DAR File No. 44104
This rule was published in the October 15, 2019, issue (Vol. 2019, No. 20) of the Utah State Bulletin.
Transportation Commission, Administration
Rule R940-6
Prioritization of New Transportation Capacity Projects
Notice of Proposed Rule
(Repeal and Reenact)
DAR File No.: 44104
Filed: 09/25/2019 04:16:57 PM
RULE ANALYSIS
Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:
The Legislature passed S.B. 72 in the 2019 General Session to amend provisions of the Utah Code related to transportation including transportation reinvestment zones, public transit districts, local option sales and use taxes, transportation governance, and a road usage charge program. The existing Rule R940-6 applies to road transportation projects, the 2019 amendments add prioritization of transit projects and other things to the Transportation Commission's (Commission) responsibilities.
Summary of the rule or change:
Section 72-1-304 as amended by S.B. 72 (2019) mandates that the Commission maintain an administrative rule that develops a written prioritization process that prioritizes: a) new transportation capacity projects, b) paved pedestrian or paved nonmotorized transportation projects that mitigate traffic congestion on the state highway system and are part of an active transportation plan approved by the department, c) public transit projects that add capacity to the public transit systems within the state, and d) pedestrian or nonmotorized transportation projects that provide connection to a public transit system. This replacement to Rule R940-6 satisfies this mandate.
Statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:
- Subsection 72-1-304(4)
Anticipated cost or savings to:
the state budget:
This proposed replacement rule may lead to a fiscal impact on the state's budget. The fiscal impact may be positive or negative. The Commission will not be able to determine with certainty what the fiscal impact will be until it has been following the new procedures for several years.
local governments:
This proposed replacement of Rule R940-6 is not likely to lead to fiscal impact to the budgets of local governments. It provides a process through which local governments and districts may nominate a project for prioritization in accordance with the process set forth in the rule. This nomination process may should lead to efficient and effective transportation and transit systems that benefit commerce and the general populations of local governments and districts. However, such impacts will be extremely difficult to calculate and will only be realized over time.
small businesses:
This proposed replacement of Rule R940-6 may lead to a fiscal impact on businesses and individuals in Utah, which may be a net savings. This replacement rule has the Commission prioritize transit and transit related projects in addition to road transportation projects. The prioritization process is to be conducted in a public forum where businesses and individuals are able to provide input about the road and transit projects being prioritized. This public process should lead to efficient and effective transportation and transit systems that benefit commerce and the general population of the state. However, such impacts will be extremely difficult to calculate and will only be realized over time.
persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:
This proposed replacement of Rule R940-6 may lead to a fiscal impact on persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities in Utah, which impact may be a net savings. This replacement rule has the Commission prioritize transit and transit related projects in addition to road transportation projects. The prioritization process is to be conducted in a public forum where businesses and individuals are able to provide input about the road and transit projects being prioritized. This public process should lead to efficient and effective transportation and transit systems that benefit commerce and the general population of the state. However, such impacts will be extremely difficult to calculate and will only be realized over time.
Compliance costs for affected persons:
There should not be any compliance costs for affected persons. This proposed replacement rule does not require anything from any private person or entity.
Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:
This proposed replacement rule will not have an immediately measurable fiscal impact on businesses.
Carlos Braceras, Executive Director
The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Office of Administrative Rules, or at:
Transportation CommissionAdministration
CALVIN L RAMPTON COMPLEX
4501 S 2700 W
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84119
Direct questions regarding this rule to:
- Christine Newman at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4026, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]
- James Palmer at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4000, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]
- Linda Hull at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4253, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]
- Lori Edwards at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4048, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]
Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:
11/14/2019
This rule may become effective on:
11/21/2019
Authorized by:
Carlos Braceras, Executive Director
RULE TEXT
Appendix 1: Regulatory Impact Summary Table*
Fiscal Costs |
FY 2020 |
FY 2021 |
FY 2022 |
State Government |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Local Government |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Small Businesses |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Non-Small Businesses |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Other Persons |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Total Fiscal Costs: |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Benefits |
|
|
|
State Government |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Local Government |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Small Businesses |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Non-Small Businesses |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Other Persons |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
Total Fiscal Benefits: |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
|
|
|
|
Net Fiscal Benefits: |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
*This table only includes fiscal impacts that could be measured. If there are inestimable fiscal impacts, they will not be included in this table. Inestimable impacts for State Government, Local Government, Small Businesses and Other Persons are described in the narrative. Inestimable impacts for Non-Small Businesses are described in Appendix 2.
Appendix 2: Regulatory Impact to Non-Small Businesses
1) This filing repeals and reenacts the existing Rule R940-6. It establishes procedures the Transportation Commission (Commission) will follow to satisfy the requirements of Section 72-1-304 as amended by S.B. 72 passed in the 2019 General Session of the Legislature to prioritize new transportation capacity projects.
2) The Legislature passed S.B. 72 (2019) to amend provisions of the Utah Code related to transportation including transportation reinvestment zones, public transit districts, local option sales and use taxes, transportation governance, and a road usage charge program. The existing Rule R940-6 applies to road transportation projects, the 2019 amendments add prioritization of transit projects and other things to the Commission's responsibilities.
3) Section 72-1-304 as amended by S.B. 72 (2019) mandates the Commission maintain an administrative rule that develops a written prioritization process that prioritizes:
a) New transportation capacity projects,
b) paved pedestrian or paved nonmotorized transportation projects that mitigate traffic congestion on the state highway system and are part of an active transportation plan approved by the department,
c) public transit projects that add capacity to the public transit systems within the state, and
d) pedestrian or nonmotorized transportation projects that provide connection to a public transit system.
This replacement to Rule R940-6 does those things.
4) This proposed reenactment of Rule R940-6 may lead to a fiscal impact on businesses and individuals in Utah, which may be a net savings. This reenacted rule has the Commission prioritize transit and transit-related projects in addition to road transportation projects. The prioritization process is to be conducted in a public forum where businesses and individuals are able to provide input about the road and transit projects being prioritized. This public process should lead to efficient and effective transportation and transit systems that benefit commerce and the general population of the state. However, such impacts will be extremely difficult to calculate and will only be realized over time.
5) The executive director of the Department has reviewed and approves this analysis.
R940. Transportation, Administration.
R940-6. Prioritization of New Transportation Capacity Projects.
[R940-6-1. Definitions.
(1) "ADT" means average daily traffic, which is
the volume of traffic on a road, annualized to a daily
average.
(2) "Capacity" means the maximum hourly rate at
which vehicles reasonably can be expected to traverse a point or
a uniform section of a lane or roadway during a given time period
under prevailing roadway, traffic, and control
conditions.
(3) "Commission" means the Transportation
Commission, which is created in Section 72-1-301.
(4) "Economic Development" may include such
things as employment growth, employment retention, retail sales,
tourism growth, freight movements, tax base increase, and
traveler or user cost savings in relation to construction
costs.
(5) "Functional Classification" means the
description of the road as one of the following:
(a) Rural Interstate;
(b) Rural Other Principal Arterial;
(c) Rural Minor Arterial;
(d) Rural Major Collector;
(e) Urban Interstate;
(f) Urban Other Freeway and Expressway;
(g) Urban Other Principal Arterial;
(h) Urban Minor Arterial; or
(i) Urban Collector.
(6) "Major New Capacity Project" means a
transportation project that costs more than $5,000,000 and
accomplishes any of the following:
(a) Add new roads and interchanges;
(b) Add new lanes; or
(c) Modify existing interchange(s) for capacity or
economic development purpose.
(7) "Mobility" means the movement of people and
goods.
(8) "MPO" as used in this section means
metropolitan planning organization as defined in Section
72-1-208.5.
(9) "Safety" means an analysis of the current
safety conditions of a transportation facility. It includes an
analysis of crash rates and crash severity.
(10) "Strategic Goals" means the Utah
Department of Transportation strategic goals.
(11) "Strategic Initiatives" means the
implementation strategies the department will use to achieve the
strategic goals.
(12) "Transportation Efficiency" is the roadway
attributes such as ADT, truck ADT, volume to capacity ratio,
roadway functional classification, and transportation
growth.
(13) "Transportation Growth" means the
projected percentage of average annual increase in ADT.
(14) "Truck ADT" means the ADT of truck traffic
on a road, annualized to a daily average.
(15) "Volume to Capacity Ratio" means the ratio
of hourly volume of traffic to capacity for a transportation
facility (measure of congestion).
R940-6-2. Authority and Purpose.
Section 72-1-304, as enacted by Senate Bill 25, 2005
General Session, directs the commission, in consultation with the
department and the metropolitan planning organizations in the
state, to make rules that establish a prioritization process for
new transportation projects that meet the department's
strategic goals. This rule fulfills that directive.
R940-6-3. Application of Strategic Initiatives to
Projects.
The department will use the strategic goals to guide the
process:
(1) The department will first seek to preserve current
infrastructure and to optimize the mobility provided by the
existing highway infrastructure before applying funds to increase
mobility by adding new lanes.
(2) The department will address means to improve the
mobility provided by the existing system through technology like
intelligent transportation systems, access management,
transportation demand management, and others.
(3) The department will assess safety through projects
addressed in paragraph (1) and (2) above. The department will
also target specific highway locations for safety
improvements.
(4) Adding new capacity projects will be recommended
after considering items in paragraph (1), (2) and (3).
(5) All recommendations will be forwarded to the
Transportation Commission for its review/action.
R940-6-4. Prioritization of Major New Capacity Projects
List.
(1) Major new capacity projects will be compiled from the
State of Utah Long Range Transportation Plan.
(2) The list will be first prioritized based upon
transportation efficiency factors, and safety factors. Each
criterion of these factors will be given a specific
weight.
(3) The major new capacity projects will be ranked from
highest to lowest with priority being assigned to the projects
with highest overall rankings.
(4) The commission will further evaluate the projects
with highest rankings considering contributing components that
include other factors such as economic development.
(5) For each major new capacity project, the department
will provide a description of how completing that project will
fulfill the department's strategic goals.
(6) In the final selection process, the commission may
consider other factors not listed above. Its decision will be
made in a public meeting forum.
R940-6-5. Commission Discretion.
The commission, in consultation with the department and
with MPOs, may establish additional criteria or use other
considerations in prioritizing major new capacity projects. If
the commission prioritizes a project over another project that
has a higher rank under the criteria set forth in R940-6-4, the
commission shall identify the change and the reasons for it, and
accept public comment at one of the public hearings held pursuant
to R940-6-7.
R940-6-6. Need for Local Government Participation for
Interchanges.
New interchanges for economic development purposes on
existing roads will not be included on the major new capacity
project list unless the local government with geographical
jurisdiction over the interchange location contributes at least
50% of the cost of the interchange from private, local, or other
non-UDOT, funds.
R940-6-7. Public Hearings.
Before deciding the final prioritization list and funding
levels, the commission shall hold public hearings at locations
around the state to accept public comments on the prioritization
process and on the merits of the projects.]
R940-6-1. Authority and Purpose.
(1) Authority. The Commission makes this administrative rule pursuant to authority delegated by Utah Code Section 72-1-304(4).
(2) Purpose. This administrative rule is to provide a procedure the Commission will follow to satisfy the requirements of Utah Code Section 72-1-304.
R940-6-2. Definitions.
(1) "Commission" means the Utah Transportation Commission created by Utah Code Subsection 72-1-301(1).
(2) "Department" means the Utah Department of Transportation created by Utah Code Subsection 72-1-201(1).
(3) "Department Approved Active Transportation Plan" means an active transportation plan that the Department has reviewed and approved.
(4) "Fixed Guideway Public Transit" means a public transit facility that uses or occupies rail for the use of public transit or a separate right-of-way for the use of public transit such as bus rapid transit systems.
(5) "Fund Allocation Percentage" means the percentage of funding for a TIF Active Transportation project, TTIF First & Last Mile project, or TTIF Transit project coming from TIF or TTIF funds.
(6) "Fund Request Amount" means the funding amount requested by a local government or district from either TIF or TTIF for a TIF Active Transportation project, TTIF First & Last Mile project, or TTIF Transit project.
(7) "In-kind match" means non-cash matches including services (labor), right-of-way, construction materials, or labor/equipment time valued at fair market value.
(8) "Match" means the 40% matching funds required by and detailed in Utah Code Subsections 72-2-124(4)(a)(viii) and 72-2-124(9)(e).
(9) "Long-Range Transportation Plan" or "LRP" means any one of the five plans developed by the Department and the state's four MPOs that forecast the state's transportation needs for the next 20- plus years, also known as the Regional Transportation Plans or RTPs.
(10) "Metropolitan planning organization" or "MPO" means the same as it is defined by Utah Code Subsection 72-1-208.5(1).
(11) "Required Match Percentage" means the match percentage (40%) required for TIF Active Transportation projects, TTIF First & Last Mile projects, and TTIF Transit projects.
(12) "Statewide strategic initiative" or "SSI" means initiatives the Department is required to develop and adopt by Utah Code Section 72-1-211.
(13) "Strategic Goals" means the Utah Department of Transportation's strategic goals.
(14) "TIF Active Transportation Projects" means paved pedestrian or paved nonmotorized transportation projects per Utah Code Section 72-2-124
(15) "TIF Highway Projects" means projects on state highways per Utah Code Section 72-2-124.
(16) "Transportation Investment Fund" or "TIF" means the capital projects fund created in 2005 by Utah Code Subsection 72-2-124(1).
(17) "Transit Transportation Investment Fund" or "TTIF" means the fund within the Transportation Investment Fund of 2005 created by Utah Code Section 72-2-124(9).
(18) "TTIF First & Last Mile Projects" means pedestrian or nonmotorized transportation projects that provides connection to a public transit system per Utah Code Section 72-2-124.
(19) "TTIF Transit Projects" means public transit capital development projects per Utah Code Subsection 72-2-124.
(20) "UDOT Planning" or "Planning" means the Planning Division of the Program Development Group of the Utah Department of Transportation.
R940-6-3. Prioritization Requirements.
The Commission, in consultation with the Department and the MPOs, will develop a written prioritization process to determine priorities and funding levels of projects in the state transportation systems and capital development of new public transit facilities for each fiscal year, taking into consideration the Department's strategic initiatives in Section 72-1-211 and the Department's Strategic Goals.
R940-6-4. Prioritization Process.
(1) The Commission's written prioritization process, developed pursuant to the requirements of Utah Code Section 72-1-304 and called "New Transportation Capacity Project Prioritization Process" having been reviewed and its implementation voted on in a properly noticed public meeting, is incorporated by reference and may be accessed at this Internet address: udot.utah.gov/go/projectprioritizationprocess.
(2) The Commission will review the written prioritization process annually.
(a) The Commission will call for and hear public input on the prioritization process during the review of the process.
(b) The Commission will provide notice of proposed amendments to the prioritization process in a public meeting, and amend the prioritization process following the public meeting, and after allowing public comments. Amendments to the prioritization process will not affect projects that have already been funded.
(c) If a TIF Highway Project is identified in Phase 1 of the LRP and the total project cost estimate is more than $5,000,000 it will be included in the annual prioritization of projects.
(d) The Commission may consider additional projects for prioritization beyond those identified in Phase I of the LRP if during the development of the LRP they were determined to be a Phase I need.
R940-6-5. Requirements and Process for Project Nomination by Local Government or District.
(1) Local governments or districts may nominate projects for prioritization.
(2) The nomination process is as follows:
(a) TIF Highway Projects.
(i) A local government or district may submit to the Commission a written nomination for a project to be included in the prioritization process. Nominations must identify the project sponsor's name, address, phone number, and email address and include a detailed description of the nominated project including why the project is important to the local government or district.
(ii) The Commission will determine if the nominated projects will be included in the annual prioritization of projects. The factors used in this determination may include, but are not limited to the following:
(A) If, during the development of the LRP, the Project was determined to be a Phase I need.
(B) If there are any proposed additional funding sources.
(C) The Commission will prioritize projects annually.
(b) TIF Active Transportation Projects.
(i) A local government or district may nominate a project to the Transportation Commission in a format determined by the Commission. Nominations must identify the project sponsor's name, address, phone number, and email address and include a detailed description of the nominated project. The nomination must also demonstrate the following requirements:
(A) That the project is in a Department Approved Active Transportation Plan; and
(B) that the project will mitigate traffic congestion on the state highway system; and
(C) that the local government or district will be responsible for the maintenance of the facility; and
(D) how the 40% match requirement will be met.
(I) The match may be an in-kind match; and
(II) The required match amount will be calculated as follows:
The Fund Request Amount divided by the Fund Allocation Percentage multiplied by the Required Match Percentage.
For example:
For a Fund Request Amount of $600,000 a Fund Allocation Percentage of 60 % and a Required Match Percentage of 40 % the required match amount would be $400,000. ($600,000 divided by 0.6) times 0.4 equals $400,000.
(III) If a nominated project meets the requirements it will be included in the annual prioritization of projects.
(IV) The Commission may request additional information from the project sponsor.
(V) The Commission will prioritize projects annually.
(c) TTIF Transit Projects.
(i) A local government or district may nominate a project to the Transportation Commission in a format determined by the Commission. Nominations must identify the project sponsor's name, address, phone number, and email address and include a detailed description of the nominated project. The nomination must also demonstrate the following requirements:
(A) That there is an ongoing funding plan for maintenance and operations. If the project sponsor is a local government this will require consultation with the transit operator to determine if the plan is consistent with the transit operator's maintenance and operations planning.
(B) How the 40 % match requirement will be met.
(I) The match may be an in-kind match; and
(II) The required match amount will be calculated as follows:
The Fund Request Amount divided by the Fund Allocation Percentage multiplied by the Required Match Percentage.
For example:
For a Fund Request Amount of $600,000 a Fund Allocation Percentage of 60 % and a Required Match Percentage of 40 % the required match amount would be $400,000. ($600,000 divided by 0.6) times 0.4 equals $400,000.
(C) If the nominated project would provide new fixed guideway public transit service, the project is identified in Phase 1 of the LRP or, during the development of the LRP, the Project was determined to be a Phase 1 need.
(I) If a nominated project meets the requirements it will be included in the annual prioritization of projects.
(II) The Commission may request additional information from the project sponsor. (iv) The Commission will prioritize projects annually.
(d) TTIF First & Last Mile Projects.
(i) A local government or district may nominate a project to the Transportation Commission in a format determined by the Commission. Nominations must identify the project sponsor's name, address, phone number, and email address and include a detailed description of the nominated project. The nomination must also demonstrate the following requirements:
(A) That the local government or district will be responsible for the maintenance of the facility; and
(I) how the 40 % match requirement will be met.
(II) The match may be an in-kind match; and
(III) The required match amount will be calculated as follows:
The Fund Request Amount divided by the Fund Allocation Percentage multiplied by the Required Match Percentage.
For example: For a Fund Request Amount of $600,000 a Fund Allocation Percentage of 60 % and a Required Match Percentage of 40 % the required match amount would be $400,000. ($600,000 divided by 0.6) times 0.4 equals $400,000.
(B) That the project will connect and improve access to transit.
(I) If a nominated project meets the requirements it will be included in the annual prioritization of projects.
(II) The Commission may request additional information from the project sponsor.
(III) The Commission will prioritize projects annually.
R940-6-6. Commission Discretion.
The Commission, in consultation with the Department, may establish additional criteria or use other considerations in establishing funding levels for capacity projects. If the Commission funds a project over another project that has a higher prioritization rank under the criteria set forth in R940-6-4, the Commission will identify the change and the reasons for it and accept public comment at a public meeting.
KEY: transportation commission, [transportation,
]roads,
transit
capacity
Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [July 9, 2012]2019
Notice of Continuation: November 3, 2015
Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 72-1-201; 72-1-304
Additional Information
More information about a Notice of Proposed Rule is available online.
The Portable Document Format (PDF) version of the Bulletin is the official version. The PDF version of this issue is available at https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bull_pdf/2019/b20191015.pdf. The HTML edition of the Bulletin is a convenience copy. Any discrepancy between the PDF version and HTML version is resolved in favor of the PDF version.
Text to be deleted is struck through and surrounded by brackets ([example]). Text to be added is underlined (example). Older browsers may not depict some or any of these attributes on the screen or when the document is printed.
For questions regarding the content or application of this rule, please contact Christine Newman at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4026, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]; James Palmer at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4000, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]; Linda Hull at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4253, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]; Lori Edwards at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4048, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]. For questions about the rulemaking process, please contact the Office of Administrative Rules.