meetings of the management committees · 2020-01-15 · 6. administration office space lease steve...

VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433

MEETINGS OF THE

Management Committees

Valley Metro RPTA METRO Light Rail

MEETING DATE Wednesday, March 5, 2014

MEETING DATE Wednesday, March 5, 2014

TIME 11:00 a.m.

TIME 12:30 p.m.

LOCATION

Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room

101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor Phoenix


February 26, 2014 TO: Members of the Valley Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail Management Committees FROM: Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer RE: March 5, 2014 Packet Notes Attached is the March 5, 2014 agendas and supporting information for the Valley Metro RPTA and METRO Light Rail Management Committee meetings. These meetings can be attended via teleconference. Please contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the call-in information. If you have any questions regarding the information in this packet, please let me know. Parking is available onsite and parking can be accessed via the entrance on Adams Street. Parking validation will be available at the meeting. Transit tickets are also available to those who attend the meeting using transit. If you need detailed directions, please contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433.


February 26, 2014

Transit Management Committee Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

11:00 a.m.

For those participating by telephone, please mute your phone when not speaking. Members please make sure your microphone is turned on when speaking and turned off when you are not speaking. Action

Recommended

1. Public Comment A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the TMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes total for all speakers.

1. For information

2. Minutes Minutes from the February 5, 2014 TMC meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), will brief the TMC on current issues.

3. For information

CONSENT AGENDA

4A. Memorandum of Understanding with Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and City of Phoenix Public Transit Department (COPPTD) for Regional Transit Planning Staff will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization of an update to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the MAG and the COPPTD regarding regional transit planning and programming responsibilities.

4A. For action

2

4B. Intergovernmental Agreements with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration Pass-Through Grants Staff will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute change orders for intergovernmental agreements with the City of Phoenix to allow Valley Metro to be reimbursed for eligible activities.

4B. For action

4C. Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Map Design and Production Services Staff will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to issue a RFP for map design and production services.

4C. For action

4D. Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Staff will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to enter into an IGA with the ADOT for Section 5311 (Rural Transit) pass-through funding for Rural Route 685 for Federal Fiscal Year 2015 (FFY15).

4D. For action

4E. Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of Buckeye Staff will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to enter into an IGA with the City of Buckeye for local funding to match federal funds for Valley Metro to conduct a Buckeye Transit Planning Study and for operation of up to four additional shortened round trips on Route 685-Gila Bend within Buckeye.

4E. For action

REGULAR AGENDA

5. Regional Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Strategy Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Wulf Grote, Director of Planning and Development, who will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the regional TOD Strategy.

5. For action

3

6. Administration Office Space Lease Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Carol Ketcherside, Director of Administration & Organizational Development, who will request that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a 12-year lease agreement with AG 101 First – 21 West Van Buren, LLC (“Landlord” for 101 North First Avenue).

6. For action

7. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events

Chair Sorrell will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events.

7. For information and discussion

8. Next Meeting The next meeting of the TMC is scheduled for Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 11:00 a.m.

8. For information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org.

http://www.valleymetro.org/


DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Public Comment PURPOSE A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the TMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None

mailto:[email protected]


DATE AGENDA ITEM 2 February 26, 2014

Summary Minutes

Valley Metro RPTA Transit Management Committee Wednesday, February 5, 2014 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

Phoenix, AZ 11:00 a.m.

Members Present Jodi Sorrell, City of Mesa, Chair Dan Cook, City of Chandler, Vice Chair Kristen Sexton, City of Avondale Sean Banda, City of Buckeye Jorge Gastelum, City of El Mirage Debbie Albert, City of Glendale Dawn Irvine, Town of Gilbert (via phone) Cato Esquivel, City of Goodyear Mitch Wagner, Maricopa County Maria Hyatt, City of Phoenix Maher Hazine, City of Peoria Madeline Clemann, City of Scottsdale David Kohlbeck, City of Surprise Mike Nevarez for Andrew Ching, City of Tempe Members Not Present Christine Hagen, City of Tolleson Sara Allred, ADOT Chair Sorrell called the meeting to order at 11:03 a.m. 1. Public Comment None. 2. Minutes Minutes from the January 8, 2014 TMC meeting were presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY MAHER HAZINE, SECONDED BY MARIA HYATT AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 8, 2014.

2

3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Mr. Steve Banta provided an update on the following items: Service Changes Design a Transit Wrap Mayor Elaine Scruggs Internship Program State Legislative Update

4. Consent Agenda The following items were presented on the consent agenda:

A. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance Coverage Renewal B. Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and

Single Audit Act Reporting Package C. Contract Award for Concrete Rehabilitation at the Mesa Operations Facility

Mr. Maher Hazine said Mr. Banta, you had mentioned on Item 4A that there were some things that possibly give some other potential insurance companies pause. Can you kind of address what those might be? Mr. Banta said I think, again, working with our broker and then just the way in which we received the bids, only being one, when you operate a maintenance facility, it sometimes lends itself to more concern, more questions, more risk. And from my position, that would have a bearing on whether an insurance company would want to engage in providing insurance, particularly for an industry that they might not fully understand. And again, we've had a good relationship with SFS Western and now CopperPoint. So we feel really good about moving forward with this insurance provider and they've given us a better price this year than they did last year. So we feel good about this award. Mr. Dan Cook said Mr. Banta, on Item 4B, don't have any problem with it. I could easily see how you get to 300,000, but I'm wondering if there could be some level of quantification of square yards, number of catch basins, something like that that helps people relate to. It really is a lot of work you're doing for $300,000. I'm pretty sure you got a good price using the job-order contracting, but, otherwise it just says parking areas and storm drains, which could be a lot or a little. That's all. Mr. Banta said so you're asking for more definition of what work is going to be accomplished Mr. Cook said yes, just so someone can get an idea of it. It really is a lot of work for $300,000.

3

Ms. Debbie Albert said Mr. Banta, and again also on Item 4B, is there a regularly scheduled maintenance program that is for this facility? Or are these just onesie, twosies as they come up and we address immediate needs? Mr. Banta said these are like street rehabilitation programs. Every so often, clearly we have responsibilities to keep the concrete clean. We want to make sure that we're not pooling water in certain areas, want to make sure the grates are structurally sound. Those types of activities do take place. But when the concrete starts cracking and heaving in certain areas, there's not much you can do to prevent it, that if you are working from a facility where you might not have been there when they actually did the original concrete pours. We're really looking at as-is conditions, and as they change we schedule the remediation work.

Ms. Albert said is there a plan for certain capital expenses every five years, 10 years, or whatever. Is there a program like that for this facility also? Mr. Banta said I know we have a long-range capital plan. I believe this is the third year in a row that we've come back and done remediation work. So hopefully after this year and potentially the next, we'll have the whole yard already re-paved and we should expect a reprieve in that work. IT WAS MOVED BY MAHER HAZINE, SECONED BY MIKE NEVAREZ AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. 5. 2014 Federal Public Transportation Agenda John Farry, Government Relations Officer, provided a presentation which included: Big Picture Importance of Federal Investment Importance of Federal Investments Federal Agenda Communication Strategy – We Are on the Move To a Brighter Future To a Revitalized Economy To a Total Transit Network To a Sustainable Local Workforce To Diminishing the Brown Cloud Need You to Help Us Move Next Steps Valley Metro Congressional Staff Luncheon Recommendation

4

Mr. Farry said this information has been reviewed with the Intergovs. Ms. Madeline Clemann said this is really good. I really like this. It's short, simple, really has some spikes in messages. The last message is a message of asking for a partnership to me. And I just, you know, we need them to partner with us to get the work done that we've all been wanting to get done. And I just wondered if you had thought about coming up with a sum of money, a statistic that says: Here's how much we are all are investing in this project together on our side of the table and we need this much from you on the other side of the table. Because one of the things that I think needs to be driven home that often is kind of neglected when we ask for money, we don't approach it from a partnership standpoint and put on the table how much we are designating on our side of the partnership, which to me, kind of fills in the whole table. Mr. Farry said that's a very good point. We usually do talk about that in some of the documentation we have where we talk about that the region has passed with Prop 400 to fund transportation locally. The various cities have passed transportation measures to fund transit. So we do mention that when we're out there, but that's a good point and it's something that we need to call out even more, I agree. I would like to add something, thank you for the compliments on this. I can't take credit for that. I should point to Hillary and her team. They did an excellent job of putting this all together and I think it's a really a good job, too. Mr. Banta said Madeline, to your point, it's well received. Every time we go back there, when John and I are back there talking to our elected leaders, we start out our conversation with: You know we're not always out here with our hands out. And we go over the funding levels from the prop 400 tax, also the local transit taxes from our region. And we let them know the projects that we haven't asked for federal support on that are moving forward. So we clearly do articulate that to them, but thank you for that comment. IT WAS MOVED BY MADELINE CLEMANN, SECONDED BY MARIA HYATT AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO FORWARD TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS APPROVAL OF THE 2014 FEDERAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AGENDA. 6. East Valley Dial-a-Ride Update – Pilot Program Status Ron Brooks, Accessible Transit Services Manager, provided a presentation which included:

5

Purpose and Presentation Outline Valley Metro’s Paratransit Goals Background – Goals of the Pilot Project Financial Results Cost Comparison with Peer Agencies Other Results Customer Perceptions Opportunities for Improvement Alternatives Potential Impact of Model on Demand Cost Projection – Traditional Model Cost Projection – Taxi Model Comparison of Taxi and Traditional Model Growth Scenarios Next Steps

Mr. Cook said good presentation. I think it addressed a lot of things that, at least, I've been thinking about for a while on this, so appreciate the clearly the effort and time put into this because there's a lot of data here. And I think I also share your theory about trip sharing being something that would help control the growth. I often wondered about it, but until you test for it you really don't know the answer, but when we went from the shared model, the traditional shared model, to the taxi, which was just a one-person ride, you could kind of see it going to go up anyway. I'm not sure that was the original intent, but for whatever reason it turned out that way, which is fine. We just need to move on from there. I'm glad to see we're going to take a look at that and look at incentives to maybe even try and further incent the trip sharing, because I think that will keep growth somewhat under a good trend. I think another factor that you allude to, just briefly, was the change in rates. I think that will help a little bit too. So it's really going to be hard to really consider these final conclusions until we see the next fare increase, which is coming in July, I think that will have some difference or impact on the numbers as well. So I'd like not to maybe rush in to some things until we see what that does, but there's certainly are a lot of things that we can do. I think the other thing that's always been, to me, a good outcome of this change is that, regardless of the cost issues, which are factors, but regardless -- setting those aside for a minute, we are carrying a lot more people and that means a lot more people are starting to be mobile and are being able to use this, so let's not lose sight of the fact that it's a good thing that we're carrying more people. But on the flip side, we do have to pay for it and, you know, that reduction of, whatever it was, eight to $10 per trip is really significant, so I look forward to having more discussion on this and working with you and your staff to, you know, make this a better

6

system overall. And ultimately, as I mentioned to Mr. Banta, it would be nice if this could be used more as a regional model somehow -- well, and if appropriate with discussion with the other cities. So thank you. Good job. Mr. Hazine said although I'm representing a west valley city and we are using a similar model in the northwest valley, I just want to make a few comments. I just hope as a region we don't go back to the traditional model. I think there are a lot of benefits with this model. Clearly, there are some things that we need to do to better manage it and I hope in doing the management it's just more of maximizing the efficiency of the system versus trying to curtail use, because that's as Mr. Cook had noted, that that's really not our intent. Our intent is to promote more people being mobile. But we do have fixed routes where they're able and we should be promoting those. I think the pricing structure, it should be such that it promotes one mode over another versus just simply prohibitive of use, but I think this model is scalable. It's something that we in Peoria been able to, at least, provide the similar service for much reduced cost. We do have a more of a hybrid, we do have cutaway buses, as well as taxis, but the reason we do that is simply because we don't have as many fixed routes, so our cut-away buses provide more of a kind of a concentric area and then everything else on the outside that the cabs provide. But I think this model is a great model. I think let's just look at how to better manage it versus just simply abandoning it all together. Ms. Clemann said thank you very much for the presentation. I really got a lot out of it and it answered some questions that we all had been thinking about. But, you know, we didn't have the data that you have to support it and the time to really put it together, so I really want to show my appreciation. Thank you for that. I think you're absolutely on the right track. I had three different areas -- we had talked to people at these partners meetings about software that's needed to really manage and understand the trip patterns that were occurring, I believe I could state it that way, with our broker company. And when we talked about it, the price seemed pretty high. But as I think about this as a regional program and not just for the East Valley, is it possible that we could improve the technology with better software and somehow, through all of us, share the cost of that as opposed to sharing the cost of East Valley Dial-A-Ride? Is it something that we could use in other systems to help improve their productivity? Mr. Brooks said I don't want to answer the part I don't know, which is the second part about sharing the costs. But what I will tell you is, in our contract with Total, this is a

7

shared responsibility. They bring most of the technology to the table and we are definitely talking with them now about what we need and how we need to make this go forward and how that shapes out in an option where, you know, in terms of asking for technology. That is not something that they currently have available to them now, but I'm not sure. But I will tell you from my standpoint, we have to have the tools that we need to manage the service and we will, you know, find ways to create those tools whether it's getting them into this contract, you know, looking at it as a future capital need.

And as far as how we share those costs, I mean, that's probably something for someone else to answer, but, you know, I think you can definitely use technology to make the service run better, but it's obviously a combination of technology and good policy. So we're focused on both. Ms. Clemann said one of the things that Valley Metro might focus on a little bit more is maybe getting some discretionary grant funding for that type of technology. I could see us possibly maybe working into a New Freedoms Grant. I'm not sure about that. I don't have the requirements right in front of me. But maybe we ought to look at some alternative ways of funding it, so we can get it and get it done. Secondly, in figuring the demand increase, I think you actually answered this, I was thinking about how the non-ADA trips -- and the bottom-line question is: If we all, as jurisdictions, at least with East Valley Dial-A-Ride, agree to over time completely do away with non-ADA ridership, if that's possible, and handle it internally at our jurisdictional levels, which, you know, Scottsdale is probably a little bit different and that we could do that, would that help reduce the cost and the ridership increases? Mr. Brooks said I think that's an interesting question and what I would tell you is that, rather than focusing on eliminating non-ADA service, one could argue that there are people who have disabilities and who are seniors who use non-ADA service who are not using ADA service because maybe they don't, you know, maybe it doesn't meet their particular needs. If you eliminate those services, one could argue that you might encourage people to apply for ADA; however, in this region it's a little bit different because of the way the fares work and the way the services overlap. I think what I would like to see us focus on is really, really getting people to use all of our transportation services, because to me that's a bigger payoff than trying to cut non-ADA service for people who might truly need it for some trips or at some times. So I think what I want to try to figure out is how do we have our cake and eat it, too, and, you know, the other approach that we're trying to take is moving non-ADA trips to lower cost business models. And I know those of you in the East Valley are pretty tired of hearing about RideChoice, but RideChoice is a model that delivers lower cost. And you in Scottsdale have your cab voucher program, which works kind of similarly. Those programs cost less, and they are designed in a way that encourages riders to travel

8

locally and take shorter trips, which is less expensive. So the two approaches for me are use those less costly models to do non-ADA trips where I can. And the second piece is really try to help people get to the use of our other modes which cost less to operate. Ms. Clemann said and on that line I would appreciate in the future a similar look at the platinum passes that we're using for this program. I think Mesa is using them, and I don't know who else is, if anybody else. So if we could get some data on that and get a look at how that's correlating to the use of the East Valley Dial-A-Ride and other ride share programs as an additional means of transporting . Ms. Sorrell said I'd just like to say I really, really appreciate your goals and strategies, and I told you this on several occasions, I think it really gives us a road map kind of where we want to strive to kind of take the program. In Mesa it gives us a little bit of comfort level, so I appreciate that. I'd like to maybe in the future, like maybe in like six months or nine months or when you guys think is appropriate, get an update on where we are toward reaching some of those goals and objectives and kind of where we are with some of that. But I think this is a great presentation and a great summary of where we've been and kind of where we're going in the near future.

Ms. Albert said in looking at your increase in ridership, is there a breakdown that you have in the increase of ADA riders versus non-ADA riders? I know you mentioned there's been an increase in those applying for ADA eligibility, but do you have a breakdown of the two? Mr. Brooks said we do in our budget that we're working on, we do break that out. I didn't for this presentation and, so I would say I don't have it with me, it's something that we are building internally because we need to, so we can communicate costs and funding to the member cities, but it's not something I brought today. Chair Sorrell said again, that was an item for information only. The next item is the transit performance report. 7. Transit Performance Report Mr. John McCormack provided a presentation which included: FY 2013 Transit Performance Report Overview System Wide Summary Bus System Peer Comparison

9

Ms. Clemann said if we could have the average fare for the other systems that would be helpful. Light Rail System Peer Comparison Paratransit System Peer Comparison

Mr. Cook said Mr. McCormack, just looking at the table, and maybe this is for future report on San Diego and Houston, I notice that the operating cost per boarding is significantly lower, the $25.28 which is closer to what we have in the East Valley. And I'm just wondering if we can maybe, as a group, look into what they're doing because they're obviously doing something there because they have a pretty good operating cost, their average fares are pretty decent and their average subsidy is pretty decent as well, so they're obviously doing something good over there. So that might be worth seeing if there's any lessons we can learn on what they're doing. Summary of Results

Ms. Maria Hyatt said John, question for you regarding the average fare. I know you presented this at the RMC last month also. And even though we've raised our fares, we are actually having -- we have a reduced average fare being collected. And I saw, if I remember correctly from last month, that we are seeing a higher usage of reduced fares than in previous years; is that correct? Do we have any other factors on why we believe our fare recovery and our average fare is lower -- not even a comparison to the other peer cities, because I don't know -- they may have a higher rate than us. Mr. McCormack said to answer the question at first, with respect to the Fiscal Year '13, our numbers were all positive in that direction. I mean, we held our average fare level. Now we did implement an increase March 1. So we would have expected, perhaps, a small uptick toward the second half of the year or the last four months of the year, and we did not realize that. I would say that the primary reason for that, a couple of things, one, was the timing of some of those purchases that are made at the retail outlets, as we talked about, but the other and continuing issue is the greater mix of reduced fare passes that are being used by our patrons. And that continues to be a trend that we're seeing in Fiscal '14 as the year has rolled out. And so we're doing some things to try to make sure that those that use the reduced fare pass are eligible. We're implementing some improvements to the ticket vending machine itself for rail where we're going to be making the individual understand what the eligibilities are before they select the reduced fare pass.

10

There's been public outreach. And it's a continuing issue with respect to operator training on fixed route bus and security folks on light rail to get greater fare compliance in those areas. So we are working on those and we recognize those are continuing challenges as we move forward. Mr. Mike Nevarez said John, do we have any demographics on the ridership O&D or anything else that would indicate what our ridership is made up of, you know, percentage of youth, obviously that probably increasing especially with Tempe providing the free pass or still paid for that, but any other demographic or categories that might be increasing that would indicate, you know, or justify the average lower fare per passenger or revenue, because I think it's -- we're trying to encourage youth to ride, so we're going to expect that. Mr. McCormack said we actually have a group that's working right now to analyze what's happening to our ridership as a whole and certainly part of that is understanding the commuter element, the youth element, and so forth. So we're going to have an O&D survey that's going to occur this coming year, and we're going to implement the type of questions that help us get answers to those: Who's using the reduced fare pass? Has the mix of our ridership actually changed from the prior years? And that would help to explain the greater usage of the reduced fare, you know, from the prior year, so we will make an extra effort to get those into the O&D surveys that we're going to be doing. This item was presented for information only. 8. Review of 2014 Bond Issuance Paul Hodgins, Manager of Revenue Generation and Financial Planning, provided a presentation which included: Overview Summary Bond Proceeds Usage

Mr. Cook said on the last slide before this, on the preliminary column, was that an estimate that was like the week before, you know, a specific date before when you actually did do the sale on -- I forget what the date was -- the thirteenth? Mr. Hodgins said Mr. Cook, I believe that was actually one week before when our financial advisor developed this looking at what the market was that particular day, I think it was January 7, when he completed that analysis. Mr. Cook said the reason I ask the question is I know when we talked about the approval for the bond sale, there was, you know, you were asking for the flexibility to do a week before so you could take the best advantage, and I know that's what you're

11

trying to show here, but when I was listening, I wasn't sure if that was actual market conditions a week before or if that was just your broker's guess as to what it would be the week before. And I guess I'm wondering, you know, from the perspective of what would have happened and what did happen, you know, if you could maybe clarify more what that preliminary was, because I think that helps everybody understand that there really is an advantage of having flexibility and here's the proof, you know, we made six million dollars on that deal by waiting a week, you know, or being able to wait a week or whatever the case may be. So, at any rate, however it would be best to, or if even possible to show that, that would be good. Mr. Hodgins said it's hard to say exactly where we would have ended up had we sold the week before. This was a best guess based on other issues that sold the week before that may have been similar, you know, revenue -- actually their revenue bonds based on an excise tax with similar ratings. I mean, there are so many factors that go into what the pricing is. So looking at what sold, this was kind of the best guess of what would have happened had we sold in those conditions the week before. Mr. Cook said I guess, all I was trying to say is, and maybe it was on a best guess, it was probably more than a guess, it was probably a lot of thought and a little bit of conjecture in there in terms of what was going to happen, but it was really kind of based on the market conditions the week before or whatever the date was two weeks before. That just helps show that by waiting, you were able to really do a lot better. So that's all that counts. This item was presented for information. 9. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 12:29 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Chief Executive Officer’s Report PURPOSE Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the TMC on current issues. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 4A February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Memorandum of Understanding with Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and City of Phoenix Public Transit Department (COPPTD) for Regional Transit Planning PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute an update to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with MAG and COPPTD regarding regional transit planning and programming responsibilities. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Federal law requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and transit operators to work cooperatively in the development of long range transportation plans and Transportation Improvement Programs. MAG, Valley Metro (VM), and the COPPTD developed an MOU that defines that cooperative relationship to foster regional transit planning, which feeds directly into state and national planning. Regional transit planning roles and responsibilities were defined in an MOU involving the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA), Valley Metro Rail (VMR), MAG and the COPPTD in April 2010. The RPTA Board approved the MOU in February 2010, followed by VMR Board approval in March 2010. The MOU was also approved by the MAG Regional Council in March 2010. Since the MOU’s approval in 2010, several changes have occurred to necessitate an update to the agreement. At the regional level, RPTA and VMR staffs were combined under a single Valley Metro staff organization. Additionally, federal rules, requirements and procedures related to transit planning were modified through the passage of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) in 2012. In addition, the MOU participants agreed that adjustments and clarification of roles and responsibilities were needed to reflect experiences since the MOU was originally approved. As a result, Valley Metro, MAG and COPPTD staffs have worked together to update the MOU. It was revised and expanded to cover the following categories:

• Transit representation on MAG Committees • Regional transit planning coordination • Regional transit programming and fund allocation coordination • Performance measurement, monitoring and reporting • Public transportation agency safety plans and transit asset management • Air quality

2

• Human services coordination transportation plan • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice • MAG Unified Planning Work Program and annual budget

Each of these topics is covered in the attached MOU. This MOU recognizes that final guidance and regulations related to some MAP-21 topics are pending and amendments/modifications may be needed as pertinent federal documents are finalized. COST AND BUDGET There is no fiscal impact of this action. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action RPTA Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the MOU for Regional Transit Planning. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS Memorandum of Understanding


1

REGIONAL TRANSIT PLANNING, PROGRAMING, AND FUND ALLOCATION AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is between and among the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA), Valley Metro Rail (METRO), and the City of Phoenix (COP) regarding transit planning, programming and fund allocation. This AGREEMENT replaces the previous Transit Planning, Programming and Fund Allocation agreement dated April 6, 2010. This AGREEMENT recognizes the Central Arizona Regional Transit (CART) Partnership that is comprised of the Town of Florence, City of Coolidge, Pinal County, and Central Arizona College. The CART Partnership was created to plan and operate a regional transit system in Pinal County. The CART service currently runs service between Florence, Coolidge, Central Arizona College, and Casa Grande, and is operated by the City of Coolidge. This AGREEMENT recognizes the transit operators in the MAG region are: RPTA, METRO, City of Phoenix, City of Coolidge, City of Glendale, City of Scottsdale, and City of Peoria. This AGREEMENT recognizes that final guidance and regulations related to Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) is pending and amendments/modifications may need to be made to this AGREEMENT. WITNESS THAT: WHEREAS, the RPTA, METRO, COP, transit operators, and other local government agencies in the MAG region are eligible to apply for and receive Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and/or Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) transit funding for capital, operating, and planning assistance for the delivery of public transportation; and WHEREAS, MAG is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for transportation planning in Maricopa County and parts of Pinal County. This area includes the Phoenix/Mesa and Avondale/Goodyear UZAs as shown in Appendix 1. MAG is directed by a duly comprised Regional Council of elected officials with a committee structure that represents all of the transit operators in the region to advise the MAG Regional Council on transportation planning and policy questions; and

WHEREAS, RPTA is the regional public transportation authority established in Maricopa County (AR§ 48-5102) and governed by elected officials from 16 member agencies. RPTA is the statutory recipient of transportation excise tax revenues applied to the Public Transportation Fund for implementation of the public transit element of the regional transportation plan, including the development and approval of the Transit Life Cycle Program. RPTA is also the regional public transportation authority designated to receive Arizona Lottery Funds for transit purposes; and WHEREAS, METRO is the nonprofit public corporation charged with the design, construction and operation of the valley’s light rail system and governed by a Board of Directors with representatives consisting of the five Member Cities of Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, Glendale and Chandler; and WHEREAS, RPTA and METRO are governed by individual Boards of Directors yet operate under a single Chief Executive Officer and staff, known as Valley Metro (VM); and

2

WHEREAS, the COP is the Designated Recipient for federal formula funds allocated under the Federal Transportation Act, as amended, in the Phoenix/Mesa UZA, and is the Grant (Direct) Recipient for federal formula funds allocated to the Avondale/Goodyear UZA as noted in the Supplemental Agreement signed by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the City of Phoenix that is submitted with each grant; and WHEREAS, this AGREEMENT describes the planning and programming relationship among those agencies that is consistent with federal law requiring the MPO and transit operators to work cooperatively in the development of long range transportation plans and Transportation Improvement Programs; and WHEREAS, the MAP-21 requires MPOs and States to establish performance measures and targets in their Long Range Transportation Plans and their Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) that address national performance measures issued by the U.S. DOT and are based on national goals outlined in law – safety, infrastructure condition, congestion reduction, system reliability, economic vitality, environmental sustainability, reduced project delivery delays, transit safety, and transit asset management; and WHEREAS, MAG, VM, the COP and other participating local government agencies rely upon a cooperative relationship to foster regional transit planning which feeds directly into state and national planning; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to the regional transit system, MAG, VM, the COP agree as follows:

I. Purpose. The purpose of this AGREEMENT is to set forth the basic structure for cooperative planning and decision making regarding transit planning and programming between MAG, VM, the COP and other participating local government agencies.

II. Transit Representation on MAG Committees.

1. Regional Council. The Regional Council is the governing and policy-making body for MAG and

comprises of elected officials appointed by each member agency. For the majority of members, the city or town mayor serves as the Regional Council member. The chairs of the Boards of Supervisors represent Maricopa and Pinal Counties on the Regional Council. The State Transportation Board members for Maricopa County represent the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). The chair of the Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee also serves on the Regional Council. The three Native American Communities are typically represented by their governor or president.

3

2. Transportation Policy Committee. The Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) consists of twenty-three members as follows: seventeen members of the regional planning agency and six members who represent regionwide business interests, one of whom must represent transit interests, one of whom must represent freight interests and one of whom must represent construction interests. The president of the senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives shall each appoint three members to the committee. Members who are appointed to the TPC serve six-year terms. The chairperson of the regional transportation planning agency may submit names to the president of the senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives for consideration for appointment to TPC.

3. Management Committee. All MAG member agencies are invited to serve as voting members of

the MAG Management Committee. ADOT and VM are also invited to serve as voting members of the MAG Management Committee on transportation related issues. The Management Committee makes recommendations to the MAG Regional Council.

4. Transportation Review Committee (TRC). All MAG member agencies are invited to serve as voting members of the MAG TRC. ADOT and VM are also invited to serve as voting members of the MAG TRC. The TRC makes recommendations to the MAG Management Committee and Regional Council.

5. Transit Committee. All MAG member agencies are invited to serve as voting members of the MAG Transit Committee. ADOT and VM are also invited to serve as voting members of the MAG Transit Committee. The MAG Transit Committee serves as the primary MAG committee to coordinate regional transit planning and programming of federal transit related funds and makes recommendations to the MAG TRC, Management Committee, and Regional Council.

III. Regional Transit Planning Coordination.

MAG agrees to prepare, adopt and maintain, as required, a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). MAG, VM and the COP agree to work cooperatively with each other and with the other transit operators and local government agencies in the refinement of the RTP through the conduct of and participation in multimodal and operational transportation studies. MAG, VM, and the COP agree to work cooperatively with each other and the other transit operators and local government agencies as described below in the development of those studies. The RTP is updated on a bi-annual basis, unless otherwise noted.

The following definitions clarify the differences in coordination levels. Lead Agency – is an organization that has the main responsibility of managing a project/study, including the primary recipient of work products and invoices for review. Co-Manager – is an agency that aids in directing the project/study and receives draft work products after the lead agency receives them and provides input prior to the review by other agencies on the products/project. Regional Partner – is an organization that participates at a higher level than other agencies and provides guidance on the project/study based on their expertise. Partner – is an organization who participates with other agencies on the project/study.

pdillon

Sticky Note

Remove space

4

1. Regional Transit System Studies. For region wide transit system studies MAG will be the lead agency with VM and COP as regional partners.

2. Sub-Regional Transit Studies. For sub-regional Studies MAG will be the lead agency with VM as

a co-manager. MAG may determine to have a transit operator conduct a specific sub-regional study.

3. High Capacity Transit Corridor Project Development. For high capacity transit (HCT) corridor

project development VM shall be the lead agency conducting and managing the project with MAG as a regional partner, and the affected local government agency(s) as partner(s). For commuter rail corridor project development, MAG, in cooperation with VM and the affected agencies/jurisdiction(s), shall determine the appropriate agency to conduct and manage the commuter rail corridor project development. For HCT project development phase for projects that require a transit corridor to move into the project development phase per federal regulations, and into the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis, VM will be the lead agency with MAG as a regional partner in the project. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) resulting from the analysis will be reviewed and approved through the VM and MAG committee process. The process for review and approval of an LPA includes the following steps: 1) review and adoption by the affected local government agency(s); 2) informational review and approval by the METRO and/or RPTA Boards, as appropriate; and 3) review through the MAG committee process, with final approval of the LPA by the MAG Regional Council. To ensure continuity in the planning process, VM will provide periodic updates to the MAG Transit Committee on HCT corridors that are in the project development phase. MAG will provide oversight and quality control over the use of the MAG travel demand model.

4. Transit System Capital Facilities and Fleet Support Studies. For regional studies MAG and VM,

in cooperation with the affected local government agency(s), shall determine the appropriate agency to lead and manage the study; for site location or community-specific studies, VM or other transit operators/local governments agencies will be the lead.

5. Regional Transit Operations Planning. VM will be the lead agency for regional transit service

planning. VM coordinates and facilitates the Regional Service Planning Working Group, which includes MAG and VM member agencies.

6. Community Transit Operations Planning. For community transit service plans, VM will be the lead agency with MAG as a partner, and will utilize the MAG RTP, related sub-regional transit studies, and other relevant studies as a starting point for analysis.

7. Sustainability. Regional sustainability issues should be coordinated at MAG, and project/facility

specific sustainability initiatives, should be coordinated by VM in conjunction with the local government agency(s).

8. Regional Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Planning/Land Use Integration. VM leads a TOD

Working Group that is collaborating on TOD related issues and developing a regional TOD strategy that includes goals, roles, and responsibilities. VM and MAG will work with local government agencies to implement effective TOD.

5

IV. Regional Transit Programming and Fund Allocation Coordination. As it relates to funding allocation, MAG, VM and the COP agree to work cooperatively with each other and with the other transit operators and local government agencies in ensuring the provision of coordinated, region wide transit services. 1. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Program of Projects (POP) Development

Process. The MAG TIP development process shall serve as the focal point for making a five year determination regarding the distribution of federal funds available for allocation by MAG for the Phoenix/Mesa and Avondale/Goodyear UZA. The TIP is updated on a bi-annual basis, unless noted otherwise. When developing a new TIP, MAG will utilize the Regional Programming Guidelines for Federal Transit Formula Funds and work with VM as a regional partner to collect information regarding projects in the Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP), which are the region’s priorities for regional public transportation/proposition 400 funds. Then MAG, working through the MAG Transit Committee, will develop a recommended prioritized list of projects per year consistent with the TLCP for the allocation of federal funds for five years, which would include all projected FTA 5307, 5337, and 5339 funds apportioned to the UZAs plus additional federal funds that may be available for distribution from FTA and FHWA. Member agencies submitting a locally funded project or a project for regional competitive funds for inclusion in the TIP, will coordinate with the regional transit operator (i.e. VM and/or COP) to evaluate the proposed project for regional connectivity in accordance with the Transit Standards & Performance Measures. MAG, VM and COP will coordinate if a member agency requests to change/modify regional routes. On an annual basis, MAG will utilize the Regional Programming Guidelines for Federal Transit Formula Funds to reconcile the current year of the TIP with the Federal funding apportionment to develop the annual transit program of projects (POP). MAG then consults with VM, the COP, transit operators and local government agencies working through the MAG Transit Committee to finalize the proposed program of projects to be adopted, and carries out a public involvement and review process for TIP adoption or amendment, in compliance with 23 CFR Sections 450.312 and 450.324. The same notices of intent, publication of proposed projects, and public involvement and review also shall be used to fulfill the public hearing requirements of 49 U.S.C. Section 5307, covering review and approval of FTA grant applications for TIP projects. MAG will advertise the proposed public hearing(s), projects to be programmed, and fund amounts to be programmed through their existing public participation process. This annual transit POP is forwarded to the MAG Transportation Review Committee, Management Committee, Transportation Policy Committee and the Regional Council to be considered for inclusion into the MAG TIP.

2. Transportation for Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities – Section 5310. This federal program supports and assists public agencies and private nonprofit groups in meeting the transportation needs of elderly persons and persons with disabilities.

6

There are three defined areas in the MAG region: the Phoenix-Mesa UZA, the Avondale-Goodyear UZA, and rural/non-urban areas, please see Appendix 1. Transportation providers in the Phoenix-Mesa UZA apply for 5310 funds through the MAG/City of Phoenix process. Transportation providers in the Avondale-Goodyear UZA and the rural/non-urban areas apply for 5310 funds through ADOT. All agencies applying for 5310 funding are required to be included in a Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan. All agencies applying for 5310 funding in the MAG region are required to be included in the MAG Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan. As the Designated Recipient for the Phoenix-Mesa UZA, COP develops the 5310 application in coordination with MAG, and utilizing the MAG Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities Transportation Committee, applications are reviewed and evaluated. ADOT facilitates an application process for rural/non-urban local government agencies and for the Avondale-Goodyear UZA. ADOT also utilizes the MAG Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities Transportation Committee to review and evaluate applications through their process. This program requires that applicants demonstrate they are utilizing the coordination strategies identified in the Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan.

3. Job Access Reverse Commute Projects – Section 5307. MAP-21 consolidated a number of

federal transportation programs. The Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) program is no longer a stand-alone program, but is now eligible for funding under the Section 5307 program. Per the Regional Programming Guidelines for Federal Transit Formula Funds, the region prioritized an annual set aside of the Section 5307 funds – to fund JARC funds for the Phoenix-Mesa UZA, even though it is not federally required. Only agencies in the Phoenix-Mesa UZA are eligible for these sub-allocated funds. The Avondale-Goodyear UZA has not designated a portion of the small UZA 5307 funds to be utilized specific for JARC-related operating activities. MAG develops and facilitates the application process for Phoenix-Mesa Section 5307 JARC related projects. Projects are not required to be selected from a locally coordinated planning process, but participation in coordination efforts is encouraged.

4. Grant Application for Federal Transit Funding. The COP is the Designated Recipient for the

Phoenix/Mesa UZA and Grant (Direct) recipient for the Avondale/Goodyear UZA for federal formula funds allocated under the Federal Transit Act, as amended, the COP will prepare grant applications to the FTA for federal transit funding. MAG works cooperatively with the COP to determine if the TIP is in agreement with the grant applications. If agreement is reached, MAG concurs with the reconciliation. All transit operators and local government agencies agree to work in good faith to develop consistent programming, documentation, and funding requests in a manner consistent with FTA requirements.

5. Progress Reports for Active Grants. Transit operators and local government agencies receiving federal transit funding will assist the COP and MAG’s efforts to track the overall progress of transit projects in active grants and the TIP. At a minimum, milestone/progress reports submitted to FTA and reviewed by MAG shall contain all of the information required in FTA Circular 5010, as amended from time to time, for grant management requirements. If project specific questions are raised by FTA or MAG that cannot be answered through review of the Transportation Electronic Award and Management (TEAM) documentation, the affected transit

7

operator or local government agency will, upon request, provide MAG or the COP, as applicable, additional information. This will be noted in agreements between the COP and sub recipients. Examples of information that may be periodically requested include the following: • A classification of the projects by the individual categories, as identified in the TIP. • A documentation of the stage of project implementation. • An explanation for any project delays if the project is behind schedule, and a remedy plan. • The reasons for any cost overruns if the project is over budget. • A status on the amount of federal funding obligated, received, and used to support projects. • Any identified needs for a TIP amendment. • Project savings to be reverted, if any, at project completion. Additionally, MAG is responsible for tracking the overall progress of all projects in the TIP. MAG is required to produce an annual list of projects for which federal funds have been obligated in the preceding year, and ensures that it is made available for public review.

6. TIP Amendments/Administrative Modifications. Each transit operator and local government

agency receiving transit funding is responsible for notifying MAG if there is the need to amend the TIP. Amendments may require three to four months to process for approval. MAG typically processes TIP amendments on a quarterly basis. A formal request for changes in project cost, scope, or schedule must be made to be incorporated in an amendment. Certain minor adjustments and administrative and project budget modifications can be made outside the formal amendment process, but must be requested in writing.

As part of the quarterly progress report, or more frequent reporting if required, each transit operator or local government agency receiving transit funding will notify MAG regarding the reasons an amendment to the TIP is needed. TIP amendments may be needed to address issues such as funding shortfalls, delays in project implementation and/or new projects that need to be included in the TIP. Subrecipients of FTA funding shall regularly update the COP on project status, and the COP shall periodically provide a grant status review to the MAG Transit Committee.

V. Performance Measurement, Monitoring, and Reporting.

As required by MAP-21, performance measurements are incorporated in the RTP, and future versions will include targets for the public transportation system as a whole that is based on safety, infrastructure condition/state of good repair, congestion reduction, system reliability, economic vitality, environmental sustainability, reduced project delivery delays, and transit asset management. MAG, VM, COP, and providers of public transportation will cooperatively select performance targets through a working group established at VM that includes MAG and VM member agencies. The performance targets are incorporated into the MAG RTP and the MAG TIP that relate to the above mentioned objectives. The MAG TIP will also report on the anticipated progress toward achieving the targets brought about by implementing the TIP. Additionally, VM in coordination with MAG, COP, transit operators and local government agencies are developing and will implement service standards and performance measures for the region’s transit service. In order to provide effective and efficient transit service that is affordable to passengers and taxpayers in the greater Phoenix metropolitan region, tradeoffs are required

8

between the costs and the benefits of providing the service. Service Standards will provide a formal mechanism for making these tradeoffs in an objective and equitable way, and provide both decision-makers and the public with the necessary data and evidence when discussing routing, scheduling, and service change decisions.

VI. Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans & Transit Asset Management. Since FTA has the authority to inspect and audit public transportation systems, VM, COP and recipients of FTA funding are required to develop agency safety plans that include performance targets, strategies, and staff training. As well, VM, COP, grantees and sub-recipients of FTA funds are required to develop Transit Asset Management Plans (TAMP) that are linked to the FTA “state of good repair” objective standards for measuring the condition of capital assets, including equipment, rolling stock, infrastructure, and facilities. MAG, VM, and the COP will lead the effort in working with grantees and sub-recipients of federal funds in setting targets based on the FTA “state of good repair” performance measures. The COP will be required to annually report on the progress of the recipients toward meeting the performance targets established for state of good repair in the Transit Asset Management Plan. Projects programmed with 5337-State of Good Repair funds must be included in the TAMP. MAG will integrate these reports into the TIP and RTP development and implementation process to build and improve the plan.

VII. Air Quality.

Since the metro-Phoenix area is in nonattainment for air quality standard, MAG is responsible for determining conformity of the TIP and RTP with the State Implementation Plan to achieve air quality standards. The goal is to ensure that transportation plans, programs, and projects do not cause or contribute to violations of the air quality standards.

Conformity consultation in the MAG region is to be done in accordance with 40 CFR 93.105 and Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-1405. Under these requirements, MAG consults with local government agencies and appropriate State and federal agencies on the TIP, the RTP, conformity analysis, and the MAG Unified Planning Work Program and Annual Budget. For local government agency consultation, the MAG Management Committee is the primary contact. This includes VM, the COP and other local government agencies that provide transit service.

VIII. Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan.

The MAG Unified Planning Work Program and Annual Budget includes the Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan as required by MAP-21 regulations. This plan pertains to the entire MAG region per the Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA). The Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan is developed by MAG with the COP, VM, and other regional stakeholders including the private/non-profit transportation providers. The Plan is updated by MAG in conjunction with the development of a new Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). This activity results in the identification of coordination strategies to ensure human services transportation more efficient and seamless as it pertains to the FTA Section 5310 projects. All agencies applying for 5310 funding are required to be included in a Human Services Coordination Transportation Plan.

9

IX. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice (EJ). The Title VI of the Civil Rights Act states that "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Environmental Justice is “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” Title VI and EJ activities are undertaken by VM, the COP, and the other various transit operators in the region. All these partners working closely together ensure that all people in the region have a voice in and benefit from investments made in transportation.

Per FTA Circular 4702.1B, the MPO and all transit providers are required to develop and implement a Title VI and EJ Program and update their Program every three years to ensure Title VI and EJ compliance. MAG is responsible for Title VI and EJ at the metropolitan planning level. This includes regional plans, studies, and analyses of data to support the work of MAG. VM is responsible for Title VI and EJ at the regional transit planning and operating level. This includes documenting all pertinent transit Title VI complaints, developing system-wide service standards and policies, developing service and fare equity policies, and performs regional transit service changes and fare structure equity analysis and analysis for capital transit projects to ensure that these are Title VI and EJ compliant. The COP is the designated recipient of FTA funds and apportions funds to subrecipients. The COP is also responsible for monitoring subrecipients' adherence to FTA requirements. The COP will respond to FTA reviews that report Title VI issues.”

X. MAG Unified Planning Work Program and Annual Budget. The MAG Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) and Annual Budget is developed in a collaborative process with federal, state and local government agencies and input is sought from the public on key issues facing the MAG region. Planning for the UPWP is a continuous process. In developing the transit element of the UPWP, MAG meets with VM, the COP and ADOT to ensure coordination of projects. Portions of the UPWP are brought incrementally to the MAG Regional Council Executive Committee, serving as the MAG Finance Committee, and to the MAG Management Committee and MAG Regional Council. Budget presentations are made from January through May each year.

In the spring of each year, the draft budget is provided to local, state and federal agencies for review in anticipation of the Intermodal Planning Group (IPG) meeting where questions and comments are heard and, if necessary, adjustments are made regarding state and federal agency comments. At the IPG meeting, MAG, VM, the COP and ADOT participate in the presentations and the meeting. The final budget is presented to the MAG Regional Council in the month of May and, upon approval, is sent in the month of June to ADOT and the FHWA.

XI. Amendments to the Agreement.

This AGREEMENT may be amended at any time by the mutual agreement of the parties hereto.

XII. Agreement Termination. Participation in the AGREEMENT may be terminated by any of the parties hereto provided that the terminating party provides notice to each of the other parties at least ninety (90) days prior to the date of termination. Termination by any one party does not relieve any other party to this AGREEMENT of its responsibilities under this AGREEMENT.

10

XIII. Agreement Authorization.

MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS _________________________________ Dennis Smith Executive Director _________________________________ Date VALLEY METRO _________________________________ Stephen Banta Chief Executive Officer _________________________________ Date CITY OF PHOENIX _________________________________ Maria Hyatt Interim Public Transit Director ________________________________ Date

pdillon

Sticky Note

Add R.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 4B February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA) with the City of Phoenix for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Pass-Through Grants PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute change orders for IGAs with the City of Phoenix to allow Valley Metro to be reimbursed for eligible activities. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro is seeking an extension of the IGAs for federal funds through the FTA in seven grants.

Grant Source Extension Date AZ-05-0203 5309 – FGM June 30, 2014 AZ-37-X011 5316 – JARC September 30, 2015 AZ-37-X014 5316 – JARC December 31, 2014 AZ-57-X008 5317 – New Freedom June 30, 2014 AZ-57-X012 5317 – New Freedom December 31, 2016 AZ-90-X103 5307 – Formula December 31, 2015 AZ-90-X109 5307 – Formula March 31, 2016

• Grant AZ-05-0203 funds are for preventive maintenance. • Grant AZ-37-X011 funds are for fixed route operations support. • Grant AZ-37-X014 funds are for fixed route operations support. • Grant AZ-57-X008 funds are for paratransit operating assistance. • Grant AZ-57-X012 are for travel training. • Grant AZ-90-X103 funds are for replacement vehicles. • Grant AZ-90-X109 funds are for replacement vehicles.

The City of Phoenix is the designated recipient for all FTA grant funds for the region. Valley Metro undertakes projects approved for FTA grant funding, then submits requests to Phoenix for reimbursement of actual expenses incurred. Phoenix then executes a drawdown of funds from FTA to pass-through the reimbursement to Valley Metro. The pass-through IGAs extensions are required in order for Phoenix to reimburse Valley Metro for eligible expenses.

2

COST AND BUDGET All expenses are within the Valley Metro RPTA Adopted FY 2014 Operating and Capital Budget. Obligations beyond FY 2014 are incorporated into the Valley Metro RPTA Five Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY2014 thru FY2018). The grant funds will offset expenses, reducing the net cost to the Public Transportation Fund and member agency budgets. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute the change orders with the City of Phoenix for the listed IGAs. CONTACT Paul Hodgins Manager of Revenue Generation and Financial Planning 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 4C February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Authorization to Issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Map Design and Production Services PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to issue a RFP for map design and production services. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro has an ongoing need for mapping services to provide current and potential riders wayfinding and service connection information to meet their transit needs. On a bi-annual basis, the Valley Metro system map is updated based on service changes and is distributed with the Transit Book and is available online. Valley Metro is also embarking on an enhanced wayfinding plan that has initiated with upgrading the signage at all 28 light rail stations. The new signs, being installed in February are custom for each station, will feature bus connections, boarding locations and neighboring destinations. The wayfinding program will extend to improving signage at transit centers in Fiscal Year 2015 (FY15) and at park-and-rides and select bus stops in future years. The wayfinding plan is an effort to provide better passenger information and ease reliance on the Transit Book. For the past two years, Valley Metro has used the services of CHK America, Inc. That contract has now expired. Valley Metro is seeking a multi-year agreement with a vendor for map design and production services in time for the preparation of materials associated with the October 2014 service changes. The federally-compliant RFP will be structured to evaluate two categories: 1) map design and updates; and 2) map production (printing). More than one award is possible. Map production has been identified separately to provide local printers with the opportunity to propose. A five-year contract term is being requested. The contract will take effect July 1, 2014 with firm(s) that can design, produce and update transit system maps and custom wayfinding signage. Staff will return in late spring/early summer with the results of the RFP and recommended contractor(s). COST AND BUDGET A five-year cost estimate for map design and update services is $1 million. Production across five years is estimated at $1.5 million.

2

These costs are not entirely new costs. Existing scope to be packaged in this RFP amounts to approximately $147,000 per year and includes: Bi-annual updates of transit system map ($16,000/year); bi-annual updates and production of light rail station wayfinding signage ($63,000/year); and bi-annual production of schedule and system information at regional transit centers, park-and-rides and select bus stops (Guide-a-Rides) ($68,000/year). New scope includes: Design, bi-annual updates and production of customized wayfinding for transit centers, park-and-rides and select bus stops as part of a five-year plan. The system map and wayfinding signs for light rail stations and transit centers are included in the FY15 proposed budget. The costs for park-and-ride and bus stop wayfinding signage and associated updates and production will be included in future year budgets. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to issue a RFP for map design and production services. CONTACT Hillary Foose Director, Communication & Marketing 602-322-4468 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 4D February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Intergovernmental Agreement with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with ADOT for Section 5311 (Rural Transit) pass-through funding for Rural Route 685 for Federal Fiscal Year 2015 (FFY15). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro staff intends to apply for up to $487,000 of FTA Formula Grants for Other than Urbanized Areas (Section 5311) funds for the FFY starting October 2014 through September 2015. The application will include administrative and operating assistance for Route 685 Gila Bend. In partnership with Maricopa County, Valley Metro modified Route 685 on January 27, 2014 in the City of Buckeye to serve the White Tank Justice Court and other city activity centers. The application will also include a request to fund four additional shortened round trips between the Buckeye Community Center and the Justice Court commencing in October 2014 in conjunction with the next scheduled Valley Metro transit service changes. These added trips are contingent upon approval of local matching funds by the City of Buckeye and federal funding approval by ADOT. No PTF funds will be used for the proposed additional trips. ADOT is the designated recipient for FTA 5311 rural formula grant funds for the state and Valley Metro must submit an application annually to receive this funding for the service identified above. ADOT’s application process requires submittal of an IGA for funding and it must be signed by Valley Metro for the application to be accepted. Upon award, ADOT finalizes the IGA with the awarded amount. COST AND BUDGET The maximum reimbursement from ADOT FFY15 is expected to be up to $487,000. The following table summarizes funding sources and amounts applicable to this Board action.

2

Funding Source Amount FTA Section 5311 (ADOT) $487,000 PTF (Local Match) $219,000 Maricopa County - Arizona Lottery Funds (Local Match) $60,000 City of Buckeye (Local Match) $36,000 Total IGA Amount $802,000

Operation of Route 685 is in the Valley Metro budget and is programmed in the Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP) with Public Transportation Funds (PTF) and Maricopa County Arizona Lottery Funds, which serve as the required sources of local match funds. Additional funding is provided through the FTA Section 5307 Job Access/Reverse Commute (JARC) program to fund the remainder of the operation not included in this IGA. If the four additional shortened Buckeye trips are approved, the additional funding and expense will be included in the FY15 budget. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to enter into an IGA with ADOT for FTA Section 5311 (Rural Transit) pass-through funding for Rural Route 685 for FFY15. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None A copy of the IGA is available upon request.



DATE AGENDA ITEM 4E February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of Buckeye to conduct a transit planning study and provide local match for additional trips to Rural Route 685-Gila Bend. PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to enter into an IGA with the City of Buckeye for their local funding to match federal funds for Valley Metro to conduct a Buckeye Transit Planning Study and for operation of up to four additional shortened round trips on Route 685-Gila Bend within Buckeye. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The City of Buckeye is seeking assistance from Valley Metro to develop a regionally connected local transit plan that will help guide the implementation of near-term and mid-term transit service and capital investments. The plan was identified as a near-term recommendation in the Maricopa Association of Governments’ Southwest Valley Local Transit System Study (SVLTSS) completed in 2013. Valley Metro, with support from HDR, the agency’s Planning Support Services Consultant, will conduct the 18-month transit study. Tasks include refining local transit circulator concepts, local fixed route bus, express bus, and rural transit service concepts identified in the SVLTSS, and developing an implementation plan that will include cost estimates, capital requirements, implementation schedule, and funding strategy. The study will include a community involvement component to solicit agency and public input. Valley Metro will also work with neighboring communities to coordinate transit services in those areas. Also, Valley Metro staff intends to apply for FTA Formula Grants for Other than Urbanized Areas (Section 5311) funds through ADOT, the designated state recipient for these grant funds, for operation of up to four additional shortened round trips on Route 685 between the Buckeye Community Center and the Justice Court. All necessary local matching funds would be provided by the City of Buckeye. COST AND BUDGET The City of Buckeye and FTA/ADOT 5304 funding will cover all Valley Metro staff and consultant expenses associated with the transit planning project. The total cost of the project will not exceed $75,000, including Valley Metro staff and HDR expenses. The federal share will be $60,000 and the City of Buckeye has committed to provide local matching funds of $15,000. This study is not included in the FY14 budget and an adjustment will be made to include it, if the IGA with the City of Buckeye is approved.

2

Operation of the additional shortened trips on Route 685 will be included in the agency’s FY15 budget if federal funding is awarded through ADOT. The service is projected to have an annual cost of up to $86,000 (in FFY15 dollars). Up to $50,000 would be federal funds and the City of Buckeye would provide the necessary local match. No regional PTF funds will be used for this added transit service. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to enter to enter into an IGA with the City of Buckeye for their local funding to match federal funds for Valley Metro to conduct a Buckeye Transit Planning Study and for operation of up to four additional shortened round trips on Route 685-Gila Bend within Buckeye. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None A copy of the IGA is available upon request.



DATE AGENDA ITEM 5 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Regional Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Strategy PURPOSE To request Board approval of the Regional TOD Strategy. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In 2011, Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) created a TOD Working Group comprised of the member cities in order to respond to regional issues and opportunities regarding planning, design, and implementation of high-capacity transit. In 2013, with the agency integration of Valley Metro Rail and Regional Public Transportation Authority, participation in the TOD Working Group was expanded to include all Valley Metro member cities, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). The expanded TOD Working Group began meeting in January 2013. The TOD Working Group agreed that as stewards of implementing the transit program in the region, Valley Metro and MAG should have a joint strategy committing support to the improvement of connections between job centers and housing. This strategy would redefine Valley Metro’s existing policy previously established for VMR staff in 2006. Since 2006, the national TOD real estate market has strengthened and demographic trends point toward significant growth in demand in the coming years. Fixed-route transit systems, such as light rail, create attractive development corridors by providing investors lower risk and greater certainty of stable, long-term ridership. Valley Metro’s 20-mile light rail line that opened in December 2008 has outperformed expectations in terms of ridership and contributed to over $7 billion in development activity adjacent or near the corridor. The TOD Strategy provides the opportunity to leverage these transportation investments and work collaboratively with communities to boost market opportunity to levels feasible for TOD and economic development. The purpose of this TOD Strategy is to promote the integration of land use and transportation by leveraging the regional transit system. The focus will be on existing and future transit corridors as approved in the Regional Transportation Plan as well as high-demand corridors associated with activity centers within the region. The TOD Strategy will establish a framework for implementation through collaborative partnerships with MAG, Valley Metro, member cities, and others including the development community.

2

Through the TOD Working Group, Valley Metro worked with MAG and member cities to determine the overall vision and appropriate roles for all parties. City staffs requested a variety of areas in which support from Valley Metro is desired and needed. In response, Valley Metro, MAG, and the TOD Working Group, actively worked on framing the key elements of this strategy. The overall goal is to develop collaborative relationships to foster TOD in the region. Specific roles and responsibilities for MAG, Valley Metro, and member cities are identified in the attached TOD Strategy. MAG’s role will be to foster and facilitate transit-friendly, mixed-use, compact, walkable communities through education and outreach. Valley Metro and member cities will be working collaboratively to implement TOD principles along current and future transit corridors. Both MAG and Valley Metro will be seeking approval of the TOD Strategy from each of their governing bodies. COST AND BUDGET There is no budget impact at this time. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the TOD Strategy. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS Draft Regional TOD Strategy


Transit Oriented Development Strategy

February 2014

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

Purpose

The purpose of this TOD strategy is to promote the integration of land use and

transportation using the investment in the regional transit system as an economic

engine to create connectivity throughout the Phoenix metropolitan area. It is the intent of

this strategy to encourage compact and mixed use development, including the transit

user and pedestrian friendly elements, along current and future light rail, commuter rail

and bus transit corridors. Additionally, this strategy should be used as a catalyst toward

improved air quality, focused economic development, attractiveness to the business and

tourist sectors and overall enhanced healthy, sustainable communities.

This TOD strategy establishes a framework in the Phoenix metropolitan region to

implement TOD strategies by leveraging collaborative partnerships between the

Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), Valley Metro, member cities and others

including the development community. It focuses on existing and future transit corridors

as approved in the Regional Transportation Plan and other high demand corridors

associated with activity centers within the region. It is the intent of this strategy to

produce desirable results in terms of connectivity, land use, sustainable economic

growth and more.

TOD Definition

TOD is a pattern of compact mixed-use development within a 5-10 minute walk of

existing or future transit stations or stops. TOD is not a one size fits all formula but

rather a framework which capitalizes on the strengths of existing or future land use,

transportation, economic and livability elements. It encourages growth around the transit

stations to produce a community environment often characterized by:

A mix of compatible and complementary land uses, scaled and designed for pedestrians, that incorporate but are not limited to jobs, housing, community services and amenities;

Small blocks with interconnected streets and sidewalks;

Integrated buildings and land uses that serve the pedestrian and respond to the built environment;

Safe, convenient and comfortable elements for walking and biking and;

Connections to multiple destinations through alternate modes of transportation.


February 2014

Goals

Goals established in this TOD strategy are intended to be met through the collaborative

partnerships between MAG, Valley Metro and member cities as well as through

partnerships with the business community, non-profit community and other

stakeholders. Through implementation of this strategy the regional stakeholders will

work to:

Promote a transit system that stimulates the creation of jobs and equitable

housing choices and supports long term economic development and business

investment.

Provide convenient, safe connectivity and multi-modal access to the transit system, while connecting to non-motorized transportation;

Build collaborative relationships to encourage and facilitate TOD through creative planning and development partnerships;

Protect and enhance the regional transit assets, investments and opportunities;

Establish performance measures for TOD that is occurring in the Phoenix metropolitan region.

Roles and Responsibilities

As previously mentioned, this strategy is based on collaborative partnerships between

multiple stakeholders. Roles and responsibilities of MAG, Valley Metro and member

cities are identified in the following table.

Roles and Responsibilities MAG Valley Metro

Local Jurisdictions

Promote and educate TOD Benefits and Principles

P P

Include assessment of TOD potential as part of system planning

P P

Include assessment of TOD potential as part of corridor development

P P

Acquire public land adjacent to transit for TOD

D

Develop public land adjacent to transit

D

Incorporate TOD principles in land use plans and regulation


February 2014

Roles and Responsibilities MAG Valley Metro

Local Jurisdictions

Incorporate and support TOD principles with regional planning goals

P P

Encourage the incorporation of TOD principles in community goals

P P

Collaborate in the development of a regional TOD plan

P P

Develop an internal strategic plan to guide each agency’s activities and roles

Roles Legend

Lead – partner agency has the primary responsibility for this TOD role. In some cases, there are various agencies who will lead the role within its jurisdiction. The lead agency is responsible for facilitating collaboration among the partner agencies.

P Partner – partner agency has a secondary responsibility for this TOD role. In most cases, there are multiple partners that should collaborate with and support the lead partner(s).

D

Lead by Delegation – Upon delegation by the local jurisdiction involved, partner agency has the primary responsibility for this TOD role.

In order to implement this strategy, MAG, Valley Metro and individual member cities are

called upon to create their own individual Strategic Action Plan to implement TOD, to be

adopted by only the jurisdiction developing the strategy, which details actions and

strategies for the roles in which they serve as a lead. Each Strategic Action Plan should

detail the action items and identify the internal staffing requirements, funding, schedule

and partner organizations and their roles. In addition, there are multiple stakeholders in

the region that have valuable and unique roles in TOD implementation. Collaborative

partnerships with the development community, the lender and financing community,

non-profit sector, business community and the public at-large will be sought to help

implement TOD in the Phoenix metropolitan region.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Administrative Office Space Lease PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a 12-year lease agreement with AG 101 First – 21 West Van Buren, LLC (“Landlord” for 101 North First Avenue). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro Rail entered into a lease for 57,000 square feet in the 101 North First Avenue building in June 2005. As Valley Metro Rail need for space diminished with the completion of the 20-mile light rail project and the downturn in the economy, the RPTA entered into a sublease for two floors of the space in December 2010. The lease expires in June 2016 and Valley Metro is required to provide notice to vacate or renew no later than June 2015. Valley Metro is located in the Downtown Phoenix Office Submarket, which has outperformed most other submarkets in the greater Phoenix area. As a result, the Downtown market has both lower vacancy and escalating rents. According to market analysis, this trajectory is expected to continue over the next five years. It will present a growing adverse condition for tenants in downtown. The forecast could have a particularly adverse impact on tenants like Valley Metro who occupy blocks of space greater than 30,000 square feet. There is already a considerable shortage of these larger blocks of space making these predicted conditions of even more concern. Valley Metro will most certainly be placed in an unfavorable position by waiting until 2015 or later to initiate an effort to renew or relocate. Anticipating these conditions, staff developed and executed a strategy to capture and stabilize long-term occupancy in a location best suited to the Agency’s needs as follows:

• Valley Metro worked with a commercial real estate professional to identify alternatives in both the Downtown and Midtown Office Market.

• At the same time, the current Landlord was supplied with a Request for Proposal detailing required modifications to current terms, and a complete breakdown and pricing notes on desired updating/upgrading for Valley Metro's current space.

• To obtain the most accurate offer possible, it was necessary to program, fit-test, and reach a preliminary space plan with pricing notes on a shortlist of the buildings most suitable. Landlords were able to make offers based on a reasonably comprehensive understanding of the required investment they must make.

2

The initial search included the few available downtown building options and numerous midtown options. From this initial search a shortlist of properties was developed:

• 101 North First Avenue (current building) • 2800 North Central Avenue • 3003 North Central Avenue

Detailed fit plans were defined for each of these options for the purpose of developing the best competitive offer from each landlord. Below is a summary of the proposals from the three short-listed properties: 101 North First

Avenue (current location)

2800 North Central Avenue


Rental Square Feet (RSF) 57,074 57,753 53,595 Useable Square Feet 52,846 54,345 49,308 Lease Term 144 Months 144 Months 144 Months Annual Rental increases $.50 per RSF $.50 per RSF $.50 per RSF Average Annual Base Rent per Square Foot $23.75 $22.89 $22.25 Average Annual Base Rent (Aggregate) $1,355,508 $1,322,139 $1,192,489 Estimated Annual Operating Expense, Taxes, Parking $134,631 $169,580 $145,253 Average Annual Total Cost $1,490,139 $1,491,719 $1,337,742 1Estimated Relocation Cost NA $1,100,000 $1,100,000 Landlord-Provided Relocation Allowance NA $2/RSF ($115,506) $2/RSF ($107,190) Net Estimated Relocation Cost NA $984,494 $992,810 1Average Cost per Annum, including annualized estimated moving expenses $1,490,139 $1,573,760 $1,420,476 Notes: 1Includes server room build-out and move expenses for 2800 and 3003 locations In addition to the analysis above, Valley Metro staff considered several other quantitative and qualitative issues associated with moving from the downtown market to the mid-town market. Issues considered include:

• Unanticipated moving costs and disruption associated with a physical move • Proximity to other agencies and time consumed with travel from mid-town to

downtown for meetings • 3003 North Central is unable to adequately match our current Boardroom

specifications • Transit and freeway accessibility

When we take into account the cost of disruption, Board room limitations, and travel time between downtown and midtown locations, the advantages of remaining in the 101 North Central Avenue building outweigh the advantages of moving to either of the midtown locations.

3

The current annual lease cost is $1.378 million. Assuming a 2.5 percent annual inflation rate, an average annual cost over the next twelve years would be $1.598 million. Under the new lease proposal, the comparable average annual cost is $1.490 million or $108,000 per year lower than today’s lease structure. Based on the full analysis, staff is recommending that Valley Metro exercise the proposal to enter into a 12-year lease at the current location of 101 North 1st Avenue commencing July 1, 2014. COST AND BUDGET The costs associated with this lease are summarized in the table above. The costs will be included in the FY15 budget and are consistent with the five-year (FY14-18) operating forecast and capital program. The cost of this lease each year will be split 50/50 between the RPTA and the METRO budgets. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information TMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the TMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a 12-year lease agreement commencing on July 1, 2014 with AG 101 First – 21 West Van Buren, LLC (“Landlord” for 101 North First Avenue) according to the base rent schedule provided with their lease proposal; a 12-year average base lease rate of $1,355,508 per year ($16,266,096 for the 12-year term of the lease) plus allowable operating expenses, taxes, and parking; an estimated 12-year total of $17,881,668 including expenses. CONTACT Carol L. Ketcherside Director, Administration and Organizational Development 602-523-6040 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 7 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair Sorrell will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS Pending Items Request


2

Transit Management Committee Pending Items Request

Item Requested Date Requested Planned Follow-up Date

VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433

February 26, 2014

Rail Management Committee Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

12:30 p.m.

For those participating by telephone, please mute your phone when not speaking. Members please make sure your microphone is turned on when speaking and turned off when you are not speaking. Action Recommended

1. Public Comment A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the RMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes total for all speakers.

1. For information

2. Minutes Minutes from the February 5, 2014 RMC meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), will brief the RMC on current issues.

3. For information

4. Memorandum of Understanding with Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and City of Phoenix Public Transit Department (COPPTD) for Regional Transit Planning Staff will request that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization of an update to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with MAG and the COPPTD regarding regional transit planning and programming responsibilities.

4. For action

2

5. Regional Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Strategy Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Wulf Grote, Director of Planning and Development, who will request that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the regional TOD Strategy.

5. For action

6. Authorization to Execute a Contract with CBS Outdoor Group, Inc. for Continuation of Advertising Sales Services

Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Hillary Foose, Director, Communication & Marketing, who will request that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract with CBS Outdoor Group, Inc. for continuation of advertising sales services through June 30, 2015.

6. For action

7. Approval of System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Hillary Foose, Director, Communication & Marketing, who will request that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy defining how advertising revenue will be used to support rail operations and customer amenities.

7. For action

8. Administration Office Space Lease Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Carol Ketcherside, Director of Administration & Organizational Development, who will request that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a 12-year lease agreement with AG 101 First – 21 West Van Buren, LLC (“Landlord” for 101 North First Avenue).

8. For action

9. Operations and Maintenance Center (OMC) Solar Project Design-Build Construction Contract Steve Banta, CEO, will introduce Wulf Grote, Director, Planning and Development, who will request that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute the OMC Solar Project design-build contract with Natural Power and Energy, LLC for $2,875,000 and authorize a contingency in the amount of $287,500 for any unforeseen changes in the project.

9. For action

3

10. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events

Chair Ching will request future RMC agenda items from members and members may provide a report on current events.

10. For information

11. Next Meeting The next meeting of the RMC is scheduled for Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 12:30 p.m.

11. For information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org

http://www.valleymetro.org/


DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Public Comment PURPOSE A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the RMC on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 2 February 26, 2014

Minutes from the Rail Management Committee Wednesday, February 5, 2014 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, Suite 1000

Phoenix, AZ 12:30 p.m.

Members Present Mike Nevarez for Andrew Ching, City of Tempe, Chair Jodi Sorrell for Chris Brady, City of Mesa, Vice Chair Dan Cook, City of Chandler Debbie Albert, City of Glendale Maria Hyatt for Rick Naimark, City of Phoenix Vice Chair Sorrell called the meeting to order at 12:48 p.m. 1. Public Comment None 2. Minutes Minutes from the January 8, 2014 RMC meeting were presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY DAN COOK, SECONDED BY DEBBIE ALBERT AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM JANUARY 8, 2014. 3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Mr. Steve Banta, provided an update on the following items: Upcoming Events

o Central Mesa Extension Rail Weld Ceremony o Northwest Extension “Love Our Community”

Service Changes Design a Transit Wrap Mayor Elaine Scruggs Internship Program Construction Update

o Northwest Phoenix Extension o Central Mesa Extension

State Legislative Update

2

4. Valley Metro Rail, Inc., Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Report

The Valley Metro Rail, Inc., Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Act Report was presented for action. IT WAS MOVED BY MIKE NEVAREZ, SECONDED BY MARIA HYATT AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO FORWARD TO THE BOARD APPROVAL OF THE VALLEY METRO RAIL, INC., FISCAL YEAR 2013 (FY13) COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT AND SINGLE AUDIT ACT REPORT. The following agenda items were presented for information and no presentations or discussions took place as presentations were provided at the preceding Transit Management Committee. 5. 2014 Federal Public Transportation Agenda 6. FY 2013 Transit Performance Report (TPR) 7. Review of 2014 Bond Issuance 8. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events None. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 12:53 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Chief Executive Officer’s Report PURPOSE Steve Banta, Chief Executive Officer, will brief the RMC on current issues. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Memorandum of Understanding with Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and City of Phoenix for Regional Transit Planning PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute an update to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with MAG and the City of Phoenix Public Transit Department (COPPTD) regarding regional transit planning and programming responsibilities. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Federal law requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and transit operators to work cooperatively in the development of long range transportation plans and Transportation Improvement Programs. MAG, Valley Metro (VM), and the COPPTD developed an MOU that defines that cooperative relationship to foster regional transit planning, which feeds directly into state and national planning. Regional transit planning roles and responsibilities were defined in an MOU involving the Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA), Valley Metro Rail (VMR), MAG and the COPPTD in April 2010. The RPTA Board approved the MOU in February 2010, followed by VMR Board approval in March 2010. The MOU was also approved by the MAG Regional Council in March 2010. Since the MOU’s approval in 2010, several changes have occurred to necessitate an update to the agreement. At the regional level, RPTA and VMR staffs were combined under a single Valley Metro staff organization. Additionally, federal rules, requirements and procedures related to transit planning were modified through the passage of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) in 2012. In addition, the MOU participants agreed that adjustments and clarification of roles and responsibilities were needed to reflect experiences since the MOU was originally approved. As a result, Valley Metro, MAG and COPPTD staffs have worked together to update the MOU. It was revised and expanded to cover the following topics:

• Transit representation on MAG Committees • Regional transit planning coordination • Regional transit programming and fund allocation coordination • Performance measurement, monitoring and reporting • Public transportation agency safety plans and transit asset management • Air quality • Human services coordination transportation plan

2

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice • MAG Unified Planning Work Program and annual budget

Each of these topics is covered in the attached MOU. This MOU recognizes that final guidance and regulations related to some MAP-21 topics are pending and amendments/modifications may be needed as pertinent federal documents are finalized. COST AND BUDGET There is no fiscal impact of this action. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information RMC: March 5, 2014 for action METRO Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the MOU for Regional Transit Planning. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS A copy of the MOU can be found attached to TMC agenda item 4A



DATE AGENDA ITEM 5 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Regional Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Strategy PURPOSE To request Board approval of the Regional TOD Strategy. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In 2011, Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) created a TOD Working Group comprised of member cities in order to respond to regional issues and opportunities regarding community/development planning, design, and implementation in proximity to high-capacity transit corridors. In 2013, with the combining of staff of VMR and the Regional Public Transportation Authority, participation in the TOD Working Group was expanded to include all Valley Metro member cities, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). The expanded TOD Working Group began meeting in January 2013. The TOD Working Group agreed that as stewards of implementing the transit program in the region, Valley Metro and MAG should have a joint strategy committing support to the improvement of connections between job centers and housing. In addition, it was agreed that the strategy should define TOD roles and responsibilities of the regional agencies and local jurisdictions. This strategy would redefine Valley Metro’s existing staff level policy previously established for VMR in 2006. Since 2006, the national TOD real estate market has strengthened and demographic trends point toward significant growth in demand in the coming years. Fixed-route transit systems, such as light rail, create attractive development corridors by providing investors lower risk and greater certainty of stable, long-term ridership. Valley Metro’s 20-mile light rail line that opened in December 2008 has outperformed expectations in terms of ridership and contributed to over $7 billion in development activity adjacent or near the corridor. The TOD Strategy provides the opportunity to leverage these transportation investments and work collaboratively with communities to boost market opportunity to levels feasible for TOD and economic development. The purpose of this TOD Strategy is to promote the integration of land use and transportation by leveraging the regional transit system. The focus will be on existing and future transit corridors as approved in the Regional Transportation Plan as well as high-demand corridors associated with activity centers within the region. The TOD Strategy will establish a framework for implementation through collaborative partnerships with MAG, Valley Metro, member cities, and others including the development community.

2

Through the TOD Working Group, Valley Metro has worked with MAG and member cities to determine the overall vision and appropriate roles for all parties. City staffs requested a variety of areas in which support from Valley Metro is desired and needed. In response, Valley Metro, MAG, and the TOD Working Group, actively worked on framing the key elements of this strategy. An overall goal is to develop collaborative relationships to foster TOD in the region. Specific roles and responsibilities for MAG, Valley Metro, and member cities are identified in the attached TOD Strategy. MAG’s role will be to foster and facilitate transit-friendly, mixed-use, compact, walkable communities through education and outreach. Valley Metro and member cities will work collaboratively to implement TOD principles along current and future transit corridors. MAG intends to seek approval of the TOD Strategy from its Regional Council in April 2014. COST AND BUDGET Current staff funding in support of the TOD Strategy is from the Regional Area Road Fund provided annually by MAG. No additional funds are being sought at this time. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information RMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the TOD Strategy. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS A copy of the TOD Strategy can be found attached to TMC agenda item 5.



DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Authorization to Execute a Contract with CBS Outdoor Group, Inc. for Continuation of Advertising Sales Services PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract with CBS Outdoor Group, Inc. to continue Advertising Sales Services from October 31, 2014 through June 30, 2015. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The Advertising Sales Services agreement with CBS Outdoor Group, Inc. was initiated in October 2009 and renewed for the full five-year term. It will expire on October 30, 2014. CBS Outdoor sells the available inventory of train wraps and rail station advertising per the Valley Metro Rail (VMR) Advertising Policy, most recently updated at the October 2013 Board meeting. Revenues are split 60/40 between VMR and CBS Outdoor respectively. In FY13, the VMR system advertising generated approximately $700,000 for operations. With the increased inventory following the October Board decision, the revenue potential is higher and will be enhanced by the opportunity of the upcoming Super Bowl. To fully maximize the revenue opportunity presented by Super Bowl 2015, staff is requesting to execute a contract under sole source conditions with CBS Outdoor through June 30, 2015. The continuity provides many advantages, including:

• Optimizing of VMR’s sales potential using the same contractor familiar with VMR’s assets/program and a sales team that is actively marketing.

o Sales push for last quarter of calendar year 2014 and Super Bowl 2015 has started.

o CBS Outdoor has already sold two full wraps for the weeks leading up/during Super Bowl 2015.

o Special advertising packages are being prepared to entice local and national advertisers.

o Transition and learning curve of a new advertising contractor are likely to create a lag in sales.

• Program stability during a high-demand event (and season) where VMR will be called upon to provide a high level of service.

o No off- and on-boarding of a contractor during this time period. o Provides staffing and process consistency to internal staff.

• Procurement of a new contract to operate on a fiscal year basis, which is helpful to internal budget and planning processes.

2

Valley Metro staff understands the need for full and open competition, even with revenue-generating agreements, and will do so with a Request for Proposals (RFP) scheduled for summer 2014. The RFP will result in a selection and new contract start date of July 1, 2015. COST AND BUDGET No budget impact. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information RMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a contract with CBS Outdoor Group, Inc. to continue Advertising Sales Services from October 31, 2014 through June 30, 2015. CONTACT Hillary Foose Director, Communication & Marketing 602-322-4468 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 7 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Approval of Light Rail System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy PURPOSE To request Board approval of the Light Rail System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy defining how advertising revenue will be used to support rail operations and customer amenities. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In October 2013, the Valley Metro Rail (VMR) Board of Directors approved an amended Advertising Policy with increased inventory of full train wraps. At that time, the Board also requested a policy be developed for how system advertising revenue is directed. Advertising revenue will continue to be directed to offset member city contributions to rail operations; a portion will also be set aside to implement customer amenities. Customer amenities, such as Wi-Fi, safety/security programs or mobile solutions, are an investment in rail operations and, more directly, the rail customer. The intent of creating a separate allocation for customer amenities is to keep focus and priority on enhancing the customer experience. A rail-only subset of the Valley Metro Regional Marketing Committee will be used to review ideas and determine project priority. The Board will be updated annually via the budget process. COST AND BUDGET In Fiscal Year 2013 (FY13), system advertising generated approximately $700,000 for VMR operations. In FY15, with an increased number of train wraps available for advertising, staff has budgeted $850,000 in advertising revenue. The attached policy suggests that 60% of the total annual revenue be directed to reduce member cities contributions for baseline operations. The remaining 40% would be used to support the development of customer amenities. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information RMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action

2

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors approval of the System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy. CONTACT Hillary Foose Director, Communication & Marketing 602-322-4468 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS Draft System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy


SYSTEM ADVERTISING REVENUE ALLOCATION POLICY Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) permits third-party advertising on its fleet and station platforms. It is guided by a Board-adopted Advertising Policy and set of standards. The revenue generated from the system advertising program is directed in two ways:

• Offset member city contributions to rail operations • Support the development of customer amenities to attract and maintain a strong

ridership base The System Advertising Revenue Allocation Policy outlines how advertising revenue is divided and the types of customer amenities supported. Revenue Allocation Formula VMR’s advertising revenue supports rail operations and is divided as follows:

• 60% - Rail member cities • 40% - Customer amenities

Revenue dedicated to rail member cities is distributed on a quarterly basis to offset their contributions to revenue service. Revenue dedicated to customer amenities is collected and set aside to specifically fund these projects. Supported Customer Amenities Customer amenities are defined as those projects that directly benefit the rail passenger and enhance their experience on the system. Example projects include implementing Wi-Fi, safety/security programs and/or mobile technology solutions. Desired customer amenities are determined by members of the Regional Marketing Committee who contribute to light rail revenue operations. Recommended projects are forwarded by Valley Metro staff to the committee. The committee determines interest and priority. Survey tools are/will continue to be used to gauge customer preference and project effectiveness. During the annual budget process, the VMR Board of Directors receives an update on customer amenities being pursued and related details. Adopted by Valley Metro Rail Board of Directors on DATE TBD.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 8 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Administrative Office Space Lease PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a 12-year lease agreement with AG 101 First – 21 West Van Buren, LLC (“Landlord” for 101 North First Avenue). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro Rail entered into a lease for 57,000 square feet in the 101 North First Avenue building in June 2005. As Valley Metro Rail need for space diminished with the completion of the 20-mile light rail project and the downturn in the economy, the RPTA entered into a sublease for two floors of the space in December 2010. The lease expires in June 2016 and Valley Metro is required to provide notice to vacate or renew no later than June 2015. Valley Metro is located in the Downtown Phoenix Office Submarket, which has outperformed most other submarkets in the greater Phoenix area. As a result, the Downtown market has both lower vacancy and escalating rents. According to market analysis, this trajectory is expected to continue over the next five years. It will present a growing adverse condition for tenants in downtown. The forecast could have a particularly adverse impact on tenants like Valley Metro who occupy blocks of space greater than 30,000 square feet. There is already a considerable shortage of these larger blocks of space making these predicted conditions of even more concern. Valley Metro will most certainly be placed in an unfavorable position by waiting until 2015 or later to initiate an effort to renew or relocate. Anticipating these conditions, staff developed and executed a strategy to capture and stabilize long-term occupancy in a location best suited to the Agency’s needs as follows:

• Valley Metro worked with a commercial real estate professional to identify alternatives in both the Downtown and Midtown Office Market.

• At the same time, the current Landlord was supplied with a Request for Proposal detailing required modifications to current terms, and a complete breakdown and pricing notes on desired updating/upgrading for Valley Metro's current space.

• To obtain the most accurate offer possible, it was necessary to program, fit-test, and reach a preliminary space plan with pricing notes on a shortlist of the buildings most suitable. Landlords were able to make offers based on a reasonably comprehensive understanding of the required investment they must make.

2

The initial search included the few available downtown building options and numerous midtown options. From this initial search a shortlist of properties was developed:

• 101 North First Avenue (current building) • 2800 North Central Avenue • 3003 North Central Avenue

Detailed fit plans were defined for each of these options for the purpose of developing the best competitive offer from each landlord. Below is a summary of the proposals from the three short-listed properties: 101 North First

Avenue (current location)



Rental Square Feet (RSF) 57,074 57,753 53,595 Useable Square Feet 52,846 54,345 49,308 Lease Term 144 Months 144 Months 144 Months Annual Rental increases $.50 per RSF $.50 per RSF $.50 per RSF Average Annual Base Rent per Square Foot $23.75 $22.89 $22.25 Average Annual Base Rent (Aggregate) $1,355,508 $1,322,139 $1,192,489 Estimated Annual Operating Expense, Taxes, Parking $134,631 $169,580 $145,253 Average Annual Total Cost $1,490,139 $1,491,719 $1,337,742 1Estimated Relocation Cost NA $1,100,000 $1,100,000 Landlord-Provided Relocation Allowance NA $2/RSF ($115,506) $2/RSF ($107,190) Net Estimated Relocation Cost NA $984,494 $992,810 1Average Cost per Annum, including annualized estimated moving expenses $1,490,139 $1,573,760 $1,420,476 Notes: 1Includes server room build-out and move expenses for 2800 and 3003 locations In addition to the analysis above, Valley Metro staff considered several other quantitative and qualitative issues associated with moving from the downtown market to the mid-town market. Issues considered include:

• Unanticipated moving costs and disruption associated with a physical move • Proximity to other agencies and time consumed with travel from mid-town to

downtown for meetings • 3003 North Central is unable to adequately match our current Boardroom

specifications • Transit and freeway accessibility

When we take into account the cost of disruption, Board room limitations, and travel time between downtown and midtown locations, the advantages of remaining in the 101

3

North Central Avenue building outweigh the advantages of moving to either of the midtown locations. The current annual lease cost is $1.378 million. Assuming a 2.5 percent annual inflation rate, an average annual cost over the next twelve years would be $1.598 million. Under the new lease proposal, the comparable average annual cost is $1.490 million or $108,000 per year lower than today’s lease structure. Based on the full analysis, staff is recommending that Valley Metro exercise the proposal to enter into a 12-year lease at the current location of 101 North 1st Avenue commencing July 1, 2014. COST AND BUDGET The costs associated with this lease are summarized in the table above. The costs will be included in the FY15 budget and are consistent with the five-year (FY14-18) operating forecast and capital program. The cost of this lease each year will be split 50/50 between the RPTA and the METRO budgets. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information RMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute a 12-year lease agreement commencing on July 1, 2014 with AG 101 First – 21 West Van Buren, LLC (“Landlord” for 101 North First Avenue) according to the base rent schedule provided with their lease proposal; a 12-year average base lease rate of $1,355,508 per year ($16,266,096 for the 12-year term of the lease) plus allowable operating expenses, taxes, and parking; an estimated 12-year total of $17,881,668 including expenses. CONTACT Carol L. Ketcherside Director, Administration and Organizational Development 602-523-6040 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS None



DATE AGENDA ITEM 9 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Operations and Maintenance Center (OMC) Solar Project Design-Build Construction Contract PURPOSE To request Board authorization for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute the OMC Solar Project design-build contract with Natural Power and Energy, LLC for $2,875,000 and authorize a contingency in the amount of $287,500 for any unforeseen changes in the project. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In 2011, Valley Metro was awarded a $2.7 million federal grant through the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas & Energy Reduction (TIGGER) program for the construction and installation of a solar project at the OMC. Including local PTF match, the total project budget is $3.4 million, and includes all management and contractor costs. The OMC Solar Project consists of designing and building a solar photo-voltaic plant, which will be capable of generating approximately 780 kW of energy per year and save on average approximately 16 percent ($100,000 average per year) of the energy consumption at the OMC. The project includes installation of solar panels on the existing parking canopies at the OMC, construction of two new parking canopies with solar panels, and installation ground-mounted solar panels north of the west parking lot. The locations of the proposed solar panels are shown in Figure 1. In 2013, Valley Metro applied for, and received, additional funding through the Arizona Public Service (APS) Schools and Government Incentive Program. The APS funding agreement is for 20 years and will provide approximately $85,000 per year in Renewable Energy Credits up to a cap equal to 40% ($1.36 million) of the total project cost. Including the energy savings created by the solar panels and the APS incentive, the local PTF investment will be recuperated in approximately four years. Valley Metro employed a two-step procurement process in selecting a qualified, responsible contractor for the referenced OMC Solar Project. Under step-one, Valley Metro issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) on August 11, 2013. On August 27, 2013 Valley Metro hosted a pre-proposal conference attended by 33 individuals representing 28 different firms.

2

On September 26, 2013, the date set for the receipt of Statements of Qualifications (SOQ), Valley Metro received eight SOQs, one from each of the following firms:

• Abengoa USA • GreenFuel Technologies, Inc. • Kitchell Contractors • Rosendin Electric • SolarCity • Natural Power and Energy, LLC • SKY Construction & Engineering, Inc. • Vanir Construction Management, Inc. / Vanir Energy, LLC

Valley Metro created a five-member evaluation committee to evaluate proposals received from interested firms. The committee consisted of individuals from the following entities:

• City of Phoenix (1 individual) • Centennial Contracting (1 individual) • Valley Metro (3 individuals)

The evaluation committee determined that of the eight SOQs received, three firms were in the competitive range and qualified to receive a Request for Proposals (RFP), the second step in the procurement process. The three firms were:

• Natural Power and Energy, LLC • Vanir Construction Management, Inc. / Vanir Energy, LLC • Sky Construction and Engineering, Inc.

Valley Metro engaged the consulting firm ARCADIS to develop an Independent Cost Estimate (ICE), a requirement whenever federal funds are expended. The ICE, dated September 9, 2013 estimated the total contractor cost for the OMC Solar Project at $3,107,576.

On October 7, 2013 Valley Metro issued its RFP to the three firms and set a response date of November 22, 2013. Each selected firm submitted price and technical proposals in response to the RFP. After performing an initial review of the proposals, the evaluation committee invited the three firms to engage in oral presentations/interviews to assist the evaluation committee in understanding the firms’ respective proposals. The oral presentations/interviews were conducted on December 10, 2013.

On December 19, 2013, the evaluation committee requested Best and Final Offers (BAFO) from the three firms. Each firm submitted a BAFO on January 10, 2014. The evaluation committee reviewed the BAFOs and found that Natural Power and Energy, LLC’s (NP&E) proposal represented the best overall value for Valley Metro. The NP&E proposal ranked the highest from both a weighted technical score perspective and also

3

offered the lowest overall cost. The evaluation committee determined that the NP&E’s $2,875,000 cost proposal was within 8% of the ICE and that it was both fair and reasonable. The evaluation committee recommended NP&E for contract award.

On January 28, 2014, Valley Metro notified NP&E that it had been selected for award of the contract.

The contract term is for a specific period of performance, which is from NTP until August 29, 2014.

COST AND BUDGET The total budget for the OMC Solar Project is $3.4 million. The funding includes $2,715,000 (80%) in federal TIGGER funds and $685,000 (20%) in PTF matching funds. Project funding is included in the Valley Metro Rail FY14 Adopted Operating and Capital Budget and FY14 -2018 Five-Year Capital Program. The cost of the construction contract will be $2,875,000. In addition, $287,500 will be set aside by Valley Metro for contingency purposes for any unforeseen changes to the project. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: February 18, 2014 for information RMC: March 5, 2014 for action Board of Directors: March 20, 2014 for action RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the CEO to execute the OMC Solar Project design-build contract with Natural Power and Energy, LLC for $2,875,000 and authorize a Valley Metro controlled contingency in the amount of $287,500. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Figure 1 – OMC Solar Panel Locations



FIGURE 1: OMC SOLAR PANEL LOCATIONS


DATE AGENDA ITEM 10 February 26, 2014 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair Ching will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Steve Banta Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENTS Pending Items Request


2

Rail Management Committee Pending Items Request

Item Requested Date Requested Planned Follow-up Date

meetings of the management committees · 2020-01-15 · 6. administration office space lease steve...

Documents