HRTPO Board Meeting │ October 18, 2012 │ Meeting Agenda ITEM #11: APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS 11A. MINUTES Minutes of the HRTPO Board meeting held on September 20, 2012 are attached. Attachment 11-A Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff recommends approval of the minutes. 11B. HRTPO FINANCIAL STATEMENT The Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for the activities for the last three months is attached. This statement reflects the financial status of the HRTPO as a whole. Attachment 11-B Recommended Action: Accept the HRTPO Financial Report. 11C. HRTPO FY 2012 AUDIT REPORT Dixon Hughes Goodman LLP has completed its annual review of the FY 2012 financial statements of the HRPDC (the fiscal agent for the HRTPO) and has given the HRPDC an Unqualified Opinion. There were no material weaknesses or deficiencies in any of the internal controls or processes of the HRPDC financial activity, and all information was free of any material misstatements. Attachment 11-C: Audit Findings Letter Enclosure 11-C: Financial Statement Recommended Action: Accept the HRTPO FY 2012 Audit Report. 11D. FY 2012-2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT: JAMES CITY COUNTY Attached is a request from James City County to transfer Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds from two cancelled CMAQ projects to a third CMAQ project that has a funding deficit as described below: • Transfer $39,145 in FY 2001 CMAQ from the Longhill Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 13719) to the Croaker Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 17633). • Transfer $162,221 in FY 2001 CMAQ from the Longhill Road Corridor Improvements project (UPC 71617) to the Croaker Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 17633). • Transfer $50,431 in State funds from a Route 658 safety project (UPC 60512) to the Croaker Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 17633) to provide the required match for the CMAQ funds. Attachment 11-D Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee recommend approval of the TIP Amendment.
Transcript
HRTPO Board Meeting │ October 18, 2012 │ Meeting Agenda
ITEM #11: APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS
11A. MINUTES
Minutes of the HRTPO Board meeting held on September 20, 2012 are attached. Attachment 11-A Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff recommends approval of the minutes.
11B. HRTPO FINANCIAL STATEMENT
The Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for the activities for the last three months is attached. This statement reflects the financial status of the HRTPO as a whole. Attachment 11-B Recommended Action: Accept the HRTPO Financial Report.
11C. HRTPO FY 2012 AUDIT REPORT
Dixon Hughes Goodman LLP has completed its annual review of the FY 2012 financial statements of the HRPDC (the fiscal agent for the HRTPO) and has given the HRPDC an Unqualified Opinion. There were no material weaknesses or deficiencies in any of the internal controls or processes of the HRPDC financial activity, and all information was free of any material misstatements. Attachment 11-C: Audit Findings Letter Enclosure 11-C: Financial Statement
Recommended Action: Accept the HRTPO FY 2012 Audit Report.
11D. FY 2012-2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT: JAMES CITY COUNTY
Attached is a request from James City County to transfer Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds from two cancelled CMAQ projects to a third CMAQ project that has a funding deficit as described below:
• Transfer $39,145 in FY 2001 CMAQ from the Longhill Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 13719) to the Croaker Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 17633).
• Transfer $162,221 in FY 2001 CMAQ from the Longhill Road Corridor Improvements project (UPC 71617) to the Croaker Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 17633).
• Transfer $50,431 in State funds from a Route 658 safety project (UPC 60512) to the Croaker Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 17633) to provide the required match for the CMAQ funds.
Attachment 11-D
Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee recommend approval of the TIP Amendment.
HRTPO Board Meeting │ October 18, 2012 │ Meeting Agenda
11E. FY 2012-2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT: JAMES CITY COUNTY
Attached is a request from James City County to transfer Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds from one cancelled CMAQ project to another CMAQ project that has a funding deficit as described below:
• Transfer $414,609 in FY 2000 CMAQ and $220,855 in FY 2001 CMAQ (total
transfer = $635,464) from the Longhill Road Multi-Use Trail project (UPC 13719) to the Monticello Avenue/Ironbound Road Intersection Improvements project (UPC 82961).
• Transfer $158,866 in State funds from an Olde Towne Road (Route 658) safety project (UPC 60512) to the Monticello Avenue/Ironbound Road Intersection Improvements project (UPC 82961) to provide the required match for the CMAQ funds.
Attachment 11-E Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee recommend approval of the TIP Amendment.
11F. FY 2012-2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT: HRT
Attached is a request from Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) to modify the scope of one project as described below:
• Project UPC T9126
o Current description: Purchase 38 (40’) Buses o Requested new description: Bus Replacement and Rebuild ($15.5M to
purchase 34 new 40-foot buses; $2.1M to rebuild eleven 29-foot buses) The requested change in project description will provide HRT with some flexibility in meeting its rolling stock needs. Revising the project to include bus rebuilds will allow HRT to get needed vehicles in service faster than purchasing new buses and at a much lower cost. Attachment 11-F
Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee recommend approval of the TIP Amendment.
HRTPO Board Meeting │ October 18, 2012 │ Meeting Agenda
11G. FY 2012-2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT: VDOT
Attached is a request from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to add one project as described below:
• Vehicle Fuel Conversion Program – Statewide (UPC T11802)
This project was developed to implement the Governor’s initiative to convert the state fleet to alternate fuels in order to reduce the state’s fuel costs. Attachment 11-G
Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee recommend approval of the TIP Amendment.
11H. REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH SCAN: FINAL REPORT
The term active transportation refers to all forms of human-powered transportation modes, including walking and bicycling. As part of the development of the HRTPO 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan, and to enhance active transportation planning efforts in Hampton Roads, HRTPO staff performed a Regional Active Transportation Research Scan (enclosed). The purpose of the scan was to identify best practices in active transportation planning within the United States and abroad. The draft report was made available for public review and comment from August 29, 2012 through September 12, 2012. No comments were received. Enclosure 11-H: Regional Active Transportation Research Scan: Final Report Recommended Action: The HRTPO staff and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee recommend approval of the report.
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 1
Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Board Minutes of September 20, 2012
The Hampton Roads TPO Board Meeting was called to order at 10:36 a.m. in the Regional Boardroom, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia, with the following in attendance: HRTPO Voting Members in Attendance: Molly Joseph Ward, Chair (HA) Alan P. Krasnoff, Vice-Chair (CH) Ella P. Ward (Alternate, CH) Christopher A. Hutson (GL) Dee Dee Darden (IW) Mary Jones (JC) McKinley Price (NN) Paul D. Fraim (NO)
Kenneth I. Wright (PO) William D. Sessoms (VB) Clyde Haulman (WM) Thomas G. Shepperd, Jr. (YK) Delegate Chris Stolle (GA) William E. Harrell (HRT) Eric Stringfield (Alternate, VDOT)
HRTPO Nonvoting Members in Attendance: Amar Dwarkanath (CH) Mary Bunting (HA) W. Douglas Caskey (IW) Robert C. Middaugh (JC) Neil A. Morgan (NN) Marcus Jones (NO)
Kenneth L. Chandler (PO) Jackson C. Tuttle, II (WM) James O. McReynolds (YK) William Harrison (CTAC) Colonel Jayne Jansen (LANGLEY-EUSTIS) Capt. David Culler (USN)
HRTPO Voting Members Absent: W. Eugene Hunt (PQ) Linda T. Johnson (SU) Thelma Drake (DRPT) Delegate John Cosgrove (GA) Senator Thomas Norment (GA)
Senator Frank Wagner (GA) Dennis Heuer (VDOT) Jerry Bridges (VPA) Kevan Danker (WATA)
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 2
HRTPO Nonvoting Members Absent: Brenda Garton (GL) J. Randall Wheeler (PQ) Selena Cuffee-Glenn (SU) James K. Spore (VB) Jeffrey Breeden (FAA) Irene Rico (FHWA) Ivan Rucker (FHWA) Tony Cho (FTA)
Brigid Hynes-Cherin (FTA) William Bell (FTAC) Col. Korvin D. Auch (LANGLEY-EUSTIS) Col. Tom Wetherington (LANGLEY-EUSTIS) Wayne Shank (NAA) Ken Spirito (PAC) Capt. John Little (USCG) Randall P. Burdette (VDOA)
Others Recorded Attending: Richard May (Citizen); Eric Martin (CH); R. Randy Martin (FR); Brian DeProfio (HA); Michael King, Sharon Scott, Jerri Wilson (NN); Paul Filion, Jeff Raliski, Ron Williams (NO); Sherri Neil (PO); Bob Matthias (VB); Jon Cawley (Daily Press); Dave Forster (Virginian Pilot); Captain M. Jackson, Wendy Vachet (Navy Region Mid-Atlantic); Ellis W. James (Sierra Club Observer); Robbyn Gayer (Hampton Roads for Rail); Ray Amoruso, Brian Smith (HRT); Mark Geduldig-Yatrofsky (Portsmouthcitywatch.org); Doug Smith (KCC); L. Frank Mach (US DOT Maritime Administration); Karen McPherson (Kimley-Horn); Jim Oliver (HRCCE); James Openshaw (CTAC); Will Christopher (FHR); Rich Clifton (RK&K); Peter Huber (Willcox & Savage); Cathy Aiello (Aiello Enterprises); HRTPO and HRPDC Staff: Camelia Ravanbakht, Sam Belfield, John Carlock, Rick Case, Rob Case, Jennifer Coleman, Nancy Collins, Greg Grootendorst, Kathlene Grauberger, Frances Hughey, Jim Hummer, Michael Kimbrel, Mike Long, Brian Miller, Kendall Miller, Jessica Nappi, Keith Nichols, Pavithra Parthasarathi, Kelli Peterson, Stephanie Shealey, Dale Stith, Joe Turner, and Chris Vaigneur. HRTPO Resolution of Appreciation Chair Ward presented a Resolution of Appreciation to Captain Mary Jackson of the U.S. Navy for her contributions to the HRTPO. Captain Jackson, on behalf of Admiral Alexander, Regional Commander, expressed her gratitude for the Navy’s inclusion on the HRTPO Board. She indicated that Captain David Culler would continue the Navy’s presence on the HRTPO Board. Approval of Agenda Chair Ward asked for any additions or deletions to the agenda. Hearing none, Mayor Price Moved to approve the agenda as written; seconded by Mr. Shepperd. The Motion Carried.
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 3
Workshop Agenda Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) Members Comment Period Mr. Layne reported the CTB approved the monies for the Dominion Boulevard project in the City of Chesapeake. These monies, approximately $80 million, came in significantly under the engineers’ estimates and the favorable bids reduced the capital from $415 million to $345 million. The project includes $152 million from the Virginia Transportation Infrastructure Bank (VTIB) which the CTB agreed to leave in the deal even though construction cost estimates came in under budget. He explained the VTIB is set up to assist in the completion of projects, and the CTB is hopeful that the low cost of financing will help the City of Chesapeake reduce its reliance on the capital appreciation bond and save the City millions of dollars in interest over the life of that loan. Mr. Layne noted that Virginia received approximately $58 million from an over-allotment of federal funds which will be utilized to resurface interstates in both Richmond and Hampton Roads. One project targeted for repaving is I-264 between Virginia Beach and Norfolk. The General Assembly requested the CTB review its composition and a recommendation offered from this discussion called for reconstituting the CTB by congressional districts. Using this scenario, Hampton Roads would receive one additional representative to the CTB. Another suggestion would give an additional member to any metropolitan area that has over two million in population; however, with this implementation, Hampton Roads would lose a member. Mr. Layne indicated Hampton Roads has benefited from increased representation on the CTB. In the current six-year plan, the region has almost 40% of funding, well over a third of all the capital monies in Virginia. Mr. Ellis reported Jennifer DeBruhl of VDOT gave a briefing to the CTB regarding changes to the Enhancement Grants Program. The program will now be entitled the Transportation Alternatives Program. Overall, there will be a funding reduction and the allocation procedure will be different in that allocations will only be given to non-motorized modes of transportation. Building grants, such as museums and lighthouses, will no longer be included in the program. Mr. Layne commented there was roughly $20 million in the program last year; however, that figure will be reduced due to mandatory expenses off the top and half of the monies going directly to the MPOs for distribution rather than through the CTB. Mayor Krasnoff expressed his appreciation to the CTB members for their efforts to move the Dominion Boulevard project forward. He noted that because the City of Chesapeake will be able to utilize the full $152 million from the VTIB, it will allow the City to authorize and award the construction contracts by November 2012. Mayor Sessoms inquired as to which body will ultimately decide on the CTB representation. Mr. Layne replied the General Assembly will make the decision. Mayor Sessoms expressed concern regarding the subject.
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 4
Mr. Ellis remarked that currently the CTB representation is determined by General Assembly congressional districts. Mr. Layne indicated that one of the recommendations combines the congressional districts along with the VDOT districts. Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) Comments and Updates Ms. Inman reported the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has signed the agreement for the $75 million necessary to complete improvements between Arkendale and Powell Creek. She stated the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Tier I High-Speed Norfolk/Richmond/Washington D.C. Corridor should be issued by the FRA in October which will allow DRPT to move forward with its Tier II EIS to accomplish environmental work and preliminary engineering. Tickets for the lowest priced Amtrak fares for opening day of the Norfolk train on December 12, 2012 have sold out. The opening ceremonial event will take place on December 11th. DRPT will be initiating a Fast Ferry Feasibility Study in consultation with the HRTPO, Hampton Roads Transit (HRT), the U.S. Navy, and other stakeholders to determine the potential for fast ferry service between the Peninsula and the Southside. HRTPO Passenger Rail Status Update Mr. Farmer reported the Northeast High-Speed Rail Corridor accommodates 2,000 passenger trains and 70 freight trains each day. It has an aging infrastructure and the FRA has begun a public scoping for a portion of the Corridor. There is a public effort in Hampton Roads to expand the focus of the Tier I Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of the Northeast Corridor to include the Hampton Roads region. Several public comments, including HRTPO staff comments, were sent to FRA in accordance with the September 14th deadline. Regarding the Hampton Roads Passenger Rail Study, Mr. Farmer stated Transportation Economics & Management Systems, Inc. (TEMS) is under contract for Phase 2A to collect data for a Service Development Plan (SDP). The data collection is well under way and should be completed before March 2013. Afterwards, Phase 2B will be implemented in which the engineering data, passenger estimates, revenues, costs, and environmental issues will be analyzed. Hampton Roads Regional Freight Study – 2012 Update Mr. Nichols reported the 2012 update of the Hampton Roads Regional Freight Study focuses on two major components: 1) Commodity Flows and 2) Regional Truck Movement. He stated the Commodity Flows component of the study analyzes foreign and domestic freight movement to, from, and within Hampton Roads for all transportation modes by weight and value for existing (2010) and projected (2040) conditions using the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Freight Analysis Framework 3 (FAF-3) database. It determines freight movements for Hampton Roads and makes comparisons with other
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 5
regions, such as Savannah, GA and Charleston, SC. It also determines the top trading partners and top commodities for Hampton Roads. In 2010, 185 million tons of freight were moved through Hampton Roads with coal as the number one commodity. By 2040, approximately 330 million tons of freight will be moved through the region. Mr. Nichols explained the second component, Regional Freight Movement, includes an analysis of the movement of trucks within Hampton Roads as well as through regional gateways and across water crossings. The study also identifies locations with high truck delay levels. The analysis is based primarily on VDOT vehicle classification counts and INRIX travel time and speed data. Mr. Nichols stated there is approximately 1.2 million truck miles of travel throughout the region each day. It is notable that the amount of truck travel has dropped approximately 18% since the economic downturn in 2007. Fifty percent of all truck travel in the region occurs between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Almost 17,000 trucks travel into and out of Hampton Roads each day. The top three routes by which this travel occurs is:
• I-64 with over 6,000 trucks per day • U.S. Route 58 with 3,200 trucks per day • U.S. Route 460 with just under 2,000 trucks per day
There are 8,400 trucks that travel between the Southside and the Peninsula each day with over half of all trucks travelling on I-664. The High Rise Bridge carries 7,800 trucks per day which is half of the 16,000 total of trucks that navigate their way over the Elizabeth River. Mr. Nichols indicated congested truck travel was studied for the first time combining INRIX data and the vehicle class counts to determine where truck congestion occurred in the area. For locations not equipped with VDOT vehicle class data stations, HRTPO staff used truck percentage estimates by VDOT and manipulated the data in order to compare similar circumstances. On the Peninsula, weekday truck delays occurred more frequently on I-64 near Ft. Eustis and the HRBT. For the Southside, congestion was at the High Rise Bridge, the Downtown Tunnel, the Midtown Tunnel, and the I-64/I-264 Interchange. Mr. Nichols expressed his appreciation to the Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) for its insight and advice. Mayor Krasnoff asked Mr. Stringfield to provide current cost estimates to construct a new High-Rise Bridge. He stated the Bridge is of high importance to the region; however, there is no funding source at this time. He noted it would be helpful to have the information before the General Assembly convenes its next session.
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 6
Mr. Stringfield stated VDOT was preparing a preliminary estimate which would include costs for a total of eight lanes throughout the corridor. He indicated the Bridge would more than likely cost approximately $500 million plus contingencies and $1.6 billion from I-464 to Bowers Hill. Mayor Krasnoff commented a new High-Rise Bridge is a cost effective way to move the flow of trucks in Hampton Roads. He indicated the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel would not see any project movement until mid-2020 and the Patriots Crossing’s cost estimate is at $3.5 billion. With the High-Rise Bridge possibly coming in at $2 billion, it would be beneficial to the region’s economy. Mayor Fraim expressed his appreciation for Mayor Krasnoff’s support of the High-Rise Bridge; however, he stated Patriots Crossing, which had been vetted through the HRTPO-approved prioritization tool, would provide more congestion relief. Mayor Krasnoff recognized the HRTPO prioritization process and stressed his request was solely for informational purposes. Mr. Layne commented there were two major projects underway in Hampton Roads: the Downtown Tunnel-Midtown Tunnel-Martin Luther King (DT-MT-MLK) Extension and the Route 460 projects which will have positive impacts on truck flow. Users of Existing Toll Facilities in Hampton Roads Mr. Case reported HRTPO staff conducted a study utilizing E-ZPass data to determine the portion of tolls paid by local individuals and organizations in Hampton Roads. E-ZPass data from the three existing toll facilities, the Coleman Bridge, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel (CBBT), and the Chesapeake Expressway were used in the study. The E-ZPass data was collected by VDOT and contains the user’s zip code which approximates a home base. Three categories were evaluated in the study:
1. E-ZPass Virginia patrons with Hampton Roads zip codes 2. Other E-ZPass Virginia patrons 3. Patrons of Other E-ZPass Agencies
According to the study, the Coleman Bridge received 79% of its E-ZPass revenue from persons based in Hampton Roads, while the CBBT and Chesapeake Expressway received only 12% and 15%, respectively, from local citizens. One reason the CBBT and the Chesapeake Expressway have a smaller percentage of local users is because drivers can pay lower rates due to discount programs at those facilities. Another reason is because both are used quite extensively for tourist traffic. HRTPO staff collected more detailed information from the CBBT and was able to create dot maps illustrating the location of these users. Chair Ward inquired as to why so many people from Illinois travelled through the CBBT. Mr. Case replied the address of record for the purchase of an E-ZPass account may be in a particular State, but the patron may not live in that State.
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 7
Chair Ward asked whether zip code information for other Hampton Roads water crossings were available from VDOT. Mr. Case replied affirmatively. Mr. Layne stated he is the CTB representative for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. In addition to local traffic, the CBBT gives discounts to those who can demonstrate some type of need. He recommended that as the region implements tolling facilities, disability discounts should be considered. HRTPO Public Participation Plan Ms. Miller reported the HRTPO’s Public Participation Plan (PPP) is designed as a resource for the HRTPO Board, staff, and general public to better understand the Organization’s overall public participation strategy and procedures. It outlines public involvement and outreach activities, as well as the HRTPO’s strategy for meeting Federal requirements pertaining to public involvement and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The current PPP was approved and adopted by the HRTPO Board on December 16, 2009 and as a living document which reflects changes in Federal Law and Mandates and new approaches to the transportation planning process, it is necessary for the plan to be updated on a regular basis. Ms. Miller stated HRTPO staff has updated and redesigned the plan. The Draft Public Participation Plan includes:
• Details regarding the public involvement successes over the last three years • An overview of different communities in Hampton Roads • Information to citizens regarding public involvement opportunities with the HRTPO • Specific outlines of public involvement for the Long-Range Transportation Plan
(LRTP) and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) • References to the new HRTPO website which will include unique perspectives of all
localities • New Title VI Environment Justice Methodology
Ms. Miller indicated that next steps will include the following:
• Public comment period from September 20, 2012 through November 8, 2012 • Draft plan will be vetted through the HRTPO Environmental Justice Roundtable
scheduled for October 10, 2012 • Final Plan with public comments to be presented to the HRTPO Board for approval
at the November 15, 2012 meeting
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 8
Senate Joint Resolution 297 – Public Transportation Study Ms. Amy Inman, Manager of Transit Planning for the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) reported that Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 297, passed in the 2011 General Assembly session, directed DRPT to conduct a one-year study of transit programs in the Commonwealth. Specifically, this legislation called for an examination of Virginia’s current transit funding practices with respect to performance, prioritization, stability, and allocation. DRPT established the Funding Study Advisory Committee which included representatives from transit agencies of all sizes, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), localities, and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) agencies. The Committee provided feedback on DRPT’s current allocation system, reviewed various formula options, and offered direct input on performance measures. Ms. Inman stated the study process explored best practices, data collection, and quality issues, and a variety of formula options were considered. A recommended approach for operating assistance for transit was developed consisting of two funding pools: a formula-based pool and a performance-based pool. Available funding would be divided evenly between the two pools. The formula-based funds would be divided equally among ridership and operating expenses. Performance-based funds would be divided equally among four metrics: customers per revenue hour, customers per revenue mile, net cost per revenue hour, and net cost per revenue mile so that peer groups of similar agencies and size communities could compete within those peer groups. The recommended approach for capital assistance for transit included:
• Continuing the application driven process • Allowing the flexibility to prioritize funding via a tiered approach • Revisiting the funding priorities every three to five years • Allowing capital funds to supplement operating assistance
DRPT is expecting a three year transition period for the recommended operating and capital assistance approaches. In 2015, DRPT would offer 100% transition assistance funding, 50% transition assistance funding in 2016, and by 2017, allocations would be solely based on performance. Ms. Inman stated DRPT will be holding stakeholder workshops and presenting the final report to the CTB in October 2012 with the report submitted to the General Assembly in November 2012. Mr. Harrell thanked Ms. Inman for the presentation. He indicated HRT is well positioned to attack the performance-based approach. However, he believed it necessary to encourage further discussion on finding additional revenue to support transit.
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 9
Action Items Agenda Public Comment Period Four people requested to address the HRTPO Board. Chair Ward asked them to limit their comments to three minutes.
Mr. Richard May Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Richard May and I'm from Virginia Beach. Like that guy on television trying to sell a Kentucky Fried Chicken sandwich, I want you to think a little because I'm not here to talk about the regional issues. I'm here to talk about one thing, and that is what I think is Virginia Beach's most important interchange on 264 – Exit 17B. That's South Independence Boulevard that leads to our Town Center which I think is a very important part of our wonderful city of Virginia Beach. Unfortunately, for those of you who are not familiar with the interchange, let me kind of give you an idea what we're looking at here. Coming eastbound on 264 when you take Exit 17B heading to Pembroke or the Town Center, you get down at the bottom of the loop you're going kind of slow because generally it's backed up around there, and you've got to merge right. Merge left, excuse me, now, when you're merging left to get into a lane, you're competing for that same space that the guy trying to go to Norfolk or heading westbound is merging right into. That kind of makes it kind of scary. When you combine that with the underpass that you're about to go under, you kind of want to get those lane maneuvers done before you get there. When you get in the lane, like I said, the other guy is competing with you for, you've still got to go over another lane to get to Town Center because if you don't, the lane becomes an exit only when you come out from under the underpass and you're heading back to Norfolk. Well, I think we've got a solution, and most of all, I think the solution is not going to cost a lot of money. We can maximize the available lanes we've got there. There's actually a second lane that's already paved, but it's kind of chopped up and not used. If you're coming down Holland Road getting ready to go to the beach, the Oceanfront, you can take the exit only lane and head eastbound on 264. Well right beyond that there is a series of stripes that effectively close off that lane and that becomes the lane that the people from eastbound 264 exiting on 17B will be merging into and the folks going to Norfolk will also be merging into. Now, if we take and open that up, you give the people going to Norfolk about another hundred yards to get in their proper lane before they go under the underpass. People coming down from 17B will still have to merge when they come out from under the underpass in order to avoid going back to Norfolk, we can open up a section of lane that is again striped off and kind of a traffic impediment. If we open up that lane, again, the paving is there, all you need to do is kind of scrape off the paint. I'm sure you can get volunteers from the people that commute on that thing on a daily basis, but if you open up that lane that gives you a clear full lane of traffic, doubling the size of the area going towards the Town Center. It opens up another lane of traffic and kind of gives the opportunity to, I think, double the amount of through traffic going through towards the Town Center. Thank you very much. Ms. Sharon Scott Good morning, everyone. I'm Sharon Scott, and today I'm here to speak as a citizen. I just want to encourage this Board to have a better relationship with VDOT because we have a team of experts here who probably could have helped prevent this traffic nightmare that we had this weekend. That was one of the best examples of poor planning that I've ever seen in my entire life. Whoever made that decision should have their performance evaluated because if they had called Marcus Jones, he could have told them that ODU and Norfolk State had football games. People were coming to town. Had he called Neil Morgan from Newport News,
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 10
they could have told him that our traffic is backed up from Fort Eustis to the HRBT every weekend. Had he called Mary Bunting, she could have told him what's going on in Hampton. So I think there was a disconnect in information and that decision-maker actually should have his performance evaluated. However, if he were, or whoever made the decision that they were going to make that decision there should have been a proliferation of signs starting in Richmond and that would have given people an opportunity to make a decision to be stuck in traffic in Hampton Roads or to take 460 and go onto wherever they were going. Secondly, you should have known before you got to a detour sign that there was a detour. Fortunately, with me living in Newport News when I got to the detour sign at James River Bridge and it directed me down Huntington Avenue, I knew that I would beat the nine and a half mile backup that was on 664. So I was able to ride all the way down to Terminal Avenue and get on 664 and get ahead of people who had been waiting in traffic probably two hours. So we should have given people more options and the James River Bridge closed should have never happened. I have been on that bridge before when one side was used for north/south traffic. There are access points on both sides of James River Bridge, and I'm making a suggestion that would have allowed that bridge to remain open on this weekend. The weekend is one of the highest travel points for our city, for tourists, and for our citizens, and we should never ever take for granted that people don't mind sitting in traffic. When making construction decisions, the persons who making their decisions should consider somebody's lifestyle other than their own. One of the earlier speakers said performance matters. Well, our citizens in Newport News and in Hampton Roads and our tourists they matter also. So that's my story and I'm sticking to it. Mr. Ellis James Good morning. Thank you, Chairman. Madam Chairman and Members of the TPO, I have a couple of things on my mind this morning, and I would like to make sure that I find out today, if I can. One of my greatest concerns is the people in Hampton Roads that are covered by this body. My understanding is that the Board for the Disabled has been either de-activated or is in limbo. Now, that's a very serious issue when it comes to the ability of the disabled to be able to move within Hampton Roads, and I would like very much to hopefully find out what the status is, if that Board has been de-activated, I would certainly urge that this body request that it be activated again. This is a deadly, serious issue for many of our citizens. I'd like to add one other observation. Along the lines of requests that I made about a half a year ago I believe it's been now, the question dear to my heart is uranium mining, and when I looked at this map of the Commonwealth of Virginia where all of the uranium instances potentially are, the thing that struck me the most was what is going to happen if we lift the moratorium in the Commonwealth of Virginia if we haven't studied what the road and traffic and truck impacts will be with respect to not only our friends to the west of us in Southside, but also there are deposits up close to Northern Virginia and there's one also just to the west of us. So in my view, there are huge implications with regard to the potential lifting of the moratorium in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and we're not prepared from the standpoint of collecting the data, and I would once again request that this body make sure that it has a good handle on that. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Mr. Robbyn Gayer Madam Chair, thank you for the time. Thank you all for allowing me to be here this morning. We have entered into the “Trainsportation Age” and as travel continues to evolve, it's vital for our region to stay ahead with choices for our citizens. I'm here today to share the launch of Hampton Roads for Rail. Hampton Roads for Rail is a regional coalition of friends of passenger rail. As some of you may know, I've been involved with the Future of Hampton Roads Transportation Infrastructure Committee, which I Co-chair. From that committee, a gentleman Danny Plaugher from Virginians for High Speed Rail, reached out to here and asked
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 11
me to join their prestigious Board – Virginians for High-Speed Rail. Soon after joining Virginians for High Speed Rail, he has asked me to start a chapter of Virginians for High Speed Rail here, which will be a regional oriented chapter known as Hampton Roads for Rail. Hampton Roads for Rail is a similar model as other successful chapters we have started across the state. For those of you familiar with the Piedmont Rail Coalition, this model is similar to where we're aiming, Virginians for High Speed Rail’s Tom Tingle for those of you who know him, is helping on the Peninsula to find a Co-chair to round out the advisory Committee and create win-win strategies that benefit both sides of the water. My sincere hope is that Hampton Roads for Rail can someday become and earn the status of being a trusted nonprofit advisor on matters of near-terms and long-term passenger rail service for all of Hampton Roads. Hampton Roads for Rail is first and foremost an action organization and we have already hit the ground running in multiple directions. We have been in communication with the State Chamber of Commerce Rail Committee to help consult on their strategy for the upcoming legislative session. In this day and age, every cause needs its own advocacy group, and we are true believers in rail locally, so we'll be that advocacy group. Quickly saving the best for last. I want to share with you a very unique adult field trip that we are putting on. Our first official event will be hosting the VIP Train Experience in December. 12-12-12 has all the makings of a blockbuster and we wanted to get in front of this momentum. Hampton Roads for Rail is purchasing one and a half train cars for the inaugural train ride and will be taking 108 citizens from Hampton Roads on a first class trip to our nation's capital. We will be having high level meetings with our leaders inside the beltway and enjoying the train as it disembarks Norfolk for the first time in over 35 years. We still have several sponsorship opportunities available to come with tickets, but the other seats in our VIP cars have already sold out. The public is hungry for new, reliable transportation options. We believe that rail could be the game changer for our region, and you are going to hear more in your communities about our actions and I wanted to give each of you a heads-up on that at this meeting today. We would like to attend future TPO Rail Advisory Committee meetings and transparently share our regional work. To connect with us now, consider liking our Facebook page, which is HR4RAIL. Once again, that is HR4RAIL. Thank you again for this time to share with you today. Enjoying the meeting.
Submitted Public Comments Chair Ward reported there were no submitted public comments in the agenda packet. Consent Items Chair Ward outlined the Consent Items as follows:
• Minutes • FY 2012-2015 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: DRPT • FY 2012-2015 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: VDOT • FY 2012-2015 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: HRT • Hampton Roads Regional Freight Study – 2012 Update • Users of Existing Toll Facilities in Hampton Roads • Military Transportation Needs Study – Military Commuter Survey
Mr. Shepperd Moved to approve the Consent items; seconded by Mr. Harrell. The Motion Carried.
Attachment 11-A
HRTPO Board Minutes – September 20, 2012 – Page 12
HRTPO 2012 Annual Meeting: Officer Elections Chair Ward reported the Nominating Committee will reconvene to recommend candidates for the HRTPO Board officer positions for the October 2012 HRTPO Annual Board Meeting. She indicated there were three current vacancies on the Nominating Committee. Mayor Kenneth Wright of Portsmouth, Ms. Mary Jones of James City County, and Mr. William Harrell of HRT volunteered to fill the vacancies with Mayor Wright as Chair. HRTPO Board Action Items: Three Month Tentative Schedule Chair Ward outlined the three month summary of upcoming action items in the HRTPO Agenda. Correspondence of Interest Chair Ward highlighted the items in the Correspondence of Interest section of the Agenda packet. For Your Information Chair Ward noted the items in the For Your Information section of the Agenda packet. Old/New Business There was no Old/New Business. Adjournment
With no further business to come before the Hampton Roads TPO, the meeting adjourned at 11:54 a.m.
Molly J. Ward Dwight L. Farmer
Chair Executive Director/Secretary
Attachment 11-A
HRTPOFISCAL YEAR 2013
REVENUES Annual Budget Current Month YTDVDOT-PL SEC 112 FEDERAL 2,107,317 VDOT-PL SEC 112 STATE 275,378 VDOT-PL SEC 112 LOCAL 275,378 VDOT CMAQ Grant 447,407 37,023 37,023 VDOT CMAQ Grant (STATE) 152,593 HRT MATCH 25,000 WAT MATCH 12,500 STATE PASS-THROUGH 37,500 FEDERAL PASS-THROUGH 300,000 VDRPT 5303 FEDERAL 231,223 VDRPT 5303 STATE 28,903 VDRPT 5303 LOCAL 28,903
REVENUES Annual Budget Current Month YTDVDOT-PL SEC 112 FEDERAL 2,107,317 VDOT-PL SEC 112 STATE 275,378 VDOT-PL SEC 112 LOCAL 275,378 VDOT CMAQ Grant 447,407 23,447 60,470 VDOT CMAQ Grant (STATE) 152,593 HRT MATCH 25,000 WAT MATCH 12,500 STATE PASS-THROUGH 37,500 FEDERAL PASS-THROUGH 300,000 VDRPT 5303 FEDERAL 231,223 VDRPT 5303 STATE 28,903 VDRPT 5303 LOCAL 28,903
REVENUES Annual Budget Current Month YTDVDOT-PL SEC 112 FEDERAL 2,107,317 VDOT-PL SEC 112 STATE 275,378 VDOT-PL SEC 112 LOCAL 275,378 VDOT CMAQ Grant 447,407 60,470 VDOT CMAQ Grant (STATE) 152,593 HRT MATCH 25,000 WAT MATCH 12,500 STATE PASS-THROUGH 37,500 FEDERAL PASS-THROUGH 300,000 VDRPT 5303 FEDERAL 231,223 VDRPT 5303 STATE 28,903 VDRPT 5303 LOCAL 28,903
September 11, 2012 To the Board of Directors Hampton Roads Planning District Commission 723 Woodlake Drive Chesapeake, VA 23320 We have audited the financial statements of Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (the "Commission") for the year ended June 30, 2012. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information in our discussions about planning matters on June 14, 2012. Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit. Significant Audit Findings Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by Hampton Roads Planning District Commission are described in Note 2 to the financial statements. No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing policies was not changed during 2012. We noted no transactions entered into by the Commission during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. We noted no estimates that were particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements. The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. The most sensitive disclosures affecting the financial statements were the disclosures concerning retirement plans and postretirement benefits other than pensions. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.
Attachment 11-C
Hampton Roads Planning District Commission September 11, 2012 Page 2 Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management has corrected all such misstatements as summarized in the attached journal entry listing. In addition, we have attached a schedule that summarizes the uncorrected misstatements of the financial statements. Management has determined that their effects are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Management Representations We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated September 11, 2012. Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the Commission’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Other Audit Findings or Issues We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the Commission’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. Other Matters We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the Commission's auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.
Attachment 11-C
Hampton Roads Planning District Commission September 11, 2012 Page 3 This information is intended solely for the use of the Board of Directors and management of Hampton Roads Planning District Commission and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Sincerely,
