Practices for Selecting Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects (2021)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

3   Background State DOTs have traditionally prioritized the movement of motor vehicles (including buses operated by public transportation providers) over other forms of surface transportation as motor vehicles have and continue to be the primary means of travel for most Americans. The structure of federal surface transportation programs has incentivized this emphasis on improvements for automobiles. This subsidization of auto-oriented road projects, over the course of several decades, has resulted in the creation of the transportation system that exists today throughout the United States. Beginning with the first apportionment of funds under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in federal fiscal year 1992, the federal government began providing funding dedicated to projects that support and expand active transportation modes such as walking and bicycling. In the same way that federal funding facilitated the growth of auto mobile-oriented transportation systems, the availability of federal funding in each succeeding piece of surface transportation–authorizing legislation has facili- tated the inclusion of pedestrian and bicycle projects in state DOT plans and capital programs. This federal funding, along with state funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects, is not without limits. Demonstrated needs as represented by the requested amount of funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects routinely exceeds available resources for most if not all state DOTs on a regular basis. In addition, state DOTs must negotiate between the competing interests of the proponents, who desire additional pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and other stakeholders, who may focus on the potential for increased automobile travel times and the removal of parking spaces as a result of implementing these facilities. However, not all indi- viduals can or choose to drive or use public transit, and people have a wide variety of reasons for walking and biking as a means of transport or for recreation. This makes the ability to safely and efficiently walk and bicycle a fundamental need for people from different back- grounds for a wide variety of trip purposes. To maximize the funding provided for nonmotorized transportation options, state DOTs have put in place practices for selecting pedestrian and bicycle projects. These practices include • Establishing policy goals and objectives along with associated performance measures, • Identifying projects to be considered for funding through state DOT–administered programs, • Evaluating and prioritizing proposed projects submitted through the solicitations, and • Selecting projects on the basis of the degree to which they advance the established policy goals and objectives. The projects selected for funding by state DOTs can be standalone pedestrian and bicycle projects as well as ones that are part of larger projects. In addition, education and encourage- ment programs that are applicable to pedestrians and bicyclists are also eligible activities under C H A P T E R 1 Introduction

4 Practices for Selecting Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects certain federal and state funding programs. State DOTs can choose to engage stakeholders at the state, regional, and local levels in varying ways as they develop plans and other activities that result in the selection of pedestrians and bicycle projects. Funding for Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects Pedestrian and bicycle projects can be programmed with funds from multiple federal pro- grams. Eligible activities for each program are defined in the authorizing legislation: some allow a broad array of uses while others are more limited. The primary federal funding programs used to program and implement pedestrian and bicycle projects are presented in alphabetical order in Table 1 along with the respective U.S. Department of Transportation administration/office responsible for overseeing the program and a nonexhaustive summary of the eligible activities. State DOTs are responsible for administering the majority of funding that is apportioned through these federal programs. ISTEA was enacted in 1991. At that time, federal funding obligated for pedestrian and bicycle improvements totaled approximately $6 million. ISTEA created the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhancements (the precursor to Trans- portation Alternatives, or TA) programs. In the first year of federal funding obligations under ISTEA (FY 1992), nearly $23 million was obligated for pedestrian and bicycle projects (FHWA 2016). In 2019, federal obligations for bicycle and pedestrian projects totaled more than $1 billion, with TA accounting for almost half (FHWA 2020). In addition to federal programs, states also provide funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects. In 2014, all 50 states had at least one source of funding that could be used for pedes- trian and bicycle projects, and 19 had a dedicated funding source for these types of projects (Advocacy Advance 2014). Some of the more prominent state sources of funds for pedestrian and bicycle projects included (in alphabetical order) development impact fees, general fund revenues, license plate fees, local planning assistance grants, severance fees for natural resource extraction, state fuel taxes, and vehicle registration and transfer fees (Advocacy Advance 2014). Phases in the Selection of Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects by State DOTs With funding sources available for the implementation of pedestrian and bicycle projects, state DOTs establish their selection processes. The review for this synthesis of state plans that include pedestrian and bicycle components indicates these processes typically include four phases, which can be categorized as follows: 1. Establishing policy goals, objectives, and performance measures—Consistent with other modes, the overall stated priorities that state DOTs establish for movements by pedestrians and bicyclists are typically articulated as a set of guiding principles, most commonly organized as policy goals and sometimes including related objectives. Performance measures consistent with these policy goals and objectives are created to evaluate projects being considered for funding by state DOT–administered programs. These performance measures also provide the opportunity to track the aggregate progress achieved toward the goals and objectives resulting from implementation of projects funded through state DOT–administered pro- grams as well as projects advanced (at the discretion of the state DOT) using revenues from other sources. State DOTs can develop these guiding principles and metrics as a strictly internal process or engage other state agencies, regional organizations, and/or local stake- holders to varying degrees.

Program Name Oversight Office/ Administration Summary of Eligible Activities Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) FHWA Activities that will likely contribute to the maintenance or attainment of at least one national ambient air quality standard by reducing air pollution in a cost-effective manner. Federal Lands Access Program FHWA Planning, research, design, and construction (including preventive maintenance) on roadways located on or adjacent to federal lands, including provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists. High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) Program FHWA Activities that are eligible under the Highway Safety Improvement Program to correct a highway safety problem on a roadway that is functionally classified as a Rural Major Collector, Rural Minor Collector, or Rural Local Road. Highway Safety Improvement Program (non-HRRR) FHWA Activities that are consistent with a state’s strategic highway safety plan and will correct a highway safety problem, including a hazardous roadway location or feature. National Highway Performance Program FHWA Activities on the National Highway System (NHS) or another eligible facility that support the achievement of a state’s performance management targets for NHS facilities. Section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program FHWA and NHTSA Programs to reduce drug- and alcohol- impaired driving, reduce speeding, improve motorcycle/pedestrian/bicyclist safety, support school-based driver education classes, increase enforcement of traffic safety laws, and other programs consistent with the respective state’s federally required Highway Safety Plan. These grants are provided to state highway safety offices, which can be (but are not required to be) housed within the state DOT. Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (non-Transportation Alternatives) FHWA Activities on any roadway other than those functionally classified as Rural Minor Collector, Urban Local Road, or Rural Local Road with exceptions. In addition, pedestrian and bicycle projects and programs eligible under the Transportation Alternatives set- aside may be funded through the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program. Transportation Alternatives (TA) FHWA Planning, design, and construction of on-road and off-road facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, including the conversion and use of abandoned railroad corridors and projects and programs eligible under the former Safe Routes to School Program. TA funding is a set-aside of the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program and includes a set-aside for Recreational Trails Program projects. State DOTs are not eligible entities for TA funds but can partner with an eligible entity to advance a project. U.S. DOT Discretionary Grants Program Office of the Secretary of Transportation A broad range of activities that include capital and planning projects eligible under current highway, transit, rail, port, intermodal, and tribal land programs. As of publication, the program is funded through the Fiscal Year 2020 Appropriations Act for National Infrastructure Investments. It is known as the Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) program. Table 1. Primary federal funding programs for pedestrian and bicycle projects.

6 Practices for Selecting Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects 2. Identifying pedestrian and bicycle projects to be proposed for implementation—Depending on the parameters of the various funding programs, eligible applicants for both federal and state funding programs for pedestrian and bicycle projects can include state DOTs them- selves, local governments, regional transportation agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and other entities. Projects may be identified internally by state DOTs via consultation with their various bureaus or offices involved in planning, safety, design, capital programming, and other functions. State DOTs can also choose to separately solicit candidate projects from external agencies and organizations or combine these solicitations with their internal pro- cesses for identifying projects. The review for this synthesis of the state planning documents that include pedestrian and bicycle projects indicates that state DOTs generally develop written guidance and other materials to guide the development of project proposals. 3. Evaluating and prioritizing proposed pedestrian and bicycle projects—State DOTs’ evaluation and prioritization of projects generated both internally and through solicitations of external stakeholders vary with respect to the qualitative and quantitative methods and analysis tools employed. The survey of the state of the practice and interviews conducted to develop the case examples for this synthesis indicate that state DOT decision-making processes can range from a highly centralized review and ranking of project proposals at the main office or head- quarters level to a delegation of at least a portion of this responsibility to district/regional staff. In some cases, non–state DOT entities, such as metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and regional planning organizations, participate in the evaluation and prioritization of proposed projects through formal consultation and/or direct involvement in the state DOT process. 4. Selecting pedestrian and bicycle projects to be awarded funds—The state DOTs’ decision to award funds to proposed pedestrian and bicycle projects may adhere strictly to the results of their evaluation and prioritization processes or incorporate other considerations. These considerations include geographic distribution (e.g., a minimum amount of funds must be awarded to each state DOT district/region, fixed proportions must be allocated to urban and rural areas) and programmatic restrictions (e.g., the total funds requested for projects of a certain type exceed the amount available in that funding program, resulting in projects of another type, which ranked lower, being funded due to the availability of funds in a different funding program for which they are eligible). Outside of the identification and evaluation of standalone pedestrian and bicycle projects, state DOTs also provide funding for pedestrian and bicycle improvements as part of larger roadway and bridge projects. These improvements may be evaluated similarly to stand- alone projects (i.e., relative to the degree to which they meet stated state DOT pedestrian and bicycle policy goals and are estimated to result in progress per associated performance measures), or separate processes may be used to determine their inclusion in larger projects (e.g., certain locations, such as cities and densely developed portions of townships, are required to provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities as part of roadway projects). Beyond the selection of pedestrian and bicycle projects to be awarded funding, some state DOTs also conduct postaward analysis to estimate the extent to which the selected projects resulted in progress toward their established goals and objectives. This type of analysis could help state DOTs better align their investments with desired outcomes via adjustments to their practices in future rounds of project identification, evaluation, and selection. Synthesis Objective The objective of this synthesis is to document and summarize state DOT practices for selecting pedestrian and bicycle projects, excluding design elements. The synthesis scope encompasses the identification of the policy goals that state DOTs use to guide evaluation

Introduction 7   and selection of pedestrian and bicycle projects along with the associated criteria, metrics, and targets included in the plans and programs they produce. The types of pedestrian and bicycle projects that are funded using federal programs and state revenues are documented along with the level of involvement in the selection process by non–state DOT stakeholders at the state, regional, and local levels. Synthesis Approach This synthesis used multiple methods to identify how state DOTs select pedestrian and bicycle projects. These included (1) a literature review of multiple sources to gain an understanding of previous research conducted on state DOT processes for identifying, evaluating, prioritizing, and selecting pedestrian and bicycle projects; (2) an inventory and review of the statewide plans and documents (e.g., reports, guidelines) relevant to the selection of pedestrian and bicycle projects for all 50 states and the District of Columbia; (3) an online survey that was distributed to the FHWA-maintained list of state bicycle and pedestrian coordinators of all 50 state DOTs and the District of Columbia about their pedestrian and bicycle policy goals, related means for evaluating projects, types of funding sources used, and engagement with external stakeholders; and (4) case examples of four state DOTs based on interviews to gather information on their experiences in selecting pedestrian and bicycle projects. This synthesis consists of five chapters, along with a list of references consulted and appen- dices detailing the instruments used to gather data: • Chapter 1, Introduction, provides the objective of this synthesis, approach used to conduct the research, background on available funding, and general phases that state DOTs employ to select pedestrian and bicycle projects. • Chapter  2, Review of Literature and Practice, summarizes the findings from the leading research related to how state DOTs evaluate and prioritize pedestrian and bicycle projects, associated measurement systems, and pedestrian and bicycle improvements implemented as part of larger projects. Key elements of pedestrian and bicycle project selection processes are discussed using an inventory of state DOT plans. • Chapter 3, Survey of the State of the Practice, discusses pedestrian and bicycle policy goals, associated criteria that are applied to different state DOT plans and programs, and the involve- ment of non–state DOT stakeholders as part of the selection of pedestrian and bicycle projects by the state DOTs that responded to the online survey. • Chapter 4, Case Examples, provides insights on how four state DOTs select, prioritize, fund, and assess pedestrian and bicycle projects, and items they have identified for potential future integration into their processes. • Chapter 5, Summary of Major Findings, reviews the key findings of this synthesis and future research needs that would provide insights and practical applications for state DOTs to consider integrating into their pedestrian and bicycle project selection processes. • The references section lists the resources consulted to produce the background and review of literature and practice components of this synthesis; these resources were instrumental in developing the survey and interview questionnaires. • The appendices present the survey questionnaire to state DOTs, the results of the completed questionnaires, and the case example interview/discussion guide.