Bell County Thoroughfare Plan 2022
1
BELL COUNTY
THOROUGHFARE PLAN
Bell County Officials
The Honorable David Blackburn
Bell County Judge
Commissioners
Precinct 1: Russell Schneider
Precinct 2: Bobby Whitson
Precinct 3: Bill Schumann
Precinct 4: John Driver
Adopted
Date Here
Prepared By:
Killeen-Temple Metropolitan Planning Organization
KTMPO Staff
Uryan Nelson, Director
Connie Quinto, Assistant Director
James McGill, Planning Manager
Hope Davis, Planner I
Anna Barge, MPH, Special Projects Coordinator
2
1. Introduction……..….……………………………………………………………………………...4
Overview………………………………………………………………………………………......4
Purpose and Goals……………………………………………………………………………….5
Plan Organization………………………………………………………………………………...5
2. Review of Existing Conditions………………………………………………………………7
Area Overview…………………………………………………………………………………….7
Population Growth ……………………………………………………………………………….8
Impact of Regional Growth Trends……………………………………………………………...9
Legislative Mandates……………………………………………………………………………..9
Functional Classification………………………………………………………………………..10
Crash Data……………………………………………………………………………………….11
3. Plan Development……………………………………………………………………………..16
Review of 2001 Thoroughfare Plan……………………………………………………………16
Review of Regional and Local Planning Documents…………………………………………17
Identified Deficiencies and Desires……………………………………………………………18
Additional Analysis……………………………………………………………………………...19
4. 2022 Thoroughfare Plan…………………………………………………………………….21
Thoroughfare Planning Principles……………………………………………………………..21
Thoroughfare Plan Map………………………………………………………………………...21
Functional Classification………………………………………………………………………..23
Typical Cross Sections…………………………………………………………………………24
5. Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………….29
Implementation …………………………………………………………………………………29
Documentation Updates………………………………………………………………………..29
Goals……………………………………………………………………………………………..29
Additional Considerations……………………………………………………………………...31
Funding Sources………………………………………………………………………………..31
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………31
Table of Contents
3
Figure 1 – Location…………………………………………………………………………………..……7
Figure 2 – Bell County Crash Data Heat Map……………………………………………………….…14
Figure 3 – 2022 Bell County Thoroughfare Plan Map………………………………………………...22
Figure 4 – Six Lane Controlled Access Facility with Frontage Roads………………………………..25
Figure 5 – Four Lane Major Arterial ……………………………………………………………………25
Figure 6 – Four Lane Minor Arterial with Continuous Center Turn Lane……………………………26
Figure 7 – Four Lane Collector with Shared Outside Lanes………………………………………….27
Figure 8 – Two Lane Collector with Continuous Center Turn Lane & Shared Outside Lanes……..27
Table 1 – Population of Bell County and Incorporated Areas………………………………………….8
Table 2 – Population Projection of Bell County and Incorporated …………………………………….8
Table 3 – Vehicle Registration……………………………………………………………………………9
Table 4 – Functional Classification System……………………………………………………………10
Table 5 – Rural Functional Classification System……………………………………………………..11
Table 6 – Percentage of Each Functional Classification System in Bell County……………………12
Table 7 – Crash Total & Fatalities ………………………………………………………………………13
Table 8 – Summary of ROW Recommendations by Functional Classification……………………...28
Table 9 – Funding Sources ……………………………………………………………………………..32
Appendix A – Bell County Thoroughfare Plan Map
Appendix B – Bell County Master Road Index
Appendix C – KTMPO Multimodal Plan
Appendix D – Regional Arterials Concept Inventory- CAMPO
Appendix E – Williamson County Long-Range Transportation Plan
Appendix F – Waco Metropolitan Area Master Thoroughfare Plan
Appendix G – 2020 Burnet County Transportation Plan
Figures
Tables
Appendices
4
Overview
In early 2022, the Bell County Commissioner’s Court asked the Killeen Temple Metropolitan
Transportation Organization (KTMPO) to develop a new long-range thoroughfare plan for the
County. Bell County’s previous thoroughfare plan had not been significantly updated since 2001.
Since then, Bell County has experienced significant changes including rapid population and
employment growth; both of which are projected to continue. The Bell County Thoroughfare Plan
(BCTP) is a transportation framework that provides guidance to the County on preserving right-
of-way (ROW) to manage growth and address current and future mobility needs. Bell County is in
one of the fastest growing parts of Texas and has many unique challenges that makes future
transportation planning essential. The County sits at the intersection of two major highways in
Central Texas and serves as a key link between major markets to the north and south. In addition,
the main entrance to Fort Hood, the largest U.S. military installation sits at the western edge of
Bell County. These factors have contributed to the County’s rapid growth and also show the need
to continue planning for a future transportation system.
The Thoroughfare Plan provides a long-range guide for planning future transportation in the
County. The purpose of the Plan is to identify future roadway projects and right of way (ROW) so
that land can be preserved as the County continues to develop through public and private efforts.
Construction of the roadways is dependent on many other factors (available funds, development
practices, individual City and County decisions, changing needs, etc.). Creating the BCTP allows
the County and its communities to plan for implementation on a regular basis and adjust priorities
as necessary. This Plan should be used as a guide for future roadway network planning, and it is
not meant to guarantee the construction of any alignments illustrated in the Plan.
A Throughfare Plan:
• Is a long range (25+ years) transportation framework
• Identifies general location and type of transportation corridors
• Preserves right-of-way for future infrastructure
• Establishes consistent county design guidelines
• Organizes future development
A Thoroughfare Plan Does NOT:
• Change ownership or land use
• Require counties/cities to build proposed roadways
• Identify or prioritize roadway projects
• Identify specific roadway alignments
• Include survey, design, cost estimate, or schedule of roadway projects
• Identify funding sources
Chapter 1 Introduction
5
Purpose and Goals
The purpose of this plan is to guide the development of the county’s transportation system to
increase the safety of all road users, provide adequate mobility for goods and services, and
promote healthy development and redevelopment county-wide. The following set of goals was set
to provide guidance for developing the plan and its final recommendations.
Goals:
• Improve roadway safety to reduce and eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes
• Identify maintenance needs and priorities
• Preserve adequate rights-of-way
• Establish county-wide design standards
• Enhance coordination between the county, incorporated cities, and the Texas Department
of Transportation (TxDOT) to develop a seamless, regional transportation plan
• Determine mechanisms to meet growing highway demand within regulatory and funding
constraints
• Present land use strategies designed to have positive impacts on the county’s
transportation infrastructure
Plan Organization
The BCTP consists of a thoroughfare map and report documenting the thoroughfare planning
process, results, and recommendations. The thoroughfare map shows the alignments of existing
and proposed future connections. The report was compiled during the project and is organized
to follow the study order. A list of the report chapters and a description of each are shown below:
1. Introduction
Provides an overview of the need for a new thoroughfare plan. Describes the plan’s purpose
and introduces the specific goals of the plan. Outlines the organization of this document.
2. Review of Existing Conditions
Reviews the existing conditions of Bell County including its population, employment,
transportation networks, and safety record. Assesses how these factors will contribute to
future conditions in the County and how that will affect the development of the plan.
3. Plan Development
Describes the plan development process, specific analysis methods used, and how public
engagement occurred. Also presents a review of the data collected in Chapter 2 and relevant
findings from the previous thoroughfare plan.
4. 2025 Thoroughfare Plan
Shows a map of the County that details generally the existing roadway conditions and future
recommendations. Describes the roadway classification system implemented in the BCTP.
6
5. Recommendations
Provides recommendations regarding policy, funding, and implementation of the plan.
Describes how the plan will serve as a guide for future thoroughfare development and provide
a basis for decision making.
7
This chapter includes a summary of the existing conditions within Bell County, including its
population, employment, transportation, and unique features. To better plan for the future of Bell
County, it is important to understand the current conditions affecting the area
Area Overview
Located in east central Texas, Bell County sits between
Austin and Dallas, and is bordered by Coryell, McLennan,
Falls, Milam, Williamson, Lampasas, and Burnet counties.
Bell County has a total area of 1,088 square miles and is
the 63
rd
largest county in Texas.
1
The County contains
two Census designated urbanized areas (UZA); the
Killeen UZA and the Temple UZA. Belton is the fourth
largest incorporated area in the county and serves as the
county seat. Several large bodies of water are present
within the county including the Little, Leon, Salado, and
Lampasas rivers, Nolan Creek, Stillhouse Hollow Lake,
and Belton Lake. The County is also one of seven
counties within the service region of the Central Texas
Council of Government (CTCOG), and within the
jurisdiction serviced by Killeen-Temple Metropolitan
Planning Organization (KTMPO).
Forming the backbone of the county’s transportation system are IH-35 and US 190, which is also
designated as IH-14 between Killeen and Temple. IH-35 is the primary north-south facility in the
County passing through the cities of Troy, Temple, Belton, and Salado. IH-35 also serves as a
major connector to the Dallas and Austin/San Antonio markets. US 190/IH-14 is the primary east-
west facility in the County that connects to Fort Hood and links the two UZAs (Temple and Killeen)
together.
Over the past two decades, the population of Bell County has skyrocketed. A strong job market,
high quality of life, and low cost of living in the county has contributed to this growth. Since the
2001 plan was adopted, several major construction projects within the county have been
completed, including the establishment of the IH-14 corridor and the expansion of the IH-35
corridor. IH-14, also known as the 14th Amendment Highway, the Gulf Coast Strategic Highway,
and the Central Texas Corridor was established in 2015 as part of the Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation Act (FAST). There are plans for the expansion of IH-14 from western Texas to
Augusta, GA, set in place by the Infrastructure and Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) which was
signed in 2021.
1
U.S. Census Bureau (data.census.gov)
Figure 1: Location
Chapter 2 Review of Existing Conditions
8
Population growth
Since 2000, Bell County’s population has increased over ~130,000 individuals, a percent increase
of 56%. By comparison, the State of Texas population increased by 8 million individuals since
2000, a percent increase of 40%. Table 1 shows the populations changes for each city in Bell
County and Texas.
This growth also shows no sign of subsiding anytime soon as Texas continues to grow, and the
Austin metropolitan area pushes farther north. Table 2 shows population projections for Bell
County and Texas through 2050.
Table 1. Population of Bell County and Incorporated Areas
2000
2010
2020
Growth
2000-2020
20,851,820
24,311,891
29,145,505
40%
237,974
310,235
370,647
56%
1,679
1,623
1,633
-3%
14,713
18,216
23,054
57%
33,595
29,589
28,295
-16%
17,309
26,700
33,097
91%
1,100
1,121
1,075
-2%
88,822
127,921
153,095
72%
1,644
1,961
1,992
21%
3,018
4,170
4,636
54%
2,176
4,259
5,917
172%
3,497
2,126*
2,394
-32%
54,437
66,102
82,073
51%
1,383
1,645
2,375
72%
14,601
26,928
31,011
112%
Source: Census Bureau (* denotes data from Texas Demographic Center)
Table 2. Population Projection of Bell County and Incorporated Areas
Jurisdiction
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
Projected
%
Change
2020-
2050
Texas Projection
32,204,920
34,894,452
37,716,495
40,686,496
43,866,965
47,342,105
62%
Bell County
Projections
375,151
396,782
418,708
440,967
462,747
483,613
30%
Source: Texas Demographic Center
9
Vehicle registration in Bell County increased 15% between 2010 and 2020. This increase impacts
the usage and maintenance on the transportation infrastructure.
Table 3. Vehicle Registration
Year
Registrations
2010
267,823
2011
270,908
2012
280,949
2013
285,313
2014
293,439
2015
297,044
2016
297,588
2017
302,427
2018
305,606
2019
311,971
2020
307,865
Source: Bell County Registration
Impact of Regional Growth Trends
Increased population growth and vehicle registrations result in increased demand for
transportation services within the county. It is important the plans we make now consider the
growth impact Bell County is expected to receive. The growing number of vehicles on the road
impacts traffic congestion, traffic safety, reliability, and maintenance on the infrastructure.
Legislative Mandates
Several pieces of Federal legislation provide the framework for transportation planning at the
State, County, and local levels. These policies must be considered when planning and scheduling
for future projects. Legislation provides guidance for regional-level measures in areas such as
safety, condition, and congestion.
• MAP-21—The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, was enacted in 2012
and created a streamlined and performance-based surface transportation program and
builds on many of the highway, transit, bike, and pedestrian programs and policies
established in 1991.
• FAST Act—The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, was passed in 2015. The
Act was the first Federal law in over ten years to provide long-term funding certainty for
surface transportation (for fiscal years 2016 through 2020; reauthorized for fiscal year
2021). The FAST Act authorized $305 billion for the Department's highway, highway and
motor vehicle safety, public transportation, motor carrier safety, hazardous materials
safety, rail, and research, technology and statistics programs.
• IIJA/BIL—The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act also known as the “Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law” was passed on November 15, 2021. The largest long-term investment
in infrastructure and economy in the nation’s history will provide $550 billion over fiscal
years 2022-2026 for roads, bridges, and mass transit.
10
Functional Classification
To ensure adequate facility capacity and function, a hierarchical system that defines the role of
each major thoroughfare needs to be established within the County. The Country will utilize the
DOT functional classification system and TxDOT rural functional classification for classification of
the roadway network throughout the County. The resulting functional classification system can
then be translated into specific physical design features including thoroughfare cross-sections,
pavement standards, and pavement widths.
Thoroughfare serve two, primarily divergent functions: movement of traffic and access to land.
Due to the conflicting requirements of these functions, the movement of traffic can be
compromised by the necessary provision of access. Effective transportation networks pose
various functions for each thoroughfare classification. As a result, no single category will provide
both high levels of movement and high levels of access to property.
The U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration established
criteria for the determination of functional classification in its publication Highway Functional
Classification: Concepts. Criteria. and Procedures. This commonly used functional classification
system consists of a hierarchy of streets. This is the classification system that will be used for this
thoroughfare plan.
Table 4. Functional Classification System
Classification
Definition
Interstates or Freeways
Connect urban and rural service areas, urban subregions, and
urban areas. There is no direct land access and facilities are
designed to carry high volumes of traffic at high speeds over
long distances.
Major Arterials
Connect two or more subregions and complement interstates
and other high-volume facilities. These routes are designed to
carry the majority of traffic through the city. Access to land is
subordinate to movement.
Minor Arterials
Connect adjacent subregions and activity centers, as well as
providing intra-community continuity. Restricted access to
major and minor traffic generators in industrial and commercial
areas is provided. More emphasis on land access is provided.
Collectors
Connect neighborhoods and land uses with transportation
facilities. These facilities have a balanced responsibility for the
provision of access and the movement of traffic. Collectors
generally carry a moderate amount of traffic during the day,
with increased levels often witnessed during the morning and
evening commute.
Local Roads and Streets
Serve neighborhoods and connect land uses with higher
transportation facilities. Designed for local traffic at slow
speeds, the primary purpose of these facilities is the provision
of access.
11
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) functionally classifies facilities according to
whether or not they are located within a designed urban area. Facilities classified within an urban
area are placed on the Urban Functional Classification system, while all other facilities are
classified on the Rural Functional Classification System.
Of most concern to Bell County, the Rural Functional Classification System consists of facilities
located outside of urban areas. TxDOT uses the following classification designations for rural
areas:
Table 5. Rural Functional Classification System
Rural Principal Arterial System. The rural
principal arterial system consists of a
connected rural network having the
following characteristics:
1. Serve corridor movements having trip length and
travel density characteristics indicative of substantial
statewide or interstate travel.
2. Serve all, or virtually all, urban areas of 50,000
population and over a large majority of those with a
population of 25,000 and over.
3. Provide an integrated network without stub
connections except where unusual geographic or
traffic flow conditions dictate otherwise.
Rural Minor Arterial System. The rural
minor arterial system should, in
conjunction with the principle arterial
system, form a rural network having the
following characteristics:
1. Link cities and larger towns and form an
integrated network providing interstate and
intercounty service.
2. Be spaced at such intervals so that all developed
areas of the county are within a reasonable distance
of an arterial highway.
3. Provide service to corridors with trip lengths and
travel densities greater than those served by the rural
collector system.
Rural Major Collector System. The rural
collector system generally serves
intercounty travel and constitutes those
routes where travel distances are shorter
than on arterial routes.
1. Provide service to a county seat not on a principal
arterial, to the larger towns, and to other traffic
generators of significance including schools, shipping
points, county parks, agricultural areas, etc.
2. Link generators with nearby larger towns or
routes of higher classification.
3. Serve the more important intercounty travel
corridors.
Rural Minor Collector System. The rural
collector system generally serves
intercounty travel and constitutes those
routes where travel distances are shorter
than on arterial routes.
1. Serve primarily to provide access to adjacent
land.
2. Provide service to travel over relatively short
distances as compared to collectors or other higher
systems.
12
Table 6. Percentage of Each Functional Classification System in Bell County
Functional System
Centerline
Percentage
Interstates
Rural (Pop. < 5,000)
17.42
1.93%
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
22.52
Large Urbanized (Pop. 200,000+)
17.77
Subtotal
57.72
Other Freeway-
Expressway
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
4.6
0.15%
Principal Arterial
Rural (Pop. < 5,000)
29.48
4.03%
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
44.74
Large Urbanized (Pop. 200,000+)
45.8
Subtotal
120.02
Minor Arterial
Rural (Pop. < 5,000)
37.16
4.32%
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
35.94
Large Urbanized (Pop. 200,000+)
55.64
Subtotal
128.74
Major Collector
Rural (Pop. < 5,000)
187.64
15.33%
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
136.05
Large Urbanized (Pop. 200,000+)
133.05
Subtotal
456.74
Minor Collector
Rural (Pop. < 5,000)
90.06
3.69%
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
18.92
Large Urbanized (Pop. 200,000+)
1.07
Subtotal
110.05
Local
Rural (Pop. < 5,000)
897.15
70.54%
Urbanized (Pop. 50,000 - 99,999)
506.82
Large Urbanized (Pop. 200,000+)
698.44
Subtotal
2,102.41
County Total
2,980.27
100%
13
Crash Data
This data is sources from TxDOT’s Crash Record Information System (CRIS) database for 2012-
2021. An average of 10 people die each day on Texas roads. For this reason, TxDOT started the
campaign on the road to zero deaths to be achieved by 2050. The road to zero is a top priority in
the state of Texas and we want to have a plan that strives to meet that goal. KTMPO did a special
study project to develop a safety dashboard for the KTMPO region. This gives planning the visual
on where is needing the most impact in transportation safety.
Table 7: Crash Total & Fatalities
Jurisdiction
Crashes
# Fatal
Bell County
52,798
397
Bartlett
11
1
Belton
5,732
30
Harker Heights
3,577
14
Holland
49
3
Killeen
19,449
121
Little River-Academy
106
1
Morgan's Point Resort
90
0
Nolanville
651
16
Rogers
99
1
Salado
95
0
Temple
13,260
79
Troy
911
6
Figure 2 to the right is data
taken from CRIS data and
uses the new KTMPO Safety
Dashboard, to visualize the
data. The figure shows a
total number of crashes in
the KTMPO boundary
between 2012-2021. This
figure breaks it down to
show the number of these
crashes that were fatal and
the number of fatalities total
for the past years. The non-
motorized category is the
pedestrian or bicyclist in
these crashes.
Figure 2
14
Figure 3 shows a breakdown of vehicles type or
pedestrian involved in the crashes. It is important for
the plans to analysis this data and see what types of
vehicles are involved in crashes and how a plan can
account for this and better set safety measures.
Figure 3
Figure 4: Bell County Crash Data Heat Map
15
Figure 5 shows the breakdown of what was the reason for the crash (speeding, asleep while
driving, followed too closely, etc.). The importance of knowing what the contributing factors in a
crash are to be able to build awareness and safety plans can avoid that incident happening in the
future.
Figure 6 shows the breakdown of the type of which the crash happened (rear-end crash,
opposite direction crash, head on crash, etc.). Analyzing the way in which a crash happens
helps create plans that reduce these certain types of crashes.
16
Figure 5: Crash Totals by Primary Contributing Factor
17
Figure 6: Type of Crash
18
Review of 2001 Thoroughfare Plan
Following a review of the 2001 Thoroughfare Plan the following information was noted:
The population of the county has increased more than 55%, which has contributed to more trips,
congestion, injuries, and fatalities on the roadways throughout the county.
Over the past 25 years, there have been incidents of drought, flooding, tornadoes, heat waves,
and winter storms, each having different negative impacts on roadways across Bell County. Winter
Storm Uri of 2021 caused damage to roads across Texas due to the ice, snow, and road salt.
Droughts can cause additional oil build-up on roads which can impact driver safety. Flooding can
cause erosion on roadways and other negative impacts to road quality and driver safety. Tornados
have the capacity to destroy roads. Heat waves can melt road surfacing and cause roads to
expand and crack. On average, nearly 5,000 people are killed and over 418,000 people are injured
in weather-related crashes each year. (Source: Ten-year averages from 2007 to 2016 analyzed
by Booz Allen Hamilton, based on NHTSA data).
The 2001 Thoroughfare Plan examined the following issues and provided recommendations to
alleviate concerns associated with these:
1. Enhance coordination between the county and incorporated cities to develop a seamless
transportation plan for the region.
2. Evaluate future traffic volumes and levels of service on thoroughfares carrying traffic within
and through the county. Projected growth for the county and region will be of principle
concern to the development of adequate fiscal, land use, and other policy strategies
needed to maximize transportation mobility.
3. Determine the mechanisms to meet growing highway demand within regulatory and
funding constraints.
4. Identify maintenance needs and priorities.
5. Present land use strategies designed to have positive impacts on the county’s
transportation infrastructure.
The previous plan also saw an increase in population within Bell County by 83% from 1970 to
2000. At the time, 75% of traffic between Mexico and the United States used the I-35 corridor.
The plan predicted that 21% of the average daily traffic would be trucks by 2025.
2
The plan identified the following deficiencies:
1. Lack of a clearly defined functional classification system.
2
Executive Summary, IH-35 Trade Corridor Study (Corridor 23), 1999.
Chapter 3 Plan Development and Analysis
19
2. Lack of clearly designated administrative policies regarding the placement and location of
future facilities.
3. Better transportation connections are needed between Bell and McLennan and Falls
Counties.
4. A strong desire within the County to carefully balance new development and growth with
traditional industries such as agriculture.
5. Lack of access management provisions.
Lastly, when considering implementation of the plan, the 2001 plan outlined mechanisms to set
forth. Development controls including the regulation of the subdivision of land within the county is
important to preserve transportation facilities. Improvements in close proximity of the city limits
should be made in consultation with the respective city.
The previous plan also suggested that the plan be reviewed regularly and revised.
While the below chart shows the goals outlined in the 2001 Plan, these goals are more like guiding
principles.
Goal
Maintain regional mobility, Bell County should work closely with TxDOT, KTMPO, to assure
continued improvements are planned and funded for these regional mobility facilities
Provide an efficient network of thoroughfares-make appropriate connections between urban
centers with an efficient network of thoroughfares
Preserve existing facilities-plan of preventative maintenance, bring substandard roadways
up to adequate levels of maintenance
Coordinate the timing of future facilities with development-need better comprehensive
planning authority at the county level
Establish subdivision guidelines that consider aspects such as adequate engineering,
drainage, access management, and public safety
Review of Regional and Local Planning Documents
The following plans were reviewed to provide additional information for the Bell County
Thoroughfare Plan.
City of Belton (2030 Comprehensive Plan)
The City of Belton’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan was developed as a policy guide to assist city
leaders in making decisions about how their city should grow and develop. The plan has goals of
maintaining and further developing a walkable city, creating enhancements along important
corridors throughout the city, and linking development with road networks to enhance both that
development and the roads themselves. The plan reviews current and future development, land
use, transportation. Based on their survey data, 56.4% of residents work outside of the city limits.
City of Harker Heights (Mobility 2030)
20
The City of Harker Heights’ Mobility 2030 Plan includes a thoroughfare plan, a sidewalk plan, off-
street hike and bike trail network plan, on-street striping plan for biking and pedestrians, transit
planning,
City of Killeen (2022 Comprehensive Plan)
The City of Killeen’s 2022 Comprehensive Plan includes concepts on the economics of land use,
Killeen’s identity, land use and growth management, mobility and connectivity, along with
information on implementation. The plan also noted issues with the lack of sidewalks and other
features that make complete streets. According to the plan’s data, Killeen has more affordable
housing index but a much lower wealth index than the county and state. Additionally, the city has
a diversity index that indicates complete diversity.
City of Temple (Mobility Master Plan 2022)
The City of Temple’s 2022 Mobility Master Plan was developed as a guide on how to improve
movement through Temple by increasing efficiency and sustainability of the current system. The
plan has these goals as its guide: Safety First, Choices, Connections, Prosperity, Community
Driven, Mobility, Maintain and Sustain, Quality of Place, and Fund and Implement. This plan
evaluated the existing transportation conditions of the area and addresses the transportation
needs to come with the growth they are expecting in the future. The data in this report shows
Temple’s growth at a 10% increase in the last five years. Their employment is also strong at
nearly 60,000 jobs in 2018.
Other Plans
Staff also reviewed neighboring regional thoroughfare plans including the CAMPO Regional
Arterials Concept Inventory from 2019, the Williamson County Long-Range Transportation Plan,
the 2012 Waco MPO Master Thoroughfare Plan, and the 2021 Burnet County Transportation
Plans. While these plans do not involve area within Bell County, their proximity as neighboring
regions does impact arterials within the County. For the most part, Bell County does not have too
many major facilities that are impacted by the plans from CAMPO, Waco MPO, and bordering
counties.
Significant areas of interest where the County interacts with neighboring regions include the IH-
35 connection with Falls/McLennan Counties in the north, the IH-35 and SH 195 connections with
Williamson County in the south and the FM roads east of IH-35 that connect south into Williamson
County. These areas are existing or potential growth spots that will have a direct impact on the
Bell County road network and need to be considered when transportation planning. The
connection between Bell County/Burnet County is another possible area for future expansion
noted in the CAMPO plan.
Identified Deficiencies and Desires
KTMPO staff hosted a Bell County Thoroughfare Plan Stakeholder Meeting on July 26, 2022.
Attendees represented several cities, school districts, engineers, and other professionals who
work in Bell County to discuss roadway improvements, additions, and possible development in
the coming years.
21
The following changes and updates were recommended by our stakeholders:
• Roads and bridges needing improvements
o Hartrick Bluff Road (east of Temple)
o FM 2268 (south of Temple)
o Armstrong Road (south of Temple)
o Highway 136 (southwest of I-35/I-14 junction)
o Royal Street and Amity Street (near Salado)
o North Point Road, FM 2483, Morgan’s Point Road, Camp Kachina Road (near
Morgan’s Point Resort)
o FM 439 (from Lake Belton to Nolanville)-including an intersection improvement
with Highway 93
o Railroad crossings along Jack Rabbit Road
o BUS 190 (eastern side of Harker Heights)
o Bunny Trail, Chaparral Road (near Killeen)
o Sparta Road from N. Wheat Road to FM 439 and parallel to that Highway 95
needs median improvements (between Belton and Temple)
o Bridge near Old 81 in Troy
• New roads or extension of roads
o Armstrong Road needs to be extended south of FM 2268 past Armstrong Loop
(south of Temple)
o FM 2484 needs to be connected to Marie Lane (Salado)
o A roadway needs to be added across from Lake Belton High School
o New roadway needed near old Roger’s Park (Morgan’s Point Resort)
o S. Main Street needs to be extended along the southern side of I-14 and then
extended in a loop fashion north towards I-14 on the western side of the road to
make a bigger loop (Nolanville)
o Chaparral Road needs to be extended east due to KISD developments near
Chaparral High School and FM 3481 from eastern Killeen needs to be extended
east to Thomas Arnold Road. (Killeen)
• Speed Reductions
o FM 3219 (Harker Heights)
o Hwy 195 (Fort Hood Road) between Stagecoach Road and Stan Schlueter Loop
(Killeen)
A public meeting was held on October 26
th
, 2022 at the Bell County Expo.
Additional Analysis
Accomplishments and Ongoing Projects in the county since the 2001 Plan, include:
Interstate 35
22
The portion of the IH-35 expansion and resurfacing through Bell County was completed ahead of
schedule in Summer of 2019. This project was completed in four parts: Project 3A1 - Troy, Project
2B - Temple, Project 1C - Belton, and Project 1B – Salado. The completion of I-35 allows more
traffic to flow through the county at a safer level and reducing congestion. The accomplishments
of the projects are as follows:
✓ Widened approximately 25 miles of I-35 from four lanes to six lanes (three lanes in each
direction).
✓ Upgrading on and off ramps.
✓ Converted frontage roads to one-way
✓ New direct connectors, U-turns and traffic signals
✓ New electric message signs
✓ Converted Main St./FM935 from an underpass to an overpass
Interstate 14
The expansion and improvement of US 190 to interstate standards and designation as Interstate
14. The first phase of this project and initial designation as IH-14 was completed in January 2017.
Current expansion of the corridor between Killeen and Temple is due to be completed in early
2023. Future expansion of the Interstate from the IH-14/IH-35 interchange to the eastern edge of
the County and beyond is in the early stages of planning and development.
23
Throughfare Planning Principles
The following principles were identified and are considered vital to the development of policies
needed for thoroughfare planning in the future.
Maintain regional mobility, Bell County should work closely with TxDOT, KTMPO, to assure
continued improvements are planned and funded for these regional mobility facilities
Provide an efficient network of thoroughfares-make appropriate connections between urban
centers with an efficient network of thoroughfares
Preserve existing facilities-plan of preventative maintenance, bring substandard roadways
up to adequate levels of maintenance
Coordinate the timing of future facilities with development-need better comprehensive
planning authority at the county level
Establish subdivision guidelines that consider aspects such as adequate engineering,
drainage, access management, and public safety
Throughfare Plan Map
The final Bell County Thoroughfare Plan map is presented in Figure 3. A full sized version is
provided in Appendix A.
Chapter 4: 2022 Thoroughfare Plan
Coryell
Falls
Milam
Williamson
McLennan
Burnet
§
¨
¦
35
§
¨
¦
14
¬
«
190
¬
«
363
¬
«
36
¬
«
36
SH36
SH195
US190
SH317
SH53
FM3470
SH201
FM2305
FM2410
Spur 290
FM1741
FM439
RANCIER
W YOUNG
Spur 172
SH95
SH317
FM439
Loop 121
SH53
FM437
FM2843
FM2268
FM93
FM1670
FM2484
FM2410
FM1237
CHAPARRAL RD
ARMSTRONG RD
FM 2271
FM1123
FM2483
OLD WACO RD
FM1741
OLD HOWARD RD
S KEGLEY RD
SHINE BRANCH
BRIGGS RD
MOORES MILL RD
Loop 121
Blackland Rd
BREWER RD
George Wilson Rd
FM2484
FM93
BRIGGS RD
FM436
FM93
FM439
ELMS
FM3481
SH95
W YOUNG
S 5TH ST
TRIMMIER RD
FM2271
ROY REYNOLDS
FM2410
FM2305
AVE H W
ROBINETT
MIDWAY
31ST ST
FM3423
SPARTA
FEATHERLINE
ROSEWOOD DR
CUNNINGHAM RD
FM1741
FM93
ELMS
FM438
FM487
FM1123
FM935
FM2268
FM485
FM2484
FM2115
FM3117
FM436
FM817
SH53
FM1237
US190
IVY GAP RD
FM2305
OLD FM 440
SH320
FM3219
ILLINOIS
CHANTZ
REESE CREEK RD
BOYS RANCH RD
PRAIRIE VIEW
9TH ST
Spur 439
38TH ST
INDUSTRIAL BLVD
14TH ST
SPARTA RD
FULLER
10TH ST
TRIMMIER RD
HOGAN RD
GOLDEN GATE DR
SIMMONDS
FOWLER
Spur 437
FM2268
FM3369
FM2086
FM940
FM2904
FM2670
SEATON RD
ROYAL ST
STRINGTOWN RD
FALLS RD
OAKALLA RD
W AMITY RD
SHAW LN
MAXDALE RD
ELMER KING RD
OLD HWY 95 RD
NEW COLONY RD
BIG ELM CREEK RD
PADDY HAMILTON RD
E AMITY RD
HARTRICK BLUFF RD
ST. JOSEPH RD
ROBERTS RD
VAUGHN RD
LUTHER CURTIS RD
TURKEY RD
FM2409
FM2601
FM2184
HAROLD CLARK RD
MOFFAT RD
FM940
CEDAR VALLEY RD
BOTTOMS RD E
FM1671
Spur 964
STRINGTOWN RD
AUCTION BARN RD
60TH ST
FM2184
BOTTOMS RD E
FORT HOOD
2022 Bell County Thoroughfare Plan
±
0 4 8 12 162
Miles
Roadway Classification, Status
Major Arterial, Existing
Major Arterial, Proposed
Limited Access Highway, Existing
Limited Access Highway, Proposed
Major Collector, Existing
Major Collector, Proposed
Minor Arterial, Proposed
Minor Arterial, Existing
Fort Hood
Water
Cities
Park
Prepared on 12/08/2022
25
Functional Classification
The fundamental basis of street functional
classification is the need to balance the two
conflicting but complementary purposes of access
and mobility. The Functional Classification system
recognizes the hierarchy of purpose among streets
that channel traffic flow from the highest level of
access (local streets) to facilities collecting these
flows (collector streets), then to facilities able to
transport these larger flows over longer distances
(arterials), and then even larger flows over even
longer distances (Interstates and freeways), with the
highest level of mobility but least amount of access
to land uses.
Interstate and Freeways – access-controlled,
maximizes mobility, provides for long-distance
travel.
Interstates are access-controlled, grade-separated
intersections, and are characterized by multi-lane,
median divided roadways. General design standards
for Interstates call for a minimum right-of-way width
of 250’ for four lanes, with the desirable standard
being six lanes and 500’. Design details are
determined by TxDOT. Bicycles and pedestrians are
prohibited due to the high speeds of these classes of
roads, so the design of supporting bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure (including shared use of
wide shoulders) is not applicable.
Major Arterial – access-managed, provides mobility,
limited access to land use.
Major Arterial are access-managed roadways,
characterized by considerable length roadways that
provide continuity throughout the area. general
design standards call for a 130’ minimum right-of-way
for a four-lane facility, with 160’ desirable for six lanes. A travel lane width of 12’ as specified is
common for existing Major Arterials in the KTMPO region, but Complete Streets and Vision Zero
guidance calls for narrowing travel lanes to 11’ to slow traffic to speeds that are safer for all road
users
Minor Arterial – access-managed, provides mobility, limited access to land use.
Roadway Terms to Know:
• Right-of-Way: Land, property, or
interest acquired for or devoted to a
transportation facility.
• Interstate: Roadway that provides
mobility across states.
• Freeway: Roadway that provides
mobility between cities.
• Major Arterial: Roadway that provides
mobility within the city.
• Minor Arterial: Roadway that provides
moderate length trips.
• Collector: Roadway that connects to
arterials.
• Local: Roadway that connects to
collectors, property access.
Increased M
obility
Increased Access
Controlled Access Roads
(Interstate or Freeway)
Major Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Roads
26
Minor Arterial are designed for fast, heavy traffic and are generally provided in a grid system.
General design standards call for a minimum right-of-way of 80’ for three lanes, increasing to 110’
for four lanes. The desirable right-of-way is 120’, which will accommodate five lanes
Collector – limited mobility, more access to land use, connects thoroughfares.
Collectors provide a greater balance between mobility and land access. With mobility as a less
critical attribute, narrower lane widths of 11’ are recommended, although widths as narrow as 10’
are cited in Complete Streets and Vision Zero guidelines. Shared auto and bicycle outside lanes
may be as narrow as 14’. Minimum right-of-way of 60’ for two lanes and 70’ for three lanes are
listed in the guidance. For four lanes, a desirable right-of-way is 80’
Typical Cross Sections
Urban and rural areas have distinctly different needs based on fundamental differences in type of
land uses, street density, and travel patterns. Not only are these systems distinctly classified
differently but constructed differently as well.
Typical cross sections are intended to illustrate the maximum right-of-way needed for each street
Functional Class. It is recognized that the actual cross section needed for any specific project at
a given time depends on several factors, including the physical characteristics of the street, traffic
volumes, mix of multimodal traffic, safety considerations, local standards and preferences, and
funding. Therefore, the cross sections presented in this plan are meant as guidance for the typical
conditions, and should be refined as needed for each specific project
Per the roadway classifications defined in the above section, typical cross-sections have been
provided in Figures 4-1 - 4-5. These are provided as a general guide and should be reevaluated
at the time of design to determine context-specificity. Elements shown in these cross-sections are
suggestions rather than requirements. Individual cross-sections should be developed in
collaboration with, and under the review of, Bell County and applicable municipalities. If Federal
funding is used to design or construct a roadway, specific design details will need to be adhered
to, per the Federal Highway Administration’s guidance at time of design and construction.
27
Figure 4 shows a typical cross section for a Controlled Access Facility with six lanes. The figure
shows a grassy center median with a typical 24’ to 30’ width, and smaller median areas buffering
between the main lanes and the frontage roads. Safety treatments in the medians or road margins
such as guardrails and cable barriers are common to prevent vehicle cross-overs but are not
shown in the illustration.
Figure 5 shows a typical cross section for a Major Arterial with four lanes and bicycle and
pedestrian accommodations consisting of separated off-street paths or sidewalks and a separated
off-street multi-use path. In this instance there are no distinct on-street bicycle facilities, but this
does not affect the bicycle’s status as a vehicle and their right to the road.
Figure 4: Six Lane Controlled Access Facility with Frontage Roads
Figure 5: Four Lane Major Arterial
28
Figure 6 shows a typical cross section for a four lane Minor Arterial with a continuous center turn
lane. Minor Arterials may have greater accommodations for bicycles and pedestrians than Major
Arterials, as they typically have lower speeds, lower traffic volumes, and a smaller percentage of
trucks in the traffic stream. The figure also shows separated off-street paths or sidewalks. Although
bikes may share the roadway with other vehicles, no special infrastructure is represented in this
cross section.
Figure 7 shows a four lane Major Collector with 12’ lanes and a continuous center turn lane with
a width of 14’. With a 9’ buffer zone on each side of the Major Collector that could be used for
sidewalks, vegetation, or widen the outside lane to 14’ to create a shared outside lane to
emphasize bicycle useability.
Figure 6: Four Lane Minor Arterial with Continuous Center Turn Lane
Figure 7: Major Collector
29
Figure 8 shows a two-lane Collector with 11’ lanes and a continuous center turn lane with a width
of 14’. This cross section shows extra space on the outside of the buffer that can be used for
vegetation, sidewalk paths, park lanes, passing lanes, or widened to add bicycle lanes.
Figure 9 shows a two-lane local road with 11’ lanes. With buffer on the outside to accommodate
public works, open ditches, passing lanes, or sidewalks.
Figure 8: Minor Collector with Continuous Center Turn Lane
Figure 9: Local
30
Table 8: Shows the Summary of ROW Recommendations by Functional Classification
Proposed Functional Classification
The recommended functional classification system for Bell County is presented in Figure 3. The
system established by the County follows the classification system as prepared by TxDOT.
Inventories of facilities designated with the existing functional classification and the proposed
functional classification are presented in Tables 9 through 12. *This is a conceptual list of roads,
for the use of planning*
Table 9: Interstate and Major Arterials Proposed Functional Classification
Facility
Existing
Proposed
SL 121
Minor Arterial
Major Arterial
US 190
Other Freeway
Interstate
US 190
Major Arterial
Interstate
SH 317
Minor Arterial
Major Arterial
SL 363
Major Arterial
Other Freeway
SH 36
Major Arterial
Other Freeway
FM 439
Minor Arterial
Major Arterial
SH 95
Minor Arterial
Major Arterial
Design Element Controlled-Access Major Arterial Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local
Prefered ROW Width Varies up to 500' 160' 120' 80' 60' 60'
Minimum ROW Width 250' 130' 80' 60' 50' 50'
Auto Lane Width Minimum 12' Preferred 12' Preferred 12' Minimum 11' Minimum 11' Minimum 10.5'
Median Treatment
Rural: minimum 36'
Urban: minimum 10'
Preferred 18'
Continuous
Center Left Turn
Lane Preferred
14' Minimum
Continuous
Center Left Turn
Lane Preferred
14' Minimum
Continuous
Center Left Turn
Lane Preferred
14' Minimum
None
Outside Vegetation
Utility/Buffer
(minimum)
Varies 15' 10' 5' 5' 5'
Notes
Inside Shoulder:
Minimum 4'
Outside Shoulder
Minimum 10'
Vertical Clearance
Minimum 14'
ROW may be greater with parking, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, bus stops, and
intersection treatments.
31
Facility
Existing
Proposed
FM 1123
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
SL 121
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 1237
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 1670
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 1741
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 2268
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 2410
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 2483
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 2484
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 2484
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 2843
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 437
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
SH 53
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 93
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
FM 93
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
ARMSTRONG RD
Local Road
Minor Arterial
BLACKLAND
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
BRIGGS RD
Local Road
Minor Arterial
CHAPARRAL RD
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
GEORGE WILSON RD
Minor Collector
Minor Arterial
HILLIARD RD
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
MOORES MILL RD
Local Road
Minor Arterial
OLD HOWARD RD
Major/Minor Collector
Minor Arterial
OLD WACO RD
Local Road
Minor Arterial
S KEGLEY RD
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
SHINE BRANCH
Local Road
Minor Arterial
SPARTA RD
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
SPARTA RD
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
CROWS RANCH RD
UPGRADE
Local Road
Minor Arterial
Table 10: Minor Arterial Proposed Functional Classification
32
Table 11: Major Collector Proposed Functional Classification
Facility
Existing
Proposed
FM 1237
Minor Collector
Major Collector
FM 2086
Minor Collector
Major Collector
FM 2670
Minor Collector
Major Collector
FM 2904
Minor Collector
Major Collector
FM 3369
Minor Collector
Major Collector
FM 940
Minor Collector
Major Collector
APPLE CIDER RD
Local Road
Major Collector
BIG ELM CREEK RD
Local Road
Major Collector
BLACKBERRY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
BREWER RD
Local Road
Major Collector
CARDON RD
Local Road
Major Collector
East AMITY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
ELMER KING RD
Local Road
Major Collector
ELMER KING RD
Local Road
Major Collector
FALLS RD
Local Road
Major Collector
GEORGE WILSON RD
Minor Collector
Major Collector
HARTRICK BLUFF RD
Minor Collector
Major Collector
HARTRICK BLUFF SPUR
Minor Collector
Major Collector
LEVY CROSSING RD
Local Road
Major Collector
LEVY XING
Local Road
Major Collector
LIVE OAK CEM RD
Local Road
Major Collector
LUTHER CURTIS RD
Local Road
Major Collector
MAXDALE RD
Local Road
Major Collector
NEW COLONY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
OAKALLA RD
Local Road
Major Collector
PADDY HAMILTON RD
Local Road
Major Collector
ROBERTS RD
Local Road
Major Collector
ROYAL ST
Local Road
Major Collector
ROYAL ST
Local Road
Major Collector
SALADO HEIGHTS DR
Local Road
Major Collector
SEATON RD
Local Road
Major Collector
SHAW LN
Local Road
Major Collector
SOUTHERLAND RD
Local Road
Major Collector
ST. JOSEPH RD
Local Road
Major Collector
STRINGTOWN RD
Minor Collector
Major Collector
THOMAS ARNOLD RD
Local Road
Major Collector
TURKEY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
TURKEY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
33
Table 11 Continued
VAUGHN RD
Local Road
Major Collector
W AMITY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
W AMITY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
W MAIN ST
Local Road
Major Collector
WEDEL CEMETERY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
WEDEL CEMETERY RD
Local Road
Major Collector
KUYKENDALL BRANCH RD
UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
SOLANA RANCH RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
WILLIAMSON RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
SMITH DAIRY RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
TAHUAYA RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
REEDS LAKE RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
ELMER KING RD
UPGRADE/EXTENSION
Local Road
Major Collector
CAMPBELL HILL RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
COUNTY LINE RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
REED CEMETARY RD
UPGRADE/EXTENSION
Local Road
Major Collector
KNOB HILL RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
BOTTOMS RD UPGRADE
Local Road
Major Collector
34
Table 12: Proposed Future Roads
35
Implementation
The Bell County Thoroughfare Plan provides a long-term template for which the County’s
transportation system can be developed. This Plan gives the Commissioner’s Court, County staff,
the Killeen-Temple Metropolitan Planning Organization, and municipal staff an understanding of
the long-term transportation needs while making short-term decisions related to roadway funding
and new development.
To accomplish the purpose of the thoroughfare plan, a set of recommendations are included in
this section. Recommendations on implementation and funding sources.
Documentation Updates
Bell County Subdivision Regulations
- Section 301.1: (a) “on major highways and roads” should be defined in terms of roadway
functional classification. (b) “public roads other than major highways” should be defined
in terms of roadway functional classification.
- Section 302: (1) Perimeter Streets: Add right-of-way requirements to match functional
classification.
- Whole Document: Tables in all sections should be clearly labeled.
Goals
The goals outlined below were developed using the SMART goal principles. These criteria help
improve the chances of succeeding in accomplishing a goal.
Mobility - Provide a multimodal transportation system that safely takes people where they
need/want to go, in a timely manner, with a perceived sense of comfort.
• Consider those of all abilities when creating roads.
• Reduce congestion related delay.
Chapter 5 Recommendations
36
Safety - Achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries for all modes on
public roads.
• Vision Zero: Achieve zero traffic related fatalities.
Choices - Develop an integrated transportation network that provides improved mobility for all
modes including active transportation, transit, and space for emerging technologies.
• Increase bike/ped facility usage
Connections - Develop a connected multimodal network providing accessible mobility options to
service the city across multiple modes that are integrated with the surrounding land use. Provide
accessible mobility options through a connected multi-modal network that is integrated into the
surrounding land use pattern.
• Close gaps in the sidewalk/bicycle network.
Community Driven - Partner with all community members and elevate the underrepresented
voices to provide community-based transportation solutions.
• Increase the number of contacts through the stakeholder engagement and public meeting
process.
Maintain and Sustain - Promote stewardship of a sustainable transportation system through asset
management and systems preservation.
• Improve roadway Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
• Improve bridges within the County’s jurisdiction.
• Increase resiliency.
• Increase redundancy.
Quality of Place - Promote place making through development of context sensitive complete
streets design elements.
• Design a context sensitive system that protects cultural resources and historical sites.
• Protect the natural environment (air quality; water quality; wetlands and flood plain).
• Implement design elements and functionality that promote a sense of community and
provide amenities such as shelters, trees, and/or shading.
Fund and Implement - Identify short-and long-term action steps while pursuing revenue
resources to build, maintain, and operate new and existing transportation infrastructure and
services.
• Develop an ongoing project selection and prioritization process that increases County
competitiveness across all modes in planning-partner infrastructure funding programs.
• Develop and fund programs to regularly monitor roadways.
• Maintain and update transportation related data sources, and fund design resources in
order to improve the county’s capability to capture grant funding.
• Strengthen public/private partnership funding opportunities to ensure infrastructure
investment sufficient to support growth.
37
Additional Considerations
Complete Streets
Complete streets are a practice that make sure streets are safe for all users.
3
This planning
process happens during the designing, building, operating, and maintenance phases of road work.
Usually this process includes considering pedestrians first, then bicyclists, and lastly automobiles.
A complete street may include sidewalks, bike lanes, comfortable and accessible public
transportation stops, frequent and safe sidewalks, median islands, roundabouts, and other safety
measures. Often times this means reducing the number of lanes for automobiles. Speed is the
leading factor in fatalities. Drives tend to drive at a slower speed when there are less lanes and
the roads are narrower. One example of increasing safety at intersections is to not include gently
rounded corners because this allows drivers to turn at a higher speed in the crosswalk while
pedestrians have to travel further due to the rounded corners. The Complete Streets policy was
implemented by TxDOT in 2011.
Vision Zero
The Vision Zero Network created the Vision Zero is a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and
severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all. First implemented in
Sweden in the 1990s, Vision Zero has proved successful across Europe- and now it is gaining
momentum in major American cities.
End the Streak
The Texas Department of Transportation created the #EndTheStreakTX in an effort to raise
awareness about the long streak of traffic deaths in Texas and how this is an issue that impacts
every Texan. Texas has lost at least one person every day on Texas roads since December 7,
2020.
Funding Sources
The funding programs listed below in Table 9 are intended as a toolbox to assist in the
implementation of the 2022 BCTP. These programs are related to development, redevelopment,
and general transportation improvements, including general roadway improvements, overpasses,
freight corridors, transit, and trails. The toolbox can be used by Bell County, its partnering local
government entities, and KTMPO. The toolbox provides a wide variety of potential funding
mechanisms for future improvements. Individual improvements that are identified in the local CIP
processes should be analyzed for which toolbox funding items will be applicable.
It is recommended that all entities work in coordination when applying for state and federal
funding, to leverage funding more effectively. Bell County should work with all potential funding
partners to create a funding plan for the next several years, with the first item being an application
to the next KTMPO Call for Projects in 2023.
3
https://smartgrowthamerica.org/what-are-complete-streets/
38
Program Type Program Function Applicable Jurisdiction Transportation and Mobility Project Type Link
Roadway Impact Fees
Roadway Impact Fees are established by Chapter 395
of the Texas Local Government Code. An impact fee is
typically a one-time payment imposed by a local
government on a property developer. The fee is meant
to offset the financial impact a new development
places on public infrastructure.
City or Local Government
The chapter allows impact fees to fund captical
costs for locally provided facilities, including
roadways.
County Assistance Disctrict (CAD) Public Service and Improvement Finance County
Funds can be used for construction, maintenance
or improvement of roads or highways. It can also
be used for public benefit: law enforcement,
maintenance or improvement of libraries,
museums, parks, or recreational facilities,
economic development, and tourism and services.
Tax Incement Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ)
Tax Increment Reimbursement Zones (TIRZ) are
special zones created by City Council or County to
attract new investment in an area. This allows for a
portion of city or county tax revenue increment to be
applied to an area or project improvement.
City or County
Public improvement promote new or
redevelopment of specifically designated zones or
projects; can include transportation and any public
improvement a city or county can fund.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/pdfs/value_
capture/value_cap_faq_tr_tir_zones.pdf
KTMPO Project Calls (TxDOT CAT 2, 7,&
9)
To implement recommended KTMPO projects that
leverage TxDOT funding.
KTMPO Jurisdictions
All form of transportation projects including roads,
overpasses, underpasses, rail, transit, pedestrian
trails, etc.
https://ktmpo.org/call-for-projects/
TxDOT Highway Bridge Program (HBP)
Fedderal-aid Program
The Highway Bridge Program (HBP) is a federal-aid
program that provides funding to enable states to
improve the condition of highway bridges through
replacement, rehabilitation and systematic preventive
maintenance. The purpose of the program is to
increase the
safety of highway bridges nationwide
Local Governments, MPOs, Tribes, and other
Funding for bridge replacement, rehabilitation, and
systematic preventive maintenance.
https://www.txdot.gov/business/grants-
and-funding/highway-bridge-program-
hbp-federal-aid.html
Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG)
Funds can be used for public improvement for Low and
Moderate Income Areas and should be part of the city
and county CDBG Program. It can be used to
implement roads, paving, water, sewer, parks, and
trails.
City or County
Project types include infrastructure, ROW, road
improvements, as well as social programs,
affordable housing, and economic development
programs.
https://www.texasagriculture.gov/Grants-
Services/Rural-Economic-
Development/Rural-Community-
Development-Block-Grant-CDBG
State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) -
Transportation Loan Program
The overall goal of the SIB Program is to provide
innovative financing methods to communities to assist
them in meeting their infrastructure needs.
Any public or private entity authorized to
construct, maintain or finance an eligible
transportation project
SIB funds can be used on all costs incidental to the
construction or reconstruction of eligible projects.
These uses typically include: Right of way
acquisition, utility relocation, engineering and
design, on or off system constnruction or
reconstruction, contingency for rising costs or
potential overruns, inspection and construction
engineering, financial and legal fees incurred
during the course of the SIB loan application and
loan agreement.
https://www.txdot.gov/business/grants-
and-funding/state-infrastructure-
bank.html
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
Invests $350 billion in highway programs over 5 years.
Creates more than a dozen new highway programs.
Creates more opportunities for local governments and
other entities.
local governments, MPOs, Tribes, and other
public authorities
Invest in bridges, climate/resilience, electric
vehicles, safety, and equity.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-
infrastructure-law/
RAISE Grant (formaly BUILD and TIGER)
The Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
Sustainability and Equity, or RAISE Discretionary
Grant program, provides a unique opportunity for the
DOT to invest in road, rail, transit and port projects that
promise to achieve national objectives.
City, Local Governments, MPOs, Tribes, and
other public authorities
RAISE grants are for planning and capital
investments that support roads, bridges, transit, rail,
ports, or intermodal transportation.
https://www.transportation.gov/RAISEgra
nts
Rail to Trails Conservancy
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC) emphasizes strategic
investments that support significant regional and
community trail development goals.
Thse projects help build, maintain, and manage
trails for recreation, transportation, and economic
vitality.
https://www.railstotrails.org/
Potential Local Funding Sources
Potential State Funding Source
Potential Federal Funding Source
Potential Non-Government Funding Sources
Table 9: Funding Sources
39
Conclusion
The 2022 Bell County Thoroughfare Plan is a long-range plan that identifies the general location
and type of transportation corridors, preserves right-of-way for future infrastructure, establishes
consistent county design guidelines, and organizes future development. The plan does not change
ownership or land use, require the County or its cities to build proposed roadways, identify funding
or prioritize roadway projects or alignments, nor include survey, design, cost estimates, or
schedule of roadway projects.
The Bell County Thoroughfare Plan promotes a safe, well-connected, and efficient county-wide
transportation system that provides adequate mobility for people, goods, and services and
promotes growth and redevelopment throughout the County. Close coordination with
municipalities will be needed for a successful implementation. As the County grows, the BCTP
should also continue to update to ensure that roadway networks are proactive in planning for the
Counties future.