E. TPO Chairman s Report (Peterson/5 minutes) Meet and Greet for Martha Shickle, RRPDC Executive Director 2.

Transcription

1

2 TPO Agenda January 7, 2016 Page 2 E. TPO Chairman s Report (Peterson/5 minutes) Meet and Greet for Martha Shickle, RRPDC Executive Director 2. Other Business F. TPO Secretary s Report (Nelson/10 minutes) Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Update 2. Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act 3. Information Items: a. TPO November Work Status Report... page 1 b. TPO November Financial Status Report... page 4 II. OLD BUSINESS DC2RVA: Consideration of TPO Recommended Alternatives (Nelson/10 minutes)... 5 ACTION REQUESTED III. NEW BUSINESS Richmond Transportation Performance Measures (Wichman/15 minutes)... 6 IV. OTHER BUSINESS A. Upcoming TPO Policy Board Meetings and Future Meeting Topics (Peterson/3 minutes)... 7 B. Next Meeting: February 4, 2016 (Peterson/2 minutes)... V. ADJOURNMENT Targeted for 10:30 a.m. BSN/sr Attachments

3 Agenda Item I.B. Minutes of the December 3, 2015 TPO Meeting 1 REQUESTED ACTION The TPO is requested to approve the Minutes of the December 3, 2015 TPO meeting as presented.

4 MEMBERS PRESENT RICHMOND REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION MINUTES OF MEETING December 3, 2015 W. Canova Peterson, IV, Chairman... Hanover County Steve A. Elswick, Vice Chairman... Chesterfield County Parker C. Agelasto... City of Richmond Manuel Alvarez, Jr.... Goochland County Jonathan Baliles... City of Richmond James H. Burrell... New Kent County Daniel A. Gecker... Chesterfield County Angela L. Gray... RMTA David Green... GRTC Transit System James M. Holland... Chesterfield County Wayne T. Hazzard (Alternate)... Hanover County Edward L. Henson, III... Town of Ashland Patricia S. O Bannon... Henrico County Ivan Rucker (Nonvoting)... FHWA Frank J. Thornton... Henrico County Von Tisdale (Nonvoting)... RideFinders Carson L. Tucker... Powhatan County David T. Williams... Powhatan County MEMBERS ABSENT Cliff Burnette (Nonvoting)... VDA Nick Britton (Nonvoting)... DRPT Sean M. Davis... Hanover County Thomas Fletcher (Nonvoting)... CTAC Kathy C. Graziano... City of Richmond Susan F. Lascolette... Goochland County Ryan Long (Nonvoting)... FTA Floyd H. Miles, Sr.... Charles City County Brian Montgomery (Nonvoting)... EDAC Michelle R. Mosby... City of Richmond John Rutledge... CRAC C. Thomas Tiller, Jr.... New Kent County CALL TO ORDER TPO Chairman W. Canova Peterson, IV, called the December 3, 2015 meeting of the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) to order at approximately 9:35 a.m. in the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission board room. CERTIFICATION OF MEETING QUORUM TPO Secretary Barbara S. Nelson reported that a quorum was present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGANCE All present stood and recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. 1

5 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 2 INTRODUCTIONS Chairman Peterson introduced and welcomed Wayne Fedora, Acting Federal Highway (FHWA) Division Administrator to the TPO meeting. At the request of James Burrell, the TPO observed a moment of silence for those lost in the most recent shooting tragedy in San Bernadino, California. I. ADMINISTRATION A. Approval of the TPO Agenda On motion by David T. Williams, seconded by James M. Holland, the TPO unanimously voted to approve the December 3, 2015 meeting agenda as presented. B. Minutes of the November 5, 2015 TPO Meeting On motion by Edward L. Henson, III, seconded by David T. Williams, the TPO unanimously approved the minutes of the November 5, 2015 TPO meeting as presented. C. Open Public Comment Period There were no requests to address the TPO. D. Consent Action Items Chairman Peterson called for requests to pull an item from the consent agenda for separate consideration and there were none. On motion of David T. Williams, seconded by Edward L. Henson, III, the TPO unanimously approved the following resolutions: 1. UWP Amendment: Budget Correction for Work Task 5.1, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Connectivity and Land Use Analysis RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) amends the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Unified Work Program (UWP) to correct a budget error in the amount of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) Special Allocation of FTA Sections 5303/5304 funds remaining unexpended in FY 2015 reducing the amount available for programming on this work task in FY 2016 by 1,078 from 40,552 to 39, RideFinders Funding Sources Report RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) accepts the RideFinders Funding Sources Report as work complete as outlined in Element 9 of the FY 2016 Unified Work Program work task 5.5, Regional Public Transportation Services. E. TPO Chairman s Report Chairman Peterson reported that the third annual Regional Transportation Forum is scheduled for March 3, tentatively to be held at the Richmond Harley Davidson facility off of I95 in Hanover County. F. TPO Secretary s Report 1. Report of Fall CTB Meeting Barbara Nelson reported on the Fall Transportation Meeting held Monday, November 30, from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. at the Eastern Henrico Recreation Center on North Laburnum Avenue. She said following an hour for review of map boards showing HB 2 projects and other information, Virginia Secretary of Transportation Aubrey Layne opened the 2

6 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 3 question and answer period of the meeting engaging in active dialogue with the audience, discussing State of Good Repair (SGR), the next phase of HB 2 project selection and other matters. Secretary Layne said the SGR phase of HB 2 will focus on bridges and pavement, asset management and extending the life of these investments. Ms. Nelson said TPO staff looks forward to working with VDOT to leverage TPO discretionary funds to advance these projects in the Richmond Region. 2. Performance Measures Report Barbara Nelson noted both state legislative mandates and federal requirements under MAP 21 for performance based planning and decisionmaking process and said that the Executive Committee was provided with a draft of the Regional Performance Measures Annual Progress Report 2015 which is posted on the RRPDC website for public comment and under review by the TPO Technical Advisory Committee. Ms. Nelson said this document will be presented for TPO consideration in the first quarter of TPO October Work Status Report; and 4. TPO October Financial Status Report Ms. Nelson reported on both the October Work Status and Financial Status reports saying the primary work effort for staff remains the 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and work with the MTP Advisory Committee on resource allocation. She reported that a companion effort, the annual Regional Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality program funds allocation process is under way. Applications have been received and the project review, ranking and selection process will begin next week with TAC action in March and TPO action in April of II. OLD BUSINESS DC2RVA: Alternatives Analysis Update Ms. Nelson provided a brief update on the November presentation to the TPO by Randy Selleck with the Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT). She said the alternatives analysis has been completed for the 123mile rail corridor from Washington, D. C. to Richmond and will be presented at a public meeting at the DMV office on West Broad Street in Richmond on Thursday, December 10 from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. with a presentation at 6:00 p.m. Ms. Nelson noted that DRPT has met with impacted localities, the Town of Ashland and Hanover County, the City of Richmond and each of Henrico and Chesterfield counties. She said the screened alternatives will be brought back for TPO consideration in January. Chairman Peterson requested that representatives from each jurisdiction attend the December 10 meeting so that they will have a knowledge base from which to discuss this matter at the January 7 TPO meeting. III. NEW BUSINESS A. Richmond Regional Bridge and Culvert Inventory & Structural Assessment Report 2015 Update Sulabh Aryal noted information included under agenda tab five as well as the fourpage report summary included with the agenda package saying the website address to the full document posted on the RRPDC website is included in the staff report. Mr. Aryal provided a presentation on the Richmond Regional Bridge and Culvert Inventory & Structural Assessment Report 2015 Update. He said this report updates information 3

7 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 4 provided in the original report approved by the TPO in 2014 using January 15, 2015 data to demonstrate the progress over one year. He said the report includes all bridges and culverts in the Richmond Region noting that there are no tunnels in this region. Mr. Aryal reviewed the four categories of deficient bridge conditions structurally deficient, functionally obsolete, weight posted, and low sufficiency ratings and provided definitions for each category. He said VDOT inspects all bridges and culverts in the Richmond Region, regardless of ownership, rating each on a scale from 0 to 100, and posts results on the online VDOT Dashboard which is updated daily. He said overpasses, flyovers and at grade level structures are all considered bridges and if a bridge has multiple structures, such as the Mayo Bridge, they are counted as separate bridges. He said the report lists all 1,412 bridges and culverts in the Region by location and by ownership, as well as by decade built or last reconstructed. Mr. Aryal said there are 77 deficient bridges and culverts in the Region with a sufficiency rating of less than 50 which are eligible for federal bridge replacement funds. Mr. Aryal reviewed the resolution proposed for TPO action noting that action would direct staff to work with VDOT and TAC to develop a regional bridge replacement and rehabilitation strategy for TPO review that would address prioritization of regional bridge needs and strategies to address them. There was significant discussion and major points brought forward through discussion and questions following Mr. Aryal s report are as follows: It is possible to have a duplicated count in this report with some structures being included in more than one category. This report is a snapshot of January 15, 2015 and structures that have been upgraded or replaced since that date would not be reflected in this report. Rob Cary, VDOT Richmond District Administrator, noted that this information may change daily and that the VDOT Dashboard is available on the VDOT website providing current information. Over the last year, VDOT has achieved a net reduction of 24 structurally deficient bridges and culverts across the Richmond District and annual state of structures and bridges report which reports from July of 2014 to July of 2015 shows that the Richmond District has an improving average health index with less than eight percent structures being structurally deficient. Functionally obsolete may have aspects that are not up to current standards but not necessarily structurally deficient. VDOT is required to oversee and report to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) that inspection is being done for bridges and large culverts listed in the national bridge inventory, which includes pedestrian and bicycle trail bridges. Local governments are required to inspect these facilities and provide the inspection reports to VDOT for any bridge or culvert facility with an opening of 36 square feet or larger. Any bridge assessed to be even remotely dangerous would be closed until it could be further assessed, maintenance performed or the facility replaced, so that public safety is not in jeopardy. Every district will receive a minimum of 5.5 percent of available State of Good Repair funds on a need basis with a maximum of 17.5 percent going to any one district. The Richmond District is slated to receive 17.4 percent in addition to routine maintenance funds. In addition to HB 2, there will be State of Good Repair funds for heavy rehabilitation and replacement of pavement and bridges. A new process is under development for prioritizing projects under State of Good Repair which will be in full force in

8 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 5 On motion of James H. Burrell, seconded by Patricia S. O Bannon, the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RRTPO) unanimously approved the following resolution: RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) accepts the Richmond Regional Bridge and Culvert Inventory & Structural Assessment Report 2015 update as work complete; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the TPO directs staff to work with TAC and VDOT Richmond District staff to develop a regional bridge replacement and rehabilitation strategy for TPO review that would include a methodology for prioritizing regional bridge needs, identify a prioritized list of bridge needs, and identify funding strategies to address the infrastructure investment needs. B. Needs and Gaps Assessment for the Transportation Disadvantaged Barbara Nelson provided a brief introduction to this work effort identified through a TPO Ad Hoc Committee on Regional Paratransit Services and Programs established in October Ms. Nelson reviewed ad hoc committee membership noting TPO members Steve Elswick, Kathy Graziano, Patricia O Bannon and Carson Tucker and members from EDAC, GRTC, DRPT and TPO staff. She said that Dillon Massey, former TPO intern, was a significant contributor in this report. Ms. Nelson said this work effort is identified under UWP Task 5.2, Elderly and Disability Transportation Needs and Services, and she noted information included under agenda tab six as well as the draft report included with the agenda package. She said this report is an update of a 2006 report and includes an evaluation of the future demand for specialized transportation services by the region s transportation disadvantaged seniors, individuals with disabilities and low income persons to identify the gaps in available services. The ad hoc met four times with the last meeting held September 14 and Mr. Lantz will review the recommendations included in the report and a recommendation from the ad hoc committee for moving forward. Ms. Nelson said she would review Executive Committee discussion about additional staff work to be undertaken following Mr. Lantz s presentation. Ken Lantz said the committee s recommendations were stratified into short, mid and longterm and he reviewed the recommendations by category. Mr. Lantz said the primary shortterm recommendation was for staff to identify an organizational structure and funding resources to support establishing a specialized transportation services coordination entity to serve as a centralized point of contact for accomplishing the other recommendations included in the plan. This would mean including a work task in the FY 17 UWP to explore such an organizational structure that could coordinate this effort. Mr. Lantz noted the TPO action requested in the staff report and Chairman Peterson asked if there were any questions for Mr. Lantz. Speaking as a member of the ad hoc committee, Pat O Bannon said this was step one, an organizational structure to support a specialized transportation services coordination entity. She said that for now, that means a centrally located telephone number and how to get to services is what would be worked toward first. Chairman Peterson said Executive Committee discussion supports the resolution as stated. Ms. O Bannon said economically challenged people don t necessarily have access to telephone app technology, but elderly individuals have a phone and can call to provide their zip code to learn what services are available within that zip code. Chairman Peterson 5

9 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 6 requested TPO action on this matter before discussing additional information brought up by David Williams in the Executive Committee meeting. On motion of Patricia S. O Bannon, seconded by James H. Burrell, the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RRTPO) unanimously approved the following resolution: RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) endorses the recommendation of the TPO Ad Hoc Committee on Regional Paratransit Services and Programs to include in the FY2017 UWP a task to explore the organizational structure to support a specialized transportation services coordination entity. At the Chairman s request, Barbara Nelson summarized the Executive Committee discussion resulting from Mr. Williams request. Ms. Nelson said Executive Committee discussion acknowledged that while updating the 2006 report provided good data and provides a platform for moving forward, it did not accomplish the objective that the Chairman who convened the ad hoc committee in October 2013 was hoping for. What he requested was a resource guide that could be used by a jurisdiction that has limited or no resources to duplicate a program to provide specialized transportation services to its citizens. This resource guide would provide examples of how paratransit is being deployed within our region or in other regions that could be emulated in rural jurisdictions in the Richmond Region. Mr. Williams said the reason he tasked Mr. Lantz with coming forward with this kind of guidance in a report was because of his experience and background with the paratransit system. He said if Mr. Lantz was aware of a program in another part of the state that had application that could be used by Powhatan County or Goochland or Hanover counties, they could use that information as something to test or adapt in their localities to create paratransit services. Barbara Nelson said that what was agreed to in the Executive Committee was that within 90 days, staff would work to develop that type of report and bring it back to the TPO. Ms. Nelson said additional discussion related to the motion just passed by the TPO for staff to incorporate into the FY 2017 Unified Work Program a task to explore what existing organizations may fill this coordinating entity role, what funding resources would be required, and how that effort may be launched and bring that information back by late Ms. Nelson noted that as also suggested by Mr. Elswick, rather than having a brief presentation on the recommendations of the report, that the TPO have the opportunity to have a more indepth presentation on all of the data included in the report, so there will be several opportunities for TPO board consideration of support for the transportation disadvantaged in the region in Pat O Bannon said that when the ad hoc committee knew that the report needed to be updated and this time they included more of the service providers in the report finding that Charles City and Goochland did have some providers, but there are some that aren t included such as churches and religious institutions that only cater to their membership. She said this is just stage one and that the committee didn t want to recommend expensive measures that may prove not to be the right direction. Chairman Peterson said this would probably come back to the TPO in the late spring time frame. Parker Agelasto asked if there had been consideration of the specific needs of the ridership other than age or poverty level demographics. He said not all paratransit services are equal and people have different disabilities which require different kinds of accommodation such as service dogs or wheelchairs. He said there needs to be a determination of the specific service needs and offerings to pair people with the appropriate provider. Chairman Peterson noted 6

10 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 7 that Appendix 10 in the report provides a good start on identifying providers and the central agency recommended by the ad hoc committee would have that kind of information to share with riders. Ms. O Bannon said they did consider what type of transportation a person may need if they use a wheelchair rather than just needing a ride and being able to use a taxi service. Chairman Peterson commended the ad hoc committee for the work that was done and he thanked Mr. Lantz for his efforts and presentation. C. Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) 2040 Tiffany Dubinsky, RRPDC staff, said no action is being requested of the TPO at this time but that she would update the TPO on the MTP project selection process as part of the fiscally constrained plan and provide information that will assist the TPO in taking action in January on the allocation guidelines that determine how the revenues are divided. Ms. Dubinsky noted that project applications for inclusion in the 2040 MTP were due November 30 and 76 applications were received which are being reviewed by staff. The MTP Advisory Committee (AC) will meet December 16 to finalize allocation guidelines for revenues which will move forward as a recommendation for TPO action at the January 7, 2016 meeting. She said at the February TPO meeting, staff plans to present a recommended fiscally constrained project list as well as an unfunded regional needs list of projects that did not receive funding in the constrained plan, but which are priorities for the region. Ms. Dubinsky reviewed the project selection process incorporating VDOT revenue projections. She said the past process was to look at the amount of funding available and then determine how many projects on the project list could be fully funded, but found during public review that there was a flaw in having a clear methodology as to why these particular projects were selected. This time the MTP AC decided to determine prioritizing the commitment of limited resources by project type and time band. Ms. Dubinsky reviewed revenue projections noting that administrative/maintenance expenses for the existing transportation system are off the top. She discussed funding sources and noted the limited amount of remaining funds to address the region s needs. She reviewed mock scenarios for allocating funds by project type within time bands and where the future transportation investments should be focused. Discussion and questions following the presentation resulted in the following major points being made: The MTP AC has not discussed disruptive technologies or technology innovations as a factor in the constrained 2040 MTP where projects are only submitted by local jurisdictions and agencies. The technical report will highlight where Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and demand services are going and will look at what technology will be expected to have future impacts. VDOT is not incorporating disruptive technology innovations in their planning process, but has discussed not needing traffic signals 30 years from now or using selfdriving vehicles on demand that would require massive storage lots. VDOT is actively involved with Virginia Tech transportation and autonomous vehicle, vehicle to vehicle and vehicle to roadway technology research. An important future meeting topic would be to have a presentation by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI) on technology innovations that may need to be considered in longterm planning. Projected technology changes may come and go, but the roads and bridges still need to be repaired and maintained. 7

11 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 8 D. Connectivity and Land Use Plan for the BRT Route Barbara Nelson said Josh Mallow, lead staff for the BRT Connectivity and LandUse Analysis, would provide a presentation on this TPO FY 2016 Unified Work Program (UWP) work task supporting the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) effort. She said while the BRT is a significant opportunity for enhanced transit in the region, it focuses on the infrastructure investment. The Connectivity and Land Use Analysis will focus on realizing the full economic potential of the corridor through strategic planning, land use, transit oriented development and walkability. The study is a collaborative effort undertaken by the TPO and the City of Richmond funded by deobligated FTA Section 5303 and 5304 funds from the Department or Rail and Public Transportation as well as funds from the City of Richmond. Mr. Mallow introduced Will Sanford, RRPDC Intern, who is working with him on this project and said they are also working with the Department of Planning and Development Review. He shared early findings from Phase I of the project, a demographic and land use analysis which is complementary to the Pulse line (BRT), and will identify opportunities for transit oriented development (TOD) surrounding each station. He explained that TOD encourages carlight or carfree lifestyles. Mr. Mallow identified three study areas. He said walksheds are the distance from a point that can be reached by foot, about a halfmile from each station, illustrating what is accessible within a ten minute walk of the bus. He said the Demographic Study Boundary is a collection of 32 census block groups and is much larger than the walkable network attempting to capture whole neighborhoods. And Mr. Mallow said the Plan Boundary is a land use boundary where the most intensive recommendations will be made. He said it excludes more historic neighborhoods such as the Fan and museum district that offer little opportunity for large scale redevelopment which come with TOD. Focusing on the demographic study area, Mr. Mallow noted demographic shifts are that are indicative of a population that would benefit from transit oriented development. He said almost twothirds of the city s jobs are located within that study area which holds nearly a quarter of the city s population where millennials, 18 to 34yearolds, comprise 57 percent of the population with the largest age group being 22 to 29 years old. He said 65 percent of households own one or fewer cars so that many households are seeking alternative transportation. Mr. Mallow reviewed land use trends showing a 23 percent increase in households and a 26 percent increase in housing units from 2000 to 2013 with much of the 111 acres of land within the plan boundary vacant and ripe for development. Mr. Mallow said the whole plan boundary is valued at 6.9 billion with 678 million in permits have been issued in the past five years indicating investment in new construction and improvements. He said onethird of the land area is occupied by surface parking lots which could eventually be redeveloped with reduced car usage. Mr. Mallow shared Infographics used in the analysis and discussed Phase II and next steps in the study. He said they are using transitoriented Denver s light rail plan to model the analysis including a stationlevel analysis with readiness scores that will be applied to a Heat Map to and draft guidelines. This will help identify which stations would benefit most from planning, which are nearly readytogo and which would require significant planning. He said the study is scheduled for completion on June 30, 2016 and he would provide another update in the spring of Significant questions and discussion followed Mr. Mallow s presentation with the following major points brought forward: The walkability area does not consider topography such as hills, only distance. 8

12 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 9 The impact of the VCU student population, which is not separately identified in the analysis, needs to be defined in order to provide a more accurate reflection of likely BRT ridership since VCU offers its own free student transit system which serves as a competing interest. The BRT line has useful purpose for VCU students for life destinations other than VCU. VCU brings some potential for increased ridership as they add student housing and eliminate student parking privileges, though the competing system will mitigate that potential. The study has been a corridor level study to date, but as the study considers each station, it will be more imperative to consult and have discussions with entities such as VCU. The VCU buses zigzag through student and residential areas, not just to limited stops on Broad Street. When VCU pulled its support from GRTC to operate their own bus system, GRTC lost ridership and suffered a revenue loss of 2 million plus a significant amount of additional FTA and state transit funds that were based on the GRTC total ridership. GRTC will enhance connections to some of the stations, but all stations are connected through the downtown transfer facility. The success of BRT is a lot bigger than just the people living in that area and there needs to be connectivity to the BRT stations getting as many people as possible to it as want to use it including those who cannot walk to it. IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. TPO Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) Meeting Report In the absence of CTAC Chairman Tom Fletcher, Barbara Nelson referred the TPO to the staff report included under agenda tab 9 and offered to answer questions. No questions were voiced. B. TPO Elderly and Disability Advisory Committee (EDAC) Meeting Report In the absence of EDAC Chairman Brian Montgomery, Barbara Nelson referred the TPO to the staff report included in agenda tab 10 and offered to answer questions. No questions were voiced. V. OTHER BUSINESS A. Upcoming TPO Policy Board Meetings and Future Meeting Topics Chairman Peterson said during agenda preparation, it came to his attention that there are efforts supported by TPO funds that are not project oriented. While most of the TPO funds go to specific projects and we have analyzed those projects with how they are going to impact our mission. But within the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding category, there are three groups that receive annual funding that is not project specific and because of that, and because there is limited funding available, it is important that the TPO be certain that what we are spending is effective in meeting the TPO s mission. He said because of that he is requesting the three groups that receive annual funding report definitive data at the February 4, 2016 meeting on the impact of the TPO s investment in their programs on congestion mitigation and air quality improvement. Chairman Peterson requested that Ms. Nelson contact the Port of Richmond, RideFinders, and the City of Richmond to report on their programs in February. In response to a question regarding the Port of Richmond, Chairman Peterson said the TPO provides CMAQ funding to these programs and would like to see what are the results and the 9

13 TPO Minutes December 3, 2015 Page 10 measurement sticks used to show that these funds are having an impact on how many trucks the Port has taken off the road with the funds we are providing and is the TPO accomplishing its mission in a reasonable manner. Barbara Nelson reported that the Port Authority Green Operator Program received a recent allocation of 900,000; the City of Richmond Employee Trip Reduction Program receives 250,000 and year and the RideFinders program receives 500,000 a year totaling more than 1.5 million annually. David Williams requested to know the total amounts of funding provided to these entities not just for this fiscal year, but for all years they have received funding and to show benefits received as well as funding amounts by fiscal year as well. Ms. Nelson noted that the RideFinders program is the longest standing program and have provided detailed annual reports to the staff and reported to the TAC each year. She said these details should all be readily be available. Chairman Peterson requested that Ms. Nelson include Mr. Williams comments in the discussion with these three groups about reporting to the TPO in February. Chairman Peterson noted that a presentation will be added to the future meeting topics to have the Virginia Tech Transportation Research group report on upcoming technologies. James Burrell stated that he is retiring after 24 years on the New Kent County Board of Supervisors and this will be his last TPO meeting. He said it has been a pleasure to serve. The TPO responded with a round of applause. Chairman Peterson thanked Mr. Burrell for his service over the years. B. Next Meeting: January 7, 2016 VI. ADJOURNMENT BSN/sr Chairman Peterson adjourned the meeting at 11:15 a.m. 10

14 Agenda Item I.D. Consent Action Item FTA Section 5310 Program Grant Applications Endorsement REQUESTED ACTION Review and approval of consent agenda item as presented. The following resolution is provided for TPO review and consideration: 2 RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Planning Organization (TPO) endorses those applications for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 funds which are complete and properly submitted prior to the February 1, 2016 submission deadline, and found by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) to be eligible for FTA Section 5310 Program funds; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the TPO authorizes inclusion of these projects in the TPO s Transportation Improvement Program subject to their selection for funding by the Commonwealth Transportation Board.

15 TPO AGENDA 1/7/16; ITEM I.D. FTA SECTION 5310 PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATIONS ENDORSEMENT Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization REQUESTED ACTION: TPO action is requested to endorse applications submitted by Richmond area local governments and human service agencies and organizations for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 program grant funds. AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Background on FTA Section 5310 Program The FTA Section 5310 grant program (i.e., Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities ) seeks to improve mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities throughout the country by removing barriers to transportation services and expanding transportation mobility options available. Section 5310 funds are apportioned to areas of the state as follows: 60 percent to large urbanized areas (population of 200,000 or greater); 20 percent to small urbanized areas (population of 50,000 to 200,000); and 20 percent to rural areas (all other areas of the state). At least 55% of the funds must be used on capital, public transportation projects planned and designed to meet the special needs of seniors and individuals with disabilities when public transportation is insufficient, inappropriate, or unavailable. At most, 45% can be spent for other capital and operating expenses. DRPT staff has advised the TPO that the Richmond Urbanized Area may have up to 1.7 million in 5310 program funds to support eligible projects. Note these funds are available to the TPO and the TriCities MPO and their use is restricted to projects and programs that serve the current Richmond Urbanized Area. DRPT Designated Recipient for the Richmond Urbanized Area At its February 14, 2013 meeting, the TPO designated DRPT as the administrator of the FTA Section 5310 program funds apportioned for the Richmond Urbanized Area (urbanized areas of the TPO and TriCities MPO). As the administering agency for these funds, DRPT is responsible for reviewing, ranking and scoring applications; submitting selected applicants for CTB review and consideration in the state s draft SixYear Improvement Program (SYIP); conducting the project/program contract process; and conducting the grant program administration of these funds with FTA. FY 2017 Applications for FTA Section 5310 Program Funds Since applications are due to DRPT by February 2, 2016 (after the January 7, 2016 TPO board meeting), staff will provide a brief staff report to the TPO Executive Committee at the March 3, 2016 meeting on the list of applications submitted. DRPT s recommended list of projects and allocations will be submitted to the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) for their review and consideration as part of the upcoming SixYear Improvement Program (SYIP). Due to the anticipated level of funding requests falling below the

16 TPO Agenda Item I.D.; FTA Section 5310 Program Grant Applications Endorsement January 7, 2016 Page 2 current level of available funds, staff anticipates that all grant funding requests that are eligible will be funded. As part of staff s request for TPO review and action, staff is also requesting authorization to amend the current Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to program those projects selected by the CTB and included in the final/upcoming SYIP. TAC RECOMMENDATION: The TPO Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has not reviewed or taken action on this matter. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the TPO take action to approve the proposed resolution as presented. TPO ACTION REQUESTED: The following resolution is presented for TPO review and action: RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Planning Organization (TPO) endorses those applications for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 funds which are complete and properly submitted prior to the February 1, 2016 submission deadline, and found by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) to be eligible for FTA Section 5310 Program funds; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the TPO authorizes inclusion of these projects in the TPO s Transportation Improvement Program subject to their selection for funding by the Commonwealth Transportation Board. BSN/KEL/sr

17 Agenda Item I.E. TPO Chairman s Report NO ACTION REQUESTED INFORMATION ITEM 1. Meet and Greet for Martha Shickle, RRPDC Executive Director 2. Other Business 3

18 MEMORANDUM To: RRPDC Commissioners and Alternates From: Martha Shickle, Executive Director Date: December 28, 2015 Subject: Cancellation of January Meetings Please be advised that as recommended by the RRPDC Executive Committee, the RRPDC Board took action during their December 10, 2015, meeting to cancel the January 14, 2016, RRPDC Executive Committee and Commission Board meetings. The next regularly scheduled RRPDC meetings will take place on Thursday, February 11, An agenda packet will be mailed to you at least ten (10) days prior to the meeting date. Please contact us if you have any questions. Thank you. MS/jhf c: RRPDC Staff John Amos

19 Agenda Item I.F. TPO Secretary s Report NO ACTION REQUESTED INFORMATION ITEM 1. Fixing America s Surface Transportation Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update 3. Information Items a. November TPO Work Status Report page 1 b. November TPO Financial Status Report page 4 4

20 RICHMOND REGIONAL TPO WORK STATUS REPORT: NOVEMBER TPO Maintenance/Special Studies TPO Board and Executive Committee: preparation of the December 3 TPO board agenda for distribution on November 23, 2015 to all TPO members, alternates and notices to interested parties. TPO Technical Advisory Committee: (November 17): Primary meeting topics included a presentation on the Connectivity and Land Use Analysis adjacent to the Bus Rapid Transit Route, revisions to the funding sources report for RideFinders, an update on the regional Bridge and Culvert Inventory and Assessment for 2015, and the 2015 Performance Measure Report. 1.2 TPO Citizen Participation Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (November 19): Primary meeting topics included a briefing on the Connectivity and Land Use Analysis to support the Bus Rapid Transit route and the DC2RVA Alternatives Analysis. Social Media: Community Affairs has established a Facebook page and Twitter account for the TPO and is promoting meetings, efforts, and activities on these sites; public meetings and notices are posted and maintained on the RRPDC website for the RRTPO. 1.3 Unified Work Program (UWP) Richmond Region Transit Vision Plan: Amendment was made to Work Task 5.3, providing details from DRPT on scope of work, end products, schedule and funding. Staff Assignments: Review of staff assignments and responsibilities are continuing; revised assignments reflecting work effort priorities divided into three tiers will be completed and reviewed with the staff in November. 2.2 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Update Plan Document MTP2040: The following activities were accomplished for this reporting period: staff work on assigned sections of the plan including research, data collection and analysis. The TPO approved the final Project Selection and Ranking Process on November 5; the deadline for filing MTP2040 applications was extended from November 13 to November 30, Land Use and Performance Measures: The data to update the performance measures has been compiled and was posted to the TPO website on October 30, In addition to RRTPO Work Status Report: November 2015 Page 1 of 3

21 the TPO approved measures, the information includes data on additional measures that is readily available, as well as identifying possible future measures for evaluating the performance of the transportation system, the planning effort, and the community impacts. As part of this year s update, the data will be displayed and described in a report format with descriptive text to better assist the community in understanding the data. The draft report was presented to TAC on November 17 and is open for public comment through December 16. At the January 2016 meeting, TAC will discuss and recommend additional planning performance measures that will be considered by the TPO at the February 2016 meeting. Revenue Projections: Staff received the final revenue projections from VDOT on October 30, The MTPAC met on November 17 to discuss the approach to recommending an allocation distribution that will move the region from allocations weighted toward the highway mode in 2017 to a multimodal allocation program by Data and Mapping: Work is continuing for revising the demographic data to support the environmental justice sections of the MTP2040. SocioEconomic Data Analysis: The final draft of the analysis report was presented to the TPO on November 5. Regional Travel Demand Model: In anticipation of receiving the final data set in October, TPO staff coordinated drafting of the first work task with the Corradino Group, the oncall consultant selected to support the TPO in its modeling efforts. This work effort is anticipated to begin in December and will include the following tasks: model review when it is released, making sure it works and does what the documentation says it does, and evaluating it with respect to what staff thinks the model should be able to do to be useful to the TPO transportation planning process. Additionally, the work task will include initial training for staff on how the model works, discuss what it can do, and how the TPO wants to use it transportation planning. This work task was reviewed by the TAC on November Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) House Bill 2 Resolutions of Endorsement: TPO reviewed and recommended revisions to the Meadowville Technology Parkway resolution project based on a new need identified in the VTrans2040 planning documents. RSTP and CMAQ Applications Staff has been working with TAC members in preparation for the submission of FY17FY22 RSTP and CMAQ applications which were due on November 20, Elderly and Disability Transportation Needs and Services Elderly and Disability Advisory Committee (November 18): Primary meeting topics included a presentation on the VDOT Work Zone Pedestrian and Bicycle Guidance and the GRTC Travel Training Program funded with FTA Section 5310 funds. RRTPO Work Status Report: November 2015 Page 2 of 3

22 5.5 Regional Public Transportation Services DC2RVA: In May 2015, the TPO received its first presentation on the DC2RVA Tier II Environmental Impact Statement (EIS); this planning effort was initiated by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) in the fall of The infrastructure improvements and service upgrades anticipated with this project will improve the travel time, service frequency, and ontime performance of passenger trains operating between Washington, DC and Richmond, VA. Staff has been working with DRPT to understand the status of the alternatives screening process and the impacts that each alternative may have in advance of a public meeting to be held in the region on December 10. DRPT provided a presentation to the TPO on November 5 and to CTAC on November 19 describing the screening of the alternatives and identifying the next steps in the EIS process. In addition to these meetings, TPO staff participated in meetings on November 10 and November 12 with local jurisdictions impacted by the EIS alternatives to evaluate the screening alternatives in advance of the December 10 public meeting. Richmond Regional Transit Vision Plan: TPO staff participated community outreach meetings on November 4 (Main Street Station) and November 5 (New Bridge Baptist Church); a third meeting was held on November 9 (CCWA at John Tyler in Chester). At the meetings, the public was provided background information on the study, the schedule for developing alternatives and recommendations, individuals were offered the opportunity to comment on regional transit needs. The results information gathered at these meetings will be shared with the Transit Vision Plan Advisory Committee on December 14 at a meeting at the RRPDC office. BRT Land Use and Connectivity Study: RRPDC staff continues to work closely with the City of Richmond staff; RRPDC staff is creating graphics and maps for the Citysponsored public meeting on November 19. The project team has moved into corridorwide analysis: determining existing transit oriented development (TOD) characteristics, market readiness, and development potential of inlying areas. Josh Mallow provided presentations to the TPO Technical Advisory Committee (November 17) and the Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (November19) in an effort to increase awareness and understanding of this work effort. RideFinders Funding Report: In approving the FY 2016 Unified Work Program, FHWA recommended that the UWP include a task to research and present to TAC a report on reasonable and sustainable sources of revenue for the RideFinders program. Staff developed a report in consultation with RideFinders to document work completed under UWP work task 5.5, Regional Public Transportation Services (Work Element 9, RideFinders Funding Sources Report). This report was presented to the RideFinders Advisory Board on October 7 and the TPO Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) at its October 20 meeting; recommendation action by the TAC was continued to the November 17 meeting at which time it was recommended to be accepted as work completed. The report is scheduled to go to the TPO on December 3. RRTPO Work Status Report: November 2015 Page 3 of 3

23 RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION PL/Section 5303/RRPDC Match Financial Status Report for November 2015 Monthly Expenditures FY16 Project Name/UWP Task Number Staff MPO Maintenance/Special Studies/1.1 RRPDC MPO Citizen Participation/1.2 RRPDC Unified Work Program/1.3 RRPDC Socioeconomic Data Development/2.1 RRPDC Long Range Transportation Plan Update/2.2 RRPDC Regional Travel Demand Model/2.3 RRPDC Transportation Database Development/GIS/2.5 RRPDC Congestion Management Process (CMP) Update/3.1 RRPDC Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Update/3.3 RRPDC Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)/4.1 RRPDC Bus Rapid Transit/5.1 RRPDC Elderly and Disabled Trans Needs and Services/5.2 RRPDC Regional Public Transportation Services/5.5 RRPDC Coordinated Human Services Mobility Plan/5.6 RRPDC Intermodal Planning/6.1 RRPDC Air Quality Plan and Program Activities/7.1 RRPDC Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning/8.1 RRPDC Bicycle and Pedestrian Count/8.2 RRPDC Total All Projects SUMMARY GRAND TOTAL (1) FY2015 UWP amended budget approved Septermber 24, 2015 Funding Sources PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL TOTAL PL Sec TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec TOTAL PL Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec TOTAL SPECIAL 5303/4 TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec CO TOTAL PL Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec Sec. 5303CO TOTAL PL Sec TOTAL Funding Source PL Sec COSec SPECIAL 5303/4 Budget Dollars(1) 527,057 45,563 4, , ,000 56,000 10, ,000 63,000 63,000 35,000 15,000 50, ,000 50,000 25, ,000 25,000 5,000 10,000 40,000 40,000 10,000 6,000 56,000 40,000 10,000 50,000 10,000 5,000 15, ,000 40, ,000 40,552 40,552 2,000 60,000 13,000 75,000 5,000 80,000 10,000 95,000 1,000 14,000 1,000 16,000 54,000 6,000 60,000 12,000 3,000 15,000 16,000 20,000 9,000 45,000 23,000 30,000 53,000 1,805,404 FY16 1,267, , ,784 40,552 1,845,956 JUL 15 65,143 AUG 15 54,665 SEP 15 34,853 OCT 15 22,422 NOV 15 23,284 65,143 6,124 54,665 2,333 34, ,784 27,206 23,284 6,124 1,488 1,488 5,309 2,333 3,679 3,679 2,556 4,136 4, ,964 2,701 2,701 4,634 4,634 2,980 4,163 4, ,309 17,156 2,556 18,023 2,964 21,012 2, ,801 17, ,023 1,396 2,500 23, ,003 24, , ,641 1,396 5, ,875 3,500 3,500 9,641 4,217 5,693 8, ,875 7,516 5,647 5,647 2,982 4, ,059 1,570 22,421 8,210 7, , ,996 22,421 7,480 7, ,143 24,707 2,874 2,874 2,248 4, ,577 2, ,132 14,996 2,640 2, ,459 3,718 6, ,744 7,024 8,150 6, ,672 2, , , , ,612 3, ,498 3,498 11, , ,090 10,720 2,612 7, , ,107 11,086 3,498 2, ,566 DEC 15 JAN 16 FEB 16 MAR 16 APR 16 MAY 16 JUN 16 2,605 2,605 6, ,153 5,232 2,982 5, , ,575 20,419 3,225 3, ,575 3,475 3, ,337 4, ,000 10,715 5,946 6,253 4,483 1,912 6, ,100 3,647 4, ,484 2,353 5, ,836 2,836 10, , ,038 1,826 1,826 1,864 1,864 78,938 3,776 16,902 3, , ,183 9,204 13,190 2, ,216 55,044 2,513 60,053 3, ,834 Total Percent Expenditures to Date 200,366 4, ,150 9,245 11,000 20,245 10,219 10,219 14,408 14,408 76,992 27, ,492 2,762 6,105 8,867 25,361 6,600 25,361 28,156 28, ,826 2,336 97,118 97,118 19,695 19, ,850 14,000 23,552 5,000 24,052 10,000 39, ,409 10,943 6,000 16, ,507 9,900 11,408 21,442 3,690 25, ,346 of Budget Spent FY16 Spent To Date 505,361 37,300 98,417 19, ,773 Percent Spent 40% 9% 96% 49% 36% 36% 11% 16% 29% 42% 22% 45% 56% 3% 61% 49% 31% 41% 9% 28% 4% 25% 47% Balance Remaining 326,691 45, , ,755 56,000 (1,000) 164,755 52,781 52,781 20,592 15,000 35,592 98,008 50,000 (2,500) 145,508 22,238 5,000 3,895 31,133 14,639 10,000 (600) 24,639 11,844 10,000 21,844 9,489 3,174 12,664 22,882 40,000 62,882 20,857 20,857 1,298 51,150 (1,000) 51,448 (0) 55,948 55,948 1,000 13, ,591 43,057 43,057 11,371 3,000 14,371 14,493 20,000 (900) 33,592 1,558 26,310 27,868 1,137,058 Balance 761, ,263 4,367 20,857 1,185,183 4

24 Agenda Item II. DC2RVA: Consideration of TPO Recommended Alternatives REQUESTED ACTION To approve a resolution of support for three alternatives in the Ashland and Hanover County area and eight alternatives in the Richmond, Henrico County and Chesterfield County area selected to move forward for further evaluation in the DC2RVA Tier II Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). RESOLUTION: The following resolution is presented for TPO review and action: WHEREAS, through the DC2RVA Tier II Environmental Impact Statement development process, the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization has the opportunity to provide input on study alternatives which will impact the future of passenger and freight rail operations in the Richmond region; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization supports the three alternatives in the Ashland and Hanover County area and eight alternatives in the Richmond, Henrico County and Chesterfield County area selected to move forward for further evaluation in the DC2RVA Tier II Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 5

25 TPO AGENDA 1/7/16; ITEM II. ALTERNATIVES CARRIED FORWARD FOR EVALUATION IN DC2RVA TIER II DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization REQUESTED ACTION: To approve resolution of support for three alternatives in the Ashland and Hanover County area and eight alternatives in the Richmond, Henrico County and Chesterfield County area selected to move forward for further evaluation in the DC2RVA Tier II Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). BACKGROUND: The DC2RVA Tier II Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), initiated in the fall of 2014 by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), will include specific rail infrastructure improvements and service upgrades intended to improve the travel time, service frequency, and ontime performance of passenger trains operating between Washington, D.C. and Richmond, VA. Specific to the Richmond TPO area, the Tier II EIS will analyze alternative station locations and track capacity improvements from the Hanover County line to the study area terminus at Centralia in Chesterfield County The EIS is a document, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which describes potential impacts of proposed activities or projects on the natural and physical environment. The EIS is a tool for decisionmaking which evaluates multiple project alternatives, and is generally phased into two or more rounds or tiers of environmental review. In Tier I, the EIS analyzes a project on a broad scale, considering general environmental conditions and levels of impact with little to no sitespecific detail. In Tier II, the EIS examines project alternatives in greater detail and impacts are addressed with potential mitigation measures. Upon approval of Tier II documentation, the decision on a preferred alternative leads to an official Record of Decision (ROD) which ultimately allows for permitting, final design, rightofway acquisition and construction to move forward. As of December 2015, the DC2RVA study team has completed alternatives development and initial screening for Tier II. As described in more detail in attachment Richmond Area Summary of Alternatives Development and Screening Process, conceptual alternatives were evaluated for potential impacts to key environmental resources, and subjected to preliminary assessment of each alignment s track design speed and ability to improve reliability of the rail corridor. The initial screening resulted in the following alternatives in the Richmond TPO area to be carried forward for further evaluation (see attached map): Alternatives in Ashland and Hanover County area: No build Add a third track alongside the existing track Add doubletrack bypass to west of Ashland as an alternative to adding a third track through Ashland Alternatives in Richmond, Henrico County and Chesterfield County area: No build Main Street Station and Staples Mill Rd Station Full Service via SLine Main Street Station and Staples Mill Rd Station Split Service via ALine Main Street Station and Staples Mill Rd Station Shared Service via SLine & ALine

26 TPO Agenda Item II.: Alternatives Carried DC2RVA Tier II DEIS: Resolution of Support January 7, 2016 Page 2 Boulevard Station only via ALine Broad Street only via ALine Main Street Station only via SLine Staples Mill Road Station only via ALine DRPT will be accepting public comments on the initial set of screened alternatives through January 8, Over the next several months DRPT will focus on completing the following tasks: refining the alternatives with more details on station terminals, parking and issues such as roadway crossings and bridges; preparing the DEIS to provide a sidebyside comparison of the alternatives; developing the Service Development Plan to analyze ridership, operations, schedules and maintenance; and continuing public outreach culminating in public hearings to review the DEIS in late TPO ACTION REQUESTED: The following resolution is presented for TPO review and action: WHEREAS, through the DC2RVA Tier II Environmental Impact Statement development process, the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization has the opportunity to provide input on study alternatives which will impact the future of passenger and freight rail operations in the Richmond region; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization supports the three alternatives in the Ashland and Hanover County area and eight alternatives in the Richmond, Henrico County and Chesterfield County area selected to move forward for further evaluation in the DC2RVA Tier II Draft Environmental Impact Statement. BSN/CW Attachments

27 [ Washington, Washington, D.C. D.C. Falls Church Manassas Park Prince William Fauquier Buckingham Branch Acca Yard FredericksburgKing George 95 Spotsylvania Caroline H H ee nn rr ii cc oo C C oo uu nn tt yy Westmoreland Essex King and Queen Hanover C C ii tt yy oo ff R R ii cc hh m m oo nn dd King William 295 Fulton Yard New Kent Richmond Richmond City of Richmond 195 Henrico Chesterfield 64 Charles City 95 Ae Lin Miles [ 1 inch = x 11 inches Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic State Plane Virginia North FIPS 4501 Feet North American Datum of 1983 SLine Imagery: Bing Maps Aerial Legend CSXT Mileposts! ( Exsiting Track _ ^ 3 I Proposed Stations Amtrak Station County/City Boundaries C:\Users\lmeadows\Desktop\RichmondArea.mxd Last Updated: C C hh ee ss tt ee rr ff ii ee ll dd C C oo uu nn tt yy Richmond Area Station Options