Corridor Planning Guidebook

Policy solutions relevant to a highway corridor could include those related to transportation, access, and land use. While the process of conducting a corridor plan may incorporate some policy solutions by design (for example, those related to design of the roadway infrastructure), others, such as access management on the local roadway system or other development policies, may be under the purview of the local agency that regulates land use and the local transportation system. Solutions related to maintenance needs or practices could also be included here.

Management and operations solutions aim to optimize the safe, efficient, and reliable use of transportation infrastructure for all travelers by improving how vehicles and users move throughout the system. At MnDOT, these solutions are typically grouped under the category of Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO). Examples include traffic incident management, traveler information, traffic signal timing and coordination, transit advantages, freight management, work zone management, managed lanes, and low-cost geometric improvements, among others. Further detail on TSMO solutions, including examples, can be found on the MnDOT TSMO webpage. TSMO Tactical Plans (available in 2026) should be consulted for potential relevant new TSMO strategies and activities.

Improvements to roadway and related infrastructure are intended to provide engineering and other infrastructure solutions to identified issues. These commonly include changes to signage, crossings, sidewalks, signals, intersections, pavement, bridges, etc.

Solutions should include a “no build” or “do nothing” option that serves as a basis for comparison to the “build” options. The “Future No Build” option should include assumptions about relevant programmed projects or other changes, including traffic growth and related land use changes, reasonably expected to occur during the planning horizon (20 years or more). Other (“build”) solutions should include these same assumptions to provide an accurate basis for comparison. The terms “Build” and “No Build” are also used in NEPA/MEPA evaluations; however, no connection to the formal environmental review process is implied by their usage in a corridor plan.

One of the purposes of a corridor plan is to develop enough detail to allow for planning-level decision making with regards to performance, impact, and cost as an input to future investment decisions. For infrastructure solutions, this equates to concept-level or sketch-level design (approximately 5% engineering) and not preliminary engineering. See further discussion under Evaluation and Refinement, below.

The Safe System Approach (SSA) is a paradigm shift from the traditional approach to traffic safety that brings a focus on proactively considering safety, providing redundancy to reduce crash severity, and accommodating human mistakes and vulnerabilities. For MnDOT, this means prioritizing the safety of the transportation system over its operational performance. Under a Safe System lens, the purpose of the state highway system is not to maximize vehicle throughput and minimize vehicular delay but rather to provide safe mobility for all road users.

SSA is a principles-based approach to address and mitigate the risk of traffic fatalities and serious injuries in the complex transportation system. Five complementary elements prevent crashes from happening and minimize the harm caused when crashes do occur: safe road users, safe vehicles, safe speeds, safe roads, and post-crash care. Of the five elements, three are most directly applicable to roadway infrastructure planning and design: safe road users, safe speeds, and safe roads. MnDOT’s 2024 Big Book of Ideas provides a comprehensive list of road safety countermeasures and strategies that can be applied to Minnesota roads.

Requirement:

Guidebook users should describe how each of the SSA elements below is incorporated into the solutions being considered. Responses should identify how the proposed solutions are new or different from standard or historic practice on the corridor.

• Safe Road Users: How does the solution address reduce the likelihood of crashes, severity of crashes, and exposure to crashes among all road users, including those who walk, bike, drive, use transit, deliver freight, and travel by other means?
• Safe Speeds: How does the solution reduce speeds to better accommodate human injury tolerances (reduce impact forces, provide additional time for drivers to stop, improve visibility)?
• Safe Roads: How does the solution incorporate design to accommodate human mistakes and injury tolerances (such as physically separating people traveling at different speeds, providing dedicated times for different users to move through a space, alerting users to hazards and other road users)?
• How could implementing a SSA approach create co-benefits toward achieving other SMTP objectives? How could implementing the proposed solutions adversely affect achievement of other SMTP objectives?

Policy Basis:

Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan: Transportation Safety Objectives

• 1. Coordinate with partners to ensure the health, safety and security for people most vulnerable, especially for those walking, rolling, bicycling and taking transit.
• 2. Modify infrastructure to accommodate all modes of transportation using complete streets, context sensitive and Safe System approaches.

Safe System Approach Implementation Plan

• Formalizes MnDOT’s commitment to universal integration of the SSA as its approach to transportation safety.

TSMO plays an important role in supporting the six objectives of the Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan (SMTP) and emphasizes safety, operational resilience, environmental sustainability, and equity.

Requirement:

Guidebook users should incorporate TSMO strategies into solutions development by considering the following questions, which may require consultation with MnDOT TSMO staff.

• What TSMO strategies and activities are currently in place in the corridor (see Step 3)?
• What TSMO strategies and activities are potentially applicable to the identified corridor needs?
• Are there TSMO strategies and activities that can improve mobility and safety without adding roadway capacity?
• How could implementing these strategies create co-benefits toward achieving other SMTP objectives? How could implementing these strategies adversely affect achievement of other SMTP objectives? What would it take to implement the identified TSMO strategies and activities?
• What are the quantitative benefits of the identified tools and strategies (reduced travel times, reduced GHG emissions, reduced crashes, etc.)?

Policy Basis:

Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan: Critical Connections Objectives

• 2.4: Use technology for system optimization for all modes.
• 2.5: Implement lower cost and targeted improvements before considering major expansion.

TSMO Strategic Plan

• TSMO strategies help achieve all six SMTP objectives, for example:
• Safety: Operational enhancements and treatments reduce safety risks to all users
• System Stewardship: TSMO strategies operate existing transportation system infrastructure to their maximum potential.
• Climate Action: Traveler information, detour routing, and coordinated emergency response enhance operational resilience; TSMO strategies that promote modal shifts or help reduce congestion contribute to greenhouse gas reductions.
• Critical Connections: TSMO encourages maximizing the mobility and accessibility of all system users by improving the safety and effectiveness of travel by all modes

Through the SMTP, MnDOT has set a target to reduce statewide per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 20% by 2050, including a 14% reduction target by 2040. MnDOT will work with partners to determine where there are greatest opportunities to meet local travel needs and SMTP targets for VMT, greenhouse gas emissions and multimodal accessibility. 

While the potential change in VMT for a given transportation corridor solution is included in the evaluation criteria, the guidance in this section provides direction for exploring VMT reducing options during planning.

Requirement:

Guidebook users should document responses to the following questions:

• What would some VMT reducing options look like in this corridor? For example, are there TSMO, transportation demand management or other opportunities to promote mode shift away from single occupant vehicle travel? What steps would need to be taken to achieve these options? Which agency partners would need to be involved?

How could implementing these options create co-benefits toward achieving other SMTP objectives? How could implementing these options adversely affect achievement of other SMTP objectives?

Policy Basis:

Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan: Climate Action Objectives

• 2.3 Monitor, track and forecast greenhouse gas emissions as part of investment, program and project decision making.
• 3.1 Integrate climate change considerations into transportation decision making and evaluate opportunities to mitigate risks.
• 4.1 Adapt design and maintenance practices to increase the resiliency of the transportation system.

Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan: 2022-2027 Work Plan

• Work with transportation partners to identify and advance statewide strategies for reducing per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 20% by 2050.