DOCSLIB.ORG

Colorado Department of Transportation Regional ITS Architecture for Southeastern Colorado

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Colorado Department of Transportation Regional ITS Architecture for Southeastern Colorado REGIONAL ARCHITECTURE FOR SOUTHEASTERN COLORADO INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Colorado Department of Transportation Regional ITS Architecture for Southeastern Colorado November 2006 Regional Intelligent Transportation Systems Architecture for Southeastern Colorado Prepared for: Colorado Department of Transportation – ITS Branch Project Manager: Bruce Coltharp Prepared by: URS Corporation 8181 East Tufts Avenue Denver, CO 80237 303-694-2770 URS Project Number 22237128 November 2006 Regional ITS Strategic Plan for Southeastern Colorado CDOT Region 1 and Region 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................i A. Project Area....................................................................................................i B. Issues and Needs...........................................................................................iv C. Core ITS Services ..........................................................................................v D. Market Packages...........................................................................................vi E. Roles and Responsibilities...........................................................................viii F. Functional Requirements.............................................................................viii G. Recommended ITS Projects ..........................................................................xi H. Financial Summary .....................................................................................xiv I. Introduction............................................................................................................1 I.A. Purpose of the Regional ITS Architecture ......................................................1 I.B. Project Process...............................................................................................3 I.C. Related Planning Efforts ................................................................................6 I.D. Conformance with the National ITS Architecture.........................................10 I.E. Organization of this Report ..........................................................................12 II. Description of the Region .....................................................................................13 II.A. Geography of the Region .............................................................................13 II.B. Transportation..............................................................................................15 II.C. Existing ITS Services and Infrastructure ......................................................19 III. Transportation Issues and Needs.........................................................................25 III.A. TPR Goals ...................................................................................................25 III.B. Stakeholder Needs and Issues Identified.......................................................26 IV. Market Package Plan ...........................................................................................32 IV.A. Advanced Traffic Management Systems ......................................................32 IV.B. Advanced Traveler Information Systems......................................................33 IV.C. Advanced Public Transportation Systems.....................................................33 IV.D. Emergency Management..............................................................................34 IV.E. Maintenance and Construction Management ................................................35 IV.F. Archived Data Management.........................................................................36 V. Operational Concept ............................................................................................37 V.A. Strategic Goals.............................................................................................37 V.B. Operational Scenarios ..................................................................................39 V.C. Freeway and Incident Management on I-70 West of Denver.........................40 V.D. Regional Traffic and Transit Management in Colorado Springs....................42 V.E. Freeway and Incident Management in Pueblo ..............................................43 V.F. Rural Highway Management on US 287 (Ports to Plains).............................45 V.G. Functional Requirements..............................................................................47 VI. Implementation Plan............................................................................................58 VI.A. Recommended ITS Projects .........................................................................58 VI.B. Projects of Statewide Significance................................................................61 VI.C. Projects of Regional Significance.................................................................64 VI.D. Relating Projects to Goals ............................................................................67 VI.E. Agreements..................................................................................................69 VI.F. ITS Standards ..............................................................................................70 VI.G. Financial Summary ......................................................................................72 VII. Next Steps .............................................................................................................75 Regional ITS Strategic Plan for Southeastern Colorado CDOT Region 1 and Region 2 Figure 1: Project Process Flow Chart...........................................................................................5 Figure 2: Project Area ...............................................................................................................13 Figure 3: Project Area Roadway Systems ..................................................................................17 Figure 4: Project Area ITS Infrastructure...................................................................................23 Figure 5: Recommended ITS Strategic Projects .........................................................................60 Tables Table 1: ITS Benefits and Performance Measures........................................................................3 Table 2: Project Area Average Daily Traffic: East – West Highways (2003).............................15 Table 3: Project Area Daily Traffic: North-South Highways (2003)..........................................15 Table 4: Existing CDOT ITS Infrastructure ...............................................................................22 Table 5: Selected ATMS Market Packages ................................................................................33 Table 6: Selected ATIS Market Packages ..................................................................................33 Table 7: Selected APTS Market Packages .................................................................................34 Table 8: Selected EM Market Packages.....................................................................................34 Table 9: Selected MCM Market Packages .................................................................................35 Table 10: Selected Archived Data Market Packages ..................................................................36 Table 11: Strategic Goals to Projects .........................................................................................68 Table 12: Financial Summary....................................................................................................73 Regional ITS Strategic Plan for Southeastern Colorado CDOT Region 1 and Region 2 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AD.................................................................................................... Archived Data Management APTS............................................................................ Advanced Public Transportation Systems ATIS.............................................................................. Advanced Traveler Information Systems ATMS............................................................................. Advanced Traffic Management Systems AVL ................................................................................................ Automated Vehicle Location AVSS.......................................................................................Advanced Vehicle Safety Systems CCTV................................................................................................... Closed Circuit Television CDOT..............................................................................Colorado Department of Transportation COGJ.........................................................................................................City of Grand Junction CSP .............................................................................................................Colorado State Patrol CSTMC ................................................................. Colorado Springs Traffic Management Center CTMC ....................................................................Colorado Transportation Management Center CVO ..........................................................................................Commercial Vehicles Operations DOIT ..............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Theodore Roosevelt Expressway and the Central North American Trade Corridor
    The Theodore Roosevelt Expressway and the Central North American Trade Corridor Prepared by Esther Tumuhairwe Mark Berwick Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute North Dakota State University Fargo, ND October 2008 Disclaimer The contents of this report reflect the work of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Mountain-Plains Consortium in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. North Dakota State University does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, Vietnam Era Veterans status, sexual orientation, marital status or public assistance status. Direct inquiries to the Executive Director and Chief Diversity Officer, 202 Old Main, (701) 231-7708. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Corridor analysis has been completed for many different designations since the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in 1991. These studies have been conducted without a clear understanding or blueprint of what should be analyzed. Differences exist in corridor analysis between rural and urban, passengers and freight, the reason for the corridor analysis, and whether the corridor is recognized by all states, provinces, and counties it passes through. The steps necessary to establish a freight corridor are ambiguous therefore, a document that describes the analysis/study process would be beneficial. A review of other corridor studies is provided. The Theodore Roosevelt Expressway and the Central North American Trade Corridors are described, including how they connect to other corridors. This paper provides some demographic and geographic information, but does not address highway capacity needs, right of way needs, restricted speed policy, processes for determining future access, evaluation of current access right of way needs for future frontage roads, and bypass opportunities in and around communities.
    [Show full text]
  • La Entrada Al Pacifico Planning Study-TTI-12-7-04
    LA ENTRADA AL PACIFICO TRADE CORRIDOR PLANNING STUDY Prepared for: Midland-Odessa Metropolitan Planning Organization and Texas Department of Transportation – Odessa District Prepared by: Texas Transportation Institute December 2004 LA ENTRADA AL PACIFICO TRADE CORRIDOR PLANNING STUDY by by William E. Frawley, AICP Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute John Overman, AICP Associate Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute Juan Villa Associate Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute and Ajay Shakyaver, P.E. Advanced Transportation Planning Engineer Texas Department of Transportation Project Title: Provide Technical Assistance Related to a Future National Corridor Planning and Development Study for the “La Entrada al Pacifico” Trade Corridor for the Midland-Odessa MPO December 2004 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the project director, Robert Cox, of the Midland-Odessa Metropolitan Planning Organization. The authors would also like to acknowledge the assistance provided by the following individuals for their valuable assistance and input: Lauren Garduno – Texas Department of Transportation James Beauchamp – Midland-Odessa Transportation Alliance In addition, the authors would like to acknowledge Claire Fazio of the Texas Transportation Insitute (TTI) for her work on maps and graphics, Edd Sepulveda of TTI for his statistical work, Lisa Day of TTI for her work on graphics, and Carol Court for her editorial work.
    [Show full text]
  • Ports-To-Plains Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study
    PORTS-TO-PLAINS CORRIDOR INTERSTATE FEASIBILITY STUDY STRATFORD 87 287 DALHART 54 DUMAS 87 60 40 AMARILLO 60 27 385 LAMESALUBBOCK 84 SEGMENT 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 380 TAHOKA JUNE 30, 2020 BIG SPRING 180 LAMESA MIDLAND ODESSA 349 BIG SPRING MIDLAND SAN ANGELO 158 ODESSA 87 20 385 SAN ANGELO ELDORADO 67 SONORA 190 ELDORADO 10 96 SONORA 83 277 DEL RIO EAGLE PASS 277 35 CARRIZO SPRINGS GULF OF MEXICO MEXICO 1 PORTS-TO-PLAINS CORRIDOR INTERSTATE FEASIBILITY STUDY (HB 1079) LAREDO 281 SEGMENT #2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ports-to-Plains Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study (House Bill 1079) The Ports-to-Plains Corridor is an international, national and state significant transportation corridor that connects and integrates Texas’ key economic engines, international trade, energy production and agriculture. The corridor also plays a vital role in supporting the growing demographic and economic centers of South and West Texas. The corridor functions as the only north- south corridor facilitating the movement of people and goods in South and West Texas and beyond. Purpose of this Report The Segment #2 Committee Ports-to-Plains Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study Report (Segment #2 Committee Report) provides the recommendations and priorities of the Segment #2 Committee members for improvements to the Ports-to-Plains Corridor in Segment #2. The Segment Committee #2 Report meets the requirements outlined in House Bill 1079 that was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 10, 2019. The recommendations in this Segment #2 Committee Report will be used by the Ports-to-Plains Advisory Committee to make their recommendations on improvements to the Ports-to-Plains Corridor to the Texas Department of Transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • Paving the Way with an Interstate
    Ports‐to‐Plains Update Paving the Future with an Interstate Topics • Texas Ports‐to‐Plains Interstate Feasibility Study • Future Interstate Designation Legislation • New Mexico Progress • Colorado Highway 71 Truck Freight Diversion Feasibility Study • Ports‐to‐Plains Passing Lanes on US 287 Texas Ports‐to‐Plains Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study What is the Ports‐to‐Plains Corridor? Key Challenges • Connectivity • Nation’s largest inland port, Laredo, Texas is not connected by interstate to the primary sources of energy and agriculture production. • Additionally, there are approximately 600 miles between I‐25 in New Mexico and I‐ 35 in Central Texas, making connectivity for most of Texas a challenge. • Economic Development • The lack of interstate standard infrastructure has negatively impacted the ability to attract economic activity. • Safety • Crash rates on undivided highways are significantly higher than the interstate‐ standard infrastructure. • Access and Mobility • Most of the communities along the Corridor do not have access to an interstate, creating a barrier to economic opportunities. Ports‐to‐Plains Corridor Trends 1990‐2050 Economic Outlook 1990‐2050 Baseline Travel Times 2018‐2050 Baseline Safety 2018‐2050 Baseline Freight Flow & Tonnage 2018‐2050 Baseline Freight Flow & Tonnage Current Export Markets Freight Flow & Tonnage Current Import Markets Corridor Interstate Feasibility Analysis and Findings 2050 Baseline 2050 Interstate Upgrade Corridor Interstate Feasibility Analysis and Findings Corridor Interstate Feasibility
    [Show full text]
  • MEMORANDUM TO: the Transportation Commission FROM
    2829 W. Howard Place, Ste. 569 Denver, CO 80204-2305 MEMORANDUM TO: The Transportation Commission FROM: Herman Stockinger and Jennifer Uebelher DATE: August 20, 2020 SUBJECT: Ports-to-Plains Purpose The Ports-to-Plains is “a grassroots alliance of communities and businesses whose mission is to advocate for a robust international transportation infrastructure to promote economic security and prosperity throughout North America's energy and agricultural heartland including Mexico to Canada.” The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Commission with an overview of the High Priority Corridors in Colorado; the CO-71 Truck Freight Diversion Feasibility Study; the 2018 Movement of Permitted Loads in Colorado; the Texas Ports-to-Plains Interstate Feasibility Study and to discuss the Future Interstate Designation. Action No action is requested at this time. Background History of Ports-to-Plains Alliance (excerpt from https://www.portstoplains.com) The inception of Ports-to-Plains came about in the mid-90’s, when elected officials and civic leaders from Lubbock, Texas wanted to improve U.S. 87/287 to the north and south of U.S. Interstate 27 between Lubbock and Amarillo, Texas in order to capture the economic benefits of trade. With interstates in the U.S. predominantly going east and west, there was a growing need for additional north/south corridors to support increasing trade opportunities. Through reaching out to civic leaders and elected officials from other communities, a base support group comprised of cities, counties, chambers and economic development organizations founded the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition. In 1998, the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor was granted its federal designation in the TEA-21 reauthorization bill as a high priority corridor from Laredo, Texas to Denver, Colorado via U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Improvement Corridors in This Plan Utilized the Following Method
    CHAPTER 7: TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS 7.0 DEFINITIONS Three types of transportation corridors are identified in the 2005-2030 Oklahoma Statewide Intermodal Transportation Plan: • Transportation Improvement Corridors: These are highway corridors where projected traffic volumes indicate additional capacity will be needed by 2030. • National High Priority Corridors: These are Congressionally-identified corridors of national significance. There are four such corridors in Oklahoma: (1) US 287 [Ports-to-Plains Corridor] from Texas to Colorado in Cimarron County; (2) US 54 [TransAmerica Corridor] from Texas to Kansas in Texas County; (3) I-35 from Texas to Kansas; and, (4) US 412 from Tulsa to Memphis, Tennessee. These corridors are eligible for special discretionary funding from the National Corridor Planning and Development (NCPD) program. • Freight Operational Improvement Corridor: These corridors represent highways with high truck traffic but do not indicate capacity needs by 2030. However, the efficiency of the these corridors is compromised by conditions such as stops in towns and cities, bridge deficiencies, geometrics, urban speed zones, school zones, at grade rail crossings, or other operating conditions that reduce the efficiency of freight movements. These corridors can benefit from corridor studies and improvements from a menu of improvements such as bypasses; intelligent transportation systems for driver information on traffic flows, weather conditions, etc.; bridge upgrades; rail grade separations; signal timing; and, geometric roadway improvements. 7.1 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT CORRIDORS 7.1.1 Definition The Transportation Improvement Corridors are highway corridors needing capacity upgrades by 2030. Transportation Improvement Corridors were first identified in the 1995 Oklahoma Statewide Intermodal Transportation Plan and resulted in the policy “To provide for continued safe and efficient movement, the plan includes the development from two to four lanes along the corridors”.
    [Show full text]
  • Ports-To-Plains Corridor (I-27)
    PORTS-TO-PLAINS Corridor Planning Ports-to-Plains Stakeholder Meeting Stakeholder Workshop - Agenda 1 Purpose of Stakeholder Workshops 3 2 Rural Transportation System Overview 4 3 Ports-to-Plains 8 4 I-27 Expansion 26 5 Key Considerations 30 6 Questions / Open Discussion 35 7 Next Steps 36 8 Contact Information 37 Ports-to-Plains Stakeholder Meeting 2 Purpose of Stakeholder Workshops . Review Ports-to-Plains history including current and future activities . Review strategies to enhance corridor . Information gathering sessions to facilitate determining path forward/next steps – Continue communication efforts and coordination with key stakeholders – Review/establish local consensus . Workshops being held: – Wednesday, March 18 – Amarillo – Thursday, March 19 – Lubbock – Friday, March 20 – Midland – Friday, March 20 – Big Spring – Monday, March 23 – Eagle Pass – Tuesday, March 24 – San Angelo Thank you for your participation! Ports-to-Plains Stakeholder Meeting 3 Rural Transportation System Overview Rural Transportation System Overview Ports-to-Plains Stakeholder Meeting 4 Rural Transportation System Overview Texas’ rural highway system represents the most extensive portion of Texas’ transportation network: . 83% of total highway system mileage with over 66,000 centerline miles . 57% of total highway system truck Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT), with over 35 million total rural system truck VMT . 61% of total on-system bridges with over 21,600 structures . Since 2009, our rural system has experienced the highest rate of both total and truck
    [Show full text]
  • US 287 at LAMAR RELIEVER ROUTE PROJECTFASTLANE Grant Application APRIL 14, 2016
    PREPARED FOR: Department of Transportation’s Nationally Significant Freight and Highway Project (NSFHP) Program US 287 AT LAMAR RELIEVER ROUTE PROJECTFASTLANE Grant Application APRIL 14, 2016 US 287 AT LAMAR RELIEVER ROUTE Previously Incurred Project Cost $8.3M Future Eligible Project Cost $160.0M Total Project Cost $168.3M NSFHP Request $96.0M Total Federal Funding (including NSFHP) $128.0M Are matching funds restricted to a specific project component? If so, which one? No Is the project or a portion of the project currently located on National Highway No Freight Network Is the project or a portion of the project located on the National Highway System Yes Does the project add capacity to the Interstate system? No Is the project in a national scenic area? No Do the project components include a railway-highway grade crossing or grade Yes separation project? Do the project components include an intermodal or freight rail project, or freight No project within the boundaries of a public or private freight rail, water (including ports), or intermodal facility? If answered yes to either of the two component questions above, how much of $6.0M requested NSFHP funds will be spent on each of these projects components? State(s) in which project is located Colorado Small or large project Large Also submitting an application to TIGER for this project? No Urbanized Area in which project is located, if applicable n/a Population of Urbanized Area n/a Is the project currently programmed in the: TIP n/a STIP No MPO Long Range Transportation Plan n/a State Long Range Transportation Plan Yes State Freight Plan Yes i OMB Approval No.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary 380 Tahoka June 30, 2020 Big Spring
    PORTS-TO-PLAINS CORRIDOR INTERSTATE FEASIBILITY STUDY STRATFORD 87 287 DALHART 54 DUMAS 87 60 40 AMARILLO 60 27 385 LAMESALUBBOCK 84 SEGMENT 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 380 TAHOKA JUNE 30, 2020 BIG SPRING 180 LAMESALAMESA MIDLAND ODESSA 349 BIGBIG SPRING SPRING MIDLANDMIDLAND SAN ANGELO 158 ODESSAODESSA 87 20 385 SANSAN ANGELO ANGELO ELDORADO 67 SONORA 190 ELDORADO 10 96 SONORA 83 277 DEL RIO EAGLE PASS 277 35 CARRIZO SPRINGS GULF OF MEXICO MEXICO 1 PORTS-TO-PLAINS CORRIDOR INTERSTATE FEASIBILITY STUDY (HB 1079) LAREDO 281 SEGMENT #3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ports-to-Plains Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study (House Bill 1079) The Ports-to-Plains Corridor is an international, national and state significant transportation corridor that connects and integrates Texas’ key economic engines, international trade, energy production and agriculture. The corridor also plays a vital role in supporting the growing demographic and economic centers of South and West Texas. The corridor functions as the only north- south corridor facilitating the movement of people and goods in South and West Texas and beyond. Purpose of this Report The Segment #3 Committee Ports-to-Plains Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study Report (Segment #3 Committee Report) provides the recommendations and priorities of the Segment #3 Committee members for improvements to the Ports-to-Plains Corridor in Segment #3. The Segment Committee #3 Report meets the requirements outlined in House Bill 1079 that was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 10, 2019. The recommendations in this Segment #3 Committee Report will be used by the Ports-to-Plains Advisory Committee to make their recommendations on improvements to the Ports-to-Plains Corridor to the Texas Department of Transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • RE: State of Coahuila, Mexico Joins Ports-To-Plains Alliance
    Media Release – For Immediate Release Contact: Michael Reeves President, Ports-to-Plains Alliance (806) 775-2338 RE: State of Coahuila, Mexico joins Ports-to-Plains Alliance The Ports-to-Plains Alliance welcomed its first Mexican member as the State of Coahuila, Mexico joined the organization in a signing ceremony in Torreón, Coahuila October 14. “Coahuila is a strong trade partner for our members and will be a great addition to Ports- to-Plains. It is a natural extension for the corridor into Coahuila not only to accommodate existing business, but to facilitate new opportunities,” said Ports-to-Plains President Michael Reeves. “When we promote our companies and products, usually we are discriminated because we do not have good highway infrastructure, even though we have others advantages, this is still our weak point,” said Coahuila Governor Humberto Moreira Valdés at the signing ceremony. “We have made progress in the effort of improving our highway network, in order to complete this project.'' The Ports-to-Plains Alliance Corridor includes Alberta, Canada and runs through nine U.S. states to Laredo, Texas. The corridor has two border crossings into Coahuila at Del Rio / Acuña and Eagle Pass / Piedras Negras. The rural corridor serves America’s energy and agriculture heartland. “Our region can fundamentally be described as a production area for food, fiber, and fuel. The ability to more easily move that raw product for its ultimate use or consumption means more profit for producers,” said San Angelo Mayor Alvin New, who participated in the signing ceremony as well. Coahuila has committed to upgrading the corridor in their state from Acuña to Torreón.
    [Show full text]
  • SWTPR June 2015 Meeting Packet
    SOUTHWEST COLORADO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMISSION Date: Friday, June 5, 2015 Place: CDOT Maintenance Facility 20581 Hwy 160 W Phone conferencing available at 877-820-7831, Passcode 306349# Time: 9am to 12:00pm AGENDA 9am I. Introductions (additions/changes to agenda) II. Accept Minutes: April 2015* Accept Financial Report: April 2015* 9:05 III. Reports 1. Airport Plans Presentation: Tony Vicari, Airport Operations Specialist 2. STAC update a. April meeting: Kevin Hall b. May meeting: Kevin Hall 3. Transportation Commissioner Report: Sidny Zink 10:35 IV. CDOT Report: 1. Intersection Prioritization Study: Mike McVaugh 2. Construction Project Update: Ed Archuleta 11:45 V. Other Business 1. Transit Provider Updates 2. Community Updates –Round Robin (pending available time) VI. Adjourn Next proposed meeting date: August 7, 2015 *vote requested SOUTHWEST REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMISSION Friday, April 3, 2015 9am to 12pm Durango Public Library, Durango TPR Members Kevin Hall, City of Durango Bentley Henderson, Archuleta County Lee San Miguel, Town of Ignacio Phillip Johnson, City of Cortez Lee San Miguel, Town of Ignacio Clifford Lucero, Archuleta County John Egan, Town of Pagosa Springs Chris La May, Town of Bayfield Greg Schulte, Town of Pagosa Springs Keenan Ertel, Montezuma County Matt Salka, Town of Bayfield Jim Davis, La Plata County Rodney Class Erickson, Southern Ute Indian Tribe Regina WhiteSkunk UMUT Others Present Miriam Gillow-Wiles, SWCCOG Sara Trujillo, SWCCOG Mike McVaugh, CDOT Ed Archuleta, CDOT Matt Muraro, CDOT Tony Cady, CDOT Kerrie Neet, CDOT Tim Web, CDOT materials engineer Nancy Shanks, CDOT Region 5 Communications Sidny Zink, Transportation Commissioner I. Introductions: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kevin Hall at 9:08 am.
    [Show full text]
  • Ports-To-Plains Corridor Feasibility Study (House Bill 1079) Frequently Asked Questions
    Ports-to-Plains Corridor Feasibility Study (House Bill 1079) Frequently Asked Questions 1) What is the Ports-to-Plains Corridor? Beginning with the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, corridors have been designated by Congress in Federal transportation legislation as high priority corridors on the National Highway System for inclusion in the NHS as specific routes or general corridors. The Ports-to-Plains Corridor is a proposed divided highway corridor stretching 963 miles from Laredo through West Texas to Denver, Colorado. The corridor was designated by Congress as a High Priority Corridor on the National Highway System in 1998. In Texas, the Ports-to-Plains Corridor is comprised of sections of Interstate 20, Interstate 27, Interstate 35, US 83, US 87, US 277, US 287, State Highway 158, and State Highway 349. 2) Why is this study being conducted? The 86th Texas Legislature passed House Bill 1079 relating to a study of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor, including an evaluation of the feasibility of certain improvements to Interstate Highway 27 (I-27), by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The governor signed the bill into law on June 10, 2019. The law requires TxDOT to submit a report on the results of the study to the governor, the lieutenant governor, the speaker of the House of Representatives, and the presiding office of each standing committee of the legislature with jurisdiction over transportation matters not later than January 1, 2021. 3) What is the difference between the “Initial Assessment on the Potential Extension of Interstate 27 within the Ports-to-Plains Corridor” that TxDOT completed in 2015 and this Corridor Feasibility Study? In early 2015, TxDOT conducted a high-level planning and public outreach effort for the Ports-to- Plains Corridor.
    [Show full text]