hampton roads transportation planning organization board ......hampton roads transportation planning...

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization

Board Meeting September 19, 2013

The Regional Board Room, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia

10:30 am 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda

WORKSHOP AGENDA 10:35 am 3. Commonwealth Transportation Board Members Comments and Updates

4. Department of Rail and Public Transportation Comments and Updates 5. Military Liaisons Comments and Updates 6. 2040 LRTP Visioning Survey Report 7. Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads 8. I-64 Peninsula Widening Project Briefing: VDOT 9. HB2313 HRTF Revenues: Resolution

MEETING AGENDA 12:00 pm 10. Public Comment Period (limit 3 minutes per individual)

11. Submitted Public Comments 12. Approval of Consent Items

A. Minutes B. HRTPO Financial Statement C. FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT D. FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT E. FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT F. FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT G. 2034 LRTP Amendment: Chesapeake H. Regional Performance Measures – FY 2013 Update I. 2040 LRTP Visioning Survey Report J. Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads K. HB2313 HRTF Revenues: Resolution

13. HRTPO Board Three-Month Tentative Schedule 14. HRTPO Draft Reports Under Review 15. Correspondence of Interest 16. Minutes of the HRTPO Board Committees 17. For Your Information 18. Old/New Business

12:30 pm ADJOURNMENT

HRTPO Board Meeting │ September 19, 2013 │ Agenda

ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER The meeting is scheduled to be called to order by the Chair at 10:30 a.m. ITEM #2: APPROVAL OF AGENDA Members are provided an opportunity to add or delete items from the agenda. Any item for which a member desires consideration by the HRTPO Board should be submitted at this time for consideration under “Old/New Business”. ITEM #3: COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEMBERS COMMENTS AND

UPDATES

Members of the Commonwealth Transportation Board are invited to address the HRTPO Board. ITEM #4: DEPARTMENT OF RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMMENTS AND

UPDATES Representatives of the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation are invited to provide comments and updates to the HRTPO Board. ITEM #5: MILITARY LIAISONS COMMENTS AND UPDATES Military liaisons are invited to provide comments and updates to the HRTPO Board.


ITEM #6: 2040 LRTP VISIONING SURVEY REPORT The HRTPO staff conducted a visioning survey as part of the development of the Vision and Goals for the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The survey began on October 10, 2012 and ran through December 31, 2012. Comprehensive methods were used in disseminating the 20 question survey to the public and a total of 1,805 responses were received and analyzed. This report summarizes the results of the survey and specifies the next steps in incorporating the findings in the development of the 2040 LRTP. The draft was made available for public review and comment from July 3, 2013 through July 17, 2013. Comments received have been addressed in the final report. This item is under the Consent Agenda for approval; see Item 12-I. Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, Deputy Executive Director, will brief the HRTPO Board on this item. This item should be of particular interest to the Board as the results of the survey will directly impact the selection of projects for the 2040 LRTP. Enclosure 6: 2040 LRTP Visioning Survey Report


ITEM #7: EXISTING AND FUTURE TRUCK DELAY IN HAMPTON ROADS The Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads report builds on the analysis of existing truck volumes and delays contained in the Hampton Roads Regional Freight Study (HRTPO, September 2012) by forecasting truck volumes and delays in Hampton Roads. It uses the new truck component and time-of-day capability of the regional travel demand model to forecast truck volumes and congestion to be faced by trucks in the next 20 years. This is the first time that HRTPO staff has forecasted future truck traffic or truck delays. This analysis shows future roadway segments with the highest total weekday truck delays. The HRTPO staff plans to review the freight component of the HRTPO Project Prioritization Tool and incorporate any changes that are warranted. The report was made available for public review and comment from July 3, 2013 through July 26, 2013. No comments were received. This item is under the Consent Agenda for approval; see Item 12-J. Mr. Sam Belfield, Senior Transportation Engineer, will brief the HRTPO Board on this item. This item should be of particular interest to the Board as the results of the study will directly impact the selection of transportation projects. Enclosure 7: Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads Report


ITEM #8: I-64 PENINSULA WIDENING PROJECT BRIEFING: VDOT Improving the capacity of I-64 on the Peninsula has long been a goal in Hampton Roads. The 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) included a project for widening I-64 from Jefferson Avenue (Exit 255) to Fort Eustis Boulevard (Exit 250) and listed the section from Fort Eustis Boulevard to Route 199 (Exit 242) as an unfunded project recommended for future consideration. In recent months, the HRTPO and VDOT have discussed possible interim capacity improvements for this section of I-64, and in July 2013, the HRTPO FY 2012-2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was amended at VDOT’s request to add a $100 million project for capacity improvements on I-64 from Jefferson Avenue (Exit 255) to Humelsine Parkway, Route 199 (Exit 242). A representative for VDOT, Hampton Roads District, will brief the HRTPO Board on the project.


ITEM #9: HB2313 HRTF REVENUES: RESOLUTION In recent meetings, the HRTPO Board has been briefed on programming options that would maximize the “regional” component of the HB2313 transportation revenues. The legislation dedicates two revenue streams to the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF) and prescribes the HRTPO to have full purview and discretion on how and when to spend these dollars. Beginning in FY 2014, HRTF funding will be approximately $179 million, growing to $234 million in FY 2019, generating approximately $5.5 billion over the next twenty years for regional transportation projects that provide the greatest impact on reducing congestion as prescribed in HB2313. During the July 18, 2013 meeting, members of the Hampton Roads General Assembly Delegation specified that the intent of the HRTF revenues prescribed in the HB2313 legislation would be used, in the most effective manner possible, to fund transportation projects that provide the greatest impact on reducing congestion. They also clarified it was not their intent that the HRTF be used to fund projects in every locality within Planning District 23, but rather to fund projects that are significant to the region as a whole. The purpose of the attached resolution is to confirm the intent of the HRTPO Board regarding the use of HRTF revenues. The resolution is included under Consent Agenda Item #12-K for HRTPO Board approval. In a related matter, HRTPO staff is currently updating the prioritization scores for all of the regionally significant projects and studies in the 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan. This information will be presented to the Board in October to assist in the selection of projects to be funded with HRTF revenues. Mayor Molly Ward, HRTPO Chair, will lead the discussion on this item. Attachment 9

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION BOARD RESOLUTION 2013-06

A RESOLUTION OF THE HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION ENDORSING THE PURPOSE OF HOUSE BILL 2313 HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION FUND REVENUES. WHEREAS, HB2313 establishes new revenues for transportation, a portion of which will be deposited to a newly established Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (the “Fund”) effective July 1, 2013; WHEREAS, HB2313 provides that the Fund be expended solely for new construction projects on new or existing roads, bridges and tunnels in the localities comprising Planning District 23 as approved by the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (the “HRTPO”) and that the HRTPO shall give priority to those projects that are expected to provide the greatest impact on reducing congestion; and WHEREAS, the HRTPO understands the intent of the legislation to mean that the Fund must be utilized in the most effective and efficient manner and applied to regionally significant projects to reduce congestion for the benefit of the entire Planning District 23 region.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization endorses the identification of Fund revenues, as prescribed in HB2313, for the use of funding regionally significant projects. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization at its meeting on the 19th day of September, 2013.

Molly J. Ward

Chair Hampton Roads Transportation

Planning Organization

Dwight L. Farmer Executive Director/Secretary

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization

Attachment 9


ITEM #10: PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Members of the public are invited to address the HRTPO Board. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. ITEM #11: SUBMITTED PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no submitted public comments. Any new written public comments will be distributed as a handout at the meeting.


ITEM #12: APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS

A. MINUTES

Minutes of the HRTPO Board meeting held on July 18, 2013 are attached. Attachment 12-A Recommended Action: Approve the minutes.

B. HRTPO FINANCIAL STATEMENT

The Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for the activities of July 2013 is attached. This statement reflects the financial status of the HRTPO as a whole. Attachment 12-B Recommended Action: Accept the financial statement.

C. FY 2012-2015 TIP AMENDMENT: VDOT

Attached is a request from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to amend the Hampton Roads FY 2012 – 2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to add the project described below:

• UPC 100856 – Oakland Industrial Park Sidewalk, Phase 2. This project involves

constructing sidewalks on: Harwood Drive, from its eastern intersection with Enterprise Drive to its western intersection with Enterprise Drive; and on Picketts Line, from Enterprise Drive to Warwick Boulevard.

o Add project to TIP o Total Cost Estimate: $936,485

Preliminary Engineering (PE) = $90,000 Right of Way (RW) = $100,000 Construction (CN) = $746,485

o Add FY 2013 PE obligation of $90,000 CMAQ (including state match) The proposed TIP amendment was made available for public review from August 28, 2013 through September 11, 2013. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the TIP amendment. Attachment 12-C Recommended Action: Approve the TIP amendment.


D. FY 2012-2015 TIP AMENDMENT: VDOT

Attached is a request from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to amend the Hampton Roads FY 2012 – 2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to revise the project described below:

• UPC 55202 – Widen Witchduck Road to 6 lanes from I-264 to Virginia Beach

Boulevard in Virginia Beach. o Total Cost Estimate: $52,963,968 o Revise the obligation information as follows:

Preliminary Engineering (PE) – update to match actual obligations; move $43,210 STP and $475,270 Advance Construction (AC) from FFY12 to Previous Obligations; move $55,817 AC from FFY12 to FFY13 and add $560,871 AC to FFY13

Right of Way (RW) – Add $20,164,218 AC in FFY13 Construction (CN) – Add $5,000,000 Revenue Sharing and $12,139,855

AC in FFY14 The proposed TIP amendment was made available for public review from August 28, 2013 through September 11, 2013. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the TIP amendment. Attachment 12-D Recommended Action: Approve the TIP amendment.

E. FY 2012-2015 TIP AMENDMENT: VDOT


• UPC 102781 – Utility Bore Under Lynnhaven Inlet in Virginia Beach.

o Total Cost Estimate: $5,623,935 o Revise the obligation information as follows:

Construction (CN) – Add $3,860,913 STP and $80,000 associated match in FFY13. Add $1,683,022 Other State Funding in FFY13

The proposed TIP amendment was made available for public review from August 28, 2013 through September 11, 2013. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the TIP amendment. Attachment 12-E Recommended Action: Approve the TIP amendment.


F. FY 2012-2015 TIP AMENDMENT: VDOT


• UPC 16103 – Oyster Point Bikeway/Sidewalk Phase IV. This project is to construct a

bikeway/sidewalk along Oyster Point Road from Jefferson Avenue to Village Green Parkway in Newport News.

o Total Cost Estimate: $450,000 o Revise the obligation information as follows:

Preliminary Engineering (PE) – Add $122,400 CMAQ and associated $30,600 state match to FFY13

Construction (CN) – Add $237,600 CMAQ and associated $59,400 state match in FFY13

The proposed TIP amendment was made available for public review from August 28, 2013 through September 11, 2013. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the TIP amendment. Attachment 12-F Recommended Action: Approve the TIP amendment.

G. 2034 LRTP AMENDMENT: CHESAPEAKE

Attached is a request from the City of Chesapeake to amend the Hampton Roads 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) to add the project described below:

• Deep Creek Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIW) Bridge Replacement. The

current two-lane drawbridge is located on U.S. Route 17 Business where it crosses the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. The current bridge was constructed in 1934 and is functionally-obsolete and weight-restricted, requiring emergency vehicles to use alternate routes to serve areas on either side of the bridge. The bridge carries approximately 25,000 vehicles per day. The roadway on either side of the bridge has been widened and the bridge is the sole remaining bottleneck in the corridor.

o Total Cost Estimate: $45,000,000 o Funding Plan:

$10 M Regional Surface Transportation Program Funds $10 M National Highway Performance Program Funds $10 M Energy and Water Development Funding $10 M Revenue Sharing Funds $ 5 M Urban Construction Funds

$45 M Total Construction Funds


The proposed LRTP amendment was been made available for public review from August 28, 2013 through September 11, 2013. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the LRTP amendment

Attachment 12-G

Recommended Action: Approve the LRTP amendment.

H. REGIONAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES – FY 2013 UPDATE

In 2009, the General Assembly passed legislation giving the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) authority to:

“require that appropriate regional organizations develop…quantifiable measures and achievable goals for the urban region relating to, but not limited to, congestion reduction and safety, transit and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) usage, job-to-housing ratios, job and housing access to transit and pedestrian facilities, air quality, movement of freight by rail, and per capita vehicle miles traveled.”

In April 2012, the HRTPO Board approved targets for Hampton Roads’ Regional Performance Measures (RPMs) and 2012 values for these RPMs, and forwarded both to the Office of the Secretary of Transportation. In 2013, HRTPO staff prepared an annual update of RPM values using the latest data available. The draft was made available for public review and comment from July 8, 2013 through July 22, 2013. No comments were received. Attachment 12-H Recommended Action: Approve the report.

I. 2040 LRTP: VISIONING SURVEY REPORT

The HRTPO staff conducted a visioning survey as part of the development of the Vision and Goals for the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The survey began on October 10, 2012 and ran through December 31, 2012. Comprehensive methods were used in disseminating the 20 question survey to the public and a total of 1,805 responses were received and analyzed. This report summarizes the results of the survey and specifies the next steps in incorporating the findings in the development of the 2040 LRTP. The draft was made available for public review and comment from July 3, 2013 through July 17, 2013. Comments received have been addressed in the final report. This item was discussed in the Workshop Agenda, Item #6. Recommended Action: Approve the report enclosed with Item #6.


J. EXISTING AND FUTURE TRUCK DELAY IN HAMPTON ROADS The Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads report builds on the analysis of existing truck volumes and delays contained in the Hampton Roads Regional Freight Study (HRTPO, September 2012) by forecasting truck volumes and delays in Hampton Roads. It uses the new truck component and time-of-day capability of the regional travel demand model to forecast truck volumes and congestion to be faced by trucks in the next 20 years. This is the first time that HRTPO staff has forecasted future truck traffic or truck delays. This analysis shows future roadway segments with the highest total weekday truck delays. The HRTPO staff plans to review the freight component of the HRTPO Project Prioritization Tool and incorporate any changes that are warranted. The report was made available for public review and comment from July 3, 2013 through July 26, 2013. No comments were received. This item was discussed in the Workshop Agenda, Item #7. Recommended Action: Approve the report enclosed with Item #7.

K. HB2313 HRTF REVENUES: RESOLUTION The purpose of this resolution is to confirm the intent of the HRTPO Board regarding the use of HRTF revenues. This item was discussed in the Workshop Agenda, Item #9. Recommended Action: Approve the resolution attached with Item #9.

HRTPO Board Minutes – July 18, 2013 – Page 1

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Board Minutes of July 18, 2013

The Hampton Roads TPO Board Meeting was called to order at 10:30 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)* Dee Dee Darden (IW) Mary Jones (JC) McKinley Price (NN) Paul D. Fraim (NO)* Kenneth I. Wright (PO) Herbert Green (Alternate, PQ) Linda T. Johnson (SU) Charles Brown (Alternate, SU) William D. Sessoms (VB)*

Thomas G. Shepperd, Jr. (YK) Thelma Drake (DRPT) Senator Thomas Norment (GA) Senator Frank Wagner (GA) Delegate Chris Stolle (GA) Delegate Mike Watson (GA)* William E. Harrell (HRT) James Utterback (VDOT) Jeff Florin (Alternate, VPA) Kevan Danker (WATA)

HRTPO Nonvoting Members in Attendance: James E. Baker (CH) Mary Bunting (HA) W. Douglas Caskey (IW) Robert C. Middaugh (JC) Jim Bourey (NN) J. Randall Wheeler (PQ)

Selena Cuffee-Glenn (SU) James K. Spore (VB) Jackson C. Tuttle, II (WM) James O. McReynolds (YK) Delceno Miles (Alternate, CTAC) Ivan Rucker (FHWA)

HRTPO Executive Director: Dwight L. Farmer

CTB Participants: Hollis Ellis (CTB) Aubrey Layne (CTB) Shep Miller (CTB)

Other Participants: Randy Martin (FR) Michael Johnson (SH) Barry Porter (SH)

HRTPO Voting Members Absent: Carter Borden (GL) W. Eugene Hunt (PQ)

Clyde Haulman (WM) Rodney Oliver (VPA)

Attachment 12-A


HRTPO Nonvoting Members Absent: Brenda Garton (GL) Marcus Jones (NO) John Rowe (PO) Shepelle Watkins-White (CTAC) Jeffrey Breeden (FAA) Irene Rico (FHWA) Tony Cho (FTA) Brigid Hynes-Cherin (FTA)

William Bell (FTAC) Col. John Allen (LANGLEY-EUSTIS) Col. Tom Wetherington (LANGLEY-EUSTIS) Wayne Shank (NAA) Ken Spirito (PAC) Capt. John Little (USCG) Capt. David Culler (USN) Randall P. Burdette (VDOA)

* Late arrival or early departure Others Recorded Attending: Earl Sorey (CH); Will Moffett (HA); Michael King, Ross McFarland, Jerri Wilson (NN); Dale Castellow, Jeff Raliski, Ron Williams (NO); Sherri Neil (PO); Sherry Hunt, Albert Moor, Eric Nielsen (SU); Thomas Leahy (VB); Vivian McGettigan (YK); Ronald Broughton (HRT); Richard Coggins, W. Dewey Hurley (Branscome, Inc.); Tracy Baynard (McGuire Woods Consulting); Angela Bezik (Principle Advantage); Ellis W. James (Sierra Club Observer); Kathy Adams, David Forster, Stephen Katz (Virginian-Pilot); Bob Baldwin (U.S. Navy); Donald Cole (Woolpert); Christen Faatz (Senator McWaters’ Office); Amanda Brewer, Craig Quigley (HRMFFA); Karen McPherson (Kimley-Horn); Vincent Mayberry (VDOT); Peter Huber (Willcox & Savage); Cathy Aiello (Aiello Enterprises); Camelia Ravanbakht, Sam Belfield, Rob Case, Brian Chenault, Kathlene Grauberger, Theresa Jones, Michael Kimbrel, Kendall Miller, Jessica Nappi, Keith Nichols, Pavithra Parthasarathi, Joe Paulus, Dale Stith, Chris Wichman (HRTPO Staff); Rick Case, James Clary, Jennifer Coleman, Nancy Collins, Jim Hummer, Randy Keaton, Mike Long, Ben McFarlane, Kelli Peterson, Tiffany Smith, Joe Turner, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC Staff) Approval of Agenda Chair Molly Ward asked for any additions or deletions to the agenda. Hearing none, Mayor William Sessoms Moved to approve the agenda as written; seconded by Mr. Jeff Florin. The Motion Carried.

Workshop Agenda Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) Members Comment Period Mr. Aubrey Layne, CTB Member, reported the CTB held its July meeting over the past two days in Hampton Roads as a joint meeting with the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel (CBBT) Commission. He indicated it was the first time these two entities had met together in over 50 years. He stated the meeting was historic because as the area continues to build mega projects across the state, he believed entities such as the CBBT Commission and the Route 460 Funding Corporation will be operating these projects and it is beneficial for these efforts to be regionally coordinated.

Attachment 12-A


Mr. Layne indicated that at the CBBT Commission meeting, the CTB voted to move forward with public hearings in July and August regarding the possibility of constructing the Thimble Shoals Tunnel; the first channel that leads in and out of Hampton Roads. The toll would increase next year by approximately 10% to accommodate for the building of the additional tunnel. He commented that commuters utilizing the CBBT would not be charged the toll increase as technology with the E-ZPass allows for the identification of such drivers. (Mayor Paul Fraim and Mayor William Sessoms arrive) Mr. Shep Miller, CTB Member, clarified that commuters who travel through the CBBT at least 15 times per month will see a decrease in their tolls. He noted that tolls for school buses carrying students for school sports and bands were decreased to one dollar. Mr. Miller stated Mr. James Utterback of VDOT briefed the CTB on over a billion dollars’ worth of projects in Hampton Roads. Mr. Hollis Ellis, CTB member, reported the CTB approved an application for Oceaneering, a revenue sharing project in Chesapeake. He stated the CTB can assist the cities and counties within the region for economic development opportunities using state transportation dollars. Mr. James Baker expressed his appreciation to the CTB members for the approval of the Oceaneering application. Mr. Ellis stated the CTB offered to assist the City of Chesapeake in order to have the project stay in Virginia. Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) Comments and Updates Ms. Thelma Drake reported the six month ridership data confirms that over 73,000 people rode the Norfolk/Amtrak train along the route to New York. These figures are slightly above the revenues that were projected within the study conducted before train service was implemented. Virginia's passenger rail service remains in the black until October 1st when the new federal rules take effect. DRPT is continuing to work with Norfolk Southern to move the departure time for the weekday train from 4:50 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. DRPT is also working with CSX on needed capacity improvements and ridership figures in order to move forward with trains 2 and 3 into Norfolk. (Mayor Alan Krasnoff arrives) Ms. Drake indicated DRPT is in the midst of its transit performance metrics. The Transit Service Delivery Advisory Committee (TSDAC) was formed, due in part to Senate Bill 1140, as the HB2313 transit money will be distributed based on performance metrics; whereas, the $160 million in operating funds will continue to be distributed based on operating costs. The TSDAC has met twice a month since April, has divided the HB2313 money into separate categories, and is working on creating long-term metrics for the future.

Attachment 12-A


Military Liaisons Comments and Updates Colonel Jayne Jansen reported the LaSalle Installation Gate will re-open tomorrow which will help with traffic traveling in and out of Langley-Ft. Eustis. She indicated the construction improvements to the Route 105 Bridge have not severely impacted travel. HRTPO 2013-2014 Officer Elections: Nominating Committee Chair Ward reported the election of officers for the HRTPO occurs at the HRTPO Board Annual Meeting in October of each year. Currently, the Nominating Committee consists of:

• Mary Jones (JC) • The Honorable Paul Fraim (NO) • The Honorable McKinley Price (NN) • The Honorable Kenneth Wright (PO) • The Honorable William Sessoms (VB) • William Harrell (HRT) • James Utterback (VDOT)

Chair Ward stated Mayor Fraim has agreed to chair the HRTPO Nominating Committee. She indicated staff has made her aware that the current HRPDC and HRTPO Chair representation from the Southside and Peninsula does not align with the HRTPO Bylaws and will be addressed by the Nominating Committee. HB2313: Financial Consulting Services Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, reported the recently enacted HB2313 legislation established new revenues for transportation, a portion of which will be deposited to a newly established Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF). At its May Retreat, the HRTPO Board was briefed on the potential policy and financial strategies on how to maximize the HRTF revenues to fund regional projects. With the realization that the General Assembly would more than likely take significant action, Mr. Farmer contacted Mr. David Miller of the PFM Group, Inc., who agreed to provide temporary financial advice at no charge. Since then, the PFM Group has coordinated with Willcox & Savage, the HRPDC Attorney of Record, and the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee to discuss potential legal and financial issues that may need to be addressed. Mr. Farmer explained that under the Virginia Procurement Regulations, public bodies can piggyback on other contracts that are similar in nature. The HRTPO can piggyback the City of Norfolk’s contract because it contains a clause in both its RFP and Contract that refers to this capability. He recommended the HRTPO Board execute a contract with the PFM Group and review its scope of work for approval. The PFM Group’s contract will specifically address bonding issues, bond capacity, overlapping debt, and any other institutional financial arrangements that may need to be a part of an amendment to the legislation. The contract is for $75,000 with a contract date of August 1, 2013 – October 31, 2013.

Attachment 12-A


Mayor Kenneth Wright asked how long the PFM Group had provided financial advice to the HRTPO free of charge. Mr. Farmer replied approximately six months and indicated such service would typically cost around $30,000 - $50,000. Memoranda of Agreement (MOA): Franklin and Southampton Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, reported that at the June 20, 2013 HRTPO Board Meeting, the HRTPO staff recommended approving an interim agreement among the HRTPO members and the two non-member localities of Franklin and Southampton that would guarantee representation and voting rights to them on matters involving the planning, programming, and funding of projects supported by the state revenues in HB2313. He noted it was important for the MOAs to reflect the proper language with regards to both the State code and Federal Regulations involving planning and programming. Since the June meeting, the MOAs have been completely vetted through HRTPO staff, Mr. Ivan Rucker of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Memorandum of Agreement (MOA): VDOT and HRTPO Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, reported that at its May Retreat, the HRTPO Board was briefed on the ongoing coordination between the Commonwealth and the HRTPO on the revenue collection, distribution process, programming, and reporting of the HB2313 Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF). Since May, HRTPO staff has had several meetings with the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), VDOT, and the Attorneys from Willcox & Savage to construct an MOA between VDOT and the HRTPO. The HRTPO Board will be provided with at least quarterly financial statements regarding the HRTF. VDOT will still be the fiscal agent, drawing down the money from the Department of Taxation and the Department of Motor Vehicles with the HRTPO deciding how to allocate the funds. HB2313 Regional Transportation Funds: Programming Options Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, stated the programming options for the HB2313 regional transportation funds are a work in progress and explained that these revenues are to be used solely for new construction projects on new or existing roads, bridges, and tunnels within the localities comprising Planning District 23. According to the General Assembly, the HRTPO should give priority to those projects that are expected to provide the greatest impact on reducing congestion in the region. He believed the HRTPO Board-approved prioritization tool will be a valuable asset in determining projects for the region as “project utility” (congestion) is one of the categories within the tool. Mayor Wright asked whether the prioritization tool is strictly related to congestion. Mr. Farmer replied the prioritization tool is comprised of three components: project utility (congestion), project viability, and economic vitality.

Attachment 12-A


Mayor Wright inquired as to whether project ranks would shift if only the congestion scores were utilized. Mr. Farmer replied the prioritization tool is a mechanism to assist the Board in ranking its projects. He indicated the scores would more than likely change; however, he believed there would not be severe shifts in the high priority projects. Mayor Wright asked for clarification regarding the Board’s predicament if the separate model run, based solely on project utility scores, differed drastically from the original results. Mr. Farmer replied the HRTPO Board has not deviated from the results of the prioritization tool nor the selection process used to score, rate, and rank Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) and Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) projects because of the strength of the models. However, he indicated the Board has the discretion to modify which projects receive top prioritization. Delegate Christopher Stolle commented the General Assembly was informed that some localities are misinterpreting portions of HB2313. He stated it was not the intent of the legislation to allocate funds for projects in each locality; rather, the funds are to be used on regional projects that will reduce congestion within the region. Senator Thomas Norment indicated that both he and Senator Frank Wagner were present during the closing hours of the HB2313 discussion and reiterated the intent of the legislation is to fund regional projects instead of several smaller local projects. Mr. Florin expressed concern with re-scoring the projects solely based on the utility (congestion) category. He believed all three components of the prioritization tool work together to produce a more beneficial ranking. Mr. Miller stated the General Assembly’s intent in passing HB2313 was clearly to relieve congestion on a regional basis. He indicated it was the responsibility of the Hampton Roads’ representatives on the CTB to advocate funds for local projects. He expressed his support to utilize all HB2313 funds towards a mega project to bring down associated tolls. Senator Wagner agreed with Senator Norment’s comments and stated the HRTPO must reach a consensus that will provide bonding authority to move forward on regional projects. He stated the citizens of Hampton Roads face the growing problem that can only be mitigated by assembling a sizable sum of money and applying it to a project that will relieve the most congestion. He indicated that if necessary, the General Assembly will clarify the bill’s language in January 2014. Mr. Layne stated that for the first time, the HRTPO will be in the position to allocate HB2313 revenues to projects, much in the same manner as the CTB allocates statewide funds. He suggested the HRTPO Board allocate the funds before bonding authority is given. He indicated that local projects in the Six Year Improvement Program (SYIP) should be funded through the CTB and noted there will be an increase in state funding for these projects. He believed it would be more beneficial to the region to utilize the funds on a major project rather than divide the money amongst several smaller projects.

Attachment 12-A


Mr. Tom Shepperd and Mayor Paul Fraim asked for clarification regarding the allocation of HB2313 revenues in response to the Senators’ concern that the funds will not be utilized on a major project. Mr. Miller replied the resolution submitted to the HRTPO Board refers to dividing the funds into three programming categories. Mr. Farmer stated the HRTPO Board must update the 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) to identify how to spend the approximately $5.5 billion regional component of the HB2313 revenues over the next 20 years. Mr. Farmer outlined possible programming options for the HRTF revenues, including:

• Bond Funded – Funding for mega projects in order to buy down tolls • Cash Match Funded – Funding to assist the CTB/VDOT complete an interstate or

interchange project by allocating up to the 20% state/local match • Cash Funded – Funding for committed projects already in the pipeline

After summarizing the above programming options, Mr. Farmer stated that before the Board meeting convened today, he received alternative guidance from the CTB members and indicated the Board could set aside the resolution as it was meant as a starting point for discussion. He commented that given the Board’s recent endorsement of the Third Crossing at its June 20, 2013 meeting, a decision was needed as to whether a portion of the revenues would be utilized to buy down this project’s tolls. He noted the decision will affect staff’s report to the Board in September regarding scores on utility (congestion) and viability because the viability category has provisions for scoring relating to sufficient funds and project feasibility. Mr. Miller expressed concern with regards to allocating funds for projects that were traditionally the responsibility of the CTB. He advised the Board to allow the CTB to deliver on its obligation before committing funds to these projects. Mr. Farmer stated that until this morning, HRTPO staff, over the past three months, was working off of VDOT’s recommendation to potentially utilize the HB2313 revenues to assist in the completion of committed FY 2014-2019 SYIP projects and noted that the SYIP lacked the $931 million to finish these projects. He recommended the Board be mindful of Mr. Miller’s comments to allow the CTB to uphold its responsibility regarding SYIP projects. Mr. Layne suggested reviewing specific projects rather than arbitrarily dividing the funds into categories before reaching an agreement on which projects to fund. Mr. Miller stated the Legislators’ comments regarding the HB2313 revenues clearly illustrate that their intent was to allocate these funds to a project or projects that will provide regional significance to Hampton Roads. He indicated that although the projects identified in the SYIP are important, state money will be allotted to these projects in the coming years. He commented that HB2313 is a unique opportunity for the region and recommended utilizing the funds to buy down tolls on a major project. Chair Ward suggested drafting another resolution with assistance from both the CTB and General Assembly Board members.

Attachment 12-A


Senator Norment agreed with Mr. Miller and discouraged the Board from diluting the funds over several projects. He stated the pipeline established under the SYIP did not take into account this action by the General Assembly and commented the HRTPO Board should collectively reassess its position due to the new funding. Mr. William Harrell indicated the HRTPO Board approved the hiring of a consultant to assist in developing the prioritization tool and suggested such aid be rendered again to evaluate which projects would provide the most significant, congestion-related regional impact. Mr. Farmer outlined the next steps as follows:

• September 2013 – Planning for HRTF project prioritization • November 2013 – HRTF project prioritization and public outreach • January 2014 – HRTPO project priorities for the FY 2015-2020 SYIP

Mayor Fraim stated the upcoming prioritization process must be transparent in nature and driven by the data and facts as real dollars are at stake. He stressed the importance of meeting attendance during the next several months in order for all members to remain informed. Mr. Farmer agreed with Mayor Fraim and stated there will be an educational public outreach campaign to inform citizens of the process that will be used to allocate the funds. Mayor Fraim inquired as to whether the HRTPO Board would recommend a list of projects. Mr. Farmer replied that under the CTB’s new guidance, he planned to speak with VDOT senior staff to have all parties involved on the same page. Mr. Layne stated the goal in allocating the funds should be to leverage them, either through bonding or state resources, in the most efficient manner possible. Mr. Farmer reported the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee and Willcox & Savage have separately discussed bonding capability, the process of issuing bonds, and what authority or entity will have that responsibility. Staff will come back to the Board in October with a set of recommendations based on advice from the Legislative Ad-hoc Committee which has representation from the General Assembly, two local elected officials, and two legislative liaisons. Roadways Serving the Military and Sea-Level/Storm Surge Rise Mr. Sam Belfield, HRTPO Senior Transportation Engineer, reported The Hampton Roads Military Transportation Needs Study is comprised of three phases:

• Highway Network Analysis (September 2011) • Military Commuter Survey (September 2012) • Roadways Serving the Military and Sea Level Rise/Storm Surge

Attachment 12-A


Sea-level rise and storm surge threats are significant challenges for the region given the low elevations within Hampton Roads. Mr. Belfield stated this report builds primarily on the first phase by estimating the sea-level rise and potential storm surge threats to the Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) established in the Highway Network Analysis report. HRTPO staff reviewed and expanded STRAHNET, originally developed by the Department of Defense, to determine the existing and potential flood locations. He outlined several examples of flooding from recent storms and past historical storms. Based on projections by the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (HRPDC) and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS), sea-level rise is anticipated at 1.5 feet between 2032 and 2065. Mr. Belfield reported that by utilizing HRPDC flood projects, staff was able to identify, by locality, the various roadways serving the military that would be subject to submersion by approximately 4.5 feet of relative water rise. The Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Virginia Beach would be the most vulnerable. He stated the area’s military installation gates would also be potentially blocked due to the submergence of surrounding roadways. Based on this analysis from the study, Mr. Belfield requested the HRTPO Board consider the impacts of sea level rise and storm surge when selecting future transportation projects. Operators at military and supporting sites will be encouraged to work with VDOT, cities, and counties, to develop detour plans for these potentially submerged roadways serving the military. VDOT and the localities will be asked to consider the latest projections for sea level rise and storm surge from the initial phase of any project. Staff is also requesting that further study be conducted to determine the impact on drainage systems throughout the region. Mr. Belfield indicated the draft version of the Military Transportation Needs Study – Roadways Serving the Military and Sea Level Rise/Storm Surge was made available for public review and comment from May 1, 2013 through May 17, 2013 with no public comments received. Mr. Shepperd asked whether the major roadways utilized by active duty personnel were considered in the study. Mr. Belfield replied affirmatively and stated that in the 2012 Military Commuter Survey, staff identified all military gate locations by which personnel would travel into and out of the area’s installations. Mr. Layne commented that at the previous CTB meeting, members were briefed on an evacuation route in Hampton Roads and inquired as to whether there was a planned evacuation exercise in the near future in which military installation gates would be closed. Mr. James Utterback replied the exercise will occur Sunday, July 21st at 3:30 a.m. on the Peninsula from west of Williamsburg up to Richmond at I-295.

Attachment 12-A


Meeting Agenda Public Comment Period One person requested to address the HRTPO Board. Chair Ward asked him to limit his comments to three minutes.

Mr. Ellis W. James Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Board. My name is Ellis W. James. I reside at 2021 Kenlake Place in the City of Norfolk and have done so for a couple of years. I could barely contain my excitement; I hope most of you saw or now know about the project that is going to have serious implications, I believe, and impacts on all of the good work that all of you are doing. The whole question of relieving congestion could very well run head long into a brick wall if we don't begin to plan now to determine what the impact of Craney Island and all of that new container cargo and shipping is going to do to all of the good work that we're working onto relieve congestion in Hampton Roads. We're going to have huge ships because of the expansion of the Panama Canal. Now, I recognize that this is more than likely a Port Authority issue. However, all of the good work that has been discussed, especially this morning, and what your efforts may come to in the end is going to have to take into account whether we go in the wrong direction or the right direction when it comes to the significant impact that I believe that the Craney Island operation is going to have. Not only for our friends in the military, the people who are so much impacted by many of the things that we have been talking about this morning, but also shipping and localities and especially Virginia Beach and Norfolk and Portsmouth and so on. I would hope that this Board will examine very closely what the potential impacts are and that we plan and get ahead of the curve and not wait for disaster to descend upon us unnecessarily because we didn't take the time or we didn't have the understanding of what it is that may be coming. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Florin commented it is projected that the impacts from Craney Island will be positive for the region. The Port generates 343,000 jobs statewide under the existing scenario; however, Craney Island will double the capacity of the port from 5 million to 10 million TEUs (Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units). Mr. Florin offered to submit traffic information to the Board in the future if requested.

Submitted Public Comments Chair Ward reported there was one submitted public comment. Consent Items Chair Ward outlined the Consent Items as follows:

• Minutes • HRTPO Financial Statement • FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: DRPT • FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: HRTPO • FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT • FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT • FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT

Attachment 12-A


• FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT • CMAQ Fund Transfer Request: Virginia Beach • CMAQ Fund Transfer Request: Portsmouth • Updated HRTPO Title VI and LEP Plan: Final Report • Travel Time Reliability of Regional Roadways: Final Report • HB2313: Financial Consulting Services • Memoranda of Agreement: Franklin and Southampton • Memorandum of Agreement: VDOT and HRTPO • HB2313 Regional Transportation Funds: Programming Options – HRTPO Resolution • Roadways Serving the Military and Sea-Level/Storm Surge Rise: Final Report

Chair Ward stated the Board was pulling Item 14-P HB2313 Regional Transportation Funds: Programming Options – HRTPO Resolution. Mayor Krasnoff Moved to approve the Consent items with the amendment; seconded by Mr. Florin. The Motion Carried. HRTPO Board Three-Month Tentative Schedule Chair Ward outlined the HRTPO Board three-month tentative schedule, including the cancellation of the August 15, 2013 HRTPO Board Meeting. HRTPO Draft Reports for Public Review Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, reported that staff has added this item to the agenda on a regular basis. He stated the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) became a public body four years ago, and as such, the media has access to draft reports at these meetings; however, every final report will be brought to the HRTPO Board for approval. (Delegate Michael Watson departs) 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.

Attachment 12-A


Adjournment With no further business to come before the Hampton Roads TPO, the meeting adjourned at 11:47 a.m. Molly J. Ward Dwight L. Farmer

Chair Executive Director/Secretary

Attachment 12-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 400,000 - VDOT CMAQ Grant (STATE) 111,300 - - 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 - -

Total Revenue 3,833,402 - -

EXPENSESPERSONNEL 2,498,263 156,400 156,400 CONTRACTUAL 112,552 - - SPECIAL CONTRACTS 42,798 - - OFFICE SERVICES 352,289 2,119 2,119 PASS THROUGH EXPENDITURES 827,500 - INDIRECT COSTS 31,631 31,631

Total Expenses 3,833,402 190,151 190,151

AGENCY BALANCE - (190,151) (190,151)

7/31/2013

STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES

Attachment 12-B

Attachment 12-C

Attachment 12-D

Hampton Roads MPO Urban Projects

UPC NO 55202 SCOPE Reconstruction w/ Added Capacity

SYSTEM Urban JURISDICTION Virginia Beach OVERSIGHT NFO

PROJECT WITCH DUCK ROAD - 6 LANES ADMIN BY Locally

DESCRIPTION FROM: I-264 TO: VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD (0.7000 MI)

PROGRAM NOTE TIP AMD to update PE base on actual oblig & current estimate, moving $43,210 (STP) & $475,270 (AC-Other) from FFY12 to PREV & moving balance of $55,817 to FFY13 and adding an addit'l $560,871 (AC-Other) FFY13; add an addit'l $20,164,218 (AC-Other) FFY13 RW; add $5,000,000 (REVSH) & $12,139,855 (AC-Other) FFY14 CN. (lco 7/29/13)

ROUTE/STREET WITCH DUCK ROAD (U000) TOTAL COST $52,963,968

FUND SOURCE MATCH FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

PE AC Federal - AC $154,172 $0 $616,688 $0 $0

RW AC

Federal - AC $5,111,058 $0 $20,444,231 $0 $0

CN Other $5,000,000 $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0

CN AC

Federal - AC $3,034,964 $0 $0 $12,139,855 $0

MPO Note

Attachment 12-D

Attachment 12-E

102781

Urban OVERSIGHT

ADMIN BY

TOTAL COST

FY12 FY14

CN $0 $0

$0 $0

$0 $0CN TOTAL $80,000 $5,543,935 $0

MPO Note

Federal - STP $80,000 $3,860,913 $0

Other $0 $1,683,022 $0

ROUTE/STREET LASKIN ROAD (0058) $5,623,935

FUND SOURCE MATCH FY13 FY15

PROJECT Utility Bore Under Lynnhaven Inlet VDOT

DESCRIPTION FROM: Gay Drive TO: 0.104 Miles West of Red Robin Road (0.2460 MI)

PROGRAM NOTE TIP Amd to add $3,860,913 (STP) & $1,683,022 (Other-State) FFY13 CN. (lco 8/13/12)

UPC NO SCOPE Utilities

SYSTEM JURISDICTION Virginia Beach

MPO TIP Report 8/23/2013 12:03:40 PM

Hampton Roads MPO

Urban Projects

1

Attachment 12-E

Attachment 12-F

Attachment 2-G

FY13UpdateofHamptonRoadsRegionalPerformanceMeasures

September2013

Attachment 12-H

Hampton Roads Regional Performance Measures

Value, year 2000

Value, year 2001

Value, year 2002

Value, year 2003

Value, year 2004

Value, year 2005

Value, year 2006

Value, year 2007

Value, year 2008

Value, year 2009

Value, year 2010

Value, year 2011

Value, year 2012

Value, year 2013

Desired Trend

A. Transportation System Performance Measures13

goal: maintain value

goal: increase value

goal: decrease value1. congestion reductionAnnual Delay, hours per peak auto commuter n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 44 40 43 43 n.a. n.a.Annual Excess Fuel Consumed, gallons per peak auto commuter n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 17 19 19 n.a. n.a.INRIX Index (extra time during peak period), % n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 12.6 17.5 13.3 10.4 n.a.

2. safetyAnnual Roadway Fatalities, number 132 153 136 129 131 139 141 155 153 124 121 136 99 n.a.Annual Roadway Fatalities, per 100 million VMT25 n.a. n.a. 1.04 1.00 0.92 0.91 0.94 0.99 1.01 0.97 0.89 0.86 n.a.28 n.a.Annual Roadway Injuries, number 17,860 17,563 17,785 18,065 17,815 16,999 16,026 14,494 14,465 14,004 13,449 14,038 15,034 n.a.Annual Roadway Injuries, per million VMT 1.33 1.33 1.29 1.24 1.23 1.16 1.10 0.98 0.97 0.95 0.90 0.96 n.a.28 n.a.Annual Roadway Crashes, number 29,432 29,393 31,442 33,047 33,108 32,629 32,019 30,276 27,599 24,005 23,142 24,115 25,192 n.a.Annual Roadway Crashes, per million VMT 2.20 2.22 2.27 2.27 2.28 2.22 2.19 2.05 1.86 1.63 1.55 1.65 n.a.28 n.a.Annual Transit Fatalities, number n.a. n.a. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 n.a. 0Annual Transit Fatalities, per 100 million PMT n.a. n.a. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 n.a.29 n.a. 0Annual Transit Injuries, number n.a. n.a. 104 47 58 98 40 71 81 109 135 113 73 n.a.Annual Transit Injuries, per 100 million PMT n.a. n.a. 127 54 62 91 37 69 69 102 118 96 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Transit Collisions19, number n.a. n.a. 73 27 27 70 19 25 15 27 40 30 26 n.a.Annual Transit Collisions19, per 100 million PMT n.a. n.a. 89 31 29 65 17 24 13 25 35 26 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Aviation Fatalities, number23 n.a. 0 0 1 0 1 3 3 0 0 1 2 0 n.a. 0Annual Aviation Accidents22, number23 n.a. 5 2 4 4 2 5 10 5 6 8 3 1 n.a.Annual Highway‐Rail Crossing Accidents20, per million population 6.3 8.8 5.7 7.5 10.5 6.1 4.3 4.9 4.2 4.8 2.4 1.2 3.5 n.a.

3. transit usageAnnual Unlinked Passenger Trips (UPT), number n.a. n.a. 1.8.E+07 1.8.E+07 2.0.E+07 2.4.E+07 2.4.E+07 2.7.E+07 2.9.E+07 1.9.E+07 1.9.E+07 1.9.E+07 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Unlinked Passenger Trips (UPT), per capita21 n.a. n.a. 12 12 14 17 16 18 20 13 13 13 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Vehicle Revenue Miles (VRM), number n.a. n.a. 1.3.E+07 1.3.E+07 1.3.E+07 1.3.E+07 1.5.E+07 1.5.E+07 1.6.E+07 1.7.E+07 1.6.E+07 1.6.E+07 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Vehicle Revenue Miles (VRM), per capita21 n.a. n.a. 9 9 9 9 10 10 11 11 11 11 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Passenger Miles Traveled (PMT), number n.a. n.a. 8.2.E+07 8.7.E+07 9.3.E+07 1.1.E+08 1.1.E+08 1.0.E+08 1.2.E+08 1.1.E+08 1.1.E+08 1.2.E+08 n.a.29 n.a.Annual Passenger Miles Traveled (PMT), per capita21 n.a. n.a. 58 61 64 74 75 70 80 72 77 78 n.a.29 n.a.Passengers Boarding or Departing Amtrak Trains (Peninsula) n.a. n.a. 150,575 137,835 128,511 129,832 128,837 138,414 166,839 158,914 163,405 175,494 195,263 n.a.On‐Time Performance, Amtrak ("Richmond / Newport News")5 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 76% 85% n.a.Operating Cost Ratio30, Amtrak ("Washington‐Newport News")5 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.99 0.87 n.a.

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO) 7/2/2013 HRTPO RPMs‐ with values and targets.xlsx

Attachment 12-H

Value, year 2000

Value, year 2001

Value, year 2002

Value, year 2003

Value, year 2004

Value, year 2005

Value, year 2006

Value, year 2007

Value, year 2008

Value, year 2009

Value, year 2010

Value, year 2011

Value, year 2012

Value, year 2013

Desired Trend

4. HOV usagePersons per Hour per HOV Ln During Peak Period, avg of count stations n.a. n.a. 582 583 554 747 572 703 598 637 685 n.a. n.a. n.a.# of Park and Ride Spaces n.a. n.a. n.a. 2,544 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4,423 n.a.# of Occupied Park and Ride Spaces, per 100,000 population n.a. n.a. n.a. 34 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.% of Commuters with Journey‐to‐Work via Carpool10 12.1% n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.4% 8.1% n.a. n.a.

5. job‐to‐housing ratiosRatio of Jobs to Labor Force2

Hampton Roads 1.00 0.99 0.97 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.93 n.a.Chesapeake city 0.85 0.86 0.84 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.87 0.88 0.86 0.86 n.a. n.a.

Gloucester county 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.49 0.49 0.47 0.51 0.51 n.a. n.a.Hampton city 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.92 0.91 0.92 0.90 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.93 0.93 n.a. n.a.

Isle of Wight county 0.85 0.82 0.77 0.78 0.77 0.74 0.66 0.65 0.65 0.63 0.57 0.55 0.57 n.a. n.a.James City county 0.91 0.89 0.87 0.88 0.82 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.87 0.85 0.85 0.80 0.82 n.a. n.a.Newport News city 1.17 1.15 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.18 1.18 1.16 1.16 1.08 1.08 1.18 1.18 n.a. n.a.

Norfolk city 1.63 1.62 1.56 1.55 1.55 1.57 1.55 1.49 1.51 1.51 1.50 1.45 1.44 n.a. n.a.Poquoson city 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.30 0.29 0.29 n.a. n.a.

Portsmouth city 0.97 0.95 0.98 1.01 1.01 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.98 1.02 1.02 1.08 1.09 n.a. n.a.Suffolk city 0.72 0.72 0.68 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.64 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.64 0.69 n.a. n.a.

Virginia Beach city 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.79 0.81 0.82 0.83 0.82 0.80 0.79 0.79 0.76 0.77 n.a. n.a.Williamsburg city 4.28 4.43 4.44 4.24 4.02 3.73 3.67 3.29 3.11 2.98 2.99 2.48 2.52 n.a. n.a.

York county 0.59 0.58 0.58 0.60 0.64 0.66 0.69 0.74 0.72 0.73 0.72 0.68 0.66 n.a. n.a.Jobs ‐ Labor Force2 Regional Linear Dissimilarity Index, 0.0 to 1.03 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 n.a.% of Workers Working in Locality (City/County) in Which They Live 49.0% n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 50.4% 48.8% 49.7% 48.3% 48.6% 47.9% 46.6% n.a. n.a.Mean Travel Time to Work, minutes 24.1 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 23.4 23.5 23.3 23.6 23.2 23.7 23.3 n.a. n.a.

6. job and housing access to transit% of Employment in TAZs1 Served by Transit18 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 84% 84% n.a.% of Households in TAZs1 Served by Transit18 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 73% 73% n.a.

7. job and housing access to pedestrian facilities% of Housing Units9 in TAZs17 with 1%+ Walk‐To‐Work Mode Share 49% n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

8. air qualityAnnual # of Days when Ozone Levels were Above 8‐Hour Standard 23 14 31 10 4 12 10 9 7 0 6 7 3 n.a. 0NOx7 (from motor vehicles), tons per day (near future)15 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 43.1 n.a. n.a. 31.9NOx7 (from motor vehicles), grams per capita per day (near future)15 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 23.2 n.a. n.a.VOC7 (from motor vehicles), tons per day (near future)15 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 35.1 n.a. n.a. 27.6VOC7 (from motor vehicles), grams per capita per day (near future)15 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 18.9 n.a. n.a.CO2 (greenhouse gas, from motor veh's), tons per day (near future)15 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 22,464 n.a. n.a.CO2 (greenhouse gas, from motor veh's), grams/capita/day (near future) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 12,076 n.a. n.a.


Attachment 12-H

Value, year 2000

Value, year 2001

Value, year 2002

Value, year 2003

Value, year 2004

Value, year 2005

Value, year 2006

Value, year 2007

Value, year 2008

Value, year 2009

Value, year 2010

Value, year 2011

Value, year 2012

Value, year 2013

Desired Trend

9. movement of freightBarge, Rail, and Truck Shares (%) of General Cargo Handled by Port of Virginia, by weight

Barge n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8% 10% 4% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% n.a.Rail n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 25% 24% 31% 31% 30% 28% 30% 32% n.a.

Truck n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 67% 66% 65% 64% 66% 68% 66% 64% n.a.Rail Mode Share (%), freight with Hampton Roads origins, by value and tonnage

by tonnage26 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 29% n.a. n.a. 35% n.a. n.a. n.a.by value26 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3% n.a. n.a. 3% n.a. n.a. n.a.

Rail Mode Share (%), freight with Hampton Roads destinations, by value and tonnageby tonnage26 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 40% n.a. n.a. 44% n.a. n.a. n.a.

by value26 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4% n.a. n.a. 5% n.a. n.a. n.a.

10. per capita vehicle miles traveledDaily Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita n.a. n.a. 23 25 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 n.a. n.a.% of Commuters with Journey‐to‐Work by Alternate Modes8 21.1% n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 17.3% 21.4% 20.1% 20.0% 17.5% 19.0% 18.8% n.a. n.a.

11. maintenance% of Pavement in Non‐Deficient Condition, VDOT‐maintained roads27 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 69.5% 69.2% 65.6% n.a. 74.6% n.a.% of Bridges Not Structurally Deficient n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 95.6% n.a. 94.7% 94.4% 93.9% 93.7% n.a.Total Transit Revenue Service Interruptions (mechanical) per million PMT n.a. n.a. 63 n.a. 82 62 59 56 40 34 45 38 n.a. n.a.

B. Financial System Performance Measures

Actual Obligations / Planned Obligations11 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.28 n.a. n.a.Average Age of Federal Dollars Spent on TIP Projects14 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.Mid‐Fiscal‐Year Total of Unspent Obligations for TIP Projects12 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.% of Total District Allocations in SYIP (i.e. omitting Statewide allocations), by District, current year4

Bristol n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8% 7% 10% 8% 8% 8% 10% 10% 11% n.a.Culpeper n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3% 2% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 3% 8% n.a.

Fredericksburg n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4% 4% 5% 5% 3% 4% 3% 6% 5% n.a.Hampton Roads n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 19% 26% 25% 18% 18% 13% 16% 21% 29%

Lynchburg n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% n.a.Northern VA n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 34% 23% 29% 35% 39% 46% 51% 37% 25% n.a.

Richmond n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 15% 20% 13% 12% 13% 11% 8% 8% 8% n.a.Salem n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7% 8% 5% 8% 7% 7% 3% 7% 8% n.a.

Staunton n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5% 4% 5% 7% 5% 6% 5% 6% 4% n.a.total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


Attachment 12-H

Footnotes1 Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) data from regional 4‐step model2 Data: ‐employment by job location (Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, QCEW) as "jobs" measure

‐employment by home location (Local Area Unemployment Statistics, LAUS) as "labor force" measure3 Linear Dissimilarity Index: Calculated via equation 2 in "Feasibility of Using Jobs/Housing Balance in Virginia Statewide Planning",

VTRC, Aug 2010, pg. 26, rendering a value between 0 (perfectly balanced) and 1 (perfectly unbalanced) for the region.See above footnote for source of data.

4 First fiscal year shown in SYIP, e.g. the "2013" number shown herein comes from the FY13 column of the FY13‐18 SYIP.5 New performance measure for FY13 evaluation (i.e. not included in FY12 evaluation).6 FTA's National Transit Database7 These two pollutants (NOx and VOC)‐‐precursors of ground‐level ozone‐‐are measured in several Va. MPOs for AQ conformity.

Note: "2011" numbers are from VDOT's MOBILE 6.2 model; subsequent numbers will be calculated using MOVES model, making comparison to earlier numbers difficult.8 Sum of all modes other than Drove Alone (i.e. including bike, ped, transit, work‐at‐home, carpool, etc.).9 Given the necessary proximity of jobs to houses of persons who walk to work, this measure is intended to cover both job and housing access to pedestrian facilities.10 The goal of HOV lanes‐‐carpooling‐‐is measured herein.11 Actual obligations ("Obligated") / planned obligations ("TIP"); source: Annual Obligation Report (AOR).12 "Total" = "Unspent Obligations" for each project, summed over all projects in TIP.

Due to large amount of funds typically obligated near end of fiscal years, "Total" calculated via financial "snapshot" taken near middle of subject fiscal year."Unspent Obligations" for a project = (total obligations for any year up to and including FY of snapshot) ‐ (total spent in any year up to snapshot date).Because the "total obligations" will exclude matching funds, the "total spent" should exclude matching funds.

13 The source of the first ten category names is Section 33.1‐23.03 Code of Va. [amended via Chapter 670],except that "movement of freight" is used herein instead of original "movement of freight by rail"; category 11 and financial RPMs were added by HRTPO.

14 This calculation covers all federal transportation dollars spent during the subject fiscal year."Average Age" is a weighted average of the ages of each payment made during the subject fiscal year.The age of a specific payment is calculated by comparing the date of the payment to the date of the appropriate obligation for that payment.To calculate "Average Age", weight the age of each payment by the amount of that payment.If the actual dates are not available, monthly or FY data may be used, e.g. the age of a payment made in FY11 for an obligation made in FY09 is 2.0 years.

15 For air quality conformity, VDOT estimates emissions for various future years including one near future year, e.g. "2011" estimated in 2010.Note that VDOT estimates NOx and VOC emissions for the ozone season, and CO2 emissions as annual averages.

16 In addition to the pollutants required for AQ conformity, VDOT calculates CO2 when it conducts analyses for conformity.17 Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) are the smallest Census areas for which journey‐to‐work data is reported for Hampton Roads.18 Due to the relatively large size of a typical TAZ, consider only those TAZs which are bordered or penetrated by transit as being served by transit.19 FTA's "National Transit Database" uses the term "collisions" ("Collision_Total"), instead of "crashes".20 FRA uses the term "accidents".21 Using July estimates from Weldon Cooper for nine localities (Ches., Norf., Ports., Suf., VaB., Hamp., JCC, NN, Wlmbg.).

Note: The Urbanized Area (UZA) population (which is typically used by FTA) could not be found for inter‐census years.For year 2000, the HR9 Weldon Cooper population (1,413,272) is similar to the Urbanized Area (UZA) population (1,394,439).

22 NTSB and FAA use the term "accidents".23 No rate (e.g. "per PMT") is included here because the number of person‐miles‐of‐travel (PMT) in the airspace above Hampton Roads is not known.24 "NHTSA": National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.25 Rate shown is for a 3‐year period ending in year shown.26 Including domestic portion of international freight movement.27 VDOT‐maintained roadways only.28 2012 VMT was not available as of June 2013.29 The "2012" transit usage numbers in the National Transit Database being the same as the "2011" numbers in that database, true 2012 numbers were not available.30 OCR = "Total Costs excl. OPEB's, Capital Charge and Other Costs" / "Total Revenue". (OPEB: other post‐employment benefits)


Attachment 12-H


ITEM #13: HRTPO BOARD THREE-MONTH TENTATIVE SCHEDULE October 2013 – Annual Meeting Thursday, October 17, 2013

• 2013-2014 Officer Elections • HRTPO 2014 Legislative Agenda • FY 2013 Audited Financial Statement • Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study 2013 Update: Part I – Crash Trends and Locations • Hampton Roads 2040 Socioeconomic Forecast & TAZ Data Allocation • FY 2013 Public Involvement and Title VI Activities • Endorsement of Transportation Alternatives Program Project Proposals • FY 2015 Unified Planning Work Program: Planning Priorities • Hampton Roads Casino Study • Hampton Roads Transportation Fund Candidate Projects

November 2013 Thursday, November 21, 2013

• Allocation of FY 2020 CMAQ and RSTP Funds • Transit Extension Studies Update: Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) • 2040 LRTP Vision Statement and Goals • Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF) Package of Projects

December 2013 Canceled


ITEM #14: HRTPO DRAFT REPORTS UNDER REVIEW A. Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study 2013 Update: Part I – Crash Trends and

Locations The Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study, a comprehensive analysis of highway safety throughout the region, was initiated in 2001. This study included sections examining General Crash Data and Trends, Interstate and Intersection Crash Findings, and Crash Analysis and Countermeasures. This report is the first full update to the original Regional Safety Study. Topics included in the 2013 Update include:

• Regional Safety Trends – Trends in traffic crashes in Hampton Roads are included, as is information related to injuries and fatalities resulting from traffic crashes. Crash data for each Hampton Roads jurisdiction is highlighted, and comparisons between Hampton Roads and other metropolitan areas in Virginia are also included.

• Crash Characteristics – This section looks at the characteristics of crashes and fatalities in Hampton Roads. Examples include crash types, driver actions, alcohol usage, speeding, and safety belt usage.

• Crash Locations – This section examines the locations of crashes, injuries, and fatalities on the Hampton Roads roadway system. Details are provided regarding how the crash data was collected and analyzed. The number of crashes by year for each location is shown, as is the rate based on the severity of crashes and the exposure to crashes.

• Next Steps – This section highlights the information that will be included in Part II of the Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study – 2013 Update.

The draft version of the Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study 2013 Update: Part I – Crash Trends and Locations report was made available for public review and comment from September 4, 2013 through September 18, 2013. It is anticipated that the final report will be on the October 2013 HRTPO Board agenda for approval. Enclosure 14-A: Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study 2013 Update: Part I – Crash

Trends and Locations B. 2040 LRTP TAZ Data Allocation

In order to run the regional travel demand model during the development of the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), it is necessary to properly allocate the 2040 socioeconomic forecast by Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ). In January 2013, each locality was asked to allocate the 2040 forecast for Households and Employment (Total, Retail, Industrial, Office, and Other Non-Retail Employment) to their respective TAZs. Using this data, HRTPO staff calculated the remaining socioeconomic TAZ totals for Population, Passenger Vehicles, and Workers.


The draft report containing this data is available for download from the HRTPO website at: www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/HR_2040_SocioeconomicForecast_TAZAllocation.pdf The draft report was made available for public review from September 4, 2013 through September 18, 2013. It is anticipated that the final report will be on the October 2013 HRTPO Board agenda for approval.

C. 2040 LRTP Vision Statement and Goals

The visioning process is an important step in developing a Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) as it provides an opportunity to gain input from locality and other stakeholder technical staffs, as well as the general public, regarding the future transportation system for Hampton Roads. The Vision and Goals for the 2040 LRTP were generated by reviewing survey responses submitted by the public, comprehensive plans from localities, MAP-21 planning factors, and VTrans 2035 guidelines. The LRTP Subcommittee has also reviewed the draft Vision and Goals and provided valuable feedback. Taking into account all the input described above, the HRTPO staff has prepared a draft 2040 LRTP Vision Statement and Goals (attached) for public review. The attached document was made available for public review from August 28, 2013 through September 26, 2013. It is anticipated that this item will be on the November 2013 HRTPO Board agenda for approval. Attachment 14-C

http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/HR_2040_SocioeconomicForecast_TAZAllocation.pdf

2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan Draft Vision Statement

With an engaged public, the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan sets forth a vision to develop a well-balanced transportation system that

promotes good quality of life while enhancing the unique character of Hampton Roads.

Attachment 14-C

2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan Draft Goals

Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.

Increase the safety of the transportation system for all users, including minimizing conflicts between motorized and non-motorized modes.

Ensure the security of the region's transportation infrastructure and its users.

Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation and improve the quality of life.

Consider the impact of transportation investments on the environment.

Promote compatibility between transportation improvements and planned land use and economic development patterns.

Increase accessibility and mobility of people and goods.

Provide a variety of transportation options that accommodates all users.

Increase the coordination of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and goods.

Promote an efficient and reliable regional transportation system.

Preserve and maintain the existing transportation system.

Engage a diverse public in the development of the region’s transportation system.

Continue to work towards finding dedicated and sustainable revenue sources for transportation to close the funding gap.

Attachment 14-C


ITEM #15: CORRESPONDENCE OF INTEREST A. REVISED HRTF REVENUE ESTIMATES

The attached letter, dated August 9, 2013, from Mr. John Lawson, VDOT Chief Financial Officer, to Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, provides revised revenue estimates for the Hampton Roads regional component of HB2313 through FY 2019. Attachment 15-A

B. HRT THANK YOU LETTER

The attached letter, dated August 9, 2013, from Mr. William Harrell, President and CEO of HRT, to Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, thanks Mr. Farmer for his participation in the development of a strategic viewbook. Attachment 15-B

C. HRTPO STAFF COMMENTS ON DRAFT 2013 UPDATE TO THE VIRGINIA STATEWIDE

RAIL PLAN

The attached letter, dated August 27, 2013, from Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, to the Department of Rail & Public Transportation, transmits HRTPO staff comments on the Draft 2013 Update to the Virginia Statewide Rail Plan. Attachment 15-C

D. VIRGINIA BEACH COMMENTS TO CTB MEMBERS REGARDING URBAN ROAD MAINTENANCE The attached letter, dated September 3, 2013, from Mayor William Sessoms of Virginia Beach, to the Commonwealth Transportation Board, Hampton Roads Members, regarding the use of state dollars to maintain urban roads. Attachment 15-D

E. VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS LETTER

TO VDOT The attached letter, dated September 6, 2013, from Mr. Gary Christie, VAMPO Chair, to the VDOT Commissioner of Highways Gregory Whirley, offering its assistance to improve communications for project programming. Attachment 15-E


F. HRTPO STAFF COMMENTS ON THE I-64 HIGH RISE BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT The attached letter, dated September 9, 2013, from Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, to the Virginia Department of Transportation, transmits HRTPO staff comments on the I-64/High Rise Bridge Widening in Chesapeake. Attachment 15-F

Attachment 15-A

Attachment 15-B

Attachment 15-C

Attachment 15-D

Attachment 15-E

Attachment 15-F


ITEM #16: MINUTES OF THE HRTPO BOARD COMMITTEES A. CITIZEN TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE: SUMMARY MINUTES

The summary minutes of the July 11, 2013 meeting of the HRTPO Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) are attached. Attachment 16-A

B. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE: SUMMARY MINUTES

The summary minutes of the September 4, 2013 meeting of the HRTPO Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) are attached.

Attachment 16-B

HRTPO CTAC Summary Minutes – July 11, 2013 - Page 1

Summary Minutes of the HRTPO Citizen Transportation

Advisory Committee (CTAC) Meeting July 11, 2013

The HRTPO Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) Meeting was called to order at 12:06 p.m. in the Regional Building Board Room, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia, with the following in attendance: HRTPO CTAC Members in Attendance: Shepelle Watkins-White, Chair (CH) John Kish (CH) Bernie Whitlock (CH) Philip Olekszyk (GL) Teresa Schmidt (HA) Michael Jones (IW) Don Cherry (JC) Sharyn Fox (NN) HRTPO CTAC Members Absent: Yukari Hughes (NN) William Christopher (NO) Randy Lougee (NO) James Openshaw (NO) Richard Green (SU)

Carlton Hardy (NN) Robbyn Gayer (NO) Theresa Danaher (PO) Kirsten Tynch (PO) Barry Dunn (PQ) Greg Edwards (VB) Delceno Miles (VB) Allan Parrott (VB) Jay Ford (VB) Casey Funk (VB) John Malbon (VB) Dewey Hurley (WM) Henry Lewis (YK)

HRTPO Staff: Brian Chenault Dwight Farmer Kendall Miller

Camelia Ravanbakht Joe Turner Chris Wichman

Others Recorded Attending: Michael Todd (DRPT); Ronald Broughton (HRT TRAC); Sarah Steele (Olde Town Civic League) Public Comment Period There were no public comments. Submitted Public Comments There were no submitted public comments.

Attachment 16-A


Approval of Agenda Chair Watkins-White asked for any additions or deletions to the agenda. Hearing none, Ms. Delceno Miles Moved to approve the agenda as written; seconded by Ms. Sharyn Fox. The Motion Carried. Summary Minutes of March 13, 2013 CTAC Meeting Chair Watkins-White asked for any additions or corrections to the March 13, 2013 minutes. Hearing none, Ms. Kirsten Tynch Moved to approve the minutes as written; seconded by Ms. Miles. The Motion Carried. CTAC Membership Update Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, welcomed CTAC’s four newest members, Barry Dunn, Carlton Hardy, John Kish, and Allan Parrott, and stated they received official HRTPO Board approval at the June 20, 2013 HRTPO Board meeting. She indicated Ms. Carolyn McPherson of Virginia Beach tendered her resignation and HRTPO staff is working to fill the vacancy. Chair Watkins-White asked whether a thank you letter should be sent to Ms. McPherson. Dr. Ravanbakht replied that a letter was mailed to Ms. McPherson. Election of CTAC Vice-Chair Chair Watkins-White stated the Vice-Chair has the responsibility of chairing CTAC meetings and attending HRTPO Board monthly meetings in the absence of the CTAC Chair. Mr. Carlton Hardy recommended Ms. Theresa Danaher for the Vice-Chair position. Ms. Danaher expressed her appreciation for the nomination; however, she declined the offer. Ms. Fox Moved to nominate Ms. Miles for the CTAC Vice-Chair position; seconded by Ms. Tynch. The Motion Carried. Regional Transportation Funding Mr. Farmer outlined the statewide revenues generated from HB2313, as follows

• Elimination of the 17.5 cents per gallon motor fuels tax • Implementation of a 3.5% tax on the wholesale price of gasoline • Implementation of a 6% tax on the wholesale price of diesel • $64 registration fee for alternative fuel vehicles • Increase of the motor vehicles sales tax from 3% to 4.15% • Increase of the general sales tax from 5.0% to 5.3% • Marketplace Equity Act (MEA) transportation share • Increase of the transportation share of existing sales & use tax from 0.5% to 0.675%

Attachment 16-A


Mr. Farmer stated these revenues will be guided by the CTB and might reach $842 million by 2018. Over the next twenty years, the region’s amount from the statewide revenues should be roughly $3 billion. In addition to the statewide funds, two revenue streams are specifically dedicated to Hampton Roads:

• Increase of the regional sales tax by 0.7% • Implementation of a 2.1% regional tax on the wholesale price of gasoline

The HRTPO will have full purview and discretion on how and when to spend these dollars. Beginning in 2014, funding will be approximately $175 million, growing to $200 million in 2015, and then by $7 or $8 million a year through 2018. Over the next twenty years, an estimated $5 or $6 billion should be available from this stream for the HRTPO Board to move projects forward in the next 20 years. Mr. Farmer summarized strategies on how to maximize the HB2313 regional component to fund projects including:

• Bond Funded – Mega Projects • Cash Match Funded – Interstate and Interchange Projects • Cash Funded – Committed and Local Projects

He indicated that at some point, the HRTPO Board will need to provide HRTPO staff, VDOT, CTB members, and the General Assembly guidance on the percentage of the revenue stream to utilize for bonding. The Mega Interstate projects eligible for bonding are:

• Third Crossing/Patriots Crossing: $3 billion project • Third Crossing/Craney Island Connector: $500 million project • Third Crossing/I-664 Widening (Hampton to Chesapeake): $2.5 billion project • I-64 Southside Widening (including the High Rise Bridge): $1.7 billion project

Projects that could be considered for Cash Matching are:

• I-64 Peninsula Widening: $350 million project with a $70 million match • Fort Eustis Boulevard Interchange: $150 million project with a $30 million match • I-64/I-264 Interchange: $350 million project with a $70 million match • Bowers Hill Interchange: $350 million project with a $70 million match

Regarding cash funded projects, Mr. Farmer stated it is likely the CTB and VDOT will recommend the HRTPO look to cash fund committed projects and those in the SYIP pipeline. Over the next twenty year period, the HRTPO may want to allocate a significant amount of cash into what the City Managers have suggested as a package of local projects funded with the regional revenue stream from HB2313. There is currently a $7.5 billion balance to complete the committed projects in the FY 2013-2018 SYIP.

Attachment 16-A


Mr. Farmer reported HRTPO staff conducted an analysis on bonding capacity in order to potentially leverage HB2313 funds and used the Patriots Crossing, a $3.5 billion project, for illustrative purposes. Mr. Farmer stated that different toll amounts will generate various revenues and explained there is a threshold at which a project could be tolled because volumes will drop off and negatively impact revenues. The following three scenarios were utilized in the analysis:

A. Use $1 billion regional bond proceeds with $1, $2, and $3 toll rates. Tolls did not cover the debt service.

B. Use $750 million regional bond proceeds and $750 million State contribution with $1, $2, and $3 toll rates. The $3 toll rate covered the debt service.

C. Use $700 million regional bond proceeds, $700 million (20%) State contribution, and $700 million (20%) Federal contribution with $1, $2, and $3 toll rates. The $2 toll rate covered the debt service.

Mr. Farmer noted that HRTPO staff studied congestion impacts by calculating volume/capacity by applying different toll rates to the harbor crossings with expanded capacity over the next 20 years. Results indicated that a $2 toll rate almost solves the capacity issue at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT) and eliminates congestion from the Monitor Merrimac Memorial Bridge Tunnel (MMMBT). Mr. Carlton expressed concern that hybrid vehicles were targeted in the legislation. Mr. Farmer replied that he was not the correct person to answer that question; however, it was his assumption that the legislation only applied to electric vehicles. Mr. Don Cherry indicated he was billed the new fee for his hybrid vehicle and noted that Senator John Miller is seeking to repeal this component of HB2313. Mr. Farmer stated it was his understanding that language referring to hybrid vehicles was removed from the bill via a compromise within the General Assembly. He noted the General Assembly may address the issue in a subsequent session. Mr. Robbyn Gayer asked for clarification regarding the phasing process of the motor vehicle sales tax. Mr. Farmer replied he was unsure; however, he commented that it might be another compromise within the legislation. He indicated that Virginia’s 4.15% motor vehicle sales tax is still one of the lowest along the East Coast. Chair Watkins-White inquired as to how the cash funded option relates to the HRTPO Board-approved prioritization tool. Mr. Farmer replied any cash funded project would be subject to the prioritization process established by the Board. Ms. Miles asked whether Northern Virginia was also creating a process in which to utilize its regional HB2313 funds. Mr. Farmer replied that the language in HB2313 is considerably different in its reference to Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia. Hampton Roads is the only region in the Commonwealth with a formalized, objective prioritization process.

Attachment 16-A


HB2313 states that Northern Virginia will have 70% of its funds allotted to the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) with the remaining 30% divided among its localities. Mr. Hardy asked for clarification regarding the toll rate figures contained in the footnotes of the Bonding Capacity presentation. Mr. Farmer replied the toll rates would be applied individually to each facility. Ms. Fox inquired as to whether the James River Bridge would be tolled under the scenarios offered in the presentation. Mr. Farmer replied the James River Bridge would remain a free option. Mr. Bernie Whitlock asked whether the staff analysis assumed that Route 460 was completed with an associated toll. Mr. Farmer replied affirmatively. Mr. Whitlock inquired as to whether any funds from the HB2313 regional component were utilized for Route 460. Mr. Farmer replied the Governor allocated $900 million from the State’s discretionary funds to build Route 460. The toll will cover approximately $300 million of the $900 million. The remaining $600 million is classified as a gift from the Governor. Mr. Hardy asked whether any of the facilities would have a reduced commuter toll. Mr. Farmer replied that toll strategy had not yet been discussed and flat fee tolls were used for the simulation. Chair Watkins-White asked if the congestion relief produced by the $3.00 toll was a result of driver behavioral change. Mr. Farmer replied CTAC members will view a video from Stockholm, Sweden which explains that if volume is reduced by only 10%, severe congestion will be eliminated. Ms. Danaher commented that people are moving out of the region because of tolls. Mr. Farmer replied that Hampton Roads is not the only area with tolls, and indicated that in some cases, tolling can drastically change travel behavior and demand. Congestion pricing is not implemented to collect revenue; rather, it is employed to change behavior, and revenue that is collected, can be used towards mass transit, rail, or other transportation modes. Mr. Gayer inquired as to how inflation might affect the tolls. Mr. Farmer replied there would be the threat of a higher toll rate if the value of the dollar decreased. Ms. Fox inquired as to whether lost revenue from the removal of the HRBT and Route 44 (now I-264) tolls has had an impact on current congestion issues. Mr. Farmer replied today’s scenario would be completely different if those tolls were still in place. He noted that each year a mega project is delayed, the project increases by $100 million.

Attachment 16-A


Ms. Schmidt stated there is a different cost associated for drivers in traffic congestion. Mr. Farmer agreed, and indicated that for every hour a citizen is idling in traffic, it burns a gallon and a half of fuel. Chair Watkins-White stated Mr. Farmer’s presentation was delivered to the HRTPO Board at the June meeting and staff has drafted CTAC Resolution 2013-01 for approval consideration as a method of providing feedback to the HRTPO Board. She indicated the Board will be discussing the HB2313 programming options at the July HRTPO Board meeting. Ms. Fox asked whether the cash match funded option provided the biggest bang for the buck. Mr. Farmer replied it lures discretionary interstate monies that VDOT might place elsewhere in the State. Ms. Fox asked for clarification with regards to whether CTAC had to select one programming option over another. Mr. Farmer stated CTAC did not have to choose a particular option and that by approving the resolution, CTAC is only agreeing to the concept of the three programming options. The details of the options would still need to be discussed by the HRTPO Board. Mr. Phil Olekszyk suggested incorporating a tolling scenario into the bonding programming option as mega projects are much more effective when a toll is utilized. Mr. Farmer replied that if all HB2313 funds were used on a single mega project, a toll would still be necessary to close the funding gap. Ms. Miles Moved to approve CTAC Resolution 2013-01; seconded by Ms. Fox. Ms. Danaher expressed concern with the lack of any mass transit language in the resolution. Mr. Farmer replied the resolution strictly pertains to the use of the HB2313 regional component funds which only includes highways, bridges, and tunnels. Mr. Olekszyk reiterated his suggestion to modify the bond funding option to include the possible benefits of tolls on mega projects. Chair Watkins-White replied that for the purpose of this resolution, CTAC’s discussion is to suggest recommendations on how the HB2313 funds should be allocated. The determination of how to more beneficially allocate the funds will be discussed at a later date. Mr. Farmer stated that if the HRTPO Board members approve the bonding option, toll rates will still need to be determined. Regarding the Motion on the floor, The Motion Carried.

Attachment 16-A


June 20, 2013 HRTPO Board Meeting: Resolutions Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, reported the HRTPO Board approved two resolutions at its June 20, 2013 meeting. The first resolution, I-64 Peninsula Widening: HRTPO Preferred Alternative, endorses the VDOT 6-Lane Option Segments 1 and 2 (Jefferson Avenue/Exist 255 to Humelsine Parkway/Exit 242) for immediate and intermediate congestion relief on I-64 Peninsula on the condition that this preference would not preclude the I-64 Peninsula 8-Lane expansion or future associated funding. The second resolution, Hampton Roads Crossing: HRTPO Preferred Alternative, reaffirms the HRMPO action of July 1997 to endorse the construction of the Third Crossing in phases, as well as endorse the continued maintenance of the existing Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT) and the study of the feasibility of congestion pricing on the HRBT and Monitor Merrimac Memorial Bridge Tunnel (MMMBT). Congestion Pricing Mr. Dwight Farmer, HRTPO Executive Director, reported that at the HRTPO Retreat in May 2013, the Board was briefed on congestion pricing to reduce peak hour congestion by impacting driver behavior and travel decisions. Specifically, the discussion involved the potential capability of demand management as an interim solution tool to ease severe congestion at the I-64 HRBT and I-664 MMMBT during peak rush hours. The educational video from “TED Talks” documenting Stockholm, Sweden’s success with congestion pricing, presented to the HRTPO Board at its Retreat, was viewed by the CTAC members. Ms. Danaher asked for the number of people in Stockholm at the time of the congestion pricing study since the study only took into account the number of vehicles on the roadways. Mr. Farmer replied he was unsure; however, he noted the toll imposed was a 24-hour a day charge and Stockholm has roughly the same population as Hampton Roads with similar congestion problems. He stated the Stockholm experiment will be implemented in Hampton Roads in February 2014 if the Virginia Supreme Court overrules Judge James Cales’ decision regarding the Downtown/Midtown Tunnel tolls. Ms. Schmidt inquired as to the length of time congestion pricing would be utilized if implemented in Hampton Roads. Mr. Farmer replied congestion pricing would be in place until a mega project could be delivered. Mr. Carlton asked for clarification regarding the peak hours of congestion pricing. Mr. Farmer replied peak hours would involve 4-6 hours a day. Future CTAC Meeting Agenda Items Chair Watkins-White highlighted the agenda items for the next CTAC meeting.

Attachment 16-A


For Your Information Chair Watkins-White noted the items in the For Your Information section of the agenda packet. Mr. Farmer stated that both the CTAC and HRTPO Board meetings could be found on YouTube. Ms. Kendall Miller, HRTPO Public Involvement & Title VI Administrator, indicated that after the HRTPO Board meetings, CTAC members would receive an email from her with the link to the meeting, highlighting agenda items of interest. Old/New Business There was no Old/New Business. Adjournment

With no further business to come before the Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee, the meeting adjourned at 1:44 p.m.

Attachment 16-A

Summary TTAC Minutes – September 4, 2013 – Page 1

Summary Minutes of the HRTPO Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) Meeting

September 4, 2013 The HRTPO Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) Meeting was called to order at 9:33 a.m. in the Regional Boardroom, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia, with the following in attendance:

TTAC Voting Members in Attendance: Michael King (Chair, NN) Robert Gey (Vice Chair, VB) Steve Froncillo (Alternate, CH) Earl Sorey (CH) Garrey Curry (GL) Keith Cannady (HA) John Yorks (HA) Paul Holt (JC) Jamie Oliver (IW) Tammy Rosario (JC) Jackie Kassel (NN)

Tom Slaughter (NN) Robert Brown (NO) Dale Castellow (NO) Jeff Raliski (NO) Susan Wilson (PO) James Wright (PO) Kevin Wyne (PQ) Sherry Earley (SU) Robert Lewis (SU) Jason Souders (Alternate, SU)

Phil Pullen (VB) Mark Shea (VB) Reed Nester (WM) Tim Cross (YK) Emily Stock (DRPT) Keisha Branch (HRT) Stephen Rowan (VDOT) Eric Stringfield (VDOT) Kevin Abt (VPA) Kevan Danker (WATA)

TTAC Voting Members Absent: Gary Walton (CH) Anne Ducey-Ortiz (GL) Emily Gibson (GL) Lynn Allsbrook (HA) Michael Stallings (IW)

Peter Stephenson (IW) Allen J. Murphy, Jr. (JC) Ellen Roberts (PQ) Debbie Vest (PQ) Scott Mills (SU)

Daniel Clayton (WM) Steve Martin (WM) J. Mark Carter (YK) Al Maddalena (YK) Jim Ponticello (VDOT)

TTAC Nonvoting Members Absent: Ivan Rucker (FHWA) Tony Cho (FTA)

Bob Baldwin (NAVY) Clifford Burnette (VDOA)

HRTPO Staff: Sam Belfield Rob Case Brian Chenault Dwight Farmer Kathlene Grauberger

Theresa Jones Mike Kimbrel Kendall Miller Keith Nichols

Joe Paulus Camelia Ravanbakht Dale Stith Chris Wichman

Others Recorded Attending: Bob Matthias, (VB); Karen McPherson (Kimley-Horn); David Forster (Virginian-Pilot); Julie Timm (HRT); Frank Azzalina (Hampton Roads Transportation, Inc.); Angela Biney, Shelley Bogue, Mitzi Crystal, Tony Gibson, Sonya Hallums-Ponton, Nathan Milaszewski, Bryant Porter, Angela Rico, Chris Voigt, Keisha Wilkins (VDOT); Rick Case, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC Staff)

Attachment 16-B


Public Comment Period There was no public comment. Submitted Public Comments There were no submitted public comments in the agenda packet. Approval of Agenda Chair Michael King asked for additions or deletions to the TTAC Agenda. Hearing none, Mr. Robert Gey Moved to approve the agenda as written; seconded by Mr. John Yorks. The Motion Carried. Summary Minutes Chair King indicated the Amended Summary Minutes of June 5, 2013 and the Summary Minutes of July 3, 2013 were included in the September TTAC Agenda. He asked for corrections or amendments to the minutes. Hearing none, Mr. Tim Cross Moved to approve both sets of minutes; seconded by Ms. Tammy Rosario. The Motion Carried. FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT Mr. Steve Rowan reported the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has requested to amend the Hampton Roads FY 2012 – 2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to add a new project as described below: o UPC 100856 – Oakland Industrial Park Sidewalk, Phase 2. This project involves

constructing sidewalks on: Harwood Drive, from its eastern intersection with Enterprise Drive to its western intersection with Enterprise Drive; and on Picketts Line, from Enterprise Drive to Warwick Boulevard.

o Add project to TIP

o Total Cost Estimate: $936,485

Preliminary Engineering (PE) = $90,000 Right of Way (RW) = $100,000 Construction (CN) = $746,485

o Add FY 2013 PE obligation of $90,000 CMAQ (including state match). The TIP amendment has been made available for public review and comment. The public review period began on August 28, 2013 and runs through September 11, 2013. Ms. Jackie Kassel Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the TIP amendment; seconded by Mr. Eric Stringfield. The Motion Carried.

Attachment 16-B


FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT Mr. Steve Rowan reported VDOT has requested to amend the Hampton Roads FY 2012 – 2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to revise one project as described below: o UPC 55202 – Widen Witchduck Road to 6 lanes from I-264 to Virginia Beach Boulevard

in Virginia Beach.

o Total Cost Estimate: $52,963,968

o Revise the obligation information as follows:

Preliminary Engineering (PE) – update to match actual obligations; move $43,210 STP and $475,270 Advance Construction (AC) from FFY12 to Previous Obligations; move $55,817 AC from FFY12 to FFY13 and add $560,871 AC to FFY13

Right of Way (RW) – Add $20,164,218 AC in FFY13 Construction (CN) – Add $5,000,000 Revenue Sharing and $12,139,855 AC

in FFY14 The TIP amendment has been made available for public review and comment. The public review period began on August 28, 2013 and runs through September 11, 2013. Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht asked whether the revised cost estimate is higher than the previous estimate. Mr. Phil Pullen replied affirmatively. Mr. Pullen Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the TIP amendment; seconded by Mr. Earl Sorey. The Motion Carried. FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT Mr. Steve Rowan reported VDOT has requested to amend the Hampton Roads FY 2012 – 2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to revise one project as described below: o UPC 102781 – Utility Bore Under Lynnhaven Inlet in Virginia Beach.



Construction (CN) – Add $3,860,913 STP and $80,000 associated match in FFY13. Add $1,683,022 Other State Funding in FFY13

The TIP amendment has been made available for public review and comment. The public review period began on August 28, 2013 and runs through September 11, 2013. Mr. Mark Shea Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the TIP amendment; seconded by Mr. Gey. The Motion Carried.

Attachment 16-B


FY 2012-2015 TIP Amendment: VDOT Mr. Steve Rowan reported VDOT has requested to amend the Hampton Roads FY 2012 – 2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to add one project as described below: o UPC 16103 – Oyster Point Bikeway/Sidewalk Phase IV. This project is to construct a

bikeway/sidewalk along Oyster Point Road from Jefferson Avenue to Village Green Parkway in Newport News.

o Total Cost Estimate: $450,000


Preliminary Engineering (PE) – Add $122,400 CMAQ and associated $30,600 state match to FFY13

Construction (CN) – Add $237,600 CMAQ and associated $59,400 state match in FFY13

The TIP amendment has been made available for public review and comment. The public review period began on August 28, 2013 and runs through September 11, 2013. Ms. Kassel Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the TIP amendment; seconded by Ms. Emily Stock. The Motion Carried. 2034 LRTP Amendment: Chesapeake Mr. Sorey reported the City of Chesapeake has requested to amend the Hampton Roads 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) to add one project as described below: o Deep Creek Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIW) Bridge Replacement. The

current two-lane drawbridge is located on U.S. Route 17 Business where it crosses the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. The current bridge was constructed in 1934 and is functionally-obsolete and weight-restricted, requiring emergency vehicles to use alternate routes to serve areas on either side of the bridge. The bridge carries approximately 25,000 vehicles per day. The roadway on either side of the bridge has been widened and the bridge is the sole remaining bottleneck in the corridor.


o Funding Plan:

$10 M Regional Surface Transportation Program Funds $10 M National Highway Performance Program Funds $10 M Energy and Water Development Funding $10 M Revenue Sharing Funds $ 5 M Urban Construction Funds $45 M Total Construction Funds

The LRTP amendment has been made available for public review and comment. The public review period began on August 28, 2013 and runs through September 11, 2013.

Attachment 16-B


Mr. Sorey Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the LRTP amendment; seconded by Mr. Tom Slaughter. The Motion Carried. Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads: Final Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, reported that HRTPO staff presented the draft Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads report to TTAC at its July 3, 2013 meeting. The draft report was available for public review and comment from July 3, 2013 through July 26, 2013. No comments were received. Mr. Slaughter Moved to approve the Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads: Final report; seconded by Ms. Keisha Branch. The Motion Carried. Regional Performance Measures – FY 2013 Update: Final Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, reported that HRTPO staff presented the draft Regional Performance Measures – FY 2013 Update to TTAC at its July 3, 2013 meeting. The draft report was available for public review and comment from July 8, 2013 through July 22, 2013. No comments were received. Mr. Cross Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the Regional Performance Measures – FY 2013 Update: Final; seconded by Mr. Jeff Raliski. The Motion Carried. 2040 LRTP Visioning Survey Report: Final Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, reported that HRTPO staff presented the draft 2040 LRTP Visioning Survey report to TTAC at its July 3, 2013 meeting. The draft report was available for public review and comment from July 3, 2013 through July 17, 2013. Comments received were addressed in the final report. Mr. Shea Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the 2040 LRTP Visioning Survey Report: Final report; seconded by Mr. Keith Cannady. The Motion Carried. FY 2012-2015 TIP: Quarterly Snapshot Mr. Chris Wichman, HRTPO Transportation Planner reported there were 11 TIP projects that had significant expenditures (over $1 million) from March – June 2013. He noted that HRTPO staff has now modified its three month periods in order to align with VDOT’s quarterly timeframe. During this quarter, nine projects recorded their first construction expenditures. Mr. Wichman presented a pie chart showing that during the past four months, approximately $5 million was spent on Preliminary Engineering, $16 million on Right of Way Acquisition, and $91 million on Construction.

Attachment 16-B


Mr. Wichman stated 8 CMAQ and RSTP projects showed no expenditures during the past two quarters, and 6 of the 8 projects were on the list last quarter. Mr. Wichman commented that next steps include:

• HRTPO staff will coordinate with VDOT and affected localities and agencies to determine reasons for the apparent lack of progress on these projects.

• HRTPO staff will continue working with VDOT to improve the data exchange. • HRTPO staff will coordinate with HRT and WATA to begin tracking expenditures

data for transit projects Ms. Sherry Early stated RSTP funds for UPC project 102111 were returned to the regional RSTP fund two years ago and asked for clarification regarding the project’s inclusion on the stalled project list. Mr. Mike Kimbrel replied staff would research the issue. Dr. Ravanbakht asked whether the $800,000 from the cancelled York County project (UPC #835121) would be returned to the regional CMAQ fund. Mr. Cross replied affirmatively. Dr. Ravanbakht inquired as to the deadline for use of ARRA funds. Mr. Rowan replied the deadline was changed from 2015 to September 2013. He indicated that VDOT has requested a waiver on a few projects still utilizing ARRA funds. Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study 2013 Update: Part I – Crash Trends and Locations: Draft Mr. Keith Nichols, HRTPO Senior Transportation Engineer, reported that the Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study, a comprehensive analysis of highway safety throughout the region, was initiated in 2001. The study has included reports examining General Crash Data and Trends, Interstate and Intersection Crash Findings, and Crash Analysis and Countermeasures. He indicated that the current draft report is the first full update to the original Regional Safety Study. Topics in the 2013 Update include:

• Regional Safety Trends – Trends in traffic crashes in Hampton Roads are included, as is information related to injuries and fatalities resulting from traffic crashes. Crash data for each Hampton Roads jurisdiction is highlighted, and comparisons between Hampton Roads and other metropolitan areas in Virginia are also included.

• Crash Characteristics – This section looks at the characteristics of crashes and

fatalities in Hampton Roads. Examples include crash types, driver actions, alcohol usage, speeding, and safety belt usage. Mr. Nichols stated there were 99 fatalities in 2012 versus an average of 120 per year over the past several years and indicated that failure to maintain control of the vehicle was the number one cause.

Attachment 16-B


• Crash Locations – This section examines the locations of crashes, injuries, and fatalities on the Hampton Roads roadway system. Details are provided regarding how the crash data was collected and analyzed. The number of crashes by year for each location is shown, as is the rate based on the severity of crashes and the exposure to crashes.

Mr. Nichols explained that 9 out of the top 10 crash severity rates on the freeways occurred on the Southside.

• Next Steps – This section highlights the information that will be included in Part II

of the Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study – 2013 Update. Mr. Nichols stated the draft version of the Hampton Roads Regional Safety Study 2013 Update: Part I – Crash Trends and Locations report will be made available for public review and comment from September 4, 2013 through September 18, 2013. HRTPO staff intends to request approval of the final report at the October 2013 TTAC and HRTPO Board meetings. 2040 LRTP TAZ Data Allocation: Draft Ms. Dale Stith, HRTPO Senior Transportation Planner, reported that in order to run the regional travel demand model during the development of the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), it is necessary to properly allocate the 2040 socioeconomic forecast by Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ). In January 2013, each locality was asked to allocate the 2040 forecast for Households and Employment (Total, Retail, Industrial, Office, and Other Non-Retail Employment) to their respective TAZs. Using this data, HRTPO staff calculated the remaining socioeconomic TAZ totals for Population, Passenger Vehicles, and Workers. She summarized the outline of the Hampton Roads 2040 Socioeconomic Forecast and TAZ Data Allocation draft report including the methodology utilized by HRTPO staff, TAZ allocations, and data tables. Ms. Stith noted that HRTPO staff will further analyze data and produce maps and charts to be included in the report. She requested TTAC members review their allocation data tables and provide any changes to her by COB September 11, 2013. She noted the draft report will be open for public review for a two week period through COB on September 18, 2013. It is anticipated that approval of the final report will occur in October 2013. 2040 LRTP Vision Statement and Goals: Draft Ms. Dale Stith, HRTPO Senior Transportation Planner, reported the visioning process is an important step in developing a Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) as it provides an opportunity to gain both public and technical input, including:

• Regional concerns/perceptions regarding transportation issues • Vision of future transportation network • Candidate projects for evaluation

Attachment 16-B


The Vision Statement and Goals were developed after reviewing:

• Survey responses and the localities’ comprehensive plans • MAP-21 planning factors • VTrans 2035 guidelines • LRTP Subcommittee input

Next steps include a 30-day public review, including comments from other HRTPO Advisory Committees. It is anticipated that approval of the final report will occur in November 2013. Mr. Kevan Danker remarked that HRTPO staff had drafted an excellent vision statement and goals. He suggested an additional goal of minimizing the total cost of operations by reviewing project maintenance at the front end of each project. Mr. Robert Gey asked for clarification regarding the LRTP goal of ensuring the security of the region’s transportation infrastructure and its users. Ms. Stith stated the security goal addresses one of the federal planning factors within MAP-21. Dr. Ravanbakht noted it will be discussed further in the LRTP Subcommittee when performance measures are addressed. HRTPO Community Outreach Activities FY 2013 Mr. Brian Chenault, HRTPO Community Outreach Planner, reported that one of the HRTPO’s priorities is to continually strengthen its Public Involvement Program by enhancing its relationship with the diverse citizenry of Hampton Roads, and engaging them throughout the development of plans, programs, and other HRTPO initiatives. As such, HRTPO staff has created a community outreach program that resulted in a number of activities and initiatives throughout FY 2013. He outlined various activities including:

• Community conversations • Presentations to Community Groups • Outreach to interested/affected parties on HRTPO special/technical reports • Participation in various local events

Mr. Chenault indicated that in FY 2014, HRTPO staff will:

• Continue with its events, meetings/presentations, and special report outreach • Provide a greater social media presence • Provide community webpages • Refine current resources

Attachment 16-B


Mr. Danker inquired as to whether any measures are in place to ensure that HRTPO staff is covering the entire region with its outreach efforts. Ms. Kendall Miller, HRTPO Public Involvement and Title VI Administrator, stated staff is committed to encompassing the entire area with its outreach activities. She outlined several activities that had occurred on the Northern Peninsula. Further, she invited members to submit groups they recommend be contact by HRTPO staff. I-64 Peninsula Widening Project Briefing Mr. Eric Stringfield of VDOT reported that two briefings had been provided to the HRTPO Board on improving the capacity of I-64 on the Peninsula from Jefferson Avenue (Exit 255) to Fort Eustis Boulevard (Exit 250) (Segment 1) and from Fort Eustis Boulevard to Route 199 (Exit 242) (Segment 2). In recent months, the HRTPO and VDOT have discussed possible interim capacity improvements for this section of I-64, and in July 2013, the HRTPO FY 2012-2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was amended at VDOT’s request to add a $100 million project for capacity improvements on I-64 from Jefferson Avenue (Exit 255) to Route 199 (Exit 242). Mr. Stringfield stated the HRTPO has identified its preferred alternative, as has the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB), and VDOT has tried to align the two as much as possible. He indicated that VDOT is in the pre-pre-scoping phase with the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on schedule with final action anticipated for November 2013 and a Record of Decision (ROD) sometime in 2014. Currently, VDOT is conducting a risk assessment. He also noted that due to stormwater regulations, it will be necessary to construct seven stormwater basins per mile which may result in right-of-way issues. Mr. Stringfield indicated the next internal project workshop will be September 26, 2013 and noted that Mr. Bruce Duval is the project manager. Formal scoping should take place by January 2014 with a project schedule in place. Chair King stated the public has asked for clarification as to whether the Fort Eustis Boulevard interchange will be included in the first phase of the project and requested Mr. James Utterback brief the HRTPO Board. Mr. Stringfield replied that VDOT is still assessing the entire project and indicated he would inform Mr. Utterback of TTAC’s request. Mr. Slaughter stated it may be more beneficial to construct the 8-lane, rather than the 6-lane option due to the many complexities associated with the project. Mr. Dwight Farmer replied the 8-lane option is currently beyond VDOT’s capability because of its high cost and indicated the HRTPO Board has approved the 6-lane option. He noted it is important to update the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) to include this project. Three-Month Tentative Schedule Chair King outlined the Three-Month Tentative Schedule for TTAC.

Attachment 16-B


For Your Information Chair King highlighted the items in the For Your Information in the section of the agenda packet. Dr. Ravanbakht reminded the TTAC members to submit requests for HRTPO Board endorsement of project proposals for the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) via letter to the Executive Director, including project description and cost, by September 18, 2013. Announcements Chair King acknowledged the written announcements in the agenda packet. Ms. Julie Timm reported HRT will be holding a series of public meetings regarding the Naval Station Norfolk Transit Extension Study on

• September 10th at the Holiday Inn Greenwich • September 11th at Norview High School • September 12th at Old Dominion University

HRT will also be holding public meeting regarding the Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study from 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. on:

• September 23rd at the Westin at Town Center • September 25th at the Doubletree Convention Center Area • September 26th at the Holiday Inn Greenwich

Dr. Ravanbakht introduced Mr. Garrey Curry of Gloucester as the newest TTAC voting member. Old/New Business There was no old/new business. Adjournment

With no further business to come before the Hampton Roads Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, the meeting adjourned at 11:03 a.m.

Attachment 16-B


ITEM #17: FOR YOUR INFORMATION A. GOVERNOR ANNOUNCES AMTRAK AND VIRGINIA AGREEMENT ON PASSENGER RAIL

Attached is a news release from the Governor’s office regarding a new operating and cost-sharing agreement between Amtrak and Virginia. Attachment 17-A

B. FTA NOTICE OF INTENT TO PREPARE AN EIS FOR THE VIRGINIA BEACH TRANSIT

EXTENSION STUDY

In the Federal Register, Volume 78, Number 157, dated August 14, 2013 (attached), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study (VBTES). The VBTES will examine extending transit service from the eastern terminus of Norfolk’s existing light rail transit (LRT) system, “The Tide”, at Newtown Road to the Virginia Beach Oceanfront. Attachment 17-B

C. KIWANIS CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO HRTPO STAFF MEMBER

Attached is a Certificate of Appreciation presented by the Virginia Beach Kiwanis Club to Mr. Brian Chenault, HRTPO Community Outreach Planner, thanking him for a recent presentation on the HRTPO. Attachment 17-C

GOVERNOR BOB MCDONNELL ANNOUNCES AMTRAK AND

VIRGINIA REACH AGREEMENT FOR NEW ERA IN PASSENGER RAIL

Commonwealth is first state to take greater control of regional intercity passenger service under federal law

WASHINGTON – Governor Bob McDonnell announced today that Virginia has stepped

up in partnership with Amtrak to sign on as the first state to usher in a new era and take greater

control of passenger rail service. Under the agreement Virginia will be assuming greater costs

associated with making intercity passenger rail service available to communities between

Washington, D.C., and Lynchburg, Newport News and Norfolk, including Richmond.

This new operating and capital cost-sharing agreement with Amtrak, as required under

federal law, needed to be in place no later than October 1, 2013 or all Virginia regional rail

service would have ceased.

“Over 1.5 million people either board or disembark on a train in Virginia,” said Governor

McDonnell. “Stopping regional Amtrak service in the Commonwealth was not an option. With

this agreement between Virginia and Amtrak, we can continue to provide for existing regional

intercity passenger rail service and work toward extending new service from Lynchburg into

Roanoke and extend more service to Norfolk. I’m pleased that Virginia was the first state able to

sign this agreement.”

-more-

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 6, 2013

ATK-13-084

Contact:

Taylor Thornley Keeney, Office of the Governor

Phone: 804 225-4260

[email protected]

Lynne McCarthy, DRPT

Department of Rail and Public Transportation

804 786.4443

[email protected]

Kimberly Woods,Amtrak

202 906.2128

[email protected]

ATK-00-000 13-084Contact: Media Relations

202 906.3860

Attachment 17-A

mailto:[email protected]



ATK-13-084

“Under the leadership of Governor McDonnell, Virginia worked to ensure that a

dedicated funding source was created to insure that state-supported regional intercity passenger

rail continues to operate after October 1,” said Transportation Secretary Sean T. Connaughton.

“Many Virginians rely on this cost-effective, comfortable transportation option, and this

administration has recognized how important this service is to citizens of the Commonwealth.”

The agreement supports Virginia’s ongoing commitment to offering the public

transportation choices to driving on congested highway corridors like I-95, Route 29, Route 460,

and I-81, expanding mobility and increasing connectivity for travel throughout the regions

served and along the Northeast Corridor. Passenger rail service also supports economic

development and job growth for long-term local investment along service routes.

“Virginia is a forward-thinking leader on this issue, developing the cost-sharing

methodology with Amtrak and becoming the first state to ensure its corridor services continue to

operate beyond the October 1 deadline,” said Amtrak President and CEO Joe Boardman.

“Virginia recognizes the value, mobility and economic development that Amtrak service brings

to the state and local communities.”

The agreement between Virginia and Amtrak is part of Section 209 of the Passenger Rail

Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), a federal law that requires Amtrak to work

with the 19 affected states to establish a consistent cost-sharing methodology for the 28 corridor

routes of less than 750 miles in order to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all states. Starting

in late 2010, Amtrak and the Section 209 State Working Group, comprised of representatives

from California, Maine, North Carolina, Virginia, and Wisconsin, developed a cost-sharing

methodology that ultimately received approval for implementation by the Surface Transportation

Board.

###

About Amtrak Virginia:

Amtrak Virginia is a program developed by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) and

Amtrak to provide more rail travel choices in Virginia. The new service promotes economic, tourism and

environmental benefits. For more information visit AmtrakVirginia.com.

About Amtrak®: Amtrak is America’s Railroad®, the nation’s intercity passenger rail service and its high-speed rail operator. A

record 31.2 million passengers traveled on Amtrak in FY 2012 on more than 300 daily trains – at speeds up to 150

mph (241 kph) – that connect 46 states, the District of Columbia and three Canadian Provinces. Amtrak operates

intercity trains in partnership with 15 states and contracts with 13 commuter rail agencies to provide a variety of

services. Enjoy the journey® at Amtrak.com or call 800-USA-RAIL for schedules, fares and more information. Join

us on facebook.com/Amtrak and follow us at twitter.com/Amtrak.

Attachment 17-A

http://www.amtrakvirginia.com/

https://www.facebook.com/Amtrak

https://twitter.com/Amtrak

49600 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2013 / Notices

aeronautical uses at existing airports or commercial space launch sites.

Paragraph 5–6.5b (formerly 311b) adds clarification that this applies to establishment of jet routes as they are one type of federal airway.

Paragraph 5–6.5c (formerly 311c) adds the example ‘‘reduction in times of use (e.g., from continuous to intermittent, or use by a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM)’’ to the list of ‘‘such as’’ actions. This clarifies that actions to return all or part of special use airspace (SUA) to the National Airspace System (NAS) includes reduction in times of use.

Paragraph 5–6.5g (formerly 311g) is slightly modified to include ‘‘Required Navigation Performance’’ (RNP). It also specifies that a Noise Screening Tool or other FAA-approved environmental screening methodology should be used.

Paragraph 5–6.5h (formerly 311h) is slightly modified to include ‘‘modification’’ of helicopter routes to clarify that establishment of helicopter routes also includes modification of these routes as long as they channel helicopter activity over major thoroughfares.

Paragraph 5–6.5i (formerly 311i) updates reference to a Noise Screening Tool (NST) or other FAA approved environmental screening methodology.

Paragraph 5–6.6b is modified to provide clarity that the categorical exclusion applies to an aerobatic practice area containing one aerobatic practice box in accordance with 1050.1E Guidance Memo #5, Clarification of FAA Order 1050.1E CATEX 312b to Aerobatic Actions.

Change 18 revises the discussion of EA format and process to streamline the explanation of each element and clarify that an EA should be concise and focused and should not be as detailed as an EIS (see Paragraph 6–2). Since this section has been reduced in detail, there are cross-references to the corresponding EIS sections for environmental assessments that may need to be more substantial.

Change 19 revises the language in notices soliciting public comment on draft EAs and draft EISs, stating that personal information provided by commenters (e.g., addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses) may be made publicly available (see Paragraphs 6–2.2.e and 7–1.2.d(1)(a)).

Change 20 adds a new paragraph to explain the conditions under which the FAA may choose to terminate preparation of an EIS and clarifies what steps the FAA should take when this situation occurs (see Paragraph 7–1.3).

Change 21 adds a discussion of FAA policy with respect to consideration of

transboundary impacts resulting from FAA actions (see Paragraph 8–3).

Change 22 updates the discussion of international actions to be consistent with DOT Order 5610.1, including guidance on coordination within the FAA/DOT and U.S. State Department when communication with foreign governments is needed (see Paragraph 8–4).

Change 23 clarifies the alternative process to consider environmental impacts before taking emergency actions necessary to protect the lives and safety of the public in emergency circumstances. These alternative arrangements are limited to actions necessary to control the immediate impacts of an emergency. Order 1050.1F expands this section to provide for emergency procedures when a CATEX or EA would be the appropriate level of NEPA review (see Paragraph 8–5).

Change 24 clarifies and expands on requirements relating to FAA adoption of other agencies’ NEPA documents (see Paragraph 8–7). Clarifies requirements for legal sufficiency review of adopted documents and when this review is required (see Paragraph 8–7.d). Also adds a discussion of recirculation requirements for EISs to highlight that there are some circumstances in which adopted documents must be re- circulated (see Paragraph 8–7.f).

Change 25 clarifies that there is no specified format for written re- evaluations. It also adds a statement to explain that written re-evaluations may be prepared even when they are not required. In addition, this section also adds a discussion of combining decision documents with written re-evaluations (i.e., a ‘‘WR/ROD’’) (see Paragraph 9–2).

Change 26 streamlines, consolidates, and clarifies provisions relating to review, approval, and signature authority for FAA NEPA documents (see Chapter 10).

Change 27 revises text in Paragraph 11–2 to clarify the authority of various parties and to be consistent with other FAA Orders (see Paragraph 11–2).

Change 28 clarifies provisions relating to explanatory guidance (see Paragraph 11–4).

Change 29 adds definitions of ‘‘NEPA lead’’ and ‘‘special purpose laws and requirements.’’ It deletes the definition of ‘‘Environmental Due Diligence Audit’’ because this term is no longer used in FAA Order 1050.1F. Definitions of ‘‘environmental studies’’, ‘‘approving official’’, and ‘‘decisionmaker’’ are revised to reflect current practice. The definition of ‘‘launch facility’’ is changed to ‘‘commercial space launch site’’ to be consistent with 14 CFR part 420. The definition of ‘‘noise sensitive

area’’ is revised to include a reference to Table 1 of 14 CFR part 150 rather than Appendix A of FAA Order 1050.1E, to provide context in light of the removal of Appendix A from proposed Order 1050.1F. (See Paragraph 11–5.b).

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 9, 2013. Lourdes Q. Maurice, Executive Director, Office of Environment and Energy. [FR Doc. 2013–19734 Filed 8–13–13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Transit Administration

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study, Virginia

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) are planning to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Virginia Beach Transit Extension Study (VBTES). The VBTES will examine extending transit service from the eastern terminus of Norfolk’s existing Light Rail Transit (LRT) system, ‘‘The Tide,’’ at Newtown Road to the Virginia Beach Oceanfront either along the former Norfolk Southern Railroad right-of-way (NSRR ROW) that runs from Newtown Road to Birdneck Road or along the NSRR ROW to Laskin Road then onto Birdneck Road. From Birdneck Road, both alignments would extend onto 19th Street terminating at the Virginia Beach Oceanfront.

In 2000, FTA and HRT prepared the Norfolk-Virginia Beach East/West Light Rail Transit System Final EIS. This document looked at an 18-mile transit system connecting downtown Norfolk to the Pavilion area of Virginia Beach. In 2009, FTA and HRT began a Supplemental EIS for the VBTES that intended to evaluate changes in the project corridor since the 2000 EIS. As the Supplemental EIS progressed, FTA and HRT began studying an additional alternative alignment along Laskin Road. This alternative alignment and the additional amount of time that elapsed since work began on the Supplemental EIS led FTA to determine that a Supplemental EIS was no longer appropriate for the VBTES and instead a new EIS should be prepared. Pursuant

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:16 Aug 13, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM 14AUN1tkel

ley

on D

SK

3SP

TV

N1P

RO

D w

ith N

OT

ICE

S

Attachment 17-B


to 23 CFR 771.123(a), FTA and HRT now issue this Notice of Intent (NOI) for an EIS for the VBTES. Although the VBTES has been under consideration in some form since the 1980’s, and was included in the 2000 Final EIS, this EIS will specifically rely on relevant information that has been developed over the last several years since the 2009 Supplemental EIS was proposed.

The EIS for the VBTES will be prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This NOI initiates formal scoping for the EIS, invites interested parties to participate in the process, provides information about the purpose and need for the study, includes the alternatives being considered for evaluation in the EIS, and identifies potential environmental effects to be considered.

HRT began its VBTES public involvement process in 2009. It held frequent public meetings in 2010, 2012, and 2013, and continues to receive public comments on the study today. HRT plans additional public meetings for September 2013 and November 2013. These continued opportunities for public involvement in the VBTES means no formal public scoping meetings are planned to be held for this EIS.

In 2009 and 2013, HRT, in coordination with FTA, contacted interested party agencies for the VBTES. As such, agencies that have previously responded to invitations to engage in the VBTES process will remain as interested parties on the study and are not required to formally respond to this notice. DATES: Written comments on the scope of reasonable alternatives and impacts to be considered in the EIS must be sent to HRT as indicated below. Written comments must be received no later than September 13, 2013. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Ms. Marie Arnt, Public Outreach Coordinator, Hampton Roads Transit, 509 E. 18th Street, Norfolk, VA 23504, by email to [email protected], or through HRT’s Web site at www.gohrt.com/about/development/ vbtes. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ryan Long, FTA Community Planner, phone: (215) 656–7051. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Proposed Project: HRT is proposing to extend transit service from the eastern terminus of Norfolk’s existing LRT system, ‘‘The Tide,’’ at Newtown Road to the Virginia Beach Oceanfront. The service extension will operate as a fixed guideway transit

system within the primary east-west transportation corridor in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia. A fixed guideway transit system operates on a separate right-of-way that is exclusive for transit or other high-occupancy vehicles. The VBTES will evaluate alternatives for this service extension, including LRT and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). The final alignment, number of stations and their locations, and specific eastern and western termini will be determined through the EIS process.

HRT is intending to seek Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program funding from FTA for one or more of the alternatives that will be examined in the EIS. The CIG program, more commonly known as the New Starts, Small Starts, and Core Capacity program, involves a multi-year, multi-step process that project sponsors must complete before a project is eligible for funding. The steps in the process and the basic requirements of the program can be found on FTA’s Web site at www.fta.dot.gov.

Purposes of and Need for the Project: The purpose of the VBTES is to provide an efficient, integrated, and multimodal system of public transit that:

• Provides an efficient transportation option independent of traffic congestion;

• Supports a dynamic local and regional economy by responding to existing and future travel needs;

• Maintains or enhances livable communities within the project study corridor; and

• Complements planned local growth initiatives and strategies.

The City of Virginia Beach and the region need VBTES to improve personal mobility and to reduce traffic congestion in ways that are safe and reliable and that support future planned growth. Four decades of significant growth in population, employment, and tourism in the City of Virginia Beach has led to increased traffic and congestion on existing roadways serving the study area. Daily and commute trips by motorists and transit users have grown longer resulting in congestion and delays in both morning and evening peak periods in the primary east-west transportation corridor through the City of Virginia Beach. This corridor is defined by I–264, Virginia Beach Boulevard, Laskin Road, and the former NSRR ROW.

The area within the corridor is largely developed. There are limited transit opportunities with the existing bus system which shares these congested roadways. In addition, the Virginia Beach Oceanfront resort area is a primary vacation destination for the

entire Commonwealth of Virginia and the mid-Atlantic region. Non-work trips to access the Virginia Beach Oceanfront area during the period of May through September lead to increased congestion and travel delays for visitors as well as for residents making work and non- work trips. These recreational trips originate from both within and outside the region.

Numerous transportation system planning studies have been completed for the Hampton Roads Region and the City of Virginia Beach that have examined the feasibility of providing additional transit service in the east- west corridor. These studies were conducted with full public participation. Each study identified the need to provide an efficient, safe, economical, and balanced transportation system (with auto, transit, and non-motorized modes of travel) that would minimize the impact to the environment and would complement the community’s development patterns. Development of a fixed-guideway transit system through Virginia Beach’s east-west corridor is discussed in the following studies:

HRT/Hampton Roads Regional Planning District Commission Plans: • HRTPO Hampton Roads 2034 Long

Range Transportation Plan (2012) • Hampton Roads Regional Transit

Vision Plan (2011) • HRPDC Hampton Roads 2030 Long

Range Transportation Plan (2006) • Norfolk to Virginia Beach Light Rail

Transit Final EIS (2000) • Virginia Beach Corridor Major

Investment Study (1995) • The Rail Systems Analysis and Fixed

Guideway Service Plan (1991) • Planning for Restoration of Rail

Passenger Service (1988) • Study of the Cost Effectiveness of

Restoring Rail Passenger Service (1986)

City of Virginia Beach Plans: • Hilltop Strategic Growth Area (SGA)

Master Plan (2012) • Lynnhaven SGA Master Plan (2012) • Rosemont SGA Master Plan (2011) • Newtown SGA Master Plan (2010) • Pembroke SGA Implementation Plan

(2009) • Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan

(2009) • Virginia Beach Oceanfront Resort

Area Plan (2005) • Virginia Beach Central Business

District Final Master Plan (1991) The HRT/Hampton Roads Regional

Planning District Commission long- range plans are available for review at the HRT Web site (www.gohrt.com) and the Hampton Roads Planning District


ley

on D

SK

3SP

TV

N1P

RO

D w

ith N

OT

ICE

S

Attachment 17-B


Commission Web site (www.hrpdc.org). The City of Virginia Beach’s plans are available on its Web site (www.vbgov.com).

Alternatives: The EIS will consider build and no-build alternatives to determine which would best serve the study area. The EIS will also include descriptions of alternatives considered for evaluation but which were determined not to be reasonable and therefore will not be carried forward for evaluation in detail in the EIS. The build alternatives being carried into the EIS will include LRT and BRT technologies.

In the VBTES, the fixed guideway alignment options for the build alternative(s) are:

• Newtown Road to the Rosemont area;

• Newtown Road to the Oceanfront along the former NSRR ROW; and

• Newtown Road to the Oceanfront partially along Laskin and Birdneck Roads.

The implementation of a fixed guideway alternative would require the location and construction of stations and park-and-ride facilities and may require a vehicle storage and maintenance facility. Stations would be located at intervals that provide service to key activity centers in the study corridor. The EIS will consider reasonable and feasible alternative locations and configurations identified for each of these facilities during the study process.

The EIS will collect and assess information for each alternative in order to evaluate and compare potential benefits and impacts. This will include such information as:

• Station locations; • Ridership Forecasts; • Construction and Operation Costs

(including utility relocations); • Impacts to natural resources

(including wetlands, protected species, air quality); and

• Impacts to the community and historic resources (including traffic, noise, businesses, residences, community resources).

No Build Alternative: The No-Build Alternative serves as the NEPA baseline against which environmental effects of other alternatives, including the proposed project once one is identified, will be measured. The No-Build Alternative will include roadway and transit facility and service improvements (other than the Build Alternatives) planned, programmed and included in the Financially Constrained Regional Transportation Plan to be implemented by the Year 2040. The No Build Alternative will include minor

transit service expansions and/or adjustments that reflect a continuation of existing service policies as identified by HRT.

Probable Effects/Potential Impacts for Analysis: HRT anticipates the VBTES will result in a preferred build alternative with beneficial travel and economic development effects but may have some adverse environmental effects. The proposed build alternative would result in travel time savings for existing transit patrons and gain new transit users who switch from automobiles, while offering a broader range of transportation options for Virginia Beach and the region. It will also support economic development and land use goals of the City of Virginia Beach as identified in its Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Growth Area plans. The proposed build alternative would also contribute to goals of reducing growth in vehicle miles traveled and emissions, including greenhouse gases.

The purpose of the EIS is to explore in a public setting the effects of the proposed project and its alternatives on the human and natural environment. FTA and HRT will evaluate the potential social, economic, and environmental impacts of the construction and operation of the proposed project. Impact areas to be addressed include: transportation; land use, zoning, and economic development; secondary development; land acquisition, visual impacts, displacements and relocations; cultural resources, including impacts on historical and archaeological resources and parklands/recreation areas; neighborhood compatibility and environmental justice; natural resource impacts including air quality, wetlands, and water resources; noise and vibration; energy use; safety and security; and wildlife and ecosystems, including endangered species. Reasonable measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate adverse impacts will be identified and evaluated.

Potential impacts are likely to be limited primarily to social and economic impacts associated with development of a fixed guideway transit project. These impacts include enhanced development opportunities and changes in zoning and local plans related to station area development. Such changes will be coordinated with the City of Virginia Beach’s comprehensive plan and Strategic Growth Area plans. Property acquisition and displacement may occur because of the development of park-and-ride facilities, alignments utilizing city street rights-of-way, and/or placement of

traction power substations (if needed). Minimal, primarily short-term (e.g., construction), impacts may occur to wetlands and/or surface waters. Construction impacts may disrupt travel and access to businesses and/or residences on a short term basis.

Role of Agencies and the Public: NEPA, and FTA’s regulations implementing NEPA, calls for public involvement in the EIS process. FTA and HRT will continue to provide a substantial level of public involvement throughout the EIS process, including open house meetings, newsletters, and outreach to city civic leagues and businesses. However, no formal public meetings are planned for the scoping period associated with this NOI due to the extensive previous public meetings hosted by HRT. Specifically related to public and agency involvement, FTA and HRT will (1) extend an invitation to other Federal and non-Federal agencies and Indian tribes that may have an interest in the proposed project to become ‘‘participating agencies’’; (2) provide an opportunity for involvement by participating agencies and the public in helping to define the purpose and need for a proposed project, as well as the range of alternatives for consideration in the EIS; and (3) establish a plan for coordinating public and agency participation in, and comment on, the environmental review process.

A comprehensive public involvement program has been developed for the VBTES and is posted on the project Web site at www.gohrt.com. The public involvement program includes a full range of involvement activities including the project Web site; outreach to local officials, community and civic groups, and the public; and development and distribution of project newsletters. Specific mechanisms for involvement are detailed in the public involvement program.

The public and participating agencies are invited to consider and comment on this preliminary statement of the purpose and need for the proposed Virginia Beach alternatives. Suggestions for modifications to the statement of purpose and need for the proposed project are welcome and will be given serious consideration. Comments on potential environmental impacts that may be associated with the proposed alternatives are also welcome. There will be additional opportunities to participate in the study process at future public meetings.

FTA and HRT will comply with all applicable Federal environmental laws, regulations, and executive orders during the environmental review process.


ley

on D

SK

3SP

TV

N1P

RO

D w

ith N

OT

ICE

S

Attachment 17-B


1 NSR states that it is seeking abandonment to permit the removal of the remaining portion of the railroad bridge over the mouth of Devil’s Run Slough at the request of the United States Coast Guard (USCG), because USCG views the bridge structure as an impediment to waterway navigation.

These requirements include, but are not limited to, the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508) and FTA’s own NEPA regulations (23 CFR part 771); the air quality conformity regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (40 CFR part 93); the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines of EPA (40 CFR part 230); the regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR part 800); the regulations implementing Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR part 402); Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (23 CFR part 774); Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, 11988 on floodplain management, and 11990 on wetlands; and DOT Order 5610.2(a) on Environmental Justice.

Paperwork Reduction: The Paperwork Reduction Act seeks, in part, to minimize the cost to the taxpayer of the creation, collection, maintenance, use, dissemination, and disposition of information. Consistent with this goal and with principles of economy and efficiency in government, it is FTA policy to limit insofar as possible distribution of complete printed sets of NEPA documents. Accordingly, unless a specific request for a complete printed set of the NEPA document is received before the document is printed, FTA and HRT will distribute only electronic copies of the NEPA document. A complete printed set of the environmental document will be available for review at HRT’s offices; an electronic copy of the complete environmental document will be available on the HRT’s Web site (www.gohrt.com).

Brigid Hynes-Cherin, Regional Administrator. [FR Doc. 2013–19623 Filed 8–13–13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P


Maritime Administration

[USCG–2003–14294]

Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port Decommissioning and License Termination

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. ACTION: Public Notice; Final Agency Approval of the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port Decommissioning and License Termination.

SUMMARY: The Maritime Administration (MARAD) announces its final clearance

and authorization of the decommissioning of the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port and termination of the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port License (License), effective as of June 28, 2013. Pursuant to Section 1503(h) of the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, as amended, a License may remain in effect until such time as it is either suspended or revoked by the Secretary of Transportation or surrendered by the licensee. For purposes of this agency action, MARAD has granted as of June 28, 2013, final clearance of the completed decommissioning of the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port facility, and approved termination of the official License and all other conditions and obligations set forth by the License. DATES: The date of termination of the License and all actions related to this action is effective as of June 28, 2013. ADDRESSES: The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this project. The docket may be viewed electronically at http:// www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG–2003–14294, or in person at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port project, contact Ms. Tracey Ford, Acting Office Director, Office of Deepwater Ports and Offshore Activities at (202) 366–0321 or [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter dated February 21, 2011, Excelerate Energy LP (Excelerate) notified MARAD and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) of its intention to decommission the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port, located 116 miles off the coast of Louisiana. Excelerate’s decision to decommission the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port was due primarily to declining pipeline capacity issues, significant operational challenges, and changes in the global natural gas market. In accordance with Article 20 of the License, Excelerate is required to decommission its deepwater port in compliance with the decommissioning plans approved by the Maritime Administrator and in accordance with applicable Federal regulations and guidelines in place at the time of decommissioning. The License further requires that MARAD approval be granted in concurrence with other relevant Federal agencies. This requirement was satisfied on April 14, 2012, and Excelerate was granted authorization by MARAD to proceed with its planned decommissioning

activities. Excelerate completed the final decommissioning process on March 14, 2013. At the end of the decommissioning process, all components of the Gulf Gateway facility were removed and the connecting pipelines were decommissioned in- place, in accordance with applicable Federal regulations.

As of the date of this notice, MARAD concurred that all decommissioning activities for the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port have been completed, and approved termination of the official License and other related License obligations.

This Federal Register Notice completes the final close-out and termination procedures for the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port and License. No further action will be undertaken by MARAD.

Additional information pertaining to the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port project may be found in the public docket at www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG–2003–14294.

Authority: 49 CFR 1.66

By order of the Maritime Administrator Dated: August 8, 2013.

Julie P. Agarwal, Secretary, Maritime Administration. [FR Doc. 2013–19687 Filed 8–13–13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–81–P


Surface Transportation Board

[Docket No. AB 290 (Sub-No. 347X)]

Norfolk Southern Railway Company— Abandonment Exemption—in Marengo County, Ala

Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NSR) has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F—Exempt Abandonments to abandon approximately 0.8 miles of rail line between milepost 241.3 N (east of the line’s crossing of the mouth of Devil’s Run Slough where the slough joins the Black Warrior River) and milepost 242.1 N (near the intersection of Nash Ave. and E. Franklin St., in Demopolis), in Marengo County, Ala.1 The line traverses United States Postal Service Zip Code 36925.

NSR has certified that: (1) No local traffic has moved over the line for at least two years; (2) no overhead traffic


ley

on D

SK

3SP

TV

N1P

RO

D w

ith N

OT

ICE

S

Attachment 17-B

Attachment 17-C


ITEM #18: OLD/NEW BUSINESS

hampton roads transportation planning organization board ......hampton roads transportation planning...

Documents