VI.LOCATION OF TIP PROJECTS
This section includes a map showing the location of TIP projects. This map makes it easy to see that projects throughout the Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA – that is all of Douglas County) are programmed in this TIP. Showing the geographic spread of TIP projects allows the MPO to show the public that there are transportation improvement needs of all kinds all around the region. This map shows the location of projects in relation to major roads and political boundaries.
A quick look at the map shows that the projects programmed in this TIP are located along
state, county and city roads. The project selection processes both at the local government and
the MPO levels stress the need to pick projects for funding based on objective factors such as
the condition of pavements, deterioration of bridges, need for greater connectivity in the
system, and other factors related to transportation planning and engineering. Projects
programmed for funding through the MPO process should directly address a transportation
system needs and relate to the goals and objectives in the MTP. This is not to say that there is
no political influence in project selection and the development of the MTP or the TIP. That
would be naïve. However, there are several rules in place from federal regulations to
engineering standards and planning best practices that encourage the planning and
programming for projects to ultimately put the money where the transportation system
improvement needs are the greatest. The map shows a good healthy spread of project
locations and projects along different classes of roads (i.e., interstate, other freeways and
expressways, principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors, minor collectors). These roadway
functional classifications are displayed on the MPO and FHWA approved Roadway Functional
Classification Maps for Lawrence and Douglas County. These classifications are also used later
in Chapter IX of this document that defines the regional significance of roadways. The next
chapter of this document presents an Environmental Justice (EJ) analysis of TIP project
locations.
Page 27 of 57
