1995-084-RES WHEREAS, CITY COUNCIL DID HERETOFORE ON THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 1995

Home Browse Search

TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COlhJVIISSION V ~RIOUS District VARIOUS County MINUTE ORDER Page -L of -1- Pages WHEREAS, Title 23, United States Code, Section l33(d)(2), and Section 160(e)(2), and Section 1015(d)(2) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (lSTEA) require that ten percent of certain funds apportioned to a state pursuant to Title 23, United States Code, Section lO4{b)(3) be used for transportation enhancement activities; and WHEREAS, the Texas Transportation Commission (the commission) by Minute Order 104227, dated August 25, 1994, established Category 4B, Texas Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program, of the Project Development Plan to be developed, mo_nitored, and approved by the commission; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 43, Texas Administrative Code (T AC), Section 11.203. a 90 day call for nominations of candidate projects was published in the Texas Register May 17, 1994; and WHEREAS, nominations were received by the Texas Department of Transportation (the department) and were evaluated for eligibility and technical standards pursuant to Title 43, Texas Administrative Code, Section 11.200 - 11.205;' and WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 43, Texas Administrative Code, Section 11.204, department staff recommends to the commission a program of candidate projects shown in Exhibit A, each project being recommended for selection based on: (A) the list of all eligible candidate projects and scores provided by the Transportation Enhancement Project Evaluation Committee (TEPEC), together with any comments or recommendations included in TEPEe's resolution; (B) other issues relevant to consideration of any candidate project for funding, including: (i) policy matters; (ii) consistency of the candidate project with the statewide long-range transportation plans; (iii) the candidate project's benefit-cost ratio, calculated by dividing the project score by the project's estimated cost; (iv) the priority ranking assigned the candidate project by the nominating entity; (v) evidence of public support for the candidate project; (vi) evidence of the commitment of project sponsors to provide more than the minimum required non-federal share of allowable project costs and their ability to do so;