Transportation Planning Gains
Momentum in Rural America

By Matt Chase, Deputy Executive Director, NADO

In 1991, Congress passed landmark legislation that transformed the philosophy of the nation’s highway and transit programs. Among the cornerstones of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), was the new requirement that states and metropolitan areas develop long-range plans and short-term improvement programs that recommend multi-modal solutions for making the transportation system more efficient and effective.

The statewide planning process was crafted to give private sector representatives, local officials and the public an opportunity to help shape transportation policies and investments within their state and region. It also encouraged a stronger partnership between state and local governments, which own and operate a combined 95 percent of the nation’s roadways and nearly all of the public transit systems.

Key Transportation Challenges in Rural America Engaging local officials in the transportation planning process Improving safety as travel continues to increase Preserving and enhancing the environment Supporting economic growth Responding to constant social and demographic changes Source: Serving Rural America, US Department of Transportation

For the first time, transportation planning placed considerable emphasis on the direct relationship between the surface transportation network and the environment, local economic development initiatives and the overall quality of life for residents. ISTEA also required that statewide plans include options for improving all components of the state transportation system, including transit services and facilities, intercity passenger service and enhancements such as pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths.

Involvement of Local Officials in Statewide Planning

Best described as the gateway for accessing federal transportation funds, statewide transportation planning has slowly evolved since its creation in 1991 to the $218 billion highway and transit bill known as the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). Among the most significant advancements for rural America is the growing acknowledgement by Congress and states that rural local officials should be given a clearly defined and more prominent role in the process.

In urban areas, ISTEA provided local elected officials and other key stakeholders with a direct link to the planning and decision making through nearly 340 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). In smaller metropolitan areas, MPOs receive federal assistance to develop local transportation plans in conjunction with the state, while the nation’s largest urban centers (populations over 200,000) are given even more control over planning and project selection.

TEA-21 provides almost three times as many resources each year to state and local governments as HUD’s community development program, EPA’s clean and safe drinking water program, the Economic Development Administration and USDA rural development combined.

At the same time, the 1991 federal law treated rural elected officials as secondary players by leaving almost all of the planning and programming responsibilities with state transportation officials. In essence, an uneven playing field was created with urban elected officials afforded specific responsibilities and resources, while rural local officials were given a minimal consultative role. This double standard occurred despite the fact that nearly 80 percent of the nation’s 3.9 million mile highway network passes through rural America.

Recognizing the inequity, Congress took major steps toward strengthening the involvement of rural local officials under TEA-21. While the new law avoids mandating a specific structure like MPOs for urban areas, the bill encouraged states to use existing regional planning and development organizations to facilitate the participation of rural officials in statewide planning.

Today, state transportation agencies are still using a number of traditional techniques to involve rural officials, such as road shows, public hearings and advisory committees. However, a growing number are tapping into the existing network of economic development districts designated by the Economic Development Administration.

“As regional planning organizations, these entities have years of economic development experience, established links and credibility with local governments, and extensive knowledge of federal and state programs,” said Roger Sheats, Deputy Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Transportation in Raleigh, North Carolina. Many have also developed additional planning capacity through advanced technologies, such as Geographic Information Systems, which were traditionally lacking in most rural communities.

Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, the Department of Transportation (PENNDOT) established a forward-thinking program to reach the state’s regions not served by MPOs. With financial assistance from the state, the existing network of six economic development districts and two independent counties are responsible for research, planning and programming.

The program provides a forum – through technical advisory committees and policy committees – where state, regional and local officials identify issues and opportunities, conduct studies and make informed recommendations regarding transportation investments. Short and long-range plans are produced in each region, and the six regional organizations and the state DOT jointly develop, negotiate and approve their rural portions of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

Rural areas are faced with the imposing challenge of making their roadways safer. As reported by the US General Accounting Office, about 60 percent of the nation’s traffic fatalities in 1999 took place on rural two-lane roads. When adjusted for vehicle miles traveled, some rural local road categories had a fatality rate over six times greater than urban interstates. These statistics are troubling since less than 40 percent of all vehicle miles are traveled on rural roads.

According to both state and local officials, the process has helped build new professional capacity at the local level, bring attention to the long-range planning needs of rural areas and generate plans more closely aligned to community interests. It has also raised awareness of local economic development activities and improved the coordination between statewide plans and regional initiatives.

Georgia
In Georgia, state transportation officials and the 16 regional planning organizations are embarking on a number of innovative initiatives to help improve the rural transportation system. In addition to assisting with public outreach campaigns, each regional organization has implemented a program to use advanced satellite technology to map road centerlines within one meter. As an end result, the state DOT, local governments and the public will have access to a powerful GIS database that includes detailed and accurate information about each road and transportation facility. “About four years ago, we initiated a dialogue with state transportation officials about ways the Regional Development Centers (RDCs) could help enhance the planning process. After studying several models from other states, the state decided to accept our offer. The result is a partnership that produces more local input, improved data collection and stronger planning,” said Vernon Martin, Executive Director of the Coastal Georgia RDC.

Regional organizations are also proving to be valuable resources for the state DOT on historic preservation and land use issues. In addition to assisting the state in evaluating the potential impact of transportation projects on historic sites, the regional organizations are helping state officials reach out to individuals with an interest in historic preservation during environmental reviews. Several regions also collect and forward data to the state on local development approvals, amendments to local development codes and comprehensive plans, and land that may be available for environmental mitigation.

Vermont
In 1992, the Vermont Agency on Transportation launched a new initiative specifically designed to move the planning process to the local and regional levels. This involved creating expanded opportunities for citizen input as well as a forum for local officials to affect state planning and investment decisions.

The state transportation agency partnered and contracted with Vermont’s 12 regional planning commissions to implement the new program since these regional groups already had years of economic development planning experience, and established credibility with local officials and the public. The Regional Planning Council (RPC) process helped the agency comply with both ISTEA and a state law (Act 250) enacted in the late 1980s that requires state agencies to conduct extensive public outreach on infrastructure projects with land use implications.

As part of the annual work program, the RPCs transportation advisory committees are composed of community officials, public transportation providers, interest groups and individual citizens. They prepare long-range transportation plans that identify the goals and objectives for all forms of transportation for up to a 20-year horizon. They identify and prioritize projects for implementation as part of the STIP, and conduct studies on specific transportation problems and issues as needed.

As part of the planning process, the RPCs work together on projects that cross jurisdictional boundaries, such as regional rail and snowmobile issues. They help the state work with local communities to develop multi-modal projects and solutions, to establish more intermodal connections in the future. The RPCs also facilitate improved communication between the state and local communities.

As reinforced in a May 2000 report by the National Academy of Public Administration, states such as Georgia, Pennsylvania and Vermont enjoy a number of benefits when giving local officials a strong role in rural transportation planning. These advantages include increased trust in government, stronger support for implementing plans and projects, and ultimately, better plans that tie into the economic development, land use and livability goals of local communities.

As with urban areas, rural communities across the nation are faced with a daunting set of challenges, such as replacing an aging network of roads and bridges, encroachment or isolation from urban centers, and constantly changing social and economic needs within each community such as a growing elderly population. Without strong partnerships between state and local officials, rural communities will be ill positioned to provide the transportation services needed to sustain viable local economies.

Editor’s note: This article is intended to create discussion and debate. It does not represent the official position of the Economic Development Digest or any of its funders.

June 2002 Index | Next Page