Texas County Progress

The Official Publication of the County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas

County Road Upkeep: Ask the Experts

by

During the North & East Texas Annual Conference in May, a panel of seasoned County Commissioners discussed Best Practices on Road Maintenance. County Progress asked two of the panelists to elaborate on their recommendations.

 

Johnson County Commissioner Rick Bailey

The key to a successful road – longevity – is in the prep work. High traffic roads generally are the priority roads. Shutting them down impacts local residents as well as emergency vehicles, school buses, etc.

A courtesy letter sent out with a guesstimated timeline for rebuild or repairs is a good practice; however, emergency situations may not allow notifications. It is always good to notify the sheriff’s office and other emergency responders.

The most important outcome is to have a “crown” in the road to shed water, as on some of our county roads, the slope may create the only drainage due to narrow rights of way. Remember, drainage is crucial.

Most, I would guess, use limestone road base for repairs or complete construction. On a lengthy project, reclaiming a road is the best solution.

I cannot emphasize enough the importance of layers and water for compaction. Once you pull off the location, the traffic can help the compaction while waiting on the ground temperatures to rise to produce a successful chip seal with emulsions and/or hot oils.

If your budget allows, there are polymer products available that are moisture barriers. These polymer products also help with dust control. We have vendors at conferences who sell these products, and they are there to help us.

A good recommendation once the project is completed is to take pictures for documentation and proof when heavy truck traffic begins to damage the roads.

As mentioned, longevity of a road starts with the prep work. A smooth surface and then a successful application of hot oil immediately rolled in pea gravel or chat rock provides years of service.

We as Commissioners have a great network in each other to pull from. Someone is dealing with your same issue in a neighboring county. Don’t hesitate to call upon them.

Cherokee County Commissioner Kelly Traylor

Your constituents think you have done your job if the driving surface is smooth. You can put a smooth surface on the road, but if the proper prep work hasn’t been addressed, then the longevity of the road is short term.

Our best county road maintenance practices start with trees. We are in the Piney Woods of East Texas. Dead or damaged trees are removed out of the right of way. They are also trimmed as high as possible to allow the sunlight to reach the road surface. Trees grows over the roads and create a canopy. The canopy will allow the roads to hold moisture.

Next, we address the drainage. The proper drainage will prevent erosion and base failures. Inspection of culverts and replacing them with the correct size to carry the normal water flow is a key step.

Road base is the next step we address. We are blessed with native iron ore in East Texas. We use this for base since it is native and abundant. This cuts down on our cost. We will use limestone on occasions.

When laying the base, we put our crown in it for the road to be able to shed water. The compaction of the base should be put in by layers. Once you get to the final layer, then the traffic can help with the compaction.

Now we are ready for the part that we as Commissioners are judged by, the surface. Some surfaces will stay with the material used as the base. You can use asphalt or chip seal for the final surface. We use oil sand on many of our roads; it is just that, oil mixed with sand. We add some aggregate with it. This surface can be milled up and relayed, which may cut down on the cost.

All of these practices have their own challenges. The major challenge comes in to play when you have to deal with traffic while performing these tasks. Most of the county roads are narrow, and some are dead-end roads. You have to allow residents to come and go, along with school buses, emergency vehicles and daily commerce (trash trucks).

The last challenges are your county budget, prioritizing projects, and Mother Nature.

There are many resources out there to help including the Texas Local Technical Assistance Program, your local TxDOT engineer, and your senior Commissioners in your county.

Trucks: How Heavy is Too Heavy?

by

Winkler County Commissioner Hope Fernandez Williams

Editor’s Note: Winkler County Commissioner Hope Fernandez Williams is communicating with her constituents via a column in her local newspaper titled “Your County Corner.” Our thanks to Commissioner Williams for sharing her latest column with our readers.

There is a bill floating around Austin in need of a sponsor. This bill has been written by lawyers on behalf of an oil and gas producer in Colorado, and their purpose is to increase the commercial motor vehicles weight from 80,000 pounds to 120,000 pounds. Their argument is that more axles would be used to distribute the weight better. Regardless how the weight is distributed, it still amounts to 120,000 pounds. We already know what the current weight is doing to our roads.

I asked one of our Department of Public Safety officers in Winkler County if he could tell me how long it would take a truck going 55 mph with a total weight of 80,000 pounds to stop if he slammed on his brakes. Here is his response: “At 55 mph in semi-perfect conditions, it would take 144 feet or about 48 yards to stop. That’s half of a football field. Not to confuse things for an air brake system, it takes ½ a second for the brakes to engage. And if you’re fatigued or distracted, it could take another ½ second to react. So that is a whole second enabling a loaded truck to travel an additional 10-20 feet before coming to a stop.” These officers are the ones that have to get on the road after each accident and do the measuring, so I would venture to say, these figures are pretty accurate.

You have heard me speak of MOTRAN, Midland-Odessa Transportation Alliance, Inc. They have become a very valuable source of information regarding the Permian Basin. Their recent statistics were chilling to say the least. From 2017 to 2018, crashes have increased 60 percent on State Highway 302 between Odessa and US 285.

In Winkler County, the total crash number in 2016 was 97; 2017 increased to 187, while 2018 gave us 313. Winkler County fatalities were three in 2016; increasing to six in 2017; 2018 gave us 21 deaths. The commercial motor vehicles in 2018 were 110 of the 313 total crashes, while the fatalities were 13 of the 21 reported.

In their report, MOTRAN lists 12 counties: Andrews, Crane, Ector, Loving, Martin, Midland, Pecos, Reeves, Terrell, Upton, Ward and Winkler. In 2016, the total crashes were 8,297. In 2018, they increased to 13,895. Also, the fatalities for those same 12 counties in 2016 was 107, increasing to 211 in 2018.

According to industry representatives, a third of these crashes involved drivers “under the influence,” however they prefer the term “driver fatigue.”

A problem by any other name is still a problem. During a DPS sting in our area recently, nearly 40 percent of inspected trucks were decommissioned due to lack of commercial driver licenses and/or overweight or unsafe equipment, as stated by MOTRAN.

According to TXDOT, we have approximately 120 weight-restricted bridges around the Delaware Basin. In the event one of these overweight trucks hits any of these bridges, it would disrupt the workload for a lot of people for nearly one year.

I truly appreciate all the work going around our area at the moment. It is making people aware of the existence of West Texas, and thanks to the oil, gas, and sand industries, we are finally coming into our own. We can see better times ahead. Our communities are bursting at the seams. With growth comes prosperity, and with prosperity comes diversity. More and better opportunities for our children. No longer will they leave West Texas for greener pastures. The greener pastures will be in their back yards, sort of speak.

One last thought to leave you with: The Permian Basin contributes only 1.5 percent of the population of the entire state of Texas, however we also account for 15 percent of the fatalities. So, ask yourselves, do we really want heavier truck loads on our highways?

 

These writings are in no way the opinion of County Progress Magazine or Winkler County government officials, but rather my observations and things I have gathered. The information contained in this column has been retrieved from MOTRAN articles and with their permission to reprint.

Brighter in Bee County

by

Lighting Project Enhances Safety, Security

By Bee County Commissioner

Dennis DeWitt

 

Light: to illuminate the dark. Sounds simple, but in rural areas of many counties in Texas there is no artificial light at night. In rural unincorporated areas, a light is a beacon in the night.

As County Commissioners in South Texas’ Bee County, Commissioner Ken Haggard and I were determined to establish safety and security lighting in our rural areas and unincorporated communities in our respective areas of responsibility. We studied the situation for many months while working with our Texas Department of Transportation partners, but to no avail. Cost, time and engineering created obstacles.

Then, the “light” went on: Why not contact the local electric service providers directly to see if they had procedures in place to furnish and install safety and security lighting in the unincorporated areas? Commissioner Haggard blazed the trail, and I quickly followed with my electrical providers.

Indeed, there was a way, but it would require several steps, time, and approvals.

First, we identified locations and presented them to Commissioners Court for initial concept approval. The Court established criteria to include the following:

• pole location must be on public right of way;
• an existing electrical pole must be available for the proposed light fixture to defer costs;
• dangerous or blind intersections;
• intersections on hills or curves; and
• intersections with heavy truck or other traffic and areas near schools or other public facilities.

Pole locations near residences were not strongly considered because of excessive light pollution into the residences.
Next, this detailed information was communicated with the electrical providers to obtain detailed costs and timelines. Another Commissioners Court meeting was necessary to facilitate discussion, approval, and funding.

Following approval, individual pole numbers and location information was communicated with the respective electrical providers and the service companies billing Bee County for electrical service. The providers and service companies coordinated the process to ensure billing was timely and accurate.

One provider required an ESID# (electrical services identifier unique point of service delivery 17- or 22-digit number) with pole numbers and a unique letter prefix to identify Bee County; for the other, utilizing identifying names and pole numbers was required. One provider required a county check be delivered to cover payment of fixtures and installation before a construction order would be issued.

Both service companies bill Bee County monthly for the lighting service, ranging from a few dollars to more than $20 depending on location and company.

This project started as a simple thought and has evolved into an important health and safety issue for Bee County residents and those passing though. Reactions have been both positive and interesting. For example, one resident asked, “Why hasn’t this been done before?”

Another individual commented he was against the light in his community because he could not sneak into his girlfriend’s house without being seen. Another questioned the expense until it was pointed out the lighting benefits everyone – rich, poor, young, and senior – basically anyone who drives, rides, or walks in these areas.

First responders, the sheriff’s office, and the electrical service providers are praising the project as they routinely make emergency calls into the dark unincorporated areas; they are especially thankful during fog or rainy weather.

To date, approximately 40 locations have been established and are in various stages of completion. Additional locations will be forthcoming as additional intersections are identified as health and safety hazard areas, and as funding becomes available. The electrical providers and our billing company enthusiastically support the project and have been incredible to work with.

As you drive through the unincorporated communities of Bee County – Skidmore, Pettus, Normanna, Tuleta, Pawnee, and Mineral – be mindful of the folks traveling after dark in those areas and how the nights are much safer because of this simple lighting project, which began with the determination of two County Commissioners to provide a safer more secure environment in their areas of responsibility.

County Roads 101

by

By Julie Anderson, Editor 

County Progress is regularly asked for information on the varied county road systems. The text below provides a simple explanation of each system and the related Commissioners Court responsibilities, along with important information on statutorily required road reports.

 

The Basics

A county road is a public road that has been accepted for maintenance by the Commissioners Court pursuant to the standards set by the Commissioners Court. These roads are located in the unincorporated areas of the county.

There are many roads within the county that are not county-maintained roads including:

  • private roads constructed in private subdivisions, maintained by the private residents/homeowners association;
  • interstate highways, S. highways, state highways, farm-to-market roads, spurs, and park roads maintained by the Texas Department of Transportation;
  • roads within an established subdivision that have not been accepted for maintenance, therefore are still the responsibility of the developer; and
  • roads within the incorporated limits of cities, villages, towns or other entities, maintained by those entities.

With regard to the authority of the Commissioners Court, Bob Bass, attorney with Allison, Bass & Magee, LLP, cites the Transportation Code and the Local Government Code.

According to Chapter 251 of the Transportation Code, the Commissioners Court may make and enforce all reasonable and necessary rules and orders for the construction and maintenance of public roads and hire the labor and purchase the machinery and equipment needed to construct and maintain public roads.

Article 16, Section 24 of the Texas Constitution, together with Chapters 251, 258 and 281 of the Texas Transportation Code, allow the County Commissioners Court to lay out and establish, change, and discontinue public roads and highways, and to exercise general control over all roads, highways, ferries, and bridges in their counties.

Road statutes and legal opinions offer additional guidelines delineating authority and limitations:

  • An individual County Commissioner has no authority to establish a county road.
  • Roads should be classified as 1st, 2nd or 3rd class roads.
  • The Commissioners Court may establish or change the status of a county road.
  • The county cannot maintain a private road.
  • County labor, materials, and equipment cannot be used on private property. (Note that by way of Article 3, Section 52f of the Texas Constitution, counties with a population under 5,000 may perform work on private roads for a fee, with all proceeds to support county road maintenance.)
  • It is vital to have clear authority for maintenance on all roads in the county inventory.

Working the Systems

Chapters 251 and 252 of the Texas Transportation Code discuss general county authority relating to roads and bridges and systems of county road administration, respectively. The first two road management options are generally known as precinct systems, whereby County Commissioners oversee the roads in their individual precincts.

  • Road Supervisor System – Chapter 251.004

The County Commissioners are the supervisors of the public roads in a county unless the county adopts an optional system of administering the county roads under Chapter 252.

The statute requires a County Commissioner serving as a road supervisor to supervise the public roads in the Commissioner’s precinct at least once each month and make a report during the ninth month of the county’s fiscal year. See the Required Road Report section below for a detailed explanation of this required report.

  • Ex Officio Road Commissioner System – Chapter 252.001

The County Commissioner takes care of the roads in the Commissioner’s precinct. Under rules adopted by the Commissioners Court, the Commissioner directs the laying out of new roads, construction or changing of roads, and building of bridges. Subject to authorization of the Commissioners Court, the Commissioner can hire employees, to be paid from the county road and bridge fund. While this section of the statute does not specifically reference a road report, the statute does state that “an ex officio road Commissioner has the duties of a supervisor of public roads…” One of the duties of a supervisor, according to Chapter 251.004 is, indeed, completing a road report. In other words, County Commissioners who supervise their precinct roads as part of the Ex Officio Road Commissioner System are required to complete a road report, confirmed Bass.

In the remaining three systems described in the statute, roads are primarily managed by someone other than the County Commissioners.

  • Road Commissioner System – Chapter 252.101

The law allows County Commissioners to employ up to four Road Commissioners who are subject to the control, supervision, orders, and approval of the Commissioners Court. The Road Commissioner ensures that roads and bridges are kept in good repair, establishes a system of grading and draining public roads, and spends funds as needed on the public roads, bridges, and culverts. Road Commissioners may use road districts separate from precincts or operate under a countywide or consolidated system. The Road Commissioner is required to give regular reports to the Commissioners Court.

While the elected County Commissioners still maintain ultimate control over the roads, the appointed Road Commissioner oversees the daily activity.

  • Road Superintendent System – Chapter 252.201

This system is sometimes referred to as the “voluntary unit system.” In this system, the Commissioners Court appoints a Road Superintendent for the county or one Road Superintendent for each precinct for a two-year term. Work performed under the Road Superintendent is subject to the general supervision of the Commissioners Court. The Road Superintendent directs the laying out, construction, changing and repairing of roads and bridges and other related duties including grading and draining. The Road Superintendent is required to file a sworn report at each regular term of the Commissioners Court.

  • County Road Department System – County Engineer or Road Administrator – Chapter 252.301

This system, commonly referred to as the “referendum unit system” or “unit system,” requires a petition signed by at least 10 percent of the numbers cast in the last election for governor. The petition is presented and certified by the clerk, like any other election, and then goes on the ballot.

According to the statute, “The ballot for the election shall be printed to permit voting for or against the proposition: ‘Adopting the Optional County Road System in _______ County.’ ” If passed, the countywide system is imposed upon the county and cannot be done away with except by another petition and vote.

The system creates a county road department that includes the Commissioners Court as a policymaking body and the County Engineer as the chief executive officer. The Commissioners Court appoints a licensed, professional engineer for an indefinite term. If a county cannot for good reason hire an engineer, the law allows the county to appoint a County Road Administrator who has had experience in road building or maintenance or other types of construction work.

Two key elements make this system unique. First, every road activity, whether it be construction, maintenance or use of county road department equipment, is “to be based on the county as a whole without regard to Commissioners’ precincts,” according to the statute.

Second, while the Commissioners Court maintains general policymaking authority, the County Engineer or Road Administrator is the executive officer, meaning he or she makes key decisions including hiring and firing, Bass specified. This contrasts with the Road Commissioner and Road Superintendent systems, in which the Commissioners Court maintains a supervisory role. The County Engineer is also required by Chapter 252.309 of the Transportation Code to prepare and file full reports on all aspects of road maintenance.

Required Road Report
Chapter 251.004 of the Transportation Code states that County Commissioners are the supervisors of the public roads in a county unless the county adopts an optional system of administering the county roads under Chapter 252 of the Texas Transportation Code.

Chapter 251.005 states that a County Commissioner who serves as a road supervisor is required to make a report during the ninth month of the county’s fiscal year showing:

  • the condition of each road or part of a road and of each culvert and bridge in the Commissioner’s precinct;
  • the amount of money reasonably necessary for maintenance of the roads in the precinct during the next county fiscal year;
  • the number of traffic control devices in the precinct defaced or torn down;
  • any new road that should be opened in the precinct;
  • any bridges, culverts, or other improvements necessary to place the roads in the precinct in good condition, and the probable cost of the improvements; and
  • additional requirement per Chapter 251.018: primary cause of any road, culvert or bridge degradation if reasonably ascertained.

In the 83rd Legislative Session, the Legislature provided for County Energy Transportation Reinvestment Zones. This legislation imposed a new reporting requirement by inserting a new section into Chapter 251 of the Transportation Code. This new section, Chapter 251.018, requires a road report for all counties, including those operating under either Chapter 251 or Chapter 252, to include in all previously required reports a statement of the “primary cause of any road, culvert or bridge degradation if reasonably ascertained.” This provision is tied to an effort to identify and track the costs to the state and county for road damages attributable to heavy truck traffic in the oil and gas sector. As a consequence, all Texas counties are now required to track the cause of degradation of roads, if ascertainable. These records were used for audit purposes for counties who participated in the Texas Infrastructure Grant Fund program.

For Chapter 251 counties (non-unit systems), the road report “shall be entered in the minutes of the Commissioners Court to be considered in improving public roads and determining the amount of taxes imposed for public roads.” In addition, “the report shall be submitted, together with each contract made by the Commissioners Court since its last report for any work on any road, to the grand jury at the first term of the district court occurring after the report is made to the Commissioners Court.”

Chapter 252 counties (unit systems) are not required to file their reports with the grand jury.

As stated earlier, Chapter 252.001 defines the Ex Officio Road Commissioner System, commonly referred to as the precinct system, whereby the County Commissioner takes care of the roads in the Commissioner’s precinct. The language in this section specifies that “an ex officio road Commissioner has the duties of a supervisor of public roads…” One of the duties of a supervisor is, indeed, completing a road report.

Chapter 252 describes who is responsible for road-related reports in the three remaining systems.

  • Chapter 252.107 requires a “Road Commissioner” to file reports at each term (meeting) of the Commissioners Court.
  • Chapter 252.207 requires a “Road Superintendent” to file a sworn report at each regular term of the Commissioners Court.
  • Chapter 252.309 sets out the duties of a “Road Engineer” or “Administrator” who shall maintain detailed records of all county expenses related to road maintenance.

“The road report is statutorily required as a basis for budgeting, so complaints of the necessity for such reports are misplaced,” Bass declared. “Additionally, if used consistently, the road report will have a very beneficial effect as evidence of county maintenance on those occasions when the county is required to defend the status of a disputed roadway.

“The practice of maintaining an annual road report is both common sense from a management perspective and of real value if used consistently,” Bass continued. “The establishment of a routine practice of documenting road maintenance costs, in terms of the statutory format, will result in much better financial support for preparation of the county budget, and will allow each precinct to better demonstrate its unique needs for funding.”

Counties Prioritize Transportation Needs

by

Counties Prioritize Transportation Needs

Officials, Voters Value Road Safety, Accessibility

 

 

By Julie Anderson, Editor

As part of its mission statement, the Collin County Engineering Department offers a commitment “to plan and implement a superior inter-modal transportation infrastructure” based on the premise that “a superior transportation infrastructure will provide citizens of Collin County with a better quality of life by alleviating traffic congestion, moving people and goods efficiently, and contributing to a stable and competitive economy.”

The need for high quality roads is not a disputable matter. However, technically speaking, when it comes to Texas county government the construction and maintenance of county roads are discretionary services. When it comes to writing the county budget, Commissioner Courts have no choice: pay for state-mandated services and then hope enough is left to fund discretionary items, such as libraries, community centers and roads.

The slower-than-expected recovery from the latest oil slump and the resulting decrease in values has some counties in a current budgetary bind. Others have been caught up in the spiraling expenses of unfunded mandates with seemingly no relief in sight.

So when it comes to prioritizing discretionary items, where do county roads fall in the mix? According to Anderson County Judge Robert Johnston, they are a top priority.

When working on last year’s county budget, Johnston noted the immediate need for a long-term plan to address the county road system. Despite two years of lower appraisal values, “I started thinking of ways to both take care of my budget and county infrastructure at the same time.”

During a budget workshop meeting, Johnston broached the topic of a bond issue to fund road and bridge initiatives, and then he allowed time for the idea to sink in. At the next budget workshop the decision was made to move forward, and on Nov. 8, 2016, Anderson County voters passed a $20 million bond issue dedicated to county roads and bridges.

“The projects include problem drainage issues that we are fixing as we work on the roads,” Johnston detailed. “By addressing these problems with enough money to be able to fix the problem instead of putting a Band-Aid on, we will get on top of the situation and keep it in good shape for years to come.”

Many of the roads in Anderson County have not been reworked from the ground up in the last 25 to 30 years, the Judge specified. The Commissioners Court hopes to repair more than 350 miles of the county’s 1,000 mile road system.

“With the county keeping our roads in top shape, it will bring an economic benefit to Anderson County through reduced repairs to vehicles traveling our roads and hopefully increased property values,” Johnston offered. “It will also address safety issues that we have had on some of our roads.”

The Anderson County road budget for 2017 is $4,521,738 plus $7 million of the $20 million bond issue, Johnston reported. The plan is to keep the road budget the same for fiscal year 2018, if values allow.

“We as a Commissioners Court believe very strongly, as do the citizens who approved our bond issue, that we should keep the infrastructure of the county in good shape,” Johnston summarized.

 

Economic Driver

While Anderson County voters were casting ballots for their $20 million bond proposal, Parker County voters were considering a $76.2 million bond issue to fund transportation projects across the county including new highways, wider roads, realigned intersections and improved stormwater drainage; the measure passed with 58.14 percent of the vote.

“Parker County Commissioners and county staff have spent the past year listening to the input of residents and businesses to identify your transportation needs,” the county shared on its transportation website, http://parkercountytransportation.com/. “They have selected these 19 projects with the goals of improving safety, reducing congestion and providing more convenient connections. These efforts follow the success of the 2008 Transportation Bond Program, which resulted in more than 25 completed projects.” Readers are then invited to explore the projects on the website by clicking on individual precincts or on links that detail specific endeavors.

Parker County has a Lateral Road Tax that is separate from the Transportation Bond funds, explained Parker County Judge Mark Riley. That money is divided among the four precincts and totals $13,066,028 for the 2016-17 fiscal year. The overall road budget for 2016-17 is over a half-million dollars more than the 2016-15 fiscal year, which totaled $12,499,895.

“That increase came from an increase in new value added to the tax rolls,” Riley offered.

The County Judge is a firm believer in using partnerships to enhance his county’s transportation initiatives, and as chairman of the Regional Transportation Council, Riley has fostered relationships throughout the region with local entities including cities and school districts.

“Our success is because of the partnerships we have built throughout the region,” Riley declared. “Our 2008 Transportation Bond was for $80 million. We were able to leverage that $80 million with an additional $73 million from state and regional sources. Perhaps our biggest success story is the fact that we finished all of our 2008 Transportation Bond projects on time and under budget.

“The fact that our voters approved another $76.2 million bond eight years after the first one was approved underscores the partnership we have with the citizens of Parker County,” Riley declared.

 

The Mission of Precinct 4

Now in his second term as Hidalgo County Commissioner, Joseph Palacios has completed over 85 drainage and road projects. In fact, as part of his mission statement, Palacios offers the following on his county webpage: “Precinct 4 aims to enhance the quality of life of our community by building, maintaining and improving roads, bridges and drainage systems.” Taking it a step further, the Commissioner offers a link to his Road and Bridge Department, which includes the following:

 

Mobile Community with Efficient and Well-Maintained Roadways: Precinct 4 is evaluating current urban and rural roadways and strategically planning for future roadway projects and enhanced traffic flow that connect the mobility of communities more effectively. The precinct is charged with ensuring that all safety measures are taken with the traffic control department. The department takes preventive maintenance measures to increase the life span of rural roadways with ongoing overlay projects.

 

Palacios had all hands on deck to recently complete his Brushline Road project, partially funded by a Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) County Energy Transportation Reinvestment Zone Grant.

The project was initiated to reduce traffic and increase emergency response east of Hidalgo County and created a new corridor running parallel to Expressway 281. The effort entailed construction of a 3.5 mile roadway adjacent to 281 to provide for an alternate route for traffic mobility and emergency services.

 

Moving Forward

          Collin County is a “land of contrasts,” shared Collin County Commissioner Duncan Webb. Almost a million people live in Collin County, with the southwestern part of the county being a densely populated urban area; the northeast portion of the county is still rural and undeveloped.

Collin County operates under a unit road system, with the Collin County Public Works Department overseeing the county roads, explained Jon Kleinheksel, director of public works.

Similar to Hidalgo County, Collin County’s general mission statement references commitment to infrastructure, and the county’s Public Works webpage goes into further detail:

Our Mission:

  • Provide the citizens of Collin County the safest driving conditions possible through proficient construction and maintenance of all county roads and bridges.
  • Maintain good public relations by providing information in a helpful and informative manner.
  • Uphold the policies approved by the Commissioners Court.
  • Continuously strive for construction and maintenance improvements through use of new methods and materials.
  • And our newest mission…to asphalt every mile of county road within 10 years.

“We have 60 miles remaining to upgrade,” Kleinheksel reported. Collin County Public Works oversees approximately 775 miles of county roads with an annual budget of about $19 million.

Kleinheksel credits the Collin County Commissioners Court with giving his department “all the tools, funding and direction to maintain pace with the incredible growth Collin County has experienced the past decade or so.”

“The Commissioners Court places a strong priority on roads,” echoed Clarence Daugherty, P.E., director of engineering.

Unlike some counties across the state, Collin County tax values have increased dramatically for the last two years, approximately 10 percent per year, Webb reported.

“Our primary challenge is getting infrastructure in place and funded before the growth and development make it impossible to do so,” he continued.

Collin County is working with TxDOT, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) and the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition to ensure the county’s infrastructure will match the explosive growth.

Last year, the Collin County Planning Board put together a Transportation Bond Committee which has in turn developed a presentation titled “Moving Forward: Funding Future Mobility in Collin County.” The committee is seeking to educate other government entities and the public on:

  • projected population growth in Collin County;
  • expected traffic to support the population; and
  • the need for Limited Access Roadways (LARs) to carry the forecast traffic.

In another education initiative, the Collin County Public Information office has been sharing feature stories on its website detailing the county’s strategies to handle projected growth, http://www.collincountytx.gov/public_information As shared in the article titled Planning for Tomorrow’s Transportation Today, “Just in the last year, our County Commissioners Court has considered and discussed transportation issues over 200 times. That’s more than four times per Court session. And that’s more than any other subject taken up by the Court in a given year.”

      Webb represents the county on the NCTCOG’s Regional Transportation Council, a 44-member transportation policy body that includes local elected or appointed officials from NCTCOG’s 16-county region and representatives from each of the area’s transportation providers.

Webb also sits on the Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition, a transportation advocacy group comprised of cities, counties and transportation agencies in a five-county region (Dallas, Denton, Collin, Rockwall and Ellis) with a primary mission to advance critical mobility projects through advocacy efforts with state and federal elected officials and regional transportation agencies.

            “Collin County has a long history of being committed to improving and funding transportation infrastructure,” Webb shared. “Collin County is taking its commitment to improving transportation infrastructure to new levels by leading efforts to build new limited access roadways in the county and proposing a half a billion dollar bond program to assist in funding such efforts in 2017.”

Subscribe to receive County Progress delivered to your front door. 

Subscribe to PBOG

Sign-up for County Progress email updates. 

Email Subscriptions

Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy

Print Friendly and PDF

County Progress

500 Chestnut St. Suite 2000
Abilene, TX 79602
325.673.4822
countyprogress@zacpubs.com

Categories