Skip to content
Facebook iconYouTube iconTwitter iconFlickr iconLinkedInInstagram
Office of Planning, Environment, & Realty (HEP)
HEP Events Guidance Publications Glossary Awards Contacts

Context Sensitive Solutions Technical Assistance: Washington State Department of Transportation

Recommendations to WSDOT

The following recommendations were provided to WSDOT in preparation for the development of their 2017 guide manual:

  1. Define context. WSDOT’s design manual and the project development process both contain points at which context should be defined; however, neither document offers direction on how to define context nor what to do with the resulting defined context. WSDOT should develop a formal process for when and how to ask the Context Questions generated as part of this technical assistance, as well as when and how to assign Performance Metrics, to include:
    1. WSDOT should collect a subset of the participants to rework the Context Questions to ensure they are appropriate and directive.
    2. The reworked Context Questions can be assigned to different phases of the project lifecycle, starting with Planning.
    3. Some Context Questions should be repeated from phase to phase, and should evolve as appropriate. For instance, one of the questions: “Is the existing and planned transportation land use context primarily auto dependent or multi-modal?” This question should first be asked at the beginning of project delivery, specifically during Scoping (see recommendation number 2 regarding creation of a formal scoping process). Shortly after the Scoping phase begins, the question should be refined to read: “Should our project scope be adjusted to support local biking, walking, or transit use?” If the answer to this question is yes, then later, at the end of preliminary design, the question should ask: “What elements have we included in the project scope to support local biking, walking, or transit use?”
    4. WSDOT should include Performance Measure development and utilization techniques and methods in the Context Questions development process. The list of Performance Measures that were suggested for the questions could be used as an example of mapping measures to objectives (the questions).
    5. The list of questions asked, answers, and comparisons to Performance Metrics should travel with the project from one stage to another (e.g., Planning to Project Initiation to Scoping to Preliminary Design to Final Design to Construction). See Recommendation #2 for suggested implementation of this process through a scope development phase.
  2. Build in a Scoping phase. The Scoping phase should be promoted as a key component of the Project Development process. As WSDOT is defining it now, the Scoping phase should be highlighted in between the Planning and Design processes, and cover the policy framework, managing system assets, identification of need, and assessing alternative strategies. Here are some criteria for navigating the Scoping phase:
    1. Scoping should be completed before a project is entered into the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for the following reasons:
      1. Once a project is placed into the STIP, the schedule of delivery for each phase (Design, Right of Way, Construction) is made public.
      2. Having publicly announced delivery expectations increases the likelihood that elected officials will press WSDOT for delivery.
      3. Since the scope is announced to the public, a constituency for that scope is generated. Once a constituency has been established, it becomes problematic to switch to a more appropriate project definition as new information on feasibility arises.
      4. When a project scope must be changed, the project’s status in the STIP also changes and causes the Metropolitan Planning Organizations and WSDOT to scramble to “fill holes” in the Program.
    2. Scoping should include both internal and external outreach. WSDOT can use this phase as an opportunity to emphasize its multi-disciplinary and community engagement techniques as applied directly to the development of project and contextual needs.
      1. Internal outreach should include a broad spectrum of WSDOT departments, such as Operations, Maintenance, Utilities, Traffic Engineering, Structures, Right of Way, and Access Management, in addition to the Environmental and Public Engagement departments.
      2. External stakeholders should include local communities, environmental and permitting agencies; and advocacy groups.
    3. WSDOT should prepare a Scoping Report to document the process and decisions made under this phase. This report can be used as the preface to the design documentation.
      1. The Scoping Report can be used as a basis for design exceptions.
      2. The report should contain a description of the Context Questions that were used to define context and the Performance Measures that were selected.
      3. The report should provide a simple structure to report on Performance Measure accomplishment.
      4. The report should document the thinking behind all design decisions, particularly as it relates to internal stakeholders. Often, when a project takes several years to develop, support units such as Traffic Engineering and Utilities departments will need to be reminded of why the project was scoped the way it was.
    4. WSDOT should develop a formal list of commitments made to project stakeholders, and mandate that the list be reviewed during each transition from one stage to another (e.g., Preliminary Design to Final Design; Final Design to Construction)
  3. Work in coordination with others in the community. WSDOT should work in collaboration with local jurisdictions, MPOs, and other state and local agencies to create regionally integrated transportation and land use plans. WSDOT may wish to consider bringing on “on-call” professional services staff capable of supplying technical assistance to communities on how to create a local network and land use plan that supports WSDOT’s mission to provide appropriate mobility for all. The benefits to WSDOT’s approach to project development and its community engagement efforts would far outweigh the costs of providing these comprehensive planning opportunities. Below is suggested rationale for investing in comprehensive planning efforts:
    1. Solutions that focus only on the movement of vehicles are no longer viable for many contexts:
      1. Congestion is increasing at an exponential rate despite major investment in building new roads and/or adding capacity to existing ones.
      2. Transportation funding remains flat, while fix-it-first needs are skyrocketing.
      3. Citizen resistance is mounting as stakeholders no longer accept Interstate-era designs in their communities.
      4. Sprawling patterns of land use are overtaxing the ability of governments to provide the infrastructure necessary to accommodate development and growth.
      5. Concerns about obesity and poor health among Americans are increasing, and there is increasing evidence that the sprawling development patterns of the last 50 years are a major contributing factor. This concern will indirectly affect the amount of funding available to WSDOT in the future.
    2. Integrated transportation and land use planning, done either at the corridor or subarea level, will provide the following return on investment to WSDOT:
      1. Communities will be educated on how to develop land use plans and street networks that don’t layer large amounts of local traffic onto the state highway system. For instance, in a community looking to create or revitalize a new town center, the development plan could site local trip origin generators (such as commercial centers, schools, and clinics) on local streets, thereby increasing the potential for the state highway to handle regional and commuting traffic.
      2. Understanding current and future development in a corridor will reveal opportunities to share expenses with developers, and will help ensure internal road networks built by developers are coordinated with the future transportation needs of the public.
      3. Communities will recognize that funds are limited and each agency is facing the significant demands of maintaining existing infrastructure. Therefore, as the cost of accommodating community goals increases, the need for the community to find ways to help fund these improvements also increases.

The NCHRP 08-36 Task 86 study Corridor Approaches to Integrating Transportation and Land Use includes examples of how to produce integrated transportation and land-use studies in local communities (available at the following link: http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=909)

Updated: 7/28/2017
HEP Home Planning Environment Real Estate
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000