DOCSLIB.ORG

Attachment a Wyoming Department

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Attachment a Wyoming Department 5/21/2013 Research Memo 1 3 RM 010 Date: May 21, 2013 Author: Michael Swank, Senior Research Analyst Re: Other States Highway Construction and Related Administrative Expenditures QUESTIONS 1. How much do other surrounding states spend on highway construction and maintenance projects and what are their relative interstate and administrative/overhead costs related to all highway construction projects? ANSWERS 1. Table 1, next page, provides a summary of Wyoming's Department of Transportation (WYDOT) surface transportation (highways and roadways) construction costs (obligations) for the last three fiscal years. The table also summarizes other surrounding states' construction cost information as well as total department budgets, interstate-only costs, and overhead or administrative costs. In short, Wyoming does not appear to be an outlier compared to the selected surrounding states in terms of the amount of the state's transportation budget dedicated to surface transportation construction costs. Two states (Montana and Nebraska) allocated a greater percentage of their budget and two states (Utah and South Dakota) allocated a lower percentage of their budget, compared to Wyoming, on surface transportation construction. In addition, compared to the two other states that were able to provide similar information (Montana and Nebraska) Wyoming has the lowest administrative costs for surface transportation construction projects (5.8% compared to 6.8% and 8.2%, respectively). Keep in mind that, generally, it is very difficult to compare each state's transportation funding practices due to a variety of factors. For example, though LSO attempted to get each state to report on construction obligations, several states provided their construction "costs" indicated by actual expenditures, contractual obligations, or budgeted amounts. In addition, the following factors should be considered when reviewing this information along with the footnotes shown below Table 1: Each state receives different levels of federal funding. Depending on the type of funding, state or local matching requirements, administrative or other allowances for certain programs' funding, the level of administrative costs and amounts dedicated to actual construction will vary; There may be different requirements depending on each state's constitutional provisions, laws, and regulations as to how other states can spend state-generated revenues on transportation expenses; WYOMING LEGISLATIVE SERVICE OFFICE • 213 State Capitol • Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 TELEPHONE (307) 777-7881 • FAX (307) 777-5466 • EMAIL • [email protected] • WEBSITE http://legisweb.state.wy.us PAGE 2 OF 2 Each state's definition of construction and maintenance costs as well as their definitions as to when certain roadways meet necessary criteria to warrant maintenance and construction activities will vary as well as from which funding sources may pay for such activities. Even when unable to compare directly to construction and maintenance costs, comparing overall department budgets among states may include unlike functions. For example, WYDOT houses the Aeronautics Division, which functions quite differently than other Divisions within the department. Table 1. Wyoming and Other Surrounding States' Highway Construction Budgets/Expenditure and Administrative Costs, FY 2010 – 2012. Funding Types Wyoming Utah Montana South Dakota 3 Nebraska State Highway Funds $115,463,748 $2,575,084,949 $489,478,427 $203,535,776 4 $523,546,665 (User Fees) Separate Legislative $142,720,939 $1,867,000 $24,249,288 $0 $0 Appropriations Local Funds $25,411,350 $50,846,026 $6,303,759 $0 $34,078,541 Other Funds $10,276,814 $0 $0 $0 $30,816,537 Federal Funds $778,163,258 $936,375,856 1 $1,000,768,821 $936,825,375 $854,627,441 Total Construction Funds $1,072,036,109 $2,627,797,975 $1,520,800,295 $936,825,375 $1,443,069,184 Interstates - All Funds $224,792,361 NS $258,643,575 NS $248,819,000 Administrative Costs $61,886,697 2 $103,614,771 2 $118,813,389 Total Department Budget $1,788,068,868 $5,789,057,482 $2,370,897,353 $1,714,890,880 $1,978,298,488 Interstates as % of All 20.97% ----- 17.01% ----- 17.24% Construction Funds Construction Funds as % of 59.95% 45.39% 64.14% 54.63% 72.94% Total Budget Administrative Costs as % of 5.77% 2 6.81% 2 8.23% Construction Funds Source: LSO Research summary of Wyoming Department of Transportation and other states information. 1 Utah specified that no American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds were included in their federal funds. 2 Utah and South Dakota noted that they do not allocate or charge administrative costs toward construction projects. Each state has a separate operations unit from which all administrative funding is accounted for their respective departments. 3 South Dakota provided data for FY 2011, 2012, and 2013. 4 South Dakota specified their construction funds as federal and non-federal funds. Non-federal funds includes state funds and/or highway user fees, but may include funding from the "Other Funds" and "Local Funds" categories, but were not separated in their response. If you need anything further, please contact LSO Research at 777-7881. WYOMING LEGISLATIVE SERVICE OFFICE • 213 State Capitol • Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 TELEPHONE (307) 777-7881 • FAX (307) 777-5466 • EMAIL • [email protected] • WEBSITE http://legisweb.state.wy.us Attachment A Wyoming Department of Transportation State and Federal Highway Improvement Obligations, Including Administrative Costs and Interstate-Specific Spending for FY 2010 – 2012 Total Dollars ($) and Percent (%) Table A1. Wyoming State, Federal, and Other Highway Improvement Obligation Dollars, with Percent and Dollars of Administrative Costs, FY 2010 – 2012. % Total Total % WYDOT Obligations Federal Obligations Fiscal Year Administrative Administrative Total of Total State and Other Fund Obligations Funds (Federal and (FY) Costs 2 Costs of Total Budgeted WYDOT Obligations State and Obligations Revenue Budgeted Other) Revenue State Total State Legislative Local (A) Highway ARS 1 and Other (G) (H = F+G) (I) (J = I / H) (K) (L = H / K) Funds Funds Funds Obligations (F = (B) (C) (D) (E) B+C+D+E) FY 2010 $43,822,651 $57,725,884 $8,187,293 $5,084,766 $70,997,942 $265,400,014 $336,397,957 $21,190,716 6.30% $640,537,860 52.52% FY 2011 $25,727,689 $13,430,410 $1,828,536 $3,239,590 $18,498,536 $239,847,400 $258,345,936 $18,623,808 7.21% $602,198,712 42.90% FY 2012 $45,913,409 $71,564,644 $15,395,521 $1,952,458 $88,912,623 $272,915,844 $361,828,467 $22,072,173 6.10% $545,332,296 66.35% FY 2010 - $115,463,749 $142,720,938 $25,411,350 $10,276,814 $293,872,851 $778,163,258 $956,572,360 $61,886,697 6.47% $1,788,068,868 53.50% 2012 Source: LSO Research summary of Wyoming Department of Transportation data. 1 "ARS" (Authority to Render Service) obligations are for work done by the DOT for private or governmental (city, county, state or federal) entities. Examples would be providing city water, sewer, and/or utility improvements, sidewalks, ADA improvements, studies or appraisals, etc. 2 Overhead/Administrative costs include program, district and administration costs indirectly attributable to highway projects. Examples are building costs, computer costs, general property costs, administration salaries, etc. Table A2. Wyoming Interstate Highway Improvement Obligations, FY 2010 – 2012. % Admin. State Fiscal Legislative Local Administrative Costs of Interstate Federal Funds Highway ARS1 Total Year Funds Funds Costs2 Construction Funds Funds Interstate 25 $31,996,010.26 $3,056,732 $0 $0 $0 $35,052,742 $2,433,033 6.94% Interstate 80 $20,977,328.95 $2,385,297 $0 $0 $0 $23,362,626 $1,595,153 6.83% 2010 Interstate 90 $9,433,883.04 $1,214,828 $0 $0 $0 $10,648,711 $717,369 6.74% Interstate 180 $81,255.82 $6,608 $0 $0 $0 $87,864 $6,179 7.03% Subtotal $62,488,478.07 $6,663,465 $0 $0 $0 $69,151,943 $4,751,734 6.87% Interstate 25 $25,998,165.04 $2,769,077 $0 $0 $0 $28,767,242 $1,976,946 6.87% Interstate 80 $21,312,427.50 $3,061,301 $0 $0 $0 $24,373,729 $1,620,635 6.65% 2011 Interstate 90 $3,264,402.29 $640,798 $0 $0 $0 $3,905,201 $248,231 6.36% Interstate 180 $750,728.00 $58,595 $0 $0 $0 $809,323 $57,087 7.05% Subtotal $51,325,722.83 $6,529,771 $0 $0 $0 $57,855,494 $3,902,899 6.75% Interstate 25 $14,248,604.44 $1,764,153 $0 $0 $0 $16,012,757 $1,083,489 6.77% Interstate 80 $51,577,982.31 $4,238,984 $0 $0 $0 $55,816,966 $3,922,081 7.03% 2012 Interstate 90 $22,274,276.14 $3,210,850 $0 $0 $0 $25,485,126 $1,693,775 6.65% Interstate 180 $450,345.78 $19,728 $0 $0 $0 $470,074 $34,245 7.29% Subtotal $88,551,208.67 $9,233,715 $0 $0 $0 $97,784,924 $6,733,590 6.89% All Total 202,365,409.57 $22,426,951 $0 $0 $0 $224,792,361 $15,388,223 6.85% FY Source: LSO Research summary of Wyoming Department of Transportation data. 1 "ARS" (Authority to Render Service) obligations are for work done by the DOT for private or governmental (city, county, state or federal) entities. Examples would be providing city water, sewer, and/or utility improvements, sidewalks, ADA improvements, studies or appraisals, etc. 2 Overhead/Administrative costs include program, district and administration costs indirectly attributable to highway projects. Examples are building costs, computer costs, general property costs, administration salaries, etc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Muncy Creek Township
    Muncy Creek Planning Area Plan Adoptions 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Plan Adoptions HUGHESVILLE BOROUGH COUNCIL – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> MUNCY BOROUGH COUNCIL – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> PICTURE ROCKS BOROUGH COUNCIL – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> SHREWSBURY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> WOLF TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – Adopted <MONTH DAY, YEAR> Lycoming 2030: Plan the Possible 2 Muncy Creek Planning Area Acknowledgements 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Acknowledgements Muncy Creek Planning Advisory Team (PAT) WALTER REED, REPRESENTATIVE OF HUGHESVILLE BOROUGH RICHARD SMITH, REPRESENTATIVE OF HUGHESVILLE BOROUGH STEVE JAQUITH, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY BOROUGH (ALTERNATE) BILL RAMSEY, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY BOROUGH LINDA STEIN, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY BOROUGH STEVEN CULVER, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP BILL POULTON, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP ANGELA SNYDER, REPRESENTATIVE OF MUNCY CREEK TOWNSHIP BILL DORMAN, REPRESENTATIVE OF PICTURE ROCKS BOROUGH EUGENE OTTERBEIN, REPRESENTATIVE OF PICTURE ROCKS BOROUGH DEAN BARTO, REPRESENTATIVE OF WOLF TOWNSHIP MELANIE MCCOY, REPRESENTATIVE OF WOLF TOWNSHIP TERRY DINCHER, REPRESENTATIVE OF SHREWSBURY TOWNSHIP REBECCA FOUGHT, REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST LYCOMING RECREATION AUTHORITY DAVID MACIEJEWSKI, REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST LYCOMING SCHOOL DISTRICT MICHAEL PAWLIK, REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST LYCOMING SCHOOL DISTRICT GENE CAHN, REPRESENTATIVE
    [Show full text]
  • Draft 2021 LRTP
    DRAFT SEDA‐COG Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Draft Long Range Transportation Plan includes regional overview information and the MPO region’s long range vision for prioritizing transportation investments. This copy of the draft plan is available as part of a 30‐day comment period beginning on May 24, 2021, and ending on June 22, 2021. The public comment period provides the public an opportunity to provide feedback on all facets of the Long Range Transportation Plan before its adoption. The plan can be reviewed online at: http://www.seda‐cog.org/departments/transportation/long‐range‐plan. Written and electronic comments may be submitted via email, SEDA‐COG web portal, fax, or Postal Service by 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 22, 2021. Email comments may be submitted to lrtp@seda‐cog.org or through the web portal at http://www.seda‐cog.org/departments/transportation/transportation‐comments Comments may be faxed to 570‐524‐9190 Please address all written comments to: Mr. Don Kiel SEDA‐COG MPO 201 Furnace Road Lewisburg, PA 17837 If you would like to provide comments or discuss the draft plan in person, a Virtual Public Meeting will be held during the public comment period as follows: Date: June 3, 2021 Time: 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Location: The content of this Notice is available in alternative formats and other languages upon request by contacting the SEDA‐COG MPO at 570‐524‐4491, or by written correspondence directed to the MPO at 201 Furnace Road, Lewisburg, PA 17837, or by email at jsaylor@seda‐cog.org.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Annual Report.Pdf
    U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program 2010 Annual Report 2010 Annual Report Department of Energy Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program Executive Summary The mission for the Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP) is to ensure federal, state, tribal, and local responders have access to the plans, training, and technical assistance necessary to safely, efficiently, and effectively respond to radiological transportation accidents. To support this mission TEPP has formed strong partnerships over the last 15 years with state, tribal and local response organizations, Federal agencies and other national programs integrating TEPP planning tools and training into a variety of hazardous materials preparedness programs. These partnerships have resulted in states and tribes either using all or portions of the TEPP resources in their programs. Many have adopted the TEPP training program, Modular Emergency Response Radiological Transportation Training (MERRTT), into their hazardous material training curriculums to assist them in preparing their fire departments, law enforcement organizations, hazardous materials response teams, emergency management officials, public information officers and emergency medical technicians to respond to a radiological transportation accidents. This Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 DOE TEPP Annual Report highlights events, outreach, partnerships and training where TEPP has proven to be integral in building radiological response capabilities of states and tribes that may need to respond to radiological incidents. To help build those capacities, TEPP promotes state and tribal implementation by providing responders who successfully complete a MERRTT Train-the-Trainer (T3) course with the tools and knowledge to integrate MERRTT into their state, tribal, or local training programs. TEPP has proven to be an effective and growing preparedness resource across the nation.
    [Show full text]
  • I-180/I-80 Interchange Signing Project
    NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOTICE OF HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT I-180/I-80 Interchange Signing HSIP-180-9(4); C.N. 13349 Identified as I-180/I-80 Interchange Signing, Construction is tentatively scheduled to begin the proposed project would install new spring of 2018 with completion within three overhead guide signs and two new overhead working days. sign structures at the Interstate 80 (I-80) and The proposed project would require short Interstate 180 (I-180) interchange located within duration detours during the removal and the city limits of Lincoln in Lancaster County. installation of the overhead signs and structures. The proposed project would begin on I-80 at mile The detours would be required for the on/off- marker (MM) 401.00 and end at MM 401.25 and ramps from westbound I-80 to northbound and begin on I-180 at MM 0.00 and end at MM 1.15. southbound I-180 and from northbound I-180 to westbound I-80. All detours would utilize I-80 The purpose of this project is to preserve the Exit 399 and Cornhusker Highway. I-180 and I-80 transportation asset, improve the reliability of the transportation system, and NDOT has worked to develop this project to perpetuate the mobility of the traveling public. minimize inconvenience and hardships. We are The need for this proposed project is based dedicated to improving Nebraska’s Highway on the condition of the overhead signs and system and with your help we can achieve this structures. goal. Proposed construction would consist of removing the existing overhead guide signs and Any questions or comments regarding this project should sign structures and installing new overhead guide be submitted to: Sarah Soula, Public Involvement Manager, Nebraska Department of Transportation, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Suspended Where Possible for July 4
    State of Illinois JB Pritzker, Governor Illinois Department of Transportation Omer Osman, Acting Secretary FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: July 1, 2020 Paul Wappel 217.685.0082 Maria Castaneda 312.447.1919 Construction suspended where possible for July 4 Non-emergency closures called off, but motorists should still expect work zones SPRINGFIELD – The Illinois Department of Transportation announced today that lanes that have been closed for construction will reopen, where possible, for the Fourth of July holiday to minimize travel disruption. Non-emergency closures will be suspended from 3 p.m. July 2 to 11:59 p.m. July 5. The following lane closures will remain in place during the holiday weekend. Work zone speed limits will remain in effect where posted. Please buckle up, put your phone down and drive sober. District 1 City of Chicago: • The following ramps in the Jane Byrne Interchange work zone will remain closed: • o Inbound Kennedy (Interstate 90/94) Expressway exit to inbound Ida B. Wells Drive. o Outbound Dan Ryan Expressway exit to Taylor Street and Roosevelt Road. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive entrance from Canal Street. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive exit to outbound Dan Ryan. o Outbound Ida B. Wells Drive exit to outbound Kennedy. o Inbound Eisenhower Expressway (Interstate -290) to outbound Kennedy; detour with U-turn posted. o Inbound Eisenhower; lane reductions continue. o Inbound Ida B. Wells Drive; lane reductions continue. • Outbound Kennedy exit at Canfield Road; closed. • Westbound Bryn Mawr Avenue between Harlem and Oriole avenues; lane reductions continue. • Westbound Higgins Avenue between Oriole and Canfield avenues; lane reductions continue.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Four
    CHAPTER FOUR EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INVENTORY WITH NEEDS ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS This Chapter of the WATS Long Range Transportation Plan provides a description of the existing multi-modal transportation system in Lycoming County encompassing highways and bridges, public transportation, airports, railroads and bike / pedestrian facilities. There are no waterway or inland ports located in the County. An inventory of current transportation assets by transportation mode will be provided, including a current physical condition and operational performance needs assessment. This data driven inventory and assessment is important to properly address transportation asset management needs and to improve operational performance of the overall system in terms of public safety, security, efficiency and cost effective movement of people and goods. HIGHWAY SYSTEM Highway Designations / Classification System According to the PennDOT Bureau of Planning and Research, there are 1,995.18 linear miles of publicly owned roadways throughout Lycoming County. PennDOT owns 716.59 linear miles, (35%) of public roadways in Lycoming County. In addition, there are 1,258.86 miles, (63%) of locally-owned roadways owned by 52 different local municipalities included on the PennDOT Liquid Fuels System. Other agencies own the remainder of roads in the County. Lycoming County government only owns two roads which are County Farm Road at the Lysock View county complex housing the Department of Public Safety (911 center), Pre- Release and county farm and an entrance road to the White Deer Recreation Complex. There are federal designations and classifications established for highway systems in the nation as noted in the following sections. Road Functional Classification System The Federal Highway Administration, PennDOT and Metropolitan & Rural Planning Organizations cooperatively establish and update maps that delineate various road classifications which group roadways into a hierarchy based on the type of highway service provided.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Illinois
    State of Illinois Illinois Department of Transportation District 1 – Urban Interstate Resurfacing Milling and resurfacing on Interstate 290 from Sacramento Boulevard to Interstate 90/94 in Chicago. District 2 – Rural 4 Lane Bridge Rehabilitation Miscellaneous repairs on the structure carrying Interstate 80 over the Mississippi River. District 6 – Rural 2 Lane Concrete pavement on County Highway 10 east of Elkhart. District 6 – Urban Streetscape Streetscape reconstruction that includes new concrete pavers, sidewalks, lighting, planting beds and traffic signals on Capitol Avenue between 5th Street and 7th Street in Springfield. District 8 – Urban Pedestrian Bridge Construction Construction of a 3-span pedestrian bridge, sidewalk, lighting, landscaping, sewer and retaining walls for the city of Alton over US 67 at Riverfront Park. Printed by authority of the State of Illinois, 0445-11, 01/11, 500 FY 2012-2017 Proposed Highway Improvement Program Spring 2011 Published by the Illinois Department of Transportation Springfield, Illinois 62764 Printed by authority of State of Illinois, April 2011, 275 copies. This document is printed on recycled paper. This document is available on-line at www.dot.il.gov/opp/publications.html. CONTENTS Page Program Development Process ................................... 1 Seeking Public Involvement – Outreach Meetings ....... 3 Executive Summary ..................................................... 5 Department of Transportation District Map ................. 21 Public Review and Comment Form ...........................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Susquehanna Brochure
    2 0 1 8 E M E RGE NCY P R E PARE DNES S GUIDE IMPORTANT EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INFORMATION INSIDE EMERGENCY Emergency Information 1 3 Any emergency at the Susquehanna plant would fall into one of the following 2 4 our categories, established by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. CLASSIFICATIONS Noti�ication of Unusual Event General Emergency Events are in process or have occurred which Events are in process or have occurred that involve indicate a potential degradation of the level of actual or imminent substantial core degradation or safety of the plant or indicate a security threat to melting with potential for loss of containment facility protection has been initiated. No releases of integrity or hostile action that results in an actual radioactive material requiring offsite response or loss of physical control of the facility. Radioactive monitoring are expected unless further releases can be reasonably expected to exceed degradation of safety systems occurs. EPA Protective Action Guideline exposure levels offsite for more than the immediate site area. Alert Events are in process or have occurred that involve an actual or potential substantial degradation Siren Maintenance of the level of safety of the plant or a security event that involves probable life-threatening risk To maintain a high level of siren to site personnel or damage to site equipment because of hostile action. Any releases are system performance, periodic expected to be limited to small fractions of the maintenace and testing may U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Protective Action Guideline exposure levels. occur. Testing may result in a growl or short 10-second sound Site Area Emergency of the siren.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of State Speed Laws
    DOT HS 810 826 August 2007 Summary of State Speed Laws Tenth Edition Current as of January 1, 2007 This document is available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade or manufacturers' names or products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...................................................iii Missouri ......................................................138 Alabama..........................................................1 Montana ......................................................143 Alaska.............................................................5 Nebraska .....................................................150 Arizona ...........................................................9 Nevada ........................................................157 Arkansas .......................................................15 New
    [Show full text]
  • Roadwork 2020 Construction Season Gets Underway with Warmer
    Wyoming Road Work Guide Pre-sorted WYOMING Wyoming Department of Transportation 5300 Bishop Blvd. Standard WYOMING Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009-3340 U.S. Postage Paid Cheyenne, WY 82009 RoadWorkGUIDE Permit No. 24 Address Service Requested Information contained herein may be reprinted without permission. Art and photos are available to the press upon ProvidedRoad monthly during construction season Work request. For more information write: by the Wyoming Department of Transportation GUIDE Public Affairs Office Vol. 20, No. 1 May 2020 WYOMING Wyoming Department of Transportation DEPARTMENT 5300 Bishop Boulevard OF TRANSPORTATION Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009-3340 2020 construction season gets underway with warmer temperatures Interstate and state highway projects ramp up for season By Jordan Achs, District 1 Spring often means rising tempera- tures, melting snow and longer days, but it also marks the start of construc- tion season for the Wyoming Depart- ment of Transportation. WYDOT packs a lot of construc- Continued from front page tion into a short season, which typical- Work has begun in downtown Cheyenne on Central and Another two-year project beginning this year on approx- ly spans from late spring through early Warren Avenue where they cross the railroad tracks, also imately nine miles of US 30 between Kemmerer and Opal fall. That work is spread out over both known as Interstate 180. Crews are replacing bridge joints involves bridge rehabilitation and other miscellaneous work. interstates and highways statewide, and patching parts of the deck on both structures. Simulta- The estimated completion date is the end of June 2021. and projects include on- and off-ramp neously, crews will be replacing concrete slabs on either side In and around Douglas, crews have begun an $11 million, repairs, pavement improvements, of the structures between Ninth Street and Lincolnway.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Bill 1009
    LB1009 LB1009 2018 2018 LEGISLATIVE BILL 1009 Approved by the Governor April 17, 2018 Introduced by Murante, 49; Friesen, 34. A BILL FOR AN ACT relating to roads; to amend sections 60-4,182, 60-601, and 60-605, Revised Statutes Cumulative Supplement, 2016, and sections 39-2103 and 60-6,186, Revised Statutes Supplement, 2017; to change the rural highway classification of major arterial to include super-two highways; to define a term; to change maximum highway speed limits as prescribed; to harmonize provisions; and to repeal the original sections. Be it enacted by the people of the State of Nebraska, Section 1. Section 39-2103, Revised Statutes Supplement, 2017, is amended to read: 39-2103 Rural highways are hereby divided into nine functional classifications as follows: (1) Interstate, which shall consist of the federally designated National System of Interstate and Defense Highways; (2) Expressway, which shall consist of a group of highways following major traffic desires in Nebraska which rank next in importance to the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. The expressway system is one which ultimately should be developed to multilane divided highway standards; (3) Major arterial, which shall consist of the balance of routes which serve major statewide interests for highway transportation. This includes super-two, which shall consist of two-lane highways designed primarily for through traffic with passing lanes spaced intermittently and on alternating sides of the highway to provide predictable opportunities to pass slower
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S1821
    March 12, 1998 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Ð SENATE S1821 are they holding down? With 0.4% unemploy- tion projects undermines the rationale the highest priority for their locality. ment in this field, and record-low unemploy- supporting the use of these formulas. It should be up to cities, counties, and ment in the broader U.S. economy, where are Moreover, this practice literally de- the state Departments of Transpor- the out-of-work Americans displaced by for- prives states of the funding which tation to prioritize what projects need eign talent? immediate attention in their stateÐ America's loss is our foreign competition's would otherwise be available for states' gain. Our need for engineers has driven us to highway priorities as established by not the federal government. Too often start R&D centers anywhere we can find en- state and local transportation plan- under the current system, a state has gineersÐcurrently, in England, Ireland and ners. to put aside its own priorities because India. We're forced offshore to fill the jobs While I believe this is a wasteful it must use its own limited funds to that we cannot fill hereÐa fine way to ``pro- practice, history has shown there is lit- provide matching funds for the large tect'' American jobs. tle chance of its outright elimination. federally designated construction Legal immigrants currently constitute Beginning in 1982 when $362 million was projects, or risk losing federal funding. 8.5% of the U.S. population, well below the set-aside for 10 such earmarks, the in- This ``Washington knows best'' ap- 13%-plus levels maintained from 1860 to 1939.
    [Show full text]