DRAFT

TEXAS RURAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN

 

May 2012 

 

 

Contents iii

Contents

Page

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ v

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. vi

Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................... vii

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ ES-1

1.0  INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 

1.1  WHAT IS THE TEXAS RURAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN? ........................................... 1 

1.2  WHY WAS THE TEXAS RURAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN DEVELOPED? ................ 1 

1.3  THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRTP AND SLRTP GOALS ............................... 4 

1.4  HOW WAS THE TRTP DEVELOPED? .............................................................................. 6 

1.5  HOW WILL THE TRTP BE USED? ..................................................................................... 7 

1.6  WHEN WILL THE TRTP BE UPDATED? ........................................................................... 8 

1.7  RURAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SOURCES ........................................................ 8 

2.0  CURRENT CONDITIONS, NEEDS AND PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS ............................... 11 

2.1  INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 11 

2.2  NOTABLE TRENDS IN RURAL TRANSPORTATION .................................................... 11 2.2.1  Aging Population ................................................................................................. 11 2.2.2  Gas and Oil Production ....................................................................................... 13 2.2.3  Challenges Facing Rural Public Transportation ................................................. 13 

2.3  NEEDS – HIGHWAYS ....................................................................................................... 15 

2.4  PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS – HIGHWAYS ................................................................... 19 

2.5  NEEDS – NON-HIGHWAY MODES ................................................................................. 23 2.5.1  Bicycles and Pedestrians .................................................................................... 23 2.5.2  General Aviation .................................................................................................. 24 2.5.3  Inland Waterways ................................................................................................ 29 2.5.4  Freight Rail .......................................................................................................... 29 2.5.5  Passenger Rail .................................................................................................... 31 2.5.6  Rural Transit ........................................................................................................ 31 2.5.7  Intercity Bus ......................................................................................................... 36 

2.6  PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS – NON-HIGHWAY MODES ............................................. 39 2.6.1  Bicycles and Pedestrians .................................................................................... 39 2.6.2  General Aviation .................................................................................................. 39 2.6.3  Inland Waterways ................................................................................................ 41 2.6.4  Rural Freight Rail Development ......................................................................... 41 2.6.5  Passenger Rail Planning ..................................................................................... 41 2.6.6  Rural Transit Capital Projects ............................................................................. 42 2.6.7  Intercity Bus Projects ........................................................................................... 42 

3.0  ECONOMIC IMPACT ................................................................................................................ 45 

Conten

iv

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

4.0  ST

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

5.0  CO

5.1

5.2

5.3

 

nts, cont’d

  INTRODU

2  ECONOM

3  ECONOM

4  CALCULA

5  TRADITIO

TAKEHOLDE

  PURPOS

2  THE PUB

3  PUBLIC O4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5 

4  TRTP PU

5  STAKEH4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 

6  PUBLIC M

7  PUBLIC

8  COMMEN

ONCLUSION

  SLRTP S

2  FUNDING

3  NEXT UP

d.

UCTION ......

MIC IMPACT

MIC IMPACT

ATION OF E

ONAL BENE

ER AND PUB

SE ................

BLIC OUTRE

OUTREACHNewsletters TRTP WebpVisualizationSocial NetwoToll Free Te

UBLIC OUTR

OLDER MEEStakeholderStakeholderStakeholder

MEETINGS

HEARING ...

NTS.............

NS .................

STRATEGIES

G OUTLOOK

PDATE ........

.....................

T DURING C

T FOLLOWIN

ECONOMIC

EFIT-COST A

BLIC OUTRE

.....................

EACH PLAN

H TOOLS ...........................

page .............n Tools .........orking Tools

elephone Line

REACH ACT

ETINGS .......r Meetings - Rr Meetings - Rr Event – Rou

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

S AND RECO

K ...................

.....................

.....................

CONSTRUCT

NG CONSTR

IMPACTS ....

ANALYSIS ...

EACH .........

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.........................................

e ...................

IVITY SCHE

.....................Round 1 .......Round 2 .......und 3 ............

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

OMMENDAT

.....................

.....................

.....................

TION ............

RUCTION .....

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

EDULE ..........

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

TIONS .........

.....................

.....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

Co

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

Page

ntents

..... 45 

..... 45 

..... 46 

..... 46 

..... 47 

..... 49 

..... 49 

..... 49 

..... 50 

..... 50 

..... 51 

..... 51 

..... 51 

..... 51 

..... 52 

..... 52 

..... 52 

..... 58 

..... 59 

..... 59 

..... 61 

..... 61 

..... 65 

..... 65 

..... 66 

..... 66 

Conten

Contents

Figures

Figure 1-Figure 1-2Figure 2-Figure 2-2Figure 2-3Figure 2-4Figure 2-5Figure 2-6Figure 2-Figure 2-8Figure 4-Figure 4-2Figure 4-3Figure 4-4Figure 4-5Figure 4-6Figure 4-Figure 4-8Figure 4-9

nts, cont’d

s

1: TRTP Stu2: Freight Su1: Percent of2: Oil and Ga3: Rural High4: Ranked P5: Texas Bus6: Texas Com7: Texas Bas8: Intercity B1: Public Out2: Round 1 S3: Questionn4: Results ....5: Red River6: Public Me7: Comment8: Stakehold9: Public Com

d.

dy Area .......upply Chain .f Population 6as Wells-Eaghway Deficierojects .........siness/Corpommunity Sersic Service Aus Service intreach ActivitStakeholder Mnaire .................................

r: Navigable (eting Photo .s Received Der Commentmments (% b

.....................

.....................65 Years andgle Ford Shancy Assessm.....................

orate Airportsrvice AirportsAirports and Hn 2010 ..........ties and DateMeeting ..................................................(left) and Non.....................During Publicts (% by Genby Generalize

.....................

.....................d Older ........le .................

ment ..................................s ....................s ....................Heliports ............................es ................................................................................n-navigable (.....................c Outreach Aneralized Toped Topic) .....

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................(right) ................................

Activities (% bpic) ....................................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................

....................by Source) ..........................................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

.....................

v

Page

....... 2 

....... 3 

..... 12 

..... 14 

..... 17 

..... 21 

..... 26 

..... 27 

..... 28 

..... 38 

..... 52 

..... 53 

..... 54 

..... 55 

..... 59 

..... 60 

..... 62 

..... 62 

..... 63 

Conten

vi

Tables

Table 2-1Table 2-2Table 2-3

Table 2-4Table 2-5Table 2-6Table 4-1Table 4-2Table 4-3

Append

A B C D E

nts, cont’d

1: Investment2: Proposed N3: Statewide

2035........4: Statewide 5: Rural Tran6: Texas Inter1: Round 1 S2: Stakeholde3: Public Mee

dices:

Summary ofStakeholderPublic TransPublic TransRanked Proj

d.

t Summary foNew CommuRural Transit....................Rural Transitsit Funding Nrcity Bus Sertakeholder M

er Webinar Deting Attenda

f Project Ranr and Public Osportation Mesportation Rejects by TxD

or Rural Capunity Service t Operating C.....................t Capital FunNeeds 2012 trvice .............

Meeting DateDates .............ance ..............

nking MethodOutreach ethodology aesults by TxD

DOT District

pacity Needs .Airports .......

Characteristic.....................

nding Needs 2to 2035 by Tx.....................s and Attend..........................................

d

and Results DOT District

.....................

.....................cs and Fundi.....................2012 to 2035xDOT Distric.....................dance .....................................................

....................

....................ng Needs 20....................5 ..................ct ..................................................................................................

Co

.....................

.....................012 to ...................................................................................................................................................

ntents

Page

..... 15 

..... 28 

..... 33 

..... 33 

..... 34 

..... 39 

..... 53 

..... 59 

..... 60 

Acronyms

Acrony

S

s and Abbrevia

yms and A

AIP

ARRA

BNSF

CIP

EDCP

FAA

FHWA

FRA

FTA

FTE

GC&SS

HER

I-45

ICB

IRP

IRR

ITS

LOS

mph

MPO

MTP

NCHRP

NETEX

NPIAS

PCE

PTN

RBEG

RPO

RTD

SAFETEA-LU

SLRTP

ations

Abbreviati

P Airport Im

A American

F Burlingto

P Capital Im

P Economi

A Federal A

A Federal H

A Federal R

A Federal T

E full-time e

S Gulf Colo

R Hurricane

5 Interstate

B Intercity b

P Intermed

R Indian Re

S Intelligen

S Level of S

h miles per

O Metropol

P Metropol

P National

X Northeas

S National

E Passeng

N Public Tr

G Rural Bus

O Regional

D Rural Tra

U Safe, AccLegacy fo

P Statewide

ons

mprovement

n Recovery a

n Northern S

mprovement

cally Disadva

Aviation Adm

Highway Adm

Railroad Adm

Transit Admin

equivalent

orado & San

e Evacuation

e 45

bus

iary Relendin

eservation Ro

t Transportat

Service

r hour

itan Planning

itan Transpo

Cooperative

st Texas Rura

Plan of Integ

er Car Equiv

ransportation

siness Enter

Planning Or

ansit District

countable, Flor Users

e Long Rang

Program

and Reinvest

Santa Fe Rail

Program

antaged Cou

ministration

ministration

ministration

nistration

Saba Railwa

n Route

ng Program

oads/Bridges

tion Systems

g Organizatio

ortation Plan

Highway Re

al Rail Trans

grated Airport

valent

Division

rprise Grant

rganization

lexible, and E

ge Transporta

tment Act of 2

lway

unty Program

ay

s Program

s

on

esearch Prog

portation Dis

t Systems

Efficient Tran

ation Plan

2009

m

gram

strict rail line

nsportation Equity Act: A

vii

viii

SORR

TASP

TBA

TIGER

TIGGER

TRTP

TTA

TTC

TT

TxDOT

UP

USACE

USDA

USDOT

UTP

R South Or

P Texas Ai

A Texas Bu

R Transpor

R Transit In

P Texas Ru

A Texas Tr

C Texas Tr

TI Texas Tr

T Texas De

P Union Pa

E U.S. Arm

A U.S. Dep

T U.S. Dep

P Unified T

rient Rail Roa

rport System

us Associatio

rtation Invest

nvestments fo

ural Transpo

ransit Associa

ransportation

ransportation

epartment of

acific Corp.

my Corps of E

partment of A

partment of T

Transportation

ad (aka Sout

m Plan

on

ment Genera

or Greenhou

rtation Plan

ation

n Commission

n Institute

f Transportati

Engineers

Agriculture

Transportation

n Program

h Orient rail l

ating Econom

se Gas and

n

ion

n

Acronyms

line)

mic Recovery

Energy Redu

s and Abbrevi

y

uction

ations

Executive Summary ES-1

Executive Summary

What is the Texas Rural Transportation Plan?

The Texas Rural Transportation Plan (TRTP) is the rural component of the Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan (SLRTP) 2035.1 As part of the SLRTP, the TRTP is a blueprint for the planning process in the rural areas that will guide the collaborative efforts between the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), local and regional decision-makers, and all transportation stakeholders to reach a consensus on needed transportation projects and services through 2035. It is a standalone document, fully consistent with the SLRTP.

The TRTP is a multi-modal transportation plan that includes the following modes:

Highways;

Non-Automobile/Non-highway modes;

o Bicycles and Pedestrians;

o General Aviation;

o Inland Waterways;

o Rail (freight and passenger); and

o Public Transportation.

Why was the TRTP Developed?

Unlike urbanized areas where Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are required by law to develop Metropolitan Transportation Plans (MTPs) that identify and prioritize future transportation projects within funding constraints, there is no equivalent requirement for rural areas. While the SLRTP included an overall assessment of rural transportation needs and a prioritization of Trunk System corridors (Chapter 5 of the SLRTP 2035), added capacity highway specific projects were not identified or ranked.

Rural transportation needs tend to be different than the transportation needs encountered in urbanized areas. As such, for the TRTP, “rural” is defined as any area outside of MPO boundaries. While the SLRTP identified capacity needs for many rural highways, capacity is usually not the primary issue as compared with urban areas. However, the impact of traffic growth in rural areas can create safety concerns. Stakeholders have overwhelmingly indicated that safe passing on rural highways is one of their top concerns, particularly given the intermittent high volume of truck traffic.

1 See TxDOT website: https://www.txdot.gov/public_involvement/transportation_plan/report.htm

ES-2

In additineeds fapproacrural tran

The Rela

Goal-setorganizamission.Strategic

1. Dfu

2. E

3. M

4. P

5. E

6. Ftrp

While aand 5) wmanner

The TxDThese nassociat

M

A

C

B

2 See TxDO3 Criteria as

used to aassociate

on to rural for non-autch to statewnsportation

lationship b

tting is an ation in inv. The SLRc Plan:2

Develop anuture multi-

Enhance saf

Maintain the

Promote con

Enhance sys

Facilitate thransportatioartners.

ll goals wewere used tin the TRT

DOT goals new goals ated:

Maintain a s

Address con

Connect Tex

Best in class

OT website: http

ssociated with gassess projects ed with non-hig

highway netomobile/nowide multi-mn for Texans

between the

important evesting res

RTP addres

n organizatmodal trans

fety for all T

e existing Te

ngestion re

stem conne

he develoon funding

ere consideto analyze

TP.3

were recenare listed b

safe system

ngestion (S

xas commu

s state age

p://www.txdot.go

oals 4 and 5 weassociated withhway modes.

eeds, the Ton-highway modal planns.

e TRTP and

early step isources thassed six go

ional strucsportation n

Texas trans

exas transp

lief strategi

ectivity; and

pment ang strategie

ered, thoselong-term a

ntly updatedbelow, toge

m (SLRTP G

LRTP Goa

unities (SLR

ncy (SLRTP

ov/about_us/stra

ere used to asseh non-highway m

TRTP includmodes. T

ning, and p

d SLRTP G

in transportat are conoals that w

cture and sneeds of al

sportation s

portation sy

ies;

d

d exchanges with tra

e related toadded capa

d as part other with th

Goals 2 and

l 4);

RTP Goal 5

P Goals 1 a

ategic_plan.htm

ess added capamodes. The TRT

Te

des an analThis providepresents a m

Goals

tation plannnsistent witwere based

strategies l Texans;

system use

ystem;

ge of comansportatio

o mobility aacity highwa

f the new 2he SLRTP

d 3);

5); and

and 6).

acity highway proTP only identifie

exas Rural Tr

E

lysis of ruraes for a mmore comp

ning. Goalsth the entid on TxDO

designed t

rs;

mprehensivon program

and connecay projects

2013–2017 goals with

ojects only. Theed rural transpor

ransportation

Executive Sum

al transportamore consisplete analys

s help guidty’s vision T’s 2011–2

to address

ve multi-mm and pr

ctivity (Goas in an obje

Strategic Pwhich they

ese criteria werertation needs

Plan

mmary

ation stent sis of

e an and

2015

s the

modal roject

als 4 ective

Plan. y are

e not

Texas Ru

Executive

Goals 4addresstherefore

How wa

TxDOT related c

S

T

A summTRTP ca

The TRrankings

S

H

TxDOT the needthe non-and privspecific as those

How wil

Prior to citizens and find

For highfactors processfactors n

4 A tool was

that were

ral Transport

Summary

4 and 5 fro congestioe remains c

as the TRTP

has adoptecomponent

Stakeholder

Technical ap

mary of howan be found

RTP objects are prese

Statewide co

Highest rank

recognizesd to coordi-highway n

vate sector projects fo

e for highwa

ll the TRTP

adoption had the opings.

hways, stakthat were . Where junot previous

s developed to re reviewed with

ation Plan

m the SLRon and conconsistent w

P Develope

ed a proactis used to d

r/public part

pproach.

w stakeholdd in Chapte

tively ranksnted in the

omparison

ked projects

s the long-tenate all mo

needs in thpartners fo

or non-highways.

P be Used?

by the Texpportunity t

keholders anot incorpstified, projsly conside

rank approximatstakeholders. T

RTP are simnnect Texawith the rev

ed?

ive approacdevelop the

ticipation; a

ders and ther 4 of the T

s all identTRTP in tw

of all projec

s in each d

erm importaodes of trae TRTP th

or the varioway modes

xas Transpto review a

and citizensorated intojects were

ered.

tely 600 rural adThe criteria were

milar to theas communvised 2013–

ch to develTRTP:

and

e public paTRTP.

tified addewo ways:

cts; and

istrict.

ance of muansportationhrough coous non-higs were not

portation Coand comme

s were invio the adde

re-ranked

dded capacity he then weighted

e 2013–201nities. The–2017 Strat

oping the T

articipated

ed capacity

ulti-modal trn. To this erdination whway modeanalyzed i

ommission ent on the

ited to highed capacity

based on

ighway projectsd based on stake

17 Strategic TRTP higtegic Plan g

TRTP. Ther

in the deve

y highway

ransportatioend, TxDOTwith the appes. It shoulin the same

(TTC), stadraft TRTP

hlight any ry highway any releva

s against a conseholder inputs.

c Plan goaghway anagoals.

re are two i

elopment o

projects.4

on planningT has idenpropriate pd be notede level of d

akeholders P, its appro

relevant daproject ran

ant new dat

sistent set of crit

ES-3

als to alysis

nter-

of the

The

g and tified

public d that detail

and oach,

ta or nking ta or

eria

ES-4

For nonrelevantthat migplanning

The TRplanningfor rural approacrural tragreatest

When w

As the SLRTP. to the Sand tratranspor

What do

ApproximThe threDetailed

The proconstrucof any aranking

Identifyinharder to

Btraabp

n-highway mt data or facght enable Tg.

RTP will prog when plan

non-highwch to statewansportatiot benefits fo

will TRTP be

rural compIt is envisi

SLRTP is aansportationrtation prior

oes the TRT

mately 600ee highest d maps of p

oject rankincted. Prioritdditional loprocess.

ng needs foo quantify.

Bicycles anreatment approach tos “Compleicyclists, peotential eco

modes, stactors that wTxDOT to e

ovide an onning funds

way transpowide multi-mn. Future or all citizen

e Updated?

ponent of toned that t

anticipated n needs erities.

TP Include

0 added capranked pro

projects in e

ngs do not tization will

ocal factors

or non-highAn overvie

nd Pedestrand position planning a

ete Streetsedestrians, onomic imp

keholders were not incenhance its

objective bs become artation acro

modal planntransportat

ns.

?

the SLRTPhe SLRTP in 2014. Trevolve the

?

pacity ruraojects in e

each TxDOT

indicate thbe determthat did no

hway modew for each

rians – In aning of ruand designis.” This atransit use

pact of bikin

and citizencorporated s approach

asis for thavailable. Inoss the statning by pretion fundin

P, the TRTwill be updransportatioreby nece

l highway pach TxDOTT District ca

he priority mined by Tx

t lend them

s is more cmode is as

addition to tmble stripsing the stre

approach cers, and drivng events a

Te

ns were alsinto the TRto multi-mo

he TxDOT n addition, te. This will

esenting a mng can be

TP content dated everyon planning

essitating c

projects weT District aan be found

in which pxDOT, takinmselves to in

complex thas follows:

he safety cs, the TRTeet environmconsiders tvers. The Tnd tourism

exas Rural Tr

E

so invited tRTP, especiodal transp

Districts tothe TRTP l enable a mmore comp invested

will be upy 4 years. Tg is a contcontinual r

ere evaluatare shown d in Append

projects wilng into acconclusion int

an for highw

concerns reTP identifiement in smthe respec

TRTP also e.

ransportation

Executive Sum

to highlightially informa

portation sys

o begin prpresents nemore consisplete analys

to secure

pdated withThe next uptinuous proreevaluatio

ed and ranon Figure

dix E.

ll be fundeount knowleto the state

way modes

lated to sures the broall cities kn

ctive needemphasizes

Plan

mmary

t any ation stem

roject eeds stent sis of e the

h the pdate ocess n of

nked. e 2-4.

ed or edge

ewide

s and

rface oader nown s of s the

Texas Ru

Executive

GpA

InspcMm

RFcfo

PoeTpre

While thnot rank

Conclus

The folloof limited

F

Mh

D

This apprecommto the SThe TRTproject r

Overall, three SLalso. Av

ral Transport

Summary

General Avlanning too

Aviation, esp

nland Wateupports corogram forhannels, la

MPO boundmaintaining

Rail (freighFreight rail ionnect withour corridor

Public Tranrganizationach region

TRTP, TxDublic transecent declin

he TRTP idked.

sions

owing stratd funding, g

Focus availa

Manage ourow we trav

Develop par

proach is vmendations SLRTP straTP also recranking pro

the emphaLRTP goalsvailability of

ation Plan

viation – Tol. The TRTpecially enh

erways – Tommerce, rr Texas poandside facdaries andthe channe

ht and pasis providedh Class I rrs.

nsportations to suppo. Initial planOT has adportation cnes in the le

dentifies kn

egies identgrowing de

able transpo

r transportavel; and

rtnerships fo

valid for theapply equa

ategies andcommends cess in the

asis on “coss is heightef funding for

xDOT’s 5-yTP emphashancing des

Texas has recreation, orts for 20cilities, and the U.S. els.

ssenger) – through a railroads. P

n – TxDOort the devns were dedditionally

capital and evel and av

nown projec

tified in themand, and

ortation fun

ation system

or providing

e TRTP andally to the T recommensome mino next SLRT

st-effectiveened for thr projects a

year Texassizes the psign standa

a significaand touris11–2012. TintermodalArmy Cor

– TxDOT hcombinatio

Passenger

OT has wovelopment oeveloped indeveloped operations

vailability of

cts for non

e TRTP arevery large

nds on the m

m in ways t

g transporta

d, for the mTRTP. The ndations toor enhancemTP update.

” strategieshe TRTP anand needs i

s Airport Syotential ecoards to allow

nt marine tm. TxDOTThe primarl interchangrps of Eng

has developon of local rail improv

rked closeof rural tra 2006, anda long-ran

s needs. Thf intercity bu

-highway m

e driven by transportat

most cost-e

hat encour

ation impro

most part, tTRTP lists

o address rments to th

s specificalnd likely fodentified in

ystem Planonomic impw corporate

transportati has devery focus isges. Most pgineers is

ped the Teshort-line r

vements we

ely with regansit coordid updated innge plan the TRTP aus services

modes, the

the competion needs:

effective inv

rage cost-ef

ovements.

the SLRTPsome mino

rural transphe added ca

ly addresseor the next n the TRTP

n is the primpact of Gene jets.

ion systemloped a ca

s on deepeports are wresponsible

exas Rail Prailroads, were identifie

gional plannation plann 2011. Foto identify also highligs.

se projects

eting challe

vestments;

ffective shif

P strategiesor modificaportation neapacity high

ed in two oSLRTP upwill continu

ES-5

mary neral

that apital ening within e for

Plan. which ed in

nning ns in

or the rural

ghted

s are

nges

fts in

s and tions

eeds. hway

of the pdate ue to

ES-6

be limitethat TxD

ed in the forDOT’s limite

reseeable fed transport

future and mtation funds

may even ws are spent

Te

worsen. It ist wisely.

exas Rural Tr

E

s more impo

ransportation

Executive Sum

ortant than

Plan

mmary

ever

1: Introduction 1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 What is the Texas Rural Transportation Plan?

The Texas Rural Transportation Plan (TRTP) is the rural component of the Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan (SLRTP) 2035.5 As part of the SLRTP, the TRTP is a blueprint for the planning process in the rural areas that will guide the collaborative efforts between the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), local and regional decision-makers, and all transportation stakeholders to reach a consensus on needed transportation projects and services through 2035. It is a standalone document, fully consistent with the SLRTP.

The TRTP is a multi-modal transportation plan that includes the following modes:

Highways;

Non-Automobile/Non-highway modes;

o Bicycles and Pedestrians;

o General Aviation;

o Inland Waterways;

o Rail (freight and passenger); and

o Public Transportation.

1.2 Why was the Texas Rural Transportation Plan Developed?

Unlike urbanized areas where Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are required by law to develop Metropolitan Transportation Plans (MTPs) that identify and prioritize future transportation projects within funding constraints, there is no equivalent requirement for rural areas. While the SLRTP included an overall assessment of rural transportation needs and a prioritization of Trunk System corridors, specific added capacity highway projects were not identified or ranked. For a complete description of the Texas Trunk System, please see chapter 5 of the Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 2035 (SLRTP).

For the TRTP, “rural” is defined as any area outside of MPO boundaries. This area is shown in green in following map:

5 See TxDOT website: https://www.txdot.gov/public_involvement/transportation_plan/report.htm

2

Rural tencountrural higHoweveStakehoof their t

Another associatproducti

ransportatiotered in urbghways, caper, the impolders havetop concern

aspect of ted with faron.

F

on needs banized arepacity is uspact of tra overwhelm

ns, particula

rural transprming, ranc

Figure 1-1:

tend to eas. While sually not thffic growth

mingly indicarly given th

portation thching, timb

TRTP Stu

be differethe SLRTP

he primary ih in rural cated that she intermitt

hat is differeer and logg

Te

dy Area

ent than tP identifiedissue as coareas can afe passingtent high vo

ent is the eging, mine

exas Rural Tr

the transp capacity n

ompared wicreate sa

g on rural holume of tru

extent of ecral extractio

ransportation

1: Introd

ortation neneeds for mith urban arafety concehighways isuck traffic.

conomic acon, and en

Plan

uction

eeds many reas. erns. s one

ctivity nergy

Texas Ru

1: Introdu

The Texmarket fogeneratedeliverinlodging,

The sizeapart froreach saffect qaccess trely on a

Specific range Mcurrent the TxDspecificatime fraapproximare not f

In additineeds f

6 These pro

from TxD

ral Transport

ction

xas economyor in-state, nes secondarg supplies aetc.

e of the staom urbanizervices, suuality of lifto personala single hig

project neMTPs. Spec10-year pla

DOT 10-yeaally examin

ame of the mately 600funded and

on to rural for non-aut

ojects were idenDOT Districts an

ation Plan

Fig

y is dependnational, anry business and equipm

ate and remzed areas. uch as heafe, can be l vehicles, whway to co

eeds in urbcific projectanning horiar Unified nes the lon

UTP. The long-term,

d not curren

highway netomobile/no

ntified by a combnd local stakeho

gure 1-2: F

ent on the rd internatiofor other fir

ment, which i

moteness oThe time

althcare, edsignificant

where transonnect with

banized arets for both izon and hTransporta

ng-term proe TRTP ad, rural, add

ntly program

eeds, the Ton-highway

bination of revieolders.

reight Sup

rural transponal consum

rms that pron turn gene

of some rurand/or dis

ducation, re. This is esit options mthe rest of

eas are adrural and

ave identifation Progroject needsddresses thded capacitmmed in the

TRTP includmodes. T

wing existing pr

pply Chain

ortation systmption. This

vide supporerates busin

ral communstances invetailers, an

especially tmay be infrthe transpo

dressed byurbanized

fied fundingram (UTP)s in rural ahis need bty highway e 10-year U

des an analThis provide

roject databases

tem to bringeconomic art activities, ess for resta

nities also solved for rnd other derue for tho

requent, anortation sys

y the MPOareas that

g sources a. However

areas beyoby identifyin

projects.6 UTP.

lysis of ruraes for a m

s and lists, and

g goods to activity such as aurants,

sets rural arural Texanestinations

ose with limd for those

stem.

Os in their lt are withinare identifier, no documond the 10-ng and ranThese pro

al transportamore consis

requesting inpu

3

areas ns to

that mited

who

long-n the ed in ment -year nking ojects

ation stent

uts

4

approacrural tran

1.3

Goal-setorganizamission.Strategic

1. Dfu

2. E

3. M

4. P

5. E

6. Ftrp

While al5) wereTRTP.8

Goal 4 wa highwa

P

C

V

7 See TxDO8 Criteria as

used to ahighway

ch to statewnsportation

The Re

tting is an ation in inv. The SLRc Plan:7

Develop anuture multi-

Enhance saf

Maintain the

Promote con

Enhance sys

Facilitate thransportatioartners.

l goals were used to a

was refocusay project a

Population b

How man

Cost effectiv

What is t

Volume to c

Existing

Future tr

OT website: http

ssociated with gassess projects modes in rural

wide multi-mn for Texans

elations

important evesting res

RTP addres

n organizatmodal trans

fety for all T

e existing Te

ngestion re

stem conne

he develoon funding

re consideranalyze lon

sed on mobaddressed

buffer

ny people l

veness

the project

apacity (Le

traffic LOS

raffic LOS o

p://www.txdot.go

oals 4 and 5 weassociated withareas.

modal planns.

ship betw

early step isources thassed six go

ional strucsportation n

Texas trans

exas transp

lief strategi

ectivity; and

pment ang strategie

red, those rng-term hig

bility. The cmobility inc

ive within 5

cost for eac

evel of Serv

on existing

on existing f

ov/about_us/stra

ere used to asseh non-highway m

ning, and p

ween th

in transportat are conoals that w

cture and sneeds of al

sportation s

portation sy

ies;

d

d exchanges with tra

related to mghway proj

criteria devcluded:

5 miles of th

ch vehicle m

vice [LOS])

g facility;

facility; and

ategic_plan.htm

ess added capamodes. The TRT

Te

presents a m

e TRTP

tation plannnsistent witwere based

strategies l Texans;

system use

ystem;

ge of comansportatio

mobility andjects in an

eloped to a

he project?

mile travele

d

acity highway proTP only identifie

exas Rural Tr

more comp

and SLR

ning. Goalsth the entid on TxDO

designed t

rs;

mprehensivon program

connectivin objective

assess the

ed?

ojects only. Theed needs assoc

ransportation

1: Introd

plete analys

RTP Goa

s help guidty’s vision T’s 2011–2

to address

ve multi-mm and pr

ty (Goals 4manner in

extent to w

ese criteria wereiated with non-

Plan

uction

sis of

als

e an and

2015

s the

modal roject

4 and n the

which

e not

Texas Ru

1: Introdu

T

T

S

Goal 5 which a

C

F

T

A

H

The TxDThese nassociat

M

A

C

B

ral Transport

ction

Change

Truck traffic

Existing

Existing

Projected

Total traffic

Existing

Forecast

Safe Passin

Scored oterrain.

remained fproject add

Completing

Is it on th

Filling gaps

Does the

Truck freigh

Indirect m

Measure

Accessibility

How doe

Hurricane E

Is the pro

DOT goals new goals ated:

Maintain a s

Address con

Connect Tex

Best in class

ation Plan

in LOS if th

truck perce

truck traffic

d truck traff

traffic; and

ted traffic.

g Needs

on safe pa

focused ondressed con

the Texas T

he Trunk Sy

in the syste

e project fill

t movemen

measure of

ed in dollars

y to populat

es the proje

vacuation R

oject on a d

were recenare listed b

safe system

ngestion (S

xas commu

s state age

he project is

entage of to

c; and

fic.

assing opp

n connectivnnectivity in

Trunk Syste

ystem or a

em

an existing

nt

f economic

s and tonna

tion centers

ect connect

Route (HER

designated

ntly updatedbelow, toge

m (SLRTP G

LRTP Goa

unities (SLR

ncy (SLRTP

s built.

otal traffic;

portunities

vity. The cncluded:

em

Phase 1 Co

g gap?

output; and

age into and

s (for emplo

population

R)

HER or is i

d as part other with th

Goals 2 and

l 4);

RTP Goal 5

P Goals 1 a

based on

riteria used

orridor?

d

d out of cou

oyment, hea

and emplo

it on a conn

f the new 2he SLRTP

d 3);

5); and

and 6).

existing fa

d to asses

unty.

althcare se

oyment cen

nector to an

2013–2017 goals with

acility type

s the exte

rvices, etc.

ters?

n HER?

Strategic Pwhich they

5

and

nt to

)

Plan. y are

6

Goals 4addresstherefore

1.4

TxDOT related c

S

T

A summTRTP ca

The tecdescribecurrentlysources

T

S

These pprocess

Pc

Sastthh

Wwocst

Rsin

4 and 5 fro congestioe remains c

How w

has adoptecomponent

Stakeholder

Technical ap

mary of howan be found

chnical apped in detail y unfunded:

TxDOT Distr

Stakeholder

projects wefeatured fo

Project Attharacteristi

Scoring – ssess eactakeholdershe extent toigher the sc

Weighting –who attende

n a scale oriterion. Ttakeholders

Ranking – cores. Stak

nitial ranke

m the SLRon and conconsistent w

was the T

ed a proactis used to d

r and public

pproach.

w stakeholdd in Chapte

proach for in Append

d, long-term

rict project

r, public, an

re ranked oour major st

tributes – ics traffic co

criteria wech project.s. Each proo which it mcore.

– each criteed eight diffof 1 to 10, wThe criterios was safe

projects wkeholders rd list of p

RTP are simnnect Texawith the rev

TRTP De

ive approacdevelop the

c outreach;

ders and ther 4 of the T

ranking thdix A. In sum rural adde

lists; and

nd TxDOT D

on a statewteps:

for each onditions w

ere develop. The critoject was smet each c

erion was aferent meetwas used toon that repassing ne

were rankereviewed throjects wa

milar to theas communvised 2013–

evelope

ch to develTRTP:

and

e public paTRTP.

he rural hummary, theed capacity

District inpu

wide basis

of the prowas develop

ped for theteria were scored fromriterion. Th

ssessed fotings acroso weight theeceived th

eeds.

d based ohe rankingss displayed

Te

e 2013–201nities. The–2017 Strat

ed?

oping the T

articipated

highway ade TRTP idey highway

ut.

and on a D

ojects analyped, e.g., le

e mobility areviewed

m 1 to 10 fohe more a p

or relative imss the statee score a phe highest

on the sums and providd at a ser

exas Rural Tr

17 Strategic TRTP higtegic Plan g

TRTP. Ther

in the deve

dded capacentified appprojects fro

District bas

yzed a coength, cost,

and conne by a cr

or each criteproject met

mportance b. This relat

project recet weightin

m of the wded furtherries of ope

ransportation

1: Introd

c Plan goaghway anagoals.

re are two i

elopment o

city projectproximatelyom two prim

sis. The ran

onsistent seetc.

ectivity goaross-sectionerion, baset a criterion

by stakehotive importaived for a gg among

weighted crr feedback.en-house p

Plan

uction

als to alysis

nter-

of the

ts is y 600 mary

nking

et of

ls to n of

ed on n, the

lders ance, given

the

iteria The

public

Texas Ru

1: Introdu

mca

The TRTin the TR

S

H

It is empfunded otaking inthemselv

TxDOT the needthe non-and privspecific as those

1.5

Prior to and com

For highfactors tjustified,including

For nonrelevantthat migplanning

When abegin prpresents 9 A tool was

that were

ral Transport

ction

meetings, anapacity hippropriate,

TP objectivRTP in two

Statewide co

Highest rank

phasized thaor constructnto accounves to inclus

recognizesd to coordi-highway n

vate sector projects fo

e for highwa

How w

adoption bmment upon

hways, stakthat were , projects wg additiona

n-highway mt data or facght enable Tg.

adopted, throject planns needs for s developed to re reviewed with

ation Plan

nd the pubghway pr added to a

vely ranks aways:

omparison

ked projects

at the projected. Prioritiznt their knosion into the

s the long-tenate all mo

needs in thpartners fo

or non-highways.

will the T

by the TTCn the draft T

keholders anot incorpowere re-ranl projects n

modes, stactors that wTxDOT to e

e TRTP wning when r rural non-

rank approximatstakeholders. T

lic was soliojects wea revised lis

all identified

of all projec

s in each d

ct rankings dzation will beowledge of e statewide

erm importaodes of trae TRTP th

or the varioway modes

TRTP be

C, stakeholdTRTP, its a

and citizensorated intonked baseot previous

keholders were not incenhance its

will provide planning f

highway tra

tely 600 rural adThe criteria were

icited for thre suggesst of ranked

d highway p

cts; and

istrict.

do not indice determine

any additranking pro

ance of muansportationhrough coous non-higs were not

e used?

ders and cipproach, an

s were invio the highwd on any

sly consider

and citizencorporated s approach

an objectivfunds becoansportatio

dded capacity he then weighted

heir input ansted and d projects.

projects.9 T

cate the prioed in conjunional local cess.

ulti-modal trn. To this erdination whway modeanalyzed i

itizens had nd findings

ited to highway projectrelevant nered.

ns were alsinto the TRto multi-mo

ve basis fome availabn across th

ighway projectsd based on stake

nd commenwere rev

he rankings

ority in whichnction with T

factors tha

ransportatioend, TxDOTwith the appes. It shoulin the same

the opport.

hlight any rt ranking pew data o

so invited tRTP, especiodal transp

or the TxDble. In addihe state. Th

s against a conseholder inputs.

nts. New adviewed and

s are prese

h projects wTxDOT Distat did not

on planningT has idenpropriate pd be notede level of d

tunity to re

relevant daprocess. Wr other fac

to highlightially informa

portation sys

DOT Districition, the This will enab

sistent set of crit

7

dded d, if

ented

will be tricts, lend

g and tified

public d that detail

eview

ta or Where ctors,

t any ation stem

cts to TRTP ble a

eria

8

more cocompletto secur

1.6

As the SLRTP. to the Sand tratranspor

1.7

State rothe StatrevenueThe secbonds aare disc

Rail funddetailed funding (FRA) aAgricultuIntercity third rou

Transit fin Chapt

There ahealth a

D

A

C

D

D

D

S

onsistent ae analysis re the great

When

rural compIt is envisi

SLRTP is aansportationrtation prior

Rural

adways arete Highwaye. These arcond type iare issued aussed in de

ding sourceanalysis for freight

and U.S. Dure (USDA)

rail is provute supporte

funding souter 3, Sectio

re several nd human

Department

Administratio

Centers for

Department

Department

Department

Social Secu

approach toof rural tra

test benefits

will the

ponent of toned that t

anticipated n needs erities.

Transpo

e generally y Fund come detailed is debt proand secureetail in Cha

es are discin the Text railroads Departmen), U.S. Depvided by Aed with fund

urces from on 5 of the

other fedeservices. T

of Educatio

on on Aging

Medicare a

of Labor E

of Labor O

of Transpo

rity Adminis

o statewidensportations for all citiz

TRTP b

the SLRTPhe SLRTP in 2014. Trevolve the

ortation

funded by mprised of in Table 3-

ograms, suced by toll repter 3, Sec

cussed briefxas Rail Pl

are availant of Transpartment of mtrak, withding from th

the FederaSLRTP.

ral agencieThese includ

on Office of

g

and Medica

Employment

Office of Dis

ortation Fed

stration Dis

e multi-mon. Future trazens.

be updat

P, the TRTwill be updransportatioreby nece

Funding

two differerevenue fro

-10 in Chapch as the evenue, or

ctions 6 and

fly in the Slan, Chapt

able from tsportation Commerce

h two of thehe states of

al Transit A

es that fundde:

f Special E

id Services

t and Traini

sability Emp

deral Highw

sability Prog

Te

dal planninansportatio

ted?

TP content dated everyon planning

essitating c

g Sourc

nt types of om transpopter 3 of thTexas Mobother fede

d 7 in the S

SLRTP in Cer 6 Finanthe Federa(USDOT), e, and varioe lines beinf Texas and

Administratio

d transporta

ducation &

s

ing Adminis

ployment Po

way Adminis

grams

exas Rural Tr

ng by presn funding c

will be upy 4 years. Tg is a contcontinual r

ces

programs. ortation usee SLRTP ability Fund,eral loan prLRTP.

Chapter 3, Sncial Optioal Railroad

the U.S. ous Texas sng funded d Oklahoma

on and TxD

ation projec

Rehabilitat

stration

olicy

stration

ransportation

1: Introd

senting a mcan be inve

pdated withThe next uptinuous proreevaluatio

The first tyer fees andand in the U through w

rograms. T

Section 8 ans. Source

AdministraDepartmen

state prograby them, aa.

DOT are sh

cts that pro

tive Service

Plan

uction

more ested

h the pdate ocess n of

pe is d tax UTP. which hese

and a es of ation nt of ams.

and a

hown

ovide

es

Texas Ru

1: Introdu

Generalsource o(TASP),aviation administaviation and provfunded b

ral Transport

ction

Aviation fof the fund TxDOT adairports un

ters its owairports. L

vide the maby federal a

ation Plan

funding is ding. As dedministers tnder the Swn fundingLocal goverandatory locand state gr

administereetailed in ththe Airport

State Block g programsrnments, incal share orants.

ed primarilyhe SLRTP ImprovemeGrant Pro

s to addrencluding citof project co

y through and the Te

ent Programgram. TxD

ess improvties, are tyosts—typica

TxDOT regexas Airpom (AIP) gra

DOT Aviatiovement neeypically ownally 10 perc

gardless ofort System ants for genon Division eds at genners of airpcent for pro

9

f the Plan neral also

neral ports

ojects

10

Thhis page inttentionally l

Te

left blank.

exas Rural Trransportation

1: Introd

Plan

uction

2: Current Conditions, Needs and Planned Improvements 11

2.0 Current Conditions, Needs and Planned Improvements

2.1 Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of current conditions, future needs and planned improvements as they relate to rural transportation—both highway and non-highway modes. Approximately 600 rural added capacity highway projects were identified and ranked. For non-highway modes, the emphasis is on gaining a better understanding the rural transportation needs, rather than identifying and ranking non-highway mode projects.

Conditions and trends affecting economics and demographics, as they relate to the multi-modal transportation system are well documented in Chapter 2 of the SLRTP. Planned improvements to the statewide multi-modal transportation system and priority corridors are documented in chapters 4 and 5, respectively, of the SLRTP.

2.2 Notable Trends in Rural Transportation

2.2.1 Aging Population

The SLRTP documented growth in urban and rural areas of the state. Many counties are expanding rapidly in population, particularly those near and on the fringes of large metropolitan areas. Many development patterns in these quickly growing “exurban” counties are being established that will influence transportation development.

Some important demographic findings in the SLRTP specific to rural counties that are include:

While statewide population is forecast to grow between 2008 and 2035 by 43.1 percent, the statewide growth in the 65 years and older category is forecast to grow by more than 3.4 million persons, a 144.0 percent increase.10

By 2035, the trend towards more elderly people living in Texas will be most significant in rural counties (22 percent aged 65 years and older, compared to 17 percent in 2008), and small counties (21 percent aged 65 years and older, compared to 15 percent in 2008) (Figure 2.1).11

10 See SLRTP Tables 2-2 and 2-3 11 See SLRTP Table 2-4. A rural county is defined as having a 2008 population of less than 20,000. A small county is

defined as having a population greater than 20,000 but less than 50,000.

12

The impover thebecomenon-higholder porural arearound youth.

This trencountiesOf the 7some urgrowing—

Rural corural recommonaccess t

Fig

pact of thise planning a factor thhway modeopulation is eas; 2) the scenic lan

nd is suppos in Texas l79 countiesrbanized ar—even in c

ounties willsidents denly serve pto distant m

gure 2-1: Pe

s trend towhorizon fo

hat increases. The rea

due to a npropensity

dscapes a

orted by reslost popula

s that lost prea populatcounties tha

likely see epend on ipersons agemedical serv

ercent of P

ards an agor the SLRingly influeson that a umber of fa

y of older pand recreat

sults from tation betweepopulation, tion—the reat are losing

a trend toit as a moe 65 and ovices.

2: Current C

Population

ging populaRTP and thences rural majority of actors: 1) thpopulationstional areas

the 2010 Cen the Cenonly 3 (Ora

emainder ag total popu

owards incrode of traover for va

Te

onditions, Nee

n 65 Years

ation will dehe TRTP, transportarural count

he aging ofto retire to

s); and 3)

Census. Sevnsus 2000 aange, San re rural. Thulation.

eased pubansportationarious acce

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

and Older

evelop slowand its eftion, for higties have af the existino rural setti

the outmig

venty nine and CensusPatricio, an

he percenta

lic transpon. Rural trssibility rea

ransportation

ned Improvem

wly but steffects will lghways an

a larger shang populatioings (especgration of

of the totals 2010 pernd Wichita)age of elde

rtation as mransit provasons inclu

Plan

ments

eadily likely d for

are of on in cially rural

l 254 riods. ) had rly is

more iders

uding

Texas Ru

2: Current

For aginare limitpresentsconditionand veh

2.2.2

Changinand gastechniquviable, d

This hasTexas, rwhich arfrom proPlay – (increaseproducti

2.2.3

In May 2conductto Improchalleng

IndBawsya

12 While hy

seen sinhttp://ww

13 http://ww14 http://ww15 http://tti.ta

ral Transport

Conditions, N

ng rural rested and ms challengns for the icles.

Gas an

ng energy ss producingue known adomestic op

s led to a reresulting inre used for oduction sit(Figure 2-2ed almost son in the E

Challen

2011, the Ted on behaove Rural ages facing r

ncreasing emand for

Boomers aressistance.

will settle inystems. Thlternative o

ydraulic fracturince 2003, althou

ww.eia.gov/dnav

ww.rrc.state.tx.us

ww.businesswee

amu.edu/docum

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

sidents whoany will coes that maging popu

nd Oil Pro

sources willg regions

as hydraulicption as the

esurgence n an increas

hydraulic ftes for disp2).13 Accordsevenfold iagle Ford i

nges Fac

Texas Tranalf of TxDOand Urban rural public

demand. transit ser

e entering tFurther, th rural area

he rising cooptions to d

ng is not a new tugh considerablyv/pet/hist/LeafHa

s/eagleford/inde

ek.com/news/20

ments/0-6205-1.

nned Improve

o do not haontinue to

may need ulation by m

oduction

l influence across the

c fracturing1

e prices of o

in oil and gse of truckfracturing inposal. Muchding to induin 2011 to s forecast t

ing Rura

nsportation OT entitled

Transit in transportat

Economicrvices will the period oe Texas St

as, which wost of fuel riving a per

technique, its usy lower than 197andler.ashx?n=P

ex.php

012-03-22/texas

pdf

ements

ave accessdrive to mto be addmodifying r

transportate nation a12 a methodoil and gas

gas explorak activity foncluding wah of the newustry reports

surpass 3to expand b

l Public T

Institute (TPeer GroupTexas.15 T

tion in Texa

c and demgrow evenof life whentate Demog

will increasehas led to rsonal vehic

se is expanding 70 peak levels. PET&s=MCRFP

-tops-finds-from

s to public tmeet their tr

dressed toroadways,

tion. Texas re using ad which hashave stead

ation and pr moving s

aste liquidsw activity iss, 14 oil pro

30 million bby 200,000

Transport

TTI) publishping and P

This researas:

mographic n stronger n they are mgrapher’s Oe the dema

a nationwcle.

and domestic oSee US EnergyPUS2&f=A

m-brazil-to-bakke

transportatiransportatio

o allow imsignage, s

and a numan enhances become adily risen.

roduction insand and o

that are tras in the Ea

oduction in barrels. Thi

barrels.

tation

ed the resuPerformancech indicate

projectionsin the futu

more likely tOffice projecand placed ide increas

oil production hay Information Ad

en-as-best-pros

ion, the opon needs.

mproved drtriping, ligh

mber of otheed oil recoan economi

n some parther chemiansported aagle Ford Sthe Eagle s year dail

ults of resee Measuremed the follo

s indicate re. Aging Bto need mocts that reton rural tr

sed deman

as risen to levelsdministration we

pect-energy#p2

13

tions This

riving hting,

er oil overy ically

rts of cals,

away Shale Ford ly oil

earch ment

owing

that Baby

obility irees

ransit d for

s not ebsite:

2

14

So

Ltrmscloa

ource: Railroad

Limited funransit is the

more than 2ales tax caities that a

ocal sales tuthorize fu

Figure 2-2

d Commission

nding optioe local opti2 percent (an be usedre not part ax is alreadnding for tra

2: Oil and G

of Texas, Eagl

ons. In Teion sales tain addition d for a var

of a transdy committeansit.

2: Current C

Gas Wells-

le Ford Informa

exas, the trax. Howeveto the 6.25

iety of purit authority ed to other

Te

onditions, Nee

Eagle Ford

ation

raditional ser, it is con5 percent sposes in aor municippurposes,

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

d Shale

ource of lonstitutionallstate sales

addition to tpal transit dleaving littl

ransportation

ned Improvem

ocal fundingy limited totax). The

transit. In departmente or no roo

Plan

ments

g for o not local most t, the om to

Texas Ru

2: Current

Rfithbth

Inboo

2.3

Consistepoint for

Small u

Inte

Tex

Reg

Rural

Inte

Tex

Reg

Total

This tabsatisfy aon the ecapacityTrunk Smiles argray lineor a cap

ral Transport

Conditions, N

Regional penancial andhroughout eyond the he services

ntegration ased operarganizationf these two

Needs

ent with ther highway n

Table

urban (5,000

erstate

xas Trunk Sy

gional/Local

erstate

xas Trunk Sy

gional/Local

ble providesanticipated estimated ly requiremeystem, and

re needed. es show eitpacity defici

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

erspectived operationthe regiontraditional

s with both i

with healations focu

ns focus ono very differ

s – Highw

e mobility aneeds is cap

e 2-1: Inves

0 to 50,000 p

ystem (non-In

Highways

ystem (non-In

Highways

s an investmrural (and ane-miles ents on intd regional/loThese neether a Trunency based

nned Improve

. There is anal resource. Rural opdemand rentercity bus

lth and huus on optim client flexi

rent perspec

ways

and connecptured in th

stment Sum(Table 3-3

population)

nterstate)

nterstate)

ment summsmall urbaneeded to terstate higocal highwads are map

nk System dd on traffic v

ements

a clear neees to find nerators, in esponse ms providers

uman servmizing servibility. Coorctives into a

ctivity goalshe SLRTP a

mmary for from the S

EstimaMiles

1

3

mary – fundan) capacity

provide a ghways, noays. The SLpped as shdesign defivolumes.

d for regionew ways toparticular,

odel and e and nearb

vices. Pubice efficienrdinating sea joint trans

s describedand shown

Rural CapSLRTP) ated Lane-s Needed

41

346

362

507

,831

594

3,681

ding that is y needs thrconsistent

on-interstateLRTP estimown on Figiciency (les

ns to coordo plan and d are challe

examine waby urban sys

lic transpocy, while h

ervices requsportation p

in Chaptebelow in Ta

pacity Need

Investm($ Mil

projected trough 2035level of de

e highwaysmates that 3gure 2-3. Oss than fou

inate the usdeliver servenged to mays to integstems.

ortation syshuman servuires integraprogram.

r 1, the staable 2-1.

ds

ment Requirelions, 2010)

92

388

105

664

1,469

511

3,529

to be neede5. This is baesign and ms on the T3,681 new lOn this mapr lanes divi

15

se of vices move grate

stem-vices ation

arting

ed

ed to ased meet exas lane-

p, the ided)

16

Thhis page int

2: Current C

tentionally l

Te

onditions, Nee

left blank.

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

ransportation

ned Improvem

Plan

ments

Texa

2: Cu

as Rural Trans

urrent Conditio

Source: At

sportation Pla

ons, Needs and

kins/URS

an

d Planned Impprovements

Figure 22-3: Rural HHighway Deficiency AAssessment

17

18

This pagee intentionaally left blannk.

2: Currrent Condition

Texas Ru

ns, Needs and

ral Transport

d Planned Imp

ation Plan

rovements

Texas Ru

2: Current

These nin the disets, it wanalyzedmap hig

Tmis

Aida

2.4

Plannedprojects address

The prochighwayinputs frand the technicaHighwayChapter

The threFigure 2

The proconstrucof any aranking

16 A tool wa

reviewed

ral Transport

Conditions, N

needs were stant futurewas possibd for the Thlighted se

There werematching pros along the

A number odentified nenalysis.

Planne

d improvemthat addre

ed other go

cess for idey projects brom rural stproject ran

al approachy Ranking r 4.

ee highest 2-4. Detaile

oject rankincted. Prioritdditional loprocess.

as developed to d with stakehold

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

overlaid we and analyle to cross-

TRTP correeveral issue

e a few locojects to adInterstate 4

of rural addeed based

ed Impro

ments for hess the mooals on a st

entifying anbeyond the takeholdersnking proceh is summaMethodolo

ranked pred maps of

ngs do not tization will

ocal factors

rank nearly 600

ders. The criteria

nned Improve

ith the locayzed as a p-check howsponded w

es:

cations whddress thos45 (I-45) co

ded capaciton the ca

ovemen

highways aobility and tatewide ba

nd ranking ttime horizos. Input waess itself. Arized in Chgy and Re

rojects in eeach TxDO

indicate thbe determthat did no

0 rural added caa were then weig

ements

ations of thepart of the Tw well the ruwith the ide

hen needs se needs. Torridor.

ty projects apacity def

nts – Hig

are focusedconnectivi

asis that ap

the rural (inon of the UTas solicitedAll identifiedhapter 1 andesults. Stak

each TxDOOT District c

he priority mined by Tx

t lend them

apacity highwayghted based on

e approximaTRTP. With ural added ntified capa

were idenThe best ex

were identficiency cri

ghways

d on rural ity goals oply to both

ncluding smTP was comfor both th

d projects wd described

keholder pa

OT District can be foun

in which pxDOT, takinmselves to in

y projects againsn stakeholder inp

ately 600 poverlayingcapacity hacity needs

ntified but xample of th

tified whereteria used

added caof the TRT

rural and u

mall urban) mprehensiv

he identificawere ranked in detail iarticipation

are shownnd in Appen

projects wilng into acconclusion int

st a consistent sputs.

projects plan these two ighway pros. The resu

there werehe unmet ne

e there wain the SL

pacity highP. The SL

urban areas

added capve and incluation of prod.16 The ovn Appendixis describe

n statewidendix E.

ll be fundeount knowleto the state

set of criteria tha

19

nned data

ojects ulting

e no eeds

as no LRTP

hway LRTP s.

pacity uded

ojects verall x A – ed in

e on

ed or edge

ewide

at were

20

Thhis page int

2: Current C

tentionally l

Te

onditions, Nee

left blank.

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

ransportation

ned Improvem

Plan

ments

Texa

2: Cu

Sou

as Rural Trans

urrent Conditio

rce: Atkins/

sportation Pla

ons, Needs and

/URS

an

d Planned Impprovements

Figure 2-4: Rankeed Projectss

21

22

This pagee intentionaally left blannk.

2: Curreent Conditions

Texas Ru

, Needs and P

ral Transport

Planned Impr

ation Plan

rovements

Texas Ru

2: Current

2.5

Identifyinhighwayownershthe multareas. Iregionalcorporatparts of

This comopportunapproacrural puthis TRTdoes wavailablerequirem

2.5.1

While bioperateduse crosbiking codesign a

In somerural tramodes. transit) m

The conexampleother roato fundacommunWhile C

17 Website

ral Transport

Conditions, N

Needs

ng needs y modes, anhip and resti-modal tran addition , and loctions. Othethe system

mplex institnities (disc

ches to shoblic transpoTP presenthat it conse resourcements.

Bicycle

icyclists and on roadwsswalks, siommunity aand constru

e cases, traansit users It is also im

modes may

ncept of “Coe of best prad users. Tamentally tnities, by chComplete S

for Complete St

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

s – Non-

for non-hignd the resusponsibilitieansportatio

to TxDOTcal agencir federal an

m, including

tutional envussed in C

ort- and/or loortation takts the resusiders to bes, while

es and Pe

nd pedestriaways, sidewdewalks, sand rural puction of hig

nsit users mwill conse

mportant toy include pe

omplete Stractice for aThe Nationatransform thanging theStreets mo

treets: http://ww

nned Improve

Highway

ghway modults harder es for maintn system,

T, there aries, authond state agthe private

vironment Chapter 1 oong-range

kes a long rlts of thatbe approprremaining

edestrian

ans are incwalks, bike houlders, aedestrians

ghways.

may walk oequently ovo recognizeeople with a

reets17” wasaddressing al Completethe look, fee way mostostly addres

ww.completestre

ements

y Modes

des is a mto quantifytenance anand how t

re varying orities, nongencies areely owned c

results in aof the TRTPplanning. Arange appreffort. Thariate to itscompliant

ns

cluded as nlanes, sho

and trails. Cwill be add

or bike as pverlap with

e that the ina wide rang

s raised duthe needs

e Streets Ceel, and fut roads are ss urban a

eets.org

s

more compy. Chapter 3nd operatiothis varies degrees o

n-profit orge responsibcomponents

an equally P and ChaAmong the roach spant said, eac

s circumstawith any

non-highwaoulders, anConsequendressed in

art of their h those of ndividuals uge of ages a

uring the stof bikes an

Coalition is aunction of planned, dand subur

plex proces3 of the SLons of each

between uf involvemganizations

ble for overs.

complex bpter 3 of thnon-highwning severa

ch modal aances and

legislative

ay modes, bd trails, wh

ntly, the neepart throug

overall tripsthe rural

using bike/pand abilities

akeholder nd pedestrian organizathe roads

designed, aban enviro

ss than thaLRTP discuh componeurban and ent by fed

s, and prseeing diffe

lend of funhe SLRTP)

way modes, al decades

agency or erealistic w

e and/or o

bicycles cahile pedesteds of the

gh the plan

s. The needbike/pedespedestrian s.

meetings aians, as weation that sand stree

nd construconments at

23

at of sses nt of rural

deral, rivate erent

nding ) and

only s and entity within other

an be rians rural ning,

ds of strian (and

as an ell as eeks ts in cted. t the

24

present small tow

The TexstakehoThe bikdifferentmode ofas the participaeconom

C

P

In

C

Ast

Clo

W

E

Ec

2.5.2

In coop(FAA), TupdatedSystemsplan is tand ecopotentiawith lon

18 Rural exa19 Website 20 Example21 See TxD

time, the owns.18

xas biking clder meetin

king commt motivationf travel, or annual Ho

ants and vies. Strateg

Complete St

Provide off-r

nvestigate w

Consider na

Address thetriping and

Continuous onger distan

Wider shoul

Ensure that

Ensure that enter of the

Genera

peration witTxDOT hasd in March 2s (NPIAS), to develop onomic cenl economicg runways

amples of Comp

for Bike Texas:

es of historic bicy

DOT website: htt

organization

communityngs regardiunity is nons: necesspart of a tootter N Hevisitors to gies that ma

treets – see

road paralle

whether rai

ational bicyc

e safety of signage;

shoulders nces;

ders;

shoulder s

rumble stre shoulder.

al Aviation

th local ais developed2010, incluplus other a statewidenters of Te

c impact of g and other

plete Streets: ht

http://www.bike

ycle tourism trai

tp://www.txdot.g

n’s website

, specificallng the ruraot homogesity, recreaourist activiell Hundredan area a

ay encoura

e earlier dis

el bike path

lroad right-

cle routes a

bicyclists

provide saf

urfaces are

rips are clo

n

rport spond a statewiddes airportairports deee system oexas. Aviageneral avir facilities t

ttp://completestr

etexas.org

ls: http://www.b

gov/business/av

2: Current C

e provides

ly BikeTexaal transportaenous, but ation, exercty.20 It was d in Wichand can p

age cycling

scussion;

hs/trails;

of-way cou

across Texa

through a

fer connect

e bike friend

ose to the e

sors and tde airport ss in the FAemed nece

of airports pation industation airporthat can ac

reets.org/webdo

iketexas.org/en/

viation/system_p

Te

onditions, Nee

examples f

as19, providation needsinstead co

cise, sport,also notedita Falls,

provide a sinclude:

uld be used

as;

combinatio

tivity for tho

dly; and

edge of lan

the Federasystem planAA Nationalessary for thproviding aitry stakehorts in rural accommodat

ocs/factsheets/c

/infrastructure/te

plan.htm

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

for rural co

ded consists of the bikomprises i quality of

d that cyclinattract largsignificant

by bicyclis

on of phys

ose bikers t

ne marking

al Aviation n—the TAS Plan of Inthe system. r access toolders havareas of thete corporat

cs-rural-2.pdf

exas-tourism-tra

ransportation

ned Improvem

ommunities

ent input toking commundividuals f life, prefeng events, ge numberboost to

ts;

ical separa

that wish to

and not in

AdministraSP.21 The TAtegrated AiThe goal o

o the populae stressede state. Airpte jets faci

ails

Plan

ments

s and

o the unity.

with erred such rs of local

ation,

o ride

n the

ation ASP, rport

of the ation

d the ports litate

Texas Ru

2: Current

long-distinterests

The TASinformat

A

A

A

A

A

R

The currof the seconombetween

ST

Bp

La

Needs arural are

Busines

The 67 provide located These aand servEach haoperatiomay be

22 Texas Ai

ral Transport

Conditions, N

tance traves across the

SP develoption, includi

An inventory

Analysis of t

An airport cl

A general es

Alternatives

Recommend

rent TASP state airpoic centers

n activity ce

Scheduled aTexas reside

Business jeopulation a

ight pistongricultural c

associated weas of Texa

ss/Corpora

business/caccess tomore than

airports areve an area as or is fo

ons within 5located wit

rport System Pl

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

el for compe state, e.g

pment procng:

y of existing

the existing

assification

stimate of n

for implem

ded state le

system incort system of Texas. A

enters and a

air carrier sents.

et aircraft aand mineral

n-engine acenters.

with the fouas are desc

ate Airport

corporate ao turboprop

30 minutee generally of concent

orecasted t5 years, or hin 25 mile

lan

nned Improve

panies bas., oil and ga

cess results

g airport fac

g capacity o

n system wi

needed imp

mentation of

egislation a

ludes 289 eis to prov

Adequate aappropriate

service sho

access sho resource c

aircraft acc

ur types of ribed below

ts

airports in p and turboes from the

located 25rated poputo have 50have two p

es of a signi

ements

sed in one as producti

s in the co

cilities, serv

of airports a

ith appropri

provements

f airport imp

nd funding

existing andvide adequaccess is exe airport fac

ould be wit

ould be wcenters.

cess should

General Avw. The need

the TASPojet businenearest co

5 miles frolation, purc

00 or morepermanentlificant natio

part of theon/refining.

ollection of

vices, and tr

and forecas

iate facility

and their c

provements

for airport

d 12 proposuate accesxpressed in

cilities:

hin a 60-m

ith a 30-m

d be with

viation airpds are defin

P are mapess aircraftommercial om other bchasing powe annual by based jet

onal recreat

e state but.

important

raffic volum

t activity lev

standards;

costs at eac

s; and

improveme

sed airportsss to the n terms of t

minute drive

minute drive

in a 30-m

orts generaned in the 5

ped in Figt and servservice or usiness/corwer, or minbusiness/cots. Some otion or pres

t with busi

aviation-re

mes;

vels;

ch airport;

ents.

s. The objepopulation the driving

e for virtual

e of signif

minute driv

ally found in5-year TASP

gure 2-5. Tve communreliever airrporate airperal produc

orporate airof these airpservation ar

25

ness

lated

ective and time

ly all

ficant

ve of

n the P.

They nities rport. ports ction. rcraft ports rea.22

26

An estimcorporattraffic.

Commu

The 106These astate, adand min30-minucommunaircraft. upgradin

23 Texas Ai

mated $251te airports

unity Servic

6 communitairports provdd capacityeral produc

ute drive fronity serviceSufficient

ng to stand

r System Plan

Figure 2-5

1 million ovrelated to m

ce Airports

ty service avide primar

y in many ofction areasom a busine airports activity exiards for tur

5: Texas Bu

ver the nexmeeting de

s

airports incry businessf the metro. Communi

ness/corporwill accom

ists at manrboprop and

2: Current C

usiness/Co

xt 5 years wesign stand

cluded in ths access topolitan areaty service arate, relievemmodate sny of thesed business

Te

onditions, Nee

orporate A

will be requards that a

he TASP ao smaller coas, and proairports areer, or commsingle and e locations jet use. 23

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

Airports

uired for thaccommoda

are mappedommunitiesovide accese generally mercial ser

light twinto justify m

ransportation

ned Improvem

he 67 businate busines

d in Figure throughou

ss to agriculocated withrvice airporn piston-enmaintenanc

Plan

ments

ness/ ss jet

e 2-6. ut the ltural hin a rt. All ngine ce or

Texas Ru

2: Current

An estimcommuninfrastruaircraft. short ternew accthe next

ral Transport

Conditions, N

mated $17nity serviceucture. Also

Included inrm and onecess to comt 0–5 or 6–1

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

Figure 2-6

1 million foe airports o planned n this amoe proposed

mmunities o10 years.

nned Improve

6: Texas Co

or the nexup to desare upgrad

ount are cod airport in or expand c

ements

ommunity

xt five yearsign standdes to acc

osts for conthe long te

capacity an

Service A

rs will be ards and

commodatenstruction oerm. These

nd are plann

irports

required toto preserv

e larger, mof two newe new airponed for con

o bring exive the exiore deman

w airports inorts will pronstruction w

27

sting sting

nding n the ovide within

28

Basic S

The 68 airports businessthe statconvenieairports business

Tab

R

M

Le

No

So

Service Airp

basic servare loca

s/corporatete. These ence for ccannot exps access, a

Figu

ble 2-2: Pro

Location

Randall Coun

Mills County

eon County

ote: Bexar Cou

ource: Texas D

ports

vice airportated withine or commu

airports tyclear-weathpand to meand may rep

ure 2-7: Te

oposed New

P

ty 0 - 5

under

0 - 5

nty is adding a

epartment of T

ts included n the servunity serviceypically ha

her flying eet the sizepresent the

exas Basic

2: Current C

w Commu

Period

construction

additional capac

Transportation,

the TASPvice area e airports oave very land trainin

e and instrue only public

Service A

Te

onditions, Nee

nity Servic

Purp

New Acce

New Acce

New Acce

city

Aviation Divisi

P are mappof comm

or may be llow usageng operatioument approc landing si

irports and

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

ce Airports

pose

ess

ess

ess

ion, 2010.

ped in Figumercial selocated in r, and proons. Manyoach standte for many

d Heliports

ransportation

ned Improvem

s

ure 2-7. Trvice, relieremote areaovide addity basic sedards to supy miles.

s

Plan

ments

hese ever, as of ional rvice pport

Texas Ru

2: Current

Basic sefacilities

Heliport

There aby indivplanned

2.5.3

The SLRservicesa facility

M

D

L

2.5.4

Freight most critshort-linrailroadsinstanceother inmaintenincreasenecessaweight rthere aravailablemay eveto be ac

A relatedI railroadmodel isMaking intensivestop pro

ral Transport

Conditions, N

ervice airp up to stand

ts

re two helipiduals, cor for future d

Inland W

RTP provids they proviy is conside

Maintenance

Deepening d

andside fac

Freight

rail needs tical need fes were cs over the es the lines nfrastructureance point

ed in weighary to handrail, slow sre industriee. A public entually be cquired by t

d need voicds to scheds based onstops to p

e operationofitable. The

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

orts will redards and r

ports includporations, developme

Waterway

des a compide, and thered urban o

e of drafts (

drafts; and

cilities and

t Rail

in rural Tefor short-lincreated from

three deccould be r

e were oft of view ht and mucdle the carspeeds, def

es located grant fundadded to t

he state in

ced by somdule stops

n high volumpick up carn, and in soe inability o

nned Improve

equire $79 reconstruct

ded in the Tand helicont, which w

ys

prehensive e factors thor rural, com

(U.S. Army

intermodal

xas are mee railroads m marginacades sinceun profitabften not thand have

ch of the ss efficientlyferred mainon the raiing program

the roadwaorder to pre

me short-lineto pick up

me and higrs from shome cases d

of short-line

ements

million forting deterio

TASP. Helippter taxi an

will be a pub

descriptionhat influencmmon need

Corps of E

interchang

et by both is funding flly profitabe the rail ly with a dif

he most meven det

short-line ty. Short-linentenance al line that m is needey system. Oeserve rail

e railroads their carlo

gh-speed coort-lines invdoes not ge

es to fund m

r the next rating pave

ports accomnd medicalblic use heli

n of Texas ce operationds include:

Engineers [U

ges

short-line afor rehabilitle lines thindustry wfferent cost

modern or eriorated otrack did nes are ofte

and older emight use

ed to meet Otherwise tservice alo

is to increaoads. The Corridors to volves a timenerate enomulti-million

5 years toement.

mmodate hl services. ipad in Gra

ports and ns. Regard

USACE]);

and Class tation projeat were sp

was deregut structure. in the be

over time. ot keep up

en characteequipment.

rail if bettthose needthe short-li

ong those co

se cooperaClass I railrmaintain thme-consumough carloa dollar repa

o bring exi

helicopters One helipoy County.

waterwaysless of whe

I railroads.ects. Most opun off Clalated. In mThe tracks

est shape Railcars

p with chaerized by lig

In some cter service ds or the frenes might orridors.

ation from Croads’ busiheir profitabming, switchads to makeair and upg

29

sting

used ort is

s, the ether

The of the ass I many s and from have nges ghter ases was

eight have

Class ness bility. hing-e the

grade

30

projects uneconofrequent

A TTI sthave noindustry especialImprove

Tsloc

Ath

A

Many ofsignificatheir ent

R

T

B

T

B

Bringingtheir viaestimate

S

C

C

S

24 Warner, J

2005. Pp

limits the tomical car t stops.

tudy compleot been able

is now ully for tra

ements inclu

The amountmaller, thu

ocomotives rew costs;

A reduction he system;

A reduction

f the short-lantly smalletire infrastru

Rail and join

Ties and fas

Ballast and s

Turnouts; an

Bridge struc

g the short-bility and to

ed that Texa

Short-line In

Class I Infra

Class I Non-

Safety – $55

J. and Solari Tep 4-5.

types and aloadings an

eted in 200e to keep using 286,0

ansporting ude:

t of cars thus reducing

and railca

of the numand

in fuel cons

ine rail tracer. The heaucture inclu

nts;

stenings;

surfacing;

nd

ctures.

-line infrasto enhance as’ annual

nfrastructure

structure –

-Infrastructu

5 million.

erra, M, Assessm

amount of cnd reluctan

0524 (still apup with cha000-pound

heavy bu

hat are neeg the amouars providin

mber of tra

sumption pe

cks were buvier rail car

uding:

tructure up rail freight freight rail n

e – $27 mil

$396 millio

ure – $159

ment of Texas S

2: Current C

commoditience on the

pplicable toanging indurailcars tolk materia

eded to traunt of trainng a savin

ins can pro

er ton of ca

uilt decadesrs in use to

to currentchoices in needs of $6

lion;

on;

million; and

Short Line Railro

Te

onditions, Nee

es they canpart of Cla

day) showeustry standao improve oals, like c

nsport the ns and congs in owne

oduce an in

argo moved

s ago whenoday will re

t standardsTexas. In t

637 million

d

oads, Texas Tra

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

n carry, thusass I railroa

ed that shoards. For inoverall sys

coal, grain

same volunsequently ership, ma

ncrease in

d.

n the maximequire railro

s is necessthe Texas Rfrom 2005

ansportation Ins

ransportation

ned Improvem

s leading toads to sche

ort-line railronstance, thestem efficie, and lum

ume of cargthe numbe

aintenance,

the capaci

mum loads woads to upg

ary to maiRail Plan itto 2030:

stitute, Novembe

Plan

ments

o the edule

oads e rail ency, mber.

go is er of

and

ity of

were grade

ntain was

er 15,

Texas Ru

2: Current

As previTexas r(frackingtruck.

2.5.5

There aof the sAmtrak’scommutservice no reque

2.5.6

Statewidan increSLRTP. Transit pamount passengto incremore rem

TxDOT, provide transit CoordinTxDOT’sregionalCoordinhave beanalysisrural puinformat

Long-RTTI and public tr2012 topopulati

ral Transport

Conditions, N

iously mentrequiring ing) process

Passen

re a limitedstate, preds routes, mter rail linesinto more aests to exte

Rural T

de rural tranease of gre

Increasedproviders in

of servicegers. Miles ase accessmote areas

in conjunrural publicfunding neation Planss first attem planning ation Plans

een synthess and the syublic transption for the

ange Rurain coordina

ransportatioo 2035 weon change.

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

tioned, the ncreased frrequires ot

nger Rail

d number oominately

most comms are locateareas of Teend Amtrak

Transit

nsit ridersheater than funding le

ncreased the miles pgrew fastesibility ands, an increa

ction with c transportaeeds throus. The Rempt to prod

organizatis during thsized by TTynthesis ofportation ddevelopme

al Transit Nation with thon in Texaere based . The initial

nned Improve

shale gas hreight rail ther materia

of Amtrak sin west anunities do ed in rural

exas. Duringk’s route into

ip in 2011 w18 percent

evels resulthe overall nrovided. Br than pass mobility in

ase in longe

the TTI aation in Texugh 2035,gional Cooduce a longons that

he latter paTI on behalf the Regioata. They

ent of the TR

Needs Anahe RTDs - ds. Initial pron availaprojections

ements

has recentlservices. Aals to be s

tations andnd northeanot have aareas. Am

g the outreo more rura

was 5.8 mit over the ted in bothumber of v

Both investsengers as n terms of

er distance t

nd the 38 xas, underto and doc

ordination Pg-range forcoordinate

art of 2011lf of TxDOTnal Coordinprovide ti

RTP.

alysis – TxDdevelopedrojections o

able state s assumed

y become aAdditionallyhipped to e

d passengeast Texas.access to p

mtrak does ach portion

al areas.

llion passe2008 rider

h capital anvehicles in ttments resa result of increased

trips and fre

Rural Traook an anacumented Plans deverecast of ru

the RTD/early 2012T. The longnation Planmely, com

DOT - with projectionsof operatindata for peach of the

an economy, the hydreach well, b

er rail routeWith limite

passenger not have p

n of this pro

nger trips. Trship level nd operatiothe fleet ansulted in aefforts by t span of sequency of

nsit Districalysis of the

the resulteloped in 2ural transit s updated2. The coog-range rurans are two

mprehensive

technical as of fundingg and cappublic trane 38 Rural

mic generatoraulic fractuboth by rail

s in rural aed stops arail service

plans to expoject there w

This represreported in

ons investmd increasedan increastransit provservice, sef service.

cts (RTDs) e long term ts in Reg2006 repreneeds. Th

d the Regordination pal transit nenew source

e, and det

assistance g needs for ital needs

nsportation Transit Dis

31

or for uring l and

areas along e. No pand were

sents n the ment. d the

se in iders rving

that rural ional

esent e 24 ional plans eeds es of ailed

from rural from and

tricts

32

(RTDs) populatibased omiles (mneeds tprojectio

A majorfor the fu

In

In

In

In

Ato

Ea

In generresponssome chchange routes. funding tables by

The proincreasetransporThe statto $410inflation$5.1 billi

would proon in 2011

on forecastsmiles travelthrough theons of the o

rity of RTDsuture as fol

ncrease in f

nterest in re

ncrease in i

nterest in co

Addition of po reflect new

Emphasis o regular ba

ral, the prime or medichange in santicipatedTable 2-3 needs fromy TxDOT D

ojected anned days ortation fleet tewide ann.5 million i. The totaion.

vide simila1. The initias of populaled with pae year 203operating an

s respondelows:

fleet size fo

esearch and

in-house ve

ooperative

passenger fw and expa

n technologsis (TTI, 20

mary types cal transposervice oped was an

contains m 2012 to District in Ap

ual revenuof service

was 1,609ual operatinin 2035 dul amount

ar service lal projectio

ation growthassengers 35. Full dend capital n

ed with app

or operation

d implemen

ehicle main

fleet mainte

facilities suanded trans

gy, includin012)

of servicesortation proerational levincrease inthe statew2035. Opeppendix D.

e miles incand daily

9 in 2011 anng expenseue to popuof operatin

2: Current C

levels as tons were coh in each ruon board)

etails of thneeds can b

proximate fa

ns

ntation of al

tenance ca

enance with

uch as transsit services

ng impleme

s in 2035 arogram. A mvels in then either fle

wide findingerating need.

crease at aspan of

nd will increes will likelylation growng funding

Te

onditions, Nee

he ratio ofompleted bural transit and assoc

he methodbe found in

acility and

lternate “gr

apacity

h other tran

sit centers,

entation, up

re expectedmajority of e next 23 yexible bus gs for opeds for each

a faster pacservice by

ease to appy increase

wth, service needed t

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

f transit revby TTI in Ddistrict to p

ciated vehology for Appendix

technology

reen” fuels t

nsit agencie

park & ride

pgrading, an

d to remainRTDs enviyears. The routes or rating charh RTD are

ce than poy 2035. Thproximately from $86.5e changes,to 2035 is

ransportation

ned Improvem

venue mileDecember 2project reveicle and fadeveloping C.

y capital vis

technologie

es

es, and she

nd replacin

n either demsioned at most com

fixed local racteristics summarize

opulation duhe rural p3,000 by 2

5 million in 2 and mone

s approxim

Plan

ments

es to 2011 enue acility g the

sions

es

elters

ng on

mand least

mmon bus and

ed in

ue to public 2035. 2011 etary ately

Texas Ru

2: Current

Populatio

Annual rev

Vehicle fle

Operating

Source: Tx

Table 2planningsummar

Ta

So

As state1,600 inincreaseamount $194.8 mchange which inbus stopand othcomputecommunplanner $83.1 m

ral Transport

Conditions, N

Table 2

n in service are

Rura

venue miles

eet size

g expenses

STAT

xDOT/TTI

2-4 containg period torized in tabl

able 2-4: S

(all value

adjusted m

Vehicle repl

O&M facilit

Passenger f

Technology

TOTAL

(all values

adjusted mil

Vehicle repla

O&M facilite

Passenger fa

Technology 

TOTAL

S

ource: TxDOT/

ed previousn 2011 to e fleet size

of operatmillion capover the pe

nclude tranp facilities. er” and incers, automnications eq

applicationmillion. The t

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

2-3: Statewand

ea 2010

al 6.9

2011

31.1

2011

1,609

2011

$86.5

EWIDE RURA

Base Year

s the stateo 2035. Dles by TxDO

Statewide R

es are inflation 

illions of dollars)

lacement

es

acilities

y and other

STATEWIDE RUs are inflation 

llions of dollars)

acement

es

acilities

and other

STATEWIDE RU

/TTI

sly, the ruraabout 3,00

e is $645.5tions or mital fundingeriod. Approsit centersThe last c

cludes projmatic vehquipment, an). The tectotal amoun

nned Improve

wide Rural d Funding

2015 202

7.5 8.

34.1 39.

1,751 2,00

$109.1 $152.

Proje

Inflation ad

M

Mi

L TRANSIT OP

An

ewide findietailed sumOT District

Rural Trans

2012‐15

$14.4

$14.6

$2.5

$9.1

$40.6

URAL TRANSIT 

2012‐15

$14.4

$14.6

$2.5

$9.1

$40.6

URAL TRANSIT C

al public tra00 by 20355 million ovmaintenanceg is neededoximately $, park and

category of ected fund

hicle locatand online pchnology-rent of capital

ements

Transit OpNeeds 201

20 2025

1 8.7

5 45.7

01 2,282 2

0 $211.5 $2

ected statewide fle

djusted millions o

Millions of miles

illions of persons

PERATING FUN

nnual Snapshot

ngs for cammaries oin Append

sit Capital

2016‐20 202

$84.9 $1

$25.0 $

$20.8 $

$13.5 $

$144.1 $2

CAPITAL FUND

2016‐20 2021

$84.9 $13

$25.0 $3

$20.8 $4

$13.5 $1

$144.1 $22

CAPITAL FUND

ansportatio5; the capitver the pee facility cd to suppo$250.2 milli

rides, termprojected ing needs tion equippresence (ielated capil funding ne

perating Ch12 to 2035

2030 2035

9.4 10.1

53.0 61.5

2,602 2,971

294.4 $410.5

eet

of dollars

s

NDING NEEDS

t

apital fundiof capital ndix D.

Funding N

1‐25 2026‐30

130.2 $176.5

$35.2 $49.7

$42.1 $69.7

$16.4 $19.9

224.0 $315.8

DING NEEDS 20

1‐25 2026‐30

30.2 $176.5

35.2 $49.7

42.1 $69.7

16.4 $19.9

24.0 $315.8

ING NEEDS 201

on fleet is etal requiredriod. Everycapital neert increasinon is neede

minals/garagcapital fundfor the foll

pment, soi.e., web deital needs eeded to 20

haracterist

na

1,073

na

$5,095 $

S 2012 to 203

2012‐2035 

Total Ch

ng needs needs for

Needs 2012

0 2031‐35

5 $239.5

7 $70.2

7 $115.2

9 $24.2

8 $449.1 $

012 to 2035

2031‐35

$239.5

$70.2

$115.2

$24.2

$449.1 $

12 to 2035

expected tod to replacy RTD haseds from 2ng fleet sized for passges, and vding needslowing itemoftware aevelopmentfrom 2012

035 is $1.17

tics

3.3

30.4 2

1,362 2

$323.9 6

35

hange

Comp

Annua

throughouteach RTD

2 to 2035

Total

$645.5

$194.8

$250.2

$83.1

$1,173.7

Total

$645.5

$194.8

$250.2

$83.1

1,173.7

o increase ce vehicles s some va2012 to 2

zes and sesenger facilvarious types is “technoms: mobile and hardwt costs for a2 to 2035 7 billion.

33

1.57%

2.76%

2.48%

6.43%

pound 

l Rate

t the D are

from and

rying 2035; rvice ities, es of ology data

ware, a trip total

34

Table 2TxDOT capital Appendi

Ta

Abilene

Amarillo

Atlanta

Austin

Beaumont

Brownwood

Bryan

Childress

Corpus Christ

Dallas

El Paso

Fort Worth

Houston

Laredo

Lubbock

Lufkin

Odessa

Paris

Pharr

San Angelo

San Antonio

Tyler

Waco

Wichita Falls

Yoakum

STATEWIDE

TxDOT District

Source: Tx

Synthestransporlevel witLegacy transit aeach of plans. Thave se

In 2010began in

-5 summarDistrict officneeds forix D.

able 2-5: R

New & 

Replacement 

Vehicles

70

160

155

585

70

427

471 $

83

i 141

987

182

314

138

120

148

‐

305

228

137

60

523

286

100

‐

348

6,039 $

t

Vehicles

xDOT/TTI

sis of Regrtation coorth the Safefor Users (

and humanthe 24 pla

The initial prved as a g

, the originn 2005. In

rizes the fce associatr rural pub

Rural Trans

Total 

Cost

# of New 

& Renov. 

Facilities

$4.8 4

$15.5 4

$13.4 6

$67.0 5

$8.1 11

$41.5 27

$101.6 7

$8.2 4

$12.8 12

$99.1 23

$19.8 3

$29.6 13

$13.1 12

$12.9 8

$13.9 26

‐ ‐

$21.0 4

$23.1 13

$14.5 12

$5.5 4

$52.3 10

$28.2 4

$9.8 3

‐ ‐

$29.8 15

$645.5 229

Rural Trans

CA

O&M Fac

ional Publrdination we, Account(SAFETEA- services pnning regio

planning efguide for the

al coordinaaddition to

unding neeted with theblic transp

sit Funding

Total 

Cost

# of New 

& Renov. 

Facilities

$3.1 4

$3.1 4

$6.0 2

$3.9 6

$9.0 1

$11.8 4

$5.7 8

$3.1 4

$9.3 8

$24.0 16

$4.1 4

$12.5 8

$12.4 19

$7.4 9

$19.9 10

‐ ‐

$2.0 0

$15.7 6

$7.8 10

$3.1 4

$8.7 7

$3.6 15

$2.4 0

‐ ‐

$16.0 15

$194.8 162

sit Funding Needs

APITAL (millions, infl

ilities Large Pax

lic Transpowas enhanc

able, Flexi-LU), whichplans for mons across fforts were e majority o

ation planso implemen

2: Current C

eds for RTe RTD. Detaportation o

g Needs 20

Total Cost

# of Ne

& Reno

Faciliti

$3.3 3

$3.3 3

$1.5

$3.1 7

$1.4 17

$3.3 3

$49.5 27

$3.3 3

$7.9 9

$11.5 5

$2.8 10

$7.0 10

$17.3 16

$7.7 2

$6.7

‐

$0.0

$5.7 7

$17.6 25

$3.3 3

$4.7 4

$9.1 15

$0.0 1

‐

$18.1 81

$188.0 2,60

s 2012 to 2035 by 

flation adjusted dolla

x Facilities Small P

ortation Coed by the ble, and Eh required lmany feder

Texas worsubmitted

of the coord

were updating many

Te

onditions, Nee

TDs based ailed docum

operators i

012 to 2035

Otew 

ov. 

es Total Cost

(techn

c

39 $1.1

39 $1.1

5 $0.3

75 $4.2

75 $2.4

32 $1.7

70 $3.4

39 $1.0

94 $2.1

59 $1.3

00 $5.4

05 $2.0

60 $2.6

26 $0.5

0 $0.0

‐ ‐

0 $0.0

70 $2.1

51 $4.7

39 $1.1

43 $1.1

50 $2.6

10 $0.3

‐ ‐

19 $21.3

00 $62.1

TxDOT District

rs)

Pax Facilities

oordinatiopassage officient Traocally deve

ral-aid transrked to devto the TTC

dinated effo

ated, buildiof the obje

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

on data pmentation on Texas

5 by TxDOT

ther

nology 

capital)

R

$0.6 $12.8

$3.5 $26.5

$3.5 $24.8

$8.0 $86.2

$1.4 $22.2

$6.6 $64.8

$3.4 $163.6

$2.8 $18.3

$4.3 $36.5

$8.2 $144.2

$1.5 $33.6

$4.6 $55.6

$1.5 $47.1

$2.2 $30.7

$2.2 $42.7

‐ ‐

$5.2 $28.2

$2.8 $49.6

$3.1 $47.7

$1.7 $14.5

$7.1 $74.0

$3.1 $46.6

$2.2 $14.8

‐ ‐

$3.5 $88.7

$83.1 $1,173.6 1

(

Total 

Capital

n Plans – f legislation

ansportationeloped, coosit programvelop regioC in Decem

orts through

ng on the ectives outl

ransportation

ned Improvem

provided byof operatingis provide

T District

Total 

evenue 

Miles

Total 

Operating

10.2 $35.9

33.2 $149.5

34.2 $137.4

104.4 $672.8

11.9 $67.0

77.4 $396.3

82.0 $524.5

18.1 $79.0

28.5 $115.2

137.5 $571.8

37.6 $80.1

60.5 $259.8

25.1 $156.9

23.2 $96.1

26.7 $145.6

‐ ‐

67.8 $263.6

48.9 $173.3

29.8 $165.6

11.0 $75.7

87.3 $431.3

48.3 $206.1

20.7 $96.2

‐ ‐

48.3 $195.2

1,072.5 $5,094.9

(millions, inflation 

adjusted dollars)

OPERATING

In 2005, pn at the fedn Equity Acordinated p

ms. As a renal coordinmber 2006hout the sta

initial workined in the

Plan

ments

y the g and d in

public deral ct: A

public esult, nated and te.

k that e first

Texas Ru

2: Current

series orecently

TxDOT includingsummarconductremaininplans cawebsite.

An initiacomponplans coprovidinPlains Rthe 2006

Many ofhiring a future. Thas bee

Other reestablishclear waFor exaplan, whFor the objectiveor not th

Several gauge thwent sooverall e

The Reindividuaestablish

25 http://ww

ral Transport

Conditions, N

of plans, madocumente

asked TTIg commonry of the inited (March ng plans wean be foun.25

al review oents outline

ontained a dg transpor

Region crea6 plan and

f the plans regional m

The Heart on successf

egions workhed new goay of demomple, Gold

hich involve2011 upda

es and perfhe objective

of the reghe achieveo far as to effectivenes

egions contal needs. hed visions

ww.regionalservic

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

any of the ed through

to reviewn themes, tial overvie2012), 20

ere to be snd under th

of the planed in TxDOdiscussion tation, andated a usefhow the reg

have also obility man

of Texas reful in conne

ked to creaoals and onstrating th

den Cresceed improvedate, the regformance m

es have bee

ions incorpment of goinclude pr

ss of the pla

tinue to wThe regio

s, missions,

ceplanning.org

nned Improve

Texas regithe 2010 U

w the updatbest pracw of the suof the 24 ubmitted uhe Texas R

s shows thOT’s suppliof unmet n

d how the ful table lisgion worked

broached tager, or thrgion has es

ecting the pu

ate vision abjectives. U

he iterative ent region ed service degion establmeasures, aen attained

porated peroals and objrocess andan to coord

work on deons continu

goals, and

ements

ons experieU.S. Census

ted coordintices, and

ubmitted plaregions hapon stakehRegions ta

hat the maied table ofeeds and/oregion add

sting the prd to addres

he subject rough plannstablished ublic with ri

nd missionUpdating thprocess of

established elivery and lished cleaallowing th.

rformance jectives. So

d outcome inate trans

eveloping aue to becod objectives

enced pops.

nated plansinnovation

ans. At the ad submitteholder approab of the R

ajority havef contents.

or previous dressed threvious barss/overcom

of mobility ning to hirea mobility mides in the

statementhe regional f regional tr

basic, attaenhancingr descriptive stakehold

measures ome regionmeasures

portation ac

and growinome bettes. Ultimately

ulation grow

s and docuns. Presentime the in

ed updated oval later in

Regional Se

e some, if Additional

barriers anhem. For erriers and ce them.

managemee a mobility managemeregion.

s for the plgoals and

ransportatioainable goag the customve goals thders to dete

into the upns, such as

in order tctivities in t

ng their plar organizey, the regio

wth, which

ument findnted here nitial review

plans, andn 2012. Theervice Plan

not all, ofly, many o

nd constrainexample, Sconstraints

ent, whethemanager innt program

lan update, objectives

on coordinaals for the 2mer experiehat were tieermine whe

pdated planCentral Te

to evaluatethe region.

ans to fit d, with cle

ons see valu

35

was

ings, is a

w was d the e full

nning

f the f the

nts to South

from

er by n the

m that

, and s is a ation. 2006 ence. ed to ether

ns to exas, e the

their early ue in

36

coordinaBrazos V

“Okcbkctr

While thregionalthese re

2.5.7

Intercity particulacommunservices

In 2000,some ofbus facinvestmerural are

In areatransporintercity transporeconom4 years,rapid exfor mark

26 Fravel, F

http://we27 U.S. Bur

http://ww

ating resouValley plan

One thing teeps increare demanetween hoeep rising, ommon linransportatio

he quote d coordinatio

ealities.

Intercit

bus transparly in smanities to eas such as he

, TxDOT anf the compacility needsent approaeas as a ma

as where rtation fills bus transp

rtation provic downtur intercity b

xpansion ofket share ag

Frederick D. Rureb1.ctaa.org/web

reau of Transpoww.bts.gov/publi

urces and a,

that never sasing whilends are some and emand wage

nk betweenon is not ke

depicts the on seeks to

ty Bus

portation is aller comm

ach other wealthcare n

nd the Texaanies that os in Texach. TxDOTajor priority

air servicean import

portation is vided the

rn in 2008,bus service f intercity bgainst both

ral Passenger Tbmodules/weba

ortation Statisticscations/schedu

are striving

seems to ce funding ioaring. Ur

mployment, es and incon all these

eeping up w

day-to-dayo mitigate th

a crucial comunities anwithin a regnot found lo

as Bus Assoperate intes to deve

T and TBA for federal

e and pastant void. Ea more affogreatest

it is not shas increa

bus servicesh the airline

Transportation. Karticles/articlefile

s, February 201led_intercity_tra

2: Current C

g to improv

change is ths decreasiban sprawmedical, o

ome are noe needs,

with the dem

y realities he negative

omponent od rural areion, as wecally.

ociation (Tercity bus selop a mo

identified tfunding.

ssenger raEven whenordable optcoverage surprising tased nations along thes and Amtr

KFH Group, Betes/trnews225_M

1: ansportation_an

Te

onditions, Nee

ve service

hat demandng. Our po

wl is resultor recreationot keeping and yet t

mand.”

many trane impacts o

of the surfaeas. This ll as to larg

BA) - an orservices in Tore comprethe need fo

ail are notn these othtion, for maacross rurto find thatnally. In lare east coasrak. Daily b

hesda, MarylanMoving.pdf

nd_the_us_rural_

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

delivery. A

d for all agopulation isting in gren destinatioup. Trans

the funding

sportation of the challe

ace transpotype of seger urban c

rganization Texas - assehensive aor facility im

t availableher modes

any.26 In 201ral Americt every yeage part, thst, success

bus operatio

nd. TRNEWS 22

_population/201

ransportation

ned Improvem

As stated in

ency resous aging. Heeater distaons. Gas pportation isg available

providers fenges pose

rtation netwervice conncenters offe

that repressessed inteand systemmprovemen

e, intercity s are availa10, intercitya.27 Given ar, for the is is due to

sfully compeons grew by

25 March-April 2

10/pdf/entire.pdf

Plan

ments

n the

urces ealth nces rices s the e for

face, ed by

work, nects ering

sents ercity matic nts in

bus able, y bus

the past

o the eting y 7.1

2003:

f

Texas Ru

2: Current

percent transporof interc

Howeve89 percehad accdecreasbe attribThis ulttranspor

While incountry,large rurof the st

28 Schwiete

Service ihttp://ww%20201

ral Transport

Conditions, N

in the yeartation systecity transit fo

er, in rural ent of rural cess in 20ed over the

buted to thtimately lertation betw

ntercity bus Figure 2-ral areas intate that do

erman, Joseph Pin the United Sta

ww.buses.org/file1%20Update%

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

ar 2011 aem to appror the fourth

areas acrareas had

10. The nue 5-year spe network

ed to 3.1 ween 2005 a

s service p-9 illustraten Texas pa

not have a

P. et al. The Inteates. Chaddick es/BISC/The%220on%20Sched

nned Improve

lone.28 “Threciably groh year in a

ross the nd access toumber of i

pan from 3,1reductionsmillion ru

and 2010.

rovides thes that therrticularly in

access to in

ercity Bus Rolls Institute for Met

20Intercity%20Bduled%20Motor

ements

e intercity ow in 2011row”.

nation, inte intercity bintercity bu169 to 2,42 made by ral residen

e most covre are still n the northentercity bus

to Record Expatropolitan Devel

Bus%20Rolls%2r%20Coach%20

bus syste, making it

rcity bus sus services

us stations 23 stations.

Greyhoundnts losing

verage in rservice gap

ern, westerservice.

ansion: 2011 Upopment, DePau

20to%20Record0Service.pdf

em was thethe fastest

service decs in 2005, o

providing This decre

d lines shoaccess to

ural areas ps. As of 2n, and sout

pdate on Schedul University: Ded%20Expansion

e only intet growing m

creased. Wonly 78 perrural cove

ease can mortly after 2o intercity

throughou2010, therethwestern p

duled Motorcoacecember 2011: n%20-

37

ercity mode

While rcent

erage ainly

2005. bus

t the e are parts

ch

38

Source: U.Transporta

NOTE: A ruBureau as

Table 2-half of T2005 an

The righTexas inno acce

S. Departmentation Statistics.

ural area is a Can urbanized a

-6 shows thTable 2-6 snd 2010 with

ht side of thn 2005 andss to interc

Figure

t of Transportat

Census block garea or urban c

he decline hows the nh access to

he table shod 2010 for wcity air, ferry

2-8: Interc

tion, Research

group with its cecluster in 2000.

in rural accnumber ando intercity se

ows the nuwhom intery, and rail.

2: Current C

city Bus Se

h and Innovative

entroid outside.

cess to inted percent oervice, inclu

umber and rcity bus se

Te

onditions, Nee

ervice in 20

e Technology A

e of the area de

ercity bus sof residents uding interc

percent of ervice is the

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

010

Administration,

efined by the U

services in in rural are

city bus ser

residents ie only inter

ransportation

ned Improvem

, Bureau of

nited States Ce

Texas. Theeas of Texarvice.

n rural arearcity mode,

Plan

ments

ensus

e left as in

as of , i.e.,

Texas Ru

2: Current

R

N

5

Source: U.Transporta

Table 2-from 96intercity access tair servi

2.6

This secranked i

2.6.1

Althoughincorpordesign,

2.6.2

In coopstatewidincludessystem. access t

TxDOT’saviation on the Develop

29 See TxD

ral Transport

Conditions, N

2005

Rural residenbus,

Number

5,215,524

S. Departmentation Statistics.

-6 indicates.1 to 87.7 bus is the

to intercity ce slightly i

Planne

ction identifn any way.

Bicycle

h no specration of pand mainte

Genera

peration witde airport s airports i

The goal oto the popu

s Aviation Cairport devanticipated

pment Prog

DOT website: htt

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

Table

nts in service air, ferry, and

% Num

96.1 4,76

t of Transportat

s the percepercent. T

e only servirail serviceincreased.

ed Impro

fies known

es and Pe

ific projectpedestrian enance activ

al Aviation

th local airsystem plan the FAAof the plan

ulation and e

Capital Impvelopment d funding leram. Throu

tp://www.txdot.g

nned Improve

e 2-6: Texas

Texas Inte

2010

area (intercitd rail)

mber %

60,055 8

tion, Research

ent of ruralThe percence option f

e was uncha

ovemen

projects fo

edestrian

s were ideand bicyclvities.

n

rport sponsan—the TA

A NPIAS, pis to deve

economic c

provement Pin Texas. Itevels of thugh multi-ye

gov/business/avi

ements

s Intercity

ercity Bus Se

ty Rural reON

% Numbe

87.7 1,003,5

h and Innovative

l residents tage of rurfell from 18anged over

nts – Non

or non-high

ns

entified for es accomm

sors and tASP.29 Theplus other lop a statecenters of T

Program (Ct is a detai

he FAA AIPear program

iation/system_p

Bus Servi

ervice

2005

esidents in inLY (not in air

er %

516 18.5

e Technology A

in areas sral resident8.5 to 13.8 r this period

n-Highw

hway mode

rural areamodations

the FAA, Te TASP, airports dewide syste

Texas.

CIP) is a finaled listing oP and the mming, the

plan.htm

ce

20

ntercity bus sr, ferry, or rail

Number

5 747,759

Administration,

served by ints in servicpercent. F

d, while acc

way Mod

es. These p

as, TxDOTin its road

TxDOT haupdated ineemed necm of airpor

ancial progof potential

Texas Ave FAA, TxD

010

ervice area l areas)

%

13.8

, Bureau of

ntercity busce areas wFor comparcess to inte

des

projects are

T considersdway plan

as developen March 2cessary forrts providin

ram for genprojects ba

viation FaciOT, and ai

39

s fell where rison, ercity

e not

s the ning,

ed a 2010, r the

ng air

neral ased ilities rport

40

sponsorscope, c

The Aviprojects anticipat

Approximsafety aenhanceprogramaircraft pfor increassets win gener

The curairports

S

In

L

The TTCidentify airport d

S

Pa

Sfo

Uo

Ch

Na

No

rs are ablecost, and sc

iation CIP for the ye

ted needs f

mately 59 and preservements, an

mmed to enhparking apreased capawhile enhanral aviation

rrent TASPthat are ide

Short term: 0

ntermediate

ong term: 1

C has estaprojects th

developmen

Safety – Pro

Preservationirport.

Standards –or current u

Upgrade – Ir longer sta

Capacity – igher activi

New Accessrea.

New Capacther area a

e to anticipchedule mo

is a tentaears 2012–2for enhance

percent of vation of synd pavemenhance the srons, and aacity. This ncing safetyairport imp

P includes entified in th

0–5 years

e term: 6–1

11–20 year

blished a phat meet pnt funds mo

ojects need

n – Project

– Improvemuser aircraft

mprovemeage lengths

Expansion ty levels.

s – A new

city – A newairports.

ate airport ore easily.

ative sched2014. Airpoed safety an

the funds ystem airpont preservasystem in thaircraft hanprogram py, capacity

provement p

improvemehree time fr

0 years

rs

priority systpresent sysost efficientl

ed to make

ts to prese

ments requit.

nts requires.

required fo

airport prov

w airport ne

2: Current C

needs an

dule of fedort needs and facility p

programmorts, primaration. Fortyhe form of

ngar developrovides a y, and functprojects.

ents to 289rames, bas

tem that alstem needsly. Current

e the facility

erve the fun

red to upg

ed for the a

or the airpo

viding new

eeded to a

Te

onditions, Nee

d accomm

deral and sare categopreservation

ed in this rily air traffy-one percenew or exte

opments—abalance betion, and in

9 existing aed on expe

lows the Txs and use priorities ar

y safe for ai

nctional or

rade the a

irport to ac

ort to acco

air access

add capacit

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

modate cha

state airporized as ein.

plan are afic control tent of the Cended runwall based onetween prencludes abo

airports anected aviatio

xDOT Avialimited sta

re:

rcraft opera

structural

irport to de

ccommodat

mmodate m

s to a previ

ty or relieve

ransportation

ned Improvem

nges in pr

rt developmither prese

llocated fotowers, secCIP is currways, expann local dem

eserving sysout $229 m

d 12 propoon activity:

ation Divisioate and fed

ations.

integrity of

esign stand

te larger air

more aircra

ously unse

e congestio

Plan

ments

roject

ment nt or

r the curity rently nded

mand stem

million

osed

on to deral

f the

dards

rcraft

aft or

erved

on at

Texas Ru

2: Current

2.6.3

Althoughstakehoto Bowie

2.6.4

Short te

In respoLegislatuDistrictsthe authpromoteformed developunemploavailable

2.6.5

TxDOT

Hmpdthac

O$cw

30 See TxD31 See FRA32 Core Ex

traveling33 See TxD

ral Transport

Conditions, N

Inland W

h no speciflder meetine County to

Rural F

rm rail fund

onse to conure passed (RRTD) in

hority to isse economicin the state, maintain,oyment ane in Chapte

Passen

is currently

High-speed million to Tx

reliminary evelop a nehe largest mt least 150 orridor that

Oklahoma C5.6 million ompletion o

work the cor

DOT website: htt

A website: http:/

press corridorsg on dedicated

DOT website: htt

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

Waterway

fic projects ngs to inveso reduce tru

Freight Ra

ding reques

ncerns aboud legislation 1981. RRsue bonds c developme. The pur and diverd foster e

er 3 of the T

nger Rail

y studying p

rail from DxDOT from engineerinew Core Exmetropolitanmiles per h

t is not curre

City to soutto TxDOT

of feasibilityrridor betwe

tp://www.txdot.g

//www.fra.dot.go

s will form the btracks at spee

tp://www.txdot.g

nned Improve

ys

were identstigate the fuck traffic. T

ail Develo

sts are outli

ut the loss oon allowingRTDs were

to assist inment in the rpose of RRrsify the economic g

Texas Rail P

Planning

passenger r

Dallas-Fort Wits High-Spg and projxpress32 con areas in thour (mph)ently serve

th Texas, ifrom its Hiy studies, aeen Oklaho

gov/business/rai

ov/rpd/passenge

backbone of theeds of 125-250

gov/business/rai

ements

ified, one ofeasibility o

This is discu

opment

ned in Sect

of rail servig the formgiven the p

n their efforstate. As o

RTDs and conomy of

growth withPlan.

g

rail improve

Worth to Hpeed Intercject-level erridor from the country) high-speed.

.e., south gh-Speed a service doma and So

il/hsipr/april_11.

er/2243.shtml

e national highmph or higher

il/hsipr/may_10.

opportunity of making thussed in Ch

tion 7 of the

ice in rural mation of Rpower of erts to preseof June 20the facilitie

f the statehin the dis

ements in fo

ouston.30 Tcity PassenenvironmenDallas-For

y. The projed intercity p

of San AntIntercity Paevelopmen

outh Texas.

htm

h-speed rail sys.

.htm

was suggehe Red Rivhapter 4.

e Texas Ra

parts of TeRural Rail minent dom

erve rail inf007, 38 RRes they acq. The intentrict. More

our corridor

The FRA hanger Rail Prtal analysi

rt Worth to Hect proposepassenger

tonio.33 FRAassenger Rnt plan, and.

stem, with elect

ested duringer navigabl

ail Plan.

exas, the TTransporta

main as wefrastructureRTDs had bquire is to nt is to red informatio

rs:

as awardedrogram31 fos necessaHouston, twes to implemrail service

A has awaRail Programd environme

trified trains

41

g the le up

exas ation ell as e and been help duce on is

d $15 or the ry to wo of ment

e in a

arded m for ental

42

AIns

I-AareCapSTLthP

2.6.6

Public trneed to life-cycleintermodprojects

2.6.7

AlthoughTTC awAct of 2vehicle comprisfacilitieslocationscompan

34 See TxD35 See TxD36 See TxD

Austin to Hntercity Paservice in th

-20 CorridoAmtrak serv

nd along teceived $26

Council, whind regionarovide bet

Shreveport. Thruway Mo

ongview. Phe Trinity R

Point.

Rural T

ransportatioreplace tra

e replacemdal terminaare driven

Intercit

h intercity bwarded fede2009 (ARRA

fleets and ing $7 milli funding ins around ties: Greyho

DOT website: htt

DOT website: ftp

DOT website: htt

Houston.34 Tssenger Rais corridor.

or. TxDOT vice betweethe Intersta65,000 in feich represel level in Tetter conneCurrently

otor coach Potential neRailway Exp

Transit Ca

on projects ansit fleet vement of facals, and otby growth

ty Bus Pr

bus serviceeral stimuluA) to eight

facilities.35

ion for facilcluded prothe state.36

ound Lines

tp://www.txdot.g

://ftp.dot.state.tx

tp://www.txdot.g

TxDOT hasail Program

and Amtren the Bossate 20 (I-2ederal fund

ents the comexas and Lectivity beShreveportService co

ew Amtrak press comm

apital Pro

in rural areehicles thatcilities, incher facilitiein rural pop

rojects

es are operaus funds frointercity bu

5 Eight comities and $

ojects to en The majo, Inc. and K

gov/business/rai

x.us/pub/txdot-in

gov/about_us/co

2: Current C

s applied fm to study

ak are consier City-Sh20) corridords for the stmmunities aLouisiana. Ttween thet and Boss

onnecting tostops inclu

muter route)

ojects

eas includet exceed th

cluding maes need pepulation.

ated on a fom the Amus companmpanies sh0.6 million hance and

ority of theKerrville Bus

il/hsipr/may_10.

nfo/stimulus/inte

ommission/2009

Te

onditions, Nee

for fundingthe potenti

nducting a reveport arr to Dallastudy througand governThe proposee Dallas sier City aro or from thude Centre), Mesquite

capital proheir useful liintenance eriodic imp

for profit bamerican Renies to fundhared a totto purchas upgrade in funding ($s Company

.htm

ercity_bus.pdf

9_meetings/tran

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

from FRAial for new

feasibility rea in Norths and Fort-gh the East ment agenced new 200Fort Wortre served bhe Amtrak e Port/DFW, Forney, T

ojects such ife standardand passerovements

asis, on Aprcovery and

d capital imtal of near

se additionantercity bus$5.7 milliony, Inc.

scripts/apr30.ht

ransportation

ned Improvem

A’s High-Sp passenge

study for hwest Louis-Worth. TxTexas Cor

cies at the 0-mile routeh Airport by Amtrak Texas Eag

W Airport (aTerrell, and

as an on-gds. Additionenger facil. These ca

ril 30, 2009d Reinvestm

mprovementrly $7.6 mial vehicles.s facilities in) went to

tm

Plan

ments

peed r rail

new siana DOT rridor local e will

and with

gle at along Wills

going nally, ities,

apital

9, the ment ts for llion, The in 15 two

Texas Ru

2: Current

Throughas feasiand wor

37 See TxD38 See TxD

ral Transport

Conditions, N

h its intercitbility and fa

rk related to

DOT website: htt

DOT website: htt

ation Plan

Needs and Pla

ty bus (ICBacility studio the Ameri

tp://www.txdot.g

tp://www.dot.sta

nned Improve

B) program,ies, rehabilcans with D

gov/business/gov

ate.tx.us/PTN/ge

ements

37 TxDOT hitation, and

Disabilities A

vernments/gran

eninfo.htm?pg=i

has fundedd constructiAct.38

nts/programs.htm

cbview

a range oion of inter

m

f projects, modal facil

43

such ities,

44

Thhis page int

2: Current C

tentionally l

Te

onditions, Nee

left blank.

exas Rural Tr

eds and Plan

ransportation

ned Improvem

Plan

ments

3: Economic Impact 45

3.0 Economic Impact

3.1 Introduction

The implementation of projects in the TRTP is expected to have a positive economic impact in Texas. Transportation infrastructure spending can have two distinct economic impacts—during construction and subsequently when the infrastructure construction is complete and becomes an operational part of the multi-modal transportation system. 39

The economic analysis of transportation investments can be done on an individual project basis or by analyzing a program of investments. Most studies take the project-by-project approach, in part since the analytic and data requirements are more straightforward. Caution must be exercised to address interactions between projects when analyzing a program or groups of projects. For example, the combined impact of two projects on competing parallel corridors may be lower than their respective standalone impacts. Alternatively, the combined impact of multiple projects along the same corridor may be greater than the sum of their respective standalone impacts.

Economic impact is different to traditional benefit/cost analysis, which is also described below.

The TRTP does not use a project-specific economic impact or benefit/cost analysis as a basis for assessing any highway or non-highway projects.

3.2 Economic Impact during Construction

Economic impacts related to the construction of transportation infrastructure projects are generally mode neutral—regardless of the type of project. During construction there will be short-term impacts for the construction industry, including construction jobs, and the industries that supply equipment and materials. The larger and longer term the construction activities, the greater the economic impact. Not only does construction provide employment for construction workers, there is a ripple effect on local communities, as construction workers spend their income on lodging, groceries, and leisure activities. State and local agencies will benefit through increased sales tax revenues. However, this short-term economic boost will end when construction work is complete. Construction activity may be disruptive to some businesses located adjacent to the project, which may in turn experience a reduction in economic activity.

39 http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/primer08.cfm

46

The resextensiv$1 spenGross DOffice robligatio(FTE) joVarious construcexpendit

3.3

Followinimproveregionaland freigjob oppobusinesstheir suinfrastru

3.4

Economproject activity, economcosts fotourism

A more in Natio"CurrentInvestm

40 http://ww41 http://ww42 http://ww43 http://ww44 http://trid

search on ve. Recentt on ARRA

Domestic Peport estim

ons) had reobs per qua

organizatction activitture.

Econo

ng completiments), op, or nationaght movemortunities foses benefit

uppliers anucture can o

Calcul

mic impact will have tourism, hoic impacts r the agricusectors.

detailed exnal Coopert Practices ents: A Syn

ww.cbo.gov/ftpdo

ww.gao.gov/new

ww.strategicecon

ww.agc.org/galle

.trb.org/view.asp

the impacly, the CoA transporroduct (GD

mated that esulted in barter over ations havety, ranging

omic Imp

on of infrasperational al economy

ment, enhanor individuat from imprd vendors

open up new

lation of

analysis ston local oousing, andmay includ

ulture, natu

xplanation orative Highfor Assess

nthesis of H

ocs/123xx/doc12

w.items/d11600.p

nomicresearch.o

ries/econ/Nation

px?id=670616

ct of transngressionartation infraDP) is betw

nearly $2between 17an 18-monte published

from 12.4

pact foll

structure coimproveme

y. In additioncements tals, and accroved trave

s. Under aw markets

f Econo

tudies meaor regional d even migde increaseral resourc

of methods hway Reseasing Econo

Highway Pra

2385/08-24-AR

pdf

org/AboutUs/Sti

nal%20Fact%20

portation ial Budget Oastructure,

ween 1 and0 billion o,000 and 4th period, ed their ow42 to 28.543

owing C

onstruction ents may on to direct to the transcess to label time andappropriate for busines

mic Imp

asure the cemployme

ration patteed econom

ce extraction

used in ecoarch Prograomic Develoactice," 200

RRA.pdf

mCalcTool.pdf

0Sheet.pdf

Te

nvestmentsOffice has the cumu

d 2.5.40 A Gf ARRA h

47,000 newexcluding inwn resear3 jobs per

Construc

(or for nonhave lastitravel bene

sportation sor markets

d reliability circumsta

sses.

pacts

consequencent patternerns. In rura

mic activity n, renewab

onomic impam (NCHRopment Im00.44

exas Rural Tr

3

s in the pestimated

lative multGovernmenighway exp

w direct full-ndirect and ch on job$1 million

ction

n-infrastructng effects

efits for indisystem imps for busineof shipmennces, new

ces that as, wage leal Texas, sor reduced

ble energy g

pact analysRP) Synthes

pacts from

ransportation

3: Economic I

public sectod that for etiplier effect Accountapenditures -time equiva

induced jobs createdof constru

ture operaton the l

ividual traveprove accesesses. Simints to and

w transporta

n infrastrucevels, busisome of thed transportageneration,

sis can be fosis Report Transporta

Plan

mpact

or is each

ct on ability

(not alent

obs.41 d by ction

ional ocal, elers ss to larly, from ation

cture ness

e key ation , and

ound 290, ation

Texas Ru

3: Econom

There amost apand comto estim

Market squantify project. economapproacprojects studied.

TTI is cuthe Ecothe econimpacts communeffects tmore inf

3.5

Benefit-cimproveimportantraditionaccident

In rural Tspeeds travel timinvolve improvethe qualwith the

45 http://rip.t46 http://ww47 http://ww

ral Transport

mic Impact

re many dppropriate mmplexity of ate indirect

studies conthe effectComparab

ic impacts ch is applie

and situat

urrently wonomic Impanomic effecthat trans

nity. The reransportatioformed cho

Traditi

cost analysment projent that all al calculatiot reduction.

Texas, whemay not beme and vehigher spement in trality of the efuture facil

trb.org/browse/d

ww.fhwa.dot.gov/

ww.fhwa.dot.gov

ation Plan

ifferent levemethod andthe projectt and induce

nsider demts on the mble case s

of a projeed to projections elsew

orking on a acts of Tracts of specportation im

esulting ecoon improve

oices.45

ional Be

sis typicallyects.46 The

assumptioon of benef.47

ere traffic voe significantehicle operaed limits a

avel speed estimate of ity may be

dproject.asp?n=

/infrastructure/a

v/planning/rural/p

els of sophd level of eft. Most calced impacts

mand and smarket of astudies areect on neigcts such as

where in the

research pansportationcific projectsmprovemenonomic impements hav

enefit-Co

y considers approach ons be dofit-cost ratio

olumes cantly improveating cost snd fewer inmay be offtravel timelow, and ve

=28069

asstmgmt/primer

planningfortrans

histication fffort for anyculations bu once the d

upply for ba change ie most oftghborhoodss bypassese region or

project Refn Improvems as well ants or lack act model w

ve on the lo

ost Anal

only directis genera

ocumented.os: time sav

n be low aned by the fusavings asntersectionsfset by incree and vehicery sensitiv

r05.cfm

s/ruralgui

for calculatiy given prouild on a redirect impac

business acin transporten used ts, downtows of small tr state can

fining a Mements that cas educate

of improvewill allow d

ocal market

lysis

t benefits aally well un. There arvings, vehic

nd traffic couture facilitysociated ws on the fueased trave

cle operatinve to the as

ing economoject dependegional inpucts have be

ctivity and trtation costto evaluatewns, or smtowns, whe

n be readily

thodology fcan be usethe genera

ements wildecision-ma

and enable

and costs onderstood; re three mcle operatin

ongestion iny. An excepwith local byuture facilityel distance.g cost savisumptions

mic impact—ds on the sut-output m

een identifie

then attemts caused e the loca

mall towns. ere compary identified

for Determed to deteral public onl have on

akers to seee them to m

of transportahowever,

main factorng savings,

nfrequent, tption may bypasses, wy. However. Consequeings assocmade.

47

—the scale

model ed.

pt to by a

alized This

rable and

ining mine n the their

e the make

ation it is

rs in , and

ravel be for which r, the ently, iated

48

Similarlymillion vmay res

For theseach prregardin

y for safety vehicle mileult in statis

se reasonsroject as itng both ben

benefits, thes traveled.tically unre

, benefit-cot is further

nefits and co

hese are ty. Light traffliable savin

osts analysr developeosts.

pically calcfic volumesngs.

is may be ed and mo

Te

culated for as (and shor

more approore detailed

exas Rural Tr

3

accident ratrt distance

opriate for d informatio

ransportation

3: Economic I

tes per hunfuture facil

future studon is avai

Plan

mpact

ndred ities)

dy on lable

4: Stakeholder and Public Outreach 49

4.0 Stakeholder and Public Outreach

4.1 Purpose

Promoting communication and transparency with the public is a fundamental tenet of TxDOT’s vision. Well-informed members of the public and stakeholders can provide valuable input to the transportation planning and decision-making process. During the development of the TRTP, TxDOT:

Provided a clearly defined purpose and objective for initiating public dialogue and soliciting input throughout the transportation planning process.

Provided adequate and timely notices of opportunities for the public to participate in cooperative dialogue, to allow sufficient time for stakeholders and interested parties to prepare their written or oral comments.

Provided venues (e.g., forums, meetings and hearings) open to all members of the public that allowed public/stakeholders to be heard and to present evidence supporting their views and positions.

Engaged in a transportation planning process that is transparent and provided stakeholders with access to educational materials and all information used (e.g., documents, exhibits, maps, photographs, etc.) in the decision-making process.

Engaged stakeholders and listened thoughtfully to comments and input during meetings held around the state.

4.2 The Public Outreach Plan

A Public Outreach Plan was created for the specific public involvement activities carried out during the development of the TRTP. TxDOT’s outreach effort:

Established early and continuous public involvement opportunities that provided timely information about transportation issues and decision-making processes to all interested parties.

Provided reasonable public access to technical and policy information used in the development of the TRTP.

Provided adequate and timely notice of public involvement activities and time for public review and comment at key decision points, including but not limited to a reasonable opportunity to comment on the draft TRTP.

To the maximum extent practicable, ensured that public meetings were held at convenient and accessible locations and times.

To the maximum extent practicable, used visualization techniques to describe the proposed TRTP.

50

Tep

DdaomA

Intram

Ph

Ppin

4.3

4.3.1

TxDOT list as thTRTP mmobility staff), fedirectorscommittinterest bicycle/ppublic trindividualine, or interestecontinue

To the malectronicallarties reaso

Demonstrateevelopmennd a varietynline/web,

meetings. AAppendix B

ncluded a raditionally nd minority

may face ch

Provided traearing impa

Provided forrocess to

nterested pa

Public

Newsle

compiled ahe foundatimailing list

authoritiesederal transs, communees, Indiangroups, an

pedestrian, ransportatioals who reqexpressed

ed parties wed involvem

aximum exy accessiblonable opp

ed explicit nt of the TRy of ways totoll-free ph

All commenB.

process funderservey househol

hallenges ac

anslation ofaired servic

r the perioensure th

arties and r

c Outrea

etters

a compreheon. All conincluding p

s, rail districsportation snity leadern tribal govnd industry

general aon. Also inquested upd interest were addedment in the p

xtent practile format su

portunity to

consideraRTP, includio comment

hone line, ants receive

for seekined by existilds, disableccessing em

f all projectces at publi

dic review hat the prorevised the

ach Tool

ensive mailntacts from planning octs, federal,taff membe

rs, organizvernment ry representviation, inlacluded on

pdates, attein the TRT

d to the maiprocess.

icable, mauch as the review info

tion and rng but not t and delivend in-perso

ed are pub

g out anding transpoed individumployment

t materials ic meetings

of the effeocess provprocess as

s

ling list for the SLRTP

rganization, state, anders, congreed state trepresentattatives fromand waterwthe TRTP

ended meeTP. Througiling list upo

Te

4:

ade public World Widrmation an

esponse tolimited to a

er input inclon at one oblic record

d considerortation systals, and nand other

into Spaniss upon requ

ectiveness vided full-s appropria

the TRTP P mailing li

ns, councilsd local elecssional disttransportatitives, civic,

m modal grway, freight

mailing lisetings, calleghout the on request,

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

informatioe Web to ad provide c

o public inample commuding mail-

of the publicand are

ring the ntems, suchon-Englishservices.

sh, as well uest.

of the puband open

ate.

using the ist were tras of governcted officialstrict directoion groups, business roups inclut and pass

st were ruraed the toll-fpublic out allowing fo

ransportation

and Public Out

on availablafford interecomments.

nput duringmenting pe-in forms, ec or stakehodocumente

eeds of th as low-inc speakers

as provisio

blic involvemn-access to

SLRTP maansferred tonment, regs (and chie

ors, state dis and adv

and econding highw

senger rail, al contactsfree informareach procor follow-up

Plan

treach

e in ested

g the riods mail, older ed in

hose come

who

on of

ment o all

ailing o the ional

efs of strict isory omic

ways, and

and ation cess, p and

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

TxDOT list. The at stake

The firstTRTP, tsecond meetingthe stud

4.3.2

TxDOT with infoanswerspresentalinks, thelectron

4.3.3

TxDOT meetingdevelopinformat

4.3.4

TxDOT social m

4.3.5

A toll frequestionPublic inmailbox project (releases

ral Transport

older and Pub

distributed newsletter

holder and

t newslettethe proposnewsletter dates andy and the p

TRTP W

created a Tormation abs to frequeations, meee project mic commen

Visualiz

developed s to effecment of thtional displa

Social

used a vamedia such a

Toll Fre

ee telephons, and recnformation was acces

(1-855-TX-s, newspap

ation Plan

lic Outreach

three TRTPrs were alsopublic mee

er (August/Ssed schedu(February locations.

public heari

Webpage

TRTP webpbout the TRently askeeting matermailing addnt box acces

zation To

visual matctively comhe TRTP. ay boards, a

Networki

ariety of tooas Faceboo

ee Teleph

ne informacord commspecialists

ssible 24 hRURAL or er advertise

P newsletteo posted onetings.

Septemberule, and p2012) provThe final nng date and

page (http://RTP goals ad questionrials, and ndress, e-massible 24 ho

ools

terials for tmmunicate

The mateand other v

ing Tools

ols to comok, Twitter,

hone Line

ation line, dments, wass answeredhours a day

1-855-897ements, me

ers by mail n the TRTP

2011) despublic/stakevided a statnewsletter (d location.

/www.txdotand objectivns, public newslettersail address,ours a day,

he webpagthe issue

rials includvisual conte

s

mmunicate wand YouTu

e

designed to operation

d the line dy, 7 days a7-8725) waeeting mate

and e-mail P webpage

scribed the eholder outtus update (April 2012)

t.gov/publicves, develoinvolvemen. The webs, toll-free te 7 days a w

ge, public mes and proded electroent.

with and inube.

o provide pal from Auduring busa week. Ths publishederials, and t

to contactsand provid

purpose atreach oppand annou) announce

c_ involvemopment procnt opportusite includeelephone nweek.

meetings, aocesses in

onic presen

nform the p

public inforugust 2011iness hour

he toll-free d in all newthe TRTP w

s on the maed as hand

nd goals oportunities.nced the p

ed the resu

ment/rural_2cess, schednities, mee

ed social mnumber, an

and stakehonvolved in ntations, m

public inclu

mation, an to July 2

rs, and a vnumber fowsletters, nwebpage.

51

ailing douts

of the The

public lts of

2035) dule, eting

media d an

older the

maps,

uding

swer 2012. voice r the news

52

4.4

Figure 4newslett

4.5

TxDOT meetingmanagedistrict ptranspordevelopin transpasseng

4.5.1

The firstTable 4-San Ang120 stak

S

D

TRTP

4-1 shows ters, stakeh

F

Stakeh

invited oves/events. A

es operatesprovided a rtation/publment officia

sportation, ger rail, freig

Stakeh

t round of -1. Identicagelo, Alpinekeholders p

NewslettAugust 2

Newslett

February 2

Stakeholder

Draft TRTP P

April 2

Public O

the timelinholder meet

Figure 4-1:

holder M

er 600 ruralA stakeholds, and/or mcross-sectiic works als, educatand modaght rail, bic

older Me

stakeholdeal material we, Lubbock,participated

ter 1    011

er 2 

2012 

rs Review 

roject List 

2012

Outreac

ne for the Ttings, public

: Public Ou

Meetings

stakeholdeder was defmaintains aonal list of directors,

tors, law enal represenycle/pedes

eetings - R

er meetingswas presen, Wichita Fain the first

StakMe

Aug

PublicMa

h Activit

TRTP public meetings

utreach Ac

s

ers to particfined as soman element

several cochamber

nforcementntatives (avtrian, and c

Round 1

s was condnted at eighalls, Alice, round of m

keholder eetings 1 

gust 2011

c Meetings rch 2012

Newsletter 

April 2012

Te

4:

ty Sched

c outreach, and the p

ctivities and

cipate in thmeone whoof the tra

ounty judgeof comm

t officials, inviation, puconstruction

ducted in At different lLufkin, Atla

meetings.

Rco

3 

2

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

dule

activities iublic hearin

d Dates

hree roundso, in some nsportations, mayors,

merce officndividuals wblic transpn/design).

August 201ocations ar

anta, and B

StakeholdMeetings 

February 20

Review & incomments on

Public HMay 2

ransportation

and Public Out

including Tng.

s of stakehocapacity, o

n system. Ecity manag

ials, econwith an inte

portation, p

11 as showround the s

Belton. A tot

er 2

012

clude n TRTP

earing          2012

Plan

treach

TRTP

older owns, Each gers, omic erest ports,

wn in state: tal of

 

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

An optistakehostraightfproposeApproximquestioncriteria m

ral Transport

older and Pub

Table 4-

Sa

Al

Lu

W

Al

Lu

At

Be

onal, inforlders durinforward withed criteria mately 100nnaire are smeasures.

ation Plan

lic Outreach

-1: Round

City

an Angelo

pine

ubbock

Wichita Falls

ice

ufkin

tlanta

elton

Figure

rmal, criterg the initiah a rating smeasure

0 completeshown in F

1 Stakehol

Mee

August

August

August

August

August

August

August

Septem

4-2: Round

ria questioal round of system fromfor prioritized questio

Figure 4.4 a

lder Meetin

ting Date

22, 2011

23, 2011

24, 2011

25, 2011

29, 2011

30, 2011

31, 2011

mber 1, 2011

d 1 Stakeh

nnaire (Fif meetings.m 1 to 10 fzing rural onnaires wand were u

ng Dates a

Atten

2

1

1

2

2

1

holder Mee

gure 4.3) The quesfor weightin

added cawere receivultimately u

and Attend

ndance

20

6

8

13

14

26

20

13

ting

was madstionnaire wng the impoapacity higved. The

used to wei

ance

de availablwas simple ortance of ehway projresults of ght each o

53

e to and

each ects.

f the of the

54

Figure 4-33: Questio

Te

4:

nnaire

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

ransportation

and Public Out

Plan

treach

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

Followinthe eighare loca

San AnMart, anoperatioline rail especialmeasurepercentaevacuat

Alpine transporon US bike/pedof conti

ral Transport

older and Pub

ng is a brief t stakeholdted in Appe

gelo: Discnd HEB disons, and the

and transflly with Mees in San Aage, and saion, popula

Meeting: Crtation plan285, vehic

destrian issnuous sho

ation Plan

lic Outreach

f summary oder meetingendix B.

ussion focustribution cee wind toweferring truckexican highwAngelo werafe passingation, and co

Comments ning procesle congestues such a

oulders. He

Figure

of the discus. Complet

used on theenters, oil aer industry.k traffic to ways and bre the trunkg needs. Thost effectiv

generally ss. Concerntion on higas seals, joeavy truck

e 4-4: Resu

ussion and te meeting

e drivers oand gas indSeveral corail. The n

border crosk system, fe lowest raeness.

expressed ns includedhways, traints, rumbletraffic is in

ults

questionnaminutes an

of rural growdustry, hyd

omments foneed for cossings. Thefuture volumated criteria

support fod safety issuansporting e strips, suncreasing b

aire highlighnd question

wth includindraulic fractcused on u

onnectivity we highest wme/existinga measures

or a more fues on US hazardous

urface qualibecause of

hts for eachnaire result

ng Target, turing (fracupgrading swas discus

weighted cr capacity, twere hurric

formalized 67, systemmaterials,

ty, and thef silver mi

55

h of ts

Wal-king)

short-ssed, iteria truck cane

rural m gap

and lack ning,

56

copper Alpine w

Lubbochighwayalternateoverweigimprovein Lubbowere ex

Wichitapedestriacceleratrunk sy

Alice: SroadwayCounty due to tnon-roadprojects/accessibcriteria m

Lufkin: completStephensignage populatidrivers, sidewalksafe pasevacuattruck tra

Atlanta such as navigabexpressemergen

mining, strwas safe pa

ck: Commey exits, ovee routes, ght permit recognitioock was sapressed tha

a Falls: Discans, as we

ator lanes stem and th

Several comys such as road. Activhe Panamadway proje/enhancembility, hurricmeasure wa

Commention of I-69,

n F. Austinfor roads

on to needshort-haul

ks from hossing needsion route.

affic.

Meeting: public tranle up to ed a needncy vehicle

ip mining, assing need

ents focuseerweight truand bicycfees back

n of rural pafe passingat the criter

cussion focell as the non FM roahe lowest w

mments focHighways ity is increaa Canal widects and

ments. The cane evacuas the trunk

ts focused , improvem University

s in Cheroded servicel railroads,uses to schs, future voThe lowes

Several stansit, passenBowie Cou for breaks

es. Also me

and the spds. The lowe

ed on conucks carryinle/pedestriak to the coplanning orgg needs. Thria favored

cused on saneed for moads and higwas hurrica

used on th181 and 97asing due tdening. Alsthe designhighest ra

uation routk system.

on recenment of roady, an overpokee Counes like hos, greenwayhools. The

olume/plannt rated crit

akeholders nger rail, freunty to res in the caentioned w

paceport. Test was hu

nectivity isng wind turan issues.ounties to ganizationshe lowest weast Texas

afety issuesore lanes oghways. Thne evacuat

e lack of co7, US 281, o Eagle Foso mentionen considerated criteriate, and saf

ntly formedds in Nacopass at FMnty, and thspitals, groys, railwayhighest ra

ned capacitteria measu

stated an eight shuttleduce truck

able and cowas the imp

Te

4:

The highestrricane eva

ssues, poorrbines caus Suggestiofund highw

s. The highwas hurricas due to den

s and the non the I-35 he highest tion.

onnectivity FM 665, an

ord Shale aed was therations fora measurefe passing

d rural plagdoches C

M 819 and he importaocery storeys convertated criteriaty, forecast ures were

interest in e services, k traffic. Loncrete barportance of

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

t rated criteacuation.

r lighting asing road dons were way maintest rated c

ane evacuanser popula

needs of biccorridor anranked cr

and systemnd the Bee and anticipae importancr bicycle aes were th

needs. Th

anning orgCounty, rout

US 59, beance of coes, etc., need into bi

a measurestotal trafficsystem ga

alternativeand making

Law enforcrriers everyf continuou

ransportation

and Public Out

eria measu

and signagdamage, lac

made to enance an

criteria meaation. Concation.

cycle ridersnd the neeriterion was

m gaps on County-Ka

ated to increce of prioritand pedeshe system he lowest r

anizations,tes to and etter directonnecting eed more tike lanes,

s in Lufkin wc, and hurricap and fore

e transportag the Red R

cement offiy 1–2 miles shoulder

Plan

treach

re in

ge at ck of give

nd to asure cerns

s and d for s the

rural arnes ease tizing strian gap,

rated

the from ional rural truck and

were cane ecast

ation, River icials s for

rs for

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

cyclists passing

Belton need fotransitioimprovecriteria fabout naemergenand put highest forecasthurrican

Specificrelated t

SSsraG4erabbrewracausa

48 The Gulf

handle 1ship san1992 acc

ral Transport

older and Pub

and rails tneeds. The

Meeting: Cor alternativns that cread cross-stafor developarrow shouncies. A maon rural roranked crit

t total traffine evacuatio

c Stakehoto non-high

StakeholderSaba Railwpeeds (curailroad mor

GC&SS ope50 to 600 ach day. Aailroads (liusinesses, usiness invegional rai

would be theailcar can tran be transnd a correpgrade thepeeds and potential

f Colorado & Sa5,000 loads in 2d used in frackincording to inform

ation Plan

lic Outreach

to trails. Te lowest wa

Comments ve modes ate bottleneate infrastrupment of hilders creatiajor supplieoads to shoteria measuc. The lowon.

older Comway modes

rs suggesteway (GC&Srrently 10–1re attractiveerates 67.5 trucks, equ

A stakeholdeke GC&SSincreased

vestment inlroad grante potential ransport fousferred to raesponding e railroad b

with increaincrease o

n Saba Railroad2012 and 25,00ng. The GC&SSmation prepared

he strongeas truck fre

included aof transp

ecks, improucture for cyighway proing safety is

er mentioneorten the diures in Belt

west ranked

mments: Ss:

ed that if invS – part o15 mph) coe to move miles betw

uivalent to er suggesteS) would employme

n the statets for railroreduction i

ur to five truail, it will rereduction

between Braased train lf 450 perc

d (GC&SS) in c00 loads the folloS has put signifid for their federa

est rated cight dollars

a request foportation, eoved commyclists, and

oject lists. Assues for 1

ed that truckstance in mton were sad criteria m

Stakeholder

vestments aof Americaould be incrsand from

ween Brady110 to 150

ed that infraprovide po

ent opportue. For TxDOoad infrastin heavy truuckloads ofsult in a redin emissio

ady and Lolengths in t

cent in train

entral Texas, a owing year. Thecant investment

al grant applicati

riteria mea.

or a higher elimination unication b

d the inclusA transit di8-passeng

ks have beemiles, minimafe passing

measures w

rs suggest

are made inn Railroadreased thatquarries in

y and Lome0 railcars, aastructure gositive econities, and OT, the pritructure upuck traffic of the same duction in cons. GC&Someta to cthe years an traffic tot

former Santa Fere are ten sand t into upgradingion.

asure in At

capacity loof four-lan

between MPion of safetstrict expreer vehiclesen taken ofmizing weag needs, ac

were the tru

ed specific

n the Gulf Cds Corporatt may maken McCulloceta. Currentare transpogrants awaronomic imp

would encimary bene

pgrade/expaon Texas’ hcommodity

consumptioSS is seekarry more

ahead. GC&tals in 2012

e Railway branccompanies alo

g the rail line sinc

tlanta was

oad designne to two-POs and RPty as part oessed conc pulling oveff the interstar and tear.ccessibility,unk system

c opportun

Colorado &tion), operae this short

ch County.4

tly an estimorting this srded to regpacts for courage greefit arising ansion prohighways. Ey. If truck freon of diesel king fundintrains at hi&SS anticip2, and mo

ch line, is expecng the GC&SS ce purchasing it

57

safe

, the -lane POs,

of the cerns er for tates The and and

nities

& San ating t-line 8The

mated sand ional local eater from

ojects Each eight fuel,

ng to igher pates re in

cted to that

t in

58

2s

ScistrtoH

ORteTinactrUcnwecR

4.5.2

TxDOT Februaryand to dstakehoTable 4-

49 Short line

frailey/ar

013. This iupport ene

Stakeholderenter of Br

s currently trucks then o Voca wou

Highway 71

One stakehoRiver navigaeam determ

Transportatin using wagricultural ement. Thransportatio

USACE is sloser to Teavigation f

will be comvaluation ionsideratio

River would

Stakeh

hosted eigy 7–9 and

discuss the lders and 5-2.

es and pure dumrchive/2011/11/1

is based onrgy develop

rs indicatedrady to Voctransportedreturn to Vould eliminat, greatly red

older suggeable up to mined that on Study51 aterborne tproducts,

he Port ofon to the rstudying thexarkana, bfrom Shrevmpleted in n either fis

on of an exhave to be

older Me

ght identica13, 2012, todraft added

55 TxDOT

mb luck: The ne15/short-lines-an

n expectedpment initia

a local initca, where 9d to Brady oca. A stakte approximducing TxD

ested TxDOBowie Cousurveys u

indicate motransportatiwood prod

f Shreveporegion by whe possibilbut only ineport-Boss2012. Th

scal year 2xtension inte made nav

eetings - R

al stakeholdo provide ad capacity representa

ext Powder Rivend-pure-dumb-l

d growth in atives elsew

tiative is to 90 percent by truck, b

keholder esmately 200,0DOT’s likely

OT should unty would undertakenore than haion if it wducts, scraort-Bossier way of theity of exte

nto Arkansasier City, Lohere were 2012 or 20to the Bow

vigable throu

Round 2

der webinaan update ohighway pr

atives partic

er Basin (Part II)uck-the-next-po

Te

4:

local extrawhere in Te

extend the of the sandefore trans

stimated tha000 truck m

y maintenan

investigatereduce truc for the T

alf of the resere availabap metals,

in Louisiae Red Rivending navias. The feaouisiana, inno approp

13. No plawie County ugh Arkans

ars each mf TRTP findroject lists acipated in t

), http://cs.trainsowder-river-basi

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

action of indexas. 49

GC&SS 17d plants aresloading to at extensionmiles per mnce costs.

e whether mck traffic.50

Texarkana spondents ble in the

steel, stoana provider (see Figgation on asibility stunto the Stapriations to

an has beearea of T

sas first.

morning andings and pand rankingthe webinar

.com/TRCCS/bn-part-ii.aspx

ransportation

and Public Out

dustrial san

7 miles frome located. Srail. The en of the railonth from S

making the The consuRegion Frewere interearea to m

one, sand,des waterbgure 4-5.) the Red R

udy to contate of Arkao continue

en proposedexas. The

d afternooprogress to gs. A total ors, as show

blogs/fred-

Plan

treach

nd to

m the Sand mpty lroad State

Red ultant eight

ested move

and borne

The River tinue nsas

e the d for Red

n on date

of 29 wn in

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

4.5.3

The finaprojects

4.6

Open-ho2012 to required

A total throughopublic m

ral Transport

older and Pub

Figure 4

W

Feb

Feb

Feb

Feb

Feb

Feb

Feb

Feb

Stakeh

al stakehold. TxDOT re

Public

ouse style present th

d in the Hou

of 205 peout the sta

meetings.

ation Plan

lic Outreach

-5: Red Riv

Source: T

Table

Webinar Dat

bruary 7, 201

bruary 7, 201

bruary 8, 201

bruary 8, 201

bruary 9, 201

bruary 9, 201

bruary 13, 20

bruary 13, 20

older Eve

der event foequested th

c Meetin

public meee draft find

uston Distric

ersons sigate on the

ver: Naviga

Texarkana Reg(Shippers’ Su

e 4-2: Stake

te We

2 9:0

2 1:00

2 9:0

2 1:00

2 9:0

2 1:30

12 9:0

12 1:30

ent – Rou

or the TRTPat stakehol

gs

etings weredings and pct because

gned in at TRTP. Tab

able (left) a

gion Freight Trurvey), Septem

eholder We

ebinar Time

00 AM–Noon

0 PM–4:00 PM

00 AM–Noon

0 PM–4:00 PM

00 AM–Noon

0 PM–4:00 PM

00 AM–Noon

0 PM–4:00 PM

und 3

P was an ellders review

hosted byprojects in t

the entire d

the openble 4-3 sho

and Non-n

ansportation Sber 2008

ebinar Dat

StakPart

M

M

M

M

ectronic suw the list an

24 of TxDthe TRTP.district is w

n-house styows the at

navigable (

Study

es

keholder ticipants

7

2

4

2

4

2

4

4

ubmission ond reply wit

DOT’s 25 diA public m

within MPO

yle public ttendance n

right)

of the final lh comment

stricts in Mmeeting wasboundaries

meetings numbers a

59

ist of ts.

March s not s.

held t the

60

TxDOTDistric

Abilene

Amarillo

Atlanta

Austin

Beaumont

Brownwoo

Bryan

Childress

Corpus Ch

Corpus Ch

Dallas

El Paso

Fort Worth

Laredo

Lubbock

Lufkin

Odessa

Odessa

Paris

Pharr

T ct

TxDOT

TxDOT

TxDOT

TxDOT

t First N

od TxDOT

Larry J

City Au

hristi Coasta

hristi TxDOT

Corsic

TxDOT

h Minera

Interna

TxDOT

TxDOT

TxDOT

TxDOT

Paris J

TxDOT

Fig

Table

T, Nolan Coun

T District Offic

T District Offic

T District Offic

National Bank,

T District Offic

J. Ringer Publ

uditorium, Chi

al Bend Colleg

T Area Office,

cana Public Lib

T Maintenance

al Wells High S

ational Center

T District Train

T District Offic

T District Offic

T District Offic

Junior College

T District Conf

gure 4-6: P

e 4-3: Publi

Meeting Locnty Maintenan

ce, Amarillo, TX

ce, Atlanta, TX

ce, Austin, TX

Jasper, TX

ce, Brownwood

ic Library, Col

ldress, TX

ge, Beeville, T

Alice, TX

brary, Corsican

e Office, Sierra

School, Minera

for Trade, Ea

ning Center, L

ce, Lufkin, TX

ce, Odessa, TX

ce, Odessa, TX

e, Paris, TX

ference Cente

ublic Meet

ic Meeting

cation ce Office, Swe

X

X

d, TX

lege Station, T

TX

na, TX

a Blanca, TX

al Wells, TX

gle Pass, TX

ubbock, TX

X

X

er, Pharr, TX

Te

4:

ting Photo

Attendanc

eetwater, TX

TX

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

ce

Date

March 8, 20

March 8, 20

March 8, 20

March 6, 20

March 7, 20

March 6, 20

March 8, 20

March 6, 20

March 6, 20

March 8, 20

March 6, 20

March 7, 20

March 8, 20

March 6, 20

March 5, 20

March 8, 20

March 8, 20

March 21, 20

March 5, 20

March 8, 20

ransportation

and Public Out

Attend

012 2

012 2

012 8

012 8

012 2

012 0

012 17

012 11

012 8

012 11

012 11

012 5

012 4

012 2

012 4

012 19

012 7

012 2

012 22

012 5

Plan

treach

dance

7

1

1

1

9

2

5

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

TxDOTDistric

San Ange

San Anton

Tyler

Waco

Wichita Fa

Yoakum

IncludingTxDOT, April 25,

4.7

One formTexas, CommisTexas R

4.8

TxDOT for the fisource. receivedcommen

ral Transport

older and Pub

T ct

lo TxDOT

nio TxDOT

TxDOT

Waco

alls TxDOT

TxDOT

g commena total of

, 2012 (note

Public

mal public to solicit p

ssion for adRegister and

Comm

has receiveinal documFigure 4-

d by genents received

ation Plan

lic Outreach

T District Offic

T, Bexar Metro

T District Offic

Transit System

T District Train

T District Offic

nts received92 oral co

e: a final ta

c Hearin

hearing wapublic inputdoption on Jd on the Tx

ments

ed a total oent). Figur-8 represeeralized tod by genera

Meeting Locce, San Angelo

o Office, San A

ce, Tyler, TX

m, Waco, TX

ning Center, W

ce, Yoakum, TX

d at the pomments ally will be p

g

as held on Mt on the TJune 28, 20xDOT webs

of 225 TRTre 4-7 repreents the peopic. Figuralized topic

cation o, TX

Antonio, TX

Wichita Falls, T

X

public meend 144 wri

prepared for

May __, 20TRTP draft 012. TxDOTite on April

P commenesents the percentage re 4-9 repc.

TX

tings with itten commr the final d

012, at 200 before pre

T posted no__, 2012.

ts (Note: a percentageof stakeho

presents th

Date

March 6, 20

March 8, 20

March 6, 20

March 6, 20

March 6, 20

March 6, 20

To

other comments were

ocument).

Riverside esenting it otice of this

final tally we of commeolder meehe percent

Attend

012 22

012 7

012 7

012 4

012 9

012 4otal 20

mments senreceived a

Drive in Auto the Tx

s meeting in

will be prepents receiveting commtage of p

61

dance

2

7

7

9

3

nt to as of

ustin, DOT n the

pared ed by ments public

62

Figure 4-7

Figure

7: Commen

4-8: Stake

StaM

Info

Super 22

nts Receiv(% b

eholder Co

akeholder Meetings

44%

O

TRTP ormation32%

2 Design%

Criter6%

ved During by Source)

mments (%

PuMe

1

Email21%

ProTRTP 

1

Bi

Other13%

ria Funding1%

Te

4:

Public Ou)

% by Gene

ublic etings18%

Phon12%

Mail 7%

oposed Projects 18%

Non TRTPprojects10%

Avia1ke/Ped

6%

g

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

utreach Act

eralized To

ne%

CommeTRTP P

5%

P 

Rail2%

Transit3%ation

1%

ransportation

and Public Out

tivities

pic)

ents on rojects%

Plan

treach

Texas Ru

4: Stakeho

All outrmeetingpublic co

Commeand at twhich thand com

Due to related Howevepublic ocontentsand Probut a co

Video oadoption

ral Transport

older and Pub

Figu

each mate photograpomments/re

nts that wethe public hhe TTC conmment form

the numbeto the TRT

er, every cooutreach efs of which ogramming py of the p

of the TxDOn will be arc

TRTP Informat4%

Super 2 0%

ation Plan

lic Outreach

ure 4-9: Pu

erials incluphs, questiesponses a

ere receivedhearing we

nsiders the s, and TxD

er and conTP, not allomment (refforts for thare availabDivision ofublic hearin

OT Commichived on T

tion

Design%

C

ublic Comm

ding newsonnaire re

are included

d during theere addressadoption of

DOT respon

ntent of thel of them egardless

he TRTP wble for viewf TxDOT. Png transcrip

ission MeeTxDOT’s we

Other17%

Criteria25%

Funding3%

ments (% b

sletters, meesults, meed in the elec

e official pused separaf the TRTP

nses are inc

e hundredscould be iof source)

will be incluwing via reqPublic meetpt is availab

eting at whebsite at htt

Bike/Pe11%

by Generali

eeting noteting summctronic note

ublic reviewately as a f. Those lett

cluded in Ap

s of commncluded spand all pr

uded in anquest to thetings and h

ble upon req

ich the TRtp://www.tx

Proposed TRTProjects 

3%

Ra14%

Transit8%

Aviatio1%

ed

ized Topic

ifications, maries, andebook.

w period of function of ters, electroppendix B.

ments receivpecifically iroceedings

n electronice Transporhearings arquest.

RTP will bedot.gov/.

P 

CommentsTRTP Proje

14%

Non TRT1

il%

on

c)

sign-in shed summarie

the Draft Tthe procesonic comme

ved by Txin this cha

s related toc notebookrtation Planre not arch

e presented

s on ects

TP projects1%

63

eets, es of

TRTP ss by ents,

xDOT apter. o the , the

nning ived,

d for

64

Thhis page inttentionally l

Te

4:

left blank.

exas Rural Tr

Stakeholder a

ransportation

and Public Out

Plan

treach

5: Conclusions 65

5.0 Conclusions

5.1 SLRTP Strategies and Recommendations

Chapter 9 of the SLRTP identified three strategies and associated recommendations. These strategies are driven by the competing challenges of limited funding, growing demand, and very large transportation needs. The three SLRTP strategies were conceived as a complementary, multi-pronged approach to:

Focus available transportation funds on the most cost-effective investments;

Manage our transportation system in ways that encourage cost-effective shifts in how we travel; and

Develop partnerships for providing transportation improvements.

This approach is equally valid for the TRTP; however, some modifications are worthy of consideration, based on the TRTP findings:

The use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies was not directly considered in the TRTP project listing, even though there appear to be potentially relevant applications. It may be appropriate to consider expanding existing TxDOT traffic management centers in the fringe area around the major urban areas, such as San Antonio, Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Austin. Given that some ITS technologies offer efficiency improvements and enhanced system management tools for highways (and transit), it is appropriate to evaluate them alongside longer term added capacity highway projects.

Investigate the potential for securing additional rural transportation funding from non-traditional/non-transportation agencies (federal and state) related to agriculture, veteran’s affairs, health and human services. This will most likely benefit rural transit.

Adopt a systematic approach to providing safe passing opportunities – this is a suggested new strategy. Safe passing was the most heavily weighted criteria among rural stakeholders. While safe passing may also be a concern in urban areas, the focus of this strategy should be on rural areas. Currently, highways that only offer occasional or short-passing opportunities may lead to driver frustration, resulting in unsafe driving behaviors such as overtaking in a no passing zone. In addition to any resulting crashes that may occur, emergency service response times in isolated areas may be high. TxDOT has evaluated certain two lane highways that have previously been identified for widening to four lane divided highways (Trunk system design deficiencies) that will not have

66

fufaw

5.2

Since thfunds cofederal remainsinclude legislatioplanning

Also masubsequgrowing previousto this itransporpurchas

Consequof the thand neeundersc

5.3

It is recothe adde

D

R

D

R

Ad

R

unding avaacilities, the

which will im

Fundin

he SLRTP ontinues tosurface tra uncertain or exclude

on expires.g, affecting

aking slow uent econo

energy sesly hard-to-is that mosrtation. Hige.

uently, the hree SLRTPeds identifiecoring the n

Next U

ommendeded capacity

Develop a m

Review how

Develop an

Revisit desig

Address somefer other l

Review and

ilable for they are plan

mprove safe

ng Outlo

was adopto be a chaansportatioas to whe

e, what lev. This is aall modes.

progress ismic recess

ector, drivereach oil ast Texans,gher transp

emphasis P goals is hed in the Teed to mak

Update

that the ney highway p

more integra

w well multi-

approach w

gn requirem

me shorter ong-term n

update sel

he foreseenning interime passing o

ook

ed nearly allenge for

on legislatioen this legvel of fund source of

s the recovsion. The Tn in part bnd gas dep and espeportation c

on “cost-efheightened TRTP will cke the best

ext SLRTP project rank

ated multi-m

-District nee

with neighb

ments for lo

term needsneeds; and

ection crite

eable futurem improvempportunities

1½ years ar all levels on continuislation wil

ding will bef great unc

very from thTexas econby the currposits to beecially ruralosts also

ffective” strfor the TRT

continue to use of the

update adking process

modal appro

eds are add

oring states

w traffic vo

s such as I

eria and we

Te

e. To providments to “Ss.

ago, the avof govern

ues to mal be enacte availablecertainty fo

he 2008 nanomy has bent level o

e economical Texans, caffect the

ategies speTP. Availabbe limited limited fund

dress the fs:

oach for int

dressed;

s for multi-s

lume areas

ITS techno

ightings if a

exas Rural Tr

de safe paSuper 2” de

vailability onment. Reake slow ped, what it, and howr statewide

ational finabeen streng

of gas priceally produccontinue to

price of g

ecifically adbility of fund

in the foreding availab

following en

ter-urban co

state needs

s;

logies, that

appropriate

ransportation

5: Conclu

assing on tesign stand

of transportaauthorizatioprogress, bts contents

w long untie transporta

ancial crisisgthened byes that enaced. The flipo pay moregoods that

ddressed inding for proeseeable fuble.

nhancemen

orridors;

s;

t may reduc

.

Plan

usions

hese dards

ation on of but it s will l the ation

and y the ables pside e for t we

n two ojects uture,

nts to

ce or

 

Appendix A: Summary of Project Ranking Method 

 

 

Appendix B: Stakeholder and Public Outreach 

 

 

Appendix C: Public Transportation Methodology and Results 

 

 

Appendix D: Public Transportation Results by TxDOT District 

 

 

Appendix E: Ranked Projects by TxDOT District