FEDERAL FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION UPDATE

1
FEDERAL FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION UPDATE
Claire Fazio Texas Transportation Institute
2
4 PHASE UPDATE PROCESS

• Pre-Phase I Estimated UZA boundaries prior to
  U.S. Census Bureau Release (34 in Tx)
• Phase I 25 MPOs Smoothed UZA boundaries
• Phase II MPOs update FC inside Metropolitan
  Planning Area Boundary (MAB)
• Phase III 25 TxDOT Districts smooth small urban
  boundaries and update FC outside MAB

3
TERMINOLOGY

• Area types
• Urbanized area (UZA) Population greater than
  50,000
• Small urban area Population between 5,000 and
  49,999
• Urban area Population of 5,000 or greater
  (Includes both urbanized and small urban)
• Rural Everything else

4
PRE-PHASE I

• TxDOT requested TTI estimate new UZA boundaries
  during U.S. Census Bureau Comment period.
• Quantify changes in population and land area for
  UZAs
• Identify new UZAs
• Potential loss of UZAs
• Population changes that may change TMA
  designation
• Summarize how the new guidelines affected UZAs
• Allowed TxDOT and MPOs to provide comments that
  could ultimately affect guidelines

5
PRE-PHASE I

• Estimated UZA boundaries using
• U.S. Census Bureau population data
• Guidelines published in Federal Register
• TransCAD
• A bunch of student workers
• U.S. Census Bureau modified some guidelines
  following comment period

6
PHASES I, II, III

• Ultimate purpose to update functional
  classification

7

• FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION USES AND IMPORTANCE

8
FC USES IMPORTANCE

• Federal functional classification (FC) is used to
  aggregate data for the Highway Performance
  Monitoring System (HPMS).

9
FC USES IMPORTANCE

• HPMS
• Reflects the extent, condition, performance, use,
  and operational characteristics of the Nations
  highways.
• Biennial Condition and Performance Report
  submitted to Congress.
• Federal-aid Highway Program levels
• Federal-aid apportionment
• Federal-aid Highway Program Scope

10
FC USES IMPORTANCE

• HPMS Uses Cont
• Used by Federal, State, local officials to make
  informed transportation-related decisions
• Air quality analysis
• Highway Statistics
• Other reports and plans

11
FC USES IMPORTANCE

• Funding!
• Roadways must be functionally classified higher
  than rural minor collector or urban local to be
  eligible for most federal funding categories
• Many state funding categories use FC to determine
  eligibility
• Many allocation and apportionment formulas use
  data aggregated by FC

12
FC USES IMPORTANCE

• Other uses for FC
• Design Standards
• Roadway design criteria often related to FC

13
WHY THE STATEWIDE EFFORT TO UPDATE FUNCTIONAL
CLASSIFICATION???
14
WHY UPDATE?

• UABs re-designated
• UABs determine urban or rural designation
• FC categories differ for urban rural areas
• Some areas have not updated FC for more than 10
  years!

15
PHASES I - III

• Little institutional knowledge of smoothing urban
  boundaries or updating FC
• Interviewed stakeholders
• TxDOT Systems Planning Section
• TxDOT Traffic Section
• TxDOT Public Transportation
• TxDOT Districts
• MPOs
• FHWA
• Developed procedures, guidebooks, electronic
  maps, inventories, and workshops for Phases I,
  II, and III

16

• PHASE I SMOOTHING UZA BOUNDARIES

17
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Urbanized area boundaries (population 50,000 or
  greater) are basically based on population
  density of census block groups and blocks
• Not well suited for transportation planning
  purposes

18
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Some boundaries shrunk significantly from 1990

19
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Roadways change rural / urban designation many
  times in short distance

20
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Unpopulated urban land uses located on urban
  fringe designated as rural

21
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Because of these reasons TxDOT, FHWA, and FTA
  allowed urban areas to smooth boundaries

22
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Workshops presented to all MPOs and TxDOT
  Districts in Texas
• Presented guidelines for smoothing
• Must include entire 2000 Census designated
  boundary
• May include entire 1990 boundary
• Continuity of roadway FC
• Incorporate fringe urban land uses (populated
  unpopulated)
• Consider traffic volumes
• No land grabs

23
PHASE I SMOOTHING UZAs

• Workshops
• Hard-copy maps showing
• 1990 2000 boundaries with roadway network
• Population density of census blocks
• Provided ArcMap files on CD
• MPOs modified ArcMap files to show proposed
  boundary adjustments
• TxDOT, FHWA, FTA reviewed have approved all
  smoothed UZA boundaries

24

• PHASES II III SMOOTHING SMALL URBAN
  BOUNDARIES UPDATING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION

25
PHASES II III

• Phase II MPOs update FC inside MAB
• Phase III TxDOT Districts smooth small urban
  boundaries update FC outside MAB
• Phases completed simultaneously

26
PHASES II III

• Must update FC in locations where urban boundary
  changed from 1990
• Encouraged to review entire network

27
PHASES II III - NEEDS
FHWA
TxDOT TPP(S)
GIS users
Functional Classification
MPOs
TxDOT Districts
Mainframe users

• Many stakeholders with many needs

28
PHASES II III - NEEDS

• FHWA
• Comply with Federal Guidelines published in
  Highway Functional Classification Concepts,
  Criteria and Procedures Revised March 1989.
• Percent of FC category mileage to total mileage
  must be reported
• MPOs obtain signed approval forms from
• Policy Chair
• TxDOT District Engineer
• Districts obtain signed approval forms from
• All County Judges
• All Mayors of towns in small urban areas
• Deadline for new FCs in HPMS database (December
  2005)

29
PHASES II III NEEDS

• TxDOT Systems Planning Section
• Minimize effort for MPOs and TxDOT Districts
• Current FC coded into ArcMap
• FC Inventories created prior to training
• Hard-copy maps to be marked with desired changes
  and submitted to TTI
• TTI code desired changes into ArcMap (MPOs and
  Districts do not have to use GIS)
• Minimize effort for Data Management
• Ease of data transfer to mainframe database
• Code FC into ArcMap files

30
PHASES II III NEEDS

• TxDOT Systems Planning Section
• Provide easy to interpret materials for FHWA
  TxDOT review
• Printed maps showing proposed changes
• FC Inventories indicating proposed changes
• Deliver consistent message at all workshops
• TxDOT Systems Planning, Data Management, FHWA
  staff at workshops
• Notes taken at each workshop
• Developing FAQ page

31
PHASES II III - NEEDS

• GIS users
• FC not yet coded into roadway network at a
  statewide level
• FC in GIS form useful for many other TxDOT
  projects
• May be able to automate future FC updates

32
PHASES II III - NEEDS

• Mainframe Database
• Biggest Challenge
• Roadway mileages must be reported accurately to
  the one-thousandth of a mile.
• If not accurate, will create two entries into
  database
• Still finalizing process for data transfer

33
PHASES II III - ArcMap
TxDOT Districts
MPOs

• Code FC into ArcMap from hard-copy maps
• Student workers coding FC into ArcMap

34
PHASES II III FC INVENTORY
TxDOT Districts
MPOs
35
PHASES II III
Phase II FC Update Inside the MAB.
AUS, BMT, CRP, DAL, ELP, FTW, and HOU Districts
will be responsible for smoothing small urban
boundaries within the MAB and updating FC within
the smoothed small urban boundaries in Phase I.
TTI Sends Proposed Updates to TxDOT
Workshop
Approved
Approved
MPOs Submit Updates to TTI
TTI Code FC in ArcMap, Create FC Inventory,
Print maps
MPOs Consult with Policy and Technical Committees
TTI Codes FC Into ArcMap
Policy Board Approves FC Updates
TxDOT Reviews Proposed FC
FHWA Reviews Proposed FC
Updated FC Inc. Into Databases for HPMS
Reporting
MPOs Review FC Inside MAB
Suggest Changes
Suggest Changes
MPO Reviews Suggested Changes
36
CONCLUSION

• Tremendous time and resources from
• MPOs
• TxDOT Districts
• TxDOT Systems Planning Section
• TxDOT Data Management Section
• FHWA
• But when completed Texas will have
• A fully updated network
• Existing errors corrected
• FC incorporated into new and evolving
  technologies
• Fully automated future updates?
• Recorded procedures to follow in 2010

37

• QUESTIONS?