LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
75th Regular Session
February 27, 1997
TO: Honorable Clyde Alexander, Chair IN RE: House Bill No. 691
Committee on Transportation By: Thompson
House
Austin, Texas
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on HB691 ( Relating
to the erection of sound barrier walls along certain parts of
Interstate Highway 610 in Houston.) this office has detemined
the following:
Biennial Net Impact to General Revenue Funds by HB691-As Introduced
Implementing the provisions of the bill would result in a net
impact of $0 to General Revenue Related Funds through the biennium
ending August 31, 1999.
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would require the Department of Transportation, as
soon as practical, to erect sound barrier walls along the west
side of Interstate 610 in Houston to reduce highway noise on
various streets.
Methodolgy
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulation 23 CFR 772,
Procedures for Abatement of Highway Noise and Construction Noise,
requires the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to develop
and implement a traffic noise analysis and abatement program
for Federal-aid Type I highway projects that involve construction
on a new location; or the alteration of an existing highway
that substantially changes either the horizontal or vertical
alignment; or an increase in the number of through-traffic lanes.
The
FHWA regulation also addresses Type II highway projects to retrofit
noise abatement along existing highways (not in conjunction
with a Type I highway construction or improvement project).
However, since there is no separate funding source identified
for Type II highway projects, these projects must compete with
all other statewide transportation needs. Therefore, the FHWA
has indicated that the development and implementation of Type
II projects are not mandatory requirements of Federal law or
regulation.
The bill would require the construction of noise
barriers along an existing highway (IH 610); therefore, they
would be considered Type II noise abatement. Also, the bill
does not indicate that a traffic noise analysis was performed
to confirm that the noise barriers are both feasible and reasonable
or that a majority of the property owners adjacent to the noise
barriers approve of their construction. Construction of these
Type II noise barriers would circumvent the traffic noise analysis
and public involvement processes, as well as pending action
of the commission upon completion of the Type II Study; and
would require TxDOT to establish a statewide Type II Noise Abatement
Program to ensure future Type II noise barriers are constructed
in a manner that is uniform, equitable and fair.
The fiscal
impact of the bill includes the cost of the IH 610 noise barriers
themselves and the costs associated with the development and
implementation of a statewide Type II Noise Abatement Program.
The probable fiscal implications of implementing the provisions
of the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
Five Year Impact:
Fiscal Year Probable Change in Number
Savings/(Cost) of State
from State Employees from
Highway Fund FY 1997
0006
1998 ($53,549,177) 8.0
1998 (53,549,177) 8.0
2000 (53,549,177) 8.0
2001 (53,549,177) 8.0
2002 (53,549,177) 8.0
Net Impact on General Revenue Related Funds:
The probable fiscal implication to General Revenue related funds
during each of the first five years is estimated as follows:
Fiscal Year Probable Net Postive/(Negative)
General Revenue Related Funds
Funds
1998 $0
1999 0
2000 0
2001 0
2002 0
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as
the provisions of the bill are in effect.
Because the bill would not have statewide impact on units of
local government of the same type or class, no comment from
this office is required by the rules of the House as to its
probable fiscal implication on units of local government.
Source: Agencies: 601 Department of Transportation
LBB Staff: JK ,PE ,ML