TARCOGTop of Alabama Regional Council of Governments TARCOGTop of Alabama Regional Council of Governments
Rural Planning Organizaton Long Range Transportation Needs Study
2014 - 2019
Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments
Rural Planning Organization (RPO)
Long Range Transportation Needs Study
2014 - 2019
September 2013
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | ii
Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments
Long Range Transportation Needs Study 2014 - 2019
Adopted: September 26, 2013
This document is posted on the Internet at www.tarcog.us
For information regarding this document, please contact
Ms. Falguni Patel, Transportation Planner Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments 5075 Research Drive NW, Huntsville, AL 35805 Ph: 256-716-2485 Email: [email protected]
This document has been financed in part by the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG) on behalf of the Rural Planning Organization, and the Alabama Department of Transportation, and produced by TARCOG pursuant to requirements set forth in amended Title 23, USC 134 and 135 (MAP-21 Sections 1201, 1202, July 2012). The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U. S. Department of Transportation.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | iii
Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments
Long Range Transportation Needs Study 2014 - 2018
Policy Committee: TBA, Chairman TBA, Vice Chairman
Technical Advisory Committee: Mr. Robert Pirando, Chairman Mr. Richard Sanders, Vice Chairman
Citizens Advisory Committee: TBA, Chairman TBA, Vice Chairman
Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments
Staff to the RPO
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | iv
Resolution
The Rural Planning Organization (RPO) adopting the Long Range Transportation Needs Study as prepared by the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG)
WHEREAS, the Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization (RPO) was established to serve as the decision-making body and to provide guidance in conducting the non-metropolitan consultation planning process for portions or all of DeKalb, Jackson, Limestone, and Marshall Counties in Alabama, as provided in amended 23 USC 134 and 135 (MAP-21 Sections 1201, 1202, July 2012); and
WHEREAS, the Rural Planning Organization (RPO) is interested in the continued development of the non-metropolitan transportation consultation process as described in 23 CFR 450.210(b) through on- going public involvement and data collection regarding the rural transportation needs and issues of the citizens in DeKalb, Jackson, Limestone, and Marshall Counties; and
WHEREAS, the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG), serving as staff to the Rural Planning Organization, has prepared a Long Range Transportation Needs Study outlining the projects and strategy to accomplish the goals of the consultation planning process and the Rural Planning Organization; and
WHEREAS, the Rural Planning Organization (RPO) Long Range Transportation Needs Study has been duly reviewed, discussed, and approved by the RPO.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this 26 th day of September 2013 that the Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization does hereby adopt and endorse the Long Range Transportation Needs Study as a guiding and supporting document for the consultation planning process.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | v
About TARCOG
Established by a local initiative in 1968, the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG) aims to identify and address common regional issues, opportunities, and challenges of Northeast Alabama’s municipalities and counties. TARCOG serves as Substate Planning District Twelve and the Area Agency on Aging. The governments of five northeast Alabama counties, DeKalb, Jackson, Limestone, Madison, and Marshall, and the municipalities located in these counties make up TARCOG. TARCOG helps local governments by obtaining funding for local government assistance, coordinating local governments’ responses to regional issues, and providing a wide range of services to the region’s governments and residents. This document was prepared and designed by the TARCOG Department of Planning and Economic Development.
Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments Department of Planning and Economic Development
Ms. Nancy D. Robertson ...... Executive Director Mr. D. C. Schafer ...... Director of Economic Development Ms. Beverly Zendt, AICP ...... Director of Planning Ms. Falguni Patel ...... Transportation Planner Mr. Scott Griess...... Associate Planner Ms. Jo Beth Gleason ...... Associate Planner
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | vi
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. The Planning Process for Rural Transportation Development ...... 1 Introduction Purpose The RPO Process Integration with the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Integration with the Statewide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2. A Vision for Rural Transportation ...... 5 Guiding Principles Transportation Goals
Chapter 3. The Transportation Situation of the District ...... 9 Location and Geography County Profiles Municipalities Population and Economy Transportation Network Environment
Chapter 4. An Analysis of Transportation Development Issues ...... 21 Network and Classification Volume & Capacity Road and Highway Safety Rural to Suburban/Urban Transition Complete Streets and Context Sensitive Design Economic Development and Intermodal Transportation Alternatives Transportation Finance
Chapter 5. Strategic Projects, Programs and Activities ...... 33 Transportation Assessment Transportation Infrastructure CEDS Transportation Projects City and Regional Planning Finance
Chapter 6. A Plan of Action for Rural Transportation Development ...... 41 TARCOG’s Mission Statement Program Activities Performance Monitoring and Update
Appendices ...... A-1
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | vii
Acknowledgements
The Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG) on behalf of Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization (RPO) acknowledges the efforts of many people who made contributions to this report and thanks them for their participation. In particular, TARCOG would like to thank Committee members of the RPO Policy Committee, RPO Technical Advisory Committee, and RPO Citizen Advisory Committee. TARCOG would also like to extend its appreciation to Mr. Jeff Pruitt, former Planning Director, for providing guidance during the process of this study. Additional thanks goes to all of those who responded to questionnaires and surveys that were sent to the stakeholders throughout the RPO region. And finally, TARCOG would like to thank the United States Department of Transportation and the Alabama Department of Transportation for their support.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | viii
Chapter 1 The Planning Process for Rural Transportation Development
Introduction Purpose The RPO Process Integration with the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Integration with the Statewide Transportation Plan
Introduction
This report is the Long Range Transportation Need Study for Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization (RPO) in Northeast Alabama. As a five year update, it was prepared in 2013 for use from 2013 to 2018. It was prepared and is maintained by the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG) for RPO service area consisting of DeKalb, Jackson, Limestone, and Marshall Counties and the 45 municipalities that lie within those counties.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 1
Purpose
The purpose of this Long Range Transportation Needs Study is to plan a coordinated approach to the Rural Transportation development of the region. This document summarizes the long range transportation needs of the region represented by the Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization. The Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization covers DeKalb County, Jackson County, portions of Limestone County, and Marshall County in northeast Alabama. In January and February of 2003, the regulations that govern how States conduct transportation planning activities were revised to include the development and use of a consultation process with non- metropolitan local officials. The revision affected the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 23, Part 450, Sections 450.104, 450.206, 450.212, 450.214, 450.216, and 450.224. These regulations were further defined in amended 23 USC 134 and 135 (MAP-21 Sections 1201, 1202, July 2012). In addition to developing a consultation process, States are required to provide for participation of these local officials in the statewide transportation planning process and in the development of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). In 2006, the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) agreed to fund statewide non- metropolitan consultation process organized similarly to a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). MPOs conduct transportation planning processes in metropolitan areas with 50,000 or more people. Among the organizations participating with ALDOT in this process is the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments which coordinates the activities of the Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization (RPO). This study is part of the formal consultation process. The RPO holds committee meetings to facilitate consultation between local officials and ALDOT. The committee meetings are the main consultation tool of the RPO. The committees consist of a Policy Committee, a Technical Advisory Committee and a Citizens Advisory Committee. The meetings and the work of the committees are documented as part of the planning process. The work of the committees includes developing several reports including this study. This study serves as a record of the consultation process between the local officials and the ALDOT as related to long range transportation needs. This study is strictly advisory. The purpose of this study is to document the long range transportation needs of Northeast Alabama as identified by the elected and appointed officials in the area. The study should help local governments address and prioritize their transportation needs. The study should also help ALDOT develop the Statewide Transportation Plan and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program and schedule the construction of transportation projects based on their budget. However, this study is strictly advisory. No funds have been set aside to undertake any of the strategies or projects included in this study.
The RPO Process
The process used in the preparation of this Long Range Transportation Needs Study is typical of a planning process used for most types of comprehensive or strategic planning. The process is aligned with the RPO guidelines provided by ALDOT. The RPO followed a three task process to identify the long range transportation needs in 2008. Those tasks were accomplished and were represented by a previous version of this report. It is the intent of the RPO to supplement and continue that effort in FY 2013 in order to develop a regionwide Long Range Transportation Needs Study for the non-metropolitan area of northeast Alabama. The tasks are summarized as follows and are represented by this report:
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 2
1. Identification of general problems and needs; 2. Preparation of a regionwide socioeconomic summary 3. Development of a regionwide vision along with supporting goals and objectives 4. Identification of strategies and projects to achieve regionwide goals 5. Prioritization of strategies and projects, 6. Review and Approval of the draft Long Range Transportation Needs Study, and 7. Adoption of the final Long Range Transportation Needs Study.
The RPO Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), Technical Advisory Committee (TCC), and Policy Committee were involved in each task. The committees had an opportunity to review the outputs of each task. Since all of the RPO committee meetings are open to public and news releases are distributed prior to the meetings, the general public also had an opportunity to be involved in each task. 1. Identification of General Problems and Needs: Problems and needs are general deficiencies within the transportation system. In order to determine general problems and needs, the RPO staff distributed questionnaires to the members of the committees and other interested persons and gathered information regarding transportation problems and needs in the area. The RPO staff summarized the identified problems and needs in this report. 2. Preparation of a Regionwide Socioeconomic Summary: At the beginning of FY 2012, the RPO staff began the preparation of a region wide socioeconomic summary. This socioeconomic summary is intended to provide a foundation for transportation planning and attempt to establish and explain the relationship between economic development and transportation planning. 3. Development of a Regionwide Vision along with Supporting Goals and Objectives: A vision is a broad view of what a group wants their community to be like in the future. Goals are more specific statements that help define the vision. If the goals are met, the vision statement will be realized. This document is prepared to carry on the RPO goals set forth in the original document from 2008 in combination with the goals of the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, and Green Infrastructure Strategy prepared by TARCOG for the region. 4. Identification of Strategies and Projects to Achieve Regionwide Goals: Strategies and projects are specific tasks that can be categorized under an identified objective. In the case of the RPO, it is expected that the specific projects will be road, bridge, and transit related since the plan is an advisory document to the ALDOT. The RPO staff will utilize ALDOT’s project management system in addition to strategies and projects generated by the RPO consultation process. 5. Prioritization of Strategies and Projects: The RPO will prioritize the projects in order to facilitate the implementation of the Plan. The prioritized list allows the ALDOT to focus on the most important projects as identified by the local governments in the region. Prioritization also allows the local governments to better focus their transportation development efforts. Each project will have a regional and/or local priority. The regional priority is how a project is ranked against every project in the Plan. The local priority is how the project ranked against every project from a particular county. Each project type (bridge, road, transit) had its own priority ranking. 6. Review and Approval of the draft Long Range Transportation Needs Study: The RPO will assemble the draft Plan during the Summer of 2013. The draft Plan will be reviewed by the RPO committees in anticipation of final adoption in September of 2013. 7. Adoption of the final Long Range Transportation Needs Study: The RPO committees performed a final review of this Long Range Transportation Needs study in September of 2013 with final adoption
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 3
at the Joint Policy Committee and Technical Advisory Committee meeting in September. This document will be submitted to ALDOT with copies provided to the county and municipal governments in the region.
Integration with Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
The Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), and economic development activities undertaken pursuant to the CEDS, are coordinated by TARCOG. In the preparation of this CEDS, a special advisory group was assembled to obtain additional insight into the District’s economic development situation and opportunities. This Advisory Group included persons from the various fields that affect economic development including Transportation. An examination of the summary of the foundation goals and objectives of the CEDS begins to reveal the synergies between the various foundation sectors and the opportunity for common strategies among them. Support of these foundation sectors is the central consideration for the CEDS. Detailed explanation of this is contained in the related CEDS Document. Two of the objectives are directly address rural transportation. Since both Transportation and Economic Development are closely related and depend upon each other to strive, these strategies are integrated in this document to maximize the impact on the region’s vibrancy.
Integration with Statewide Transportation Plan
Alabama has an ongoing program to undertake the preparation of a Statewide Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program. The purpose of this study is to document the long range transportation needs of Northeast Alabama as identified by the elected and appointed officials in the area. The study should help ALDOT develop the Statewide Transportation Plan and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program and schedule the construction of transportation projects based on their budget. However, this study is strictly advisory. No funds have been set aside to undertake any of the strategies or projects included in this study.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 4
Chapter 2 A Vision for Rural Transportation
Guiding Principles Transportation Goals
Guiding Principles
This vision for sustainable transportation network was prepared in consideration of a number of guiding principles. These guiding principles serve as an underpinning upon which goals and objectives are derived in consultation with community stakeholders and leadership. The following is a brief summary of the strategic transportation goals and the vision for the transportation planning process in Northeast Alabama. The Importance of Scale Planning for transportation network requires an understanding of the importance of scale on issues that impact the region and the projects, programs and activities that may be brought to improve the local network. Scale, in this discussion, refers to issues that may be considered regional, county wide, and local in scope.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 5
Regional. This refers to the RPO Region of Northeast Alabama. It is a unique, dynamic region with a distinct ecology, mobility, and connectivity that informs the regional network. It is contained within the shared watershed of the Tennessee River. Any development patterns that happen within this watershed affect the regional fabric and the quality-of-life infrastructure of the entire region. Understanding the history, ecology, and cultural patterns of this region is imperative to understanding the context of the transportation network connecting them. County. Within the region, the building blocks include four rural counties that are connected by Huntsville MPO area in the middle. The statistical areas are the metropolitan area of Huntsville and the micropolitan areas of Fort Payne, Scottsboro, and Albertville. Since some of the funding mechanisms are tied to county level, understanding them is essential in building the transportation network. Local. Cities, towns and places are centers. In addition, there are numerous undesignated corridors along major transportation routes. Along with natural infrastructure, these built centers and corridors provide the physical “place-based” structure of the communities of the entire area. For the most part, these centers and corridors are the places where people live, work and play, providing a hub for local economic, civic, and cultural activity.
Transportation Goals
Regional identity and place consciousness cultivate a commitment and connection to place that is undeniable. Places have a distinct flavor, culture, tradition, vernacular, and value system that is inherently unique to a specific geographically-bounded location . In order to build a sustainable transportation network, it is necessary to lay a strong foundation based on the assets or strengths that are already at hand. Rural, Northeast Alabama has a VISION to guide the transportation planning process. The following vision statement contains two main ideas and is the statement of intent for the RPO Study Area.
“The rural region of Northeast Alabama will have a well-planned, safe, and effective transportation system that helps to sustain and promote a fulfilling quality of life and a strong, competitive economy.”
In support of the above vision, there are three long range GOALS that are intended to guide future transportation planning efforts. Goal 1: Improve the quality of life in the region by providing for the growth of transportation facilities and services that enhance opportunities for future development while protecting the existing natural and social environments. Goal 2: Improve the economic vitality of the region by planning for an integrated and mixed transportation system that allows for the most effective movement of people and goods. Goal 3: Promote a well-planned, well-managed and well-maintained transportation system by programming for the most efficient and effective use of transportation resources.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 6
These three long range goals are supported by the five goals of the work program of the Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization (RPO). The goals of the RPO work program are: Goal 1: A well managed rural transportation planning process; Goal 2: An effective transportation committee structure; Goal 3: A comprehensive data library and distribution source; Goal 4: Reports that are useful to the ALDOT and the local governments; and Goal 5: A well informed public who actively participate in the rural transportation planning process.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 7
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 8
Chapter 3 The Transportation Situation of the District
Location and Geography County Profiles Municipalities Population and Economy Transportation Network Environment
Location and Geography
The study area of the Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization is situated in northeast Alabama in the southern foothills of the Appalachian Mountains and the southernmost area of the Tennessee River Valley. The study area consists of approximately 3,139.4 square miles covering four counties. These are DeKalb County, Jackson County, Marshall County and portions of Limestone County. Portions of Limestone County are included in the RPO study area, the Huntsville Area MPO study area and the Decatur Area MPO study area, respectively. This section provides a synopsis of the study area by integrating demographic profiles of the region from CEDS. The following paragraphs contain a more detailed description of the location and geography of each of the four counties.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 9
County Profiles
DeKalb County DeKalb County covers much of the Appalachian foothills section of northeast Alabama. To its north is Jackson County and to its east is Georgia. Its western border is shared with Marshall County. South of DeKalb is Cherokee and Etowah Counties. The County stretches from the northeast to the southwest and covers a total land area of 777.9 square miles. DeKalb resides on top of Sand Mountain and is split between a western region of elevated plateau and an eastern region of mountainous ridges and canyon features. Transportation networks are more uniform and consistent in the western region to Fort Payne and Interstate 59. East of these locations Lookout Mountain has fewer and less well-connected roadways. The county seat and principal population center is Fort Payne. No major bodies of water are found in DeKalb County, but the Little River Canyon area acts in a similar fashion to that of a major river in that it prevents east to west travel except in a few locations. Jackson County Jackson County forms the far northeast corner of Alabama. It is entirely bordered on the north by Tennessee, on the east by Georgia, on the west by Madison County, and on the south by Marshall and DeKalb Counties. Jackson County is the seventh largest county in Alabama by land area, and has a total land area of 1,078.7 square miles. This area is divided into three physical regions. In the northwest, the Cumberland Plateau creates hilly terrain where transportation routes chiefly follow small river and creek valleys. Central to the county, the Tennessee River and floodplain cut through Jackson County in a southwesterly direction. This relatively flat terrain is the path of Jackson County’s primary transportation route, U.S. Highway 72, as well as the location of its principal population centers. Only two bridges allow access across the river to Jackson County’s third physical region. The Sand Mountain area of the county is notably elevated from the river but is flat on top. A consistent network of county roads ties the small towns of this area together. Limestone County Limestone County is the westernmost county in the District. To its north is the Tennessee state line and it borders Lauderdale County to the west and Madison County to the east. Lawrence and Morgan Counties form the southern boundary, sharing the Tennessee River with Limestone County. Within its boundary Limestone County has 568.1 square miles of land that tends to gently rise to the north. The county is largely covered by fertile floodplain, and this gentle terrain results in a road system dominated by long, straight routes on a north-south and east-west orientation based on early township and range lines. Only the section northwest of the Elk River varies largely from this pattern. Limestone County is roughly cut into four quadrants by its two principal roadways. Interstate 65 halves the county as it runs from north to south and US Highway 72 bisects the county as it travels from west to east towards Madison County. Four feeder roads link the county seat, Athens, with outlying communities: US Highway 31 through Tanner, State Road 99 from the Lester area, Highway 127 from Elkmont, and Highway 251 from Ardmore. Marshall County Marshall County is the southernmost county in the District and is bordered by six other counties. The dominant feature within Marshall County is Lake Guntersville, the largest reservoir on the Tennessee River. Area measurements reinforce the importance of the lake as a physical feature; while Marshall County contains the smallest land area of any county in the TARCOG region, at 567.1 square miles, it holds the largest amount of water area at 56.1 square miles. Sloping terrains ring the central lake region,
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 10 but in the southeast corner of the county a steep rise onto Sand Mountain tapers off to relatively flat terrain on top. This portion of the county remains geographically distinct from the areas west of Lake Guntersville. Four municipalities contain much of the county population: Arab in the southwest; Guntersville, the county seat, is placed on a peninsula in the Lake; Albertville and Boaz both extend across Sand Mountain following US Highway 431. Primary roads within the county include US Highways 231 and 431, and State Roads 75 and 79. The area with the least consistent road network is found surrounding Grant in the northern corner of Marshall County.
Municipalities
The counties and places within the study area are shown on the accompanying map. The map indicates the Study Area of the Rural Planning Organization as well as the location of the Huntsville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Decatur Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. DeKalb County There are seventeen incorporated municipalities in DeKalb County. They are Collinsville, Crossville, Fort Payne, Fyffe, Geraldine, Hammondville, Henagar, Ider, Lakeview, Mentone, Pine Ridge, Powell, Rainsville, Sand Rock, Shiloh, Sylvania, and Valley Head. All but three of these municipalities are towns of less than 2,000 in population. Fort Payne is the largest city and is also the county seat. Jackson County There are thirteen municipalities in Jackson County, all but three of which are towns of less than 1,000 in population. Incorporated municipalities in Jackson County are Bridgeport, Dutton, Hollywood, Hytop, Langston, Paint Rock, Pisgah, Pleasant Groves, Scottsboro, Section, Skyline, Stevenson and Woodville. Limestone County There are eight municipalities in Limestone County. Incorporated municipalities in Limestone County are Ardmore, Athens, Elkmont, Lester and Mooresville. Three of these – Decatur, Huntsville and Madison - have their major portions in other counties. Of those located wholly in Limestone County, only Athens has a population of more than 2,000 persons. Marshall County There are seven municipalities in Marshall County, three of which are towns of less than 2,000 in population, three of which are about 7,000 in population and one which is over 17,000. Incorporated municipalities in Marshall County are Albertville, Arab, Boaz, Douglas, Grant, Guntersville and Union Grove. Population and Economy
Population Growth Population is a measure of the number of residents of a geographic location. Population trends indicate changes in demand and use of transportation facilities. Understanding the nature of population trends and dynamics is essential to planning for future growth. The population of the RPO region increased 12.71% from 2000 to 2010. The individual counties’ populations increased in this time, with the exception of Jackson County, which saw a reduction in population over the ten year period of -1.3%. Over the same time, the State experienced a population
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 11 growth of 7.5%, while the Southeast region of the United States grew by about 14.3% between 2000 and 2010. Limestone County’s population increased the most, experiencing an increase of 26% in 10 years.
Population Growth from 2000 to 2010 2000 2010 Change % DeKalb 64,452 71,109 10.30% Jackson 53,926 53,227 -1.30% Limestone 65,676 82,782 26.00% Marshall 82,231 93,019 13.10% RPO 266,285 300,137 12.71% Alabama 4,447,100 4,779,736 7.50% United States 281,421,906 308,745,538 9.70% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census
Median Age Not surprisingly, the populations within the region are experiencing an increasingly aging population like elsewhere in the country. As was noted in the above section, the population of Jackson County declined from 2000 to 2010. When this is combined with the significant increase in median age, it is clear that it is younger populations who have been leaving the County. From 1960 to 2010, the median age of the United States has increased steadily from 29.5 to 37.2.
Median Age from 2000 to 2010 2000 2010 Change DeKalb 36.3 37.5 +1.2 Jackson 37.6 41.4 +3.8 Limestone 35.8 38.4 +2.6 Marshall 36.9 38.2 +1.3 Alabama 35.8 37.9 +2.1 United States 35.3 37.2 +1.9 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census
Population Density Along with population growth is an increase in population density. Population density varies greatly within the region from over 164 persons per square mile in Limestone County to less than 50 in Jackson County. Locally, the difference is even greater. The population growth in Limestone County combined with the greatest increase in population density in the county is leading to concerns for better planning and infrastructure needs. Looking at the growth patterns in the County, it should be noted that majority of growth is within or adjacent to Huntsville MPO study area.
Population Density (persons per square mile) in 2000 and 2010 2000 2010 Change % DeKalb 82.9 91.5 10.4% Jackson 50.0 49.4 -1.2% Limestone 115.6 147.8 27.9% Marshall 145.0 164.4 13.4% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 12
Total Personal Income Total personal income is the measure of the total wealth available to purchase goods and services in a local economy. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), personal income is the total of all income that is received by all persons from all sources whether by wages and salaries, rental income, dividends and interest, and so on.
Total Personal Income in 2000 and 2010 2000 2010 Change % DeKalb 1,339,458 1,796,001 34.10% Jackson 1,171,914 1,571,108 34.10% Limestone 1,481,515 2,659,321 79.50% Marshall 1,787,005 2,820,072 57.80% RPO 5,779,892 8,846,502 53.06% Alabama 107,150,846 160,332,462 49.60% United States 8,554,866,000 12,353,577,000 44.40% Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. Dept of Commerce
Total personal income (in thousands of dollars) was measured within the RPO region for the individual counties in 2000 and 2010, and then totaled for the entire district. The greatest increase in total personal income between 2000 and 2010 was in Limestone County with a ten year percent change of 79.5%. Second was Marshall County with a 57.8% increase in total personal income and DeKalb and Jackson Counties both experienced the same increase of 34.1%. Total personal income for the entire RPO region increased by 53.06% from 2000 to 2010, while the State of Alabama’s total personal income increased by 49.6% over the ten year period.
Per Capita Personal Income Per Capita Personal Income is calculated as the personal income of the residents of a given area divided by the resident population of the area. It is broadly representative of the amount of wealth within the local economy standardized by the number of people in the study area. Per capita income has its weakness as a measure, particularly in that it does not account for income distribution. However, as a benchmarking tool for comparing study areas, it is a straight forward and easily-compared estimate of wealth that accounts for population.
Per Capita Income in 2000 and 2010 2000 2010 Change % DeKalb 20,719 25,252 21.90% Jackson 21,711 29,546 36.10% Limestone 22,459 31,948 42.30% Marshall 21,679 30,257 39.60% Alabama 24,067 33,504 39.20% United States 30,319 39,937 31.70% Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Dept of Commerce
Per capita income for Limestone County in 2000 was at $22,459 and by 2010 it had increased 42.3% to $31,948. This ranks it first in greatest per capita increase and per capita income total for both 2010 and
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 13
2000. Marshall County ranked third highest per capita income of the four counties in 2000. The total for 2000 was $21,679 and by 2010, it was $30,257, representing a 39.5% increase over this time. Jackson County ranked second among the counties in per capita income in 2000 at $21,711, and by 2010, it was $29,546, an increase of 36.1%. DeKalb County ranks last place in all three categories. In 2000, its per capita income was only at $20,719. In 2010, it was at $25,252, an increase of only 21.9%.
Employment by Industry Employment by industry is an indication of the type of industry sectors in which local economic activity is concentrated.
Summary of Employment in 2010 DeKalb Jackson Limestone Marshall Total Employment 33,480 23,526 39,147 43,513 Employment by Type Wage and Salary Employment 68.4% 72.5% 57.3% 83.7% Proprietors Employment 31.6% 27.5% 42.7% 16.3% Farm 20.2% 20.8% 7.1% 21.6% Non-farm 79.8% 79.2% 92.9% 78.4% Employment by Industry Farm 7.4% 6.2% 3.7% 3.9% Non-farm 92.6% 93.8% 96.3% 96.1% Private 87.6% 82.1% 81.2% 84.2% Government 12.4% 17.9% 18.8% 15.8%
According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, employment by industry from 2006 to 2010 exhibited both positive and negative changes throughout the region. As a whole, the region increased its total employment in 2010. However, employment numbers vary from county to county. DeKalb County’s total employment decreased by -8.04% from 36,408 in 2006 to 33,480 in 2010. In Jackson County, total employment went from 25,595 in 2006 to 23,526 in 2010, which is a decrease of -8.08%. Limestone County follows the same trend, with its total employment decreasing from 39,815 to 39,147, a decrease of -1.68%. Finally, Marshall County’s total employment decreased by -7.38%, from 46,980 in 2006 to 43,513 in 2010. Farm employment increased in DeKalb, Jackson, Limestone, and Marshall County. Manufacturing employment saw decreases in all four counties, with the most significant being in Limestone County, a - 8.9% decrease. In conclusion, although total employment increased in the region as a whole, employment in each of the counties decreased. Farm employment increased, while nonfarm employment decreased. Manufacturing employment decreased in the region, and local government saw both positive and negative changes in the counties.
Unemployment Unemployment rates have been generally falling since the worst part of the recent recession. However, they appear to have moved back up somewhat over the Summer of 2012. The following chart indicates unemployment rates, not seasonally adjusted, for the counties within the region as compared to Alabama and the United States in May of 2011 and 2012 with preliminary rates as of July 2012. DeKalb County has suffered the greatest unemployment in the area with the faster growing areas of Limestone and County consistently having the lowest.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 14
Unemployment in May 2011, May 2012 and July 2012 May 2011 May 2012 July 2012* DeKalb 11.5 8.6 10.0 Jackson 8.7 7.4 8.6 Limestone 7.5 6.4 7.6 Madison 7.5 6.5 7.7 Marshall 8.9 7.2 8.5 Alabama 8.9 7.5 9.0 United States 8.7 7.9 8.6 * Preliminary. All rates are not seasonally adjusted. Source: Alabama Department of Industrial Relations
Transportation Network
Highways Numerous highways run through the region. The major Interstate highways in the District are: Interstate 59 that runs northeast and southwest through the eastern portion of the region in DeKalb County and connects the area to Birmingham to the southwest and to Chattanooga to the northeast; Interstate 65 that runs north and south through the western portion of the District in Limestone County and connects the area to Nashville to the north and to Decatur and Birmingham to the south; and Interstate 565 that connects Interstate 65 to Huntsville. Other major highways include: US Highway 11 that parallels I-59; US Highway 31 that parallels I-65; US Highway 72 and Alt US Highway 72 that run east and west through the District and connect the area to Florence and Memphis to the west and to Chattanooga to the east; and US Highway 231 and US Highway 431 that run north and south through the District connecting the area to Fayetteville and Nashville to the north and to Birmingham and Gadsden to the south.
Approximate Highway Mileage in the Region County County State Interstate Total DeKalb County 1,598.0 212.6 42.5 1,853.1 Jackson County 1,063.0 253.1 0.0 1,316.1 Limestone County 1,095.0 103.3 36.6 1,234.9 Marshall County 1,218.0 152.6 0.0 1,370.6 Total 4,974.0 721.6 79.1 5,774.7
Railroads The primary railroads in the region include 1) the Norfolk Southern RR that runs through the Big Wills Valley area of DeKalb County, paralleling I-59, from Birmingham to Chattanooga; 2) the Norfolk Southern RR that runs from Huntsville to Scottsboro and on up to Stevenson; 3) the CSX Transportation RR that runs from Stevenson to Chattanooga; 4) the CSX Transportation RR that runs north and south from Decatur through Athens to Ardmore; 5) the Norfolk Southern RR that runs from Decatur to Huntsville; and 6) the CSX Transportation RR that runs from Guntersville to Attalla.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 15
The region also has four short line railroads. These include, in Madison County, the Huntsville & Madison County Railroad Authority, the Huntsville – Madison County Airport Authority railroad, and the Mercury and Chase Railroad (this are in MPO area, but have regional impact); and in Jackson County, the Sequatchie Valley Railroad. Airports There are several general aviation airports that are located throughout the District. But the only commercial airport serving the region is located in Huntsville MPO area. The commercial airport is Huntsville International Airport. It is located in Madison County in the I-565 Corridor midway between the I-65 junction and downtown Huntsville. The facility covers 5,800 acres and has two parallel runways. The runways are 12,600 and 10,000 feet in length. The Airport offers commercial passenger service by major carriers. The Airport is part of the Port of Huntsville which consists of, in addition to the Airport, the International Intermodal Center and the Jetplex Industrial Park. The intermodal facility is an inland port that offers one central location for air, rail and highway transportation of domestic and international air cargo. The Port is home to Public Use Foreign Trade Zone 83, U.S. Customs, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. There is one airport in DeKalb County. Isbell Field Airport at Fort Payne is located about two miles north of Fort Payne in the central area of the county near Interstate 59. It is a general aviation airport used regularly for corporate and business use, recreational flying and as a gateway for resort tourists. It is also used occasionally for agricultural spraying, aerial photography and law enforcement, and has a 5,013 foot paved runway. There are two airports in Jackson County. Scottsboro Municipal/Word Field is located about two miles from Scottsboro in the central area of the county near US 72. It is a general aviation airport used regularly for recreational flying and tourism and occasionally for aerial applications of agricultural chemicals, aerial inspections by utility companies and law enforcement. It has one 5,250 foot paved runway. The Stevenson Airport is located about two miles northeast of Stevenson, also near US 72. It is a general aviation airport used primarily for recreational flying and has one 4,106 foot paved runway. There is one airport in Limestone County which is Pryor Field. Pryor Field is located three miles northeast of Decatur in the southeastern area of the county. It is a general aviation airport used for corporate use, flight instruction and recreational flying, and has a 6,001 foot paved runway. There are two airports in Marshall County at Guntersville and Albertville. Guntersville Municipal Airport is located just north of Guntersville along US Highway 431. It is a general aviation airport used regularly for recreational flying and career training and occasionally for corporate activity, receiving resort visitors, law enforcement, prisoner transport, emergency medical evacuation, medical shipments, real estate tours, and traffic and news reporting. It has one 3,360 foot paved runway. The Albertville Municipal Airport is located southwest of Albertville along Alabama Highway 75. It is a general aviation airport used primarily for flight instruction, corporate use and recreational flying. It is occasionally used for aerial inspections, search and rescue, and law enforcement, and has a 6,117 foot paved runway. Waterways According to the Army Corps of Engineers website, the US is linked by a network of inland waterways consisting of over 25,000 miles of navigable rivers and harbors. This network includes water passages along the Atlantic and Gulf Coast. It is utilized by both commercial and private vessels, linking ports in twenty states, extending from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. The Tennessee-Cumberland Rivers system is a major part of our nationwide network of waterways. The Tennessee River is joined with the Cumberland by the Ohio River and the Barkley Canal. They are operated as a unit, linking communities
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 16
and industry in the Tennessee River valley with our nationwide system of waterways and ports, providing a year-round water route of nearly 1200 miles. The Tennessee River is navigable from the Ohio River, near Paducah, Kentucky, to Celina, Tennessee, a distance of 381 miles. A series of fourteen locks and dams on the twin rivers system help move traffic up and down the rivers in stair steps. The Tennessee River falls 500 feet on its way to the Ohio River. Over fifty million tons of commodities are shipped annually via the Tennessee River, and approximately 180 ports and terminals on the Tennessee support industries that provide thousands of beneficial jobs for valley residents. Most of the goods shipped on the Tennessee River are giant bulk material, such as raw materials, fuels, and aerospace and defense production materials. Commodities such as coal make up 50% of all cargo shipped by barge on the Tennessee-Cumberland Rivers system. Crude materials, such as building products, iron and steel, are the next most frequently shipped items by barge. Petroleum, chemicals and farm products are also transported via the Tennessee River. Barge transportation requires less energy than any other type of transportation. According to the Army Corps of Engineers, one gallon of fuel will move one ton of freight fifty miles by barge, making it an ideal method of transportation and distribution of low cost shipping of raw materials, fuels, and other bulk items that support our Defense and Aerospace cluster.
Environment
Land Cover Information on land use and land coverage is available from the 2007 Alabama Watershed Assessment of the Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Committee. In the Assessment, the land within the region is grouped into nine different categories. These categories are principle row crops, other crops, pasture, hay land, forest, urban, water, mined land, and other.
District Land Cover in 2007 RPO DeKalb Jackson Limestone Marshall Principle crops 10.9 % 4.2% 6.6% 30.4% 2.4% Other crops 1. 1% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 3.1% Pasture 12.5 % 6.9% 11.2% 28.1% 3.8% Hay land 4. 3% 0.8% 1.8% 10.7% 4.0% Forest 43.9 % 47.3% 64.2% 19.5% 44.8% Urban 5.6 % 3.0% 5.3% 7.5% 6.7% Water 6.8 % 0.5% 6.0% 3.9% 16.8% Mined Land 0.3% 0.4% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% Other 14.6 % 37.0% 2.9% 0.0% 18.5%
The land within the four county region differs very much in type and use. The highest percentage of land in the region is forest. While Jackson County has the highest percentage of the forest in the region, the land cover indicates the importance of agriculture to Limestone County is the highest in the region. Water Quality The Tennessee River, its watershed, tributaries, and abundant wetlands, is by far the most cherished resource in the region. It is the source of our region’s food supply, water supply, power supply, transportation routes, recreation, relaxation, history, culture and livelihood. In fact, recreational boating on the Tennessee River contributes over $25 million to the valley economy each year, and overall water- based recreation generates in excess of $2 Billion in annual revenues throughout the Tennessee Valley Region.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 17
The importance of collaboration and planning to the overall quality of life within the Tennessee Valley watershed should never go understated. Watershed awareness is crucial to the planning process. Any development that happens within the Tennessee River watershed impacts every resident that lives within the basin who utilizes the river’s vast resources. Understanding watershed management and watershed integrity is crucial to the planning and economic development process. Any activity that happens upstream will affect residents living downstream, and vice versa. The watershed does not respect geopolitical boundaries. It is important to involve, engage, and educate every interest living within the watershed the important role they share toward the integrity of their watershed and the quality of their drinking water and food supply. The Tennessee River also has traditionally provided jobs and supported the livelihoods of those living within its basin. It is a shared resource. It gives us a regional identity and a sense of place. According to a joint study by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), the Tennessee River is the most intensively used river system in the country. Approximately 97 percent of the water currently withdrawn from the river is returned to the system for use downstream, making the region one of the lowest overall water consumers in the United States. Economies throughout the Tennessee Valley Region depend on the river system for low-cost power generation, municipal & industrial water supply, efficient waterborne transportation, recreation, tourism, environmental preservation, and jobs. Over fifty million tons of commodities are shipped annually down the Tennessee River. Approximately one hundred-eighty ports and terminals on the Tennessee support industries that provide thousands of beneficial jobs for valley residents. Unfortunately, this robust economic and industrial activity, the maintenance of the lock and dam system for hydroelectric power, and other riparian impacts, has adversely affected the water quality of the Tennessee. It is vital to the long-term sustainable development of the region that we work closely with environmental resource management experts to protect and maintain this valuable resource now and for future generations. The streams listed on the following table are those within the District which have been listed by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management for a variety of contaminants under Section 303(d) for 2010. Several of these streams have management plans in place that are under implementation. Contamination can affect the desirability of a stream for any number of activities, particularly recreational activities such as swimming and fishing.
Streams Listed Under Section 303(d) for 2010 Stream County Uses Causes Riley Maze Creek Marshall Fish & wildlife Toxicity, siltation Tibb Creek Marshall Fish & wildlife Toxicity, siltation Warren Smith Creek Jackson Fish & wildlife Siltation Guess Creek Jackson Fish & wildlife Unknown toxicity, organic enrichment, pathogens Hughes Creek Marshall Fish & wildlife Siltation Mill Pond Creek Marshall Fish & wildlife Siltation Swan Creek Limestone Fish & wildlife Nutrients Elk River Limestone Swimming, fish & wildlife Nutrients, pH Sulphur Creek Limestone Fish & wildlife Nutrients
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 18
Threatened and Endangered Species There are at least eighteen threatened or endangered species within the region. While the fact that these species are threatened or endangered is cause for concern, it also illustrates the biodiversity of the region which can be turned to opportunities for study and research. These species and their location within the four counties are shown in the following table.
Species Status DeKalb Jackson Limestone Marshall Gray Bat Endangered x x x x Indiana Bat Endangered x Bald Eagle Threatened x x x Wood Stork Endangered x Red Cockaded Woodpecker Endangered x Flattened Musk Turtle Threatened x Slackwater Darter Threatened x Boulder Darter Endangered x Palezone Shiner Endangered x Snail Darter Threatened x Mussells* Varies x x x x Anthony's Riversnail Endangered x x Price's Potato-bean Threatened x Morefield's Leather Flower Endangered American Hart's Tongue Fern Threatened x Harperella Endangered x Kral's Water Plantain Threatened x Green Pitcher Plant Endangered x x
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 19
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 20
Chapter 4 An Analysis of Transportation Development Issues
Network and Classification Volume and Capacity Road and Highway Safety Rural to Suburban/Urban Transition Context Sensitive Design Economic Development and Intermodal Transportation Alternatives Transportation Finance
This Chapter is an analysis of Transportation Planning Principles within the region starting with a brief review of transportation Network and Classification issues. The principles and grants mentioned here are not intended to be exhaustive but to capture some sense of the direction of transportation development issues in the area.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 21
Network and Classification
The RPO region contains a number of individual streets and street types, each serving a different purpose within the transportation network. A Functional Classification system is used to group and describe roads according to the type of service they provide and their role in the network.
The functional classification for a given roadway is determined based on its setting (urban or rural) and whether its main role is providing connectivity, mobility, or accessibility. The number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), average annual daily traffic (ADT), and adjoining land uses of a roadway are also considered. Traditionally, the roadway functional classification system has been used to describe how travel flows through the regional roadway network and to determine project eligibility for inclusion in different transportation planning projects and grants. The arterial streets form the backbone of the network. Local roads feed the collectors, which in turn feed the arterials.
Traditional planning and design standards classify the functionality of highway and street networks based on two major factors: 1. Access to adjacent properties and land uses; and 2. Mobility for vehicles needing to travel through the area without stopping.
The relationship between access and mobility is shown in the figure on the right, borrowed from the FHWA. The figure also shows the street order hierarchy. As access moves toward mobility, traffic is channelized from lower (local) street to higher order (arterial) streets.
The primary function of local or neighborhood streets is to provide access. These streets are intended to serve localized areas or neighborhoods, including local commercial and mixed-use land uses. Local streets are not intended for use by through traffic. The primary function of arterials is mobility. The arterial is designed with the intent to carry more traffic than is generated within its corridor. Arterials serve a range of travel distances and traffic volumes.
In the Alabama Statewide Transportation Plan, functional Classification categories are defined as: Interstates and Freeways/Expressways – provide the greatest mobility because access is generally limited to defined interchanges and high-speed movement is permitted. Arterial Streets – carry large volumes of traffic at moderate speeds, providing the essential regional network and connecting activity centers. In addition to rural or urban designation, arterials are further divided into principal arterials and minor arterials. Collector Streets – connect activity centers and residential areas by collecting traffic from streets in residential and commercial areas and distributing it to the arterial system at low to moderate speeds. Generally, interstates and selected federal highways cover the rural principal arterial network. The remaining federal and state facilities create the rural minor arterial network. Within urban areas, generally federal and state highways define a major portion of the urban principal and minor arterial network. A significant number of county and municipal roads are also classified as urban arterials.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 22
Context Sensitive Design In the traditional approach, arterials are often characterized as facilities designed to transport people and goods and provide mobility. While freeways and expressways within the principal arterial system are intended to move people and goods quickly and efficiently, the other principal arterials and minor arterials in the transportation network are not intended for this purpose. Minor arterials which are designed or function more like freeways present a major problem for the region. Limiting access points (intersections and driveways) on arterials enhances mobility for cars while limiting access to pedestrians and bicyclists. Balancing the need to provide access and mobility along many of the arterial streets is one of the greatest challenges faced by transportation planners in their efforts to create vibrant streets. All streets do not serve the same function; each street serves a unique purpose. While grouping streets into functional classifications assists with establishing policy and planning, designing, and construction improvements, adjacent land use and other natural elements of the transportation facility should also be considered during the design process. Recently, the Federal Highway Administration published “Flexibility in Highway Design” to highlight flexibility in the AASHTO “Green Book,” which is the design manual for federally-funded roadway projects. It recognizes the importance of Context Sensitive Design. The fundamental idea that transportation projects should be designed and implemented with respect for their natural and urban surroundings is basic to context-sensitive design. Context must be addressed at a larger scale that highlights the importance of whole places (e.g., neighborhoods, downtowns, and business districts) rather than individual roadway segments or points along a roadway. ALDOT has also recognized the need to incorporate some of these principles in to road design in the state. Network and Connectivity Roadways have many purposes, including providing local and regional mobility, offering access to homes and businesses, and supporting economic growth. A well-connected road network provides many alternative routes between destinations. By increasing the options for motorists to travel from one point to another, a well-connected regional network permits greater flexibility in designing individual roadways. Improving roadway connectivity can serve regional mobility equally well as widening major roadways. A well-connected network always serves the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists better than simply widening arterial roadways. Development of a network that effectively ties together all roadway classes – arterial, collector and local - is a key. The capacity of a roadway can be managed by better integrating land use and transportation planning. Connectivity in a road network refers to the density of connections and the directness of links between them. Higher connectivity results in improved travel choices and emergency access. It can be measured by Connectivity Index as shown in Figure on the right, borrowed from the APA Planning and Urban Design Standards. Connectivity Index is a ration of the number of links to the number of nodes in a street network. Nodes are street intersections and ends, and links are stretches of road that connect nodes. All roadway networks should be evaluated using the measures on internal connectivity, external connectivity, and route directness. Generally, communities can create connectivity codes to implement some of these principles in the local transportation network. These regulations generally require greater connectivity in future developments: • by setting a maximum block length;
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 23
• requiring developers to meet the connectivity ratios; and, • by requiring pedestrian/bicycle connections, even in developments with cul-de-sacs. A growing number of municipalities in the country are adopting connectivity codes as part of subdivision and land development ordinances, requiring well-connected networks in new developments. This could be an effective tool for communities in the RPO region to achieve better connectivity in the transportation network.
Volume and Capacity
Traffic volume data helps to determine the number, movements, and classifications of roadway vehicles at a given location. These data can help identify critical flow time periods, determine the influence of large vehicles or pedestrians on vehicular traffic flow, or document traffic volume trends. It is important in planning future updates to current roadways as well as designing new roads. The measurement of traffic volumes is one of the most basic functions of highway planning and management. Traffic volume counts provide the most commonly employed measure of roadway usage and are needed for the majority of traffic engineering analyses. They are also used in highway capacity and performance measures using following methods: • Volume-to-Capacity (V/C) ratio is a measure of the amount of traffic on a given roadway in relation to the amount of traffic the roadway was designed to handle. • Level of Service (LOS) is an estimate of congestion and performance of the transportation system with letter designations A (best) through F (worst). Measures relying on volume-to-capacity ratios traditionally have been used because: (a) data on traffic volumes are usually relatively easy to obtain and often already exist, (b) travel demand models are designed to estimate future volumes on the transportation network, and (c) estimates of capacity can be derived using documents such as the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). As mentioned in the Alabama Statewide Transportation Plan, ALDOT uses the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio as a performance measure. Since roads in urban and rural areas have different operational characteristics and users have different expectations for these roadways, separate performance measures are used for these two systems. In rural areas, a v/c ratio of 0.75 or greater is considered deficient, while a ratio of 0.90 or greater in urban areas is used to define deficiencies. Rural Traffic Shed Analysis For a corridor, Volume to capacity ratio, speed, and crash rate can be combined and indexed into a corridor score, which is used to rank roadways in terms of congestion priority. These methods work the best for urban area, but they might not be as effective in rural settings. In recent years, Rural Traffic Shed Analysis has been done in other part of the country to effectively manage roadway capacity. This technique allows local government to allocate development permit based on the capacity of the roadway system. It divides a rural area into "traffic sheds" based on land served by various collectors and arterials. Trip generation rates associated with various land uses are applied to estimate traffic volumes and compare future volumes to roadway capacity with a given amount of development. It is the most applicable where there is a general flow of traffic towards an urban center.
Road and Highway Safety
According to FHWA, although the Interstate and state highway networks accommodate the greatest traffic volumes and highest posted speeds, approximately 40 percent of all fatal crashes on the highway
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 24
network occur on local roads. Local roads are owned and maintained by local jurisdictions such as city, town, or county, and can be rural or urban. With continued urban sprawl and new mobility demands placed on many rural and suburban areas, safety challenges have grown on local roadways. States are challenged to integrate road safety measures at the local level. To significantly reduce the number of roadway related crashes on the road network, safety improvements at the local road level have to be addressed along with those efforts at the state level. The Top of Alabama RPO provides consultation between state and local communities to improve safety in the largely rural RPO region. Safety of a roadway can be improved by promoting programs and technologies to reduce the number of fatalities and injuries by different locations and types, such as: Intersection, local & rural road, pedestrian & bicycle, roadway departure, etc. Different programs that promote or improve roadway safety are described in the following sections.
Rural to Suburban/Urban Transition
As the northeastern region of Alabama increases its rural to suburban to urban growth pattern, the transition between these paradigmatic development forms must be addressed. When rural counties and communities consider the transition between rural road networks and suburban or urban road networks there are two concepts that need to be considered. The first is how the transportation network of an area changes over time when a rural area becomes more suburban in character, and a suburban area becomes even more urban. How that transition is planned for and then implemented can make the difference between a smooth and affordable, or a painful and expensive change. These considerations are typically within the purview of the comprehensive planning process that communities should participate in. If a community does not have a professional planner as a part of its staff, regional councils of governments normally employ planners to assist the communities in their region in the process of developing such plans. TARCOG’s Planning and Economic Development department can assist communities with this process. The second is the manner in which transportation zones connecting rural to more urbanized environments can be used to control the speed at which motorists enter urbanized areas, typically bringing them from high speed limits in outlying rural areas down to the slower posted speed limits within inner-suburban or urban areas. Traffic speeds in these corridors are typically high, even in locations with reduced posted speed limits. Therefore, there is a need to find ways to reduce operating speeds as drivers enter these developed areas. Visual cues that help drivers realize the need to reduce their driving speed may be few in these areas, and drivers may be well into the reduced speed limit zones before this becomes apparent, and this can cause several undesirable consequences for both drivers entering these areas and vehicle operators, bicyclists, and pedestrians already in these slower speed environments. Traffic calming features for local roadway systems have more recently been used by engineers to assist in reducing traffic speeds and volumes. However, to ensure acceptable values of traffic performance measures, expressed in delay time and queue length, additional or similar features need to be developed for those highways and major arterial throughways that carry significant volumes of traffic. Traffic calming methods for areas within an urbanized area typically use some kind of horizontal deflection such as chicanes, pinch points, physically raised “traffic islands” or hatched areas, gateways, reduced road width, change of road surface &/or color, over run areas, traffic circles (roundabouts), offset intersections, and others. For transition locations, research has determined that traffic calming and speed reducing strategies using either physical or perceptual road narrowing represented better
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 25
choices. In addition to these road narrowing techniques, the most effective speed reducing scenarios for transition zones included median treatments – especially medians in a series – or that treatment combined with gateways. Complete Streets and Context Sensitive Design Complete Streets are streets for everyone. They are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. People of all ages and abilities are able to safely move along and across streets in a community, regardless of how they are traveling. Complete Streets make it easy to cross the street, walk to shops, and bicycle to work. They allow buses to run on time and make it safe for people to walk to and from train stations. Current trends show that 55% of Americans would rather drive less and walk more. In more urbanized areas, transit is growing faster than population or driving. And about a third of Americans simply don’t drive. Approximately 500 communities throughout the U.S. have adopted Complete Streets policies, and the FHWA and USDOT have incorporated Complete Streets policy, they encourage States, and local governments to adopt similar policies, and to go beyond minimum design standards and requirements. While there is no magic formula for what a Complete Street looks like, there are a number of good policies and principles that comprise the elements of Complete Streets: • Guiding Principle: To design, operate and maintain streets to promote safe and convenient access for “all users” – including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit vehicles & users, as well as motorists – of all ages & abilities o Aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network. o Recognizes the need for flexibility: that all streets are different and user needs will be balanced. o Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all roads. o Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and operations, for the entire right of way. o Makes any exceptions specific and sets a clear procedure that requires high-level approval of exceptions. o Directs the use of the latest and best design standards. o Directs that complete streets solutions fit in with context of the community. o Establishes performance standards with measurable outcomes. Examples of Complete Streets features include: • Adequate or generous pedestrian sidewalks • Well designed and constructed crosswalks with correct demarcation and traffic signaling • ADA compliant features such as curb ramps and textured pavements • Center turn lanes &/or medians • Dedicated bicycle lanes, or provision for road sharing • Transit stops where transit systems are available. • Landscape plantings and street trees to provide shade to pedestrians, and visual cues that contribute to traffic calming • Adequate travel lanes for automobiles and transport vehicles • Parking accommodations for automobiles
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 26
Context sensitive design , also known as Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS), is an aspect of Complete Streets, and it is a collaborative, interdisciplinary, holistic approach to the development of transportation projects. It is both process and product, characterized by a number of attributes. It involves all stakeholders, including community members, elected officials, interest groups, and affected local, state, and federal agencies. It puts project needs and both agency and community values on a level playing field and considers all trade–offs in decision making. Often associated with design in transportation projects, Context Sensitive Solutions should be a part of all phases of program delivery including long range planning, programming, environmental studies, design, construction, operations, and maintenance. Context sensitive (design) solutions lead to outcomes that: • Are in harmony with the community and preserve the environmental, scenic, aesthetic, historic, and natural resource values of the area. • Are safe for all users. • Solve problems that are agreed upon by a full range of stakeholders • Meet or exceed the expectations of both designers and stakeholders, thereby adding lasting value to the community, the environment, and the transportation system. • Demonstrate effective and efficient use of resources (people, time, budget,) among all parties.
Each community and county within the Region 12 area should develop complete streets policies All future road or street projects within communities in the region, and those areas between communities where feasible should incorporate context sensitive complete streets principles and practices from the planning phases through construction. TARCOG’s Planning & Economic Development department can/should work with communities and counties within this region to develop these policies as a part of their overall comprehensive plan and associated guiding documents.
Economic Development and Intermodal
With a view to the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), several guiding principles are enumerated which work in conjunction with issues pertaining to transportation. They serve as an underpinning upon which goals and objectives are derived.
The five northeastern counties of Alabama represented by Region 12 of Alabama – including DeKalb, Jackson, Limestone, Madison, and Marshall – have an intricate network of roads, and state, US, and Interstate highways which are heavily used to move people and goods throughout, linking farms and homes to cities, towns, and places throughout the region and beyond. These “ways” are added to by a variety of other transportation options including Rail-ways, Water-ways, and Air-ways which combine to form a multi- modal and inter-modal transportation system. The challenge for this region is to capture and use the efficiencies that such a multi/inter-modal system can provide.
Furthermore, the CEDS identifies two objectives that must be considered and integrated in the nexus of economic development, transportation, and keeping the region an attractive area to live, work and play. Commerce & Place Making , Objective 2.1 : Plan Transportation Corridors. Explore the use of corridor-based alternatives analysis and traffic shed analysis that fully considers land use and commercial impacts in transportation planning.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 27
Manufacturing, Distribution & Logistics , Objective 4.1 : Facilitate Intermodal Transportation. Leverage resources to put in place the proper infrastructure throughout the District to facilitate the transportation of goods and services locally, regionally and globally, particularly intermodal transportation networks that support manufacturing and distribution. Also provide for expanded utility infrastructure and broadband communication capabilities. Intermodal facilities The International Intermodal Center, which sits adjacent to Huntsville International Airport, connects international flights carrying freight containers to either rail or truck services. The Mason Dixon Intermodal trucking company also exists nearby in Madison, Alabama. A number of industrial parks throughout the region have rail spurs that serve the industries within them, and truck carriers are ubiquitously available throughout the region. Transportation Alternatives
Current trends and statistics indicate that a significant number of Americans would rather drive less and walk or use other alternative means of transportation more. There are a variety of alternatives to the ubiquitous automobile. In addition to the health advantages of self-powered conveyance, for trips up to one mile it is often more efficient and more preferable to walk to destinations, and for trips of up to five miles, it is often more efficient and preferable to use bicycles. In locations where an efficient and affordable public transit system is available, this represents a community-wide alternative to driving. The Transportation Enhancement activities, enumerated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), through its Transportation Enhancement Activities program (TE, MAP-21) through 2014, Will be replaced by the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). The Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) is a reimbursable, federal aid funding program for transportation related, community projects designed to strengthen the intermodal transportation system. It provides funding for projects that enhance the cultural, aesthetic, historic, and environmental aspects of the intermodal transportation system. The program can assist in funding projects that create bicycle and pedestrian facilities, restore historic transportation buildings, convert abandoned railway corridors to pedestrian trails, mitigate highway runoff, and other transportation related enhancements. o Alabama’s Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP): TAP funds are federal funds, all federal regulations apply. Community Transportation Enhancement Programs (CTEPs) are programs that fund transportation related projects designed to strengthen the cultural, aesthetic, and environmental aspects of community and regional intermodal transportation systems. The CTEPs allow for the implementation of a variety of non-traditional projects. Bicycles and Pedestrians Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles. 54% of older Americans living in inhospitable neighborhoods say they would walk and bike more often if the built environment improved. Between 2001 and 2009, 16 to 34-year-olds took 24% more bike trips. In many communities throughout the nation, bicycle use is the main mode of transportation for people 16 years of age and younger. • New or reconstructed sidewalks, walkways, or curb ramps; • wide paved shoulders for nonmotorized use, bike lane striping, bike parking, and bus racks; • construction or major rehabilitation of off-road shared use paths (nonmotorized transportation trails);
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 28
• trailside and trailhead facilities for shared use paths; • bridges and underpasses for pedestrians and bicyclists and for trails. • Inner-community & inter-community bicycle and pedestrian corridors should be established • Combine several means: “Bike Route” designations, bike lanes, greenways, rails-to-trails, etc. • Make Bike/Pedestrian transportation an integral part of “ways” within and throughout communities & the region to move from one destination to another at the discretion of the individual, rather than just recreational paths or tracks within a community park. • Provide locations to safely park and lock bicycles, and other 2-wheeled vehicles, at numerous destination places • Provide ADA compliant access: crosswalks, curb ramps, building access provisions • Provide safe and accessible sidewalks and ensure their continued maintenance and repair. Non-Driver Safety Approximately 1/3 of Americans do not drive. This includes more than 21% of Americans over 65, Children under 16, and low income Americans who cannot afford to drive. According to 2006 US DOT/NHTSA Fatality Reporting system, pedestrians make up 11%, and bicyclists make up 2% of road deaths. More than 40% of pedestrian deaths in 2007-08 occurred where no crosswalks were available. And where no sidewalks are available, pedestrians are often forced to walk in the roadway. Handicapped individuals often find obstacles to their mobility in the form of non-existent, inadequate, or obstructed sidewalks, insurmountable curbing, and lack of transit options. • Provide safe and accessible transit stops where transit systems exist; • Provide transit opportunities for the disabled or elderly; • Provide adequate sidewalks and well designed crosswalks; • Provide educational activities to encourage safe walking and bicycling; • Conduct bicycle and pedestrian safety campaigns throughout the region o Aimed at bicyclists, pedestrians AND MOTORISTS o Similar to the “Share the Road” & “Look Twice for Motorcycles” campaign Railroad Corridor Conversion Often referred to as “Rails-to-Trails” paths, these pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian ways provide alternative routes to roads that may be unsuitable for alternative transportation modes. They often link neighborhoods and also provide inter-community connections between towns and cities. They usually exist on existing rights of way or easements, and have a well-developed base to lay a smooth traveling surface upon. • Inventory abandoned rail lines throughout region, Old forest service roads, old county roads, old foot/horse/wagon paths • Determine which would make good rail-to-trail conversions &/or trail improvement/upgrade projects. • Acquiring railroad rights-of-way; planning, designing, and constructing multiuse trails; developing rail-with-trail projects. • Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including the conversion and use of the corridors for pedestrian or bicycle trails).
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 29
Scenic Byways The Transportation Enhancement activities, enumerated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), include Scenic or Historic highway programs. Other examples of eligible activities related to this kind of initiative include construction of turnouts, overlooks, and viewing areas; construction of tourist or visitor and welcome center facilities; designation signs and markers. • “A National Scenic Byway is a road recognized by the United States Department of Transportation for one of the six "intrinsic qualities": archeological, cultural, historic, natural, recreational, and/or scenic.” • While Alabama has two designated National Scenic Byways, one being designated as an All American Road, no national byway designation exists in Northeastern Alabama. • Northeast Alabama has two areas that are part of the “Alabama Scenic Byway” program, which could augment recreational, tourism industry and other economic development efforts. Examples include: Lookout Mountain Parkway, and a portion of The Appalachian Highlands Scenic Byway. o Inventory other potential scenic or historic byways throughout the region o Determine which ones could be designated as scenic or historic byways and seek funding to develop these ways. Community Improvement The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides a number of funding opportunities for communities. Community Transportation Enhancement Programs (C TE Ps) expand transportation choices and fund transportation related projects including pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and safety programs, and others designed to strengthen the cultural, aesthetic, and environmental aspects of community and regional intermodal transportation systems. The CTEPs allow for the implementation of a variety of non-traditional projects. The Transportation Enhancement (TE) Activities will be replaced by the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) . These projects must qualify under one or more of the 12 eligible categories. The eligible activities under these transportation enhancement programs include: 1. Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles. 2. Provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists. 3. Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites (including historic battlefields). 4. Scenic or historic highway programs (including the provision of tourist and welcome center facilities). 5. Landscaping and other scenic beautification. 6. Historic preservation. 7. Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures, or facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals). 8. Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including the conversion and use of the corridors for pedestrian or bicycle trails). 9. Inventory, control, and removal of outdoor advertising. 10. Archaeological planning and research. 11. Environmental mitigation-- i. to address water pollution due to highway runoff; or, ii. reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity. 12. Establishment of transportation museums.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 30
For each of these activities there are additional considerations and a set of guiding principles, and questions, which an applicant must review and answer as part of the process.
Environmental Mitigation Environmental mitigation, while being a part of overall transportation enhancement efforts and potential funding, deserves additional mention. Environmental mitigation activities are intended to address water pollution due to highway runoff; as well as reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity, as they relate to surface transportation. Examples include soil erosion controls, detention and sediment basins, and river clean-ups for existing highway runoff; and wildlife underpasses or other measures to reduce vehicle caused wildlife mortality and/or to maintain wildlife habitat connectivity. • In ALL transportation projects, context sensitive design solutions must incorporate environmental mitigation to offset potential deleterious effects of a variety of transportation construction projects. Including: o BMP Anti-erosion and siltation measures during demolition and construction projects, including drainage way and stream protection. o Wetlands mitigation measures, including Wetlands Banking (WB) In Lieu of Fees (ILF) • Federal Highway Administration Environmental review & design processes for Interstate & US Highways.
Transportation Finance
The transportation system is the creation of a carefully balanced partnership of federal, state, regional, and local governments, the private sector, and all the system users and customers. Responsibility for this massive, complex system is divided among many organizations and jurisdictions. These collectively finance, build, operate, and maintain local streets and roads, intercity highways, and public transit systems provide the vital mobility to modern economic and social life. Transportation investments are often highly political and sometimes subject to vigorous debate. The planning and funding of transportation systems has always had to balance the priorities of many competing interests, including motorists, truckers, shippers, taxpayers, and many others. Traditional approaches to finance fall short and policymakers at all levels of government find it necessary to explore innovative finance options. Communities throughout our region are growing and changing from rural to urban. The new growth requires expansion in infrastructure. The communities need new roads, expansion for certain activities, and repairs for existing road network. In order to serve our communities well, we conducted a survey of elected officials and engineers in our region to understand their need. Lack of funding was one of the top most concerns for our communities, at the same time some of the well established transportation programs are rarely utilized in the region. These programs are included with the transportation planning techniques above.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 31
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 32
Chapter 5 Strategic Projects, Programs and Activities
Transportation Assessment Transportation Infrastructure CEDS Transportation Projects City and Regional Planning Finance
Transportation Assessment
In Spring 2012, the committees of the Rural Planning Organization began discussing the long range transportation needs of the Region and a survey of local officials and committee members was conducted to examine the transportation needs in the region. These discussions were continued through 2013 and have brought forth many needs and concerns. Those concerns were further evaluated against the ALDOT five year plan and ATRIP (Alabama Transportation Rehabilitation and Improvement Program) projects. Final projects have been consolidated into the paragraphs below. The comments were grouped primarily according to the highway corridor or highway corridor segment in which the need or concern was located. Each corridor was further evaluated based on different characteristics
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 33 and functions of each corridor in the region. They are categorized by the needs and concerns as to 1) area of impact, 2) priority, and 3) timeframe. The area of impact could be state, regional or local. Most items listed were regional. The priority for a need could be low, medium or high. And, the suggested timeframe could be short-term (less than five years), long-term (more than five years), or ongoing. The recommendations of needs and concerns are described in more detail in the following table and shown on map 5.1 at the end of this document. By far, most of the needs discussed were in regard to highways, therefore, that is the focus of this report. It was noted that there were general concerns regarding airports, waterways, and railroads that required further discussion. Regarding airports, there are five airports in the study area. Also, the Tennessee River is considered an asset to the region not only for recreational purposes but also as a river transportation opportunity. Unfortunately, usage of the Tennessee River is limited by port sites. There is a need to improve and increase docks and begin to better utilize the Tennessee River. By looking at population and other trends, there is anticipated to be a considerable increase of jobs in the North Alabama area due to BRAC and other successful economic development activities. With the population growth and land development that will come with jobs growth, roadways throughout the region will likely need to be extensively improved well into the future. Funding will need to be addressed for identified specific long-term needs, other long-term needs that will arise with population growth and for other short-term maintenance needs that are mentioned at the end of this section.
Transportation Projects and Strategy
Project Area of Impact Priority Timeframe Characteristics / Designations
Transportation Infrastructure
US Highway 72 in Jackson County. Regional Low Long-Term Primary East-West Connector Opportunities to improve US 72 might include Partial State Bicycle Route EW1 the provision of acceleration and deceleration Appalachian Regional - lanes at all turnouts and crossovers. Service Commission(ARC) Corridor V roads are already being built on a limited basis Significant Truck Traffic in the Scottsboro area. If the Memphis to Atlanta Highway becomes a reality, a four lane connector to this highway from US 72 in Scottsboro will likely be needed. The US 72 corridor is expected to experience significant development from Huntsville to the Scottsboro area in the next several years as a result of decisions of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC). Southwestern portions of the County are expected to experience higher than average population growth. Scottsboro and its immediate area are already experiencing higher than average population growth. Longer term, growth is anticipated along the entire US 72 corridor up to Stevenson based on development that is occurring near the Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 34
US Highway 72 in West Limestone County . US Regional High Short -Term Primary East -West Corridor hwy 72 needs to be widened at the railroad Partial State Bicycle Route EW1 overpass in Athens, which creates a traffic bottleneck during rush hours. Discussions have been held between highway and railroad officials. Also, the portion of the highway that is west of Athens is of concern with regard to safety and traffic flow. It is suggested that US 72 be reconstructed with design considerations including more lanes, a median that would include a center turn lane on US 72 through all of Limestone County, and appropriate acceleration and deceleration lanes. Interim safety projects to widen and restriping to five lanes is underway on that portion of the highway from Athens to the Elk River.
US Highway 72 in East Limestone County. In Regional Medium Long-Term Primary East-West Corridor conjunction with the above discussion, requests State Bicycle Route EW1 have been made to study this route in East Limestone County. With the growth of the Huntsville area as a regional employment center, the needs along this portion of the highway are only expected to increase.
US Highway 72 (Alt / State 20) from I-65 to State/Regional High Short-Term Appalachian Regional - Decatur. The Interstate Highway System is a Commission(ARC) Corridor V significant asset to northeast Alabama with Significant Truck Traffic most areas being served by a nearby highway. I-65 runs north and south through the region connecting the region to Birmingham and Nashville. I-565 provides a quick route from I- 65 near Decatur into the Huntsville area which is much faster and safer than old Hwy 20. However, the interstate designation of I-565 doesn’t go through to Decatur. This corridor is just outside the RPO study area but has considerable impact on the region. Preliminary design is currently underway.
US Highway 431 between Guntersville and Regional Medium Long-Term State Bicycle Route NS3 Huntsville (Bikeway). US Highway 431 between Significant Truck Traffic Guntersville and Huntsville has been noted as a good facility. With the improvements made over the last 20 years, this is a much faster and much safer than previously and the bridges have helped. In addition to the highway traffic needs on this highway, it is also been designated as State Bicycle Route NS3. This route would be partially within the RPO Study area and partially within the Huntsville MPO study area.
US Highway 431 in Guntersville. The immediate Local Medium to Low Long-Term State Bicycle Route NS3 Guntersville area including lakeside properties Significant Truck Traffic and the US Highway 431 area over the mountain are now experiencing a higher than average level of growth which is expected to continue. The anti-skid pavement and the center divider going up the mountain on US 431 have increased safety. But, the use of street lights on US 431 South including across the river bridge needs to be improved. Also, place a median barrier from the Holiday Inn to the other side of the Stockton Causeway.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 35
Furthermore, US Highway 431 in Guntersville needs to be a divided highway. The current volume of traffic combined with the angle parking in the downtown, the road presents a number of safety issues. Traffic coming off the river bridge into downtown is generally well above the speed limit.
US Highway 431 in Albertville and Boaz. It is Local Medium Short-to-Long Significant Truck Traffic the major artery through the Albertville and Term Boaz area. The highway connects this area to Guntersville and Huntsville to the North and Gadsden to the South. It carries a significant amount of both local and through traffic. There have been significant complaints about traffic congestion in the Albertville and Boaz area due to the many crossovers and red lights along the highway 431 in that area. Reportedly, many people have resorted to using the secondary roads along the highway because they ultimately are faster. The interim improvements to this highway in past few years have helped some. For the long-term, plans are being developed to make this highway six lanes.
US Highway 431 / Alabama Highway 69 Local Medium Short-Term Significant Truck Traffic Intersection. The intersection of US Highway 431 and Alabama Highway 69 is difficult to maneuver, and needs intersection improvement in terms of redesign or better pavement markings. It is also a safety hazard during rainy weather because of improper drainage.
US Highway 431 / Access Road Intersection Local High Short-Term Significant Truck Traffic Congestion at the access road near the Spring School Traffic Creek Drive access to US Highway 431 has continued to be a problem. This road is used by the high school traffic. It has bad stacking distance and new development in the area, is compounding the problem. It is not possible to stop the traffic coming down the mountain, but the Spring Creek Drive area continues to experience population growth and land development. A better access road would serve local business, Spring Creek Drive, and old Highway 205. A cooperation effort including the City, particularly in the process of land development, is needed.
Alabama Highway 35 Bridge between Regional High Short-Term Principal Arterial Scottsboro and Section. AL Highway 35 from Scottsboro to Section, including the Tennessee River Bridge is a major problem for east/west traffic through the region. This highway and bridge is the only river crossing for some distance in this area. The west bound side of the bridge has been replaced. The older east bound bridge needs to be replaced.
Alabama Highway 35 between Scottsboro and Regional High Short-Term Principal Arterial Section. Another need relating to Alabama Highway 35 from Scottsboro to Section is the need to make improvement to the road segment that goes up the mountain on the east side of the Tennessee River Bridge. This area
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 36 has a steep grade and narrow right -of -way. An active project to study this portion of AL 35 is currently underway.
Alabama Highway 35 in Fort Payne (Joe’s Truck Regional Medium Long-Term Significant Truck Traffic Stop). There is not a good and direct route from Principal Arterial the region eastward to the Atlanta area. Alabama Highway 35 is one of the few routes that go in that direction. In Fort Payne, the highway is directed through downtown and a residential area before going up Lookout Mountain to points east. This is a safety hazard especially for trucks coming down the mountain. It brings a considerable amount of through traffic and truck traffic through the downtown area with the difficult turning movements in that area. Alternatives should be examined for the construction of a bypass, possibly located south of downtown where Alabama Highway 35 intersects US Highway 11.
Alabama Highway 75 between Albertville and Regional High Short-Term Significant Truck Traffic Birmingham. AL Highway 75 is a direct route Economic Corridor between Albertville and Birmingham. It is considered a pretty good road, but the heavy truck traffic makes it difficult to maintain. A long range opportunity would be to have four lanes on Alabama Highway 75 between Albertville and Birmingham. The portion of the highway from Albertville to just South of the Albertville Airport is currently under design for airport expansion.
Alabama Highway 75 between Rainsville and Regional/Local Medium Long-Term Regional Mobility Albertville. AL Highway 75 is a direct route between Rainsville and Albertville. It is a minor arterial street serving small towns in DeKalb County. It also serves as an alternate parallel route to AL Highway 11 and US highway 72. There are a few projects underway to improve and widen this road, which should be continued to provide access to these small towns.
Alabama Highway 79 between US 431 and US Regional Medium Long-Term Regional Mobility 72. A very contentious issue is the stretch of Alabama Highway 79 from Scottsboro south through Marshall County. There are complaints of the overwhelming amount of tractor-trailer traffic on this road. There are also some concerns about future years because of the growth and development that is happening outside of Scottsboro. It is feared that this might increase traffic and become a serious safety issue. A long range opportunity would be to improve Alabama Highway 79 between US 431 and US 72. The plans for the local segment of the Memphis to Atlanta Highway includes improvements to Alabama Highway 79 south to Us Highway 431, however, there are no current plans to upgrade to four lanes.
Alabama Highway 227 between US 431 and Regional Medium Long-Term Regional Mobility Guntersville State Park. This highway has been Tourist Route noted as a local problem due to bad alignment. State Bicycle Route NS3 There have been recent improvements, but it is
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 37 a constrained road making improvements difficult. It is also a designated State Bicycle Route.
Athens Bypass. As stated in the discussion Local Low Long-Term Regional Mobility regarding US Highway 72, there are a number of Congestion Management issues regarding east / west traffic through Limestone County. One suggestion as a long range solution is to construct a bypass around Athens to the south of the city. This bypass would tie into I-65 at Tanner and relieve congestion in the Athens area.
Memphis to Atlanta Highway. For many years, State Low Long-Term Regional Mobility a Memphis to Atlanta Highway has been Economic Development proposed improve access and economic development opportunities of the region by providing better connections to the major metropolitan areas of Memphis and Atlanta. A corridor has been designated and portions of it, particularly in the Huntsville MPO study area, are in the planning stages, notable the segment from South Parkway to New Hope. Other segments within the RPO study area are yet to be funded. It is mentioned here since its development would be a significant addition to the interstate highway system, or, if not an interstate, it would be a major limited access highway with interstate characteristics.
CEDS Transportation Projects
Plan Transportation Corridors. Explore the use Regional Medium Ongoing Economic Development of corridor-based alternatives analysis and Regional Mobility traffic shed analysis that fully considers land use and commercial impacts in transportation planning.
Facilitate Intermodal Transportation. Leverage Regional Medium Short-Term Economic Development resources to put in place the proper Regional Mobility infrastructure networks to facilitate the transportation of goods and services locally, regionally and globally, particularly intermodal transportation networks that support manufacturing and distribution.
Wayfinding. Assist local communities in the Regional High Ongoing Economic Development development of “wayfinding” programs. Tourism
Men tone Street Improvements. Provide Local Medium Short -Term Local Network Improvement general street and safety improvements along with a scenic walking trail.
I-65 Road Crossing . Construct a fourth road Local/Regional Medium Long -Term Regional Mobility crossing of I-65 in Limestone County to augment Economic Development the three present crossings.
Railroad Spur Upgrade. Upgrade the TVA Local Medium Short -Term Economic Development Bellefonte railroad spur to serve the new Hollywood area Jackson County Industrial Park located at Hollywood.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 38
Elm Industrial Park Upgrades. Local Medium Long -Term Economic Development Extend Wilkinson Street to intersect with Airport Road, widen the Airport Road intersection with Highway 127 and provide the addition of a utilities corridor.
Albertville Industrial Park Access. Develop rail Local Medium Short-Term Economic Development & road access to Albertville Industrial Board Park.
City and Regional Planning
Areawide Development Planning. Promote the Regional Medium Ongoing Regional Mobility establishment of regional and sub-regional Economic Development plans for community and economic Quality of Life development along with the establishment of local planning authority in unincorporated areas.
Protect Rural Character and the Urban/Rural Regional High Ongoing Regional Mobility Interface. Preserve environmental integrity and Quality of Life rural character when developing communities on previous farmland and use preservation strategies on the fringe of cities and towns to provide identity and quality of life to the entire region, protection of communities from natural hazards, and protection of vital wetlands and migratory corridors.
Support Complete Neighborhoods. Use the Regional Medium Ongoing Regional Mobility development and redevelopment of commercial Economic Development centers and corridors as an integral, structural Quality of Life component of more complete and livable neighborhoods and communities, and locate and design community facilities to support livable and walkable places.
Finance
Fully Utilize Existing Programs. Explore Regional High Ongoing Regional Mobility opportunities to fully utilize existing Economic Development transportation grants and other available Quality of Life programs to finance transportation facilities and other related activities.
Private Finance Opportunities. Explore the Regional High Ongoing Regional Mobility possibility of new financing opportunities from Economic Development private sector sources. Quality of Life
Finance Awareness. Educate the communities Regional Medium Ongoing Regional Mobility about available financial assistance, including Economic Development the availability of low interest loans and grants. Quality of Life
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 39
General Highway Issues Overall, the Region is considered to have a generally good highway system. The roads are in fairly good shape and many of the roads in rural areas are paved. Among the best things noted regarding general maintenance issues are the good striping and pavement marker maintenance and reasonably aggressive resurfacing programs. Ongoing problems that need to be addressed include:
• Shoulder maintenance; • Vegetation management; • Signage; • Safety improvements such as turning lanes, guard rails, drainage improvement, etc.; • Traffic lights.
Among the best and most effective opportunities and needs for overall improvement to the highway system is improvement of railroad crossings and signals, especially rural crossings, and additional bridge replacement funding.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 40
Chapter 6 A Plan of Action for Rural Transportation Development
TARCOG’s Mission Statement Program Activities Performance Monitoring and Update
Mission Statement
The mission of TARCOG is to be an innovative regional partner with member governments, developing and delivering services to improve the quality of life of the people and communities of Northeast Alabama.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 41
Program Activities
The Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization was established as a statewide extension and continuation of a pilot project performed at the West Alabama Rural Planning Organization. In furtherance of the foregoing mission statement, and for the accomplishment of the strategic projects, programs and activities contained in this Long Range Transportation Needs Study, the Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments, operating as the Rural Planning Organization (RPO) for Substate District 12 of the State of Alabama, will undertake the following activities.
Coordinate the Long Range Transportation Plan Coordinate the preparation, updating, maintenance and implementation of the District’s Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). • Comply with State and/or Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) reporting requirements on Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) structure, updates and revision mandates. • Conduct an annual LRTP Goals, Objectives and Accomplishments review and apply requisite metrics and make necessary revisions in scope and activities. • Perform ongoing research to expand funding opportunities that match project needs outlined in the (LRTP).
Provide Project Information Provide information to the State and FTA on the status of District programs, projects and activities as well as related needs that may qualify for FTA participation. • Review potential projects for State and Federal program funding. • Facilitate State or Federal pre-application and application activity, and as needed, perform any resulting project administration on a contract basis.
Coordinate Funding Coordinate between Federal, State, regional and local agencies and communities to deliver funding for transportation development projects and programs. • Continue to actively research public and private funding sources. • Provide application assistance and project administration for the following agencies and programs. Assist Local Governments Assist local governments in adapting their daily operations to modern transportation planning methods and technologies that will increase their ability to manage transportation growth in their jurisdictions. • Assist local governments with community transportation planning including the preparation of comprehensive plans, revitalization plans, and functional plans for, transportation, etc. • Assist local governments in the preparation of development regulations including, subdivision regulations, street plans, etc., that may help them to address their transportation related concerns. • Provide updates to member governments and transportation development partners on Transportation development issues (i.e. funding opportunities, new legislation, best practices, etc.).
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 42
Promote the Expansion and Attraction of industry Transportation Resources Promote the expansion of existing industry and the attraction of new industry that lead to the creation of quality jobs for the District, as it relates to rural transportation resources. • Assist in securing financial aid to develop and expand local airport and water port facilities. • Provide technical assistance to solicit needed equipment for the maintenance and improvement of the District’s highway, road and street systems.
Support Community Transportation Infrastructure Facilitate growth and enhance public health, safety and welfare by providing support for community transportation infrastructure to improve the overall quality of life in the region. Provide Technical Assistance Provide technical assistance to the public and private sectors to help disseminate information relative to various local transportation planning and management programs. • Serve as repository for Census Data, Labor Market Data and other statistical information. • Provide timely, accurate demographic information for each county on the Agency website. • Assist in grant and loan writing, and provide mapping and graphics support as needed for grants, project proposals, etc., to eligible members. • Conduct project-specific research and development studies (i.e., economic impact studies, annexation proposals, capital improvement plans). • Support and encourage multi-county planning efforts and facilitate intergovernmental cooperation to address regional issues.
Serve as the Areawide Transportation Clearinghouse Continue to serve as the areawide clearinghouse for information concerning Federal and State transportation-related assistance programs. Oversight Oversight of this LRTP is vested in the Department of Planning and Economic Development of TARCOG - which functions as the regional Rural Planning Organization - with the advice of the RPO Policy Committee. The RPO committees will continue to meet in the future if the planning process is funded. The committee meetings will continue to be the main consultation tool in the process. The quarterly meetings will be held and the meetings will follow the established agenda. This will allow local officials and officials with the ALDOT to discuss transportation issues and programs. The meetings will continue to offer the same public involvement opportunities. The RPO staff will continue to document the meetings and the work of the committees. RPO staff will also maintain communication with those agencies and entities that may be designated as stakeholders and may be involved with implementation of specific actions. Any necessary adjustments can be accomplished through amendments adopted by the Policy Committee.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 43
LRTP Annual Report This LRTP may be monitored by a process of annual review. Following adoption of this LRTP, the RPO staff and the Policy Committee will continue to review and update this document. They will monitor the social, economic and transportation trends in the region, and periodically work through each of the tasks to verify and recertify the outputs of each, and they will determine whether or not there is a need to expand this document. Changes to existing trends may require the addition, deletion, or re- prioritization of strategies or projects. If such Annual Report is deemed necessary, it will be prepared and submitted to the RPO Policy Committee. Performance Measures Working with the Policy Committee, the RPO may establish a list of performance measures that would be used to evaluate successful development and implementation of the LRTP. Other measures may be added from time to time in order to obtain a better picture of the transportation situation of the District. Continuing Public Involvement Public involvement is important to the development of any plan. But, it is just as important to the implementation efforts that follow. Continuing public involvement in the development and implementation of a LRTP helps to assure the reasonableness and public acceptance of a community’s efforts. Copies of this LRTP will be maintained and available at the offices of TARCOG. In addition, it will be placed on TARCOG’s web site. Between five-year updates, a file will be maintained by the Department containing public comments regarding the contents of the LRTP. These comments will be periodically reviewed by the Department during annual monitoring of the progress of implementation and during evaluation and update. Continuing public participation will be sought for evaluation and potential update, eventually contributing to the publication of a new Long Range Transportation Plan.
Five-Year Update The RPO will continue to review and update this document. The staff and committees will periodically work through each of the tasks to verify and recertify the outputs of each. The Policy Committee will be expected to adopt the updated Long Range Transportation Needs document in September 2013 and every five years thereafter.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2014 – 2019 | 44
Appendices
Appendix I Rural transportation Survey Appendix II Review of Relevant Documents Appendix III Selected Bibliography Appendix IV Map 5.1: Map of Identified Projects
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-1
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-2
Appendix I
Rural Transportation Survey Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
The Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments (TARCOG) is in the process of developing a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy and a Long Range Transportation Needs Study within its five county service area. To make sure that these studies are in keeping with local needs, the Council would like to know more about your views regarding rural transportation issues in your community. Please take a few moments and help us with the following questions.
Name ______Community ______
Position ______Date ______
1. Most communities struggle with older roads that are just not up to handling the amount of traffic that is now on them. In your opinion, what location is the biggest problem...
(a) In your community? ______
(b) In your county? ______
(c) In your region? ______
2. Many communities have a particular location on a road that seems to be a continuing safety problem ...where a lot of accidents seem to happen. Are there such locations in your community? Where?
(a) ______
(b) ______
3. Other than safety issues, are there particular locations in your community where roads or streets present other problems such as flooding or inadequate traffic control devices, etc?
(a) ______
(b) ______
4. Subdivision regulations are used by local communities to provide design and construction guidelines for new local streets. Regarding subdivision regulations...
(a) Has your community adopted subdivision regulations? ______
(b) Do you think your community's subdivision regulations are up-to-date and adequate? ______
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-3
______5. What do you think is the single best opportunity to improve roads and highways...
(a) In your community? ______
(b) In your county? ______
(c) In your region? ______
6. It doesn't seem that there will ever be enough money to solve all of our transportation problems. What else do you think is the greatest challenge to improving roads and highways...
(a) In your community? ______
(b) In your county? ______
(c) In your region? ______
7. Are there any road or highway improvements that you think would be especially important to promoting economic development and creating jobs...
(a) In your community? ______
(b) In your county? ______
(c) In your region? ______
8. Do you have any other thoughts or comments on road, street and highway issues in your community, county or region? Please write them below and use as many additional sheets as you wish. Thank you.
Please mail, fax or email this survey to:
Jeffrey A. Pruitt, AICP Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments 5075 Research Drive NW Huntsville, AL 35805 Phone: 256-830-0818 / Fax: 256-830-0843 / [email protected]
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-4
Appendix II Review of Relevant Documents
TARCOG Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy: 2012 TARCOG Rural Area Long Range Transportation Needs: 2008 TARCOG Regional Transportation Study: 2008 Statewide Transportation Plan: 2008 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Statewide Freight Plan: 2010 Statewide Rail Plan: 2008 Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan: 2010
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
A summary of the foundation goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is indicated below. Examination of this chart begins to reveal the synergies between the various foundation sectors and the opportunity for common strategies among them. Support of these foundation sectors is the central consideration for the CEDS. Detailed explanation of this is contained in the related CEDS Document. Two of the objectives in the chart directly address rural transportation. These are highlighted in blue.
Agriculture and Commerce and Science, Technology Manufacturing, Travel and Forestry Place Making and Defense Distribution and Tourism Logistics
Support Local Plan Promote Industrial/ Facilitate Protect Natural Growers Transportation Institutional Intermodal Infrastructure Corridors Collaboration Transportation
Promote Farm to Develop Training Strengthen Education Support Support School Education Partnerships and Research Retraining for Environmental Advanced Education Manufacturing
Protect Rural Support Leverage Assist with Create a Regional Character and Complete Competitive Preparedness Identity the Urban/Rural Neighborhoods Advantages Programs Interface
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-5
Integrate Urban Involve Business Position for Base Promote Foster Place and Rural in Hazard Realignment and Economic Commitment Economies Mitigation Closure Diversification
Promote Local Promote Foster a Culture of Expand Financing Promote Local Products Downtowns and Funding Alternatives Arts and Culture Business Districts
2.1. Plan Transportation Corridors. Explore the use of corridor-based alternatives analysis and traffic shed analysis that fully considers land use and commercial impacts in transportation planning.
4.1. Facilitate Intermodal Transportation. Leverage resources to put in place the proper infrastructure throughout the District to facilitate the transportation of goods and services locally, regionally and globally, particularly intermodal transportation networks that support manufacturing and distribution.
CEDS Projects, Programs and Activities
These projects, programs and activities have been incorporated in this study with available updates.
TARCOG Rural Area Long Range Transportation Needs Study of 2008
The Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments published the Long Range Transportation Needs Study in 2008. The purpose of the Study was to summarize the needs of the non-metropolitan area of the region that includes DeKalb County, Jackson County, Marshall County, and a portion of Limestone County. The needs and concerns discussed through a series of meetings were grouped primarily according to the highway corridor or corridor segment in which the need was located. Detailed discussion is contained within the Study but the priorities and timeframe are indicated here. Updates to these projects are listed chapter 5 of this study.
TARCOG Regional Transportation Study 2008
The Regional Transportation Study of 2008 represents a selection of material created for the purpose of distribution at citizen, technical and policy meetings. The primary topics discussed include: 1) a summary of traffic counts ; 2) various county accident data collected by the University of Alabama; 3) the age and rating of selected bridges within the region; and 4) the number of paved miles of roadway within each county. The data is presented on a county-by-county basis using a series of maps to illustrate conditions. Taken together, the various data sets indicate a region that contains an above-average amount of highway compared to the rest of the state, an aging infrastructure that threatens to outpace capabilities to maintain it, and particular corridors within the region that are experiencing rapid, significant growth and the inevitable complications that this entails.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-6
Statewide Transportation Plan
The Alabama Statewide Transportation Plan was published in June, 2008. It presents long range multimodal assessments of the state’s transportation program. It includes an overview and assessment of: • Roadway conditions and needs; • Transit and passenger rail; • Bicycle and pedestrian systems; and • Freight transportation systems. Also included transportation related issue regarding access management, economic development and environmental protection. The four primary goals identified for the SWTP update are: 1) Provide safe and efficient transportation for people and goods; 2) Protect the public and private investment in transportation 3) Provide an interconnected transportation system that supports economic development objectives; 4) Provide a transportation system that preserves the quality of the environment and enhances the quality of life.
Statewide Freight Plan
Alabama Statewide Freight Study and Action Plan was published on June 30, 2010. The purpose of the Study was to better understand freight needs and issues and to conduct an economical and efficient freight planning process that can be integrated with the conventional transportation program in order to support economic growth and development at the state and local level. The report reviews freight movement by the various modes of freight transportation, freight movement between states, port studies, primary economic/industry sector and commodity data, The Study noted that, of the four counties in the RPO, Marshall County was among the top ten counties of the state for both origin and destination of truck freight. Marshall County was also among the top ten counties as a destination of rail freight, and for both origin and destination of air freight. Limestone County was among the top ten counties as an origin of water freight and for both origin and destination of air freight. DeKalb County was among the top ten counties for both origin and destination of air freight. Major commodity flows through the area were noted as: 1) Mixed freight and non-metallic ore on US 72 east of I-65; 2) Base metal and waste/recycled material on US 72 west of I-65; 3) Unknown freight both northbound and southbound on I-65. Major suggestions related to the area included: 1) Suggestion for a “freight corridor” that would consider I-65 and US 31 together when continued widening of one roadway is not feasible. 2) Suggestion for an “inland port” to relieve truck transportation, perhaps taking advantage of the existing intermodal facilities at the Port of Huntsville.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-7
Statewide Rail Plan
The Alabama Rail Plan was published by ALDOT in 2008. The stated purpose of state rail planning is to examine rail carriers and shippers, communities and other elements comprising the transportation network so that each element can perform its proper role in an efficient and equitable manner. The Plan studies trends in rail line density and usage, abandonments, and the rise of intermodalism among other things. It establishes a set of nine goals, the first being the maintenance of a viable freight and passenger system that is essential to the economic viability and continued prosperity of all the region of Alabama. The railroads in the RPO study area include Norfolk Southern which runs east and west through Limestone Madison and Jackson counties as well as southwest to northeast through DeKalb County, and CSX Transportation which runs north and south through Limestone County and in the northeast corner of Jackson County. In addition to these is a short line railroad, the Sequatchie Valley Railroad, also in the northeast corner of Jackson County near Bridgeport. This Chapter is an analysis of Transportation Planning Principles within the region starting with a brief review of transportation Network and Classification issues. The principles and grants mentioned here are not intended to be exhaustive but to capture some sense of the direction of transportation development issues in the area.
Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
The Alabama Department of Transportation Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan was published in 2010. Its purpose, as stated in the Plan, was to “guide decisions as to where bicycle and pedestrian facilities should be provided to meet the demands for bicycling and walking.” The Plan was designed to achieve the following goals: 1) Integrate existing bicycle facilities with a large, statewide bicycle network; 2) Establish bicycle facilities between municipalities and other resources throughout the state; 3) Establish pedestrian and bicycle facilities that complement local and regional non-motorized transportation plans. The Plan contains a set of design recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as a statewide network of on-road bicycle facilities which connect Alabama’s municipalities and natural/cultural resources. There are two state bike routes that pass through the RPO area. These are EW 1 and NS 3. EW 1 runs east and west connecting Athens, Madison, Huntsville and Scottsboro primarily along AL 99, US 72 and AL 35. NS 3 runs north and south, southeast of Huntsville and across Guntersville Lake on US 431, AL 227 adjacent to Guntersville State Park, and connecting onto the Appalachian Highlands Scenic Byway on AL 68 east of I-59. There two bike route connectors. Connector C2 connects EW 1 near Scottsboro north along AL 79/TN 16 to the Southern Rambler Tennessee State Bicycle Route. Connector C18 connects Gadsden north along AL 7/US 11 and/or designated scenic byways through Fort Payne to the Hammondville/Valley Head/Mentone area. This potentially connects state bike route EW 2 near Gadsden to state bike route NS 3 near Collinsville and finally to an extended EW 1 from Scottsboro.
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-8
Appendix III Selected Bibliography
Related Documents “Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2013 – 2018.” Huntsville, Alabama: Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments, September 2012. “Long Range Transportation Needs Study.” Huntsville, Alabama: Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments, September 2008.
Selected References “Alabama Statewide Transportation Plan.” Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Department of Transportation, 2008. “Alabama Rail Plan ” Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Department of Transportation, 2008. “Alabama Statewide Freight Study and Action Plan.” Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Department of Transportation, 2010. “Alabama Department of Transportation Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.” Montgomery, Alabama: Alabama Department of Transportation, 2010. “FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines.” Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, 2005. “FHWA Freight and Land Use Handbook.” Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, 2012. “Noteworthy Practices: Addressing Safety on Locally-Owned and Maintained Roads.” Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, 2010. “Aligning Strategies to Maximize Impact. ” Washington, D.C.: National Association of Development Organizations, 2012. American Planning Association (ed.). 2006. “ Planning and Urban Design Standards .” Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. “Determining Effective Roadway Design Treatments for Transitioning From Rural Areas to Urban Areas on State Highways.” Oregon State University and Clemson University, 2008 “Complete Streets.” Alabama Technology Transfer Center, Auburn University, September, 2013. “Transportation Enhancement Activities.” Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration website. Accessed at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/transportation_enhancements/ “MAP-21: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century.” Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration website. Accessed at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/MAP21/ “About the Program.” Alabama Scenic Byways website. Accessed at: http://www.alabamabyways.com/about-the-program/
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-9
“Lookout Mountain Parkway.” Alabama Scenic Byways website. Accessed at: http://www.alabamabyways.com/2012/08/25/lookout-mountain-parkway/ “The Appalachian Highlands Scenic Byway.” Alabama Scenic Byways website. Accessed at: http://www.alabamabyways.com/2013/01/01/the-appalachian-highlands-scenic-byway/ “Complete Streets.” Conservation Alabama Foundation website. Accessed at: www.conservationalabamafoundation.org “National Complete Streets Coalition.” Smart Growth America website. Accessed at: http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets
TARCOG | Long Range Transportation Needs Study | 2015 – 2019 | A-10
Top of Alabama Rural Planning Organization
Lawrence Giles LongLincoln Range Transportation Needs Franklin Marion
Lester Ardmore ST53 ST251
Bridgeport Elkmont Hazel Green ST73 ST127 2 65 Hytop ST ¦¨§ ST65 Lauderdale New Market 72 99 ¤£ ST Meridianville Stevenson 53 ST 117 Harvest ST Moores Mill ST146 Dade Limestone County ¤£72 Skyline Jackson Athens Huntsville ¤£72 Madison 53 County ¦¨§65 ST 231 ¤£72 County ¤£ ST255 72 ¤£ ¤£72 Pleasant Groves 79 ST Hollywood 255 ST53 ¤£431 ST75 Madison ST Ider Walker Gurley 279 71 Redstone Arsenal ST Pisgah ST ST35 Paint Rock ¦¨§565 Scottsboro ST279 Henagar ¦¨§565 ¤£72 ¤£31 Woodville 40 ¤£72 ¤£72 ST Dutton Triana Section Owens Cross Roads ST117 Mentone Sylvania ¤£11 Hammondville Valley Head Langston 35 Lawrence ¤£431 ST Grant Powell RPO Transportation Projects ST35 Rainsville US Hwy 72 in West Limestone County ST1 ST35 Shiloh Athens Bypass Fyffe Fort Payne Morgan Pine Ridge Chattooga De Ka lb 35 35 ST US Hwy 72 in East Limestone County County ST ¤£431 ST227 ST35 Memphis to Atlanta Hwy Union Grove Guntersville
Lakeview US Hwy 72 (Alt/ State 20) from I-65 to Decatur Marshall ¦¨§59 176 County ST69 69 ST ST ST69 431 Geraldine US Hwy 72 in Jackson County ¤£ ST69 Arab ¤£431 AL Hwy 35 Bridge between Scottsboro and Section
£431 AL Hwy 35 between Scottsboro and Section ¤ 75 ST ST68 Crossville ST68 AL Hwy 35 in Fort Payne Albertville Collinsville AL Hwy 79 between US Hwy 431 and US Hwy 72 Ü This map was prepared by US Hwy 431 between Guntersville and Huntsville Boaz ST227 Top of alabama CherokeeRegional Council of Governments ST168 from the best information made available at the US Hwy 431 in Guntersville Cullman Douglas time of publication. TARCOG makes no Winston AL Hwy 227 between US 431 and Guntersville State Park representations as to the accuracy of the data provided. This map is intended as a representation US Hwy 431 and AL Hwy 69 Intersection of the RPO Long Range Needs Projects and is Blount US Hwy 431 in Albertville and Boaz RPO Study Area Etowah intended for no other purpose.
AL Hwy 75 between Albertville and Birmingham Decatur MPO Study Area September 26, 2013 02.5 5 10 15 20 AL Hwy 75 between Rainsville and Albertville Huntsville MPO Study Area Miles Map 5.1