1 / 17

Route Transfer

Route Transfer. February 2004 TAC Meetings. History of Route Transfer Study. Problems with Previous Process (ADOT’s perspective). No list of candidate routes Opportunities missed to make transfers as highway segments bypassed Improvements too expensive

amato
Download Presentation

Route Transfer

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Route Transfer February 2004 TAC Meetings

  2. History ofRoute Transfer Study

  3. Problems with Previous Process(ADOT’s perspective) • No list of candidate routes • Opportunities missed to make transfers as highway segments bypassed • Improvements too expensive • Pace of transfers/abandonments too slow • Lengthy negotiations and administration

  4. Technical Advisory Committee • John Pein ADOT Planning • Joe Hughes RTAC • Don Freeman PAG • Rick Powers District Engineer, Globe • Bill Alfier District Engineer, Yuma • Steve Hansen ADOT Right-of-Way

  5. Study Schedule • 1st TAC Meeting (December 4, 2001) • Transportation Board (May 2, 2002) • 2nd TAC Meeting (July 23, 2002) • Review with ADOT DEs (September 2, 2002) • 3rd TAC Meeting (September 23, 2002)

  6. Study Schedule (Continued) • November 2002 Transportation Board Discussion: • Consult with local stakeholders • Use Level of Development to Identify Routes • Local Government/Stakeholder Meetings • MAG (December 10, 2002) • PAG (January 8, 2003) • Rural Transportation Summit (January 16-17, 2003)

  7. Study Schedule (Continued) • Technical Advisory Committee (March 2003) • Transportation Board • Transportation Board approves Route Transfer Policy (August 15, 2003)

  8. Transfer of State Routes Policy • SHS provide for statewide and regional movements • Cooperate with local jurisdictions • Maintain a list of eligible transfer routes • Transfer bypassed and parallel routes

  9. Priorities for Transfer • Local government interest • Bypass/Alternate route construction • Not needed for system continuity • Others

  10. Summary of County/City Comments • Concern about wholesale abandonment of routes and forcing local agencies to take them • Concern about the financial impact on local governments • Questions about specific routes

  11. 2004 Scope for Route Transfer Study

  12. Route Transfer Technical Advisory Committee

  13. Update October 2003 Draft Report

  14. Board Identified Issues • LOD / SOC • Internal ADOT procedures • Set-aside funding • Design and maintenance standards for urban highways • Local to State transfer • Frontage/Spur Road Inventory

  15. Rural Transportation Summit Identified Issues • Change functional classification • Redistribute maintenance funds • Local government cost computations

  16. Other Issues

  17. TAC Organization/Future Meetings

More Related