Plan, Program, and Policy Development
From vision to adopted policy
Policy development moves vision → goals → measurable objectives → performance targets → strategies → programmed projects. Strong answers show the chain intact: a goal without a measure and a funding line is rhetoric. Key instruments include alternatives analysis, scenario planning, the long-range plan and its fiscally constrained project list, the TIP/STIP as the implementation lever, comprehensive-plan consistency and concurrency requirements, zoning and land development codes, TDM ordinances, complete streets and Vision Zero policies, parking and pricing policy, transit-oriented development, and resilience and GHG-reduction targets.
Environmental and equity review
Know the NEPA ladder: categorical exclusion, EA leading to FONSI, or EIS leading to a Record of Decision. Federal funding, permits, or other federal actions trigger it. Environmental justice under Title VI and EO 12898 requires both avoidance of disproportionate adverse effects and meaningful involvement of affected communities - not merely a demographic description.
Traps
Questions test whether a policy is self-implementing (it is not - it needs code changes, pricing, or programming), confuse outputs (miles of bike lane built) with outcomes (crashes, VMT, emissions), and assume NEPA applies only when federal dollars are spent.
Rule of thumb
Every adopted policy should answer three questions: What changes? Who changes it? What funds or regulation compel it? If one is missing, the policy is aspirational.
Worked example - prioritization scoring
A weighted framework scores safety 4/5 at 40% weight, access 3/5 at 30%, cost-effectiveness 2/5 at 30%. Score = 0.4(4) + 0.3(3) + 0.3(2) = 1.6 + 0.9 + 0.6 = 3.1 out of 5.