Contents - Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook - Publications - Pedestrian & Bicycle Program - Processes - Planni

Contents - Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook - Publications - Pedestrian & Bicycle Program - Processes - Planning - FHWA
About
FHWA Organization
Headquarters Offices
Field Offices
Careers
Business Opportunities
Staff Directories
Highway History
Programs
Acquisition Management
Federal Lands Highway
Infrastructure
Innovative Program Delivery
Operations
Planning, Environment, and Realty
Policy
Research, Development & Technology
Safety
Browse by Topics
Resources
Core Highway Topics
Federal-Aid Essentials
Automation
Publications & Statistics
Laws & Regulations
Policy & Guidance Center
Section 508
Professional Development
National Highway Institute (NHI)
Resource Center
Accessibility Resource Library
FHWA Research Library
Briefing Room
Press Releases
Speeches & Testimony
Photos
Videos
Media Contacts
Contact
Search FHWA
Office of Planning, Environment, & Realty (
HEP
Planning
Environment
Real Estate
HEP
Events
Guidance
Publications
Glossary
Awards
Contacts
Statewide
Metropolitan
Rural
Tribal
Pedestrian & Bicycle
Land Use
Tools
Authorizing Legislation
Publications
Related Links
Other Resources
Contacts
For more information, please contact
Matt Smoker
FHWA
Planning
Processes
Pedestrian & Bicycle Program
Publications
Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook
Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook
Contents
Report Notes and Acknowledgements
Executive Summary
Purpose and Approach
Key Themes
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
1. Introduction
2. Getting Started
2.1 Understand the Users of the Plan
2.2 State DOT Role
2.3 Function of the Plan
2.4 Pedestrian Plan, Bicycle Plan, or Both?
3. Institutional and Policy Analysis
3.1 Institutional Relationships
3.2 Taking Stock of Existing Policies and Plans
3.2.1 State Capital Programming
3.2.2 Metropolitan Planning Organization Long-Range Plans
3.2.3 Complete Streets
3.2.4 Project Development Process
3.2.5 Design Guidelines and Flexibility
3.2.6 Safety
3.2.7 Accessibility
4. Developing Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures
4.1 Articulating Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
4.2 Performance Management and Monitoring
4.3 When to Develop Goals and Objectives
5. Public Participation
5.1 Reasons to Involve the Public
5.2 Identifying Stakeholders
5.3 Public Involvement Methods
5.4 Documentation of Public Involvement
6. Information Base and Content
6.1 Consistency with Relevant Plans, Programs, Policies, and Processes
Federal Plans, Programs, and Policies
6.2 Existing Conditions and Trends
7. Identifying Needs and Priority Areas
7.1 Key Corridors and Priority Areas
7.2 U.S. Bicycle Route System
7.3 Network and Gap Analysis
7.4 Evaluate and Select Specific Project Locations
7.5 Recreational Routes/Trails
8. Implementation
8.1 Tying the Plan to Project Development
8.2 Explicit Roles and Timelines
8.3 Programming Funds
8.4 Benchmarking and Performance Measurement
9. Keys to Success
Appendix A: State Pedestrian and Bicycle Plans
Appendix B: Key Pedestrian and Bicycle Data Sources by Subject Area
Appendix C: Key Pedestrian and Bicycle Resources and Tools
Appendix D: Examples from State Plans
1. Prioritizing Criteria: Colorado
2. Project Selection: Areas of Concern in Hawaii
3. Inserting Nonmotorized Consideration Into the Project Development Process: Louisiana
4. Funding Local Complete Streets Projects: Washington
Acknowledgements
The project team thanks the State Departments of Transportation that participated in the development of this guidebook and their staff who graciously shared their time, knowledge, and experience:
Betsy Jacobson
Colorado DOT
Ken Tatsuguchi and Rachel Roper
Hawaii DOT
Milly Ortiz
Iowa DOT
Brian Parsons
Louisiana DOTD
Kate Sylvester and Marty Baker
Maryland DOT
Greta Alquist, Jasna Hadzic, and Tim Mitchell
Minnesota DOT
Lauren Blackburn
North Carolina DOT
Jon Kaplan
Vermont Agency of Transportation
Paula Reeves
Washington DOT
Executive Summary
Purpose and Approach
The purpose of this handbook is to help State departments of transportation (DOTs) develop or update State pedestrian and bicycle plans. Based on research including interviews with nine State DOTs and critical evaluations of plans and associated documents from 15 States (see Appendix A) this handbook covers statewide planning from plan inception and scoping to engaging stakeholders and the general public; developing goals, objectives, and strategies; collecting and analyzing data; linking to the larger statewide transportation planning process; and implementation. For each stage of the planning process, this handbook uses recent experiences and noteworthy practices from DOTs around the country, helping to inform a new generation of statewide nonmotorized planning and implementation.
Key Themes
The following themes emerged from discussions with statewide pedestrian and bicycle coordinators in early 2014. Discussions with DOTs in Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, Vermont, and Washington yielded the following key themes.
Plan Focus
Most statewide plans are policy plans
. Many States want plans that focus more on guidance and direction than lists of projects. Still, some plans identify specific corridors for statewide bicycling routes and include project scoping checklists and project prioritizing criteria.
The plan needs a clear purpose.
Many States felt it was important to think about how the results of the plan are used, beginning with the end in mind and working backwards. Planners should consider who will use it and what it will be used for; this helps to define the expectations of the process.
Planning Process
The plan is a point in time
. The plan may be prompted by legislative requirements, DOT priorities, and/or internal champions. Other plans and initiatives will follow it. Engagement, buy-in, and ownership are critical to making it a living document that influences departmental direction.
Public involvement is time intensive, but essential to a quality outcome
. Good public involvement requires significant energy and resources. If the budget does not allow many in-person meetings, webinars and interactive web tools can be effective.
Plan development can span a wide range of costs and effort
. Statewide pedestrian and bicycle planning efforts can vary widely in terms of cost and effort, from less than $100,000 to upwards of $800,000. The range depends on the level of detail, data collection, the balance between focusing on specific projects and corridors versus policy, and the degree to which the plan is developed in-house or uses outside consultants. Some States break up the planning process into multiple, discrete phases in order to help with funding.
Institutional Analysis
Internal coordination is important, especially with district engineers and people tasked with collecting data
. The State DOT staff are the people that ultimately implement the plan. Coordination is key for information exchange, education, and buy-in.
Many plans place great emphasis on coordination with the agency's project development process.
It is critical to link planning to project development, in order to ensure that the plan concepts are followed through into practice. This type of effort may relate to implementing
"Complete Streets"
policies or other design guidelines, changing internal procedures, or providing professional training internally and externally.
Performance Management
Long-term data collection for performance management should be carefully considered
. In order to successfully track plan and program performance over time, agencies must identify the right mix of accountability, ownership, and resources for long-term data collection.
The connection between performance measures and project selection criteria needs to be strengthened.
This is an emerging area in planning that some States are making progress on, but there is still much to learn about the most effective pedestrian and bicycle performance measures and how to best apply them at the statewide level.
When selecting performance measures and indicators, planners should be careful to focus on what the State DOT can control
. Performance monitoring is important for tracking progress of planning efforts and continuing to make the case for increased investments. However, planners should consider carefully the measures and indicators that they will be able to influence and track through the planning process. For instance, does the plan address bicycle facility development across the State or only on State routes? DOT plans should not rely too heavily on decisions or data collection by other entities to track the plan's success.
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Abbreviation
Term
ADA
Americans with Disabilities Act
AASHTO
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
CDOT
Colorado Department of Transportation
CSS
Context Sensitive Solutions
CTDOT
Connecticut Department of Transportation
DOT
Department of Transportation
FHWA
Federal Highway Administration
GIS
Geographic Information System
HSIP
Highway Safety Improvement Program
IDOT
Iowa Department of Transportation
ITE
Institute of Transportation Engineers
LaDOTD
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development
LRTP
Long Range Transportation Plan
MAP-21
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21
st
Century
MDOT
Maryland Department of Transportation
MnDOT
Minnesota Department of Transportation
MPO
Metropolitan Planning Organization
NACTO
National Association of City Transportation Officials
NCDOT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
NCHRP
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
RTP
Recreational Trails Program
SHSP
State Highway Safety Plan
STIP
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
TAP
Transportation Alternatives Program
TDOT
Tennessee Department of Transportation
TIP
Transportation Improvement Program
VDOT
Vermont Department of Transportation
WisDOT
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
WSDOT
Washington State Department of Transportation
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed this handbook to help State departments of transportation (DOTs) develop or update State pedestrian and bicycle plans using recent experiences and noteworthy practices from their peers. With assistance from the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe), FHWA conducted detailed interviews with 9 State DOTs and critically evaluated plans and associated documents from 15 States. This report summarizes the findings of that effort and is designed to share recent experiences and noteworthy practices in preparing and implementing pedestrian and bicycle plans.
Top
<<
< Prev
Contents
10
Next >
>>
Updated: 6/28/2017
HEP Home
Planning
Environment
Real Estate
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Web Policies & Notices
No Fear Act
Report Waste, Fraud and Abuse
U.S. DOT Home
USA.gov
WhiteHouse.gov
Federal Highway Administration
| 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000