1. Border Master Plans Lower Rio Grande Valley – Tamaulipas International Relations Office – TxDOT 1 2012 Border to Border Transportation Conference Session: Transportation Planning: Internationally & Locally

2. Background 2 Initially JWC promoted a first pilot Border Master Plan in the California/Baja California region Border master plans have also been included in the binational agenda at the presidential level The presidents' border vision recognizes the importance of facilitating lawful trade and travel; thus a Declaration on 21st Century Border Management was issued on May 2010 and a Binational Action Plan was drafted subsequently President Barack Obama (U.S.A.) and President Felipe Calderón (Mexico), May 19, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson)

3. Background 3 California-Baja California Border Master Plan completed in 2008 – Currently being updated Texas-Mexico Border relatively large – Laredo - Coahuila/Nuevo León/Tamaulipas Border Master Plan (Laredo District) – Lower Rio Grande Valley – Tamaulipas Border Master Plan (Pharr District) – El Paso/New Mexico – Chihuahua Border Master Plan (El Paso District + New Mexico DOT) Arizona/Sonora effort also underway

4. Design stakeholder process that is inclusive and ensure participation Increase understanding of POE and transportation planning processes on both sides of border Develop and implement plan to prioritize POE and transportation projects over short, medium, and long term Establish communication process among federal, state, regional, and local stakeholders on both sides of border Objectives

5. Requirements for Success 5 Stakeholder participation and commitment Obtaining data and information –Current and future demand on existing infrastructure –Planned future projects to allow prioritization

6. 6 Task 1 - Establish Stakeholder Participation and Commitment Task 2 - First Stakeholder Meetings Task 3 - Analyze Data, Consultancy Reports, and Documentation Task 4 - Second Stakeholder Meetings Task 5 - Stakeholder Workshops Task 6 - Rank Priority Projects Task 7 - Finalize Documentation Task 8 - Disseminate Study Findings Summary of Tasks

7. Stakeholder Participation Identified for Pharr BMP: More than 150 stakeholders (e.g., 50 agencies) at the federal, state, county/municipal, and city level in both countries 5 railroad companies (8 officials) 14“ border partners” (e.g., 22 participants) Implemented: Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Technical Working Group (TWG) 7

8. 8 Policy Advisory Committee Technical Working Group Provide overall direction Establish clear parameters Review and approve criteria for future evaluation of projects Attempt to incorporate findings and priorities into “own” planning and programming processes Commit resources and staff to ensure timely exchange of available information Provide requested information in timely manner Review assessments and documentation Select criteria to be endorsed and adopted by the Policy Advisory Committee Make recommendations to Policy Advisory Committee Types of Stakeholders

9. Meetings PAC 1 Meeting Voting on Study Area & Time Horizons PAC 2 Meeting Summary of obtained data & introduction to criteria & weights voting procedure PAC 3 Meeting TWG 1 Inventory of infrastructure & data request TWG 2 Obtained data review TWG 3 Criteria & Weights Voting 9 PAC 4 Meeting Endorsement

10. Voting Process Prioritization of projects can be sensitive and contentious Needed a process to ensure “equal voice” in selecting criteria and criteria weights used for project prioritization Critical to endorsement of plan and implementing project priorities 10

11. Used i>Clicker technology that allowed anonymous voting Stakeholders voted on criteria, were shown results, discussed results, and re-voted Process continued until voting results were unaltered from round to round 11 Ensure Participation

12. Develop inventories of FUTURE Projects Prioritize future required investments to serve anticipated cross- border demand over the short, medium, and long term 12 Existing or new POEs Existing or new Transportation Infrastructure Relevant to POEs Roadways Interchanges Rail A Border Master Plan Seeks to

13. Why Border Master Plans? Funding – Inadequate funding for all planned projects … need to prioritize – No funding to invest in projects that are not well supported Border Master Plans aim – to identify binational POE and multi-modal project priorities – secure commitment from stakeholder agencies to implement priority projects – to ensure continued dialogue among agencies in moving forward 13

14. Pharr District – Jurisdiction 14 Los Tomates/Veterans Bridge Gateway International Bridge Brownsville Matamoros (B&M) Bridge B&M Rail Bridge [Brownsville West Rail Bypass] Free Trade Bridge Weslaco/Progreso Bridge Donna Bridge Pharr – Reynosa Bridge McAllen/Hidalgo Reynosa Bridge Anzaldúas Bridge Los Ebanos Ferry Starr-Camargo Bridge Roma Bridge (Suspension- Closed) Roma Bridge Falcon Dam Crossing

15. Area of Influence 15 The area of influence was defined as: Option A: Border Counties of the Pharr District and the corresponding Mexican Municipalities

16. Focused Study Area 16 The Focused Study Area was defined as: Option B: 15 miles (24 Kms) to the North and South of the border line – including some geographical bumps

17. 17  Task 1 - Establish Stakeholder Participation and Commitment   Task 2 - First Stakeholder Meetings  Task 3 - Analyze Data, Consultancy Reports, and Documentation  Task 4 - Second Stakeholder Meetings  Task 5 - Stakeholder Workshops  Task 6 – Rank Priority Projects   Task 7 - Finalize Documentation   Task 8 - Disseminate Study Findings Finalizing – Lower Rio Grande Valley Contract Finalizes Spring 2013 First Draft will be ready early 2013

18. 18 Eduardo Hagert Texas Department of Transportation International Relations Office Phone: (512) 936-0906 IRO Main Line: (512) 936-0942 Eduardo.Hagert@txdot.gov http://texasbmps.com/ Questions?