for
oth
er u
se.
Acc
ess
Man
agem
ent P
lan
– A
mun
icip
ality
may
ado
pt a
n ac
cess
man
agem
ent p
lan
to m
anag
e tra
ffic
and
acce
ss o
nto
publ
ic ro
ads
from
adj
acen
t pro
perty
.
Dow
ntow
n, V
illag
e C
ente
r, or
New
Tow
n C
ente
r Pla
n –
A m
unic
ipal
ity m
ay a
dopt
a p
lan
for t
he d
evel
opm
ent a
nd re
vita
lizat
ion
of
dow
ntow
n an
d vi
llage
cen
ters
, or t
o pl
an fo
r a n
ew to
wn
cent
er.
Ope
n Sp
ace
Plan
– A
mun
icip
ality
may
ado
pt a
pla
n to
ass
ess
criti
cal n
atur
al re
sour
ces
and
to g
uide
pub
lic a
nd p
rivat
e co
nser
vatio
n st
rate
gies
.
Con
serv
atio
n C
omm
issi
on
A m
unic
ipal
ity m
ay fo
rm a
con
serv
atio
n co
mm
issi
on to
wor
k on
con
serv
atio
n an
d na
tura
l res
ourc
e pl
anni
ng is
sues
.
Sour
ce:
Verm
ont D
epar
tmen
t of H
ousi
ng a
nd C
omm
unity
Affa
irs.
Verm
ont I
nter
stat
e In
terc
hang
e Pl
anni
ng a
nd D
evel
opm
ent
Des
ign
Gui
delin
es.
2004
.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
E-1
App
endi
x E
Land
Use
Str
ateg
ies
for T
rans
port
atio
n C
orrid
ors:
Exa
mpl
es fr
om O
ther
Sta
tes
Col
orad
o –
Inte
rgov
ernm
enta
l Agr
eem
ents
Add
ress
Hig
hway
C
orrid
or D
evel
opm
ent
Loca
l and
sta
te g
over
nmen
t age
ncie
s in
Col
orad
o m
ake
wid
espr
ead
use
of in
terg
over
nmen
tal a
gree
men
ts (I
GA
) to
coor
dina
te la
nd u
se p
lann
ing
and
trans
porta
tion
issu
es.
For e
xam
ple,
the
Tow
ns o
f Win
dsor
and
Sev
eran
ce
ente
red
into
an
IGA
to h
arm
oniz
e pl
anni
ng a
nd g
over
n de
velo
pmen
t alo
ng H
ighw
ay 3
92 b
etw
een
the
two
tow
ns.
Thei
r goa
l was
to a
void
rapi
d an
d po
orly
pla
nned
dev
elop
men
t alo
ng th
is h
ighw
ay c
orrid
or th
at m
ight
be
exac
erba
ted
by m
unic
ipal
com
petit
ion
for t
ax re
venu
e. T
he a
gree
men
t, ad
opte
d in
200
0, d
oes
the
follo
win
g:
• S
olid
ifies
the
grow
th b
ound
arie
s fo
r bo
th W
inds
or a
nd S
ever
ance
, agr
eein
g up
on a
reas
whe
re th
e bo
unda
-rie
s of
the
two
tow
ns m
eet a
nd d
irect
ing
deve
lopm
ent t
o ar
eas
with
in th
e to
wns
’ bou
ndar
ies;
• C
reat
es a
Coo
pera
tive
Pla
nnin
g A
rea
(CP
A)
for
join
t pl
anni
ng,
in w
hich
the
tow
ns s
hare
bot
h th
e re
spon
sibi
lity
for
and
the
bene
fits
of d
evel
opm
ent
in t
his
area
with
hig
h in
dust
rial a
nd c
omm
erci
al g
row
th
pote
ntia
l alo
ng H
ighw
ay 3
92;
• R
equi
res
both
tow
ns to
dev
elop
and
impl
emen
t a C
orrid
or D
evel
opm
ent P
lan
for t
he C
PA
– c
onta
inin
g sp
e-ci
fic e
lem
ents
– w
ithin
12
mon
ths
of s
igni
ng th
e in
terg
over
nmen
tal a
gree
men
t;
• A
s de
velo
pmen
t occ
urs
in th
e C
PA
, the
inte
rgov
ernm
enta
l agr
eem
ent i
mpl
emen
ts re
venu
e sh
arin
g in
whi
ch
the
tow
ns d
ivid
e th
e ta
x re
venu
e fro
m d
evel
opm
ent i
n th
e C
PA
;
• C
oord
inat
es th
e de
velo
pmen
t of a
n ef
ficie
nt a
nd w
ell-p
lann
ed w
ater
and
sew
er s
ervi
ce fo
r the
CP
A; a
nd
• A
dopt
s a
cons
iste
nt a
nd m
anda
tory
des
ign
stan
dard
for t
he C
PA.
For m
ore
info
rmat
ion,
see
: ht
tp://
ww
w.s
praw
lact
ion.
org/
hallo
ffam
e/H
Win
dson
.htm
l.
Flor
ida
– C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Ord
inan
ce a
nd U
.S. 9
8 S
ectio
n 33
7.27
3, F
lorid
a S
tatu
tes,
pro
vide
s th
at lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts m
ay d
esig
nate
a tr
ansp
orta
tion
corri
dor f
or m
an-
agem
ent b
y in
clud
ing
the
corri
dor i
n th
e tra
nspo
rtatio
n el
emen
t of t
he lo
cal c
ompr
ehen
sive
pla
n, a
nd m
ay th
erea
fter
adop
t a c
orrid
or m
anag
emen
t ord
inan
ce to
incl
ude
crite
ria to
man
age
the
land
use
s w
ithin
and
adj
acen
t to
the
trans
porta
tion
corri
dor.
The
sta
tute
s ac
know
ledg
e th
at c
oord
inat
ing
land
use
and
tran
spor
tatio
n is
impo
rtant
to
alle
viat
ing
traffi
c co
nges
tion
and
mai
ntai
ning
an
effe
ctiv
e tra
nspo
rtatio
n sy
stem
, and
that
tran
spor
tatio
n co
rrid
or
man
agem
ent c
an b
est b
e ac
hiev
ed th
roug
h th
e in
clus
ion
of c
orrid
ors
in lo
cal g
over
nmen
t com
preh
ensi
ve p
lans
.
The
U.S
. 98
corri
dor i
n P
olk
Cou
nty
repr
esen
ts a
suc
cess
ful e
xam
ple
of c
orrid
or m
anag
emen
t. In
200
1, a
s de
vel-
opm
ent p
ress
ures
beg
an n
orth
of t
he c
ity li
mits
of B
arto
w, l
ocal
offi
cial
s sa
w th
e ne
ed to
take
act
ion
to p
reve
nt
acce
ss a
nd c
onge
stio
n pr
oble
ms
alon
g th
e pr
evio
usly
und
evel
oped
cor
ridor
. Th
e P
olk
Cou
nty
Tran
spor
tatio
n Fl
orid
a Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k E-
2
App
endi
x E
Land
Use
Stra
tegi
es fo
r Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Co
rrid
ors:
Exa
mpl
es fr
om O
ther
Sta
tes
(con
tinue
d)
Pla
nnin
g O
rgan
izat
ion,
the
MPO
for t
he re
gion
, dra
fted
an M
OU
in c
oope
ratio
n w
ith th
e Fl
orid
a D
OT,
the
Citi
es o
f B
arto
w a
nd L
akel
and,
and
Pol
k C
ount
y. T
he M
OU
est
ablis
hed
the
basi
s fo
r wid
enin
g U
.S. 9
8 to
six
lane
s w
hile
pr
ovid
ing
trans
it se
rvic
e an
d de
velo
ping
a m
ulti-
use
recr
eatio
nal t
rail.
The
MO
U a
lso
outli
ned
stat
e an
d lo
cal o
bjec
-tiv
es th
at c
an b
e m
et fo
r the
road
way
thro
ugh
land
dev
elop
men
t and
sub
divi
sion
regu
latio
ns.
Fina
lly, t
he M
OU
id
entif
ied
the
inte
ntio
n of
all
thre
e lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts to
am
end
thei
r com
preh
ensi
ve p
lans
to in
clud
e a
desi
gnat
ed
U.S
. 98
corr
idor
(pur
suan
t to
stat
e st
atut
es).
The
pla
ns a
lso
wou
ld b
e am
ende
d fo
r con
sist
ency
with
a c
orrid
or
acce
ss m
anag
emen
t pla
n (C
AM
P) d
evel
oped
by
FDO
T in
con
sulta
tion
with
the
juris
dict
ions
.
The
CA
MP
was
ulti
mat
ely
adop
ted
in 2
004
and
mun
icip
aliti
es a
re in
the
proc
ess
of u
pdat
ing
thei
r pla
ns.
A p
ropo
sed
serv
ice
road
sys
tem
, whi
ch is
beg
inni
ng to
be
deve
lope
d, w
ill p
rovi
de a
cces
s to
and
bet
wee
n bu
sine
sses
ac
com
mod
atin
g m
ore
“loc
al tr
affic
” w
hile
allo
win
g th
roug
h tra
ffic
on th
e ar
teria
l. T
he S
teer
ing
Com
mitt
ee c
harg
ed
with
dev
elop
ing
the
CA
MP
cont
inue
s to
mee
t to
ensu
re im
plem
enta
tion,
dis
cuss
ing
the
deta
ils o
f how
pro
pose
d de
velo
pmen
ts s
houl
d co
mpl
y w
ith th
e C
AM
P.
Flor
ida
– M
artin
Cou
nty
Inco
rpor
ates
Acc
ess
Man
agem
ent
in L
ocal
Ord
inan
ces
Mar
tin C
ount
y, F
lorid
a’s
Roa
dway
Des
ign
Ord
inan
ce (n
o. 5
61) i
nclu
des
a se
ctio
n on
acc
ess
man
agem
ent
addr
essi
ng th
e ac
cess
cla
ssifi
catio
n of
the
road
way
and
rela
ted
inte
rsec
tion
spac
ing
stan
dard
s, c
orne
r cle
aran
ce,
acce
ss a
mon
g pr
oper
ties,
driv
eway
spa
cing
and
des
ign,
and
ove
rlay
zone
s. T
he o
rdin
ance
als
o in
clud
es s
ectio
ns
on m
obili
ty a
nd c
onne
ctiv
ity, w
ith th
e in
tent
of d
isco
urag
ing
the
use
of lo
cal s
treet
s fo
r cut
-thro
ugh
traffi
c w
hile
m
aint
aini
ng th
e ov
eral
l con
nect
ivity
of t
he ro
adw
ay s
yste
m fo
r veh
icle
traf
fic, b
icyc
lists
, and
ped
estri
ans.
For m
ore
info
rmat
ion,
see
: ht
tp://
web
serv
er.m
artin
.fl.u
s/G
OV
T/de
pts/
leg/
ords
/ord
.561
.htm
l.
Indi
ana
– M
adis
on C
ount
y A
dopt
s a
Cor
ridor
Ove
rlay
Dis
tric
t Af
ter a
dopt
ing
a ne
w c
ompr
ehen
sive
pla
n in
200
1, M
adis
on C
ount
y, In
dian
a (n
orth
east
of I
ndia
napo
lis) p
asse
d a
deve
lopm
ent o
rdin
ance
that
incl
udes
new
road
des
ign
stan
dard
s, a
cces
s co
ntro
l, co
rrid
or p
rese
rvat
ion,
cor
ridor
ov
erla
y di
stric
ts, a
nd n
on-m
otor
ized
faci
lity
requ
irem
ents
. Ex
cerp
ts fr
om th
e C
orrid
or O
verla
y D
istri
ct Z
onin
g O
rdin
ance
incl
ude:
• Pu
rpos
e –
The
purp
ose
of th
is A
rticl
e is
to e
stab
lish
an o
verla
y di
stric
t to
addr
ess
the
uniq
ue c
hara
cter
istic
s of
the
prop
ertie
s ad
jace
nt t
o th
e m
ajor
tran
spor
tatio
n co
rrid
ors
in M
adis
on C
ount
y ex
cept
in P
lann
ed U
nit
Dev
elop
men
t dis
trict
s.
• B
uild
ing
Orie
ntat
ion
– A
ll pr
imar
y st
ruct
ures
sha
ll fa
ce th
e fro
nt o
f the
lot o
n w
hich
they
are
loca
ted.
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k E-
3
App
endi
x E
Land
Use
Stra
tegi
es fo
r Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Co
rrid
ors:
Exa
mpl
es fr
om O
ther
Sta
tes
(con
tinue
d)
• La
ndsc
apin
g –
Land
scap
ing
scre
enin
g sh
all b
e pr
ovid
ed a
roun
d th
e pe
rimet
er o
f al
l par
king
are
as w
hich
in
clud
e 15
or m
ore
park
ing
spac
es.
• En
tran
ce D
rives
– E
ntra
nce
driv
es a
cces
sing
lots
from
an
arte
rial o
r col
lect
or ro
ad m
ay b
e lo
cate
d no
clo
ser
than
200
feet
from
any
oth
er d
rive
on th
e sa
me
side
of t
he p
ublic
road
, or 5
00 fe
et fr
om a
ny in
ters
ectio
n of
two
publ
ic r
oad
right
s-of
-way
. I
nter
ior
driv
eway
s pa
ssin
g th
roug
h fro
nt y
ards
par
alle
l to
publ
ic r
oads
sha
ll be
de
sign
ed a
nd c
onst
ruct
ed to
stu
b in
to a
djac
ent p
rope
rties
and
incl
uded
in c
ross
acc
ess
ease
men
ts.
• Sh
ared
Par
king
– P
arki
ng a
reas
res
trict
ed to
pat
rons
of t
he b
usin
ess
loca
ted
on e
ach
spec
ific
lot s
hall
be
proh
ibite
d.
• Pa
rkin
g Lo
catio
n –
No
mor
e th
an 3
0 pe
rcen
t of
the
par
king
spa
ces
prov
ided
on
each
lot m
ay b
e pl
aced
be
twee
n th
e fro
nt fa
cade
of t
he p
rimar
y st
ruct
ure
and
the
abut
ting
publ
ic s
treet
.
• Pe
dest
rian
Wal
kway
s –
Ped
estri
an w
alkw
ays
shal
l be
prov
ided
acr
oss
the
front
age
of a
ll lo
ts, c
onne
ctin
g th
e lo
t, th
e pr
imar
y st
ruct
ure,
and
par
king
are
as to
eac
h ot
her a
nd w
ith a
djac
ent p
rope
rties
.
Sou
rce:
Mad
ison
Cou
nty
Zoni
ng O
rdin
ance
Arti
cle
Four
: C
orrid
or D
evel
opm
ent O
verla
y D
istri
ct.
http
://w
ww
.mcp
lann
ing.
net/.
Ken
tuck
y –
Zoni
ng O
verla
y D
istr
ict C
ompl
emen
ts A
rter
ial I
mpr
ovem
ents
in
Bow
ling
Gre
en
In B
owlin
g G
reen
in s
outh
wes
tern
Ken
tuck
y, th
e Ke
ntuc
ky T
rans
porta
tion
Cab
inet
and
the
com
mun
ity h
ad re
ache
d an
impa
sse
over
the
wid
enin
g of
Cem
eter
y R
oad
from
two
to fi
ve la
nes,
firs
t pro
pose
d in
the
early
198
0s to
add
ress
co
nges
tion
and
safe
ty is
sues
on
this
hea
vily
trav
eled
road
. R
esid
ents
fear
ed th
at th
e w
iden
ed ro
ad, w
hich
ser
ves
as a
n im
porta
nt g
atew
ay c
onne
ctin
g do
wnt
own
Bow
ling
Gre
en to
I-65
, wou
ld b
e ov
erw
helm
ed w
ith s
trip
deve
lop-
men
t sim
ilar t
o S
cotts
ville
Roa
d to
the
north
.
Rev
ivin
g th
e pr
ojec
t in
the
mid
-199
0s, C
abin
et d
istri
ct e
ngin
eers
wor
ked
with
loca
l sta
keho
lder
s to
sel
ect a
new
al
ignm
ent f
or a
n ar
teria
l, re
desi
gn it
as
a fo
ur-la
ne d
ivid
ed b
oule
vard
, ena
ct la
nd u
se p
rote
ctio
ns a
long
the
alig
nmen
t th
roug
h a
zoni
ng o
verla
y di
stric
t, an
d in
corp
orat
e bi
cycl
e an
d pe
dest
rian
acco
mm
odat
ions
into
the
desi
gn.
The
over
lay
dist
rict,
writ
ten
by th
e ci
ty a
nd c
ount
y pl
anni
ng c
omm
issi
on, s
peci
fies
allo
wab
le u
ses,
bui
ldin
g de
sign
and
la
ndsc
apin
g fe
atur
es, a
nd c
onne
ctio
ns to
the
road
way
and
the
shar
ed-u
se p
ath.
The
com
bina
tion
of d
esig
n ch
ange
s an
d la
nd u
se p
rote
ctio
ns a
llow
ed th
e pr
ojec
t to
mov
e fo
rwar
d, a
nd re
cons
truct
ion
of C
emet
ery
Roa
d w
as
com
plet
ed in
200
4.
Kent
ucky
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Ca
bine
t
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k E-
4
App
endi
x E
Land
Use
Stra
tegi
es fo
r Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Co
rrid
ors:
Exa
mpl
es fr
om O
ther
Sta
tes
(con
tinue
d)
New
Jer
sey
– C
orrid
or P
lann
ing
Inte
grat
es T
rans
port
atio
n an
d La
nd U
se
The
New
Jer
sey
Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n (N
JDO
T) is
und
erta
king
nin
e co
rrido
r pla
nnin
g pi
lot s
tudi
es th
roug
h-ou
t the
Sta
te.
The
corri
dors
invo
lve
arte
rial r
oads
of t
wo
to 3
0 m
iles
in le
ngth
with
con
gest
ion
and/
or s
afet
y pr
ob-
lem
s. T
he c
orrid
or s
tudi
es a
re a
ddre
ssin
g no
t jus
t the
road
way
itse
lf, b
ut a
lso
loca
l stre
et n
etw
orks
that
inte
rface
w
ith th
e ar
teria
l roa
dway
as
wel
l as
adja
cent
land
use
pat
tern
s. I
n ea
ch c
ase,
the
Dep
artm
ent i
s w
orki
ng w
ith lo
cal
juris
dict
ions
to a
ddre
ss c
ircul
atio
n sy
stem
s, a
cces
s m
anag
emen
t, an
d la
nd u
se in
the
corri
dor.
A s
igni
fican
t obj
ec-
tive
of th
e co
rrido
r stu
dies
is to
find
sol
utio
ns to
tran
spor
tatio
n pr
oble
ms
that
are
less
cap
ital-i
nten
sive
than
bui
ldin
g m
ulti-
lane
and
lim
ited-
acce
ss h
ighw
ays,
as
NJD
OT
has
real
ized
that
ther
e is
no
way
it c
an fu
nd a
ll of
the
stat
ewid
e ca
pita
l im
prov
emen
ts th
at h
ave
been
stu
died
or p
lann
ed th
roug
hout
the
Stat
e.
The
Dep
artm
ent’s
pilo
t stu
dies
are
brin
ging
in s
peci
alis
ts to
hel
p co
mm
uniti
es re
shap
e th
eir l
and
use
and
stre
et
netw
ork
patte
rns.
The
Dep
artm
ent i
s on
ly fu
ndin
g st
udie
s in
com
mun
ities
, tho
ugh,
that
hav
e ex
pres
sed
a w
illin
g-ne
ss to
wor
k w
ith th
e D
epar
tmen
t to
incl
ude
land
use
stra
tegi
es a
s pa
rt of
the
solu
tion
set.
In T
rent
on, f
or e
xam
ple,
th
e S
tate
is w
orki
ng w
ith th
e ci
ty o
n th
e re
desi
gn o
f Rou
te 2
9, th
e R
iver
front
Par
kway
, cur
rent
ly a
four
-lane
free
way
w
allin
g of
f the
dow
ntow
n fro
m th
e D
elaw
are
Riv
er.
The
city
wou
ld li
ke to
con
vert
the
high
way
to a
bou
leva
rd a
nd
real
ign
it to
redu
ce im
pact
s on
the
dow
ntow
n. T
he S
tate
has
indi
cate
d its
willi
ngne
ss to
pur
sue
the
proj
ect,
but o
nly
as lo
ng a
s th
e ci
ty u
nder
take
s la
nd u
se a
nd lo
cal r
oad
netw
ork
plan
ning
in c
onju
nctio
n w
ith th
e st
ate
high
way
re
desi
gn.
Wes
t Virg
inia
– P
utna
m C
ount
y A
dopt
s a
Cor
ridor
Lan
d U
se P
lan
In ru
ral P
utna
m C
ount
y, W
est V
irgin
ia, t
he c
ount
y le
d th
e de
velo
pmen
t of a
cor
ridor
land
use
pla
n to
acc
ompa
ny th
e pl
anne
d w
iden
ing
and
real
ignm
ent o
f U.S
. 35
thro
ugh
the
coun
ty, w
hich
wou
ld a
ddre
ss s
afet
y an
d ca
paci
ty p
rob-
lem
s on
a m
ajor
truc
k ro
ute.
Cou
nty
offic
ials
exp
ecte
d th
at th
e pr
ojec
t, in
con
junc
tion
with
pla
nned
util
ity e
xpan
-si
ons,
wou
ld re
sult
in a
dditi
onal
sca
ttere
d de
velo
pmen
t tha
t wou
ld th
reat
en s
carc
e pr
ime
agric
ultu
ral l
and
in th
e riv
er
valle
y an
d ch
ange
the
exis
ting
rura
l cha
ract
er o
f dev
elop
men
t. T
hrou
gh a
pub
lic in
volv
emen
t pro
cess
, the
cou
nty
deve
lope
d a
com
mun
ity-s
uppo
rted
plan
for t
he c
orrid
or th
at w
ould
con
cent
rate
com
mer
cial
dev
elop
men
t aro
und
inte
rcha
nges
and
in s
peci
fic in
dust
rial d
evel
opm
ent a
reas
, whi
le li
miti
ng d
evel
opm
ent o
utsi
de o
f the
se a
reas
to ru
ral
dens
ities
and
use
s. T
he c
ount
y ha
s si
nce
adop
ted
zoni
ng c
onsi
sten
t with
this
pla
n. T
he p
roje
ct is
esp
ecia
lly n
ote-
wor
thy
beca
use
it re
pres
ents
the
first
app
licat
ion
of z
onin
g in
this
rura
l are
a.
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k E-
5
App
endi
x E
Land
Use
Stra
tegi
es fo
r Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Co
rrid
ors:
Exa
mpl
es fr
om O
ther
Sta
tes
(con
tinue
d)
Wis
cons
in –
Wis
DO
T Pa
rtic
ipat
es in
Loc
al C
ompr
ehen
sive
Pla
nnin
g To
pre
serv
e m
obili
ty a
nd s
afet
y, e
nsur
e en
viro
nmen
tal p
rote
ctio
n, a
nd s
uppo
rt st
ate-
led
smar
t gro
wth
effo
rts, t
he
Wis
cons
in D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
porta
tion
(Wis
DO
T) h
as b
egun
ove
r the
pas
t fiv
e to
10
year
s to
wor
k w
ith c
omm
uni-
ties
on la
nd u
se is
sues
, im
prov
ing
the
linka
ge b
etw
een
trans
porta
tion
plan
ning
, pro
ject
dev
elop
men
t, an
d la
nd u
se
deci
sion
-mak
ing.
Wis
DO
T’s
appr
oach
has
larg
ely
focu
sed
on o
utre
ach
to lo
cal c
omm
uniti
es w
ithin
the
corri
dor
plan
ning
pro
cess
as
wel
l as
with
in e
ach
com
mun
ity’s
com
preh
ensi
ve p
lann
ing
proc
ess.
The
age
ncy
does
not
hav
e fo
rmal
aut
horit
y to
par
ticip
ate
in th
e lo
cal p
lann
ing
proc
ess,
but
they
are
wor
king
to b
uild
rela
tions
hips
with
com
mu-
nitie
s in
ord
er to
be
able
to p
rovi
de in
put o
n an
info
rmal
bas
is.
Dis
trict
sta
ff ar
e pr
ovid
ed w
ith in
form
atio
n on
the
stat
us o
f loc
al c
ompr
ehen
sive
pla
n de
velo
pmen
t in
thei
r are
as a
nd
are
enco
urag
ed to
wor
k w
ith lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts to
pro
vide
inpu
t int
o th
ese
effo
rts.
(Sta
te le
gisl
atio
n pa
ssed
in 1
999
requ
ires
com
mun
ities
to a
dopt
com
preh
ensi
ve p
lans
and
est
ablis
hes
a tra
ckin
g sy
stem
to m
onito
r pla
n de
velo
p-m
ent.)
For
exa
mpl
e, a
s pa
rt of
a c
orrid
or p
lann
ing
proc
ess
for S
tate
Hig
hway
21,
an
impo
rtant
eas
t-wes
t cor
ridor
co
nnec
ting
Lake
Win
neba
go a
nd th
e Fo
x V
alle
y to
wes
tern
des
tinat
ions
, Wis
DO
T D
istri
ct 3
sta
ff ha
ve w
orke
d w
ith
com
mun
ities
alo
ng th
e hi
ghw
ay to
ens
ure
that
pro
tect
ions
are
impl
emen
ted
to c
onta
in s
trip
com
mer
cial
dev
elop
men
t an
d to
pre
serv
e rig
ht-o
f-way
for f
utur
e ex
pans
ion
or re
alig
nmen
t. In
the
Tow
n of
Om
ro, w
est o
f Osh
kosh
, Wis
DO
T st
aff a
ttend
ed lo
cal p
lann
ing
mee
tings
and
revi
ewed
and
com
men
ted
on d
rafts
of t
he to
wn’
s co
mpr
ehen
sive
pla
n.
In it
s ad
opte
d pl
an, t
he to
wn
rese
rved
righ
t-of-w
ay fo
r a li
mite
d-ac
cess
byp
ass
of th
e to
wn,
iden
tifie
d pa
ralle
l and
lo
cal s
treet
con
nect
ions
, and
reco
mm
ende
d zo
ning
aro
und
inte
rcha
nges
to s
uppo
rt co
mm
erci
al d
evel
opm
ent.
For f
urth
er in
form
atio
n, s
ee:
• W
isD
OT
– ht
tp://
ww
w.d
ot.w
isco
nsin
.gov
/loca
lgov
/land
/
• S
tate
Hig
hway
21
Cor
ridor
Stu
dy –
http
://w
ww
.dot
.wis
cons
in.g
ov/p
roje
cts/
d3/in
dex.
htm
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
F-1
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
Exam
ples
of C
orrid
or S
tudi
es a
nd M
anag
emen
t Pla
ns
Verm
ont
Bur
lingt
on-E
ssex
Cor
ridor
. D
MJM
+Har
ris, e
t al.
Bur
lingt
on-E
ssex
Cor
ridor
Alte
rnat
ives
Ana
lysi
s. P
repa
red
for
Chi
ttend
en C
ount
y M
PO
, Bur
lingt
on, V
T, 2
001.
http
://w
ww
.ccm
po.o
rg/V
T15/
U.S
. Rou
te 7
, Win
oosk
i-Geo
rgia
. O
man
Ana
lytic
s, e
t al.
U.S
. Rou
te 7
Win
oosk
i to
Geo
rgia
Cor
ridor
Stu
dy:
Cor
ridor
Tra
nspo
rt Pl
an.
Pre
pare
d fo
r Chi
ttend
en C
ount
y M
PO, 2
001.
http
://w
ww
.ccm
po.o
rg/U
S7/
VT 1
5, J
eric
ho-H
ardw
ick.
Res
ourc
e S
yste
ms
Gro
up, I
nc.
VT 1
5 –
Jeric
ho to
Har
dwic
k C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Pl
an.
Pre
pare
d fo
r Lam
oille
Cou
nty
Pla
nnin
g C
omm
issi
on a
nd C
hitte
nden
Cou
nty
MP
O, 2
004.
ht
tp://
ww
w.c
cmpo
.org
/Lib
rary
File
s/ o
r http
://w
ww
.lcpc
vt.o
rg/
VT 1
00, W
ater
bury
-Mor
risto
wn.
Res
ourc
e S
yste
ms
Gro
up, I
nc.
VT 1
00 A
cces
s M
anag
emen
t Pla
n. P
repa
red
for
Lam
oille
Cou
nty
Plan
ning
Com
mis
sion
and
Cen
tral V
erm
ont R
egio
nal P
lann
ing
Com
mis
sion
, 200
4.
http
://w
ww
.lcpc
vt.o
rg/
VT 3
0, B
rattl
ebor
o-W
inha
ll. W
indh
am R
egio
nal P
lann
ing
Com
mis
sion
. Ve
rmon
t Rou
te 3
0 C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t St
udy,
199
9.
Oth
er S
tate
s M
ichi
gan
– U
.S. 3
1. T
he N
orth
wes
t Mic
higa
n C
ounc
il of
Gov
ernm
ents
dev
elop
ed a
Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent P
lan
for
U.S
. 31
in M
anis
tee
Cou
nty.
The
pla
n in
clud
es re
com
men
datio
ns to
man
age
grow
th, r
educ
e co
nges
tion,
enh
ance
sa
fety
, im
prov
e ro
adw
ay c
apac
ity, c
onso
lidat
e an
d el
imin
ate
driv
eway
s, im
prov
e in
ters
ectio
ns, i
mpr
ove
driv
eway
co
nfig
urat
ion
and
spac
ing,
enh
ance
non
-mot
oriz
ed tr
avel
, and
man
age
acce
ss in
the
corr
idor
. ht
tp://
ww
w.n
wm
.org
/Com
mun
ity/U
S31
Cor
ridor
/
Min
neso
ta –
Tru
nk H
ighw
ay 6
1. T
his
30-m
ile, t
wo-
lane
road
way
cor
ridor
alo
ng th
e M
issi
ssip
pi R
iver
and
Lak
e P
epin
con
nect
s to
four
-lane
seg
men
ts o
n ei
ther
end
. Th
e H
ighw
ay 6
1 C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Stu
dy, a
repo
rt id
entif
ying
tran
spor
tatio
n ne
eds
and
plan
ning
opt
ions
from
Wab
asha
to R
ed W
ing,
was
com
plet
ed in
Apr
il 20
03.
http
://w
ww
.dot
.sta
te.m
n.us
/d6/
proj
ects
/hw
y61/
Nor
th C
arol
ina.
The
Nor
th C
arol
ina
Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n is
und
erta
king
a s
erie
s of
stra
tegi
c hi
ghw
ay c
or-
ridor
stu
dies
that
are
add
ress
ing
trans
porta
tion
and
land
use
issu
es.
http
://w
ww
.ncd
ot.o
rg/p
lann
ing/
tpb/
SH
C/d
ocum
ents
/
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k F-
2
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
(con
tinue
d)
Rel
ated
Ver
mon
t Pol
icie
s, G
uide
lines
, and
Res
ourc
es
VTra
ns L
ong-
Ran
ge T
rans
port
atio
n Pl
an (L
RTP
) and
Mod
al P
olic
y Pl
ans
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion.
Ver
mon
t Lon
g-R
ange
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Pl
an, 2
002.
ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/pl
anni
ng/s
tudi
es.h
tm
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion.
Ver
mon
t’s H
ighw
ay S
yste
m P
olic
y Pl
an, 2
004.
Ver
mon
t Sys
tem
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n S
tudi
es, i
nclu
ding
Airp
ort S
yste
m P
olic
y Pl
an (1
998)
, Rai
l Pol
icy
Plan
(199
8), a
nd
Pub
lic T
rans
it P
olic
y P
lan
(200
0):
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
plan
ning
/stu
dies
.htm
Stat
e Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Impr
ovem
ent P
rogr
am (S
TIP)
V
erm
ont A
genc
y of
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n. S
tate
wid
e Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Impr
ovem
ent P
rogr
am F
FY04
. ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/N
ewsP
ub.h
tm
Cap
ital P
rogr
am a
nd P
roje
ct D
evel
opm
ent P
lan
V
erm
ont A
genc
y of
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n. C
apita
l Pro
gram
and
Pro
ject
Dev
elop
men
t Pla
n F
Y 2
005.
ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/N
ewsP
ub.h
tm
Proj
ect D
evel
opm
ent P
roce
ss
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion
Pro
ject
Dev
elop
men
t Pro
cess
. ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/pr
ogde
v/S
ectio
ns/P
DM
anua
l/01m
anta
bl.h
tm
Des
ign
Gui
delin
es a
nd S
tand
ards
C
hitte
nden
Cou
nty
Reg
iona
l Pla
nnin
g C
omm
issi
on.
Tran
sit-O
rient
ed D
esig
n (T
OD
) for
Chi
ttend
en C
ount
y –
Gui
delin
es fo
r Pla
nner
s, P
olic
y-m
aker
s, D
evel
oper
s, a
nd R
esid
ents
. Fi
rst E
ditio
n, M
arch
200
2.
http
://w
ww
.ccr
pcvt
.org
/ (c
lick
on P
ublic
atio
ns fo
r lin
k to
this
doc
umen
t)
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion.
Pro
gram
Dev
elop
men
t Man
uals
, Gui
delin
es a
nd P
ublic
atio
ns
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
prog
dev/
Pro
gdev
.htm
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion.
Sta
te D
esig
n St
anda
rds.
199
7.
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
prog
dev/
stan
dard
s/st
atab
ta.h
tm
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k F-
3
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
(con
tinue
d)
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion.
Ped
estri
an a
nd B
icyc
le F
acilit
y Pl
anni
ng a
nd D
esig
n M
anua
l. 2
002.
ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/pr
ogde
v/D
ocum
ents
/LTF
/Fin
alP
edes
trian
And
Bic
ycle
Faci
lity/
Ped
Bike
TOC
.htm
l
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of T
rans
porta
tion.
Tra
ffic
Cal
min
g St
udy
and
Appr
oval
Pro
cess
for S
tate
Hig
hway
s. 2
003.
ht
tp://
ww
w.a
ot.s
tate
.vt.u
s/pl
anni
ng/D
ocum
ents
/Tra
fficC
alm
ing.
Ver
mon
t Dep
artm
ent o
f Hou
sing
and
Com
mun
ity A
ffairs
. Ve
rmon
t Int
erst
ate
Inte
rcha
nge
Plan
ning
and
D
evel
opm
ent D
esig
n G
uide
lines
. 20
04.
http
://w
ww
.dhc
a.st
ate.
vt.u
s/P
lann
ing/
Inte
rsta
teIn
terc
hang
e.ht
m
Acc
ess
Man
agem
ent P
olic
ies
and
Plan
s V
erm
ont A
genc
y of
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n. V
erm
ont A
cces
s M
anag
emen
t. 2
004.
http
://w
ww
.vta
cces
sman
agem
ent.i
nfo/
Ass
et M
anag
emen
t Pol
icie
s an
d Pr
ogra
ms
C
ambr
idge
Sys
tem
atic
s, In
c. V
Tran
s As
set M
anag
emen
t Vis
ion
and
Wor
k Pl
an.
Pre
pare
d fo
r Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of
Tran
spor
tatio
n, 2
002.
http
://w
ww
.aot
.sta
te.v
t.us/
plan
ning
/Doc
umen
ts/V
Tran
s%20
Ass
et%
20M
gmnt
%20
VW.p
df
Stat
e La
nd U
se P
olic
ies
and
Com
mun
ity P
lann
ing
Ver
mon
t Age
ncy
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
. R
ipar
ian
Buffe
r Gui
danc
e. 2
005.
ht
tp://
ww
w.a
nr.s
tate
.vt.u
s/si
te/h
tml/b
uff/b
uffe
r-fin
al-2
005.
Ver
mon
t Dep
artm
ent o
f Hou
sing
and
Com
mun
ity A
ffairs
. Ve
rmon
t Int
erst
ate
Inte
rcha
nge
Plan
ning
and
D
evel
opm
ent D
esig
n G
uide
lines
. 20
04.
http
://w
ww
.dhc
a.st
ate.
vt.u
s/P
lann
ing/
Inte
rsta
teIn
terc
hang
e.ht
m
Act 2
50 –
Sta
te L
and
Use
and
Dev
elop
men
t Pla
ns (T
itle
10 V
SA C
hapt
er 1
51).
Ver
mon
t Env
ironm
enta
l Boa
rd,
http
://w
ww
.sta
te.v
t.us/
envb
oard
/sta
tute
.htm
Verm
ont M
unic
ipal
Pla
nnin
g an
d D
evel
opm
ent A
ct (T
itle
24 V
SA C
hapt
er 1
17).
ht
tp://
ww
w.le
g.st
ate.
vt.u
s/st
atut
es/s
ectio
ns.c
fm?T
itle=
24&
Cha
pter
=117
Ver
mon
t Dep
artm
ent o
f Hou
sing
and
Com
mun
ity A
ffairs
, Pla
nnin
g D
ivis
ion.
ht
tp://
ww
w.d
hca.
stat
e.vt
.us/
Plan
ning
/pub
licat
ions
.htm
Ver
mon
t Pla
nnin
g In
form
atio
n C
ente
r. h
ttp://
ww
w.v
pic.
info
/
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k F-
4
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
(con
tinue
d)
Cor
ridor
Pla
nnin
g G
uide
book
s an
d R
efer
ence
s
Nat
iona
l Gui
danc
e Sm
ith, S
teve
n A.
Gui
debo
ok fo
r Tra
nspo
rtatio
n C
orrid
or S
tudi
es:
A Pr
oces
s fo
r Effe
ctiv
e D
ecis
ion-
Mak
ing.
N
atio
nal C
oope
rativ
e H
ighw
ay R
esea
rch
Pro
gram
(NC
HR
P) R
epor
t 435
, Nat
iona
l Aca
dem
y P
ress
, Was
hing
ton,
D
.C.,
1999
.
Tran
spor
tatio
n R
esea
rch
Boa
rd.
Gui
danc
e fo
r Im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e AA
SHTO
Stra
tegi
c H
ighw
ay S
afet
y Pl
an
Tran
spor
tatio
n R
esea
rch.
Nat
iona
l Coo
pera
tive
Hig
hway
Res
earc
h P
rogr
am (N
CH
RP
) Rep
ort 5
00, V
olum
es 1
–13.
N
atio
nal A
cade
my
Pre
ss, W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.,
2003
-200
4.
Willi
ams,
Chr
istin
e N
. C
oope
rativ
e Ag
reem
ents
for C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t. N
atio
nal C
oope
rativ
e H
ighw
ay R
esea
rch
Pro
gram
(NC
HR
P) S
ynth
esis
Rep
ort 3
37, T
rans
porta
tion
Res
earc
h B
oard
, Was
hing
ton,
D.C
., 20
04.
Idah
o Id
aho
Tran
spor
tatio
n D
epar
tmen
t. Id
aho
Cor
ridor
Pla
nnin
g G
uide
book
. B
oise
, ID
, 199
8.
http
://w
ww
.itd.
idah
o.go
v/pl
anni
ng/re
ports
/cor
rpla
n/co
orgu
id.p
df
Del
awar
e D
elaw
are
Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n. C
orrid
or C
apac
ity P
rese
rvat
ion
Prog
ram
Gui
de.
http
://w
ww
.del
dot.n
et/s
tatic
/pub
s_fo
rms/
man
uals
/cor
r_ca
p/to
c.ht
ml
Del
awar
e D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
porta
tion.
Rou
te 4
0 C
orrid
or Im
prov
emen
ts:
2001
Cor
ridor
Mon
itorin
g an
d Tr
igge
ring
Prog
ram
Rep
ort,
2002
. ht
tp://
ww
w.d
eldo
t.net
/sta
tic/p
roje
cts/
rt40/
page
s/20
yrlrp
/200
1cor
ridor
repo
rt.ht
m
Flor
ida
W
illiam
s, K
ristin
e M
., an
d M
arga
ret A
. Mar
shal
l. M
anag
ing
Cor
ridor
Dev
elop
men
t: A
Mun
icip
al H
andb
ook.
Cen
ter
for U
rban
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n R
esea
rch,
199
6. h
ttp://
ww
w.c
utr.u
sf.e
du/re
sear
ch/a
cces
s_m
/ada
70/c
orrid
or.p
df
Ken
tuck
y
Blu
egra
ss T
omor
row
and
Gla
tting
Jac
kson
Ker
cher
Ang
lin L
opez
Rin
ehar
t, In
c. B
lueg
rass
Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent
Plan
ning
Han
dboo
k. P
repa
red
for K
entu
cky
Tran
spor
tatio
n C
abin
et, 2
000.
ht
tp://
ww
w.k
ytc.
stat
e.ky
.us/
Mul
timod
al/A
cces
s.as
p
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k F-
5
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
(con
tinue
d)
Ohi
o O
hio
Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n. P
roje
ct D
evel
opm
ent P
roce
ss M
anua
l. 2
004.
http
://w
ww
.dot
.sta
te.o
h.us
/pdp
/
Ore
gon
Ore
gon
Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n. M
ain
Stre
et…
Whe
n a
Hig
hway
Run
s Th
roug
h It:
A H
andb
ook
for O
rego
n C
omm
uniti
es.
1999
. ht
tp://
egov
.ore
gon.
gov/
LCD
/TG
M/d
ocs/
mai
nstre
et.p
df
Land
Use
and
Gro
wth
Man
agem
ent S
trat
egie
s
Are
ndt,
Ran
dall
G.
Rur
al b
y D
esig
n. A
PA P
lann
ers
Pre
ss, C
hica
go, I
L, 1
994.
Dan
iels
, Tho
mas
L.;
John
W. K
elle
r and
Mar
k B.
Lap
ping
. Sm
all T
own
Plan
ning
Han
dboo
k. A
PA
Pla
nner
s Pr
ess,
C
hica
go, I
L, 1
995.
Kel
ly, E
ric D
. M
anag
ing
Com
mun
ity G
row
th:
Polic
ies,
Tec
hniq
ues,
and
Impa
cts.
Pra
eger
, 199
4.
Nel
son,
Arth
ur C
., an
d Ja
mes
B. D
unca
n. G
row
th M
anag
emen
t Prin
cipl
es a
nd P
ract
ices
. A
PA P
lann
ers
Pre
ss,
Chi
cago
, IL,
199
5.
Smar
t Gro
wth
Net
wor
k an
d In
tern
atio
nal C
ity/C
ount
y M
anag
emen
t Ass
ocia
tion.
Get
ting
to S
mar
t Gro
wth
: 10
0 Po
licie
s fo
r Im
plem
enta
tion,
and
Get
ting
to S
mar
t Gro
wth
II:
100
Mor
e Po
licie
s fo
r Im
plem
enta
tion.
ht
tp://
ww
w.e
pa.g
ov/s
mar
tgro
wth
/get
ting_
to_s
g2.h
tm o
r http
://w
ww
.sm
artg
row
th.o
rg/li
brar
y/
Ver
mon
t Dep
artm
ent o
f Hou
sing
and
Com
mun
ity A
ffairs
, Pla
nnin
g D
ivis
ion.
ht
tp://
ww
w.d
hca.
stat
e.vt
.us/
Plan
ning
/pub
licat
ions
.htm
Ver
mon
t Pla
nnin
g In
form
atio
n C
ente
r. h
ttp://
ww
w.v
pic.
info
/
Publ
ic In
volv
emen
t Met
hods
C
hitte
nden
Cou
nty
Met
ropo
litan
Pla
nnin
g O
rgan
izat
ion.
Pub
lic In
volv
emen
t Pla
n.
http
://w
ww
.ccm
po.o
rg/g
etin
volv
ed/p
ubin
volv
emen
t/pip
.htm
l
Fede
ral H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istra
tion.
Pub
lic In
volv
emen
t Tec
hniq
ues
for T
rans
porta
tion
Dec
isio
n-M
akin
g. P
ublic
atio
n N
o. F
HW
A-P
D-9
6-03
1, 1
996.
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/repo
rts/p
ittd/
cove
r.htm
Fede
ral H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istra
tion.
Too
l Kit
for I
nteg
ratin
g Tr
ansp
orta
tion
and
Land
Use
Dec
isio
n-M
akin
g.
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/pla
nnin
g/la
ndus
e/in
dex.
htm
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent C
omm
issi
on.
Parti
cipa
tion
Tool
s fo
r Bet
ter C
omm
unity
and
Lan
d U
se P
lann
ing.
ht
tp://
ww
w.lg
c.or
g/fre
epub
/land
_use
/par
ticip
atio
n_to
ols/
inde
x.ht
ml
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k F-
6
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
(con
tinue
d)
Nat
iona
l Par
k S
ervi
ce.
Publ
ic P
artic
ipat
ion
in H
isto
ric P
rese
rvat
ion
Plan
ning
. ht
tp://
ww
w.c
r.nps
.gov
/hps
/pad
/Pla
nCom
pan/
Pub
licP
artic
/
Uni
vers
ity o
f Ver
mon
t, C
ente
r for
Rur
al S
tudi
es.
Citi
zen
Parti
cipa
tion
Stra
tegi
es fo
r Mun
icip
al P
lann
ing
in V
erm
ont.
V
erm
ont P
lann
ing
Info
rmat
ion
Cen
ter,
http
://w
ww
.vpi
c.in
fo/e
dtra
inin
g/ci
tpar
t.htm
Virg
inia
Tec
h U
nive
rsity
, Dep
artm
ent o
f Urb
an A
ffairs
and
Pla
nnin
g. P
artn
ersh
ips
and
Parti
cipa
tion
in P
lann
ing.
ht
tp://
ww
w.u
ap.v
t.edu
/cdr
om/
Ver
mon
t Dan
ville
Pro
ject
web
site
: ht
tp://
ww
w.d
anvi
llepr
ojec
t.com
GIS
Too
ls
Com
mun
ity B
uild
-Out
Ana
lysi
s To
ol.
Uni
vers
ity o
f Ver
mon
t – C
ente
r for
Rur
al S
tudi
es.
http
://cr
s.uv
m.e
du/c
pdp/
build
out/;
Com
mun
ityV
iz.
http
://w
ww
.com
mun
ityvi
z.co
m/.
App
lied
to in
terc
hang
e ar
ea in
Ran
dolp
h, V
erm
ont
ww
w.c
omm
unity
viz.
com
/dow
nloa
ds/re
sour
ce%
20lib
rary
/ cas
e%20
stud
ies/
Ran
dolp
h,%
20V
T.pd
f
PLA
CE
3 S.
http
://w
ww
.ene
rgy.
ca.g
ov/p
lace
s/
Smar
t Gro
wth
Inde
x. h
ttp://
ww
w.e
pa.g
ov/s
mar
tgro
wth
/topi
cs/s
g_in
dex.
htm
Wha
t-If t
ool.
http
://w
ww
.wha
t-if-p
ss.c
om/
Ana
lytic
al M
etho
ds a
nd D
ata
Sour
ces
Cen
ter f
or R
ural
Mas
sach
uset
ts.
Man
ual o
f Bui
ld-O
ut A
naly
sis,
199
0.
http
://w
ww
.um
ass.
edu/
larp
/crm
/pas
tpub
licat
ions
.htm
l
Dow
ling,
Ric
hard
G.
Plan
ning
Tec
hniq
ues
to E
stim
ate
Spee
ds a
nd S
ervi
ce V
olum
es fo
r Pla
nnin
g Ap
plic
atio
ns.
Nat
iona
l Coo
pera
tive
Hig
hway
Res
earc
h P
rogr
am (N
CH
RP
) Rep
ort 3
87, N
atio
nal A
cade
my
Pre
ss, W
ashi
ngto
n,
D.C
., 19
97.
Fede
ral H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istra
tion.
Sce
nario
Pla
nnin
g w
eb s
ite.
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/pla
nnin
g/sc
enpl
an/
Fede
ral H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istra
tion.
Too
l Kit
for I
nteg
ratin
g Tr
ansp
orta
tion
and
Land
Use
Dec
isio
n-M
akin
g.
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/pla
nnin
g/la
ndus
e/in
dex.
htm
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k F-
7
App
endi
x F
Add
ition
al R
esou
rces
(con
tinue
d)
Glu
ck, J
erom
e S.
, Her
bert
S. L
evin
son,
and
Ver
gil G
. Sto
ver.
Impa
cts
of A
cces
s M
anag
emen
t Tec
hniq
ues.
N
atio
nal C
oope
rativ
e H
ighw
ay R
esea
rch
Pro
gram
(NC
HR
P) R
epor
t 420
, Nat
iona
l Aca
dem
y P
ress
, Was
hing
ton,
D
.C.,
1999
.
Inst
itute
of T
rans
porta
tion
Eng
inee
rs.
Trip
Gen
erat
ion,
7th E
ditio
n. W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.,
2001
.
Loui
s B
erge
r & A
ssoc
iate
s, In
c. G
uida
nce
for E
stim
atin
g th
e In
dire
ct E
ffect
s of
Pro
pose
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Proj
ects
. N
atio
nal C
oope
rativ
e H
ighw
ay R
esea
rch
Pro
gram
(NC
HR
P) R
epor
t 403
, Nat
iona
l Aca
dem
y P
ress
, Was
hing
ton,
D
.C.,
2004
.
Par
sons
Brin
cker
hoff
Qua
de a
nd D
ougl
as, I
nc.
Land
Use
Impa
cts
of T
rans
porta
tion:
A G
uide
book
. N
atio
nal
Coo
pera
tive
Hig
hway
Res
earc
h P
rogr
am (N
CH
RP
) Rep
ort 4
03, N
atio
nal A
cade
my
Pre
ss, W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.,
1999
.
Tran
sit C
oope
rativ
e R
esea
rch
Pro
gram
. Tr
avel
er R
espo
nse
to T
rans
porta
tion
Syst
em C
hang
es:
Tran
sit
Coo
pera
tive
Res
earc
h P
rogr
am (T
CR
P) R
epor
t 95
Cha
pter
s 1-
18, N
atio
nal R
esea
rch
Cou
ncil,
Was
hing
ton,
D.C
., 20
04.
Tran
spor
tatio
n R
esea
rch
Boa
rd.
Acce
ss M
anag
emen
t Man
ual.
Com
mitt
ee o
n A
cces
s M
anag
emen
t, Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Res
earc
h B
oard
, Was
hing
ton,
D.C
., 20
04.
Tran
spor
tatio
n R
esea
rch
Boa
rd.
Hig
hway
Cap
acity
Man
ual 2
000.
Nat
iona
l Res
earc
h C
ounc
il, W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.,
2000
.
Ve
rmon
t Cor
ridor
Man
agem
ent H
andb
ook
G-1
App
endi
x G
G
loss
ary
A
ADT
– A
nnua
l Ave
rage
Dai
ly T
raffi
c: T
he to
tal n
umbe
r of v
ehic
les
pass
ing
a fix
ed p
oint
dur
ing
a on
e-ye
ar p
erio
d,
divi
ded
by 3
65.
ADT
– Av
erag
e D
aily
Tra
ffic:
The
ave
rage
num
ber o
f veh
icle
s pa
ssin
g a
fixed
poi
nt in
a 2
4-ho
ur ti
mef
ram
e.
Acce
ss M
anag
emen
t – T
he o
ptim
izat
ion
of d
rivew
ays
and
inte
rsec
tions
to m
aint
ain
safe
ty a
t a ro
adw
ay’s
full
traffi
c-ca
rryin
g ca
paci
ty.
A ba
lanc
e be
twee
n ac
cess
to p
rope
rties
and
the
nece
ssity
to p
rese
rve
road
way
cap
acity
.
Asse
t Man
agem
ent –
A s
trate
gic
appr
oach
to m
anag
ing
trans
porta
tion
infra
stru
ctur
e –
to e
nabl
e m
ore
effe
ctiv
e re
sour
ce a
lloca
tion
and
utili
zatio
n, b
ased
upo
n qu
ality
info
rmat
ion
and
anal
yses
, to
addr
ess
faci
lity
pres
erva
tion,
op
erat
ion,
and
impr
ovem
ent.
Bui
ldou
t – T
he to
tal a
mou
nt o
f dev
elop
men
t tha
t cou
ld o
ccur
in a
n ar
ea u
nder
exi
stin
g le
gal a
nd e
nviro
nmen
tal
cons
train
ts (s
uch
as a
dopt
ed z
onin
g re
gula
tions
and
topo
grap
hica
l con
stra
ints
).
Cap
acity
– T
he v
olum
e of
veh
icle
s a
road
was
des
igne
d to
car
ry in
a u
nit o
f tim
e, s
uch
as a
n ho
ur; t
his
term
als
o ca
n be
app
lied
to tr
ansi
t or b
icyc
le/p
edes
trian
pat
hs.
Cha
nnel
izat
ion
– S
epar
atio
n of
con
flict
ing
traffi
c m
ovem
ents
into
def
ined
pat
hs o
f tra
vel t
o fa
cilit
ate
the
safe
and
or
derly
mov
emen
t of v
ehic
les,
ped
estri
ans,
and
bic
ycle
s.
Cor
ridor
– A
bro
ad g
eogr
aphi
c ba
nd c
onne
ctin
g po
pula
tion
and
empl
oym
ent c
ente
rs a
nd s
erve
d by
var
ious
tran
s-po
rtatio
n m
odes
, with
in w
hich
pas
seng
er a
nd fr
eigh
t tra
vel,
land
use
, top
ogra
phy,
env
ironm
ent,
and
othe
r cha
rac-
teris
tics
are
eval
uate
d fo
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n pu
rpos
es.
Cra
sh R
ate
– Th
e nu
mbe
r of v
ehic
ular
cra
shes
on
a gi
ven
porti
on o
f a ro
adw
ay s
yste
m d
ivid
ed b
y th
e to
tal n
umbe
r of
veh
icle
mile
s of
trav
el o
n th
at p
ortio
n of
the
syst
em d
urin
g th
e sa
me
time
perio
d –
typi
cally
exp
ress
ed a
s th
e nu
mbe
r of c
rash
es p
er m
illion
veh
icle
mile
s of
trav
el.
Cum
ulat
ive
Impa
cts
– Th
e im
pact
on
the
envi
ronm
ent w
hich
resu
lts fr
om th
e in
crem
enta
l im
pact
of a
n ac
tion
(suc
h as
a tr
ansp
orta
tion
proj
ect)
whe
n ad
ded
to o
ther
pas
t, pr
esen
t, an
d re
ason
ably
fore
seea
ble
futu
re a
ctio
ns.
Envi
ronm
enta
l Jus
tice
– Th
e po
licy
goal
of i
dent
ifyin
g an
d av
oidi
ng d
ispr
opor
tiona
te a
dver
se im
pact
s on
min
ority
an
d lo
w-in
com
e in
divi
dual
s an
d co
mm
uniti
es.
FHW
A –
The
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Fe
dera
l Hig
hway
Adm
inis
tratio
n, th
e Fe
dera
l age
ncy
resp
onsi
ble
for a
dmin
istra
tion
of F
eder
al-a
id h
ighw
ay fu
nds.
Func
tiona
l Cla
ss –
The
gro
upin
g of
stre
ets
and
high
way
s in
to c
lass
es, o
r sys
tem
s, a
ccor
ding
to th
e ch
arac
ter o
f se
rvic
e th
ey a
re in
tend
ed to
pro
vide
.
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k G
-2
App
endi
x G
G
loss
ary
(con
tinue
d)
GIS
– G
eogr
aphi
c In
form
atio
n S
yste
m.
Goa
l – A
gen
eral
sta
tem
ent o
f an
outc
ome
to b
e ac
hiev
ed o
ver t
he lo
ng te
rm.
Gro
wth
Man
agem
ent –
The
fram
ewor
k us
ed b
y co
mm
uniti
es to
mak
e in
form
ed d
ecis
ions
abo
ut h
ow a
nd w
here
th
ey g
row
.
HC
M –
Hig
hway
Cap
acity
Man
ual.
IGA
– In
terg
over
nmen
tal A
gree
men
t.
Indu
ced
Gro
wth
– D
evel
opm
ent t
hat o
ccur
s in
resp
onse
to im
prov
emen
ts m
ade
to th
e tra
nspo
rtatio
n sy
stem
, typ
i-ca
lly a
s a
resu
lt of
impr
oved
acc
essi
bilit
y or
attr
activ
enes
s of
a lo
catio
n.
Inte
rmod
al –
A tr
ansp
orta
tion
syst
em c
onne
ctin
g or
incl
udin
g di
ffere
nt m
odes
of t
rans
porta
tion.
Inte
rmod
al F
acili
ties
– Tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s su
ch a
s pa
rk-a
nd-r
ide
lots
, rai
l ter
min
als,
airp
orts
, bus
and
trai
n st
a-tio
ns, a
nd w
ater
por
ts th
at c
onne
ct d
iffer
ent m
odes
of t
rans
porta
tion,
eith
er fo
r pas
seng
er o
r fre
ight
mov
emen
t.
ITE
– In
stitu
te o
f Tra
nspo
rtatio
n E
ngin
eers
.
LOS
– Le
vel o
f Ser
vice
: Th
e cl
assi
ficat
ion
of g
ener
al tr
affic
con
ditio
ns.
The
leve
l of s
ervi
ce ra
nges
from
“A”
(the
be
st),
to “
F.”
It is
a m
easu
re o
f how
a h
ighw
ay o
r an
inte
rsec
tion
perfo
rms
in te
rms
of s
peed
, tra
vel t
ime,
free
dom
to
man
euve
r, tra
ffic
inte
rrup
tions
, and
del
ays.
LRTP
– L
ong-
Ran
ge T
rans
porta
tion
Plan
: Th
e st
atem
ent o
f the
way
s a
regi
on p
lans
to in
vest
in it
s tra
nspo
rtatio
n sy
stem
. Fe
dera
l reg
ulat
ions
requ
ire th
at M
POs
(ser
ving
urb
aniz
ed a
reas
of a
t lea
st 5
0,00
0 po
pula
tion)
dev
elop
an
RTP
that
has
at l
east
a 2
0-ye
ar h
oriz
on a
nd is
upd
ated
at l
east
eve
ry fi
ve y
ears
(thr
ee y
ears
in a
ir qu
ality
non
atta
in-
men
t and
mai
nten
ance
are
as).
MO
U –
Mem
oran
dum
of U
nder
stan
ding
.
MPO
– M
etro
polit
an P
lann
ing
Org
aniz
atio
n: T
he o
rgan
izat
iona
l ent
ity d
esig
nate
d by
law
with
lead
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r de
velo
ping
tran
spor
tatio
n pl
ans
and
prog
ram
s fo
r urb
aniz
ed a
reas
of 5
0,00
0 or
mor
e in
pop
ulat
ion.
NEP
A –
Nat
iona
l Env
ironm
enta
l Pol
icy
Act
: A
Fede
ral l
aw th
at re
quire
s ag
enci
es to
eva
luat
e an
d di
sclo
se e
nviro
n-m
enta
l im
pact
s of
pro
pose
d ac
tions
. Th
e pr
oces
s be
gins
with
an
Env
ironm
enta
l Ass
essm
ent (
EA
) to
dete
rmin
e if
an
actio
n w
ill ha
ve s
igni
fican
t im
pact
s. M
ajor
tran
spor
tatio
n pr
ojec
ts w
ill ty
pica
lly re
quire
a fu
ll E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ct
Sta
tem
ent (
EIS
).
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k G
-3
App
endi
x G
G
loss
ary
(con
tinue
d)
NH
S –
Nat
iona
l Hig
hway
Sys
tem
: A
sys
tem
of n
atio
nally
sig
nific
ant r
oadw
ays
desi
gnat
ed in
the
1991
Inte
rmod
al
Sur
face
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Ef
ficie
ncy
Act
. Th
e N
HS
incl
udes
the
Inte
rsta
te H
ighw
ay S
yste
m; o
ther
rout
es id
entif
ied
as
havi
ng s
trate
gic
defe
nse
char
acte
ristic
s; ro
utes
pro
vidi
ng a
cces
s to
maj
or p
orts
, airp
orts
, pub
lic tr
ansp
orta
tion
and
inte
rmod
al tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s; a
nd m
any
prin
cipa
l urb
an a
nd ru
ral a
rteria
ls w
hich
pro
vide
regi
onal
ser
vice
.
Obj
ectiv
e –
An
obje
ctiv
e is
rela
ted
to a
goa
l, an
d re
pres
ents
a m
ore
spec
ific,
mea
sura
ble
end
to b
e re
ache
d.
Orig
in-D
estin
atio
n Su
rvey
– A
sur
vey
of tr
avel
ers
to d
eter
min
e th
eir t
rip o
rigin
s an
d de
stin
atio
ns.
Orig
in-
dest
inat
ion
surv
eys
may
be
cond
ucte
d by
tele
phon
e or
mai
l with
in a
n ar
ea o
f int
eres
t, or
by
inte
rvie
w o
r pos
tcar
d at
sp
ecifi
c tra
nspo
rtatio
n fa
cilit
ies
of in
tere
st.
Ove
rlay
Dis
tric
t – A
dditi
onal
zon
ing
requ
irem
ents
that
are
sup
erim
pose
d up
on e
xist
ing
zoni
ng in
spe
cifie
d ar
eas
as
show
n on
a z
onin
g m
ap.
Peak
Hou
r – T
he 6
0-m
inut
e pe
riod
in th
e a.
m. o
r p.m
. in
whi
ch th
e la
rges
t vol
ume
of tr
avel
is e
xper
ienc
ed.
RFP
– R
eque
st fo
r Pro
posa
ls.
Rig
ht-o
f-Way
– L
and
used
gen
eral
ly fo
r stre
ets,
sid
ewal
ks, a
lleys
, or o
ther
pub
lic u
ses.
Rig
ht-o
f-way
als
o is
use
d to
re
fer t
o th
e di
stan
ce b
etw
een
lot p
rope
rty li
nes
whi
ch g
ener
ally
con
tain
s no
t onl
y th
e st
reet
pav
emen
t, bu
t als
o th
e si
dew
alks
, gra
ss a
rea,
and
und
ergr
ound
and
abo
vegr
ound
util
ities
.
Rip
aria
n B
uffe
r – A
stri
p of
gra
ss, s
hrub
s, a
nd/o
r tre
es a
long
the
bank
of a
rive
r or s
tream
that
filte
rs p
ollu
ted
runo
ff an
d pr
ovid
es a
tran
sitio
n zo
ne b
etw
een
wat
er a
nd h
uman
land
use
.
Roa
dway
– T
he p
ortio
n of
the
stre
et ri
ght-o
f-way
whi
ch c
onta
ins
the
stre
et p
avem
ent a
nd g
utte
r and
is u
sed
prim
ar-
ily a
s a
chan
nel f
or v
ehic
ular
mov
emen
t and
sec
onda
rily
as a
dra
inag
e ch
anne
l for
sto
rm w
ater
.
RPC
– R
egio
nal P
lann
ing
Com
mis
sion
.
RTP
– R
egio
nal T
rans
porta
tion
Plan
: Th
e st
atem
ent o
f the
way
s a
regi
on p
lans
to in
vest
in it
s tra
nspo
rtatio
n sy
s-te
m.
Fede
ral r
equi
rem
ents
app
ly to
RTP
dev
elop
men
t in
urba
nize
d ar
eas
of a
t lea
st 5
0,00
0 po
pula
tion
(see
LR
TP).
Scen
ario
Pla
nnin
g –
A fra
mew
ork
for d
evel
opin
g a
shar
ed v
isio
n fo
r the
futu
re b
y an
alyz
ing
vario
us fo
rces
(e.g
., he
alth
, tra
nspo
rtatio
n, e
cono
mic
, env
ironm
enta
l, la
nd u
se, e
tc.)
that
affe
ct g
row
th.
Sce
nario
pla
nnin
g is
a c
olla
bora
-tiv
e pr
oces
s th
at te
sts
vario
us fu
ture
alte
rnat
ives
for t
heir
abilit
y to
mee
t reg
iona
l and
com
mun
ity n
eeds
.
Scre
enin
g 1)
– T
he p
roce
ss o
f nar
row
ing
dow
n a
list o
f opt
ions
for c
onsi
dera
tion
base
d on
est
ablis
hed
crite
ria.
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k G
-4
App
endi
x G
G
loss
ary
(con
tinue
d)
Scre
enin
g 2)
– A
met
hod
of v
isua
lly s
hiel
ding
or o
bscu
ring
one
abut
ting
or n
earb
y st
ruct
ure
or u
se fr
om a
noth
er b
y fe
ncin
g, w
alls
, ber
ms
or m
ount
ing
or d
ense
ly p
lant
ed v
eget
atio
n.
Seco
ndar
y Im
pact
s –
Impa
cts
that
are
cau
sed
by a
n ac
tion
(suc
h as
a tr
ansp
orta
tion
proj
ect)
that
occ
ur la
ter i
n tim
e an
d fa
rther
rem
oved
in d
ista
nce,
but
are
stil
l for
esee
able
. Al
so k
now
n as
“in
dire
ct im
pact
s.”
Sket
ch-L
evel
Ana
lysi
s –
A q
uick
met
hod
for e
stim
atin
g th
e po
tent
ial i
mpa
cts
of a
tran
spor
tatio
n st
rate
gy, w
here
an
appr
oxim
ate,
ord
er-o
f-mag
nitu
de a
sses
smen
t is
suffi
cien
t.
Stak
ehol
der –
A p
erso
n or
org
aniz
atio
n th
at h
olds
an
inte
rest
in th
e ou
tcom
e of
a p
roje
ct o
r stu
dy.
STIP
– T
he S
tate
wid
e Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Impr
ovem
ent P
rogr
am:
A m
ulti-
year
cap
ital p
rogr
am o
f tra
nspo
rtatio
n pr
o-je
cts.
In
Ver
mon
t, th
e ST
IP in
corp
orat
es th
e TI
P fo
r the
Chi
ttend
en C
ount
y M
PO.
Stra
tegy
– A
n im
plem
enta
tion
step
take
n to
ach
ieve
a g
oal:
e.g
., “u
nder
take
saf
ety
impr
ovem
ents
at h
igh-
cras
h lo
catio
ns.”
Surf
ace
Tran
spor
tatio
n Pr
ogra
m –
A F
eder
al h
ighw
ay fu
ndin
g pr
ogra
m c
ateg
ory.
Fun
ds m
ay b
e us
ed fo
r a w
ide
varie
ty o
f pur
pose
s, in
clud
ing:
roa
dway
con
stru
ctio
n, re
cons
truct
ion,
resu
rfaci
ng, r
esto
ratio
n an
d re
habi
litat
ion;
ro
adw
ay o
pera
tiona
l im
prov
emen
ts; c
apita
l cos
ts fo
r tra
nsit
proj
ects
; hig
hway
and
tran
sit s
afet
y im
prov
emen
ts;
bicy
cle
and
pede
stria
n fa
cilit
ies;
sce
nic
and
hist
oric
al tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s; a
nd, p
rese
rvat
ion
of a
band
oned
tra
nspo
rtatio
n co
rrido
rs.
TAC
– T
echn
ical
Adv
isor
y C
omm
ittee
.
TIP
– Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Impr
ovem
ent P
rogr
am:
A fi
nanc
ially
con
stra
ined
thre
e-ye
ar p
rogr
am li
stin
g sp
ecifi
c pr
ojec
ts
and
stra
tegi
es fr
om th
e lo
ng-r
ange
tran
spor
tatio
n pl
an th
at a
re p
riorit
ized
for f
undi
ng.
By
Fede
ral r
egul
atio
n, T
IPs
mus
t be
deve
lope
d fo
r urb
aniz
ed a
reas
of a
t lea
st 5
0,00
0 po
pula
tion.
TPI –
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Pl
anni
ng In
itiat
ive:
A S
tate
of V
erm
ont i
nitia
tive
desi
gned
to in
clud
e al
l seg
men
ts o
f the
pub
lic
in p
lann
ing
impr
ovem
ents
to V
erm
ont’s
tran
spor
tatio
n sy
stem
.
Traf
fic C
alm
ing
– A
col
lect
ion
of m
easu
res
to re
duce
the
nega
tive
effe
cts
of m
otor
veh
icle
use
, alte
r driv
er b
ehav
ior
and
impr
ove
cond
ition
s fo
r non
-mot
oriz
ed s
treet
use
rs.
Traf
fic c
alm
ing
mea
sure
s in
clud
e ro
adw
ay a
ltera
tions
suc
h as
gat
eway
s, d
ivid
ing
isla
nds,
cur
b ex
tens
ions
, tex
ture
d cr
ossw
alks
, and
man
aged
acc
ess
to in
divi
dual
pro
perti
es
thro
ugh
shar
ed o
r lim
ited
curb
cut
s. S
treet
scap
e de
sign
als
o pl
ays
an im
porta
nt ro
le in
traf
fic c
alm
ing
with
en
hanc
emen
ts s
uch
as li
ghtin
g, s
igna
ge, a
nd la
ndsc
apin
g, w
hich
rein
forc
e vi
llage
cha
ract
er a
nd a
t the
sam
e tim
e,
impr
ove
aest
hetic
s an
d hu
man
com
fort.
Verm
ont C
orrid
or M
anag
emen
t Han
dboo
k G
-5
App
endi
x G
G
loss
ary
(con
tinue
d)
Trav
elsh
ed –
The
tota
l con
tribu
ting
area
that
gen
erat
es tr
ips
that
use
the
corri
dor.
Trig
ger –
The
val
ue o
f a m
easu
rabl
e in
dica
tor (
e.g.
, ave
rage
dai
ly tr
affic
, vol
ume-
to-c
apac
ity ra
tio, p
opul
atio
n de
nsity
) tha
t, w
hen
reac
hed,
will
cau
se a
set
of a
gree
d-up
on a
ctio
ns to
be
take
n (e
.g.,
cond
uct t
raffi
c st
udy)
.
Trip
Gen
erat
or –
A la
nd u
se th
at is
an
orig
in o
r des
tinat
ion
for t
rave
lers
.
Turn
ing
Mov
emen
t – A
veh
icul
ar m
ovem
ent t
hrou
gh a
n in
ters
ectio
n, d
efin
ed b
y th
e la
ne a
nd le
g fro
m w
hich
the
vehi
cle
orig
inat
es a
nd th
e la
ne a
nd le
g to
whi
ch th
e ve
hicl
e tra
vels
afte
r pas
sing
thro
ugh
the
inte
rsec
tion.
Tur
ning
m
ovem
ent c
ount
s de
term
ine
the
num
ber o
f veh
icle
s ex
ecut
ing
a gi
ven
turn
ing
mov
emen
t in
a de
fined
per
iod
of ti
me.
View
shed
– T
he a
rea
with
in v
iew
of a
def
ined
obs
erva
tion
poin
t or c
orrid
or.
VMT
– V
ehic
le M
iles
of T
rave
l: A
sta
ndar
d m
easu
re o
f tra
vel a
ctiv
ity, t
ypic
ally
cal
cula
ted
by m
ultip
lyin
g th
e av
erag
e le
ngth
of t
rip b
y th
e to
tal n
umbe
r of t
rips
(for a
n ar
ea),
or b
y m
ultip
lyin
g th
e le
ngth
of a
road
way
seg
men
t by
the
AD
T on
that
road
way
(for
a ro
adw
ay s
egm
ent).
Volu
me
– Th
e nu
mbe
r of v
ehic
les
that
pas
s th
roug
h a
give
n m
ile o
f roa
d in
a u
nit o
f tim
e su
ch a
s a
day;
this
term
al
so c
an b
e ap
plie
d to
tran
sit o
r bic
ycle
/ped
estri
an p
aths
.
VPD
– V
ehic
les
per D
ay.
V/C
– V
olum
e-ca
paci
ty ra
tio:
The
ratio
of t
he tr
affic
vol
ume
on a
road
way
to th
e ca
paci
ty o
f the
road
way
ove
r a
give
n tim
e pe
riod.