Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Kingsport MTPO adopts Tennessee and Virginia performance targets for safety, bridge and system performance

2337535 · February 13, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The MTPO voted to adopt state-set performance targets for PM1 (safety) and the PM2/PM3 (bridge and system performance) measures, opting to use Tennessee and Virginia state targets rather than set separate MPO-specific numbers.

The Kingsport Metropolitan Transportation Planning Organization voted to adopt state performance targets for both Tennessee and Virginia during its Feb. 13 meeting.

Leslie (MPO staff) explained that PM1 safety targets—covering fatalities, fatality rate, serious injuries, serious injury rate and non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries—are typically adopted annually and that the MTPO customarily adopts state targets. She said Tennessee’s statewide targets appear in the packet and Virginia expresses targets as percentage goals translated into MPO-area numbers. Leslie recommended adopting the states’ targets again this year because the MPO lacks resources to develop its own separate targets.

After a motion and second, members approved the PM1 targets by voice vote with no recorded opposition. The MTPO then considered PM2 (pavement and bridge condition) and PM3 (system performance) measures. Leslie reported that Tennessee did not change PM2 but adjusted PM3 measures; Virginia did not adjust its measures and the prior Virginia targets were included for reference. The board moved to adopt the states’ PM2 and PM3 targets and approved them by voice vote.

Members discussed which geographic boundary applies to Virginia targets; staff confirmed the Virginia figures are sized to the MPO’s Virginia planning area (a smaller portion of the MPO than the Tennessee side). One member noted that resource constraints motivated the decision to adopt state targets rather than develop MPO-specific numeric targets.

The board recorded no roll-call tallies in the transcript for these votes; staff stated six voting members were present or represented by proxy at the start of the meeting.