eb
DRAFT
Regional Transportation
Plan Guidelines
Revised ------ 2007
California Transportation Commission
2007 California
Regional Transportation
Plan Guidelines
California Transportation Commission
2007 RTP Guidelines
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
2007 Regional Transportation Plan
Guidelines
Adopted by the California Transportation Commission
on September 20, 2007
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 14522
Commissioners Commission Staff
James C. Ghielmetti – Chair John Barna – Executive Director
John Chalker – Vice Chair David Brewer – Chief Deputy Director
Bob Alvarado Maura Twomey – Deputy Director
Marian Bergeson Annette Gilbertson – Assistant Deputy Director
James Earp Susan Bransen – Assoc. Deputy Director
R. Kirk Lindsey Caltrans Staff
Joseph Tavaglione Sharon Scherzinger- Supervising Trans. Planner
Carl Guardino Garth Hopkins – Senior Transportation Planner
Larry Zarian Juven Alvarez – Associate Transportation Planner
Terry Farris – Associate Transportation Planner
Senator Alan S. Lowenthal – Ex Officio
Assembly Member Pedro Nava – Ex Officio
2007 RTP Guidelines
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
Table of Contents Page #
Chapter 1 - Introduction
1.1 Why Conduct Long- Range Transportation Planning?…….………………………….. 9
1.2 Background and Purpose of the Regional Transportation Plan ( RTP)
Guidelines………………………………………………………………………………….
10
1.3 Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Regional Transportation
Planning Agencies in California……………………………………….…………………
12
1.4 Purpose of the Regional Transportation Plan..……………………………….……….. 15
1.5 California Transportation Planning and Programming Process…………….……….. 16
1.6 SAFETEA- LU Items Impacting the Development of RTPs………………….……….. 17
1.7 Key Additions to the 2007 RTP Guidelines………………….………………………… 19
Chapter 2 – Regional Transportation Plan Overview
2.1 State Requirements…………..…………………………………………………………. 23
2.2 Land Use, Scenario and Regional Blueprint Planning ……………………………… 23
2.3 Federal Requirements..………………………………….……………………………… 24
2.4 Relationship between RTP, OWP & FTIP…………………………………………….. 25
2.5 Consistency with Other Planning Documents……….……………………………….. 26
Chapter 3 – Regional Transportation Plan Contents
General
3.1 Policy, Action and Financial Elements ………………………………………………… 31
3.2 Adoption - Update Cycles and Amendments……………………………..…………… 33
3.3 RTP Checklist……………………………………………………………………………... 34
Financial
3.4 Financial Overview………………………………………………………………………. 35
3.5 Fiscal Constraint……………………..…………………………………………..……….. 37
3.6 Listing of Constrained and Un- constrained Projects………………………………….. 38
3.7 Funding Identification and Forecasting………..…..…………………………………… 39
3.8 Estimating Future Transportation Costs………………….……………………………. 40
3.9 Asset Management ……..…………………………………………...………….……….. 41
RTP Consultation/ Coordination
3.10 Consultation and Coordination………………………………………………………….. 43
3.11 Participation Plan…………………………………………………………………………. 45
3.12 Private Sector Involvement……………………………………………………………… 47
3.13 Consultation with Interested Parties……………………….…………………………… 48
3.14 Native American Tribal Government Consultation & Coordination………………….. 49
3.15 Consultation with Resource Agencies…………………………………………………. 50
3.16 Coordinated Public Transit/ Human Services Transportation Plans………………… 52
2007 RTP Guidelines
Page #
Modal Discussion
3.17 Highways, Local Streets and Roads……………………………………..…………….. 53
3.18 Transit……………………………………………………………………………………… 54
3.19 Goods Movement ( Maritime/ Rail/ Trucking/ Aviation)……………....…………………. 55
3.20 Regional Airport System…………………………………………………………………. 56
3.21 Bicycle & Pedestrian……………………………………………………………………… 56
Programming/ Operations
3.22 Transportation System Operations and Management………………………….…….. 57
3.23 Coordination with Programming Documents………………………………….……….. 58
3.24 Regionally Significant Projects …………………………………………………………. 59
3.25 Regional ITS Architecture……………………………………………………………….. 59
3.26 Performance Measures ……………………………………………………….………… 61
3.27 Transportation Safety ……………………….…...……………………………………… 63
3.28 Transportation Security ………………………….……..…………..…………………… 64
3.29 Congestion Management Process………………………...…………………………… 65
3.30 Transportation Modeling / Projecting Future Demand..…………...………………….. 67
RTP Environmental Considerations
3.31 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….………. 69
3.32 Environmental Documentation.………………………………………………………… 69
3.33 SAFETEA- LU Environmental Requirements…………………………………………. 71
3.34 SAFETEA- LU Environmental Recommendations……………………………………. 71
3.35 Key Environmental Considerations for Best Practices………………………………. 72
3.36 Project Intent Statements/ Plan Level Purpose and Need Statements…………….. 74
3.37 Air Quality and Transportation Conformity……………………………………….. ….. 75
APPENDICES
A Federal and State Transportation Planning Process Flowchart …………………… 81
B State and Federal Programming Process Flowchart………………………………… 85
C Regional Transportation Plan Checklist……………………………………………….. 89
D Title 23 CFR Part 450 Appendix A – Linking Transportation Planning
and NEPA Processes……………………………………………………………………..
95
E Integration of the Planning and NEPA Processes…………………………………….. 111
F Air Quality Conformity Checklists
1. MPO Conformity checklist …………………………………………………………
129
2. Rural Area Conformity checklist ……………….………………………………… 135
G Caltrans Regional Planning Staff Contacts …………………………………………… 141
H Glossary of Transportation Terms……………………………………..……………….. 145
2007 RTP Guidelines
Chapter 1
Introduction
2007 RTP Guidelines
8
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
9
1.1 Why Conduct Long- Range Transportation Planning?
Transportation helps shape an area’s economic health and quality of life. Not only does the
transportation system provide for the mobility of people and goods, it also influences patterns of
growth and economic activity through accessibility to land. Furthermore, the performance of this
system affects such public policy concerns as air quality, environmental resource consumption,
social equity, “ smart growth,” economic development, safety, and security. Transportation
planning recognizes the critical links between transportation and other societal goals. The
planning process is more than merely listing highway and transit capital investments, it requires
developing strategies for operating, managing, maintaining, and financing the area’s
transportation system in such a way as to advance the area’s long- term goals.
The Regional Transportation Plan ( RTP), also called a Metropolitan Transportation Plan ( MTP)
or Long- Range Transportation Plan is the mechanism used in California by both Metropolitan
Planning Organizations ( MPOs) and Regional Transportation Planning Agencies ( RTPAs) to
conduct long- range ( minimum of 20 years) planning in their regions.
The 2006 California Transportation Plan prepared by the California Department of
Transportation ( Caltrans) Stated: “ Transportation is an integral part of the social and economic
fabric of California. It cannot be examined without considering population growth and
demographics, changing travel behavior and increasing demand, safety, employment, housing,
land use, the environment, community values, individual opportunity, and resources.”
The trends and challenges identified in the California Transportation Plan include:
• Economy – The economic status of our State is dependant upon the safe and efficient
movement of people and goods.
• Goods Movement – An estimated 45 percent of all containerized cargo passes through
California’s ports. An efficient and effective freight transportation system is essential to
economic growth, productivity, comparative advantage, national security, and the overall
quality of life in California and the United States.
• Employment – By 2020, employment of wage and salary workers in California is
expected to grow by more than 30 percent.
• Transportation Revenue and Expenditures – Adequate and flexible funding is one of the
greatest challenges in providing a transportation system that offers a high degree of
accessibility to all Californians and supports and enhances the efficient movement of
goods. The primary source of revenue for transportation projects is the excise tax
collected on each gallon of gasoline. The purchasing power of this tax is steadily
diminishing, because it has not kept pace with inflation.
• Environment – Vehicle fuel combustion and associated health and greenhouse gas
emissions impact our air quality. Transportation sources also impact water and visual
quality, vegetation, wildlife, open space, other land uses and other quality of life issues.
• Land Use Impacts on Transportation – The way communities are planned and designed
has a profound impact on our travel behavior. Uncoordinated decision- making, single-use
zoning ordinances, and low- density growth planning can result in airport restrictions
and closures, increased traffic congestion and commute times, air pollution, greater
reliance on fossil fuels, loss of wildlife habitat and open spaces, inequitable distribution
of economic resources, and loss of a sense of community.
2007 RTP Guidelines
10
• Housing- Employment Mismatch – Many regions in California have an imbalance of
housing and jobs. The heavily urbanized areas of the State have a lot of jobs, however
many employees have to commute long distances between where there work and their
housing located in the outlying suburban areas. This jobs/ housing imbalance adds to
congestion, increasing air pollution and decreases our overall quality of life.
• Population and Demographics – California is the most populous and rapidly growing
State in the nation. The State’s population is also the most ethnically diverse, having no
ethnic majority. Although this growth and diversity adds to California’s economic
strength and vibrancy, it also creates a multitude of social, economic, environmental and
transportation challenges for policy makers.
• Travel Behavior – In recent years, the number of non- work related trips has overtaken
the number of commute trips, leading to increased congestion during off- peak periods
and more demand on local road networks.
1.2 Background and Purpose of the RTP Guidelines
The RTP Guidelines are to be developed pursuant to California Government Code sections
14522 and 65080 that State:
“ 14522. In cooperation with the regional transportation planning agencies, the
commission ( CTC) may prescribe study areas for analysis and evaluation by
such agencies and guidelines for the preparation of the regional transportation
plans.”
“( 3)( d) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, each transportation
planning agency shall adopt and submit, every four years, an updated regional
transportation plan to the California Transportation Commission and the
Department of Transportation. A transportation planning agency located in a
Federally designated air quality attainment area or that does not contain an
urbanized area may at its option adopt and submit a regional transportation
plan every five years. When applicable, the plan shall be consistent with
Federal planning and programming requirements and shall conform to the
regional transportation plan guidelines adopted by the California
Transportation Commission ( CTC). ...”
The purposes of these Guidelines are to:
1. Promote an integrated, Statewide, multimodal, regional transportation planning process
and effective transportation investments;
2. Set forth a uniform transportation planning framework throughout California by
identifying Federal and State requirements and statues impacting the development of
RTPs;
3. Promote a continuous, comprehensive, and cooperative transportation planning process
that facilitates the rapid and efficient development and implementation of projects while
maintaining California’s commitment to public health and environmental quality; and,
4. Promote a planning process that considers the views of all the stakeholders.
2007 RTP Guidelines
11
The purpose of RTPs is to encourage and promote the safe and efficient management,
operation and development of a regional intermodal transportation system that will serve the
mobility needs of goods and people. The RTP Guidelines are intended to provide guidance so
that MPOs and RTPAs will develop their RTPs to be consistent with Federal and State
transportation planning requirements. This is important because State statues require that
RTPs serve as the foundation of the Federal Transportation Improvement Program ( FTIP). The
FTIPs are prepared by MPOs and identify the next four years of transportation projects to be
funded for construction. The CTC cannot program projects that are not identified in the RTP.
Since the mid- 1970s, with the passage of AB 69, ( Chapter 1253, Statute of 1972) California
State law has required the preparation of RTPs to address transportation issues and assist local
and State decision- makers in shaping California’s transportation infrastructure.
The Federal requirement for the development of RTPs originated in the 1970’ s as well. Federal
legislation required the formation of MPOs for any urbanized areas with a population greater
than 50,000. An MPO has five core functions:
1. Maintain a setting for regional decision- making;
2. Preparation of an Overall Work Program ( OWP);
3. Involve the public in this decision- making;
4. Prepare an RTP; and,
5. Develop a Transportation Improvement Program ( FTIP).
MPOs Federally required responsibilities are identified in Title 23 U. S. C. Section 134 and Code
of Federal Regulations ( CFR) 450.300.
The California RTP Guidelines were first adopted by the CTC in May 1978 and subsequently
revised in August 1978, December 1982, October 1987, July 1991, December 1992, November
1994, and December 1999. A 2003 Supplement was also prepared that was based on a 2003
RTP Evaluation Report completed for the CTC.
The December 1999 revision of the Guidelines was prepared to achieve conformance with State
and Federal transportation planning legislation and was based on the Federal Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century ( TEA- 21) and California Senate Bill ( SB 45, Chapter 622 Statues
1997). The latest Federal surface transportation reauthorization bill called the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users ( SAFETEA- LU)
was signed into law in 2005.
This 2007 revision of the RTP Guidelines was prepared in order to address changes in the
planning process resulting from SAFETEA- LU and to incorporate information from the 2003
Supplement into the RTP Guidelines.
While the guidelines include both State and Federal requirements, MPOs and RTPAs have the
flexibility to be creative in selecting transportation planning options that best fit their regional
needs. The guidelines recognize that ‘ one size does not fit all’. Solutions and techniques used
by a large, urban MPO will be different than those used by a small, rural RTPA.
Recommendations and suggestions for providing documentation that is needed to meet the
project eligibility requirements of the Federal Transportation Improvement Program ( FTIP) and
the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program ( ITIP) is also included.
The 2007 RTP Guidelines continue to use the words “ Shall” and “ Should”, a convention
established by the previous RTP Guidelines. Where the RTP Guidelines reflect a State or
2007 RTP Guidelines
12
Federal statutory or regulatory requirement, the word “ Shall” is used with a statutory or
regulatory citation. The word “ Should” will be used where the Guidelines reflect a permissive
or optional statutory reference such as may or should. Each section ends with Federal and
State Requirements ( Shalls), Federal and State Recommendations ( Shoulds), and “ Best
Practices” discussions where appropriate.
Changes to Federal statute are implemented by the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFRs) that
are also known as the ‘ final rules’. SAFETEA- LU section 6001, Transportation Planning is
codified in the final rule that was issued for Title 23 CFR Part 450 on February 14,2007. The
majority of citations in these guidelines refer to the implementing regulations i. e. the CFR
section.
Because there are a variety of names used for the programming document that is prepared by
an MPO, the RTP Guidelines will refer to the programming document that accompanies an RTP
as the FTIP. The FTIP is defined as a constrained 4- year prioritized list of all transportation
projects that are proposed for Federal, State and local funding. The FTIP is developed and
adopted by the MPO and is updated every two years. It is consistent with the RTP and it is
required as a prerequisite for Federal funding. In this document the words FTIP and RTIP are
used interchangeably. In a similar fashion, the federal terminology for congestion management
program is also referred to in this document as a congestion management process or plan.
It should be noted that the CTC is requiring the non- MPO RTPAs to address the Federal
planning requirements during the development of their RTPs. The justification being Federal
planning regulations address metropolitan planning ( MPOs) and Statewide planning for non-
MPO areas of the State. The State of California addresses some of the Federal Statewide
planning regulations through the California Transportation Plan ( CTP). The CTP is a policy
document prepared by the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans). It is not project
specific. The State relies on the non- MPO RTPAs to address some of the Federal Statewide
planning requirements. While the CTP is prepared by Caltrans, it is developed in collaboration
with all transportation stakeholders including public involvement. These RTPAs are
compensated by the State using rural planning assistance ( RPA) funds for their planning efforts.
1.3 Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Regional Transportation
Planning Agencies in California
In cooperation with the Governor, 18 Federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organizations
( MPOs) and 26 State statutorily created Regional Transportation Planning Agencies ( RTPAs)
prepare Regional Transportation Plans in California. MPOs must adhere to Federal planning
regulations during the preparation of their RTPs. California statutes and the RTP Guidelines
identify the RTP requirements for both RTPAs and MPOs.
MPOs are Federally designated while the majority of State designated RTPAs ( specifically
those responsible for preparing RTPs) are described under California Government Code
Section 29532 et seq. Federal legislation passed in the early 1970’ s required the formation of
an MPO for any urbanized area with a population greater than 50,000. MPOs were created in
order to ensure that existing and future expenditures for transportation projects and programs
were based on a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive ( 3- C) planning process. One of
the core functions of an MPO is to develop an RTP through the planning process.
2007 RTP Guidelines
13
To carry out various transportation planning functions, MPOs receive annual Federal
metropolitan planning funds from the Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA) and Federal
Transit Administration ( FTA). Twenty- six designated RTPAs receive annual State planning
funds called rural planning assistance ( RPA) to carry out their respective planning requirements.
The map on the next page identifies the 18 MPOs ( in darker shade) and the 26 RTPAs that
prepare RTPs ( in lighter shade or dot pattern).
2007 RTP Guidelines
14
2007 RTP Guidelines
15
1.4 Purpose of the Regional Transportation Plan
RTPs are planning documents developed by MPOs and RTPAs in cooperation with Caltrans
and other stakeholders. They are required to be developed by MPOs and RTPAs per State
legislation, ( Government Code Section 65080 et seq.). MPOs are required to prepare these
long- range plans per Federal regulation ( Title 23 USC Section 134). The purpose of the RTP is
to establish regional goals, identify present and future needs, deficiencies, and constraints,
analyze potential solutions, estimate available funding and propose investments.
California statute refers to these documents as “ Regional Transportation Plans” or RTPs. In
California planning circles, these long range planning documents normally use the term “ RTP”.
However several California MPOs refer to RTPs using the term “ Metropolitan Transportation
Plan or MTP” which is used in Federal planning regulations. “ RTP” or “ MTP” are terms used to
describe the same document.
Pursuant to Title 23 CFR 450.322 et seq, FHWA describes the development and contents of
RTPs as follows:
“ The transportation plan is the Statement of the ways the region plans to
invest in the transportation system. The plan shall “ include both long- range
and short- range program strategies/ actions that lead to the development of
an integrated intermodal transportation system that facilitates the efficient
movement of people and goods.” The plan has several elements, for
example: Identify policies, strategies, and projects for the future; Determine
project demand for transportation services over 20 years; Focus at the
systems level, including roadways, transit, non- motorized transportation, and
intermodal connections; Articulate regional land use, development, housing,
and employment goals and plans; Estimate costs and identify reasonably
available financial sources for operation, maintenance, and capital
investments); Determine ways to preserve existing roads and facilities and
make efficient use of the existing system; be consistent with the Statewide
transportation plan; and Be updated every five years or four years in air
quality nonattainment and maintenance areas. MPOs should make special
efforts to engage interested parties in the development of the plan. In cases
where a metropolitan area is designated as a nonattainment or maintenance
area, the plan must conform to the SIP for air quality.”
Transportation planning by MPOs/ RTPAs is a collaborative process, led by the MPO/ RTPA,
State and other key stakeholders in the regional transportation system. The process is
designed to foster involvement by all interested parties, such as the business community,
community groups, environmental organizations, the general public, and local jurisdictions
through a proactive public participation process conducted by the MPO/ RTPA in coordination
with the State and transit operators. It is essential to extend public participation to include
people who have been traditionally underserved by the transportation system and services in
the region. Neglecting public involvement early in the planning stage can result in delays during
the project stage.
New SAFETEA- LU requirements are addressed in Section 1.6. However, the traditional steps
undertaken during the regional planning process include:
2007 RTP Guidelines
16
1. Providing a long- term ( 20 year) visioning framework;
2. Monitoring existing conditions;
3. Forecasting future population and employment growth;
4. Assessing projected land uses in the region and identifying major growth
corridors;
5. Identifying alternatives and needs and analyzing, through detailed planning
studies, various transportation improvements;
6. Developing alternative capital and operating strategies for people and goods;
7. Estimating the impact of the transportation system on air quality within the
region; and,
8. Developing a financial plan that covers operating costs, maintenance of the
system, system preservation costs, and new capital investments.
The RTPs are developed to provide a clear vision of the regional transportation goals,
objectives and strategies. This vision must be realistic and be within fiscal constraints. In
addition to providing a vision, the RTPs have many specific functions, including:
1. Providing an assessment of the current modes of transportation and the potential of new
travel options within the region;
2. Projecting/ estimating the future needs for travel and goods movement;
3. Identification and documentation of specific actions necessary to address the regions
mobility and accessibility needs;
4. Identification of guidance and documentation of public policy decisions by local, regional,
State and Federal officials regarding transportation expenditures and financing;
5. Identification of needed transportation improvements, in sufficient detail, to serve as a
foundation for the: ( a) Development of the Federal Transportation Improvement Program
( FTIP), and the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program ( ITIP), ( b) Facilitation
of the National Environmental Protection Act ( NEPA)/ 404 integration process and ( c)
Identification of project purpose and need.
6. Employing performance measures that demonstrate the effectiveness of the
transportation improvement projects in meeting the intended goals.
7. Promotion of consistency between the California Transportation Plan, the regional
transportation plan and other plans developed by cities, counties, districts, Native
American Tribal Governments, and State and Federal agencies in responding to
Statewide and interregional transportation issues and needs;
8. Providing a forum for; ( 1) participation and cooperation and ( 2) to facilitate partnerships
that reconcile transportation issues which transcend regional boundaries; and,
9. Involving community- based organizations as part of the public, Federal, State and local
agencies, Native American Tribal Governments, as well as local elected officials, early in
the transportation planning process so as to include them in discussions and decisions
on the social, economic, air quality and environmental issues related to transportation.
1.5 California Transportation Planning and Programming Process
The State of California and Federal transportation agencies allocate millions of dollars of
planning funds annually to support California’s transportation system. State and Federal
planning and programming legislation has been initiated and is periodically revised to provide
guidance in the use of these funds to plan, maintain and improve the transportation system.
2007 RTP Guidelines
17
The Planning and Programming Process is the result of State and Federal legislation to assure
that:
1. The process is as open and transparent as possible;
2. Environmental considerations are addressed; and,
3. Funds are allocated in an equitable manner to address transportation needs.
The chart in Appendix A provides a simple diagram of a complex process. Each entity in the
chart reflects extensive staff support and legislative direction. The result is the planning and
programming process that reflects the legislative and funding support of the California
transportation system.
1.6 SAFETEA- LU Items Impacting the Development of RTPs
Public Participation Plan/ Outreach – Each MPO shall provide citizens, affected public
agencies, representatives of public transportation employees, freight shippers, private
transportation providers, representatives of public transportation users, representatives of
pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities users, representatives of the
disabled, and other interested parties with a “ reasonable opportunity” to comment on the
RTP. The public participation plan must be developed prior to updating the RTP and FTIP
and shall provide for input from the stakeholders during its preparation. ( Title 23 CFR
450.316)
Changes to Federal Planning Factors – The planning factor to “ protect and enhance
environment, promote energy conservation and improve quality of life” was expanded to
also include “ promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and
local planned growth and economic development patterns.” Equally important, safety and
security were separated into individual planning factors to highlight the importance of each
issue. ( Title 23 CFR 450.306)
Contents of the Participation Plan Shall Include: Development of the RTP in consultation
with all interested parties; Provision that all interested parties have reasonable opportunities
to comment on the contents of the RTP; All public meetings are held at a convenient and
accessible locations; Employment of visualization techniques to describe the RTP ( such as
geographic information systems ( GIS), maps, graphs, charts and other visual methods of
interpreting data and information); and, making the information available to the public in
electronic accessible format and means, such as the World Wide Web in order to afford a
reasonable opportunity for all parties including the general public to comment on the RTP.
A minimum public comment period of 45 days shall be provided before the initial or revised
participation is adopted by the MPO. ( Title 23 CFR 450.316)
RTP Cycle Updates – An RTP shall be updated every four years, or more frequently, if the
MPO elects to do so. In attainment regions, MPOs may elect to update their RTPs every
five years. ( Title 23 CFR 450.322( c))
2007 RTP Guidelines
18
Identify Transportation Facilities – An RTP shall include an identification of transportation
facilities, including major roadways, multimodal and intermodal, facilities, and intermodal
connectors. ( Title 23 CFR 450.322( e)( 2))
Identify Mitigation Activities – An RTP shall include a discussion of types of potential
environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities that may
have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by
the plan. ( Title 23 CFR 450.322( f)( 7))
Consultation and Coordination – The RTPs environmental mitigation discussions shall be
developed in consultation with Federal, State and Tribal land management, wildlife, and
regulatory agencies. ( Title 23 CFR 450.322( f)( 7)). Additional consultation, as appropriate,
with State and local agencies responsible for land use, natural resources, environmental
protection, conservation and historic preservation during development of RTP is required by
( Title 23 CFR 450.322( g))
Financial Plan – A Financial Plan shall demonstrate how an adopted RTP can be
implemented, indicate resources that can reasonably be expected to be available to carry
out the plan, and recommends any additional financing strategies for needed projects and
programs. Total dollar amount for projects included in the FTIP must take into account a
projected rate of inflation. The MPO, transit operators and State shall cooperatively develop
estimates of funds that will be available to support plan implementation. ( Title 23 CFR
450.322( i))
Identify Operational and Management Strategies - Operational & Management Strategies
shall be included in order to improve the performance of the existing transportation facilities,
to relieve vehicular congestion and maximize the safety and mobility of people and goods.
( Title 23 CFR Part 450.322( f)( 3))
Identify Capital Investment Strategies – Capital investment strategies and other strategies
shall be included to preserve the existing and projected future metropolitan transportation
infrastructure, and provide for multimodal capacity increases based on regional priorities
and needs. ( Title 23 CFR Part 450.322( f)( 5))
Congestion Management Process – The Congestion Management Process ( CMP) should
be an integral part of developing RTPs and FTIPs for MPOs that also serve as
transportation management areas ( TMAs). ( Title 23 CFR 450.320( c))
Visualization Technique and RTP/ MTP Publication – An RTP shall include visualization
techniques such as GIS based, graphs, maps, bar charts, pie charts and other visual aids
that a public participant understands without great technical detail, but more comprehensive
and basic. The RTP shall be available on a website and for the life of the plan. ( 23 CFR
Part 450.316( a))
Safety Issues – SAFETEA- LU separated “ safety” and “ security” as planning factors ( Title 23
CFR Part 450.322).
Security Issues – RTPs should include a safety element that incorporates and summarizes
the goals, priorities and projects that are contained in the California Strategic Highway
Safety Plan as well as emergency relief and disaster preparedness plans that support
homeland security and the personal security of the public ( Title 23 CFR Part 450.322( 7)( h)).
2007 RTP Guidelines
19
Public Transit/ Human Services Transportation Plan – A public transit/ human services
transportation plan as required by 49 U. S. C. 5310, 5316 and 5317 should be consistent with
the metropolitan transportation planning process. ( Title 23 CFR 450.306( g))
1.7 Key Changes to the 2007 RTP Guidelines
SAFETEA- LU Related
1. Section 3.2 – SAFETEA- LU added one more year to how often MPOs must update their
RTPs. State statute was also changed to mirror this new federal update period.
2. Section 3.6 – The discussion on financial issues relating to the RTP has been expanded.
Although RTPs have always had to be financially constrained, the 2007 update now
requires the 20- year financial estimate to take into account construction related inflation
costs. RTPs should also include a list of un- constrained projects in addition to the list of
financially constrained projects.
3. Section 3.10 – Increased the amount of information concerning consultation and
coordination during the preparation of the RTP. MPOs/ RTPAs must now consult with
resource agencies during the development of the RTP to ensure potential problems are
discovered early in the planning process.
4. Section 3.11 – Requires MPOs to prepare a separate participation plan prior to
development of RTP.
5. Section 3.16 – SAFETEA- LU requires MPOs to consult the Public Transit/ Human
Services Transportation Plan ( prepared by transit agencies) during the development of
the RTP.
6. Section 3.22 – Transportation system operations and management issues must now be
addressed in the RTP.
7. Sections 3.27 & 3.28 – Regional transportation safety issues and now the role of the
MPO/ RTPA during a large- scale security incident or natural disaster must be discussed
in the RTP.
8. Section 3.31 – The 2007 RTP Guidelines dramatically expand the discussion on RTP
environmental considerations. This section was prepared in consultation with Div. of
Environmental Analysis staff. SAFETEA- LU requires RTPs to discuss what mitigation
actions should be addressed in the RTP ( mitigation is addressed in California through
the RTPs CEQA document)
Other Key Additions to the 2007 RTP Guidelines
1. Section 2.2 – Discusses relationship of the RTP to regional blueprint planning efforts.
2. Section 3.23 – Expanded the discussion on coordination between RTPs and
programming documents.
3. Section 3.26 – Transportation system performance measures were refined.
4. Section 3.29 – Expanded discussion on congestion and corridor management.
2007 RTP Guidelines
20
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
21
Chapter 2
Regional Transportation Plan
Overview
2007 RTP Guidelines
22
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
23
2.1 State Requirements
California statute relating to the development of the RTPs is primarily contained in Government
Code Section 65080. State planning requirements apply to both Federally designated MPOs
and State designated RTPAs.
Just like changes resulting from the Federal SAFETEA- LU legislation, Government Code
Section 65080 requires that MPOs located in nonattainment regions update their RTPs at least
every four years. State statute requires MPOs located in air quality attainment regions and all
RTPAs that prepare RTPs to update their RTPs every five years.
When applicable, RTPs shall be consistent with Federal planning and programming
requirements and shall conform to the RTP Guidelines adopted by the California Transportation
Commission ( CTC). In addition, the CTC cannot program projects that are not identified in the
RTP.
Section 65080 States RTPs shall address three distinct elements:
1. Policy Element
2. Action Element
3. Financial Element
Additional California Government Code Sections apply to the development of RTPs.
Government Code Section 65080 - An MPO/ RTPA with a population exceeding 200,000
persons may prepare at least one “ alternative planning scenario” during the development of the
RTP. The purpose of the alternative planning scenario is to address attempts to reduce growth
in traffic congestion, make more efficient use of existing transportation infrastructure, and
reduce the need for costly future public infrastructure.
Government Code Section 65080 - Prior to adoption of the RTP, a public hearing shall be
held after publishing notice of the hearing. After the RTP is adopted by the MPO/ RTPA, the
plan shall be submitted to the CTC and Caltrans. One copy should be sent to the CTC. Two
copies should be submitted to the appropriate Caltrans district office. The Caltrans district
office will send one copy to the headquarters Division of Transportation Planning.
Government Code Section 65081.1
Regions that contain a primary air carrier airport ( defined by the Federal Aviation
Administration as an airport having at least 10,000 annual scheduled passenger boardings)
shall work collaboratively to include an airport ground access improvement program within the
RTP. This program shall address airport access improvement projects, including major arterial
and highway widening and extension projects, with special consideration given to mass transit.
2.2 Land Use, Scenario and Regional Blueprint Planning
Authority for transportation decisions rest with the MPOs/ RTPAs and Caltrans. City and county
governments make the land use decisions. There is a reciprocal relationship between the fields
of transportation planning and land use planning. Transportation access impacts housing
2007 RTP Guidelines
24
choices and the location of housing and commercial development impacts transportation. The
Regional Blueprint grant program is seen as a vehicle for linking the fields of transportation, land
use, and environmental planning.
Blueprint planning program is a voluntary grant program for MPOs and RTPAs funded by
Caltrans. Its goal is to promote regional collaboration and integrated planning. The objective of
this program is to develop a shared or consensus vision of the future as it relates to
infrastructure and growth. The primary focus of the regional blueprint planning effort is to
coordinate decisions regarding transportation, land use ( such as housing) and the environment.
The Blueprint plan, also known as a preferred land use pattern or Preferred Growth Scenario
( PGS), is an analytical tool developed to inform decision- makers.
The process for developing the Blueprint plan is as important as the outcome of the planning
efforts. Key elements of the Blueprint planning process are 1) engaging the public, especially
the traditionally under- represented, 2) involving a broad range of stakeholders, 3) use of
scenario planning or “ visioning” techniques and 4) use of regional scale data/ GIS modeling.
The Blueprint plan is intended to provide more housing and transportation choices, less
congestion, improved air quality, improved social justice and economic competitiveness, better
environmental protection, and streamlined transportation project delivery. MPOs and RTPAs
should describe their regional blueprint planning efforts in the RTP and describe its relationship
to the RTP process – the two processes are linked.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: None
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: Government Code Section 65080.3 gives an MPO/ RTPA with a population exceeding
200,000 persons the option to prepare at least one “ alternative planning scenario” during the
development of the RTP.
Best Practices: A regional Blueprint plan can be an important, key component that should be
prepared before the development of the RTP. Describing the MPO/ RTPAs Blueprint planning
efforts and its relationship to the RTP process is considered to be a best practice. In addition to
Blueprint planning, MPO/ RTPAs might want to consider implementing context sensitive
solutions and developing data that is easily accessed by multi- agency staff. See San Joaquin
Valley Blueprint efforts at:
http:// www. sjvalleyblueprint. com
and the California Regional Blueprint Planning Program website at
http:// www. calblueprint. dot. ca. gov./
2.3 Federal Requirements
Federal requirements for the development of RTPs are directed at the federally designated
MPOs. The primary Federal requirements regarding RTPs are addressed in the metropolitan
2007 RTP Guidelines
25
transportation planning rules – Title 23 CFR Part 450 and 49 CFR Part 613. These Federal
regulations incorporating both SAFETEA- LU and TEA- 21 changes were updated by FHWA and
FTA and published in the February 14, 2007 Federal Register. The final guidance is commonly
referred to as the Final Rule.
In the Final Rule, the metropolitan transportation planning process provides for consideration of
the following Federal planning factors:
1. Economic vitality and global competitiveness, productivity and efficiency;
2. Safety of the transportation system;
3. Security of the transportation system;
4. Accessibility and mobility of people and freight;
5. Protection of the environment, energy conservation, quality of life, and consistency
between ( regional) transportation improvements and local as well as State planned
growth;
6. Integration and connectivity of the transportation system across modes for both
people and freight;
7. Efficient transportation management and operations; and,
8. Preservation of the transportation system.
Federal Clean Air Act conformity requirements pursuant to the Amendments of 1990, apply in all
MPO/ RTPA nonattainment areas. The Clean Air Act ( 42 USC 7506( c))” conformity” requirement
ensures that Federal funding and approval are given to transportation plans, programs and
projects that are consistent with the air quality goals established by a State Implementation Plan
( SIP). For MPO nonattainment regions, the MPO and FHWA are responsible for making the
RTP conformity determination. Both the MPO and FHWA must be able to determine that any
new transportation projects will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations or
delay timely attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The transportation
conformity rule ( 40 CFR Part 93) sets forth policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating
and assuring conformity of transportation activities.
Title VI ensures that all people have equal access to the transportation planning process. It is
important that MPOs/ RTPAs comply with this Federal civil rights requirement during the RTP
development process. Title VI States that all people regardless of their race, sexual orientation
or income level will be included in the decision- making process.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices: See general discussion above.
2.4 Relationship Between the RTP, OWP and FTIP
The three key planning documents produced by the MPOs and RTPAs are:
2007 RTP Guidelines
26
1. Regional Transportation Plan – Looks out over a 20 plus- year period providing a vision
for future demand and transportation investment within the region.
2. Overall Work Program – The OWP lists the transportation planning studies and tasks to
be performed by the MPO, RTPA or member agency during that fiscal year. Note: the
OWP is also referred to as a Unified Planning Work Program ( UPWP) in Federal
regulations.
( MPOs Only:)
3. Federal Transportation Improvement Program – The FTIP is a financially constrained
four- year program listing all Federally funded and regionally significant projects in the
region.
Key Planning Documents Produced by MPOs/ RTPAs
Time/ Horizon Contents Update Requirements
RTP
20+ Years
Future Goals,
Strategies &
Projects
Nonattainment MPOs – Every 4
Years
Attainment MPOs –
Every 5 Years
RTPAs – Every 5 Years
OWP
1 Year
Planning Studies
and Tasks
Annually
FTIP
4 Years
Transportation
Projects
Every 2 Years
2.5 Consistency with Other Planning Documents
RTPs are just one of the planning documents prepared by local and regional agencies
impacting transportation. It is very important that the RTP be consistent with other plans
prepared by local, State, Federal agencies and Native American Tribal Governments. This
consistency will ensure that no conflicts would impact future transportation projects. While
preparing an updated RTP, MPOs/ RTPAs should, as appropriate, incorporate or consult such
local/ regionally prepared documents as:
1. General Plans ( especially the Circulation and Housing Elements);
2. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans;
3. Air quality State Implementation Plans ( SIPs); and,
4. Multi- species Habitat Conservation Plans.
MPOs/ RTPAs should also consult State prepared planning documents such as:
1. California Transportation Plan
2. California Rail Plan;
3. Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan;
4. Transportation Concept Reports;
5. California Aviation System Plan;
6. Statewide Wildlife Action Plan;
7. Goods Movement Action Plan;
8. Strategic Highway Safety Plan; and,
2007 RTP Guidelines
27
9. California Strategic Highway Safety Plan.
Additionally, as the Corridor System Management Plan process evolves, the RTP should be
consistent with the operation of the corridor.
New Federal regulations as a result of SAFETEA- LU, require MPOs to consult with resource
agencies during the development of the RTP. This consultation should include the development
of regional mitigation and identification of key documents prepared by those resource agencies
that may impact future transportation plans or projects. MPO staff should make a concerted
effort to ensure any actions in the RTP do not conflict with those of the resource agencies.
2007 RTP Guidelines
28
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
29
Chapter 3
Regional Transportation Plan
Contents
2007 RTP Guidelines
30
Page Left Intentionally Blank
2007 RTP Guidelines
31
General
3.1 Policy, Action and Financial Elements
The development of the RTP is based on State and Federal statutory and regulatory
requirements in addition to CTC policy directions. As per Government Code 65080, each
MPO/ RTPA shall prepare and adopt an RTP directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced
regional transportation system including, but not limited to, mass transportation, highway,
railroad, maritime, bicycle, pedestrian, goods movement and aviation. In addition, the RTP shall
be action oriented and pragmatic, considering both short- term ( 0- 10 years) and long- term ( 10-
20 years) periods. Government Code 65080 States the RTP shall include the following
components:
The Policy Element
The purpose of the Policy Element is to identify legislative, planning, financial and institutional
issues and requirements, as well as any areas of regional consensus. The Policy Element
presents guidance to decision- makers of the implications, impacts, opportunities, and foreclosed
options that will result from implementation of the RTP. Moreover, the Policy Element is a
resource for providing input and promoting consistency of action among State, regional and
local agencies including; transit agencies, congestion management agencies, Employment
Development Departments, the California Highway Patrol, private and public groups, tribal
governments, etc. California statutes State that each RTP shall ( Government Code Section
65080 ( b)) include a Policy Element that:
1. Describes the transportation issues in the region;
2. Identifies and quantifies regional needs expressed within both short and
long- range planning horizons ( Government Code Section 65080 ( b) ( 1)); and,
3. Maintains internal consistency with the Financial Element and fund
estimates.
Legislation requires that the objectives shall ( Government Code Section 65080 ( b) ( 1)) be linked
to short- range and long- range transportation implementation goals or horizons. Each objective
should be consistent with the needs identified in the RTP as a means of strengthening the
linkage between statewide system planning and ultimate project implementation. The RTP shall
consider factors specified in Section 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code.
The Policy Element should clearly convey the region’s transportation policies. As part of this
Element, the discussion should; ( 1) relay how these policies were developed, ( 2) identify any
significant changes in the policies from the previous plans and ( 3) provide the reason for any
changes in policies from previous plans.
MPOs/ RTPAs with populations that exceed 200,000 persons have the option to quantify a set of
indicators including, but not limited to, all of the following:
A. Measures of mobility and traffic congestion;
B. Measures and needs for road and bridge maintenance and rehabilitation;
C. Measures of means of travel;
D. Measures of safety reliability and security;
E. Measures of equity and accessibility;
2007 RTP Guidelines
32
F. Other sources of data and information may also be used, such as a regions
own source/ s of information and data.
The Action Element
The second major component as required in Section 65080 States that RTPs shall have an
“ Action Element”. The Action Element of the RTP consists of short and long- term activities that
address regional transportation issues and needs. All transportation modes ( highways, mass
transportation, rail, maritime, bicycle, pedestrian and aviation facilities and services) are
addressed. In addition, the Action Element should also identify investment strategies,
alternatives and project priorities beyond what is already programmed.
The Action Element is divided into two sections. The first section includes a discussion of the
preparatory activities such as identification of existing needs, assumptions, and forecasting and
potential alternative actions. The second section addresses the data and conclusions.
The Financial Element
The financial element is statutorily required. The Financial Element is fundamental to the
development and implementation of the RTP. It identifies the current and anticipated revenue
sources and financing techniques available to fund the planned transportation investments
described in the Action Element. The intent of the Financial Element is to define realistic
financing constraints and opportunities. Finally, with this financing information, alternatives are
developed and used by State and local decision- makers in funding planning projects.
There are six major components that constitute the Financial Element:
1. Summary of costs to operate and maintain the current transportation system;
2. Estimate of costs and revenues to implement the projects identified in the
Action Plan;
3. Inventory of existing and potential transportation funding sources;
4. List of candidate projects if funding becomes available;
5. Potential funding shortfalls; and,
6. Identification of alternative policy directions that affect the funding of projects.
It is very important that RTPs reflect the transportation needs of the specific region. There are
State statutory content requirements for the Policy, Action and Financial elements of the RTP;
however, there is flexibility in choosing a format for the presentation of this information. Most
MPOs/ RTPAs use the categories of Policy, Action and Financial to organize their RTP.
The RTP should also include the following:
1. Executive Summary – An Executive Summary of the RTP as an introductory chapter.
The Executive Summary should provide a regional perspective, and identify the
challenges and transportation objectives to be achieved.
2. Reference to regional environmental issues and air quality documentation needs.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: None
State: California Government Code Section 65080
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
2007 RTP Guidelines
33
Best Practices:
http:// www. scrtpa. org/ RTplan. htm
http:// www. mendocinocog. org/ regional_ trans_ plan2005. shtml
3.2 Adoption - Update Cycles and Amendments
Regional transportation planning is a dynamic process requiring continuous monitoring and
periodic updating. Updating an RTP ensures the MPOs planning process is valid and
consistent with current and forecasted transportation and land use conditions and trends for at
least a 20- year planning horizon.
MPOs/ RTPAs may revise the transportation plan at any time using the procedures in this
section without a requirement to extend the horizon year. The transportation plan ( and any
revisions or amendments) shall be approved by the MPO’s Board and submitted for
informational purposes to the CTC and Caltrans. Copies of any revised or amended
transportation plans must be provided to the FHWA and the FTA.
California State law, ( Government Code Section 65080( d)) mirrors the Federal update
requirement and States that nonattainment MPOs must update their RTPs at least every four
years and attainment MPOs at least every five years. Failure of an MPO to adhere to the State
required update period could result in the CTC not adopting the region’s FTIP. Non- MPO
RTPAs are required by State statute to update their RTPs at least every five years, regardless if
they are located in an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area or not.
RTPs can be amended or modified. The U. S. DOT identified two types of revision methods for
an RTP ( 1) A major revision that is an “ amendment” and, ( 2) A minor revision that is an
“ administration modification.”
The definitions in SAFETEA- LU, Title 23 USC 101( a) and 49 USC 5302 clarify major and minor
amendments to RTPs.
RTP Amendment ( major)
RTPs must be amended whenever a plan revision takes place such as the addition or deletion
of a project or a major change in project scope, cost and schedule. Other potential triggers for
an RTP Amendment could include changing programmed project phases or any major change
in design concept or design scope ( e. g. changing project termini or the number of through traffic
lanes). Amendments require public review for possible comments, demonstration of fiscal
constraint and conformity determination ( for MPOs located in nonattainment and maintenance
areas).
RTP Administrative Modification ( minor)
As Stated in SAFETEA- LU, Administrative Modification means a minor revision to a Regional
Transportation Plan that includes minor changes to project/ project phase costs, minor changes
to funding sources of previously included projects, and other minors changes to projects/ project
phase initiations dates.
2007 RTP Guidelines
34
An RTP administrative modification is much more flexible and open to wide interpretation. An
Administrative Modification is a revision that does not require public review and comment, re-demonstration
of fiscal constraint, or a conformity determination ( in nonattainment and
maintenance areas).
Re- Adopting Existing RTPs
Readopting the existing RTP is an option if no significant factors have occurred within the region
that would impact the existing RTP. However, this option would need to look closely at the
current status of the RTPs fiscal constraint, conformity determination and any changes to the
project scope, cost and schedule of their FTIPs. Re- adopting an RTP could mean that no new
projects are presented in the document, nor will there be new projects in the RTPs current
update cycle.
When an MPO/ RTPA Board prepares an RTP amendment or update, they also need to be
aware that a conformity determination may need to be conducted, depending on the type of
changes, modifications or amendments. An amendment that makes any of the following
changes to the RTP would require a new conformity determination for the RTP:
1) The amendment adds or deletes a non- exempt project;
2) The amendment significantly changes the design concept or scope of a regionally
significant project; or
3) The amendment changes the implementation year such that it affects a
transportation conformity analysis year.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 USC 450.322 ( c), mandatory RTP update cycles for MPOs.
State: CA Government Code Section 65080 ( d), mandatory RTP update cycles for RTPAs
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
It is recommended that MPOs/ RTPAs coordinate with Caltrans district regional planners on
reviewing, commenting and at times facilitating the determination of what constitutes an RTP
Amendment or Administrative modification.
3.3 RTP Checklist
The RTP Checklist is contained in Appendix C of this document. The purpose of the RTP
Checklist is to establish a minimum standard for developing the RTP. The checklist of
transportation planning requirements has been updated in order to conform to the new
requirements identified in SAFETEA- LU.
The 2003 Supplement to the 1999 RTP Guidelines revised the checklist. The format was the
same, however, MPOs/ RTPAs should now include the page numbers indicating where the
Checklist items are addressed in the region’s RTP. This requirement of identifying page
numbers will assist the general public, Federal, State and local agencies to locate the
information contained in the RTP.
2007 RTP Guidelines
35
The Checklist must be completed by the MPO/ RTPA and submitted to the CTC and Caltrans
along with the draft RTP. This Checklist will be available electronically from Caltrans planning
staff. Each MPO/ RTPA is encouraged to complete the Checklist electronically. Following its
completion, the MPOs or RTPAs Executive Director ( or designated representative) must sign
the Checklist to indicate that the information is complete and correct.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: None
State: Pursuant to California Government Code, Section 14032( a), which authorizes the CTC to
request an evaluation of all Regional Transportation Plans Statewide to be conducted by
Caltrans. All MPOs/ RTPAs are required to submit an RTP Checklist with their Draft and Final
RTP when the document is submitted to Caltrans and the CTC.
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices: None
Financial
3.4 Financial Overview
Federal statute and regulations and California State statute requires RTPs to contain an
estimate of funds available for the 20- year planning horizon. This discussion of financial
information is fundamental to the development and implementation of the RTP. The financial
portions of the RTP identify the current and anticipated revenue sources and financing
techniques available to fund the planned transportation investments described in other portions
of the RTP. The intent being to define realistic financing constraints and opportunities. All
projects, except illustrative projects i. e. unconstrained projects, must be fully funded in order to
be included in the RTP. With this financing information, alternatives are developed and used
by the MPO/ RTPA, local agencies and State decision- makers in funding transportation projects.
During programming and project implementation the total cost of the project is refined and
broken out by cost per phase.
Section 6001 of Public Law 109- 59, ( SAFETEA- LU) requires each transportation plan and each
transportation improvement program prepared by the MPO to include a financial plan that
demonstrates how the adopted Plan and TIP can be implemented. The Financial Plan should
also indicate resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be
made available to carry out the transportation plan and FTIP, identify innovative financing
techniques to finance projects, programs and strategies, and recommend any additional
financing strategies for needed projects and programs. The Federal statutory requirements are
codified in Title 23 USC 134( i)( 2)( C) and 134( j)( 2)( B). Federal regulations pertaining to financial
planning and constraint for Statewide and metropolitan transportation plans and programs are
codified in Title 23 CFR part 450.
2007 RTP Guidelines
36
There are six major components that should be addressed in the financial portion of the RTP:
1. Projected Available Funds – The MPO/ RTPA, public transit operators and the State shall
cooperatively develop estimates of funds that will reasonably be available to support
RTP implementation. All anticipated public and private financial resources available
over the next 20 years, including estimated highway, local streets and roads, bicycle and
pedestrian and transit funds, shall be identified. The financial plan shall include
recommendations for additional financing strategies. New funding sources and
strategies shall also be identified. Beginning December 11, 2007, all revenue estimates
for the financial plan must use an inflation rate that reflects the “ year of expenditure
dollars” developed cooperatively by the MPO, State and transit operators.
2. Projected Costs – The MPO shall take into account all projects and strategies proposed
for funding with Federal, State, local and private fund sources in developing the financial
plan. Estimate of costs to implement the projects identified in the four year FTIP and
the RTP must be included. Beginning December 11, 2007, both the revenue and
construction cost estimates must use inflation rates to reflect “ year of expenditure
dollars” based on reasonable financial principles and information developed
cooperatively by the MPO/ RTPA, State and public transportation operators.
3. Projected Operation and Maintenance Costs – The financial plan shall contain system
level estimates of costs and revenue sources that are reasonably expected to be
available to adequately operate and maintain Federal- aid highways and public
transportation. Best practices in developing the RTP financial plan would also include
revenue sources for the operation and maintenance of local streets and roads as well as
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Summary of costs to operate and maintain the current
transportation system. This should be identified by mode and include the cumulative
cost of deferred maintenance on the existing infrastructure. Financial plans that support
the RTP process must assess capital investment and other measures necessary to
ensure the preservation of:
A) The existing transportation system, including requirements for operational
improvements;
B) Resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation of existing and future major
roadways, as well as operations, maintenance, modernization, and rehabilitation
of existing and future transit facilities.
4. Constrained RTP - Financially constrained list of candidate projects with the available
funding ( short and long- term).
5. Un- Constrained ( Illustrative) List of Projects - Un- constrained ( Illustrative) list of
candidate projects if additional funding becomes available ( short and long- term). The
financial plan may include additional projects that would be included in the adopted
transportation plan if additional resources were to become available.
6. Potential Funding Shortfall. The short and long- term needs for system operation,
preservation, and maintenance can be enormous. Simply maintaining the existing
system can demand a huge investment, while system expansion demands investments
of a similar scale. At times, the combination of these competing demands can cause
temporary shortfalls to an MPOs or RTPAs budget. To the extent there appear to be
shortfalls, the MPO/ RTPA must identify a strategy to address these gaps in funding prior
2007 RTP Guidelines
37
to the adoption of a new RTP - or the amendment of an existing RTP. The strategy
should include an action plan that describes the steps to be taken that will make funding
available within the time frame shown in the financial plan and needed to implement the
projects in the long- range transportation plan. There should be, among other things, a
range of options to address projected shortfalls. The strategy may rely upon the
MPO/ RTPAs or transit operators past record of obtaining funding. If it relies on new
funding sources, the MPO/ RTPA must demonstrate that these funds are reasonably
expected to be available.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.322( f)( 10)
State: California Government Code Section 65080( b)
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. mtc. ca. gov/ planning/ 2030_ plan/ index. htm
http:// www. bcag. org/__ planning/ 2004_ RTP. html
3.5 Fiscal Constraint
Fiscal constraint is the demonstration of sufficient funding ( Federal, State local and private) to
operate and maintain transportation facilities and services and to implement planned and
programmed transportation system improvements. Fiscal constraint can also be thought of as
the description of fully funded projects in the RTP based on the projected available revenues
during the 20 plus year planning horizon.
Title 23 CFR 450.104 provides the following definition of fiscal constraint or fiscally constrained:
“ ( it) means that the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, and STIP includes sufficient financial
information for demonstrating that projects in the metropolitan transportation plan, TIP and STIP
can be implemented using committed, available or reasonably available revenue sources, with
reasonable assurance that federally supported transportation system is being adequately
operated and maintained. For the TIP and the STIP, financial constraint/ fiscal constraint applies
to each programming year. Additionally, projects in air quality nonattainment and maintenance
areas can be included in the first two years of the TIP or STIP only if funds are ‘ available’ or
‘ committed’.”
To support air quality planning under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, a special
requirement has been placed on air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas, as
designated by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). Specifically, projects in air
quality nonattainment and maintenance areas can be included in the first two years of the FTIP
only if funds are " available or committed" ( Title 23 CFR 450.324( e)). Available funds include
those derived from an existing source of funds dedicated to or historically used for
transportation purposes. For Federal funds, authorized and/ or appropriated funds and the
extrapolation of formula and discretionary funds at historic rates of increase are considered
“ available.” Committed funds include funds that have been bound or obligated for transportation
2007 RTP Guidelines
38
purposes. For State funds that are not dedicated to or historically used for transportation
purposes, only those funds over which the Governor has control may be considered as
“ committed.” For local and private sources not dedicated to or historically used for
transportation purposes, a commitment in writing/ letter of intent by the responsible official or
body having control of the funds constitutes a “ commitment.” Additionally, EPA's transportation
conformity regulations specify that an air quality conformity determination can only be made on
a fiscally constrained RTP and FTIP ( 40 CFR 93 part 108). Therefore, nonattainment and
maintenance areas may not rely on proposed new taxes or other new revenue sources for the
first two years of the FTIP. New funding for RTP projects from a proposed gas tax increase, a
proposed regional sales tax, or a major funding increase still under debate would not qualify as
" available or committed" until it has been enacted by legislation or referendum i. e. the period of
time between the sunset date of the current regional sales tax and before the next legislative or
referendum action to restore or increase funding.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: : Title 23 CFR part 450.322( f)( 10)
State: California Government Code Section 65080( b)
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. sandag. org/ index. asp? projectid= 292& fuseaction= projects. detail
http:// www. scag. ca. gov/ rtp2004/ 2004/ FinalPlan. htm
3.6 Listing of Constrained and Un- constrained Projects
In addition to the current list of financially constrained projects identified in the RTP, each Plan
should contain a list of needed unconstrained projects ( Illustrative projects). Illustrative project
means an additional transportation project that may ( but is not required to) be included in the
RTP if reasonable additional resources were to become available. This unconstrained list will
identify projects that are recommended by the MPO/ RTPA without a funding source identified.
The list should be included separately from the financially constrained project list. It is also
preferred that projects on the unconstrained list be identified by transportation corridor within the
region.
The following is accomplished by including a list of regionally desired un- funded ( Illustrative)
transportation projects in the RTP:
1. Assures funding flexibility should additional funding become available.
2. Allows for a more accurate determination of overall transportation needs.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.322 ( f)( 10) Requires a fiscally constrained list of projects.
State: None
2007 RTP Guidelines
39
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.322 ( f)( 10)( vii) For illustrative purposes, the list of projects may
include additional projects if an additional source of funds if located.
State:
Best Practices:
http:// www. mtc. ca. gov/ planning/ 2030_ plan/ index. htm
http:// www. sacog. org/ mtp/ 2035
3.7 Revenue Identification and Forecasting
Revenue forecasts for RTPs can take into account new funding sources that are " reasonably
expected to be available." New funding sources are revenues that do not currently exist or that
may require additional steps before the MPO/ RTPA or transit agency can commit such funding
to transportation projects. As required in SAFETEA- LU, strategies for ensuring the availability
of these planned new revenue sources must be clearly identified. Future revenues may be
projected based on historical trends, including consideration of past legislative or executive
actions. The level of uncertainty in projections based on historical trends is generally greatest
for revenues in the " outer years" ( 10 years or more) of an RTP.
According to Title 23 CFR part 450.322 ( f)( 10)( iv), the MPO shall take into account all projects
and strategies proposed for funding under Title 23 U. S. C.; Title 49 U. S. C. Chapter 53; other
Federal funds; State transportation funds; local funding sources and private sources of funds for
transportation projects. Beginning December 11, 2007, funding estimates contained in the RTP
must use an inflation rate to reflect “ year of expenditure dollars”.
Title 23 CFR 450.322( f)( 10)( viii) states: “ In cases that the FHWA and the FTA find a
metropolitan transportation plan to be fiscally constrained and a revenue source is subsequently
removed or substantially reduced ( i. e. by legislative or administrative actions), the FHWA and
FTA will not withdraw the original determination of fiscal constraint; however, in such cases, the
FHWA and FTA will not act on an updated or amended metropolitan transportation plan that
does not reflect the changed revenue situation.” The same policy applies if project costs or
operations/ maintenance cost estimates change after an RTP or FTIP is adopted. Such a
change in cost estimates does not invalidate the adopted transportation plan or program.
However, the revised costs must be provided in new or amended RTPs and FTIPs. In such
cases, FHWA will expect the MPO to identify alternative sources of revenue as soon as
possible. In such cases the FHWA/ FTA will not act on new or amended RTPs or FTIPs unless
they reflect the changed revenue and project cost situation. If FHWA and FTA find an RTP or
FTIP to be fiscally constrained and the planned/ programmed projects are included based on
outdated or invalid cost estimates, then FHWA/ FTA will not make funding or environmental
approval actions for the listed project( s) unless the RTP and FTIP are updated or amended to
reflect the latest project cost estimate.
The estimated revenue by existing revenue source ( local, State, Federal and private) available
for transportation projects shall be determined and any shortfalls identified. Proposed new
revenues and/ or revenue sources to cover shortfalls shall be identified, including strategies for
ensuring their availability for proposed investments. Existing and proposed revenues shall
cover all forecasted capital, operating, and maintenance costs. All cost and revenue projections
2007 RTP Guidelines
40
shall be based on the data reflecting the existing situation and historical trends. For
nonattainment and maintenance areas, the financial plan element shall address the specific
financial strategies required to ensure the implementation of projects and programs ( TCMs) to
reach air quality compliance
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.322( f)( 10)
State: California Government Code Section 65080( b)
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. bcag. org/__ planning/ 2004_ RTP. html
http:// www. fresnocog. org/ document. php? pid= 320& x= 272
3.8 Estimating Future Transportation Costs
As a result of SAFETEA- LU ( Title 23 CFR Part 450.322( f)( 10)( iv)), costs of future transportation
projects must use “ year of expenditure dollars” rather than “ constant dollars” in cost and
revenue estimates to better reflect the time- based value of money. After December 2007,
MPOs/ RTPAs must ensure project costs identified in both the RTP and FTIP are in year of
expenditure dollars. This is particularly crucial for large- scale projects with
construction/ implementation dates stretching into the future. For those MPOs located in air
quality nonattainment and maintenance areas the financial plan developed by the MPO shall
address the specific financial strategies and funding sources required to ensure the
implementation of TCM’s whether or not the TCM’s are identified in the SIP pursuant to Title 23
CFR 450.322 ( f)( 10)( vi).
Reporting the costs in year of expenditure dollars will provide the proper context to express a
more realistic estimate of future construction costs. After cost estimates are prepared for the
RTP and FTIP, the costs should be expressed in year of expenditure dollars. This can be done
by assigning an inflation rate per year to the proposed midpoint of construction. Make certain
that the selected year of expenditure reflects a realistic scenario, taking into account project
planning and development durations, as well as construction. Inflation rates may be different for
specific cost elements ( e. g. construction vs. right- of- way). The RTP should clearly specify how
inflation is considered in the estimate and clearly State that the estimate is expressed in year of
expenditure dollars. Consider multiple sources for determining the inflation rate, including
nationwide and local references. Include consideration of any locality- specific cost factors that
may reflect a growth rate significantly in excess of the inflation rate, such as land acquisition
costs in highly active markets. The inflation rate( s) should be based on sound, reasonable
financial principles and information, developed cooperatively by the MPO/ RTPA and transit
agencies. To ensure consistency, similar financial forecasting approaches ideally should be
used for the RTP and FTIP. In addition, the financial forecast approaches, assumptions, and
results should be clear and well documented.
2007 RTP Guidelines
41
In relation to the MPOs financial plan, SAFETEA- LU now permits the use of aggregate cost
ranges or cost bands. “ For the outer years of the metropolitan transportation plan ( i. e. beyond
the first 10 years), the financial plan may reflect aggregate cost ranges/ cost bands, as long as
the future funding sources( s) is reasonably expected to be available to support the projected
cost ranges/ cost bands.
Revenues and related cost estimates for operations and maintenance should be based on a
reasonable, documented process. Some accepted practices include:
Trend analysis - A functional analysis based on expenditures over a given duration, in which
costs or revenues are increased by inflation, as well as a growth percentage based on historic
levels. This analysis could be linear or exponential. When using this approach, however, it is
important to be aware of new facilities or improvements to existing facilities. Transit operations
and maintenance costs will vary with the average age of the bus or rail car fleet.
Cost per unit of service – Examples include: lane- mile costs; centerline mile costs; traffic
signal cost; transit peak vehicles by vehicle type; revenue hours; and vehicle- miles by vehicle
type.
Regardless of the methodology employed, the assumptions should be adequately documented
by the MPO/ RTPA and transit agency. Estimating current and reasonably available new
revenues and required operations and maintenance costs over a 20- year planning horizon is not
an exact science. To provide discipline and rigor, MPOs/ RTPAs and transit operators should
attempt to be as realistic as possible, as well as ensure that all costs assumptions are publicly
documented.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.322( f)( 10)
State: California Government Code Section 65080( b)
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: Title 23 CFR 450.322 ( f)( 10)( v) authorizes the option to use aggregate cost ranges or
bands in the outer years of the RTP.
State: None
Best Practices: In keeping with the Federal and State efforts to streamline the project delivery
and NEPA review process at the project level by providing environmental information at the
earliest point in time, it is recommended that the RTP also include a preliminary cost estimate
for the mitigation activities that are identified.
3.9 Asset Management
From increased vehicle miles traveled, growing population, and greater congestion to aging
infrastructure and escalating operating costs, today's challenging circumstances put demands
greater than ever on the transportation system. The goal of asset management is to minimize
the life- cycle costs for managing and maintaining transportation assets, including roads,
transit, bridges, tunnels, runways, rails, and roadside features.
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ( AAHSTO) defines
asset mangement as:
2007 RTP Guidelines
42
“ A strategic and systematic process of operating, maintaining, upgrading, and expanding
physical assets effectively through their life cycle. It focuses on business and engineering
practices for resource allocation and utilization, with the objective of better decisionmaking
based upon quality information and well defined objectives."
Through the use of management systems, engineering and economic analysis, and other tools,
MPOs/ RTPAs and transit operators can more comprehensively view the big picture and
evaluate collected data before making decisions as to how specific resources should be
deployed. Asset management principles and techniques should be applied throughout the
planning process, from initial goal setting and long- range planning to development of the TIP
and then through operations, preservation, and maintenance.
MPOs/ RTPAs should ensure the transportation system is managed to meet both current and
future demands and that expenditures are optimal. Asset managment principles and techniques
are valuable tools that can be applied by an MPO/ RTPA and result in more effective
decisionmaking. The MPO/ RTPA role in a successful asset management program includes
defining performance measures for assets through public involvement, serving as a repository
for asset data, and promoting standard data collection and technology applications.
MPOs/ RTPAs can also educate the public and decisionmakers and work cooperatively with
stakeholders across transportation modes.
Title 23 CFR Part 450.306( e) States the following concerning asset management:
“ In carrying out the metropolitan transportation planning process, MPOs, States, and public
transportation operators may apply asset management principles and techniques in
establishing planning goals, defining TIP priorities, and assessing transportation
investment decisions, including transportation system safety, operations, preservation, and
maintenance, as well as strategies and policies to support homeland security and to
safeguard the personal security of all motorized and non- motorized users.”
The following are the benefits of applying transportation asset management during the planning
process:
1. Maximize transportation system performance.
2. Improve customer satisfaction.
3. Minimize life- cycle costs.
4. Match service provided to public expectations.
5. Make more informed, cost- effective program decisions and better use of existing
transportation assets.
MPOs/ RTPAs should consider including asset management principles in the development of
their RTPs.
Additional information is available from the FHWA at:
http:// www. fhwa. dot. gov/ infrastructure/ asstmgmt/ tpamb. cfm
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: None
State: None
2007 RTP Guidelines
43
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: Title 23 CFR Part 450.306( e) - MPOs, States, and public transportation operators
may apply asset management principles and techniques in establishing planning goals,
defining TIP priorities, and assessing transportation investment decisions.
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. sjcog. org/ Programs% 20&% 20Projects/ Transportation_ files/ RTP. htm
http:// www. hcaog. net/ docs/ RTP. 2006
Consultation/ Coordination
3.10 Consultation & Coordination
Transportation planning is a collaborative process, led by the MPO/ RTPA and other key
stakeholders in the regional transportation system. Transportation planning activities include
visioning, forecasting population/ employment, identifying major growth corridors, projecting
future land use, assessing needs, developing capital and operating strategies to move people
and goods, and developing a financial plan. The required planning processes are designed to
foster involvement by all interested parties, such as the business community, community
groups, walking and bicycling representatives, environmental organizations, the Native
American community, neighboring MPOs/ RTPA and the general public through a proactive
public participation process.
Coordination is the cooperative development of plans, programs and schedules among
agencies and entities with legal standing in order to achieve general consistency. Consultation
means that one or more parties confer with other identified parties in accordance with the
established process and, prior to taking action( s), considers the views of the other parties and
periodically informs them about action( s) taken. It is very important for the development of the
RTP to be conducted both in coordination and consultation with interested parties.
In addition to having an extensive public participation process, each MPO/ RTPA should
coordinate its regional transportation planning activities with all transportation providers, facility
operators such as airports, appropriate federal, State, local agencies, Native American Tribal
Governments, environmental resource agencies, air districts, pedestrian and bicycle
representatives and adjoining MPOs/ RTPAs. The RTP shall ( Title 23, CFR Section
450.316( a)( 13)) reflect consultation with resource and permit agencies to ensure early
coordination with environmental resource protection and management plans.
RTPs are required to be developed in coordination with local and regional air quality planning
authorities ( Title 23, Section 134 ( g)( 3)) and shall ( Title 40 CFR Section 93.105 ( b)) reflect
specific consultation activities with air quality agencies on the development of the RTP.
MPOs/ RTPAs participate in air quality planning by providing vehicle counts for emissions
inventories. They also develop methods to reduce transportation related emissions. This
participation helps lay the groundwork for future SIP conformity determinations. All
2007 RTP Guidelines
44
MPOs/ RTPAs in nonattainment and maintenance areas must coordinate the development of
their RTPs with the Air Quality Management District( s) located within the MPOs region in order
to ensure conformity with the SIP. The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires SIP
development to be coordinated with the transportation planning process ( Title 42, Section
7504( b)). Detailed requirements may also be found in 40 CFR 51 and 93 ( Transportation
Conformity rules).
Due to the importance of including a wide range of various parties in the development of the
RTP, non- MPO RTPAs will also need to conform to the same coordination and consultation
requirements as MPOs. Development of the Public Participation Plan and the RTP shall include
consultation and coordination with all interested parties and shall, at a minimum, describe
explicit procedures, strategies and desired outcomes.
Consultation shall not be limited to a public hearing notice to the general public and
stakeholders. Providing access to information to the general public, incorporating public
comments and input on plans, programs and policies should also be embraced.
In summary, the consultation process shall:
1. Provide adequate public notice and the opportunity to comment on proposed RTPs and
public participation plans;
2. Employ visualization techniques to describe the RTP;
3. Make the RTP electronically accessible, such as placing it on the Internet;
4. Hold public hearings at convenient and accessible locations and times;
5. Demonstrate explicit consideration and response to public input on the RTP
( documentation);
6. Seek out and considering the needs of those traditionally underserved by existing
transportation systems, such as low income and minority households;
7. Provide additional opportunities to comment on the RTP and the FTIP, if the final version
differs due to additional comments;
8. Coordinate with the state transportation planning and public involvement processes;
and,
9. Periodically review intended RTP outcomes, products and/ or services.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: None
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.316 encourages MPOs to develop a process and mechanism in
which all parties may provide comments/ input on the MPOs public participation plan and in the
development of the RTP.
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. sjcog. org/ Programs% 20&% 20Projects/ Transportation_ files/ RTP. htm
http:// www. mcagov. org/ publications. htm
2007 RTP Guidelines
45
3.11 Participation Plan
Involving the public in planning and project development poses a major challenge. Many people
are skeptical about whether they can truly influence the outcome of a transportation project.
Others feel that transportation plans, are too abstract and long- term to warrant attention.
The RTP is one of the key processes an MPO/ RTPA undertakes. It is a primary avenue for
public participation in the long- range transportation planning process. Title 23 CFR Part
450.316( a) states the following concerning participation and consultation:
“ The MPO shall develop and use a documented participation plan that defines a process for
providing citizens, affected public agencies, representatives of public transportation employees,
freight shippers, providers of freight transportation services, private providers of transportation,
representatives of users of public transportation, representatives of users of pedestrian
walkways and bicycle transportation facilities, representatives of the disabled, and other
interested parties with reasonable opportunities to be involved in the metropolitan transportation
planning process.”
The purpose of the MPOs/ RTPAs participation plan is to establish the process by which the
public can participate in the development of regional transportation plans and programs. The
public participation plan should be designed to assist MPO/ RTPA staff in implementing an
effective public participation process through a variety of strategies. It provides MPO/ RTPA
staff with a menu of techniques or activities from which they can tailor their specific program’s
input process. Which public participation methods the MPO/ RTPA uses will require a careful
analysis of what is wished to be accomplished as well as the scope of the particular
transportation project. Plenty of flexibility is available to MPOs/ RTPAs in developing specific
public involvement programs. Every given situation or region in California is different, and each
approach to a specific public involvement challenge will be unique.
When significant written and oral comments are received on the draft RTP and as a result of the
participation process or the interagency consultation process required under the EPA
transportation conformity regulations ( 40 CFR part 93), a summary, analysis and report of the
proposed comments shall be made as part of the final RTP.
It is important to note the public participation plan should be prepared prior to the development
of the RTP. The public participation plan should have public input during its preparation and
have a 45- day comment period before the MPOs/ RTPAs board adopts it. This enhanced public
participation plan is a new requirement as a result of SAFETEA- LU.
Title 23 CFR part 450.316( a)( 1)( iii) now requires the participation plan to use visualization
techniques to describe the RTP and FTIP. Visualization techniques range from a simple line
drawing or hand written chart to technologically complex web cast public meetings and GIS
modeling and computer generated maps. The specific type of visualization technique is
determined by the MPO/ RTPA.
The public participation plan and both the draft and adopted RTP shall be posted on the World
Wide Web, to the maximum extent practicable and for the life of the RTP. It is also
recommended MPOs/ RTPAs place hard copies of the draft and adopted copies of RTPs in local
libraries and other locations where the public would have access to these documents.
2007 RTP Guidelines
46
Public involvement programs for regional transportation plans in California are required to follow
state and federal requirements. If the minimum State and federal requirements are inadequate
for the region, the MPOs/ RTPAs may develop a more specialized public involvement program if
that proves to be more effective.
In developing RTPs, the MPO/ RTPA should consult with agencies and officials responsible for
other planning activities within their region that are affected by transportation or at least
coordinate the planning process to incorporate input. These areas include, but are not limited
to, the listed examples:
1. State and local growth;
2. Economic development;
3. Environmental protection;
4. Airport operations; and,
5. Goods Movement.
When the MPO/ RTPA region includes Indian Tribal Lands, the MPO/ RTPA shall appropriately
involve the federally recognized Native American Tribal Government( s) in the development of
the RTP. The MPO/ RTPA should also seek input even from tribes that are not federally
recognized or from other “ interested parties” that may have a background and/ or history of
Native American culture within the region.
Similarly, when the MPO/ RTPA region includes federal public lands, the MPO/ RTPA shall
appropriately involve the federal land management agencies in the development of RTP.
Finally, the MPO shall, to the extent practicable, develop a documented process that outlines
roles, responsibilities, and key decision points for consulting with other governments and
agencies. Non- MPO public participation efforts shall at minimum develop a documented
process that outlines roles, responsibilities and provides outreach efforts to all sectors of the
local community.
Non- MPOs ( RTPAs) may include a separate Public Participation Plan, however non- MPOs shall
at minimum include a detailed discussion of public participation efforts within the RTP. For
example, public hearings, workshops, surveys, brochures and other methods that invite
comments or input for the public participation efforts and RTP development.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 USC Part 450.316, the MPO shall develop and use a documented
participation plan that defines a process for providing reasonable opportunities for all parties to
comment and be involved in the metropolitan transportation planning process.
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. mtc. ca. gov/ get_ involved/ participation_ plan. htm
http:// www. sandag. org/ index. asp? classid= 28& fuseaction= home. classhome
2007 RTP Guidelines
47
http:// www. tehamacountypublicworks. ca. gov/ Transportation/ index. htm
http:// www. sjcog. org/ Programs% 20&% 20Projects/ Transportation_ files/ RTP. htm
Federal guidance for Environmental Justice analysis can be found at
http:// www. fhwa. dot. gov/ environment/ ej2. htm
3.12 Private Sector Involvement
Private sector involvement relates to how the goods movement industry and other business or
commercial interests are represented in the development of the RTP. Trucks, freight trains,
taxis, limousines all use the transportation network and are an integral part of the regional
transportation system. Other examples of private sector involvement in the development of the
RTP include Transportation Management Associations, private transit operators, developers,
and Chambers of Commerce. Their absence in the regional transportation planning process
adversely impacts the efficiency of the transportation network.
In most urbanized areas of California, the number of trucks on the highway system has
substantially increased. This has had a direct impact on traffic congestion within these areas.
An increased level of truck activity has also had an impact in rural areas of the state, although
primarily on the principle routes in rural counties. For these reasons, an RTP that does not
include the “ Private Sector” in the planning process is not a viable plan. The impact of the
private sector on the transportation system is just too significant not to be included and
documented in the RTP process.
Unfortunately, in many plans, the private sector is not identified as a planning partner. Where
addressed, goods movement is discussed in the abstract with minimal long- range assumptions
identified or assessed.
MPOs/ RTPAs should take necessary actions to ensure major trucking firms, large employers
and business organizations are formally invited to participate in the preparation of the RTP. The
MPO/ RTPA should strive to include any major long- range plans of these organizations that may
have an impact on the regional transportation system. The purpose is to provide private sector
transportation providers a process of communication and involvement into the region’s
transportation planning process. The specific outreach techniques developed and ultimately
used is dependent on the size and composition of the region. These efforts to solicit input into
the long- range regional transportation planning process should be documented in the RTP.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Federal regulations require private sector involvement as a component of the regional
transportation planning process. Title 23 USC part 134 ( g)( 4), Title 23 USC part 135( e) and
Title 23 CFR part 450.316 ( a) require the transportation planning process include input from the
goods movement industry and other transportation organizations.
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
2007 RTP Guidelines
48
State: California Government Code § 14000( d) recommends that a comprehensive multimodal
transportation planning process should be established which involves all levels of government
and the private sector in a cooperative process to develop coordinated transportation plans.
Best Practices:
http:// www. sacog. org/ goodsmovement
3.13 Consultation with Interested Parties
The U. S. DOT defines consultation as: “ one or more parties confer with other identified parties
in accordance with an established process and, prior to taking action( s), considers the views of
the other parties and periodically informs them about action( s) taken.” Some areas of
consultation could include transportation, land use, employment, economic development,
housing, community development and environmental issues.
The U. S. DOT definition of “ interested parties” to be engaged in statewide and metropolitan
transportation planning has been expanded. The MPO/ RTPA shall provide the following
interested parties with reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed RTP:
1. Citizens;
2. Affected public agencies;
3. Representatives of public transportation employees;
4. Freight shippers;
5. Private providers of transportation;
6. Representatives of users of public transportation;
7. Representatives of users of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities;
8. Representatives of people with disabilities;
9. Providers of freight transportation services; and,
10. Other interested parties.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Consulting with interested parties on plans, programs and projects shall include
individuals or organizations that are not mentioned in Title 23 CFR Part 450.316( a). Title 23
CFR part 450.316( d) requires MPOs to consult with federal land use management agencies as
appropriate during the development of RTP. RTPAs shall comply as well. Title 23 CFR part
450.322( g) states that MPOs shall consult as appropriate with State and local agencies
responsible for land use management, natural resources, environmental protection,
conservation and historic preservation during the development of their RTP. RTPAs shall
comply with this as well.
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. sjcog. org/ Programs% 20&% 20Projects/ Transportation_ files/ RTP. htm
2007 RTP Guidelines
49
http:// www. scag. ca. gov/ rtp2004/ 2004/ FinalPlan. htm
http:// www. edctc. org/_ rtp. htm
3.14 Native American Tribal Government Consultation and Coordination
During the development of the RTP, Tribal Government consultation can be described as the
MPO/ RTPA conducting meetings with representatives of the federally recognized Tribal
Government during the preparation of the RTP prior to taking action( s) on the plan and making
sure to consider input from the tribe. Tribal Government coordination is the comparison of the
MPOs/ RTPAs transportation plans, programs, projects and schedules with similar documents
prepared by the tribe. The MPO/ RTPA needs to ensure consistency with tribal plans and the
RTP.
Currently there are 108 federally recognized Tribes in California. The federally recognized
Tribal Governments hold inherent power of limited sovereignty and are charged with the same
responsibility as other governmental authorities. In addition, California is home to the largest
Native American population in the country, including non- federally recognized Tribes, and urban
Indian communities.
The MPO or RTPA should include a discussion of consultation, coordination and communication
with federally recognized Tribal Governments when the tribes are located within the boundary of
an MPO/ RTPA. The MPO/ RTPA should establish a government- to- government relationship
with each Tribe in the region. This refers to the protocol for communicating between the
MPOs/ RTPAs and the Tribal Governments as a sovereign nation. This consultation process
should be documented in the RTP. The initial point of contact for Tribal Governments should be
the Chairperson for the tribe.
The MPO/ RTPA should develop protocol and communication methods for outreach and
consultation with the Tribal Governments. However these protocol/ communication methods
should be re- evaluated if the agencies are un- successful in soliciting a response during the
development of the RTP.
It is important to ensure that efforts in establishing channels of communication are documented
in the RTP. For further information and assistance in the consultation process, contact the
California Department of Transportation Native American Liaison Branch.
As mentioned above, California is home to many non- federally recognized tribes as well as
Native Americans living in urban areas. MPOs/ RTPAs should involve the Native American
communities in the public participation processes. Establishing and maintaining government- to-government
relations with federally recognized Tribal Governments through consultation is
separate from, and precedes the public participation process.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.316( c) requires MPOs to involve the federally recognized Native
American Tribal Government in the development of the RTP and FTIP. RTPAs shall comply as
well.
Title 23 CFR part 450.316 ( a)( 1), the participation plan shall be developed by the MPO in
consultation with all interested parties and shall, at a minimum, describe explicit procedures,
strategies and desired outcomes. The requirement of including interested parties in the
2007 RTP Guidelines
50
development of the participation plan and the RTP would include federally recognized or non-federally
recognized tribes.
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
U. S. Department of Transportation Order 5301.1 ensures that programs, policies and
procedures administered by the U. S. DOT are responsive to the needs and concerns of Native
Americans. This Order provides a very thorough overview of the various Federal regulations
and Executive Orders on this subject. This Order is available at:
http:// environment. fhwa. dot. gov/ guidebook/ vol2/ 5301.1. pdf
In addition to the best practice noted above, it is recommended that federally and non- federally
recognized Tribal Governments be consulted when historic, sacred sites, subsistence resources
or traditional collecting properties are present in the MPOs jurisdiction.
A Current example of tribal government coordination in California can be found at:
http:// www. sandag. org/? subclassid= 105& fuseaction= home. subclasshome
3.15 Consultation with Resource Agencies
Current federal regulations require MPOs to consult with resource agencies, State and local
agencies responsible for land use management, environmental protection, conservation, and
historic preservation concerning the development of the RTP.
The consultation efforts shall involve:
1. Comparing transportation plans with State conservation plans, maps and other data, if
available; and,
2. Comparing transportation plans with inventories of natural and historic resources, if
available.
New federal requirements seek to receive input/ comments from resource agencies early in the
planning process. The reason for proactive consultation and engagement is to prevent project
delays at a later time. In other words, coordinating and consulting with resources agencies
early in the planning process, may lead to better coordination, minimal litigation, possible project
cost savings and an upfront understanding of resource agency issues.
Some examples of resource agencies that could included in a more seamless multi- agency
process, but are not limited to California Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA), California
Coastal Commission, and US Fish and Wildlife, U. S. Army Corp of Engineers, California
Department of Fish and Game and California Department of Parks and Recreation. An
MPO/ RTPA shall coordinate and consult with resource agencies on data or information sharing,
if available.
2007 RTP Guidelines
51
The following is a preliminary list of resource agencies that should be consulted in the
development of the RTP:
1. Federal agencies ( including FWHA, EPA and FTA);
2. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers;
3. NOAA Fisheries Services;
4. U. S. National Park Service;
5. U. S. National Marine and Fishery Service;
6. California Environmental, energy, resource and permit agencies;
7. California Coastal Commission;
8. California Energy Commission;
9. California Office of Planning and Research;
10. California Environmental Protection Agency;
11. California Resources Agency;
12. California Water Resources Control Board;
13. California Regional Water Quality Control Board;
14. California Department of Fish and Game;
15. California Integrated Waste Management Board;
16. California Air Resources Board;
17. Bay Conservation and Development Commission ( Bay Area);
18. Regional Air Quality Management Districts, and,
19. Private sector carpools / rideshare coordinators.
20. California Department of Parks and Recreation.
The challenge will be getting a speedy response or comments on the RTP, its programs and
projects. It is understandable that these efforts will depend on the specific region. MPOs in the
Sacramento Valley and Southern California have chosen to send letters requesting comment/ s
on plans, programs and projects and when they do not hear back from the resource agencies,
they now ask, “ why are you not able to comment?”
Caltrans maintains a list of federal and State resource agencies that should be consulted during
the preparation of the RTP. This list is available through the Caltrans website or by notifying
Caltrans transportation planning staff.
Interagency Consultation for Transportation Conformity – The transportation conformity rule
requires that State and local agencies establish formal procedures to ensure interagency
coordination on critical transportation conformity issues. Nonattainment and maintenance areas
have adopted consultation procedures to meet these requirements. These procedures are
federally enforceable and should be followed for each conformity determination.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 450.322( g)( 1) & ( g)( 2) requires MPOs to consult and compare plans,
maps, and natural or historic resources with resource agencies, State and local agencies
responsible for land use management, environmental protection, conservation, and historic
preservation agencies.
State: California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA), consultation with agencies, governments
or individuals that could potentially be impacted by transportation projects in the RTP.
2007 RTP Guidelines
52
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices: Two prime examples of resource agency consultation relating to Habitat
conservation plans can be found at San Joaquin Council of Governments’ Habitat Programs
and Projects websites:
http:// www. sjcog. org/ Programs% 20&% 20Projects/ Transportation_ files/ RTP. htm
http:// www. sjcog. org/ Programs% 20&% 20Projects/ Habitat_ files/ Participation. htm
http:// www. sandag. org/ index. asp? projectid= 263& fuseaction= projects. detail
http:// www. scag. ca. gov/ rtp2004/ 2004/ FinalPlan. htm
3.16 Coordinated Public Transit/ Human Services Transportation Plans
The aim of the Coordinated Public Transit/ Human Services Transportation Plan is to improve
transportation services for persons with disabilities, older adults and individuals with lower
incomes by ensuring that communities coordinate the available transit resources. Coordination
enhances transportation access, minimizes duplication of services and facilitates the most
appropriate cost- effective transportation possible with available resources.
Federal transit law requires that projects selected for funding under the following Federal Transit
Administration ( FTA) programs be derived from a coordinated plan: Elderly Individuals and
Individuals with Disabilities Program ( 49 U. S. C Section 5310), Job Access and Reverse
Commute Program ( 49 U. S. C Section 5316), and New Freedom Program ( 49 U. S. C Section
5317). Information on these programs can be found at:
http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ MassTrans.
MPOs/ RTPAs are not required to be the lead agency in the development of the coordinated
plan. Federal guidance states that the coordinated plan may be developed separately or as a
part of the metropolitan transportation planning process. In any case, MPOs/ RTPAs should
ensure that the plan is coordinated and consistent with their regions metropolitan transportation
planning process.
The coordinated plan must be developed through a process that includes representatives of
public, private, and non- profit transportation and human services providers and participation by
members of the public. The public participation requirements may be shared with those for the
development of the RTP.
As with all FTA programs, transit projects selected for funding must be consistent with the RTP
and FTIP. Further, the annual list of obligated projects is a planning requirement that will
necessitate active involvement by the MPO in those programs.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: None
State: None
2007 RTP Guidelines
53
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: Title 23 CFR 450.306( g) states the regional planning process should be coordinated
and consistent with the preparation of the coordinated public transit- human services
transportation plan as required by 49 U. S. C. 5310, 5316 and 5317.
State: None
Best Practices: None
Modal Discussion
The RTP is the key document prepared by the MPO/ RTPA that reflects future plans of the
transportation system for the region. This future vision includes all modes of transportation and
is one of the key functions of the RTP.
Both federal regulations and State statute require RTPs to address each transportation modes
individually. Title 23 CFR 540.322( b) states: “ the transportation plan shall include
strategies/ actions that lead to the development of an integrated multimodal transportation
system to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of people and goods in addressing current
and future transportation demand.”
Title 23 CFR 450.322( f)( 2) requires that RTPs address both existing and proposed
transportation facilities such as major roadways, transit lines ( both rail and primary bus routes),
multimodal and intermodal connector facilities, pedestrian walkways and bicycle facilities.
California Government Code Section 65080( a) states that transportation planning agencies shall
prepare and adopt an RTP directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional
transportation system that includes mass transportation, highway, railroad, maritime, bicycle,
pedestrian, goods movement, and aviation facilities.
3.17 Highways, Local Streets & Roads
The section of the RTP discussing highways, local streets and roads should consider the
following:
1. An overview of the primary highway and arterial road system within the region;
2. Dual access of the local road system with bicycles;
3. National and State highway system, and regionally significant streets and roads;
4. Any corridor preservation processes for possible future transportation projects ( i. e. Right
of Way, historic highways, abandoned rails);
5. Local maintenance and rehabilitation needs ( including deferred maintenance);
6. Maintenance of State highways;
7. Data collection and other infrastructure requirement for ITS; and,
8. Unmet highway needs.
2007 RTP Guidelines
54
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR 450.322( b) requires short and long- range strategies for an integrated
multimodal transportation system.
State: Government Code Section 65080( a) requires that the RTP shall be directed at
achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system.
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. scrtpa. org/ RTplan. htm
http:// www. pctpa. org/ library/ rtp2027/ rtp2027_ final. htm
http:// www. trpa. org/ default. aspx? tabindex= 13& tabid= 317
3.18 Transit
Transit plays a key role in the regional effort to reduce traffic congestion, VMT and vehicle
emissions particularly in urbanized areas. The increased use of transit by the general public will
also be a key element to reducing greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.
Transit systems also play an important role in the mobility of people who are elderly, people who
are low- income and people with disabilities. Given these reasons, it is crucial for MPOs/ RTPAs
to engage in a continual dialogue with the transit operators within their region.
The section of the RTP addressing mass transportation issues ( including regional transit
services and urban rail systems) should address:
1. Identification of passenger transit modes within the region ( bus, light and heavy rail,
etc.);
2. Integration with transit, highway, street and road projects ( including identification of
priorities);
3. Implementation plans, operational strategies and schedule for future service ( including
construction and procurement);
4. Operational integration between transit fleets, and other modes ( passenger rail, aviation,
taxis, etc.);
5. Summation of the short and long range transit plans along with the capital finance plans
for the 20- year period of the RTP;
6. Short and long- range transit plans and capital finance plans for the 20- year RTP period;
7. Inventory of bus fleets by fuel type ( diesel, natural gas, and other alternative fuels);
8. Unmet transit needs;
9. Urban and commuter rail project priorities; and,
10. ITS elements to increase efficiency, safety and level of service.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR part 540.322( b) requires short and long- range strategies for an integrated
multimodal transportation system.
2007 RTP Guidelines
55
State: Government Code Section 65080( a) the RTP shall be directed at achieving a
coordinated and balanced regional transportation system.
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices: None
3.19 Goods Movement ( Maritime/ Rail/ Trucking/ Aviation)
Goods movement is at the heart of California’s economy. With the vast array of products that
need to get from here to there, the importance of the multi- model transportation system is
paramount. Infrastructure degradation would have a crippling effect on the business, safety and
quality of life.
The RTP section discussing goods movement should identify the following:
1. The role of goods movement within the region ( this general discussion will include
intermodal connectivity between all applicable maritime facilities, freight rail lines,
inventory of major routes used for trucking, major warehouses and freight transfer
facilities, and aviation cargo facilities);
2. Plans for future expansion of seaport and airport cargo handling facilities and issues
regarding access to these ports;
3. Projections for future expansion of freight rail lines within the region;
4. Freight rail and Maritime port access issues ( if applicable);
5. USA/ Mexico border crossing issues ( if applicable);
6. State maritime policy and plans; and,
7. ITS issues relating to goods movement.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR 450.322( b) requires short and long- range strategies for an integrated
multimodal transportation system.
State: Government Code Section 65080( a) requires that the RTP shall be directed at achieving
a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system.
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. mtc. ca. gov/ planning/ 2030_ plan
http:// www. scag. ca. gov/ rtp2004/ 2004/ FinalPlan. htm
2007 RTP Guidelines
56
3.20 Regional Airport System
Airports are a major contributor to the local, state and national economy. The value of the
State’s air cargo is approximately over $ 173 billion and the California share of the U. S. travel
market is approximately twelve percent.
The RTP section addressing aviation should identify the following:
1. An overview of the role the airport system within the region;
2. An airport inventory of the commercial and general aviation airports within the region.
This should include a general description of each airport ( number of commercial flight,
based aircraft, number of annual operations, etc.);
3. Airport ground access and required ground access plans - If region contains primary air-carrier
airport( s), the RTP shall include an Airport Ground Access Improvement Program
as specified in California Government Code 65081. A primary air- carrier airport is
defined by the Federal Aviation Administration as having 10,000 annual passenger
enplanements;
4. Short and long- range capital improvement plans and projects for the airports within the
region;
5. Outcomes of the California Aviation System Plan and regional aviation system planning
efforts; and,
6. The identification of the State required Airport Land Use Commission within the region
and discussion of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR 450.322( b) requires short and long- range strategies for an integrated
multimodal transportation system.
State: California Government Code 65081.1 requires each RTPA with a primary air- carrier
airport to have an Airport Ground Access Improvement Program for mass transportation.
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. actc- amador. org/ projects/ reports. php
3.21 Bicycle & Pedestrian
The use of bicycles and walking as a means of transportation has increased dramatically in
California over the last 20 years. Both modes of transportation promote a healthy lifestyle and
reduce environmental impacts. The RTP section discussing bicycle and pedestrian issues
should identify the following:
1. Bicycle routes within the region ( including bicycle routes on local streets);
2. Policies, plans and programs used to promote the usage of bikes and walking;
2007 RTP Guidelines
57
3. Transit interface with bicyclists and pedestrians; and,
4. Unmet bicycle and pedestrian needs.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 CFR 450.322( f)( 8) requires MPOs to include a discussion of pedestrian
walkways and bicycle transportation facilities in accordance with Title 23 USC 217( g)
State: Government Code Section 65080( a) requires that the RTP shall be directed at
achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system.
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
State: None
Best Practices:
http:// www. ambag. org/ planning/ MTP. html
Programming/ Operations
3.22 Transportation System Operations & Management
The RTP shall address operational and management strategies aimed at improving the
performance of the existing regional transportation system in order to reduce transportation
congestion issues and maximize the safety and mobility of people and goods. Examples of
operational and management include: ( a) Traffic incident management ( b) Travel information
services( c) Roadway weather information ( d) Freeway management ( e) Traffic signal
coordination and ( f) and bicycle and transit trip planning.
Although operational and management strategies may be implemented on a regional, area-wide,
or project- specific basis, those included in an RTP should typically be those that have
importance on a regional level.
RTPs shall include existing and proposed transportation facilities ( including major roadways,
transit, multimodal and intermodal facilities, pedestrian walkways and bicycle facilities and
connectors) that should function as an integrated regional transportation system with emphasis
on those facilities that serve important national and regional needs.
If applicable, the locally preferred alternative selected from an Alternative Analysis under the
FTA’s Capital Investment Grant Program ( Section 5309) needs to be adopted as part of the
RTP as a condition for funding under 49 USC 5309.
Requirements ( Shalls)
Federal: Title 23 USC Section 134, 450.322 ( f)( 3) requires strategies for improving the regional
transportation system and reducing congestion.
State: None
Recommendations ( Shoulds)
Federal: None
2007 RTP Guidelines
58
State: None
Best Practices: A U. S. Department of Transportation document titled; “ Management &
Operations in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan: A Guidebook for Creating an Objectives-
Driven, Performance- Based Approach” provides a very good overview on how to integrate
transportation system management and operations into the planning process.
3.23 Coordination With Programming Documents
The Federal Transportation Improvement Program ( FTIP) is a four- year prioritized listing of
federally funded and non- federally funded regionally significant transportation projects that is
developed and formally adopted by an MPO as part of the metropolitan transportation planning
process. MPOs work cooperatively with public transportation agencies as well as other local,
state, and federal agencies to propose projects for inclusion in the FTIP. Each project or
project phase in the FTIP must be consistent with the approved RTP. The FTIP must be
updated at least every four years. MPOs may also refer to the FTIP as the Metropolitan
Transportation Improvement Program ( MTIP). Specific requirements for the development and
content of the FTIP are contained in Title 23 CFR Part 450.324.
As with the RTP, some MPOs refer to their four- year FTIP by other terms. Below is table
outlining the various terms used by federal, state and the MPOs to refer to the same
documents, the four- year FTIP prepared by the MPOs and the STIP, which is prepared by
Caltrans and includes all of the FTIPs and projects from the non- MPO counties.
Federal Term Used State Term Used Terms Used by MPOs
TIP FTIP TIP, MTIP, FTIP, RTIP
FSTIP STIP FSTIP
Projects included in the FTIP may include projec