Table of Contents Regional Transportation Coordination Strategy 2



Download 324.25 Kb.
Page3/5
Date conversion21.02.2016
Size324.25 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5

Strategy for Preparing Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan

Transportation Coordination Planning Approach



Philosophy and Core Values
Coordination at any level and in any environment relies upon the creation of partnerships based upon trust and mutual respect. Building the relationships that become the foundation of future coordination efforts will be a central benefit of this planning process. Toward that end, the approach for the development of the Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan is guided by two key core values: inclusiveness and open communications.
This Plan development process reflects these core values in several ways. A Scoping Group comprised of transportation providers, health and human service providers, and transportation/regional planners created the Work Plan. The Scoping Group listed the following anticipated benefits of the planning process:


  • Gaining knowledge of what transportation services are out there

  • Increasing efficiency

  • Meeting the transportation needs to support independent living

  • Meeting needs of flexible work shifts

  • Providing access to jobs

  • Benefiting clients

  • Promoting improved regional planning

  • Providing access to all/ improved service/ efficient use of resources

  • Demonstrating the need for additional funding

  • Providing consolidated information of services offered (catalog of services)

  • Showing how low funding creates problems retaining drivers (cannot pay market wages)

  • Identifying non-profit/volunteer organization partnering opportunities

  • Focusing on key transit constituency groups (elderly, people who are disabled, economically disadvantaged)

  • Focusing State on funding and eliminating constraints

  • Learning how to maneuver around constraints

  • Finding ways to share resources to better serve customers and improve efficiency

This list reflects a desire of the region to provide customers quality information and services efficiently and effectively.


The Scoping Group then built the Work Plan on two tracks – technical and outreach activities. A subcommittee developed a general approach to incorporate stakeholder input and review into the Work Plan in a structured way. This organizational structure for development and oversight of the Plan reflects the goals of building relationships through an open process that encompasses a broad range of stakeholders.
Building relationships and effecting change are long-term activities. The Work Plan reflects the need for on-going planning efforts to sustain and enhance progress made during this first year’s planning effort.
Organization

The organizational structure for this planning effort is as below:




The Planning Committee unanimously designated Heart of Texas Council of Governments (HOTCOG) as the Lead Agency. In its role as Lead Agency, HOTCOG will staff and provide day-to-day project management support to the process. HOTCOG staff and/or consultants will conduct work Plan activities attributed to the “Planning Group”. It is expected that the Planning Group will be comprised of designated staff of HOTCOG under the supervision of HOTCOG management; and staff from regional agencies who will provide support to HOTCOG. The Planning Group may also make use of interim Task Forces for specific focused topics (e.g. development of a survey instrument).


The Regional Transportation Coordinating Council (RTCC) will provide project oversight. The RTCC will be comprised of executive-level representatives of agencies involved in the planning and/or delivery of transportation; and of client organizations that provide or require such services; and representatives of customer/client advocacy groups. All meetings of the RTCC will be advertised and open to the public.
The Super Stakeholders group is comprised of the wide array of people and organizations that will be affected by this process and its outcome. The Scoping Group outreach subcommittee developed the following initial listing of stakeholders:


  • Consumers/riders and their representatives

  • People who are disabled, aging, economically disadvantaged

  • Providers of public and private transportation

  • Churches, private-for-hire (taxis, etc.), publicly funded transportation providers

  • Volunteer/ non-profit/ charitable organizations

  • Elected officials/ appointed boards

  • Employers/schools/retail/ Chambers/Economic Development Boards/convention & visitors’ bureaus

  • Adjoining regions – transportation providers

  • Community Resource Coordination Groups (CRCGs)

  • Dialysis Centers/ VA health service locations, Mission Waco, etc.

  • Law Enforcement

The chairperson of the Super Stakeholders group selected at the first meeting will also serve on the RTCC in order to insure coordination of efforts.


The Stakeholders Working Group (SWG) is a subcommittee of the Super Stakeholders. It will be comprised of 10 – 20 representatives of the larger group. The SWG will work with the RTCC and the Lead Agency to insure that the plan receives input and review by constituency groups.
Communications
While the first Task of the Work Plan includes developing the detailed outreach and communications plan, the Scoping Group discussed the importance of an effective communications plan in conforming to the core values of inclusiveness and openness. Initial thoughts are as follows:


  • The kick-off meeting is very important in setting both direction and tone. Mass mailing notices should go out a month in advance of that meeting. A single consolidated contact e-mail list must be developed using the existing 2-1-1 directory and other resources as the foundation.

  • The initial meeting advance communications should include a variety of additional media, including use of television, newspaper (Waco and rural), community calendars, agency newsletters, Public Service Announcements, CRCG meetings and a project website.

  • Surveys need to have multiple “modes” of response, ranging from hand-written to web-based.

  • Focus groups are a key opportunity to reach consumers who do not have telephones or computers. In Task 2 of the Work Plan, potential targeted markets include rural communities, Bi-lingual communities, and finding ways to reach homebound consumers.

In summary, the planning process incorporates both technical and community outreach activities in order to build relationships to identify, develop, sustain and enhance regional transportation coordination efforts.


Task 1: Establish Coordination Plan Goals/Objectives





  1. Review local and national examples of successful coordination projects.

The purpose of the first subtask is to identify examples of successful regional transit coordination projects to serve as background information to assist in explaining the potential of this overall effort to Stakeholders. The research will rely on available, existing sources of information. For example, the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) of the Transportation Research Board (TRB) published several documents with case studies of successful projects. Additional resources include the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA), publications from the coordination programs in other states (Florida, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Ohio, for example) and publications for a variety of federal agencies. The Coordinating Council for Access and Mobility lists coordinated transportation references at http://www.unitedweride.gov/. The National Transit Resource Center provides additional references.


The Planning Group will conduct research and prepare a presentation highlighting the projects, the partnerships, the operational and funding mechanisms employed, the goals for coordinating transportation and the outcomes, with emphasis on measures of performance. The members of the Planning Group will also contribute examples of local transportation programs that have similarity or reflect an opportunity for the Heart of Texas region. In this way, the Planning Group will use this task as a tool to relate national experience to the local transportation environment.
The lessons learned from the national examples of successful coordinated projects will be used in the next activity to draft goals and objectives for the Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan.


  1. Draft goals/objectives for transportation coordination in the Heart of Texas region.

Based on the research in Subtask 1.A., the Planning Group will develop a set of goals and objectives to serve as the focus of the Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan. The language of House Bill 3588 and subsequent instructions of the Texas Transportation Commission’s Study Group provide a starting place for developing goals. The goals for coordinated transportation in Texas are as follows:




  • To improve the delivery of transportation services

  • To generate efficiencies in operation that can lead to increased levels of service

  • To enhance customer service/satisfaction

  • To encourage cooperation and coordination

Based upon guidance from the Regional Transportation Coordinating Council (RTCC) members, the Planning Group will adapt and expand these goals as appropriate for the Heart of Texas region. The Planning Group will develop objectives for each goal for further discussion with members of the RTCC and with Stakeholders.




  1. Refine draft Stakeholder Involvement/Communications plan previously developed during scoping.




    1. Stakeholders will be involved in each task in the Work Plan. During the first month of the project, the planning group will develop a detailed Stakeholder involvement plan.




      1. The preliminary list of stakeholders, identified during scoping, will be expanded to include as many interested agencies, associations, groups and individuals as possible. Stakeholders identified during the scoping process were as follows:




  • Consumers/riders or their representatives

  • People who are disabled, aging, economically disadvantaged

  • Providers of public and private transportation

  • Churches, private-for-hire (taxis, etc.), publicly funded transportation providers

  • Volunteer/ non-profit/ charitable organizations

  • Elected officials/ appointed boards

  • Employers/schools/retail

  • Adjoining regions – transportation providers

  • Community Resource Coordination Groups

  • Dialysis Centers/ VA health service locations, etc.




      1. The method of direct outreach to Stakeholders may vary from task to task. In some instances, a workshop format may be the most appropriate for sharing and discussing information. Other outreach formats that might be considered are stakeholder focus group discussions, public meetings with panel discussions and question and answer exchange with the audience, distribution of printed information or questionnaire, or public meetings with formal presentations and smaller group break-out sessions. The decision on format for stakeholder involvement will be developed and modified as appropriate during the regional planning effort.

      2. Throughout the planning process, additional Stakeholder involvement will come in the format of monthly briefings for the RTCC, status reports to boards and agency leaders, and briefings for elected officials at key points in the process.

      3. The overall communications strategy drafted during scoping will be refined, including a comment and feedback database that catalogues all comments from all sources and venues and documents the ultimate disposition of each comment.




    1. Convene initial meeting with Super Stakeholder Group (SSG). The information to be shared with Stakeholders in the first meeting will include:




      1. Purpose of the Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan and overview of process (RTCC, SSG, etc.).

      2. Presentation on the local and national examples of successful coordination projects.

      3. Copies of draft goals/objectives to solicit feedback on goals, stakeholder concerns. Note that goals/objectives will be re-visited upon completion of inventory process in Task 2.

      4. Proposed communications plan, including any mechanism for general public comment.

      5. Facilitated discussion of the Work Plan to identify Stakeholders’ roles, expectations and/or interests in the planning process.

      6. Identification of Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) to represent SSG over the twelve-month process. Note that SSG will reconvene to review and comment upon draft Regional Transportation Coordination Plan.




  1. Develop draft methodology for evaluation of potential coordination strategies.




    1. During Task 1, the Planning Group will develop a methodology to evaluate coordination strategies. The initial efforts will evolve into a performance-based evaluation of implementation strategies, reflecting input from Stakeholders.




    1. The Planning Group will translate goals and objectives into measures of effectiveness whenever possible. For example, the goal “To increase efficiencies in operation” might have as an objective to “To improve productivity” and the measure of effectiveness might be “Average passenger boardings per hour.” A coordination strategy for one transportation provider to serve the customers of two or more agencies with the same vehicle – and thus increase the passenger boardings with the same resource -- might score well in a performance-based evaluation.




    1. The evaluation of potential coordination strategies will incorporate the concepts of a business model:

      1. Keep the customer first

      2. Focus on the markets to be served

      3. Involve users (current and targeted) in the process

Some customer service based goals may be qualitatively measured.

Task 2: Inventory Current Conditions



EXPECTED OUTCOME: Task 2 features a survey of transportation providers and agencies that provide health and human services in the region to establish a solid baseline of information regarding public transportation services, resources and needs in the region. Existing transit coordination projects will be highlighted.


  1. Identify all transportation providers and social and human service organizations needing or providing transportation for clients in the region. (Include umbrella organizations that administer several programs and understand the challenges, barriers, and restrictions for different programs under the umbrella. Include individual organizations under the umbrella agency as well.)

The purpose of this subtask is to create a comprehensive listing of providers of transportation services to the public, social or human service agencies that provide transportation for clients, and social or human service agencies that serve clients who need transportation. The 2-1-1 Database of approximately 400 organizations can serve as an initial list of agencies. This list can then be augmented through contacting known agencies, including umbrella agencies, to obtain any information they have on peer organizations not already contained on the listing. These agencies will be the survey group for the inventory of current conditions.




  1. Survey providers of transportation services and providers of human services.

The Planning Group will prepare a survey instrument to gather key data from the organizations in Subtask A. These data include the following:


    • A description of the client base, including qualification criteria, trip purpose limitations, client market size and geographic distribution.

    • For service providers, a list of services provided, method of service delivery, quantity of service, fleet size and age, ridership, fare structure and any limitations (geographic, trip purpose, client qualifications).

    • The agency’s sources of income, expenditure levels and any restrictions associated with how financial resources are spent (by income source).

    • A description of any current coordination activities, including the agencies with whom they partner, the contents of the coordination, the mechanism for the arrangement (e.g. contract), the financial and customer benefits accrued through the partnership, and any limitations placed upon the partnership.

    • A listing of customer needs that are currently not being met and the causes for this gap in service. Also, a listing of met needs that are perceived by the agency as requiring excessive resources.

    • A listing of opportunities that the agency sees for activities that would improve the efficiency or effectiveness of services to their customers and the restraints to implementing these improvements.

    • The agency’s observations regarding emerging/long-term trends that are likely to impact their future transportation needs.

The Planning Group will devise a methodology for distribution and gathering of these surveys with an intention of maximizing the response rate to the survey. This methodology should include consideration of multiple paths through which data can be requested and submitted, including mailed survey instruments, internet-based surveys, telephone and personal interviews. The methodology should include a prioritization of data needs and a follow-up process to increase the response rate related to key agencies or specific information needs and have a minimum acceptable response rate


Upon completion of the design of the survey and of the survey administration plan, the Planning Group will convene an advisory panel comprised of representative service providers and client agencies. This advisory panel will review the instrument for clarity and identify any additional data interests (a survey pre-test may be administered if clarity of the instrument is deemed an issue by the advisory panel). The panel will then review the administration plan and provide input on how to achieve a strong response rate. The Planning Group will revise the instrument and administration plan. The Planning Group will then administer the survey in accordance with the plan. If minimum acceptable response rates are not achieved, the Planning Group will take targeted additional steps to achieve these targets (such as telephone or personal interviews).


  1. Gather supplemental information on unserved needs.

As part of the data gathering described above, agencies will be asked to identify unmet service demands as well as services that are not efficiently met. The purpose of this subtask is to augment those data.


The first method of augmenting information will be maximizing use of existing information sources. For example, many organizations maintain logs of service requests that they were not able to fill. Secondly, the Planning Team will conduct detailed focus group discussions with selected key agencies on the topic of unserved transportation needs. Finally, the public will be encouraged to comment on all aspects of public transportation service utilizing mechanisms established by the Planning Group. Methods of collecting public information may include web-based comment systems, central call-in lines, on-street random surveys and/or focus group research. A sound communications plan must be implemented in order to generate public knowledge and interest in responding.


  1. Summarize information about services, providers, available resources and existing needs.

The Planning Group will summarize the results of the data collection effort. The summary report will include a description of the survey administration plan and an analysis of the effectiveness of that plan through a review of response rates by agency type (transportation providers, client agencies using transportation, agencies with clients who need transportation).


The Planning Group will document the results of their survey efforts in tabular form. The data will be summarized in accordance with the break-out elements listed in Task 2 Subtask B. The analysis of unmet needs will incorporate both the general agency survey results and the results of all supplemental efforts to identify unmet needs. The summary will also include a section that documents existing transportation coordination projects in the region and will enumerate the customer service and financial/ operational benefits of these partnerships.


  1. Identify barriers or obstacles to regional transportation coordination

The purpose of this subtask is to catalog the restraints to coordination that will need to be addressed in order to move projects forward to implementation. During the inventory, transportation and service providers and users will have listed limitations that they face in trying to work with other agencies. The following is an initial listing of typical barriers to coordination of services:




  • Vehicle specification. Because of differing client bases, the types of vehicles (size, internal configuration, special equipment) will also differ. This makes shared use of fleets difficult. Other vehicle issues are age and condition of different fleets. Vehicles purchased with federal or State funds must meet the accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; a waiver of this requirement is rarely issued by TxDOT. Further, if State funding is involved, the vehicles must also meet State requirements for use of alternative fuels as defined by TxDOT. TxDOT does not recognize other options to use of clean fuels that are offered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Use of alternative fuels increases the capital cost of the vehicles; may require investment into fueling infrastructure improvements; and may increase the cost of operation of the vehicles.

  • Driver requirements. Different providers have different minimum requirements for their drivers (age, driving record, background, CDL requirements), different training programs, and may have different drug and alcohol testing protocols. These differences may cause insurance coverage difficulties when sharing staff among providers.

  • Client circumstances. Different agencies have different eligibility criteria for clients and often have trip purpose based limitations. Further, practical circumstances related to the client bases can make coordination difficult or impractical (for example, mixing dialysis patients with cognitively disabled youth).

  • Funding silos. Funding challenges are a natural result of the factors listed above. Client service organizations often have funding restrictions associated with client type and/or trip purpose and the structure for reimbursement can also vary (per trip, mileage based), increasing the complexity of combining services under a coordinated provider.

  • Cost structuring. Differing approaches to the allocation of agency expenses can lead to financial issues between collaborating agencies. A common circumstance arises when an agency wants to buy service from a public transit operator. The agency’s perception of the cost of transportation may be only direct, out-of-pocket expenses. The transit operator’s fully allocated cost structure can reflect higher unit costs for services than the agency expects.

  • Regulations and laws. Both regulations and laws can impose conditions that constrain cooperation. Constraints based upon law can be difficult to change because of the time required to address the problem through the legislature.

  • Cross-agency concerns. These concerns center on the areas of both trust and turf. Cooperative ventures require some agencies to turn their clients over to another agency for transportation. There are often concerns about whether clients will continue to receive the same level and quality of service.

  • Resource constraints. Funding limitations can constrain the ability of agencies to develop successful coordination projects, particularly if the project requires capital investment to permit long-term reduction in operating cost.

  • Reporting/Data requirements. Funding, client service and operating agencies may all have specific data informational requirements. Managing those data needs across a series of agencies can complicate consolidation of services.

The information received during the inventory will be categorized in a manner similar to the above. The degree to which a proposed opportunity is affected by these types of constraints will influence the ease of implementation, which will be a factor considered during the evaluation of options.




  1. Report on existing conditions.

The Planning Group will share the findings with Stakeholders (SWG) in outreach efforts as designed in Task 1. Stakeholders meeting(s) will be conducted to provide the opportunity for review and comment on findings.



The findings will then be presented to the RTCC. The RTCC will also re-visit the list of goals for the overall planning effort (see Task 1) and verify/modify them as appropriate based on survey findings and research into unmet needs. After RTCC review and concurrence, the results will be posted to the public Internet site.

Task 3: Identify Opportunities to Achieve Goals for Regional Transportation Coordination



EXPECTED OUTCOME: The purpose of Task 3 is to encourage all planning participants to think creatively about ways to achieve regional transportation coordination in order to enhance service delivery, increase customer satisfaction, and/or improve efficiency and effectiveness.



A. Identify opportunities to leverage existing transportation coordination

projects
One outcome of Task 2 is the highlighting of current coordination activities in the region. These existing efforts provide a springboard for developing potential short-term and long-term additional service enhancement opportunities. One key component of any successful coordination effort is the formation of a working partnership; in the case of existing coordination effort, those relationships are already established. In this subtask, the Planning Group will develop ideas of ways to leverage existing partnerships to enhance the benefits of their arrangement. The Planning Group will also look for comparable situations where this type of partnership would likely succeed.
B. Identify new opportunities to enhance regional transportation services

through coordination.
The purpose of this subtask is to identify new opportunities to enhance service delivery, increase customer satisfaction, and improve efficiency and effectiveness through regional transportation coordination This subtask makes use of information regarding national experience (gathered in Task 1) as well as information related to the region’s current coordination efforts (gathered in Task 2) as catalysts to brainstorming. The Planning Group will develop a list of possible additional coordination projects. This list will include a focus on non-traditional and innovative approaches designing, providing and funding partnerships. The purpose of Task 3 is to build a list of creative options; evaluation of options will occur in following tasks. Any opportunity for immediate action or quick implementation will be highlighted for early Stakeholder and RTCC review as pilot projects.
C. Report on transportation coordination opportunities with Stakeholders.
The Planning Group will share the findings with Stakeholders in outreach efforts as designed in Task 1. The findings will include, at a minimum, a list of opportunities to enhance current coordination efforts, a list of new coordination opportunities, and a list of potential pilot projects. In order to maintain an open and creative environment at this point in the process, communication to the Stakeholders will be written and not shared initially at a public meeting. The Group will seek additional ideas for coordination projects from Stakeholders.
The Report on Opportunities and Stakeholder comments will be updated, reviewed with the RTCC. The RTCC will then revisit the set of evaluation criteria for potential strategies drafted in Task 1. The RTCC will modify these criteria as appropriate for use in Task 4. Opportunities and adopted evaluation criteria will be posted to the Internet site. Pilot projects may also begin implementation based upon the results of this review cycle.

Task 4: Evaluate and Create a Short List of Opportunities for Regional Transportation Coordination



EXPECTED OUTCOME: The purpose of this task is to evaluate the different strategies for regional transportation coordination and to develop a list of the highest ranked projects with specific identification of the barriers or obstacles to implementation.


    1. Evaluate opportunities for regional transportation coordination.

Previously during this planning process, a list of goals, objectives and related evaluation criteria were developed. The Planning Group will now apply these criteria to consideration of all opportunities identified in Task 3. The Planning Group will develop an evaluation matrix that would resemble the following):




Example Evaluation Matrix




























Opportunity 1

Opportunity 2

Opportunity 3

Etc.

EVALUATION CRITERIA













Goal 1, Objective 1













Goal 1, Objective 2













Goal 2, Objective 1













Goal 3, Objective 1













Goal 3, Objective 2













etc.












The table will display information and potentially a scoring of each opportunity across the criteria. This information will identify any immediate action/pilot project opportunities, and will serve to establish an implementation program for a Short List of viable opportunities.





    1. Document the coordination projects with the highest ranking after evaluation; identify required actions to overcome obstacles to implementation and any immediate-action pilot projects.

The Planning Group will identify a Short List of projects that appear to have the greatest return of benefits for the project cost. For opportunities that are short-listed, the Planning Group will identify potential approaches to funding, operations and administration. The Planning Group will also list any obstacles (regulatory and legal) which must be addressed prior to the implementation of an opportunity. The Planning Group will review the matrix to identify any potential pilot projects for immediate action and develop a phasing plan for remaining projects The phasing plan would include, as an element, the steps necessary to overcome specific obstacles and a schedule for that activity.


C. Present evaluation results and priority projects listing.
At this point, the Planning Group is closing in on a plan. In concert with the RTCC and numerous stakeholder organizations, the Planning Group has developed goals and evaluation criteria for projects; developed a list of ideas for projects (both enhancements to current partnerships and creations of new ones); and evaluated the opportunities to create a Short List (as well as a Pilot Project list, if appropriate).
In this subtask, the Planning Group will present the evaluation results and the draft list of priority projects for regional transportation coordination to the SWG, boards of agencies, elected officials and the RTCC for discussion. These groups will provide additional comment for the evaluation matrix, review the Short List, and give any additional guidance or suggestions in evaluating the opportunities.


Task 5: Develop Draft Regional Transportation Coordination Plan



EXPECTED OUTCOME: The purpose of Task 5 is to prepare the complete draft regional transportation coordination plan with specific implementation strategy and schedule for each priority project. The draft will include the steps required to overcome barriers and a plan for ongoing performance evaluation.
A. Develop project description and implementation plan for each priority

project
The overall purpose of Task 5 is to create a Draft Regional Transportation Coordination Plan based upon the Short List and related comments received during Task 4. This first sub-task is designed to create a complete and consistent series of descriptions of each opportunity that was short-listed in Task 4. The project description and implementation plan will include the following information for each opportunity:


  • List the agency/agencies responsible for implementing the project and their respective roles, with a specific “project manager” named. A description of the project approval process for each involved agency will be included.

  • Total the implementation costs, both for project start-up and for the on-going operation of the project.

  • Describe the funding mechanism for the project that ultimately will tie back to the cost information. For each project element, document all funding partners with in-kind contributions fully described. In addition, this section will contain the estimated timeline for funding approvals.

  • Document the benefits of this partnership. This will include qualitative and quantitative measures; and will focus on how the clients/patrons will benefit as well as the agencies themselves.

  • Enumerate any obstacles to implementation. Each obstacle will have a proposed method of resolution noted. The resolution method will include identification of any required action of a policy board or elected governmental entity and timeline/ scheduling implications.

  • Based upon funding requirements and obstacle resolution, the project will have an implementation schedule as well as an assessment of the degree of “risk” to that schedule.



B. Compile draft plan with projects, budgets, funding plans and

implementation schedules.
Programmed by years, the first year of the plan will include two general types of activities. For projects that can be implemented immediately, the Planning Group will enumerate the implementation steps and the schedule for accomplishing each. For projects hindered by constraints, the Planning Group will prepare a timeline and list of action items to complete toward removal of those obstacles.
C. Develop a performance-monitoring plan to evaluate the effectiveness of implemented strategies.
The project description and implementation plan developed in Subtask A included anticipated costs and benefits for each project. The Planning Group will develop a plan to examine actual costs, results and benefits for projects as they are implemented. This information will assist in making decisions on how to improve the effectiveness of a given strategy, and in preparing plan updates.
D. Establish a process for updating and expanding elements of the Regional

Transportation Coordination Plan.
The purpose of this Subtask is to develop a sustainable process for continuing regional planning efforts, including processes for technical plan updating and for on-going Stakeholder communication/ review. The plan will include resources needed for future planning.

Task 6: Complete Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan (2006) and Submit to Texas Transportation Commission



EXPECTED OUTCOME: Complete all necessary steps for review of the draft Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan by Stakeholders, elected officials, policy boards and the public. Finalize the draft Report and submit to the Texas Transportation Commission.

A. Review complete draft regional transportation coordination plan with Stakeholders.
The draft Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan will be subject to a thorough public review process. The Planning Group will publish and distribute the draft Coordination Plan in advance of conducting review meetings with the Super Stakeholders group, elected officials, policy boards, the public, and the RTCC. The purpose of this final review is to assure that the coordination plan fairly reflects the thoughts and desires of the community.
B. Revise plan to reflect comments received from Stakeholders.
The Planning Group will prepare a summary of the public review process along with a list of comments received during the review of the Draft Coordination Plan. Each comment listed will also have a Planner Group response. Most responses will be categorized into one of a set of standardized actions that would include but not be limited to the following: “comment incorporated”, “comment placed in “transit center” or future concerns” (as discussed in the Approach), “comment noted”. This system will provide a complete record of the public review process with a reasonable investment of effort. The Planning Group will update the draft Coordination Plan as appropriate and distribute the final Coordination Plan.

C. Present regional transportation coordination plan to relevant policy boards

for concurrence.
The RTCC will offer to present the final draft of the regional transportation coordination plan to policy boards of the agencies responsible for implementation in the next year for concurrence. The RTCC will modify and then formally approve the final Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan (2006).


D. Submit Plan to Texas Transportation Commission.
The RTCC will submit the Heart of Texas Regional Transportation Coordination Plan (2006) to the Texas Transportation Commission.


1   2   3   4   5


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page