Transportation Planning Capacity Building Program

– Peer Workshop Report –

Rural Transportation Planning

Printable version (PDF)

Table of Contents

1. Summary
2. Background
3. Speaker Presentations
   1. Impacts of Transportation on Economic Development in West Virginia
   2. West Virginia Modal Presentations
   3. West Virginia Statewide Plan
   4. West Virginia Rural Planning & Development Council Example
   5. Keynote Presentation via the TPCB Peer-to-Peer Exchange Program
   6. Intermodal Facilities — Solutions to Rural Freight Issues and Economic Development Considerations
4. Facilitated Breakout Sessions
5. Concluding Remarks / Peer Expert Recommendations
6. For More Information
7. Attachments
   1. Agenda
   2. List of Participants
   3. Workshop Evaluation Form

I. Summary

The following report summarizes the results of a Peer Workshop held through the Transportation Planning Capacity Building (TPCB) Program, which is jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

The FHWA West Virginia Division office, the West Virginia Department of Highways and the Rahall Transportation Institute co-hosted a one-day workshop focused on rural transportation planning and more specifically how best to kick–off the update to West Virginia's Statewide Transportation Plan. More than seventy conference participants attended the session.

Experts from throughout West Virginia and FHWA gave presentations on their work and issues with which they are currently dealing. After the presentations, audience members were invited to join the discussion. Amy Kessler, Transportation Planning Director for the North Central Regional Planning Organization was invited to present her experiences with an established rural planning organization from Pennsylvania.

Major topics of Ms. Kessler's presentation included the roles and responsibilities of an RPO in PA, how they are funded, their involvement in statewide transportation planning, TIP, LRTP and UPWP development, the Local Technical Assistance (LTAP) program, and most importantly lessons learned.

back to top

II. Background

The state of West Virginia is embarking on their first non-policy level Statewide Transportation Plan. Because WVDOT has responsibility for approximately 95% of the highway system, input and interest from its rural planning partners has waned in recent years. The co-sponsors of the workshop see this as an opportunity to spur the input and interest from rural and local planning partners, which will strengthen the statewide planning process.

The overall benefit from this peer–to–peer assistance is the strengthening of the rural planning process in West Virginia. The Workshop co–sponsors see this effort as a building block for future planning efforts throughout the state. The workshop's facilitated afternoon sessions were designed to brainstorm ways to improve rural transportation planning in West Virginia.

back to top

III. Speaker Presentations

A. Impacts of Transportation on Economic Development in West Virginia:

H. Tom Brown – Director of Community and Public Works, City of Bridgeport, West Virginia

• Gave many examples of economic development activity in the Bridgeport region.
• "Transportation planned well leads to economic development."

B. West Virginia Modal Presentations:

Cindy Butler – WVDOT State Rail Authority

• Railroads are the economic lifelines to the communities they serve.
• West Virginia has "rail banked" 260 miles of rail lines that serve as trails now, but could be returned later to rail service.
• West Virginia owns and operates two shortline rail roads.

Susan Chernenko – WVDOT Aeronautics Commission

• Described West Virginia's small, but growing air service system.
• Noted that access to the air facility is key to its success, and that runway length can be a determining factor in a facility's success.

Jim Sothen – WVDOT Division of Highways

• It will take 200+ years of funding at the current rate to cover all of the transportation needs West Virginia has identified for the next 20 years.

Fawn Thompson – Federal Highway Administration, Resource Center, Atlanta, GA

• Presented the basics of the federal-aid system.
• Provided examples of different MPO and State DOT Planning products
• Introduced the concept of project selection and prioritization.

C. West Virginia Statewide Plan: Wes Stafford – Wilbur-Smith & Associates Indicated that this event is the kick-off meeting for the update of the WV Statewide Transportation Plan. Development of the Statewide plan can be an 18 month to 2 year process. Noted that the plan provides a blueprint for capital development The process will be strong on public participation The process and plan will coordinate land use and economic development The plan will look at all modes and touch on: Economic Development Tourism Freight/Goods Movement Program Development Additional funding is NOT a given Will need to look at priorities, choices and consequences Scenario planning Modernization Preservation Expansion

Figure 1: Wes Stafford presenting the kick-off of the WV Statewide Transportation Plan.

back to top

D. West Virginia Rural Planning & Development Council Example:

Fred Rader – Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council, Parkersburg, WV

• WV includes
  • 11 Regional Development Councils
  • 6 of them are MPOs
  • 5 have no planning staff in-house
• Work through many national and regional associations
  • National Association of Development Organizations (NADO)
  • Rural Planning Organizations of America (RPO America)
• Local agencies are concerned about not being able to set transportation planning and programming priorities within their regions.

E. Keynote Presentation via the TPCB Peer-to-Peer Exchange Program: Amy Kessler — North Central Rural Planning Organization, Ridgway, Pennsylvania An RPO in Pennsylvania is an organization of local stakeholders who provide a forum for local decision-making on transportation issues of a regional nature Originally established in 1992 based on the 7 Appalachian Regional Commission's Local Development Districts or LDD's RPOs have the exact same primary planning responsibilities as MPOs in PA UPWP TIP LRTP Public Participation

Figure 2: Amy Kessler's presentation on the rural transportation planning process in Pennsylvania.

• How are RPOs funded in PA?
  • Funding is allocated to PA RPOs based on a formula that accounts for population, land area, and the complexity of the area's transportation system
    • Federal funds from FHWA and FTA (STP)
    • State Government
    • Local Government
    • Public Private Partnerships
• RPO Plan and TIP development follow the same process that an MPO would follow
• Lessons learned include:
  • Need an RPO champion at the state and regional levels.
  • Increased awareness at the local level of how projects get funded.
  • The process must be a collaborative effort.
  • Communication is the key to success.
  • Staffing – regional planning issues have become more complex and require greater technical skills.

To see Amy Kessler's presentation, click here:
http://web2.ncentral.com/transportation/PDF/WV_1JUNE07_Presentation.pdf

back to top

Keynote Presentation Q&A:

• How is funding allocated to the RPOs in PA?
  • Similar to how funding is allocated to the MPOs in PA
  • TIP funding is formula-based decided in collaboration with PennDOT and other planning partners through a series of financial guidance workgroups
• How do you set priorities for project implementation at the local/rural/regional level?
• Collaborative process of identifying projects with PennDOT, County Planners, local officials and the public
• Understanding the trends and issues affecting the region, needs of the system.
• How are very large projects funded in rural areas if they exceed the targeted regional allocation?
• As a part of the collaboratively-developed financial guidance, the state DOT has an allocation of "Spike" funding that it uses to supplement regional target allocations for large, statewide important projects.

F. Intermodal Facilities — Solutions to Rural Freight Issues and Economic Development Considerations:

Mark Hammond — US Army Corp of Engineers

• Efficient use of the state's waterways will allow the regions to prosper.
• Access to surface transportation is key to a successful waterway system.
• The Port of Huntington is the largest inland port in the US, and one of the largest ports in terms of tonnage moved.
• Do not forget waterways in the Statewide Plan.

Dr. Robert Smith — Virginia Tech Department of Wood Science

• 44 counties in rural WV generate 90% of the state's timber exports.
• Traditionally these are small family-run businesses with fewer than 30 employees.
• In the 1990s 7,000 jobs were lost in timber business in WV.
• Today 55% of solid wood furniture is imported from China.

Dr. Dave Nutter — Virginia Tech Department of Economic Development

• Roanoke Valley, VA Intermodal Terminal
• A fee on rental cars in this region generates $23M/yr for rail projects.
• Public Involvement is key to the development of these types of projects.
• With public money comes public accountability.

back to top

IV. Facilitated Breakout Sessions

After the panelists completed their presentations, the discussion transitioned into facilitated breakout sessions. Moderators posed two identical questions to participants in each breakout session. At the conclusion of the facilitated session, participants in each group were asked to vote on their top solutions for each question.

• Tom highlighted the top items for the upcoming WVDOT Statewide Transportation Plan.

Question 1 – Key focus areas for the upcoming WVDOT Statewide Transportation Plan:

• Economic development.
• Utilizing a corridor approach to analyze transportation needs.
• Maintenance of the existing system should be given priority over system expansion.
• Integration of the statewide plan with existing MPO transportation plans.
• Development of an objective and transparent project selection process.
• Ensuring an equitable share of transportation resources for rural areas in WV.

Question 2 – Mechanisms to help rural entities and State officials work together:

• The WVDOT should conduct regional group meetings on a recurring basis to gather input on transportation issues.
• Need to develop a statewide freight task force including members that would cut across all modes, urban and rural, private sector, shippers, etc.
• The WVDOT needs to develop a more user-friendly website that encourages public input.
• The WVDOT should lead an effort to initiate state mandated county comprehensive plans.
• The WVDOT should utilize the Regional Planning & Development Councils more effectively to plan and advance transportation projects.
• The WVDOT should consider and develop additional funding options for transportation.

Figure 3: One of two facilitated breakout groups discussing next steps
and the future of rural transportation planning in West Virginia

back to top

V. Concluding Remarks / Peer Expert Recommendations

Each participant was asked to fill out an evaluation form at the end of the session.

• As a whole, the feedback was very positive; participants rated the presentations and the format as being a positive networking opportunity.
• Positive aspects specifically included the chance to hear from other states (PA), and to learn how an RPO could function within the planning process.
• See Appendix C for sample evaluation form and an analysis of the responses that were turned in at the completion of the workshop.

back to top

VI. For More Information

The FHWA West Virginia Division Office organized this workshop, and will serve as the main point of contact for future rural planning initiatives in the state.

back to top

VII. Attachments

A. Workshop Agenda

back to top

back to top

What was the most valuable part of this workshop?

What you would like to see improved in the workshop (for example, issues to discuss in greater detail or other strategies or tools to include)?

List one or two ideas, procedures, methods, principles or theories gained from this workshop that you can readily apply when you return to your job.

List other trainings that would be useful to you.

We appreciate your thoughts and participation in this workshop.

What Do You Know About Rural Transportation Planning?

You may already possess some knowledge of transportation planning. This evaluation will help you and us to assess the degree to which you increased your knowledge and understanding as a result of this workshop. The following is a list of subjects that may be covered in the workshop you will be taking.

Instructions: Please rate your level of competence in each one by placing the appropriate scale number in the appropriate column.

1 = I have no knowledge in this area.
2 = I have some knowledge in this area.
3 = I can do this at an average level of competence.
4 = I am confident in this area.
5 = I am confident and competent enough to teach someone else.

Understand rural transportation planning process/issues
Understand activities of WV Dept of Transportation
Understand upcoming statewide transportation plan and process
Understand responsibilities and activities of MPOs/RPOs
Understand the connection between transportation & econ development
Understand the Heartland Corridor project
Understand key WV business interests and issues

Additional Comments:

D. Workshop Evaluation Results and Analysis

Overall, attendees had a positive experience at the workshop, and increased their knowledge and skill levels. Question-by-question results follow:

Respondents rated how strongly they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements (where "1" indicates strong disagreement and "5" indicates strong agreement).

What was the most valuable part of this workshop?

• Networking with different agencies.
• Strategies pertaining more toward the rural public & applicable programs, education in conjunction with organizations. For example, a presentation that relates directly to the people affected within the scope of organizations.
• Other state perspective.
• Exchange of concerns, issues, ideas.
• The breakout sessions were 'eye-opening' for a neophyte such as myself.
• Seeing different planning models, input info what is needed in WV.
• All of it-very good!.
• Discussion of intermodal transportation and interaction with global economy.
• The review of the coming WV statewide transportation plan & PA RPOs.
• To keep people informed to the problems with funding.
• Listening to Patrick Donovan.

What you would like to see improved in the workshop (for example, issues to discuss in greater detail or other strategies or tools to include)?

• Public notice, support, impact of program implementation.
• 1/2 day instead of 1 day workshop.
• Clearer statement of issues/problems.
• Greater details on issues.
• More regional meetings.
• The microphone.
• Issues to be discussed in greater detail.
• In depth look at potential development of public & private partnerships, i.e. ways to develop.
• Keep the workshops coming.
• More of what it takes to run these facilities.

List one or two ideas, procedures, methods, principles or theories gained from this workshop that you can readily apply when you return to your job.

• Scenarios involving public citizen negotiations with emphasis on strategies concerning opposition.
• Integrate modes in transportation planning.
• Local involvement for planning purposes.
• Planning discussion was good, somewhat dry, but good.
• The importance of informing the public involved in new projects before the programs really start developing.
• Just about all of it.

List other trainings that would be useful to you.

• Development of public & private partnerships to enhance economic opportunities.

In order to measure changes in knowledge about transportation planning, workshop organizers asked participants to rate their competency in various areas. The "before" and "after" levels reveal that there remains a need to deliver additional training and resources on various topics; the change in competency levels reveals the effectiveness of different sections of the workshop, and opportunities to share expertise in other topic areas (for instance, connections between transportation and economic development).

1 = I have no knowledge in this area.
2 = I have some knowledge in this area.
3 = I can do this at an average level of competence.
4 = I am confident in this area.
5 = I am confident and competent enough to teach someone else.