No. 41484 (Amendment): Rule R926-2. Evaluation of Proposed Additions to or Deletions from the State Highway System

(Amendment)

DAR File No.: 41484
Filed: 04/19/2017 10:31:40 AM

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

The Department of Transportation completed a five-year review of this rule in September 2016. After the review, the Department determined that the rule is still necessary, but that it needs to be amended and updated to conform to current policy and practices.

Summary of the rule or change:

This amendment clarifies the purpose of the rule, eliminates definitions for terms that are no longer used, eliminates text that sets deadlines and time frames that are no longer valid, eliminates text that makes the Transportation Commission responsible to perform tasks that are now performed by the Department, and makes several technical and grammatical corrections.

Statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

• Section 72-4-102.5
• Section 72-4-102

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

The Department does not anticipate that this amendment will have any impact on the state's budget. The amendment addresses procedures that are internal to the Department and will not have any impact on parties external to the Department, fiscal or otherwise.

local governments:

The Department does not anticipate that this amendment will have any impact on the budgets of local governments. The amendment addresses procedures that are internal to the Department and will not have any impact on parties external to the Department, fiscal or otherwise.

small businesses:

The Department does not anticipate that this amendment will have any impact on the budgets of small businesses. The amendment addresses procedures that are internal to the Department and will not have any impact on parties external to the Department, fiscal or otherwise.

persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:

The Department does not anticipate that this amendment will have any impact on the budgets of persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities. The amendment addresses procedures that are internal to the Department and will not have any impact on parties external to the Department, fiscal or otherwise.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

This amendment makes changes to procedures within the Department. No persons external to the Department will be affected by this amendment.

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

This amendment will not have any fiscal impact on business.

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
Program Development
CALVIN L RAMPTON COMPLEX
4501 S 2700 W
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84119-5998

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 [e-mail]
• James Palmer at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4000, by FAX at 801-965-4338, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]
• Linda Hull at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4253, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

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:

06/14/2017

This rule may become effective on:

06/21/2017

Authorized by:

Carlos Braceras, Executive Director

RULE TEXT

R926. Transportation, Program Development.

R926-2. Evaluation of Proposed Additions to or Deletions from the State Highway System.

R926-2-1. Authority.

This rule establishes the procedure [and criteria ]by which highways shall be considered for the addition to or deletion from the state highway system as required by Utah Code Ann. Section 72-4-102.[5.]

 

R926-2-2. Purpose.

Using the criteria for state highways as provided in Section 72-4-102.5, the department will determine whether to recommend the addition of or deletion from the state highway system a roadway or segment of roadway. The purpose of this rule is to establish the following:

(1) [a]A process for a highway authority to propose additions to or deletions from the state highway system[;], and

(2) [a]A procedure for evaluating requested additions to or deletions from the state highway system .[; and

(3) a set of criteria by which proposed changes shall be consistently evaluated.]

 

R926-2-3. Definitions.

[The terms used in this rule to describe different types of highways shall have the same meaning as provided in Utah State Code under Section 72-4-102.5 which is the same as provided under the Federal Highway Administration Functional Classification Guidelines.]

(1) " C[c]ommission" means the Utah Transportation Commission;

(2) " D[d]epartment" means the Utah Department of Transportation;

(3) " L[l]ocal H[h]ighway A[a]uthority" means the local political subdivision, such as town, city or county responsible for the highway system in that jurisdiction;

[(4) "tourist area" means an area of the state frequented by tourists for the purpose of visiting national parks, national recreation areas, national monuments, or state parks;]

( 4[5]) " T[t]ransfer" means the process of adding or deleting a segment of roadway from one government's highway system to or from another government's highway system;

[(6) "urban area" has the same meaning as provided under the Federal Highway Administration Functional Classification Guidelines.]

 

R926-2-4. Notifications.

The following notifications shall be made regarding the T[t]ransfer of highways.

(1) The D[d]epartment will [annually, on or before September 1st, ]notify the local highway authorities of its intent to collect proposed changes to the state system annually.[with the responding proposals requested to be returned to the department by December 1st.]

[(2) The department shall no later than June 30th of each year notify the Transportation Interim Committee of the Legislature of any proposed transfers.]

( 2[3]) [The commission shall notify the public and any affected local highway authority of any transfer under consideration and provide the opportunity to discuss that proposal at an open public meeting of the commission.]The Department will ensure an affected local highway authority is notified of any transfer under consideration by the Commission at an open public meeting.

( 3[4]) As provided in 72-4-102(4)(a), [T]the C[c]ommission or the Department shall, no later than November 1[st] of each year, notify and provide to the Transportation Interim Committee of the Legislature:

(a) a list of the highways recommended for T[t]ransfer;

(b) a list of potential T[t]ransfers that are currently under consideration; and

(c) a list of T[t]ransfers that were proposed but not agreed to by the D[d]epartment or L[l]ocal H[h]ighway A[a]uthority.

 

R926-2-5. Procedure for Requesting an Addition to or a Deletion from the State Highway System.

A request for the addition to or deletion of a highway from the state highway system shall be made by the Local Highway Authority[government agency] currently responsible for the highway, a member of the Utah Transportation Commission or the Utah Department of Transportation. The request shall be conveyed to the Utah Department of Transportation and will be directed to the region director responsible for the area where the highway is primarily located.

 

R926-2-6. Procedure for Evaluating Proposed Changes to the State System.

The procedure for evaluating proposed changes to the state highway system is as follows:

(1) The [r]Region [d]Director shall:

(a) notify all impacted local government agencies of the proposed change;

(b) make a preliminary review of the proposed change that may include but not be limited to:

(i) determine of what, if any funding will accompany the road T[t]ransfer;

(ii) determine of what, if any, physical improvements may be necessary on the roadway before the T[t]ransfer is completed;

(iii) secure a written statement from the L[l]ocal Highway Authority[government agency] regarding the proposed T[t]ransfer;

(iv) make a judgment as to which highway [agency]authority has the best operational abilities for maintenance and construction activities on the proposed route; and

(v) determine if the highway continuity and the efficiency of state highway system operation and maintenance activities is impacted by the proposed change.

(c) forward the proposed T[t]ransfer along with the results of the preliminary review to the Program Development[Systems Planning and Programming ]Director; and

(d) present and discuss potential road T[t]ransfers at the regularly scheduled monthly Transportation Commission meetings.

(2) The Program Development[Systems Planning and Programming] Director shall review the request from the region director and shall:

(a) determine if the proposed T[t]ransfer meets the criteria in Utah Code Section 72-4-102.5 to qualify for inclusion on the state highway system and is consistent with statewide practice;

(b) with the Director of Program Financing, identify the source of funds, if any, proposed to accompany the T[t]ransfer; and

(c) shall present the evaluation to the C[c]ommission with a recommendation whether the route qualifies for inclusion on the state highway system and any proposed funding considerations;

(3) The C[c]ommission shall review the recommendation and shall:

(a) consider the proposed T[t]ransfer at a public meeting where the affected local officials are invited to discuss and comment on the proposed change;

(b) discuss any funding considerations and the circumstances under which the proposed T[t]ransfer will take place;

(c) take into account any other factors considered appropriate in consultation with the D[d]epartment and L[l]ocal H[h]ighway A[a]uthority impacted;

(d) approve or reject the proposed change in the state highway system;

(e) if it approves the T[t]ransfer, make the required changes to the state highway system by resolution; and

(f) report to the Transportation Interim Committee of the Legislature as detailed in Subsection 926-2-4( 3[4]).

(4) The C[c]ommission may continue to process proposed T[t]ransfers that are currently under consideration by using the same notification and evaluation criteria as presented in this rule.

(5) As provided in 72-4-102, the State Legislature must approve additions to or deletions from the state highway system.[The State Legislature will review the addition to or deletions from the state highway system and shall approve or disapprove the changes.]

 

[R926-2-7. Criteria for Inclusion of Highways in the State Highway System.

Highways requested to be added to or to remain on the state highway system shall be evaluated as follows:

(1) General Criteria:

(a) The primary function of state highways is to provide for the safe and efficient movement of traffic, while providing access to property is a secondary function.

(b) The primary function of county and municipal highways is to provide safe and efficient access to property.

(c) For purposes of this rule, if a highway is within ten miles of a location identified under this section, the location is considered to be served by that highway.

(2) A state highway shall:

(a) serve a statewide purpose by accommodating interstate movement of traffic or interregion movement of traffic within the state;

(b) primarily move higher traffic volumes over longer distances than highways under local jurisdiction;

(c) connect major population centers;

(d) be spaced so that:

(i) all developed areas in the state are within a reasonable distance of a state highway; and

(ii) duplicative state routes are avoided.

(e) provide state highway system continuity and efficiency of state highway system operation and maintenance activities;

(f) include all interstate routes, all expressways, and all highways on the National Highway System as designated by the Federal Highway Administration under 23 C.F.R. Section 470, Subpart A, as of January 1, 2005; and

(g) exclude parking lots, driving ranges, and campus roads.

(3) In addition to the provisions of Subsection (1), in rural areas a state highway shall:

(a) include all minor arterial highways;

(b) include a major collector highway that:

(i) serves a county seat;

(ii) serves a municipality with a population of 1,000 or more;

(iii) serves a major industrial, commercial, or recreation areas that generate traffic volumes equivalent to a population of 1,000 or more;

(iv) provides continuity for the state highway system by providing major connections between other state highways;

(v) provides service between two or more counties; or

(vi) serves a compelling statewide public safety interest; and

(c) exclude all minor collector streets and local roads.

(4) In addition to the provisions of Subsection (1), in urban areas a state highway shall:

(a) include all principal arterial highways;

(b) include a minor arterial highway that:

(i) provides continuity for the state highway system by providing major connections between other state highways;

(ii) is a route that is expected to be a principal arterial highway within ten years; or

(iii) is needed to provide access to state highways; and

(c) exclude all collector highways and local roads.

(5) In addition to the provisions of Subsections (2) and (3), in tourist areas, a state highway:

(a) shall include a highway that:

(i) serves a national park or a national recreational area; or

(ii) serves a national monument with visitation greater than 100,000 per year; or

(b) may include a highway that:

(i) serves a state park with visitation greater than 100,000 per year; or

(ii) serves a recreation site with a visitation greater than 100,000 per year.]

 

KEY: transportation planning, highway planning, highways, transportation

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [July 28, 2006]2017

Notice of Continuation: September 8, 2016

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 72-4-102.5

---