Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Not Your Grandfather's DOT: The FDOT District 5 and PennDOT Experiences--Brian Hare

634 views

Published on

Title: Not Your Grandfather's DOT: The FDOT District 5 and PennDOT Experiences
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute moderated discussion
Abstract: Today's economic realities require the rethinking of conventional transportation approaches. Learn about how Florida and Pennsylvania's Department of Transportation are using new tools, policies, and guides to proactively plan multi-modal transportation solutions.
Presenters:
Presenter: Jane Lim-Yap Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Co-Presenter: Steven Deck Parsons Brinckerhoff
Co-Presenter: Brian Hare PennDOT Program Center
Co-Presenter: Mary Raulerson Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Not Your Grandfather's DOT: The FDOT District 5 and PennDOT Experiences--Brian Hare

  1. 1. Not Your Grandfather’s DOT: The FDOT District 5 and PennDOT Experiences pro walk pro bike pro place | 9.9.2014
  2. 2. Question What best describes your area of specialty a. Land Use b. Transportation c. Economics d. All of the above e. None of the above
  3. 3. Linking Planning and NEPA: Integrating Land Use and Transportation & More… Pro Walk Pro Bike Pro Place Pittsburgh, PA September 9, 2014 Steven B. Deck, AICP Parsons Brinckerhoff Camp Hill, PA Brian D. Hare, P.E. PennDOT Program Center
  4. 4. PA Planning Framework:
  5. 5. Only 50-60% have zoning Nearly 2,600 municipalities 67 counties 24 MPOs/RPOs 11 PennDOT Engineering Districts Only county comprehensive plans required Municipalities regulate land use Land Use/Transportation Integration Challenges: Many municipalities lack full-time staff
  6. 6. PennDOT Educational Efforts:
  7. 7. 14% 4% 21% 20% 41% Adopted plan or ordinance Considered adoption of a plan or ordinance Still considering adoption of plans or ordinances Private sector - work with municipalities or counties using the training tools No action taken PennDOT Educational Outcomes:
  8. 8. Educating local officials on integrated transportation and land use Addressing community goals through transportation planning & programming Integrating regional transportation planning with localized land use management Incentivizing multimodal, non-conventional transportation solutions Building partnerships for comprehensive solutions Ongoing Integration Challenges:
  9. 9. Primary Objectives of LPN Changing the Rules Where we’ve been… Where we’re going… Content for Discussion 1 2 3 4
  10. 10. Primary Objectives of Linking Planning and NEPA 1
  11. 11. More than 4,000 of Pennsylvania’s bridges are structurally deficient. Pennsylvania ranks last in the nation in this statistic.
  12. 12. Photographer: penywise. Used through license agreement with morguefile.com Limited Financial Resources.
  13. 13. Transportation Technology is changing
  14. 14. Public Expectations are changing
  15. 15. Changing the Rules 2 “….Partnering to build great communities for future generations of Pennsylvanians by linking transportation investments and land use planning and decision making.”
  16. 16. Changing the Rules Smart Transportation Guidebook •Flexible design on all projects •Increase coordination with local municipalities •Link land use contexts and roadway design values
  17. 17. Money counts Choose projects with high value/price ratio Enhance the Local Network Look beyond level-of-service Safety first and maybe safety only Accommodate all modes Leverage and preserve existing investments Build towns not sprawl Develop local governments as strong land use partners Understand the context; plan and design within the context Land Use, Transportation & Livability Themes
  18. 18. Understand the Context in Planning Context MUST consider: Land Use Community Environment Transportation Financial Integrating the New Approach
  19. 19. Linking Planning and NEPA Where we’ve been… 3
  20. 20. • Increasing Collaboration • Earlier Collaboration • Following the Process Linking Planning and NEPA Implementation 2 1 3
  21. 21. Development of the New Process •2009 – 5 Regional Workshops •2010 – 2 Regional Summits Intensive COLLABORATION….. Linking Planning and NEPA Implementation
  22. 22. Intensive Collaboration…. Linking Planning and NEPA Implementation •15 Metropolitan Planning Organizations •8 Regional Planning Organizations •Environmental Resource Agencies •11 Engineering District Offices •Central Office Technical Staff
  23. 23. The Process Framework for Change Linking Planning with NEPA
  24. 24. FINAL PRODUCTS…..September 2010 Linking Planning and NEPA Implementation
  25. 25. Linking Planning and NEPA •LPN Goals –“Connect” Planning and NEPA –Incorporate Smart Transportation into our Process –Improved Joint Responsibility for Financial Planning –Streamline the Environmental Process –Select Best Value Projects
  26. 26. Level 2 Screening Form
  27. 27. Level 2 Screening – Environmental Data
  28. 28. Level 2 Screening – Design Criteria
  29. 29. Linking Planning and NEPA •LPN Objectives…… –Define the Purpose and Need –Better understanding of Scope –Better handle on the Schedule –Better handle on the Budget
  30. 30. Linking Planning and NEPA What we’re hearing… 4
  31. 31. 3 Years into the LPN Process •What we’re hearing… –All Districts and Planning Partners have implemented the Process –Good starting point for PM’s when assigned a project –Encourages communication between Districts and MPO/RPOs –A few Districts have met with MPO/RPOs to agree on the process of completing forms
  32. 32. 3 Years into the LPN Process •What we’re hearing… –Large amount of time up front, presumably saves time in the end –Don’t see value in having forms for every project –Straight forward rehab or replacement project should not necessarily need a form
  33. 33. 3 Years into the LPN Process •What we’re hearing… –What is the need for involving MPO/RPOs on maintenance/asset management type projects? –Many counties (esp. rural) are not involved in the process – Ped/Bike information is important to identify demand for accommodations
  34. 34. Linking Planning and NEPA Where we’re going… 5
  35. 35. Where we’re going… •Learning from our experiences •Implementing best practices •Revising the policies/practices, accordingly •Focusing on the value •Greater effort on the right projects versus minimal effort on ALL projects…
  36. 36. 2008 Transportation Planning Excellence Award 2012 National Environmental Excellence Award Category of Planning NATIONAL RECOGNITION
  37. 37. THANK YOU!

×