Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization Board Meeting – May 19, 2011

AGENDA ITEM #6: MINUTES SUBJECT: Minutes of previous HRTPO Board meeting. BACKGROUND: Minutes of the HRTPO Board meeting held on April 21, 2011 are attached. Attachment 6 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The HRTPO staff recommends approval of the minutes.

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 1

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Board Minutes of April 21, 2011

The Hampton Roads TPO Board Meeting was called to order at 10:37 a.m. in the Regional Boardroom, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia, with the following in attendance: HRTPO Voting Members in Attendance: William D. Sessoms, Chairman (VB) Molly Joseph Ward, Vice-Chair (HA) Alan P. Krasnoff (CH) Stan D. Clark (IW) Bruce C. Goodson (JC) McKinley Price (NN)* Paul D. Fraim (NO) Herbert Green (Alternate, PQ) Kenneth I. Wright (PO)

Robert Barclay (Alternate, SU) Thomas G. Shepperd, Jr. (YK) Amy Inman (DRPT) Delegate Glenn Oder (GA)* Senator John Miller (GA) Senator Yvonne B. Miller (GA)* Philip Shucet (HRT) Dennis Heuer (VDOT) Mark Rickards (WATA) HRTPO Nonvoting Members in Attendance: William E. Harrell (CH)* Brenda Garton (GL) Mary Bunting (HA) W. Douglas Caskey (IW) Robert C. Middaugh (JC) Neil A. Morgan (NN)* Marcus Jones (NO) J. Randall Wheeler (PQ)

Selena Cuffee-Glenn (SU) James K. Spore (VB) Jackson C. Tuttle, II (WM) James O. McReynolds (YK) William Bell (FTAC) CDR Barnes (Alternate, USCG) Capt. Mary Jackson (USN)* Wendy Vachet (Alternate, USN) HRTPO Executive Director: Dwight L. Farmer

Other Participants: Hollis Ellis (CTB) Aubrey Layne (CTB) HRTPO Voting Members Absent: Christian D. Rilee (GL) W. Eugene Hunt (PQ) Linda T. Johnson (SU)

Clyde Haulman (WM) Delegate John Cosgrove (GA) Jerry Bridges (VPA)

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 2

HRTPO Nonvoting Members Absent: Kenneth L. Chandler (PO) William Harrison (CTAC) Jeffrey Breeden (FAA) Irene Rico (FHWA) Ivan Rucker (FHWA) Tony Cho (FTA)

Letitia A. Thompson (FTA) Wayne Shank (NAA) Ken Spirito (PAC) Colonel Glenn Grothe (U.S. Army) Capt. Mark Ogle (USCG) Randall P. Burdette (VDOA) * Late or Early Departure Others Recorded Attending: Earl Sorey (CH); Brian DeProfio (HA); Steven Hicks (JC); Tom Slaughter, Jerri Wilson (NN); John Keifer, Bryan Pennington, Jeff Raliski, Rod Woolard (NO); Sherri Neil (PO); Albert Moor (SU); Bob Matthias, Phil Pullen, Mark Schnaufer (VB); Tony Gibson, Adam Jack, Nicholas Nies (VDOT); Jon Cawley (Daily Press); Will Christopher (FHR); Rich Clifton, Leo Rutledge (RK&K); Ellis James (Sierra Club Observer); Tracy Baynard (McGuire Woods Consulting); V. Clary (ECI); Peter Huber (Willcox and Savage); Cathy Aiello (Biggs & Fleet); HRTPO and HRPDC Staff: Camelia Ravanbakht, Sam Belfield, John Carlock, Rick Case, Rob Case, Jennifer Coleman, Nancy Collins, Kathlene Grauberger, Greg Grootendorst, Frances Hughey, Jim Hummer, Rob Jacobs, Whitney Katchmark, Michael Kimbrel, Brian Miller, Kendall Miller, Keith Nichols, Joe Paulus, Kelli Peterson, Joe Turner, and Chris Vaigneur. Public Comment Period One person requested to address the HRTPO Board. Chairman Sessoms asked him to limit his comments to three minutes. Mr. Ellis James

Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the organization. My name is Ellis W. James. I reside in Norfolk. I would like to briefly address the VDOT study that has come out. It's titled Interstate 64 – Peninsula study. Those of us on the Southside who are very much in favor of a third crossing, I guess we were pleasantly surprised to see the study, but we were surprised, and I am quite concerned about where we are going to be able to do this with respect to the priority list that we have already clearly established pretty well, and so I would hope that the transportation organization will take a very close look at this. It would certainly, in my view, be the solution to a lot of our problems that we're struggling with currently, and that includes being respectful of the concerns of our friends over on the Peninsula side. I really appreciate the fact that at least we get a chance to look at this, and I hope that we can see this established somewhere on the priority list in an effective manner. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Submitted Public Comments Chairman Sessoms stated there were submitted public comments in the agenda packet. Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 3

Approval of the Agenda Consent Agenda Chairman Sessoms asked if there were any additions or deletions to the agenda. Hearing none, he outlined the Consent Agenda as follows:

• Minutes • FY 2009-2012 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: Chesapeake • FY 2009-2012 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: Newport News • FY 2009-2012 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: Norfolk • FY 2009-2012 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: James City County • FY 2009-2012 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment: James City County Mr. Goodson Moved to approve the Consent Agenda as written; seconded by Mr. Clark. The Motion Carried.

Remarks by CTB Member Aubrey Layne Mr. Layne stated the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) had its meeting on April 20, 2011 and expressed his gratitude to Mr. Farmer and Ms. Ravanbakht for their attendance. The major topic of discussion at the meeting was the first presentation of the State’s Six-Year Improvement Plan (SYIP) and Mr. Layne indicated it was the Governor’s intention to hopefully create as many as 100,000 jobs across the state. He explained the State’s $4 billion budget will be reduced by several factors including: • $600 million for Maintenance Hampton Roads is the most significant user of maintenance dollars across the state and the CTB has charged the VDOT Commissioner to inform the CTB on a regular basis regarding maintenance issues. • $300 million for the Infrastructure Bank The top designated project in the state in this category is the Dominion Boulevard project in the City of Chesapeake. • $500 million for Debt Service (GARVEE Bonds) • $200 million for the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) for high-speed and intercity passenger rail service. • $1.4 billion for Public Private Partnerships (P3s) The Midtown/Downtown Tunnel and the Route 460 projects are two of the four projects that will receive funding from this amount. Hampton Roads should receive a substantial portion of this allocation. Mr. Layne stated the resulting figure of $1 billion will be allocated to the projects in the SYIP, and of that amount, Hampton Roads will receive $200 million. He noted he had

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 4

recently spoken with the region’s military representatives to inform them that Hampton Roads received $10 million for the ATI Terminal and Interchange. He commented that a key element to the allocation process is the understanding that monies will not be allowed to lay dormant. Mr. Layne remarked that the CTB recognized the HRTPO in its efforts with its reform plan and the actions taken by the HRTPO Board in the last year had been successful in obtaining funds for the area and is a step in the right direction towards receiving more transportation funding. (Senator Yvonne Miller and Delegate Oder arrive) In conclusion, he summarized the following standards which will be used as a guideline when determining which road projects will receive funding: • Fund deficits on underway project phases • Fund underway project phases and phases that start in 2011 or later • Fund deficient bridges and paving projects • Increased funding for preliminary engineering • Support the PPTAs in which Hampton Roads has two projects • Accelerate those projects with additional funds – Dominion Boulevard would fall under category • Any balances that are not being utilized will be redirected by the CTB Mr. Farmer stated the decision by the CTB to designate MPO funds, in coordination with TPO and VDOT staff, will improve the overall process. By filtering it through local CTB members, it will develop a system which can only assist the HRTPO in advancing its projects. Mr. Farmer commented that it was his understanding that DRPT had received three train slots across the Appomattox River Bridge for 2013 with one train partially funded with hopes of more dedicated funding to follow. He noted that funding success through negotiations and deliberations between DRPT, the Secretary of Transportation, the General Assembly, and the Governor will be critical for Hampton Roads. Ms. Inman stated DRPT should have the train slots by October of 2013 if not before. Negotiations with Norfolk Southern and CSX at the Collier Yard are progressing in bringing the single track down to Norfolk. She indicated DRPT will provide the HRTPO with monthly updates. Mr. Farmer stated the HRTPO was informed by the CTB that the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT) study must be completed before any public private partnership (P3) could be advanced. The timeline on the HRBT study is approximately two and a half years. With regards to the Patriots Crossing, a re-evaluation of that project is in process and the HRTPO will receive the report when completed.

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 5

Mayor Krasnoff expressed his appreciation to CTB members Aubrey Layne, Hollis Ellis, and Shep Miller. He also thanked the four General Assembly HRTPO Voting members for their assistance in communicating the transportation needs of Hampton Roads. He stated the HRTPO has made great strides in the past year for the citizens of Hampton Roads. Chairman Sessoms also expressed his gratitude to the CTB members and stated the HRTPO Board should be proud of the work it has accomplished over the past year. 2034 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Project List Amendment: U.S. Route 460 Mr. Farmer stated he had conferred with VDOT staff and was recommending an amendment to the approved list of projects and studies to include U.S. Route 460 in the 2034 LRTP for full construction. Currently listed in the 2034 LRTP as a study only, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has concluded that the U.S. Route 460 project has met the fiscal-constraint guidelines needed for inclusion into the 2034 LRTP for full construction. Mr. Farmer noted the project was scheduled for a detailed proposal. Mr. Heuer indicated the proposal was being reviewed by the VDOT Commissioner and the Secretary of Transportation and a decision was eminent. The intent is for the CTB to have the proposal in-hand by Fall 2011. Mr. Clark Moved to amend the 2034 LRTP Project List to include U.S. Route 460 as a full construction project; seconded by Ms. Garton. The Motion Carried. I-64 Peninsula Study Environmental Impact Statement: VDOT Mr. Nicholas Nies, Project Manager, Environmental Division of VDOT, stated the I-64 Peninsula Study Process consists of the following components in addition to public hearing input:

• Project Initiation/Scoping/Purpose and Need • Alternatives Development • Technical and Environmental Studies • Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) • Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) • Record of Decision (ROD) Mr. Nies indicated that VDOT is currently in the project initiation phase and the purpose and need statement is being developed. FHWA is the lead federal agency and will approve the NEPA process, and the CTB will decide on what alternative, if any, will be carried forward. The VDOT Study Team sent letters in February requesting cooperating and participating agencies and Mr. Nies noted the HRTPO was included in that distribution.

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 6

The project is under an aggressive three year schedule; initiated in January 2011 with a FEIS hopefully generated in November 2013. In conclusion, Mr. Nies stated there will be numerous agency and public outreach opportunities to comment on the I-64 Peninsula Study. Mayor Price stated the I-64 study was important to the Peninsula and the entire region. He asked if the time table of the study could be accelerated. Mr. Nies replied the study would normally take six years to complete; however, VDOT has initiated an aggressive timeline of three years. Mayor Fraim asked why the CTB decision, with regards to the I-64 study, would be released in October 2011, yet the final impact statement would not be issued until a year later. Mr. Nies replied that once the CTB has agreed on how to proceed, there is additional analysis that is required, including archaeology field work and responding to agency public comments. Mr. Shepperd inquired as to why the VDOT schedule is detailed in 2011, yet vague in 2012. Mr. Nies stated the schedule is currently in the initial stages. He indicated that once VDOT submits its report to CTB, there will be minimal involvement from the localities. He did note that if there are concerns from the jurisdictions, VDOT will meet with them to discuss. Mr. Shepperd asked if VDOT planned to submit one or several alternatives to the CTB. Mr. Nies replied he was unable to answer that question at this time because the options are not yet known. VDOT must first determine the existing and future transportation needs for the corridor and from that develop alternatives that meet those needs. Mr. Heuer indicated that when the CTB makes its decision regarding the best alternative to implement, VDOT will post the decision and public comment will be received before the final impact statement is issued. Mr. Shepperd expressed his concern regarding VDOT’s decision to re-analyze the two options already on the table for the HRBT along with any other alternatives that may emerge. He stated the process should be accelerated rather than delayed. Mr. Nies replied there will be a coordination plan which will be posted shortly and will allow for the participating agencies to comment on the process. Mr. Heuer stated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) sets forth a process with strict steps that must be followed. He noted that if the proper steps were not adhered to, the process will be subject to challenges which can slow down the project. Review of the VDOT FY 2012-2017 Six Year Improvement Program (SYIP) Mr. Adam Jack, District Planning and Investment Manager of VDOT, expressed his appreciation to the HRTPO Board for its exceptional work with the prioritization process as it will assist VDOT with its SYIP in a systemic way in order to move projects forward and receive more funding for the district.

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 7

He explained the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) is the funding mechanism in the approval process for transportation funds that are utilized statewide. Its primary role is to adopt a SYIP by July 1st of each year. In populations greater than 50,000, the MPO has the responsibility to develop, in cooperation with the state and transit operators, a Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that is consistent with the long-range plan. Mr. Jack stated VDOT met with the MPOs on January 21, 2011 and outlined the CTB priorities, including, but not limited to: • Fund deficits on underway project phases • Maximize federal funds to meet federal strategy • Fund deficient bridges and pavements • Support PPTAs • Redirect inactive balances on projects He presented a slide which outlined approximately $3.4 million and $7.4 million in un-programmed CMAQ and RSTP funding in Hampton Roads. In conclusion, Mr. Jack stated the draft FY 12-17 SYIP would be released on April 20th with a public hearing in Hampton Roads on April 27th. He encouraged all localities represented in the HRTPO to be in attendance and provide comments on the SYIP. It is anticipated that the CTB will adopt the FY 12-17 SYIP on June 15, 2011. Mayor Fraim asked if the $3.4 million in CMAQ funds and the $7.4 million of RSTP funds discovered in the reconciliation process could be allocated by the localities. Mr. Jack replied that the identified money may be able to be re-programmed. The reported numbers have since been revised and VDOT and HRTPO staff are currently working on the final figures. Mayor Fraim asked if any of the localities had requested the CMAQ and RSTP funds. Mr. Farmer replied that HRTPO and VDOT staff have reconciled the funds and are now determining with the localities on where to move them. Mayor Fraim asked how the localities could be involved in re-allocating the monies. Mr. Heuer explained that when the information comes to the HRTPO, it is in the form of a data dump. When VDOT pulls each reconciliation, it is from a constantly moving set of accounting books. Some of the money that presents as unallocated is because it has not yet been billed to a particular project. Mr. Heuer commented that any money that has been discovered over and above a project estimate has not yet been reallocated to other projects. Mayor Fraim asked if any part of the $3.4 and $7.4 million is still needed by projects that are currently being billed. Mr. Jack answered affirmatively.

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 8

Mayor Fraim inquired if some of that money will eventually be freed up for other projects. Mr. Jack replied affirmatively and noted that the City of Norfolk recently transferred $120,000 from these funds. Mayor Fraim stated the City of Norfolk’s Light Rail Transit Project would benefit from these additional funds. Mr. Jack replied that the TTAC was currently discussing the remaining fund allocations. Mr. Shucet suggested asking Ms. Inman or Ms. Drake, the Director of DRPT, to speak with the HRTPO Board to discuss DRPT’s participation in the SYIP. Chairman Sessoms agreed with Mr. Shucet’s recommendation. HRTPO Annual Obligations Report Mr. Farmer stated the report would be reviewed by an advisory committee and brought back to the HRTPO at its May 19th Board Meeting. (Mr. Harrell and Capt. Jackson depart) INRIX National Traffic Scorecard Mr. Nichols stated Inrix has produced the National Traffic Scorecard report each year since 2007. The Scorecard details the status of congestion in the largest 100 metropolitan areas across the country where data is collected from over four million GPS-enabled vehicles, including taxis, shuttles, trucks, and delivery vans. Inrix measures the Peak Period Travel Time Tax which is the percentage of extra travel time the average trip takes during the peak travel periods as compared to uncongested free flow conditions. According to Inrix, the peak period travel time tax in Hampton Roads is 13 percent which is an increase from last year although traffic volume has remained relatively flat. Hampton Roads has the 5th worst peak period travel time tax when evaluated against a total of 35 comparable metropolitan areas in 2010. The City of Richmond was recognized as the city with the best peak period travel time tax in the same 35 metropolitan areas. Mr. Nichols explained Inrix also measures the Worst Time Travel Time Tax which represents travel conditions during the worst 15-minute period throughout the week in each region. In Hampton Roads, the worst time travel time tax occurred at 4:30 p.m. on Fridays in 2010 and was calculated at 42 percent. In comparison to the other 35 large metropolitan areas, Hampton Roads had the 4th highest worst time travel time tax in 2010. Finally, Inrix ranked congested corridors for the first time in 2010. In order to be considered as a congested corridor, the following two criteria had to be met:

• Average speed during congested periods must be less than half of what the free flow speed would be. If the free flow speed is 55 miles an hour, during congested times speeds would need to be below 27.5 miles an hour. • Corridor has to be congested for a length more than 3 miles.

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 9

The East and Westbound tubes of the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel were the two corridors that qualified in the Hampton Roads area. The Eastbound and Westbound tubes ranked 67the and 221st respectively nationwide. (Mayor Price and Mr. Morgan depart) Delegate Oder asked if there was another congested corridor in Virginia and how did it compare to the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel. Mr. Nichols replied that I-95 in Northern Virginia was ranked the highest congested corridor in Virginia. Mayor Fraim stated the report contained good information which should be submitted to the General Assembly and CTB members. Delegate Oder commented that Hampton Roads is geographically challenged with regards to transportation. He noted that the City of Richmond has instituted toll roads and authorities and was not nearly as restricted by its geography as Hampton Roads. Mr. Shucet expressed his appreciation to Mr. Nichols for an excellent report and indicated that with both the CTB’s involvement in allocating funds, and the HRTPO’s prioritization process, Hampton Roads can begin moving forward in solving its transportation issues. Mr. Wheeler asked why Washington D.C. was not in the report. Mr. Nichols replied that Washington D.C. is a larger metropolitan area than that of Hampton Roads and only comparable metropolitan areas were included in the report. HRTPO Title VI Plan Ms. Miller stated the HRTPO Title VI plan was recently updated and was approved by the Federal Highway Administration. The Title VI plan will be implemented throughout the HRTPO and all of its practices. Title VI was created in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlines the condition that any entity that is the recipient of federal funds may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, and national origin with the use of those federal funds. Subsequent laws and Presidential Executive Orders added handicap, sex, age, and income status to the criteria for which discrimination is prohibited. She explained that while Title VI is a law, environmental justice is a mandate that President Clinton signed into effect in 1994 and concerns itself with transparency and access to the process. She presented slides that outlined how the Title VI plan will be utilized within the following areas:

• Communications and Public Participation • Planning and Programming • Environmental Justice • Consultant Contracts • Education and Training

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 10

In conclusion, Ms. Miller asked for approval of the HRTPO Title VI Plan and HRTPO Resolution 2011-03. Mayor Fraim Moved to approve the HRTPO Title VI Plan; seconded by Mr. Shepperd. The Motion Carried. Mr. Shepperd Moved to approve HRTPO Resolution 2011-03; seconded by Mr. Heuer. The Motion Carried. HRTPO High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail Train Recognition Mr. Farmer explained he had met with Ms. Drake on several occasions and they were in the process of working out a strategy to refine a draft scope of the High-Speed Rail Transit Vision. He noted that a decision on Tier I is still pending and commented the HRTPO could not move forward without approval. In conversations with Ms. Drake, Mr. Farmer stated she had suggested the HRTPO consider branding the train from Norfolk so that the public could more easily identify the train with Hampton Roads. Senator Yvonne Miller stated high-speed and intercity passenger rail is a critical issue for Hampton Roads and it must stay in the forefront for the HRTPO. She recommended the HRTPO investigate ways to utilize the area’s waterways for business travel as well as recreational uses. Chairman Sessoms thanked Senator Yvonne Miller for her comments and indicated HRTPO staff would evaluate train branding for Hampton Roads. Mr. Shepperd expressed his appreciation to Senator Yvonne Miller regarding a letter she transmitted to Senator Mark Warner. HRTPO Board Action Items: Three Month Tentative Schedule Chairman Sessoms outlined the three month summary of upcoming action items in the HRTPO agenda. Correspondence of Interest Chairman Sessoms highlighted the items in the Correspondence of Interest section of the Agenda packet. For Your Information Chairman Sessoms noted the items in the For Your Information section of the Agenda packet. Old/New Business There was no old/new business.

Attachment 6

HRTPO Board Minutes – April 21, 2011 – Page 11

Adjournment With no further business to come before the Hampton Roads TPO, the meeting adjourned at 11:43 a.m. William D. Sessoms, Jr. Dwight L. Farmer Chairman Executive Director/Secretary

Attachment 6